大般若波羅蜜多經

06

Furthermore, Subhuti, what do you think? Is the true suchness of the Buddha’s ten powers itself a great bodhisattva?

– No, Blessed One!

– Is the true suchness of the four fearlessnesses, the four unhindered understandings, and the eighteen distinctive qualities of a Buddha itself a great bodhisattva?

– No, Blessed One!

– Is that which is other than the true suchness of the Buddha’s ten powers a great bodhisattva?

– No, Blessed One!

– Is that which is other than the true suchness of the four fearlessnesses, the four unhindered understandings, and the eighteen distinctive qualities of a Buddha a great bodhisattva?

– No, Blessed One!

– Is there a great bodhisattva within the true suchness of the Buddha’s ten powers?

– No, Blessed One!

– Is there a great bodhisattva within the true suchness of the four fearlessnesses, the four unhindered understandings, and the eighteen distinctive qualities of a Buddha?

– No, Blessed One!

– Is the true suchness of the Buddha’s ten powers present within a great bodhisattva?

– No, Blessed One!

– Is the true suchness of the four fearlessnesses, the four unhindered understandings, and the eighteen distinctive qualities of a Buddha present within a great bodhisattva?

– No, Blessed One!

– Is there a great bodhisattva apart from the true suchness of the Buddha’s ten powers?

– No, Blessed One!

– Is there a great bodhisattva apart from the true suchness of the four fearlessnesses, the four unhindered understandings, and the eighteen distinctive qualities of a Buddha?

– No, Blessed One!

Furthermore, Subhuti, what do you think? Is the true suchness of great loving-kindness itself a great bodhisattva?

– No, Blessed One!

– Is the true suchness of great compassion, great sympathetic joy, and great equanimity itself a great bodhisattva?

– No, Blessed One!

– Is that which is other than the true suchness of great loving-kindness a great bodhisattva?

– No, Blessed One!

– Is that which is other than the true suchness of great compassion, great sympathetic joy, and great equanimity a great bodhisattva?

– No, Blessed One!

– Is there a great bodhisattva within the true suchness of great loving-kindness?

– No, Blessed One!

– Is there a great bodhisattva within the true suchness of great compassion, great sympathetic joy, and great equanimity?

– No, Blessed One!

– Is the true suchness of great loving-kindness present within a great bodhisattva?

– No, Blessed One!

– Is the true suchness of great compassion, great sympathetic joy, and great equanimity present within a great bodhisattva?

– No, Blessed One!

– Is there a great bodhisattva apart from the true suchness of great loving-kindness?

– No, Blessed One!

– Is there a great bodhisattva apart from the true suchness of great compassion, great sympathetic joy, and great equanimity?

– No, Blessed One!

Furthermore, Subhuti, what do you think? Is the true suchness of the thirty-two marks of a great being itself a great bodhisattva?

– No, Blessed One!

– Is the true suchness of the eighty subsidiary characteristics itself a great bodhisattva?

– No, Blessed One!

– Is that which is other than the true suchness of the thirty-two marks of a great being a great bodhisattva?

– No, Blessed One!

– Is that which is other than the true suchness of the eighty subsidiary characteristics a great bodhisattva?

– No, Blessed One!

– Is there a great bodhisattva within the true suchness of the thirty-two marks of a great being?

– No, Blessed One!

– Is there a great bodhisattva within the true suchness of the eighty subsidiary characteristics?

– No, Blessed One!

– Is the true suchness of the thirty-two marks of a great being present within a great bodhisattva?

– No, Blessed One!

– Is the true suchness of the eighty subsidiary characteristics present within a great bodhisattva?

– No, Blessed One!

– Is there a great bodhisattva apart from the true suchness of the thirty-two marks of a great being?

– No, Blessed One!

– Is there a great bodhisattva apart from the true suchness of the eighty subsidiary characteristics?

– No, Blessed One!

Furthermore, Subhuti, what do you think? Is the true suchness of the Dharma of non-forgetfulness itself a great bodhisattva?

– No, Blessed One!

– Is the true suchness of the nature of constant equanimity itself a great bodhisattva?

– No, Blessed One!

– Is that which is other than the true suchness of the Dharma of non-forgetfulness a great bodhisattva?

– No, Blessed One!

– Is that which is other than the true suchness of the nature of constant equanimity a great bodhisattva?

– No, Blessed One!

– Is there a great bodhisattva within the true suchness of the Dharma of non-forgetfulness?

– No, Blessed One!

– Is there a great bodhisattva within the true suchness of the nature of constant equanimity?

– No, Blessed One!

– Is the true suchness of the Dharma of non-forgetfulness present within a great bodhisattva?

– No, Blessed One!

– Is the true suchness of the nature of constant equanimity present within a great bodhisattva?

– No, Blessed One!

– Is there a great bodhisattva apart from the true suchness of the Dharma of non-forgetfulness?

– No, Blessed One!

– Is there a great bodhisattva apart from the true suchness of the nature of constant equanimity?

– No, Blessed One!

Furthermore, Subhuti, what do you think? Is the true suchness of the knowledge of all phenomena itself a great bodhisattva?

– No, Blessed One!

– Is the true suchness of the knowledge of the paths and the knowledge of all aspects itself a great bodhisattva?

– No, Blessed One!

– Is that which is other than the true suchness of the knowledge of all phenomena a great bodhisattva?

– No, Blessed One!

– Is that which is other than the true suchness of the knowledge of the paths and the knowledge of all aspects a great bodhisattva?

– No, Blessed One!

– Is there a great bodhisattva within the true suchness of the knowledge of all phenomena?

– No, Blessed One!

– Is there a great bodhisattva within the true suchness of the knowledge of the paths and the knowledge of all aspects?

– No, Blessed One!

– Is the true suchness of the knowledge of all phenomena present within a great bodhisattva?

– No, Blessed One!

– Is the true suchness of the knowledge of the paths and the knowledge of all aspects present within a great bodhisattva?

– No, Blessed One!

– Is there a great bodhisattva apart from the true suchness of the knowledge of all phenomena?

– No, Blessed One!

