金剛經決疑

Many people explain the two words “Vajra” on the basis of its hardness and sharpness, by which it can cut through things. This is merely a general explanation. In the Western Regions, however, there is a precious substance called vajra. This treasure is exceedingly hard and cannot be destroyed, yet it can destroy all other things. If this treasure is taken as an analogy for prajna, which can eliminate afflictions, then although the explanation comes close to the principle, it is still not the Buddha’s intent; it is merely an ordinary view following old conventions.

Prajna means wisdom; it is precisely the mind of the Buddha, that is, the Buddha’s wisdom. Paramita means reaching the other shore. It indicates the ultimate state of the mind.

Thus, the title Vajra Prajnaparamita expresses the meaning of this sutra and particularly reveals the Buddha’s adamantine mind.

Moreover, the adamantine mind is the fundamental mind through which the Buddha cultivated the cause and realized the fruit. Now that the Buddha has appeared in the world to teach and transform sentient beings, he employs this mind entirely. He teaches bodhisattvas to take the adamantine mind as the foundation for cultivating the cause and as the first gateway for entering the Great Vehicle.

Therefore, he especially points out the adamantine mind in order to resolve doubts. Because this mind is unlike the ordinary sentiments of worldly beings, the whole world is unable to understand the Buddha. Furthermore, the Buddha is originally not a worldly person, yet now he has suddenly come into the human realm, so everyone who sees him gives rise to doubt.

Moreover, in all the Buddha’s daily activities, everything is different: his speech differs, his rules differ from those of the world, and everything runs counter to worldly ways. Thus, those who see him are stirred to doubt. For this reason, devas and Mara kings wished to harm the Buddha; Devadatta and Ajatashatru wished to kill the Buddha; and then everyone slandered the Buddha.

Therefore, the Buddha said, “When I appear in the world, all devas, humans, asuras, non-Buddhists, and Mara kings are bound to become frightened and doubtful.” Indeed! Not only did devas and humans give rise to doubt, but even foremost disciples such as Kashyapa and others all doubted the Buddha. The Dharma he taught was suddenly emptiness and suddenly existence, suddenly affirmation and suddenly denial; sometimes he praised and sometimes he disparaged, sometimes he encouraged and sometimes he rebuked—there were no fixed words at all.

Therefore, when the disciples heard the Dharma, they all doubted and did not believe. Thus they said, “Is this not Mara masquerading as the Buddha in order to disturb our minds?” If even the foremost disciples were like this, one can well imagine the condition of beginners!

Because the Dharma taught by the Buddha was difficult to believe and difficult to understand, even thirty years after the Buddha appeared in the world and first began teaching the Dharma, his disciples still harbored doubts and did not believe. Thus, the Buddha endured this injustice for a very long time. Today, fortunately, Subhuti has understood a little and perceived the World-Honored One to some small extent, and so he offers praise.

Therefore, prompted by Subhuti’s doubt, the World-Honored One decisively dispels it, laying bare his own true adamantine mind and revealing it clearly to him, so that he may thoroughly awaken and no longer doubt, and so that the doubts of those who hear may swiftly cease. Thus, this sutra is truly the Buddha’s teaching of his own mind in order to cut off the doubts of disciples studying the Buddha’s teaching; it does not say that prajna can eliminate the afflictions of sentient beings.

Such an interpretation is incorrect. One need only observe that every passage in the sutra concerns Subhuti’s doubts—his doubts about the Buddha’s mind. The Buddha reveals this mind in order to dispel those doubts.

Where does it ever say that wisdom is used to eliminate the afflictions of sentient beings? Therefore, the title of this sutra names the Dharma itself; it is not an analogy. One need only eliminate the disciples’ doubts, and the afflictions of sentient beings will thereby be eliminated.

This sutra has but one essential flavor: dispelling doubt and giving rise to faith. For those who study the Way take faith as their foundation and doubt as their obstruction. There are three kinds of doubt:

Doubt regarding the person,

Doubt regarding the Dharma,

Doubt regarding oneself.

Doubt regarding the person means considering the person to be untrue. For example, when disciples hear the Buddha speak of the physical body, the Dharma body, the great body, and the small body, they do not know which is the true Buddha. This is doubt regarding the person—doubt regarding the Buddha.

Furthermore, when teaching the Dharma, the Buddha has only just said that something exists when he then says that it does not exist, and afterward says that it is not nonexistent. Because his statements appear inconsistent, they arouse great doubt. This is doubt regarding the Dharma.

Some people who hear may be able to believe and have no doubt regarding the Dharma, yet when they see how vast and great the Dharma is, they begin to doubt whether their own faculties are too inferior to bear it or to practice it. This is doubt regarding oneself.

All three kinds of doubt are present in this sutra. Wherever Subhuti harbors doubt, the Buddha immediately drives it away and destroys it, bringing all doubt to an end. Thus it is said, “When doubt and regret have been completely exhausted, one abides in true wisdom.” This is the purport of this sutra.

In this land, many people have explained the Vajra Sutra, but their explanations do not accord with the Buddha’s intent. In the Western Regions, however, the bodhisattva Vasubandhu divided the sutra according to twenty-seven doubts, and this is quite accurate. Although its meaning issued from a sage, by the time the treatise was transmitted to this land it had passed through translation.

Translators vary in skill, and when the words fail to convey the meaning, they instead produce obstructions that make it difficult for students to discern. This subtle and profound purport cannot be expressed in speech. The moment it falls into words, it becomes mere dregs; how much less could attachment to superficial written language reach what is subtle and wondrous?

The difficulty of annotation lies in portraying the Buddha’s mind; nowhere does it avoid the flaw of imitating another’s frown. It is like worldly people writing an account of someone’s life: they can recount the events, but cannot fully transmit the person’s spirit. This is the difficulty.

In resolving these doubts, the essential point is first to perceive Subhuti’s doubts. If the doubtful concerns are fully revealed, the Buddha’s words that dispel them become clear of themselves, without awaiting explanation. Therefore, in this explanation of the doubts, each doubt is first presented before the corresponding passage of the text, and then each section is explained according to the way it dispels that doubt. If one forgets the words and realizes the meaning, one attains the central principle of this sutra.

Root Text:

Thus Have I Heard. At One Time the Buddha Was Staying in Anathapindika’s Garden in the Jeta Grove, in the Kingdom of Shravasti, Together with an Assembly of 1,250 Great Bhikshus.

Explanation:

This is the customary formula for the teaching of the Dharma during the Buddha’s lifetime. The various commentaries have explained it fully, so it will not be discussed at length here.

Root Text:

At That Time, When It Was Time to Eat, the World-Honored One Put On His Robe, Took Up His Bowl, and Entered the Great City of Shravasti to Beg for Food. After Begging for Food in Order from House to House Within the City, He Returned to His Dwelling. Having Finished His Meal, He Put Away His Robe and Bowl, Washed His Feet, Arranged His Seat, and Sat Down.

Explanation:

This describes the Buddha’s ordinary life in the world; his daily activities appeared no different from those of everyone else. There was nothing unusual or extraordinary. Yet within them was one point in which he differed from others. Very few people understood it.

Root Text:

At That Time, the Elder Subhuti Rose from His Seat in the Midst of the Great Assembly, Bared His Right Shoulder, Placed His Right Knee on the Ground, Joined His Palms Respectfully, and Addressed the Buddha, Saying: “How Rare, World-Honored One!”

Explanation:

In his ordinary daily life in the world, the Tathagata appeared just like everyone else, yet within it was one point in which he differed. Although people met the Buddha face-to-face, none understood it. Today, Subhuti suddenly discerned it. Therefore, he praised him, saying, “How rare!” Alas! The Tathagata had lived among his disciples for thirty years, yet the disciples had never understood where the Buddha set his feet. Because they did not understand, they passed over it heedlessly, merely saying that he was just like everyone else. Consequently, they harbored many doubts about whatever the Buddha said and did not believe it. Had Subhuti not seen through this, would there ultimately have been no one who understood the Buddha?

Root Text:

The Tathagata Skillfully Protects and Keeps the Bodhisattvas in Mind, and Skillfully Entrusts and Instructs the Bodhisattvas.

Explanation:

Here Subhuti praises the “rarity” of the Buddha. This is precisely because he personally perceived the painstaking concern of the Tathagata. Bodhisattvas are disciples studying under the Buddha; that is, those who formerly belonged to the Lesser Vehicle and have only just given rise to the mind of the Great Vehicle.

They are bodhisattvas whose minds have been unsettled by “emptiness.” The Buddha single-mindedly safeguards and remains mindful of those of this kind. He has no other intention; he wishes only to entrust and commit this mind to them. Safeguarding and remaining mindful is the Buddha’s original vow in appearing in the world: he wishes only that all sentient beings become no different from the Buddha.

Only when every person has become a Buddha will his heart be satisfied. Yet because sentient beings possess little virtue, heavy defilements, and timid, frail resolve, they cannot bear this responsibility. They are like young children, while the Buddha, like a loving mother safeguarding and remaining mindful of her children, never for a moment neglects or abandons them, but attends thoroughly to everything.

The Buddha cares for and cherishes them as though protecting a newborn child; hence this is called “safeguarding and remaining mindful.” He wishes only that all sentient beings proceed directly until they attain Buddhahood; hence this is called entrusting. Yet he does not dare state it plainly, but only secretly employs skillful means to bring them to accomplishment; hence it is called “skillful.” The sutra says: “I employ immeasurable and innumerable skillful means to guide sentient beings, so that every one of them may reach the ground of omniscience.” This is the meaning of safeguarding, remaining mindful, and entrusting.

Scripture:

World-Honored One! When Good Men and Good Women Give Rise to the Mind of Unsurpassed Bodhi, How Should They Abide, and How Should They Subdue That Mind?

Explanation:

Here Subhuti specifically asks for the method of settling the mind. At first, in the Lesser Vehicle, they sought only their own deliverance and were unwilling to deliver sentient beings; hence theirs was called a small mind. Now, through the Tathagata’s kindness in employing many methods for more than twenty years to refine them and arouse the mind that delivers sentient beings, those sentient beings who possess the great mind are called bodhisattvas.

The essential purpose is to cause them to teach and transform sentient beings below while seeking the fruit of Buddhahood above. Those of this kind personally undertake to benefit sentient beings; hence they are said to give rise to the mind of bodhi. Here Subhuti has already placed faith in the Buddha’s mind.

Yet he sees that bodhisattvas who have newly given rise to the great mind have not yet awakened to the true characteristic of “true emptiness,” and that this is difficult to distinguish clearly from the “one-sided emptiness” to which they formerly clung. Previously, the nirvana of the Lesser Vehicle could be grasped as a place in which to settle this mind. Now they have relinquished their former “emptiness” but have not yet realized “true emptiness.” That is to say: “Advancing, there is no new realization to attain; retreating, they have lost their former ground.” This is called the distracted thought of “emptiness.” Because they remain wholly attached to names and words and have not forgotten their habitual tendencies, they wish to have something upon which to rely.

They further cling to the belief that there is definitely a fruit of Buddhahood that can be sought; hence they speak of seeking the fruit of Buddhahood and regard it as a place of abiding. If they wish to seek the fruit of Buddhahood above, they must teach and transform sentient beings below. Only when all sentient beings have been delivered can they attain Buddhahood.

Yet wherever they now look throughout the three-thousand-great-thousand world system, they see immeasurable and boundless sentient beings. When could they ever finish delivering them all? If sentient beings are never exhausted, how could they attain the fruit of Buddhahood?

Because their mind urgently seeks a place in which to abide, this mind is unsettled and cannot be subdued. Therefore, Subhuti specifically requests a method for settling this mind. Yet Subhuti has already perceived the Buddha’s mind and praised it as rare; why, then, does he open his mouth and separately ask these two questions?

It is because everyone thinks: “Today the World-Honored One has already attained perfect enlightenment, and so we see that the World-Honored One’s mind is peaceful, secure, free, and at ease in his daily activities. But the minds of those who have newly resolved to seek the fruit of Buddhahood remain uncertain. How should they abide, and how should they subdue their minds?” This is the intent of the question here.

Settling the mind refers to the Second Patriarch attending upon Patriarch Bodhidharma and asking him to settle his mind. Bodhidharma replied: “Bring me your mind, and I shall settle it for you.” The Second Patriarch said: “I have searched for the mind, but ultimately it cannot be found.” The Patriarch said: “I have already settled your mind.” Yet under the gate of the Patriarchs, the matter is concluded with a single statement; hence this is the Chan School.

Here the World-Honored One expounds a considerable number of teachings for settling the mind, his grandmotherly compassion taking such pains; hence this is the Teaching School. Ultimately, it is nothing other than “searching for the mind, it ultimately cannot be found.” Before the Fourth Patriarch, the Lankavatara Sutra was used to seal the mind. At Huangmei, the Sixth Patriarch used the Diamond Sutra to seal the mind.

Therefore, this sutra is not a mere appearance of written words and cannot be regarded through spoken and written language. Its subtle wonder lies in being apart from words. Throughout this sutra, whenever it says, “What do you think?” it is turning the question back upon that very doubt.

This is because everyone’s mind gives rise to doubt by following words. Although it has not yet been expressed, the mind has already stirred with thoughts—that is, discrimination by meanings and words. This is called the habitual tendency of names and words.

