T33n1699_金剛般若疏

大正藏第 33 冊 No. 1699 金剛般若疏

No. 1699 [cf. No. 235]

金剛般若經序

胡吉藏法師撰

金剛般若波羅蜜經者。斯乃是三觀之虛明。一實之淵致。昔仙人苑內未耀此摩尼。今長者園中方灑茲甘露。良由小志先開故早馳羊鹿。大心始發方駕此白牛。斯乃正教之供范薩埵明訓。非云非雨德潤四生。非日非月照明三界。統萬行若滄海之納眾流。蕩紛異若冬霜之凋百草。若具存梵本應云跋阇羅般若波羅蜜修多羅。此土翻譯金剛智慧彼岸到經。明無累不摧稱曰金剛。無境不照目為般若。永勉彼此名波羅蜜。經者訓法常也。

金剛般若疏卷第一

胡吉藏法師撰

玄意十重。一序說經意。二明部儻多少。三辨開合。四明前後。五辨經宗。六辨經題。七明傳譯。八明應驗。九章段十正辨文。

問佛以種種因緣說摩訶般若。今有何等義故演說是經。答摩訶般若廣為菩薩說菩薩行。此經為諸大人略說大法。如經云。佛告須菩提。此經為發大乘者說。為最上乘者說故。問曰云何為諸大人略說大法。答曰佛法無量。略說因果則總攝一切。因者所謂菩薩真實大愿真實大行。言大愿者如經。菩薩住般若心中欲遍度一切眾生令入無餘涅槃。而

【現代漢語翻譯】現代漢語譯本《金剛般若疏》

No. 1699 [cf. No. 235]

《金剛般若經序》

胡吉藏法師撰

《金剛般若波羅蜜經》（Vajra Prajna Paramita Sutra）者，此乃是三觀（three kinds of observation）之虛明，一實（one reality）之淵致。昔日仙人苑內未曾顯耀此摩尼（mani，寶珠），如今長者園中方才灑下這甘露。實在是因為小乘之志先開啟，所以早早地奔向羊鹿二車（象徵小乘）。大乘之心才開始發，方才駕馭這白牛車（象徵大乘）。這乃是正教的典範，薩埵（Sattva，勇猛）的明確訓誡。它非云非雨，卻能以德澤潤四生（four kinds of birth）。它非日非月，卻能照明三界（three realms）。它統攝萬行，如同滄海容納眾流。它滌盪紛繁差異，如同冬霜凋零百草。如果完整地儲存梵文版本，應該叫做《跋阇羅般若波羅蜜修多羅》（Vajra Prajna Paramita Sutra）。此土翻譯為金剛智慧彼岸到經。闡明無有累贅、不可摧毀，稱之為金剛（vajra，金剛）。沒有境界不能照耀，稱之為般若（prajna，智慧）。永遠勉勵到達彼岸，名為波羅蜜（paramita，彼岸）。經者，訓示法則常理。

《金剛般若疏》卷第一

胡吉藏法師撰

玄妙之意有十重：一、序說經意；二、說明部類的多少；三、辨別開合；四、說明前後關係；五、辨明經的宗旨；六、辨明經的題目；七、說明傳譯；八、說明應驗；九、章節段落；十、正式辨析經文。

問：佛以種種因緣宣說《摩訶般若》（Maha Prajna，大智慧），如今有何等意義要演說這部經？答：《摩訶般若》廣泛地為菩薩宣說菩薩行。這部經是為諸位大人略說大法。如經中所說：『佛告須菩提（Subhuti，空生）。此經是為發大乘心者說，為最上乘者說。』問：如何是為諸位大人略說大法？答：佛法無量，略說因果就總攝一切。因，就是菩薩真實的大愿和真實的大行。說到大愿，如經中所說：『菩薩安住于般若心中，想要普遍度化一切眾生，令他們進入無餘涅槃（nirvana，寂滅）。』

【English Translation】 English version The Commentary on the Diamond Sutra

No. 1699 [cf. No. 235]

Preface to the Diamond Sutra

Composed by Dharma Master Huijizang

The Diamond Prajna Paramita Sutra (Vajra Prajna Paramita Sutra) embodies the clarity of the three kinds of observation and the profound essence of the one reality. In the past, this mani (jewel) was not revealed within the hermitage of the immortals; now, this nectar is being sprinkled in the garden of the elders. This is because the aspiration for the lesser vehicle was awakened first, leading to the early pursuit of the sheep and deer carts (symbolizing the lesser vehicle). The aspiration for the great vehicle has just begun to arise, leading to the driving of the white ox cart (symbolizing the great vehicle). This is the model of the orthodox teaching, the clear instruction of Sattva (courageous one). It is neither cloud nor rain, yet it nourishes the four kinds of birth with virtue. It is neither sun nor moon, yet it illuminates the three realms. It unifies myriad practices, like the ocean receiving all streams. It washes away myriad differences, like winter frost withering all grasses. If the complete Sanskrit version were preserved, it should be called the Vajra Prajna Paramita Sutra. This land translates it as the Diamond Wisdom to the Other Shore Sutra. It clarifies that there is no encumbrance and that it cannot be destroyed, hence it is called vajra (diamond). There is no realm that it cannot illuminate, hence it is called prajna (wisdom). It constantly encourages reaching the other shore, hence it is called paramita (other shore). Sutra means to instruct in the principles and constancy of the Dharma.

Commentary on the Diamond Sutra, Volume 1

Composed by Dharma Master Huijizang

There are ten layers of profound meaning: 1. Preface explaining the meaning of the Sutra; 2. Clarifying the number of divisions; 3. Distinguishing opening and closing; 4. Explaining the relationship between before and after; 5. Clarifying the purpose of the Sutra; 6. Clarifying the title of the Sutra; 7. Explaining the transmission and translation; 8. Explaining the verification; 9. Chapters and sections; 10. Officially analyzing the text.

Question: The Buddha expounds the Maha Prajna (Great Wisdom) through various causes and conditions. What is the significance of expounding this Sutra now? Answer: The Maha Prajna extensively explains the practices of Bodhisattvas for Bodhisattvas. This Sutra briefly explains the Great Dharma for great beings. As the Sutra says, 'The Buddha told Subhuti (Empty Born): This Sutra is for those who have aroused the Mahayana mind, for those who are of the supreme vehicle.' Question: How is it briefly explaining the Great Dharma for great beings? Answer: The Buddha Dharma is immeasurable. Briefly explaining cause and effect encompasses everything. Cause refers to the Bodhisattva's true great vows and true great practices. Speaking of great vows, as the Sutra says, 'Bodhisattvas abide in the Prajna mind, desiring to universally liberate all sentient beings, causing them to enter Nirvana (extinction) without remainder.'

實無所度。言大行者如經。菩薩不住於法而行佈施等一切諸行。而無所行。若不以般若心發願則愿不成愿。若不以般若心修行則行不成行。是故菩薩欲修願行要須般若。是名因義。所言果者。菩薩以行無所得因故得無所得果。無所得果即是如來實相法身。如經。不可以諸相得見如來。若見諸相非相則見如來無為法身。今欲為諸大人說此因果故說是經。複次為現在未來一切眾生。真實分別利益功德故說此經。如經云。佛滅度後後五百歲。般若中能生一念凈信。外為諸佛護念。內得無邊功德。勝舍大千珍寶亦勝舍恒沙身命。複次為欲說第一義悉檀故說是經。第一義悉檀者所謂諸法實相。滅一切戲論過一切言語。亦無所過亦無所滅。譬如火炎四不可觸的無所依止。如經。不可取不可說。謂不可取心行斷。不可說言語滅。即是第一義悉檀。複次以大悲心受請說法。故說是經。如法華云。於三七日中思惟如是事。眾生諸根鈍著樂癡所盲。我寧不說法疾入于涅槃。爾時梵王稽首勸請。眾生根性為上中下。愿開甘露門為演說法。是以如來便趣鹿苑說乎四諦。乃至祇園演于般若。問曰昔鹿苑說四諦可為梵王。今祇園演于般若。何闕受請。答曰梵王所請非止小法。如來受請本為大事。大事者所謂般若波羅蜜是。複次佛欲集諸法藥愈難愈病

【現代漢語翻譯】現代漢語譯本實際上沒有什麼可以度量的。所謂『大行』，就像經典所說，菩薩不住著于任何法，而行佈施等一切諸行，但又無所執著。如果不用般若之心發願，那麼愿就不能成就；如果不用般若之心修行，那麼行也不能成就。所以，菩薩想要修願行，必須要依靠般若。這叫做『因義』。所謂『果』，菩薩以行無所得的因，所以得到無所得的果。這無所得的果，就是如來的實相法身。如經典所說：『不可以諸相得見如來。若見諸相非相，則見如來無為法身。』現在想要為各位大人宣說這因果，所以說這部經。再次，爲了現在和未來的一切眾生，真實地分別利益和功德，所以說這部經。如經典所說：『佛滅度后，后五百歲，在般若中能生起一念清凈的信心，外面有諸佛護念，內心得到無邊的功德，勝過捨棄大千世界的珍寶，也勝過捨棄恒河沙數的身命。』再次，爲了宣說第一義悉檀（Paramārtha-siddhānta，勝義諦），所以說這部經。所謂第一義悉檀，就是諸法的實相，滅除一切戲論，超越一切言語，也沒有什麼可以超越，也沒有什麼可以滅除。譬如火焰，四面不可觸控，也沒有什麼可以依靠。如經典所說：『不可取，不可說。』所謂不可取，是說心行斷絕；所謂不可說，是說言語滅盡。這就是第一義悉檀。再次，因為以大悲心接受請求而說法，所以說這部經。如《法華經》所說：『在三七日中思惟這件事，眾生的諸根遲鈍，被貪愛和愚癡所矇蔽，我寧可不說法，迅速進入涅槃。』當時梵天王稽首勸請：『眾生的根性有上中下，愿您開啟甘露之門，為他們演說佛法。』因此，如來便前往鹿野苑宣說四諦，乃至在祇園精舍演說般若。有人問：『過去在鹿野苑宣說四諦，可以認為是應梵天王的請求，現在在祇園精舍演說般若，為什麼沒有接受請求呢？』回答說：『梵天王所請求的，不僅僅是小法。如來接受請求，本來是爲了大事。所謂大事，就是般若波羅蜜。』再次，佛想要聚集各種法藥，來醫治難以醫治的疾病。

【English Translation】 English version There is actually nothing to measure. The so-called 'Great Practice' is as the sutras say, Bodhisattvas do not dwell on any dharma, but perform all practices such as giving, yet without any attachment. If one does not make vows with the heart of Prajna (wisdom), then the vow cannot be fulfilled; if one does not cultivate with the heart of Prajna, then the practice cannot be accomplished. Therefore, if Bodhisattvas want to cultivate vows and practices, they must rely on Prajna. This is called the 'meaning of cause'. The so-called 'fruit' is that Bodhisattvas, with the cause of practicing without attainment, therefore obtain the fruit of non-attainment. This fruit of non-attainment is the Dharmakaya (Dharma-body) of the Tathagata (Thus Come One), which is the true reality. As the sutras say: 'The Tathagata cannot be seen through various forms. If one sees that all forms are non-forms, then one sees the unconditioned Dharmakaya of the Tathagata.' Now, I want to explain this cause and effect to all of you, so I am speaking this sutra. Furthermore, for the sake of truly distinguishing benefits and merits for all sentient beings in the present and future, this sutra is spoken. As the sutras say: 'After the Nirvana (extinction) of the Buddha, in the subsequent five hundred years, if one can generate a single thought of pure faith in Prajna, externally they will be protected and念 by all Buddhas, and internally they will obtain boundless merits, surpassing the giving away of treasures of a thousand great worlds, and even surpassing the giving away of bodies and lives as numerous as the sands of the Ganges River.' Furthermore, this sutra is spoken to explain the Paramārtha-siddhānta (Ultimate Truth). The so-called Paramārtha-siddhānta is the true reality of all dharmas, extinguishing all conceptual proliferation, transcending all language, and there is nothing to transcend, nor is there anything to extinguish. It is like a flame, which cannot be touched from any side and has nothing to rely on. As the sutras say: 'It cannot be grasped, it cannot be spoken.' The so-called 'cannot be grasped' means that the activity of the mind is cut off; the so-called 'cannot be spoken' means that language is extinguished. This is the Paramārtha-siddhānta. Furthermore, this sutra is spoken because of accepting the request to teach the Dharma with great compassion. As the Lotus Sutra says: 'For three seven days, I contemplated this matter, the faculties of sentient beings are dull, blinded by attachment and ignorance, I would rather not teach the Dharma and quickly enter Nirvana.' At that time, King Brahma bowed his head and requested: 'The faculties of sentient beings are of superior, middle, and inferior levels, may you open the gate of nectar and expound the Dharma for them.' Therefore, the Tathagata went to the Deer Park to preach the Four Noble Truths, and even to the Jetavana (G園林) to expound Prajna. Someone asks: 'In the past, preaching the Four Noble Truths in the Deer Park can be considered as responding to the request of King Brahma, but now, expounding Prajna in the Jetavana, why is there no acceptance of a request?' The answer is: 'What King Brahma requested was not just a small Dharma. The Tathagata accepted the request originally for a great matter. The so-called great matter is the Prajna Paramita (Perfection of Wisdom).' Furthermore, the Buddha wants to gather various Dharma medicines to cure difficult-to-cure diseases.

。故說是經。所以者何。一切眾生有二種病。一者身病。謂老病死。二者心病。謂貪瞋癡。自有生死已來不得般若藥故。無人能治此病。佛以般若金剛摧破二病。故說是經複次欲增諸菩薩唸佛三昧故說此經。一切眾生雖慾念佛不識如來多墮邪觀。如經。以色見我音聲求我則墮邪道不能見法身。法身者以正法為身。故秤法身。故華嚴經云。正法性遠離一切言語道一切趣非趣。悉皆寂滅相。正法性者則是實相。斯經盛明實相。即是盛明法身。故觀身實相。觀佛亦然。為斯觀者名為正觀。異斯觀者名為邪觀。複次欲顯示中道拔二邊見故說是經。如經。發三菩提心者。於法不說斷滅相。菩提心者即是道心。道謂正道。發正道心。豈墮斷常。若墮斷常。即發斷常心。是則不名發正道心。今欲令諸菩薩發正道心斷常觀息故說此經。複次欲說異法門異念處故。故說此經。昔說善門不善門記門無記門常無常苦樂等念處。今欲說非善門非不善門非記門非無記門非常非無常念處。如經。法尚應舍。何況非法。複次欲轉眾生深重鄣故說此經。下云。應墮惡道以受持經故。三惡道消滅當得三菩提。如是種種因緣。並是依經文及影龍樹大論故說般若因緣。問曰為何等位人說是經耶。答曰有人言。般若是高位所行。我等凡夫豈預斯事。故望岸自絕。

今謂不然。此人乃是無礙法中自作障礙。可不悲乎。若言般若必在高位。高位之人本自不墮惡道。何俟習行方得離耶。今經言。欲不墮惡道不生卑賤家。欲世世人天凈土受樂乃至究竟大般涅槃。須學般若。此意乃明應墮惡道者行般若故不墮。故從薄地凡夫已上乃至十地已還。皆須學般若也。複次有婆藪盤豆弟子金剛仙論師。菩提流支之所傳。述亦說般若緣起。所以說般若者為斷眾生十種障故。言十種障者。一無物相障。二有物相障。三非有似有相障。四謗相障。五一有相障。六異有相障。七實有相障。八異異相障。九如名義相障。十如義名相障。此之十障障于般若。八障般若一一障中皆對十障。所言無物相障者。眾生久劫已來著我我所多滯有病。是以如來說一切法皆畢竟空。但稟教之徒聞畢竟空便起邪見。謂無因果則失二諦。此之斷見障于般若。為此障故佛說斯經。如經。菩薩不住一切法行於佈施等一切諸行。故以萬行為因法身為果。所以雖畢竟空而因果無失也。所言有物相障者。前是斷見。今是常見。稟教之徒既聞菩薩行因得果。便謂因是能感果能酬有能行之人所行之行。是則無見雖泯有念還生。故名為障。為是障故說般若治之。如經。若菩薩有我相人相則非菩薩。見有法相非法相亦非菩薩。雖復行施三事恒空。因

【現代漢語翻譯】現代漢語譯本：現在說不是這樣。這個人乃是在無礙的佛法中自己製造障礙，不是很可悲嗎？如果說般若智慧必定要在高位才能獲得，那麼高位之人本來就不會墮入惡道，又何必等到學習修行才能脫離呢？現在經文說，想要不墮入惡道，不生在卑賤的家庭，想要世世代代在人天凈土享受快樂，乃至最終達到大般涅槃（maha-parinirvana，偉大的完全寂滅），就必須學習般若。這個意思很明顯，是說那些應該墮入惡道的人，因為修行般若的緣故才不墮入。所以從資質淺薄的凡夫開始，乃至十地菩薩，都必須學習般若。再者，有婆藪盤豆（Vasubandhu）的弟子，金剛仙論師，是菩提流支（Bodhiruci）所傳授的，也闡述了般若的緣起。之所以要說般若，是爲了斷除眾生的十種障礙。所說的十種障礙是：一、無物相障，二、有物相障，三、非有似有相障，四、謗相障，五、一有相障，六、異有相障，七、實有相障，八、異異相障，九、如名義相障，十、如義名相障。這十種障礙障礙了般若智慧。八種障礙中的每一種都對應著十種障礙。所說的無物相障，是說眾生長久以來執著于『我』和『我所』，多有執著的毛病。因此，如來說一切法都是畢竟空。但是接受教導的人聽到畢竟空，就產生了邪見，認為沒有因果，從而失去了二諦（two truths，勝義諦和世俗諦）。這種斷滅見障礙了般若智慧。爲了消除這種障礙，佛陀宣說了這部經。如經文所說：『菩薩不住於一切法，而行於佈施等一切諸行。』所以用萬行作為因，法身作為果。因此，雖然一切畢竟空，但因果關係並沒有喪失。所說的有物相障，前面是斷見，現在是常見。接受教導的人既然聽聞菩薩修行因能得到果報，就認為因是能感果的，果是能酬報的，有能修行的人，有所修行的行為。這樣，雖然無的見解消除了，有的念頭又產生了，所以稱為障礙。爲了消除這種障礙，宣說般若來對治它。如經文所說：『如果菩薩有我相、人相，就不是菩薩。見到有法相、非法相，也不是菩薩。』雖然修行佈施，但施者、受者、施物這三件事始終是空的，因

【English Translation】 English version: Now, it is not like that. This person is creating obstacles for themselves within the unobstructed Dharma. Is this not lamentable? If it is said that prajna (般若，wisdom) must be attained in a high position, then those in high positions would inherently not fall into evil realms. Why would they need to practice to be liberated? The current sutra states that if one desires not to fall into evil realms, not to be born into lowly families, to enjoy happiness in the pure lands of humans and devas (gods) in every lifetime, and ultimately attain maha-parinirvana (大般涅槃，great complete nirvana), one must study prajna. This meaning is clear: those who should fall into evil realms do not fall because they practice prajna. Therefore, from ordinary beings with shallow roots upwards to the tenth bhumi (十地，tenth ground) bodhisattvas, all must study prajna. Furthermore, there was a disciple of Vasubandhu (婆藪盤豆), the acharya (teacher) Vajrasena (金剛仙), whose teachings were transmitted by Bodhiruci (菩提流支), who also expounded on the origination of prajna. The reason for explaining prajna is to sever the ten kinds of obstacles for sentient beings. The ten kinds of obstacles are: 1. Obstacle of no-thingness, 2. Obstacle of thingness, 3. Obstacle of seeming existence when it is non-existent, 4. Obstacle of slander, 5. Obstacle of one-thingness, 6. Obstacle of different-thingness, 7. Obstacle of real-thingness, 8. Obstacle of different-different-thingness, 9. Obstacle of name-meaning as such, 10. Obstacle of meaning-name as such. These ten obstacles obstruct prajna. Each of the eight obstacles to prajna corresponds to the ten obstacles. The so-called obstacle of no-thingness refers to sentient beings who, for countless kalpas (劫，eons), have been attached to 'self' and 'what belongs to self,' and have many clinging sicknesses. Therefore, the Tathagata (如來，Thus Come One) said that all dharmas (法，phenomena) are ultimately empty. However, those who receive the teachings develop wrong views upon hearing 'ultimately empty,' believing that there is no cause and effect, thus losing the two truths (二諦，conventional truth and ultimate truth). This nihilistic view obstructs prajna. To eliminate this obstacle, the Buddha spoke this sutra. As the sutra says, 'Bodhisattvas do not abide in any dharma but practice all practices such as giving.' Therefore, they use myriad practices as the cause and the Dharmakaya (法身，Dharma body) as the result. Thus, although everything is ultimately empty, cause and effect are not lost. The so-called obstacle of thingness: the previous was nihilistic view, this is eternalistic view. Those who receive the teachings, having heard that bodhisattvas can attain results by practicing causes, then believe that the cause is what can induce the result, the result is what can repay, there are people who can practice, and there are practices that are practiced. In this way, although the view of non-existence is eliminated, the thought of existence arises again, so it is called an obstacle. To eliminate this obstacle, prajna is taught to cure it. As the sutra says, 'If a bodhisattva has an idea of self, an idea of person, then they are not a bodhisattva. Seeing that there are dharma characteristics and non-dharma characteristics, they are also not a bodhisattva.' Although they practice giving, the three things—giver,

果宛然而未曾感應。類如空中種樹。亦同空里織羅。豈得聞有便起常見。所言非有似有相障者。稟教之徒聞上菩薩不著有無。而便生異見。若使有無皆不可得何得有萬用不同。故如六塵異對四大互反。以有萬用故知不無。問曰云何名為非有似有。答曰譬如陽炎非有似有。眾生所見萬用之有。此所見有非有似有故秤為障。云何治之。還以喻破。譬喻如陽炎雖復似有而實非有。所見之有亦本自非有。如經。一合相者則不可說但凡夫之人貪著其事。下夢幻泡影亦是破之言謗相障者。或者聞上第二有物相障法體是空。次聞第三萬法用空。便謂生死涅槃眾生佛性一切皆空。作此空見便謗佛性。所以者何。今辨空者生死虛妄。可得是空。佛性非妄。是故不空。是以經言。空者二十五有。不空者大般涅槃。此經下文云亦非無相。非無相者。正明佛性非是無性相。問曰涅槃可明佛性。般若何有此說。答曰涅槃明佛性。般若未明佛性。此是訶梨門人作如此說。今婆藪弟子明般若佛性乃是眼目異名。是故般若亦明佛性次第五第六一有相障異有相障者。此即一異相對。斯之一異。通內外兩計備一切諸法如僧佉計一世師計異尼乾子計亦一亦異若提子計非一非異。斯之四執皆障般若。又如學佛教之徒。或言二諦一體異體。或言相續假故一。實法滅

【現代漢語翻譯】現代漢語譯本果宛然而未曾感應，就像在空中種樹，也像在空中織羅，怎麼能聽到就立刻產生常見的錯誤觀念呢？所說的『非有似有』是指一種障礙。接受教導的人聽到上等菩薩不執著于有和無，就產生了不同的見解。如果說有和無都不可得，又怎麼會有萬物的不同作用呢？比如六塵（色、聲、香、味、觸、法）相互對立，四大（地、水、火、風）相互反駁。因為有萬物的不同作用，所以知道不是什麼都沒有。問：什麼叫做『非有似有』？答：比如陽炎（海市蜃樓）並非真實存在，但看起來好像存在。眾生所見到的萬物的作用，這種所見到的『有』，是『非有似有』，所以被稱為障礙。如何去除這種障礙呢？用比喻來破除。比如陽炎雖然看起來好像存在，但實際上並不存在。所見到的『有』，也本來就不是真實存在的。如經書所說，『一合相』是不可說的，只是凡夫俗子貪戀執著于這些事物。後面的夢幻泡影也是用來破除這種觀念的。說『謗相障』，有些人聽到上面說的第二種障礙，認為法體是空，接著聽到第三種，認為萬法的作用是空，就認為生死、涅槃、眾生、佛性一切都是空。產生這種空見，就是誹謗佛性。為什麼這麼說呢？現在辨析空，生死是虛妄的，可以說是空。佛性不是虛妄的，所以不是空。因此經書上說，『空』指的是二十五有（三界中的二十五種存在形式），『不空』指的是大般涅槃。這部經書的下文說『亦非無相』，『非無相』正是說明佛性不是沒有自性的。問：涅槃可以說明佛性，般若（智慧）有什麼說法呢？答：涅槃說明佛性，般若還沒有明確說明佛性。這是訶梨門人（一個宗派）這樣說的。現在婆藪弟子（另一個宗派）認為般若和佛性只是眼目的不同名稱，所以般若也說明佛性。接下來是第五和第六種障礙，『一有相障』和『異有相障』，這指的是一和異的相對關係。這種一和異，貫穿內外兩種觀點，涵蓋一切諸法，比如僧佉派認為一切都是一，世師派認為一切都是異，尼乾子派認為一切既是一又是異，若提子派認為一切非一非異。這四種執著都障礙般若。又比如學習佛教的人，或者說二諦（真諦和俗諦）是一體或者異體，或者說相續是虛假的所以是一，實法滅。

【English Translation】 English version The result is apparent but without any actual response, like planting trees in the sky, or weaving silk in the void. How can one immediately develop common misconceptions upon hearing? The so-called 'non-existent yet seemingly existent' refers to an obstacle. Those who receive teachings, upon hearing that superior Bodhisattvas are not attached to existence or non-existence, develop different views. If both existence and non-existence are unattainable, how can there be myriad different functions? For example, the six sense objects (rupa (form), shabda (sound), gandha (smell), rasa (taste), sparsa (touch), dharma (objects of mind)) are mutually opposed, and the four great elements (earth, water, fire, wind) are mutually contradictory. Because there are myriad different functions, we know that it is not that nothing exists. Question: What is meant by 'non-existent yet seemingly existent'? Answer: For example, a mirage is not truly existent, but it appears to be. The functions of the myriad things seen by sentient beings, this 'existence' that is seen is 'non-existent yet seemingly existent,' therefore it is called an obstacle. How to remove this obstacle? Use analogy to break it down. For example, a mirage, although it appears to exist, is actually non-existent. The 'existence' that is seen is also fundamentally non-existent. As the sutra says, 'The one aggregate' is unspeakable, but ordinary people are greedy and attached to these things. The subsequent 'dream, illusion, bubble, shadow' are also used to break down this concept. Saying 'obstructing the appearance of slander,' some people, upon hearing the second obstacle mentioned above, think that the essence of Dharma is empty. Then, upon hearing the third, that the functions of all dharmas are empty, they think that birth and death, Nirvana, sentient beings, and Buddha-nature are all empty. Developing this view of emptiness is slandering Buddha-nature. Why is this so? Now, analyzing emptiness, birth and death are illusory and can be said to be empty. Buddha-nature is not illusory, therefore it is not empty. Therefore, the sutra says, 'Empty' refers to the twenty-five existences (twenty-five realms of existence in the three realms), 'not empty' refers to the Great Nirvana. The following text of this sutra says 'also not without characteristics,' 'not without characteristics' precisely clarifies that Buddha-nature is not without its own nature. Question: Nirvana can explain Buddha-nature, what does Prajna (wisdom) have to say about this? Answer: Nirvana explains Buddha-nature, Prajna has not yet clearly explained Buddha-nature. This is what the followers of Harivarman (a school) say. Now, the disciples of Vasubandhu (another school) believe that Prajna and Buddha-nature are merely different names for the eyes, therefore Prajna also explains Buddha-nature. Next are the fifth and sixth obstacles, 'obstructing with the appearance of oneness' and 'obstructing with the appearance of difference,' which refer to the relative relationship between oneness and difference. This oneness and difference permeates both internal and external views, encompassing all dharmas, such as the Samkhya school believing that everything is one, the Vaisheshika school believing that everything is different, the Nirgrantha school believing that everything is both one and different, and the Ajivika school believing that everything is neither one nor different. These four attachments all obstruct Prajna. Furthermore, like those who study Buddhism, some say that the two truths (conventional truth and ultimate truth) are the same or different, or that continuity is false and therefore one, while the real dharma ceases.

故為異。如此定執亦障般若。云何治之。如下文說。如來說一合相則非一合相。亦應云。如來說異散相則非異散相。但凡夫貪著見一合相亦凡夫貪著見異散相。故諸佛菩薩檢此一異。究竟無從名破一異。第七第八實有相障異異相障者。此之兩障執教執相。以為一雙。言教執者。上來六章事並皆空破除。惑者便云。如其無者佛何故說。以佛說故則知不無。由如色法。如其是無不應說色。以說色故則知非無。以執佛說言法實有故名為障。云何治之。如下文說。菩薩不應住色生心。不應住聲香味觸法生心。若有六塵云何不住。以不住故則知無六。如來雖說有六但假名字。云何執于假名便言實有。異異相障者。惑者云。若諸法但有假名無實體者。云何諸法各各有相。如見鵠知池見煙知火。名為標相頸細唇粗底平腹大。是瓶體相。角夅垂壺。是為牛體相。既有此諸相。不應但有假名。作此執者即名為障。云何治之。如經云。離一切相即名諸佛。若實有相云何可離。以其離故則知無相。第九如名義相障。第十如義名相障。所言如名義相障者。惑者云。若諸法無有相者云何有名。以有名故則知有相。如以火名召火則得火來不得水至。以水名召水則得水來不亦得火至。故知有名以表於法則法體不無。作此謂者即秤為障。然此第九與第七

【現代漢語翻譯】現代漢語譯本因此產生了差異。像這樣固執地執著也會障礙般若（prajna，智慧）。如何治療這種情況呢？就像下文所說的。如來說『一合相』（ekalakshana，統一的相）即『非一合相』，也應該說，如來說『異散相』（nanalakshana，差異分散的相）即『非異散相』。只是凡夫貪戀執著于『一合相』，也貪戀執著于『異散相』。所以諸佛菩薩考察這一和異，最終無法命名，從而破除了一和異的執著。第七和第八實有相障礙，異異相障礙。這兩種障礙，執著于教義，執著于現象，可以看作是一對。所謂教義的執著，是說前面六章所講的事物都被空破除了，迷惑的人就說，如果什麼都沒有，佛為什麼還要說呢？因為佛說了，就知道不是沒有。就像色法（rupa，物質現象）一樣，如果它是沒有的，就不應該說色。因為說了色，就知道不是沒有。因為執著于佛所說的言語和法是真實存在的，所以叫做障礙。如何治療這種情況呢？就像下文所說的。菩薩不應該因為看到色而生心，不應該因為聽到聲音、聞到香味、嚐到味道、感覺到觸覺、想到法而生心。如果存在六塵（sadayatana，六種感官對像），怎麼能不住著呢？因為不住著，就知道沒有六塵。如來雖然說了有六塵，但只是假名字。為什麼執著于假名字，就說它是真實存在的呢？所謂異異相障礙，是說迷惑的人認為，如果諸法只有假名字而沒有實體，那麼為什麼諸法各自都有相呢？比如看到天鵝就知道有池塘，看到煙就知道有火。名稱是標相，頸細、唇粗、底平、腹大，是瓶子的體相。角、夅、垂、壺，是牛的體相。既然有這些相，就不應該只有假名字。產生這種執著就叫做障礙。如何治療這種情況呢？就像經書上說的，『離一切相，即名諸佛』。如果真的有相，怎麼能離開呢？因為能夠離開，就知道沒有相。第九是如名義相障礙，第十是如義名相障礙。所謂如名義相障礙，是說迷惑的人認為，如果諸法沒有相，怎麼會有名字呢？因為有名，就知道有相。比如用火的名字召喚火，就能得到火來，而得不到水至；用水的名字召喚水，就能得到水來，也不會得到火至。所以知道有名是爲了表示法，那麼法體就不是沒有的。產生這種想法就叫做障礙。然而這第九和第七...

【English Translation】 English version Therefore, differences arise. Such fixed adherence also obstructs prajna (wisdom). How to cure it? As the following text says. The Tathagata (如來，one of the titles of a Buddha) says 'ekalakshana' (一合相, the unified characteristic) is 'non-ekalakshana'. It should also be said that the Tathagata says 'nanalakshana' (異散相, the diverse and scattered characteristics) is 'non-nanalakshana'. It is just that ordinary people are greedy and attached to seeing 'ekalakshana', and also greedy and attached to seeing 'nanalakshana'. Therefore, all Buddhas and Bodhisattvas examine this oneness and difference, and ultimately cannot name it, thereby breaking the attachment to oneness and difference. The seventh and eighth are the actual obstacle of characteristics and the obstacle of differing characteristics. These two obstacles, attachment to teachings and attachment to phenomena, can be regarded as a pair. The so-called attachment to teachings means that the matters mentioned in the previous six chapters have all been emptied and broken. Those who are confused then say, if there is nothing, why did the Buddha say it? Because the Buddha said it, we know it is not nothing. Just like rupa (色法, material phenomena), if it is nothing, we should not talk about rupa. Because we talk about rupa, we know it is not nothing. Because of attachment to the words and dharmas spoken by the Buddha as real, it is called an obstacle. How to cure it? As the following text says. Bodhisattvas should not give rise to mind because of seeing rupa, and should not give rise to mind because of hearing sound, smelling fragrance, tasting flavor, feeling touch, or thinking of dharma. If there are six ayatanas (六塵, six sense objects), how can one not dwell on them? Because one does not dwell on them, one knows there are no six ayatanas. Although the Tathagata said there are six ayatanas, they are just provisional names. Why cling to provisional names and say they are real? The so-called obstacle of differing characteristics means that those who are confused think that if all dharmas only have provisional names and no substance, then why do all dharmas have their own characteristics? For example, seeing a swan knows there is a pond, and seeing smoke knows there is fire. The name is a mark, a thin neck, thick lips, a flat bottom, and a large belly are the physical characteristics of a bottle. Horns, 夅, hanging, and a pot are the physical characteristics of a cow. Since there are these characteristics, there should not only be provisional names. Creating this attachment is called an obstacle. How to cure it? As the sutra says, 'To be apart from all characteristics is called all Buddhas.' If there are real characteristics, how can they be separated? Because they can be separated, we know there are no characteristics. The ninth is the obstacle of name and meaning, and the tenth is the obstacle of meaning and name. The so-called obstacle of name and meaning means that those who are confused think that if all dharmas have no characteristics, how can there be names? Because there are names, we know there are characteristics. For example, using the name of fire to summon fire, we can get fire to come, but not water to arrive; using the name of water to summon water, we can get water to come, but not fire to arrive. Therefore, we know that having a name is to represent the dharma, then the essence of the dharma is not non-existent. Generating this thought is called an obstacle. However, this ninth and seventh...

障不同者。第七則執于佛教以生迷著。今則直尋相名言有物體所以為異。云何治之。如下經云。說微塵則非微塵。如聚微塵則成細色。如聚細色乃至成於世界。雖有世界之名而實無其體。乃至雖有微塵之名而實無其體。既無其體焉得有名。如肇公云。名無得物之功。物無應名之實。名無得物之功則非名。物無應名之實則非物。非名非物名物安在。第十如義名相障者。惑者言。若諸法無體。云何眾生受用萬法。既其受用則有萬法之體。以有萬法之體則有萬法之名。以體證名故祥為障。云何治之。如下經說。一切有為法如夢幻泡影。內心外境悉無所有。云何言有法體以體證名耶。問曰此之十障般若治之。今為當用此釋。為當不用。答曰若必言有。惑是能障。解是能滅。還是生滅觀。義即是障也。便須破之。若言般若為能破障為所破。為見故破。不見故破。為獨故破。為伴故破。如此檢責即不見惑之可滅解之可生。此即非解非惑無生無滅。如此事了悟始名般若也。

第二重明般若多少。問曰般若波羅蜜凡有幾種。答曰備探南北遍撿經論。部數不同。第一有二種。出大智論。第四十一及九十九捲雲。般若有二種。一共聲聞說。二但為十地諸大菩薩說。下位之所不聞。今諸部般若多是共聲聞說也。第二有三種。三種者釋論

【現代漢語翻譯】現代漢語譯本對於不同型別的障礙。第七種是執著于佛教而產生迷惑。現在則是直接探尋表象、名稱和語言，認為物體之間存在差異。如何對治這種情況呢？如下經文所說：『說微塵則非微塵。如聚微塵則成細色。如聚細色乃至成於世界。』雖然有世界的名稱，但實際上沒有它的實體。乃至雖然有微塵的名稱，但實際上沒有它的實體。既然沒有它的實體，又怎麼會有名稱呢？如僧肇所說：『名無得物之功，物無應名之實。』名稱沒有獲得物體的功用，物體沒有應和名稱的實際。名稱沒有獲得物體的功用，那就不是名稱；物體沒有應和名稱的實際，那就不是物體。既不是名稱也不是物體，名稱和物體又在哪裡呢？第十種是如義名相障。迷惑者說：『如果諸法沒有實體，眾生如何受用萬法？既然能夠受用，那麼就有萬法的實體。因為有萬法的實體，所以有萬法的名稱。』因為實體證實了名稱，所以認為這是障礙。如何對治這種情況呢？如下經文所說：『一切有為法如夢幻泡影，內心外境悉無所有。』怎麼能說有法體來證實名稱呢？問：這些十種障礙，般若（Prajna，智慧）可以對治。現在是應當用這種解釋，還是不應當用呢？答：如果一定要說有，迷惑是能障礙的，理解是能滅除障礙的，這還是生滅觀。這種意義本身就是障礙。就必須破除它。如果說般若是能破除障礙的，障礙是所破除的，是爲了看見而破除，還是因為看不見而破除？是爲了單獨而破除，還是爲了有伴侶而破除？這樣檢查反思，就看不見迷惑是可以滅除的，理解是可以產生的。這就是非理解非迷惑，無生無滅。如此事情了悟才叫做般若。第二重說明般若的多少。問：般若波羅蜜（Prajnaparamita，般若波羅蜜多）總共有幾種？答：遍查南北，翻閱經論，部數不同。第一種有兩種。出自《大智度論》第四十一卷和第九十九卷，說：般若有兩種，一種是為聲聞（Sravaka，小乘修行者）說的，一種是隻為十地諸大菩薩（Bodhisattva，菩薩）說的，下位的人聽不到。現在各部般若大多是為聲聞說的。第二種有三種。三種出自《釋論》（註釋）。

【English Translation】 English version Regarding the different types of obstacles. The seventh is attachment to Buddhism, which leads to delusion. Now, it is directly seeking phenomena, names, and language, considering that objects differ from each other. How to counteract this? As the following sutra says: 'To speak of a dust mote is not to speak of a dust mote. As the aggregation of dust motes forms fine colors. As the aggregation of fine colors eventually forms a world.' Although there is the name of a world, in reality, it has no substance. Even though there is the name of a dust mote, in reality, it has no substance. Since it has no substance, how can it have a name? As Seng Zhao (a famous Chinese Buddhist monk) said: 'Names have no function of obtaining objects, and objects have no reality that corresponds to names.' Names have no function of obtaining objects, then they are not names; objects have no reality that corresponds to names, then they are not objects. If it is neither name nor object, where are names and objects? The tenth is the obstacle of name and form as meaning. The deluded say: 'If all dharmas (Dharma, teachings or phenomena) have no substance, how can sentient beings experience the myriad dharmas? Since they can experience them, then there is the substance of the myriad dharmas. Because there is the substance of the myriad dharmas, there are the names of the myriad dharmas.' Because substance confirms names, this is considered an obstacle. How to counteract this? As the following sutra says: 'All conditioned dharmas are like dreams, illusions, bubbles, and shadows; the inner mind and outer realms are all without substance.' How can one say that there is a substance of dharmas to confirm names? Question: These ten obstacles, can Prajna (Prajna, wisdom) counteract them? Now, should we use this explanation, or should we not? Answer: If one insists on saying that there is, delusion is what can obstruct, and understanding is what can eliminate the obstruction; this is still the view of arising and ceasing. This meaning itself is an obstacle. Then it must be broken. If one says that Prajna is what can break the obstacle, and the obstacle is what is broken, is it broken for the sake of seeing, or is it broken because of not seeing? Is it broken for the sake of being alone, or is it broken for the sake of having a companion? Examining and reflecting in this way, one cannot see that delusion can be eliminated, and that understanding can arise. This is neither understanding nor delusion, neither arising nor ceasing. Only when one realizes this matter is it called Prajna. The second layer explains the quantity of Prajna. Question: How many kinds of Prajnaparamita (Prajnaparamita, Perfection of Wisdom) are there in total? Answer: After thoroughly investigating the north and south and examining the sutras and treatises, the number of divisions differs. The first kind has two types. It comes from the Mahaprajnaparamita-sastra (Great Treatise on the Perfection of Wisdom), volumes 41 and 99, which says: There are two kinds of Prajna, one is spoken for the Sravakas (Sravaka, Hearers or Disciples), and the other is only spoken for the great Bodhisattvas (Bodhisattva, beings on the path to Buddhahood) of the ten bhumis (bhumi, stages). Those in lower positions cannot hear it. Now, most of the Prajna in various divisions are spoken for the Sravakas. The second kind has three types. The three types come from the Sastra (commentary).

第六十七卷云般若部云般若部儻有多有少有上中下。謂光贊放光道行也。舊云。光贊有五百卷。此土零落唯有十卷。或分為十二卷。有三十七品。即是上品。次放光為中品。道行為下品也。放光有二十卷。是古大品。道安法師所講者。今新定本有二十七卷。或為二十四卷。對小品為大品。於前三部實應是中品也。道行即是小品。有十卷。即有新定本。有七卷。釋論七十九捲雲。般若義乃無邊卷數有限。謂小品放光光贊既前列。餘二同前。而以小品名代道行也。故知道行即是小品也。第三明四種般若者。長安睿法師小品序云。斯經正文凡有四種。多則十萬偈。少則六百偈。此之大品猶是外國中品耳。隨宜之言復何足計其多少。雖習四名而不列數。有人云。當以金剛足前三部以為四也。然金剛止有三百許偈。睿公云。少則六百偈。故知未必用金剛足之。次明五時般若者。出仁王經。初云釋迦入大寂定眾相謂言。大覺世尊前已為我等大眾二十九年說摩訶般若波羅蜜金剛般若天王問波若光贊波若。今復放光斯作何事。既列四種於前。第五最後說仁王護國般若。又大悲比丘尼本願經末記。或在仁王末記云。五時波若者是佛三十年中通化三乘人也。第一佛在王舍城說大品般若。小品從中出。第二佛在舍衛祇洹精舍說金剛波若。本有

【現代漢語翻譯】現代漢語譯本第六十七卷《云般若部》討論了《般若部》中篇幅的多寡以及質量的上下之分。這裡所說的就是《光贊般若經》、《放光般若經》和《道行般若經》。舊時的說法是，《光贊般若經》有五百卷，但流傳到此地的只有十卷，或者分為十二卷，共有三十七品，屬於上品。《放光般若經》屬於中品，《道行般若經》則為下品。《放光般若經》有二十卷，是古本的大品般若，是道安法師曾經講解過的。現在新修訂的版本有二十七卷，或者分為二十四卷。相對於小品般若來說，它被稱為大品般若，但實際上，在前述三部經中，它應該屬於中品。《道行般若經》就是小品般若，有十卷，也就是新修訂的版本，也有七卷。《釋論》第七十九卷說，般若的意義是無邊的，而卷數是有限的。這裡所說的小品般若、《放光般若經》、《光贊般若經》已經在前面列出，其餘兩部與前述相同，而用小品般若來代替《道行般若經》。因此可知，《道行般若經》就是小品般若。第三，闡明四種般若。長安的睿法師在《小品般若經序》中說，這部經的正文大致有四種，多則十萬偈，少則六百偈。這裡所說的大品般若，在外國也只是中品而已。隨著情況而說的言論，又何必去計算它的多少呢？雖然學習了四種名稱，但沒有列出數量。有人說，應當用《金剛般若經》加上前面的三部經作為四種般若。然而，《金剛般若經》只有三百多偈，睿公說，少則六百偈，因此可知未必用《金剛般若經》來充數。接下來闡明五時般若，出自《仁王經》。最初說釋迦牟尼佛進入大寂定，大眾互相說道：『大覺世尊先前已經為我們大眾說了二十九年的摩訶般若波羅蜜（Mahā-prajñāpāramitā，偉大的智慧到彼岸），金剛般若（Vajra-prajñā，金剛智慧），天王問般若（Deva-rāja-prajñā，天王所問的智慧），光贊般若（Guanzan-prajñā，光贊智慧）。現在又放光，這是要做什麼呢？』既然在前面列出了四種般若，第五種最後說的是《仁王護國般若經》。又《大悲比丘尼本願經》末尾記載，或者在《仁王經》末尾記載說，五時般若指的是佛陀三十年中普遍教化三乘人的情況。第一，佛陀在王舍城（Rājagṛha）說了大品般若，小品般若從中而出。第二，佛陀在舍衛祇洹精舍（Śrāvastī Jetavana-vihāra）說了金剛般若，原本就有。

【English Translation】 English version Volume 67 of the 'Cloud Prajna Section' discusses the quantity and quality (superior, middle, inferior) within the 'Prajna Section'. This refers to the Guanzan Prajna Sutra, Fangguang Prajna Sutra, and Daoxing Prajna Sutra. The old saying is that the Guanzan Prajna Sutra had 500 volumes, but only ten volumes have been transmitted here, or divided into twelve volumes, with a total of thirty-seven chapters, belonging to the superior category. The Fangguang Prajna Sutra belongs to the middle category, and the Daoxing Prajna Sutra is the inferior category. The Fangguang Prajna Sutra has twenty volumes and is the ancient version of the Large Prajna, which Dharma Master Dao'an once lectured on. The newly revised version now has twenty-seven volumes, or divided into twenty-four volumes. Relative to the Small Prajna, it is called the Large Prajna, but in fact, among the aforementioned three sutras, it should belong to the middle category. The Daoxing Prajna Sutra is the Small Prajna, with ten volumes, which is the newly revised version, and also has seven volumes. The 79th volume of the Commentary says that the meaning of Prajna is boundless, but the number of volumes is limited. The Small Prajna, Fangguang Prajna Sutra, and Guanzan Prajna Sutra mentioned here have already been listed earlier, and the remaining two are the same as the aforementioned, and the Small Prajna is used to replace the Daoxing Prajna Sutra. Therefore, it can be known that the Daoxing Prajna Sutra is the Small Prajna. Third, clarifying the four types of Prajna. Dharma Master Rui of Chang'an said in the Preface to the Small Prajna Sutra that the main text of this sutra roughly has four types, with as many as 100,000 gathas and as few as 600 gathas. The Large Prajna mentioned here is only a middle category in foreign countries. Why bother to calculate the amount of words spoken according to the situation? Although four names have been learned, the quantity is not listed. Some people say that the Vajra Prajna Sutra plus the previous three sutras should be used as the four types of Prajna. However, the Vajra Prajna Sutra only has more than 300 gathas, and Master Rui said that there are as few as 600 gathas, so it is known that the Vajra Prajna Sutra is not necessarily used to make up the number. Next, clarifying the five periods of Prajna, which comes from the Renwang Sutra. Initially, it says that Shakyamuni Buddha entered the Great Samadhi, and the assembly said to each other: 'The Great Awakened World Honored One has previously spoken to us for twenty-nine years about the Mahā-prajñāpāramitā (Great Perfection of Wisdom), Vajra-prajñā (Diamond Wisdom), Deva-rāja-prajñā (Wisdom Asked by the Heavenly King), and Guanzan-prajñā (Prajna of Light Praise). Now, what is the reason for emitting light again?' Since the four types of Prajna have been listed earlier, the fifth and last one mentioned is the Renwang Huguo Prajna Sutra. Also, the end of the Great Compassion Bhikshuni's Original Vow Sutra records, or the end of the Renwang Sutra records, that the five periods of Prajna refer to the Buddha's universal teaching of the Three Vehicles for thirty years. First, the Buddha spoke the Large Prajna in Rājagṛha (King's Abode), and the Small Prajna came from it. Second, the Buddha spoke the Vajra Prajna in Śrāvastī Jetavana-vihāra (Jetavana Monastery in Shravasti), which originally existed.

八卷。淮南零落唯有格量功德一品。別為一卷存其本名亦云金剛。第三佛在祇洹說天王問波若。大本不來漢地。此土唯有須真天子問波若七卷。法才王子問波若三卷。四天王問波若一卷。並出其中。第四佛在王舍城說光贊般若。成具道行廣凈。此三部從光贊中出。第五佛在王舍城說護國波若。次流支三藏云波若應有八部。第一部有十萬偈。第二部有二萬五千偈。此之二部猶在外國。第三部有二萬二千偈。即是大品。第四部有八千偈。即是小品。第五部有四千偈。第六部有二千五百偈。此之二部亦未傳漢地。第七部有六百偈。即是文殊師利波若。第八部三百偈。即是此金剛波若。又言。有光贊大空道行等流支三藏云。此皆十萬偈波若中一品。非是別部。今以釋論驗之。不同流支所說。釋論云。波若部儻有多有少有上中下。云何言光讚道行非是別部耶。又大論第百卷云。如此中波若或有二萬二千偈。大波若有十萬偈。諸龍天宮有千億萬偈。以其壽命長遠念力堅強故堪聞多說。人中壽命短促憶識力弱止有少許文字。若爾豈局在五時限現於八部耶。

第三辨開合。問余經曾無再說。何故波若諸部無量。答佛經無量。來漢地者蓋不足言。但今唯見波若多部未見余經多耳。而今且論波若多部者。眾生入道要由波若。所以者何

【現代漢語翻譯】現代漢語譯本：八卷般若經。淮南的譯本零落不全，只有格量功德品還儲存下來，單獨成為一卷，也叫做《金剛般若經》。第三種是佛陀在祇洹精舍（Jetavana Vihara）宣說的《天王問般若經》。大本的《般若經》沒有傳到漢地。此地只有《須真天子問般若經》七卷，《法才王子問般若經》三卷，《四天王問般若經》一卷，都是從《天王問般若經》中節選出來的。第四種是佛陀在王舍城（Rajagrha）宣說的《光贊般若經》，內容包括成具道行和廣凈。這三部經是從《光贊般若經》中節選出來的。第五種是佛陀在王舍城宣說的《護國般若經》。其次，流支三藏（Tripitaka Dharmaruci）說，般若經應該有八部。第一部有十萬偈（偈頌）。第二部有二萬五千偈。這兩部經還在外國。第三部有二萬二千偈，就是《大品般若經》。第四部有八千偈，就是《小品般若經》。第五部有四千偈。第六部有二千五百偈。這兩部經也沒有傳到漢地。第七部有六百偈，就是《文殊師利般若經》。第八部有三百偈，就是這部《金剛般若經》。又有人說，有《光贊般若》、《大空般若》、《道行般若》等，流支三藏說，這些都是十萬偈《般若經》中的一個品，不是單獨的部。現在用《釋論》來驗證，和流支所說的不同。《釋論》說，般若經的部類，或者多，或者少，或者有上、中、下之分。怎麼能說《光贊般若》、《道行般若》不是單獨的部呢？而且《大智度論》第一百卷說，像這裡所說的般若經，或者有二萬二千偈，如果有十萬偈，諸龍天宮（Naga-Deva realm）有千億萬偈。因為他們的壽命長遠，念力堅強，所以能夠聽聞和講述更多的內容。人間壽命短促，記憶力弱，只有少許文字。如果這樣，難道侷限在五時，顯現於八部嗎？第三，辨別開合。有人問：其他的經典沒有重說的，為什麼般若經的部類卻有無量呢？回答說：佛經無量，傳到漢地的恐怕不足以說。但是現在只看到般若經的部類多，沒有看到其他的經典多罷了。而現在且說般若經的部類多的原因，眾生進入佛道，關鍵在於般若。為什麼這樣說呢？

【English Translation】 English version: Eight fascicles of Prajna Sutra. The Huainan version is fragmented, with only the 'Graded Merits' chapter remaining, existing as a separate fascicle, also known as the 'Diamond Sutra'. The third is the 'Prajna Sutra Questioned by the Heavenly King' spoken by the Buddha at Jetavana Vihara. The complete version of this Prajna Sutra has not been transmitted to the Han region. Here, we only have the seven fascicles of the 'Prajna Sutra Questioned by Prince Suchin', the three fascicles of the 'Prajna Sutra Questioned by Prince Dharmamati', and the one fascicle of the 'Prajna Sutra Questioned by the Four Heavenly Kings', all excerpted from the 'Prajna Sutra Questioned by the Heavenly King'. The fourth is the 'Glorious Praise Prajna Sutra' spoken by the Buddha in Rajagrha, which includes the accomplishment of the path and vast purity. These three scriptures are excerpted from the 'Glorious Praise Prajna Sutra'. The fifth is the 'Protect the Country Prajna Sutra' spoken by the Buddha in Rajagrha. Furthermore, Tripitaka Dharmaruci said that there should be eight parts of the Prajna Sutra. The first part has 100,000 gathas (verses). The second part has 25,000 gathas. These two parts are still in foreign countries. The third part has 22,000 gathas, which is the 'Large Perfection of Wisdom Sutra'. The fourth part has 8,000 gathas, which is the 'Small Perfection of Wisdom Sutra'. The fifth part has 4,000 gathas. The sixth part has 2,500 gathas. These two parts have also not been transmitted to the Han region. The seventh part has 600 gathas, which is the 'Manjushri Prajna Sutra'. The eighth part has 300 gathas, which is this 'Diamond Prajna Sutra'. Someone also said that there are the 'Glorious Praise Prajna', the 'Great Emptiness Prajna', and the 'Practice of the Path Prajna', etc. Tripitaka Dharmaruci said that these are all chapters from the 100,000-gatha Prajna Sutra, not separate parts. Now, examining it with the 'Commentary', it is different from what Dharmaruci said. The 'Commentary' says that the categories of the Prajna Sutra are either many or few, or have upper, middle, and lower divisions. How can it be said that the 'Glorious Praise Prajna' and the 'Practice of the Path Prajna' are not separate parts? Moreover, the hundredth fascicle of the 'Mahaprajnaparamita Shastra' says that the Prajna Sutra spoken of here has either 22,000 gathas, or if there are 100,000 gathas, the Naga-Deva realm has hundreds of billions of gathas. Because their lifespans are long and their power of mindfulness is strong, they are able to hear and speak more content. Human lifespans are short, and memory is weak, so there are only a few texts. If this is the case, is it limited to five periods and manifested in eight parts? Third, distinguishing between opening and closing. Someone asks: Other sutras have never been repeated, why are there countless categories of the Prajna Sutra? The answer is: The Buddha's teachings are countless, and what has been transmitted to the Han region is probably not enough to mention. But now we only see that there are many categories of the Prajna Sutra, and we have not seen many other sutras. And now, let's talk about the reason why there are many categories of the Prajna Sutra. The key for sentient beings to enter the Buddhist path lies in Prajna. Why is this so?

。一切凡夫未得道者皆由有所依著。波若正破眾生有所依著。故說無依著之法。波若是真實懺悔故。諸大乘經辨真實懺悔皆依般若。如普賢經云。一切業障海皆從妄想生。若欲懺悔者端坐念實相。大涅槃亦云。若聞無作無受。王之重罪必得除滅。問諸經各說無所得法各滅重罪。云何獨言諸經滅罪皆依波若。答諸大乘經雖並是無依無得。但波若多作無依無得之說正破眾生依得之病。余經不爾。至如涅槃正明常無常。法華明會三歸一之法。華嚴廣明菩薩因果德行。不正辨無依無得。為是義故眾經說得道之與滅罪要須波若。是以般若有多部不同。取其大要。眾生常有依得之病。是以如來常說無依得法。如二夜經云。佛從得道夜訖至泥洹夜常說波若。五時之與八部何足為多。問般若五時為五部。華嚴八會何故不為八部。八會既合為一部。五時何不合為一部。答通而為論皆得相類。今不爾者。華嚴八會此義則前後相成。如前說。十信十住十行十回向十地及大小相海。此即淺深次第因果相成。故得合為一部。五時般若非是淺深次第前後相成。故各開五部。

第四重明二經前後。問摩訶般若金剛般若何者前說。答云開善法師。會稽基法師。姑蘇華山顏法師。大領師等。皆云。如仁王所列前說摩訶次說金剛。更以兩義證之。一者

【現代漢語翻譯】現代漢語譯本：所有尚未得道的凡夫俗子，都是因為有所依賴和執著。而《般若經》（Prajna，智慧）正是爲了破除眾生的依賴和執著，所以宣說無所依賴的法。《般若經》是真實的懺悔之法，因此，所有大乘經典在闡述真實懺悔時，都依據《般若經》。例如，《普賢行愿品》中說：『一切業障如海深，皆由妄想之所生，若欲懺悔滅罪者，端坐思念真實相。』《大涅槃經》也說：『若聞無作無受之理，即使是極重的罪業也必定可以消除。』問：各種經典都宣說無所得之法，都能消除重罪，為什麼唯獨說諸經滅罪都要依據《般若經》？答：雖然所有大乘經典都講無依無得，但《般若經》更多地宣說無依無得的道理，正是爲了破除眾生依賴和求得的毛病。其他的經典則不是這樣。比如，《涅槃經》主要闡明常與無常的道理，《法華經》闡明會三歸一之法，《華嚴經》廣泛闡明菩薩的因地修行和果地功德，並沒有著重辨析無依無得的道理。正因為這個原因，眾經都說要證得道果和消除罪業，必須依靠《般若經》。因此，《般若經》有很多不同的版本，這裡取其大要來說。眾生常常有依賴和求得的毛病，所以如來佛祖常常宣說無依無得之法。如《二夜經》中說：『佛陀從得道之夜起，直到涅槃之夜止，都在宣說般若。』五時說法和八部經典又算得了什麼呢？問：《般若經》有五時之分，分為五部。為什麼《華嚴經》有八會之說，卻沒有分為八部？既然八會可以合為一部，為什麼五時不能合為一部？答：從總的方面來說，都可以類比。現在不這樣做的原因是，《華嚴經》的八會，其義理是前後相承的。如前面所說，十信、十住、十行、十回向、十地，以及大小相海，這些都是由淺入深，次第相承，因果相成的，所以可以合為一部。《般若經》的五時說法，並非由淺入深，次第相承，前後相成，所以要各自分開為五部。第四重是闡明兩部經的先後順序。問：《摩訶般若經》（Maha Prajna，偉大的智慧）和《金剛般若經》（Diamond Sutra，金剛石般的智慧）哪一部先說？答：開善法師、會稽基法師、姑蘇華山顏法師、大領師等都認為，如《仁王經》所列，先說《摩訶般若》，其次說《金剛般若》。還可以用兩種理由來證明這一點。第一點是：

【English Translation】 English version: All ordinary people who have not attained enlightenment are attached to something. The Prajna (Wisdom) Sutra specifically aims to break through the attachments of sentient beings, therefore it teaches the Dharma of non-attachment. The Prajna Sutra is the true repentance, hence all Mahayana Sutras rely on Prajna when discussing true repentance. For example, the Samantabhadra's Conduct and Vows Sutra says: 'All karmic obstacles, as deep as the ocean, arise from delusional thoughts. If one wishes to repent and eradicate sins, sit upright and contemplate the true nature of reality.' The Nirvana Sutra also says: 'If one hears the principle of non-action and non-reception, even the heaviest sins will surely be eliminated.' Question: Various sutras speak of the Dharma of non-attainment and each eliminates heavy sins. Why is it said that the elimination of sins in all sutras relies on Prajna? Answer: Although all Mahayana Sutras speak of non-reliance and non-attainment, the Prajna Sutra speaks more about non-reliance and non-attainment, specifically to break through the disease of sentient beings' reliance and attainment. Other sutras are not like this. For example, the Nirvana Sutra mainly clarifies the principle of permanence and impermanence, the Lotus Sutra clarifies the Dharma of converging the three into one, and the Avatamsaka Sutra extensively clarifies the Bodhisattva's causes, effects, virtues, and practices, without specifically distinguishing non-reliance and non-attainment. For this reason, all sutras say that to attain enlightenment and eliminate sins, one must rely on Prajna. Therefore, there are many different versions of the Prajna Sutra. Here, we take the main points to discuss. Sentient beings often have the disease of reliance and attainment, so the Tathagata (Thus Come One) often speaks of the Dharma of non-reliance and non-attainment. As the Two Nights Sutra says: 'From the night the Buddha attained enlightenment until the night of Nirvana, he constantly spoke of Prajna.' What are the five periods of teaching and the eight divisions of scriptures? Question: The Prajna Sutra has five periods, divided into five sections. Why does the Avatamsaka Sutra have eight assemblies but is not divided into eight sections? Since the eight assemblies can be combined into one section, why can't the five periods be combined into one section? Answer: Generally speaking, they can all be compared. The reason for not doing so now is that the meaning of the eight assemblies of the Avatamsaka Sutra is coherent from beginning to end. As mentioned earlier, the ten faiths, ten abodes, ten practices, ten dedications, ten grounds, and the great and small marks of the Buddha, these are all from shallow to deep, sequentially coherent, and the causes and effects complement each other, so they can be combined into one section. The five periods of the Prajna Sutra are not from shallow to deep, sequentially coherent, and not coherent from beginning to end, so they must each be divided into five sections. The fourth emphasis is on clarifying the order of the two sutras. Question: Which was spoken first, the Maha Prajna (Great Wisdom) Sutra or the Diamond Sutra (Vajra Prajna Paramita Sutra)? Answer: The Dharma Master Kai Shan, the Dharma Master Kuaiji Ji, the Dharma Master Yan of Huashan in Gusu, and the Great Leader, etc., all believe that, as listed in the Benevolent Kings Sutra, the Maha Prajna was spoken first, followed by the Diamond Sutra. This can be proven by two reasons. The first is:

大智論云。前未說菩薩行。今始欲為彌勒等說菩薩行故說波若。若前已說金剛波若。則是已說菩薩行。不應言未說也。二者金剛波若經初云。善護念諸菩薩善付屬諸菩薩。未說摩訶般若。則未有菩薩。云何付屬護念耶。今說摩訶竟方有菩薩。故后說金剛般若始得明護念付屬菩薩也。次有人言。前說金剛后說大品。何以知之有三義三文往證。三義。一金剛是破相之名。十二年中名有相教。受字之徒生分別相。封執難祛。佛初開此經明無相深理破彼相著心。故假金剛強喻空解。二者說此經。止集千二百五十比丘等不廣集天人菩薩。正為將明甚深空理化著相眾生。欲令親近弟子在前悟解。因此得便傳教義成。便聲聞助佛揚化。菩薩理中近佛事蹟更遠。又欲令菩薩轉教。聲聞望岸而退故。前為常隨佛者說於此經。三者形小故有大。前說此經甚略。未廣明菩薩萬行。名為小。后演放光般若。此始復廣明無相解萬行差別。名為摩訶般若。以此義往推故知。金剛般若是第一時說。摩訶般若次在第二。次文證亦有三。一者此經下文須菩提問佛云。頗有眾生得聞如是言說章句。生實信不。若爾前已說大品。無量眾生得信悟解。轉教說法。善吉于大品教門曾無此疑。今至此經方復致問。在義難解。二者善吉領解云。我從昔來所得慧眼未曾得

【現代漢語翻譯】現代漢語譯本：《大智度論》中說，之前沒有講過菩薩行，現在開始要為彌勒（Maitreya，未來佛）等講說菩薩行，所以才說《般若經》（Prajna，智慧）。如果之前已經講過《金剛般若經》（Vajra Prajna，金剛智慧），那就是已經講過菩薩行，不應該說沒有講過。第二，《金剛般若經》一開始就說『善護念諸菩薩，善付囑諸菩薩』。如果還沒講《摩訶般若》（Maha Prajna，大智慧），那就還沒有菩薩，怎麼付囑和護念呢？現在講了《摩訶般若》之後才有了菩薩，所以後來講《金剛般若》才能明白護念和付囑菩薩的道理。其次有人說，先講《金剛經》，后講《大品般若經》（Mahaprajnaparamita Sutra，大品般若經）。憑什麼知道呢？有三個理由和三段經文可以證明。三個理由：一是《金剛經》是破除表相的經典。十二年中講的是有相教，接受教義的人會產生分別心，難以去除執著。佛陀最初開講此經，闡明無相的深刻道理，破除他們對錶相的執著。所以用金剛來比喻空性的智慧。二是講這部經時，只聚集了一千二百五十比丘等，沒有廣泛聚集天人菩薩。正是爲了闡明甚深的空性之理，教化執著于表相的眾生。想讓親近的弟子先領悟理解，因此方便傳授教義。這樣聲聞（Śrāvaka，小乘弟子）可以幫助佛陀弘揚教化。菩薩（Bodhisattva，發菩提心者）在道理上更接近佛陀，在事蹟上更遙遠。又想讓菩薩去轉教，聲聞望而卻步。所以先為常隨佛陀的人講這部經。三是形體小而內容大。之前講這部經非常簡略，沒有廣泛闡明菩薩的萬行，所以稱為小。後來演說《放光般若經》（Pancavimsatisahasrika Prajnaparamita Sutra，二萬五千頌般若經），才開始廣泛闡明無相的智慧和萬行的差別，所以稱為《摩訶般若》。用這個道理來推斷，就知道《金剛般若經》是第一時講的，《摩訶般若經》是第二時講的。其次經文的證據也有三個。一是這部經的下文，須菩提（Subhuti，佛陀弟子）問佛陀說：『頗有眾生得聞如是言說章句，生實信不？』如果之前已經講過《大品般若經》，無數眾生已經信悟理解，並且轉教說法。須菩提在大品教門中從來沒有這樣的疑問，現在到了這部經才又提出疑問，在道理上難以理解。二是須菩提領悟理解后說：『我從昔來所得慧眼未曾得...』

【English Translation】 English version: The Mahaprajnaparamitopadesa (大智度論) says, 'Previously, the conduct of Bodhisattvas (菩薩) was not discussed. Now, it is intended to explain the conduct of Bodhisattvas to Maitreya (彌勒) [the future Buddha] and others, therefore, the Prajna (般若) [wisdom] is spoken. If the Vajra Prajna Sutra (金剛般若經) [Diamond Sutra] had already been spoken, then the conduct of Bodhisattvas would have already been explained, and it should not be said that it has not been explained.' Secondly, the Vajra Prajna Sutra begins by saying, 'Well protect and remember all Bodhisattvas, well entrust all Bodhisattvas.' If the Maha Prajna (摩訶般若) [Great Wisdom] has not been spoken, then there are no Bodhisattvas yet. How can there be entrustment and protection? Now, after the Maha Prajna is spoken, there are Bodhisattvas. Therefore, the subsequent speaking of the Vajra Prajna makes clear the meaning of protecting and entrusting Bodhisattvas. Next, some say, 'The Vajra Sutra was spoken first, and then the Mahaprajnaparamita Sutra (大品般若經) [Large Perfection of Wisdom Sutra].' How do we know this? There are three reasons and three scriptural passages to prove it. Three reasons: First, the Vajra [Diamond] is a name for breaking through appearances. In the twelve years, the teaching of appearances was taught. Disciples who received the teachings developed discriminating thoughts and found it difficult to remove attachments. The Buddha initially opened this sutra to clarify the profound principle of non-appearance and break through their attachment to appearances. Therefore, the strong metaphor of the diamond is used to represent the understanding of emptiness. Second, when this sutra was spoken, only 1,250 bhikkhus (比丘) [monks] and others were gathered, and not a wide gathering of devas (天) [gods], humans, and Bodhisattvas. It was precisely to clarify the profound principle of emptiness and transform sentient beings attached to appearances. The intention was to have close disciples understand and comprehend first, thus facilitating the transmission of the teachings. In this way, Śrāvakas (聲聞) [Hearers] can assist the Buddha in propagating the teachings. Bodhisattvas are closer to the Buddha in principle but further away in deeds. Furthermore, the intention was to have Bodhisattvas transmit the teachings, while Śrāvakas retreat from the shore. Therefore, this sutra was spoken first to those who constantly followed the Buddha. Third, it is small in form but great in content. This sutra was spoken very briefly before, without extensively clarifying the ten thousand practices of Bodhisattvas, so it is called small. Later, the Pancavimsatisahasrika Prajnaparamita Sutra (放光般若經) [Perfection of Wisdom in 25,000 lines] was expounded, which began to extensively clarify the wisdom of non-appearance and the differences in the ten thousand practices, so it is called Maha Prajna. Based on this reasoning, we know that the Vajra Prajna Sutra was spoken in the first period, and the Maha Prajna was spoken in the second period. Next, there are also three scriptural passages as evidence. First, in the lower part of this sutra, Subhuti (須菩提) [a disciple of the Buddha] asks the Buddha, 'Are there any sentient beings who, upon hearing such words and phrases, will generate true faith?' If the Mahaprajnaparamita Sutra had already been spoken before, countless sentient beings would have already believed, understood, and transmitted the teachings. Subhuti never had such doubts in the teachings of the Mahaprajnaparamita Sutra, but now he raises the question in this sutra, which is difficult to understand in principle. Second, Subhuti, upon understanding and comprehending, says, 'From the wisdom eye I have attained in the past, I have never...'

聞如是之經。若爾前佛說大品。豈不能說經轉教耶。得言不聞深經。若聞而未悟。豈能轉教。三者善吉答佛。不應以三十二相見如來。若爾前已聞大品。云何執色相是佛。若生此執非謂解空。故知直執昔日相教故謂色身為佛。而開善舉兩義為證。今須釋之。一者大智論云。說摩訶已前未明菩薩行者。此是未廣明菩薩行耳。非不已略說金剛。二者云。未說大品故未有菩薩善付屬者。此事不然。今明。佛初成道以三乘度人。豈無菩薩付屬。彌勒即是其人。以文義往推故知前說金剛波若也。今明。此之二釋未可專判。隨宜之言復何可定其前後。或可一時具說多部。或可一部具經多時。至大品中更當委釋。

第五辨經宗。問此經以何為宗。答釋者不同。有人言以無相境為宗。所以者何。明此經正遣蕩萬相明無相理故以無相之理為此經宗。有人言。此經以智慧為宗。自有二說。一說云。慧有二種。一者因中智慧。二者果中智慧。今正以因中智慧為此經宗。凡有四文為證。一者大品初云。欲得一切種智當學般若。此意言。欲得佛地智慧當習因中智慧。二者勸學品通勸三乘學般若。此經未說二乘作佛而勸令學般若。證般若但在因中非是果也。三者釋論初云。為彌勒等說菩薩行故說般若。故知是般若因中之行。至果則轉名萬德。

四者釋論四十九捲雲。因中名般若。菩薩成佛時轉名一切種智。故般若不屬佛但屬菩薩。又云。般若成佛時轉名薩般若。佛智窮堅極利。即是金剛薩波若。今既說波若。故知但明十地無漏。所以是因中般若為宗。有人言。從初地以上終乎佛果。皆平等悉為經體。此則因之與果併爲經宗。即開善舊用因慧中。復有二說。有人言。但取無相實慧以為經宗。故勝鬘經云。金剛喻者是第一義智。有人言。實智方便智悉為經宗。故大品二週之說具明二慧。有人言。境之與智合為經宗。故瑤法師云。語經宗極則以實相為宗。明聖心則以妙智為主。是故境智合為經宗。問如斯等說何者是實。答有人言。皆有道理悉是佛語故。有人言。如此諸說並悉失般若意。又有人言。唯我一解是。余釋盡非。如莊嚴云。因名金剛果非金剛。以因中斷惑果地不斷。開善云。因果俱金剛。因果俱斷惑。故云佛智斷佛菩提智斷。今明般若無一定相。如大火炎四邊不可觸。豈得各定執。今當一一責之。若言境是波若。而今般若於汝正是智慧。云何辨于般若不以般若為宗遂取非般若為宗。次責問若以智慧為宗者。大智論云。般若深重智慧輕薄。今既說深重般若。何故不取深重般若為宗而取輕薄智慧為宗。次問若取因中智慧以為般若。是亦不然。所以者何。經中

【現代漢語翻譯】現代漢語譯本四者釋論四十九卷中說，在因地時名為般若（prajna，智慧），菩薩（bodhisattva，覺悟有情）成佛（Buddha，覺悟者）時轉名為一切種智（sarvakarajnana，對一切事物和現象的智慧）。因此，般若不屬於佛，只屬於菩薩。又說，般若在成佛時轉名為薩般若（sarvajna，一切智）。佛的智慧極其堅固銳利，就是金剛薩波若（vajra-sarvajna，金剛一切智）。現在既然說般若，就知道只是闡明十地（dasabhumi，菩薩修行的十個階段）的無漏（anasrava，沒有煩惱）智慧，所以是以因地中的般若為宗旨。有人說，從初地以上直到佛果（buddha-phala，成佛的果位），都平等地作為經的本體。這就是把因和果都作為經的宗旨。即是開善寺（Kai Shan Temple）舊時所用的因慧。又有兩種說法。有人說，只取無相實慧（nirvikalpa-jnana，沒有分別的真實智慧）作為經的宗旨。所以《勝鬘經》（Srimala Sutra）說，金剛喻（vajropama，如金剛般堅固的比喻）是第一義智（paramartha-jnana，最高的真理智慧）。有人說，實智（tattva-jnana，真實的智慧）和方便智（upaya-jnana，善巧的智慧）都作為經的宗旨。所以《大品般若經》（Mahaprajnaparamita Sutra）二週的說法，詳細闡明了兩種智慧。有人說，境（vishaya，認識的對象）和智（jnana，認識的主體）合起來作為經的宗旨。所以瑤法師（Master Yao）說，談論經的宗旨，最根本的是以實相（tathata，事物的真實面貌）為宗旨；闡明聖人的心，則以妙智（adbhuta-jnana，不可思議的智慧）為主。因此，境和智合起來作為經的宗旨。問：像這樣的說法，哪個是真實的？答：有人說，都有道理，都是佛說的話。有人說，這些說法都失去了般若的意義。又有人說，只有我的理解是正確的，其他的解釋都不對。如《莊嚴經論》（Mahayana-sutralamkara-sastra）說，因地時名為金剛，果地時則不是金剛，因為因地時斷除迷惑，果地時則不再有迷惑可斷。開善寺說，因和果都是金剛，因和果都斷除迷惑。所以說佛智斷，佛菩提智斷。現在說明般若沒有一定的相狀，如大火燃燒，四邊不可觸控，怎麼能各自固執己見呢？現在應當一一責問。如果說境是般若，而現在般若對你來說正是智慧，為什麼辨別般若時不以般若為宗旨，卻取非般若為宗旨？其次責問，如果以智慧為宗旨，大智論（Mahaprajnaparamita-sastra）說，般若深重，智慧輕薄。現在既然說深重的般若，為什麼不取深重的般若為宗旨，而取輕薄的智慧為宗旨？其次問，如果取因地中的智慧作為般若，這也是不對的。為什麼呢？經中...