– Is there a great bodhisattva apart from the true suchness of the knowledge of the paths and the knowledge of all aspects?

– No, Blessed One!

At that time, the Buddha said to the Venerable Subhuti: What meaning do you contemplate when you say that the true suchness of form itself is not a great bodhisattva; that the true suchness of feeling, perception, volitional formations, and consciousness itself is not a great bodhisattva; that what is other than the true suchness of form is not a great bodhisattva; that what is other than the true suchness of feeling, perception, volitional formations, and consciousness is not a great bodhisattva; that there is no great bodhisattva within the true suchness of form; that there is no great bodhisattva within the true suchness of feeling, perception, volitional formations, and consciousness; that the true suchness of form is not present within a great bodhisattva;

that the true suchness of feeling, perception, volitional formations, and consciousness is not present within a great bodhisattva; that there is no great bodhisattva apart from the true suchness of form; and that there is no great bodhisattva apart from the true suchness of feeling, perception, volitional formations, and consciousness?

The Venerable Subhuti replied: Blessed One, whether form or feeling, perception, volitional formations, and consciousness, ultimately none can be apprehended, because their nature is nonexistent; how much less could there be the true suchness of form and the true suchness of feeling, perception, volitional formations, and consciousness! Since these instances of true suchness do not exist, how could one say that the true suchness of form itself is a great bodhisattva; that the true suchness of feeling, perception, volitional formations, and consciousness itself is a great bodhisattva; that what is other than the true suchness of form is a great bodhisattva; that what is other than the true suchness of feeling, perception, volitional formations, and consciousness is a great bodhisattva;

that there is a great bodhisattva within the true suchness of form; that there is a great bodhisattva within the true suchness of feeling, perception, volitional formations, and consciousness; that the true suchness of form is present within a great bodhisattva; that the true suchness of feeling, perception, volitional formations, and consciousness is present within a great bodhisattva; that there is a great bodhisattva apart from the true suchness of form; or that there is a great bodhisattva apart from the true suchness of feeling, perception, volitional formations, and consciousness?

Furthermore, Subhuti! In light of what meaning do you say that the true suchness of the eye ayatana itself is not a great bodhisattva; that the true suchness of the ear, nose, tongue, body, and mind ayatanas itself is not a great bodhisattva; that what is other than the true suchness of the eye ayatana is not a great bodhisattva; that what is other than the true suchness of the ear, nose, tongue, body, and mind ayatanas is not a great bodhisattva; that within the true suchness of the eye ayatana there is no great bodhisattva; that within the true suchness of the ear, nose, tongue, body, and mind ayatanas there is no great bodhisattva; that within a great bodhisattva there is no true suchness of the eye ayatana;

that within a great bodhisattva there is no true suchness of the ear, nose, tongue, body, and mind ayatanas; that apart from the true suchness of the eye ayatana there is no great bodhisattva; and that apart from the true suchness of the ear, nose, tongue, body, and mind ayatanas there is no great bodhisattva?

The Venerable Subhuti replied: Blessed One! Whether the eye ayatana or the ear, nose, tongue, body, and mind ayatanas, ultimately none can be apprehended, because they have no intrinsic nature; how much less could there be the true suchness of the eye ayatana or the true suchness of the ear, nose, tongue, body, and mind ayatanas! Since these instances of true suchness do not exist, how could it be said that the true suchness of the eye ayatana itself is a great bodhisattva; that the true suchness of the ear, nose, tongue, body, and mind ayatanas itself is a great bodhisattva; that what is other than the true suchness of the eye ayatana is a great bodhisattva; that what is other than the true suchness of the ear, nose, tongue, body, and mind ayatanas is a great bodhisattva;

that within the true suchness of the eye ayatana there is a great bodhisattva; that within the true suchness of the ear, nose, tongue, body, and mind ayatanas there is a great bodhisattva; that within a great bodhisattva there is the true suchness of the eye ayatana; that within a great bodhisattva there is the true suchness of the ear, nose, tongue, body, and mind ayatanas; that apart from the true suchness of the eye ayatana there is a great bodhisattva; or that apart from the true suchness of the ear, nose, tongue, body, and mind ayatanas there is a great bodhisattva?

Furthermore, Subhuti! In light of what meaning do you say that the true suchness of the form ayatana itself is not a great bodhisattva; that the true suchness of the sound, odor, taste, touch, and dharma ayatanas itself is not a great bodhisattva; that what is other than the true suchness of the form ayatana is not a great bodhisattva; that what is other than the true suchness of the sound, odor, taste, touch, and dharma ayatanas is not a great bodhisattva; that within the true suchness of the form ayatana there is no great bodhisattva; that within the true suchness of the sound, odor, taste, touch, and dharma ayatanas there is no great bodhisattva; that within a great bodhisattva there is no true suchness of the form ayatana;

that within a great bodhisattva there is no true suchness of the sound, odor, taste, touch, and dharma ayatanas; that apart from the true suchness of the form ayatana there is no great bodhisattva; and that apart from the true suchness of the sound, odor, taste, touch, and dharma ayatanas there is no great bodhisattva?

The Venerable Subhuti replied: Blessed One! Whether the form ayatana or the sound, odor, taste, touch, and dharma ayatanas, ultimately none can be apprehended, because they have no intrinsic nature; how much less could there be the true suchness of the form ayatana or the true suchness of the sound, odor, taste, touch, and dharma ayatanas! Since these instances of true suchness do not exist, how could it be said that the true suchness of the form ayatana itself is a great bodhisattva; that the true suchness of the sound, odor, taste, touch, and dharma ayatanas itself is a great bodhisattva; that what is other than the true suchness of the form ayatana is a great bodhisattva;

that what is other than the true suchness of the sound, odor, taste, touch, and dharma ayatanas is a great bodhisattva; that within the true suchness of the form ayatana there is a great bodhisattva; that within the true suchness of the sound, odor, taste, touch, and dharma ayatanas there is a great bodhisattva; that within a great bodhisattva there is the true suchness of the form ayatana; that within a great bodhisattva there is the true suchness of the sound, odor, taste, touch, and dharma ayatanas; that apart from the true suchness of the form ayatana there is a great bodhisattva; or that apart from the true suchness of the sound, odor, taste, touch, and dharma ayatanas there is a great bodhisattva?