Scripture:

The Buddha Said: “Excellent! Excellent, Subhuti! As You Have Said, the Tathagata Skillfully Safeguards and Remains Mindful of All Bodhisattvas and Skillfully Entrusts All Bodhisattvas. Now Listen Attentively, and I Shall Explain It for You.

Good Men and Good Women Who Give Rise to the Mind of Unsurpassed Bodhi Should Abide in This Manner and Subdue Their Minds in This Manner.”

Explanation:

The intent of Subhuti’s question is that bodhisattvas who have given rise to the mind do not enjoy the same peace of mind, ease, freedom, and comfort as the Buddha. Thus, if they wish to become equal to the Buddha, they must act in their daily lives just as the Buddha does; only then can they become Buddhas. I observe that the Buddha’s mind is so peaceful and at ease, whereas the bodhisattvas’ minds cannot abide.

How can they subdue their minds and bring them to peace? The Buddha’s reply means: “If bodhisattvas seek the peaceful mind through which one becomes a Buddha, they need seek nothing else. They need only understand my mind of safeguarding, remaining mindful, and entrusting, as you have done, and this mind will naturally be at peace.

Nor is any other method of subduing it necessary.” Therefore he says, “As you have said.” It is enough merely for the mind to be at peace; what further need is there to subdue it? It should simply be thus. Therefore he says, “in this manner.”

Scripture:

So It Is, World-Honored One! I Earnestly Wish to Hear It.

Explanation:

“So it is” means that Subhuti directly trusts the unobstructed mind of the Buddha. Having already perceived the Buddha’s mind, it would seem unnecessary for him to speak; but because the bodhisattvas have not yet grasped this meaning, he wishes gladly to hear it.

Scripture:

The Buddha Told Subhuti: “All Great Bodhisattvas Should Subdue Their Minds in This Manner.”

Explanation:

Here the Buddha teaches the method of settling the mind. Its meaning appears in the passage that follows. Previously, Subhuti asked the Buddha about two matters: abiding and subduing.

Now the Buddha agrees to speak only of subduing and does not speak of abiding. Ordinary beings and followers of the Two Vehicles habitually cling exclusively to a place of abiding. This is the habitual tendency of names and words.

Those proceeding toward the Great Vehicle must first dispel this habitual tendency of names and words, because neither sentient beings nor nirvana are real dharmas; ultimately, they cannot be apprehended. This is because they take names and words as their substance. Once names and words have been relinquished and habitual tendencies swiftly emptied, this mind will become peaceful, still, and silent of itself, without waiting to be subdued.

Therefore, the Buddha teaches only the subduing of the mind and does not speak of abiding the mind, lest he provoke habitual tendencies. The saying, “When the mad mind does not cease, it is only when it ceases that there is bodhi,” means that one need only exhaust all ordinary sentiments; there is no separate holy understanding. The Buddha does not bind people with any real dharma whatsoever.

Therefore, he does not speak of abiding.

Scripture:

All the Various Kinds of Sentient Beings—Whether Born from Eggs, Born from Wombs, Born from Moisture, or Born by Transformation; Whether Possessing Form or Formless; Whether Possessing Perception, Without Perception, or Neither Possessing Perception nor Lacking Perception—I Cause Them All to Enter Nirvana Without Remainder and Be Delivered into Extinction. In This Manner, Immeasurable, Innumerable, and Boundless Sentient Beings Are Delivered into Extinction, Yet in Truth No Sentient Being Is Delivered into Extinction. Why Is This? Subhuti! If a Bodhisattva Has the Characteristic of a Self, the Characteristic of a Person, the Characteristic of a Sentient Being, or the Characteristic of a Lifespan, Then He Is Not a Bodhisattva.

Explanation:

Here the World-Honored One directly teaches the method of contemplation for settling the mind. When bodhisattvas give rise to the mind, that which they seek is the fruit of Buddhahood, and those whom they teach and transform are sentient beings. There are only these two matters. The reason their minds are not at peace is that they have not yet seen sentient beings in their suchness. Wherever they look, they see only sentient beings; when, then, could they ever finish delivering them all?

If living beings are not brought to an end, the fruit of Buddhahood is difficult to seek. Seeing it as exceedingly distant, the mind finds no peace and strives without cease; therefore, one must seek to subdue the mind. The Buddha now teaches the method of liberating living beings, whose essential point is contemplation of non-self.

A bodhisattva sees that living beings are numerous and difficult to liberate completely, because when there is the mark of a self, the mark of a person is perceived. As person confronts person, how could there be any limit to the living beings throughout the three-thousandfold world? They multiply and proliferate without diminishing, and so the bodhisattva fears that it will be difficult to liberate them all.

In truth, the bodhisattva has not yet seen that living beings are originally suchness itself. Although living beings are numerous, they comprise only twelve classes; however immeasurable they may be, there are only twelve. Contemplating each of these twelve classes in turn, they may ultimately be included within only the four modes of birth: birth from a womb, from an egg, from moisture, and by transformation.

Moreover, within these four modes of birth there are only the two dharmas of form and mind. As for form, there is merely form and formlessness. As for mind, there is merely having perception and having no perception.

Even when taken to the utmost, they end only in “neither existence” nor “nonexistence.” These twelve classes already encompass all living beings throughout the Dharma-realm. How, then, could they be considered many? Furthermore, although these twelve classes are called living beings, the form and mind of living beings are originally provisional combinations.

Being provisional combinations, living beings are originally empty; they appear to exist only because of delusion. If living beings are contemplated as “originally empty,” then living beings are originally suchness itself. Since living beings are thus, they all become quiescent and extinguished.

This is to liberate them completely, causing all to enter nirvana without remainder. How could this be difficult?

Vimalakirti said: “All living beings are ultimately quiescent; they need not be extinguished again.” Thus, although countless, immeasurable, and boundless living beings are led to extinction, in reality not a single living being is led to extinction. Why? Because there is originally no self.

If there is a self, there is a person; if there is a person, there are living beings and a life span. If these four marks exist, one is not called a bodhisattva—how much less could one speak of liberating living beings? Therefore, in liberating living beings, a bodhisattva should contemplate non-self.

With no self, there is no person; when there is neither self nor person, the realm of living beings is naturally quiescent. When living beings are quiescent, the fruit of Buddhahood is not far away. Why still fear that it is distant and will take a long time?

Therefore, a bodhisattva should contemplate non-self.

The passage below says: “Knowing that all dharmas are without self and attaining the perfection of patience—this is a true bodhisattva.”

Doubt:

The Buddha teaches bodhisattvas to liberate living beings, taking giving as the foundation. Those who receive gifts are all living beings. Now, if living beings are all empty, who receives the gift in the act of giving?

Therefore, the passage below replies: “When giving, a bodhisattva should not cling to the mark of living beings.”

Canonical Text:

Furthermore, Subhuti, in regard to dharmas, a bodhisattva should give without abiding anywhere. That is to say, one should give without abiding in forms and give without abiding in sounds, odors, flavors, tangible objects, or dharmas. Subhuti! A bodhisattva should give in this manner, without abiding in marks.

Explanation:

This dispels the doubt that clings to marks. Upon hearing that living beings are all empty, Subhuti wondered:

“Since living beings are empty, when a bodhisattva gives, there is no recipient, for the six sense objects do not exist and living beings are originally empty.” Therefore, the text says, “should abide nowhere.” This teaches that one should not cling to the sensory marks of living beings. He also secretly wondered, “If one does not abide in marks, how can there be merit?” Therefore, the passage below replies, “Merit free from marks is greater.”

Canonical Text:

Why is this so? If a bodhisattva gives without abiding in marks, that merit cannot be conceived or measured. Subhuti, what do you think? Can the empty space in the east be measured?

– No, World-Honored One.

– Subhuti! Can the empty space to the south, west, and north, in the four intermediate directions, above, and below be conceived or measured?

– No, World-Honored One.

– Subhuti! The merit of a bodhisattva who gives without abiding in marks is likewise inconceivable and immeasurable.

Explanation:

This dispels the doubt that clings to marks and reveals the wondrous practice of freedom from marks. Yet bodhisattvas practice giving expressly to seek merit. If the mind that seeks merit clings to marks, the merit will not be great.

Therefore, the World-Honored One provisionally points out that merit free from marks is greater, thereby setting their minds at ease. Giving while clinging to marks is confined to what bears marks, and the marks of living beings are as minute as motes of dust; even if merit is obtained, how great could that merit be? If, at the very moment of giving to living beings, one sees neither a giver nor a recipient, nor any object that is given, then the three spheres are all empty, and there is no mark in which one can abide.

Merit that does not abide in marks is inconceivable. Therefore, empty space is used as an analogy.

Canonical Text:

Subhuti! A bodhisattva should abide only as instructed.

Explanation:

This concludes the teaching on the method of setting the mind at peace. Earlier, it was asked how the mind, being unable to abide peacefully, should be subdued. The World-Honored One taught that the essential method of subduing it is contemplation of non-self. When there is no self, there is no person. When both person and self are forgotten, one’s own mind is quiescent, and all living beings are likewise quiescent. Since living beings are quiescent, Buddhahood need not be sought. Thus, the mind that pursues and seeks comes to rest, the sentiments of grasping and rejecting disappear, inside and outside are both empty, and the one mind remains unmoving. This is called the method of setting the mind at peace. Therefore, the conclusion is suchness.

Doubt:

Previously, giving was taken as the merit by which living beings below are taught and transformed, solely for the sake of seeking the fruit of Buddhahood above. Now the mark of living beings is empty, and the essence of the three spheres is quiescent. Surely, then, this is an empty and contrived cause. Can one seek a fruit possessing marks by means of a cause without marks? Moreover, the bodily marks of the Tathagata are plainly visible before us; they cannot be attained through a cause without marks. This is seeing the Tathagata by means of marks, and so the Buddha refutes it, saying:

Canonical Text:

– Subhuti! What do you think? Can the Tathagata be seen by means of bodily marks?

– No, World-Honored One. The Tathagata cannot be seen by means of bodily marks. Why? The bodily marks spoken of by the Tathagata are not bodily marks.

The Buddha said:

– Subhuti, whatever possesses marks is false and illusory. If one sees that all marks are not marks, one sees the Tathagata.

Explanation:

This directly reveals the wondrous practice of marklessness. Upon hearing of the markless cause, Subhuti wondered whether this cause could seek the fruit of Buddhahood, which possesses marks. This is to see the Tathagata by means of marks.

It is clinging to the marks of the Buddha’s responsive transformation body and failing to see the true essence of the Dharma-body. The World-Honored One therefore refuted this attachment to marks. Subhuti understood the purport, and so the Buddha directly declared that the Tathagata cannot be seen by means of marks.

When the Tathagata speaks of the body, he is speaking of the Dharma-body; therefore, he says it is not a body. Yet the Dharma-body also has no marks. Thus, within the marks of all dharmas, one sees the marklessness of the Tathagata; it is not that, apart from all dharmas, there is some separate appearance.

It is thereby made clear that the markless cause accords with the markless fruit.

Doubt:

That a markless cause accords with a markless fruit is a very profound meaning, difficult to believe and difficult to understand. Thus, a doubt arose.

Canonical Text:

Subhuti said to the Buddha:

– World-Honored One, will there be living beings who, upon hearing such words and passages, give rise to genuine faith?

The Buddha said:

– Subhuti, do not speak thus. After the Tathagata has entered nirvana, in the last five hundred years, there will be people who uphold the precepts and cultivate merit, and who, upon encountering these passages and sentences, will give rise to faith and regard them as true. You should know that these people will not have planted roots of goodness in the presence of only one Buddha, two Buddhas, three, four, or five Buddhas, but will have planted roots of goodness in the presence of immeasurable hundreds of thousands of myriads of Buddhas. Upon hearing these passages and sentences, they need only give rise to a single thought of pure faith. Subhuti, the Tathagata will assuredly know and assuredly see that these beings attain immeasurable merit and virtue such as this. Why? Because if the minds of these beings grasp at characteristics, they become attached to a self, a person, a being—if the minds of these beings grasp at characteristics, they become attached to a self, a person, a being, and a life span. If they grasp at the characteristics of dharmas, they become attached to a self, a person, a being, and a life span. Why? Because if they grasp at the characteristics of non-dharmas, they become attached to a self, a person, a being, and a life span. Therefore, they should grasp neither dharmas nor non-dharmas. The Tathagata has often said, “Bhiksus, you should know that the Dharma I teach is like a raft. Even the Dharma should be relinquished; how much more so what is not Dharma.”

Explanation:

This directly reveals the Buddha’s knowledge and vision. At first, because Subhuti conceived an attachment to the cause as possessing characteristics, the Buddha used giving without abiding in characteristics to refute it. He then doubted that a cause without characteristics could not accord with a result possessing characteristics, because he was attached to the notion that the Buddha possessed form and characteristics.

Therefore, the Buddha used the Dharma-body, which has no characteristics, to refute this. Thus, it became clear that a cause without characteristics accords with a result without characteristics. In this way, both cause and result are empty, and both person and dharmas vanish.

This meaning is extremely profound, difficult to believe and difficult to understand. He therefore asked the Buddha doubtfully, “Is it possible that there are people who can believe this Dharma?” “Possible” means “can”; the expression “passages and sentences” refers to the preceding teaching that cause and result are without characteristics. The Buddha replied, “How could there not be such people!” Those who believe this Dharma are not ordinary people; only those who uphold the precepts and cultivate merit can believe it.