【English Translation】 English version The forty-ninth chapter of the 'Commentary on the Four' states: In the causal stage, it is named Prajna (prajna, wisdom). When a Bodhisattva (bodhisattva, an enlightened being) attains Buddhahood (Buddha, the awakened one), it is transformed and named Sarvakarajnana (sarvakarajnana, the wisdom of all things and phenomena). Therefore, Prajna does not belong to the Buddha but only to the Bodhisattva. It also says: When Prajna attains Buddhahood, it is transformed and named Sarvajna (sarvajna, all-knowing). The Buddha's wisdom is extremely firm and sharp, which is Vajra-sarvajna (vajra-sarvajna, diamond-like all-knowing). Now that Prajna is being discussed, it is known that it only clarifies the ten Bhumis (dasabhumi, the ten stages of a Bodhisattva's practice) of Anasrava (anasrava, without outflows). Therefore, it takes Prajna in the causal stage as its principle. Some say that from the first Bhumi up to the fruit of Buddhahood (buddha-phala, the fruit of becoming a Buddha), all are equally considered the essence of the Sutra. This is to take both cause and effect as the principle of the Sutra. This is the old usage of the wisdom of cause by Kai Shan Temple. There are also two other views. Some say that only Nirvikalpa-jnana (nirvikalpa-jnana, non-discriminating true wisdom) is taken as the principle of the Sutra. Therefore, the Srimala Sutra (Srimala Sutra) says that Vajropama (vajropama, a diamond-like metaphor) is Paramartha-jnana (paramartha-jnana, the wisdom of the highest truth). Some say that both Tattva-jnana (tattva-jnana, true wisdom) and Upaya-jnana (upaya-jnana, skillful means wisdom) are taken as the principle of the Sutra. Therefore, the two rounds of teachings in the Mahaprajnaparamita Sutra (Mahaprajnaparamita Sutra) clearly explain the two wisdoms. Some say that the combination of Vishaya (vishaya, the object of cognition) and Jnana (jnana, the subject of cognition) is taken as the principle of the Sutra. Therefore, Master Yao (Master Yao) said that when discussing the principle of the Sutra, the most fundamental is to take Tathata (tathata, the true nature of things) as the principle; when clarifying the mind of a sage, Adbhuta-jnana (adbhuta-jnana, inconceivable wisdom) is the main focus. Therefore, the combination of Vishaya and Jnana is taken as the principle of the Sutra. Question: Among these statements, which is true? Answer: Some say that all have their reasons and are the words of the Buddha. Some say that these statements all miss the meaning of Prajna. Others say that only my understanding is correct, and all other interpretations are wrong. As the Mahayana-sutralamkara-sastra (Mahayana-sutralamkara-sastra) says, in the causal stage, it is named Vajra, but in the fruit stage, it is not Vajra, because in the causal stage, delusions are cut off, while in the fruit stage, there are no more delusions to be cut off. Kai Shan Temple says that both cause and effect are Vajra, and both cause and effect cut off delusions. Therefore, it is said that Buddha-jnana is cut off, and Buddha-bodhi-jnana is cut off. Now it is explained that Prajna has no fixed form, like a great fire burning, with its four sides untouchable. How can one stubbornly cling to their own views? Now, each should be questioned. If you say that Vishaya is Prajna, and now Prajna is precisely wisdom to you, why do you not take Prajna as the principle when distinguishing Prajna, but instead take non-Prajna as the principle? Secondly, if wisdom is taken as the principle, the Mahaprajnaparamita-sastra (Mahaprajnaparamita-sastra) says that Prajna is profound and wisdom is shallow. Now that profound Prajna is being discussed, why not take profound Prajna as the principle, but instead take shallow wisdom as the principle? Thirdly, if the wisdom in the causal stage is taken as Prajna, this is also incorrect. Why? In the Sutra...

有種種說。或云因名般若。果稱薩般若。或因果悉稱般若。如大經。三德之中有般若德。故知般若亦是果名。不應偏執。次問若言始從初地終至佛果通取因果為宗者。是亦不然。釋論云。有人言。漏無漏慧皆是般若。有人言。但無漏慧是般若。龍樹無的取捨。何因緣故而汝偏執。又問若言般若通因果者。何故釋論但云是因。斯則得通復失其別。次責若言境智合為宗者。亦應境智合為般若。于汝義中。智是正般若。境是相從般若。亦應智是正宗境是相從宗。此與前說更復何異。次問若言七家皆是者。此不識得失耳。如愚癡盲人不知道路通與不通皆言是道。故復為失也。次問若言莊嚴為是開善為非者。開善亦以開善為是。莊嚴為非。此亦一是非彼亦一是非。竟誰是耶。如大品云。是見實余妄語耳。問山門解釋與他為同爲異。答若求由來眾解若得。可問與今義同異。求竟不可得。將誰同異耶能如此。不同不異不自不他無依無得。一無所住。即是般若之玄宗也。作上解有所依住。皆非般若宗也。今明般若無有定相。隨緣善巧。義無不通。而正般若未曾境與不境智與不智乃至因與不因果與不果。方便隨緣。在因名因。在果名果。在境名境。在智名智。故果因境智必得名悉得。如肇師云。原夫能境智因果者豈境智因果之所能。良以

【現代漢語翻譯】現代漢語譯本：有種種說法。有人說，因為最初名為般若（prajna，智慧），結果才稱為薩般若（sarva-prajna，一切智慧）。或者說，因和果都稱為般若。如同《大般涅槃經》所說，三德之中有般若德，因此可知般若也是果位的名稱，不應該偏執一端。接著問，如果說從初地菩薩到最終佛果都貫通因果作為宗旨，這也是不對的。《大智度論》說，有人說，有漏慧和無漏慧都是般若；有人說，只有無漏慧才是般若。龍樹菩薩沒有明確的取捨，你憑什麼偏執一端？又問，如果說般若貫通因果，為什麼《大智度論》只說是因？這樣就得到了貫通，又失去了差別。接著責問，如果說境和智合為宗旨，也應該境和智合為般若。在你的觀點中，智是真正的般若，境是相隨的般若，也應該智是真正的宗旨，境是相隨的宗旨。這和前面的說法又有什麼不同？接著問，如果說七家說法都是正確的，這是不識得失。如同愚癡的盲人不知道道路通暢與否，都說是道路。所以又是錯誤的。接著問，如果說莊嚴法師的解釋是正確的，開善法師的解釋是不正確的，開善法師也認為開善法師的解釋是正確的，莊嚴法師的解釋是不正確的。這樣你認為一個正確，他認為一個正確，究竟誰是正確的呢？如同《大品般若經》所說，這是實見，其餘是妄語。問，山門的解釋與其他的解釋是相同還是不同？答，如果追溯由來，眾人的解釋如果能夠得到，可以問與現在的意義相同還是不同。追究到底也無法得到，將與誰相同或不同呢？能夠做到這樣，不同不異，不自不他，無所依賴，無所得，一無所住，就是般若的玄妙宗旨。如果作以上的解釋，有所依賴和執著，都不是般若的宗旨。現在說明般若沒有固定的相狀，隨順因緣，善巧方便，義理上沒有不通達的。而真正的般若，未曾是境與非境，智與非智，乃至因與非因，果與非果。方便隨順因緣，在因位時名為因，在果位時名為果，在境時名為境，在智時名為智。所以果、因、境、智必定得到名稱，全部得到。如同肇法師所說，探究那能、境、智、因、果，難道是境、智、因、果所能及的嗎？實在是

【English Translation】 English version: There are various views. Some say that because the initial name is Prajna (wisdom), the result is called Sarva-prajna (all-wisdom). Or, both the cause and the result are called Prajna. As stated in the Mahaparinirvana Sutra, among the three virtues is the virtue of Prajna, thus it is known that Prajna is also the name of the fruit, and one should not be attached to one extreme. Next, if you say that from the initial Bhumi (stage of a Bodhisattva) to the final Buddhahood, the cause and effect are taken as the principle, that is also not correct. The Mahaprajnaparamita-sastra says, 'Some say that both defiled and undefiled wisdom are Prajna; some say that only undefiled wisdom is Prajna.' Nagarjuna (Longshu) Bodhisattva did not make a definite choice, so why are you attached to one extreme? Also, if you say that Prajna pervades cause and effect, why does the Mahaprajnaparamita-sastra only say it is the cause? This gains pervasion but loses distinction. Next, if you say that the object and wisdom combined are the principle, then the object and wisdom should also be combined as Prajna. In your view, wisdom is the true Prajna, and the object is the accompanying Prajna, so wisdom should also be the true principle, and the object the accompanying principle. How is this different from the previous statement? Next, if you say that all seven schools are correct, this is not recognizing gain and loss. Like a foolish blind person who does not know whether the road is clear or not, and says that it is the road. So it is also a mistake. Next, if you say that the explanation of Dharma Master Zhuangyan is correct and the explanation of Dharma Master Kaisan is incorrect, Dharma Master Kaisan also thinks that his explanation is correct and Dharma Master Zhuangyan's explanation is incorrect. In this way, you think one is correct and he thinks one is correct, who is correct in the end? As the Mahaprajnaparamita Sutra says, this is the true view, and the rest are false words. Question: Is the explanation of Shanmen the same as or different from other explanations? Answer: If you trace the origin, if the explanations of the people can be obtained, you can ask whether it is the same or different from the current meaning. If you investigate to the end and cannot obtain it, with whom will it be the same or different? If you can do this, not the same, not different, not self, not other, without reliance, without attainment, without dwelling on anything, that is the profound principle of Prajna. If you make the above explanation, with reliance and attachment, it is not the principle of Prajna. Now it is explained that Prajna has no fixed form, follows conditions skillfully, and there is no meaning that is not understood. And the true Prajna has never been object or non-object, wisdom or non-wisdom, even cause or non-cause, fruit or non-fruit. Conveniently following conditions, it is called cause when in the position of cause, it is called fruit when in the position of fruit, it is called object when in the object, it is called wisdom when in the wisdom. Therefore, fruit, cause, object, and wisdom must obtain names, all obtained. As Dharma Master Zhao said, exploring that which is able, object, wisdom, cause, and effect, how can it be reached by object, wisdom, cause, and effect? It is truly

非境非智慧境能智。非因非果能因能果等耳。而今就文為論。一往方言。般若非因非果正以因果為宗。問以何義知因果為宗。答經及論文並作此說。經云。發菩提心住般若乃至無住相佈施。如此大愿大行即是因義。次得如來無為法身。即是果義。論文至信者章中雲說因果深義。于彼惡世時不空必有實故知明因辨果事已究竟。然後方明信受。故知因果為此經正宗耳。

第六辨經名更開五句(一解佛說二釋金剛明解般若四釋波羅蜜五三經)。經曰金剛般若波羅蜜。釋曰。經題有二種。一者具足。二者不具足。具足應言佛說金剛般若。不具足但云金剛般若。問曰。余經何因緣故不題佛說。答一切諸經佛口自說。皆悉應題為佛說也。而不題者存略故。問曰。何故此經題為佛說耶。答曰。大智論云。有五種人說。一者佛口自說。二者弟子說。三者諸天說。四者仙人說。五化人說。今此經是佛口自說非餘人說。是故題佛說也。問曰。余經亦是佛口自說非餘人說。何故不云佛自說。答曰。已如前說理實應題。以存略故。複次如大品等經。命須菩提說。非佛自說。是故不得題為佛說。但云摩訶波若。波若具兼師弟子二說。此經不爾。雖對須菩提而佛自說非命說也。複次以理言之。應題佛說。所以者何。諸外道六師等輩亦皆說經。

【現代漢語翻譯】現代漢語譯本：非境非智慧境，能境能智。非因非果，能因能果等等。現在就經文進行討論，從一般意義上說，般若（Prajna，智慧）並非因也非果，但正是以因果為根本宗旨。問：根據什麼意義得知因果是其根本宗旨？答：經典以及論著都這樣說。經中說：『發菩提心（Bodhicitta，覺悟之心），安住于般若，乃至不住相佈施（Dana Paramita，無執著的佈施）』，這樣的大愿大行就是因的意義。其次，獲得如來無為法身（Dharmakaya，法身），就是果的意義。論著《至信者章》中說『闡述因果的深刻含義，在那邪惡的時代，並非虛妄，必定真實』，因此可知明白因辨別果的事已經究竟，然後才闡明信受。所以可知因果是這部經的根本宗旨。

第六，辨析經名，進一步展開為五句（一、解釋『佛說』，二、解釋『金剛』，三、闡明『般若』，四、解釋『波羅蜜』，五、總結三經）。經文說：『金剛般若波羅蜜』。解釋說：經題有兩種，一是具足，二是不具足。具足的說法應該是『佛說金剛般若』，不具足的說法只說『金剛般若』。問：其他經典為什麼不題『佛說』呢？答：一切經典都是佛親口所說，都應該題為『佛說』。但不題是因為要保持簡略。問：為什麼這部經題為『佛說』呢？答：大智論中說，有五種人說法：一是佛親口所說，二是弟子說，三是諸天說，四是仙人說，五是化人說。現在這部經是佛親口所說，不是其他人說的，所以題為『佛說』。問：其他經典也是佛親口所說，不是其他人說的，為什麼不說是佛親口所說呢？答：已經像前面所說，道理上應該題，因為要保持簡略。再次，像《大品經》等經典，是命令須菩提（Subhuti，佛陀的弟子）說的，不是佛親口所說，所以不能題為『佛說』，只能說『摩訶般若』（Maha Prajna，偉大的智慧）。般若兼顧了師父和弟子兩種說法。這部經不是這樣，雖然是對須菩提說的，但是佛親口所說，不是命令說的。再次，從道理上說，應該題『佛說』。為什麼呢？因為外道六師等輩也都在說經。

【English Translation】 English version: Non-realm, non-intelligent realm, the realm can be intelligent. Non-cause, non-effect, capable of cause, capable of effect, and so on. Now, let's discuss the text. Generally speaking, Prajna (wisdom) is neither cause nor effect, but it takes cause and effect as its fundamental principle. Question: By what meaning do we know that cause and effect are its fundamental principle? Answer: The sutras and treatises both say this. The sutra says: 'Generating Bodhicitta (the mind of enlightenment), abiding in Prajna, and even practicing non-attachment Dana Paramita (perfection of giving),' such great vows and great practices are the meaning of cause. Next, attaining the Tathagata's (Thus Come One) unconditioned Dharmakaya (the body of the Dharma), is the meaning of effect. The treatise 'Chapter on Those Who Believe' says, 'Explaining the profound meaning of cause and effect, in that evil age, it is not empty, it must be real,' therefore it can be known that the matter of understanding cause and distinguishing effect has been completed, and then the acceptance of faith is explained. Therefore, it can be known that cause and effect are the fundamental principle of this sutra.

Sixth, analyzing the name of the sutra, further expanding into five sentences (1. Explaining 'Thus Spoken by the Buddha', 2. Explaining 'Vajra', 3. Clarifying 'Prajna', 4. Explaining 'Paramita', 5. Summarizing the three sutras). The sutra says: 'Vajra Prajna Paramita'. Explanation: There are two types of sutra titles, one is complete, and the other is incomplete. The complete saying should be 'Thus Spoken by the Buddha Vajra Prajna', the incomplete saying only says 'Vajra Prajna'. Question: Why don't other sutras have 'Thus Spoken by the Buddha' in their titles? Answer: All sutras are spoken by the Buddha himself, and all should be titled 'Thus Spoken by the Buddha'. But they are not titled because they are kept brief. Question: Why is this sutra titled 'Thus Spoken by the Buddha'? Answer: The Mahaprajnaparamita Sastra says that there are five types of people who speak the Dharma: 1. Spoken by the Buddha himself, 2. Spoken by disciples, 3. Spoken by devas (gods), 4. Spoken by immortals, 5. Spoken by emanations. Now this sutra is spoken by the Buddha himself, not by others, so it is titled 'Thus Spoken by the Buddha'. Question: Other sutras are also spoken by the Buddha himself, not by others, why don't they say 'Thus Spoken by the Buddha himself'? Answer: As said before, in principle, it should be titled, but it is kept brief. Furthermore, like the Mahaprajnaparamita Sutra and other sutras, Subhuti (one of the Buddha's principal disciples) was instructed to speak, not the Buddha himself, so it cannot be titled 'Thus Spoken by the Buddha', but only 'Maha Prajna' (Great Wisdom). Prajna covers both the teacher's and the disciple's teachings. This sutra is not like that, although it is spoken to Subhuti, it is spoken by the Buddha himself, not instructed. Furthermore, in principle, it should be titled 'Thus Spoken by the Buddha'. Why? Because the six heretical teachers and others also speak sutras.

今恐墮邪見欲簡異六師故。題佛說使人信受法也。複次道不孤運。必由人弘。法雖佛師要由佛說法乃得弘。以是義故題能說之人所說之法。則于義具足也。二釋金剛。問曰。金剛為是譬名。為是法名。答曰。有人言。金剛是譬。如世間中金剛寶堅而且利。譬于波若體堅用利。今謂不然。所以者何。汝於法譬生二見故。謂金剛但譬而非法波若但法而非譬。則譬礙於法不得以譬為法。法礙於譬不得以法為譬。複次若言借世金剛喻般若者。亦應借世智慧以譬般若。若言般若自有智慧非世間智慧。亦應自有金剛非世間金剛也。複次若言金剛是譬喻者。摩訶之名亦應是譬喻。若言般若廣大體是摩訶。亦應般若堅利體是金剛。問汝今何故作如此難。答波若名為真實之法。無所依止。不可言大。不可言小。不可言法。不可言譬。過一切語言。滅一切觀行。今非小大嘆美為大。非金剛非不金剛嘆美為金剛。非小非大寄大以宣之。大既是法。非金剛非不金剛寄金剛以宣之。金剛亦得是法。借金剛以目之。金剛既是譬。寄大以目之。大亦是譬。故以譬言之一切皆是譬。以法言之一切皆是法。複次金剛是譬般若是法。金剛是喻非喻為喻。所喻之理非理為理。非理為理雖理而事。非喻為喻雖事而理。雖理而事故知非理。雖事而理故知非事。是以

般若未曾理事。但無名相中假名相說。故金剛為事。般若為理。此是不二二義為眾生故假名相說二。豈定二耶問云。何是金剛耶。答曰。大智論云。外國名越阇。此言金剛。又華嚴經云斫家羅。此翻金剛圍山。又舊相傳直云跋阇羅。真諦三藏云跋阇羅侈(臺履反)迦(居伽反)問曰。舊翻跋阇羅為金剛出何處文。答賢愚經第二卷。波斯匿王醜女名跋阇羅。晉言金剛。問曰。汝以金剛喻般若者。此有何義。答曰。如世間寶金剛第一。出世間寶般若第一。複次如金剛寶一切世人不能秤價。般若法寶所有所生功德一切世人不能秤量。複次如金剛寶若置山頂及在平地。直過無礙。到金剛際同性乃住。般若金剛亦復如是。置福山頂若罪平地。直過無礙。到諸法實相非罪非福非有非無同性乃住。複次如世金剛寶照徹清凈。故羅什云。方寸金剛照數十里物皆映現。般若亦爾。照實相水明瞭清凈。複次如金剛寶除那羅延一切眾生不能執持。般若亦爾。除信悟無依無得大力觀人。若樂小法及著見眾生不能信持。如經說。為發大乘者說。為發最上乘者說。若樂小法者及著諸見不能信持。複次譬如丈夫食小金剛終身不銷。波若亦爾。若能了悟不可朽滅必得作佛。複次若有眾生。得金剛寶遠離一切貧窮困苦受諸安樂。若得般若離生死苦得大涅槃

。複次如金剛寶所在之處能銷惡鬼及諸蠱毒。般若亦爾。所在之處天魔外道惡鬼不能得其便。複次如金剛寶悉摧破一切諸物。而是金剛無有折損。般若亦爾。悉能摧破一切煩惱而無折損。複次金剛一切諸物不能摧破。般若亦爾。一切論者及諸煩惱不能摧破。複次如金剛寶若在日中色則不定。般若亦爾。在大眾中亦復不定。或說名因。或說名果。在小心人中則名為小。在大心人中則名為大。在境名境。在智名智。而是般若無一定相。故偈云。般若是一法。佛說種種名。隨諸眾生力。為之立異字。複次如金剛寶雖有如此種種勝用。未嘗有心自言我勝。般若亦爾。雖有無量種種功德。而未當有心。是故般若不可思議。問金剛出何處。答毗婆沙云。如從礦出金從金出金剛。故知金中之精名金剛。問金剛與天如意珠云何同異。答大智論云。帝釋手執金剛與修羅鬥。碎落閻浮提變成如意珠。毗婆沙云金剛能破頗梨山及如意珠。故知異也。複次此明般若與金剛同。而是般若超絕金剛。非可譬喻。金剛是世間物。般若非間失之則憂之得之則喜。得般若者無憂無喜。金剛是無知之物。般若無知無所不知。無量功德今略說而已。複次有人言。聲聞法中從假名空終至羅漢通名金剛。菩薩法中從三十心終至佛慧通名金剛。若別而為論。從初地以

【現代漢語翻譯】現代漢語譯本：再者，如同金剛寶所在之處能夠消除惡鬼和各種蠱毒，般若（Prajna，智慧）也是如此。般若所在之處，天魔、外道、惡鬼都無法得逞。再者，如同金剛寶能夠摧毀一切事物，而自身卻不會有任何折損，般若也是如此。般若能夠摧毀一切煩惱，而自身卻不會有任何折損。再者，金剛寶是任何事物都無法摧毀的，般若也是如此。一切論者以及各種煩惱都無法摧毀般若。再者，如同金剛寶在陽光下顏色不定，般若也是如此。在大眾之中，般若的說法也不固定，有時被稱為『因』，有時被稱為『果』。在小心眼的人看來，般若是小的；在大心量的人看來，般若是大的。在境界中，般若被稱為『境』；在智慧中，般若被稱為『智』。而般若並沒有固定的相狀。所以偈語說：『般若是一法，佛說種種名，隨諸眾生力，為之立異字。』再者，如同金剛寶雖然有如此種種殊勝的功用，卻從未有心自認為自己殊勝，般若也是如此。般若雖然有無量種種功德，卻從未動過這樣的念頭。所以，般若是不可思議的。問：金剛是從哪裡產生的？答：《毗婆沙論》（Vibhasa）中說，如同從礦石中提煉出金子，從金子中提煉出金剛。由此可知，金子中的精華就叫做金剛。問：金剛和天上的如意珠有什麼相同和不同？答：《大智度論》（Mahaprajnaparamita-sastra）中說，帝釋天（Indra）手執金剛與阿修羅（Asura）戰鬥，金剛碎落到閻浮提（Jambudvipa，我們所居住的這個世界）就變成了如意珠。《毗婆沙論》中說，金剛能夠摧毀頗梨山（Crystal Mountain）以及如意珠。由此可知，金剛和如意珠是不同的。再者，這說明般若與金剛相似，但是般若超越金剛，無法用金剛來比喻。金剛是世間之物，得到它就高興，失去它就憂愁；得到般若的人，沒有憂愁也沒有喜悅。金剛是沒有知覺的物體，般若則是無知而無所不知。無量的功德，現在只是簡略地說說而已。再者，有人說，在聲聞法（Sravakayana）中，從假名空（Conceptual Emptiness）到阿羅漢（Arhat）的證悟，都通稱為金剛。在菩薩法（Bodhisattvayana）中，從三十心（Thirty Minds）到佛慧（Buddha-wisdom），都通稱為金剛。如果分別來論述，從初地（First Bhumi）開始……

【English Translation】 English version: Furthermore, just as a Vajra jewel (Diamond Jewel) can eliminate evil spirits and various poisons, so too is Prajna (Wisdom). Wherever Prajna is present, demons, heretics, and evil spirits cannot take advantage. Furthermore, just as a Vajra jewel can destroy all things without itself being damaged, so too is Prajna. Prajna can destroy all afflictions without itself being damaged. Furthermore, a Vajra jewel cannot be destroyed by anything, and so too is Prajna. All debaters and various afflictions cannot destroy Prajna. Furthermore, just as the color of a Vajra jewel is uncertain in the sunlight, so too is Prajna. In a crowd, the way Prajna is spoken of is also not fixed; sometimes it is called 'cause,' sometimes it is called 'effect.' In the eyes of a small-minded person, Prajna is small; in the eyes of a large-minded person, Prajna is large. In the realm of experience, Prajna is called 'realm'; in wisdom, Prajna is called 'wisdom.' But Prajna does not have a fixed form. Therefore, a verse says: 'Prajna is one dharma, the Buddha speaks of various names, according to the power of all beings, different words are established for it.' Furthermore, just as a Vajra jewel, although it has such various and excellent functions, has never had the thought of considering itself superior, so too is Prajna. Although Prajna has immeasurable and various merits, it has never had such a thought. Therefore, Prajna is inconceivable. Question: Where does the Vajra come from? Answer: The Vibhasa (Commentary) says, just as gold is extracted from ore, and Vajra is extracted from gold. From this, it is known that the essence of gold is called Vajra. Question: What are the similarities and differences between the Vajra and the heavenly wish-fulfilling jewel (Cintamani)? Answer: The Mahaprajnaparamita-sastra (Great Wisdom Sutra) says that when Indra (Lord of the Gods) fought with the Asuras (Demons) holding a Vajra, the Vajra broke and fell to Jambudvipa (the world we live in) and became a wish-fulfilling jewel. The Vibhasa says that the Vajra can destroy Crystal Mountain and the wish-fulfilling jewel. From this, it is known that the Vajra and the wish-fulfilling jewel are different. Furthermore, this explains that Prajna is similar to the Vajra, but Prajna surpasses the Vajra and cannot be compared to it. The Vajra is a worldly object; one is happy to obtain it and sad to lose it. One who obtains Prajna has neither sorrow nor joy. The Vajra is an inanimate object; Prajna is without knowledge yet knows everything. The immeasurable merits are now only briefly mentioned. Furthermore, some say that in the Sravakayana (Vehicle of Hearers), from Conceptual Emptiness to the attainment of Arhat (Enlightened Being), all are commonly called Vajra. In the Bodhisattvayana (Bodhisattva Vehicle), from the Thirty Minds to Buddha-wisdom, all are commonly called Vajra. If discussed separately, from the First Bhumi (Ground) onwards...

去終至佛慧始名真金剛。所以者何。而三十心人但是學妄未得真妄。但是伏惑未能斷惑。相由入體。所以未得秤真金剛也。亦得相從名金剛。初地以去得於真妄解正能斷惑。相不入體。是真金剛。舊以窮學之心喻金剛者。約開善義。伏惑既周。又無明元品之惑。此最難伏。唯是窮學之心而能伏之。故至佛果起佛智斷之。以是義故窮學之心名曰金剛。複次有人言。窮學之心正能斷惑。故名金剛。如此等說。並言有惑之可斷有解之能斷。以是義故名有所得。有所得故不能斷惑。無有金剛。如經中說。有所得者不從一地至一地。複次汝言未斷惑時有惑無解。斷惑之時有解無惑。此則惑是本有而今無。解是本無而今有。是生滅觀。如經中說。諸法本有今無。又言。若諸法前有後無。諸佛菩薩則有罪過。今所明者。知惑本不有今亦不無。解本不無今亦不有。是故諸法不有不無。不生不滅。非縛非解。無觀無緣乃名般若。問曰。若如是者。云何經言一念相應慧斷煩惱及習。答若見有生滅。則不能斷。以了諸法不解不惑非斷不斷故煩惱斷也。問金剛但喻般若。亦喻余法。答借金剛種種喻。大經以喻法身云金剛身。又喻三昧云金剛三昧。此喻定為金剛也。今喻智慧名金剛也。問金剛是天上寶。是人中寶耶。答人天具有。如轉輪王金輪是

金剛寶。故所擬皆碎。帝釋執金剛與修羅鬥。即是天上寶也。第三釋般若。般若是外國語。釋論有二文。一者般若秦言智慧。開善用之。次文云。般若深重智慧輕薄。不可以輕薄智慧秤量深重般若。莊嚴法師云。般若名含五義。智慧但是一條。非正翻譯。但解智慧經論不同。凈名經分二字解之。知眾生心念如應說法。起于智業。不取不捨入一相門。起于慧業。舊釋此文云。智是有解。慧是空解。亦智是化他慧是自行。大品云道慧道種慧一切智一切種智。此則智慧名通空有也。又因名慧。果秤智。如因名道慧道種慧。果秤一切智一切種智。又智名通因果。如三智義。聲聞一切智。菩薩道種智。佛一切種智。又慧名通因果。法華云。諸佛平等大慧也。成論文合解智慧兩字云。真慧名智。又云。慧名智人。又云。慧義經中說解脫智是慧義。故智猶慧也。又大智論亦有二文。般若者秦言慧也。又云。秦言智慧也。問經論何故言語或出或沒。乍合乍開。不分明一途示人合分明得解耶。答聖人非不能一途分明示人。而今有出沒言者。此有深意。以眾生本來有取著之心。以是因緣系屬於魔。生死不絕。若輪常轉。不悟中道佛性正觀般若。今若復作一途實說。則更增其依著之心。所以不定出沒。動其生死根識令迥悟正法。故不定之說為

【現代漢語翻譯】現代漢語譯本金剛寶。所以凡是想比擬它的東西都會破碎。帝釋天手持金剛杵與阿修羅戰鬥，這就是天上的寶物。第三是解釋般若（Prajna，智慧）。般若是外國語。釋論中有兩種說法。一種是般若，用漢語來說就是智慧。開善法師採用這種說法。另一種說法是，般若深奧厚重，智慧輕浮淺薄，不能用輕浮淺薄的智慧來衡量深奧厚重的般若。莊嚴法師說，『般若』這個名稱包含五種含義，而『智慧』只是一條，不是正確的翻譯。只是解釋智慧的經論有所不同。《維摩詰經》將這兩個字分開解釋：瞭解眾生的心念，如其所需而說法，這是智業；不取不捨，進入一相門，這是慧業。舊的解釋說，『智』是有所理解，『慧』是空性的理解。或者說，『智』是教化他人，『慧』是自我修行。《大品般若經》中說，道慧、道種慧、一切智、一切種智，這裡『智慧』這個名稱貫通空有。另外，因稱為慧，果稱為智。比如因稱為道慧、道種慧，果稱為一切智、一切種智。還有，『智』這個名稱貫通因果，比如三智的含義：聲聞的一切智，菩薩的道種智，佛的一切種智。還有，『慧』這個名稱貫通因果。《法華經》中說：『諸佛平等大慧』。《成唯識論》將『智慧』兩個字合起來解釋說：『真實的慧稱為智。』又說：『慧是智人。』又說：『慧的含義在經中說是解脫智，這就是慧的含義。』所以智就是慧。另外，《大智度論》中也有兩種說法：『般若，用漢語來說就是慧。』又說：『用漢語來說就是智慧。』問：為什麼經論中的言語有時出現有時隱藏，時而合在一起時而分開，不明確地用一種方式來指示人們，合在一起或分開才能理解呢？答：聖人並非不能用一種明確的方式來指示人們，而現在有出現和隱藏的說法，這其中有深刻的含義。因為眾生本來就有取著之心，因為這個因緣而隸屬於魔，生死輪迴永不停止。如果不領悟中道佛性、正觀般若，如果現在又用一種確定的方式來如實宣說，那麼就會更加增加他們依附執著的心。所以用不確定的、出現和隱藏的方式，來動搖他們生死的根本意識，使他們徹底領悟正法。所以不確定的說法是爲了...

【English Translation】 English version Vajra treasure. Therefore, everything that is intended to be compared to it is shattered. Indra (Śakra, the ruler of the devas) holds the vajra and fights with the Asuras (demons), which is a heavenly treasure. Third is the explanation of Prajna (wisdom). Prajna is a foreign word. There are two interpretations in the Shastra. One is that Prajna, in Chinese, is wisdom. Kaishan uses this interpretation. The other interpretation is that Prajna is profound and weighty, while wisdom is shallow and light; shallow and light wisdom cannot be used to measure profound and weighty Prajna. Dharma Master Zhuangyan said that the name 'Prajna' contains five meanings, while 'wisdom' is only one, and is not a correct translation. It's just that the sutras and treatises explaining wisdom are different. The Vimalakirti Sutra explains the two characters separately: knowing the thoughts of sentient beings and speaking the Dharma as appropriate is karma of wisdom (智業); not grasping or abandoning, entering the one-aspect gate, is karma of prajna (慧業). The old interpretation says that '智' (zhi, wisdom) is understanding something, and '慧' (hui, prajna) is understanding emptiness. Or, '智' is to transform others, and '慧' is self-cultivation. The Mahaprajnaparamita Sutra says, 'Path-Prajna, Seed-Prajna of the Path, All-Wisdom, All-Kind-Wisdom,' here the name 'wisdom' encompasses both emptiness and existence. In addition, the cause is called Prajna, and the result is called Wisdom. For example, the cause is called Path-Prajna, Seed-Prajna of the Path, and the result is called All-Wisdom, All-Kind-Wisdom. Also, the name 'Wisdom' encompasses cause and effect, such as the meaning of the Three Wisdoms: the All-Wisdom of the Shravakas (hearers), the Seed-Prajna of the Path of the Bodhisattvas, and the All-Kind-Wisdom of the Buddhas. Also, the name 'Prajna' encompasses cause and effect. The Lotus Sutra says, 'The great and equal Prajna of all Buddhas.' The Cheng Weishi Lun (Vijnaptimatrata-siddhi Shastra) combines the two characters 'wisdom' and 'prajna' to explain, saying, 'True Prajna is called Wisdom.' It also says, 'Prajna is a wise person.' It also says, 'The meaning of Prajna is explained in the sutras as the wisdom of liberation, which is the meaning of Prajna.' Therefore, Wisdom is Prajna. In addition, the Mahaprajnaparamita-upadesha also has two interpretations: 'Prajna, in Chinese, is called Prajna.' It also says, 'In Chinese, it is called wisdom.' Question: Why do the words in the sutras and treatises sometimes appear and sometimes hide, sometimes combined and sometimes separated, not clearly indicating to people in one way, and only by combining or separating can they be understood? Answer: It is not that the sages cannot clearly indicate to people in one way, but there are appearances and concealments now, and there is a profound meaning in this. Because sentient beings originally have a mind of attachment, and because of this cause, they are subordinate to Mara (demon), and the cycle of birth and death never stops. If they do not realize the Middle Way, Buddha-nature, correct contemplation, and Prajna, if they now speak truthfully in a definite way, then it will further increase their minds of attachment. Therefore, they use uncertain, appearing and hiding ways to shake the root consciousness of their birth and death, so that they thoroughly realize the correct Dharma. Therefore, the uncertain saying is for...

益深矣。若學者定執經論一文以成一家之義者。皆是系屬魔人耳。又眾生非一國土一根性一善知識。是故諸佛種種說法也。問已知般若名。云何是般若體。答地論人說。有二種般若。一真修般若。即第八識。二緣修般若。即第七識。成論師言。緣真諦心忘懷絕相。以此解心為般若體。阿毗曇師云。緣四諦理無漏慧相是般若體。此三解即世盛行。具須破洗。至大品玄中廣明。但即世多誦此經。今輒言其要句。冀參玄君子領其指外。問今以何為般若。答若行人了悟顛倒。豁然悟解假名般若。問此豁然悟解豈非心耶。答此解悟非心非離心。問云何非心非離心。答既言心悟解。豈離心耶。此悟心畢竟不起有心無心。豈即心耶。問若言心悟還是即心。若言悟此心不得心有無。便是離心。答猶言即離。還是不悟。如其得悟竟有何即離。問既不即離應不迷悟。答迷故言其即離。悟故了無即離。既不即離竟復何有迷悟耶。可取其意。勿著其言也。第四釋波羅蜜。波羅蜜此云彼岸到。外國風俗法凡作一事究竟名波羅蜜。今悟道之人雖復積功累劫。若不得般若為行不成。若悟般若萬行周畢。故名波羅蜜般若問既有彼岸。云何為此岸及中流耶。答聖人直假名說彼岸。令其因此悟入。何必須作此岸彼岸中流耶。大經云。雖無此岸而有彼岸。即其

【現代漢語翻譯】現代漢語譯本益處就更深了。如果學佛之人執著于經論中的一句話，並以此形成自己的理論，這些人都是屬於魔道的。而且眾生的根器、善知識和所處的國土都不一樣，所以諸佛才會用各種不同的方法來說法。問：已經知道了般若（Prajna，智慧）這個名稱，那麼什麼是般若的本體呢？答：地論宗的人說，有兩種般若。第一種是真修般若，也就是第八識（Alaya-vijñāna，阿賴耶識）。第二種是緣修般若，也就是第七識（Manas-vijñāna，末那識）。成實論師說，以緣于真諦之心，忘卻一切表象，用這種理解的心作為般若的本體。阿毗曇師說，緣於四諦之理的無漏智慧之相，是般若的本體。這三種解釋在世間廣為流傳，都需要破除和洗滌。這些內容在大品般若經的玄義中已經詳細說明。現在世人大多誦讀這部經，我在這裡只說其中的要點，希望參玄的君子能夠領會言語之外的真意。問：現在應該以什麼作為般若呢？答：如果修行人領悟了顛倒，豁然開悟，這就是假名般若。問：這種豁然開悟難道不是心嗎？答：這種理解和開悟既不是心，也不是離開心。問：為什麼說既不是心，也不是離開心呢？答：既然說是心開悟，怎麼能說是離開心呢？這種悟心畢竟沒有生起有心或無心的念頭，怎麼能說是心本身呢？問：如果說是心開悟，那就是心本身。如果說開悟這種心，不能執著於心的有無，那就是離開心。答：如果說即是又離，那就是沒有開悟。如果真正開悟了，哪裡還有什麼即是或離呢？問：既然不即不離，那就不應該有迷惑和開悟。答：因為迷惑，所以才說即是又離。因為開悟，所以了無即是或離。既然不即不離，又哪裡有什麼迷惑和開悟呢？可以領會其中的意思，不要執著于言語。第四是解釋波羅蜜（Pāramitā，到彼岸）。波羅蜜的意思是到達彼岸。外國的風俗習慣是，凡是做一件事情達到究竟，就叫做波羅蜜。現在悟道之人，即使積累功德無數劫，如果沒有般若，修行也不能成就。如果領悟了般若，所有的修行就圓滿了，所以叫做波羅蜜般若。問：既然有彼岸，為什麼又有此岸和中流呢？答：聖人只是假借名稱說彼岸，讓人因此而悟入。何必一定要執著於此岸、彼岸和中流呢？大經中說，雖然沒有此岸，卻有彼岸，就是這個意思。

【English Translation】 English version The benefit is even deeper. If a student clings to a single sentence in the scriptures and treatises to form his own school of thought, all such people are attached to demonic beings. Moreover, sentient beings are not of one country, one nature, or one good teacher. Therefore, the Buddhas teach in various ways. Question: Having known the name of Prajna (wisdom), what is the substance of Prajna? Answer: The people of the Dilun school say that there are two kinds of Prajna. The first is true cultivation Prajna, which is the eighth consciousness (Alaya-vijñāna). The second is conditional cultivation Prajna, which is the seventh consciousness (Manas-vijñāna). The Chengshi school says that the mind that is connected to the true reality, forgetting all appearances, is the substance of Prajna. The Abhidhamma masters say that the aspect of non-outflow wisdom connected to the Four Noble Truths is the substance of Prajna. These three explanations are widely circulated in the world and need to be refuted and cleansed. These contents are explained in detail in the profound meaning of the Great Perfection of Wisdom Sutra. Now, most people recite this sutra, and I will only say the key points here, hoping that those who study the profound can understand the true meaning beyond words. Question: What should be taken as Prajna now? Answer: If a practitioner realizes the inversion and suddenly awakens, this is the provisional name Prajna. Question: Isn't this sudden awakening the mind? Answer: This understanding and awakening is neither the mind nor apart from the mind. Question: Why is it said to be neither the mind nor apart from the mind? Answer: Since it is said that the mind awakens, how can it be said to be apart from the mind? This awakened mind ultimately does not give rise to the thought of having a mind or not having a mind, so how can it be said to be the mind itself? Question: If it is said that the mind awakens, then it is the mind itself. If it is said that awakening this mind cannot be attached to the existence or non-existence of the mind, then it is apart from the mind. Answer: If you say it is both identical and separate, then you are not enlightened. If you are truly enlightened, where is there any identity or separation? Question: Since it is neither identical nor separate, then there should be no delusion or enlightenment. Answer: Because of delusion, it is said to be both identical and separate. Because of enlightenment, there is no identity or separation. Since it is neither identical nor separate, then where is there any delusion or enlightenment? You can grasp the meaning, but do not cling to the words. Fourth is the explanation of Pāramitā (to the other shore). Pāramitā means reaching the other shore. The custom in foreign countries is that when one completes something, it is called Pāramitā. Now, if a person who has attained enlightenment accumulates merit for countless kalpas, if he does not have Prajna, his practice cannot be accomplished. If he realizes Prajna, all practices will be completed, so it is called Pāramitā Prajna. Question: Since there is an other shore, why are there this shore and the middle stream? Answer: The sage only uses the name of the other shore to make people realize it. Why must one cling to this shore, the other shore, and the middle stream? The Great Sutra says that although there is no this shore, there is an other shore, which is the meaning.

事也。必須作者。大智論云。有無見為此岸。破有無見智慧為彼岸。檀為中流。第五釋經。經有三種。或文為經。或理為經。或文理合為經。地論師云。三十心前人文為經。三十心文理合為經。初地已去用理為經。今明文理因緣故為經。因文悟道故。以能表之文為經也。

第七辨傳譯。問大悲比丘尼本願經末記云。金剛般若本有八卷。今唯有格量功德一品。此事云何。答義不應爾。所以者何。此一卷經具有三人翻譯。一者羅什法師弘始四年于逍遙園正翻一卷。若有八卷何不翻譯之。二者流支三藏於此土重複翻譯。經之與論合有三卷。而經長有信者一章。論解釋始終。事義既畢。初則明經緣起歸敬之義。末則表隨喜讚歎功德。若有八卷何因緣故止解一品。三者真諦三藏於嶺南重翻此經。文小意廣不云有八卷。又且此經序正流通三分具足。何得止言一品。問大悲比丘尼本願經末記又云。初說大品。小品出其中。后說光贊。道行出其中。此事云何。答是亦不然。道行由是小品之異名。大智論前列光贊放光道行。后複列云小品放光光贊。故知小品即道行之異稱也。睿公小品序云。此經三十章。貫之以道。故稱道行。當知道行由是小品。

第八明應驗。問誦持般若有何驗益。答此經流行漢地二百餘年。誦者得益不可

【現代漢語翻譯】現代漢語譯本：這是關於『事』的討論。必須要有作者。《大智度論》中說：『執著于有和無的見解，就如同在此岸；破除有和無的見解的智慧，才是到達彼岸；而佈施（檀）就像是中間的河流。』第五，解釋經典。經典有三種：或者文字本身是經典，或者義理是經典，或者文字和義理結合才是經典。地論師說：『在三十心位之前，文字是經典；在三十心位時，文字和義理結合是經典；初地菩薩以上，用義理作為經典。』現在說明，因為文字和義理的因緣，所以才是經典。因為通過文字領悟真理，所以將能夠表達真理的文字作為經典。第七，辨別傳譯。問：《大悲比丘尼本願經》的末尾記載說，《金剛般若經》原本有八卷，現在只有格量功德這一品，這是怎麼回事？答：義理上不應該是這樣。為什麼呢？因為這一卷經有三個人翻譯。一是鳩摩羅什（Kumarajiva）法師在弘始四年于逍遙園正式翻譯了一卷。如果有八卷，為什麼不翻譯呢？二是菩提流支（Bodhiruci）三藏在此土重複翻譯。經和論合起來有三卷，而經文只有信者一章，論解釋了始終。事情和義理既然完畢，開始就闡明了經的緣起和歸敬的意義，最後就表達隨喜讚歎功德。如果有八卷，為什麼只解釋一品呢？三是真諦（Paramārtha）三藏在嶺南重新翻譯此經，文字簡略而意義廣泛，也沒有說有八卷。而且此經序分、正宗分、流通分三部分都具備，怎麼能只說一品呢？問：《大悲比丘尼本願經》的末尾記載又說，先說《大品般若經》（Mahāprajñāpāramitā Sūtra），《小品般若經》（Aṣṭasāhasrikā Prajñāpāramitā Sūtra）從中而出；后說《光贊般若經》，《道行般若經》從中而出，這是怎麼回事？答：這也是不對的。《道行般若經》是《小品般若經》的另一個名稱。《大智度論》前面列舉了《光贊般若經》、《放光般若經》、《道行般若經》，後面又列舉了《小品般若經》、《放光般若經》、《光贊般若經》，所以知道《小品般若經》就是《道行般若經》的別稱。睿公的《小品般若經》序中說：『此經三十章，貫穿以道，所以稱為道行。』應當知道《道行般若經》就是《小品般若經》。第八，說明應驗。問：誦持《般若經》有什麼應驗和利益？答：此經在漢地流行二百多年，誦讀的人得到的利益不可計數。

【English Translation】 English version: This is a discussion about 'matters'. There must be an author. The Mahāprajñāpāramitopadeśa says: 'Attachment to views of existence and non-existence is like being on this shore; the wisdom that breaks through views of existence and non-existence is reaching the other shore; and giving (dāna) is like the river in between.' Fifth, explaining the scriptures. There are three types of scriptures: either the text itself is the scripture, or the meaning is the scripture, or the combination of text and meaning is the scripture. The Daśabhūmika-sūtra commentators say: 'Before the thirtieth mind-moment, the text is the scripture; at the thirtieth mind-moment, the combination of text and meaning is the scripture; from the first bhūmi (stage of a Bodhisattva) onwards, the meaning is used as the scripture.' Now it is explained that because of the causes and conditions of text and meaning, it is a scripture. Because of realizing the truth through the text, the text that can express the truth is taken as the scripture. Seventh, distinguishing transmission and translation. Question: The postscript of the Mahākaruṇā Bhikṣuṇī Praṇidhāna Sūtra says that the Vajracchedikā Prajñāpāramitā Sūtra originally had eight volumes, but now there is only one chapter on the merit of measuring. How is this? Answer: It should not be so in terms of meaning. Why? Because this one-volume scripture was translated by three people. First, Dharma Master Kumārajīva (Kumarajiva) officially translated one volume in the fourth year of the Hongshi era at Xiaoyao Garden. If there were eight volumes, why not translate them? Second, Tripiṭaka Bodhiruci (Bodhiruci) repeatedly translated it in this land. The scripture and commentary together have three volumes, and the scripture only has one chapter on believers, and the commentary explains the beginning and the end. Since the matter and meaning are complete, the beginning clarifies the origin and the meaning of taking refuge, and the end expresses rejoicing and praising merit. If there were eight volumes, why only explain one chapter? Third, Tripiṭaka Paramārtha (Paramārtha) re-translated this scripture in Lingnan, the text is concise and the meaning is broad, and it does not say that there are eight volumes. Moreover, this scripture has the three parts of introduction, main body, and conclusion, how can it be said to be only one chapter? Question: The postscript of the Mahākaruṇā Bhikṣuṇī Praṇidhāna Sūtra also says that the Mahāprajñāpāramitā Sūtra was spoken first, and the Aṣṭasāhasrikā Prajñāpāramitā Sūtra came out of it; the Suvikrāntavikrāmī Prajñāpāramitā Sūtra was spoken later, and the Daoxing Prajñāpāramitā Sūtra came out of it. How is this? Answer: This is also incorrect. The Daoxing Prajñāpāramitā Sūtra is another name for the Aṣṭasāhasrikā Prajñāpāramitā Sūtra. The Mahāprajñāpāramitopadeśa lists the Suvikrāntavikrāmī Prajñāpāramitā Sūtra, the Fangguang Prajñāpāramitā Sūtra, and the Daoxing Prajñāpāramitā Sūtra first, and then lists the Aṣṭasāhasrikā Prajñāpāramitā Sūtra, the Fangguang Prajñāpāramitā Sūtra, and the Suvikrāntavikrāmī Prajñāpāramitā Sūtra later, so it is known that the Aṣṭasāhasrikā Prajñāpāramitā Sūtra is another name for the Daoxing Prajñāpāramitā Sūtra. In Rui Gong's preface to the Aṣṭasāhasrikā Prajñāpāramitā Sūtra, it says: 'This scripture has thirty chapters, which are connected by the Dao, so it is called Daoxing.' It should be known that the Daoxing Prajñāpāramitā Sūtra is the Aṣṭasāhasrikā Prajñāpāramitā Sūtra. Eighth, explaining the responses. Question: What are the responses and benefits of reciting and upholding the Prajñāpāramitā Sūtra? Answer: This scripture has been circulating in the Han region for more than two hundred years, and the benefits obtained by those who recite it are countless.

稱記。昔在山僧誦之。空中彈指異香滿室。又開善法師誦得延壽七年。又朱仕衡行以大品投火。火為之滅而經不燒。廣益無量。不可具述。

第九釋章段。此經文約理玄。釋者鮮得其意。致使科段煙塵紛穢遂令般若日月翳而不明。今粗列眾師以示其得失。原夫大聖屬緣吐教意。令表筌悟實。其旨則不在文字。希得意之徒領其要歸。其所寄也。自北土相承流支三藏具開經作十二分釋。一者序分。二者護念付屬分。三者住分。四者修行分。五者法身非有為分。六者信者分。七者格量分。八者顯性分。九者利益分。十者斷疑分。十一者不住道分。十二者流通分。夫大聖說法必有由致。故有序分。將說大法必為諸菩薩。已悟之徒則須加被。未悟之者付屬已悟。故有第二護念付屬。既護念付屬令其住般若中。故有第三住分。雖得住立更進修諸行。故次有第四修行分也。以修無得之因故得無為之果。故次明法身非有為分。說此因果必有信受之人。故次須明信者分。信持則功德無邊。故須明格量分。持說之人所以功德無邊必由佛性。若不識于佛性則無此功德。故有顯性分也。以依佛性所修功德利益無窮。故須明利益分也。上來一週說法。利根已悟。中下未了。更復生疑。故有第十斷疑分。疑心既除則無所依住。故有第十一不住

【現代漢語翻譯】現代漢語譯本：稱記：過去有山僧誦讀此經，空中便有彈指聲，奇異的香氣充滿房間。又有開善法師誦讀此經，得以延長壽命七年。又有朱仕衡以《大品般若經》投入火中，火焰因此熄滅，而經書卻沒有被燒燬。此經的利益廣大無邊，無法一一詳盡敘述。

第九，解釋章節段落。這部經文內容精深玄妙，解釋的人很少能領會其中的真意，導致章節段落的劃分如同煙塵般紛亂污濁，以致於般若的智慧之光被遮蔽而不明亮。現在我粗略地列出各位法師的解釋，以顯示他們的得失。原本，偉大的聖人因應機緣而宣說教義，意在使人通過言語文字而領悟真實的道理。因此，經文的宗旨並不在于文字本身，希望能夠領會其意的人領悟其要點和歸宿。經文所寄託的意義就在於此。

從北土相傳，流支三藏將此經分為十二個部分來解釋：第一是序分，第二是護念付屬分，第三是住分，第四是修行分，第五是法身非有為分，第六是信者分，第七是格量分，第八是顯性分，第九是利益分，第十是斷疑分，第十一是不住道分，第十二是流通分。偉大的聖人說法必然有其原因，所以有序分。將要宣說大法，必然是爲了諸位菩薩，對於已經覺悟的人需要加以護念，對於尚未覺悟的人則要將已覺悟的人囑託給他們，所以有第二護念付屬分。既然護念和囑託，就要讓他們安住于般若之中，所以有第三住分。雖然得以安住，還要進一步修習各種修行，所以接著有第四修行分。因為修習無所得的因，所以得到無為的果，所以接著闡明法身非有為分。宣說這種因果，必然有信受之人，所以接著需要闡明信者分。如果能夠信受奉持，那麼功德就無邊無際，所以需要闡明格量分。奉持和宣說此經的人之所以功德無邊，必然是由於佛性。如果不認識佛性，就沒有這種功德，所以有顯性分。因為依靠佛性所修的功德利益無窮，所以需要闡明利益分。以上是一週的說法，利根之人已經覺悟，中等和下等根器的人尚未明瞭，因此又產生疑問，所以有第十斷疑分。疑心既然消除，就沒有什麼可以依賴和執著的，所以有第十一不住道分。

【English Translation】 English version: Record of Praise: In the past, when a mountain monk recited this scripture, there would be finger snaps in the air and the room would be filled with extraordinary fragrance. Furthermore, Dharma Master Kaisan, by reciting this scripture, was able to extend his life by seven years. Also, Zhu Shiheng threw the 'Large Perfection of Wisdom Sutra' into the fire, and the flames were extinguished, but the scripture was not burned. The benefits of this scripture are vast and immeasurable, and cannot be fully described.

Ninth, Explanation of Chapters and Sections. This scripture's text is profound and mysterious, and those who interpret it rarely grasp its true meaning, causing the division of chapters and sections to be as chaotic and defiled as smoke and dust, so that the sun and moon of prajna wisdom are obscured and unclear. Now I will roughly list the explanations of various Dharma masters to show their gains and losses. Originally, the Great Sage expounded the teachings in response to conditions, intending to enable people to realize the truth through words and language. Therefore, the purpose of the scripture is not in the words themselves, and it is hoped that those who can understand its meaning will grasp its essentials and destination. The meaning that the scripture conveys lies in this.

Passed down from the Northern Lands, Tripitaka Master Kumarajiva divided this scripture into twelve parts for explanation: First is the Introductory Section, second is the Section on Protection, Mindfulness, and Entrustment, third is the Abiding Section, fourth is the Practice Section, fifth is the Section on the Dharmakaya as Non-conditioned, sixth is the Believer's Section, seventh is the Comparative Measurement Section, eighth is the Manifestation of Nature Section, ninth is the Benefit Section, tenth is the Doubt-Severing Section, eleventh is the Non-Abiding Path Section, and twelfth is the Circulation Section. The Great Sage's teachings must have a cause, so there is an Introductory Section. About to expound the Great Dharma, it must be for all Bodhisattvas; those who have already awakened need to be protected and mindful, and those who have not yet awakened need to be entrusted to those who have already awakened, so there is a second Section on Protection, Mindfulness, and Entrustment. Since there is protection, mindfulness, and entrustment, they must be allowed to abide in prajna, so there is a third Abiding Section. Although they are able to abide, they must further cultivate various practices, so there is a fourth Practice Section. Because they cultivate the cause of non-attainment, they obtain the fruit of non-conditioned, so there is a subsequent explanation of the Section on the Dharmakaya as Non-conditioned. Explaining this cause and effect, there must be those who believe and accept it, so there is a subsequent need to explain the Believer's Section. If one can believe and uphold it, then the merits will be boundless, so there is a need to explain the Comparative Measurement Section. The reason why those who uphold and expound this scripture have boundless merits must be due to Buddha-nature. If one does not recognize Buddha-nature, there will be no such merit, so there is a Manifestation of Nature Section. Because the merits cultivated by relying on Buddha-nature are infinitely beneficial, there is a need to explain the Benefit Section. The above is one cycle of teachings; those with sharp faculties have already awakened, while those with medium and lower faculties have not yet understood, so doubts arise again, so there is a tenth Doubt-Severing Section. Since doubt has been eliminated, there is nothing to rely on or cling to, so there is an eleventh Non-Abiding Path Section.

道分。此之大法非止益現在。亦利益未來。故有第十二流通分也。然分雖十二不出因果。統其始末凡有四周。護念付屬至修行分此則明因。法身非有為分斯則辨果益。是一週明因果也。次從信者分至於格量此則為因感得顯性之果。此則次周明因果也。既明佛性。依性之修行即因義。有因故得果。即利益分。謂三週明因果也。斷疑為因。不住道為果。則四周明因果也。然此之解釋盛行北地。世代相承多歷年序。而稟學之徒莫不承信。余鉆仰累年載。意謂不然。今請問之。此十二分為出般若經文。為是婆藪論釋。今所觀經論悉無斯意。蓋是人情自穿鑿耳。渾沌之絞絡良弊於此也。問作此分文有何過失而汝非之。答其妨甚多。不可具載。今略題數過以示其通塞也。一者作此分文則不識經之通別。所以者何。至如序分則通序一經。如護念付屬等十分此是正說中之別段。云何取經之通文以例正說之別段斯則失之大矣。又且汝云從大千珍寶至舍恒沙身命名格量分。此則未識經始終故有斯謬耳。所以者何。此中格量凡舉內外兩施。外施則有三千之與恒沙。內施之中亦有二種。一者直舍恒沙身施。二者次舉日三時舍恒沙身施。此方盡格量之極。汝何故但取前三種為格量分。而不取三時捨身為格量分。是以為失。又且論云從法身非有為分

【現代漢語翻譯】現代漢語譯本道分（道的分類）。這種大法不僅利益現在，也利益未來。所以有第十二流通分。然而，雖然分為十二分，卻不出因果二字。統觀其始終，共有四周。從護念付屬分到修行分，這部分闡明了因；從法身非有為分，則辨析了果益。這是第一週闡明因果。其次，從信者分到格量分，這部分是因感得顯性之果。這是第二週闡明因果。既然闡明了佛性，依佛性而修行就是因的意義。因為有因，所以能得果，這就是利益分。這是第三週闡明因果。斷疑是因，不住道是果。這是第四周闡明因果。然而，這種解釋在北方地區盛行，世代相傳，歷經多年，而學習的人沒有不信奉的。我鉆研仰慕多年，認為不是這樣。現在請問一下，這十二分是出自《般若經》的經文，還是婆藪（Vasubandhu）論師的解釋？現在我所看到的經論都沒有這個意思，這大概是人們自己穿鑿附會罷了。這種混亂的糾纏實在是很糟糕的。問：作這種分文有什麼過失，而你反對它？答：它的妨礙很多，不能全部記載。現在略微列舉幾個過失，來顯示它的通與不通。一是作這種分文，就不認識經的通與別。為什麼這樣說呢？比如序分，是通序一部經。像護念付屬等十分，這是正說中的別段。怎麼能取經的通文來比例正說的別段呢？這樣就大錯特錯了。而且，你說從大千珍寶到舍恒沙身，命名為格量分。這是因為不認識經的始終，所以才有這種錯誤。為什麼這樣說呢？這裡格量分，凡是舉內外兩種佈施。外施則有三千世界珍寶佈施與恒河沙數身佈施。內施之中也有兩種，一是直接舍恒河沙數身佈施，二是接著舉出每天三次舍恒河沙數身佈施。這才是格量之極。你為什麼只取前三種作為格量分，而不取三時捨身為格量分？這是第一個失誤。而且，論中說從法身非有為分

【English Translation】 English version Dào Fēn (Divisions of the Path). This great Dharma not only benefits the present but also the future. Therefore, there is the twelfth division, the Circulation Division. However, although divided into twelve, it does not go beyond the two words, cause and effect. Looking at it from beginning to end, there are four cycles. From the Protection and Entrustment Division to the Practice Division, this part elucidates the cause; from the Dharmakaya Non-Action Division, it discerns the benefit of the result. This is the first cycle elucidating cause and effect. Secondly, from the Believer Division to the Comparison Division, this part is the cause that evokes the manifest result. This is the second cycle elucidating cause and effect. Since Buddha-nature is elucidated, practicing according to Buddha-nature is the meaning of cause. Because there is cause, there is result, which is the Benefit Division. This is the third cycle elucidating cause and effect. Severing doubt is the cause, non-abiding in the path is the result. This is the fourth cycle elucidating cause and effect. However, this explanation is prevalent in the northern regions, passed down through generations for many years, and those who study it all believe in it. I have studied and admired it for many years, but I don't think it is so. Now, let me ask, are these twelve divisions from the sutra text of the Prajna Sutra, or are they the explanation of the Vasubandhu (a famous Buddhist scholar) commentary? Now, the sutras and commentaries I have seen do not have this meaning. This is probably just people's own conjecture and fabrication. This kind of chaotic entanglement is really terrible. Question: What are the faults of making these divisions, and why do you oppose them? Answer: There are many obstacles, which cannot all be recorded. Now, I will briefly list a few faults to show its coherence or incoherence. First, making these divisions does not recognize the general and specific aspects of the sutra. Why do I say this? For example, the Introductory Division is a general introduction to a sutra. Like the Protection and Entrustment Division and the other ten divisions, these are specific sections in the main discourse. How can you take the general text of the sutra to compare with the specific sections of the main discourse? This is a big mistake. Moreover, you say that from the Great Thousand Treasures to the Abandonment of Ganges-sand Bodies, it is named the Comparison Division. This is because you do not recognize the beginning and end of the sutra, so you have this error. Why do I say this? Here, the Comparison Division refers to both internal and external giving. External giving includes giving treasures of the three thousand worlds and giving bodies as numerous as the sands of the Ganges. Internal giving also includes two types: one is directly giving bodies as numerous as the sands of the Ganges, and the other is then giving bodies as numerous as the sands of the Ganges three times a day. This is the ultimate comparison. Why do you only take the first three as the Comparison Division and not the giving of bodies three times a day as the Comparison Division? This is the first mistake. Moreover, the commentary says that from the Dharmakaya Non-Action Division

已來並是斷疑。汝云何獨取須菩提重問已去為斷疑分。又且此經有兩週之說。經論並作斯判。汝何故取前周之說以開多分。取後周之說合為一分。抑大為小患之甚也。又流通實是大章。還依小段之例。亦所不可。其間碎分章句。爰至異言語目于經論並穢。至文當具顯之。復有人言。十二分開之既其難解。取其易見裁為六章。六章者。一序分。二護念付屬分。三住分。四修行分。五斷疑分。六流通分。此之分別蓋是學之劣者。過還同前而患復更甚。所以者何。若言后同是斷疑分。就斷疑中不復更開。附前亦是同非斷疑。不斷疑中亦應不開。不斷疑中有種種義。既開多分。斷疑之中何因緣故取為分。若爾涂行乞食應是一分。若使涂行乞食既屬序分而不開者。護念付屬屬正說亦應不開。又元前解之與后釋都不識論文之大體。所以者何。論主直是釋其難文略其易句。云何後人見論解釋便取為科段。復有人注金剛般若開三門。從如是我聞至愿樂欲聞。是因緣門。謂具此因緣故得說般若。從佛告應如是降伏至見諸相非相。明般若體門。從白佛頗有眾生下。明功德門。然此解釋義亦不盡。流通復屬何門。又復後周重說又屬何門。有人言。開為三段。一者序說。二者正說。三者流通說。大聖說法必有由漸。故有序說。序說既竟正宗宜開

。故有正說。非唯近益當時。亦乃遠被來葉。故有流通說。今謂三說開經于理無妨。但開善之流不識三說起盡。故復為失。所以者何。至如序文取善吉之問為嘆請序。如來之答始屬正經。此事為謬。然一切經若問若答皆悉是正。云何以問為序以答為正。大涅槃經。時會獻供為序。純陀請受問難即以為正。此經涂行乞食以之為序。善吉發問即應是正。大品亦然。如來廣現神變以之為序。告舍利弗即以為正。斯事易明不應濫也。又且三說無定。雖序說不妨有正。雖正說不妨有序。流通亦爾。何者。以序于正故名為序。以正於序故名為正。正說悟道既得是正。序說悟道亦得是正。今但約一往方言故開三不同耳。就此三中各開二段。序有二者。一通序。二者別序。正文有二。第一週廣說。第二週略說。流通有二。一序佛說經究竟。二者明時眾歡喜奉行。序中二段凡有四雙。一者通。二者別。通以同爲義。眾經六事悉同故名通序。別以異為義。眾經各異。或父母送書。或長者獻蓋。或天雨四華。或涂行乞食。故名別序。次雙證信序發起序者。安此六事令人生信。故名證信序。涂行乞食發起正經名發起序。次雙遺教序與現前序。明如來將入泥曰。阿難心沒憂海不能自喻。阿泥樓馳云。汝是持佛法藏人。所應問者須及時問。於是阿難

【現代漢語翻譯】現代漢語譯本因此有正說（正經之說）。它不僅對當時有益，而且對後世也有深遠的影響。因此有流通說（流通分之說）。現在認為這三種說法（序說、正說、流通說）用來開解經文在道理上沒有妨礙。但是像開善法師這樣的人不明白這三種說法的起始和終結，所以又出現了錯誤。為什麼這麼說呢？例如，序文選取善吉（Sudatta）的提問作為嘆請序（讚歎和請求的序），而如來的回答才屬於正經（正文）。這件事是錯誤的。然而，一切經文，無論是提問還是回答，都全部是正經。為什麼把提問作為序，把回答作為正經呢？《大涅槃經》（Mahāparinirvāṇa Sūtra）中，法會獻供是序，純陀（Cunda）請求接受問難就是正經。這部經（指目前所討論的經）中，涂行乞食（佛陀在泥地上行走乞食）作為序，善吉（Sudatta）的提問就應該是正經。《大品般若經》（Mahāprajñāpāramitā Sūtra）也是這樣，如來廣泛顯現神通作為序，告訴舍利弗（Śāriputra）就是正經。這件事很容易明白，不應該混淆。而且，這三種說法沒有固定的界限。即使是序說，不妨礙其中有正說的內容；即使是正說，不妨礙其中有序說的內容。流通說也是如此。為什麼呢？因為序說先於正說，所以稱為序；因為正說先於序說，所以稱為正。正說領悟佛道，既然可以稱為正，序說領悟佛道，也可以稱為正。現在只是按照通常的情況來說，所以才區分出三種不同的說法。在這三種說法中，每一種又可以分為兩段。序有兩部分：一是通序（共同的序），二是別序（特別的序）。正文有兩部分：第一週是廣說（詳細的解說），第二週是略說（簡略的解說）。流通有兩部分：一是說明佛陀說經的究竟意義，二是說明當時大眾歡喜奉行。序中兩段，總共有四對。第一對是通序和別序。通序以『同』為意義，因為所有經文的六事（信、聞、時、主、處、眾）都相同，所以稱為通序。別序以『異』為意義，因為各部經文各有不同，有的經是父母送書，有的經是長者獻蓋，有的經是天雨四種花，有的經是涂行乞食，所以稱為別序。接下來一對是證信序和發起序。安立這六事，使人生起信心，所以稱為證信序。涂行乞食，發起正經的內容，稱為發起序。接下來一對是遺教序和現前序。說明如來將要進入涅槃（Nirvāṇa），阿難（Ānanda）內心沉沒在憂愁的海洋中，不能自拔。阿泥樓（Aniruddha）勸告他說：『你是持佛法的人，應該問的問題必須及時提問。』於是阿難

【English Translation】 English version Therefore, there is the 'Correct Discourse' (the discourse of the main scripture). It not only benefits the present but also profoundly influences future generations. Hence, there is the 'Circulation Discourse' (the discourse of the circulation section). Now, it is believed that these three discourses (Introductory Discourse, Correct Discourse, and Circulation Discourse) do not hinder the understanding of the scriptures in principle. However, people like Dharma Master Kaishan do not understand the beginning and end of these three discourses, thus leading to errors. Why is this so? For example, the preface selects Sudatta's question as the 'Admiration and Request Preface' (a preface of praise and request), while the Tathagata's answer belongs to the 'Correct Scripture' (main text). This is incorrect. However, all scriptures, whether questions or answers, are entirely the 'Correct Scripture'. Why is the question taken as the preface and the answer as the 'Correct Scripture'? In the Mahāparinirvāṇa Sūtra, the offering at the assembly is the preface, and Cunda's request to accept questions and difficulties is the 'Correct Scripture'. In this scripture (referring to the scripture being discussed), walking and begging in the mud is taken as the preface, and Sudatta's question should be the 'Correct Scripture'. The Mahāprajñāpāramitā Sūtra is also like this, the Tathagata widely manifesting supernatural powers is taken as the preface, and telling Śāriputra is the 'Correct Scripture'. This matter is easy to understand and should not be confused. Moreover, these three discourses do not have fixed boundaries. Even the Introductory Discourse does not prevent it from containing the content of the Correct Discourse; even the Correct Discourse does not prevent it from containing the content of the Introductory Discourse. The Circulation Discourse is also the same. Why? Because the Introductory Discourse precedes the Correct Discourse, it is called the 'Introduction'; because the Correct Discourse precedes the Introductory Discourse, it is called 'Correct'. Realizing the Buddha's path through the Correct Discourse can be called 'Correct', and realizing the Buddha's path through the Introductory Discourse can also be called 'Correct'. Now, it is only based on the usual situation that these three different discourses are distinguished. Within these three discourses, each can be divided into two parts. The introduction has two parts: one is the 'General Introduction' (common introduction), and the other is the 'Specific Introduction' (special introduction). The main text has two parts: the first week is the 'Extensive Explanation' (detailed explanation), and the second week is the 'Brief Explanation' (concise explanation). The circulation has two parts: one is to explain the ultimate meaning of the Buddha's teaching of the scripture, and the other is to explain that the masses at that time joyfully practiced it. In the two parts of the introduction, there are a total of four pairs. The first pair is the General Introduction and the Specific Introduction. The General Introduction takes 'sameness' as its meaning, because the six factors (faith, hearing, time, host, place, assembly) of all scriptures are the same, so it is called the General Introduction. The Specific Introduction takes 'difference' as its meaning, because each scripture is different, some scriptures are parents sending books, some scriptures are elders offering canopies, some scriptures are the heavens raining four kinds of flowers, some scriptures are walking and begging in the mud, so it is called the Specific Introduction. The next pair is the 'Faith-Establishing Introduction' and the 'Initiating Introduction'. Establishing these six factors makes people generate faith, so it is called the Faith-Establishing Introduction. Walking and begging in the mud, initiating the content of the main scripture, is called the Initiating Introduction. The next pair is the 'Legacy Introduction' and the 'Present Introduction'. It explains that the Tathagata is about to enter Nirvana, and Ānanda's heart is submerged in the ocean of sorrow, unable to extricate himself. Aniruddha advised him: 'You are the one who upholds the Buddha's Dharma, you must ask the questions you should ask in time.' Then Ānanda

作於四問。最後問云。一切經初置何等語。佛言。一切經初當安如是我聞。遺言令安此六事。故名遺教序。現說經時即有乞食等事名現前序。次雙經前序經後序。說經竟後方有如是六事名經後序。說經之前有乞食之事名經前序。問曰。佛何因緣故一切經初令安六事。答曰。為證信故。大智論云。說時方人令人生信故。複次一切外道皆以吉法貫在經初。故百論云。諸師作經簡初皆說吉。今欲簡異外道故。故貫以六事。問曰。若安六事異外道者。外道亦言安此六事。何以簡耶。答曰。明此是般若六事。故以證信簡異外道。般若信者此是無依無得之信。故大品云。不信一切法名為信般若。一切法不生故名為般若生。不信一切法故名信般若也。

第十正釋文。如是我聞通序有六事。如是者。第一明所聞之法。問曰。佛是一切智人無師自悟不從他聞。何故言如是我聞。若言如是我聞即從他聞。非一切智人也。答曰。已如前釋。此非佛自稱如是我聞。乃是敕于侍者令稱我聞。複次此是阿難等大弟子自稱如是我聞。如集法藏中說。阿難登高座。大迦葉問曰。何處最初說法。阿難合掌向涅槃方答大迦葉云。如是我聞。佛初在鹿苑為五比丘說法。是故非佛自稱。真諦三藏述婆藪釋云。阿難將誦出法藏登無畏座。變身如佛三十二相八

【現代漢語翻譯】現代漢語譯本：作於四問。最後問道：『一切佛經最初應放置什麼語句？』佛回答說：『一切佛經最初應當安放「如是我聞」。』這是遺囑，命令安放這六件事，所以叫做《遺教序》。現場說法時，即有乞食等事，名為《現前序》。其次是雙經前序和經後序。說法完畢后，才有這六件事，名為《經後序》。說法之前有乞食之事，名為《經前序》。問道：『佛陀因何緣故，一切佛經最初要安放這六件事？』回答說：『爲了證明可信的緣故。《大智論》說，說明時間、地點、人物，使人生起信心。』再次，一切外道都用吉祥的語句貫穿在經文開頭。所以《百論》說：『各家師父製作經文，在開頭都說吉祥的話。』現在想要區別于外道，所以貫穿這六件事。問道：『如果安放這六件事就能區別于外道，但外道也說安放這六件事，如何區別呢？』回答說：『說明這是般若的六件事，所以用以證明可信，區別于外道。』般若的信，是無所依賴、無所得的信。所以《大品般若經》說：『不相信一切法，名為相信般若。』一切法不生，所以名為般若生。不相信一切法，所以名為相信般若。

第十，正式解釋經文。《如是我聞》通序有六件事。「如是」是第一，說明所聽聞的法。問道：『佛是一切智人，無師自悟，不從他人聽聞，為何說「如是我聞」？如果說「如是我聞」，就是從他人聽聞，就不是一切智人。』回答說：『已經如前面解釋，這不是佛自己稱「如是我聞」，而是命令侍者稱「我聞」。』再次，這是阿難等大弟子自己稱「如是我聞」。如《集法藏》中所說，阿難登上高座，大迦葉問道：『最初在何處說法？』阿難合掌向涅槃的方向回答大迦葉說：『如是我聞，佛最初在鹿野苑為五比丘說法。』所以不是佛自己稱。真諦三藏敘述婆藪的解釋說：『阿難將要誦出法藏，登上無畏座，變身如佛的三十二相八十種好。

【English Translation】 English version: Made upon four questions. The last question asks: 'What words should be placed at the beginning of all sutras?' The Buddha replied: 'At the beginning of all sutras, one should place 'Thus have I heard (如是我聞).' This is a testament, ordering the placement of these six things, hence it is called 'Preface of the Testamentary Teaching (遺教序).' When speaking the Dharma on the spot, there are matters such as begging for food, which is called 'Preface of the Present (現前序).' Next are the double preface before the sutra and the preface after the sutra. Only after the Dharma has been spoken are these six things present, which is called 'Preface After the Sutra (經後序).' Before speaking the Dharma, there is the matter of begging for food, which is called 'Preface Before the Sutra (經前序).' Asked: 'For what reason does the Buddha order that these six things be placed at the beginning of all sutras?' Replied: 'For the sake of proving trustworthiness. The Mahaprajnaparamita-sastra (大智論) says that stating the time, place, and people makes people generate faith.' Furthermore, all non-Buddhist paths use auspicious words at the beginning of their texts. Therefore, the Sata-sastra (百論) says: 'Masters composing texts all speak of auspiciousness at the beginning.' Now, wanting to differentiate from non-Buddhists, these six things are inserted. Asked: 'If placing these six things differentiates from non-Buddhists, but non-Buddhists also say they place these six things, how is it differentiated?' Replied: 'It clarifies that these are the six things of Prajna (般若), therefore using them to prove trustworthiness differentiates from non-Buddhists.' The faith of Prajna is a faith of no reliance and no attainment. Therefore, the Mahaprajnaparamita Sutra (大品般若經) says: 'Not believing in all dharmas is called believing in Prajna.' All dharmas are not produced, therefore it is called Prajna being produced. Not believing in all dharmas is called believing in Prajna.