Furthermore, Subhuti! In light of what meaning do you say that the true suchness of the eye dhatu itself is not a great bodhisattva; that the true suchness of the ear, nose, tongue, body, and mind dhatus itself is not a great bodhisattva; that what is other than the true suchness of the eye dhatu is not a great bodhisattva; that what is other than the true suchness of the ear, nose, tongue, body, and mind dhatus is not a great bodhisattva; that within the true suchness of the eye dhatu there is no great bodhisattva; that within the true suchness of the ear, nose, tongue, body, and mind dhatus there is no great bodhisattva; that within a great bodhisattva there is no true suchness of the eye dhatu;

that within a great bodhisattva there is no true suchness of the ear, nose, tongue, body, and mind dhatus; that apart from the true suchness of the eye dhatu there is no great bodhisattva; and that apart from the true suchness of the ear, nose, tongue, body, and mind dhatus there is no great bodhisattva?

The Venerable Subhuti replied: Blessed One! Whether the eye dhatu or the ear, nose, tongue, body, and mind dhatus, ultimately none can be apprehended, because they have no intrinsic nature; how much less could there be the true suchness of the eye dhatu or the true suchness of the ear, nose, tongue, body, and mind dhatus! Since these instances of true suchness do not exist, how could it be said that the true suchness of the eye dhatu itself is a great bodhisattva; that the true suchness of the ear, nose, tongue, body, and mind dhatus itself is a great bodhisattva; that what is other than the true suchness of the eye dhatu is a great bodhisattva; that what is other than the true suchness of the ear, nose, tongue, body, and mind dhatus is a great bodhisattva;

that within the true suchness of the eye dhatu there is a great bodhisattva; that within the true suchness of the ear, nose, tongue, body, and mind dhatus there is a great bodhisattva; that within a great bodhisattva there is the true suchness of the eye dhatu; that within a great bodhisattva there is the true suchness of the ear, nose, tongue, body, and mind dhatus; that apart from the true suchness of the eye dhatu there is a great bodhisattva; or that apart from the true suchness of the ear, nose, tongue, body, and mind dhatus there is a great bodhisattva?

Furthermore, Subhuti! In light of what meaning do you say that the true suchness of the form dhatu itself is not a great bodhisattva; that the true suchness of the sound, odor, taste, touch, and dharma dhatus itself is not a great bodhisattva; that what is other than the true suchness of the form dhatu is not a great bodhisattva; that what is other than the true suchness of the sound, odor, taste, touch, and dharma dhatus is not a great bodhisattva; that within the true suchness of the form dhatu there is no great bodhisattva; that within the true suchness of the sound, odor, taste, touch, and dharma dhatus there is no great bodhisattva; that within a great bodhisattva there is no true suchness of the form dhatu;

that within a great bodhisattva there is no true suchness of the sound, odor, taste, touch, and dharma dhatus; that apart from the true suchness of the form dhatu there is no great bodhisattva; and that apart from the true suchness of the sound, odor, taste, touch, and dharma dhatus there is no great bodhisattva?

The Venerable Subhuti replied: Blessed One! Whether the form dhatu or the sound, odor, taste, touch, and dharma dhatus, ultimately none can be apprehended, because they have no intrinsic nature; how much less could there be the true suchness of the form dhatu or the true suchness of the sound, odor, taste, touch, and dharma dhatus! Since these instances of true suchness do not exist, how could it be said that the true suchness of the form dhatu itself is a great bodhisattva; that the true suchness of the sound, odor, taste, touch, and dharma dhatus itself is a great bodhisattva; that what is other than the true suchness of the form dhatu is a great bodhisattva; that what is other than the true suchness of the sound, odor, taste, touch, and dharma dhatus is a great bodhisattva;

that within the true suchness of the form dhatu there is a great bodhisattva; that within the true suchness of the sound, odor, taste, touch, and dharma dhatus there is a great bodhisattva; that within a great bodhisattva there is the true suchness of the form dhatu; that within a great bodhisattva there is the true suchness of the sound, odor, taste, touch, and dharma dhatus; that apart from the true suchness of the form dhatu there is a great bodhisattva; or that apart from the true suchness of the sound, odor, taste, touch, and dharma dhatus there is a great bodhisattva?

Furthermore, Subhuti! In light of what meaning do you say that the true suchness of the eye-consciousness element is not a great bodhisattva; that the true suchness of the ear-, nose-, tongue-, body-, and mind-consciousness elements is not a great bodhisattva; that what is other than the true suchness of the eye-consciousness element is not a great bodhisattva; that what is other than the true suchness of the ear-, nose-, tongue-, body-, and mind-consciousness elements is not a great bodhisattva; that within the true suchness of the eye-consciousness element there is no great bodhisattva; that within the true suchness of the ear-, nose-, tongue-, body-, and mind-consciousness elements there is no great bodhisattva;

that within a great bodhisattva there is no true suchness of the eye-consciousness element; that within a great bodhisattva there is no true suchness of the ear-, nose-, tongue-, body-, and mind-consciousness elements; that apart from the true suchness of the eye-consciousness element there is no great bodhisattva; and that apart from the true suchness of the ear-, nose-, tongue-, body-, and mind-consciousness elements there is no great bodhisattva?