Nor have these people planted roots of goodness in the presence of only one Buddha, two Buddhas, three, four, or five Buddhas. Rather, they have planted roots of goodness in the presence of immeasurable thousands and myriads of Buddhas. Only when their roots have penetrated deeply for a very long time can they believe it.

When beings of such great faculties have even a single thought of faithful conviction, I will assuredly know and assuredly see that they have attained immeasurable merit. It is evident that this merit without characteristics far surpasses the seeking of merit possessing characteristics. Why can those who accord with the absence of characteristics attain so much merit?

Because these beings have no characteristics of a self, a person, a being, or a life span. Not only are these four characteristics empty, but all characteristics of existence and nonexistence are also empty. Therefore, it is said that there are neither characteristics of dharmas nor characteristics of non-dharmas.

Because the minds of these beings do not grasp at characteristics, they are free from everything. If, in a single thought, they become attached to the four characteristics through dharmas or non-dharmas, they are thereby attached to the four characteristics. Because they do not grasp at characteristics, both mind and its objects are empty, and they attain such supreme merit.

This is the power of the Tathagata’s True Knowledge and Vision. Therefore, I teach bodhisattvas that they should not grasp at the characteristics of dharmas or non-dharmas. Why is this so?

Once they enter this Dharma, both person and dharmas are empty, and they swiftly leave behind every act of grasping, from which all forms of “existence” arise. How could this be a trivial matter? Therefore, I have often taught my disciples to relinquish the Dharma, which means relinquishing emotional discrimination.

When emotional discrimination vanishes, wisdom becomes perfect and complete. Hence it is said, “Even the Dharma must be relinquished; how much more so what is not Dharma.”

Doubt:

Having heard the Buddha say that the Buddha has no physical characteristics and that the Dharma cannot be grasped, Subhuti then wondered, “If both the Buddha and the Dharma are without characteristics, then there is neither Buddha nor Dharma. Yet we presently see that he has attained Buddhahood and complete, unsurpassed enlightenment; and at present the Buddha is teaching the Dharma. Why, then, is it said that they do not exist?” This is the doubt that the Buddha’s words are contradictory; therefore, the following passage exposes and refutes it.

Canonical Text:

– Subhuti, what do you think? Has the Tathagata attained unsurpassed, complete enlightenment? Does the Tathagata have any Dharma that he teaches?

Subhuti replied:

– As I understand the meaning of what the Buddha has taught, there is no fixed dharma called unsurpassed, complete enlightenment, nor is there any fixed dharma that the Tathagata can teach. Why? The Dharma taught by the Tathagata can neither be grasped nor expressed; it is neither Dharma nor non-Dharma. Why is this so? Because all sages and noble ones are distinguished by the unconditioned Dharma.

Explanation:

This removes both the view concerning the Buddha and the view concerning the Dharma. In Subhuti’s mind, thoughts of the existence of the Buddha and the existence of the Dharma had just begun to arise. These are called discriminations of conceptual thought.

He harbored them without yet expressing them. The Buddha refuted them in advance, calling his name and questioning him: “What do you think?” This means, “How does your conceptual mind discriminate? Is there truly something attained in the Buddha’s enlightenment?

Does the Tathagata truly teach any Dharma?” This questioning was intended to probe his thought. Subhuti understood the purport and therefore presented his realization, saying that, as he understood the Buddha’s teaching, there was fundamentally no fixed dharma called enlightenment, nor any fixed dharma that the Tathagata could teach. Here Subhuti profoundly understood the Tathagata’s purport of non-grasping.

This applies not only to the Tathagata: all sages and noble ones are distinguished by the unconditioned Dharma, and thus it cannot be grasped. Here, the intent of revealing the provisional and disclosing the real has already been shown in part.

Doubt:

Subhuti had understood the purport that there is neither Buddha nor Dharma, but he did not know how one who accords with the unconditioned could attain supreme merit. Therefore, in what follows, the Tathagata uses freedom from characteristics to refute this doubt.

Canonical Text:

– Subhuti, what do you think? If a person were to give in charity the seven treasures filling the three-thousand-great-thousand world-system, would that person attain much merit and virtue?

Subhuti replied:

– Very much, World-Honored One! Why? Because this merit and virtue has no inherent nature of merit and virtue; therefore, the Tathagata says that the merit and virtue is great.

The Buddha said:

– If, moreover, someone receives and upholds this sutra, even so little as four lines of verse… and teaches them to others, that person’s merit surpasses the former person’s. Why is this so? Subhuti, all Buddhas and the Dharma of the Buddhas’ unsurpassed, complete enlightenment arise from this sutra. Subhuti, that which is called the Buddha-Dharma is not the Buddha-Dharma.

Explanation:

This uses merit without characteristics to reveal that the Dharma without characteristics is supreme. Subhuti had realized the principle of the absence of characteristics, but he did not know that according with this principle would bring merit without characteristics. How could this merit surpass merit possessing characteristics?

Therefore, the Buddha first used giving that possesses characteristics and compared its merit, showing that it does not equal the supreme merit of upholding four lines of verse. Because all Buddhas are born from this prajna, it is said, “Prajna is the mother of all Buddhas”; therefore, the merit is great. It is like the worldly saying, “A mother is honored on account of her child.” Thus, prajna can give birth to the Buddha-Dharma, yet prajna itself is fundamentally not the Buddha-Dharma.

Hence it is said, “That which is called the Buddha-Dharma is not the Buddha-Dharma.”

Doubt:

The Dharma cannot be taught, the Buddha cannot be attained, and neither can be apprehended. Moreover, in former times the World-Honored One taught us sravakas the Dharma of the Four Noble Truths; that was Dharma. By practicing in accordance with it, we attained the fruits. We abide in reliance upon nirvana; thus there is a place in which we abide. Why, then, does the World-Honored One say that everything is empty? This was the conceptual discrimination in the minds of the assembly. Therefore, the World-Honored One again raised the fruits of the Lesser Vehicle and questioned Subhuti in return, using his reply to refute this doubt.

Canonical Text:

– Subhuti, what do you think? Does a stream-enterer think, “I have attained the fruit of stream-entry”?

Subhuti replied:

– No, World-Honored One! Why? A stream-enterer is so called because one has entered the stream, yet there is nowhere one enters. Not entering forms, sounds, odors, tastes, tangible objects, or dharmas is called stream-entry.

– Subhuti, what do you think? Does a once-returner entertain this thought: “I have attained the fruit of once-returning”?

– No, World-Honored One. Why? Because “once-returner” means “one who goes and returns once,” yet in truth there is no returning; therefore one is called a once-returner.

– Subhuti, what do you think? Does a non-returner entertain this thought: “I have attained the fruit of non-returning”?

– No, World-Honored One. Why? Because a non-returner is called “one who does not return,” yet in truth there is no non-returning; therefore one is called a non-returner.

– Subhuti, what do you think? Does an arhat entertain this thought: “I have attained the fruit of arhatship”?

– No, World-Honored One. Why? In truth, there is no dharma called an arhat. World-Honored One, if an arhat were to think, “I have attained the path of arhatship,” he would thereby be attached to a self, a person, a sentient being, and a life span. World-Honored One, the Buddha has said that I have attained the samadhi of non-contention and am foremost among human beings. World-Honored One, I do not think that I am an arhat free from desire. World-Honored One, if I were to think, “I have attained the path of arhatship,” the World-Honored One would not have said that Subhuti is one who practices aranya conduct. Because Subhuti in truth has no practice, Subhuti is therefore called one who delights in aranya conduct.

Explanation:

This is precisely the True Principle of Non-Abiding. Having heard that the Buddha cannot be sought and the Dharma cannot be grasped, the assembly advanced toward “nothing in which one can abide.” Yet formerly, the World-Honored One taught us sravakas to leave birth and death and abide peacefully in nirvana; thus it was not that there was no fruit and no dharma in which one could abide. Why, then, does the World-Honored One now say that both Buddha and Dharma are empty?

Because followers of the Lesser Vehicle had not yet relinquished their habitual attachment to names and words, they clung to the real existence of dharmas and found it difficult to enter prajnaparamita. Consequently, doubts arose repeatedly. The World-Honored One used the realization of Subhuti, the One Born of Emptiness, to enable the assembly to understand.

Therefore, he cited the fruits formerly taught and asked in return, “What do you think?” The Sanskrit Srotapanna is translated into Chinese as “stream-enterer,” meaning one who enters the stream. “Entering” has the meaning of going against the current. It means going against the current of birth and death; yet to speak of going against the current merely refers to not entering the six sense objects and is therefore called going against the current.

It does not mean that there is a “here” against which one can go, or a “there” into which one can enter and abide.

Sakrdagamin is called in Chinese “one who goes and returns once.” This means that a small remnant of the delusions of thought remains in the desire realm, so one need return to the desire realm only once more to sever them, after which one passes beyond it forever. Yet there is likewise no real place of going or returning in which one can abide.

Anagamin is called in Chinese “non-returner.” This means that one will no longer come to undergo birth in the desire realm. It means only this; there is likewise no state of non-returning in which one can abide.

Arhat is called in Chinese “one who is unborn.” Because one sees that all those dharmas are empty and that in truth no dharmas exist, not a single thought arises—nothing more than this. Such a one has never thought, “I am an arhat,” nor is there any realm of arhatship in which one can abide. If an arhat were himself to think, “I am an arhat,” his view would be the same as that of sentient beings, and he would thereby be attached to the four characteristics.

Subhuti, the One Born of Emptiness, verifies this through his own experience: “The World-Honored One has always praised me for attaining the samadhi of non-contention and has also praised me as foremost among human beings. He further declared me foremost among arhats free from desire. I have received the kindness of the World-Honored One in praising me so fully.

Yet when I have examined my own mind, I have truly never given rise to even a single thought of attachment that I am an arhat free from desire. If I had such a thought, the World-Honored One would not have said that I am one who delights in the practice of serene seclusion. Examining this through my own experience, I know that the nirvana taught in former times originally had no place in which to abide.

This sufficiently shows that the Tathagata’s bodhi certainly offers nothing in which one can abide. What doubt could remain?” The passage below resolves the doubt that “the Buddha assuredly has an attainment.”

Doubt:

Having heard the preceding instruction, it is now clear that one does not abide in the fruit of Buddhahood. Yet if that fruit cannot be attained, why do we presently see that the Tathagata received a prediction from Dipankara Buddha? Surely this means that Buddhahood is definitely attained. Is there not, then, a fruit in which one can abide? The answer below is that there is nothing attained.

Canonical Text:

The Buddha said:

– Subhuti, what do you think? In the past, when the Tathagata was in the presence of Dipankara Buddha, did he attain anything with regard to the Dharma?

– No, World-Honored One. When the Tathagata was in the presence of Dipankara Buddha, he truly attained nothing with regard to the Dharma.

Explanation:

This teaches the ultimate purport that there is nothing attained. Having heard the teaching of non-abiding, one realizes that there is no abiding in bodhi. One then doubts that although there is no abiding in bodhi, the fruit of Buddhahood is certainly attained. If the fruit of Buddhahood were not attained, how could a prediction have been transmitted and bestowed? The World-Honored One therefore questioned Subhuti, the One Born of Emptiness, in return to resolve this doubt. Although Dipankara Buddha spoke a prediction, it was merely a seal of confirmation upon this very mind. In truth, there was nothing attained. Had there been anything attained, Dipankara Buddha certainly would not have bestowed a prediction upon me.

Doubt:

There is no abiding in bodhi, and the fruit of Buddhahood is not attained. If so, there is no need to adorn a Buddha-land. Why, then, did the World-Honored One teach us to practice the bodhisattva path and adorn Buddha-lands?

Canonical Text:

– Subhuti, what do you think? Do bodhisattvas adorn Buddha-lands?

– No, World-Honored One. Why? Because the adornment of Buddha-lands is not adornment; therefore it is called adornment.

– Therefore, Subhuti, great bodhisattvas should thus give rise to a pure mind. They should not give rise to a mind abiding in forms; they should not give rise to a mind abiding in sounds, fragrances, tastes, tangible objects, or dharmas. They should give rise to that mind without abiding anywhere.

Explanation:

This directly reveals the Dharma for bringing the mind to peace. Subhuti’s doubt was this: since Buddhahood is not attained and there is no abiding in nirvana, if this is so, why is it necessary to adorn Buddha-lands? Those who cling to this doubt suppose that the practice of liberating sentient beings actually requires adorning Buddha-lands as though renovating monasteries.

This is the attachment to characteristics of foolish people. The World-Honored One therefore posed a question to Subhuti, the One Born of Emptiness: “Do bodhisattvas truly adorn Buddha-lands?” Subhuti understood the purport and replied, “Adorning is not adornment; therefore it is called adornment.” How can this be understood? A Buddha-land is a Pure Land, but could this Pure Land possibly be adorned by heaping up the seven treasures?

What sentient beings perceive is a defiled land, where evil karma brings forth various forms of suffering, whereas the domain of the Buddhas is a Pure Land, where only the purity of the awakened mind cleanses every defilement. When defiling karma is no more, the land naturally becomes pure; thus it is adorned by means of a pure mind. Yet this adornment is not the same as worldly adornment.

Therefore it is said, “It is not adornment; only then is it called adornment.” Viewed in this way, when bodhisattvas adorn Buddha-lands, they do not borrow anything from outside; they merely purify their own minds. When the mind is pure, the land is pure. Therefore it is said that they should only give rise to a pure mind in this manner, without requiring any other kind of adornment.