Tenth, the formal explanation of the text. 'Thus have I heard' as a general preface has six things. 'Thus' is the first, clarifying the Dharma that was heard. Asked: 'The Buddha is all-knowing, enlightened without a teacher, and does not hear from others, so why say 'Thus have I heard'? If it is said 'Thus have I heard,' then it is hearing from others, and not being all-knowing.' Replied: 'It has already been explained as before. This is not the Buddha himself saying 'Thus have I heard,' but rather ordering the attendant to say 'I heard'.' Furthermore, this is Ananda (阿難) and other great disciples themselves saying 'Thus have I heard.' As it is said in the Samgiti-sutra (集法藏), Ananda ascended the high seat, and Mahakasyapa (大迦葉) asked: 'Where was the Dharma first spoken?' Ananda, with palms together facing the direction of Nirvana, replied to Mahakasyapa: 'Thus have I heard, the Buddha first spoke the Dharma to the five bhikkhus (比丘) in the Deer Park.' Therefore, it is not the Buddha himself saying it. Paramartha (真諦) Tripitaka narrates Vasubandhu's (婆藪) explanation, saying: 'Ananda, about to recite the Dharma-pitaka (法藏), ascended the Fearless Seat, transforming his body like the Buddha's thirty-two marks and eighty minor marks of excellence.'

十種好。是時大眾生三種疑。一謂釋迦雖復前滅今還重出為我說法。二謂釋迦已滅。此是他方佛來。三謂釋迦雖滅阿難既為佛弟子。今遂成佛代于佛處。為有此三疑。是以阿難即便釋疑雲如是我聞。明如來如是已滅我從佛邊聞非上三事也。言如是者。釋此一句有二十餘師。今略而不述。一者依龍樹所解。云如是者。佛法大海信為能入智為能度。如是者即是信也。以信故言此事如是。若不信則言此事不如是。今要由信得入佛法。是故經初建言如是。般若信者。明般若無依無得無戲論畢竟清凈真實可信。故因此信得入般若也。次婆藪盤豆釋云。如是者。謂決定義。略明二種。一教如是。二理如是。教如是者。凡有數義。一者如佛教度量故云如是。所以者何。三世諸佛或廣說法。或處中說。或略說法。今阿難傳正法還如佛廣略不增不減。故云如是。二者如是諸佛次第而說所以者何。一切說法凡有六事。一者發起。二略標宗。三廣解釋。四難。五通。六流通付屬。阿難今且次第誦持佛語。故云如是。三者如經名字故云如是。傳持佛經須識經名。若不識經名云何知義。所以者何。經之名題總攝一經。如大品章雖九十總名摩訶般若。以摩訶之名攝九十章義。為是事故須識經名。阿難如名誦持故云如是。四者因緣如是。三世諸佛說經

【現代漢語翻譯】現代漢語譯本十種好。這時大眾產生了三種疑惑。第一種是認為釋迦牟尼（Śākyamuni，佛教創始人）雖然之前已經涅槃，現在又重新出現為我們說法。第二種是認為釋迦牟尼已經涅槃，這是其他佛從其他地方來的。第三種是認為釋迦牟尼雖然涅槃，阿難（Ānanda，佛陀的十大弟子之一，以記憶力超群著稱）既是佛的弟子，現在就成佛代替佛的位置。因為有這三種疑惑，所以阿難就解釋疑惑說『如是我聞』。說明如來（Tathāgata，佛的稱號之一）已經這樣涅槃，我是從佛那裡聽聞的，不是以上三種情況。說到『如是』，解釋這句話的有二十多位法師，現在簡略而不敘述。第一種是依照龍樹（Nāgārjuna，大乘佛教的重要思想家）所解釋的，說『如是』就是佛法大海，信是能夠進入的，智慧是能夠度過的。『如是』就是信。因為相信所以說這件事是『如是』。如果不相信就說這件事不如是。現在要通過相信才能進入佛法，所以經典開始就建立『如是』。般若（Prajñā，智慧）的信，說明般若沒有依靠，沒有獲得，沒有戲論，畢竟清凈真實可信。所以因為這個信才能進入般若。其次婆藪盤豆（Vasubandhu，印度佛教瑜伽行派的重要論師）解釋說，『如是』就是決定義。簡略說明兩種，一是教『如是』，二是理『如是』。教『如是』，凡是有數種意義。一是如佛教的度量所以說『如是』。為什麼呢？三世諸佛或者廣泛說法，或者處中說法，或者簡略說法。現在阿難傳授正法還像佛一樣，廣略不增加也不減少，所以說『如是』。二是如是諸佛次第而說，為什麼呢？一切說法凡是有六件事，一是發起，二是簡略標明宗旨，三是廣泛解釋，四是提問，五是解答，六是流通囑咐。阿難現在且次第誦持佛語，所以說『如是』。三是如經典名字所以說『如是』。傳持佛經必須認識經典的名字。如果不認識經典的名字，怎麼知道意義？為什麼呢？經典的名字總攝一經。如大品（Mahāprajñāpāramitā Sūtra，《大般若經》的一部分）的章節雖然有九十，總名是摩訶般若（Mahāprajñā，大智慧）。用摩訶的名字統攝九十章的意義。因為這個緣故必須認識經典的名字。阿難如名字誦持所以說『如是』。四是因緣如是。三世諸佛說經

【English Translation】 English version Ten kinds of goodness. At this time, the assembly had three kinds of doubts. The first was that Śākyamuni (the founder of Buddhism), although he had previously entered Nirvana, has now reappeared to preach the Dharma for us. The second was that Śākyamuni has already entered Nirvana, and this is another Buddha from another land. The third was that although Śākyamuni has entered Nirvana, Ānanda (one of the Buddha's ten great disciples, known for his exceptional memory), being a disciple of the Buddha, has now become a Buddha and taken the Buddha's place. Because of these three doubts, Ānanda then dispelled the doubts by saying, 'Thus have I heard.' This clarifies that the Tathāgata (one of the titles of the Buddha) has already entered Nirvana in this way, and I heard it from the Buddha, not the above three situations. Speaking of 'Thus,' there are more than twenty masters who have explained this sentence, which I will now briefly omit. The first is according to Nāgārjuna's (an important thinker of Mahayana Buddhism) explanation, saying that 'Thus' is the ocean of the Buddha's teachings, faith is what enables one to enter, and wisdom is what enables one to cross over. 'Thus' is faith. Because of faith, it is said that this matter is 'Thus.' If one does not believe, then one says that this matter is not 'Thus.' Now, one must enter the Buddha's teachings through faith, so the sutra begins by establishing 'Thus.' The faith of Prajñā (wisdom) clarifies that Prajñā has no reliance, no attainment, no frivolous debates, and is ultimately pure, true, and trustworthy. Therefore, it is through this faith that one can enter Prajñā. Next, Vasubandhu (an important teacher of the Yogacara school of Indian Buddhism) explains that 'Thus' means definitive meaning. Briefly explaining two kinds: one is the teaching 'Thus,' and the other is the principle 'Thus.' The teaching 'Thus' has several meanings. First, it is like the Buddha's teaching measure, so it is said 'Thus.' Why? The Buddhas of the three times either preach extensively, or preach moderately, or preach briefly. Now, Ānanda transmits the true Dharma just like the Buddha, neither increasing nor decreasing in breadth or brevity, so it is said 'Thus.' Second, it is like the Buddhas speaking in sequence, why? All teachings have six aspects: first, initiation; second, briefly stating the purpose; third, extensive explanation; fourth, questioning; fifth, answering; and sixth, circulation and entrustment. Ānanda is now reciting and upholding the Buddha's words in sequence, so it is said 'Thus.' Third, it is like the name of the sutra, so it is said 'Thus.' To transmit and uphold the sutra, one must know the name of the sutra. If one does not know the name of the sutra, how can one know the meaning? Why? The name of the sutra encompasses the entire sutra. For example, the chapters of the Mahāprajñāpāramitā Sūtra (part of the Great Perfection of Wisdom Sutra) , although there are ninety, are collectively named Mahāprajñā (great wisdom). The name Mahā encompasses the meaning of the ninety chapters. Because of this reason, one must know the name of the sutra. Ānanda recites and upholds according to the name, so it is said 'Thus.' Fourth, the causes and conditions are 'Thus.' The Buddhas of the three times preach the sutras

因緣略具四義。一者根本有一切智方能說經。二者有大悲心然後說法。三者為報正法恩故然後說法。四者決定證信有四。一知說經有時。二知說經處所。三知能說之人即是如來。四知有聽經之眾。如是時處聽眾說者。如我所說實可信受故云如是。理如是者。言理是有則名有見。言理是無名為邪見。亦有亦無是名相違見。非有非無名愚癡見。所明之理若墮此四中即不名如是。今離此四謗無所依止故名如是。我聞者。此第二明能聞之人。我者所以阿難自稱我者。一欲證親從佛邊聞故非是傳聞。所以者何。我今親從如來聞。是故稱我。二者欲顯阿難過去世願行成就。是故稱我。阿難無量劫來修習多聞。本願力故得陀羅尼。一經于耳永無漏失曾不再問。譬如寫水置之異器。故法華云。我與阿難於空王佛所同時發心。而我好精進遂致作佛。阿難常樂多聞故持我法藏。又如經云。釋迦本昔為迦葉佛作沙彌。師日日限誦經千言。兼為師乞食。恐誦經不上一心憂懼。阿難於時為長者。在路見之憂色便問所以。故具答上事。長者仍語沙彌。日日給食令得安心誦經莫復憂惱。長者發願言。若沙彌成佛我當爲法藏第一弟子。以顯宿願滿足故稱為我。三者以自在故所以稱我。如大經云。阿難具足多聞智慧。一切眾生不能一時具領佛語。設能具領

【現代漢語翻譯】現代漢語譯本因緣略具四種含義。第一，根本上要具備一切智（sarvajna，指佛陀所具有的遍知一切的智慧）才能宣說佛經。第二，要有大慈悲心然後才說法。第三，爲了報答正法的恩德然後才說法。第四，要決定地相信有四種情況：一要知道說經的適當時機。二要知道說經的處所。三要知道能說經的人就是如來（tathagata，佛的稱號之一）。四要知道有聽經的聽眾。像這樣，時間、地點、聽眾、說法者都具備，就像我所說的那樣真實可信，所以說『如是』。『理如是』的意思是說，如果認為理是『有』，就叫做有見（bhava-drsti，執著于存在的見解）。如果認為理是『無』，就叫做邪見（mithya-drsti，錯誤的見解）。如果認為理是『亦有亦無』，這就叫做相違見（viruddha-drsti，自相矛盾的見解）。如果認為理是『非有非無』，就叫做愚癡見（moha-drsti，迷惑無知的見解）。所闡明的道理如果落入這四種見解之中，就不能稱作『如是』。現在遠離這四種誹謗，沒有任何依靠，所以叫做『如是』。『我聞』，這是第二部分，說明能聽聞的人。『我』，阿難（Ananda，佛陀的十大弟子之一，以記憶力強著稱）之所以自稱『我』，一是想要證明是親自從佛陀那裡聽聞的，而不是傳聞。為什麼呢？因為我現在是親自從如來那裡聽聞的，所以稱『我』。二是想要顯示阿難過去世的願行已經成就，所以稱『我』。阿難無量劫以來修習多聞，憑藉本來的願力得到陀羅尼（dharani，總持，指能總攝憶持一切法義的記憶力）。佛經一經過他的耳朵，就永遠不會遺漏，從來不需要再問。譬如把水倒進不同的容器一樣。所以《法華經》（Saddharma Pundarika Sutra）說：『我和阿難在空王佛那裡同時發心，我因為精進修行所以成就了佛果，阿難常常喜歡多聞，所以能持有我的法藏。』又如經中所說，釋迦（Sakya，釋迦牟尼佛的簡稱）過去世為迦葉佛（Kasyapa Buddha，過去七佛之一）做沙彌（sramanera，出家男子）。他的師父每天限定他誦經一千字，還要為師父乞食。沙彌恐怕誦經不能一心一意，因此憂愁恐懼。阿難當時是一位長者，在路上看到沙彌面帶憂色，便問他原因。沙彌詳細地回答了上述情況。長者於是對沙彌說，每天供給食物，讓他安心誦經，不要再憂愁煩惱。長者發願說：『如果沙彌將來成佛，我應當做他法藏第一的弟子。』這是爲了顯示宿願已經滿足，所以稱『我』。三是因為自在的緣故所以稱『我』。如《大般涅槃經》（Mahaparinirvana Sutra）所說，阿難具備多聞智慧，一切眾生不能一時完全領會佛陀所說的話，即使能夠完全領會

【English Translation】 English version The conditions (hetu-pratyaya) briefly possess four meanings. First, fundamentally, one must possess all-knowing wisdom (sarvajna) to be able to expound the scriptures. Second, one must have great compassion (maha-karuna) before teaching the Dharma. Third, one teaches the Dharma to repay the kindness of the true Dharma. Fourth, one must have a firm conviction in four aspects: one must know the appropriate time to expound the scriptures; one must know the place where the scriptures are expounded; one must know that the one who can expound the scriptures is the Tathagata (Thus Come One, an epithet of the Buddha); and one must know that there is an assembly of listeners. Thus, with the time, place, audience, and speaker all present, what I say is truly believable, hence the term 'Thus it is'. The meaning of 'Thus it is' is that if one says the principle is 'existent', it is called the view of existence (bhava-drsti). If one says the principle is 'non-existent', it is called a false view (mithya-drsti). If one says it is 'both existent and non-existent', it is called a contradictory view (viruddha-drsti). If one says it is 'neither existent nor non-existent', it is called a view of ignorance (moha-drsti). If the principle being explained falls into these four views, it cannot be called 'Thus it is'. Now, being apart from these four slanders and having no reliance, it is called 'Thus it is'. 'I heard', this is the second part, explaining the one who is able to hear. 'I', the reason why Ananda (one of the ten principal disciples of the Buddha, known for his excellent memory) refers to himself as 'I' is firstly, to prove that he heard it personally from the Buddha, and not through hearsay. Why? Because I am now hearing it personally from the Tathagata, therefore I say 'I'. Secondly, it is to show that Ananda's vows and practices in past lives have been accomplished, therefore he says 'I'. Ananda has cultivated much learning for countless kalpas (eons), and through the power of his original vows, he obtained dharani (a mnemonic device, a collection of mantras and spells). Once a scripture passes through his ears, it is never lost, and he never needs to ask again. It is like pouring water into different containers. Therefore, the Lotus Sutra (Saddharma Pundarika Sutra) says: 'I and Ananda made the vow at the same time in the presence of the Buddha King of Emptiness, and I, through diligent practice, attained Buddhahood, while Ananda always delighted in much learning, therefore he holds my Dharma treasury.' Furthermore, as it is said in the scriptures, Sakya (short for Sakyamuni Buddha) in a past life was a Sramanera (novice monk) serving Kasyapa Buddha (one of the past seven Buddhas). His teacher limited him to reciting a thousand words of scripture each day, and he also had to beg for food for his teacher. The Sramanera was worried that he would not be able to recite the scriptures with a single mind, and therefore he was anxious and fearful. Ananda at that time was a wealthy man, and he saw the Sramanera on the road looking worried, so he asked him the reason. The Sramanera explained the above situation in detail. The wealthy man then said to the Sramanera, 'I will provide you with food every day so that you can recite the scriptures in peace and no longer worry.' The wealthy man made a vow, saying, 'If the Sramanera becomes a Buddha in the future, I shall be his foremost disciple in holding the Dharma treasury.' This is to show that his past vows have been fulfilled, therefore he says 'I'. Thirdly, it is because of his freedom that he says 'I'. As the Mahaparinirvana Sutra says, Ananda possesses much learning and wisdom, and all sentient beings cannot fully comprehend the Buddha's words at once, even if they could fully comprehend

。無陀羅尼力不能憶而不忘。雖有憶而不忘。亦不能具三慧于聞法中不能自在。不名為我。我者是自在義。今阿難能一時具領佛語亦能永持不忘。四者具足發生三慧于聞法中而得自在。是故稱我。問曰。佛法無我。何故稱我。答中論云。諸法實相中非我非無我。欲引導眾生故假名說我。是故無過。聞者所以稱聞。亦具數義。一者欲顯所聞人德。阿難所聞不從外道及佛弟子仙人化人及諸天聞。今所聞者從一切智人邊聞。二者欲顯所聞法最勝。明佛法名句味巧妙義理深凈。若外道法但有語言無有實義。若聞佛法名為正聞。三者所顯理最勝佛法正道圓滿具足無有顛倒。如理而說名為正說。如理而聞名為正聞。四者行最勝故名正聞。依正教修行。即是行中最勝故名為正聞。五者修行得正果故為正聞。正果者所謂大般涅槃。問為用神聞。為用識聞。為用根聞。為和合聞。若用神聞何故神用耳聞不用眼聞。若用識聞亦如是難。若用根聞無有識時空根應聞。若一一不能聞者和合亦不能聞。以如是義悉無有聞。答曰。今言聞者。是因緣聞。因緣聞者。是不聞聞。聞而無所聞。是以經云。其說法者無說無示。其聽法者無聞無得。如來說無所說。阿難聞無所聞。如此說聽乃可相成。一時者。此第三明說教之時。如轉輪王出世是寶物可得之時

【現代漢語翻譯】現代漢語譯本：沒有陀羅尼（Dharani，總持）的力量，就不能做到憶持不忘。即使能夠憶持不忘，也不能在聽聞佛法時具足三慧（三種智慧），不能自在，就不能稱為『我』。『我』的意義是自在。現在阿難（Ananda，佛陀十大弟子之一）能夠一時全部領受佛語，也能永遠憶持不忘。四者具足，能夠生起三慧，在聽聞佛法中得到自在，所以才被稱為『我』。有人問：佛法講『無我』，為什麼又稱『我』呢？回答說，《中論》（Madhyamaka-karika）中說：諸法的實相中，既非『我』也非『無我』，爲了引導眾生，才假名說『我』，所以沒有過失。聽聞者之所以稱為『聞』，也具有多種意義。一是想要顯示聽聞者的功德。阿難所聽聞的，不是從外道以及佛的弟子、仙人、化人以及諸天那裡聽來的，現在所聽聞的，是從一切智人（佛陀）那裡聽來的。二是想要顯示所聽聞的法最為殊勝，說明佛法名句的意味巧妙，義理深奧清凈。如果外道的法，只有語言而沒有實際意義，如果聽聞佛法，就稱為『正聞』。三是所顯示的道理最為殊勝，佛法是正道，圓滿具足，沒有顛倒。如實地宣說，稱為『正說』，如實地聽聞，稱為『正聞』。四是修行最為殊勝，所以稱為『正聞』。依靠正確的教法修行，就是修行中最殊勝的，所以稱為『正聞』。五是修行得到正果，所以稱為『正聞』。正果就是指大般涅槃（Mahaparinirvana，完全的涅槃）。有人問：是用神識聽聞，還是用意識聽聞，還是用根（感官）聽聞，還是用和合聽聞？如果用神識聽聞，為什麼神識用耳朵聽聞，不用眼睛聽聞？如果用意識聽聞，也有同樣的疑問。如果用根聽聞，沒有意識的時候，空空的根應該也能聽聞。如果一一不能聽聞，那麼和合也不能聽聞。按照這樣的說法，就都沒有聽聞了。回答說：現在所說的聽聞，是因緣聽聞。因緣聽聞，就是不聞之聞，聽聞而無所聞。所以經中說：說法的人無說無示，聽法的人無聞無得。如來說無所說，阿難聞無所聞，這樣說和聽才能相互成就。『一時』，這是第三個說明宣說教法的時間。就像轉輪王（Chakravartin，統治世界的理想君主）出世，是寶物可以得到的時候。

【English Translation】 English version: Without the power of Dharani (總持, the power of retaining all teachings), one cannot remember without forgetting. Even with the ability to remember without forgetting, one cannot fully possess the three wisdoms (三慧) and be free in hearing the Dharma. Such a one cannot be called 'I'. The meaning of 'I' is freedom. Now, Ananda (阿難, one of the ten great disciples of the Buddha) can receive all the Buddha's words at once and remember them forever. He possesses all four qualities, can generate the three wisdoms, and is free in hearing the Dharma. Therefore, he is called 'I'. Someone asks: The Buddha-dharma speaks of 'no-self' (無我), why then call it 'I'? The answer is in the Madhyamaka-karika (中論): In the true nature of all dharmas, there is neither 'I' nor 'no-I'. To guide sentient beings, the term 'I' is used provisionally, so there is no fault. The term 'hearing' (聞) also has several meanings. First, it is to show the virtue of the hearer. What Ananda hears is not from external paths, disciples of the Buddha, immortals, emanations, or devas. What is heard now is from the All-Knowing One (一切智人, the Buddha). Second, it is to show that the Dharma heard is the most supreme, clarifying the skillful meaning and profound, pure principles of the Buddha-dharma's names, phrases, and tastes. If the teachings of external paths have only words without real meaning, hearing the Buddha-dharma is called 'right hearing' (正聞). Third, the principle shown is the most supreme. The Buddha-dharma is the right path, complete and perfect, without inversion. Speaking according to the truth is called 'right speaking' (正說), and hearing according to the truth is called 'right hearing'. Fourth, the practice is the most supreme, hence it is called 'right hearing'. Relying on the correct teachings for practice is the most supreme practice, hence it is called 'right hearing'. Fifth, one attains the right fruit through practice, hence it is called 'right hearing'. The right fruit is the Great Parinirvana (大般涅槃, complete Nirvana). Someone asks: Is hearing done with the spirit, with consciousness, with the senses, or with a combination? If hearing is done with the spirit, why does the spirit use the ears to hear and not the eyes? If hearing is done with consciousness, the same question arises. If hearing is done with the senses, when there is no consciousness, the empty senses should be able to hear. If each cannot hear individually, then the combination cannot hear either. According to this reasoning, there is no hearing at all. The answer is: The hearing spoken of now is hearing through conditions (因緣). Hearing through conditions is hearing without hearing, hearing without anything to be heard. Therefore, the sutra says: The one who speaks has nothing to say or show, and the one who listens has nothing to hear or gain. The Tathagata speaks of nothing spoken, and Ananda hears of nothing heard. Only in this way can speaking and listening complement each other. 'At one time' (一時) is the third point, explaining the time of teaching. It is like the appearance of a Chakravartin (轉輪王, the ideal monarch who rules the world) in the world, a time when treasures can be obtained.

。如如來出世法寶可得之時。故云一時。二者一切狂聾眾生聞如來說得醒悟時故云一時。又有正師時。有正教時。有正學時。故云一時。具此三時眾生得道。中觀論云真法及說者聽者難得故。若具此三種則生死有邊。若不具此三種則生死無邊。又眾生若未下信種時不名一時。今說般若是下信種時。若已下信種時是正觀增長時。若正觀已增長時是善根成就時。故云一時。又阿難一時能具足領于佛說。故云一時。又是逗一時根緣。故云一時。所以者何。諸佛說法廣略不同。今所以略說波若者。此是逗一時根緣故爾。又須知是般若一時。般若一時者。不時假言時。不一假言一。佛者。此第四標說教之主。上來雖表三事。然邪正未分。第四標佛方顯明得失。所以者何。雖言我聞一時。未知從誰邊聞。是故今云從佛邊聞非餘人也。然論云。婆伽婆者能斷煩惱有大功德故名婆伽婆。住者有二種。一者外住。二者內住。言外住者凡有四種。一王化處住。謂釋迦住在娑婆。二者異俗住。謂住。在一切僧伽藍內。三威儀住。謂行住坐臥悉名為住。四未舍壽分住。謂如來未入涅槃。內住有四。一者天住。住施戒等。二梵住。住四無量心。三者聖住。住空無相無愿。四者佛住。住諸法實相中。此是般若無住無不住。為眾生故假名為住。舍衛國

【現代漢語翻譯】現代漢語譯本：當如來出世的佛法珍寶可以獲得的時候，所以稱為『一時』。第二，一切愚昧聾聵的眾生聽聞如來說法而醒悟的時候，所以稱為『一時』。還有正師之時，有正教之時，有正學之時，所以稱為『一時』。具備這三種時機，眾生才能得道。《中觀論》說，真正的佛法、說法者和聽法者都難以獲得。如果具備這三種條件，生死輪迴就有終結之時；如果不具備這三種條件，生死輪迴就沒有終結之時。此外，眾生如果沒有種下信仰的種子，就不能稱為『一時』。現在宣說《般若經》，正是種下信仰種子的時候。如果已經種下信仰的種子，就是正觀增長的時候。如果正觀已經增長，就是善根成就的時候，所以稱為『一時』。另外，阿難能夠一時完全領會佛所說，所以稱為『一時』。又是適應一時的根機和緣分，所以稱為『一時』。為什麼這樣說呢？諸佛說法有廣有略，現在之所以略說《般若經》，是因為適應一時的根機和緣分。還要知道這是《般若經》的『一時』。《般若經》的『一時』，不是執著於時間的『時』，不是執著于數字的『一』。『佛』，這是第四個標示，說明教法的主講者。上面雖然表明了三件事，但邪正還沒有分清。第四個標示『佛』，才能夠顯明得失。為什麼這樣說呢？雖然說『我聞一時』，但不知道是從誰那裡聽聞的。所以現在說從佛那裡聽聞，而不是從其他人那裡聽聞。經論中說，『婆伽婆』（Bhagavan）能夠斷除煩惱，具有大功德，所以稱為『婆伽婆』。『住』有兩種，一種是外住，一種是內住。外住有四種：一是王化處住，指釋迦（Sakyamuni）住在娑婆（Saha）；二是異俗住，指住在一切僧伽藍（Sangharama）內；三是威儀住，指行住坐臥都稱為住；四是未舍壽分住，指如來（Tathagata）沒有進入涅槃（Nirvana）。內住有四種：一是天住，安住于佈施、持戒等；二是梵住，安住於四無量心；三是聖住，安住于空、無相、無愿；四是佛住，安住于諸法實相中。這是《般若經》的無住而無所不住，爲了眾生的緣故，假名為住。舍衛國（Sravasti）

【English Translation】 English version: When the Dharma treasure of the Tathagata (Thus Come One) appearing in the world can be obtained, it is called 'at one time'. Secondly, when all ignorant and deaf beings hear the Tathagata expounding the Dharma and awaken, it is called 'at one time'. There is also the time of a true teacher, the time of true teachings, and the time of true learning, so it is called 'at one time'. With these three times, sentient beings can attain the Way. The Madhyamaka-karika (Treatise on the Middle Way) says that true Dharma, the speaker, and the listener are difficult to obtain. If these three conditions are met, the cycle of birth and death will have an end; if these three conditions are not met, the cycle of birth and death will have no end. Furthermore, if sentient beings have not planted the seed of faith, it cannot be called 'at one time'. Now, the Prajna Sutra is being expounded, which is the time to plant the seed of faith. If the seed of faith has already been planted, it is the time when right contemplation increases. If right contemplation has already increased, it is the time when good roots are accomplished, so it is called 'at one time'. In addition, Ananda (Buddha's disciple) was able to fully understand what the Buddha said at one time, so it is called 'at one time'. It is also adapting to the faculties and conditions of one time, so it is called 'at one time'. Why is this so? The Buddhas' teachings vary in length and brevity. The reason why the Prajna Sutra is briefly explained now is because it adapts to the faculties and conditions of one time. It is also necessary to know that this is the 'at one time' of the Prajna Sutra. The 'at one time' of the Prajna Sutra is not clinging to the 'time' of time, nor is it clinging to the 'one' of numbers. 'Buddha', this is the fourth indication, explaining the main speaker of the teachings. Although the three things have been indicated above, right and wrong have not yet been distinguished. The fourth indication, 'Buddha', can clarify gains and losses. Why is this so? Although it is said 'I heard at one time', it is not known from whom it was heard. Therefore, it is now said that it was heard from the Buddha, not from others. It is said in the scriptures that 'Bhagavan' (The Blessed One) can cut off afflictions and has great merit, so he is called 'Bhagavan'. 'Dwelling' has two types, one is external dwelling, and the other is internal dwelling. There are four types of external dwelling: one is dwelling in the place of royal transformation, referring to Sakyamuni (Sage of the Shakya clan) dwelling in Saha (World of suffering); the second is dwelling in a different custom, referring to dwelling in all Sangharama (Monasteries); the third is dwelling in demeanor, referring to walking, standing, sitting, and lying down all being called dwelling; the fourth is dwelling without abandoning the lifespan, referring to the Tathagata (Thus Come One) not entering Nirvana (Liberation). There are four types of internal dwelling: one is heavenly dwelling, abiding in giving, precepts, etc.; the second is Brahma dwelling, abiding in the Four Immeasurable Minds; the third is the holy dwelling, abiding in emptiness, signlessness, and wishlessness; the fourth is the Buddha dwelling, abiding in the true nature of all dharmas. This is the non-dwelling and non-non-dwelling of the Prajna Sutra, for the sake of sentient beings, it is nominally called dwelling. Sravasti (Ancient Indian city)

者。此是第五明住處。處有二種。一者通處。二者別處。舍衛國即是通處。祇洹精舍即是別處也。問佛何因緣故多住王舍城及舍衛國。答佛前受。頻婆娑羅王請故住王舍城。次受須達多請故住舍衛國。複次欲報法身恩故住王舍城。為報生身恩故住舍衛國。所以者何。佛在王舍城摩伽陀國得道。是故為報法身恩故住王舍城。問佛生中天竺迦毗羅衛國。今舍衛國是東天竺國。今云何言為報生身恩故住舍衛城。答佛上祖本在東天竺舍衛國住。末來中天竺迦毗羅城。今從本立名。故云報生身恩故住舍衛國也。複次王舍城及舍衛國多人物。故佛欲于多人處教化眾生。如經說。舍衛國凡有九億家。如賢愚經說有十八億人。複次此二國生多智慧人及六師輩。是故佛多住此城。問何故名舍婆提。答有北土論師云。昔劫初有仙人兄弟二人。弟名舍婆。此云幼小。兄稱阿婆提。此云不可害。二人住此處求道。因以名之。弟略去婆兄略去阿。二名雙取故云舍婆提。真諦三藏云。彼國正音應云奢羅摩死底。此云好名聞國。昔有仙人。有好名聞在此中住。從仙人作名故云好名聞國也。又云。此國具足有四義。一多寶。二此中人多受五欲樂。三有諸法德。此國中人多行施戒。謂之法德。四未來得解脫果。明此國中人未來多生人天中及得解脫果。有此

【現代漢語翻譯】現代漢語譯本：這是第五個關於佛陀居住地的說明。居住地有兩種：一種是通處（普遍的處所），一種是別處（特定的處所）。舍衛國（Śrāvastī，古印度城市名）就是通處，祇洹精舍（Jetavana-vihāra，佛陀常住的精舍）就是別處。問：佛陀因為什麼因緣，經常住在王舍城（Rājagṛha，古印度城市名）和舍衛國呢？答：佛陀先前接受了頻婆娑羅王（Bimbisāra，古印度摩揭陀國王）的邀請，所以住在王舍城；後來接受了須達多（Sudatta，給孤獨長者）的邀請，所以住在舍衛國。再者，佛陀爲了報答法身（Dharmakāya，佛的法性身）之恩，所以住在王舍城；爲了報答生身（Rūpakāya，佛的色身）之恩，所以住在舍衛國。為什麼這麼說呢？佛陀在王舍城摩伽陀國（Magadha，古印度國名）得道，所以爲了報答法身之恩住在王舍城。問：佛陀出生在中天竺（印度）的迦毗羅衛國（Kapilavastu，古印度釋迦族所居的城邦）。現在舍衛國是東天竺國，為什麼說爲了報答生身之恩住在舍衛國呢？答：佛陀的先祖本來住在東天竺的舍衛國，後來才遷到中天竺的迦毗羅衛城。現在是從根本上立名，所以說爲了報答生身之恩住在舍衛國。再者，王舍城和舍衛國人口眾多，所以佛陀想在人多的地方教化眾生。如經中所說，舍衛國總共有九億戶人家，如《賢愚經》所說有十八億人。再者，這兩個國家產生很多有智慧的人以及六師（外道）之輩，所以佛陀經常住在這兩個城市。問：為什麼叫做舍婆提（Śrāvastī的另一種音譯）？答：有北方的論師說，過去劫初的時候，有仙人兄弟二人，弟弟名叫舍婆，意思是『幼小』，哥哥叫做阿婆提，意思是『不可害』。二人在這個地方求道，因此用他們的名字命名。弟弟的名字省略了『婆』，哥哥的名字省略了『阿』，取兩個名字的一部分，所以叫做舍婆提。真諦三藏（Paramārtha，南朝時期翻譯家）說，那個國家正確的發音應該是奢羅摩死底（Śrāvastī的音譯）。意思是『好名聞國』。過去有仙人，有好名聲，住在這個地方，從仙人的名字命名，所以叫做『好名聞國』。又說，這個國傢俱足四種含義：一是多寶，二是這裡的人大多享受五欲之樂，三是有諸法之德，這個國家的人大多行佈施持戒，稱為法德，四是未來能得到解脫果。說明這個國家的人未來大多能生到人天之中，以及得到解脫果。有這些

【English Translation】 English version: This is the fifth explanation regarding the dwelling places of the Buddha. There are two types of dwelling places: one is a common place (general location), and the other is a specific place (particular location). Śrāvastī (an ancient Indian city) is the common place, and Jetavana-vihāra (a monastery where the Buddha often stayed) is the specific place. Question: For what reasons did the Buddha frequently reside in Rājagṛha (an ancient Indian city) and Śrāvastī? Answer: The Buddha previously accepted the invitation of King Bimbisāra (an ancient Indian king of Magadha), so he resided in Rājagṛha; later, he accepted the invitation of Sudatta (Anāthapiṇḍika, a wealthy merchant), so he resided in Śrāvastī. Furthermore, the Buddha resided in Rājagṛha to repay the kindness of the Dharmakāya (the Dharma body of the Buddha); he resided in Śrāvastī to repay the kindness of the Rūpakāya (the physical body of the Buddha). Why is this so? The Buddha attained enlightenment in Magadha (an ancient Indian kingdom) in Rājagṛha, so he resided in Rājagṛha to repay the kindness of the Dharmakāya. Question: The Buddha was born in Kapilavastu (an ancient city-state of the Shakya clan) in Central India. Now Śrāvastī is in East India, so why is it said that he resided in Śrāvastī to repay the kindness of the Rūpakāya? Answer: The Buddha's ancestors originally lived in Śrāvastī in East India, and later moved to Kapilavastu in Central India. Now the name is established from the origin, so it is said that he resided in Śrāvastī to repay the kindness of the Rūpakāya. Moreover, Rājagṛha and Śrāvastī have large populations, so the Buddha wanted to teach sentient beings in places with many people. As it is said in the scriptures, Śrāvastī has a total of nine hundred million households, and as the Xianyu Jing (Sutra of the Wise and Foolish) says, there are eighteen hundred million people. Furthermore, these two countries produce many wise people and the Six Teachers (heretics), so the Buddha often resided in these two cities. Question: Why is it called Śrāvastī? Answer: Some northern teachers say that in the distant past, there were two hermit brothers. The younger brother was named Śrāva, meaning 'small,' and the elder brother was called Avati, meaning 'invincible.' The two practiced the Way in this place, so it was named after them. The younger brother's name omitted 'va,' and the elder brother's name omitted 'A,' taking parts of both names, so it is called Śrāvastī. Paramārtha (a translator during the Southern Dynasties) said that the correct pronunciation in that country should be Śrāvastī. It means 'country of good reputation.' In the past, there was a hermit with a good reputation who lived in this place, and it was named after the hermit, so it is called 'country of good reputation.' It is also said that this country possesses four meanings: first, it is rich in treasures; second, the people here mostly enjoy the pleasures of the five desires; third, it has the virtues of the Dharma, and the people in this country mostly practice giving and precepts, which are called Dharma virtues; fourth, they will attain the fruit of liberation in the future. This indicates that the people in this country will mostly be reborn in the realms of humans and gods in the future, and will attain the fruit of liberation. It has these

四義遠聞余國故云好名聞國也。從來舊翻為聞物國。此土多出好物遠聞諸國故名聞物國。十二由經云。無物不有。勝於余處也。問佛住舍衛凡得幾年。答經云。住舍衛國得二十五年。有九億家。三億家見佛不聞法。三億家亦聞法亦見佛。三億家不見佛不聞法。真諦三藏云。住舍衛始終得七年。住王舍城得四年。今未詳也。問王城舍衛前住何處。答云。佛前住王舍城。後來舍衛也。言祇樹給孤獨園者。此第二名為別處。問何因緣故起立此祇園精舍。答如十二由經涅槃經賢愚等經廣說。如賢愚第九捲雲。舍衛國主波斯匿王有一大臣。名曰須達。其人居家巨富財寶無限。好喜佈施燕濟貧窮及諸孤老。時人因為其立號名為給孤獨。爾時長者生七男兒。年並長大為其娉娶。次第至六。余有第七兒。端正殊異。偏心愛念。當爲娶妻欲得極妙姿容端正有相之女。為兒求之。即語諸婆羅門言。誰有好女相貌備足。當爲我行求之。諸婆羅門便為推覓。展轉到王舍城中。有一大臣名曰護珍。財富無量。信敬三寶。時婆羅門到其家從乞食。彼國法施人物時要令童女持物佈施。護珍長者時有一女。儀容端正顏色殊妙。持食出施婆羅門。婆羅門見之心大歡喜我所覓者正當是爾。即問女言。頗有人來求索汝未。女答言未有。更問言女子。汝父在不。

【現代漢語翻譯】現代漢語譯本四義遠聞余國，因此被稱為好名聞國。舊譯為聞物國。此地多出產好物，遠傳諸國，所以名為聞物國。《十二游經》說，『無物不有，勝於其他地方。』問：佛陀在舍衛城住了幾年？答：經中說，住在舍衛國二十五年。那裡有九億戶人家，三億戶人家見到佛但不聞法，三億戶人家既聞法也見佛，三億戶人家既不見佛也不聞法。真諦三藏說，住在舍衛城始終七年，住在王舍城四年。現在還未詳細考證。問：佛陀在王舍城和舍衛城之前住在哪裡？答：佛陀之前住在王舍城，後來才到舍衛城。『祇樹給孤獨園』，這第二個名字是別稱。問：因為什麼因緣而建立這祇園精舍？答：如《十二游經》、《涅槃經》、《賢愚經》等經中廣說。如《賢愚經》第九卷所說：舍衛國國王波斯匿王有一位大臣，名叫須達（Sudatta），他家境非常富有，財寶無數，喜歡佈施，賙濟貧窮和孤寡老人。當時的人們因此給他起了個稱號叫給孤獨（Anathapindika）。當時這位長者生了七個兒子，都已長大成人，併爲他們娶了妻子。依次到了第六個兒子，還剩下第七個兒子，相貌端正殊異，特別喜愛。打算為他娶妻，想要找一個容貌極其美妙端正的女子。為兒子求親，就對婆羅門（Brahmana）說：『誰家有好女兒，相貌俱佳，請為我尋找。』諸位婆羅門便為他尋找，輾轉到了王舍城中。有一位大臣名叫護珍（Guazhen），財富無量，信敬三寶。當時婆羅門到他家乞食。那個國家的習俗是佈施物品時要讓童女拿著物品佈施。護珍長者當時有一個女兒，儀容端正，顏色殊妙，拿著食物出來佈施給婆羅門。婆羅門見到她，心中非常歡喜，『我所尋找的正是她！』就問那女子說：『有沒有人來向你求親？』女子回答說：『還沒有。』又問：『女子，你父親在家嗎？』

【English Translation】 English version The four meanings are widely known in other countries, hence it is called the country of good reputation (好名聞國). The old translation is the country of known objects (聞物國). This place produces many good things, which are widely known in various countries, hence it is called the country of known objects. The Sutra of Twelve Travels (十二游經) says, 'There is nothing that is not here, surpassing other places.' Question: How many years did the Buddha stay in Shravasti (舍衛城)? Answer: The sutra says that he stayed in Shravasti for twenty-five years. There were nine hundred million households there, three hundred million of whom saw the Buddha but did not hear the Dharma, three hundred million of whom both heard the Dharma and saw the Buddha, and three hundred million of whom neither saw the Buddha nor heard the Dharma. The Tripiṭaka Master Paramārtha (真諦三藏) said that he stayed in Shravasti for seven years in total and in Rajagriha (王舍城) for four years. This has not yet been verified in detail. Question: Where did the Buddha stay before Rajagriha and Shravasti? Answer: The Buddha stayed in Rajagriha before coming to Shravasti. 'Jetavana Anathapindika's Monastery (祇樹給孤獨園),' this second name is a separate designation. Question: What were the causes and conditions for establishing this Jetavana Monastery? Answer: As widely explained in the Sutra of Twelve Travels, the Nirvana Sutra (涅槃經), the Sutra of the Wise and Foolish (賢愚經), etc. As stated in the ninth volume of the Sutra of the Wise and Foolish: King Prasenajit (波斯匿王) of Shravasti had a minister named Sudatta (須達), who was extremely wealthy, with countless treasures, and loved to give alms, providing for the poor and the elderly. At that time, people gave him the title Anathapindika (給孤獨). At that time, this elder had seven sons, all of whom had grown up and married. In order, up to the sixth son, there remained the seventh son, whose appearance was particularly handsome and extraordinary, and whom he loved dearly. He intended to find a wife for him, wanting to find a woman with an extremely beautiful and virtuous appearance. Seeking a wife for his son, he said to the Brahmins (婆羅門): 'Who has a good daughter with excellent qualities? Please find her for me.' The Brahmins then searched for him, eventually reaching Rajagriha. There was a minister named Guazhen (護珍), who had immeasurable wealth and revered the Three Jewels. At that time, the Brahmins went to his house to beg for food. The custom in that country was that when giving alms, a young maiden should hold the items to be given. Minister Guazhen had a daughter at that time, whose appearance was dignified and whose complexion was beautiful. She came out holding food to give to the Brahmins. When the Brahmins saw her, they were overjoyed, 'She is exactly the one I am looking for!' They asked the girl, 'Has anyone come to ask for your hand in marriage?' The girl replied, 'Not yet.' They further asked, 'Girl, is your father at home?'

女答云在。婆羅門語言。可令出外我欲見之與共談語。時女入內白其父言。外有客來欲得相見。其父便出。時婆羅門問訊起居安和善否㬈涼既竟。謂長者言。舍衛國王有一大臣。字曰須達。為國輔相識不。答言。未見其人但聞其名。報言。知不是人于彼舍衛國第一富貴。汝於此間富貴亦最第一。須達有兒端正殊妙卓犖多奇。欲取君子女可爾不。答言可爾。時婆羅門未得自還。仍值估客來舍衛國即便因之寄書。逆報須達具陳其事。須達得書歡喜。即詣波斯匿王求請小許時為兒娶婦。王即聽之。於是大載珍寶趣王舍城。于其路次拯濟貧乏至王舍城。到護珍家為兒求妻。護珍長者歡喜迎達安置敷具。暮宿其舍。內則搔擾辦具飲食。須達念言。今此長者設何供具。欲作何等。將非欲請國王太子長大臣及以婚姻者乎。便問之曰。長者今暮躬自執營如是事務施設供具。為欲請國王太子大臣者乎。答言不也。又問欲設婚姻親戚會耶。答言不也。又問將何所作。答言。明日欲請佛及比丘僧。於時須達聞佛僧名肅然毛豎。如其所得心情悅豫。重問曰。云何名佛。愿解其義。長者答言。汝不聞耶凈飯王子厥名曰悉達。其生之日天降瑞應。天神侍衛即行七步。唱言天上天下唯我為尊。須達聞說如是等好事歡喜踴躍感念信敬。於今夜即欲見佛。

【現代漢語翻譯】現代漢語譯本女子回答說：『在。』婆羅門說：『可以讓她出來嗎？我想見她，和她談談。』當時，女子進入屋內告訴她的父親說：『外面有客人來，想要見您。』她的父親就出來了。當時，婆羅門問候長者起居安好，身體是否康健，寒暄完畢后，對長者說：『舍衛國的國王有一位大臣，名字叫須達（Sudatta，樂善好施者），是國家的輔佐，您認識他嗎？』長者回答說：『沒有見過這個人，只是聽說過他的名字。』婆羅門說：『您知道嗎，這個人是舍衛國第一富有的人。您在這裡的富有也是第一。須達有一個兒子，端正殊妙，卓越不凡，想要娶您的女兒，可以嗎？』長者回答說：『可以。』當時，婆羅門沒有立即返回，正好遇到商人前往舍衛國，就順便委託他們寄信，預先告知須達，詳細陳述了這件事。須達收到信后非常高興，立即前往拜見波斯匿王（Pasenadi，舍衛國國王），請求允許他抽出一點時間為兒子娶媳婦。國王就答應了他。於是，須達裝載了大量的珍寶前往王舍城（Rajagrha，古印度城市），在路途中救濟貧困的人，到達王舍城。到了護珍（name of the father of the bride）長者的家，為兒子求娶妻子。護珍長者高興地迎接須達，安排座位和鋪設臥具，讓他住下。護珍長者家裡面則忙碌地準備飲食。須達心想：『現在這位長者準備什麼供品呢？想要做什麼呢？難道是想要邀請國王、太子、大臣以及舉辦婚禮嗎？』就問他說：『長者今天晚上親自操勞，像這樣忙碌地準備供品，是想要邀請國王、太子、大臣嗎？』長者回答說：『不是。』又問：『是想要舉辦婚禮親戚聚會嗎？』長者回答說：『不是。』又問：『那麼將要做什麼呢？』長者回答說：『明天想要邀請佛（Buddha，覺悟者）以及比丘僧（bhiksu-samgha，佛教僧團）。』當時，須達聽到佛和僧的名字，頓時肅然起敬，汗毛豎立。心中感到無比的喜悅。再次問道：『什麼是佛？希望您能解釋它的含義。』長者回答說：『您沒有聽說過嗎？凈飯王（Suddhodana，釋迦牟尼佛的父親）的王子，名字叫悉達（Siddhartha，釋迦牟尼佛的本名）。他出生的時候，天空降下吉祥的徵兆。天神侍衛著他，立即走了七步，唱言天上天下唯我為尊。』須達聽了這些美好的事情，歡喜踴躍，心生敬仰，希望今晚就能見到佛。

【English Translation】 English version The woman replied, 'I am here.' The Brahmin said, 'May she come out? I wish to see her and speak with her.' At that time, the woman went inside and told her father, 'There is a guest outside who wishes to see you.' Her father then came out. At that time, the Brahmin inquired about the elder's well-being, asking if he was at peace and in good health. After the greetings, he said to the elder, 'The King of Sravasti (ancient Indian city) has a minister named Sudatta (the one who gives well), who is an advisor to the country. Do you know him?' The elder replied, 'I have not seen this person, but I have heard his name.' The Brahmin said, 'Do you know that this person is the wealthiest in the country of Sravasti? Your wealth here is also the greatest. Sudatta has a son who is handsome, extraordinary, and outstanding. He wishes to marry your daughter. Is that acceptable?' The elder replied, 'It is acceptable.' At that time, the Brahmin did not return immediately. It happened that merchants were going to Sravasti, so he entrusted them with a letter to inform Sudatta in advance, detailing the matter. Sudatta was very happy to receive the letter and immediately went to see King Pasenadi (King of Sravasti), requesting permission to take some time to marry a wife for his son. The king granted his request. Thereupon, Sudatta loaded a large amount of treasures and went to Rajagrha (ancient Indian city), helping the poor along the way, and arrived at the house of the elder Hucen (name of the father of the bride) to seek a wife for his son. The elder Hucen happily welcomed Sudatta, arranged seats and bedding, and had him stay. Inside the house, they were busy preparing food and drink. Sudatta thought, 'What offerings is this elder preparing now? What does he want to do? Could it be that he wants to invite the king, the crown prince, the ministers, or hold a wedding?' He asked, 'Elder, tonight you are personally busy preparing offerings like this. Do you want to invite the king, the crown prince, or the ministers?' The elder replied, 'No.' He asked again, 'Do you want to hold a wedding or a family gathering?' The elder replied, 'No.' He asked again, 'Then what are you going to do?' The elder replied, 'Tomorrow I want to invite the Buddha (the awakened one) and the bhiksu-samgha (community of monks).' At that time, Sudatta heard the names of the Buddha and the Samgha, and he was immediately respectful and his hair stood on end. He felt immense joy in his heart. He asked again, 'What is the Buddha? I hope you can explain its meaning.' The elder replied, 'Have you not heard? The prince of King Suddhodana (father of Sakyamuni Buddha), whose name is Siddhartha (original name of Sakyamuni Buddha). On the day of his birth, the heavens sent auspicious signs. The gods attended to him, and he immediately took seven steps, proclaiming, 'Above the heavens and below the heavens, I alone am the honored one.' Sudatta heard these wonderful things, rejoiced, and felt reverence, hoping to see the Buddha tonight.

於是天為之明。便爾而去。中夜出門見天祠即為作禮忽忘唸佛心。於是曉還更闇。自念言。今夜闇。若我往者要為惡鬼猛狩之所見害。且還入城待曉當去。爾時即有天。空中見其欲悔便下語言。居士莫悔。我是汝昔善知識蜜肩婆羅門。因聞法故得生天中。汝往見佛得無量利益。正使今日得百車珍寶乃至一四天下滿中珍寶。不如舉足至世尊所所得利益。過百千倍。汝去莫悔。須達聞天說如此語益增敬念。於是在闇還得明曉。便爾尋路往至世尊所。佛知爾時須達來便出外經行。是時須達遙見世尊猶如金山。相好威容嚴然昺著。睹之心悅不知禮法。直問世尊。不審瞿曇起居何如。世尊即時令就坐。是時首陀會天遙見須達雖睹世尊而不知禮足。諸天即化作四人行列而來到世尊所。執佛足作禮。長跪問訊右繞三匝卻住一面。是時須達見其如此。乃為愕然而自念言。恭敬之法事應如是。即起離坐禮敬。問訊起居右繞三匝卻住一面。爾時世尊即為說法。四諦微妙。苦空無常。既其聞法歡喜即證須陀洹果。於是白佛。唯愿如來垂慈臨傾舍衛大城中眾生除邪就正。世尊告曰。出家之法與俗有別。住止處所應當有異。彼無精舍云何得去。是時須達白佛言。世尊弟子能起愿見聽許。世尊默然。須達辭往因白佛言。還至本國當造精舍。不知揩法

【現代漢語翻譯】現代漢語譯本於是天亮了。他便出發了。半夜出門，看見天祠，就想向它行禮，忽然忘記了唸佛的心。於是天亮后返回，天又黑了。他心想：『今晚這麼黑，如果我前往，一定會被惡鬼猛獸所傷害。還是返回城裡，等到天亮再去吧。』這時，有個天人在空中看見他想要後悔，便下來對他說：『居士不要後悔。我是你以前的善知識蜜肩婆羅門（Mitra婆羅門）。因為聽聞佛法，得以升到天界。你前去見佛，能得到無量的利益。即使今天得到一百車珍寶，乃至一個四天下都裝滿珍寶，也不如你舉步前往世尊那裡所得的利益，超過百千倍。你前去不要後悔。』須達（Sudatta，給孤獨長者）聽天人說了這些話，更加敬唸佛陀。於是在黑暗中又得了光明，便沿著路前往世尊那裡。佛陀知道須達要來，便出來在外面經行。這時，須達遠遠地看見世尊，猶如金山一般，相好光明，威容莊嚴，非常顯著。他看了心裡歡喜，卻不知道禮法，直接問世尊：『不知瞿曇（Gotama，佛陀的姓氏）起居如何？』世尊立刻讓他坐下。這時，凈居天的天人遠遠地看見須達雖然看見世尊，卻不知道禮足，這些天人就化作四個人，排成行列來到世尊那裡，抓住佛的腳行禮，長跪問訊，右繞三匝，然後站在一邊。這時，須達看見他們這樣，感到非常驚訝，心想：『恭敬的禮法應該像這樣。』於是起身離開座位，禮敬、問訊，右繞三匝，然後站在一邊。這時，世尊就為他說法，講述四諦（Four Noble Truths）的微妙之處，苦、空、無常的道理。須達聽了佛法，歡喜踴躍，立刻證得了須陀洹果（Sotapanna，入流果）。於是他稟告佛陀：『唯愿如來慈悲，降臨舍衛（Savatthi）大城，救度城中眾生，使他們捨棄邪見，歸於正道。』世尊告訴他說：『出家人的生活方式與在家人的生活方式不同，居住的地方也應該有所區別。那裡沒有精舍（Vihara，寺院），怎麼能去呢？』這時，須達稟告佛陀說：『世尊，弟子願意發願建造精舍，希望得到您的允許。』世尊默然應允。須達告辭離去，因為要返回本國建造精舍，所以請教佛陀：『不知道建造精舍的規矩。』

【English Translation】 English version Then the sky brightened. He then departed. In the middle of the night, he went out and saw a heavenly shrine, intending to pay homage, but suddenly forgot his mindfulness of the Buddha. Then, at dawn, he returned, and it became dark again. He thought to himself, 'Tonight is so dark; if I go, I will surely be harmed by evil ghosts and fierce beasts. I should return to the city and wait until dawn to go.' At that moment, a Deva (god) in the sky saw that he was about to regret his decision and descended, saying, 'Layman, do not regret. I am Mitra Brahmana (Mitra Brahmin), your former good friend. Because of hearing the Dharma (Buddha's teachings), I was reborn in the heavens. If you go to see the Buddha, you will gain immeasurable benefits. Even if you were to receive a hundred carts of treasures today, or even a Jambudvipa (one of the four continents in Buddhist cosmology) filled with treasures, it would not compare to the benefits you would gain by taking a step towards the Blessed One, which would exceed it by a hundred thousand times. Go forth and do not regret.' Sudatta (Anathapindika, a wealthy merchant known for his generosity) heard the Deva speak these words and increased his reverence and mindfulness. In the darkness, he regained his clarity and followed the path to where the Blessed One was. The Buddha, knowing that Sudatta was coming, went outside to walk back and forth. At that time, Sudatta saw the Blessed One from afar, like a golden mountain, with his radiant features and dignified presence, shining brightly. Seeing this, his heart rejoiced, but he did not know the proper etiquette and directly asked the Blessed One, 'I wonder, Gotama (Buddha's family name), how are you?' The Blessed One immediately invited him to sit down. At that time, the Suddhavasa Devas (devas from the Pure Abodes) saw from afar that Sudatta, although seeing the Blessed One, did not know to pay homage to his feet. These devas transformed into four people, lined up, and came to the Blessed One, grasped the Buddha's feet to pay homage, knelt down to inquire, circumambulated him three times to the right, and then stood to one side. When Sudatta saw this, he was astonished and thought to himself, 'The proper way to show respect should be like this.' He then rose from his seat, paid homage, inquired, circumambulated him three times to the right, and then stood to one side. At that time, the Blessed One then taught him the Dharma, explaining the subtle aspects of the Four Noble Truths (Cattāri Ariya Saccāni), the principles of suffering, emptiness, and impermanence. Having heard the Dharma, Sudatta rejoiced and immediately attained the fruit of Sotapanna (Stream-enterer). He then said to the Buddha, 'May the Tathagata (another name for the Buddha) have compassion and descend upon the great city of Savatthi (a major city in ancient India), to deliver the beings in the city, causing them to abandon wrong views and embrace the right path.' The Blessed One told him, 'The way of life for those who have left home is different from that of laypeople, and the places where they dwell should also be different. There is no Vihara (monastery) there; how can I go?' At that time, Sudatta said to the Buddha, 'Blessed One, this disciple is willing to make a vow to build a Vihara, hoping to receive your permission.' The Blessed One silently agreed. Sudatta took his leave, because he was returning to his home country to build a Vihara, so he asked the Buddha, 'I do not know the rules for building a Vihara.'

。唯愿世尊使一弟子共往敕示。世尊思惟。舍衛城內婆羅門信邪倒見。餘人往者必不能辦。唯舍利弗是婆羅門種。少小聰明神通兼備。去必有益。即便命之共須達往。於是還到舍衛國。共舍利弗案行諸地。何處平博堪起精舍。悉皆周遍無葉意處。唯王太子祇陀有園。其地平正其樹郁茂。不近不遠正得處所。時舍利弗告須達云。今此園地宜起精舍。若遠作者乞食難得。近則憒鬧妨廢行道。須達歡喜到太子所向太子言。我今欲為如來起立精舍。唯太子園地可以宜用。愿欲買之。太子笑曰。我何所乏。此園茂盛當用遊戲。云何欲買耶。須達於是慇勤不已。太子聊復戲云。卿若能以黃金布地。令間無空地便當相與。須達於是恭諾。載金布地隨價。太子云。我向戲言。何得便買。須達白言。太子之法不應戲言。而作妄語。非謂儲君無堪紹繼。即共太子往詣斷事人所。時首陀會天當爲佛起精舍。恐諸斷事大臣偏為太子。則便化作一人為斷事者。語太子言。夫太子者不應妄語。而有戲笑既已許賣。不宜中悔。遂斷園與須達。須達歡喜便得敕使人以象馬負金布八十頃。須臾欲滿唯殘有少地。須達思惟。當出何藏金足不多不少當得滿足。祇陀問言。嫌高買臺。答曰。自念必何金藏可足當滿之。祇陀念言。佛必有大德。乃使斯人輕財乃爾。

【現代漢語翻譯】現代漢語譯本：唯愿世尊派遣一位弟子與須達（Sudatta，給孤獨長者）一同前去指示。世尊思惟，舍衛城（Śrāvastī）內的婆羅門（Brahmin）信奉邪見，其他人前去必定無法辦成此事。只有舍利弗（Śāriputra）是婆羅門種姓，從小聰明且具備神通，前去必定有益。於是便命令他與須達一同前往。他們於是回到舍衛國，與舍利弗一同勘察各處土地，哪裡平坦寬闊可以建造精舍（Vihāra）。他們走遍各處，沒有找到滿意的地方。只有國王太子祇陀（Jeta）有一座園林，那裡的土地平坦方正，樹木茂盛，不遠不近，正是合適的地方。當時，舍利弗告訴須達說：『現在這片園地適合建造精舍。如果離得太遠，乞食難以獲得；離得太近，則會喧鬧妨礙修行。』須達聽后非常高興，到太子那裡對太子說：『我現在想為如來（Tathāgata）建造精舍，只有太子的園地可以適用，希望能夠購買。』太子笑著說：『我有什麼缺乏的呢？這座園林茂盛，正可以用來遊玩，為什麼要購買呢？』須達於是慇勤不已。太子便開玩笑說：『你如果能用黃金鋪滿地面，令其間沒有空地，我就應當把園林給你。』須達於是恭敬地答應了，用車載著黃金鋪地，按照價格計算。太子說：『我剛才只是開玩笑，怎麼能真的買呢？』須達回答說：『太子不應該開玩笑，而說妄語。否則就不能成為合格的儲君。』於是與太子一同前往斷事人那裡。當時，首陀會天（Śuddhāvāsa）想要為佛陀建造精舍，擔心各位斷事大臣偏袒太子，於是便化作一人作為斷事人。他對太子說：『太子不應該說妄語，而有戲言，既然已經答應賣了，就不應該中途反悔。』於是判決將園林判給須達。須達非常高興，便命令人以象馬馱著黃金鋪滿八十頃的土地。很快就要鋪滿了，只剩下少許土地。須達思惟，應當拿出哪個倉庫的黃金，不多不少，才能足夠鋪滿。祇陀問道：『嫌棄高價買地嗎？』須達回答說：『我正在想哪個倉庫的黃金可以足夠鋪滿。』祇陀心想：『佛陀必定有很大的德行，才能使這個人輕視錢財到這種地步。』。

【English Translation】 English version: 'I only wish that the World-Honored One would send one of his disciples with Sudatta (meaning 'giver of good,' a wealthy merchant also known as Anathapindika) to instruct him.' The World-Honored One pondered, 'The Brahmins (Brahmin) in Śrāvastī (city in ancient India) hold wrong and perverse views. If anyone else goes, they will surely not be able to accomplish this. Only Śāriputra (one of the Buddha's chief disciples) is of Brahmin lineage, intelligent from a young age, and possesses supernatural powers. His going will surely be beneficial.' He then ordered him to go with Sudatta. Thereupon, they returned to the city of Śrāvastī, and together with Śāriputra, surveyed the lands, seeking a place that was flat and broad enough to build a Vihāra (monastery). They searched everywhere but found no place to their liking. Only Prince Jeta (a prince in ancient India) had a garden, the land of which was flat and square, and the trees were lush. It was neither too near nor too far, just the right location. At that time, Śāriputra said to Sudatta, 'This garden is suitable for building a Vihāra. If it is too far, it will be difficult to beg for food; if it is too near, it will be noisy and interfere with practice.' Sudatta was overjoyed and went to the prince, saying, 'I now wish to build a Vihāra for the Tathāgata (meaning 'the thus-gone one,' an epithet of the Buddha). Only your garden is suitable for this purpose. I wish to buy it.' The prince laughed and said, 'What do I lack? This garden is lush and suitable for recreation. Why would I want to sell it?' Sudatta then earnestly persisted. The prince then jokingly said, 'If you can cover the ground with gold, leaving no empty space, then I will give it to you.' Sudatta then respectfully agreed and loaded gold onto carts to cover the ground according to the price. The prince said, 'I was only joking just now. How can I really sell it?' Sudatta replied, 'A prince should not joke and speak falsely. Otherwise, he is not fit to be the heir apparent.' Thereupon, he went with the prince to the adjudicators. At that time, the Śuddhāvāsa (pure abodes) heavens wished to build a Vihāra for the Buddha and feared that the adjudicating ministers would be biased towards the prince. Therefore, they transformed into one person to act as the adjudicator. He said to the prince, 'A prince should not speak falsely and joke. Since you have already agreed to sell, you should not go back on your word.' Thus, he ruled that the garden be given to Sudatta. Sudatta was overjoyed and ordered people to use elephants and horses to carry gold to cover the eighty acres of land. Soon it was about to be filled, with only a small piece of land remaining. Sudatta pondered, 'Which treasury should I take gold from, so that it will be neither too much nor too little, but just enough to fill it?' Jeta asked, 'Do you begrudge the high price of buying the land?' Sudatta replied, 'I am thinking about which treasury has enough gold to fill it.' Jeta thought, 'The Buddha must have great virtue to make this person disregard wealth to such an extent.' .

即語云。齊是可止。勿更出金。園屬卿樹屬我。我自為佛造立門樓。須達歡喜即便歸家當施功作。六師聞之即往白王。長者須達買太子園欲為瞿曇造立精舍。聽我與彼捔試道術。其若得勝便聽起立。王即召長者問之。今六師云。卿買祇陀園為瞿曇起立精舍。彼求共沙門弟子捔其道術。彼若得勝者乃得起造。如其不能不得起造。長者歸家著垢膩衣愁惱不樂。身子明日著衣持缽至長者家。見其不樂即問曰。何故爾耶。長者答曰。起立精舍恐不得成。是故愁耳。身子曰。有何事故。答曰。今諸六師詣王求捔道術。尊者得勝乃聽起立。若不如彼即不聽也。然六師輩等出家來久。素學伎術無能及者。未知尊者能與彼捔道術以不。身子答言。正使六師之徒滿三千世界眾如竹林。不能動吾一毛。欲捔術但恣聽之。長者歡喜更著新衣往白王言。六師欲捔恣隨其意。王即告六師宣語國人。卻後七日當於城外六師與沙門共捔道術。國中十八億人。時彼國法擊鼓集眾。若擊銅鼓十二億人集。若打銀鼓十四億人集。若振金鼓一切皆集。七日既滿打鼓一切皆集。六師眾有三億人。是時人民悉為王及六師敷坐。爾時長者為身子施坐。時身子在一樹下寂然入定游諸禪門。通達無礙。作念云。此會中大眾習邪來久。憍慢自高。此之群生當以何德而降伏之

【現代漢語翻譯】現代漢語譯本：正如經文所說：『就這樣停止吧，不要再拿出黃金了。園子歸你（須達），樹木歸我（祇陀太子）。我親自為佛陀建造門樓。』須達（Sudatta，給孤獨長者）非常高興，立刻回家準備開始施工。六師（Six heretical teachers）聽說這件事後，立刻去稟告國王：『長者須達（Sudatta）買下了祇陀（Jeta）太子的園林，想要為瞿曇（Gotama，喬達摩，即佛陀）建造精舍。請允許我們與他比試道術，如果我們獲勝，就允許他建造。』國王就召見長者詢問此事。『現在六師（Six heretical teachers）說，你買下祇陀（Jeta）園林是爲了給瞿曇（Gotama）建造精舍。他們請求與沙門（Shramana，出家修行者）弟子比試道術。如果他們獲勝，就允許你建造，如果他們不能獲勝，就不允許你建造。』長者（須達）回到家，穿著骯髒的衣服，憂愁不樂。舍利弗（Sariputta）第二天穿著袈裟，拿著缽來到長者（須達）家，看到他不高興，就問：『為什麼這樣？』長者（須達）回答說：『建造精舍恐怕不能成功，所以憂愁。』舍利弗（Sariputta）說：『有什麼事？』長者（須達）回答說：『現在各位六師（Six heretical teachers）去見國王，請求比試道術。尊者（舍利弗）如果獲勝，就允許建造，如果不如他們，就不允許建造。然而六師（Six heretical teachers）等人出家很久了，一向學習伎倆法術，沒有人能比得上他們。不知道尊者（舍利弗）能否與他們比試道術。』舍利弗（Sariputta）回答說：『即使六師（Six heretical teachers）之徒充滿三千世界，人數像竹林一樣多，也不能動我一根毫毛。想要比試法術，就隨他們便。』長者（須達）非常高興，換上新衣服去稟告國王說：『六師（Six heretical teachers）想要比試，就隨他們的意願。』國王就告訴六師（Six heretical teachers），並向國人宣告：『七天後，將在城外，六師（Six heretical teachers）與沙門（Shramana）共同比試道術。』國內有十八億人。當時那個國家的法律是擊鼓聚眾。如果擊銅鼓，就有十二億人聚集；如果打銀鼓，就有十四億人聚集；如果振金鼓，所有人都會聚集。七天期滿，擊鼓，所有人都聚集了。六師（Six heretical teachers）的隊伍有三億人。當時人民都為國王和六師（Six heretical teachers）鋪設座位。這時，長者（須達）為舍利弗（Sariputta）設定座位。當時，舍利弗（Sariputta）在一棵樹下寂然入定，遊歷各種禪定之門，通達無礙。他心想：『這次集會中的大眾，學習邪道已經很久了，驕傲自大。對於這些眾生，應當用什麼德行來降伏他們呢？』

【English Translation】 English version: As the scripture says: 'Just stop there. Do not bring out any more gold. The garden belongs to you (Sudatta), and the trees belong to me (Prince Jeta). I will personally build the gatehouse for the Buddha.' Sudatta (the Elder Sudatta, also known as Anathapindika) was overjoyed and immediately returned home to prepare for construction. The Six Heretical Teachers (Six heretical teachers) heard about this and immediately went to report to the king: 'The Elder Sudatta (Sudatta) has bought Prince Jeta's (Jeta) garden and intends to build a monastery for Gotama (Gotama, i.e., the Buddha). Please allow us to compete with him in spiritual powers. If we win, then he will be allowed to build.' The king then summoned the Elder and asked him about this. 'Now the Six Heretical Teachers (Six heretical teachers) say that you bought Jeta's (Jeta) garden to build a monastery for Gotama (Gotama). They request to compete with the Shramana (Shramana, renunciate practitioners) disciples in their spiritual powers. If they win, then you will be allowed to build; if they cannot win, then you will not be allowed to build.' The Elder (Sudatta) returned home, wearing dirty clothes, worried and unhappy. Sariputta (Sariputta) the next day, wearing his robes and carrying his bowl, came to the Elder's (Sudatta) house. Seeing that he was unhappy, he asked: 'Why is this?' The Elder (Sudatta) replied: 'I am worried that the construction of the monastery may not succeed.' Sariputta (Sariputta) said: 'What is the matter?' The Elder (Sudatta) replied: 'Now the Six Heretical Teachers (Six heretical teachers) have gone to see the king, requesting to compete in spiritual powers. If the Venerable One (Sariputta) wins, then construction will be allowed; if you are not as good as them, then it will not be allowed. However, the Six Heretical Teachers (Six heretical teachers) and others have been renunciates for a long time, and they have always studied skills and magic, and no one can match them. I do not know if the Venerable One (Sariputta) can compete with them in spiritual powers.' Sariputta (Sariputta) replied: 'Even if the followers of the Six Heretical Teachers (Six heretical teachers) filled three thousand worlds, as numerous as a bamboo forest, they could not move a single hair of mine. If they want to compete in magic, just let them do as they please.' The Elder (Sudatta) was overjoyed and changed into new clothes and went to report to the king, saying: 'If the Six Heretical Teachers (Six heretical teachers) want to compete, then let them have their way.' The king then told the Six Heretical Teachers (Six heretical teachers) and announced to the people of the country: 'In seven days, outside the city, the Six Heretical Teachers (Six heretical teachers) and the Shramana (Shramana) will compete in spiritual powers together.' There were eighteen hundred million people in the country. At that time, the law of that country was to gather the people by beating drums. If the bronze drum was beaten, twelve hundred million people would gather; if the silver drum was beaten, fourteen hundred million people would gather; if the golden drum was beaten, everyone would gather. When the seven days were up, the drums were beaten, and everyone gathered. The Six Heretical Teachers' (Six heretical teachers) group had three hundred million people. At that time, the people all set up seats for the king and the Six Heretical Teachers (Six heretical teachers). At this time, the Elder (Sudatta) set up a seat for Sariputta (Sariputta). At that time, Sariputta (Sariputta) was sitting silently under a tree, entering into samadhi, traveling through various gates of meditation, and attaining unobstructed understanding. He thought to himself: 'The masses in this assembly have been studying heretical paths for a long time, and they are arrogant and conceited. What virtue should be used to subdue these beings?'