The Venerable Subhuti said: Blessed One! Whether the eye-consciousness element or the ear-, nose-, tongue-, body-, and mind-consciousness elements, ultimately none can be apprehended, because their nature is nonexistent; how much less could there be the true suchness of the eye-consciousness element or the true suchness of the ear-, nose-, tongue-, body-, and mind-consciousness elements! Since these instances of true suchness do not exist, how could it be said that the true suchness of the eye-consciousness element is a great bodhisattva; that the true suchness of the ear-, nose-, tongue-, body-, and mind-consciousness elements is a great bodhisattva; that what is other than the true suchness of the eye-consciousness element is a great bodhisattva;

that what is other than the true suchness of the ear-, nose-, tongue-, body-, and mind-consciousness elements is a great bodhisattva; that within the true suchness of the eye-consciousness element there is a great bodhisattva; that within the true suchness of the ear-, nose-, tongue-, body-, and mind-consciousness elements there is a great bodhisattva; that within a great bodhisattva there is the true suchness of the eye-consciousness element; that within a great bodhisattva there is the true suchness of the ear-, nose-, tongue-, body-, and mind-consciousness elements; that apart from the true suchness of the eye-consciousness element there is a great bodhisattva;

or that apart from the true suchness of the ear-, nose-, tongue-, body-, and mind-consciousness elements there is a great bodhisattva?

Furthermore, Subhuti! In light of what meaning do you say that the true suchness of eye-contact is not a great bodhisattva; that the true suchness of ear-, nose-, tongue-, body-, and mind-contact is not a great bodhisattva; that what is other than the true suchness of eye-contact is not a great bodhisattva; that what is other than the true suchness of ear-, nose-, tongue-, body-, and mind-contact is not a great bodhisattva; that within the true suchness of eye-contact there is no great bodhisattva; that within the true suchness of ear-, nose-, tongue-, body-, and mind-contact there is no great bodhisattva; that within a great bodhisattva there is no true suchness of eye-contact; that within a great bodhisattva there is no true suchness of ear-, nose-, tongue-, body-, and mind-contact;

that apart from the true suchness of eye-contact there is no great bodhisattva; and that apart from the true suchness of ear-, nose-, tongue-, body-, and mind-contact there is no great bodhisattva?

The Venerable Subhuti said: Blessed One! Whether eye-contact or ear-, nose-, tongue-, body-, and mind-contact, ultimately none can be apprehended, because their nature is nonexistent; how much less could there be the true suchness of eye-contact or the true suchness of ear-, nose-, tongue-, body-, and mind-contact! Since these instances of true suchness do not exist, how could it be said that the true suchness of eye-contact is a great bodhisattva; that the true suchness of ear-, nose-, tongue-, body-, and mind-contact is a great bodhisattva; that what is other than the true suchness of eye-contact is a great bodhisattva; that what is other than the true suchness of ear-, nose-, tongue-, body-, and mind-contact is a great bodhisattva;

that within the true suchness of eye-contact there is a great bodhisattva; that within the true suchness of ear-, nose-, tongue-, body-, and mind-contact there is a great bodhisattva; that within a great bodhisattva there is the true suchness of eye-contact; that within a great bodhisattva there is the true suchness of ear-, nose-, tongue-, body-, and mind-contact; that apart from the true suchness of eye-contact there is a great bodhisattva; or that apart from the true suchness of ear-, nose-, tongue-, body-, and mind-contact there is a great bodhisattva?

Furthermore, Subhuti! In light of what meaning do you say that the true suchness of the feelings arising with eye-contact as condition is not a great bodhisattva; that the true suchness of the feelings arising with ear-, nose-, tongue-, body-, and mind-contact as condition is not a great bodhisattva; that what is other than the true suchness of the feelings arising with eye-contact as condition is not a great bodhisattva; that what is other than the true suchness of the feelings arising with ear-, nose-, tongue-, body-, and mind-contact as condition is not a great bodhisattva; that within the true suchness of the feelings arising with eye-contact as condition there is no great bodhisattva;

that within the true suchness of the feelings arising with ear-, nose-, tongue-, body-, and mind-contact as condition there is no great bodhisattva; that within a great bodhisattva there is no true suchness of the feelings arising with eye-contact as condition; that within a great bodhisattva there is no true suchness of the feelings arising with ear-, nose-, tongue-, body-, and mind-contact as condition; that apart from the true suchness of the feelings arising with eye-contact as condition there is no great bodhisattva; and that apart from the true suchness of the feelings arising with ear-, nose-, tongue-, body-, and mind-contact as condition there is no great bodhisattva?

The Venerable Subhuti said: Blessed One! Whether the feelings arising with eye-contact as condition or the feelings arising with ear-, nose-, tongue-, body-, and mind-contact as condition, ultimately none can be apprehended, because their nature is nonexistent; how much less could there be the true suchness of the feelings arising with eye-contact as condition or the true suchness of the feelings arising with ear-, nose-, tongue-, body-, and mind-contact as condition!

Since these instances of true suchness do not exist, how could it be said that the true suchness of the feelings arising with eye-contact as condition is a great bodhisattva; that the true suchness of the feelings arising with ear-, nose-, tongue-, body-, and mind-contact as condition is a great bodhisattva; that what is other than the true suchness of the feelings arising with eye-contact as condition is a great bodhisattva; that what is other than the true suchness of the feelings arising with ear-, nose-, tongue-, body-, and mind-contact as condition is a great bodhisattva; that within the true suchness of the feelings arising with eye-contact as condition there is a great bodhisattva;

that within the true suchness of the feelings arising with ear-, nose-, tongue-, body-, and mind-contact as condition there is a great bodhisattva; that within a great bodhisattva there is the true suchness of the feelings arising with eye-contact as condition; that within a great bodhisattva there is the true suchness of the feelings arising with ear-, nose-, tongue-, body-, and mind-contact as condition; that apart from the true suchness of the feelings arising with eye-contact as condition there is a great bodhisattva; or that apart from the true suchness of the feelings arising with ear-, nose-, tongue-, body-, and mind-contact as condition there is a great bodhisattva?

Furthermore, Subhuti! In light of what meaning do you say that the true suchness of the earth element is not a great bodhisattva; that the true suchness of the water, fire, wind, space, and consciousness elements is not a great bodhisattva; that what is other than the true suchness of the earth element is not a great bodhisattva; that what is other than the true suchness of the water, fire, wind, space, and consciousness elements is not a great bodhisattva; that within the true suchness of the earth element there is no great bodhisattva; that within the true suchness of the water, fire, wind, space, and consciousness elements there is no great bodhisattva; that within a great bodhisattva there is no true suchness of the earth element;

that within a great bodhisattva there is no true suchness of the water, fire, wind, space, and consciousness elements; that apart from the true suchness of the earth element there is no great bodhisattva; and that apart from the true suchness of the water, fire, wind, space, and consciousness elements there is no great bodhisattva?

