能斷金剛般若波羅蜜多經論釋

+ The Tathagata says that this is the perfection of marks; it is not the perfection of marks, and therefore it is called the perfection of marks. What does this mean? The verse states:

Precisely in the true Dharma-body

There are no perfect auspicious marks,

Nor is there perfection of marks;

Know this through the body’s lack of intrinsic nature.

In the Dharma-body there is no separateness,

No Tathagata, and no duality;

Yet that perfection of marks is again taught

Because both entities are empty.

It should be known that the true Dharma-body is not a form-body perfected with auspicious marks, nor is it the perfection of the various marks, because these lack the intrinsic nature of a body. This is called the meaning that the Dharma-body has no perfection of marks. Yet it is not that the Tathagata lacks those two things: the perfect form-body and the perfection of marks. Because these two are not separate from the Dharma-body, the Tathagata therefore possesses those auspicious marks. Thus, the perfect form-body and the perfection of marks are stated once again. Because both are empty, these two are also said to be nonexistent.

When it is said that this is not perfection, and likewise is not the perfection of marks, they are nevertheless also said to exist, because the perfect form-body and the perfection of marks are spoken of. What does this mean? Because that Dharma-body does not possess those auspicious marks, it is therefore called the Tathagata.

The perfect form-body and the perfection of marks are not separable from that body; therefore, the nature of the Dharma-body is not like them. The Dharma-body, however, is not their intrinsic nature.

If it is said that one should not contemplate the Tathagata by means of the perfect form-body or the body possessing the perfection of marks, how then can the Tathagata expound the Dharma? In answering this objection, it is explained that one slanders the Tathagata by mistakenly grasping, because one cannot understand the meaning taught by the Tathagata. The verse states:

What the Tathagata teaches also does not exist;

The twofold teaching is what is grasped.

Why is “expounding the Dharma” stated twice? The verse says: “The twofold teaching is what is grasped.” What are the two?

1. The words.

2. The meaning.

This is so because the text states: “There is no Dharma that can be expounded.” Is that called expounding the Dharma? The answer is:

Because it is not separate from the dharmadhatu,

The teaching also has no intrinsic nature.

Because it is not separate from the dharmadhatu, no intrinsic nature of an act of teaching can be found outside that dharmadhatu.

If it is said that there is no Blessed One as the speaker, then the Dharma that is spoken is likewise not separate from the Dharma-body and thus becomes nonexistent. How, then, could anyone revere and believe this profound and wondrous Dharma? To eliminate this objection, the answer is:

Though speaker and spoken teaching are profound,

It is nevertheless not the case that none revere and believe.

– The sutra says: “Wonderful Birth! They are not sentient beings, nor are they non-sentient beings.” What does this mean? The verse states:

Because they are not sentient beings, yet not non-beings,

Though not yet noble ones, they accord with the noble nature.

+ Sentient beings capable of giving rise to reverent faith are not sentient beings. This is because other sentient beings do not accord with the noble nature but accord with the nature of ordinary beings.

+ “Nor are they non-sentient beings”: This is because they accord with the noble nature. The meaning here is that, when contrasted with the nature of ordinary beings, they are not sentient beings; when considered in relation to the nature of noble ones, they are not non-sentient beings. Why? “Sentient beings, sentient beings—the Tathagata says they are not sentient beings.” This is stated with reference to the nature of foolish and inferior ordinary beings.

+ “Therefore they are called sentient beings”: This is stated with reference to the nature of noble ones. If it is said that the Tathagata has never had any Dharma that is clearly known, then how, after leaving the assembly, could his successive perfect knowledge be called unsurpassed perfect enlightenment? In answering this objection, it is explained that it is not through awakening to some existent Dharma that one is called unsurpassed perfectly enlightened. The verse states:

Because not even the slightest Dharma exists,

Know that enlightenment is unsurpassed;

Because the dharmadhatu does not increase,

Its nature is pure and equal,

And its skillful means are unsurpassed.

Here, because there is not even the slightest Dharma that could surpass it, it is called unsurpassed. Moreover, the dharmadhatu does not increase; because that Dharma is equal, it is called unsurpassed, since the nature of anything above it is empty. Moreover, the Tathagata’s Dharma-body is pure and equal. That Dharma is therefore always the same, without the slightest increase, and is called unsurpassed. Moreover, the own-mark of that Dharma is selflessness. This itself is what is highest. Since the nature of a higher state is empty, it is called unsurpassed.