。思惟是已即立誓言。若我無數劫中慈孝父母沙門婆羅門者。今我入眾令一切人為我作禮。時六師眾已集。而身子獨未來。便白王言。瞿曇弟子自知無術怖畏不來。王告長者。汝師今在何許。須達即至身子所白言。大眾已集。愿來詣會。時身子從禪定起整衣。安詳而趣如師子王往詣大眾。是時大眾及諸六師見其形容忽然起立。如風靡草不覺為禮。時身子便升須達所敷之坐。六師眾中有一弟子。名勞度差善知幻術。于大眾前咒作大樹蔭覆于眾。眾咸謂言。是勞度差作。時舍利弗便以神力作毗嵐風。吹拔樹根倒著于地碎若微塵。眾言舍利弗勝。勞度差復咒作一池。四邊布七寶水中生於蓮華。眾人言勞度差所作。舍利弗作一六牙白象。牙上有華華上有玉女。其象徐行蹈池含水踏華。眾人皆言舍利弗勝。勞度差復作一山七寶莊嚴華果茂盛。眾人言勞度差所作。舍利弗又作金剛力士。以金剛杵打之即便碎破。眾皆云舍利弗勝。勞度差復作一龍有十頭。于虛空中雨種種寶電雷振地。眾人皆言是勞度差作。舍利弗作一金翅鳥王即擘裂食之。眾人皆言舍利弗勝。勞度差復作一牛王。身體肥大峰角。銳地奔突來前。時舍利弗化作師子王即便擊裂食之。眾人皆言舍利弗勝。勞度差復變身作一夜叉鬼。形體長大頭上火然。目赤如血口四牙。目

【現代漢語翻譯】現代漢語譯本他這樣思索之後，就立下誓言：『如果我在無數劫中確實孝順父母，供養沙門（Śrāmaṇa，指出家修道者）和婆羅門（Brāhmaṇa，指祭司階層），那麼今天我進入大眾之中，就讓所有人都為我作禮。』當時，六師外道（指六位非佛教的宗教導師）的信徒已經聚集，只有舍利弗（Śāriputra，佛陀的十大弟子之一，以智慧著稱）還沒有來。於是須達長者（Sudatta，給孤獨長者，佛教的著名護法）就對國王說：『喬達摩（Gautama，釋迦牟尼佛的姓）的弟子自知沒有法術，害怕所以不來。』國王問須達長者：『你的老師現在在哪裡？』須達長者立即到舍利弗那裡，稟告說：『大眾已經聚集，希望您能來赴會。』當時，舍利弗從禪定中起身，整理好衣服，安詳地走向會場，如同獅子王一般。當時，大眾和六師外道的信徒看到舍利弗的儀容，忽然起身站立，如同風吹倒草一樣，不知不覺地向他行禮。當時，舍利弗就登上須達長者所鋪設的座位。六師外道中有一個弟子，名叫勞度差（Raudraksha），擅長幻術。他在大眾面前施咒，變出一棵大樹，樹蔭覆蓋大眾。眾人都說：『這是勞度差所作。』當時，舍利弗就用神通力變出毗嵐風（一種強風），將樹連根拔起，倒在地上，碎成微塵。眾人都說舍利弗勝。勞度差又施咒變出一個池塘，四邊裝飾著七寶，水中生長著蓮花。眾人都說這是勞度差所作。舍利弗變出一頭六牙白象，象牙上有花，花上有玉女。白象緩緩行走，在池塘中吸水，用腳踩著蓮花。眾人都說舍利弗勝。勞度差又變出一座山，用七寶裝飾，花果茂盛。眾人都說這是勞度差所作。舍利弗又變出一個金剛力士（Vajra-pani，手持金剛杵的護法神），用金剛杵擊打那座山，山立刻破碎。眾人都說舍利弗勝。勞度差又變出一條龍，有十個頭，在天空中降下各種寶物，電閃雷鳴，震動大地。眾人都說這是勞度差所作。舍利弗變出一隻金翅鳥王（Garuda，一種神鳥），立刻將龍撕裂吞食。眾人都說舍利弗勝。勞度差又變出一頭牛王，身體肥大，峰角尖銳，在地上奔突而來。當時，舍利弗化作獅子王，立刻將牛王擊裂吞食。眾人都說舍利弗勝。勞度差又變身成一個夜叉鬼（Yaksa，一種鬼神），形體高大，頭上燃燒著火焰，眼睛赤紅如血，口中有四顆牙齒。

【English Translation】 English version Having reflected thus, he then made a vow: 'If in countless kalpas (aeons) I have indeed been filial to my parents and have supported Śrāmaṇas (ascetics) and Brāhmaṇas (priests), then today, when I enter the assembly, may everyone present pay homage to me.' At that time, the followers of the six heretical teachers (referring to six non-Buddhist religious teachers) had already gathered, but Śāriputra (one of the Buddha's ten principal disciples, known for his wisdom) had not yet arrived. Thereupon, Sudatta (Anāthapiṇḍika, a famous Buddhist benefactor) said to the king: 'Gautama's (the Buddha's family name) disciple knows he has no magical powers and is afraid to come.' The king asked Sudatta: 'Where is your teacher now?' Sudatta immediately went to Śāriputra and reported: 'The assembly has gathered; I hope you will come to the meeting.' At that time, Śāriputra arose from meditation, adjusted his robes, and calmly proceeded to the assembly, like a lion king. When the assembly and the followers of the six heretical teachers saw Śāriputra's appearance, they suddenly stood up, like grass bending in the wind, and unconsciously paid homage to him. Then, Śāriputra ascended the seat prepared by Sudatta. Among the six heretical teachers, there was a disciple named Raudraksha, who was skilled in illusion. In front of the assembly, he chanted a spell and conjured a large tree, whose shade covered the assembly. Everyone said: 'This was done by Raudraksha.' At that time, Śāriputra used his supernatural power to create a violent wind (a type of strong wind), which uprooted the tree, causing it to fall to the ground and shatter into dust. Everyone said that Śāriputra had won. Raudraksha then chanted a spell and conjured a pond, adorned with seven treasures on all sides, with lotus flowers growing in the water. Everyone said this was done by Raudraksha. Śāriputra conjured a six-tusked white elephant, with flowers on its tusks and jade maidens on the flowers. The elephant walked slowly, drawing water from the pond and trampling on the lotus flowers. Everyone said that Śāriputra had won. Raudraksha then conjured a mountain, decorated with seven treasures and lush with flowers and fruits. Everyone said this was done by Raudraksha. Śāriputra then conjured a Vajra-pani (a protective deity holding a vajra club), who struck the mountain with his vajra club, causing it to shatter immediately. Everyone said that Śāriputra had won. Raudraksha then conjured a dragon with ten heads, which rained down various treasures in the sky, with lightning and thunder shaking the earth. Everyone said this was done by Raudraksha. Śāriputra conjured a Garuda (a mythical bird), which immediately tore the dragon apart and devoured it. Everyone said that Śāriputra had won. Raudraksha then conjured a bull king, with a large body and sharp horns, rushing forward on the ground. At that time, Śāriputra transformed into a lion king, who immediately struck the bull king and devoured it. Everyone said that Śāriputra had won. Raudraksha then transformed himself into a Yaksha (a type of spirit), with a tall body, flames burning on his head, and eyes as red as blood, with four teeth in his mouth.

出火驚懼奔走。時舍利弗復化作毗沙門王。夜叉恐怖即欲退走。四面火起無有去處。唯舍利弗邊清涼無火。即便屈伏頂禮火即還滅。眾人咸言舍利弗勝勞度差不如。爾時舍利弗身升虛空現十八變及八自在。時會見其神力咸懷歡喜。舍利弗即為說法。隨其福行各得道跡。六師弟子三億人于舍利弗所出家學道。捔伎術竟四眾各還所止。長者共身子還圖精舍地。手自投繩一頭。舍利弗欣然含笑。長者問。尊人何笑。答云。始欲經地六天宮已成。即借道眼長者悉見。長者即問舍利弗。六慾天何處最勝。舍利弗云。第四天中少欲知足。恒有一生補處菩薩來生其中。須達言。我正當生第四天中。長者出斯言已餘五宮悉滅。唯第四天宮湛然不變也。又更投繩時舍利弗慘然憂色。則問尊人何故憂色。答曰。汝見此地中蟻子不。答曰已見。舍利弗言。汝於過去毗波尸佛時。亦於此地為彼佛起精舍。而此蟻子在此中生。乃至今日凡九十一劫。受一種身不得解脫。生死長遠唯福是要。不可不勤。是故身子慘傷長者悲愍也。長者起精舍用妙栴檀為香泥。別房住止千二百人。凡一百二十處打揵槌施設欲往請佛。復思惟。上有國王應當令知。若不啟白儻有瞋恨。往白波斯匿王。我為佛已起精舍。愿大王遣使請佛。時王聞已遣使詣王舍城請佛及僧。愿

【現代漢語翻譯】現代漢語譯本因（勞度差）放火，眾人驚恐四處奔走。當時，舍利弗（Sariputra，佛陀十大弟子之一，以智慧著稱）又化作毗沙門王（Vaisravana，佛教護法神，四大天王之一）。夜叉（Yaksa，一種鬼神）恐懼，立即想要逃走。四面八方燃起大火，無處可去，只有舍利弗身邊清涼沒有火焰。夜叉隨即屈服，頂禮膜拜，火焰立即熄滅。眾人紛紛說舍利弗勝過勞度差，遠不如他。當時，舍利弗身升虛空，顯現十八種變化和八種自在。當時在場的人們見到他的神力，都心懷歡喜。舍利弗隨即為他們說法，隨著他們各自的福德因行，各自證得道跡。六師（指當時與佛教對立的六個外道教派）的弟子三億人在舍利弗處出家學道。較量伎倆完畢，四眾各自回到住處。長者（指給孤獨長者，Anathapindika，佛教大護法）與舍利弗一同回到規劃精舍的土地。長者親手投擲繩索確定邊界，一頭交給舍利弗。舍利弗欣然含笑。長者問：『尊者為何發笑？』答道：『剛開始規劃土地時，六慾天（Desire Realm）的宮殿已經建成。』長者隨即借用道眼，完全看見了。長者就問舍利弗：『六慾天中何處最殊勝？』舍利弗說：『第四天（兜率天，Tusita）中少欲知足，經常有一生補處菩薩（Bodhisattva，指下一產生佛的菩薩）來生於其中。』須達（Sudatta，給孤獨長者的本名）說：『我正應當生於第四天中。』長者說出這句話后，其餘五座宮殿全部消失，只有第四天宮殿湛然不變。又再次投擲繩索時，舍利弗神色悽慘憂愁。長者就問尊者為何面露憂色。答道：『你看見這土地中的螞蟻了嗎？』答道：『已經看見。』舍利弗說：『你在過去毗波尸佛（Vipassi Buddha，過去七佛之一）時，也曾在這塊土地上為那位佛陀建造精舍，而這隻螞蟻就在這裡出生，乃至今日已經九十一劫（kalpa，時間單位），受同一種身形不得解脫。生死長遠，唯有福德才是最重要的，不可不勤奮。』因此舍利弗感到悲傷，長者也感到悲憫。長者建造精舍，用上好的旃檀（Sandalwood）作為香泥。分別設定房間供一千二百人居住。共有一百二十處準備敲打犍椎（Ghandi，召集僧眾的法器）進行佈施，想要前往迎請佛陀。又思惟：上面還有國王，應當讓他知道。如果不稟告，恐怕會有嗔恨。於是前往稟告波斯匿王（Prasenajit，古印度拘薩羅國國王）：『我已為佛陀建造精舍，愿大王派遣使者迎請佛陀。』當時國王聽聞后，派遣使者前往王舍城（Rajagrha，古印度摩揭陀國首都）迎請佛陀及僧眾，希望...

【English Translation】 English version Due to the fire set by (Laudochha), people were frightened and ran in all directions. At that time, Sariputra (one of the ten great disciples of the Buddha, known for his wisdom) transformed into King Vaisravana (a Buddhist guardian deity, one of the Four Heavenly Kings). The Yaksha (a type of spirit) was terrified and immediately wanted to flee. Fire blazed in all directions, leaving nowhere to escape, except that there was coolness and no fire near Sariputra. The Yaksha then submitted, prostrated, and the fire immediately extinguished. The people all said that Sariputra was superior to Laudochha and far surpassed him. At that time, Sariputra ascended into the sky, manifesting eighteen transformations and eight freedoms. The people present at the time, seeing his divine power, were filled with joy. Sariputra then preached to them, and according to their respective meritorious deeds, each attained the path. Three hundred million disciples of the Six Teachers (referring to the six heretical sects that opposed Buddhism at the time) renounced their homes and studied the Way under Sariputra. After the competition of skills, the four assemblies each returned to their dwellings. The Elder (referring to Anathapindika, a great protector of Buddhism) returned with Sariputra to the land where the monastery was planned. The Elder personally threw the rope to determine the boundaries, handing one end to Sariputra. Sariputra smiled happily. The Elder asked, 'Venerable one, why do you smile?' He replied, 'When the land was just being planned, the palaces of the Six Desire Heavens (Desire Realm) were already completed.' The Elder then borrowed the eye of the Way and saw everything completely. The Elder then asked Sariputra, 'Which of the Six Desire Heavens is the most supreme?' Sariputra said, 'In the Fourth Heaven (Tusita Heaven), there is little desire and contentment. A Bodhisattva (one who is destined to become a Buddha in the next life) who will be reborn there often comes to be born in it.' Sudatta (Anathapindika's original name) said, 'I should be born in the Fourth Heaven.' After the Elder spoke these words, the other five palaces all disappeared, only the Fourth Heaven palace remained serene and unchanged. When the rope was thrown again, Sariputra looked sad and worried. The Elder then asked why the Venerable one looked worried. He replied, 'Do you see the ants in this land?' He replied, 'I have seen them.' Sariputra said, 'In the past, during the time of Vipassi Buddha (one of the past seven Buddhas), you also built a monastery on this land for that Buddha, and this ant was born here, and even today, after ninety-one kalpas (a unit of time), it has been trapped in the same form and has not been liberated. The cycle of birth and death is long, and only merit is the most important, so one must not be diligent.' Therefore, Sariputra felt sadness, and the Elder also felt compassion. The Elder built the monastery, using fine sandalwood as fragrant mud. Separate rooms were set up for twelve hundred people to live in. There were a total of one hundred and twenty places prepared to strike the Ghandi (a Dharma instrument used to summon the Sangha) for alms, wanting to go and invite the Buddha. He also thought: There is also a king above, and he should be informed. If he is not informed, he may be angry. So he went to inform King Prasenajit (the king of Kosala in ancient India): 'I have built a monastery for the Buddha, and I wish that the Great King would send messengers to invite the Buddha.' When the king heard this, he sent messengers to Rajagrha (the capital of Magadha in ancient India) to invite the Buddha and the Sangha, hoping...

臨覆舍衛國。爾時世尊與四部眾前後圍繞。放光動地至舍衛國。漸近城邊一切大眾持諸供具迎待世尊。到已放大光明以指案三千世界皆悉震動。伎樂不鼓自鳴一切聾盲拘癖皆得具足。一切人民睹佛歡喜。十八億人民並聚佛所。世尊爾時隨病為說法藥各得道跡。須達造精舍因緣事如是。言祇陀者。真諦三藏云。外國應云鳩摩羅祇陀。此云童真太子。又云祇陀者。此云戰勝。昔有兵賊欲破舍衛。波斯匿王遂拒破賊宮人啟云。生於太子。因以立名故名戰勝。須達多者。此云善與。父母無兒就神乞之。夢中得兒故名善與。彼土曾十二年中不雨。而須達巨富賑濟貧乏。故名給孤獨長者。今言祇樹給孤獨園者。此是君臣兩舉。通別二名。祇陀是君名。給孤獨即是臣稱。樹是其別所。園即是通處。又祇樹是門處故前明。園是精舍故后舉。又祇陀是本稱。給孤是末名。真諦三藏云。須達為過去第四鳩留村馱佛已於此地起精舍。爾時此地廣四十里。佛及人壽四萬歲。須達爾時名毗沙長者。以金板布地寶衣覆之供養佛也。第五俱那含牟尼佛時。人及佛壽三萬歲。爾時須達名大家主長者。以銀布地滿中乳牛之子以為供養。爾時地廣三十里。第六迦葉佛壽及人三萬歲。須達爾時名大番悉長者。以七寶布地。地廣二十里。以為供養。第七釋迦佛及

【現代漢語翻譯】現代漢語譯本臨近舍衛國時，世尊被四部弟子前後圍繞，放出光明，震動大地，到達舍衛國。漸漸靠近城邊時，所有大眾拿著各種供具迎接世尊。到達后，世尊放出大光明，用手指按壓三千世界，一切都震動起來。樂器不敲自鳴，所有聾盲、肢體不全的人都變得健全。所有人民看到佛陀都非常歡喜。十八億人民聚集在佛陀處。世尊當時根據他們的病癥為他們說法，給予法藥，使他們各自證得道果。須達（Sudatta，善施）建造精舍的因緣就是這樣。說到祇陀（Jetavana，逝多林）這個名字，真諦三藏說，外國應該叫做鳩摩羅祇陀（Kumara-Jetavana），這裡翻譯為童真太子。又說祇陀，翻譯為戰勝。過去有兵賊想要攻破舍衛國，波斯匿王（Prasenajit）於是抵抗並擊破了賊寇，宮人稟告說，生了太子。因此用這件事來命名，所以叫做戰勝。須達多（Sudatta），這裡翻譯為善與。他的父母沒有兒子，就向神祈求。夢中得到兒子，所以叫做善與。那個地方曾經有十二年沒有下雨，而須達非常富有，賑濟貧困的人，所以叫做給孤獨長者（Anathapindika，無依者之救濟者）。現在說的祇樹給孤獨園（Jetavana-Anathapindika-arama），這是君臣兩人名字並舉，包括通名和別名。祇陀是君主的名字，給孤獨是臣子的稱呼。樹是它的特別之處，園是它的通常之處。又因為祇樹是門所在的地方，所以先說明。園是精舍所在的地方，所以後提起。又祇陀是本來的稱呼，給孤獨是後來的名字。真諦三藏說，須達在過去第四位鳩留孫佛（Krakucchanda Buddha）時，已經在這塊土地上建造精舍。當時這塊土地廣四十里。佛和人的壽命是四萬歲。須達當時名叫毗沙長者（Visakha），用金板鋪地，用寶衣覆蓋，供養佛陀。在第五位拘那含牟尼佛（Kanakamuni Buddha）時，人和佛的壽命是三萬歲。當時須達名叫大家主長者，用銀鋪地，用滿地的乳牛之子作為供養。當時土地廣三十里。在第六位迦葉佛（Kasyapa Buddha）時，人和佛的壽命是三萬歲。須達當時名叫大番悉長者，用七寶鋪地，土地廣二十里，用來供養。第七位釋迦佛（Sakyamuni Buddha）以及

【English Translation】 English version Approaching Shravasti, the World-Honored One, surrounded by the fourfold assembly, emitted light and shook the earth, arriving at Shravasti. Gradually nearing the city, all the assembly, holding various offerings, welcomed the World-Honored One. Upon arrival, the World-Honored One emitted great light and pressed his finger upon the three thousand worlds, causing everything to shake. Musical instruments played without being struck, and all the deaf, blind, and crippled became whole. All the people, beholding the Buddha, rejoiced greatly. Eighteen billion people gathered at the Buddha's place. The World-Honored One then, according to their ailments, preached the Dharma, giving them the medicine of the Dharma, enabling them to each attain the path. The circumstances of Sudatta (Sudatta, 'Good Giver') building the monastery are thus. Regarding the name Jetavana ('Jeta's Grove'), Paramārtha (真諦三藏) says that in foreign lands it should be called Kumara-Jetavana, which is translated here as 'Prince Jeta'. Also, Jeta is said to mean 'Victorious'. In the past, when soldiers and bandits wanted to break into Shravasti, King Prasenajit (波斯匿王) resisted and defeated the bandits, and the palace attendants reported that a prince was born. Therefore, this event was used to name him, so he was called 'Victorious'. Sudatta is translated here as 'Good Giver'. His parents had no son, so they prayed to the gods. In a dream, they obtained a son, so he was called 'Good Giver'. That land had not rained for twelve years, and Sudatta was very wealthy, providing relief to the poor, so he was called Anathapindika ('Feeder of the Helpless'). Now, the Jetavana-Anathapindika-arama (祇樹給孤獨園) is a combination of the names of the king and the minister, including both the general and specific names. Jeta is the name of the king, and Anathapindika is the title of the minister. The tree is its specific feature, and the grove is its general location. Also, because the Jeta tree is where the gate is located, it is mentioned first. The grove is where the monastery is located, so it is mentioned later. Also, Jeta is the original name, and Anathapindika is the later name. Paramārtha says that Sudatta, in the time of the fourth Buddha Krakucchanda (鳩留孫佛) in the past, had already built a monastery on this land. At that time, this land was forty li (里) wide. The lifespan of the Buddha and people was 40,000 years. Sudatta at that time was named Visakha (毗沙長者), and he paved the ground with gold plates and covered it with precious garments to offer to the Buddha. In the time of the fifth Buddha Kanakamuni (拘那含牟尼佛), the lifespan of people and the Buddha was 30,000 years. At that time, Sudatta was named Mahagrihapati (大家主長者), and he paved the ground with silver and filled it with the offspring of milk cows as offerings. At that time, the land was thirty li wide. In the time of the sixth Buddha Kasyapa (迦葉佛), the lifespan of people and the Buddha was 30,000 years. Sudatta at that time was named Mahadhanapati (大番悉長者), and he paved the ground with seven treasures, and the land was twenty li wide, to use as offerings. The seventh Buddha Sakyamuni (釋迦佛) and

人壽百歲。地廣十里。以金布地此處供養。彌勒出世地還廣四十里。以七寶布地以為供養。佛及人壽八萬歲。須達爾時名儴佉王。儴佉王此云螺王。其色白如螺也。出家得成羅漢。又須知此處是般若處般若依果。其猶彌勒樓館。亦如法尚香城也。

金剛波若經義疏卷第一終大正藏第 33 冊 No. 1699 金剛般若疏

金剛般若經義疏卷第二

胡吉藏法師撰

與大比丘眾者。此是第六明同聞眾。問何因緣故要須六事。答具足六事義乃圓足。所以者何。如是即所聞之法。我聞是能聞之人。一時是說經之時。佛是演教之主。祇洹為說教之處。今是同聞之眾。亦是教所為人。並此亦得是證經人。亦得是聽經人。若取釋迦同行宿世善友。多是證經之人。證如來所說可信。證阿難所聞無僻。若是聽經之人多是實行也。問大智論云。菩薩經初有聲聞眾有菩薩眾。聲聞經初但有聲聞無菩薩眾。若爾今是大乘經。何故有聲聞眾無菩薩眾。答曰。具撿大乘經有四句不同。一者大乘經初但有菩薩眾無聲聞眾。即如華嚴七處八會。二者大乘經初但有聲聞眾無菩薩眾。即是此經。三者大乘經初具有大小兩眾。即如涅槃大品。四者大乘經初俱無兩眾。則如金光明及勝鬘等經也。問何因緣故此大乘經但有聲聞

【現代漢語翻譯】現代漢語譯本人壽百歲（指人的壽命為一百歲）。地廣十里（指土地廣闊十里）。以金布地此處供養（用黃金鋪滿地面在此處進行供養）。彌勒出世地還廣四十里（彌勒佛出世時，土地會更加廣闊，達到四十里）。以七寶布地以為供養（用七種珍寶鋪滿地面作為供養）。佛及人壽八萬歲（佛和人的壽命都將達到八萬歲）。須達爾時名儴佉王（須達在那時名為儴佉王）。儴佉王此云螺王（儴佉王，也稱為螺王）。其色白如螺也（他的膚色像螺一樣潔白）。出家得成羅漢（出家修行證得阿羅漢果位）。又須知此處是般若處般若依果（要知道這裡是般若智慧的所在，般若智慧依賴於修行證果）。其猶彌勒樓館（就像彌勒佛的樓閣）。亦如法尚香城也（也像法尚香城一樣）。《金剛波若經義疏》卷第一終大正藏第 33 冊 No. 1699 《金剛般若疏》

《金剛般若經義疏》卷第二

胡吉藏法師撰

與大比丘眾者（與眾多大比丘在一起）。此是第六明同聞眾（這是六種成就中的第六種，表明聽法者共同聽聞）。問何因緣故要須六事（問：因為什麼緣故需要這六種成就）。答具足六事義乃圓足（答：具備這六種成就，意義才能圓滿）。所以者何（為什麼這樣說呢）。如是即所聞之法（『如是』是指所聽聞的佛法）。我聞是能聞之人（『我聞』是指能夠聽聞佛法的人）。一時是說經之時（『一時』是指說經的時間）。佛是演教之主（佛是宣講教義的主）。祇洹為說教之處（祇洹精舍是說法的場所）。今是同聞之眾（現在是共同聽聞佛法的僧眾）。亦是教所為人（也是佛法所要教化的人）。並此亦得是證經人（這些人也可以是證明佛經真實性的人）。亦得是聽經人（也可以是聽聞佛經的人）。若取釋迦同行宿世善友（如果說是與釋迦牟尼佛一同修行，宿世的善友）。多是證經之人（大多是證明佛經真實性的人）。證如來所說可信（證明如來所說的話是可信的）。證阿難所聞無僻（證明阿難所聽聞的沒有偏差）。若是聽經之人多是實行也（如果是聽經的人，大多是實踐佛法的人）。問大智論云（問：《大智度論》中說）。菩薩經初有聲聞眾有菩薩眾（菩薩藏的經典開始時既有聲聞眾也有菩薩眾）。聲聞經初但有聲聞無菩薩眾（聲聞藏的經典開始時只有聲聞眾沒有菩薩眾）。若爾今是大乘經（如果是這樣，現在是屬於大乘經典）。何故有聲聞眾無菩薩眾（為什麼只有聲聞眾而沒有菩薩眾）。答曰（答：）。具撿大乘經有四句不同（仔細檢查大乘經典，有四種不同的情況）。一者大乘經初但有菩薩眾無聲聞眾（第一種情況是大乘經典開始時只有菩薩眾沒有聲聞眾）。即如華嚴七處八會（例如《華嚴經》的七處八會）。二者大乘經初但有聲聞眾無菩薩眾（第二種情況是大乘經典開始時只有聲聞眾沒有菩薩眾）。即是此經（就是這部《金剛經》）。三者大乘經初具有大小兩眾（第三種情況是大乘經典開始時既有聲聞眾也有菩薩眾）。即如涅槃大品（例如《涅槃經》和《大品般若經》）。四者大乘經初俱無兩眾（第四種情況是大乘經典開始時既沒有聲聞眾也沒有菩薩眾）。則如金光明及勝鬘等經也（例如《金光明經》和《勝鬘經》等）。問何因緣故此大乘經但有聲聞（問：因為什麼緣故這部大乘經典只有聲聞眾）

【English Translation】 English version The human lifespan is a hundred years. The land is ten li (a Chinese unit of distance, approximately 500 meters) wide. To spread gold on the ground here as an offering. When Maitreya (the future Buddha) appears in the world, the land will be forty li wide. To spread seven treasures on the ground as an offering. The Buddha and humans will live for eighty thousand years. At that time, Sudatta (a wealthy merchant known for his generosity) was named King Rangkhya. King Rangkhya is also called King Snail. His color is as white as a snail. He renounced the world and became an Arhat (one who has attained enlightenment). Furthermore, know that this place is the abode of Prajna (wisdom), and Prajna relies on the fruit of enlightenment. It is like Maitreya's pavilion. It is also like the city of Dharma-fragrance. End of the first volume of the Commentary on the Diamond Prajna Sutra Taisho Tripitaka Volume 33, No. 1699, Commentary on the Diamond Sutra

Commentary on the Diamond Prajna Sutra, Volume Two

Composed by Dharma Master Huijizang

'With a great assembly of Bhikshus (fully ordained monks).' This is the sixth aspect, indicating the assembly of those who hear together. Question: What is the reason for needing these six aspects? Answer: Having these six aspects complete makes the meaning complete. Why is that? 'Thus' refers to the Dharma (teachings) that is heard. 'I heard' refers to the person who is able to hear. 'At one time' refers to the time when the Sutra was spoken. The Buddha is the master who expounds the teachings. Jetavana (a monastery) is the place where the teachings are spoken. Now, this is the assembly of those who hear together. They are also the people for whom the teachings are intended. Furthermore, these can also be people who verify the Sutra. They can also be people who listen to the Sutra. If we consider them as Shakyamuni's (the current Buddha) companions and virtuous friends from past lives, they are mostly people who verify the Sutra. They verify that what the Tathagata (another name for the Buddha) said is trustworthy. They verify that what Ananda (the Buddha's attendant, known for his memory) heard is without error. If they are people who listen to the Sutra, they are mostly people who practice it. Question: The Mahaprajnaparamita Shastra (Great Treatise on the Perfection of Wisdom) says that Sutras for Bodhisattvas (enlightenment beings) begin with assemblies of both Shravakas (hearers, disciples) and Bodhisattvas. Sutras for Shravakas begin only with assemblies of Shravakas and no Bodhisattvas. If that is the case, this is a Mahayana (Great Vehicle) Sutra. Why is there an assembly of Shravakas but no assembly of Bodhisattvas? Answer: Upon careful examination, Mahayana Sutras have four different situations. First, Mahayana Sutras begin only with assemblies of Bodhisattvas and no Shravakas, such as the Avatamsaka Sutra (Flower Garland Sutra) in its seven locations and eight assemblies. Second, Mahayana Sutras begin only with assemblies of Shravakas and no Bodhisattvas, which is this Sutra. Third, Mahayana Sutras begin with assemblies of both Shravakas and Bodhisattvas, such as the Nirvana Sutra and the Mahaprajnaparamita Sutra. Fourth, Mahayana Sutras begin with neither assembly, such as the Suvarnaprabhasa Sutra (Golden Light Sutra) and the Srimala Sutra. Question: What is the reason that this Mahayana Sutra only has an assembly of Shravakas?

眾。答曰。今此經中實具兩眾。何以知之。下流通文廣列眾故。今但列聲聞眾者。示以此般若要略門故。又應具四眾。今但列比丘者。一者釋迦出世比丘最在前入道故。二者心形兩勝故。形則勝於在俗。心則勝比丘尼。是故偏列。又此諸比丘是如來內眷屬。與佛共住常在佛邊。餘三眾不爾。又比丘眾能受正法能說正法助佛揚化。是故偏列。所以不列菩薩者。菩薩是客來故。所以不列。聲聞舊眾故。所以偏列之。又顯示教中聲聞威儀勝於菩薩。菩薩形無定方反常而化。又今正欲破聲聞人邪曲之見令信受般若。是故偏列。菩薩不爾。所以不列。言大比丘僧者。外國應云摩訶比丘僧。摩訶者或大或勝或多。言大者具大戒故具大德故大名聞故。言多者數至千二百五十人故。言勝者諸眾中最勝故。論議能勝九十六種外道故。比丘名乞士。從俗人乞食以資身。從諸佛乞法以練神也。言僧者。福田經說。諸有五凈德名曰福田。一者發心離俗懷珮道故。二毀於形好應法服故。三者永割親愛無的漠故。四者委棄軀命集善法故。五者志求大乘欲度人故。千二百五十人者。佛初成道前度五人。次度優樓頻螺迦葉摩訶迦葉得五百人。次度那提迦葉伽耶迦葉兄弟二人各有二百五十弟子。合成千人。次度舍利弗目連復得二百五十人。合有一千二百五

【現代漢語翻譯】現代漢語譯本眾：回答說，這部經中實際上包含了兩種聽眾。憑什麼知道呢？因為後面的流通分中廣泛列舉了各種聽眾。現在只列出聲聞眾，是爲了表明這是般若的精要法門。此外，本應包括四眾弟子（比丘、比丘尼、優婆塞、優婆夷），現在只列出比丘，一是釋迦牟尼佛出世時，比丘最先入道；二是比丘在身形和心性上都更勝一籌。身形上勝過在家眾，心性上勝過比丘尼。因此特別列出比丘。而且這些比丘是如來的親眷屬，與佛共同居住，常在佛身邊，其餘三眾則不然。此外，比丘眾能夠接受正法，能夠宣說正法，幫助佛陀弘揚教化，因此特別列出。不列出菩薩的原因是，菩薩是外來的客人。不列出聲聞以外的其他舊有聽眾，所以特別列出聲聞。此外，也顯示在教法中，聲聞的威儀勝過菩薩。菩薩的形象沒有固定的方式，反而常常以反常的方式來教化。而且現在正是要破除聲聞人邪曲的見解，讓他們信受般若，因此特別列出聲聞，菩薩則不然，所以不列出。說到『大比丘僧』，在外國應該說『摩訶比丘僧』。『摩訶』的意思是『大』、『勝』或『多』。說『大』，是因為他們具足大戒、具足大德、具有大名聞。說『多』，是因為人數達到一千二百五十人。說『勝』，是因為他們在所有聽眾中最殊勝，論辯能夠勝過九十六種外道。比丘被稱為『乞士』，從世俗之人那裡乞食來維持身體，從諸佛那裡乞法來磨練精神。說到『僧』，在《福田經》中說，具有五種清凈功德的人被稱為『福田』：一是發心離開世俗，懷抱修道的志向；二是毀壞美好的形貌，穿著符合佛法的僧服；三是永遠割捨親情愛戀，沒有固定的居所；四是委棄生命，積聚善法；五是立志追求大乘佛法，想要度化他人。一千二百五十人，是佛陀最初成道時，先度化了五人。然後度化了優樓頻螺迦葉（Uruvilva-kasyapa）、摩訶迦葉（Maha-kasyapa），得到了五百人。然後度化了那提迦葉（Nadi-kasyapa）、伽耶迦葉（Gaya-kasyapa）兄弟二人，他們各有二百五十名弟子，合起來有一千人。然後度化了舍利弗（Sariputra）、目連（Maudgalyayana），又得到了二百五十人，總共有一千二百五十人。

【English Translation】 English version The assembly: The answer is, in this sutra, there are actually two assemblies. How do we know this? Because the circulation section below extensively lists the assemblies. The reason for only listing the Sravaka (Śrāvaka) assembly now is to show that this is the essential gate of Prajna (Prajñā). Furthermore, there should be four assemblies (Bhikkhus, Bhikkhunis, Upasakas, Upasikas), but only Bhikkhus are listed now. Firstly, when Shakyamuni Buddha (Śākyamuni) appeared in the world, Bhikkhus were the first to enter the path. Secondly, Bhikkhus are superior in both form and mind. In form, they are superior to laypeople; in mind, they are superior to Bhikkhunis. Therefore, Bhikkhus are specifically listed. Moreover, these Bhikkhus are the inner retinue of the Tathagata (Tathāgata), living with the Buddha and always by his side, which is not the case for the other three assemblies. Furthermore, the Bhikkhu assembly can receive the Dharma (Dharma), can speak the Dharma, and assist the Buddha in propagating the teachings. Therefore, they are specifically listed. The reason for not listing Bodhisattvas (Bodhisattva) is that Bodhisattvas are guests. The reason for not listing other old assemblies besides Sravakas is why Sravakas are specifically listed. Furthermore, it shows that in the teachings, the demeanor of Sravakas is superior to that of Bodhisattvas. The form of Bodhisattvas is not fixed, and they often transform in unconventional ways. Moreover, the current intention is to break the heretical views of Sravakas and lead them to believe in and accept Prajna. Therefore, Sravakas are specifically listed, but not Bodhisattvas, so they are not listed. Speaking of 'Great Bhikkhu Sangha (Saṃgha),' in foreign countries, it should be called 'Maha Bhikkhu Sangha.' 'Maha' means 'great,' 'superior,' or 'many.' Saying 'great' is because they possess great precepts, great virtues, and great fame. Saying 'many' is because the number reaches one thousand two hundred and fifty people. Saying 'superior' is because they are the most superior among all assemblies, and their arguments can overcome the ninety-six kinds of heretical paths. Bhikkhus are called 'beggars,' begging for food from laypeople to sustain their bodies and begging for the Dharma from the Buddhas to refine their spirits. Speaking of 'Sangha,' the Sutra of the Field of Merit says that those who possess five pure virtues are called 'fields of merit': firstly, having the aspiration to leave the secular world and embrace the path of cultivation; secondly, destroying beautiful appearances and wearing robes that conform to the Dharma; thirdly, forever severing familial love and having no fixed abode; fourthly, entrusting their lives to accumulate good deeds; fifthly, aspiring to seek the Great Vehicle and wanting to liberate others. The one thousand two hundred and fifty people are those whom the Buddha initially converted upon attaining enlightenment, first converting five people. Then he converted Uruvilva-kasyapa (Uruvilva-kāśyapa) and Maha-kasyapa (Mahākāśyapa), obtaining five hundred people. Then he converted the two brothers Nadi-kasyapa (Nadī-kāśyapa) and Gaya-kasyapa (Gayā-kāśyapa), each with two hundred and fifty disciples, totaling one thousand people. Then he converted Sariputra (Śāriputra) and Maudgalyayana (Maudgalyāyana), obtaining another two hundred and fifty people, totaling one thousand two hundred and fifty people.

十五人。今但舉其大數取有名聞者。正云千二百五十也。爾時世尊下。第二別序。就別序中大開為二。第一明如來涂行乞食。第二明如來敷座而坐入於三昧。就此二章各開兩段。初章二者。一明往事。二明還事。后章二者。一明敷座。即入定前方便。二而坐一句。第二正入三昧。問何因緣故前明乞食后入三昧。答曰。欲令眾生生福德故。所以前明乞食。欲令眾生生智慧故。入三昧后說法。複次前利益在家眾生故。后通利益出家在家諸大眾故。亦云前益白衣則別益。何故。唯就白衣乞食不就比丘比丘尼乞食。故稱別後為四眾說法則通利益。複次前與眾生世間利。后與眾生出世間利故。複次前示為福田。顯如來是應供故。后明佛為施主。以般若法施眾生。即是釋迦如來正遍知義。複次初是中前利益眾生。后是中后利益眾生故。複次前是身業益物。后入三昧是意業益物。次說般若是口業益物也。複次前欲令生身久住故。后欲令法身久住故。欲令生身久住乞食資于生身。后說般若即是益於法身。以有此兩住令眾生得二身之益也。又乞食示如來少欲知足之行。說法顯如來微妙之解。又乞食明佛慈悲。說法明佛智慧。又乞食示末世眾生身軌。說法示末世眾生心軌。合令一切眾生心依般若也。又令弟子從俗人乞食以資身。從如來受般

若以練神。二事便足。又乞食破憍慢心。說般若破愚癡心。問大經因食開涅槃與此經何異。答彼經因食開如來法身常身非雜食身。此經因乞食明有上來諸義也。又二經亦同。初乞食明與凡夫二乘同。次說法明不可以身相得見如來故如來身非是食身。論云。三相異體故離彼是如來。要須先同而後異。此即欲令凡夫二乘皆發心求佛身也。問今說般若何因緣故前明乞食。答云。至人動無非時。諸有所作悉皆益物。故不應責所由。複次以近顯遠。故將說般若前明乞食。所以者何。世間飲食本以資身養命。般若法食資法身養于慧命。複次乞食是四聖之種。般若是眾聖之本。複次道遠乎哉。體之即神。是故飲食不離般若。若能了食清凈即是般若也。就經文中凡有五句。一標福物之人。二明乞食之時節。三辨乞食儀容。四明乞食之處所。五明乞食方法。爾時世尊者。此即是第一標福物之人。成實論云。具上九號故名世尊。食時下。第二明乞食之時。此乃是世間粗事而遠表佛法兩益。而自他無惱。然世間居士食有定時。初旦則始營未辦。晚日啖食既訖。今是營食初熟之時。於是行詣。可謂得時。聖人心雖存道。身托有資。今內無積畜之累。外有福物之功。乞若得時彼我兼益。乞若失時則自他兩惱。故云食時。以知時故名大法師。信哉誠

說。著衣持缽下。第三明整。于容儀明衣有三種。著亦三時。若平常臥起著於五條。名安陀衛。此云下品衣亦云內著衣。若入眾法事著於七條。名郁多羅僧。此雲中品衣。若入聚落見國王長者著僧伽梨。此云大衣亦云正著衣。從九條已上至二十五條略為三品。品中有三合成九種。下品三者九條十一十三條也。中品三者十五十七十九條也。上品三者二十一二十三二十五條也。此隨形大小故制條葉多少。佛身丈六可著二十五條。今人唯可十五條而已。外國通稱袈裟。此云離塵服。若紅紫相糅則增物染心。今三種壞色則貪心不起。二云消瘦衣。入道之人身被此服則煩惱折落。三者云蓮華服。此借喻為名。體凈離垢有類芙蕖。四者云間色衣。三色相間共成一衣。真諦三藏云赤血色衣。外國袈裟雖復五部不同。同皆赤色。問常云三種壞色。云何言並赤色。答常解云。新衣前取青染。次則入泥。次樹汁度之名為木蘭。故云若青若泥若木蘭。三藏云。預是中國人都無此法。言三種壞色者。三色之中隨用一色以點印之。若有青處即用青點。若無有青處用泥為點。無泥處可磨鐵汁點之。並但應取一色便足。但為時處各異一色不恒。恐諸比丘生於疑悔故言於三種隨取一色。十八部義雖異衣色是一。故大經云。見我弟子著赤色衣謂呼是血。但

點不同故有諸部為異。若薩婆多部點顯現處。上座部則節節皆點。若正量部但點四角也。三藏又云。外國亦無五部著五種衣。但佛為波斯匿王解夢。玄記末世有惡比丘破我法者分為五部。彼土俗人有五性故著五色衣。為表五種神異故也。問佛入涅槃之時。三衣為在何處。答說處不同。若依胎經云。佛將入涅槃手自牒三衣置金棺中以儭佛身。若依摩耶經說。摩耶從忉利天下不復見佛。唯見佛僧伽梨及錫杖。而自悲嘆云。我子在世著執此物以用度人。今空無主。以此而推三衣猶在。三藏云。佛五條即在彌梯羅國。七條在半遮尸國。大衣及錫杖在罽賓國。尼師檀在迦毗羅國。持缽者。一隨順三世佛法。二者為破外道手自捧食。三顯威儀利物不同下賤乞人。四為示永功德器。無量壽經云貯功德示福田。著袈裟示福田。律中雲。佛將阿難往南山國。彼土多有良田。鄰壟可愛。仍令傳像之以製衣。表出家之人為世福田能令施心種子獲無量報。有散種良田收功而萬倍故。衣之條葉擬似田之壟畔。所以經云示福田也。缽姼羅此云應量器。即表出家人體具智斷內外相應即是應受人天供養之器也。佛初受二女乳糜。即是金器盛之。廣於一尋。此是未成道時食器也。至成道竟次受提謂波利長者所施果。或言是麨。爾時未有缽。自念。三世諸佛

【現代漢語翻譯】現代漢語譯本由於觀點不同，才會有各個部派的差異。例如，薩婆多部（Sarvastivada，一切有部）只在關鍵處標點，而上座部（Theravada，長老部）則在每一節都標點。正量部（Sammitiya，正量部）則只在四角標點。三藏（Tripitaka，佛教經典總稱）又說，外國也沒有五部穿著五種顏色的衣服。只是佛陀為波斯匿王（Prasenajit，古印度拘薩羅國國王）解夢時，預言末世會有惡比丘破壞佛法，分裂為五部。那些地方的百姓因為有五種根性，所以穿五種顏色的衣服，以此來表示五種神通差異。有人問，佛陀入涅槃（Nirvana，佛教術語，指解脫）時，三衣（Tricivara，比丘所穿的三種僧衣）在哪裡？回答說，不同的經典有不同的說法。如果依據《胎經》所說，佛陀將要入涅槃時，親手疊好三衣，放在金棺中，用來裝飾佛身。如果依據《摩耶經》所說，摩耶夫人（Maya，釋迦牟尼的生母）從忉利天（Trayastrimsa，佛教欲界六天之一）下來后，再也見不到佛陀，只看到佛陀的僧伽梨（Samghati，大衣）和錫杖（Khakkhara，比丘所持的杖），於是悲嘆道：『我的兒子在世時，穿著拿著這些東西來度化世人，現在卻空無主人。』由此推斷，三衣應該還在。三藏說，佛陀的五條衣在彌梯羅國（Mithila，古印度城市），七條衣在半遮尸國（Pancasila，可能是指五戒），大衣和錫杖在罽賓國（Kashmir，古印度地區），尼師檀（Nisidana，坐具）在迦毗羅國（Kapilavastu，釋迦牟尼的故鄉）。持有缽（Patra，食器）的原因：一是隨順過去、現在、未來三世諸佛的傳統；二是爲了破斥外道用手捧食物的習慣；三是顯示威儀，與乞丐不同；四是顯示永恒的功德之器。《無量壽經》說，缽是『貯功德，示福田』。穿著袈裟（Kasaya，僧侶所穿的法衣）也是『示福田』。《律藏》中說，佛陀曾帶領阿難（Ananda，釋迦牟尼的十大弟子之一）前往南山國，那裡的土地有很多良田，田埂鄰近，非常可愛，於是讓人們模仿田地的樣子來製作袈裟，表示出家之人是世間的福田，能夠讓佈施善心的人獲得無量的福報，就像在肥沃的良田里播撒種子，可以收穫萬倍的功德一樣。袈裟的條葉就像田地的田埂，所以經中說袈裟是『示福田』。缽姼羅（Patra）翻譯成漢語是『應量器』，就是表示出家人身心具備智慧和決斷，內外相應，就是應該接受人天供養的器具。佛陀最初接受兩位牧女供養的乳糜（Payasa，乳粥），是用金器盛放的，大約有一尋（古代長度單位）那麼大，這是佛陀未成道時的食器。等到成道之後，接著接受提謂（Trapusa）和波利（Bhallika）兩位長者供養的果實，或者說是炒麵。那時還沒有缽，佛陀心想，三世諸佛

【English Translation】 English version Due to differing viewpoints, various schools arose. For example, the Sarvastivada (Sarvastivada, the 'All Exists' school) only marks significant points, while the Theravada (Theravada, the 'Elders' school) marks every section. The Sammitiya (Sammitiya, a personalist school) only marks the four corners. The Tripitaka (Tripitaka, the Buddhist canon) also states that in foreign lands, there are no five schools wearing five different colors of robes. It was only when the Buddha interpreted a dream for King Prasenajit (Prasenajit, King of Kosala in ancient India) that he predicted that in the degenerate age, evil monks would destroy the Dharma and split into five schools. The people in those regions wear five colors of robes because they have five different natures, thus representing five kinds of supernatural differences. Someone asked, 'When the Buddha entered Nirvana (Nirvana, the ultimate goal of Buddhism), where were his three robes (Tricivara, the three robes worn by monks)?' The answer is that different scriptures have different accounts. According to the Womb Sutra, when the Buddha was about to enter Nirvana, he personally folded his three robes and placed them in a golden coffin to adorn his body. According to the Maya Sutra, after Maya (Maya, the mother of Shakyamuni Buddha) descended from the Trayastrimsa Heaven (Trayastrimsa, one of the six heavens of the Desire Realm), she could no longer see the Buddha, but only saw the Buddha's Samghati (Samghati, outer robe) and Khakkhara (Khakkhara, a monk's staff), and lamented, 'My son, when he was alive, wore and carried these things to liberate people, but now they are without a master.' From this, it can be inferred that the three robes are still around. The Tripitaka says that the Buddha's five-piece robe is in Mithila (Mithila, an ancient Indian city), the seven-piece robe is in Pancasila (Pancasila, possibly referring to the Five Precepts), the large robe and staff are in Kashmir (Kashmir, an ancient Indian region), and the Nisidana (Nisidana, sitting cloth) is in Kapilavastu (Kapilavastu, the birthplace of Shakyamuni Buddha). The reasons for holding a Patra (Patra, a bowl): first, to follow the tradition of the Buddhas of the past, present, and future; second, to refute the heretics' habit of eating with their hands; third, to display dignified conduct, different from beggars; and fourth, to show an eternal vessel of merit. The Infinite Life Sutra says that the bowl is 'to store merit and show the field of blessings.' Wearing the Kasaya (Kasaya, a monk's robe) is also 'to show the field of blessings.' The Vinaya (Vinaya, monastic rules) says that the Buddha once led Ananda (Ananda, one of the ten great disciples of Shakyamuni Buddha) to the Southern Mountain Country, where there were many fertile fields, and the ridges were close together and lovely. So he had people imitate the appearance of the fields to make the Kasaya, indicating that monks are the fields of blessings for the world, enabling those who give with a good heart to receive immeasurable blessings, just like sowing seeds in fertile fields, which can reap ten thousand times the merit. The strips of the Kasaya are like the ridges of the fields, so the sutra says that the Kasaya is 'to show the field of blessings.' Patra is translated into Chinese as '應量器 (ying liang qi),' which means 'a vessel of appropriate measure,' indicating that monks possess wisdom and discernment, and are internally and externally consistent, and are therefore worthy of receiving offerings from humans and gods. The Buddha initially received the milk porridge (Payasa, rice porridge) offered by two shepherdesses, which was placed in a golden vessel, about one fathom (an ancient unit of length) in size. This was the Buddha's eating utensil before enlightenment. After enlightenment, he then received the fruits, or roasted flour, offered by the elders Trapusa and Bhallika. At that time, there was no bowl, and the Buddha thought, 'All the Buddhas of the three ages'

無有手捧食法。是以四王奉以四缽。佛以手案之合成一缽。而四重文現。又三藏云。凈居天還將過去四王石缽以付四王。四王各用奉佛。此缽今在罽賓國。有塔盛之。至像法滅四王還將付凈居天。凈居天待彌勒出令四王送與彌勒。然缽之大小三品不同。上品容三缽他飯。一缽他羹。余可食物者半羹下品則容一缽他飯。半缽他羹。余可食物半羹。若大於少少於大是為中品缽。缽他是外國六舛器。上品缽則容三斗。可盛二斗七舛食。須空上三舛。以示少欲。下品缽容一斗半。可盛一斗二舛食。須空上三舛。則是一斗二舛。兩盈之間名中品缽也。大智論云。明缽有八種。不許弟子畜金銀缽。恐生貪故。不許畜木缽。受垢故。但許畜二種。謂鐵瓦等也。佛畜石缽也。問曰。頗有佛不著袈裟不用缽不耶。答有。大論云。天王佛作白衣威儀也。入舍衛大城乞食下。第四明乞食之處所。舊解云。園去城有千二百步。或有言四里。如來受食其法有三。一坐待日時。名膳自至。二則外來請佛。請佛有二。一者佛與眾僧俱去。二者僧去而佛不去。遣人請食。所以不去者凡為五事。一為入定。二為諸天說法。三為看病比丘。四為案行房舍。五為欲制戒也。三者如來自行乞食。行法有三。一則飛空而去。二者足離地四寸而印文現地。三者足踐蓮

【現代漢語翻譯】現代漢語譯本：沒有用手捧食物的方法。因此四大天王各自奉上四個缽。佛用手按壓，將它們合成一個缽，並且顯現出四重紋路。另外，《三藏》中說，凈居天人也將過去諸佛的石缽交給四大天王，四大天王各自用來供奉佛。這個缽現在在罽賓國（Kashmir），有一座塔來盛放它。到像法時期末，四大天王還會將它交給凈居天人。凈居天人等待彌勒（Maitreya）出世，讓四大天王送給彌勒。然而缽的大小分為上、中、下三品，各不相同。上品缽可以容納三缽他（patra，容量單位）的飯，一缽他的羹，剩餘可以食用的食物半缽他。下品缽則可以容納一缽他的飯，半缽他的羹，剩餘可以食用的食物半缽他。如果大於下品而少於上品，就是中品缽。缽他是外國的六舛（chuan，容量單位）器。上品缽可以容納三斗（dou，容量單位），可以盛二斗七舛的食物，需要空出上面的三舛，來表示少欲。下品缽容納一斗半，可以盛一斗二舛的食物，需要空出上面的三舛，就是一斗二舛。兩盈之間叫做中品缽。《大智度論》中說，明確缽有八種，不允許弟子蓄積金銀缽，恐怕產生貪慾的緣故。不允許蓄積木缽，因為容易藏污納垢。只允許蓄積兩種，就是鐵缽和瓦缽等。佛使用的是石缽。問：有沒有佛不穿袈裟、不用缽的時候呢？答：有。《大智度論》中說，天王佛示現白衣的威儀。進入舍衛（Shravasti）大城乞食如下。第四點說明乞食的處所。舊的解釋說，園林距離城市有一千二百步，或者有人說是四里。如來接受供養的方法有三種。一是坐著等待時間，名叫『膳自至』。二是外面來請佛。請佛有兩種情況，一是佛與眾僧一同去，二是僧眾去而佛不去，派人請佛去吃飯。不去的原因有五種：一是入定，二是為諸天說法，三是看望生病的比丘（bhikshu），四是巡視房舍，五是想要制定戒律。三是如來自己去乞食。行走的方法有三種：一是飛在空中而去，二是腳離地四寸，並且腳印顯現在地上，三是腳踩在蓮花上。

【English Translation】 English version: There is no method of eating food by holding it in the hand. Therefore, the Four Heavenly Kings each offered four bowls (patra). The Buddha pressed them together with his hand, combining them into one bowl, and four layers of patterns appeared. Furthermore, the Samantapasadika says that the Pure Abode Heavens also gave the stone bowls of past Buddhas to the Four Heavenly Kings, and each of the Four Heavenly Kings used them to offer to the Buddha. This bowl is now in the country of Kashmir (Kashmir), and there is a pagoda to hold it. When the Dharma-image Ending Age arrives, the Four Heavenly Kings will also return it to the Pure Abode Heavens. The Pure Abode Heavens will wait for Maitreya (Maitreya) to appear and have the Four Heavenly Kings deliver it to Maitreya. However, the sizes of the bowls are different, with upper, middle, and lower grades. The upper-grade bowl can hold three patras of rice, one patra of soup, and half a patra of other edible food. The lower-grade bowl can hold one patra of rice, half a patra of soup, and half a patra of other edible food. If it is larger than the lower grade but smaller than the upper grade, it is a middle-grade bowl. A patra is a foreign vessel of six chuan. The upper-grade bowl can hold three dou, and can hold two dou and seven chuan of food, requiring the top three chuan to be left empty to show little desire. The lower-grade bowl holds one and a half dou, and can hold one dou and two chuan of food, requiring the top three chuan to be left empty, which is one dou and two chuan. The space between the two full measures is called a middle-grade bowl. The Mahaprajnaparamita Shastra says that it is clear that there are eight kinds of bowls, and disciples are not allowed to accumulate gold or silver bowls, for fear of generating greed. They are not allowed to accumulate wooden bowls because they easily accumulate dirt. Only two kinds are allowed, namely iron bowls and earthenware bowls, etc. The Buddha used a stone bowl. Question: Are there times when the Buddha does not wear a kasaya (袈裟, monastic robe) or use a bowl? Answer: Yes. The Mahaprajnaparamita Shastra says that the Heavenly King Buddha manifested the demeanor of a layman. Entering the great city of Shravasti (Shravasti) to beg for food is as follows. The fourth point explains the place to beg for food. The old explanation says that the garden is one thousand two hundred steps away from the city, or some say four li. There are three methods for the Thus Come One (Tathagata) to receive offerings. First, sitting and waiting for the time, called 'meals come by themselves'. Second, someone comes from outside to invite the Buddha. There are two situations for inviting the Buddha: one is that the Buddha and the Sangha (僧伽, monastic community) go together, and the other is that the Sangha goes but the Buddha does not go, sending someone to invite the Buddha to eat. There are five reasons for not going: first, to enter samadhi (三昧, meditative absorption); second, to preach the Dharma (法, teachings) to the heavens; third, to visit sick bhikshus (比丘, monks); fourth, to inspect the rooms; and fifth, to want to establish precepts. Third, the Thus Come One goes to beg for food himself. There are three methods of walking: first, flying in the air; second, the feet are four inches off the ground, and footprints appear on the ground; and third, the feet step on lotuses.

華而蓮華動而足不動。佛所以涂步乞食者。依瓔珞女經凡有十事。一者如來入城乞食。眾生見佛三十二相如須彌山王故發菩提心。必求如來身也。二者城中有盲聾疾病等人乃至百苦。不能得至如來所。是故如來入城放光照之。眾苦休息便發菩提心。三者為剎利婆羅門豪貴長者自恃種性不生敬心。見如來威德嚴儀挺特有異於世故憍慢心息。故發菩提心。四者為守護女人有三監五礙故不得見佛。又為懈怠者雖與如來鄰住而不能往。故佛今入城令其因得禮拜問訊。故發菩提心也。五者如來入城四王八部皆悉導從。各赍華香歌詠供養。城中人見即便生念云。諸天尚舍天樂供養于佛。我等云何而不供養禮拜者哉。故因發心也。六者如來持四王所奉之缽。實是一缽四緣宛然為異。城中人見此希有。是故發菩提心也。七者為貧富二人。若使富者見如來缽空於是多施。若是貧者便見如來缽滿即少施皆生歡喜。故發菩提心也。八者如來缽中受百味飯食。皆悉不雜還如異器盛食。一切眾僧諸眾生等恣意而散不增不減。見者歡喜無不發心也。九者為未來弟子諸比丘等。現行乞食作其儀軌不畜有為。十者如來之身常在三昧。其身不食。但為利益眾生故現行乞食。以是因緣故云入城乞食也。言于其城中次第乞已者。第五句明乞食方法。有論師言。

【現代漢語翻譯】現代漢語譯本『華而蓮華動而足不動』，意思是蓮花在動，但佛的足卻沒有動。佛陀之所以托缽乞食，依據《瓔珞女經》，有以下十個原因：一、如來（Tathagata，佛的稱號）進入城市乞食，眾生見到佛的三十二相（thirty-two marks of the Buddha）如同須彌山王（Mount Sumeru，佛教宇宙觀中的聖山），因此發起菩提心（bodhicitta，覺悟之心），必定會尋求如來之身。二、城中有盲、聾、疾病等受各種痛苦的人，無法到達如來所在之處。因此，如來進入城市，放出光明照耀他們，使各種痛苦止息，從而發起菩提心。三、爲了那些自恃種姓（caste）的剎帝利（Kshatriya，武士階層）、婆羅門（Brahmin，祭司階層）、豪貴長者，他們不生恭敬心。當他們見到如來的威德和莊嚴的儀態，與世俗之人截然不同，他們的驕慢之心便會止息，從而發起菩提心。四、爲了那些被守護的女人，她們受到『三監五礙』的限制，無法見到佛。也爲了那些懈怠的人，即使與如來鄰近而居，也不能前往拜見。因此，佛陀進入城市，使她們因此得以禮拜問訊，從而發起菩提心。五、如來進入城市時，四大天王（Four Heavenly Kings）和八部眾（Eight kinds of non-human beings）都跟隨引導，各自拿著鮮花和香，歌詠供養。城中的人見到此景，便會生起這樣的念頭：『諸天尚且捨棄天上的快樂來供養佛，我們怎麼能不供養禮拜呢？』因此而發起菩提心。六、如來拿著四大天王所奉獻的缽（bowl），實際上是一個缽，但從四個因緣來看，卻宛然不同。城中的人見到這種稀有景象，因此發起菩提心。七、爲了貧富兩種人。如果富人見到如來的缽是空的，就會多加布施。如果是窮人，便會見到如來的缽是滿的，即使少許佈施也會感到歡喜，從而發起菩提心。八、如來的缽中接受各種美味的飯食，但各種食物都不會混雜，就像用不同的器皿盛放一樣。一切僧眾和眾生等隨意取用，不會增加也不會減少。見到的人都感到歡喜，沒有不發心的。九、爲了未來的弟子，如比丘（bhikkhu，出家男子）等，佛陀示現乞食的行為，作為他們的儀軌，不積蓄財物。十、如來的身體常處於三昧（samadhi，禪定）之中，自身並不需要飲食。但爲了利益眾生，才示現乞食的行為。因為這些因緣，所以說入城乞食。『言于其城中次第乞已者』，第五句說明了乞食的方法。有論師說。

【English Translation】 English version 『The lotus moves, yet the feet remain still.』 The reason why the Buddha walks for alms, according to the Yingluo Maiden Sutra (瓔珞女經), is for the following ten reasons: 1. When the Tathagata (如來, Buddha's title) enters a city for alms, sentient beings see the Buddha's thirty-two marks (三十二相) resembling Mount Sumeru (須彌山, the sacred mountain in Buddhist cosmology), thus generating bodhicitta (菩提心, the mind of enlightenment) and surely seeking the body of the Tathagata. 2. In the city, there are blind, deaf, and sick people, among others, suffering various afflictions, who cannot reach the Tathagata. Therefore, the Tathagata enters the city, emitting light to illuminate them, causing their various sufferings to cease, thereby generating bodhicitta. 3. It is for those Kshatriyas (剎帝利, warrior caste), Brahmins (婆羅門, priestly caste), wealthy and noble elders who rely on their lineage and do not generate respect. When they see the Tathagata's majestic virtue and dignified demeanor, distinct from worldly people, their arrogance subsides, thereby generating bodhicitta. 4. It is for those guarded women, restricted by the 'three supervisions and five obstacles,' who cannot see the Buddha. Also, for those lazy people who, even living near the Tathagata, cannot go to pay respects. Therefore, the Buddha enters the city, allowing them to have the opportunity to bow and inquire, thereby generating bodhicitta. 5. When the Tathagata enters the city, the Four Heavenly Kings (四大天王) and the Eight kinds of non-human beings (八部眾) all follow and guide, each carrying flowers and incense, singing and making offerings. When the people in the city see this scene, they will have the thought: 'Even the gods abandon heavenly pleasures to make offerings to the Buddha, how can we not make offerings and pay respects?' Thus, they generate bodhicitta. 6. The bowl (缽) held by the Tathagata, offered by the Four Heavenly Kings, is actually one bowl, but from the perspective of four conditions, it appears different. When the people in the city see this rare sight, they generate bodhicitta. 7. It is for both the poor and the rich. If the rich see the Tathagata's bowl is empty, they will give generously. If the poor see the Tathagata's bowl is full, even a small offering will bring joy, thereby generating bodhicitta. 8. The Tathagata's bowl receives various delicious foods, but the foods do not mix, as if they were placed in different containers. All the monks and sentient beings can take freely, without increasing or decreasing. Those who see this are delighted, and all generate bodhicitta. 9. For future disciples, such as bhikkhus (比丘, ordained monks), the Buddha demonstrates the act of begging for alms as their model, not accumulating possessions. 10. The Tathagata's body is constantly in samadhi (三昧, meditative absorption), and does not need food. However, for the benefit of sentient beings, the Buddha manifests the act of begging for alms. Because of these reasons, it is said that the Buddha enters the city for alms. 『Yan yu qi cheng zhong ci di qi yi zhe』 (言于其城中次第乞已者), the fifth sentence explains the method of begging for alms. Some commentators say.

外國四姓豪族並在城內住。若使庶人屠兒等並在城外住。若入城時各自別行不相參雜。今言次第乞者。由在城內四姓之中。不擇其貧富次第而從乞也。又善吉舍貧從富謂今雖受果未來無因。今欲使其修未來因業果相續。是故舍貧從富也。迦葉則舍富從貧。愍其交切之苦。又過去不施今生貧窮。今不行施來世復貧。貧相系無得脫時。是以舍富從貧。此之二人雖有慈悲而不能平等。是故為凈名所屈。今如來欲顯平等之道。所以次第乞也。還至本處下。第二明得食後事。然須識般若大意。此是去而不往。歸無所還。受而不納。食而不餐也。此中亦有四句。第一明還至本處。然缽他既滿須反所住以待中時。又利物故往。利竟便還。所以令缽滿即還。不許隨得隨啖者。略有二。前供養師長。二兼濟老病。如來得食分為三分。一分佈施陸地眾生。一分佈施水中眾生。一分自食。若有老病亦分施也。飯食訖者。第二句明食事竟究。收衣缽者。第三明攝容儀也。洗足已者。第四句亦有五。一者明洗塵累。涂步行乞雖離地四寸而示有塵垢。故便洗也。二示尊敬般若故須身凈方說。三為護僧臥具。四為諸天下禮敬于足。五為表眾生煩惱應凈。問佛日行幾里。答如轉輪王法日行四十里也。問樂瓔珞女經云。雖明乞食為於十事。今更有餘義不耶

【現代漢語翻譯】現代漢語譯本外國的四個姓氏的豪族都住在城內。如果讓平民百姓、屠夫等都住在城外。如果進入城內時，各自按照不同的路線行走，互不混雜。現在所說的『次第乞』（依次乞食），是因為在城內的四個姓氏中，不選擇貧富，按照順序去乞食。還有，善吉（Sāṃgharakṣita，人名）捨棄貧窮的人家而選擇富裕的人家，認為現在雖然承受果報，但未來沒有種下善因。現在想要讓他們修未來之因，使善業果報相續不斷。所以捨棄貧窮的人家而選擇富裕的人家。迦葉（Kāśyapa，人名）則捨棄富裕的人家而選擇貧窮的人家，憐憫他們困苦的境地。而且過去不佈施，今生才會貧窮。如果今生還不佈施，來世還會貧窮。貧窮會相互牽連，沒有脫離的時候。因此捨棄富裕的人家而選擇貧窮的人家。這兩個人雖然都有慈悲心，但不能做到平等。所以被維摩詰（Vimalakīrti）所折服。現在如來想要彰顯平等之道，所以才次第乞食。『還至本處下』，第二部分說明得到食物后的事情。然而必須認識般若（Prajñā，智慧）的大意。這是『去而不往，歸無所還，受而不納，食而不餐』。這裡面也有四句。第一句說明『還至本處』。既然缽已經滿了，就必須返回住處等待中午時分。又因為利益眾生才去乞食，利益完畢就返回。所以讓缽滿了就返回，不允許隨得隨吃的原因，大概有兩點：一是先供養師長，二是兼顧救濟年老體弱的人。如來得到食物後分為三份：一份分給陸地上的眾生，一份分給水中的眾生，一份自己食用。如果有年老體弱的人，也分給他們。『飯食訖者』，第二句說明吃飯的事情已經完畢。『收衣缽者』，第三句說明整理儀容。『洗足已者』，第四句也有五層含義：一是表明洗去塵勞。雖然托缽乞食時腳離地面四寸，但還是表示有塵垢，所以要洗腳。二是表示尊敬般若，必須身體潔凈才能說法。三是爲了保護僧人的臥具。四是爲了讓天下的人禮敬佛足。五是爲了表示眾生的煩惱應該清凈。問：佛陀一天行走多少里？答：如同轉輪聖王（cakravartin）的法，一天行走四十里。問：《樂瓔珞女經》中說，乞食是爲了十件事，現在還有其他的意義嗎？

【English Translation】 English version The powerful families of the four foreign castes all live within the city. If commoners and butchers live outside the city. When entering the city, they each walk separately and do not mix. The 'sequential begging' ( Skt: anupūrva-bhikṣā) mentioned now is because among the four castes within the city, one begs in order without choosing the poor or the rich. Furthermore, Saṃgharakṣita abandons the poor and chooses the rich, believing that although they are now receiving the results of past actions, they have not planted good causes for the future. Now he wants them to cultivate future causes so that good karmic results will continue. Therefore, he abandons the poor and chooses the rich. Kāśyapa abandons the rich and chooses the poor, pitying their suffering. Moreover, because they did not give alms in the past, they are poor in this life. If they do not give alms in this life, they will be poor in the next life. Poverty will be interconnected, and there will be no escape. Therefore, he abandons the rich and chooses the poor. Although these two have compassion, they cannot be equal. Therefore, they are subdued by Vimalakīrti. Now the Tathāgata wants to reveal the path of equality, so he begs in order. 'Returning to the original place' is the second part, explaining what happens after obtaining food. However, one must understand the great meaning of Prajñā (wisdom). This is 'going without going, returning without returning, receiving without accepting, eating without eating.' There are also four sentences here. The first sentence explains 'returning to the original place.' Since the bowl is full, one must return to the dwelling place to wait for noon. Also, one goes to beg for the benefit of sentient beings, and returns after the benefit is complete. Therefore, the reason for returning as soon as the bowl is full, and not allowing eating as one goes, is roughly twofold: first, to offer to teachers and elders; second, to provide for the elderly and sick. The Tathāgata divides the food into three parts: one part is distributed to sentient beings on land, one part is distributed to sentient beings in water, and one part is eaten by himself. If there are elderly and sick people, it is also distributed to them. 'Having finished eating' is the second sentence, explaining that the matter of eating is completed. 'Collecting robes and bowls' is the third sentence, explaining arranging one's appearance. 'Having washed the feet' is the fourth sentence, which also has five meanings: first, it indicates washing away the dust and toil. Although the feet are four inches above the ground when begging for food, it still indicates that there is dust, so the feet must be washed. Second, it indicates respect for Prajñā, and one must be clean in body before speaking. Third, it is to protect the bedding of the monks. Fourth, it is for all people in the world to pay homage to the Buddha's feet. Fifth, it is to indicate that the afflictions of sentient beings should be purified. Question: How many li does the Buddha walk in a day? Answer: Like the Dharma of a Cakravartin (wheel-turning king), he walks forty li a day. Question: The Lè Yīngluò Nǚ Jīng (The Sutra of the Joyful Necklace Woman) says that begging for food is for ten things, are there other meanings now?