Venerable Subhuti further doubted, “Since purity has been spoken of, how is the mind to arise?” The Buddha said, “Give rise to a pure mind in this way.” This means only that one should not give rise to a mind defiled by the six sense objects; it does not mean that there is some “purity” in which one can abide while giving rise to the mind. As it is said, “When every attachment is exhausted and discriminating thought is forgotten, the pure mind manifests of itself.” Therefore, “One should give rise to that mind without abiding anywhere.” The Third Patriarch said, “Do not pursue conditioned existence; do not dwell in the endurance of emptiness” (mo zhu you yuan, bu zhu kong ren).

Here, giving rise to the mind without abiding is taken as the Dharma for bringing the mind to peace. The subtle and wondrous skill of this Dharma does not go beyond this point. Thus, when the Sixth Patriarch heard this line once, he attained sudden awakening on the spot.

Doubt:

If not adorning a Buddha-land means that there is no Buddha-land, then where does the Buddha’s body, thousands of zhang in stature, dwell? This is the doubt that the reward body must dwell in some real land.

Canonical Text:

– Subhuti, suppose there were a person whose body was like Sumeru, the king of mountains. What do you think? Would that body be great?

Subhuti replied:

– Very Great, World-Honored One! Why? The Buddha Says That Which Is Not a Body Is Called a Great Body.

Explanation:

This points to the true land of the Dharma body. Upon hearing that the Buddha-land cannot be adorned, one then doubts that the reward body must surely have a real dwelling place. If it is not adorned, where would it reside and abide?

The Buddha refutes this by teaching that the Dharma body is not a body. The meaning is that the land is not a land; this itself is the Constantly Quiescent Light. The body that is not a body is precisely the Dharma body.

Since the Dharma body has no characteristics, the Buddha-land has no form. Yet if the body cannot be seen by means of characteristics, how could the land be adorned? From the point of relinquishing the characteristics of the six sense objects and the characteristics of mental conditions, the refutation of doubts has now reached the direct realization that “both body and land are empty.” Only when mind and objects have both ceased is the ultimate principle of prajnaparamita realized, revealing the truth of the non-abiding Dharma body.

Thus, from the beginning of the teaching up to this point, the principle has been brought to completion, beyond the reach of words—the ultimate principle where words are forgotten. If anyone can believe this Dharma, that person’s merit is immeasurable. Therefore, the following passage compares merits.

Canonical Text:

– Subhuti, Suppose There Were As Many Ganges Rivers As There Are Grains of Sand in the Ganges River. What Do You Think? Would the Grains of Sand in All Those Ganges Rivers Be Many?

Subhuti Replied:

– Very Many, World-Honored One! Those Ganges Rivers Alone Would Be Innumerable, How Much More So Their Grains of Sand.

– Subhuti, I Shall Tell You Truly. If a Good Man or Good Woman Were to Give in Charity the Seven Treasures Filling as Many Three-Thousand-Great-Thousand World Systems as There Are Grains of Sand in All Those Ganges Rivers, Would That Person Gain Much Merit?

Subhuti Replied:

– Very Much, World-Honored One!

The Buddha Told Subhuti:

– If a Good Man or Good Woman, in Regard to This Sutra, Were Even to Receive and Uphold Only a Four-Line Verse and So Forth, and Explain It to Others, This Merit Would Still Surpass the Former Merit. Moreover, Subhuti, Wherever This Sutra Is Taught, If Even Only a Four-Line Verse and So Forth Is Received and Upheld, You Should Know That All Devas, Humans, and Asuras in the World Should Make Offerings at That Place, Regarding It as a Stupa or Shrine of the Buddha. How Much More So If Someone Is Able to Receive, Uphold, Read, and Recite the Entire Sutra. Subhuti, You Should Know That This Person Accomplishes the Foremost, Supreme, and Most Rare Dharma. Wherever This Scripture Is Found, There Is the Buddha, or a Great and Venerable Disciple of the Buddha.

Explanation:

This uses an analogy to reveal the excellence of the Dharma, saying that the merit of the four-line verse surpasses seven treasures as numerous as the sands of the Ganges. This is because this Dharma is the foremost, supreme, and rarest Dharma. This four-line verse is the entirety of the Dharma body, no different from the Buddha abiding in the world and teaching his disciples.

The Dharma body has already been fully revealed above, all doubts have suddenly been shattered, words are forgotten, and the principle has reached its ultimate point. Having grasped the essential meaning, Subhuti then asks for the name of the sutra to bring the teaching to a conclusion.

Canonical Text:

At That Time, Subhuti Said to the Buddha:

– World-Honored One! By What Name Should This Sutra Be Called? How Should We Reverently Uphold It?

The Buddha Said:

– Subhuti, This Sutra Is Called the Vajra Prajnaparamita. By This Name You Should Reverently Uphold It. Why Is This So? Subhuti! The Prajnaparamita Spoken of by the Buddha Is Not Prajnaparamita; Therefore It Is Truly Prajnaparamita.

Explanation:

This points to the ultimate destination of prajnaparamita’s true reality. Subhuti had awakened and understood; the entirety of prajnaparamita had been revealed, and there was no other Dharma. Therefore, he asked for the sutra’s name to bring the teaching to a conclusion. The World-Honored One instructed him: This sutra is called the Vajra Prajnaparamita. The meaning is that this Dharma has no name; it is simply mind. He further asked how it should be reverently upheld. The Buddha replied: Uphold this Dharma with this very mind. Because mind is originally no-mind, Dharma is also no-Dharma. Therefore, it is said: Prajnaparamita is not prajnaparamita.

Before hearing this Dharma, Subhuti’s mind was not at peace, so at the outset he entreated the Buddha to show how the mind should be subdued. Because everything seen before his eyes was a realm of sense objects, sentient beings and the Buddha seemed far apart, defilement and purity followed different paths, and grasping and relinquishing faced different directions. Thus, his mind was not at peace and was difficult to subdue; consequently, Subhuti raised various doubts.

At first, he doubted that sentient beings were difficult to liberate, and the Buddha told him that sentient beings are originally empty. He then doubted that buddhahood was difficult to seek, and the Buddha told him that buddhahood need not be sought. Next, he doubted that giving was difficult to perfect, and the Buddha again instructed him in the emptiness and quiescence of the three spheres.

He doubted that the Buddha-land was difficult to adorn, and the Buddha told him that if he kept his mind pure, it would indeed be adorned. He further doubted that the reward body had nowhere to rely, and the Buddha told him that the Dharma wheel needed no place of reliance; the Buddha told him that the Dharma body needed no place of reliance.

At this point, Subhuti’s meticulous and skillful inquiry had reached its utmost limit, and all doubts had melted like ice. The Buddha-mind had been fully revealed, with nothing remaining concealed. Thus, the minds of those who heard became peaceful and naturally subdued, and so he asked for the sutra’s name to conclude the teaching.

The World-Honored One did not burden people with a substantial Dharma; he merely named this very mind, and thereby brought the teaching to a conclusion. The text below separately teaches the ultimate principle of the Dharma body. As it is said, at the top of a hundred-foot pole, take one further step; only when one fully possesses the Vajra eye can one attain ultimate accord.

Therefore, when Subhuti awakened and understood, he shed tears and praised the teaching as unfathomable, like a traveler returning home after a long absence who, upon seeing his loving mother, immediately weeps with emotion. It proceeds directly to the inconceivable and only then ceases.

Canonical Text:

– Subhuti, What Do You Think? Does the Tathagata Have Any Dharma to Teach?

Subhuti Replied:

– World-Honored One, the Tathagata Has No Dharma to Teach.

Explanation:

Here, Subhuti had awakened to the principle of the Dharma body, but then wondered: If the Dharma body has no characteristics, who is now teaching the Dharma? This is the doubt that there is a Dharma being taught, so the Buddha questioned him in return. Subhuti then awakened to the fact that, since the body is no-body, the Dharma likewise cannot be spoken.

Doubt:

The Dharma body has no characteristics, but having no characteristics would mean falling into annihilation. If annihilation has no characteristics, where could the Dharma body be seen? Because the assembly had this doubt, the Buddha refuted it.

Canonical Text:

– Subhuti, What Do You Think? Are the Minute Particles Contained Within a Three-Thousand-Great-Thousand World System Many?

Subhuti Replied:

– Very Many, World-Honored One!

– Subhuti, The Minute Particles Spoken of by the Tathagata Are Not Minute Particles; Therefore They Are Called Minute Particles. The World Spoken of by the Tathagata Is Not a World; Therefore It Is Called a World.

Explanation:

This points out that although all dharmas are empty, they do not fall into annihilation. Upon hearing that the Dharma body has no characteristics, one again doubts that this means falling into annihilation. If it were annihilation, there would be nowhere to seek the Dharma body.

The World-Honored One teaches that every particle and every land is the Dharma body. Therefore, he asks: “Are the minute particles within a three-thousand-great-thousand world system many?” The answer is: “Very many.” If one contemplates them as minute particles and worlds, the eyes are filled with sense objects and the myriad phenomena bustle in profusion. If one contemplates them as neither minute particles nor worlds, there is a single path of vast openness, true emptiness, luminous and quiescent.

This is “Quiescent extinction and numinous emptiness rely upon the myriad forms to reveal their images. Horizontally and vertically throughout the illusory realm, they merge the real within the one nature.” Therefore, “The green bamboo, verdant and lush, is entirely true suchness; the yellow flowers, dense and profuse, are wholly prajnaparamita,” and “Mountains, rivers, and the great earth completely reveal the body of the Dharma King.” To see the Dharma body, one must fully possess the true Vajra eye.

Therefore, it is said that the world is not a world; it is called a world.

Doubt:

Upon hearing that only the Dharma body without characteristics is called the Buddha, one may ask: If having no characteristics is the Buddha, then is the Buddha presently before us, endowed with the thirty-two marks, not the Buddha?

This is to mistake the transformation body for the True Buddha. The following passage refutes this by showing that the Dharma body and the transformation body are one in essence.

Canonical Text:

– Subhuti, What Do You Think? Can the Tathagata Be Seen by Means of the Thirty-Two Marks?

— No, World-Honored One! The Tathagata cannot be seen by means of the thirty-two marks. Why? Because the thirty-two marks spoken of by the Tathagata are not marks; therefore, they are called the thirty-two marks.

Explanation:

This teaches that the Dharma-body and the transformation-body are secretly one. Do not say that one who possesses marks is not the Buddha. Right within the thirty-two marks, the Buddha is originally without marks. If marks are themselves non-marks, then the response-body is itself the Dharma-body. At this point, the three bodies are one essence. Body and land are both empty; principle reaches its utmost, discriminating thought is forgotten, and words fall entirely silent. Therefore, it is praised: one who can accord with this principle and, in turn, teach it to others has immeasurable merit.

Canonical Text:

— Subhuti, if a good man or good woman were to give in charity as many bodies and lives as there are grains of sand in the Ganges, and if another person were, from within this sutra, to receive and uphold even a four-line verse and explain it to others, that person's merit would be far greater.

Explanation:

This reveals the supreme benefit of the Dharma of emptiness. The World-Honored One has disclosed the principle to its utmost; all doubts have been dispelled, the four marks have suddenly become empty, attachment to self has vanished, and the distinct bodies stand revealed. The World-Honored One compares the vast merit of giving away as many bodies and lives as there are grains of sand in the Ganges, yet it does not equal receiving and upholding a four-line verse with body and mind and explaining it to others.

This markless merit truly cannot be measured. Subhuti fully comprehended this purport and, deeply moved at hearing what he had never heard before, shed tears, wept, and praised it as rare. The earlier words, “skillfully mindful and protective, skillfully entrusting,” refer precisely to this.

+ First, he had already understood and awakened.

+ Then, he expressed his feelings.

Canonical Text:

At that time, Subhuti, having heard this sutra taught and having deeply understood its meaning and purport, shed tears and wept. He addressed the Buddha, saying:

— How rare, World-Honored One! The Buddha has taught such an exceedingly profound scripture. From the time I first attained the wisdom-eye until now, I have never before heard such a sutra.

World-Honored One, if anyone hears this sutra and gives rise to pure faith, the true mark will thereby arise. One should know that this person has accomplished the foremost and rarest merit. World-Honored One, this true mark is itself not a mark; therefore, the Tathagata calls it the true mark.

World-Honored One, now that I have heard such a scripture, it is not especially difficult for me to believe, understand, receive, and uphold it. But in the future age, five hundred years hence, if there are sentient beings who hear this sutra and believe, understand, receive, and uphold it, such persons will be foremost among those who are rare. Why?

Because such persons have no mark of self, mark of person, mark of sentient being, or mark of one who lives a lifespan. Why is this so? The mark of self is itself no mark, and the marks of person, sentient being, and one who lives a lifespan are themselves not marks.

Why? Because those who are free from all marks are called Buddhas.

The Buddha told Subhuti:

— Thus it is! Thus it is! If anyone hears this sutra and is neither alarmed, frightened, nor terrified, one should know that this person is exceedingly rare. Why? Subhuti, the foremost paramita spoken of by the Tathagata is not the foremost paramita; therefore, it is called the foremost paramita.

Explanation:

This is the seal of accord whereby the Buddha-mind is entered and the Buddha's knowledge and vision are attained. Yet Subhuti and the other followers of the Lesser Vehicle, as well as sentient beings generally, were all attached to marks. From the Buddha's appearance in the world until then, more than twenty years had passed, and the various teachings he expounded had never entirely departed from marks.