Moreover, it is also unsurpassed with respect to skillful means. Because all existing wholesome dharmas are perfected, it is called unsurpassed. Apart from that bodhi, wholesome dharmas are not perfected; hence those skillful means are in fact surpassed. This is precisely what the Tathagata teaches to be non-Dharma.

+ “Therefore they are called wholesome dharmas”: What does this mean? The verse states:

Because their nature is contaminated, they are non-Dharma;

Thus, they are not wholesome dharmas.

Therefore they are called wholesome.

Because their nature is contaminated, they cannot retain the mark of contamination—that is, they cannot maintain it. Therefore they are called wholesome dharmas, for the uncontaminated nature is definitively capable of being maintained as the wholesome nature.

+ If wholesome dharmas must be used to attain great bodhi, then none of the teachings that have been expounded could attain bodhi, because their nature is indeterminate. To prevent this objection, the distinction in merit is again discussed in reply. Even if the Dharma expounded were indeterminate, ultimately there would still be attainment. The verse states:

Though the Dharma taught is indeterminate,

Know that attainment is not absent.

Because bodhi can be attained only through not being separate from that Dharma, know that it is in dependence upon this Dharma that bodhi is realized. The verse states:

Because this single Dharma treasure

Surpasses those immeasurable treasures.

Thus, the Dharma treasure taught here, when compared with the boundless treasures such as the innumerable Mount Sumerus mentioned previously, reveals a distinction in merit. Even if the former merit were divided into hundreds of portions, not one could equal this, and so forth through the extensive exposition. The verse states:

Among all forms of calculation and division,

The causes also differ;

Searching throughout the world,

No analogy can equal it.

What is the meaning stated here? It compares this merit with the former accumulation of merit and speaks of four distinctions: numerical calculation, relative portion, cause, and analogy. Even after searching throughout the world, no analogy can be found for comparison.

+ “Distinction by numerical calculation”: Beginning with a hypothetical division into one hundred parts and continuing through all numerical fractions, none can express the difference.

+ “Merely speaking of calculation”: This should be understood as a general inclusion of all other existing modes of numerical calculation.

+ “Or relative portion”: There is a distinction in their power, just as the affairs of a strong person and a weak person are not the same.

+ “Or ratio”: Their classes differ. This means that this kind of merit cannot originally be numerically compared with the former kind of merit, just as noble and lowly persons are not placed together for numerical comparison.

+ “Cause”: This clarifies that cause. Since the fruit is also unrelated, it is said that the former cannot serve as a cause equal to this merit. In this world there is absolutely no analogy that can be compared with this merit. Because the former merit is truly small in comparison with this merit and is entirely inadequate to describe it, the text says: “Even an analogy cannot be found.”

+ If it is said that the nature and marks of that Dharma are equal, and therefore there is no inequality, then there is neither one who liberates nor anyone who is liberated. Why, then, does the Tathagata speak of liberating sentient beings? To remove this objection, the following passage is introduced. What meaning does it reveal? The verse states:

The dharmadhatu is equal;

The Buddha liberates no sentient beings.

Names and aggregates alike

Do not exist outside the dharmadhatu.

What is called a sentient being exists in relation to those skandhas and ayatanas. Both the name and the skandhas do not exist outside the dharmadhatu. The nature of that dharmadhatu is equal. Therefore, there has never been a single sentient being who could be liberated by the Tathagata. Why, then, should there be attachment to a self? What does this mean? If it is said that only those five skandhas are liberated, this amounts to accepting the existence of a sentient being. Therefore, the verse states:

If attachment to dharmas arises,

It is equal to, or exceeds, attachment to self.

Definite attachment to liberating sentient beings

Is no attachment, yet is deluded attachment.