。答三藏云。佛欲為破惡世貪名利高慢出家人多貪積聚。是故如來自行乞食。又為息外道譏謗言沙門釋子多好著樂。是故行乞。又為顯如來少欲知足。不受人天所奉供養躬自行乞。又有二外道一者樂行。坐受供養。二者苦行。過時而乞。所以過時者。正以或得不得為苦行也。今如來為破二事。佛自乞故破著樂外道。以其乞得時故破苦行外道。敷座而坐下。第二明將說般若故前入三昧。文亦有二。一者敷座定前方便。二者而坐正入三昧。所以自敷座者。般若名為佛母。今欲尊敬般若故自敷座。二者隨順諸佛教戒。若不自敷座臥具。得突吉羅罪。又是示少欲知足。不使人敷也。言而坐者。第二正入三昧。論經長有結跏趺坐。是坐中最勝故。見者歡喜故。身得安穩故。心得端直故。所以入三昧者。如來靜散無二。實無出入。而今為說法人作于模軌。夫說深法必須靜心。若不靜心則不識根緣亦不審法相。是故如來前入三昧然後說法。則是明照于根緣明審法相。毗婆沙云。依相書善法示聰明人相。聰明人相者。善言所言。善行所行。善思所思。是故如來入定思惟然後方說也。又示輕賤薄眾生模軌法則故。有人得少知見。他問即答而不思之。如來不爾。久思惟竟方乃說也。時長老須菩提下。若依開善此則猶屬序分。此之一文名嘆請

序。今謂不爾。已如前說。善吉正問。如來正答　如華嚴普慧二百句問。普賢二千句答。何故容割問為序截答為正。北地論師云。此文屬十二分中護念付屬分。是亦不然。如前說善吉有嘆有請。嘆即是護念付屬。請即是發乎四句問。若以嘆爲護念付屬分者。應以請文為請問分。若言論解護念付屬以之為分。不解請問故請問非分者。論亦不解通別二序。應無序分。然此是未見論家制作之意故生此謬耳。此是易故不釋。難故須解。豈是解與不解而判分與不分耶。今從此文屬第二正說般若分也。若三業分經者。乞食等身業利益分。入三昧意業利益分。今是口業利益分也。若以福慧為判者。上是生物福德門。今是生物智慧門。亦上是利益在家門。今是通益一切門。具如前十數對說。亦不可專作序正兩分。故經意無盡。言多不足。三段失旨。意顯于茲。今聊寄一名為序正流通之說耳。就此正說開為二週。第一週為利根人廣說般若。第二週為中下根未悟略說般若。作此開文驚乎常聽。今具引事義證其起盡。問何以知前是一週后復是一週說耶。答今當以數義驗之。一者經自有文。善吉有前問后問。二問略同。如來前答后答二答相類。是故當知二週說也。又經語難明。今以論為證論解前經答四問竟。而後次第生起釋玄疑伏難。蟬聯而來

【現代漢語翻譯】現代漢語譯本序言。現在說不是這樣。已經像前面所說的那樣了。善吉（Subhuti，須菩提）正確地提問，如來（Tathagata）正確地回答，就像《華嚴經》中普慧（Sarvamati）的兩百句提問，普賢（Samantabhadra）的兩千句回答。為什麼允許分割提問作為序言，截斷回答作為正文呢？北方的論師說，這段文字屬於十二分教中的護念付囑分。這也是不對的。像前面所說，善吉有讚歎和請求。讚歎就是護念付囑，請求就是發起四句提問。如果以讚歎作為護念付囑分，那麼應該以請求的文字作為請問分。如果說論典解釋護念付囑，因此可以作為一分，而不解釋請問，所以請問不是一分，那麼論典也不解釋通序和別序，應該沒有序分。然而這是因為沒有理解論家的製作意圖而產生的謬誤。這部分容易理解所以不解釋，困難所以需要解釋，難道是根據解釋與否來判斷是否為一分嗎？現在認為這段文字屬於第二部分，正說般若。如果以三業來分經文，那麼乞食等是身業利益分，入三昧是意業利益分，現在這是口業利益分。如果以福慧來判斷，上面是產生福德之門，現在是產生智慧之門。上面是利益在家之人，現在是普遍利益一切眾生之門。具體如前面十種對比所說。也不可專門作為序分和正宗分兩部分。所以經文的意義是無窮無盡的，言語再多也不足以表達。分為三段會失去宗旨，意義在這裡顯現。現在姑且寄託一個名稱，稱為序正流通之說。就這正說部分，分為兩週。第一週為利根之人廣說般若，第二週為中下根未悟之人略說般若。這樣劃分經文會使常聽之人感到驚訝。現在具體引用事例和義理來證明它的起始和終結。問：憑什麼知道前面是一週，後面又是一週的說法呢？答：現在應當用數字的意義來驗證。一是經文自身有文，善吉有前問和后問，兩次提問大致相同。如來前後的兩次回答也相似。所以應當知道這是兩週的說法。又經文的語言難以明白，現在用論典作為證明，論典解釋完前面經文回答四個問題后，然後次第生起解釋玄妙的疑問和降伏困難，像蟬聯一樣而來。

【English Translation】 English version Preface. Now it is said that it is not so. It has already been said as before. Subhuti (善吉) asks correctly, and the Tathagata (如來) answers correctly, just like in the Avatamsaka Sutra, Sarvamati's (普慧) two hundred questions and Samantabhadra's (普賢) two thousand answers. Why is it permissible to divide the questions as the preface and cut off the answers as the main body? The northern scholars say that this text belongs to the 'protected and entrusted' section among the twelve divisions of teachings. This is also incorrect. As said before, Subhuti has praise and request. Praise is the 'protected and entrusted', and request is the initiation of the four-line question. If the praise is taken as the 'protected and entrusted' section, then the requesting text should be taken as the 'questioning' section. If it is said that the commentary explains the 'protected and entrusted', therefore it can be a section, but it does not explain the questioning, so the questioning is not a section, then the commentary also does not explain the general and specific prefaces, and there should be no preface section. However, this is a fallacy arising from not understanding the intention of the commentators. This part is easy to understand so it is not explained, and it is difficult so it needs to be explained. Is it based on whether it is explained or not to judge whether it is a section or not? Now it is considered that this text belongs to the second part, the correct exposition of Prajna. If the sutra is divided by the three karmas, then begging for food etc. is the benefit of body karma, entering samadhi is the benefit of mind karma, and now this is the benefit of speech karma. If judged by merit and wisdom, the above is the gate of generating merit, and now it is the gate of generating wisdom. The above benefits those at home, and now it universally benefits all beings. Specifically, as said in the previous ten comparisons. It is also not possible to specifically divide it into the preface and the main body. Therefore, the meaning of the sutra is endless, and no amount of words is enough to express it. Dividing it into three sections would lose the purpose, and the meaning is revealed here. Now, let's just give it a name, calling it the theory of preface, main body, and circulation. Regarding this correct exposition, it is divided into two cycles. The first cycle broadly explains Prajna for those with sharp faculties, and the second cycle briefly explains Prajna for those with medium and lower faculties who have not yet awakened. Dividing the sutra in this way will surprise those who listen regularly. Now, specific examples and meanings are cited to prove its beginning and end. Question: How do you know that the former is one cycle and the latter is another cycle of explanation? Answer: Now we should verify it with the meaning of numbers. First, the sutra itself has text, Subhuti has a previous question and a later question, and the two questions are roughly the same. The Tathagata's previous and later answers are also similar. Therefore, it should be known that this is a two-cycle explanation. Also, the language of the sutra is difficult to understand, and now the commentary is used as proof. After the commentary explains the previous sutra answering the four questions, then it successively arises to explain the profound doubts and subdue difficulties, coming like a chain of cicadas.

。亦釋后問竟次第生起釋玄疑伏難。相接而至。是故知為兩週也。斯乃經論兩證豈虛構哉。問曰。聖人制作理致玄遠。辭即巧妙。豈當一軸之經遂有二週煩長。答曰。雖曰兩週其旨各異非煩長也。所以者何。類如大品兩週。前周明於實慧。後周辨于善權今之兩週在義亦異。前周則凈于緣。後周則盡于觀。然要須緣凈觀盡不緣不觀無所依止方能悟于般若。故肇公云。法無有無之數。聖無有無之智。法無有無之數則無數于外。聖無有無之智則無心於內。于外無數于內無心。彼已寂滅乃階其妙。影公云。萬化非無宗。宗之者無相。虛宗非無契。契之者無心。故至人以無心之妙慧契彼無相之虛宗。此則內外兩冥。緣智俱寂。豈容名數于其間哉。斯二三子言與經會。信而好古。余豈異哉。問何以得知前周盡緣後周盡觀耶。答經有明文。論有誠說。前經直云雖度眾生而無眾生可度。正嘆菩薩依般若作無所得發心乃至無所得修行。而經意雖復緣觀俱息。但文未正顯灼破于觀主。故鈍根之徒由言有于菩薩巧度眾生巧能修行。故後周經文方息四心無發心人乃至修行者。然前周正勸生四心。後周明四心亦息。豈不然乎。論偈云。于內心修行。存我為菩薩。此則障於心違于不住道。以是義故當知。此文正息觀至盡于觀主。文義昺然無所疑也。

【現代漢語翻譯】現代漢語譯本：而且《釋后問》詳細解釋了次第生起的玄妙疑問和潛藏的難題，前後相接，因此可以知道這是兩週說法。這實在是經典和論著的雙重證明，難道是虛構的嗎？有人問：『聖人的著作，其道理玄妙深遠，文辭精巧。難道會有一卷經書出現兩週說法，顯得繁瑣冗長嗎？』回答說：『雖然說是兩週說法，但其主旨各有不同，並非繁瑣冗長。為什麼這麼說呢？類似於《大品般若經》的兩週說法，前一週側重闡明實慧（真實智慧），后一週側重辨析善巧方便。現在的這兩週說法，在意義上也不同。前一週側重於清凈因緣，后一週側重於窮盡觀照。然而，必須要因緣清凈，觀照窮盡，不依賴因緣，不進行觀照，才能領悟般若（智慧）。』所以僧肇大師說：『法沒有有無的數量，聖人沒有有無的智慧。法沒有有無的數量，所以不在外尋求數量；聖人沒有有無的智慧，所以內心沒有執著。不在外尋求數量，內心沒有執著，這樣才能寂滅，從而達到妙境。』道影法師說：『萬物的變化並非沒有宗本，但能作為宗本的東西是沒有相狀的。虛無的宗本並非沒有契合之處，但能契合它的是無心。』所以，達到極高境界的人用無心的妙慧去契合那無相的虛宗。這就是內外兩方面都冥合，因緣和智慧都寂滅，哪裡還能容納名相和數量存在於其中呢？僧肇大師和道影法師的這些話與經義相符，他們相信並愛好古義，我又怎麼會與他們不同呢？有人問：『怎麼知道前一週是窮盡因緣，后一週是窮盡觀照呢？』回答說：『經文有明確的記載，論著有誠實的說法。前一週的經文直接說「雖然度化眾生，但沒有眾生可度」，正是讚歎菩薩依仗般若，以無所得的心發願，乃至以無所得的心修行。雖然經文的意思是因緣和觀照都止息，但文字上沒有明確地破除觀照的主體。所以，根器遲鈍的人會認為菩薩確實度化了眾生，確實能夠修行。因此，后一週的經文才止息四種心，沒有發心的人，乃至沒有修行的人。然而，前一週正是勸導生起四種心，后一週則說明四種心也要止息，難道不是這樣嗎？』論中的偈頌說：『在內心修行，存有「我」是菩薩的想法，這就會障礙內心，違背不住于相的道理。』因為這個緣故，應當知道，這段經文正是要止息觀照，達到窮盡觀照的主體。文義非常明白，沒有什麼可以懷疑的。

【English Translation】 English version: Moreover, 'Shih Hou Wen' (Explanation of Subsequent Questions) explains in detail the subtle doubts and hidden difficulties that arise sequentially, connecting one after another. Therefore, it can be known that there are two rounds of teachings. This is truly a double proof from both the sutras and the commentaries; how could it be a fabrication? Someone asks: 'The works of the sages have profound and far-reaching principles, and their words are ingenious. How could a single scroll of scripture have two rounds of teachings, appearing verbose and lengthy?' The answer is: 'Although it is said that there are two rounds of teachings, their main points are different and not verbose or lengthy. Why is this so? Similar to the two rounds of teachings in the 'Mahaprajnaparamita Sutra' (Great Perfection of Wisdom Sutra), the first round focuses on clarifying actual wisdom (real wisdom), and the second round focuses on distinguishing skillful means. The current two rounds of teachings are also different in meaning. The first round focuses on purifying conditions (緣, yuan), and the second round focuses on exhausting contemplation (觀, guan). However, it is necessary to have pure conditions and exhausted contemplation, not relying on conditions, and not engaging in contemplation, to realize Prajna (智慧, zhihui, wisdom).' Therefore, Master Sengzhao (僧肇) said: 'The Dharma has no number of existence or non-existence, and the sage has no wisdom of existence or non-existence. The Dharma has no number of existence or non-existence, so it does not seek number externally; the sage has no wisdom of existence or non-existence, so there is no attachment in the mind. Not seeking number externally and having no attachment in the mind, one can achieve stillness and reach the realm of wonder.' Doying (道影) Dharma Master said: 'The myriad transformations are not without a source, but that which serves as the source is without form. The empty source is not without a connection, but that which connects to it is without mind.' Therefore, the person who reaches the highest state uses the wonderful wisdom of no-mind to connect with that formless, empty source. This is the merging of both internal and external, and the stillness of both conditions and wisdom. How can names and numbers be accommodated within it? These words of Master Sengzhao and Doying Dharma Master are in accordance with the meaning of the sutras. They believe in and love the ancient meaning, so how could I be different from them? Someone asks: 'How can it be known that the first round exhausts conditions and the second round exhausts contemplation?' The answer is: 'The sutras have clear records, and the commentaries have sincere statements. The first round of the sutra directly says, 'Although one liberates sentient beings, there are no sentient beings to be liberated,' which praises the Bodhisattva (菩薩, pusa) for relying on Prajna, making vows with a mind of non-attainment, and even practicing with a mind of non-attainment. Although the meaning of the sutra is that both conditions and contemplation cease, the text does not explicitly break the subject of contemplation. Therefore, people with dull faculties will think that the Bodhisattva truly liberates sentient beings and is truly able to practice. Therefore, the second round of the sutra stops the four minds, there is no one who makes vows, and even no one who practices. However, the first round precisely encourages the arising of the four minds, and the second round explains that the four minds must also cease. Isn't that so?' The verse in the commentary says: 'Practicing in the inner mind, having the thought of 'I' being a Bodhisattva, will obstruct the mind and violate the principle of non-abiding.' Because of this reason, it should be known that this passage of scripture is precisely to stop contemplation, reaching the exhaustion of the subject of contemplation. The meaning of the text is very clear, and there is nothing to doubt.

此之二週非止是一經之大意。乃是方等之旨歸至人環中之妙術也。又前周為前會。後周為後會。下當更辨。就前周文科為二別。一善吉致問。二如來答。就問之中復開為二。一者經家序能問之人儀容。二者發言正問。初序中又二。一者標對揚之主。二序請法之儀。爾時者。此是如來加與善吉之時。亦是時會發悟之時。故云爾時。問此經加與義與大品何異。答大品則具口意二加。發言命說稱為口加。與其智慧辨才名為意加。今此經但其與智慧辯才為意加。不命之令說無有口加也。然下文亦有對揚之義。但無炳然命說故與大品不同。須菩提者。此人本跡其事難知。三藏云。是本東方世界青龍陀佛影向能仁為弟子化。其猶文殊之例也。或有經云。此是化人。攝大乘論明身子是化人。善吉猶為其例。又經云。是舍衛國長者之子位登遺顏。言遺顏者。法身菩薩過阿鞞之位也。復云。是舍衛國內有婆羅門。名曰鳩留。其人無子祈天神。天神云。汝家大富無堪生者。因見一大德天下詫生其家。兒既長大。令父母請佛還家。後送佛反於祇洹即得羅漢果。復有經說。昔為白衣人。見沙門乞食不得空缽而反。因以食與之。后得十劫常生天中。故其人福德深厚無比。又言。是凈音向王太子。如此等說多出福報雜譬喻經。須菩提者翻為善業。亦

【現代漢語翻譯】現代漢語譯本：這兩週所講的內容不僅僅是一部經的大意，而是方等經的宗旨歸宿，是至人圓融無礙的精妙法術。此外，前一週的內容是前會，后一週的內容是後會，下面應當進一步辨析。就前一週的文科分為兩部分：一是善吉（Subhuti，佛陀的十大弟子之一，解空第一）提出問題，二是如來（Tathagata，佛陀的稱號之一，意為『如實而來者』）回答。在提問的部分又分為兩部分：一是經家敘述能提問的人的儀容，二是發言正式提問。首先，在敘述儀容的部分又分為兩部分：一是標明對揚的主體，二是敘述請法的儀態。『爾時』，這是如來加持善吉的時機，也是當時法會大眾開悟的時機，所以說是『爾時』。有人問，這部經的加持與《大品般若經》有什麼不同？回答是，《大品般若經》具備口加和意加兩種加持。發言命令宣說稱為口加，給予智慧辯才名為意加。現在這部經只是給予智慧辯才作為意加，沒有命令他宣說，所以沒有口加。然而，下文也有對揚的意義，只是沒有像《大品般若經》那樣明確地命令宣說，所以與《大品般若經》不同。須菩提（Subhuti），這個人的本跡難以知曉。《三藏》記載說，他是東方世界青龍陀佛的影向，作為釋迦牟尼佛（Sakyamuni Buddha，佛教的創始人）的弟子來教化眾生，就像文殊菩薩（Manjusri，象徵智慧的菩薩）的例子一樣。或者有經書說，這是化人。《攝大乘論》說明身子（Sariputra，舍利弗，佛陀十大弟子之一，智慧第一）是化人，善吉也是這樣的例子。又有經書說，他是舍衛國（Sravasti，古印度城市）長者的兒子，位登遺顏。所說的遺顏，是指法身菩薩（Dharmakaya Bodhisattva，證悟法身之菩薩）超過阿鞞跋致（Avaivartika，不退轉）的地位。又說，在舍衛國內有一個婆羅門（Brahmin，印度教的祭司階層），名叫鳩留（Kurura），這個人沒有兒子，祈求天神。天神說，你家大富，沒有堪當生育的人。後來看到一位大德天下詫生在他家。兒子長大后，讓父母請佛陀回家，後來送佛陀返回祇洹精舍（Jetavana Vihara，佛陀在世時重要的弘法場所），立即證得阿羅漢果（Arhat，斷盡煩惱，證得解脫的聖者）。又有經書說，過去他是一位白衣人（layman，在家居士），看到一位沙門（Sramana，出家修行者）乞食沒有得到食物，空缽而回，因此把食物給了他。後來得到十劫常生天中的福報，所以這個人福德深厚無比。又說，他是凈音向王太子。如此等等的說法多出自《福報雜譬喻經》。須菩提（Subhuti）翻譯為善業，也

【English Translation】 English version: These two weeks of teachings are not merely the general meaning of one sutra, but rather the ultimate aim of the Vaipulya sutras (方等, a category of Mahayana sutras), and the wonderful technique of the perfected being within the circle (至人環中, referring to the enlightened state of being all-encompassing and without boundaries). Furthermore, the previous week's content is the 'previous assembly,' and the following week's content is the 'following assembly,' which should be further distinguished below. The textual structure of the previous week is divided into two parts: first, Subhuti's (善吉, one of the Buddha's ten great disciples, foremost in understanding emptiness) questions; second, the Tathagata's (如來, one of the Buddha's titles, meaning 'the one who comes as is') answers. Within the questions, there are again two parts: first, the sutra compiler describes the demeanor of the person who is able to ask questions; second, the formal asking of the questions. Initially, within the description of demeanor, there are again two parts: first, identifying the subject of the dialogue; second, describing the etiquette of requesting the Dharma. 'At that time' (爾時) refers to the time when the Tathagata bestowed grace upon Subhuti, and also the time when the assembly awakened, hence it is said 'at that time.' Someone asks, how is the grace bestowed in this sutra different from that in the 'Mahaprajnaparamita Sutra' (大品般若經)? The answer is, the 'Mahaprajnaparamita Sutra' possesses both verbal and mental grace. Verbally commanding to speak is called verbal grace, and bestowing wisdom and eloquence is called mental grace. Now, this sutra only bestows wisdom and eloquence as mental grace, without commanding him to speak, so there is no verbal grace. However, there is also the meaning of dialogue in the following text, but it is not as clearly commanded to speak as in the 'Mahaprajnaparamita Sutra,' so it is different. Subhuti (須菩提), the origin and traces of this person are difficult to know. The 'Tripitaka' (三藏, the three divisions of the Buddhist canon) records that he is the shadow of the Green Dragon Buddha (青龍陀佛) in the Eastern World, incarnating as a disciple of Sakyamuni Buddha (釋迦牟尼佛, the founder of Buddhism) to transform beings, like the example of Manjusri (文殊菩薩, the bodhisattva of wisdom). Or some sutras say that this is a transformation body. The 'Mahayana-samgraha' explains that Sariputra (身子, one of the Buddha's ten great disciples, foremost in wisdom) is a transformation body, and Subhuti is also such an example. Furthermore, some sutras say that he is the son of an elder in Sravasti (舍衛國, an ancient Indian city), who has attained the position of 'leaving behind the physical form' (遺顏). The so-called 'leaving behind the physical form' refers to a Dharmakaya Bodhisattva (法身菩薩, a bodhisattva who has realized the Dharmakaya) who has surpassed the stage of Avaivartika (阿鞞跋致, non-retrogression). It is also said that in Sravasti there was a Brahmin (婆羅門, a priestly caste in Hinduism) named Kurura (鳩留), who had no son and prayed to the gods. The gods said, 'Your family is very wealthy, and there is no one worthy to be born into it.' Later, they saw a great virtuous person born into his family. After the son grew up, he had his parents invite the Buddha to their home, and later sent the Buddha back to Jetavana Vihara (祇洹精舍, an important place for the Buddha to propagate the Dharma during his lifetime), immediately attaining the fruit of Arhat (阿羅漢, a saint who has extinguished all afflictions and attained liberation). Furthermore, some sutras say that in the past he was a layman (白衣人, a lay Buddhist), who saw a Sramana (沙門, a renunciate practitioner) begging for food and returning with an empty bowl, so he gave him food. Later, he obtained the merit of being born in the heavens for ten kalpas (劫, eons), so this person's merit is immeasurably profound. It is also said that he was the crown prince of Jingyin Xiang. Such accounts are mostly found in the 'Fubao Zapiyu Sutra.' Subhuti (須菩提) translates as 'good deeds,' also

言善學。舊云善吉。善吉與善財生異。何者。善財生時七寶踴現故名善財。須菩提生時舉室皆空。父母疑怪請問相師。相師云。唯善唯吉。故名善吉。又云空生。即從生時受稱。其人內秘菩薩行。外現聲聞。位高可崇故呼為長老也。即從坐起下。第二明請法之儀。此中凡有五句。一避席脩敬。弟子儀法既尊人重法。不可晏然而坐。故將欲請道。所以避席。偏袒右肩者。既表師弟之儀則。示永有驅策之相。又是隨從國法。故脩敬袒肩。右膝著地者。此明屈曲伏從。示師弟無有違拒之貌。合掌向佛者。此是斂肅容貌專心受道也。而白佛言者。上來經家序其身業此之一句序其口業也。希有世尊者。此下第二正明發問。就此為兩。第一稱歎。第二請問。言希有世尊者。中阿含二十四卷云。昔時大王者我身是也。我從子至子從孫至孫從族至族。八萬四千轉輪王。並前剃除髻發舍家趣非家。又增一阿含第二十一卷云。若如來不出家者。當二千五百歲作轉輪王。今舍轉輪王位遂能為物涂行乞食。故為希有。又善吉知般若無相無貌。念想觀除言語亦滅。而無名相中為眾生故作名相說。雖作名字而不傷無名。故為希有。譬如劫盡大火世界洞然。有人擔一束乾草而從火中過不燒一葉。故為希有。善護念諸菩薩善付屬諸菩薩者。嘆也。問何因

緣故有此嘆耶。答此一言貫於前后。如來所以涂行乞食者。正為大慈大悲。護念付屬諸菩薩故也。又今說般若者。亦為護念付屬諸菩薩故也。又嘆上涂行乞食以為希有。則嘆佛身業。今嘆護念菩薩。是嘆如來意業。善付屬諸菩薩。即是嘆口業。如來既三業利物。故善吉並嘆三業。問云。何名為善護念耶。答欲使其內德堅固名為護念。令其外德成就名為善付囑。問諸佛如來常念六道。何因緣故偏念菩薩。答雖常念六道。但菩薩堪受般若。有其內因。是故外為諸佛護念。問諸佛護念有何利益。答猶如魚子。母念則成不念則壞。菩薩亦爾。佛若護念善根則成。若不護念善根則壞。付囑者。以無上法寶付諸菩薩。以諸菩薩善能問答。如是法寶則得久住無量千世。所以通稱為善者。若護念付囑聲聞則不善。今以護念付囑菩薩故名為善。具如大經付囑老少二人譬也。依論解釋。論曰。巧護義應知。加彼身同行者。此釋善護念也。善是巧之異名。故云巧護義應知也。加彼身同行者。護念即是加與之義。謂加與二力。一者加其智慧力令成就佛法故。此即是加其自行。故名為身。身即自身也。次加其教化眾生力。即是加其化他力。令受化之徒與其行同。故云同行也。不退得未得是名善付囑者。此之半偈釋付囑義。論云善護念者。依根熟菩

【現代漢語翻譯】現代漢語譯本：因為什麼緣故發出這樣的讚歎呢？回答說，這一句話貫穿前後。如來之所以要沿路乞食，正是因為大慈大悲，護念和咐囑各位菩薩的緣故。而且現在宣說般若，也是爲了護念和咐囑各位菩薩的緣故。又讚歎之前沿路乞食是稀有難得，這是讚歎佛的身業。現在讚歎護念菩薩，這是讚歎如來的意業。善於咐囑各位菩薩，這就是讚歎口業。如來既然用身、口、意三業來利益眾生，所以善吉（Subhuti，須菩提）一併讚歎這三業。有人問：『什麼叫做善護念呢？』回答說：『使其內在的功德堅固，叫做護念；使其外在的功德成就，叫做善付囑。』有人問：『諸佛如來常常憶念六道眾生，因為什麼因緣而偏偏憶念菩薩呢？』回答說：『雖然常常憶念六道眾生，但是菩薩堪能接受般若，有其內在的因緣，所以外在有諸佛的護念。』有人問：『諸佛的護念有什麼利益呢？』回答說：『猶如魚卵，母親憶念就能成活，不憶念就會壞死。菩薩也是這樣，佛如果護念，善根就能成就；如果不護念，善根就會壞死。』所謂『付囑』，就是把無上的法寶交付給各位菩薩，因為各位菩薩善於提問和回答，這樣的法寶才能長久住世，流傳無量千世。之所以統稱為『善』，如果護念和付囑聲聞，就不能稱為『善』，現在因為護念和付囑菩薩，所以稱為『善』。具體可以參考《大經》中付囑老少二人的譬喻。根據論的解釋，論中說：『巧妙護持的意義應當知曉，加上他們身同行的人。』這是解釋『善護念』。『善』是『巧』的另一種說法，所以說『巧妙護持的意義應當知曉』。『加上他們身同行的人』，護念就是加持的意思。所謂加持兩種力量：一是加持他們的智慧力，使他們成就佛法，這就是加持他們的自行，所以稱為『身』，身就是自身。二是加持他們教化眾生的力量，也就是加持他們的化他力，使接受教化的人和他們一樣修行，所以說『同行』。『不退得未得是名善付囑者』，這半句偈頌解釋了『付囑』的意義。論中說，善護念是依靠根器成熟的菩薩。

【English Translation】 English version: What is the reason for this exclamation? The answer is that this one statement connects the beginning and the end. The reason why the Tathagata (如來，one of the titles of a Buddha) walks and begs for food is precisely because of great compassion, protecting and entrusting all the Bodhisattvas (菩薩，enlightenment being). Moreover, the reason for speaking of Prajna (般若，wisdom) now is also for the sake of protecting and entrusting all the Bodhisattvas. Furthermore, praising the previous walking and begging for food as rare and precious is praising the Buddha's bodily karma. Now, praising the protection and mindfulness of Bodhisattvas is praising the Tathagata's mental karma. Being good at entrusting all the Bodhisattvas is praising the verbal karma. Since the Tathagata benefits beings with the three karmas of body, speech, and mind, Subhuti (善吉，one of the Buddha's principal disciples) praises all three karmas together. Someone asks: 'What is called 'good protection and mindfulness'?' The answer is: 'Making their inner merits firm is called protection and mindfulness; making their outer merits accomplished is called good entrustment.' Someone asks: 'The Buddhas and Tathagatas always remember the six realms of beings, but for what reason do they particularly remember the Bodhisattvas?' The answer is: 'Although they always remember the six realms of beings, the Bodhisattvas are capable of receiving Prajna and have an inner cause, so outwardly they have the protection and mindfulness of the Buddhas.' Someone asks: 'What are the benefits of the Buddhas' protection and mindfulness?' The answer is: 'Like fish eggs, they will live if the mother remembers them, and they will die if she does not. It is the same with Bodhisattvas. If the Buddha protects and is mindful, the roots of goodness will be accomplished; if he does not protect and is mindful, the roots of goodness will be destroyed.' The so-called 'entrustment' is the delivery of the unsurpassed Dharma treasure to all the Bodhisattvas, because the Bodhisattvas are good at asking and answering questions, so this Dharma treasure can abide in the world for a long time and be passed down for countless thousands of generations. The reason why it is collectively called 'good' is that if the protection and entrustment are given to Sravakas (聲聞，disciples), it cannot be called 'good'. Now, because the protection and entrustment are given to Bodhisattvas, it is called 'good'. For details, refer to the analogy of entrusting the old and young in the 'Great Sutra'. According to the explanation of the treatise, the treatise says: 'The meaning of skillful protection should be known, plus those who walk with them.' This explains 'good protection and mindfulness'. 'Good' is another name for 'skillful', so it is said that 'the meaning of skillful protection should be known'. 'Plus those who walk with them', protection and mindfulness means blessing. The so-called blessing of two forces: one is to bless their wisdom power so that they can accomplish the Buddha-dharma, which is to bless their self-practice, so it is called 'body', which is the self. The second is to bless their power to teach and transform sentient beings, that is, to bless their power to transform others, so that those who receive the teachings practice the same way as them, so it is said 'walk together'. 'Non-retreating attainment of what has not been attained is called good entrustment', this half-verse explains the meaning of 'entrustment'. The treatise says that good protection and mindfulness relies on Bodhisattvas with mature roots.

薩說。善付囑者。依根未熟菩薩說。根熟菩薩則堪加與自行化他二種之力。以如前明。今以根未熟菩薩付囑根熟菩薩。令其未熟得熟也。不退得未得者。已得功德令其不退。所未得者而令得之。故云不退得未得也。問論釋之與舊解云何同異。答論以人付囑於人名善付囑。舊釋以法寶付囑於人名善付囑。兩言雖異會歸終一。以人付囑人終令得悟法。即是付囑法義。以法付囑人終為化人義。即是付囑人也。又一義防遏眾魔不令得菩薩便為護念義。為說道法令如說修行為付囑也。問根熟與未熟約何位耶。答北地論師云。根熟菩薩即是內凡習種性之人。必能趣于初地名為根熟。若是外凡未能必入于初地名為未熟。善男子善女人發菩提心者。此第二正發問。若依羅什法師翻經唯可三問。一問菩提心。二問云何應住。三問降伏。但解此三問眾師不同。第一師云。問雖有三不出愿之與行。菩提心一問即是問愿。降伏住二問即是問行。菩薩之道不出願行二門。行以涉行為義。愿以要期為旨。行若無願行則無所御。愿若無行愿則不果。其猶鳥之二翼車之兩輪。故行以即事涉行。愿以懸求未得。今明行愿之義實如所說。若偏以菩提心為愿。此事未然。今以發正道心名菩提心。豈得空有其愿而無行耶。復有師云。應為三問。一問菩提心即問平

等空。二問云何住問實法空。三問云何降伏問假名空。然觀門次第應從淺至深。今乃從深至淺。此是說門非是行門。問者唯慕其深前問深也。今謂此亦不然。三空乃通貫大小今正辨菩薩之行。又且問無三空之辭。佛答無三空之意。初答乃明菩薩成廣大心遍度眾生而無所度。非謂但明假名空也。若但明假名空。即應但辨無眾生亦無度義亦無廣大心義。今乃明大心而無度無度而大心。此乃是無度度義度無度義。二慧具足。云何偏是假名空。次答住問亦非實空。若是實空。應明無有諸法無有修行。今乃明於一切法無所依住而修檀等萬行。豈偏是實空耶。今依論經凡有四句問。一問云何發菩提心。二問云何應住。三問云何修行。四問云何降伏。所以有此四問者。凡為菩薩必須發菩提心。故前問發心。若不依般若發心。則住顛倒不住般若。今依般若發心。則住般若不住顛倒。故次問住菩提心。既得住立故修行萬行。所以次問修行。以修無所得行故顛倒有得之心析伏不起。所以次問降伏也。佛言善哉。此下第二如來答問。開為二別。一答問緣起。二正答。答問緣起。復開為二。一美其嘆請。二則許酬其問。然佛嘆善吉者。良由善吉嘆得時宜問復會道故佛嘆之。又善吉是聲聞人今遂能問菩薩事。此為希有故復嘆之。又時會恐菩薩道深

【現代漢語翻譯】現代漢語譯本等空（Deng Kong，相等空性）。二問云何住，問實法空（Shi Fa Kong，真實法空性）。三問云何降伏，問假名空（Jia Ming Kong，假名空性）。然而觀門的次第應該從淺至深。現在卻從深至淺。這是說門，不是行門。提問者只是仰慕其深奧，所以先問深奧的。現在說這也不對。三空乃是貫通大小乘的，現在正是辨析菩薩的修行。而且提問中沒有三空的說法。佛的回答也沒有三空的意思。最初的回答是闡明菩薩成就廣大的心，普遍度化眾生而無所度。不是說僅僅闡明假名空。如果僅僅闡明假名空，就應該只辨析沒有眾生，也沒有度化的意義，也沒有廣大心的意義。現在是闡明大心而無度化，無度化而大心。這乃是無度化之度化義，度化無度化義。二慧具足。怎麼能偏說是假名空呢？其次回答的住的問題，也不是實空。如果是實空，應該闡明沒有諸法，沒有修行。現在是闡明於一切法無所依住而修佈施等萬行。怎麼能偏說是實空呢？現在依據論經，凡是有四句提問。一問云何發菩提心（Pu Ti Xin，菩提心）。二問云何應住。三問云何修行。四問云何降伏。所以有這四個問題的原因是，凡是作為菩薩，必須發起菩提心。所以前面問發心。如果不依據般若（Bo Re，智慧）發心，就住在顛倒之中，不住在般若之中。現在依據般若發心，就住在般若之中，不住在顛倒之中。既然能夠住立，所以修行萬行。所以接著問修行。因為修無所得行，所以顛倒有得之心分析伏滅不起。所以接著問降伏。佛說：『善哉。』下面第二部分是如來回答提問。分為兩個部分。一是回答提問的緣起。二是正式回答。回答提問的緣起，又分為兩個部分。一是讚美其提問。二是答應酬答其提問。然而佛讚歎善吉（Shan Ji）的原因是，因為善吉讚歎得時宜，提問又符合佛道，所以佛讚歎他。而且善吉是聲聞人，現在竟然能夠提問菩薩的事情。這是稀有的，所以又讚歎他。而且當時法會恐怕菩薩道深

【English Translation】 English version Equal emptiness. The second question asks how to abide, inquiring about the emptiness of real dharmas (Shi Fa Kong, emptiness of real dharmas). The third question asks how to subdue, inquiring about the emptiness of nominal existence (Jia Ming Kong, emptiness of nominal existence). However, the order of the gates of contemplation should proceed from shallow to deep. Now, it goes from deep to shallow. This is the gate of explanation, not the gate of practice. The questioner only admires its profundity, so he asks about the profound first. Now, it is said that this is also not correct. The three emptinesses pervade both the Mahayana and Hinayana, and now it is precisely analyzing the practice of the Bodhisattva. Moreover, there is no mention of the three emptinesses in the question. The Buddha's answer also does not imply the three emptinesses. The initial answer clarifies that the Bodhisattva achieves a vast mind, universally liberating sentient beings without anything to be liberated. It is not merely clarifying the emptiness of nominal existence. If it were merely clarifying the emptiness of nominal existence, it should only analyze that there are no sentient beings, nor is there the meaning of liberation, nor is there the meaning of a vast mind. Now, it clarifies the great mind without liberation, and liberation without the great mind. This is the meaning of liberating without liberation, and the meaning of liberation without liberation. The two wisdoms are complete. How can it be biased towards the emptiness of nominal existence? The subsequent answer to the question of abiding is also not the emptiness of real existence. If it were the emptiness of real existence, it should clarify that there are no dharmas, no practice. Now, it clarifies that one abides nowhere in all dharmas while cultivating the ten thousand practices such as giving. How can it be biased towards the emptiness of real existence? Now, according to the treatises and sutras, there are generally four questions. The first question asks how to generate the Bodhicitta (Pu Ti Xin, Bodhi mind). The second question asks how one should abide. The third question asks how to practice. The fourth question asks how to subdue. The reason for these four questions is that, as a Bodhisattva, one must generate the Bodhicitta. Therefore, the first question asks about generating the mind. If one does not generate the mind based on Prajna (Bo Re, wisdom), one abides in delusion, not in Prajna. Now, generating the mind based on Prajna, one abides in Prajna, not in delusion. Since one is able to abide, one cultivates the ten thousand practices. Therefore, the next question asks about practice. Because one cultivates the practice of non-attainment, the deluded mind of attainment is analyzed, subdued, and does not arise. Therefore, the next question asks about subduing. The Buddha said: 'Excellent.' The second part below is the Tathagata's answer to the questions. It is divided into two parts. One is the origin of the answer to the questions. The other is the formal answer. The origin of the answer to the questions is further divided into two parts. One is to praise the question. The other is to promise to answer the question. However, the reason why the Buddha praises Subhuti (Shan Ji) is that Subhuti praises the timeliness, and the question also accords with the Buddha's path, so the Buddha praises him. Moreover, Subhuti is a Shravaka, and now he is able to ask about the affairs of the Bodhisattva. This is rare, so he praises him again. Moreover, at that time, the assembly feared that the Bodhisattva's path was profound.

小乘智淺問容僻謬。故印嘆之令眾尊人重法也。汝今諦聽下。此第二句許答其問。就文為二。初正誡許。次受旨愿聞。此兩易知皆如文所列。佛告須菩提下。第二如來正答。就正答中若依論判。則應開為兩。則酬其四問。次從於意云何可以身相見如來下竟經。皆是斷疑。故論主判此章。云自下一切修多羅中斷生疑心。前酬四問名為略說般若。后斷眾疑即是廣說。今采論意按致一經開為三別。第一明般若體門。二明信受門。三明格量門。明此三者。既稱般若波羅蜜經。故前明般若體。既明般若體竟。必有信受人。故次明信受門。信持則獲福無盡。故次明格量門。又前就因果說般若。即是法門次就信受門說般若。即是人門。后就功德門說般若。明人行法故得功德也。就前門為二。一答其四問即明因門。二斷眾疑次辨果門。因即無依無住。果則無相無為。般若未曾因果。為眾生故故作因果名說。就明因門答其四問唯有兩章經文。由來舊釋。初章經非答菩提心門。乃是答降伏心問。次章經答其住問。后舉佛果答菩提心問。北地論師云。初答其住問不答菩提心問。今謂並不然。若言此中遍度四生非答菩提心問者。汝復以何法名菩提心。又下第二週中善吉更發三問。佛答發菩提心者。當生如是心滅度一切眾生而無滅度。此即是牒菩

提心問而解釋之。云何言非答菩提心耶。今明經雖兩章共酬四問。初一章經答住問。即是答菩提心問。次一章經答修行問。即是答降伏心問也。問云何答其住問。即是答菩提心耶。解云。由發菩提心故得住大乘法。若不發菩提心則不住大乘。故論云利益深心住此乘功德滿。就初經文復開為二。第一對於善吉總勸菩薩發菩提心。二者正明發心之義。初則如文。問曰。今正辨菩提心。寧言如是降伏其心。答以發一菩提心故不起凡夫及二乘心即是降伏。初明遍度眾生故異二乘心。降伏二乘。后明度無所度。是降伏凡夫心也。降伏二乘即是以他降自。降伏凡夫心即是以無降有也。又降伏二乘亦得是以有降無。二乘無慈悲心菩薩有慈悲心故。是以有降無。復以無降有。如前說也。又此中明大慈大悲。即降伏貪瞋煩惱。故名降伏。又菩薩雖度眾生。實無眾生可度。即是降伏眾生見也。又菩薩若言有眾生可度。即是常見。若言無眾生可度。則見斷見。今雖度眾生實無所度。故降伏常見。雖無所度而常度眾生。故降伏斷見也。所有一切眾生之類下。此第二正明發菩提心。論偈云。廣大第一常其心不顛倒。利益深心住此乘功德滿。故用於四心釋此經文。四心者。一廣大心。二者第一心。三者常心。四者不顛倒心。問何因緣建乎四心。答凡

為菩薩異凡夫二乘自調自度。今言遍度三界六道名廣大心。雖復遍度眾生。若遍與眾生人天之樂名為下心。若遍與眾生二乘之樂名曰中心。今遍與眾生大涅槃樂名第一心。菩薩雖復遍與眾生大涅槃樂。或時休息。生死道長眾生性多。云何可遍度之令得常樂。是故於生死中起疲厭心。今明生死邊如虛空。眾生性邊亦如虛空。是中無生死往來亦無解脫者。故能菩薩常度眾生誨而不倦名為常心。雖度眾生而不見眾生可度。是名菩薩不顛倒心。以建此四心住菩薩道得大利益故。論云利益深心住。是故建此四心則菩提心滿足。故論云此乘功德滿。雖有四心不出慈悲般若。前三是慈悲心。后一是般若心。前是功德。后是智慧。前亦是方便。后名為實慧。故發心即具福慧亦即具二慧。如大經云發心畢竟二不別。若望開善義。假名空但是空心。但得四中之一。又二慧中但得實慧意耳。問何故名廣大心。答從所有一切眾生之類至非有想非無想已來。總攝眾生名廣大心。此中二句。所有一切眾生之類。此總攝眾生。若卵生下。此有三句別攝眾生。第一句以一門攝眾生。謂一生門。第二有色無色二門攝眾生。欲色兩界名為有色。無色一界名為無色。第三以三門攝眾生。無想者即是色界第四禪中無想天也。非有想非無想者無色界最後天也。有想

【現代漢語翻譯】現代漢語譯本：菩薩與凡夫、聲聞、緣覺二乘不同，他們只是自我調伏、自我解脫。現在所說的『遍度三界六道』，才稱得上是廣大之心。菩薩雖然普遍救度眾生，如果只是給予眾生人天福樂，這稱為下等心。如果普遍給予眾生聲聞、緣覺二乘的快樂，這稱為中等心。現在普遍給予眾生大涅槃的快樂，這稱為第一等心。菩薩雖然普遍給予眾生大涅槃的快樂，有時也會休息。生死輪迴的道路漫長，眾生的根性又多，怎麼可能普遍救度他們，使他們得到常樂呢？因此，在生死輪迴中會產生疲憊厭倦之心。現在闡明生死的邊際如同虛空，眾生本性的邊際也如同虛空，其中沒有生死的往來，也沒有解脫的人。所以菩薩能夠恒常救度眾生，教誨而不疲倦，這稱為常心。雖然救度眾生，卻不認為有眾生可度，這稱為菩薩不顛倒心。因為建立了這四種心，安住于菩薩道，才能得到大利益。所以《論》中說『利益深心住』。因此，建立這四種心，菩提心才能圓滿。所以《論》中說『此乘功德滿』。雖然有四種心，但不超出慈悲和般若。前三種是慈悲心，后一種是般若心。前三種是功德，后一種是智慧。前三種也是方便，后一種稱為真實智慧。所以發菩提心就具備了福德和智慧，也具備了二種智慧。如《大涅槃經》所說：『發心畢竟二不別』。如果從開善義的角度來看，假名為空，但只是空心，只能得到四種心之中的一種。而且在二種智慧中，只能得到實慧的意義。問：為什麼稱為廣大心？答：從所有一切眾生之類，到非有想非無想天以來，總括所有眾生，稱為廣大心。這兩句話中，『所有一切眾生之類』，是總括所有眾生。從卵生開始，這有三句話分別概括眾生。第一句用一個門來概括眾生，即一生門。第二句用有色、無色二門來概括眾生。欲界和色界稱為有色，無色界稱為無色。第三句用三門來概括眾生。『無想』指的是第四禪中的無想天。『非有想非無想』指的是無色界的最高天。有想 English version: The Bodhisattva differs from ordinary beings and the two vehicles of Śrāvakas (hearers) and Pratyekabuddhas (solitary realizers), who only tame and liberate themselves. Now, 'universally liberating the beings in the Three Realms and Six Paths' is called the vast mind. Although the Bodhisattva universally saves beings, if they only give beings the happiness of humans and gods, this is called an inferior mind. If they universally give beings the happiness of the two vehicles, this is called a middling mind. Now, universally giving beings the happiness of Great Nirvana is called the supreme mind. Although the Bodhisattva universally gives beings the happiness of Great Nirvana, they sometimes rest. The path of Samsara (cycle of birth and death) is long, and the nature of beings is diverse. How can they universally save them and enable them to attain constant bliss? Therefore, they develop a sense of weariness and aversion in Samsara. Now, it is explained that the boundary of Samsara is like space, and the boundary of the nature of beings is also like space. There is no coming and going of Samsara, nor is there anyone who is liberated. Therefore, the Bodhisattva can constantly save beings, teaching without weariness, which is called the constant mind. Although they save beings, they do not see any beings to be saved, which is called the Bodhisattva's non-inverted mind. Because they have established these four minds and abide in the Bodhisattva path, they can obtain great benefits. Therefore, the Treatise says, 'Abiding in the mind of profound benefit.' Therefore, establishing these four minds fulfills the Bodhi mind. Therefore, the Treatise says, 'The merit of this vehicle is complete.' Although there are four minds, they do not go beyond loving-kindness (Metta), compassion (Karuna), and Prajna (wisdom). The first three are the mind of loving-kindness and compassion, and the last one is the mind of Prajna. The first three are merit, and the last one is wisdom. The first three are also skillful means, and the last one is called true wisdom. Therefore, the arising of the Bodhi mind is the simultaneous possession of merit and wisdom, and also the simultaneous possession of the two wisdoms. As the Great Nirvana Sutra says, 'The arising of the mind and the ultimate are not different.' If viewed from the perspective of opening up goodness, the provisional name is emptiness, but it is only an empty mind, and only one of the four minds can be obtained. Moreover, among the two wisdoms, only the meaning of true wisdom can be obtained. Question: Why is it called the vast mind? Answer: From all kinds of beings to the realm of neither perception nor non-perception, encompassing all beings is called the vast mind. In these two sentences, 'all kinds of beings' encompasses all beings. Starting from those born from eggs, there are three sentences that separately encompass beings. The first sentence encompasses beings with one door, namely the door of birth. The second sentence encompasses beings with the two doors of form and formlessness. The Desire Realm and the Form Realm are called form, and the Formless Realm is called formlessness. The third sentence encompasses beings with three doors. 'Non-perception' refers to the Heaven of Non-Perception in the Fourth Dhyana (meditative absorption). 'Neither perception nor non-perception' refers to the highest heaven in the Formless Realm. Perception

【English Translation】 English version: The Bodhisattva differs from ordinary beings and the two vehicles of Śrāvakas (hearers) and Pratyekabuddhas (solitary realizers), who only tame and liberate themselves. Now, 'universally liberating the beings in the Three Realms and Six Paths' is called the vast mind. Although the Bodhisattva universally saves beings, if they only give beings the happiness of humans and gods, this is called an inferior mind. If they universally give beings the happiness of the two vehicles, this is called a middling mind. Now, universally giving beings the happiness of Great Nirvana is called the supreme mind. Although the Bodhisattva universally gives beings the happiness of Great Nirvana, they sometimes rest. The path of Samsara (cycle of birth and death) is long, and the nature of beings is diverse. How can they universally save them and enable them to attain constant bliss? Therefore, they develop a sense of weariness and aversion in Samsara. Now, it is explained that the boundary of Samsara is like space, and the boundary of the nature of beings is also like space. There is no coming and going of Samsara, nor is there anyone who is liberated. Therefore, the Bodhisattva can constantly save beings, teaching without weariness, which is called the constant mind. Although they save beings, they do not see any beings to be saved, which is called the Bodhisattva's non-inverted mind. Because they have established these four minds and abide in the Bodhisattva path, they can obtain great benefits. Therefore, the Treatise says, 'Abiding in the mind of profound benefit.' Therefore, establishing these four minds fulfills the Bodhi mind. Therefore, the Treatise says, 'The merit of this vehicle is complete.' Although there are four minds, they do not go beyond loving-kindness (Metta), compassion (Karuna), and Prajna (wisdom). The first three are the mind of loving-kindness and compassion, and the last one is the mind of Prajna. The first three are merit, and the last one is wisdom. The first three are also skillful means, and the last one is called true wisdom. Therefore, the arising of the Bodhi mind is the simultaneous possession of merit and wisdom, and also the simultaneous possession of the two wisdoms. As the Great Nirvana Sutra says, 'The arising of the mind and the ultimate are not different.' If viewed from the perspective of opening up goodness, the provisional name is emptiness, but it is only an empty mind, and only one of the four minds can be obtained. Moreover, among the two wisdoms, only the meaning of true wisdom can be obtained. Question: Why is it called the vast mind? Answer: From all kinds of beings to the realm of neither perception nor non-perception, encompassing all beings is called the vast mind. In these two sentences, 'all kinds of beings' encompasses all beings. Starting from those born from eggs, there are three sentences that separately encompass beings. The first sentence encompasses beings with one door, namely the door of birth. The second sentence encompasses beings with the two doors of form and formlessness. The Desire Realm and the Form Realm are called form, and the Formless Realm is called formlessness. The third sentence encompasses beings with three doors. 'Non-perception' refers to the Heaven of Non-Perception in the Fourth Dhyana (meditative absorption). 'Neither perception nor non-perception' refers to the highest heaven in the Formless Realm. Perception

一句。除上二處通三界也。問何故不以六道攝眾生。答六道不攝中陰。四生則一切攝故也。我皆令入無餘涅槃者。此下第二明第一心也。此言無餘者非灰身滅智小乘無餘。斯乃無累不盡無復余累。無德不圓無復余德。故云無餘也。問此乃是涅槃教意。云何釋般若文。答作此問者乃是五時教意非經論之說。般若論云。此經正辨無為法身。與大般涅槃更復何異。如是滅度無量無邊眾生者。此下第三名為常心。問般若論云。不見眾生異於菩薩常不離是心名曰常心。此意云何。答今言常心可有二義。一者常不離正觀心名曰常心。則是論意。不見眾生異於菩薩。不見菩薩異眾生故眾生菩薩皆畢竟凈。常作此觀名曰常心。二者以正觀心常度眾生不休不息名曰常心。何以故若菩薩有我相下。此第四明不顛倒心。雖常度眾生無眾生可度名不顛倒。若見有眾生則是我見。凡夫自不能度。何能度物耶。複次須菩提於法應無所住行於佈施下。此第二章經答修行降伏心二問。前明以初發心故得住大乘。不發心不得住大乘。故發心與住二事相成。故合酬也。今二門亦爾。以修行故得降伏顛倒。若不修無得萬行。以何降伏有得煩惱。故二門相成。故須合酬也。又四門次第。前鬚髮心。發心故得住大乘。住大乘故修行。修行故煩惱得降伏也。然此經文

【現代漢語翻譯】一句。除了以上兩處，（菩薩）通達三界（欲界、色界、無色界）。問：為什麼不用六道（地獄、餓鬼、畜生、阿修羅、人、天）來涵蓋眾生？答：六道不包括中陰身（死亡到投胎之間的過渡期），而四生（胎生、卵生、濕生、化生）則涵蓋一切。『我皆令入無餘涅槃者』，以下第二部分闡明第一心（菩提心）。這裡說的『無餘』，不是指灰身滅智的小乘無餘涅槃，而是指沒有煩惱未盡，沒有剩餘的煩惱；沒有功德不圓滿，沒有剩餘的功德，所以說是『無餘』。問：這乃是涅槃經的教義，如何解釋《般若經》的文句？答：提出這個問題的人，乃是執著於五時教（佛陀根據眾生根器不同，在不同時期所說的不同教法）的意旨，而不是經論的說法。《般若論》說：此經（《般若經》）正是辨明無為法身（不生不滅的真如自性），與大般涅槃（究竟解脫的境界）又有什麼不同呢？『如是滅度無量無邊眾生者』，以下第三部分名為常心（恒常不變的菩提心）。問：《般若論》說：不見眾生與菩薩有差別，常不離這種心，名為常心。這是什麼意思？答：現在說的常心，可以有兩種解釋。一是常不離正觀之心，名為常心，這與《般若論》的意義相符。不見眾生異於菩薩，不見菩薩異於眾生，所以眾生和菩薩都畢竟清凈。常作這樣的觀想，名為常心。二是以正觀之心，恒常度化眾生，不休不息，名為常心。何以故？如果菩薩有我相（執著于自我的虛妄觀念）……以下第四部分闡明不顛倒心（如實知見的心）。雖然恒常度化眾生，卻沒有眾生可度，名為不顛倒。如果見到有眾生可度，那就是我見（執著于自我的錯誤見解）。凡夫自己都不能度脫，又怎麼能度化他人呢？複次，須菩提，於法應無所住，行於佈施……以下第二章經文回答修行降伏心（通過修行來降伏妄心）的兩個問題。前面說明因為初發菩提心，所以能夠安住于大乘（菩薩乘）。不發菩提心，就不能安住于大乘。所以發心與安住是相輔相成的，因此合在一起回答。現在的兩個問題也是如此，因為修行，所以能夠降伏顛倒。如果不修習萬行，用什麼來降伏有得煩惱（執著于有所得的煩惱）？所以兩個問題是相輔相成的，因此需要合在一起回答。而且這四門（發心、安住、修行、降伏）是有次第的。首先需要發菩提心，因為發菩提心，所以能夠安住于大乘。安住于大乘，所以能夠修行。通過修行，煩惱才能被降伏。然而這段經文……

【English Translation】 A sentence. Besides the above two places, (the Bodhisattva) penetrates the Three Realms (Desire Realm, Form Realm, Formless Realm). Question: Why not use the Six Realms (hell-beings, hungry ghosts, animals, asuras, humans, devas) to encompass sentient beings? Answer: The Six Realms do not include the intermediate state (the transitional period between death and rebirth), while the Four Births (womb-born, egg-born, moisture-born, transformation-born) encompass everything. 'I cause them all to enter Nirvana without residue,' the second part below explains the first mind (Bodhi mind). The 'without residue' mentioned here does not refer to the Hinayana Nirvana without residue of extinguishing the body and annihilating wisdom, but rather to no afflictions unexhausted, no remaining afflictions; no merits unfulfilled, no remaining merits, hence it is called 'without residue.' Question: This is the teaching of the Nirvana Sutra, how to explain the sentences of the Prajna Sutra? Answer: The person who raises this question adheres to the meaning of the Five Periods of Teaching (different teachings given by the Buddha at different times according to the different capacities of sentient beings), and not the statements of the sutras and treatises. The Prajna Treatise says: This sutra (the Prajna Sutra) precisely elucidates the unconditioned Dharmakaya (the true nature of Suchness that is neither born nor dies), what difference is there with the Great Nirvana (the state of ultimate liberation)? 'Thus, liberating immeasurable and boundless sentient beings,' the third part below is called the Constant Mind (the unchanging Bodhi mind). Question: The Prajna Treatise says: Not seeing sentient beings as different from Bodhisattvas, constantly not departing from this mind, is called the Constant Mind. What does this mean? Answer: The Constant Mind now spoken of can have two explanations. One is constantly not departing from the mind of correct contemplation, which is called the Constant Mind, which is consistent with the meaning of the Prajna Treatise. Not seeing sentient beings as different from Bodhisattvas, not seeing Bodhisattvas as different from sentient beings, therefore sentient beings and Bodhisattvas are all ultimately pure. Constantly making such contemplation is called the Constant Mind. The second is constantly liberating sentient beings with the mind of correct contemplation, without ceasing, which is called the Constant Mind. Why? If the Bodhisattva has an ego-appearance (a false notion of clinging to the self) ... The fourth part below explains the Undistorted Mind (the mind of seeing reality as it is). Although constantly liberating sentient beings, there are no sentient beings to be liberated, which is called undistorted. If one sees that there are sentient beings to be liberated, that is an ego-view (a false view of clinging to the self). Ordinary people cannot liberate themselves, how can they liberate others? Furthermore, Subhuti, one should give with a mind that is nowhere supported... The second chapter of the sutra below answers the two questions of cultivating and subduing the mind (subduing the deluded mind through cultivation). The previous explanation stated that because of initially generating the Bodhi mind, one can abide in the Mahayana (Bodhisattva Vehicle). Without generating the Bodhi mind, one cannot abide in the Mahayana. Therefore, generating the mind and abiding are complementary, so they are answered together. The current two questions are also like this, because of cultivation, one can subdue distortion. If one does not cultivate the myriad practices, what can one use to subdue the afflictions of attainment (afflictions of clinging to attainment)? Therefore, the two questions are complementary, so they need to be answered together. Moreover, these four doors (generating the mind, abiding, cultivating, subduing) have an order. First, one needs to generate the Bodhi mind, because of generating the Bodhi mind, one can abide in the Mahayana. Abiding in the Mahayana, one can cultivate. Through cultivation, afflictions can be subdued. However, this passage of scripture...

略意含。非可一言得盡。今更以數義釋之。一者前章正辨發菩提心。今此一章辨于修行。所以明此二者。如華嚴經善財童子於一一善知識所。皆自稱云已發菩提之心未知云何修菩薩行。學菩薩道。故知前鬚髮心然後修行。菩提心即是愿義。今之一章辨菩薩行義。菩薩之道雖復多門。統其大歸不出願行。然愿門雖多略為四弘誓願。行門無量略為六波羅蜜。四弘誓願者。一未度苦海令其得度。二未脫業煩惱縛令得脫之。三未得道諦之安令得安之。四未得滅諦涅槃令得涅槃。前章明一切眾生皆得涅槃。即是四愿之中略舉后究竟愿也。今一章經略舉六度中最初行也。然前章舉於後愿則攝得三愿。后章舉初行則攝於五行。問云何后愿得攝前愿。云何初行得攝後行耶。答后愿既令眾生皆得滅諦涅槃。豈不度苦脫集見道諦耶。次辨初行攝後行者。論云。檀義攝於六。資生無畏法。此中一二三名為修行住。此偈意明六度悉名為檀義。但檀義有三種。一資生檀即是佈施。資益眾生亦是以資生之物以用佈施。二者無畏檀持戒忍辱。持戒即不犯財奪命。即是施物無畏。忍辱不加報於物亦是施物無畏。故此兩度名無畏檀。精進禪定智慧此之三度名為法檀。言法檀者以法施物。故名法檀精進則說法無倦。禪定則知他人心方能說法。般若是智慧。正

【現代漢語翻譯】現代漢語譯本：大意包含的內容很多，不能用一句話完全表達。現在再用幾個要點來解釋它。第一，前一章主要辨析發起菩提心（bodhicitta，覺悟之心）。現在這一章辨析修行。所以要闡明這兩者。例如《華嚴經》（Avatamsaka Sutra）中，善財童子（Sudhana）在每一位善知識（kalyāṇa-mitra）處，都自稱已經發了菩提之心，但不知道如何修菩薩行（bodhisattva-caryā），學習菩薩道（bodhisattva-mārga）。因此可知，必須先發心，然後才能修行。菩提心就是愿（praṇidhāna）的意思。現在這一章辨析菩薩行的意義。菩薩的道路雖然有很多門徑，但總的來說，不出愿和行。然而，愿門雖然很多，可以概括為四弘誓願（catvāri praṇidhānāni）。行門無量，可以概括為六波羅蜜（ṣaṭ pāramitā）。四弘誓願是：一、未度過苦海的眾生，令其得度；二、未脫離業和煩惱束縛的眾生，令其脫離；三、未得到道諦（mārga-satya）之安樂的眾生，令其得到安樂；四、未得到滅諦（nirodha-satya）涅槃（nirvāṇa）的眾生，令其得到涅槃。前一章闡明一切眾生都能得到涅槃，這就是四愿之中略舉了最後的究竟愿。現在這一章經文略舉了六度（ṣaṭ pāramitā）中最開始的佈施（dāna）之行。然而，前一章舉了最後的愿，就攝取了前三愿。后一章舉了最初的佈施之行，就攝取了其餘五行。問：為什麼最後的愿能攝取前面的愿？為什麼最初的佈施之行能攝取後面的行？答：最後的愿既然要令眾生都得到滅諦涅槃，難道不就度過了苦海，脫離了集諦（samudaya-satya），證得了見道諦（darśana-mārga-satya）嗎？其次，辨析最初的佈施之行如何攝取後面的行。《瑜伽師地論》（Yogācārabhūmi-śāstra）中說：『佈施的意義包含六度，即資生、無畏、法。』這其中一二三稱為修行住。這句偈語的意思是，六度都可以稱為佈施的意義。但佈施的意義有三種：一、資生布施，就是佈施資養生命之物，也是用資生之物來進行佈施。二、無畏佈施，即是持戒（śīla）和忍辱（kṣānti）。持戒就是不侵犯他人的財產和生命，就是給予他人無畏。忍辱是不對他人施加報復，也是給予他人無畏。因此這兩種度被稱為無畏佈施。精進（vīrya）、禪定（dhyāna）、智慧（prajñā）這三種度稱為法佈施。說法佈施就是以佛法作為佈施之物，所以稱為法佈施。精進則說法不知疲倦，禪定則能瞭解他人的心意才能說法，般若是智慧，是正確的...

【English Translation】 English version: The implied meaning contains much and cannot be fully expressed in a single sentence. Now, let me explain it further with several key points. First, the previous chapter mainly discusses the generation of Bodhicitta (bodhicitta, the mind of enlightenment). This chapter discusses practice. Therefore, it is necessary to clarify these two. For example, in the Avatamsaka Sutra (Avatamsaka Sutra), Sudhana (Sudhana) at each Kalyana-mitra (kalyāṇa-mitra, virtuous friend), claims to have generated the mind of Bodhi, but does not know how to practice the Bodhisattva-caryā (bodhisattva-caryā, the conduct of a Bodhisattva), and learn the Bodhisattva-mārga (bodhisattva-mārga, the path of a Bodhisattva). Therefore, it is known that one must first generate the mind and then practice. Bodhicitta is the meaning of vow (praṇidhāna). This chapter discusses the meaning of Bodhisattva practice. Although there are many paths for Bodhisattvas, in general, they do not go beyond vows and practice. However, although there are many vow paths, they can be summarized as the Four Great Vows (catvāri praṇidhānāni). The practice path is immeasurable, but it can be summarized as the Six Perfections (ṣaṭ pāramitā). The Four Great Vows are: first, to liberate sentient beings who have not crossed the sea of suffering; second, to liberate sentient beings who have not escaped the bondage of karma and afflictions; third, to bring peace to sentient beings who have not attained the bliss of the Path Truth (mārga-satya); fourth, to lead sentient beings who have not attained Nirvana (nirvāṇa) of the Cessation Truth (nirodha-satya) to Nirvana. The previous chapter explained that all sentient beings can attain Nirvana, which is a brief mention of the ultimate vow among the four vows. This chapter briefly mentions the first practice of giving (dāna) among the Six Perfections (ṣaṭ pāramitā). However, the previous chapter mentioned the last vow, which encompasses the first three vows. The latter chapter mentions the first practice of giving, which encompasses the remaining five practices. Question: Why can the last vow encompass the previous vows? Why can the first practice of giving encompass the subsequent practices? Answer: Since the last vow is to enable all sentient beings to attain the Cessation Truth of Nirvana, doesn't it mean that they have crossed the sea of suffering, escaped the Accumulation Truth (samudaya-satya), and attained the Truth of the Path of Seeing (darśana-mārga-satya)? Secondly, analyze how the initial practice of giving encompasses the subsequent practices. The Yogācārabhūmi-śāstra (Yogācārabhūmi-śāstra) says: 'The meaning of giving encompasses the six perfections, namely, providing sustenance, fearlessness, and Dharma.' Among these, one, two, and three are called the dwelling of practice. The meaning of this verse is that all six perfections can be called the meaning of giving. However, there are three types of giving: first, giving sustenance, which is giving things that nourish life, and also using things that provide sustenance for giving. Second, giving fearlessness, which is upholding precepts (śīla) and patience (kṣānti). Upholding precepts means not violating others' property and lives, which is giving others fearlessness. Patience means not retaliating against others, which is also giving others fearlessness. Therefore, these two perfections are called giving fearlessness. Diligence (vīrya), meditation (dhyāna), and wisdom (prajñā) are called Dharma giving. Dharma giving means using the Dharma as the object of giving, so it is called Dharma giving. Diligence means speaking the Dharma tirelessly, meditation means understanding the minds of others in order to speak the Dharma, and prajna is wisdom, which is correct...

能說法。故此三種名為法檀。言一二三者。一即是資生檀也。二則戒忍。三即后三度也。又此中依般若修行。但明佈施者。如攝五品檀說具攝於五故。又略舉初故。又檀則攝眾生之要法故也。又前章經明菩薩內有大慈大悲。此一章經明菩薩方便外能赴救。所以者何。菩薩發菩提心以赴緣度物為務。故大品云。菩薩大事者。所謂不捨一切眾生。然度眾生必須二事。一者內有慈悲心。二者外有方便救濟。前章明遍拔眾生生死苦即是大悲心義。與眾生大涅槃樂即是大慈心義。雖內有慈悲之心。未有慈悲之事。是故今辨菩薩修行佈施等萬行而拔濟之。令其離苦使其得樂。即是成上慈悲之義。問曰。上辨內有慈悲。今明外能赴救。何須般若。答上辨內有慈悲要須般若。若無般若則慈悲不成。故大論云。慈悲與實相合行。大悲雖拔其苦而實無所拔。大慈雖與其樂而實無所與。故慈悲不妨畢竟空。畢竟空不妨慈悲心。故雖行畢竟空觀而不捨大慈大悲。雖行大慈大悲不捨畢竟空觀。故知即以畢竟空為慈悲。即以慈悲為畢竟空。故慈悲未曾不空。空未曾不慈悲也。今明修行亦與實相合行故。雖修萬行而實無所行。雖無所行而常修萬行。故行無所行。無所行故具二慧也。又前章經正明菩薩度于眾生始識眾生相識于度相。知度無所度。方是識

【現代漢語翻譯】現代漢語譯本：能夠說法，因此這三種施捨被稱為法檀（Dharma-dāna，佛法的佈施）。所說的一、二、三，『一』指的是資生檀（Āmiṣa-dāna，生活資具的佈施），『二』指的是戒和忍，『三』指的是後面的三種波羅蜜（Pāramitā，到彼岸）。此外，這裡依據般若（Prajñā，智慧）修行，只說明佈施，是因為如《攝五品檀》所說，它具足包含五種佈施。而且這是略舉開始，又因為佈施是攝受眾生的重要方法。此外，前一章經說明菩薩內心具有大慈大悲，這一章經說明菩薩以方便善巧在外救助。為什麼這麼說呢？菩薩發起菩提心（Bodhi-citta，覺悟之心）以隨順因緣度化眾生為己任。所以《大品般若經》說，菩薩的大事就是不捨棄一切眾生。然而度化眾生必須具備兩件事：一是內心有慈悲心，二是外在有方便救濟。前一章經說明普遍拔除眾生的生死苦，就是大悲心的意義；給予眾生大涅槃（Mahā-nirvāṇa，大解脫）的快樂，就是大慈心的意義。雖然內心有慈悲之心，但還沒有慈悲的行為，所以現在闡明菩薩修行佈施等萬行來救濟眾生，使他們脫離痛苦，使他們得到快樂，這就是成就上述慈悲的意義。有人問：上面闡述內心有慈悲，現在說明外在能夠救助，為什麼需要般若？回答說：上面闡述內心有慈悲，必須要般若。如果沒有般若，那麼慈悲就不能成就。所以《大智度論》說，慈悲與實相（Tathatā，事物的真實本性）合在一起執行。大悲雖然拔除眾生的痛苦，但實際上沒有所拔除的；大慈雖然給予眾生快樂，但實際上沒有所給予的。所以慈悲不妨礙畢竟空（Śūnyatā，空性），畢竟空不妨礙慈悲心。所以雖然修行畢竟空觀，但不捨棄大慈大悲；雖然修行大慈大悲，但不捨棄畢竟空觀。所以要知道，就是以畢竟空為慈悲，就是以慈悲為畢竟空。所以慈悲未曾不是空，空未曾不是慈悲。現在說明修行也與實相合在一起執行，所以雖然修行萬行，但實際上沒有所修行；雖然沒有所修行，但常常修行萬行。所以修行無所行，因為無所行，所以具足兩種智慧。此外，前一章經正是說明菩薩度化眾生，開始認識眾生的相，認識度化的相，知道度化沒有所度化，才是認識。

【English Translation】 English version: Able to expound the Dharma. Therefore, these three types of giving are called Dharma-dāna (gift of Dharma). The 'one, two, three' mentioned refers to: 'one' being Āmiṣa-dāna (gift of material resources), 'two' being morality and patience, and 'three' being the latter three Pāramitā (perfections). Furthermore, here, based on the practice of Prajñā (wisdom), only giving is explained because, as stated in 'Compendium of the Fivefold Giving,' it fully encompasses the five types of giving. Moreover, it is a brief mention of the beginning, and also because giving is the essential method for gathering beings. Furthermore, the previous chapter explained that Bodhisattvas possess great compassion internally, while this chapter explains that Bodhisattvas skillfully provide external aid. Why is this so? Bodhisattvas generate Bodhi-citta (mind of enlightenment) with the duty of adapting to conditions to liberate beings. Therefore, the Mahāprajñāpāramitā Sūtra says that the great task of Bodhisattvas is not to abandon all beings. However, liberating beings requires two things: first, having compassion internally; second, having skillful means for external aid. The previous chapter explained that universally removing the suffering of birth and death of beings is the meaning of great compassion; giving beings the joy of Mahā-nirvāṇa (great liberation) is the meaning of great loving-kindness. Although there is compassion internally, there are no compassionate actions. Therefore, now it is explained that Bodhisattvas cultivate giving and other myriad practices to rescue beings, enabling them to escape suffering and attain joy, which is the accomplishment of the aforementioned meaning of compassion. Someone asks: Above, it was explained that there is compassion internally; now it is explained that there is external ability to aid. Why is Prajñā needed? The answer is: Above, it was explained that there is compassion internally, and Prajñā is necessary. If there is no Prajñā, then compassion cannot be accomplished. Therefore, the Mahāprajñāpāramitopadeśa says that compassion operates in conjunction with Tathatā (suchness). Although great compassion removes the suffering of beings, in reality, there is nothing removed; although great loving-kindness gives beings joy, in reality, there is nothing given. Therefore, compassion does not hinder Śūnyatā (emptiness), and Śūnyatā does not hinder compassion. Therefore, although practicing the contemplation of Śūnyatā, one does not abandon great compassion; although practicing great compassion, one does not abandon Śūnyatā. Therefore, know that Śūnyatā is compassion, and compassion is Śūnyatā. Therefore, compassion has never not been empty, and emptiness has never not been compassionate. Now it is explained that practice also operates in conjunction with Tathatā. Therefore, although cultivating myriad practices, in reality, there is nothing cultivated; although there is nothing cultivated, one constantly cultivates myriad practices. Therefore, practice is without practice, and because there is no practice, one possesses both wisdoms. Furthermore, the previous chapter precisely explained that Bodhisattvas liberate beings, beginning with recognizing the characteristics of beings, recognizing the characteristics of liberation, and knowing that liberation is without liberation, which is recognition.