Fearing that they would give rise to doubt, he taught them provisionally, gradually refining and eliminating their attachments in many ways, and only now revealed the original mind. Why? Because the Buddha's original vow is to cause everyone to proceed toward the ultimate ground of the Great Vehicle.

Now he would guide those formerly of the Lesser Vehicle to bring forth the mind of the Great Vehicle, specifically taking this Vajra mind-ground as the basis for cultivating the cause. Therefore, he first used this mind to sever their various doubts and cause right faith to arise. This prajna is the initial gateway into the Great Vehicle and the beginner's mind from which a bodhisattva's awakening arises.

The mind referred to as being mindfully protected and entrusted is precisely this mind. Because the disciples of the Lesser Vehicle had never heard it before and only now heard it, and had never understood it in the past but only now awakened to it, they were like a child deprived of milk who suddenly encounters a loving mother. Therefore, it was wholly fitting that Subhuti, upon hearing it, was deeply moved and shed tears.

Thus he praised it as rare. Earlier, Subhuti praised the World-Honored One as rare because he had just glimpsed this mind of the World-Honored One, though he had not yet heard it fully explained. Now the World-Honored One had revealed it completely, breaking through layer after layer until every doubt was dispelled.

This indeed was the truly rare mind. Because it had never before been heard, it truly was a rare Dharma. Subhuti described his own realization and also inspired his companions, meaning: I heard it and awakened, and of myself declare it rare.

If there is even one other person who, upon hearing it, can place faith in the purity of their own mind in this way, then the true mark becomes present and all delusions are extinguished. Such a person is also, in themselves, a rare person. Why?

Because the Dharma that transcends marks is extremely difficult to believe and understand.

Moreover, although it was difficult for us who personally beheld the Tathagata to believe, when we heard the Buddha's wondrous voice, belief and understanding were not so difficult. But after the Buddha's nirvana, when the age of the sages has receded into the distance, five hundred years hence, the five evil turbidities will be severe, Mara's influence will flourish, and the Dharma will be weak. It will be extremely difficult for anyone to believe this Dharma.

If anyone can believe it, that person will be foremost among those who are rare. Why? Because this person can transcend the four marks.

Yet the four marks are suchness itself. To understand this is to see the Dharma-body. Therefore, it is said, “Those who can transcend all marks are called Buddhas.” This is indeed exceedingly rare.

Upon hearing these words, the World-Honored One confirmed them, saying, “Thus it is! Thus it is! It is truly as you say.” Because this Dharma is great while people's capacities are small, those who hear it all give rise to alarm, doubt, and fear.

One who hears it without becoming alarmed, doubtful, or afraid is indeed a rare person, for what I teach does not reside in words. Therefore, it is said, “It is not the foremost; therefore, it is called the foremost.”

Doubt:

Previously, what was given in charity consisted of objects enjoyed through the six sense-fields; this is external giving. Although such things are difficult to relinquish, once relinquished, the giver still hopes to obtain merit. The World-Honored One had taught that one should not abide in marks, saying that markless merit is greater.

Accordingly, he further said that not only does giving the seven treasures not equal markless merit, but even the merit from giving away as many bodies and lives as there are grains of sand in the Ganges is difficult to compare with it. Giving one's body and life is internal giving. Subhuti therefore again doubted: external possessions may be forgotten, but the body and life are difficult to relinquish; how could they possibly be given up?

The World-Honored One knew his thought and therefore extensively taught the practice of patience to dispel this doubt. If one's body is dismembered without anger arising, then the self is empty. This was the doubt in the mind of the principal interlocutor.

The hidden intent of this sutra is that the World-Honored One wished tacitly to break through a bodhisattva's two attachments—to self and to dharmas. Yet attachment to self concerns the five skandhas of body and mind. Furthermore, this body of five skandhas has both a provisional designation and actual dharmas.

Previously, the provisional designation was refuted; now, through the example of the body's dismemberment, the actual dharmas of the five skandhas are examined and refuted.

Canonical Text:

– Subhuti, the Tathagata says that the perfection of patience is not the perfection of patience; therefore it is called the perfection of patience. Why is this so? Subhuti, long ago, when King Kali dismembered my body, at that time I had no notion of a self, no notion of a person, no notion of a sentient being, and no notion of a life span. Why? In the past, as each part of my body was cut away, if I had held a notion of a self, a notion of a person, a notion of a sentient being, or a notion of a life span, I would have given rise to anger and hatred. Subhuti, I also recall that for five hundred lifetimes in the past I was an Immortal Practicing Patience. Throughout all those lifetimes, I had no notion of a self, no notion of a person, no notion of a sentient being, and no notion of a life span. Therefore, Subhuti, a bodhisattva should relinquish all notions and bring forth the mind of unsurpassed bodhi. One should not give rise to a mind dwelling upon form, nor should one give rise to a mind dwelling upon sounds, fragrances, tastes, tangible objects, or dharmas. One should give rise to a mind that dwells nowhere. If the mind has anything upon which it dwells, then it does not truly dwell. Therefore, the Buddha says that the mind of a bodhisattva should not dwell upon form when practicing giving. Subhuti, for the benefit of all sentient beings, a bodhisattva should practice giving in this manner. The Tathagata teaches that all notions are not notions. He also teaches that all sentient beings are not sentient beings.

Explanation:

This passage refutes the substantial existence of the dharmas of the five skandhas. In conclusion, it answers the question, “How should one abide?” Upon hearing of giving up one’s body and life, Subhuti did not yet comprehend that the five skandhas are originally empty; thus, he doubted and did not believe, considering it extremely difficult. He thought that one might still be able to give the seven external treasures without dwelling upon their characteristics.

But relinquishing one’s body and life would be impossible. If one does not relinquish body and life, the notion of self has not yet become empty. Clearly, when one clings to characteristics, it is difficult to accord with true emptiness.

Therefore, the Blessed One specifically cited the practice of patience: when King Kali dismembered his body, if he had not yet forgotten the four notions, anger and hatred would have arisen. Thus, his freedom from anger showed his realization that the intrinsic nature of the five skandhas is originally empty. This is what is meant by cutting water or blowing upon light, while remaining serene and unmoved, because all characteristics have been relinquished.

Therefore, I teach that bodhisattvas should relinquish all characteristics and bring forth the mind of bodhi. They should not give rise to a mind dwelling upon the six sense objects, but should give rise to a mind that dwells nowhere. This concludes the preceding passage, gathering together its essential meaning of relinquishing characteristics in answer to the question, “How should one abide?” It further teaches: “If the mind has a place upon which it dwells, then both mind and its objects are false; it is certainly not true abiding.” This is precisely why the Buddha taught that bodhisattvas should practice giving without dwelling upon the characteristic of form.

Yet, since bodhisattvas act for the benefit of all sentient beings, only by practicing giving in this manner do they perform the wondrous practice. They must not cling and thereby give rise to their own speculative views. The Tathagata teaches that all characteristics are true suchness and that all sentient beings are true suchness.

Therefore, it was previously said, “If one sees that all characteristics are not characteristics, one sees the Tathagata.” Thus, in concluding, the Buddha teaches: “All characteristics are not characteristics; sentient beings are not sentient beings.”

Doubt:

It has been said that by not dwelling upon characteristics, everything is empty. Thus, the wisdom that realizes this must also be empty, for it has no substance. If dharmas have no substance, how could they produce causes and bring about the experience of effects? The intended answer is that one should simply have firm faith in the Buddha’s teaching that the Tathagata’s personally realized realm is certainly neither false nor deceptive.

Canonical Text:

– Subhuti! The Tathagata is one who speaks what is true, speaks what is real, speaks what is thus, speaks without deception, and speaks without contradiction. Subhuti! The Dharma attained by the Tathagata is neither real nor unreal.

Explanation:

This conclusion causes one to hold firmly to truth. When Subhuti heard the Buddha say that both cause and effect are empty, he immediately wondered: if the effect is empty, there is no need to employ a cause; if the cause is empty, the effect cannot be attained. Now, while practicing giving as a cause, one is further told to give rise to a mind that does not dwell; thus, there would be no real effect that could be realized. The Blessed One therefore teaches that one need only have firm and genuine faith in the Buddha’s words and need not give rise to numerous doubts. The Dharma attained by the Tathagata is neither real nor unreal and cannot be sought through clinging discriminative consciousness. This teaching is used to refute the doubt.

Doubt:

To practice giving without dwelling upon characteristics while giving rise to the mind—this is said to be giving rise to a mind that does not dwell. How, then, can it accord with prajnaparamita? The following passage answers and refutes this doubt.

Canonical Text:

– Subhuti! If the mind of a bodhisattva dwells upon dharmas while practicing giving, that person is like someone who has entered darkness and sees nothing. If the mind of a bodhisattva does not dwell upon dharmas while practicing giving, that person is like someone with eyes who, in the bright light of the sun, sees all kinds of forms.

Explanation:

This teaches the benefit of non-abiding. A mind that has a place upon which it dwells belongs to ignorance, because the mind is obstructed by its objects. It is like a person who enters darkness and cannot see a single thing. When the mind does not dwell, all obstructions are completely removed. Both self and others disappear. It is like the sun rising high and illuminating the myriad phenomena everywhere. Thus, this mind that dwells nowhere is true prajnaparamita. What the Buddha realized is nothing other than this very mind.

Doubt:

Furthermore, if this non-abiding mind is prajnaparamita, how can it accord with the Buddha’s mind? The following passage answers and refutes this doubt.

Canonical Text:

– Subhuti, in a future age, if good men or good women are able to receive, uphold, read, and recite this sutra, the Tathagata, through the Buddha’s wisdom, will certainly know that all such people have accomplished immeasurable and boundless merit. Subhuti! Suppose good men or good women were, in the early morning, to give bodies and lives equal in number to the sands of the Ganges; at midday, to give bodies and lives equal in number to the sands of the Ganges; and in the evening, to give bodies and lives equal in number to the sands of the Ganges—giving their bodies in this manner for immeasurable hundreds of thousands of myriads of kotis of kalpas. If another person merely hears this sutra and has faith without opposing it, that person’s merit surpasses theirs. How much more so for one who copies, receives, upholds, reads, and recites it, and explains it to others!

Explanation:

This teaches that the mind and the Buddha are equal. Subhuti’s doubt implied that his own wisdom could not accord with the Buddha’s wisdom. The Buddha’s meaning is that prajnaparamita is without written words, yet written words themselves are prajnaparamita; thus, the sutra I teach is prajnaparamita in its entirety.

If someone can faithfully accept it, that person necessarily enters into wondrous accord with the Buddha’s wisdom. Through his intrinsic wisdom, the Buddha clearly knows that this person’s merit is immeasurable. This is the merit of a single thought that instantly accords with the Buddha’s mind.

Suppose that at the three periods of each day someone gave bodies and lives as numerous as the sands of the Ganges. That person’s merit would certainly be great, yet it would not equal the merit of one who, in a single thought of faith, accords with prajnaparamita without opposing it. Such a person may be said to have skillfully entered the Buddha’s wisdom, and this merit is even greater.

How much more so if one also copies, receives, upholds, reads, and recites the sutra and explains it to others!

Canonical Text:

– Subhuti! To summarize, this sutra possesses inconceivable, immeasurable, and boundless merit. The Tathagata teaches it for those who have brought forth the mind of the Great Vehicle and for those who have brought forth the mind of the Supreme Vehicle. If someone is able to receive, uphold, read, and recite it and explain it extensively to others, the Tathagata will fully know and fully see that person. Such a person accomplishes merit that is immeasurable, incalculable, limitless, and inconceivable. People such as these bear the Tathagata’s unsurpassed bodhi. Why is this so? Subhuti! Those who delight in lesser teachings cling to the view of a self, the view of a person, the view of a sentient being, and the view of a life span. Therefore, they are unable to hear, receive, uphold, read, or recite this sutra or explain it to others.

Explanation:

This praises prajnaparamita as intended exclusively for those of the highest and most supreme capacities. Previously, the text repeatedly spoke of clinging to the four notions, which is coarse. Here it speaks of clinging to the four views, which is subtle.

Canonical Text:

– Subhuti! Wherever this sutra is present, throughout all places, all devas, humans, and asuras in the world should make offerings to it. Know that such a place is a stupa. All should honor it, bow reverently, circumambulate it, and scatter flowers and incense there.

Explanation:

This praises the eternally abiding Dharma-body of Prajnaparamita.

Canonical Text:

Furthermore, Subhuti, if a good man or good woman who receives, upholds, reads, and recites this sutra is despised by others, that person, because of karmic offenses committed in previous lives, should have fallen into the evil realms. Yet because that person is despised by others in this life, those karmic offenses from previous lives will certainly be extinguished, and that person will attain unsurpassed, complete, perfect enlightenment.

Explanation:

This praises Prajnaparamita for its benefit of freeing one from obstructions and releasing one from bondage: it not only extinguishes offenses but also enables one to attain the supreme fruit.

Canonical Text:

– Subhuti, I recall that incalculable asamkhyeya kalpas ago, before the time of Dipankara Buddha, I encountered eight hundred and forty thousand myriad kotis of nayutas of Buddhas. I made offerings to and served them all, never once neglecting them. If, moreover, in a later age someone is able to receive, uphold, read, and recite this sutra, the merit thereby attained will exceed my merit from making offerings to all those Buddhas by a hundredfold, a thousandfold, or a hundred thousand myriad kotis of times, to the point that no calculation or analogy can express it. Subhuti, if in a later age a good man or good woman receives, upholds, reads, and recites this sutra, and if I were to describe fully the merit thereby attained, some who heard it would become mentally deranged, doubtful, and disbelieving. Subhuti, you should know that the meaning of this sutra is inconceivable, and its resulting recompense is likewise inconceivable.