As the text says: “Wonderful Birth! Attachment to self—the Tathagata says—is non-attachment. Deluded attachment—the Tathagata says—is non-arising.” This means that noble dharmas cannot arise from it. If it is said that one should not contemplate the Tathagata through the perfection of marks because those are not his intrinsic nature, and that the Dharma-body is his intrinsic nature, one might nevertheless argue that the intrinsic nature of the Tathagata’s Dharma-body can be inferred and known through the perfection of marks. Someone may raise such an objection. To eliminate this doubt, the following passage is introduced. What meaning does it clarify? The verse states:

One should not use the form entity;

The Tathagata is solely the Dharma-body.

Otherwise a wheel-turning monarch

Would be equal to the Tathagata.

This refers to the karmic reward of the marks of recompense, which is also called the perfection of marks. Because one accomplishes these through the wondrous power of merit, bodhi is attained. Someone says: “The Tathagata directly realized unsurpassed perfect enlightenment by means of that perfection of marks.” To eliminate this idea, the text says: “One should not use the perfection of marks,” and so forth. What does this clarify? The verse states:

The perfection of marks is itself a karmic reward;

Perfect merit is not accepted

As capable of producing the Dharma-body,

For the means and their natures differ.

The true Dharma-body has wisdom as its intrinsic nature, which is different from the essential nature of that merit. What meaning do these two verses reveal? The verses state:

If one sees me through form,

Or seeks me through sound,

That person practices wrongly

And cannot see me.

One should contemplate the Buddha’s Dharma-nature,

Which is the Teacher’s Dharma-body.

The Dharma-nature is difficult to know;

Such a person cannot discern it.

The meaning of these two verses is as stated. The verse says:

Those who merely see form or hear sound

Do not know the Buddha.

That Dharma-body, true suchness,

Is not an object of consciousness.

The intent of this passage is to clarify that one should not contemplate the Tathagata through the two things of form and sound. Therefore, ordinary beings cannot see him. How is this so? Such persons undertake erroneous striving. It means that ordinary beings delusively undertake mistaken effort and do not rely upon the right path in seeking to see the Tathagata.

This is called the Dharma-nature, namely true suchness.

If it is said that merit does not realize bodhi, then the karmic merit of bodhisattvas and its fruits should be abandoned. To explain this doubt, the following passage appears.

Although the nature of that merit cannot by itself create the site of enlightenment, the verse states:

That merit is never lost;

Its karmic fruit is not cut off.

Attaining acceptance is likewise not cut off,

Because undefiled realization is attained.

Again discussing the cause of merit,

For this reason that analogy is presented.

That merit has no recompense;

Right acceptance does not accept excessively.

This is because it has the nature of being a provision for that wisdom. What further meaning is there? Is an analogy again presented concerning that merit? It should be said:

Attaining acceptance is likewise not cut off,

Because undefiled realization is attained.

Again discussing the cause of merit,

For this reason that analogy is presented.

Another doubt arises: Since the acceptance of the non-arising of dharmas has been attained, wisdom does not arise; therefore, all the merits of bodhisattvas should be cut off. To show that merit is not cut off but instead becomes utterly pure, the merit attained is said to be abundant and its fruit especially excellent. With respect to the non-arising of dharmas, the absence of intrinsic nature is realized. There are two kinds of absence of intrinsic nature, because the essential nature of both does not arise.

– The sutra says: “Wonderful Birth! It should be accepted correctly and should not be accepted excessively.”

What is correct acceptance, and what is not accepting excessively?

Answer: Because that merit has no recompense, it is accepted correctly and not excessively. All existing merit that brings about karmic recompense should be known as something to be disenchanted with and abandoned. Acceptance of it is excessive acceptance, like leaving the right road and entering a dangerous path. That merit, however, does not bring about karmic recompense. Therefore, accepting it in this way is correct acceptance and not excessive.

Question: If the bodhisattva’s accumulation of merit does not bring about recompense, how can the fruit attained through it be known?

Answer:

That merit produces the fruit of transformation

And brings benefit to sentient beings.

This occurs spontaneously:

Having become a Buddha, one appears in all directions.

Coming and going are also transformations;

Perfect enlightenment always remains unmoved.

Within that sphere of the dharmadhatu,

Know that it is neither one nor different.

The Buddhas, the Blessed Ones, manifest various transformations. It is not that the Tathagata himself comes or goes, and so the verse states:

This occurs spontaneously:

Having become a Buddha, one appears in all directions.