The Venerable Subhuti said: “Blessed One! Whether the earth dhatu or the water, fire, wind, space, or consciousness dhatu, ultimately none can be apprehended, because their nature does not exist; how much less could there be the true suchness of the earth dhatu or the true suchness of the water, fire, wind, space, or consciousness dhatu! Since these true suchnesses do not exist, how could it be said that the true suchness of the earth dhatu itself is a great bodhisattva; that the true suchness of the water, fire, wind, space, or consciousness dhatu itself is a great bodhisattva; that what is other than the true suchness of the earth dhatu is a great bodhisattva; that what is other than the true suchness of the water, fire, wind, space, or consciousness dhatu is a great bodhisattva;

that within the true suchness of the earth dhatu there is a great bodhisattva; that within the true suchness of the water, fire, wind, space, or consciousness dhatu there is a great bodhisattva; that within a great bodhisattva there is the true suchness of the earth dhatu; that within a great bodhisattva there is the true suchness of the water, fire, wind, space, or consciousness dhatu; that apart from the true suchness of the earth dhatu there is a great bodhisattva; or that apart from the true suchness of the water, fire, wind, space, or consciousness dhatu there is a great bodhisattva?”

“Furthermore, Subhuti! In view of what meaning do you say that the true suchness of the causal condition itself is not a great bodhisattva; that the true suchness of the immediately antecedent condition, the object condition, or the dominant condition itself is not a great bodhisattva; that what is other than the true suchness of the causal condition is not a great bodhisattva; that what is other than the true suchness of the immediately antecedent condition, the object condition, or the dominant condition is not a great bodhisattva; that within the true suchness of the causal condition there is no great bodhisattva; that within the true suchness of the immediately antecedent condition, the object condition, or the dominant condition there is no great bodhisattva;

that within a great bodhisattva there is no true suchness of the causal condition; that within a great bodhisattva there is no true suchness of the immediately antecedent condition, the object condition, or the dominant condition; that apart from the true suchness of the causal condition there is no great bodhisattva; or that apart from the true suchness of the immediately antecedent condition, the object condition, or the dominant condition there is no great bodhisattva?”

The Venerable Subhuti said: “Blessed One! Whether the causal condition or the immediately antecedent condition, the object condition, or the dominant condition, ultimately none can be apprehended, because their nature does not exist; how much less could there be the true suchness of the causal condition or the true suchness of the immediately antecedent condition, the object condition, or the dominant condition! Since these true suchnesses do not exist, how could it be said that the true suchness of the causal condition itself is a great bodhisattva; that the true suchness of the immediately antecedent condition, the object condition, or the dominant condition itself is a great bodhisattva; that what is other than the true suchness of the causal condition is a great bodhisattva;

that what is other than the true suchness of the immediately antecedent condition, the object condition, or the dominant condition is a great bodhisattva; that within the true suchness of the causal condition there is a great bodhisattva; that within the true suchness of the immediately antecedent condition, the object condition, or the dominant condition there is a great bodhisattva; that within a great bodhisattva there is the true suchness of the causal condition; that within a great bodhisattva there is the true suchness of the immediately antecedent condition, the object condition, or the dominant condition; that apart from the true suchness of the causal condition there is a great bodhisattva;

or that apart from the true suchness of the immediately antecedent condition, the object condition, or the dominant condition there is a great bodhisattva?”

“Furthermore, Subhuti! In view of what meaning do you say that the true suchness of dependently arisen dharmas itself is not a great bodhisattva; that what is other than the true suchness of dependently arisen dharmas is not a great bodhisattva; that within the true suchness of dependently arisen dharmas there is no great bodhisattva; that within a great bodhisattva there is no true suchness of dependently arisen dharmas; or that apart from the true suchness of dependently arisen dharmas there is no great bodhisattva?”

The Venerable Subhuti said: “Blessed One! Dependently arisen dharmas ultimately cannot be apprehended, because their nature does not exist; how much less could there be the true suchness of dependently arisen dharmas! Since this true suchness does not exist, how could it be said that the true suchness of dependently arisen dharmas itself is a great bodhisattva; that what is other than the true suchness of dependently arisen dharmas is a great bodhisattva; that within the true suchness of dependently arisen dharmas there is a great bodhisattva; that within a great bodhisattva there is the true suchness of dependently arisen dharmas; or that apart from the true suchness of dependently arisen dharmas there is a great bodhisattva?”

“Furthermore, Subhuti! In view of what meaning do you say that the true suchness of ignorance itself is not a great bodhisattva; that the true suchness of formations, consciousness, name-and-form, the six ayatanas, contact, feeling, craving, clinging, existence, birth, or aging-and-death itself is not a great bodhisattva; that what is other than the true suchness of ignorance is not a great bodhisattva; that what is other than the true suchness of formations through aging-and-death is not a great bodhisattva; that within the true suchness of ignorance there is no great bodhisattva; that within the true suchness of formations through aging-and-death there is no great bodhisattva; that within a great bodhisattva there is no true suchness of ignorance;

that within a great bodhisattva there is no true suchness of formations through aging-and-death; that apart from the true suchness of ignorance there is no great bodhisattva; or that apart from the true suchness of formations through aging-and-death there is no great bodhisattva?”

The Venerable Subhuti said: “Blessed One! Whether ignorance or formations through aging-and-death, ultimately none can be apprehended, because their nature does not exist; how much less could there be the true suchness of ignorance and the true suchness of formations through the true suchness of aging-and-death! Since these true suchnesses do not exist, how could it be said that the true suchness of ignorance itself is a great bodhisattva; that the true suchness of formations through aging-and-death itself is a great bodhisattva; that what is other than the true suchness of ignorance is a great bodhisattva; that what is other than the true suchness of formations through aging-and-death is a great bodhisattva; that within the true suchness of ignorance there is a great bodhisattva;

that within the true suchness of formations through aging-and-death there is a great bodhisattva; that within a great bodhisattva there is the true suchness of ignorance; that within a great bodhisattva there is the true suchness of formations through aging-and-death; that apart from the true suchness of ignorance there is a great bodhisattva; or that apart from the true suchness of formations through aging-and-death there is a great bodhisattva?”