Explanation:

This praises those who awaken to Prajnaparamita: in a single thought, they are swiftly born into the Buddha’s household and, life after life and kalpa after kalpa, never depart from the Buddha. Therefore, this merit is exceedingly supreme. If, in the later age during the Dharma-ending period, anyone is able to believe, that person’s merit will be even greater. Because the merit of this Prajnaparamita is inconceivable, its resulting recompense is likewise beyond conception and measure.

At the beginning, the questions were asked, “How should one abide? How should one subdue the mind?” Up to this point, the doubts and attachments of ordinary beings who bring forth the great resolve and cultivate the bodhisattva conduct have been thoroughly demolished. Yet the two attachments to self and dharmas have both coarse and subtle forms.

Previously, the two coarse attachments were demolished: namely, attachment to the body and mind composed of the five skandhas as the self, and attachment to one’s own practice of the six paramitas while pursuing sense objects and seeking bodhi; this latter is attachment to dharmas. Both attachments are attachments to characteristics. This demolishes the doubts of bodhisattvas who have newly brought forth the resolve but have not yet awakened to Prajnaparamita, revealing the meaning: “Below, no beings are seen who can be delivered.” What follows then demolishes the two subtle attachments concerning self.

Although a bodhisattva has awakened to Prajnaparamita, there may still remain the attachments:

– There is a wisdom that realizes, taken as the self.

– There is suchness that is realized, taken as a person.

– That which realizes and awakens is taken as a being.

– Realization and awakening have not yet been forgotten and continue secretly and uninterruptedly like the span of a life; this is taken as one who lives a life.

These four characteristics are extremely subtle. Within these two subtle attachments, there still remains the self that is aware of self. Therefore, the text below, in developing this point, mentions only the word “self.” If this attachment to self is demolished, then “Above, there is no fruit of Buddhahood that can be sought.” The wording of this passage of the sutra is the same as that of the preceding section, but its meaning is different (1). Readers should understand this.

Canonical Text:

At That Time, Subhuti Addressed the Buddha, Saying:

– World-Honored One, when a good man or good woman brings forth the resolve for unsurpassed bodhi, how should that person abide, and how should that person subdue the mind?

The Buddha Told Subhuti:

– If a good man or good woman brings forth the resolve for unsurpassed bodhi, that person should give rise to this thought: “I should lead all beings to nirvana. Yet when all beings have been led to nirvana, not a single being has actually been led to nirvana.” Why is this so? Subhuti, if a bodhisattva has the characteristic of a self, the characteristic of a person, the characteristic of a being, or the characteristic of one who lives a life, then that person is not a bodhisattva. Why is this so? Because in truth there is no dharma by which one brings forth the resolve for unsurpassed bodhi.

Explanation:

From this point onward, the two subtle attachments to self and dharmas are demolished. At the beginning of the sutra, the questions “How should one abide? How should one subdue the mind?” were raised because newly resolved bodhisattvas still dwelling among ordinary beings are beings of great resolve who have newly brought forth the determination to deliver beings. Consequently, they have various attachments to characteristics:

– They cultivate while clinging to their own physical body composed of the five skandhas.

– In practicing giving, they still cling to the coarse objects of the six sense fields and seek blessed rewards.

– In seeking bodhi, they cling to the physical characteristics of the Transformation Buddha.

– They regard a buddha-land as a land adorned with precious objects.

Because these various practices never depart from characteristics, they remain very far from Prajnaparamita.

Whenever Non-Arising raised a doubt, the Buddha demolished it layer by layer, until all characteristics had been relinquished and he could accord with the true wisdom of Prajnaparamita and suchness to which Non-Arising had awakened. Only from this point were the assembly’s doubts dispelled. This sutra text is inconceivable.

The entire first half of the scroll bears this meaning. The self demolished there was based entirely upon views arising among ordinary beings: namely, the self constituted by the physical characteristics of the five skandhas; all four characteristics were coarse. From this passage onward, the attachment of bodhisattvas who have awakened to Prajnaparamita is demolished.

It points out that the realizing wisdom has not yet been forgotten and is taken, through attachment, as the self. This is the remaining self that is aware of self—the two subtle attachments to self and dharmas—and all four characteristics are subtle. Therefore, this passage begins by presenting the single word “self.” It says only, “I should lead beings to nirvana,” without speaking of giving.

This means that merit is already perfected, while the view distinguishing beings from the Buddha has yet to disappear. Thus the coarse is treated first and the subtle afterward. One may ask, “If this subtle wisdom is the self, why are the questions ‘How should one abide?

How should one subdue the mind?’ the same as the earlier questions?” The answer is: “Abiding is asked about because, although this bodhisattva has departed from the five skandhas, habitual tendencies still remain; thus, even within the wisdom of suchness, the bodhisattva still seeks a place to abide. Moreover, because of the urgency to seek bodhi, the bodhisattva clings to the notion that bodhi is something in which one can abide.

Seeking it without attaining it, the mind is not at peace; hence, ‘subdue’ is spoken of.” This mind that seeks Buddhahood is not yet at peace because the discriminating view between beings and the Buddha remains; consequently, it cannot attain the equality of the one suchness. Although the question is the same, its meaning is different. Therefore, the World-Honored One demolishes this attachment by saying: One who brings forth the resolve for bodhi should contemplate thus: “After I have led all beings to nirvana, in truth not a single being has been led to nirvana,” because beings are originally suchness itself and do not await being led to nirvana.

If one clings to the existence of beings who are led to nirvana, one is attached to the four characteristics and is not a bodhisattva. This is not seeing any beings who can be delivered. Yet beings and Buddhas have always been equal.

Since beings cannot be extinguished, in truth there is no dharma by which a bodhisattva can bring forth the resolve to seek bodhi. Why? Because beings are originally quiescent and extinct; they are already bodhi itself.

How, then, could there still be anything to seek? This is not seeing any fruit of Buddhahood that can be sought.

Doubt:

If in truth there is no dharma by which bodhi can be attained, then is not the Prajnaparamita to which I have awakened a dharma? And did not the World-Honored One, in the presence of Dipankara Buddha, attain this dharma as the cause of his later Buddhahood? Would that not be the attainment of bodhi? Why, then, is it said that there is no dharma that can be attained? Therefore, this is demolished below.

Canonical Text:

– Subhuti, when the Tathagata was in the presence of Dipankara Buddha, was there any dharma by which he attained unsurpassed bodhi?

– 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 unsurpassed bodhi.

The Buddha Said:

– So it is! So it is! Subhuti, in truth there was no dharma by which the Tathagata attained unsurpassed bodhi. Subhuti, if there had been a dharma by which the Tathagata attained unsurpassed bodhi, Dipankara Buddha would not have bestowed a prediction upon me, saying, “In a future age, you will become a Buddha named Shakyamuni.” Because in truth there was no dharma by which unsurpassed bodhi was attained, Dipankara Buddha bestowed a prediction upon me, saying, “In a future age, you will become a Buddha named Shakyamuni.”

Explanation:

This teaches that bodhi admits of no attainment, thereby demolishing the doubtful attachment concerning the Buddha. Non-Arising suspected that, in the presence of Dipankara Buddha, the Buddha truly had a dharma that could be attained. The World-Honored One successively followed this line of thought in order to demolish the deluded conception, precisely to reveal that in truth there is not a single dharma that can be attained.

Doubt:

The Dharma of prajnaparamita is the true cause for attaining Buddhahood. Now, if it is said that there is no dharma, then there is no cause; how, then, can the fruit of bodhi be attained? Below, the Dharma-body, which does not belong to cause and effect, is used to dispel this doubt.

Canonical Text:

– Why is this so? Tathagata means the suchness of all dharmas. If someone says that the Tathagata attained unsurpassed bodhi, Subhuti, in truth there is no dharma by which the Buddha attained unsurpassed bodhi. Subhuti! In the unsurpassed bodhi attained by the Tathagata, there is neither reality nor falsity. Therefore, the Tathagata says: “All dharmas are Buddha-Dharma.” Subhuti! What is called all dharmas is not all dharmas; thus it is called all dharmas. Subhuti! It is like a person whose body is great.

Subhuti said:

– Blessed One! The great body of which the Tathagata speaks is not a great body; thus it is called a great body.

Explanation:

This reveals that the Dharma-body does not belong to cause and effect. Subhuti had not yet penetrated the true essence of the Dharma-body and therefore did not know that it does not belong to cause and effect; thus he clung to the view that the Tathagata had cultivation and attainment. The Buddha therefore used non-attainment to dispel this attachment.

Still fearing that he might not awaken, the Buddha directly taught that bodhi is said to have nothing that can be attained because the Tathagata is without form or appearance and is the very suchness of all dharmas in their immediate essence. Furthermore, all dharmas are originally suchness itself; how could they require cultivation before being realized? Therefore, I say that in truth there is no dharma of bodhi that the Buddha could attain.

In the Chan school it is said, “Regarding the path that leads upward, the Buddhas of the three times permit no one to glimpse it; should one glimpse it, one’s eyes must go blind,” because here there is nothing that can be grasped or sought. Bodhi is in truth not the least bit extraordinary; it is merely not giving rise, regarding all dharmas, to inverted views of annihilationism or eternalism. Therefore, it is said to be neither real nor false.

All dharmas are not dharmas. If one knows that the great body is not a body, one will certainly know that all dharmas are not dharmas.

Doubt:

Having heard that in truth there is no dharma by which the aspiration is aroused, Subhuti doubted: “It is because I possess a dharma for liberating beings that I am called a bodhisattva. If there is no dharma, how can one be called a bodhisattva?” Below, the absence of dharmas and self is used to dispel this doubt.

Canonical Text:

– Subhuti! The same is true of a bodhisattva. If one were to say, “I shall bring immeasurable beings to nirvana,” one could not be called a bodhisattva. Why is this so? Subhuti! In truth there is no dharma called a bodhisattva. Therefore, the Buddha says that all dharmas are without self, without person, without sentient being, and without one who lives a life. If a bodhisattva says, “I shall adorn a Buddha-land,” that person cannot be called a bodhisattva. Why is this so? The adornment of Buddha-lands spoken of by the Tathagata is not adornment; thus it is called adornment. Subhuti! If a bodhisattva thoroughly comprehends the Dharma of no-self, the Tathagata says that person is truly a bodhisattva.

Explanation:

This teaches the selflessness of the Dharma-body in order to dispel the two subtle attachments of a bodhisattva. Subhuti clung to the view that only one who possessed a dharma for liberating beings could be called a bodhisattva. The Blessed One said that in truth no such dharma exists, thereby eliminating attachment to dharmas.

Fearing that Subhuti might doubt, “If there is no dharma for liberating beings, how can a Buddha-land be adorned?” the Blessed One taught that the Land of Eternal Quiescent Light does not depend upon adornment, thereby eliminating the abiding mind and breaking attachment to self. Both are devoid of self. One who does not penetrate this principle is not a true bodhisattva.

Therefore, only one who thoroughly comprehends the Dharma of no-self is said by the Tathagata to be a true bodhisattva.

Doubt:

If a bodhisattva does not perceive beings who can be liberated and does not perceive lands that can be purified, then why does the Tathagata need the five eyes? To dispel this doubt, the Buddha taught that discerning and knowing the minds of sentient beings constitutes the eyes; it is not that five eyes truly exist.

Canonical Text:

– Subhuti! What do you think? Does the Tathagata possess the physical eye?

– Yes, Blessed One! The Tathagata possesses the physical eye.

– Subhuti! What do you think? Does the Tathagata possess the heavenly eye?

– Yes, Blessed One! The Tathagata possesses the heavenly eye.

– Subhuti! What do you think? Does the Tathagata possess the wisdom eye?

– Yes, Blessed One! The Tathagata possesses the wisdom eye.

– Subhuti! What do you think? Does the Tathagata possess the Dharma eye?

– Yes, Blessed One! The Tathagata possesses the Dharma eye.

– Subhuti! What do you think? Does the Tathagata possess the Buddha eye?

– Yes, Blessed One! The Tathagata possesses the Buddha eye.

– Subhuti! What do you think? Does the Buddha speak of the grains of sand in the Ganges as grains of sand?

– Yes, Blessed One! The Tathagata speaks of them as grains of sand.

– Subhuti! What do you think? Suppose there were as many Ganges Rivers as there are grains of sand in one Ganges River, and as many grains of sand as there are in all those Ganges Rivers. Would the Buddha-worlds corresponding to that number be many?

– Very many, Blessed One!

The Buddha said to Subhuti:

– The Tathagata knows all the various kinds of minds possessed by the sentient beings in that many lands. Why is this so? The Tathagata says that all minds are not minds. Why is this? Subhuti! The past mind cannot be apprehended, the present mind cannot be apprehended, and the future mind cannot be apprehended.

Explanation:

This teaches that mind, Buddha, and sentient beings are not different from one another. Subhuti doubted that, because the Buddha possesses all five eyes, there must be dharmas that can be seen, as well as corresponding worlds and sentient beings. The Blessed One taught that possessing all five eyes does not mean that there truly are eyes; rather, seeing and knowing the minds of sentient beings is what is called the eyes.