度。知眾生無眾生。方始識眾生。今此章經正辨度義。前雖識度猶未正度。如雖復識病猶未授藥。今此章經正明度義。即是正授于藥。亦前章正明識病。此章正明識藥。眾生即是病。由般若故能識眾生。即是由般若故能識病也。今修萬行併爲眾生。是故萬行悉名為藥。由般若故解悟萬行。由般若故方能識藥。又前章經正辨眾生空。今此章經明諸法空。前辨雖度眾生無眾生可度。故是眾生空。今明雖修萬行實無所修。即是法空。問曰。大品開宗則云不見菩薩及菩薩字。此經開宗何因緣故但言不見眾生。答大品不見菩薩即不見眾生。此經辨不見眾生即不見菩薩。但兩經互舉。能所不同耳。又大品正勸菩薩學般若。或者便謂有菩薩能學般若所學。為此義故前破菩薩明不見菩薩。此經明菩薩發菩提心欲度眾生。便謂有眾生可度。是故今破無有眾生。問曰。何因緣故前辨眾生空。今明法空以為說般若耶。答曰。般若未曾空與不空。但眾生多滯有病故破有病明於空耳。有病既息空則不留。如大火炎不可四觸。但佛在世時眾生根利直聞說空不取空相。故無所依止即便得道也。就此章經開為三段。第一正明無住相以修行。第二明得無所得果。第三結勸。就初為二。第一正答修行問。第二答降伏心問。此即第一言無所住行佈施者。即如大

【現代漢語翻譯】現代漢語譯本：度。知道眾生並非真實的眾生，才能真正認識眾生。現在這一章經文正是辨明『度』的意義。之前雖然認識了『度』，但還不是真正的『度』，就像認識了疾病卻沒有給予藥物。現在這一章經文正是闡明『度』的意義，也就是真正地給予藥物。也像前一章經文闡明認識疾病，這一章經文闡明認識藥物。眾生就是疾病，因為般若的緣故能夠認識眾生，也就是因為般若的緣故能夠認識疾病。現在修習各種修行都是爲了眾生，所以各種修行都可以稱為藥物。因為般若的緣故理解和領悟各種修行，因為般若的緣故才能認識藥物。另外，前一章經文辨明眾生是空性的，現在這一章經文闡明諸法是空性的。前面辨明雖然度化眾生，但實際上沒有眾生可度，所以是眾生空。現在闡明雖然修習各種修行，但實際上沒有什麼可修習的，這就是法空。有人問：在《大品般若經》的開宗明義中說『不見菩薩以及菩薩這個名稱』，這部經的開宗明義為什麼只說『不見眾生』呢？回答：《大品般若經》中不見菩薩也就是不見眾生，這部經中辨明不見眾生也就是不見菩薩。只是兩部經互相舉例，能和所不同罷了。另外，《大品般若經》主要勸導菩薩學習般若，有些人就認為有菩薩能夠學習般若以及所學習的內容。爲了這個緣故，前面破除菩薩的觀念，闡明不見菩薩。這部經闡明菩薩發菩提心想要度化眾生，有些人就認為有眾生可以度化。所以現在破除這種觀念，說明沒有眾生。有人問：為什麼先辨明眾生空，現在闡明法空來宣說般若呢？回答：般若從未曾有空與不空的分別，只是眾生大多執著于『有』的病，所以破除『有』的病來闡明空性。『有』的病一旦消除，空性也不再停留。就像大火的火焰，無法用四種方式觸碰。只是佛陀在世時，眾生的根器銳利，直接聽聞空性，不會執取空相，所以沒有所依賴的，就能證得道果。這一章經文可以分為三個部分。第一部分，闡明不執著于任何相而修行。第二部分，闡明證得無所得的果。第三部分，總結勸勉。第一部分又分為兩個部分。第一部分，正面回答修行的提問。第二部分，回答降伏其心的提問。這就是第一部分所說的『不執著于任何地方而行佈施』，就像大 English version: 'To liberate. To know that sentient beings are not truly sentient beings is to truly recognize sentient beings. This chapter of the sutra is precisely to clarify the meaning of 'liberation'. Although 'liberation' was understood before, it was not true 'liberation', just like recognizing a disease but not administering medicine. This chapter of the sutra precisely elucidates the meaning of 'liberation', which is to truly administer medicine. It is also like the previous chapter elucidating the recognition of disease, and this chapter elucidating the recognition of medicine. Sentient beings are the disease, and because of Prajna (wisdom), one can recognize sentient beings, which is to recognize the disease because of Prajna. Now, cultivating all practices is for the sake of sentient beings, so all practices can be called medicine. Because of Prajna, one understands and comprehends all practices, and because of Prajna, one can recognize medicine. Furthermore, the previous chapter elucidated that sentient beings are empty in nature, and this chapter elucidates that all dharmas (phenomena) are empty in nature. The previous chapter clarified that although sentient beings are liberated, there are no sentient beings to be liberated, so it is the emptiness of sentient beings. Now it clarifies that although various practices are cultivated, there is actually nothing to be cultivated, which is the emptiness of dharmas. Someone asks: In the opening of the Mahaprajnaparamita Sutra (Great Wisdom Sutra), it says 'not seeing Bodhisattvas or the name of Bodhisattvas'. Why does this sutra only say 'not seeing sentient beings' in its opening? Answer: In the Mahaprajnaparamita Sutra, not seeing Bodhisattvas is not seeing sentient beings. In this sutra, clarifying not seeing sentient beings is not seeing Bodhisattvas. It is just that the two sutras use different examples, with different subjects and objects. Furthermore, the Mahaprajnaparamita Sutra mainly encourages Bodhisattvas to learn Prajna, and some people think that there are Bodhisattvas who can learn Prajna and what is being learned. For this reason, the concept of Bodhisattvas is refuted earlier, clarifying not seeing Bodhisattvas. This sutra clarifies that Bodhisattvas generate Bodhicitta (the mind of enlightenment) and want to liberate sentient beings, and some people think that there are sentient beings to be liberated. Therefore, this concept is now refuted, stating that there are no sentient beings. Someone asks: Why is the emptiness of sentient beings clarified first, and then the emptiness of dharmas is clarified to explain Prajna? Answer: Prajna has never had the distinction of emptiness or non-emptiness, but sentient beings mostly cling to the disease of 'existence', so the disease of 'existence' is refuted to clarify emptiness. Once the disease of 'existence' is eliminated, emptiness no longer remains. It is like the flames of a great fire, which cannot be touched in four ways. It is just that when the Buddha was in the world, sentient beings had sharp faculties, and upon directly hearing about emptiness, they did not grasp onto the appearance of emptiness, so they had nothing to rely on and could attain enlightenment. This chapter of the sutra can be divided into three parts. The first part clarifies cultivating without clinging to any characteristics. The second part clarifies attaining the fruit of non-attainment. The third part is a concluding exhortation. The first part is further divided into two parts. The first part directly answers the question about cultivation. The second part answers the question about subduing the mind. This is the first part that says 'giving without dwelling anywhere', like a great'

【English Translation】 To liberate. Knowing that sentient beings are not truly sentient beings is the only way to truly recognize sentient beings. This chapter of the sutra is precisely to clarify the meaning of 'liberation'. Although 'liberation' was understood before, it was not true 'liberation', just like recognizing a disease but not administering medicine. This chapter of the sutra precisely elucidates the meaning of 'liberation', which is to truly administer medicine. It is also like the previous chapter elucidating the recognition of disease, and this chapter elucidating the recognition of medicine. Sentient beings are the disease, and because of Prajna (wisdom), one can recognize sentient beings, which is to recognize the disease because of Prajna. Now, cultivating all practices is for the sake of sentient beings, so all practices can be called medicine. Because of Prajna, one understands and comprehends all practices, and because of Prajna, one can recognize medicine. Furthermore, the previous chapter elucidated that sentient beings are empty in nature, and this chapter elucidates that all dharmas (phenomena) are empty in nature. The previous chapter clarified that although sentient beings are liberated, there are no sentient beings to be liberated, so it is the emptiness of sentient beings. Now it clarifies that although various practices are cultivated, there is actually nothing to be cultivated, which is the emptiness of dharmas. Someone asks: In the opening of the Mahaprajnaparamita Sutra (Great Wisdom Sutra), it says 'not seeing Bodhisattvas or the name of Bodhisattvas'. Why does this sutra only say 'not seeing sentient beings' in its opening? Answer: In the Mahaprajnaparamita Sutra, not seeing Bodhisattvas is not seeing sentient beings. In this sutra, clarifying not seeing sentient beings is not seeing Bodhisattvas. It is just that the two sutras use different examples, with different subjects and objects. Furthermore, the Mahaprajnaparamita Sutra mainly encourages Bodhisattvas to learn Prajna, and some people think that there are Bodhisattvas who can learn Prajna and what is being learned. For this reason, the concept of Bodhisattvas is refuted earlier, clarifying not seeing Bodhisattvas. This sutra clarifies that Bodhisattvas generate Bodhicitta (the mind of enlightenment) and want to liberate sentient beings, and some people think that there are sentient beings to be liberated. Therefore, this concept is now refuted, stating that there are no sentient beings. Someone asks: Why is the emptiness of sentient beings clarified first, and then the emptiness of dharmas is clarified to explain Prajna? Answer: Prajna has never had the distinction of emptiness or non-emptiness, but sentient beings mostly cling to the disease of 'existence', so the disease of 'existence' is refuted to clarify emptiness. Once the disease of 'existence' is eliminated, emptiness no longer remains. It is like the flames of a great fire, which cannot be touched in four ways. It is just that when the Buddha was in the world, sentient beings had sharp faculties, and upon directly hearing about emptiness, they did not grasp onto the appearance of emptiness, so they had nothing to rely on and could attain enlightenment. This chapter of the sutra can be divided into three parts. The first part clarifies cultivating without clinging to any characteristics. The second part clarifies attaining the fruit of non-attainment. The third part is a concluding exhortation. The first part is further divided into two parts. The first part directly answers the question about cultivation. The second part answers the question about subduing the mind. This is the first part that says 'giving without dwelling anywhere', like a great

品開宗不住法住般若無所舍具足檀。然此中既云不住六塵。亦即不住六根六識。但文略故偏明不住六塵耳。大品問住品。明不住一切法故是住般若。今言不住六塵。六塵攝法盡矣。然菩薩身口意業一切所為行住坐臥乃至舉動施為產業之事。皆是無依無得。今偏言不住行施。豈非略舉一以例諸耶。若依論經便有三種。一者不著自身故行佈施。若著自身則惜外物故不行施。今不著自身則不惜外物故能行施也。二者無所住一句。即是不著報恩。報恩者。謂供養恭敬等也。三者不住色聲香味觸法佈施。即是不著果報。果報者。謂人天樂等。菩薩若著報恩及以果報則舍遠佛道。是故不著報恩及以果報也。須菩提菩薩應如是佈施下。若依論意即是答第四降心問。然要須修行故有所得心乃降伏耳。故次修行后明降伏也。以菩薩不見三事故行佈施名為降伏。言三事者。謂施者受者財物等。以不見財物故得諸法空。不見施者受者故得眾生空。以得此二空即是降伏人法見也。然論作此意正以修無所得行即是降伏有所得心。故兩問相成兩答相成也。問初章經親有降伏言。何故不答降伏問今始答之耶。有釋云。先但明眾生空。未明法空。故生法二空未具得不得稱降伏。今具得生法二空始是降伏名也。又前始明是菩提心未明菩薩行。故降義未成。

今願行俱成降伏義始顯也。若菩薩不住相佈施下。此第二明修無所住因得無所得果。所以有此文來者有二義。一者即是舉果勸修。良以修無住因得福無邊。是故勸修無住相佈施也。二者即是釋疑。疑者云。有住佈施可有福德。無住佈施應無福德。是故釋云有所得施功德則少無所得施其福無邊。問今持戒行道書經造佛功德可多。云何以無住心而作福與十力空等。此言極成過差也。答覆面之舌言豈虛哉。子若不信今當略述。夫福德因扶理而生。故釋善以扶理為義。以無所住蓋是扶理之極。福豈不多。以此而思煥然可解也。故一切有所得心積劫種種修行持戒坐禪皆是乖道。故福不多。今無得施與道相應。故福多。故爾前一切功德不及五華施福多也就此文開為三別。第一法說。第二譬說。第三合譬。法說如文。東方虛空下。第二譬說就中有兩。初舉東方虛空為喻。次舉九方虛空為喻。各有問答。如文尋之。問何因緣故借虛空為喻。答凡有二義。一者虛空無相無為。無住相施無依無得。是故假此為喻。二者虛空包含廣大。無住相施果報亦大。故假喻也。須菩提無住相佈施亦如是下。第三合譬。如文可尋。須菩提菩薩但應如所教住下。此第三章結勸也。所言如所教住者。如上來無所得之教。應須依此而住依此而修行也。須菩提于意

【現代漢語翻譯】現代漢語譯本：現在希望修行和願力都成就，降伏的意義才開始顯現。如果菩薩不住相佈施（指菩薩不執著于佈施的行為、對像和自我），以下的內容是第二部分，闡明修習不住相的因，可以得到無所得的果。之所以有這段文字，有兩個意義：一是舉出結果來勸勉修行。因為修習不住相的因，可以獲得無邊的福德，所以勸勉修習不住相的佈施。二是解釋疑惑。有人疑惑說，有所住的佈施可以有福德，無住的佈施應該沒有福德。所以解釋說，有所得的佈施功德就少，無所得的佈施福德就無邊。問：現在持戒、修行、書寫經書、建造佛像的功德可能很多，為什麼用無住的心來做福，就與佛的十力（佛所具有的十種力量）空性相等呢？這種說法太過分了。答：佛所說的真實不虛。你如果不相信，我現在就簡略地說明。福德的產生是因為扶助真理，所以解釋善以扶助真理為意義。以無所住的心，就是扶助真理的極致，福德怎麼會不多呢？用這個道理來思考，就可以煥然大悟了。所以一切有所得的心，經過累劫的種種修行、持戒、坐禪，都是背離正道的，所以福德不多。現在無所得的佈施與道相應，所以福德多。所以之前一切的功德，比不上用五種鮮花供養的福德多。這段文字可以分為三個部分：第一是法說，第二是譬說，第三是合譬。法說就像經文所說。『東方虛空』以下是第二譬說，其中有兩部分：先舉東方虛空為比喻，再舉九方虛空為比喻，各有問答，就像經文所說。問：因為什麼緣故借用虛空來做比喻？答：大概有兩個意義。一是虛空無相無為，無住相的佈施無依無得，所以借用虛空來做比喻。二是虛空包含廣大，無住相佈施的果報也大，所以借用虛空來做比喻。『須菩提，無住相佈施也像這樣』以下是第三合譬，就像經文所說可以找到答案。『須菩提，菩薩但應如所教住』以下是第三章的總結勸勉。所說的『如所教住』，就是像上面無所得的教導，應該依此而住，依此而修行。須菩提，你認為怎麼樣？

【English Translation】 English version: Now, the hope is that both practice and vows will be accomplished, and the meaning of subduing will begin to manifest. If a Bodhisattva practices giving without attachment (referring to a Bodhisattva not being attached to the act of giving, the recipient, and the self), the following is the second part, explaining that cultivating the cause of non-attachment can lead to the result of non-attainment. There are two meanings for this passage: first, it uses the result to encourage practice. Because cultivating the cause of non-attachment can obtain boundless merit, it encourages the practice of giving without attachment. Second, it resolves doubts. Some doubt that giving with attachment can have merit, while giving without attachment should have no merit. Therefore, it explains that the merit of giving with attachment is little, while the merit of giving without attachment is boundless. Question: Now, the merit of upholding precepts, practicing, writing scriptures, and building Buddha images may be great. Why is it that doing good with a mind of non-attachment is equal to the ten powers (the ten powers possessed by a Buddha) and emptiness? This statement is too excessive. Answer: The words of the Buddha are true and not false. If you do not believe, I will now briefly explain. The arising of merit is because of supporting the truth, so explaining goodness means supporting the truth. Having a mind of non-attachment is the ultimate support of the truth, so how can the merit not be great? By thinking about this principle, one can suddenly understand. Therefore, all minds with attachment, through countless eons of various practices, upholding precepts, and meditation, are deviating from the right path, so the merit is not great. Now, giving without attainment is in accordance with the Dao, so the merit is great. Therefore, all previous merits are not as great as the merit of offering five kinds of flowers. This passage can be divided into three parts: first is the Dharma explanation, second is the analogy, and third is the combination of analogy. The Dharma explanation is as the scripture says. 'Eastern space' and below is the second analogy, which has two parts: first, it uses eastern space as a metaphor, and then it uses the space of the nine directions as a metaphor, each with questions and answers, as the scripture says. Question: For what reason is space used as a metaphor? Answer: There are roughly two meanings. First, space is without form and without action, and giving without attachment is without reliance and without attainment, so space is used as a metaphor. Second, space contains vastness, and the result of giving without attachment is also great, so space is used as a metaphor. 'Subhuti (one of the ten principal disciples of the Buddha, known for his understanding of emptiness), giving without attachment is also like this' and below is the third combination of analogy, as the scripture says can be found. 'Subhuti, Bodhisattvas should abide as taught' and below is the concluding encouragement of the third chapter. The so-called 'abide as taught' is like the above teaching of non-attainment, one should abide by this and practice according to this. Subhuti, what do you think?

云何可以身相見如來不下。若依開善。舉平等空答菩提心問。今謂二義不然。一者有顛倒過。要先發菩提心然後行菩薩行。豈得前明菩薩行竟今始辨發菩提心耶。二者此中文云可以身相見如來不。若是平等空則無復如來。何名見佛耶。今作五義生起此章。一者若依論釋。自上已來答四問竟。從此下第二章斷生疑心。答於四問即是略說般若。若斷生疑心則是廣說般若。故論云自下一切修多羅中斷生疑心。故知說經皆是斷生疑故也。若依因果分門。上來酬於四問即是辨無所得因。此下第二明無為法身之果。若行有所得因還得有所得果。故大經云。有所得者名曰無明。有所得者名二十五有。今無所得因故得無為法身之果。故大經云。無所得者名為智慧。無所得者名大涅槃。又初章經明發菩提心。次章經明修菩薩行。今一章經辨得於佛道。此三即是次第。是故斯經其義要也又成上菩提心義。發菩提心下度眾生上求佛道。下度眾生已辨眾生之相。故度無所度。今上求佛道。故須識法身。即是求無所求。若不識眾生則不能度眾生。若不識法身則不能上求佛道也。若有所得發心求佛。如凈名所呵。即欲令其舍菩提見。而是發菩提心舍于佛見。乃見佛耳。亦上辨度眾生即辨眾生空。次辨修萬行則辨六塵諸法空。此人之與法並是世間畢竟

空。今明不可以諸相得見如來。即是諸佛空。故眾生無所有則非眾生。諸佛無所有是即非佛。故非眾生非佛非生死非涅槃。故眾生與佛本來不二。然為破二見故云不二。在二既息不二亦除。故華嚴云。不著不二法。以無一二故也。若能如此而悟。一切諸見畢竟不起。始是金剛。稱為般若。就此文中開為三意。第一如來騰眾疑以問善吉。二善吉對如來以釋疑。第三如來印述結成得失。此即是初。所言疑者。上云菩薩行無住相圓因。時眾生疑。因若無住果應無為。今見果是有為。云何因是無住。所以者何。小乘人言。釋迦之身體具有三相。初生王宮即是生義。次八十年住世即是住義。雙林入滅即是滅義也。今果既具此三相。豈得言因是無所住耶。是故佛騰眾疑以問善吉。可以身有三相見如來法身不耶。須菩提言不也世尊下。此第二善吉對佛釋時會之疑。問佛應自釋。何故令善吉釋。答欲示有得解之人故令善吉釋。又善吉是小乘人。今欲引接小乘人令信如來身是無為故令善吉釋也。又如雀母引子。善吉亦爾。欲引聲聞令同其所解。善吉是聲聞既知如來身是無為。我亦是聲聞。亦須知如來身是無為不為三相所相也。又善吉欲引菩薩令求如來法身。所以者何。小乘之人尚知如來身是無為。云何菩薩言佛是有為。問涅槃經可辨佛是

【現代漢語翻譯】空。現在和未來不可能通過諸相來見到如來（Tathagata，如來的稱號）。因為一切諸佛的本質是空性。所以，如果說眾生一無所有，那就不是真正的眾生；如果說諸佛一無所有，那就不是真正的佛。因此，既非眾生，也非佛，既非生死，也非涅槃。所以，眾生與佛本來就是不二的。然而，爲了破除二元對立的見解，才說不二。當二元對立的觀念消失時，不二的觀念也應去除。所以《華嚴經》（Avatamsaka Sutra）說：『不執著于不二之法，因為沒有一和二的分別。』如果能夠如此領悟，一切見解終將不起，這才是金剛般若（Vajra Prajna，堅固的智慧）。就這段經文而言，可以分為三個要點：第一，如來提出問題以消除大眾的疑惑；第二，善吉（Subhuti，須菩提的另一個名字）回答如來的問題以解釋疑惑；第三，如來印可並總結得失。這便是第一個要點。所謂疑惑，是指前面提到菩薩行無住相的圓滿因地時，眾生疑惑：如果因是無住的，那麼果應該是無為的。現在看到果是有為的，怎麼能說因是無住的呢？原因是什麼呢？小乘人認為，釋迦（Sakyamuni，釋迦牟尼佛的簡稱）的身體具有三相：初生王宮是生相，八十年住世是住相，雙林入滅是滅相。現在果既然具備這三相，怎麼能說因是無所住呢？所以佛提出問題以消除大眾的疑惑：可以通過身體的三相見到如來的法身嗎？須菩提（Subhuti）回答說：『不，世尊（Bhagavan，佛的尊稱）。』這是第二個要點，善吉對佛解釋時會大眾的疑惑。疑問是，佛應該自己解釋，為什麼讓善吉解釋呢？回答是，爲了顯示有能夠理解的人，所以讓善吉解釋。而且善吉是小乘人，現在想要引導小乘人相信如來的身體是無為的，所以讓善吉解釋。又像雀母引導孩子一樣，善吉也是如此，想要引導聲聞（Sravaka，聽聞佛法的人）達到相同的理解。善吉是聲聞，既然知道如來的身體是無為的，我也是聲聞，也應該知道如來的身體是無為的，不受三相的束縛。而且善吉想要引導菩薩去尋求如來的法身。原因是什麼呢？小乘的人尚且知道如來的身體是無為的，為什麼菩薩卻說佛是有為的？問：在《涅槃經》（Nirvana Sutra）中可以辨別佛是...

【English Translation】 Emptiness. Now and in the future, the Tathagata (title of the Buddha) cannot be seen through physical characteristics. That is because all Buddhas are empty in nature. Therefore, if one says that sentient beings possess nothing, then they are not true sentient beings; if one says that Buddhas possess nothing, then they are not true Buddhas. Hence, neither sentient beings nor Buddhas, neither birth and death nor Nirvana. Therefore, sentient beings and Buddhas are originally non-dual. However, in order to break through dualistic views, it is said to be non-dual. When dualistic concepts cease, the concept of non-duality should also be removed. Therefore, the Avatamsaka Sutra (Flower Garland Sutra) says: 'Do not cling to the non-dual Dharma, because there is no distinction between one and two.' If one can realize this, all views will ultimately not arise; this is Vajra Prajna (Diamond Wisdom). Regarding this passage, it can be divided into three main points: First, the Tathagata raises questions to dispel the doubts of the assembly; second, Subhuti (another name for the disciple) answers the Tathagata's questions to explain the doubts; third, the Tathagata approves and summarizes the gains and losses. This is the first point. The so-called doubt refers to the previous mention of the Bodhisattva's practice of the perfect cause of non-abiding, at which time sentient beings doubted: If the cause is non-abiding, then the result should be unconditioned (uncreated). Now seeing that the result is conditioned (created), how can it be said that the cause is non-abiding? What is the reason? The Hinayana (Small Vehicle) followers believe that Sakyamuni (short for Sakyamuni Buddha) has three characteristics: being born in the royal palace is the characteristic of birth, living in the world for eighty years is the characteristic of dwelling, and entering Nirvana in the Sala Grove is the characteristic of extinction. Now that the result possesses these three characteristics, how can it be said that the cause is non-abiding? Therefore, the Buddha raises questions to dispel the doubts of the assembly: Can the Dharmakaya (Dharma Body) of the Tathagata be seen through the three characteristics of the physical body? Subhuti replied: 'No, Bhagavan (Blessed One, title of the Buddha).' This is the second point, Subhuti explains the doubts of the assembly to the Buddha. The question is, the Buddha should explain it himself, why let Subhuti explain it? The answer is, in order to show that there are those who can understand, so Subhuti is allowed to explain. Moreover, Subhuti is a Hinayana follower, and now wanting to guide the Hinayana followers to believe that the Tathagata's body is unconditioned, so Subhuti is allowed to explain. Just as a sparrow mother guides her children, Subhuti is also like that, wanting to guide the Sravakas (listeners of the Dharma) to reach the same understanding. Subhuti is a Sravaka, since he knows that the Tathagata's body is unconditioned, I am also a Sravaka, and I should also know that the Tathagata's body is unconditioned, not bound by the three characteristics. Moreover, Subhuti wants to guide the Bodhisattvas to seek the Dharmakaya of the Tathagata. What is the reason? The Hinayana followers already know that the Tathagata's body is unconditioned, why do the Bodhisattvas say that the Buddha is conditioned? Question: In the Nirvana Sutra, one can distinguish that the Buddha is...

無為。般若經云何有於此說。答蓋是五時教人作此問耳。今般若論中正破此問。故偈云三相異體故離彼是如來。豈得般若教中佛是有為。又今辨般若正法即是法身。般若非為非無為。即是法身。非為非無為但為對凡夫二乘身是有為故。嘆美作無為耳。亦不同北土論師謂如來身定是無為。為與無為並是般若功用也。不可以身相見如來者。不可以生住滅三相見如來無為法身也。何以故如來所說身相者。時會復疑。若言三相非如來者。何故如來昔說有三相耶。昔說生在凈飯王家。即是說有生相。卻後三月當入涅槃。即是滅相。八十年住世。即是住相。是故釋云。如來所說有三相者。即非身相。言非身相者。非是法身無為相也。此是無生生方便。即是生身。故有三相。若生無生方便。即是法身。無三相也。佛告須菩提下。此第三如來述成結其得失。所以須述成者。時會恐善吉所解未能不謬。是故如來述成其解。就此文中凡有兩句。初句明失。凡有名相皆是憶想而有。悉是虛妄。豈但計生住滅非虛妄耶。若見諸法相非相下。第二句明得。若見一切諸相非法身相。即是見法身。故華嚴云。一切法不生。一切法不滅。若能如此觀。諸佛常現前也。

金剛般若經義疏卷第二大正藏第 33 冊 No. 1699 金剛般若疏

【現代漢語翻譯】現代漢語譯本無為（Asamskrta，指非造作、無生滅的境界）。《般若經》（Prajna Sutra）中為何有這樣的說法？回答說，這大概是五時教（Buddha's Five Periods of Teaching）的教化，人們才會提出這樣的問題。現在《般若論》（Prajnaparamita Sutra）中正是爲了破斥這個問題。所以偈頌說：『生、住、滅三相是異體的，所以遠離它們才是如來。』難道在般若的教義中，佛是有為（Samskrta，指有造作、有生滅的）嗎？而且現在辨明般若正法就是法身（Dharmakaya，佛的真身）。般若既不是有為，也不是無為，它就是法身。說它既不是有為也不是無為，只是爲了針對凡夫和二乘人認為身是有為的，所以才讚美它是無為罷了。也不同於北方地區的論師認為如來身一定是無為的說法，因為有為和無為都是般若的功用。不能以身相見如來，是因為不能以生、住、滅三相見如來的無為法身。為什麼呢？如來所說的身相，當時聽法的人又產生了疑惑。如果說三相不是如來，那麼為什麼如來過去又說有三相呢？過去說生在凈飯王（Suddhodana）家，就是說有生相；卻在三個月后將要進入涅槃（Nirvana），就是滅相；八十年住世，就是住相。所以解釋說，如來所說的有三相，不是指法身之相。說不是法身之相，就不是指法身無為之相。這是無生而生的方便，是應化身，所以有三相。如果生是無生的方便，那就是法身，沒有三相。佛告須菩提（Subhuti）以下，這是第三部分，如來闡述並總結其得失。之所以要闡述總結，是當時聽法的人恐怕善吉（Subhuti）所理解的可能不正確。所以如來闡述並總結他的理解。在這段文字中，總共有兩句。第一句說明了過失。凡是名相都是由憶想而產生的，都是虛妄的。豈止是認為生、住、滅不是虛妄呢？若見諸法相非相以下，第二句說明了所得。如果見到一切諸相不是法身之相，那就是見到了法身。所以《華嚴經》（Avatamsaka Sutra）說：『一切法不生，一切法不滅。如果能夠這樣觀察，諸佛就會常常在眼前顯現。』《金剛般若經義疏》卷第二大正藏第 33 冊 No. 1699 《金剛般若疏》

【English Translation】 English version Asamskrta (unconditioned). Why is there such a saying in the Prajna Sutra (Prajna Sutra)? The answer is that this question is probably asked because of the teachings of the Five Periods of Teaching. Now, this question is refuted in the Prajnaparamita Sutra (Prajnaparamita Sutra). Therefore, the verse says: 'The three characteristics of arising, abiding, and ceasing are different entities, so being apart from them is the Tathagata.' How can it be that in the teachings of Prajna, the Buddha is Samskrta (conditioned)? Moreover, now it is clarified that the Prajna Dharma is the Dharmakaya (Buddha's Dharma Body). Prajna is neither conditioned nor unconditioned; it is the Dharmakaya. Saying that it is neither conditioned nor unconditioned is only to address the fact that ordinary people and those of the Two Vehicles consider the body to be conditioned, so it is praised as unconditioned. It is also different from the northern region's teachers who believe that the Tathagata's body must be unconditioned, because both conditioned and unconditioned are the functions of Prajna. One cannot see the Tathagata by physical characteristics because one cannot see the Tathagata's unconditioned Dharmakaya by the three characteristics of arising, abiding, and ceasing. Why? The physical characteristics that the Tathagata spoke of caused doubt among those listening to the Dharma at that time. If it is said that the three characteristics are not the Tathagata, then why did the Tathagata say in the past that there are three characteristics? In the past, it was said that he was born in the house of King Suddhodana (Suddhodana), which means there is the characteristic of arising; but after three months, he will enter Nirvana (Nirvana), which is the characteristic of ceasing; and he lived in the world for eighty years, which is the characteristic of abiding. Therefore, it is explained that the three characteristics that the Tathagata spoke of do not refer to the Dharmakaya. Saying that it is not the Dharmakaya means that it is not the unconditioned characteristic of the Dharmakaya. This is the expedient of arising without arising, which is the manifested body, so there are three characteristics. If arising is the expedient of non-arising, then it is the Dharmakaya, without three characteristics. The following, 'The Buddha told Subhuti (Subhuti),' is the third part, where the Tathagata elaborates and concludes its gains and losses. The reason for elaborating and concluding is that those listening to the Dharma at that time were afraid that Subhuti's understanding might not be correct. Therefore, the Tathagata elaborates and concludes his understanding. In this passage, there are two sentences in total. The first sentence clarifies the fault. All names and forms are produced by recollection and are all illusory. How can it be that only the belief that arising, abiding, and ceasing are not illusory? The following, 'If one sees all dharmas as non-forms,' the second sentence clarifies the gain. If one sees all forms as not being the form of the Dharmakaya, then one has seen the Dharmakaya. Therefore, the Avatamsaka Sutra (Avatamsaka Sutra) says: 'All dharmas do not arise, and all dharmas do not cease. If one can observe in this way, all Buddhas will always appear before one.' The Meaning of the Diamond Sutra, Volume 2 Taisho Tripitaka, Volume 33, No. 1699, Diamond Sutra Commentary

金剛般若經義疏卷第三

胡吉藏法師撰

須菩提白佛言頗有眾生者。此下第二段明信受波若義。所以明信受者。上說波若即是能被之教。今明信受即是所被之緣。此即是緣教相稱。若緣非教緣此教則不稱緣。若教非緣教此緣則不稟教。以今緣是教緣故此緣稟教得益。以教是緣教故此則不空說。為此因緣故緣教相稱也。又佛種種門說于波若。上已因果門說波若竟。今就信受門說于般若。所以了悟無依無得。故名信受。說此無依無得之信。即是說般若義也。就此門中問答為二。初即是善吉發問。所以問者。上明因辨果義已周滿。是故今問信受之人。然因是無所得因。果是無所得果。因是無所得因雖行萬行而實無所行。果是無所得果雖得菩提而實無所得。此事難信。若實有萬行可行實有佛果可得。信之則易。若實無萬行可行實無佛果可得。信之了亦易。若言俗諦自有因果真諦自無因果。有無各轍信之亦易。今並不然。雖修萬行而不見菩薩能行。不見萬行可行。無所依止而修萬行濟度眾生。此事希有。是以難信。如空中種樹不依于地而溉灌修治有于華實。此事為難是。故今問明有信者。若言佛身同於二乘是生滅法。亦易信。若言佛身是常住法凝然在金剛後心。此亦易信。若言應身自無常。法身自是常。

【現代漢語翻譯】現代漢語譯本：《金剛般若經義疏》卷第三胡吉藏法師撰『須菩提白佛言：頗有眾生者』。從這裡開始是第二段，闡明信受般若的意義。之所以要闡明信受，是因為前面已經說明般若是能施教的教法，現在闡明信受是所被教化的因緣。這便是因緣與教法相互契合。如果因緣不是教法的因緣，那麼這個因緣就與教法不相稱；如果教法沒有因緣，那麼這個因緣就不能稟承教法。因為現在的因緣是教法的因緣，所以這個因緣稟承教法而獲得利益。因為教法是因緣的教法，所以這個教法不是空說。因為這個因緣，所以因緣與教法相互契合。而且，佛以種種方式宣說般若。前面已經用因果之門宣說了般若。現在就用信受之門宣說般若。所以要了悟無所依、無所得，所以叫做信受。宣說這種無依無得的信心，就是宣說般若的意義。就這個信受之門來說，問答分為兩部分。開始是善吉（Subhuti）發問。之所以要發問，是因為前面已經闡明了因辨果的意義已經周全圓滿。所以現在問的是信受之人。然而，因是無所得的因，果是無所得的果。因是無所得的因，雖然修行萬行，但實際上沒有所行。果是無所得的果，雖然得到菩提（Bodhi），但實際上沒有所得。這件事難以置信。如果確實有萬行可以修行，確實有佛果可以得到，相信它就容易。如果確實沒有萬行可以修行，確實沒有佛果可以得到，相信它也容易。如果說俗諦（Samvriti-satya）自有因果，真諦（Paramārtha-satya）自無因果，有和無各有途徑，相信它也容易。現在卻不是這樣。雖然修行萬行，但不見菩薩（Bodhisattva）能行，不見萬行可行，無所依止而修行萬行濟度眾生，這件事稀有，所以難以置信。如同在空中種樹，不依于地而灌溉修治，卻有花和果實，這件事是困難的。所以現在問的是有沒有信受的人。如果說佛身同於二乘（Śrāvakayāna and Pratyekabuddhayāna），是生滅法，也容易相信。如果說佛身是常住法，凝然在金剛後心，這也容易相信。如果說應身（Nirmāṇakāya）自然是無常的，法身（Dharmakāya）自然是常的。

【English Translation】 English version: The Meaning of the Diamond Prajna Sutra, Volume 3 Composed by Dharma Master Ji Zang 'Subhuti said to the Buddha: Are there any beings?' This begins the second section, elucidating the meaning of believing and accepting Prajna (wisdom). The reason for elucidating belief and acceptance is that the preceding section explained Prajna as the teaching that can be bestowed. Now, elucidating belief and acceptance means it is the condition to be taught. This is the correspondence between condition and teaching. If the condition is not the condition of the teaching, then this condition is not in accordance with the teaching. If the teaching has no condition, then this condition cannot receive the teaching. Because the present condition is the condition of the teaching, this condition receives the teaching and gains benefit. Because the teaching is the teaching of condition, this teaching is not spoken in vain. Because of this cause and condition, the condition and teaching correspond to each other. Moreover, the Buddha speaks of Prajna in various ways. The previous section already spoke of Prajna through the gate of cause and effect. Now, it speaks of Prajna through the gate of belief and acceptance. Therefore, one must realize non-reliance and non-attainment, hence the name belief and acceptance. Speaking of this belief of non-reliance and non-attainment is speaking of the meaning of Prajna. Regarding this gate of belief and acceptance, the questions and answers are divided into two parts. The beginning is Subhuti's question. The reason for asking is that the meaning of distinguishing cause and effect has already been fully explained. Therefore, now it asks about the person who believes and accepts. However, the cause is the cause of non-attainment, and the effect is the effect of non-attainment. The cause is the cause of non-attainment, although practicing myriad practices, in reality, there is nothing practiced. The effect is the effect of non-attainment, although attaining Bodhi, in reality, there is nothing attained. This matter is difficult to believe. If there are indeed myriad practices to practice, and there is indeed Buddhahood to attain, believing it is easy. If there are indeed no myriad practices to practice, and there is indeed no Buddhahood to attain, believing it is also easy. If it is said that conventional truth (Samvriti-satya) has its own cause and effect, and ultimate truth (Paramārtha-satya) has no cause and effect, with existence and non-existence each having its own path, believing it is also easy. But now it is not like this. Although cultivating myriad practices, one does not see a Bodhisattva able to practice, one does not see myriad practices able to be practiced, without reliance, one cultivates myriad practices to liberate sentient beings. This matter is rare, so it is difficult to believe. It is like planting a tree in the air, not relying on the ground but irrigating and cultivating it, yet having flowers and fruits. This matter is difficult. Therefore, now it asks whether there are believers. If it is said that the Buddha's body is the same as the Two Vehicles (Śrāvakayāna and Pratyekabuddhayāna), it is a dharma of arising and ceasing, it is also easy to believe. If it is said that the Buddha's body is a permanent dharma, solidified in the Vajra after-mind, this is also easy to believe. If it is said that the Transformation Body (Nirmāṇakāya) is naturally impermanent, and the Dharma Body (Dharmakāya) is naturally permanent.

此亦易信。今明如來雖生畢竟不生。雖滅畢竟不滅。雖無生無滅而生滅方便利益眾生。此事希有。是故難信。所以問也。問曰。此為問現在信。為問未來信耶。答曰。現在眾生福慧深厚三多具足。在祇洹受道聞必生信。故不問現在。但佛滅度後後五百歲入像法中。此時眾生薄福鈍根。雖尋經文不能通了。故聞不生信。大智論解信毀品文云。佛滅度后五百歲後有五百部。皆執佛語不知佛意為解脫。故聞畢竟空如刀傷心。故知未來能信人少。故知問未來世也。又此舉未來有信以況現在。未來是惡世。外不值佛內薄福鈍根。尚信波若。況現世之人聞不生信。佛告須菩提下。此第二章明如來答。就文為二。一者遮無答。二者明有信答。莫作是說者。即是遮無答也。汝勿謂現在有信受之人。言未來起信受也。故云莫作是說也。如來滅後後五百歲下。此第二明有信答。就文大開七別。第一明信之時節。第二明能信之人。第三明所信之法。第四正出信心。第五明信之所由。第六明信之利益。第七廣釋信義。此即第一。言后五百歲者。有人言。正法五百年為初五百。次像法五百年為中五百。次像法后五百年名后五百。今舉最後五百。此是像法將滅衰弊之時。亦有信般若者。況前兩五百無信人耶。今謂不然。言后五百歲者。如大智論明五

【現代漢語翻譯】現代漢語譯本：這也容易相信。現在明白如來雖然示現出生，但畢竟沒有真正的出生；雖然示現滅度，但畢竟沒有真正的滅度。雖然沒有真正的生滅，卻以生滅的方便來利益眾生。這件事非常稀有，所以難以置信，因此才提問。提問說：『這是爲了問現在的信受，還是爲了問未來的信受呢？』回答說：『現在的眾生福德和智慧深厚，三事（可能指戒、定、慧）多具足，在祇洹精舍聽聞佛法必定生起信心，所以不問現在。只是佛陀滅度后，后五百歲進入像法時期，此時的眾生福薄根鈍，即使尋找經文也不能通達明瞭，所以聽聞后不能生起信心。《大智度論》解釋信毀品時說，佛陀滅度后五百歲后，有五百部，都執著于佛陀的言語，卻不知道佛陀的真實意圖是爲了解脫，所以聽聞畢竟空就像刀傷心一樣。』因此知道未來能生信的人很少，所以知道是問未來世的事情。又，這裡舉出未來有信的人，來比況現在。未來是惡世，外不遇到佛，內里福薄根鈍，尚且能信般若，何況現在世的人聽聞后不能生信呢？佛告須菩提下，這是第二章，說明如來的回答。就文義分為二：一是遮止無答，二是說明有信的回答。『莫作是說』，就是遮止無答。你不要認為現在有信受的人，說未來才生起信受。所以說『莫作是說』。『如來滅後後五百歲下』，這是第二，說明有信的回答。就文義大開七別：第一，說明信的時節；第二，說明能信的人；第三，說明所信的法；第四，正式闡述信心；第五，說明信的緣由；第六，說明信的利益；第七，廣泛解釋信義。這裡是第一。說到后五百歲，有人說，正法五百年為初五百，其次像法五百年為中五百，其次像法后五百年名為后五百。現在舉出最後五百，這是像法將要滅亡衰敗的時候，也有信般若的人。難道前兩個五百年就沒有信的人嗎？我現在認為不是這樣。說到后五百歲，如《大智度論》說明五

【English Translation】 English version: This is also easy to believe. Now, it is clear that the Tathagata, though appearing to be born, ultimately is not born; though appearing to be extinguished, ultimately is not extinguished. Though there is no true birth or extinction, the Tathagata uses the expedient of birth and extinction to benefit sentient beings. This matter is rare, and therefore difficult to believe, which is why the question is asked. The question is: 'Is this question about belief in the present, or about belief in the future?' The answer is: 'Sentient beings in the present have deep blessings and wisdom, and are fully endowed with the three (possibly referring to morality, concentration, and wisdom). Hearing the Dharma at Jetavana Vihara, they will surely generate faith, so the present is not questioned. However, after the Buddha's Parinirvana, in the latter five hundred years, entering the Dharma-image age, sentient beings at this time will have shallow blessings and dull roots. Even if they seek the scriptures, they will not be able to understand them thoroughly, so they will not generate faith upon hearing. The Mahaprajnaparamita-sastra explains the chapter on belief and disbelief, saying that after five hundred years after the Buddha's Parinirvana, there will be five hundred sects, all clinging to the Buddha's words but not knowing the Buddha's true intention for liberation, so hearing about ultimate emptiness is like a knife wounding the heart.' Therefore, it is known that few people in the future will be able to believe, so it is known that the question is about the future age. Furthermore, the mention of those who have faith in the future is used to compare with the present. The future is an evil age, where one does not encounter the Buddha externally and has shallow blessings and dull roots internally, yet they still believe in Prajna. How much more so should people in the present age generate faith upon hearing? 'The Buddha told Subhuti below' is the second chapter, explaining the Tathagata's answer. The meaning of the text is divided into two parts: first, refuting the absence of an answer; second, explaining the answer of having faith. 'Do not say this' is refuting the absence of an answer. You should not think that there are people who have faith in the present, saying that faith will only arise in the future. Therefore, it says 'Do not say this.' 'After the Tathagata's Parinirvana, in the latter five hundred years below' is the second, explaining the answer of having faith. The meaning of the text is divided into seven distinct parts: first, explaining the time of faith; second, explaining the people who can believe; third, explaining the Dharma that is believed in; fourth, formally elucidating faith; fifth, explaining the causes of faith; sixth, explaining the benefits of faith; seventh, extensively explaining the meaning of faith. This is the first. Regarding the latter five hundred years, some say that the first five hundred years are the era of the True Dharma, the next five hundred years are the era of the Dharma-image, and the five hundred years after the Dharma-image are called the latter five hundred years. Now, the last five hundred years are mentioned, which is the time when the Dharma-image is about to perish and decline, yet there are still people who believe in Prajna. Are there no people who believe in the previous two five hundred years? I now believe that this is not the case. Regarding the latter five hundred years, as the Mahaprajnaparamita-sastra explains five

百歲已后也。前五百年得道者多不得者少。故名正法。次五百年得道者少不得者多。名為像法。既正法滅已次入像法名后五百歲。此中雖多不信。如五百部之例然亦有信受之人。故大品云。是波若波羅蜜佛滅度后南方轉至北方。是中四眾要有信持乃至供養也。又解云。佛滅后千年。為斷疑雲前五百是正法故聞有信。后五百是像法故聞不信。若爾後五百年無信波若。故佛今答云。后五百亦有信者。不應言無信者也。此時亦有信持乃至供養也。有持戒修福者下。此第二明有能信之人。什師翻經但明二人。一者持戒人。二者修福人。持戒人多是出家菩薩。修福多是在家菩薩。大智論云。出家菩薩以尸羅為首。在家菩薩以檀為首。是故今文但明二人。然此二人具通大小。若有所得小乘二人則不信波若。故下文云若樂小法者則於此經不能聽受讀誦。若大乘二人樂無所得乃信是法。故下文云此經為大乘者說為最上乘者說。若是論經便有三人。論云不空以有實菩薩三德備。第三即是智慧人也。前之二人名為聞信。若智慧人此是證信也。又言。能信之人既是勝人。故舉止行二善物情所貴。以褒嘆之令得信受。持戒是止善。修福是行蓋。此二攝一切善盡。則諸惡莫作諸善奉行故舉此二攝一切人也。於此章句下。第三明所信之法。即上因果

【現代漢語翻譯】現代漢語譯本：佛陀涅槃百年之後。前五百年得道的人多，不得道的人少，所以稱為正法時期。接下來的五百年，得道的人少，不得道的人多，稱為像法時期。正法滅盡之後，進入像法時期，名為后五百年。這其中雖然有很多人不相信佛法，例如五百部之例，但也有信受奉行的人。所以《大品般若經》說：『般若波羅蜜（Prajnaparamita，智慧到彼岸）在佛陀滅度后，從南方輾轉到北方。這其中四眾弟子（比丘、比丘尼、優婆塞、優婆夷）一定要有信奉、受持乃至供養的人。』又有人解釋說：佛陀滅度后一千年，是爲了斷除人們的疑惑，因為前五百年是正法時期，所以聽聞佛法的人多有信心；后五百年是像法時期，所以聽聞佛法的人多不相信。如果這樣說，后五百年就沒有人相信般若了。所以佛陀現在回答說：后五百年也有相信的人，不應該說沒有相信的人。這個時候也有信奉、受持乃至供養的人。『有持戒修福者』以下，這是第二點說明有能夠相信的人。鳩摩羅什（Kumarajiva）法師翻譯的經文中只說明瞭兩種人：一是持戒的人，二是修福的人。持戒的人多是出家菩薩，修福的人多是在家菩薩。《大智度論》說：出家菩薩以尸羅（Sila，戒律）為首，在家菩薩以檀那（Dana，佈施）為首。所以現在的經文只說明瞭這兩種人。然而這兩種人普遍包括大乘和小乘。如果有所得的小乘人，這兩種人則不相信般若。所以下文說『如果喜歡小法的人，就不能聽受讀誦這部經』。如果是大乘的這兩種人，喜歡無所得，就相信這部經。所以下文說『這部經是為大乘人說的，是為最上乘人說的』。如果是論經，便有三種人。《論》說不空以有實菩薩三德具備。第三種就是智慧人。前面兩種人名為聞信，如果是智慧人，這就是證信。又說：能夠相信的人既然是殊勝的人，所以舉止行為都是善的，為世人所看重。用讚美來使他們得到信受。持戒是止惡，修福是行善。這兩種行為涵蓋了一切善行，也就是諸惡莫作，眾善奉行，所以舉出這兩種行為來涵蓋所有的人。『於此章句下』，這是第三點說明所相信的法，也就是上面的因果。

【English Translation】 English version: A hundred years after the Parinirvana (death) of the Buddha. In the first five hundred years, those who attain enlightenment are many, and those who do not are few, hence it is called the Era of the Right Dharma (正法). In the next five hundred years, those who attain enlightenment are few, and those who do not are many, hence it is called the Era of the Semblance Dharma (像法). After the Right Dharma has perished, entering the Era of the Semblance Dharma, it is called the Latter Five Hundred Years. Although there are many who do not believe in this, such as the example of the five hundred sections, there are also those who believe and accept it. Therefore, the Mahaprajnaparamita Sutra (大品般若經) says: 'Prajnaparamita (般若波羅蜜, wisdom that reaches the other shore) after the Buddha's Parinirvana, turns from the South to the North. Among them, the fourfold assembly (比丘, Bhikshus; 比丘尼, Bhikshunis; 優婆塞, Upasakas; 優婆夷, Upasikas) must have those who believe, uphold, and even make offerings.' Some also explain: One thousand years after the Buddha's Parinirvana, it is to dispel people's doubts, because the first five hundred years are the Era of the Right Dharma, so those who hear the Dharma mostly have faith; the latter five hundred years are the Era of the Semblance Dharma, so those who hear the Dharma mostly do not believe. If that is the case, then in the latter five hundred years, no one believes in Prajnaparamita. Therefore, the Buddha now answers: In the latter five hundred years, there are also those who believe, one should not say that there are none who believe. At this time, there are also those who believe, uphold, and even make offerings. 'Those who uphold the precepts and cultivate blessings' below, this is the second point explaining that there are those who are able to believe. Kumarajiva (鳩摩羅什) translated the scriptures, only explaining two types of people: one is those who uphold the precepts, and the other is those who cultivate blessings. Those who uphold the precepts are mostly monastic Bodhisattvas, and those who cultivate blessings are mostly lay Bodhisattvas. The Mahaprajnaparamitasastra (大智度論) says: Monastic Bodhisattvas take Sila (尸羅, precepts) as the foremost, and lay Bodhisattvas take Dana (檀那, giving) as the foremost. Therefore, the current text only explains these two types of people. However, these two types of people universally include both Mahayana and Hinayana. If they are Hinayana people who have attachments, then these two types of people do not believe in Prajnaparamita. Therefore, the following text says 'If those who delight in the Small Vehicle (小法), then they cannot listen to, receive, recite this Sutra.' If they are Mahayana people, these two types of people delight in non-attachment, then they believe in this Sutra. Therefore, the following text says 'This Sutra is spoken for those of the Great Vehicle (大乘), it is spoken for those of the Supreme Vehicle (最上乘).' If it is discussing the Sutra, then there are three types of people. The Treatise says that Amoghavajra (不空) possesses the three virtues of a real Bodhisattva. The third is the person of wisdom. The previous two types of people are called hearing and believing, if it is a person of wisdom, then this is verifying belief. It is also said: Since those who are able to believe are superior people, therefore their conduct and actions are all good, and valued by the world. Use praise to enable them to gain belief and acceptance. Upholding the precepts is stopping evil, and cultivating blessings is doing good. These two actions encompass all good deeds, that is, do no evil, do all good, therefore these two actions are mentioned to encompass all people. 'Under this chapter and verse', this is the third point explaining the Dharma that is believed, which is the above cause and effect.

法門名為章句也。能生信心下。此第四正辨于經生信。以此為實者。即是無所得實信。若有所得信雖異小乘不信。若望無所得信還成不信。故大品有信毀之品。欲明有所得信此即成毀。今此是無所得實相正信。故言以此為實。亦信波若是法之實相。故云以此為實也。當知是人下。此第五明信之所由。所以聞經決能信者。良以殖因積久故能信受。故涅槃云。熙連河沙諸如來所發菩提心。然後乃能于惡世中不謗是經。今亦爾。三多久殖故能信而不謗。文有二句。前句明非值少佛。以于下。第二句明值于多佛也。聞是章句乃至一念生凈信者下。第六章明信得利益。凡有二益。一者外為諸佛知見。二者內得無邊功德。然信波若之利難可稱量。今舉一念之信尚獲無邊功德。始終之信故復難言。如來懸鑒信謗皆知。而今偏舉信人者。略有三義。一者此經是諸佛之母為佛守護故。若生希向則為佛所記錄。故大品云。佛常以佛眼觀此經卷。若受持者則為佛護念。為如來之所齒錄。直置世間為天王貴勝知友。尚自歡喜。況為如來之所親愛耶。二者此福與虛空等。豈下地所能知。唯佛窮其邊底。三者佛無二言。言必可信。今明信得多福。故其福必知多。問何因緣故名為知見。答論云。如來愿智力知非是比智知。佛眼所見非肉眼見。又佛知此

【現代漢語翻譯】現代漢語譯本『法門名為章句也。能生信心下。』這是第四部分，正式辨明因經典而生起的信心。以這個為真實，就是無所得的真實信心。如果是有所得的信心，雖然不同於小乘的不信，但如果與無所得的信心相比，仍然是不信。所以《大品般若經》中有『信毀品』，想要說明有所得的信心實際上就是譭謗。現在這裡是無所得的實相正信，所以說『以此為實』，也是相信般若是法之實相，所以說『以此為實也』。『當知是人下。』這是第五部分，說明信心的由來。之所以聽聞經典就能決定相信，是因為長期以來種下了善因，積累了功德，所以能夠信受。所以《涅槃經》說，在像熙連河沙數一樣多的如來那裡發菩提心，然後才能在惡世中不誹謗這部經。現在也是這樣，因為長久以來種植了善因，所以能夠相信而不誹謗。文中有兩句，前一句說明並非只值遇了少數的佛，『以于下』，第二句說明值遇了眾多的佛。『聞是章句乃至一念生凈信者下。』這是第六章，說明因信而得到的利益。總共有兩種利益，一是外在的為諸佛所知見，二是內在的得到無邊功德。然而，相信般若的利益難以衡量，現在舉例說，即使只是一念的信心，尚且能獲得無邊功德，始終如一的信心就更難說了。如來懸知一切，信與不信都知道，而現在偏偏舉出相信的人，略有三種意義。一是這部經是諸佛之母，為佛所守護，所以如果產生希求之心，就會被佛所記錄。所以《大品般若經》說，佛經常用佛眼觀察這部經卷，如果有人受持，就會被佛護念，被如來所記錄，直接安置在世間，成為天王貴勝的知友，尚且會感到歡喜，更何況是被如來所親愛呢？二是這種福報與虛空相等，豈是下地所能知曉的，只有佛才能窮盡其邊底。三是佛無二言，所說必定可信。現在說明相信能得到很多福報，所以佛必定知道其福報之多。問：因為什麼因緣而被稱為知見？答：論中說，如來用愿智力來知曉，不是用比智來知曉。佛眼所見，不是肉眼所見。而且佛知道這些。

【English Translation】 English version 'The Dharma gate is named chapter and sentence. 'Able to generate faith below.' This is the fourth part, formally distinguishing the faith arising from the scripture. Taking this as reality is the real faith of no-attainment. If it is the faith of something attained, although it is different from the disbelief of the Hinayana, it is still disbelief compared to the faith of no-attainment. Therefore, the 'Mahaprajnaparamita Sutra' has a chapter on 'Faith and Defamation,' wanting to explain that the faith of something attained is actually defamation. Now this is the true faith of the reality of no-attainment, so it is said 'taking this as reality,' which is also believing that Prajna is the reality of Dharma, so it is said 'taking this as reality.' 'Know that this person below.' This is the fifth part, explaining the origin of faith. The reason why hearing the scripture can lead to a firm belief is because of the long-term planting of good causes and the accumulation of merits, so one can accept it with faith. Therefore, the 'Nirvana Sutra' says that one must generate the Bodhi mind in the presence of Buddhas as numerous as the sands of the Ganges River before one can avoid slandering this scripture in an evil age. It is the same now; because of the long-term planting of good causes, one can believe without slandering. There are two sentences in the text. The first sentence explains that one has not only encountered a few Buddhas, 'because of below,' and the second sentence explains that one has encountered many Buddhas. 'Hearing these chapters and sentences, even generating a pure faith for a single moment below.' This is the sixth chapter, explaining the benefits gained from faith. There are two benefits in total: one is externally being known and seen by all Buddhas, and the other is internally gaining boundless merits. However, the benefits of believing in Prajna are immeasurable. Now, to give an example, even a single moment of faith can obtain boundless merits, let alone constant faith. The Tathagata knows everything, both belief and disbelief, but now only those who believe are mentioned, with three meanings. First, this scripture is the mother of all Buddhas and is protected by the Buddhas, so if one generates a desire for it, it will be recorded by the Buddhas. Therefore, the 'Mahaprajnaparamita Sutra' says that the Buddha often observes this scripture with the Buddha's eye, and if someone upholds it, they will be protected by the Buddha, recorded by the Tathagata, and directly placed in the world, becoming a friend of heavenly kings and nobles, which would be joyful, let alone being loved by the Tathagata? Second, this blessing is equal to space, how can it be known by the lower realms, only the Buddha can exhaust its boundaries. Third, the Buddha has no double-tongue, and what is said must be trustworthy. Now it is explained that believing can obtain many blessings, so the Buddha must know how many blessings there are. Question: For what reason is it called knowledge and vision? Answer: The treatise says that the Tathagata knows with the power of the wisdom of vows, not with the wisdom of comparison. What the Buddha's eye sees is not what the physical eye sees. Moreover, the Buddha knows these.

人行菩提因。見此人得菩提果。故言知見。何以故下。此是第七廣釋凈信之義。若依論師釋。上來通明三種人信。此的辨第三智慧人信。今明此言即通。上釋于信得德福無邊。今釋無邊所以。良由得無生信故其福無邊。但無生信自具二種。一者聞信。二者證信。就此釋中有三何以。故大開三別。第一明得。第二明失。第三勸舍失從得。此是初。自有兩句。初句明眾生空。次句明諸法空。所以明此二空釋信義者。大智論云。知眾生及法不生故名無生法忍。雖渡眾生。眾生畢竟不可得即是無眾生。雖行萬行。諸法畢竟不可得此即無生法忍。是故今辨此二空為無生凈信。又眾生空故是無果患。諸法空故即無因患。所以者何。會法已成人故。法因而人果。因果兩患雙離故其福無邊。又無人見故超凡夫地。凡夫著我不知無我。今辨無我即離凡夫地。又知法空故離二乘地。二乘之人但得人無我不得法無我。又以無人故離煩惱障。已無法故離於智障。超凡越聖兼二障俱盡。是故其福無邊。離人見中具無十六。今但略故止言無四。五陰中起我我所心。故名為我。不斷不絕相續住世。名為眾生。計有一根之命不斷猶有我。故稱為命者。亦名為人。外道計有神我死此生彼經游六道。故名壽者也。無法相無非法相者。第二句明法空。雖不見我

【現代漢語翻譯】現代漢語譯本『人行菩提因，見此人得菩提果，故言知見。』這是說，因為修行菩提之因，才能見到此人獲得菩提之果，所以才說這是『知見』。『何以故下，此是第七廣釋凈信之義。』以下的內容，是第七次廣泛解釋清凈信心的意義。『若依論師釋，上來通明三種人信，此的辨第三智慧人信。今明此言即通。』如果依照論師的解釋，前面是總的說明三種人的信心，這裡是明確辨別第三種有智慧的人的信心。現在說明這段話是通用的。『上釋于信得德福無邊，今釋無邊所以。良由得無生信故其福無邊。』前面解釋了對於信能獲得無邊的功德和福報，現在解釋為什麼是無邊的。這是因為獲得了無生信，所以福報才是無邊的。『但無生信自具二種。一者聞信。二者證信。』但是無生信本身具有兩種：一是聽聞而產生的信心，二是證悟而產生的信心。『就此釋中有三何以。故大開三別。第一明得。第二明失。第三勸舍失從得。此是初。』就這個解釋中有三個『何以』（為什麼）。因此，大體上展開三個方面：第一說明獲得，第二說明失去，第三勸導捨棄失去而從獲得。這是第一個方面。『自有兩句。初句明眾生空。次句明諸法空。』這裡有兩句話，第一句說明眾生是空的，第二句說明諸法是空的。『所以明此二空釋信義者。大智論云。知眾生及法不生故名無生法忍。』之所以要說明這兩種空性來解釋信的意義，是因為《大智論》中說：『知道眾生和法都是不生的，所以叫做無生法忍。』『雖渡眾生。眾生畢竟不可得即是無眾生。雖行萬行。諸法畢竟不可得此即無生法忍。』雖然度化眾生，但眾生畢竟是不可得的，這就是無眾生。雖然修行萬行，但諸法畢竟是不可得的，這就是無生法忍。『是故今辨此二空為無生凈信。』所以現在辨別這兩種空性作為無生清凈信。『又眾生空故是無果患。諸法空故即無因患。』而且，因為眾生是空的，所以沒有果的禍患；因為諸法是空的，所以沒有因的禍患。『所以者何。會法已成人故。法因而人果。因果兩患雙離故其福無邊。』為什麼這樣說呢？因為領會了法就已經成就了人，法是因，人是果，因果兩種禍患都遠離了，所以福報才是無邊的。『又無人見故超凡夫地。凡夫著我不知無我。今辨無我即離凡夫地。』而且，因為沒有人見，所以超越了凡夫的境界。凡夫執著於我，不知道無我，現在辨別無我，就離開了凡夫的境界。『又知法空故離二乘地。二乘之人但得人無我不得法無我。』而且，因為知道法是空的，所以離開了二乘的境界。二乘之人只證得了人無我，沒有證得法無我。『又以無人故離煩惱障。已無法故離於智障。超凡越聖兼二障俱盡。是故其福無邊。』而且，因為沒有人，所以離開了煩惱障；因為沒有法，所以離開了智障。超越了凡夫和聖人，兩種障礙都消盡了，所以福報才是無邊的。『離人見中具無十六。今但略故止言無四。』離開了人見，就具備了沒有十六種見解。現在只是簡略地說明，只說沒有四種。『五陰中起我我所心。故名為我。不斷不絕相續住世。名為眾生。』在五蘊（色、受、想、行、識）中產生我、我所的心，所以叫做我。不斷不絕，相續存在於世間，叫做眾生。『計有一根之命不斷猶有我。故稱為命者。亦名為人。』認為有一根的生命不斷絕，仍然有我，所以稱為命者，也叫做人。『外道計有神我死此生彼經游六道。故名壽者也。』外道認為有神我，死後從這裡生到那裡，經歷六道輪迴，所以叫做壽者。『無法相無非法相者。第二句明法空。雖不見我』『沒有法相，也沒有非法相』，第二句話說明法是空的。雖然沒有看見我

【English Translation】 English version 'A person practices the cause of Bodhi, and sees this person attain the fruit of Bodhi, therefore it is called knowledge and vision.' This means that because one cultivates the cause of Bodhi, one can see this person attain the fruit of Bodhi, hence it is called 'knowledge and vision'. 'What follows, is the seventh extensive explanation of the meaning of pure faith.' The following content is the seventh extensive explanation of the meaning of pure faith. 'If according to the interpretation of the masters, the above generally explains the faith of three types of people, this specifically distinguishes the faith of the third type of wise person. Now it is clarified that this statement is universal.' If according to the interpretation of the masters, the previous part generally explains the faith of three types of people, this specifically distinguishes the faith of the third type of wise person. Now it is clarified that this statement is universal. 'The above explains that faith obtains boundless merit and blessings, now explaining why it is boundless. It is because one obtains faith in non-origination that the blessings are boundless.' The previous part explained that faith obtains boundless merit and blessings, now explaining why it is boundless. It is because one obtains faith in non-origination that the blessings are boundless. 'But faith in non-origination itself has two types: first, faith from hearing; second, faith from realization.' But faith in non-origination itself has two types: first, faith from hearing; second, faith from realization. 'In this explanation, there are three 'why's. Therefore, it broadly unfolds three aspects: first, explaining attainment; second, explaining loss; third, encouraging abandoning loss and following attainment. This is the first aspect.' In this explanation, there are three 'why's (reasons). Therefore, it broadly unfolds three aspects: first, explaining attainment; second, explaining loss; third, encouraging abandoning loss and following attainment. This is the first aspect. 'There are two sentences. The first sentence clarifies the emptiness of sentient beings. The second sentence clarifies the emptiness of all dharmas.' There are two sentences here. The first sentence clarifies the emptiness of sentient beings. The second sentence clarifies the emptiness of all dharmas. 'The reason for clarifying these two emptinesses to explain the meaning of faith is that the Mahaprajnaparamita Shastra says: 'Knowing that sentient beings and dharmas do not arise is called the forbearance of non-origination'.' The reason for clarifying these two emptinesses to explain the meaning of faith is that the Mahaprajnaparamita Shastra says: 'Knowing that sentient beings and dharmas do not arise is called the forbearance of non-origination'. 'Although crossing over sentient beings, sentient beings are ultimately unattainable, which is non-sentient beings. Although practicing myriad practices, dharmas are ultimately unattainable, this is the forbearance of non-origination.' Although crossing over sentient beings, sentient beings are ultimately unattainable, which is non-sentient beings. Although practicing myriad practices, dharmas are ultimately unattainable, this is the forbearance of non-origination. 'Therefore, now distinguishing these two emptinesses as pure faith in non-origination.' Therefore, now distinguishing these two emptinesses as pure faith in non-origination. 'Moreover, because sentient beings are empty, there is no suffering of the fruit. Because dharmas are empty, there is no suffering of the cause.' Moreover, because sentient beings are empty, there is no suffering of the fruit; because dharmas are empty, there is no suffering of the cause. 'Why is this so? Because understanding the Dharma has already accomplished the person. Dharma is the cause, and the person is the fruit. Because both the suffering of cause and fruit are abandoned, the blessings are boundless.' Why is this so? Because understanding the Dharma has already accomplished the person. Dharma is the cause, and the person is the fruit. Because both the suffering of cause and fruit are abandoned, the blessings are boundless. 'Moreover, because there is no view of self, one transcends the realm of ordinary beings. Ordinary beings are attached to self and do not know non-self. Now distinguishing non-self is to leave the realm of ordinary beings.' Moreover, because there is no view of self, one transcends the realm of ordinary beings. Ordinary beings are attached to self and do not know non-self. Now distinguishing non-self is to leave the realm of ordinary beings. 'Moreover, because one knows that dharmas are empty, one leaves the realm of the two vehicles (Shravakayana and Pratyekabuddhayana). People of the two vehicles only attain the non-self of persons but do not attain the non-self of dharmas.' Moreover, because one knows that dharmas are empty, one leaves the realm of the two vehicles. People of the two vehicles only attain the non-self of persons but do not attain the non-self of dharmas. 'Moreover, because there is no person, one is free from the obstacle of afflictions. Because there is no dharma, one is free from the obstacle of knowledge. Transcending ordinary beings and surpassing sages, both obstacles are completely exhausted. Therefore, the blessings are boundless.' Moreover, because there is no person, one is free from the obstacle of afflictions. Because there is no dharma, one is free from the obstacle of knowledge. Transcending ordinary beings and surpassing sages, both obstacles are completely exhausted. Therefore, the blessings are boundless. 'In abandoning the view of self, one possesses the absence of sixteen views. Now, for the sake of brevity, we only say there are no four.' In abandoning the view of self, one possesses the absence of sixteen views. Now, for the sake of brevity, we only say there are no four. 'Arising from the five skandhas (form, feeling, perception, mental formations, and consciousness) is the mind of 'I' and 'mine', therefore it is called 'I'. Continuously and uninterruptedly abiding in the world is called 'sentient being'.' Arising from the five skandhas is the mind of 'I' and 'mine', therefore it is called 'I'. Continuously and uninterruptedly abiding in the world is called 'sentient being'. 'Considering that the life of one root is not interrupted, there is still an 'I'. Therefore, one who is called 'life' is also called 'person'.' Considering that the life of one root is not interrupted, there is still an 'I'. Therefore, one who is called 'life' is also called 'person'. 'Externalists consider that there is a spirit-self that dies here and is born there, traversing the six realms of existence. Therefore, it is called 'life-span'.' Externalists consider that there is a spirit-self that dies here and is born there, traversing the six realms of existence. Therefore, it is called 'life-span'. 'Those who have no dharma-aspect and no non-dharma-aspect. The second sentence clarifies the emptiness of dharmas. Although not seeing the I'

猶見有五陰之法。故今明亦無法相。五陰之法既無。五陰本無名為非法。空病亦空故云無非法相。此應如凈名三種次第。初不見我為眾生空。次不見法名為法空。不見非法亦名空病亦空。所以明此三空者。我見是眾結之根本。故明我見。次有見無見又是斷常之本乖道事深。故明有無見也。有人言。修善離惡。以善為法惡為非法。又有人言。以空遣有。以空為法有為非法。若依論經。人空之中有於四句。法空之中亦有四句。故論偈云依八八義別。言八八義者。人四法四名為一八破人四破法四。不此八病復為一八。故云八八。言法四者。一者法相。二者非法相。三者相。四者非相。此四是病也。問外道計我可是病。今見法生時是有。滅時是無。何故言病耶。答作此問者。未讀大乘經論也。破第一句法相言非法相者。陰界入等法不可得故言無法相。破第二句者言非無法相者。惑者聞陰入界虛誑故空便謂。諸法實相亦空。如大經云。既聞生死虛誑謂涅槃亦虛誑。為破此執生死自虛誑空。實相涅槃此非是空。故云空者二十五有。不空者大般涅槃。破第三句者云無相者。惑者云。涅槃實相若不可空便還同有。若不可有還應是空。是故今云不可謂涅槃還是有無相也。涅槃實相不可說有無相。破第四句者。惑者既聞實相不可有無。便應

【現代漢語翻譯】現代漢語譯本仍然執著於五陰（色、受、想、行、識，構成個體經驗的五個要素）之法。因此，現在闡明也沒有『法相』（事物表象）這種東西。既然五陰之法不存在，五陰的本質就是空無，所以稱為『非法』。連空這種病態的執著也是空的，所以說沒有『非法相』。這應該像《維摩詰經》中描述的三種次第一樣：首先，不見『我』，是為『眾生空』；其次，不見『法』，是為『法空』；不見『非法』，也稱為『空病亦空』。之所以要闡明這三空，是因為『我見』是各種煩惱的根本，所以要闡明『我見』。其次，『有見』和『無見』又是斷見和常見的根源，違背正道非常嚴重，所以要闡明『有無見』。有人說，修行就是要行善去惡，以善為『法』，惡為『非法』。又有人說，用空來去除有，以空為『法』，有為『非法』。如果按照經論，在人空之中有四句（四種觀點），在法空之中也有四句。所以論中的偈頌說，依據八八之義來區分。所說的八八之義，是指人四法四，合為一個八，破除人四破除法四，不執著這八種病態的觀點，又成為一個八，所以說是八八。所說的法四，是指：一者『法相』，二者『非法相』，三者『相』，四者『非相』。這四種都是病態的執著。有人問：外道執著于『我』，這當然是病態的。現在看到法生起時是有，滅去時是無，為什麼也說是病態呢？回答：提出這個問題的人，是沒有讀過大乘經論啊！破除第一句『法相』，說『非法相』，是因為陰、界、入等法是不可得的，所以說沒有『法相』。破除第二句，說『非非法相』，是因為迷惑的人聽到陰、入、界是虛妄的，就認為一切法的實相也是空的。如同《大般涅槃經》所說，既然聽聞生死是虛妄的，就認為涅槃也是虛妄的。爲了破除這種執著，生死本身是虛妄空性的，而實相涅槃並非是空。所以說，空指的是二十五有（三界中的二十五種存在形式），不空指的是大般涅槃。破除第三句，說『無相』，是因為迷惑的人說，涅槃實相如果不可空，那就又和有相同了；如果不可有，那就應該還是空。所以現在說，不可認為涅槃還是有無相。涅槃實相不可說是有無相。破除第四句，迷惑的人既然聽聞實相不可有無，就應該...

【English Translation】 English version Still clinging to the five skandhas (form, feeling, perception, mental formations, and consciousness, the five elements that constitute individual experience). Therefore, it is now clarified that there is also no such thing as 'dharma-lakshana' (the appearance of things). Since the five skandhas do not exist, the essence of the five skandhas is emptiness, so it is called 'non-dharma'. Even the morbid attachment to emptiness is empty, so it is said that there is no 'non-dharma-lakshana'. This should be like the three stages described in the 'Vimalakirti Sutra': First, not seeing 'self' is 'emptiness of sentient beings'; second, not seeing 'dharma' is 'emptiness of dharma'; not seeing 'non-dharma' is also called 'emptiness of the disease of emptiness'. The reason for clarifying these three emptinesses is that 'self-view' is the root of all afflictions, so 'self-view' must be clarified. Secondly, 'view of existence' and 'view of non-existence' are also the source of eternalism and nihilism, which seriously violate the right path, so 'view of existence and non-existence' must be clarified. Some say that cultivation is to do good and avoid evil, taking good as 'dharma' and evil as 'non-dharma'. Others say that emptiness is used to remove existence, taking emptiness as 'dharma' and existence as 'non-dharma'. According to the sutras and treatises, there are four sentences (four viewpoints) in the emptiness of person, and there are also four sentences in the emptiness of dharma. Therefore, the verses in the treatise say that they are distinguished according to the meaning of eight eights. The so-called meaning of eight eights refers to the four of person and the four of dharma, which together form one eight, breaking the four of person and breaking the four of dharma. Not clinging to these eight morbid views becomes another eight, so it is said to be eight eights. The so-called four of dharma refers to: first, 'dharma-lakshana'; second, 'non-dharma-lakshana'; third, 'lakshana'; and fourth, 'non-lakshana'. These four are all morbid attachments. Someone asks: It is of course morbid for outsiders to cling to 'self'. Now seeing that dharma arises is existence, and when it ceases is non-existence, why is it also said to be morbid? Answer: The person who asked this question has not read the Mahayana sutras and treatises! Refuting the first sentence 'dharma-lakshana', saying 'non-dharma-lakshana', is because the skandhas, realms, and entrances are unattainable, so it is said that there is no 'dharma-lakshana'. Refuting the second sentence, saying 'non-non-dharma-lakshana', is because confused people hear that the skandhas, entrances, and realms are illusory, and think that the true nature of all dharmas is also empty. As the 'Mahaparinirvana Sutra' says, since hearing that birth and death are illusory, they think that nirvana is also illusory. In order to break this attachment, birth and death themselves are illusory and empty, while the true nature of nirvana is not empty. Therefore, it is said that emptiness refers to the twenty-five existences (the twenty-five forms of existence in the three realms), and non-emptiness refers to the Great Parinirvana. Refuting the third sentence, saying 'no-lakshana', is because confused people say that if the true nature of nirvana cannot be empty, then it is the same as existence; if it cannot be existence, then it should still be empty. So now it is said that it cannot be thought that nirvana is still existence or non-existence. The true nature of nirvana cannot be said to be existence or non-existence. Refuting the fourth sentence, since confused people have heard that the true nature cannot be existence or non-existence, they should...