Coming and going are also transformations;

Perfect enlightenment always remains unmoved.

To reveal this meaning, the following passage is introduced.

There has never been any going or coming; therefore, he is called the Tathagata. What does this mean? If the Tathagata possessed such differences as going and coming, that would be incorrect, for his constant nature undergoes no change.

+ The analogy of grinding minute particles into ink: What does it illustrate, and what does it reveal? Answer:

Within that sphere of the dharmadhatu,

Know that it is neither one nor different.

It is said that the Tathagata’s nature within the sphere of the dharmadhatu is neither one nor different. To reveal this matter, it is clarified through that analogy. The verse states:

Minute particles ground into ink

Serve as an analogy revealing the dharmadhatu.

Again, what meaning is clarified by the analogy of grinding a world into ink? The verse states:

That treatise employs the act of “grinding”

To clarify the exhaustion of the afflictions.

Its nature is neither accumulated nor combined,

Revealing that its nature is not one;

Yet in their common combination,

It is clear that their nature is not different.

For example, when ink is made, the existing particles of dust are extremely numerous and minute. Their nature is not confined to one location, and what is gathered is not a single entity. Yet their nature is also not different, because they are combined together. Since there is no principle by which each can be separately severed, it should be understood in this way. The Buddhas, the Blessed Ones, have completely eliminated the afflictive hindrances within the dharmadhatu. Their nature is neither one nor different. Thus, the three-thousandfold great-thousand world system is comprehensively cited: it is both not an aggregate by nature and an aggregate by nature, and its difference is likewise the same.

+ “The Tathagata says that it is not the nature of an aggregate; therefore, it is called an aggregate of extremely minute particles.” What meaning does this clarify? If what is accumulated were one, it should not be called an aggregate of extremely minute particles. Again, if it were a single world, it should not be called a three-thousandfold great-thousand world system.

Therefore, it is said: “That is attachment to an aggregate.” The Tathagata says that this is non-attachment, not attachment to an aggregate. Because it is deluded attachment, it is called attachment to an aggregate. To clarify what differs from this, all else should lack unsurpassed right knowledge (?).

What further reason is there? Why do ordinary beings grasp an aggregate where in truth no aggregate exists? (?) To eliminate this objection, it is said that their attachment is merely described as existent according to conventional discourse. What meaning does this clarify?

The verse states:

Not understanding, relying only on conventional words,

Foolish ordinary beings grasp delusively.

+ “Wonderful Birth! The Tathagata has taught what sentient beings call the view of self, and so forth.” What meaning does this reveal? The verse states:

Severing the two—self and dharmas—

Is called realization of enlightenment.

The entities of both self and dharmas are empty. Although the severance of these two is spoken of, bodhi is nevertheless not attained as an entity. What, then, is severed so that attainment becomes possible? Answer: The two views are severed. Those two views are what must be eliminated. The verse states:

Therefore, view and non-view

Have no object; attachment is delusive.

Thus, it should be known that the entity of self is empty. The Tathagata says that the sentient beings’ view of self is non-view because it has no object. This means that the supposed object of self has always been nonexistent.

The text says: “It should be called the view of self.” This clarifies that it exists through deluded discrimination. In this way, after revealing the nature of view and non-view according to the principle of selflessness, the nature of view and non-view with respect to dharmas is likewise revealed. Therefore, the text says: “All dharmas should be known in this way.” Yet the nature of that conception of dharmas is also non-mark, just like the view of self.

What further meaning is there in saying that these two views of self and dharmas have the nature of non-view? The answer states:

Because these are subtle hindrances,

Knowing them thus, one should sever them.

The meaning revealed here is that these two—self and dharmas—are attachments to views. This means they are subtle hindrances. Only by correctly knowing their nature as non-view in these two respects can one eliminate them. The sutra says: “It should be known thus! It should be seen thus! It should be understood thus!” As for this passage, the verse states:

Only through attaining the two kinds of wisdom,

Together with meditative concentration, are they eliminated.

This means that the hindrance is eliminated through conventional wisdom and ultimate wisdom, as well as through meditative concentration, which is the support of those two kinds of wisdom.

What meaning is revealed by again discussing the distinction in merit? The verse states:

Merit is presented to clarify the transformation body;

Merit is inexhaustible, not nonexistent.