Moreover, the Tathagata knows and sees all the various kinds of minds of the immeasurable sentient beings throughout worlds as numerous as the sands of the Ganges. This is because sentient beings are the sentient beings within the Tathagata’s own mind; whenever a sentient being stirs a single thought, the Tathagata’s own mind stirs. How, then, could he fail to know and see it?

Subhuti further doubted that, if the minds of sentient beings arise and cease, the Tathagata’s mind must also arise and cease. Therefore, the Blessed One said that the minds of the sentient beings spoken of here are originally suchness itself, fundamentally unborn and unceasing, and equal in quiescence to the Tathagata’s mind, utterly devoid of the characteristics of birth and death, coming and going. Mind, Buddha, and sentient beings are not different from one another; therefore, when the mind is sought throughout the three times, it can ultimately never be apprehended.

Doubt:

On one occasion, the Blessed One dispelled attachments by saying that there is no land that can be adorned and no sentient being who can be liberated. Yet he feared that Subhuti, upon hearing this, might become entangled in discursive thought and suppose that, if sentient beings and lands are both empty, then generosity brings no merit and there is no need to cultivate. Therefore, the Blessed One dispelled this doubt by saying that the merit of non-merit is exceedingly great.

Canonical Text:

– Subhuti! What do you think? If someone filled a great trichiliocosm with the seven treasures and used them to practice generosity, would that person, through these causes and conditions, obtain much merit?

– Yes, Blessed One! Through these causes and conditions, that person would obtain much merit. Nevertheless, because merit is empty, the Tathagata says that this person obtains much merit.

Explanation:

This teaches the merit of signlessness. Because Subhuti was attached to generosity characterized by appearances, he said that in truth there was no merit. He simply did not know that, when the six sense-objects involved in the act of giving are originally empty, there is no merit to be attained. Therefore, the Blessed One used the teaching, “Because merit is empty, the merit is great,” to dispel this attachment. The emptiness spoken of here is not utter nonexistence; because the capacity of the mind is like empty space, the merit obtained is all the greater.

Doubt:

Upon hearing that one should not abide in appearances when liberating beings and adorning Buddha-lands, Subhuti gave rise to this doubt: Liberating beings and adorning Buddha-lands are the causes for attaining Buddhahood, and they bring forth the fruit of adornment, through which the myriad virtues are perfected. Now it is said that there are no sentient beings to liberate and no Buddha-land that can be adorned; thus all causes are cut off and cease to exist.

It is also said that there is no bodhi that can be realized; thus there is no fruit. If both cause and effect are utterly cut off, there is no Buddha. Yet the Tathagata is visibly endowed with the full perfection of physical characteristics.

From where, then, did these arise? Therefore, the Buddha used the teaching, “One should not perceive the Tathagata by the perfection of physical characteristics,” to dispel this doubt.

Canonical Text:

– Subhuti! What do you think? Can the Buddha be perceived by means of a body of physical characteristics?

– No, World-Honored One! The Tathagata should not be seen by means of the perfection of the physical body. Why? The Tathagata has said that the perfection of the physical body is not the perfection of the physical body; it is merely called the perfection of the physical body.

– Subhuti! What do you think? Can the Tathagata be seen by means of the perfection of all characteristics?

– No, World-Honored One! The Tathagata should not be seen by means of the perfection of all characteristics. Why? The Tathagata has said that the perfection of all characteristics is not perfection; it is merely called the perfection of all characteristics.

Explanation:

This passage refutes attachment to the physical characteristics of the reward body in order to reveal that the Dharma body and the reward body are secretly one.

– The perfection of the physical body is the Buddha’s reward body, adorned with the myriad virtues. Because throughout many kalpas he liberated beings and adorned Buddha lands, this fruition arose in accord with those causes. Therefore, the Tathagata speaks of the perfection of the physical body.

– Moreover, this reward body is originally the Dharma body; hence it is said not to be the perfection of the physical body.

This refutes the characteristic of “that which is seen.” What follows refutes the seeing of “the one who sees.” Because the reward body is the Dharma body, there is no characteristic that can be seen. When wisdom and essence are thusness, the affliction of seeing disappears. When object and wisdom are secretly one, the Dharma body naturally manifests.

Whenever one speaks of affirmation or negation, such words serve as barriers, lest one fall into the lair of right and wrong; thus both sides are blocked and driven away. Therefore, the Dharma spoken by the Tathagata is fundamentally ineffable. It merely guards against the mental ailments of sentient beings, preventing conceptual attachments from arising, and dispels emotional attachments so that they abide nowhere.

That is all; practitioners should understand this.

Doubt:

Having heard that the Buddha fundamentally has no characteristics by which he may be seen, Subhuti then wondered: If there are no bodily characteristics, who is now teaching the Dharma? Therefore, the Buddha uses “nothing that can be taught” to dispel this doubt.

Scriptural Text:

– Subhuti! Do not say that the Tathagata thinks, “I should have a Dharma to teach.” Do not think in this way. Why? If anyone says that the Tathagata has a Dharma to teach, that person slanders the Buddha and does not understand what I have said. Subhuti! In teaching the Dharma, there is no Dharma that can be taught; this is called teaching the Dharma.

Explanation:

This refutes the doubt that the Tathagata’s reward body can teach the Dharma. When the Tathagata appears in the world, fundamentally there is no Dharma that can be taught. He merely responds to the attachments of sentient beings and strikes them down—with only a single word. Whenever he says “not” or “empty,” the essential purpose is to use obstructive words to block the deluded thoughts of sentient beings; this is precisely the meaning of mindful protection. Therefore, it is called teaching the Dharma.

Doubt:

Subhuti had awakened to the principle that the Dharma body neither speaks nor teaches. Because this Dharma is extremely profound, he wondered whether sentient beings in later ages would recognize it and be able to accept it with faith. Therefore, this doubt arose. What follows uses “no sentient beings” to refute it.

Scriptural Text:

At that time, the venerable Subhuti addressed the Buddha, saying:

– World-Honored One! Will sentient beings in the future, upon hearing this Dharma taught, give rise to faith?

The Buddha said to Subhuti:

– They are neither sentient beings nor not sentient beings. Why? Subhuti! Those called sentient beings, the Tathagata says, are not sentient beings; they are merely called sentient beings.

Explanation:

This teaches that sentient beings and Dharma are of one suchness, thereby refuting attachment to the view of sentient beings. Subhuti had awakened to the Dharma body and was already able to believe and accept it. Nevertheless, because this Dharma is extremely profound, he wondered whether people in the future would be able to believe it. Subhuti’s view of arising and cessation had not yet disappeared, and so he formed the notion of sentient beings in a future age. The World-Honored One replied:

– Because sentient beings are fundamentally suchness and are equal to the Dharma, how could there be a characteristic of the future? Sentient beings are suchness, equal throughout the three periods of time. This is truly the ultimate consummation of prajna. The six phrases beginning with “They are not sentient beings...” mean:

– Sentient beings are originally suchness in themselves; therefore, it is said: they are not sentient beings.

– Because true suchness accords with conditions and gives rise to all phenomena, it is said that they are not not sentient beings.

– It is further explained that sentient beings are true suchness according with conditions: all dharmas combine and arise together; therefore, they are spoken of as “provisionally designated sentient beings.”

– Because “sentient beings” is only a provisional designation, the Tathagata says that they are not truly sentient beings.

– Because there is no real arising, they are called sentient beings.

Doubt:

The Dharma body is without characteristics, and there is no Dharma that can be attained. Why, then, is it said that by cultivating all wholesome dharmas one attains bodhi? What follows uses “equality without attainment” to refute this doubt.

Scriptural Text:

Subhuti addressed the Buddha, saying:

– World-Honored One! Is the Buddha’s attainment of unsurpassed bodhi actually non-attainment?

The Buddha said:

– So it is! So it is! Subhuti, with regard to unsurpassed bodhi, I have not attained even the slightest dharma; therefore, it is called unsurpassed bodhi. Furthermore, Subhuti! This Dharma is equal, with neither high nor low; therefore, it is called unsurpassed bodhi. By being without self, person, sentient being, or life span, and by cultivating all wholesome dharmas, one attains unsurpassed bodhi. Subhuti! As for the wholesome dharmas that are spoken of, the Tathagata says they are not wholesome dharmas; they are merely called wholesome dharmas.

Explanation:

This refutes the view concerning Buddha and Dharma. Subhuti had awakened to the purity of the Dharma body, in which there is no Dharma that can be attained. Nevertheless, he still doubted the Buddha’s statement that cultivating all wholesome dharmas leads to the attainment of bodhi, for this would imply an attainment.

Is the Tathagata’s bodhi truly without attainment? The Buddha said: There is truly nothing attained, because sentient beings and the Buddha are equal, neither two nor different; this itself is bodhi. That is all.

How could there truly be anything realized or attained? The statement that cultivating wholesome dharmas leads to bodhi refers only to cultivation undertaken after relinquishing the four characteristics. Because cultivation itself is non-cultivation, attainment is also non-attainment.

Because there is nothing attained, it is called the true wholesome Dharma.

Doubt:

If wholesome dharmas are nonexistent, then what Dharma is supreme? What follows declares that “the person who realizes prajna is supremely excellent.”

Scriptural Text:

– Subhuti! Suppose that throughout the three-thousandfold great-thousand world-system there were as many heaps of the seven treasures as there are Mount Sumerus, kings of mountains, and someone gave them all in charity. If this were compared with another person who receives, upholds, reads, and recites even a four-line verse from this Prajnaparamita Sutra and explains it to others, the merit of the former would not equal even one hundredth of the latter, nor one hundred-thousand-myriad-millionth; indeed, no calculation or analogy could compare with it.

Explanation:

This praises the merit of the prajna that is free from characteristics as supremely excellent. Furthermore, if cultivating wholesome dharmas does not attain bodhi, and if wholesome dharmas are not supreme, then what Dharma is supreme? The Buddha said: Great Prajna is supremely excellent. Within the three-thousandfold world-system are ten billion Mount Sumerus. Even if one were to give away an equal quantity of the seven treasures, though the resulting merit would be great, it would not equal the merit of realizing four lines of prajna. This is because such giving clings to characteristics and covets benefit, whereas prajna is free from characteristics and therefore surpasses it immeasurably; no analogy can compare with it.

Doubt:

Subhuti heard that sentient beings and the Buddha are equal. But if they are equal, there are no sentient beings; why, then, is it said that the Tathagata liberates sentient beings? This would imply characteristics of self and person. What follows uses “the disappearance of both self and person” to refute this doubt.

Scriptural Text:

– Subhuti! What do you think? You should not say that the Tathagata thinks, “I should liberate sentient beings.” Subhuti! Do not think in this way. Why? In truth, there are no sentient beings whom the Tathagata liberates. If there were sentient beings whom the Tathagata liberated, then the Tathagata would have the notions of self, person, sentient being, and life span. Subhuti! When the Tathagata speaks of a self, it is not a self, yet ordinary beings regard it as a self. Subhuti! The Tathagata says that ordinary beings are not ordinary beings; they are merely called ordinary beings.

Explanation:

This dispels the doubt that the Buddha possesses the notions of self and person, and reveals the true self of the Dharma-body. It is said that sentient beings and the Buddha are equal; since they are equal, there is neither Buddha nor sentient beings. Why, then, is it said that I am liberating sentient beings?

Sentient beings constitute the notion of a person, while “I liberate sentient beings” constitutes the notion of a self. If person and self are clearly present, the four notions have not been eliminated. This is precisely what the Chan school means by: “One has reached the realm of the Dharma-body but has not yet penetrated the realm beyond the Dharma-body.” Therefore, the World-Honored One used these words to dispel it.

Do not say that the Tathagata thinks: “I entertain the thought of liberating beings.” For if I entertained this thought, I would be an ordinary being. Yet the Tathagata says that an ordinary being is not even an ordinary being; how could the Tathagata still retain a view of self? Here, both sage and ordinary being are exhausted, leaving one level path.

At this point, the profound purport of prajnaparamita reaches its culmination.

Doubt:

Since the Dharma-body has no self and the reward-body cannot be seen through characteristics, are the thirty-two characteristics not the Buddha?

Canonical Text:

– Subhuti! What do you think? Can the Tathagata be seen by means of the thirty-two characteristics?

Subhuti replied:

– Yes, indeed! Yes, indeed! The Tathagata can be seen by means of the thirty-two characteristics.

The Buddha said:

– Subhuti! If the Tathagata could be seen by means of characteristics, then a wheel-turning sage-king would be the Tathagata.

Subhuti addressed the Buddha, saying:

– World-Honored One! As I understand the meaning of what the Buddha has taught, one should not see the Tathagata by means of the thirty-two characteristics.

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

If one sees me through form,

Or seeks me through sound,

That person practices a deviant path

And cannot see the Tathagata.

Explanation:

This teaches that the responsive transformation-body is not the true reality, thereby revealing that the Dharma-body is free from characteristics. Subhuti had already awakened to the selflessness of the Dharma-body and the characteristiclessness of the reward-body, which constitute the true Buddha. He then wondered which Buddha it was that was visibly endowed with the thirty-two characteristics.

Thus, he still entertained a view concerning the Buddha. The World-Honored One questioned him: Can the Tathagata truly be seen by means of the thirty-two characteristics? Subhuti clung to the belief that the thirty-two characteristics were certainly the Buddha.