不可得說。是故今明雖絕有無為眾生故無說而說。云何言不可說。但舊經文略。但云無非法相也。何以故若心取相下。此第二對得明失。亦是舉失顯得。就此為二。初明計人為失。次明計法為失。今失即是初。若心取相即取眾生相。則同外道計有我人。是故為失也。若取法相下。此第二明計法為失。就中有兩。前明見法為失。次明見非法為失。問曰。若計法為失。應云著於法相。何因緣故計法為失著我相也。答理實應然。計人故著人。計法故著法。今明欲顯其失患之甚。計法之人非但起於法見。計法之人還起我見。以法是我因緣故也。成實論云。灰炭不盡樹想還生。又數論取一切有相非病。取我相為病。成實論云。有二諦則非病。取我人故是病耳。今明不然。但使生心動念則過同我人。何以故若取非法相下。此第二明著于非法此亦為失。既聞計法為失。或者便謂無法為得。是故今云若計非法是亦為失。所以者何。計有非法必起法見。若有法見則有我見。又若無有我則無所計。以有所計故知有我。所以計于非法亦復著我。是故不應取非法下。此第三章勸舍失從得。此文有二。一者正勸舍失。二者引證。此即是初勸舍失。然法與非法尚自須舍。我人之見去何不捨。是故舉法況人。但勸舍法不勸舍人。以是義故如來常說下。

第二引證。阿含經中佛為比丘作于筏喻。譬如有人為賊所逐。取草為筏度于彼岸。既至彼岸則便舍筏。初則取筏度河。既至彼岸則河筏兩舍矣。譬意初則以善舍惡。后則善惡雙舍。初則以法舍人以空舍有。次則人法兩除空有雙凈。如是生死涅槃萬善類然。若依論經。大意略同其文小異。論經亦有三何以故。與舊經意同。第三何以故云不應取法非不取法。此明理教之義。以得理忘教得月舍指故。故云不應取法。而藉教悟理因指得月故非不取法。如到岸舍筏故不應取筏。為欲度河故非不取筏也。問筏喻是小乘經。云何證大乘耶。答筏在小名小在大名大也。又舉小況大。于小乘法中尚明兩舍。況于大乘耶。如中論引迦旃延論。是小乘尚舍有無況大乘耶。法尚應舍。何況非法。明有是物情所安尚應須舍。無非六情所對豈可執也。須菩提于意云何下。此文所以來者凡有二義。一者證信故來。上辨無依無得之信乃至法非法皆舍。今明一切賢聖同作此悟。故知此法可信受也。二者依論釋疑故來。論主至此章凡釋三疑。初舉法身非有為釋以果徴因疑。次信者章雙釋因果之疑。謂說因果法門便無信者。上明有信者。即釋此疑。今此一章經釋以果徴果疑。上法身非有為章云生住滅相非是無為法身故。不可以此三相見如來法身。疑者云。若言

【現代漢語翻譯】現代漢語譯本第二引證。《阿含經》中，佛陀為比丘們做了筏的譬喻。譬如有人被賊追趕，就用草紮成筏子，以此渡到彼岸。既然已經到達彼岸，就應該捨棄筏子。最初是藉助筏子渡河，既然已經到達彼岸，那麼河與筏子都應該捨棄了。譬喻的意義是，最初用善來捨棄惡，後來善與惡都要一併捨棄。最初用佛法來捨棄凡人，用空性來捨棄有相。其次，人與法都要去除，空與有都要清凈。如此，生死與涅槃，萬善的種類，都是如此。如果依據論和經，大意略同，只是文字稍有不同。論和經中也有三個『何以故』。與舊經的意義相同。第三個『何以故』說『不應取法，非不取法』。這是說明理與教的意義。因為領悟了真理就應該忘記教義，得到了月亮就應該捨棄指向月亮的手指。所以說『不應取法』。然而，憑藉教義來領悟真理，因為手指而看到了月亮，所以『非不取法』。如同到達彼岸就應該捨棄筏子，所以不應該執取筏子。爲了想要渡河，所以不能不取筏子。問：筏的譬喻是小乘經典，如何用來證明大乘佛法呢？答：筏子在小乘中稱為小，在大乘中稱為大。又是用小的來比況大的。在小乘佛法中尚且說明兩舍，更何況是大乘佛法呢？如同《中論》引用迦旃延論，小乘尚且捨棄有與無，更何況是大乘呢？佛法尚且應該捨棄，更何況不是佛法呢？說明有是眾生的情感所安住的，尚且應該捨棄。無不是六根所能對境的，怎麼可以執著呢？『須菩提，于意云何』以下，這段文字的出現有兩個意義。一是用來證明可信。上面辨明了無依無得的信心，乃至佛法與非法都要捨棄。現在說明一切賢聖都共同證悟了這個道理。所以知道這個佛法是可以信受的。二是依據論來解釋疑惑。論主到這一章，總共解釋了三個疑惑。最初舉法身非有為，來解釋以果來推測因的疑惑。其次，在信者章中，同時解釋了因與果的疑惑。認為宣說因果的法門就沒有信者。上面說明有信者，就是解釋這個疑惑。現在這一章經文，解釋以果來推測果的疑惑。上面法身非有為章說，生住滅相不是無為法身，所以不可以用這三種相來見如來法身。疑惑的人說，如果說

【English Translation】 English version Second citation. In the Agama Sutra, the Buddha made the analogy of a raft for the bhikkhus (monks). For example, if someone is being chased by thieves, they would make a raft out of grass to cross to the other shore. Once they have reached the other shore, they should abandon the raft. Initially, they used the raft to cross the river, but once they have reached the other shore, both the river and the raft should be abandoned. The meaning of the analogy is that initially, one uses good to abandon evil, but later both good and evil should be abandoned together. Initially, one uses the Dharma to abandon ordinary people, and uses emptiness to abandon existence. Secondly, both people and Dharma should be removed, and both emptiness and existence should be purified. Thus, samsara (birth and death) and nirvana (liberation), and the myriad kinds of good, are all like this. If based on the shastras (treatises) and sutras (scriptures), the general meaning is the same, only the wording is slightly different. There are also three 'Why?' in the shastras and sutras. The meaning is the same as the old sutras. The third 'Why?' says 'One should not grasp the Dharma, but it is not that one should not grasp the Dharma'. This explains the meaning of principle and teaching. Because once one has realized the truth, one should forget the teachings; once one has obtained the moon, one should abandon the finger pointing at the moon. Therefore, it is said 'One should not grasp the Dharma'. However, one relies on the teachings to realize the truth, and sees the moon because of the finger, so 'it is not that one should not grasp the Dharma'. Just as one should abandon the raft upon reaching the other shore, so one should not cling to the raft. In order to cross the river, one cannot but take the raft. Question: The analogy of the raft is a Hinayana (Small Vehicle) scripture, how can it be used to prove Mahayana (Great Vehicle) Buddhism? Answer: The raft is called small in the Small Vehicle and large in the Great Vehicle. It is also using the small to compare to the large. Even in the Small Vehicle Buddhism, it is explained that both should be abandoned, let alone in the Great Vehicle Buddhism? Just as the Madhyamaka-karika (Fundamental Verses on the Middle Way) quotes the Katyayanavavada Sutra, the Small Vehicle still abandons existence and non-existence, let alone the Great Vehicle? Even the Dharma should be abandoned, let alone what is not the Dharma? It explains that existence is what sentient beings' emotions dwell in, and it should still be abandoned. Non-existence is not what the six senses can perceive, how can one cling to it? From 'Subhuti, what do you think?' onwards, the appearance of this passage has two meanings. One is to prove credibility. The above clarifies the faith of non-reliance and non-attainment, and even the Dharma and non-Dharma should be abandoned. Now it explains that all the sages have jointly realized this principle. Therefore, it is known that this Dharma can be believed and accepted. Second, it is based on the shastra to explain doubts. The author of the shastra, in this chapter, has explained a total of three doubts. Initially, he cited the dharmakaya (Dharma Body) as non-existent to explain the doubt of inferring the cause from the effect. Secondly, in the chapter on believers, he simultaneously explained the doubts of cause and effect. He believed that there would be no believers if he preached the Dharma of cause and effect. The above explains that there are believers, which is to explain this doubt. Now this chapter of the sutra explains the doubt of inferring the effect from the effect. The above chapter on the dharmakaya as non-existent says that the characteristics of arising, abiding, and ceasing are not the asamskrta dharmakaya (unconditioned Dharma Body), so these three characteristics cannot be used to see the tathagata dharmakaya (Tathagata's Dharma Body). The doubter said, if you say

三相非是佛者。應亦釋迦不得菩提。不為物說法。而今釋迦樹王下實證得菩提。趣于鹿苑為物說法。若爾則應王宮實生。雙樹實滅。不應言三相非佛。今正破此疑。就文為二。一者佛騰眾疑以問善吉。二者善吉奉對以破眾疑。今即是初。佛問意云。于意云何下。汝言佛于樹王下實得菩提耶。五十年住世實為說法耶。善吉答中大開二別。第一正破實證實說之疑。第二更破異疑。此即是初。善吉云。無有實得菩提。無有實說法。論偈云。應化非真佛亦非說法者。明佛有三種。一者法身佛。即以正法為身。二者報身佛。即是修因已滿果起酬因名為報佛。三者化身佛。今言無有實證無有實說者。釋迦即是化身佛。非是真佛。即是化證化說非是實證實說。以此例前。釋迦即是化生化滅非實生實滅。是故如來身是無為。故云無有定法名菩提。亦無有定法如來可說也。何以故如來所說法者。此下第二破無說之疑。惑者聞上釋迦是化佛無有實證無有實說。便謂無有化說無有化證。是故今明雖無實證而有化證。雖無實說而有化說。故云如來所說法即是化說。前即破實說之疑。今則破無化說之疑也。不可取不可說者。此句更復破疑。惑者既聞有于化說便謂有法可說。佛若有說聽者便應有取。以有說故則言語不斷。聽者有取故則心行不滅。今

【現代漢語翻譯】現代漢語譯本：如果三相（指佛的三種身：法身、報身、化身）不是佛，那麼釋迦牟尼佛也不應該證得菩提。如果佛不為眾生說法，那麼現在釋迦牟尼佛在菩提樹下實際證得了菩提，並且前往鹿野苑為眾生說法，這又該如何解釋？如果這樣，就應該說在王宮實際出生，在雙樹林實際涅槃，不應該說三相不是佛。現在正是爲了破除這個疑惑。就文義而言，分為兩部分：一是佛陀提出種種疑問來詢問善吉（Subhuti，須菩提），二是善吉回答來破除種種疑問。現在是第一部分。佛陀提問的意思是：『于意云何』（你認為如何）以下，你說佛陀在菩提樹下實際證得了菩提嗎？五十年住世實際在說法嗎？善吉的回答中，大致分為兩部分：第一，正面破除實際證悟和實際說法的疑惑；第二，進一步破除其他的疑惑。現在是第一部分。善吉說：『無有實得菩提，無有實說法』。論偈說：『應化非真佛，亦非說法者』。說明佛有三種：一是法身佛，即以正法為身；二是報身佛，即是修因圓滿，果報顯現，酬償因緣，名為報佛；三是化身佛。現在說『無有實證，無有實說』，釋迦牟尼佛就是化身佛，不是真佛，即是化現的證悟，化現的說法，不是實際的證悟，實際的說法。以此類推，釋迦牟尼佛就是化現的出生，化現的涅槃，不是實際的出生，實際的涅槃。所以如來的身是無為的，所以說沒有一定的法叫做菩提，也沒有一定的法是如來可以說的。為什麼呢？如來所說的法，以下是第二部分，破除無說的疑惑。迷惑的人聽到上面說釋迦牟尼佛是化身佛，沒有實際的證悟，沒有實際的說法，就認為沒有化現的說法，沒有化現的證悟。所以現在說明，雖然沒有實際的證悟，但是有化現的證悟；雖然沒有實際的說法，但是有化現的說法。所以說如來所說的法就是化現的說法。前面是破除實際說法的疑惑，現在是破除沒有化現說法的疑惑。『不可取不可說者』，這句話進一步破除疑惑。迷惑的人既然聽到有化現的說法，就認為有法可以被說。佛如果有所說，聽者就應該有所取。因為有所說，所以言語就不會斷絕。聽者有所取，所以心行就不會滅。

【English Translation】 English version: If the three aspects (referring to the three bodies of the Buddha: Dharmakaya, Sambhogakaya, and Nirmanakaya) are not the Buddha, then Shakyamuni Buddha should also not have attained Bodhi. If the Buddha does not teach the Dharma for sentient beings, then how can it be explained that Shakyamuni Buddha actually attained Bodhi under the Bodhi tree and went to the Deer Park to teach the Dharma for sentient beings? If so, it should be said that he was actually born in the royal palace and actually entered Nirvana in the Sala Grove, and it should not be said that the three aspects are not the Buddha. Now, this is precisely to dispel this doubt. In terms of the meaning of the text, it is divided into two parts: first, the Buddha raises various questions to ask Subhuti (須菩提), and second, Subhuti answers to dispel various doubts. Now is the first part. The Buddha's intention in asking is: 'What do you think?' (于意云何) below, do you say that the Buddha actually attained Bodhi under the Bodhi tree? Did he actually teach the Dharma for fifty years while living in the world? In Subhuti's answer, it is roughly divided into two parts: first, directly dispelling the doubt of actual enlightenment and actual teaching; second, further dispelling other doubts. Now is the first part. Subhuti says: 'There is no actual attainment of Bodhi, no actual teaching of the Dharma.' The verse says: 'The manifested is not the true Buddha, nor is he a speaker of the Dharma.' This explains that there are three types of Buddhas: first, the Dharmakaya Buddha, which is the Dharma as the body; second, the Sambhogakaya Buddha, which is the fulfillment of the cause of cultivation, the manifestation of the fruit, and the reward for the cause, called the Reward Buddha; third, the Nirmanakaya Buddha. Now it is said that 'there is no actual enlightenment, no actual teaching,' Shakyamuni Buddha is the Nirmanakaya Buddha, not the true Buddha, that is, the manifested enlightenment, the manifested teaching, not the actual enlightenment, the actual teaching. By analogy, Shakyamuni Buddha is the manifested birth, the manifested Nirvana, not the actual birth, the actual Nirvana. Therefore, the body of the Tathagata is unconditioned, so it is said that there is no fixed Dharma called Bodhi, and there is no fixed Dharma that the Tathagata can speak. Why? The Dharma spoken by the Tathagata, the following is the second part, dispelling the doubt of no speaking. Those who are confused hear that Shakyamuni Buddha is the Nirmanakaya Buddha, without actual enlightenment, without actual teaching, and think that there is no manifested teaching, no manifested enlightenment. Therefore, it is now explained that although there is no actual enlightenment, there is manifested enlightenment; although there is no actual teaching, there is manifested teaching. Therefore, it is said that the Dharma spoken by the Tathagata is the manifested teaching. The previous is to dispel the doubt of actual teaching, and now it is to dispel the doubt of no manifested teaching. 'That which cannot be grasped or spoken,' this sentence further dispels doubt. Those who are confused, having heard that there is manifested teaching, think that there is a Dharma that can be spoken. If the Buddha speaks, the listener should grasp something. Because there is speaking, speech will not cease. If the listener grasps something, the activity of the mind will not cease.

以言語滅故不可說。以心行滅故不可取。大智論云。波若波羅蜜實法不顛倒唸相觀。已除言語法亦滅。即是此意也。非法非非法者。此句成上不可取不可說意。諸法實相非有非無。非有故非法。非無故非非法。既離有離無。云何可說。既離有離無。云何可取。即此如凈名仁王所辨。其說法者無說無示。其聽者無聞無得。一切賢聖皆以無為法而有差別者。所以有此文來者。成上非法非非法非有非無義也。以一切賢聖皆體悟無為。無為無有無無。是故當知諸法實相非有非無。豈可取說。論文云。佛所以能說實相無為法者。由體悟無為法故耳。故無為是說因也。又一切聖人所證尚不可說。聽者豈可取也。此中不獨舉佛乃至廣引眾聖者。此意欲證一切賢聖同悟此法。當知此法必可信受。問何故言一切賢聖無為而有差別。答覆為釋疑。既言同悟無為則眾聖無異。便無十地階級四果淺深。是故今明雖同悟無為所悟不同。故有三聖為異。三鳥出網三獸度河而升空有近遠。涉水有淺深。即是其事。問三佛乃是地論師說。汝今何故乃用斯義。答作此問者非。是通方之論。今一師辨無一豪可得一切皆是義。如思益云一切法正一切法邪。若有所得心非唯三佛不可得。一佛二佛悉是戲論。若以無所得了悟之心。隨緣所說一佛二佛三佛十佛至無量

【現代漢語翻譯】現代漢語譯本以言語滅盡的緣故，真理是不可說的。因為心識活動止息，所以真理是不可執取的。《大智度論》說：『般若波羅蜜（Prajnaparamita，智慧的完美）的真實法，是不顛倒的念頭相互觀照。』當言語表達被去除，語言文字也隨之寂滅，這就是此句的含義。『非非法』，這句是用來成就上面『不可取』、『不可說』的含義。諸法的實相，既非『有』也非『無』。說它『非有』，所以是『非法』；說它『非無』，所以是『非非法』。既然遠離了『有』和『無』，又怎麼能說呢？既然遠離了『有』和『無』，又怎麼能執取呢？這就像《維摩詰經》（Vimalakirti Nirdesa Sutra）和《仁王經》（Ren Wang Jing）所闡述的那樣：說法的人無說無示，聽法的人無聞無得。一切賢聖都是以無為法而有所差別。之所以有這段文字，是爲了成就上面『非法非非法』、『非有非無』的含義。因為一切賢聖都體悟了『無為』，而『無為』之中沒有『有』也沒有『無』，所以應當知道諸法的實相既非『有』也非『無』，又怎麼能執取和言說呢？論文中說：佛之所以能夠宣說實相無為法，是因為他體悟了無為法。所以，『無為』是宣說的原因。而且，一切聖人所證悟的境界尚且不可說，聽法的人又怎麼能執取呢？這裡不單單舉佛，而是廣泛地引用了眾多聖賢，意在證明一切賢聖都共同體悟了這個法。應當知道這個法必定是可以信受的。問：為什麼說一切賢聖都證悟了『無為』，卻又有差別呢？答：這是爲了消除疑惑。既然說共同證悟『無為』，那麼眾聖就沒有差別，也就沒有十地（Dasabhumika，菩薩修行的十個階段）的階級，四果（Srotaapanna，斯陀含，阿那含，阿羅漢）的淺深了。所以現在說明，雖然共同證悟『無為』，但所悟的程度不同，所以三聖（聲聞乘，緣覺乘，菩薩乘）之間有差異。就像三隻鳥飛出羅網，三隻野獸渡過河流，升空有遠近，涉水有深淺，就是這個道理。問：三佛（過去佛，現在佛，未來佛）是《地論師》（Dilunshi）的說法，你現在為什麼引用這個意義？答：提出這個問題是不對的。這是通達各方之論。現在一師辨析，沒有一毫可以得到，一切都是義理。就像《思益經》（Visesacinti-brahma-pariprccha）所說：『一切法正，一切法邪。』如果有所得之心，不要說三佛不可得，一佛二佛都是戲論。如果以無所得的了悟之心，隨緣所說，一佛二佛三佛十佛乃至無量佛，都是可以的。

【English Translation】 English version Because speech is extinguished, it cannot be spoken. Because the activity of the mind ceases, it cannot be grasped. The Mahaprajnaparamita-sastra (Great Treatise on the Perfection of Wisdom) says: 'The real Dharma of Prajnaparamita (Perfection of Wisdom) is the contemplation of non-inverted thoughts.' When verbal expression is removed, language and writing also cease; this is the meaning of this sentence. 'Neither non-Dharma' (非非法) This phrase is used to accomplish the meaning of 'cannot be grasped' and 'cannot be spoken' above. The true nature of all Dharmas is neither 'existent' nor 'non-existent.' Saying it is 'non-existent,' therefore it is 'non-Dharma'; saying it is 'not non-existent,' therefore it is 'neither non-Dharma.' Since it is far from 'existence' and 'non-existence,' how can it be spoken? Since it is far from 'existence' and 'non-existence,' how can it be grasped? This is like what is explained in the Vimalakirti Nirdesa Sutra and the Ren Wang Jing (Sutra of Humane Kings): the one who speaks the Dharma neither speaks nor shows, and the one who listens to the Dharma neither hears nor attains. All sages and saints differ because of Asamskrta-dharma (unconditioned dharma). The reason for this passage is to accomplish the meaning of 'neither non-Dharma' and 'neither existent nor non-existent.' Because all sages and saints realize Asamskrta (unconditioned), and in Asamskrta there is neither existence nor non-existence, therefore it should be known that the true nature of all Dharmas is neither existent nor non-existent; how can it be grasped and spoken? The treatise says: The reason why the Buddha is able to proclaim the Asamskrta-dharma of true reality is because he realized Asamskrta. Therefore, 'Asamskrta' is the cause of proclamation. Moreover, the state realized by all sages and saints cannot be spoken, so how can the listener grasp it? Here, not only the Buddha is mentioned, but many sages and saints are widely cited, intending to prove that all sages and saints have jointly realized this Dharma. It should be known that this Dharma must be believed and accepted. Question: Why is it said that all sages and saints have realized 'Asamskrta,' but there are still differences? Answer: This is to eliminate doubts. Since it is said that they jointly realize 'Asamskrta,' then there is no difference between the saints, and there are no stages of the Ten Bhumis (Dasabhumika, ten stages of Bodhisattva practice) or the shallowness and depth of the Four Fruits (Srotaapanna, Sakrdagamin, Anagamin, Arhat). Therefore, it is now explained that although they jointly realize 'Asamskrta,' the degree of realization is different, so there are differences between the Three Vehicles (Sravakayana, Pratyekabuddhayana, Bodhisattvayana). It is like three birds flying out of the net and three wild animals crossing the river, with distances in the air and depths in the water; this is the principle. Question: The Three Buddhas (past Buddha, present Buddha, future Buddha) are the sayings of the Dilunshi (Treatise on the Ten Stages), why are you quoting this meaning now? Answer: It is wrong to ask this question. This is a theory that understands all directions. Now, one teacher analyzes that nothing can be obtained, and everything is principle. It is like what is said in the Visesacinti-brahma-pariprccha (Sutra of the Profound Thought of Brahma): 'All Dharmas are correct, all Dharmas are wrong.' If there is a mind of attainment, not to mention the Three Buddhas cannot be obtained, one Buddha and two Buddhas are all playfulness. If with a mind of realization without attainment, according to the circumstances, one Buddha, two Buddhas, three Buddhas, ten Buddhas, up to immeasurable Buddhas, are all possible.

佛並皆無礙。云何茍存二身疑於三佛。問何故須立三佛。答義要有三。由有法佛故有報佛。由有報佛故有化佛。法佛是佛性。要由佛性故修因滿成報身。此二即是自德。然後化眾生即是化他德。故有化佛也。須菩提于意云何若人滿三千大千世界七寶佈施下。此是第三格量顯勝稱歎勸修門。若以福慧而判。上來就智慧門說般若已。今以功德門說般若。般若未曾福慧。為眾生故作福慧名說也。又上來就無依無得說波若。今就稱歎門說波若。又上來明波若體。今明波若用。以能受持生無邊功德是故用也。就此門中開為三別。第一舉外施格量。第二舉內施格量。第三舉釋迦往因格量。就舉外施格量中更開為二。第一正舉外施格量。第二釋成格量優劣之意。就正格量中復開為二。第一正舉二種財施格量稱歎。第二辨于經名。就初亦開為二。第一正舉二施格量受持波若一四句偈。第二稱歎波若。在處處貴在人人尊。就第一舉二施格量四句開為二別。第一舉三千世界七寶佈施格量四句。第二舉恒沙界七寶佈施格量四句就初章中復開二別。第一正舉財施格量。第二釋成格量之義。今即是初。問何因緣故有此文來。答此文來意凡有近遠。所言遠者如向數義。所言近者論生起云。若諸法實相不可取說。文字則是可取可說。受持應無功德。為

【現代漢語翻譯】現代漢語譯本：佛陀證悟后，已沒有任何障礙。為何還要執著於二身（應化身和報身）的說法，從而對三佛（法身佛、報身佛、應化身佛）產生疑惑呢？

問：為何需要設立三佛的說法？

答：從義理上來說，必須要有這三種佛。因為有法身佛（Dharmakaya Buddha），所以才有報身佛（Sambhogakaya Buddha）；因為有報身佛，所以才有應化身佛（Nirmanakaya Buddha）。法身佛是佛性（Buddha-nature），必須通過佛性才能修因圓滿，成就報身。法身佛和報身佛是自利之德，然後化度眾生是利他之德，所以有應化身佛。

須菩提，你認為怎麼樣？如果有人用充滿三千大千世界的七寶（seven treasures）來佈施……

這是第三種比較衡量，用以彰顯殊勝、稱揚讚歎、勸勉修行的法門。如果用福德和智慧來判斷，上面已經就智慧之門闡述了般若（Prajna，智慧）。現在用功德之門來闡述般若。般若本身並沒有福德和智慧的分別，只是爲了適應眾生，才假借福德和智慧之名來解說。

而且，上面是從無所依、無所得的角度來闡述般若，現在是從稱揚讚歎的角度來闡述般若。上面是闡明般若的本體，現在是闡明般若的作用。因為能夠受持般若，就能產生無邊的功德，這就是般若的作用。在這個法門中，可以分為三個部分：第一，舉外在佈施的比較衡量；第二，舉內在佈施的比較衡量；第三，舉釋迦牟尼佛（Sakyamuni Buddha）往昔因地的比較衡量。在舉外在佈施的比較衡量中，又可以分為兩個部分：第一，正式舉出兩種財物佈施的比較衡量；第二，解釋說明比較衡量優劣的意義。在正式的比較衡量中，又可以分為兩個部分：第一，正式舉出兩種佈施的比較衡量，以及受持般若的四句偈（four-line verse）；第二，稱揚讚歎般若。般若在任何地方都尊貴，在任何人那裡都受尊重。在第一部分，舉出兩種佈施的比較衡量和四句偈中，又可以分為兩個部分：第一，舉出用三千大千世界的七寶佈施的比較衡量；第二，舉出用恒河沙數世界的七寶佈施的比較衡量。在第一章中，又可以分為兩個部分：第一，正式舉出財物佈施的比較衡量；第二，解釋說明比較衡量的意義。現在就是第一部分。問：因為什麼因緣，才會有這段經文的出現？答：這段經文的出現，有遠和近兩種原因。所說的遠因，就像前面所說的那些義理。所說的近因，是根據論典中生起的說法：如果諸法的實相（true nature of all phenomena）是不可取、不可說的，那麼文字就是可以取、可以說的。如果受持文字沒有功德，那麼……

【English Translation】 English version: Buddhas, having attained enlightenment, are free from all obstructions. Why then cling to the notion of two bodies (Nirmanakaya and Sambhogakaya), thus doubting the Three Bodies (Dharmakaya, Sambhogakaya, and Nirmanakaya)?

Question: Why is it necessary to establish the concept of the Three Bodies of Buddha?

Answer: From the perspective of meaning, these three bodies are essential. Because there is the Dharmakaya Buddha (Body of Essence), there is the Sambhogakaya Buddha (Body of Bliss); and because there is the Sambhogakaya Buddha, there is the Nirmanakaya Buddha (Body of Transformation). The Dharmakaya Buddha is the Buddha-nature. It is through Buddha-nature that one cultivates the causes to perfection, achieving the Sambhogakaya. These two, Dharmakaya and Sambhogakaya, represent self-benefit. Then, transforming sentient beings represents benefiting others, hence the Nirmanakaya Buddha.

Subhuti, what do you think? If someone were to fill three thousand great thousand worlds with the seven treasures (seven treasures) and give them away in charity...

This is the third type of comparison and measurement, used to reveal the supreme, praise and extol, and encourage cultivation. If judged by merit and wisdom, the above has already expounded Prajna (Prajna, wisdom) from the perspective of the wisdom gate. Now, Prajna is expounded from the perspective of the merit gate. Prajna itself does not inherently possess merit or wisdom; it is only for the sake of adapting to sentient beings that it is explained using the names of merit and wisdom.

Moreover, the above expounds Prajna from the perspective of non-reliance and non-attainment. Now, Prajna is expounded from the perspective of praise and extolment. The above clarifies the substance of Prajna, while the present clarifies the function of Prajna. Because one can uphold and maintain Prajna, boundless merit is generated; this is the function of Prajna. Within this gate, it can be divided into three parts: first, citing the comparison and measurement of external giving; second, citing the comparison and measurement of internal giving; third, citing the comparison and measurement of Sakyamuni Buddha's (Sakyamuni Buddha) past causes. In citing the comparison and measurement of external giving, it can be further divided into two parts: first, formally citing the comparison and measurement of two types of material giving; second, explaining the meaning of the superiority and inferiority of the comparison and measurement. In the formal comparison and measurement, it can be further divided into two parts: first, formally citing the comparison and measurement of two types of giving, and the four-line verse (four-line verse) of upholding and maintaining Prajna; second, praising and extolling Prajna. Prajna is esteemed everywhere and respected by everyone. In the first part, citing the comparison and measurement of two types of giving and the four-line verse, it can be further divided into two parts: first, citing the comparison and measurement of giving with the seven treasures filling three thousand great thousand worlds; second, citing the comparison and measurement of giving with the seven treasures filling worlds as numerous as the sands of the Ganges River. In the first chapter, it can be further divided into two parts: first, formally citing the comparison and measurement of material giving; second, explaining the meaning of the comparison and measurement. The present is the first part. Question: Due to what causes and conditions does this passage of scripture arise? Answer: The arising of this passage of scripture has both distant and near causes. The so-called distant causes are like the meanings mentioned earlier. The so-called near causes are based on the saying that arises in the treatises: if the true nature of all phenomena (true nature of all phenomena) is unattainable and unspeakable, then words are attainable and speakable. If upholding and maintaining words has no merit, then...

釋此疑。明文字雖是可取可說因此文字得悟波若。則是因說悟無說。是以受持者其福無邊。故格量也。就文為二。第一正舉財施。第二格量波若。舉財施中自開為二。第一佛問。第二善吉答。開為二別。初正答。次簡擇答。正答如文。阿泥樓馱以一食施九十一劫常受安樂況今大千妙寶以用佈施。其福不多。問實有以大千妙寶佈施以不。答亦得言實有亦得言假說。言實有者。轉輪聖王領四天下。能以四天下滿中妙寶以用佈施。大梵天王主領大千世界。能以大千妙寶佈施。故知得是實有。言假設者。若無此事假說言有。亦不及受持波若。佛欲令人尊重波若故。雖無事假說明也。何以故是福德即非福德者。此下第二簡擇答。有人言。福德即是世諦。即非福德即真諦。明此福德虛假即真。是名福德。多者世諦故說多也。一切諸法不出二諦。故就二諦明之。今謂此釋似無次第。今乃是釋福德多之義。何因緣故明二諦也。復有人言。此是福德非福德。非福德福德。此是波若福德。但波若中有財施法施。波若財施法施實無優劣。但受財施人一生富樂。未能未來滅惡道之苦。受法施人能滅三惡道報。未來生天人好家乃至作佛。是故財施不及法施。今謂約受人其實如此。但此中約能施人格之耳。不約受人格之。故不同此釋也。但施不同。

【現代漢語翻譯】現代漢語譯本解釋這個疑問。雖然文字本身可以被理解和講述，並因此通過文字領悟般若（Prajna，智慧），但這是因為通過講述而領悟了不可言說之理。因此，接受和奉持般若的人，其福報是無邊的。所以要進行衡量。就文義而言，分為兩部分。第一部分是正式舉例財佈施，第二部分是衡量般若。在舉例財佈施中，又分為兩部分。第一部分是佛陀提問，第二部分是善吉（Subhuti）回答。善吉的回答又分為兩部分。首先是正面回答，其次是簡要選擇性地回答。正面回答如經文所示。阿泥樓馱（Aniruddha）以一食佈施，在九十一劫中常受安樂，更何況現在用大千世界的珍寶來進行佈施，其福報難道不多嗎？提問：實際上是否存在用大千世界的珍寶進行佈施的情況？回答：既可以說實際存在，也可以說是假設的說法。說實際存在，是因為轉輪聖王（Chakravartin）統治四大天下，能夠用充滿四大天下的珍寶來進行佈施。大梵天王（Mahabrahma）主宰大千世界，能夠用大千世界的珍寶來進行佈施。因此可知確實存在這種情況。說是假設，是因為如果沒有這件事，就假設有這件事，也比不上受持般若的功德。佛陀想要人們尊重般若，所以即使沒有這件事，也假設說明。為什麼說『是福德即非福德』呢？這是下面的第二部分，簡要選擇性地回答。有人說，福德是世俗諦（Samvriti-satya，相對真理），『即非福德』是真諦（Paramartha-satya，絕對真理）。說明這個福德是虛假的，即是真理，這就是所謂的福德。『多』是世俗諦，所以說『多』。一切諸法都離不開二諦，所以就二諦來闡明。我認為這個解釋似乎沒有條理。現在解釋的是福德多的含義。因為什麼因緣要闡明二諦呢？又有人說，『此是福德非福德，非福德福德』，這是般若的福德。只是般若中有財佈施和法佈施。般若的財佈施和法佈施實際上沒有優劣之分。但是接受財佈施的人一生富裕快樂，卻不能在未來世滅除惡道的痛苦。接受法佈施的人能夠滅除三惡道的果報，未來能夠生於天人好的家庭，乃至成佛。因此財佈施比不上法佈施。我認為從接受佈施的人的角度來看，確實如此。但是這裡是從能佈施的人的角度來衡量的，不是從接受佈施的人的角度來衡量的，所以不同於這種解釋。只是佈施的方式不同。

【English Translation】 English version Explain this doubt. Although the words themselves can be understood and spoken, and thus one can realize Prajna (wisdom) through the words, it is because one realizes the unspeakable truth through speaking. Therefore, those who accept and uphold Prajna have boundless blessings. So it needs to be measured. In terms of the meaning of the text, it is divided into two parts. The first part is formally citing the example of material giving (Dana), and the second part is measuring Prajna. In the example of material giving, it is further divided into two parts. The first part is the Buddha's question, and the second part is Subhuti's answer. Subhuti's answer is further divided into two parts. First is the direct answer, and second is the brief selective answer. The direct answer is as the text says. Aniruddha, with one meal offering, constantly receives happiness for ninety-one kalpas (aeons), how much more so now with the offering of the treasures of the great chiliocosm (Maha-sahasra-lokadhatu), wouldn't the blessings be many? Question: Is there actually a situation where the treasures of the great chiliocosm are used for offering? Answer: It can be said that it actually exists, or it can be said to be a hypothetical statement. Saying it actually exists is because the Chakravartin (Wheel-turning King) rules the four continents and can use the treasures filling the four continents for offering. Mahabrahma (Great Brahma King) rules the great chiliocosm and can use the treasures of the great chiliocosm for offering. Therefore, it can be known that this situation does exist. Saying it is hypothetical is because if there is no such thing, it is assumed that there is such a thing, which is still not as good as the merit of upholding Prajna. The Buddha wants people to respect Prajna, so even if there is no such thing, it is assumed to explain it. Why is it said 'is blessing, then not blessing'? This is the second part below, a brief selective answer. Some say that blessing is Samvriti-satya (conventional truth), 'then not blessing' is Paramartha-satya (ultimate truth). It explains that this blessing is false, which is the truth, and this is what is called blessing. 'Many' is Samvriti-satya, so it is said 'many'. All dharmas (phenomena) cannot be separated from the two truths, so it is explained in terms of the two truths. I think this explanation seems disorganized. Now it explains the meaning of many blessings. For what reason should the two truths be explained? Some also say, 'this is blessing, not blessing, not blessing blessing', this is the blessing of Prajna. It's just that in Prajna there are material giving and Dharma giving. The material giving and Dharma giving of Prajna actually have no superiority or inferiority. However, those who receive material giving are rich and happy in this life, but cannot eliminate the suffering of the evil paths in the future. Those who receive Dharma giving can eliminate the retribution of the three evil paths, and in the future can be born in good families of gods and humans, and even become Buddhas. Therefore, material giving is not as good as Dharma giving. I think this is indeed the case from the perspective of the recipient of the offering. But here it is measured from the perspective of the giver, not from the perspective of the recipient, so it is different from this explanation. It's just that the methods of giving are different.

有得財施不及無得法施。此是互對自有無得財施勝有得法施。自有無得財法勝有得財法。問無得財施何如無得法施。有得財施亦作此問。答財法不二則無得財施與無得法施無有優劣。但無優劣優劣義則法施為勝財施為劣也。有得法施亦勝有得財施。大格如此也。今依論釋。論云福不趣菩提。此簡佈施之福雖多此是有漏福德。即非福德者非無漏無所得福德也。是名福德者。論經重言福德福德。此意略判福德凡有二種。一者有漏福德。二者無漏福德。是故重言福德福德。問善吉但應答佛明佈施福多。何因緣故忽簡福德漏與無漏。答善吉領解佛意。佛意欲明佈施之福雖多而是有漏。是故答佛如我所解。佈施福多者。此是有漏之福多耳非無漏也。佛言下。第二正舉財施格量法施。就中有二。初明持經勝於佈施。第二釋勝所以。今即是初。問云。何名為四句偈耶。有人言。此經下文兩四句偈。即是其事。今謂此人得經語不得經意。若取下偈為四句偈者。自經初已來便應非偈。受持之者便無功德。又當佛說經時至此中未有後兩偈。云何逆格量耶。有人言。一切大乘經四句要偈。如雪山之四句等。即是其事。是亦不然。今正論波若不涉余經。有人言。凡是言說成就一義者此即是偈。故偈名為竭義。取其竭盡則名為偈。今謂亦不然。經

【現代漢語翻譯】現代漢語譯本：有獲得財富的佈施比不上沒有獲得的佛法的佈施。這是相互比較，自有未獲得的財富佈施勝過已獲得的佛法佈施，自有未獲得的財富和佛法佈施勝過已獲得的財富和佛法佈施。問：未獲得財富的佈施與未獲得佛法的佈施相比如何？已獲得財富的佈施也可以這樣問。答：財富和佛法不是二元對立的，那麼未獲得財富的佈施與未獲得佛法的佈施就沒有優劣之分。但如果論優劣的意義，那麼佛法佈施勝過財富佈施。已獲得佛法的佈施也勝過已獲得財富的佈施。大致的原則是這樣。現在依據論典來解釋。論典說：『福不趨向菩提（bodhi，覺悟）』。這是簡要說明佈施的福報雖然多，但這是有漏的福德。『即非福德者』，不是指沒有福德，而是指非無漏、無所得的福德。『是名福德者』，論經中重複說『福德福德』，這裡的意思是簡要地判斷福德大致有兩種：一種是有漏福德，一種是無漏福德。所以重複說『福德福德』。問：善吉（Subhuti，須菩提，佛陀的弟子）本應回答佛陀說明佈施的福報多，為什麼忽然簡要區分福德的有漏和無漏？答：善吉領會了佛陀的意圖。佛陀的意圖是想說明佈施的福報雖然多，但那是有漏的。所以回答佛陀說，按照我的理解，佈施的福報多，這只是有漏的福報多，不是無漏的。佛說：下面第二點，正式舉出財富佈施與佛法佈施的比較。其中有兩點：第一，說明受持經文勝過佈施；第二，解釋勝過的原因。現在是第一點。問：『什麼叫做四句偈（gatha，偈頌）？』有人說：『這部經下文的兩個四句偈就是。』我認為這個人只得到了經文的字句，沒有得到經文的意義。如果以下面的偈頌作為四句偈，那麼從這部經開始以來就應該不是偈頌，受持這部經的人就沒有功德。而且當佛陀說經的時候，到這裡還沒有後面的兩個偈頌，怎麼能倒過來比較呢？有人說：『凡是大乘經的四句重要偈頌，如雪山（Himalaya，喜馬拉雅山）的四句偈等，就是。』這也是不對的。現在討論的是《般若經》（Prajna Sutra，智慧經），不涉及其他的經。有人說：『凡是言說成就一個意義的，這就是偈頌。所以偈頌名為竭義，取其竭盡的意思就叫做偈頌。』我認為也不對。經

【English Translation】 English version: Gifts of wealth obtained are not as good as gifts of Dharma (teachings) not obtained. This is a mutual comparison; naturally, giving wealth without obtaining Dharma is superior to giving Dharma with obtaining wealth. Naturally, giving wealth and Dharma without obtaining is superior to giving wealth and Dharma with obtaining. Question: How does giving wealth without obtaining compare to giving Dharma without obtaining? The same question can be asked about giving wealth with obtaining. Answer: Wealth and Dharma are not dualistic, so there is no superiority or inferiority between giving wealth without obtaining and giving Dharma without obtaining. However, if we discuss the meaning of superiority and inferiority, then giving Dharma is superior and giving wealth is inferior. Giving Dharma with obtaining is also superior to giving wealth with obtaining. This is the general principle. Now, we explain according to the treatises. The treatises say: 'Merit does not lead to Bodhi (enlightenment).' This briefly explains that although the merit of giving is much, it is defiled merit. 'That which is not merit' does not mean there is no merit, but rather it is non-defiled, non-attainment merit. 'That which is called merit,' the treatises and sutras repeatedly say 'merit, merit.' The meaning here is to briefly judge that there are roughly two types of merit: one is defiled merit, and the other is non-defiled merit. Therefore, it is repeated 'merit, merit.' Question: Subhuti (one of the Buddha's disciples) should have answered the Buddha by explaining that the merit of giving is much. Why did he suddenly briefly distinguish between defiled and non-defiled merit? Answer: Subhuti understood the Buddha's intention. The Buddha's intention was to explain that although the merit of giving is much, it is defiled. Therefore, he answered the Buddha, 'According to my understanding, the merit of giving is much, but this is only much defiled merit, not non-defiled merit.' The Buddha said: Below, the second point, formally presenting the comparison between giving wealth and giving Dharma. There are two points within this: first, explaining that upholding the sutras is superior to giving; second, explaining the reason for the superiority. Now is the first point. Question: 'What is called a four-line gatha (verse)?' Someone says: 'The two four-line gathas in the following part of this sutra are it.' I think this person only obtained the words of the sutra and did not obtain the meaning of the sutra. If the following verses are taken as four-line gathas, then this sutra from the beginning should not be gathas, and those who uphold this sutra would have no merit. Moreover, when the Buddha was speaking the sutra, there were no later two verses at this point, so how can it be compared in reverse? Someone says: 'All important four-line gathas of the Mahayana sutras, such as the four-line gatha of Himalaya (snow mountain), are it.' This is also incorrect. Now we are discussing the Prajna Sutra (wisdom sutra), which does not involve other sutras. Someone says: 'Anything that is spoken and accomplishes a meaning is a gatha. Therefore, a gatha is called 'exhausting meaning,' taking the meaning of exhausting is called a gatha.' I think it is also incorrect. Sutra

乃明四句偈。今云其義竭盡何必的論四句。自有一句于義亦盡。若是別偈則句定言不定。若是通偈則言定句不定。別偈句定言不定者。要須四句故句定。或五言四七六等故言不定也。通偈言定者。要滿三十二字也。句不定者。三十二字或一三四句不定也。今既云四句則是別偈。云何以通釋耶。有人言。三十二字名為一偈。是亦不然。乃是外國數經法耳。非關四句偈也。有人言。凡是經論能顯道者。悉名為偈。此亦不然。今的云四句偈。云何乃通取顯道之言。顯道何必四句耶。有人言。假名四句。如一假有。不可定有定無亦有亦無非有非無。亦得言假有。即不有乃至假有未曾有無。故此假四句即名為偈。今謂上來亦無此說。乃是通方之論耳。有人言。上不可取不可說非法非非法即是一四句偈。今謂是亦不然。若唯此是偈余應非偈。有人言。前答善吉四句問。即是四句偈也。是亦不然。前乃是答於四句。豈關偈耶。今世俗中以四句為一偈。佛隨世俗亦以四句為一偈。明此乃是舉少況多之言耳。然一四句斯言最少。若能受持一四句其福無邊。況復一段一章一品一部耶。故須得經意勿著語言也。何以故下。此第二釋勝所以。至人極法從是經生。是故持經其福為勝。論云二能趣菩提。即是受持四句及演說四句也。所謂佛法即非佛

【現代漢語翻譯】現代漢語譯本：現在來闡明四句偈（gatha，頌）。如今說它的意義已經窮盡，何必一定要討論四句呢？自然有一句也能窮盡其義。如果是別偈，那麼句式固定而語言不固定。如果是通偈，那麼語言固定而句式不固定。別偈句式固定而語言不固定，是因為必須是四句，所以句式固定；或者五言、四言、七言、六言等，所以語言不固定。通偈語言固定，是因為必須滿足三十二個字。句式不固定，是因為三十二個字可以是一句、三句、四句，不固定。現在既然說是四句，那就是別偈，怎麼能用通偈來解釋呢？有人說，三十二個字稱為一偈。這也是不對的，那是外國計算經文的方法，與四句偈無關。有人說，凡是經論能夠顯現佛道的，都稱為偈。這也是不對的，現在明確說是四句偈，怎麼能籠統地取顯道之言呢？顯道何必一定是四句呢？有人說，假名四句，如同一假有，不可說它一定有、一定沒有、亦有亦無、非有非無。也可以說假有，即不有乃至假有，未曾有無。所以這假四句就稱為偈。我認為以上說法也沒有這種說法，只是通達方便的論述罷了。有人說，『上不可取不可說非法非非法』就是一四句偈。我認為這也是不對的，如果只有這個是偈，其餘的就應該不是偈了。有人說，前面回答善吉（Subhuti）的四句問，就是四句偈。這也是不對的，前面只是回答四句，與偈有什麼關係呢？現在世俗中以四句為一偈，佛隨順世俗也以四句為一偈。說明這只是舉少況多的說法。然而一四句是最少的，如果能夠受持一四句，其福德無邊，更何況一段、一章、一品、一部經呢？所以必須理解經文的意義，不要執著于語言。『何以故下』，這是第二重解釋殊勝的原因。至人所證的極法是從這部經產生的，所以持經的福德最為殊勝。論中說『二能趣菩提』，就是受持四句以及演說四句。所謂佛法即非佛。

【English Translation】 English version: Now to clarify the four-line gatha (verse). Now it is said that its meaning is exhausted, why necessarily discuss the four lines? Naturally, one line can also exhaust its meaning. If it is a specific gatha, then the structure is fixed but the language is not. If it is a general gatha, then the language is fixed but the structure is not. A specific gatha has a fixed structure but unfixed language because it must be four lines, so the structure is fixed; or five-character, four-character, seven-character, six-character, etc., so the language is not fixed. A general gatha has fixed language because it must fulfill thirty-two characters. The structure is not fixed because the thirty-two characters can be one line, three lines, or four lines, which is not fixed. Now since it is said to be four lines, then it is a specific gatha, how can it be explained with a general gatha? Someone says that thirty-two characters are called one gatha. This is also incorrect; that is a foreign method of counting sutras, which is unrelated to the four-line gatha. Someone says that all sutras and treatises that can reveal the Buddha's path are called gathas. This is also incorrect; now it is clearly said to be a four-line gatha, how can one generally take words that reveal the path? Why must revealing the path necessarily be four lines? Someone says that the provisional name of four lines is like a provisional existence, which cannot be said to be definitely existent, definitely non-existent, both existent and non-existent, or neither existent nor non-existent. It can also be said to be provisionally existent, that is, not existent up to provisionally existent, never having been existent or non-existent. Therefore, this provisional four lines is called a gatha. I think the above statement does not have this kind of saying; it is just a discussion of skillful means. Someone says that 'what is above cannot be grasped, cannot be spoken of, is neither dharma nor non-dharma' is one four-line gatha. I think this is also incorrect; if only this is a gatha, then the rest should not be gathas. Someone says that the previous answer to Subhuti's four questions is a four-line gatha. This is also incorrect; the previous was just answering four questions, what does it have to do with a gatha? Now in the secular world, four lines are considered one gatha, and the Buddha follows the secular world and also considers four lines as one gatha. This explains that it is just a saying of mentioning the few to imply the many. However, one four-line is the least; if one can receive and uphold one four-line, the merit is boundless, let alone a section, a chapter, a fascicle, or an entire sutra? Therefore, one must understand the meaning of the sutra and not be attached to the language. 'Why is it so?' This is the second explanation of the reason for its superiority. The ultimate dharma realized by the perfect being arises from this sutra, so the merit of upholding the sutra is the most superior. The treatise says 'two can approach Bodhi', which is receiving and upholding the four lines and expounding the four lines. What is called Buddha-dharma is not Buddha.

法者。有人言。此是遣執。嚮明出生極果人法。恐物著故須遣即空。今謂不然。前明即非福德。亦應恐生物著故須遣也。有人言。佛法非佛法如中假之流。是亦不然。恐是玉卮無珰也。今依論釋。成上持經福多之義。偈云唯獨諸佛法福成第一體。所言佛法者。唯佛是無上菩提之法也。即非佛法者。自佛以外二乘菩薩無有此法。故云即非佛法也。以佛獨有故此法第一。今持經福能生第一之法。是故持經之福其福最勝。須菩提于意云何須陀洹能作是念下。此第二釋成格量之義。就此章中大開二別。第一舉小乘因果釋成格量之義。第二舉大乘因果釋格量之義。就此二章各開兩別。初段兩者。第一舉小乘因成格量義。第二舉小乘果成格量義。今即是初。問曰。云何舉大小乘義成格量耶。答前章云如來所說皆不可取不可說。乃至一切賢聖皆體悟實相無為而有差別。然此語意即是明悟實相無依無得之義。以悟無依無得故。須有大小乘賢聖不同疑者云。若言諸法不可取不可說無依無得者。云何小乘取得四果。乃至大乘證得佛耶。以大小乘皆有證得故。知非是無依無得。以大小乘皆說有證得故知。非是不可說義。今為釋此疑故。明大小乘雖有證得而實無所得。雖有所說實無所說。是故當知無取無說無依無得。是以舉大小乘。釋成上不可

【現代漢語翻譯】現代漢語譯本：關於『法』，有人說：『這是爲了去除執著，從而顯明證得極果之人的法。』他們擔心人們執著於法，所以需要去除它，使其為空。但我認為不然。如果前面所說的『即非福德』也應該擔心人們執著，那麼也應該去除它。有人說：『佛法非佛法，類似於中假之流。』這也是不對的，恐怕是寶貴的玉杯上沒有裝飾物一樣。現在我依據論典來解釋，成就上面所說的持經功德多的含義。偈語說：『唯獨諸佛法，福成第一體。』所說的『佛法』，只有佛才是無上菩提之法。『即非佛法』，是指除了佛以外，二乘（聲聞、緣覺）和菩薩沒有這種法。所以說『即非佛法』。因為只有佛才有，所以這種法是第一的。現在持經的功德能夠產生第一的法，因此持經的功德最為殊勝。『須菩提，于意云何？須陀洹（梵文Srotāpanna，入流果）能作是念』以下，這是第二次解釋，成就衡量比較的意義。在這一章中，大致分為兩個部分。第一，舉小乘的因果來解釋成就衡量比較的意義。第二，舉大乘的因果來解釋衡量比較的意義。在這兩章中，各自分為兩個部分。最初的部分又分為兩個。第一，舉小乘的因來成就衡量比較的意義。第二，舉小乘的果來成就衡量比較的意義。現在就是第一部分。有人問：『如何舉大小乘的意義來成就衡量比較呢？』回答說：『前一章說，如來所說皆不可取不可說，乃至一切賢聖皆體悟實相無為而有差別。』然而，這句話的意思是說，體悟實相是無所依無所得的。因為體悟到無所依無所得，所以有大小乘賢聖的不同。有人懷疑說：『如果說諸法不可取不可說，無所依無所得，那麼小乘如何取得四果（須陀洹果、斯陀含果、阿那含果、阿羅漢果），乃至大乘證得佛果呢？』因為大小乘都有證得，所以知道不是無所依無所得。因為大小乘都說有證得，所以知道不是不可說。現在爲了解釋這個疑惑，說明大小乘雖然有證得，但實際上沒有所得。雖然有所說，但實際上沒有所說。所以應當知道無取無說無依無得。因此，舉大小乘來解釋成就上面的不可取不可說。

【English Translation】 English version: Regarding 『Dharma,』 some say: 『This is to eliminate attachment, thereby revealing the Dharma of those who attain the ultimate fruit.』 They worry that people will become attached to the Dharma, so it needs to be removed, making it empty. But I think not. If the aforementioned 『then not merits』 should also worry that people will become attached, then it should also be removed. Some say: 『Dharma is not Dharma, similar to the flow of the middle way.』 This is also incorrect, perhaps like a precious jade cup without ornaments. Now I rely on the commentaries to explain and accomplish the meaning of the above-mentioned merit of upholding the Sutra. The verse says: 『Only the Buddhas' Dharma, merit becomes the first entity.』 The 『Dharma』 mentioned refers to only the Buddha's Dharma of unsurpassed Bodhi. 『Then not Dharma』 refers to the fact that other than the Buddha, the two vehicles (Śrāvaka and Pratyekabuddha) and Bodhisattvas do not have this Dharma. Therefore, it is said 『then not Dharma.』 Because only the Buddha has it, this Dharma is the first. Now the merit of upholding the Sutra can generate the first Dharma, therefore the merit of upholding the Sutra is the most supreme. 『Subhuti, what do you think? Can a Srotāpanna (Sanskrit: Srotāpanna, Stream-enterer) have such a thought』 onwards, this is the second explanation, accomplishing the meaning of comparison. In this chapter, it is roughly divided into two parts. First, using the cause and effect of the Small Vehicle to explain and accomplish the meaning of comparison. Second, using the cause and effect of the Great Vehicle to explain the meaning of comparison. In these two chapters, each is divided into two parts. The initial part is further divided into two. First, using the cause of the Small Vehicle to accomplish the meaning of comparison. Second, using the effect of the Small Vehicle to accomplish the meaning of comparison. Now it is the first part. Someone asks: 『How can the meaning of the Small and Great Vehicles be used to accomplish comparison?』 The answer is: 『The previous chapter said that all that the Tathagata speaks is neither graspable nor speakable, and even all the sages realize the unconditioned reality and have differences.』 However, the meaning of this sentence is that realizing reality is without reliance and without attainment. Because of realizing without reliance and without attainment, there are differences between the sages of the Small and Great Vehicles. Someone doubts: 『If it is said that all dharmas are neither graspable nor speakable, without reliance and without attainment, then how can the Small Vehicle attain the four fruits (Srotāpanna, Sakrdagamin, Anagamin, Arhat), and even the Great Vehicle attain Buddhahood?』 Because both the Small and Great Vehicles have attainment, it is known that it is not without reliance and without attainment. Because both the Small and Great Vehicles say there is attainment, it is known that it is not unspeakable. Now, to explain this doubt, it is explained that although both the Small and Great Vehicles have attainment, in reality there is no attainment. Although there is something spoken, in reality there is nothing spoken. Therefore, it should be known that there is no grasping, no speaking, no reliance, and no attainment. Therefore, the Small and Great Vehicles are used to explain and accomplish the above-mentioned ungraspable and unspeakable.

取不可說乃至皆以無為法而有差別也。問曰。云何成上格量。答諸法若是可取可說有依有得者。受持則無功德。良由波若無取無說。是以受持其福無邊。問曰。此經下文云。為大乘者說。若樂小法者不能聽受。大品云。波若是菩薩法不屬二乘。今云何乃引小乘為證成。答此舉小況大。明小乘人尚悟無依無得無取無說。云何菩薩而不信無所得法耶。如大品引先尼為證。聽者聞諸法畢竟空不信受故引先尼。小乘人尚信法空。今大乘人無相法中豈不信空耶。又今是無所得三乘。是波若善巧方便用。此是大小非有所得小也。又欲引學小乘人令入大法。欲為小乘亦須學此法。如大品云諸天子汝欲住須陀洹果亦不離是忍也。問若爾此法便是通三乘法。答如觀中道者有三品。下智觀故得聲聞菩提。中智觀故得緣覺菩提。上智觀故得佛菩提也。問何故聲聞法中立於四果。菩薩法中開於十地。師云。今須開此一路。此一路擁塞來久。今明無礙通方悉得。聖人善巧為欲出處眾生隨其根性故開大小。然至論道門未曾大小。今作大小者。並是赴根緣故開大小方便。然大小不同。由有其通別。若通而為論。大小皆得名地。大小悉得稱果故。如三乘共十地。八人地見地即須陀洹果。薄地即斯陀含果。離欲地即阿那含果。已辦地即阿羅漢果。菩薩法中

{ "translations": [ "現代漢語譯本", "不可取、不可說，乃至一切都以無為法而有所差別。問：如何成就上格量？答：如果一切法是可以取、可以說的，有依靠、有可得的，那麼受持就沒有功德。正因為般若（Prajna，智慧）是無取無說的，所以受持它的福報是無邊的。問：此經下文說，是為發大乘心的人說的，如果喜歡小法的人不能聽受。《大品般若經》（Mahaprajnaparamita Sutra）說，般若是菩薩（Bodhisattva）的法，不屬於二乘（聲聞乘和緣覺乘）。現在為什麼引用小乘來作為證明呢？答：這是用小的來比況大的，說明小乘人尚且能領悟無依、無得、無取、無說，菩薩怎麼會不相信無所得法呢？如同《大品般若經》引用先尼（Sreni）作為證明，聽者聽到諸法畢竟空而不信受，所以引用先尼，小乘人尚且相信法空，現在大乘人在無相法中難道不相信空嗎？而且現在是無所得的三乘，是般若的善巧方便運用。這說的是大小乘，並非有所得的小乘。又想引導學習小乘的人進入大法，想為小乘人說法也必須學習此法。如同《大品般若經》說，諸天子，你們想安住于須陀洹果（Srotapanna，預流果），也不能離開這個忍。問：如果這樣，此法便是通於三乘的法了。答：如同觀中道的人有三品，下智觀的緣故得到聲聞菩提（Sravaka-bodhi，聲聞的覺悟），中智觀的緣故得到緣覺菩提（Pratyekabuddha-bodhi，緣覺的覺悟），上智觀的緣故得到佛菩提（Buddha-bodhi，佛的覺悟）。問：為什麼聲聞法中設立四果，菩薩法中開立十地？師說：現在必須開闢這一條道路，這條道路擁塞很久了，現在說明沒有阻礙，通達四方都能得到。聖人善巧，爲了使處在各種境地的眾生隨順其根性，所以開立大小乘。然而說到道門，未曾有大小之分。現在說的大小，都是爲了適應根器和因緣而開立的方便。然而大小乘不同，在於它們有共通和特別之處。如果從共通的角度來說，大小乘都可以稱為地，大小乘都可以稱為果。如同三乘共同具有十地，八人地、見地就是須陀洹果，薄地就是斯陀含果（Sakrdagamin，一來果），離欲地就是阿那含果（Anagamin，不來果），已辦地就是阿羅漢果（Arhat，無學果）。菩薩法中" ], "english_translations": [ "English version", 'That which cannot be taken or spoken of, even everything, has differences because of the unconditioned dharma. Question: How is the highest standard achieved? Answer: If all dharmas are something that can be taken, can be spoken of, have reliance, and are attainable, then upholding them has no merit. Precisely because Prajna (wisdom) is without taking and without speaking, upholding it brings boundless blessings. Question: The text below this sutra says that it is spoken for those who aspire to the Mahayana (Great Vehicle). Those who delight in the small dharma cannot listen and receive it. The Mahaprajnaparamita Sutra says that Prajna is the dharma of Bodhisattvas (enlightenment beings) and does not belong to the Two Vehicles (Sravakayana and Pratyekabuddhayana). Why is the Small Vehicle now cited as proof? Answer: This uses the small to illustrate the great, showing that even those of the Small Vehicle can understand non-reliance, non-attainment, non-taking, and non-speaking. How could Bodhisattvas not believe in the dharma of non-attainment? Just as the Mahaprajnaparamita Sutra cites Sreni as proof, listeners hear that all dharmas are ultimately empty and do not believe it, so Sreni is cited. Even those of the Small Vehicle believe in the emptiness of dharmas, so how could those of the Great Vehicle not believe in emptiness in the dharma of no-form? Moreover, this is now the Three Vehicles of non-attainment, which is the skillful means of Prajna. This refers to the Great and Small Vehicles, not the Small Vehicle of attainment. Furthermore, it is intended to guide those who study the Small Vehicle to enter the Great Dharma. To teach the Small Vehicle, one must also study this dharma. As the Mahaprajnaparamita Sutra says, \'O heavenly beings, if you wish to abide in the fruit of Srotapanna (stream-enterer), you cannot be apart from this forbearance.\' Question: If so, is this dharma a dharma that is common to the Three Vehicles? Answer: Just as those who contemplate the Middle Way have three levels: those who contemplate with lower wisdom attain Sravaka-bodhi (the enlightenment of a Sravaka), those who contemplate with middle wisdom attain Pratyekabuddha-bodhi (the enlightenment of a Pratyekabuddha), and those who contemplate with higher wisdom attain Buddha-bodhi (the enlightenment of a Buddha). Question: Why are the Four Fruits established in the Sravaka dharma, while the Ten Bhumis are opened up in the Bodhisattva dharma? The teacher said: Now we must open up this one path. This one path has been blocked for a long time. Now it is explained that there are no obstacles, and all directions can be attained. The sages are skillful, and in order to enable beings in various situations to follow their nature, they establish the Great and Small Vehicles. However, when it comes to the path of the Way, there has never been a distinction between Great and Small. The Great and Small that are spoken of now are all expedient means established to suit the faculties and conditions. However, the Great and Small Vehicles are different in that they have common and special aspects. If we discuss it from a common perspective, both Great and Small Vehicles can be called Bhumis, and both Great and Small Vehicles can be called Fruits. Just as the Three Vehicles share the Ten Bhumis, the eighth person-bhumi and the seeing-bhumi are the fruit of Srotapanna, the thin-bhumi is the fruit of Sakrdagamin (once-returner), the detachment-bhumi is the fruit of Anagamin (non-returner), and the accomplished-bhumi is the fruit of Arhat (one who is worthy). In the Bodhisattva dharma" ] }

已辦地屬佛地。是知大小皆得名地。然大小皆名果者。小乘既名四果。菩薩十地亦名十果。故大品云。有法是菩薩道。無法是菩薩果也。若就別為論。開大小不同則果地為異。小乘則名因果。菩薩稱為十地。所以菩薩名地。是勝持廣普能生能成。有此眾義故與其地名。聲聞無此諸義。故不名為地。聲聞之人厭老病死欲入無餘。故斷除煩惱數辨蘇息。遂其心期。故與其果稱。菩薩無此諸事。故不名為果。然復有互舉之義。其事常通。何以知之。如三種皆乘三種皆道三種皆地三種皆聖人。然地豈不通耶。故知隨舉一義耳。問依小乘義明惑唯有見諦思惟。斷三界見諦惑既立初果。斷思惟亦立一果。若爾唯應有二果。何得有四果耶。若斷三界思惟既立三果。三界見諦亦應立三果。又若約界而判既有三界。斷三界惑應有三果。何故斷欲界惑立於二果。斷上二界惑立一果耶。若依靜散而判。欲界已為散地。斷欲界惑應立一果。上二界已為靜地。斷二界惑亦應立一果。今何因緣故不依此諸義立因果耶。答此是如來善巧假名制立。無有定相。通而為論具如問也。而今不爾者。斷三界見諦出三塗之表為聖人。故立初果人。見惡道塵散八十八頭蛇死就斷三界思惟更立三果。斷欲界思惟立於二果。斷上二界思惟立羅漢。所以然者。欲界是苦難

【現代漢語翻譯】現代漢語譯本：已證得的境界屬於佛的境界。由此可知，無論小乘還是大乘，都可以稱為『地』（Bhumi，境界）。然而，無論小乘還是大乘，都可以稱為『果』（Phala，果位）。小乘有四果的說法，菩薩的十地也被稱為十果。所以《大品般若經》中說：『有法是菩薩道，無法是菩薩果。』如果分別來討論，區分大小乘的不同，那麼果位也會有所不同。小乘稱為因果，菩薩則稱為十地。菩薩被稱為『地』，是因為他們殊勝、持有、廣博、普遍，能夠生髮和成就一切。具備這些含義，所以用『地』來稱呼。聲聞沒有這些含義，所以不稱為『地』。聲聞之人厭惡衰老、疾病和死亡，希望進入無餘涅槃，所以斷除煩惱，仔細辨別，得以休息，實現他們的願望，所以用『果』來稱呼。菩薩沒有這些事情，所以不稱為『果』。然而，也有互相借用的情況，這種用法是常見的。為什麼這麼說呢？比如三種（智慧、斷、道）都稱為乘，三種都稱為道，三種都稱為地，三種都稱為聖人。那麼『地』難道不通用嗎？所以要知道這只是隨舉一義罷了。問：按照小乘的教義，迷惑只有見諦和思惟兩種。斷除三界的見諦惑就證得初果，斷除思惟惑也證得一個果位。如果這樣，那麼應該只有二果才對，怎麼會有四果呢？如果斷除三界的思惟惑就證得三果，那麼斷除三界的見諦惑也應該證得三果。而且，如果按照界來劃分，既然有三界，那麼斷除三界的迷惑就應該有三果。為什麼斷除欲界的迷惑就證得二果，斷除上二界的迷惑就證得一果呢？如果按照靜和散來劃分，欲界屬於散地，斷除欲界的迷惑應該證得一果。上二界屬於靜地，斷除上二界的迷惑也應該證得一果。現在是什麼原因不按照這些道理來設立因果呢？答：這是如來善巧方便，假名安立，沒有固定的相狀。總的來說，就像你所問的那樣。而現在不是這樣，是因為斷除三界的見諦惑，超出三惡道，成為聖人，所以設立初果人。見到惡道如塵土般散落，八十八使（見惑）如毒蛇般死去。接著斷除三界的思惟惑，再設立三果。斷除欲界的思惟惑，證得二果。斷除上二界的思惟惑，證得阿羅漢果。之所以這樣，是因為欲界是充滿痛苦和艱難的。

【English Translation】 English version: The realm that has been attained belongs to the Buddha's realm. From this, it is known that both the Small Vehicle (Hinayana) and the Great Vehicle (Mahayana) can be called 'Bhumi' (stage, level). However, both the Small Vehicle and the Great Vehicle can be called 'Phala' (fruit, result). The Small Vehicle has the concept of the Four Fruits, and the Ten Bhumis of the Bodhisattva are also called the Ten Fruits. Therefore, the Mahaprajnaparamita Sutra says: 'Existing dharmas are the Bodhisattva's path, non-existing dharmas are the Bodhisattva's fruit.' If we discuss them separately, distinguishing the differences between the Small and Great Vehicles, then the fruit stages will also be different. The Small Vehicle is called cause and effect (因果, hetu-phala), while the Bodhisattva is called the Ten Bhumis. The Bodhisattva is called 'Bhumi' because they are superior, upholding, broad, universal, and able to generate and accomplish everything. Because they possess these meanings, they are called 'Bhumi'. The Hearers (聲聞, Sravakas) do not have these meanings, so they are not called 'Bhumi'. The Hearers are disgusted with old age, sickness, and death, and wish to enter Nirvana without remainder (無餘涅槃, nirupadhisesa-nirvana), so they cut off afflictions, carefully discern, and are able to rest, fulfilling their wishes, so they are called 'Fruit'. Bodhisattvas do not have these things, so they are not called 'Fruit'. However, there are also cases of mutual borrowing, and this usage is common. Why is this so? For example, the three (wisdom, cutting off, path) are all called vehicles, the three are all called paths, the three are all called bhumis, and the three are all called sages. Then isn't 'Bhumi' universal? So know that this is just citing one meaning. Question: According to the teachings of the Small Vehicle, delusion only has two types: the delusion of view (見諦惑, dṛṣṭi-heya) and the delusion of thought (思惟惑, bhāvanā-heya). Cutting off the delusions of view in the Three Realms (三界, trayo dhātava) results in attaining the First Fruit (初果, srota-apanna), and cutting off the delusions of thought also results in attaining a fruit. If this is the case, then there should only be two fruits, so how can there be four fruits? If cutting off the delusions of thought in the Three Realms results in attaining the Three Fruits, then cutting off the delusions of view in the Three Realms should also result in attaining the Three Fruits. Moreover, if we divide according to the realms, since there are Three Realms, then cutting off the delusions of the Three Realms should result in attaining the Three Fruits. Why is it that cutting off the delusions of the Desire Realm (欲界, kāma-dhātu) results in attaining the Second Fruit, and cutting off the delusions of the Upper Two Realms results in attaining one fruit? If we divide according to stillness and scattering, the Desire Realm belongs to the scattered ground, and cutting off the delusions of the Desire Realm should result in attaining one fruit. The Upper Two Realms belong to the still ground, and cutting off the delusions of the Two Realms should also result in attaining one fruit. What is the reason why we do not establish cause and effect according to these principles? Answer: This is the Tathagata's skillful means, establishing provisional names, without fixed characteristics. Generally speaking, it is like what you asked. But the reason it is not like this now is because cutting off the delusions of view in the Three Realms, going beyond the three evil paths, and becoming a sage, is why the person of the First Fruit is established. Seeing the evil paths scattered like dust, the eighty-eight bonds (見惑, dṛṣṭi-heya) dying like poisonous snakes. Then cutting off the delusions of thought in the Three Realms, and then establishing the Three Fruits. Cutting off the delusions of thought in the Desire Realm, attaining the Second Fruit. Cutting off the delusions of thought in the Upper Two Realms, attaining the Arhat fruit (阿羅漢果, arhat). The reason for this is that the Desire Realm is full of suffering and difficulty.

地。此既難可過度。是以斷欲界惑立於二果上二界非苦難地。已有解基惑則易斷。是以斷上二界惑立阿羅漢果。言斷欲界惑立二果者。欲界思惟有九品。斷前六品名斯陀含果。具斷後三品立阿那含果。所以斷前六品立斯陀含果者。毗婆娑中和須密論師云。前六品煩惱能發無作潤於三涂。是故斷此六品制於一果。又且既開惑以為九品。是則上中二三品其惑則重。是以斷之立於一果。后三品既輕。故斷之而立阿那含果。莊嚴師云。欲界思惟九品煩惱潤業不同。前之三品潤邊地貧窮。次有三品潤邊地富貴。問曰。立此四果出何處文。答毗婆娑以五義故立。一者舍于曾道。二者得未曾道。三者得一味解脫。四者具修十六行。五者修得八智。今以五義具立初果。下三果者可具三義。謂舍于曾道得未曾道及一味解脫也。如此等義數論中廣釋。但知是假名方便。不如數論有所得解。數論但得名字不知佛意也。就初果文前問。次答。就答中有三。一正答明悟初果時不見得與不得證與不證。即成上不可取不可說義也。何以故下。第二句釋于上義。須陀洹者。此言修習無漏。亦名逆生死流。流有二種。一生死流即是煩惱。二者道流名為正觀。今此中具明二流。名為入流即是入于道流。不入色聲香味觸法即是逆生死流。由入道流故逆生死流。

故入道流。然入道流而實無所入。亦逆生死流實無所逆。第三句是名須陀洹者。結名也。余經云得須陀。名為溝巷斷結。前觀欲界苦斷欲界苦下煩惱。次觀上界苦斷上界苦下煩惱。還觀欲界集。次觀上界集。如是上下屈曲似於溝巷。故云溝巷斷結。三藏師云。得須陀洹者。此云至流。如煩惱引人至生死流。八正道引人至涅槃流也。問何故但云不入六塵。答既不入六塵亦不入六情六識。即明於法空。不見須陀洹故即是人空。入道流無所入故則涅槃不可得。逆生死流無所逆故生死不可得。故不人不法不生死。不涅槃乃名波若須陀洹也。第二果亦有問答。文來可知。斯陀含者。此云薄淫怒癡。亦名一往來。此人猶感欲界兩生。一生天上一生人中。便成羅漢。故名一往來。亦名頻來。以頻受兩生故名曰頻來。第三阿那含者。此云不還。亦云不來。斷欲界結盡不生欲界故名不來也。而實無來者。問阿那含名不來既雲實不來。斯陀含名一往來應雲實往來。上云一往來實無往來。時阿那含名不來。應云無不來。答其實應爾。但互文現意。而不爾者。那含名不來而云實無來者。此不來之名而無得之語其義相稱。故以無來之語還釋不生之名。上二果名不同此。所以非類也。又意實應言而無不來。今少不字但云無來者。無即兼不故省煩言也

【現代漢語翻譯】現代漢語譯本：所以，入道之流（Srota-apanna，須陀洹），實際上並沒有什麼可進入的。同樣，逆生死之流，實際上也沒有什麼可逆轉的。第三句稱之為『須陀洹』，是總結性的命名。其他經典中說，獲得須陀洹，被稱為斷除了『溝巷結』。先前觀察欲界的苦，斷除欲界苦下的煩惱；接著觀察上界的苦，斷除上界苦下的煩惱；再回頭觀察欲界的集（Samudaya，苦的生起），然後觀察上界的集。這樣上下往復，就像在溝巷中一樣，所以說斷除了『溝巷結』。三藏法師說，獲得須陀洹，意思是『至流』，就像煩惱引導人們進入生死之流，八正道引導人們進入涅槃之流一樣。有人問：為什麼只說不入六塵（色、聲、香、味、觸、法）？回答是：既然不入六塵，也不入六情（眼、耳、鼻、舌、身、意）和六識（眼識、耳識、鼻識、舌識、身識、意識），這就表明了法空（Dharma-sunyata）。不見須陀洹，就是人空（Pudgala-sunyata）。入道之流沒有什麼可進入的，因此涅槃（Nirvana）不可得；逆生死之流沒有什麼可逆轉的，因此生死不可得。所以，不人、不法、不生死、不涅槃，才稱為般若（Prajna）須陀洹。第二果（斯陀含，Sakrdagamin）也有問答，文義稍後可知。斯陀含，意思是『薄淫怒癡』，也稱為『一往來』。這種人還要感受欲界兩次的生死，一次在天上，一次在人間，然後成就阿羅漢（Arhat）。所以稱為『一往來』，也稱為『頻來』，因為頻繁地承受兩次生死，所以稱為『頻來』。第三果阿那含（Anagamin），意思是『不還』，也稱為『不來』。斷除了欲界的結縛，不再生於欲界，所以稱為『不來』。但實際上並沒有什麼『來』。有人問：阿那含名為『不來』，既然說實際上不來，斯陀含名為『一往來』，應該說實際上往來。上面說『一往來，實際上沒有往來』，現在阿那含名為『不來』，應該說『沒有不來』。回答是：實際上應該這樣說，但這是互文見義，所以沒有這樣說。阿那含名為『不來』，而說『實際上沒有來』，這種『不來』之名與『無得』之語，其意義相稱，所以用『無來』之語來解釋『不生』之名。上面兩個果位的名稱與此不同，所以不能類比。另外，本意實際上應該說『沒有不來』，現在省略了『不』字，只說『沒有來』，『無』字就兼有『不』的意思，所以省略了繁瑣的言語。

【English Translation】 English version: Therefore, the stream-enterer (Srota-apanna), in reality, has nothing to enter. Likewise, reversing the stream of birth and death, in reality, there is nothing to reverse. The third phrase, 『is named Srota-apanna,』 is a concluding designation. Other sutras say that attaining Srota-apanna is called severing the 『ditch-and-lane fetters.』 First, observing the suffering of the desire realm, one cuts off the lower afflictions of the desire realm's suffering; then, observing the suffering of the upper realms, one cuts off the lower afflictions of the upper realms' suffering; then, turning back to observe the arising (Samudaya) of the desire realm, and then observing the arising of the upper realms. This back-and-forth movement is like being in a ditch and lane, so it is said that one severs the 『ditch-and-lane fetters.』 The Tripitaka master says that attaining Srota-apanna means 『arriving at the stream,』 just as afflictions lead people to the stream of birth and death, and the Eightfold Path leads people to the stream of Nirvana. Someone asks: Why only say not entering the six sense objects (rupa, sabda, gandha, rasa, sparsa, dharma)? The answer is: Since one does not enter the six sense objects, one also does not enter the six senses (eye, ear, nose, tongue, body, mind) and the six consciousnesses (eye-consciousness, ear-consciousness, nose-consciousness, tongue-consciousness, body-consciousness, mind-consciousness), which clarifies the emptiness of phenomena (Dharma-sunyata). Not seeing the Srota-apanna is the emptiness of persons (Pudgala-sunyata). Entering the stream has nothing to enter, therefore Nirvana is unattainable; reversing the stream of birth and death has nothing to reverse, therefore birth and death are unattainable. Therefore, not person, not phenomena, not birth and death, not Nirvana, is called Prajna Srota-apanna. The second fruit (Sakrdagamin) also has questions and answers, the meaning of which will be known later. Sakrdagamin means 『thinning of lust, anger, and delusion,』 also called 『once-returner.』 This person still experiences two births in the desire realm, once in the heavens and once among humans, and then becomes an Arhat. Therefore, it is called 『once-returner,』 also called 『frequent-returner,』 because one frequently undergoes two births, so it is called 『frequent-returner.』 The third fruit, Anagamin, means 『non-returner,』 also called 『non-comer.』 Having cut off the fetters of the desire realm, one is no longer born in the desire realm, so it is called 『non-comer.』 But in reality, there is no 『coming.』 Someone asks: Anagamin is named 『non-comer,』 since it is said that one actually does not come, Sakrdagamin is named 『once-returner,』 it should be said that one actually returns. Above it says 『once-returner, in reality, there is no returning,』 now Anagamin is named 『non-comer,』 it should be said 『there is no non-coming.』 The answer is: In reality, it should be said that way, but this is a mutual explanation, so it is not said that way. Anagamin is named 『non-comer,』 and it is said 『in reality, there is no coming,』 this name of 『non-coming』 and the words 『no attainment』 are consistent in meaning, so the words 『no coming』 are used to explain the name of 『non-birth.』 The names of the above two fruits are different from this, so they cannot be compared. Also, the original intention should actually be to say 『there is no non-coming,』 now the word 『non』 is omitted, and only 『no coming』 is said, the word 『no』 includes the meaning of 『not,』 so the cumbersome words are omitted.