“Furthermore, Subhuti! In view of what meaning do you say that the true suchness of the perfection of generosity itself is not a great bodhisattva; that the true suchness of the perfections of pure ethical discipline, patient endurance, diligence, meditation, or prajnaparamita itself is not a great bodhisattva; that what is other than the true suchness of the perfection of generosity is not a great bodhisattva; that what is other than the true suchness of the perfections of pure ethical discipline, patient endurance, diligence, meditation, or prajnaparamita is not a great bodhisattva; that within the true suchness of the perfection of generosity there is no great bodhisattva;

that within the true suchness of the perfections of pure ethical discipline, patient endurance, diligence, meditation, or prajnaparamita there is no great bodhisattva; that within a great bodhisattva there is no true suchness of the perfection of generosity; that within a great bodhisattva there is no true suchness of the perfections of pure ethical discipline, patient endurance, diligence, meditation, or prajnaparamita; that apart from the true suchness of the perfection of generosity there is no great bodhisattva; or that apart from the true suchness of the perfections of pure ethical discipline, patient endurance, diligence, meditation, or prajnaparamita there is no great bodhisattva?”

The Venerable Subhuti said, “Blessed One! Whether the perfection of generosity, or the perfections of moral discipline, patience, vigor, meditative concentration, and prajnaparamita, ultimately none can be apprehended, because their nature is nonexistent. How much less could there be the true suchness of the perfection of generosity or the true suchness of the perfections of moral discipline, patience, vigor, meditative concentration, and prajnaparamita!

Since these true suchnesses do not exist, how could it be said that the true suchness of the perfection of generosity itself is a great bodhisattva; that the true suchness of the perfections of moral discipline, patience, vigor, meditative concentration, and prajnaparamita itself is a great bodhisattva; that what is other than the true suchness of the perfection of generosity is a great bodhisattva; that what is other than the true suchness of the perfections of moral discipline, patience, vigor, meditative concentration, and prajnaparamita is a great bodhisattva; that within the true suchness of the perfection of generosity there is a great bodhisattva;

that within the true suchness of the perfections of moral discipline, patience, vigor, meditative concentration, and prajnaparamita there is a great bodhisattva; that within a great bodhisattva there is the true suchness of the perfection of generosity; that within a great bodhisattva there is the true suchness of the perfections of moral discipline, patience, vigor, meditative concentration, and prajnaparamita; that apart from the true suchness of the perfection of generosity there is a great bodhisattva; or that apart from the true suchness of the perfections of moral discipline, patience, vigor, meditative concentration, and prajnaparamita there is a great bodhisattva?”

“Furthermore, Subhuti! With what meaning in view do you say that the true suchness of internal emptiness itself is not a great bodhisattva; that the true suchness of external emptiness, internal-and-external emptiness, the emptiness of emptiness, great emptiness, ultimate emptiness, the emptiness of the conditioned, the emptiness of the unconditioned, ultimate emptiness, boundless emptiness, the emptiness of dispersion, the emptiness of nonchange, the emptiness of intrinsic nature, the emptiness of individual characteristics, the emptiness of common characteristics, the emptiness of all dharmas, the emptiness of the unapprehensible, the emptiness of nonexistence, the emptiness of self-nature, and the emptiness of the nonexistence of self-nature itself is not a great bodhisattva;

that what is other than the true suchness of internal emptiness is not a great bodhisattva; that what is other than the true suchness of external emptiness through the emptiness of the nonexistence of self-nature is not a great bodhisattva; that within the true suchness of internal emptiness there is no great bodhisattva; that within the true suchness of external emptiness through the emptiness of the nonexistence of self-nature there is no great bodhisattva; that within a great bodhisattva there is no true suchness of internal emptiness; that within a great bodhisattva there is no true suchness of external emptiness through the emptiness of the nonexistence of self-nature; that apart from the true suchness of internal emptiness there is no great bodhisattva;

or that apart from the true suchness of external emptiness through the emptiness of the nonexistence of self-nature there is no great bodhisattva?”

The Venerable Subhuti said, “Blessed One! Whether internal emptiness or external emptiness through the emptiness of the nonexistence of self-nature, ultimately none can be apprehended, because their nature is nonexistent. How much less could there be the true suchness of internal emptiness or the true suchness of external emptiness through the emptiness of the nonexistence of self-nature!

Since these true suchnesses do not exist, how could it be said that the true suchness of internal emptiness itself is a great bodhisattva; that the true suchness of external emptiness through the emptiness of the nonexistence of self-nature itself is a great bodhisattva; that what is other than the true suchness of internal emptiness is a great bodhisattva; that what is other than the true suchness of external emptiness through the emptiness of the nonexistence of self-nature is a great bodhisattva; that within the true suchness of internal emptiness there is a great bodhisattva; that within the true suchness of external emptiness through the emptiness of the nonexistence of self-nature there is a great bodhisattva;

that within a great bodhisattva there is the true suchness of internal emptiness; that within a great bodhisattva there is the true suchness of external emptiness through the emptiness of the nonexistence of self-nature; that apart from the true suchness of internal emptiness there is a great bodhisattva; or that apart from the true suchness of external emptiness through the emptiness of the nonexistence of self-nature there is a great bodhisattva?”