The World-Honored One used the wheel-turning sage-king to break this attachment. At that moment, Subhuti awakened to the fact that the Tathagata cannot be seen by means of the thirty-two characteristics. The World-Honored One then taught this verse on freedom from characteristics:

If one sees me through form,

Or seeks me through sound,

That person practices a deviant path

And cannot see the Tathagata.

Doubt

Hearing that the Dharma-body and reward-body are without characteristics and that the responsive transformation-body is not the true reality, Subhuti gave rise to the view that the Dharma-body is annihilated. Because he had not realized the true self of the Dharma-body, the Buddha refuted this with the teaching of “non-annihilation.”

Canonical Text:

– Subhuti, if you were to think thus: The Tathagata did not attain unsurpassed bodhi through the perfection of characteristics. Subhuti, do not think that the Tathagata did not attain unsurpassed bodhi through characteristics. Subhuti! If you think that those who give rise to the mind of unsurpassed bodhi declare that all dharmas are annihilated, do not think in this way. Why? Those who give rise to the mind of unsurpassed bodhi do not, with regard to dharmas, declare the characteristic of annihilation. Subhuti, suppose a bodhisattva were to give in charity the seven treasures filling worlds equal in number to the sands of the Ganges, and suppose another person knew that all dharmas are without self and accomplished the patience regarding the non-arising of dharmas. This bodhisattva would surpass the merit attained by the former bodhisattva. Why? Subhuti, because bodhisattvas do not receive merit.

Subhuti addressed the Buddha, saying:

– World-Honored One! Why do bodhisattvas not receive merit?

– Subhuti, a bodhisattva who creates merit should not crave or cling to it. Therefore, it is said that bodhisattvas do not receive merit.

Explanation:

This dispels the view of annihilation. Hearing that one should see the Buddha by being free from characteristics, Subhuti gave rise to the view of annihilation and said that the Tathagata did not attain bodhi through the perfection of characteristics. The Buddha taught: Do not think in this way.

To think in this way is to declare that all dharmas are annihilated. Yet those who give rise to the mind of bodhi do not, with regard to dharmas, declare the characteristic of annihilation; they merely say that all dharmas are without self. If, furthermore, a person knew that all dharmas are without self and accomplished the patience regarding the non-arising of dharmas, the merit of this bodhisattva would far surpass the merit of one who gave the seven treasures filling lands as numerous as the sands of the Ganges, because this bodhisattva does not receive merit.

To say that one does not receive merit does not mean that merit is entirely nonexistent; it means only that one does not crave or cling to merit. Though it is said that there is no doing, no creating, and no receiving, in reality the karma of good and evil is never lost. The World-Honored One appeared in the world and taught the Dharma for forty-nine years, speaking only the single word “emptiness.” Because sentient beings in all nine realms cling to a self in all dharmas, the Tathagata taught only the word “emptiness” to break that attachment.

This is the adamantine true eye, directly contemplating the single path beyond. Therefore, the Chan school’s “special transmission and direct pointing” enters solely through this very point.

Doubt:

It has been said that there is no self and that merit is not received, yet the Tathagata is visibly seen walking, standing, lying down, and sitting. Is this not the Tathagata’s self? The view that the three bodies are either one or different has not yet been eliminated; therefore, the equality of the Dharma-body has not yet been realized.

Canonical Text:

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

Explanation:

This brings the teaching back to the boundary of the true reality of the Dharma-body. Subhuti saw dignified deportment in movement and stillness and regarded it as the Tathagata. This was specifically to perceive coming and going as existent. How could the Tathagata have coming or going? At this point, attachment is exhausted and discriminating thought forgotten; movement and stillness are nondual, and ultimate reality is suchness itself. This is the pinnacle of subtlety. If the views of oneness and difference have not yet been eliminated, the meaning of “the three bodies are one essence” has not yet been realized. Therefore, the text below uses the world and its particles of dust to dispel them.

Canonical Text:

– Subhuti, suppose a good man or good woman were to pulverize a three-thousand-great-thousand world-system into dust. What do you think? Would these particles of dust be numerous?

Subhuti replied:

– Extremely numerous, World-Honored One! Why? If these particles of dust truly existed, the Buddha would certainly not call them particles of dust. Why? The particles of dust spoken of by the Buddha are not particles of dust; therefore, they are called particles of dust. Thus, the three-thousand-great-thousand world-system spoken of by the Tathagata is not a world-system; therefore, it is called a world-system. Why? If the world-system truly existed, it would be a characteristic of a single composite unity. The Tathagata says that a characteristic of a single composite unity is not a characteristic of a single composite unity; therefore, it is called a characteristic of a single composite unity. Subhuti, a single composite unity is inexpressible; ordinary beings merely crave and cling to this matter.

Explanation:

This dispels the views of oneness and difference. Subhuti had not yet realized that the three bodies are one essence, so the World-Honored One used the particles of dust and the world-system, which are neither one nor different, to instruct him. Speaking of particles of dust, they are not one; speaking of the world-system, it is not different.

When particles of dust gather, they form a world-system: thus, they are different yet not different. When a world-system disperses, it becomes particles of dust: thus, it is one yet not one. Contemplated in this way, the characteristics of oneness and difference can never be apprehended.

Because they cannot be apprehended, they do not truly exist. If the characteristics of oneness and difference truly existed, there would be a characteristic of a single composite unity. “Single composite unity” is a one-sided view, because if it accords with oneness, it is not difference; if it accords with difference, it cannot be oneness.

If particles of dust truly existed, they could not gather to form a world-system. If the world-system truly existed, it could not disperse into particles of dust. The ignorant regard this as a characteristic of a single composite unity.

The Tathagata says: A characteristic of a single composite unity is not truly such; because it is free from the two extremes, it is called a single composite unity. Once the two extremes have been left behind, it is inexpressible. Ordinary beings cannot free themselves from the two extremes of existence and nonexistence, oneness and difference, but crave and cling to this matter.

Therefore, they cannot realize that the three bodies are one essence or understand the principle of the equality of the Dharma-body.

Doubt:

Since the Dharma-body is equal, everything is empty and therefore cannot be seen. Why, then, did the Buddha say that there are views of the four notions? Thus, these are again dispelled below.

Canonical Text:

– Subhuti, if someone says that the Buddha speaks of a view of self, a view of a person, a view of sentient beings, and a view of a life span—Subhuti, what do you think? Does this person understand the meaning of what I teach?

– No, World-Honored One! This person does not understand the meaning of the Tathagata’s teaching. Why? The World-Honored One teaches that the view of self, the view of a person, the view of sentient beings, and the view of a life span are “empty” (for the purpose of eliminating sentient beings’ views). Therefore, they are called the view of self, the view of a person, the view of sentient beings, and the view of a life span. Subhuti, one who has given rise to the mind of unsurpassed bodhi should know all dharmas in this way and should not give rise to the marks of dharmas. Subhuti, what the Tathagata calls the marks of dharmas are not the marks of dharmas; therefore, they are called the marks of dharmas.

Explanation:

This passage refutes attachment to the existence of a seeing that is apart from marks. Having awakened to the principle that the dharmakaya is equal, such, and unchanging, Subhuti then wondered: Since the essence of the dharmakaya cannot be seen by means of marks, why did the World-Honored One nevertheless speak of abandoning the view of the four marks? Fearing that Subhuti secretly harbored this doubt, the Buddha questioned him closely: Suppose someone were to say that the World-Honored One taught the existence of attachment to the view of the four marks.

Would you say that this person understood my meaning? Subhuti then awakened to the Buddha’s intention and replied: This person does not understand the meaning of the Tathagata’s teaching. Why?

The World-Honored One’s statement that there is a view of the four marks does not mean that there actually exists a mark of seeing that can be pointed out. It was taught as “empty” solely to eliminate the emotional attachment of those who perceive marks. This word “empty” differs from the other instances of the word “empty.” In the preceding passages, “empty” always bore the meaning of “not.” Here, however, “empty” is a word of eradication.

It means eliminating the view of marks from the minds of sentient beings. It is not that the Buddha teaches the existence of this view of marks; rather, it is sentient beings’ own view of marks. Therefore, it is said, “They are called.” The two words meaning “are called” also differ from the previous instances and must be examined carefully.

All sentient beings are deluded and inverted in their perception of marks. Their attachments are firm and difficult to break, so the Buddha must employ the vajra wisdom-mind to destroy them, enabling beings to behold the original wisdom and the true essence of the dharmakaya. At first, they cling to the view that the body and mind of the five skandhas and the marks of the six sense objects truly exist.

Thus attached to marks, they practice giving in pursuit of the Buddha’s merit. The World-Honored One refutes this with non-abiding. Next, they cling to the existence of the mark of bodhi, which the Buddha refutes with “nothing to be attained.” Afterward, they cling to giving characterized by marks as a means of adorning a buddha-land, which the Buddha refutes with “there is no land that can be adorned.” They then cling to the mark of merit as the cause that brings about the marks of karmic recompense, which the Buddha refutes with “there is no complete physical body.” Next, they cling to the notion that the Tathagata definitely possesses the marks of the three bodies,

which the Buddha refutes with “the transformation body is not real” and “the reward body is free from marks.” They then cling to the notion that the dharmakaya definitely possesses marks, which the Buddha refutes with “the dharmakaya is not a mark.” Thereafter, they cling to the notion that the dharmakaya definitely possesses the mark of a real self, which the Buddha refutes with “all things are without self.” Finally, they cling to the notion that the Tathagata definitely possesses the marks of the three bodies, which the Buddha refutes with “neither one nor different.” Layer after layer is demolished until all marks are empty and every mark has vanished.

At that moment, the one mind has nothing upon which to rely; principle reaches its utmost limit and emotional conception is forgotten, directly revealing the ultimate reality of the dharmakaya. Since the false marks that are the objects of perception are empty, the false seeing that is the perceiving subject also disappears. This is the ultimate standard of genuine, consummate prajna.

It penetrates directly the single upward path of the dharmakaya. Therefore, the Buddha firmly admonishes that one who has given rise to the mind of bodhi should know in this way, see in this way, believe and understand in this way regarding all dharmas, without giving rise to the marks of dharmas. Only upon reaching this point does one truly know, truly see, truly believe, and truly understand; one will then never again give rise to views and concepts concerning the marks of dharmas.

At this point, both person and dharma are forgotten, sage and ordinary being both disappear, the path of language is severed, and the activities of the mind cease. To arouse the mind is immediately to err; to stir a thought is immediately to depart from it. Therefore, the Buddha further eliminates attachment by saying: The so-called marks of dharmas are not the marks of dharmas; only then are they the true marks of dharmas, beyond comparison with any false perception.

Therein lies the exceedingly subtle, profound purport of prajna.

Doubt:

Subhuti had awakened to the dharmakaya in its entirety, yet he further wondered: The dharmakaya does not know how to expound the Dharma; the one who expounds the Dharma is the transformation body. If the Dharma taught by the transformation body cannot reach the realm of the dharmakaya, how can upholding this Dharma produce merit? The passage below teaches that “what is expounded by the transformation body is precisely the true dharmakaya,” because the three bodies are one essence.

Main Text:

– Subhuti! If someone were to fill immeasurable asamkhya worlds with the seven treasures and give them away, and if a good man or good woman who has given rise to the mind of bodhi were to uphold this sutra, even so little as four lines of verse and so forth, receiving, upholding, reading, and reciting them and explaining them to others, the merit of the latter would surpass that of the former. Why? One who explains it to others does not grasp or cling to marks, but remains ever thus, unmoving.

Explanation:

This teaches that the Buddha’s transformation body expounds the Dharma in suchness. Subhuti wondered: If the Dharma spoken by the Buddha’s transformation body cannot reach the realm of the dharmakaya, how can merit be obtained? The Buddha said: The teaching of the transformation body is precisely the teaching of the dharmakaya, because the three bodies are not different. Thus, if someone can receive, uphold, read, and recite even four lines of this Dharma and explain them to others, that person’s merit is supreme, because that person neither grasps nor clings to marks, but remains ever thus, unmoving. At this point, every mote of dust expounds it, every land expounds it, and all expound it with vigor.

Doubt:

The dharmakaya is quiescent; how, then, can it expound the Dharma? The passage below teaches right contemplation: Using the empty and quiescent prajna, one enters through “contemplation of the provisional.” Entering “emptiness” through the “provisional” is therefore called true emptiness, because the provisional itself is true.

Main Text:

– Why is this so?

All conditioned dharmas

Are like dreams, illusions, bubbles, and shadows,

Like dew and also like lightning;

Thus should they be contemplated.

Explanation:

This is the wondrous contemplation through which one enters the True Emptiness of Prajna. Because true emptiness is utterly quiescent, one borrows the provisional in order to contemplate it. If contemplation according to these six analogies is perfected, true emptiness will reveal itself. In a single instant, both principle and essence become manifest. This is precisely the teaching of the method of contemplation. Practitioners should enter through this gateway; here the true realm of the dharmakaya reaches its ultimate consummation.

Main Text:

When the Buddha had finished teaching this sutra, the Elder Subhuti, together with the bhikshus, bhikshunis, male lay followers, female lay followers, and the entire world with its devas, humans, and asuras, having heard the Buddha expound the Dharma, were filled with joy, faithfully accepted it, and reverently practiced it.

Explanation:

This is the customary formula for concluding a sutra. Whenever those who hear rejoice, the wondrous teaching has surely accorded with their minds. Having accorded with it, they truly believe, earnestly accept, and reverently practice it without falsity.