Although the Tathagata spontaneously and extensively performs every transformative activity, the true Dharma proclaimed by that transformation body is uncontaminated merit and therefore becomes limitless and inexhaustible.

What is correct exposition, and so forth? The intent is to reveal that the Tathagata does not himself declare, “I am a transformation body.” The verse states:

When the Buddhas expound the Dharma,

They do not say that their bodies are transformations.

Precisely because they do not proclaim this themselves,

Their teaching is true.

What does this discuss? It explains that although the Tathagata proclaims the Dharma and manifests transformations for sentient beings, he does not himself say: “I am a transformation body.” Because he does not make such an improper declaration, this is called correct exposition. The intent is that, were it otherwise, those sentient beings to be transformed would not give rise to reverence. This is precisely the activity that benefits many sentient beings, and yet there is no Dharma that can be expounded. If it is said that the Tathagata has many transformation bodies and expounds the Dharma without end, why did the Buddha teach that there is nirvana? To explain this doubt, the verse states:

The Tathagata’s realization of nirvana

Is neither a fabrication nor something different.

The Tathagatas’ realization of complete quiescence is not something fabricated. The intrinsic nature of conditioned existence is likewise not different from that fabrication. Although nirvana is manifested, it is a transformation, demonstrating sameness with samsara in order to benefit sentient beings. This clarifies that the Tathagata does not abide in nirvana. He abides in neither samsara nor nirvana. What further reason is there? Does he demonstrate sameness with samsara while not abiding in the causes and conditions of samsara? The answer states:

All conditioned dharmas

Are like stars, a cataract, a lamp, an illusion,

Dew, bubbles, dreams, lightning, and clouds;

They should be contemplated in this way.

This combination consists of nine things,

To be contemplated with right wisdom.

The nine things beginning with stars are parallel dharmas and analogies illustrating nine kinds of right wisdom contemplating their objects. What are the nine contemplations? They should be understood as nine kinds of things that are contemplated. What are these objects of contemplation? The verse states:

Perceived appearance together with consciousness,

Dwelling place, body, and objects of enjoyment;

The past, what remains in the present,

And what has not yet come are clearly observed.

Here, perception should be contemplated as stars. This refers to mental dharmas: when the radiance of right wisdom, like sunlight, appears, the light of those stars becomes entirely hidden. The appearance of the object of cognition should be contemplated as the tiny circles falsely seen by a person with diseased eyes.

That consciousness should be contemplated as a lamp. Here, dependent perception arises through the power of defiled craving. The dwelling place should be contemplated as an illusion; that is, the container-world consists of many diverse substances and lacks true nature.

The body should be contemplated as a drop of dew, abiding only for an instant. Objects of enjoyment should be contemplated as masses of foam. The nature of enjoyment arises from the conjunction of three things.

All compounded things of the past should be contemplated as dream objects, whose nature is mere recollection. Present events should be contemplated as lightning, their nature being to perish rapidly. The future should be contemplated as clouds: the alaya-consciousness, in the state of seeds, is capable of retaining all seeds.

When one performs these nine contemplations, what benefit and supreme wisdom are attained? The verse states:

By contemplating appearances,

Enjoyment, and continual change,

One attains, among conditioned things,

Undefiled and unobstructed mastery.

What does this mean? The contemplation of conditioned dharmas has three aspects:

1. Contemplating, seeing, and knowing objects: This is contemplation of the marks of compounded conditioned things.

2. Contemplating the container-world, the body, and objects of enjoyment: This is contemplation of enjoyment, here through that which is enjoyed.

3. Contemplating the continual transformations and distinctions of the three times: This is contemplation of change and non-abiding.

Through this contemplation, one can attain unhindered mastery and freedom among conditioned dharmas. Thus, although one remains in samsara, one is not defiled by afflictions. If that wisdom realizes complete quiescence and “reduces the body to ashes,” where could the flavor of compassion remain? The verse states:

Through this rare Dharma of the Buddhas,

The profound meanings of the dharani’s phrases,

The explanation definitively determined by the Loving One is expanded;

Merit is attained, causing beings swiftly to become pure.

END OF SCROLL 3