“Furthermore, Subhuti! With what meaning in view do you say that the true suchness of the four foundations of mindfulness itself is not a great bodhisattva; that the true suchness of the four right efforts, the four bases of spiritual power, the five faculties, the five powers, the seven factors of awakening, and the Noble Eightfold Path itself is not a great bodhisattva; that what is other than the true suchness of the four foundations of mindfulness is not a great bodhisattva; that what is other than the true suchness of the four right efforts through the Noble Eightfold Path is not a great bodhisattva; that within the true suchness of the four foundations of mindfulness there is no great bodhisattva;

that within the true suchness of the four right efforts through the Noble Eightfold Path there is no great bodhisattva; that within a great bodhisattva there is no true suchness of the four foundations of mindfulness; that within a great bodhisattva there is no true suchness of the four right efforts through the Noble Eightfold Path; that apart from the true suchness of the four foundations of mindfulness there is no great bodhisattva; or that apart from the true suchness of the four right efforts through the Noble Eightfold Path there is no great bodhisattva?”

The Venerable Subhuti said, “Blessed One! Whether the four foundations of mindfulness or the four right efforts through the Noble Eightfold Path, ultimately none can be apprehended, because their nature is nonexistent. How much less could there be the true suchness of the four foundations of mindfulness or the true suchness of the four right efforts through the Noble Eightfold Path!

Since these true suchnesses do not exist, how could it be said that the true suchness of the four foundations of mindfulness itself is a great bodhisattva; that the true suchness of the four right efforts through the Noble Eightfold Path itself is a great bodhisattva; that what is other than the true suchness of the four foundations of mindfulness is a great bodhisattva; that what is other than the true suchness of the four right efforts through the Noble Eightfold Path is a great bodhisattva; that within the true suchness of the four foundations of mindfulness there is a great bodhisattva; that within the true suchness of the four right efforts through the Noble Eightfold Path there is a great bodhisattva;

that within a great bodhisattva there is the true suchness of the four foundations of mindfulness; that within a great bodhisattva there is the true suchness of the four right efforts through the Noble Eightfold Path; that apart from the true suchness of the four foundations of mindfulness there is a great bodhisattva; or that apart from the true suchness of the four right efforts through the Noble Eightfold Path there is a great bodhisattva?”

“Furthermore, Subhuti! With what meaning in view do you say that the true suchness of the Noble Truth of suffering itself is not a great bodhisattva; that the true suchness of the Noble Truths of the origin of suffering, the cessation of suffering, and the path itself is not a great bodhisattva; that what is other than the true suchness of the Noble Truth of suffering is not a great bodhisattva; that what is other than the true suchness of the Noble Truths of the origin of suffering, the cessation of suffering, and the path is not a great bodhisattva; that within the true suchness of the Noble Truth of suffering there is no great bodhisattva; that within the true suchness of the Noble Truths of the origin of suffering, the cessation of suffering, and the path there is no great bodhisattva;

that within a great bodhisattva there is no true suchness of the Noble Truth of suffering; that within a great bodhisattva there is no true suchness of the Noble Truths of the origin of suffering, the cessation of suffering, and the path; that apart from the true suchness of the Noble Truth of suffering there is no great bodhisattva; or that apart from the true suchness of the Noble Truths of the origin of suffering, the cessation of suffering, and the path there is no great bodhisattva?”

The Venerable Subhuti said: “Blessed One! Whether the noble truth of suffering or the noble truths of the origin, cessation, and path, ultimately none can be apprehended, because their nature is nonexistent; how much less could there be the true suchness of the noble truth of suffering or the true suchness of the noble truths of the origin, cessation, and path! Since these true suchnesses do not exist, how could it be said that the true suchness of the noble truth of suffering itself is a great bodhisattva; that the true suchness of the noble truths of the origin, cessation, and path itself is a great bodhisattva; that something other than the true suchness of the noble truth of suffering is a great bodhisattva;

that something other than the true suchness of the noble truths of the origin, cessation, and path is a great bodhisattva; that within the true suchness of the noble truth of suffering there is a great bodhisattva; that within the true suchness of the noble truths of the origin, cessation, and path there is a great bodhisattva; that within a great bodhisattva there is the true suchness of the noble truth of suffering; that within a great bodhisattva there is the true suchness of the noble truths of the origin, cessation, and path; that apart from the true suchness of the noble truth of suffering there is a great bodhisattva; or that apart from the true suchness of the noble truths of the origin, cessation, and path there is a great bodhisattva?”

“Furthermore, Subhuti! With what meaning in view do you say that the true suchness of the four dhyanas itself is not a great bodhisattva; that the true suchness of the four immeasurables and the four formless attainments itself is not a great bodhisattva; that something other than the true suchness of the four dhyanas is not a great bodhisattva; that something other than the true suchness of the four immeasurables and the four formless attainments is not a great bodhisattva; that within the true suchness of the four dhyanas there is no great bodhisattva; that within the true suchness of the four immeasurables and the four formless attainments there is no great bodhisattva; that within a great bodhisattva there is no true suchness of the four dhyanas;

that within a great bodhisattva there is no true suchness of the four immeasurables and the four formless attainments; that apart from the true suchness of the four dhyanas there is no great bodhisattva; or that apart from the true suchness of the four immeasurables and the four formless attainments there is no great bodhisattva?”

The Venerable Subhuti said: “Blessed One! Whether the four dhyanas or the four immeasurables and the four formless attainments, ultimately none can be apprehended, because their nature is nonexistent; how much less could there be the true suchness of the four dhyanas or the true suchness of the four immeasurables and the four formless attainments! Since these true suchnesses do not exist, how could it be said that the true suchness of the four dhyanas itself is a great bodhisattva; that the true suchness of the four immeasurables and the four formless attainments itself is a great bodhisattva; that something other than the true suchness of the four dhyanas is a great bodhisattva;

that something other than the true suchness of the four immeasurables and the four formless attainments is a great bodhisattva; that within the true suchness of the four dhyanas there is a great bodhisattva; that within the true suchness of the four immeasurables and the four formless attainments there is a great bodhisattva; that within a great bodhisattva there is the true suchness of the four dhyanas; that within a great bodhisattva there is the true suchness of the four immeasurables and the four formless attainments; that apart from the true suchness of the four dhyanas there is a great bodhisattva; or that apart from the true suchness of the four immeasurables and the four formless attainments there is a great bodhisattva?”

“Furthermore, Subhuti! With what meaning in view do you say that the true suchness of the eight liberations is not a great bodhisattva; that the true suchness of the eight bases of mastery, the nine successive absorptions, and the ten totalities itself is not a great bodhisattva; that something other than the true suchness of the eight liberations is not a great bodhisattva; that something other than the true suchness of the eight bases of mastery, the nine successive absorptions, and the ten totalities is not a great bodhisattva; that within the true suchness of the eight liberations there is no great bodhisattva; that within the true suchness of the eight bases of mastery, the nine successive absorptions, and the ten totalities there is no great bodhisattva;

that within a great bodhisattva there is no true suchness of the eight liberations; that within a great bodhisattva there is no true suchness of the eight bases of mastery, the nine successive absorptions, and the ten totalities; that apart from the true suchness of the eight liberations there is no great bodhisattva; or that apart from the true suchness of the eight bases of mastery, the nine successive absorptions, and the ten totalities there is no great bodhisattva?”

The Venerable Subhuti said: “Blessed One! Whether the eight liberations or the eight bases of mastery, the nine successive absorptions, and the ten totalities, ultimately none can be apprehended, because their nature is nonexistent; how much less could there be the true suchness of the eight liberations or the true suchness of the eight bases of mastery, the nine successive absorptions, and the ten totalities! Since these true suchnesses do not exist, how could it be said that the true suchness of the eight liberations itself is a great bodhisattva; that the true suchness of the eight bases of mastery, the nine successive absorptions, and the ten totalities itself is a great bodhisattva; that something other than the true suchness of the eight liberations is a great bodhisattva;

that something other than the true suchness of the eight bases of mastery, the nine successive absorptions, and the ten totalities is a great bodhisattva; that within the true suchness of the eight liberations there is a great bodhisattva; that within the true suchness of the eight bases of mastery, the nine successive absorptions, and the ten totalities there is a great bodhisattva; that within a great bodhisattva there is the true suchness of the eight liberations; that within a great bodhisattva there is the true suchness of the eight bases of mastery, the nine successive absorptions, and the ten totalities; that apart from the true suchness of the eight liberations there is a great bodhisattva;

or that apart from the true suchness of the eight bases of mastery, the nine successive absorptions, and the ten totalities there is a great bodhisattva?”

“Furthermore, Subhuti! With what meaning in view do you say that the true suchness of the gateway to liberation through emptiness itself is not a great bodhisattva; that the true suchness of the gateways to liberation through signlessness and wishlessness itself is not a great bodhisattva; that something other than the true suchness of the gateway to liberation through emptiness is not a great bodhisattva; that something other than the true suchness of the gateways to liberation through signlessness and wishlessness is not a great bodhisattva; that within the true suchness of the gateway to liberation through emptiness there is no great bodhisattva; that within the true suchness of the gateways to liberation through signlessness and wishlessness there is no great bodhisattva;

that within a great bodhisattva there is no true suchness of the gateway to liberation through emptiness; that within a great bodhisattva there is no true suchness of the gateways to liberation through signlessness and wishlessness; that apart from the true suchness of the gateway to liberation through emptiness there is no great bodhisattva; or that apart from the true suchness of the gateways to liberation through signlessness and wishlessness there is no great bodhisattva?”

The Venerable Subhuti said: “Blessed One! Whether the gateway to liberation through emptiness or the gateways to liberation through signlessness and wishlessness, ultimately none can be apprehended, because their nature is nonexistent; how much less could there be the true suchness of the gateway to liberation through emptiness or the true suchness of the gateways to liberation through signlessness and wishlessness! Since these true suchnesses do not exist, how could it be said that the true suchness of the gateway to liberation through emptiness itself is a great bodhisattva; that the true suchness of the gateways to liberation through signlessness and wishlessness itself is a great bodhisattva;

that something other than the true suchness of the gateway to liberation through emptiness is a great bodhisattva; that something other than the true suchness of the gateways to liberation through signlessness and wishlessness is a great bodhisattva; that within the true suchness of the gateway to liberation through emptiness there is a great bodhisattva; that within the true suchness of the gateways to liberation through signlessness and wishlessness there is a great bodhisattva; that within a great bodhisattva there is the true suchness of the gateway to liberation through emptiness; that within a great bodhisattva there is the true suchness of the gateways to liberation through signlessness and wishlessness;

that apart from the true suchness of the gateway to liberation through emptiness there is a great bodhisattva; or that apart from the true suchness of the gateways to liberation through signlessness and wishlessness there is a great bodhisattva?”

Furthermore, Subhuti! What meaning do you discern that you say that the very suchness of the dharani gateways is not a great bodhisattva; the very suchness of the samadhi gateways is not a great bodhisattva; that which is other than the suchness of the dharani gateways is not a great bodhisattva; that which is other than the suchness of the samadhi gateways is not a great bodhisattva; within the suchness of the dharani gateways there is no great bodhisattva; within the suchness of the samadhi gateways there is no great bodhisattva; within a great bodhisattva there is no suchness of the dharani gateways; within a great bodhisattva there is no suchness of the samadhi gateways; apart from the suchness of the dharani gateways there is no great bodhisattva;

and apart from the suchness of the samadhi gateways there is no great bodhisattva?

The Venerable Subhuti addressed the Buddha: Blessed One! Whether the dharani gateways or the samadhi gateways, ultimately they cannot be apprehended at all, because their nature is nonexistent; how much less could there be the suchness of the dharani gateways and the suchness of the samadhi gateways! Since these forms of suchness do not exist, how could it be said that the very suchness of the dharani gateways is a great bodhisattva; the very suchness of the samadhi gateways is a great bodhisattva; that which is other than the suchness of the dharani gateways is a great bodhisattva; that which is other than the suchness of the samadhi gateways is a great bodhisattva; within the suchness of the dharani gateways there is a great bodhisattva;

within the suchness of the samadhi gateways there is a great bodhisattva; within a great bodhisattva there is the suchness of the dharani gateways; within a great bodhisattva there is the suchness of the samadhi gateways; apart from the suchness of the dharani gateways there is a great bodhisattva; or apart from the suchness of the samadhi gateways there is a great bodhisattva?

Volume 16

End