。問四果十智中具有幾智。答初二果十智中除盡無生及他心。問凡夫外道尚得他心。二果聖人何故不得。答聖人非不能得。若得他心即得四禪斷欲界非復初二果也。第三果人八智。加他心。第四果具十智也。從第四果去。即是第二舉小乘果以成格量之義。上來三種雖並稱果。若望羅漢並皆是因。就此文中復開為二。一者通舉羅漢。二者別明善吉。初亦有問答。答中有三。一直答。二順釋答。三反釋答。問四人並皆稱果。何故前三云果羅漢稱道。答果道之名皆通四人。但羅漢既其德極。簡異上三偏云道也。所以然者。大經云。菩提名盡智無生智。菩提此稱為道。羅漢既得此二智與其道名。上之三果未得二智不名與道也。第二偏據善吉悟解勝為證者。善吉猶是羅漢。但今是對揚之主。又復別得勝定異於餘人。又自引為證。欲使于義明顯也。就文有四。一明佛就其得上果。二明其果不作得意。三明若有得意則不為佛所印可。四明以無著故為佛所嘆。人中最為第一者凡有三種第一。一者人第一。二者離第一。謂離二種障。一離煩惱障。二離定障也。三者德第一。即得無諍定及斷煩惱障智斷定障智。問何因緣修無諍三昧。答凡有三義。一者昔聞佛說此三昧有種種功德。心信愿得。今成羅漢故修此定。由昔因故便習得也。二者在凡

【現代漢語翻譯】現代漢語譯本問：四果（Srotapanna, Sakrdagamin, Anagamin, Arhat）十智中具有幾種智慧？答：初果（Srotapanna）和二果（Sakrdagamin）在十智中，除去盡智（Ksaya-jnana）、無生智（Anutpada-jnana）和他心智（Paracitta-jnana）。問：凡夫和外道尚且能得到他心智，二果聖人為什麼不能得到？答：聖人並非不能得到，如果得到他心智，就得到了四禪（Dhyana），斷除了欲界（Kama-dhatu）的煩惱，不再是初果和二果的境界了。三果（Anagamin）的人具有八智，加上他心智。四果（Arhat）的人具足十智。從四果開始，就是第二次舉小乘果位來成就格量之義。上面三種果位雖然都稱為果，如果與阿羅漢（Arhat）相比，都還是因。就這段經文又分為兩種：一是通舉阿羅漢，二是分別說明善吉（Subhuti）。初者也有問答，答中有三種：一是直接回答，二是順著解釋回答，三是反過來解釋回答。問：四人都稱為果，為什麼前三果稱為果，阿羅漢稱為道？答：果和道的名稱都通用於四人，但阿羅漢已經達到德行的極致，爲了區別於前三果，所以偏稱為道。之所以這樣說，是因為《大般涅槃經》（Mahaparinirvana Sutra）說：『菩提（Bodhi）名為盡智、無生智』，菩提在這裡稱為道，阿羅漢既然得到了這兩種智慧，所以稱為道，上面的三果沒有得到這兩種智慧，所以不稱為道。第二，偏重於善吉的悟解殊勝作為證明，善吉仍然是阿羅漢，但現在是對揚的主角，又特別得到了殊勝的禪定，不同於其他人，又自己引以為證，想要使義理更加明顯。就經文有四點：一，說明佛認可他得到上果；二，說明他得到果位並不自滿；三，說明如果有所得意，就不會被佛所認可；四，說明因為沒有執著，所以被佛所讚歎。人中最爲了不起的人有三種第一：一是人第一；二是離第一，指遠離兩種障礙，一是遠離煩惱障（Klesavarana），二是遠離定障（Dhyanavarana）；三是德第一，即得到無諍定（Arana Samadhi）以及斷除煩惱障的智慧和斷除定障的智慧。問：因為什麼因緣修習無諍三昧（Arana Samadhi）？答：凡有三種意義：一是過去聽佛說此三昧有種種功德，內心相信並希望得到，現在成為阿羅漢，所以修習此定，由於過去的因緣，便習慣修習。二是在凡夫

【English Translation】 English version Question: Among the ten wisdoms of the Four Fruits (Srotapanna, Sakrdagamin, Anagamin, Arhat), how many wisdoms are possessed? Answer: The first fruit (Srotapanna) and the second fruit (Sakrdagamin) in the ten wisdoms, exclude the Exhaustion Knowledge (Ksaya-jnana), the Non-arising Knowledge (Anutpada-jnana), and the Knowledge of the Minds of Others (Paracitta-jnana). Question: Ordinary people and non-Buddhists can attain the Knowledge of the Minds of Others, why can't the saints of the second fruit attain it? Answer: It's not that the saints cannot attain it. If they attain the Knowledge of the Minds of Others, they will attain the Four Dhyanas (Dhyana) and cut off the desires of the Desire Realm (Kama-dhatu), and will no longer be in the realm of the first and second fruits. The person of the third fruit (Anagamin) possesses eight wisdoms, plus the Knowledge of the Minds of Others. The person of the fourth fruit (Arhat) possesses all ten wisdoms. Starting from the fourth fruit, it is the second time to use the fruits of the Small Vehicle to achieve the meaning of comparison. Although the above three fruits are all called fruits, if compared with Arhats (Arhat), they are all still causes. This passage is further divided into two types: one is the general mention of Arhats, and the other is the separate explanation of Subhuti (Subhuti). The former also has questions and answers, and there are three types of answers: one is a direct answer, the second is an answer that explains accordingly, and the third is an answer that explains in reverse. Question: All four are called fruits, why are the first three fruits called fruits, and Arhats called the Path? Answer: The names of fruit and path are both applicable to all four, but Arhats have reached the extreme of virtue, so to distinguish them from the first three fruits, they are specifically called the Path. The reason for this is that the Mahaparinirvana Sutra (Mahaparinirvana Sutra) says: 'Bodhi (Bodhi) is called the Exhaustion Knowledge and the Non-arising Knowledge.' Bodhi is called the Path here. Since Arhats have attained these two wisdoms, they are called the Path. The above three fruits have not attained these two wisdoms, so they are not called the Path. Secondly, it emphasizes Subhuti's superior understanding as proof. Subhuti is still an Arhat, but now he is the main subject of praise, and he has also specially attained superior Samadhi (Samadhi), which is different from others. He also uses himself as proof, wanting to make the meaning clearer. There are four points in the text: first, it explains that the Buddha recognizes his attainment of the upper fruit; second, it explains that he is not complacent about attaining the fruit; third, it explains that if there is any complacency, it will not be recognized by the Buddha; fourth, it explains that because there is no attachment, he is praised by the Buddha. The most remarkable person among people has three kinds of firsts: one is the first in person; the second is the first in detachment, referring to being away from two kinds of obstacles, one is being away from the Klesavarana (Klesavarana), and the other is being away from the Dhyanavarana (Dhyanavarana); the third is the first in virtue, that is, attaining the Arana Samadhi (Arana Samadhi) and the wisdom to cut off the Klesavarana and the wisdom to cut off the Dhyanavarana. Question: What are the causes and conditions for practicing the Arana Samadhi (Arana Samadhi)? Answer: There are generally three meanings: one is that in the past, I heard the Buddha say that this Samadhi has various merits, and I believed in my heart and hoped to attain it. Now that I have become an Arhat, I practice this Samadhi. Because of the past causes and conditions, I am accustomed to practicing it. The second is in ordinary people

夫時于多眾生起諍故受苦報。今得無學還憶昔憂悔故修此定。三者欲令多人得現果報故復修之。得此定已前作方便守護他心。無一眾生於我起諍。然後現身故名無諍。問以何方便法修此定耶。答前散心中發願。隨其心願要期近遠。或一土一村人物處所。悉愿見其形相姓族名字及知其心所趣向。發此愿已入達分三昧。如昔所愿皆悉分明。此事已還出散心。憶念定中所見如夢中所見覺已還憶。以是義故能遮惡生善不煩惱他。故名無諍。無諍與愿智相成如前說也。問云。何名為無諍。答有人言。以慈心為無諍。以慈心故不與物諍。有人言。第四禪名無諍。以此定離三災免四受故也。有人言。空解為無諍定。有人言。即以無諍智為無諍定。今依論釋。論云。依彼善吉者遠離二種障。斷煩惱故得羅漢。斷三昧鄣得無諍定。故知此別是方法定。非是空解亦非四禪亦非慈心也。問文云離欲羅漢。離何欲耶。答非是離煩惱之慾。乃是善吉好修阿蘭若行遠離五欲五塵之境名為離欲。阿蘭若者此云無事。即是優遊任放不為塵累所拘。四段文處易知不須出也。佛告須菩提如來昔在然燈佛所下。是第二章舉大乘因果釋成上義。就文為兩。第一舉大乘因釋成前義。第二舉大乘果釋成前義。就舉大乘因中開為二別。第一舉受記。第二明嚴土。今即初

。所以有此文來者。從上如來所說法不可取不可說文生。若言諸法不可取者。昔為儒童菩薩應不得記。若昔為儒童菩薩遂得記者。則諸法可取。若言諸法不可說者。然燈佛不應為其授記。既為釋迦授記汝于來世當得作佛。則是可說。以時會有於此疑故。佛騰眾疑問于善吉。故云如來於然燈佛所有法得菩提不。善吉答云。于然燈佛所實無所得。此意明不見人是能得無有記之可得。具如凈名彌勒章記。如是無得無不得。乃名得受記。此得實無所得也。北人云。凡有四時受記。一是習種性不現前受記。二是道種性亦不現前受記。三是初地現前受記。四是八地大無生忍現前受記。此中文明釋迦由是習種性菩薩。未得初地已上無生法忍記。今佛問善吉云。我于爾時已證初地無生法忍三菩提耶。乃至金剛已后常住現果證三菩提耶。善吉答云。如來爾時未得初地無生法忍三菩提。亦未得金剛后常住三菩提。今謂論無此義。又未見經說。若就義推。于理不可。此中乃明無依無得之義。破有依有得之疑。成上不可取不可說意。云何乃作行位淺深解釋。故於義不然。但經中不無三賢十聖之說。首楞嚴經亦有四種受記之文。非此中正意也。于意云何莊嚴佛土不下。此第二次辨嚴土釋成上義。來意同前。若言諸法不可取不可說。云何菩薩取凈佛

【現代漢語翻譯】現代漢語譯本：所以才有這樣的文字出現。這些文字是從如來所說的不可執取、不可言說的法中產生的。如果說一切法都不可執取，那麼過去作為儒童菩薩（指釋迦牟尼佛的前世）就不應該被授記。如果過去作為儒童菩薩而得到了授記，那麼就說明諸法是可以執取的。如果說一切法都不可言說，那麼燃燈佛（過去佛）就不應該為他授記，既然為釋迦（釋迦牟尼佛）授記說『你將來會成佛』，那就是可以言說的。因為當時大眾對此有疑問，所以佛陀向善吉（須菩提）提出疑問。所以說，『如來在燃燈佛那裡，對於任何法有所得而證得菩提嗎？』善吉回答說：『在燃燈佛那裡，實際上沒有任何所得。』這個意思表明，不見有人是能得到什麼的，也沒有授記這件事可以得到。詳細的解釋可以參考《維摩詰經·彌勒菩薩品》的註解。像這樣無所得也無不得，才叫做得到授記。這種得到實際上是無所得。北方的人說，一般有四種授記：一是習種性沒有顯現時受記；二是道種性也沒有顯現時受記；三是初地菩薩現前受記；四是八地菩薩得到大無生法忍時現前受記。這裡說明釋迦牟尼佛是由習種性菩薩，沒有得到初地以上的無生法忍的授記。現在佛陀問善吉說：『我在那時已經證得初地無生法忍的三菩提了嗎？』乃至『金剛之後常住現果證得三菩提了嗎？』善吉回答說：『如來那時沒有得到初地無生法忍的三菩提，也沒有得到金剛之後常住的三菩提。』現在認為這種說法在經論中沒有這個意思，也沒有見過哪部經這樣說。如果按照這個意思來推斷，在道理上是不可以的。這裡是闡明無所依、無所得的意義，破除有所依、有所得的疑惑，成就上面所說的不可取、不可說的意思。怎麼能用修行位次的深淺來解釋呢？所以在義理上是不對的。但是經中並不是沒有三賢十聖的說法。《首楞嚴經》也有四種授記的說法，但這不是這裡所要表達的真正意思。『于意云何莊嚴佛土不下』，這是第二次辨明莊嚴佛土，解釋成就上面的意義，來的意思和前面一樣。如果說一切法不可取、不可說，為什麼菩薩要取清凈的佛土呢？

【English Translation】 English version: Therefore, this text exists. It originates from the 'unobtainable' and 'unspeakable' Dharma spoken by the Tathagata (another name for Buddha). If it is said that all Dharmas are unobtainable, then the Bodhisattva (a being on the path to Buddhahood) as a young Brahmin (referring to Shakyamuni Buddha's past life) should not have received a prediction. If the Bodhisattva as a young Brahmin did receive a prediction, then it means that Dharmas are obtainable. If it is said that all Dharmas are unspeakable, then Dipamkara Buddha (a past Buddha) should not have given him a prediction. Since Dipamkara Buddha predicted to Shakya (Shakyamuni Buddha), 'You will become a Buddha in the future,' then it is speakable. Because the assembly had doubts about this at that time, the Buddha asked Subhuti (one of the Buddha's main disciples, known for understanding emptiness). Therefore, it is said, 'Did the Tathagata, at Dipamkara Buddha's place, gain anything from any Dharma to attain Bodhi (enlightenment)?' Subhuti replied, 'At Dipamkara Buddha's place, there was actually nothing gained.' This means that no one is seen as being able to gain anything, and there is no prediction that can be obtained. Detailed explanations can be found in the annotations of the 'Vimalakirti Sutra,' chapter on Maitreya (the future Buddha). Like this, neither obtaining nor not obtaining is called receiving a prediction. This obtaining is actually non-obtaining. People from the North say that there are generally four types of predictions: first, a prediction when the seed of habit is not manifest; second, a prediction when the seed of the path is also not manifest; third, a prediction when the first Bhumi (stage of Bodhisattva development) is manifest; fourth, a prediction when the eighth Bhumi is attained with the Great Patience of Non-Origination. This explains that Shakyamuni Buddha was a Bodhisattva of the seed of habit, not having received the prediction of the non-origination Dharma-patience above the first Bhumi. Now the Buddha asks Subhuti, 'Did I, at that time, already realize the three Bodhis (enlightenment) of the first Bhumi's non-origination Dharma-patience?' and even 'After the Vajra (diamond-like samadhi), did I constantly abide in the present result and realize the three Bodhis?' Subhuti replied, 'The Tathagata did not attain the three Bodhis of the first Bhumi's non-origination Dharma-patience at that time, nor did he attain the constant abiding three Bodhis after the Vajra.' Now it is believed that this statement does not have this meaning in the sutras and treatises, and no sutra has been seen to say this. If inferred according to this meaning, it is not reasonable. This clarifies the meaning of non-reliance and non-attainment, dispelling the doubts of reliance and attainment, and accomplishing the meaning of unobtainable and unspeakable mentioned above. How can it be explained by the depth of the stages of practice? Therefore, it is not correct in meaning. However, the sutras are not without the teachings of the Three Worthies and Ten Saints. The Shurangama Sutra also has the statement of four types of predictions, but this is not the true meaning to be expressed here. 'What do you think about the adornment of the Buddha-land?' This is the second time to clarify the adornment of the Buddha-land, explaining and accomplishing the above meaning. The intention is the same as before. If it is said that all Dharmas are unobtainable and unspeakable, why should Bodhisattvas take the pure Buddha land?

土行。為釋此疑故有此文來也。問因行無量。何故前辨受記今明嚴土。答受記是菩薩自行。嚴土是化他行。自悟無生故佛授記是自行。眾生之類是菩薩佛土故嚴土之行。則是化他行。行門雖多不出此二。是故明也。又前論得記則是正果。今論嚴土則依果。又菩薩得無生已后更無餘事。唯成就眾生凈佛國土。故次第二句來。文亦有二。一問二答。問意可知。就答中有二。第一正明嚴土之真偽。第二勸修凈土因。今即是初。若依大品經說。此中始終圓成一意。即是菩薩無大莊嚴為大莊嚴。雖大莊嚴實無莊嚴。然依論釋。此中文雲鬚菩提言不也世尊者。此明如來法身實無七寶形相莊嚴。故不應言菩薩有七寶凈土之可取也。如來說莊嚴佛土者。疑者云。若形相莊嚴非真土者。佛何故說七寶等為凈土。令菩薩修凈土因取凈土果耶。故今釋云。如來以正法為身無身非身。是故無土。今說形相為凈土者。此為始行之人令棄土沙之穢取寶玉之凈耳。非是第一義真凈土也。故言如來莊嚴佛土則非莊嚴也。是名莊嚴者。此是第一義真實莊嚴。正以諸法實相無德不備無累不凈故名莊嚴。為至人之所棲止故名之為土。應如是生清凈心下。此第二明凈土因。然上明土果。破別相世俗之土。明第一義真凈佛土。故明二土真偽不同。此中辨因有得失之

【現代漢語翻譯】現代漢語譯本：『土行。』爲了解釋這個疑問，所以有這段經文的出現。問：因為修行的方法有很多，為什麼前面辨明受記，現在闡明嚴土（莊嚴佛土）？答：受記是菩薩的自利修行，嚴土是度化他人的修行。自己領悟到無生法忍，所以佛陀給予授記，這是自利修行。眾生這類是菩薩的佛土，所以莊嚴佛土的修行，就是度化他人的修行。修行的方法雖然很多，但不超出這兩種。所以要闡明。又，前面討論得到授記，就是證得正果。現在討論莊嚴佛土，則是依于果位。又，菩薩得到無生法忍之後，再沒有其他的事情，唯有成就眾生，清凈佛國土。所以接著第二句而來。經文也有兩部分，一是提問，二是回答。提問的意思可以理解。在回答中有兩點，第一是正面闡明莊嚴佛土的真偽，第二是勸導修習凈土的因。現在是第一點。如果依照《大品經》所說，這裡始終圓成一個意思，就是菩薩沒有大的莊嚴才是大的莊嚴。雖然有大的莊嚴，實際上沒有莊嚴。然而依照論的解釋，這段經文說『須菩提言：不也，世尊』，這是說明如來的法身實際上沒有七寶形相的莊嚴。所以不應該說菩薩有七寶凈土可以追求。如來說莊嚴佛土，提問者說：如果形相莊嚴不是真土，佛陀為什麼說七寶等是凈土，讓菩薩修凈土的因，取得凈土的果呢？所以現在解釋說：如來以正法為身，無身也非身。因此沒有土。現在說形相是凈土，這是爲了讓剛開始修行的人捨棄土沙的污穢，取寶玉的清凈罷了。不是第一義的真凈土。所以說『如來莊嚴佛土，則非莊嚴』。『是名莊嚴』，這是第一義的真實莊嚴。正是因為諸法實相無德不具備，無累不乾淨，所以名為莊嚴。為至人所棲息的地方，所以稱之為土。『應如是生清凈心』以下，這是第二點闡明凈土的因。然而上面闡明土的果，破斥別相世俗的土，闡明第一義真凈佛土。所以闡明兩種土的真偽不同。這裡辨別修因的得失。

【English Translation】 English version: 'Earth Practice.' This passage exists to resolve this doubt. Question: Since there are countless methods of practice, why did you previously discuss receiving predictions and now clarify the adornment of the Buddha-land (Yan Tu)? Answer: Receiving predictions is the self-benefiting practice of a Bodhisattva, while adorning the Buddha-land is the practice of transforming others. Realizing non-origination (Wu Sheng Fa Ren), the Buddha bestows predictions, which is self-benefiting practice. Sentient beings are the Buddha-land of the Bodhisattva, so the practice of adorning the Buddha-land is the practice of transforming others. Although there are many methods of practice, they do not go beyond these two. Therefore, it needs to be clarified. Furthermore, the previous discussion about receiving predictions is about attaining the right fruit (Zheng Guo). The current discussion about adorning the Buddha-land is based on the fruit. Moreover, after a Bodhisattva attains non-origination, there is nothing else to do except to accomplish sentient beings and purify the Buddha-land. Therefore, it follows the second sentence. The text also has two parts: a question and an answer. The meaning of the question is understandable. In the answer, there are two points: first, to directly clarify the truth and falsehood of adorning the Buddha-land; second, to encourage the cultivation of the causes of the Pure Land. Now is the first point. According to the Great Perfection of Wisdom Sutra (Da Pin Jing), this is a complete and consistent idea from beginning to end, which means that the Bodhisattva's lack of great adornment is the great adornment. Although there is great adornment, there is actually no adornment. However, according to the commentary, this passage says, 'Subhuti said: No, World Honored One.' This explains that the Dharma body (Fa Shen) of the Tathagata (Ru Lai) actually has no adornment of the seven treasures (Qi Bao). Therefore, it should not be said that the Bodhisattva has a Pure Land of seven treasures to pursue. The questioner says that the Tathagata speaks of adorning the Buddha-land: If the adornment of form is not the true land, why does the Buddha say that the seven treasures are the Pure Land, allowing Bodhisattvas to cultivate the causes of the Pure Land and obtain the fruit of the Pure Land? Therefore, it is now explained that the Tathagata takes the Right Dharma (Zheng Fa) as the body, which is neither body nor non-body. Therefore, there is no land. Now, saying that form is the Pure Land is only to allow beginners to abandon the impurity of earth and sand and take the purity of treasures. It is not the true Pure Land of the first meaning. Therefore, it is said, 'The Tathagata adorns the Buddha-land, which is not adornment.' 'It is called adornment,' which is the true adornment of the first meaning. It is precisely because the true nature of all dharmas (Zhu Fa) lacks no virtue and is free from all impurities that it is called adornment. It is a place for the perfect person to dwell, so it is called land. 'One should generate a pure mind in this way' below, this is the second point clarifying the cause of the Pure Land. However, the above clarifies the fruit of the land, refuting the separate and worldly lands, and clarifying the true and pure Buddha-land of the first meaning. Therefore, it clarifies the difference between the truth and falsehood of the two lands. Here, the gains and losses of cultivating the cause are distinguished.

異。就文開為三別。第一正勸修得。二者勸舍失。三者重勸修得。應如是生清凈信心。此即是勸修得也。不應住聲香味觸法生心者。此第二句勸失舍。應無所住下。第三句勸修得。須菩提譬如有人身如須彌山王下。第二明大乘果證前無取無說。成格量之義。就文為二。前佛問。次善吉答。今即初。問成論人釋云。山王廣大譬無相理廣大也。今謂不然。非但義無次第。亦是文無所出。今依論生起猶為釋疑。疑雲。若無取無說者。云何諸佛取得菩提而為他說得菩提耶。所以舉須彌山者。明須彌於十寶山中最大。譬佛於十地中最大。須彌此云妙高山。亦云安明山也。釋意云。如須彌山雖於十寶山中之大亦無心言大。佛亦爾。雖于眾聖中大亦云無心言大。雖得菩提亦無心言得也。佛說非身是名大身者。又釋疑。疑雲。聞須彌無心言大。謂與佛齊須彌既是有為有漏。言佛亦是有為有漏。故今釋云佛說非身者。明佛不同須彌非是有為有漏身。故云非身是名大身。即是無為無漏身也。故云是名大身也。問此舉三佛中何佛耶。答正舉報佛。所以然者。報佛正是修因滿故得菩提。法佛是佛性未得菩提。故不說法佛。得報佛竟方起應化。故化佛亦非得菩提。故但舉報佛也。須菩提于意云何如恒河中所有沙數下。此第二舉諸恒河沙珍寶佈施。

【現代漢語翻譯】異。就文開為三別。第一是正式勸導修行以獲得成就，第二是勸導捨棄過失，第三是再次勸導修行以獲得成就。應當像這樣生起清凈的信心。這也就是勸導修行以獲得成就。『不應住聲香味觸法生心』，這第二句是勸導捨棄過失。『應無所住』以下，第三句是勸導修行以獲得成就。須菩提（Subhuti，佛陀的弟子）譬如有人身如須彌山王（Sumeru，佛教宇宙觀中的聖山之王）以下，第二部分闡明大乘（Mahayana）果證之前沒有執取和言說，成就了格量的意義。從文義上分為兩部分。前面是佛陀的提問，接下來是善吉（Subhuti的另一個名字）的回答。現在是第一部分，提問是爲了成就論者的解釋，說須彌山王廣大，譬如無相之理廣大。現在我認為不然，不僅僅是義理上沒有次第，也是文句上沒有出處。現在依據論的生起仍然是爲了解釋疑惑。疑惑是，如果沒有執取和言說，那麼諸佛（Buddhas）如何取得菩提（Bodhi，覺悟）而為他人說得菩提呢？所以舉須彌山為例，說明須彌山在十寶山中最大，譬如佛在十地（Bhumi，菩薩修行的十個階段）中最大。須彌，這裡翻譯為妙高山，也翻譯為安明山。解釋的意思是，如須彌山雖然在十寶山中最大，也沒有心思說自己大。佛也是這樣，雖然在眾聖中最大，也沒有心思說自己大。雖然得到菩提，也沒有心思說自己得到。佛說『非身是名大身』，又是爲了解釋疑惑。疑惑是，聽到須彌山沒有心思說自己大，認為和佛一樣。須彌山既是有為有漏（conditioned and defiled），說佛也是有為有漏。所以現在解釋說佛說的『非身』，說明佛不同於須彌山，不是有為有漏之身，所以說『非身是名大身』，就是無為無漏之身。所以說『是名大身』。問：這裡舉的是三佛（Trikaya，佛的三身）中的哪一佛？答：正是舉報佛（Sambhogakaya，報身佛）。之所以這樣，是因為報佛正是因為修行圓滿才得到菩提。法佛（Dharmakaya，法身佛）是佛性（Buddha-nature）還沒有得到菩提，所以不說說法佛。得到報佛之後才開始應化（Nirmanakaya，應身佛），所以化佛也不是得到菩提，所以只舉報佛。須菩提，你的意思怎麼樣？如恒河（Ganges）中所有沙數以下，這是第二部分，舉諸恒河沙珍寶佈施。

【English Translation】 Different. The text is divided into three parts. The first is to formally encourage cultivation to achieve attainment, the second is to encourage abandoning faults, and the third is to re-encourage cultivation to achieve attainment. One should generate pure faith in this way. This is encouraging cultivation to achieve attainment. 'One should not dwell on sound, smell, taste, touch, and dharma to generate thoughts,' this second sentence encourages abandoning faults. 'One should dwell nowhere' below, the third sentence encourages cultivation to achieve attainment. Subhuti (佛陀's disciple), for example, if a person's body is like Mount Sumeru (Sumeru, the king of sacred mountains in the Buddhist cosmology) below, the second part clarifies that before the fruit of Mahayana (大乘) is attained, there is no grasping or speaking, achieving the meaning of a standard. From the meaning of the text, it is divided into two parts. The first is the Buddha's question, and the next is Subhuti's (善吉, another name for Subhuti) answer. Now is the first part, the question is to achieve the explanation of the theorists, saying that Mount Sumeru is vast, like the vastness of the principle of non-form. Now I think not, not only is there no order in the meaning, but also there is no source in the sentences. Now, according to the arising of the treatise, it is still to explain doubts. The doubt is, if there is no grasping or speaking, then how do the Buddhas (諸佛) attain Bodhi (菩提, enlightenment) and speak of attaining Bodhi for others? Therefore, Mount Sumeru is taken as an example to illustrate that Mount Sumeru is the largest among the ten treasure mountains, like the Buddha being the largest among the ten Bhumis (十地, the ten stages of a Bodhisattva's practice). Sumeru, here translated as 'Wonderful High Mountain,' is also translated as 'Peaceful Bright Mountain.' The meaning of the explanation is, like Mount Sumeru, although it is the largest among the ten treasure mountains, it has no intention of saying it is large. The Buddha is also like this, although he is the greatest among the saints, he has no intention of saying he is great. Although he has attained Bodhi, he has no intention of saying he has attained it. The Buddha said, 'Non-body is called great body,' which is also to explain doubts. The doubt is, hearing that Mount Sumeru has no intention of saying it is large, it is thought to be the same as the Buddha. Since Mount Sumeru is conditioned and defiled (有為有漏), it is said that the Buddha is also conditioned and defiled. Therefore, now it is explained that the Buddha's 'non-body' illustrates that the Buddha is different from Mount Sumeru, not a conditioned and defiled body, so it is said that 'non-body is called great body,' which is the unconditioned and undefiled body. Therefore, it is said that 'it is called great body.' Question: Which of the three bodies of Buddha (Trikaya, 佛的三身) is mentioned here? Answer: It is precisely the Sambhogakaya (報身佛, the Reward Body of the Buddha) that is mentioned. The reason for this is that the Sambhogakaya is precisely because of the completion of cultivation that Bodhi is attained. The Dharmakaya (法身佛, the Dharma Body of the Buddha) is the Buddha-nature (佛性) that has not yet attained Bodhi, so the Dharmakaya is not spoken of. Only after attaining the Sambhogakaya does the Nirmanakaya (應身佛, the Manifestation Body of the Buddha) begin, so the Nirmanakaya is also not the attainment of Bodhi, so only the Sambhogakaya is mentioned. Subhuti, what do you think? Like the number of sands in the Ganges (Ganges) River below, this is the second part, giving alms with treasures as numerous as the sands of the Ganges.

格量持說四句偈也。所以有此文來者。凡有二義。一者上明佈施少正是三千世界珍寶故不及持經。今明佈施多謂諸恒沙世界珍寶應及持經。又上大千珍寶但施眾生故是福田劣。今恒沙珍寶供養諸佛此是福田勝。應及持經。今明雖施多田勝由是有所得施亦不及持經也。問先說大千格量既不及持經。何故不即說恒沙珍寶以格量持經耶。答增數明義。從小至多實應相次。但上聞大千格量不及持經。時會或未了不及之所以。謂波若猶是可取可說。云何受持四句及勝大千珍寶。是以上廣釋疑。明波若非可取可說故四句雖少若持若說其福則多。佈施雖多是可取可說故其福則少。所以釋前疑竟方顯勝之所由。故方更格量也。就此文中為二。一明財施福多。二明法施格量。就初有兩問答即為二意。初一番明沙數多。后一番明福德多。今以問答相承直為四別。一舉沙數為問。二稱事而答。三舉財施為問。四明施福多也。初問中有三意。前舉一恒沙為本。二以沙數河。三以彼沙數河中之沙為問。第二答中有兩意。初直答多。從后德。但諸恒河下顯多之義。明諸河顯數尚以無邊。況河中之沙云何可數。問何因緣故佛經之中多舉恒河為喻。答於四河中恒河最大其沙又多故舉為喻。二者外道云。此是吉河。入中洗者罪垢清凈故舉為喻。三者余河名

【現代漢語翻譯】現代漢語譯本格量持說四句偈（gè）（頌歌）也。之所以有這段文字，主要有兩個原因。一是前面說明佈施少量，即使是三千大千世界的珍寶，也不及受持經文。現在說明佈施大量，即使是如同恒河沙數的世界的珍寶，也應該能比得上受持經文。而且，前面說的大千世界珍寶只是佈施給眾生，所以是劣等的福田。現在說如同恒河沙數的珍寶供養諸佛，這是殊勝的福田，應該能比得上受持經文。現在說明即使佈施很多，福田殊勝，但因為是有所得的佈施，仍然比不上受持經文。問：先前說大千世界的佈施比不上受持經文，為什麼不直接說用恒河沙數的珍寶來衡量受持經文呢？答：這是爲了通過增加數量來闡明意義。從小到多，實際上應該依次進行。只是先前聽到大千世界的佈施比不上受持經文時，當時在場的人可能還不明白比不上的原因。認為般若（bō rě）（智慧）仍然是可以獲取和言說的。憑什麼受持四句偈就能勝過大千世界的珍寶呢？因此，用更廣闊的解釋來消除疑惑，說明般若不是可以獲取和言說的，所以四句偈雖然少，如果受持和宣說，其福德就多。佈施雖然多，但因為是可以獲取和言說的，所以其福德就少。因此，在解釋完先前的疑惑后，才顯示出殊勝的原因。所以才進一步進行衡量。這段文字分為兩部分。一是說明財施的福德多，二是說明法施的格量。在第一部分中，有兩問兩答，即為兩個意思。第一番說明沙數多，后一番說明福德多。現在以問答相承，直接分為四個部分。一是舉沙數為問，二是根據事實回答，三是舉財施為問，四是說明施福多。第一個問題中有三個意思。首先舉一個恒河沙為根本，二是以沙數計算河流，三是以那些沙數河流中的沙子為問題。第二個回答中有兩個意思。首先直接回答很多，然後從功德方面回答。但『諸恒河』（zhū héng hé）以下顯示多的意義，說明眾多河流顯示的數量尚且是無邊無際的，何況河流中的沙子怎麼能數得清呢？問：因為什麼緣故佛經之中多用恒河來比喻？答：在四條河流中，恒河最大，它的沙子又多，所以用它來比喻。二是外道認為，這是吉祥的河流，進入其中洗浴的人罪惡污垢就能清凈，所以用它來比喻。三是其他河流的名字 English version The Geya (偈) of Four Lines is being discussed in terms of its merit. The reason for this passage is twofold. First, it was previously stated that giving alms, even if it were treasures of the three thousand great thousand worlds, is not comparable to upholding the scriptures. Now, it is being clarified that giving alms in vast quantities, even treasures equaling the sands of the Ganges River worlds, should be comparable to upholding the scriptures. Moreover, the previous treasures of the great thousand worlds were only given to sentient beings, making it an inferior field of merit. Now, offering treasures equaling the sands of the Ganges River to all Buddhas is a superior field of merit, which should be comparable to upholding the scriptures. It is now being explained that even with abundant giving and a superior field of merit, because it is giving with attachment to reward, it is still not comparable to upholding the scriptures. Question: Previously, it was said that giving alms of the great thousand worlds is not comparable to upholding the scriptures. Why not directly use treasures equaling the sands of the Ganges River to compare with upholding the scriptures? Answer: This is to clarify the meaning by increasing the quantity. From small to large, it should proceed sequentially. However, upon hearing that giving alms of the great thousand worlds is not comparable to upholding the scriptures, those present may not have understood the reason for the incomparability. They might think that Prajna (般若) (wisdom) is still something that can be grasped and spoken of. How can upholding a four-line Geya surpass the treasures of the great thousand worlds? Therefore, a broader explanation is used to dispel doubts, clarifying that Prajna is not something that can be grasped and spoken of. Thus, although the four-line Geya is short, if it is upheld and spoken, its merit is great. Although giving alms is abundant, because it is something that can be grasped and spoken of, its merit is small. Therefore, after explaining the previous doubts, the reason for the superiority is revealed. Hence, a further comparison is made. This passage is divided into two parts. First, it explains that the merit of material giving is great. Second, it explains the measure of Dharma (法) giving. In the first part, there are two questions and two answers, which constitute two meanings. The first part explains the multitude of sands, and the second part explains the multitude of merits. Now, with questions and answers following each other, it is directly divided into four parts. First, the number of sands is raised as a question. Second, the answer is given according to the facts. Third, material giving is raised as a question. Fourth, it is explained that the merit of giving is great. The first question has three meanings. First, one Ganges River sand is taken as the basis. Second, the rivers are calculated by the number of sands. Third, the sands in those rivers of sands are raised as a question. The second answer has two meanings. First, it directly answers that there are many. Then, it answers from the aspect of merit. However, the phrase 'Zhu Heng He' (諸恒河) below reveals the meaning of multitude, explaining that the number of rivers shown is still boundless, let alone the sands in the rivers, how can they be counted? Question: For what reason do the Buddhist scriptures often use the Ganges River as a metaphor? Answer: Among the four rivers, the Ganges River is the largest, and its sand is abundant, so it is used as a metaphor. Second, the heretics believe that this is an auspicious river, and those who bathe in it will have their sins and defilements cleansed, so it is used as a metaphor. Third, the names of other rivers

【English Translation】 English version The Geya (偈) of Four Lines is being discussed in terms of its merit. The reason for this passage is twofold. First, it was previously stated that giving alms, even if it were treasures of the three thousand great thousand worlds, is not comparable to upholding the scriptures. Now, it is being clarified that giving alms in vast quantities, even treasures equaling the sands of the Ganges River worlds, should be comparable to upholding the scriptures. Moreover, the previous treasures of the great thousand worlds were only given to sentient beings, making it an inferior field of merit. Now, offering treasures equaling the sands of the Ganges River to all Buddhas is a superior field of merit, which should be comparable to upholding the scriptures. It is now being explained that even with abundant giving and a superior field of merit, because it is giving with attachment to reward, it is still not comparable to upholding the scriptures. Question: Previously, it was said that giving alms of the great thousand worlds is not comparable to upholding the scriptures. Why not directly use treasures equaling the sands of the Ganges River to compare with upholding the scriptures? Answer: This is to clarify the meaning by increasing the quantity. From small to large, it should proceed sequentially. However, upon hearing that giving alms of the great thousand worlds is not comparable to upholding the scriptures, those present may not have understood the reason for the incomparability. They might think that Prajna (般若) (wisdom) is still something that can be grasped and spoken of. How can upholding a four-line Geya surpass the treasures of the great thousand worlds? Therefore, a broader explanation is used to dispel doubts, clarifying that Prajna is not something that can be grasped and spoken of. Thus, although the four-line Geya is short, if it is upheld and spoken, its merit is great. Although giving alms is abundant, because it is something that can be grasped and spoken of, its merit is small. Therefore, after explaining the previous doubts, the reason for the superiority is revealed. Hence, a further comparison is made. This passage is divided into two parts. First, it explains that the merit of material giving is great. Second, it explains the measure of Dharma (法) giving. In the first part, there are two questions and two answers, which constitute two meanings. The first part explains the multitude of sands, and the second part explains the multitude of merits. Now, with questions and answers following each other, it is directly divided into four parts. First, the number of sands is raised as a question. Second, the answer is given according to the facts. Third, material giving is raised as a question. Fourth, it is explained that the merit of giving is great. The first question has three meanings. First, one Ganges River sand is taken as the basis. Second, the rivers are calculated by the number of sands. Third, the sands in those rivers of sands are raised as a question. The second answer has two meanings. First, it directly answers that there are many. Then, it answers from the aspect of merit. However, the phrase 'Zhu Heng He' (諸恒河) below reveals the meaning of multitude, explaining that the number of rivers shown is still boundless, let alone the sands in the rivers, how can they be counted? Question: For what reason do the Buddhist scriptures often use the Ganges River as a metaphor? Answer: Among the four rivers, the Ganges River is the largest, and its sand is abundant, so it is used as a metaphor. Second, the heretics believe that this is an auspicious river, and those who bathe in it will have their sins and defilements cleansed, so it is used as a metaphor. Third, the names of other rivers

字數轉。此河世世名字不轉也。又五天竺國在此河邊住。佛弟子眼見故舉為喻。香山頂有阿耨達池流出四河。恒河即是四河中一也。有人言。此河長八千里。廣處四十里狹處十里。此中沙極細如麨面。水作白色如乳。極深象馬度皆沒。次舉經格量。其文可見。財施不及法施者具有多義。一者明法施之時能施之人多是聖人智人。若使財施能施之者則不爾。愚人無能行施。所以財施則劣法施則勝也。二明受法施之人亦必是智人方能領受。愚者之與畜生不能受。此故明法施為勝。三者明得福為勝。財施則但明能施之者得福受施之者則不得。若使法施則能所二人並皆得福。是故為勝也。四者法施則能施所施皆得而不失。若使財施則受施之人得五事果能施則失也。五者財施則但益肉身。法施則益法身。六者則法施能斷惑。財施正是伏慳。七者法施則出有法。財施則是有流。八者財施果有盡。法施果無盡。九者財施不一時得。法施則一時而得。十者明法施具四攝。財施但一攝。是故法施勝於財施也。複次隨說是經下。上來舉二財施格量四句經竟。此下第二嘆經之處及美受持之人。明經在處則處貴。在人則人尊。就文有四。一明經在處則處重。二明在人則人尊。三釋人尊。四釋處重。如塔者。塔婆外國語。亦云支提。此云方墳。然為

【現代漢語翻譯】現代漢語譯本：字數轉（字數不確定）。這條河的名字世世代代都不會改變。又有五個天竺國（India）住在這條河邊。佛弟子親眼所見，所以用它來做比喻。香山頂上有阿耨達池（Anavatapta）流出四條河。恒河（Ganges）就是這四條河中的一條。有人說，這條河長八千里，寬的地方四十里，窄的地方十里。河中的沙子非常細，像炒過的麵粉一樣。水是白色的，像牛奶一樣。非常深，大象和馬渡河都會被淹沒。接下來引用經文來衡量。經文的內容可以參考。財佈施不如法佈施，這其中有很多含義。第一，說明在行法佈施的時候，能佈施的人大多是聖人或有智慧的人。如果行財佈施，能佈施的人則不一定是聖人或智者。愚笨的人沒有能力行佈施。所以財佈施不如法佈施殊勝。第二，說明接受法佈施的人也必須是有智慧的人才能領悟接受。愚笨的人和畜生不能接受法佈施。因此說明法佈施更為殊勝。第三，說明得到的福報不同。財佈施只能使能佈施的人得到福報，接受佈施的人則得不到福報。如果行法佈施，那麼能佈施的人和接受佈施的人都能得到福報。所以法佈施更為殊勝。第四，法佈施能使能佈施的人和接受佈施的人都得到利益而沒有損失。如果行財佈施，接受佈施的人得到五種果報，能佈施的人則會有所損失。第五，財佈施只能利益肉身，法佈施則能利益法身。第六，法佈施能斷除迷惑，財佈施只能暫時抑制吝嗇。第七，法佈施能使人脫離有為法，財佈施則是有為法的流轉。第八，財佈施的果報有窮盡的時候，法佈施的果報沒有窮盡的時候。第九，財佈施不能同時得到果報，法佈施則能同時得到果報。第十，說明法佈施包含四攝法（Four means of attracting others），財佈施只包含一種。所以法佈施勝過財佈施。接下來是『隨說是經下』。上面引用了兩個財佈施來衡量四句經文。下面第二部分是讚歎經典之處以及讚美受持經典的人。說明經典所在之處就變得尊貴，經典在人身上人就變得尊貴。從文義上有四個方面。第一，說明經典所在之處就變得重要。第二，說明經典在人身上人就變得尊貴。第三，解釋人為什麼尊貴。第四，解釋處所為什麼重要。『如塔者』，塔婆（Stupa）是外國語，也叫支提（Caitya），這裡叫做方墳。實際上是...

【English Translation】 English version: The number of words changes. The name of this river will not change for generations. Also, the five Indias (Five regions of India) live by this river. Buddha's disciples saw it with their own eyes, so they used it as a metaphor. On the top of Fragrant Mountain is Anavatapta Lake (Lake Anavatapta), from which four rivers flow. The Ganges (Ganges River) is one of the four rivers. Some say that this river is eight thousand miles long, forty miles wide in some places, and ten miles wide in narrow places. The sand in this river is very fine, like roasted flour. The water is white, like milk. It is very deep, and elephants and horses are submerged when crossing the river. Next, quote the scriptures to measure. The content of the scriptures can be referred to. Giving wealth is not as good as giving Dharma, which has many meanings. First, it shows that when giving Dharma, most of those who can give are saints or wise people. If giving wealth, those who can give are not necessarily saints or wise people. Foolish people have no ability to give. Therefore, giving wealth is inferior to giving Dharma. Second, it shows that those who receive Dharma must also be wise people to be able to comprehend and accept it. Foolish people and animals cannot receive Dharma. Therefore, it is explained that giving Dharma is more superior. Third, it shows that the blessings obtained are different. Giving wealth can only bring blessings to those who can give, while those who receive the giving do not receive blessings. If giving Dharma, then both the giver and the receiver can receive blessings. Therefore, giving Dharma is more superior. Fourth, giving Dharma enables both the giver and the receiver to benefit without loss. If giving wealth, the receiver receives five kinds of rewards, and the giver will suffer losses. Fifth, giving wealth only benefits the physical body, while giving Dharma benefits the Dharma body. Sixth, giving Dharma can cut off confusion, while giving wealth can only temporarily suppress stinginess. Seventh, giving Dharma enables people to escape from conditioned dharmas, while giving wealth is the cycle of conditioned dharmas. Eighth, the rewards of giving wealth have an end, while the rewards of giving Dharma have no end. Ninth, the rewards of giving wealth cannot be obtained at the same time, while the rewards of giving Dharma can be obtained at the same time. Tenth, it shows that giving Dharma includes the four means of attracting others (Four Saṃgrahavastus), while giving wealth only includes one. Therefore, giving Dharma is superior to giving wealth. Next is 'Following the Saying of this Sutra'. The above quoted two wealth givings to measure the four-line verse. The second part below is to praise the merits of the sutra and to praise those who uphold the sutra. It shows that the place where the sutra is located becomes noble, and the person becomes noble when the sutra is on the person. There are four aspects from the meaning of the text. First, it shows that the place where the sutra is located becomes important. Second, it shows that the person becomes noble when the sutra is on the person. Third, explain why the person is noble. Fourth, explain why the place is important. 'Like a Pagoda', Stupa (Stupa) is a foreign word, also called Caitya (Caitya), here called Fang Fen (Square Tomb). Actually it is...

尊法身是故敬塔。為重此經故供養所在處。問大品云。滿十方舍利作一分。波若經卷為一分。佛問天主。二分之中意取何所分。天主答。寧取波若經卷。以能生舍利及一切佛法故。若爾經既勝於舍利。則應經所在處過於塔廟。今云何言如塔。經處若言如塔。則波若經卷應如塔舍利。以理言之。實應過塔。但世間敬塔以為尊極。是故今藉以喻耳。何況有人下。第二明在人則人尊。當知是人下。第三釋人尊。若是經典下。第四釋處貴。此經諸佛之母。能生諸佛及三乘十地。大品云。波若所在之處十方諸佛常在其中。故欲供養佛當知供養波若。波若與佛無二無別故云則為有佛也。及尊重弟子者。此處乃有文殊普賢。非止目連身子。大品云。諸天日作三時禮敬。六齋日彌多。故經所在處四面皆令清凈也。當何名此經下。若依開善。從上已來並是說波若體。此之一章明波若名。即是名說也。今明名說體說非無此義。但此文猶屬格量段也。前格量中開為二別。第一正舉二種財施格量稱歎。第二章辨于經名。所以辨經者。上舉二施格量及稱歎。經在處則處貴。居人則人尊。時眾聞經有斯勝德咸欲受持。但未識名字。是故此中辨名也。就文為二。初問。次答。問中有二。一問經名。二問受持也。佛告須菩提是經名為金剛波若下。第二答

【現代漢語翻譯】現代漢語譯本因為尊重法身，所以要尊敬佛塔。爲了重視這部經，所以要供養經書所在的地方。有人問《大品般若經》中說：『如果將充滿十方世界的舍利子作為一份，而《般若經》經卷作為一份，佛問天主，在這兩份之中，你認為應該選擇哪一份？』天主回答說：『寧願選擇《般若經》經卷，因為它能產生舍利子以及一切佛法。』如果這樣說，《般若經》既然勝過舍利子，那麼《般若經》所在的地方就應該勝過塔廟。現在為什麼說（《般若經》所在的地方）如同佛塔呢？如果說經書所在的地方如同佛塔，那麼《般若經》經卷就應該如同佛塔中的舍利子。從道理上來說，實際上應該勝過佛塔。但是世間人尊敬佛塔，認為是最尊貴的，所以現在借用這個比喻罷了。『何況有人下』，第二部分說明在人，則人尊貴。『當知是人下』，第三部分解釋人為什麼尊貴。『若是經典下』，第四部分解釋地方為什麼尊貴。這部經是諸佛之母，能夠產生諸佛以及三乘十地。《大品般若經》中說：『《般若經》所在的地方，十方諸佛常常在其中。』所以想要供養佛，應當知道供養《般若經》。《般若經》與佛沒有兩樣，沒有差別，所以說『則為有佛』。『及尊重弟子者』，這裡乃是有文殊（Manjusri）菩薩、普賢（Samantabhadra）菩薩，不只是目連（Maudgalyayana）、舍利子（Sariputra）。《大品般若經》中說：『諸天每天做三次禮敬，六齋日更加頻繁。』所以經書所在的地方，四面都要保持清凈。『當何名此經下』，如果按照開善（Kaisan）的說法，從上面開始都是在說《般若經》的本體。這一章說明《般若經》的名稱，也就是名稱的解說。現在說明名稱的解說和本體的解說並非沒有這個意義，但是這段文字仍然屬於格量段。前面的格量中分為兩個部分，第一部分是正式舉出兩種財施進行格量稱讚，第二章辨別經名。之所以要辨別經名，是因為上面舉出兩種佈施的格量以及稱讚，經書所在的地方則地方尊貴，居住的人則人尊貴，當時聽眾聽聞經書有這樣的殊勝功德，都想要受持，但是還不認識經書的名字，所以在這裡辨別經名。從文章結構上分為兩部分，首先是提問，然後是回答。提問中又有兩個問題，一是問經名，二是問如何受持。『佛告須菩提是經名為金剛波若下』，第二部分是回答。

【English Translation】 English version Because of respecting the Dharmakaya (Dharmakaya: the body of the Dharma, the ultimate nature of reality), one should respect the stupa. To value this sutra, one should make offerings to the place where the sutra is located. Someone asked, 'The Mahaprajnaparamita Sutra says: 'If the relics filling the ten directions are taken as one part, and the Prajnaparamita Sutra scroll is taken as one part, the Buddha asked the Lord of the Heavens, 'Which part would you choose between these two parts?'' The Lord of the Heavens replied, 'I would rather choose the Prajnaparamita Sutra scroll, because it can produce relics and all the Buddha-dharma.' If this is the case, since the Prajnaparamita Sutra is superior to the relics, then the place where the Prajnaparamita Sutra is located should be superior to the stupa. Why is it now said that (the place where the Prajnaparamita Sutra is located) is like a stupa? If it is said that the place where the sutra is located is like a stupa, then the Prajnaparamita Sutra scroll should be like the relics in the stupa. In terms of reason, it should actually be superior to the stupa. But people in the world respect the stupa as the most honorable, so now it is just used as a metaphor. 'Moreover, if there is someone below,' the second part explains that if it is in a person, then the person is honorable. 'It should be known that this person below,' the third part explains why the person is honorable. 'If it is a classic below,' the fourth part explains why the place is noble. This sutra is the mother of all Buddhas, capable of producing all Buddhas and the Three Vehicles and Ten Grounds. The Mahaprajnaparamita Sutra says: 'The place where the Prajnaparamita Sutra is located, the Buddhas of the ten directions are always in it.' Therefore, if you want to make offerings to the Buddha, you should know to make offerings to the Prajnaparamita Sutra. The Prajnaparamita Sutra and the Buddha are not different, so it is said 'then there is a Buddha'. 'And respect the disciples,' here there are Manjusri (Manjusri: a Bodhisattva associated with wisdom) Bodhisattva and Samantabhadra (Samantabhadra: a Bodhisattva associated with practice and meditation) Bodhisattva, not just Maudgalyayana (Maudgalyayana: one of the Buddha's foremost disciples) and Sariputra (Sariputra: one of the Buddha's foremost disciples). The Mahaprajnaparamita Sutra says: 'The gods make three times of reverence every day, and more frequently on the six fasting days.' Therefore, the place where the sutra is located should be kept clean on all four sides. 'What should this sutra be called below,' according to Kaisan's (Kaisan: a Buddhist scholar) explanation, everything from above is talking about the essence of the Prajnaparamita Sutra. This chapter explains the name of the Prajnaparamita Sutra, which is the explanation of the name. Now explaining the explanation of the name and the explanation of the essence is not without this meaning, but this passage still belongs to the section on comparison. In the previous comparison, it was divided into two parts, the first part is to formally cite two kinds of material giving for comparison and praise, and the second chapter distinguishes the name of the sutra. The reason for distinguishing the name of the sutra is that the above cites the comparison and praise of the two kinds of giving, the place where the sutra is located is noble, and the person who lives there is honorable. At that time, the audience heard that the sutra has such excellent merits and virtues, and they all wanted to receive and uphold it, but they did not know the name of the sutra, so the name is distinguished here. From the structure of the article, it is divided into two parts, first the question, and then the answer. There are two questions in the question, one is to ask the name of the sutra, and the other is to ask how to receive and uphold it. 'The Buddha told Subhuti that this sutra is called the Diamond Prajnaparamita below,' the second part is the answer.

經名。前問有二。一問經名。二問受持。今具答二問。開為二別。第一正答二問。第二釋成答問意。今前答二問即為二。初答名。二答受持。今前答名。金剛般若者。波若未曾法譬。非譬不譬假設譬名。非法不法強作法名。非名不名強為立名名金剛波若耳。以是名字下。第二答持經問。所以者何下。第二釋成答問意。他云。答名中三段。一標金剛之名即辨堅利之義。第二遣于體堅。第三遣其用利。上答名即標堅利義竟。此下即是遣其體堅。就遣體堅中二句。初明佛說波若即非般若。明心行斷也。下如來無所說。明絕言語也。今問上不可取不可說已明心行斷語言絕。今何因緣更復明絕。今依論判此二句。初句明下有所異。次句明上有所同。問何故明下有所異上有所同耶。答下同二乘上異諸佛。則波若不足可尊敬受持。良由下異二乘上同諸佛故可尊敬。以勸物之意故作此說也。下有異者。上標此經名為金剛。但二乘斷惑之智亦名金剛。未知此經。名金剛者是何金剛耶。故釋云。佛說波若者。此是佛波若佛金剛也則非般若者。非是二乘智慧。非二乘金剛也。須菩提于意云何下。他云。前明斷心行。今辨絕語言。今依論意不然。前文明下有異。今句明上有所同。時會疑雲。但釋迦作此說般若。余佛亦作此說耶。故佛牒時眾疑問

【現代漢語翻譯】現代漢語譯本經名。前面有兩個問題。第一個問題是經名，第二個問題是受持。現在完整地回答這兩個問題，分為兩部分。第一部分是正面回答這兩個問題，第二部分是解釋並完成回答問題的意義。現在先回答這兩個問題，分為兩部分。首先回答經名，其次回答受持。現在先回答經名。『金剛般若』，般若（prajna，智慧）是沒有可以比擬的法，用譬喻也不是，不用譬喻也不是，假設地譬喻一個名稱。不是法也不是非法，勉強地稱作法名。不是名也不是非名，勉強地為它建立一個名稱，叫做『金剛般若』罷了。以下是回答受持經的問題。『所以者何』以下，是第二部分解釋並完成回答問題的意義。有人說，回答經名分為三段。第一段標明『金剛』之名，即辨明其堅固銳利的意義。第二段否定其本體是堅硬的。第三段否定其作用是銳利的。上面回答經名，已經標明了堅固銳利的意義，以下就是否定其本體是堅硬的。在否定本體是堅硬的部分，有兩句話。第一句說明佛所說的般若（prajna，智慧）即非般若（prajna，智慧），說明斷絕心行。下一句『如來無所說』，說明斷絕言語。現在提問，上面已經說明不可取、不可說，已經明白了斷絕心行、斷絕言語，現在因為什麼緣故還要再次說明斷絕呢？現在根據論典來判斷，這兩句話，第一句說明下面有所不同，第二句說明上面有所相同。提問，為什麼說明下面有所不同，上面有所相同呢？回答，下面與二乘（聲聞乘和緣覺乘）不同，上面與諸佛相同。那麼般若（prajna，智慧）就不值得尊敬受持了。正因為下面與二乘（聲聞乘和緣覺乘）不同，上面與諸佛相同，所以值得尊敬。爲了勸勉眾生的意思，所以這樣說。下面有所不同，上面標明此經名為『金剛』，但是二乘（聲聞乘和緣覺乘）斷惑的智慧也叫做金剛。不知道此經名為金剛，是什麼金剛呢？所以解釋說，『佛說般若（prajna，智慧）者』，這是佛的般若（prajna，智慧），佛的金剛，『則非般若（prajna，智慧）者』，不是二乘（聲聞乘和緣覺乘）的智慧，不是二乘（聲聞乘和緣覺乘）的金剛。須菩提，你的意思怎麼樣？有人說，前面說明斷絕心行，現在辨明斷絕言語。現在根據論典的意思不是這樣。前面說明下面有所不同，現在這句說明上面有所相同。當時集會的大眾懷疑說，只有釋迦牟尼佛這樣說般若（prajna，智慧），其他的佛也這樣說嗎？所以佛重複當時大眾的疑問。

【English Translation】 English version Sutra Name. There are two questions asked previously. The first question is about the Sutra's name, and the second is about its acceptance and upholding. Now, both questions are answered in full, divided into two parts. The first part directly answers the two questions, and the second part explains and completes the meaning of the answers. Now, we first answer the two questions, divided into two parts. First, we answer the name; second, we answer the upholding. Now, we first answer the name. 'Vajra Prajna (prajna, wisdom)'—Prajna (prajna, wisdom) is a Dharma (dharma, law) that has never been compared. It is neither a metaphor nor a non-metaphor; it is hypothetically named as a metaphor. It is neither Dharma (dharma, law) nor non-Dharma (dharma, law); it is forcibly called a Dharma (dharma, law) name. It is neither a name nor a non-name; it is forcibly established as a name called 'Vajra Prajna (prajna, wisdom)'. The following answers the question of upholding the Sutra. 'Why is that so?' below is the second part, explaining and completing the meaning of the answers. Someone says that answering the name is divided into three sections. The first section marks the name 'Vajra', which distinguishes its meaning of firmness and sharpness. The second section denies that its substance is hard. The third section denies that its function is sharp. Above, answering the name, the meaning of firmness and sharpness has been marked. Below is the denial that its substance is hard. In the part denying that its substance is hard, there are two sentences. The first sentence explains that the Prajna (prajna, wisdom) spoken by the Buddha is not Prajna (prajna, wisdom), explaining the cutting off of mental activity. The next sentence, 'The Tathagata (tathagata, thus come one) has nothing to say', explains the cutting off of speech. Now, the question is, above, it has already been explained that it cannot be taken or spoken, and it has already been understood that mental activity is cut off and speech is cut off. Now, for what reason is it further explained that it is cut off? Now, according to the treatise, these two sentences, the first sentence explains that there are differences below, and the second sentence explains that there are similarities above. The question is, why explain that there are differences below and similarities above? The answer is that below it is different from the Two Vehicles (Śrāvakayāna and Pratyekabuddhayāna), and above it is the same as all Buddhas. Then Prajna (prajna, wisdom) would not be worthy of respect and upholding. Precisely because it is different from the Two Vehicles (Śrāvakayāna and Pratyekabuddhayāna) below and the same as all Buddhas above, it is worthy of respect. It is said in this way for the sake of encouraging beings. There are differences below. Above, this Sutra is marked with the name 'Vajra', but the wisdom of the Two Vehicles (Śrāvakayāna and Pratyekabuddhayāna) that cuts off delusion is also called Vajra. Not knowing that this Sutra is named Vajra, what kind of Vajra is it? Therefore, it is explained, 'The Prajna (prajna, wisdom) spoken by the Buddha'—this is the Buddha's Prajna (prajna, wisdom), the Buddha's Vajra, 'then it is not Prajna (prajna, wisdom)'—it is not the wisdom of the Two Vehicles (Śrāvakayāna and Pratyekabuddhayāna), it is not the Vajra of the Two Vehicles (Śrāvakayāna and Pratyekabuddhayāna). Subhuti (subhuti, one of the ten great disciples of the Buddha), what do you think? Someone says that the previous explanation was about cutting off mental activity, and now it is about distinguishing the cutting off of speech. Now, according to the meaning of the treatise, it is not like this. The previous explanation was about the differences below, and now this sentence explains the similarities above. At that time, the assembled crowd doubted and said, only Shakyamuni (sakyamuni, the historical Buddha) Buddha speaks of Prajna (prajna, wisdom) in this way; do other Buddhas also speak of it in this way? Therefore, the Buddha repeats the doubts of the crowd at that time.

善吉。如來有所說不。此問意明釋迦獨有此說。余佛不作此說耶。須菩提云如來無所說者。此明釋迦無別有說。還同十方三世佛說。離三世佛說外無別有說也。故大品無作品云。說是波若時。十方各千佛現同說是波若經。難問者皆號釋提桓因。解釋波若者皆名須菩提。天主更問。但現在十方佛作此說。未來諸佛亦作此說。佛答當來彌勒亦作如是說。故知十方三世佛同作此說。大品廣故廣明同。今文略故略明同。所以同者。明波若只是一正觀。正道豈當有異耶。須菩提于意云何下。他云。此是第三遣于用利。波若能斷假實二惑。得假實二解故是波若之用。今此中明假實兩境皆空。豈有兩惑可斷二解能斷。故是遣其用利也。他就此中為二。初明依果空。次身相下明正果空。初中又兩。一者舉微塵明實法空。二者舉世界辨假名空也。今依論第二釋成格量優劣。所以時眾疑。何故持經小而福多。佈施多而福少耶。故今釋云。佈施雖多是煩惱塵染因。還得顛倒生死果。譬如大千世界微塵雖多。還成世界塵土之果。明四句雖小此是不顛倒因。還得不顛倒果故。持經雖少而得福多。佈施雖多而福小也。文云諸微塵者。明微塵有兩種。一者塵染之塵。二者成世界無記之塵。以兩塵相濫故今簡之。諸微塵者是成地微塵也。非微塵者非塵染

微塵也。是名微塵者結是成地微塵也。如來說世界下。前明因今辨果。如文。次舉三十二相者。他云。前明依果空。今明正果空。依果空中有假實。今正果空有問答。今明前云不可以身相見如來。已明正果空。此中何因緣復明耶。故不同常說。依論猶是釋成上格量意。明何但佈施塵染之福不及持經。只相好之業亦不及持經。又持經之福尚勝相好之業。豈不勝佈施耶。故有此文來。此中直明二果優劣。即顯二因優劣也。何者法身之果勝相好之果。顯法身因勝相好因。以持經是法身法故。持經福勝相好業也。于意云何可以身相見如來不者。可以相好身見法身以不。作此問也。須菩提答云不可以身相見如來者。不可以相好見法身也。如來所說身相則非身相者。此明所說身相非法身也。是名身相。是相好身也。須菩提以恒河沙身命下。第二明內施格量。上外施格量中有二。初舍三千世界七寶。次舍恒沙世界七寶。今內施格量中亦二。初舍恒沙身命。次舉日三時舍恒沙身命佈施。今初。所以有此文來者。上明外施格量。此未足稱易。今舍內身命。方乃為重也。又上明外施是下施格量。今明內施是中施格量。何以知之。大論呵迦旃延以內施為上。若是財施此明名下施。內施名中施。若無依無得施方是上施。汝何得以中為上耶。故知

【現代漢語翻譯】現代漢語譯本微塵（極小的塵埃）。名為微塵者，聚集起來就成了地上的微塵。如來說世界下，前面闡明原因，現在辨別結果，就像經文所說。接下來舉出三十二相（佛陀所具有的三十二種殊勝的身體特徵）的原因，有人說，前面闡明依果（依賴果報而顯現的現象）是空性的，現在闡明正果（通過修行直接獲得的果報）也是空性的。依果的空性中有假有實，現在正果的空性有問答。現在說明前面說不可以身相見如來，已經闡明了正果的空性，這裡為什麼又要再次闡明呢？所以和通常的說法不同。依據論典，仍然是爲了解釋和完成上面的比較衡量之意。說明為什麼僅僅佈施塵土所獲得的福報不如持經（受持佛經）的功德，僅僅相好（佛像的莊嚴形象）的功德也不如持經。而且持經的福報尚且勝過相好的功德，難道不勝過佈施嗎？所以有這段經文的出現。這裡直接說明兩種果報的優劣，也就顯現了兩種因的優劣。哪種果報呢？法身（佛陀的真身）的果報勝過相好的果報，顯現了法身的因勝過相好的因。因為持經是法身之法，所以持經的福報勝過相好的業。『于意云何，可以身相見如來不？』（你的意思如何，可以用身體的相貌來見如來嗎？）這是問是否可以通過相好之身見到法身。須菩提回答說：『不可以身相見如來』，就是不可以通過相好見到法身。『如來所說身相，則非身相』，（如來所說的身相，就不是真正的身相），這說明所說的身相不是法身，名為身相，是相好之身。須菩提以恒河沙身命下，第二部分說明內施（捨棄自身）的比較衡量。上面外施（捨棄身外之物）的比較衡量中有兩種，首先是捨棄三千大千世界的七寶，其次是捨棄恒河沙世界的七寶。現在內施的比較衡量中也有兩種，首先是捨棄恒河沙的身命，其次是舉出每天三個時辰捨棄恒河沙的身命進行佈施。現在是第一種。之所以有這段經文的出現，是因為上面說明外施的比較衡量，還不足以稱為容易，現在捨棄內在的身命，才算是重要的。而且上面說明外施是下施的比較衡量，現在說明內施是中施的比較衡量。憑什麼知道呢？《大智度論》呵斥迦旃延以內施為上施。如果是財施，這裡說明是下施，內施名為中施，如果無依無得的施捨才是上施。你為什麼把中施當作上施呢？所以知道。

【English Translation】 English version 『Microscopic dust particles.』 What are called microscopic dust particles are the aggregates that form the dust particles on the earth. 『Tathagata speaks of the world below,』 previously clarifying the cause, now distinguishing the result, as the text says. Next, the reason for mentioning the thirty-two marks (the thirty-two auspicious physical characteristics of a Buddha) is, as others say, previously clarifying that the dependent result (phenomena that appear relying on karmic results) is emptiness, now clarifying that the direct result (results directly obtained through practice) is also emptiness. In the emptiness of the dependent result, there is the false and the real; now, in the emptiness of the direct result, there are questions and answers. Now, clarifying that previously it was said that the Tathagata cannot be seen by physical form, already clarifying the emptiness of the direct result, why is it clarified again here? Therefore, it is different from the usual explanation. According to the treatises, it is still to explain and complete the meaning of the above comparison and measurement. Clarifying why the merit of merely giving dust is not as good as upholding the sutras, the merit of merely the auspicious marks (the majestic image of the Buddha) is also not as good as upholding the sutras. Moreover, the merit of upholding the sutras is even greater than the merit of the auspicious marks, wouldn't it be greater than giving? Therefore, this passage appears. Here, it directly explains the superiority and inferiority of the two results, which also reveals the superiority and inferiority of the two causes. Which result? The result of the Dharmakaya (the true body of the Buddha) is superior to the result of the auspicious marks, revealing that the cause of the Dharmakaya is superior to the cause of the auspicious marks. Because upholding the sutras is the Dharma of the Dharmakaya, the merit of upholding the sutras is superior to the karma of the auspicious marks. 『What do you think, can the Tathagata be seen by physical form?』 This is asking whether the Dharmakaya can be seen through the body with auspicious marks. Subhuti answered, 『The Tathagata cannot be seen by physical form,』 which means the Dharmakaya cannot be seen through the auspicious marks. 『What the Tathagata speaks of as physical form is not physical form,』 this explains that the physical form spoken of is not the Dharmakaya, it is called physical form, it is the body with auspicious marks. Subhuti, with the lives as numerous as the Ganges sands below, the second part explains the comparison and measurement of inner giving (sacrificing oneself). Above, in the comparison and measurement of outer giving (sacrificing external things), there are two types: first, giving away the seven treasures of the three thousand great thousand worlds; second, giving away the seven treasures of the Ganges sand worlds. Now, in the comparison and measurement of inner giving, there are also two types: first, sacrificing lives as numerous as the Ganges sands; second, mentioning giving away lives as numerous as the Ganges sands for alms three times a day. Now is the first type. The reason why this passage appears is that the above explanation of the comparison and measurement of outer giving is not enough to be called easy; now, sacrificing the inner life is considered important. Moreover, the above explanation of outer giving is the comparison and measurement of inferior giving; now, the explanation of inner giving is the comparison and measurement of middle giving. How do we know this? The Mahaprajnaparamita Shastra scolds Katyayana for considering inner giving as superior giving. If it is wealth giving, here it is explained as inferior giving; inner giving is called middle giving; if giving without reliance and without attainment is superior giving. Why do you consider middle giving as superior giving? Therefore, we know.

內施是中施。故從下施格次至中施格也。此文為二。初正明格。第二領解釋疑。初復為二。初正明舍恒沙身。第二正格。今初云舍恒沙身者。今生舍一身命施。次生復舍一身命佈施。如是舍恒沙身命佈施也。就受施中具有三句。一須身不須命。如止須食肉。二須命不須身。如怨家止欲得命。三身命俱須。通上二句也。若復有人下。第二正格量。然持說俱得功德如文。

金剛波若經義疏卷第三畢大正藏第 33 冊 No. 1699 金剛般若疏

金剛般若疏卷第四

胡吉藏法師撰

爾時須菩提聞說是經下。第二領解釋疑。文為二。初領解。次釋疑。領解中為二。初領解。第二佛述成。初領解為四。第一自領解。第二明他領解。三明自領解為易。四明他領解為難。初領解又二。第一經家序其悟解相貌。第二正明領解。初序其相貌者有四。一標領解人。二明所領解法。三正明領解。第四領解相貌。問得解應歡喜。云何乃悲泣耶。答領解相貌不同。凡有三句。一者得解歡喜。如法華身子踴躍歡喜。二者得解悲泣。如此文。三得解亦歡喜亦悲泣。如善集王悲喜交集。喜則欣今悟。悲則慨昔迷。悲喜雙兼二事也。希有世尊下。第二明得解。我從昔來所得慧眼未曾得聞者。古來釋經前後不同。一家

【現代漢語翻譯】現代漢語譯本：內施是中施。所以是從下施的層次提升到中施的層次。這段文字分為兩部分。第一部分是正式說明層次，第二部分是引導解釋疑惑。第一部分又分為兩部分。第一部分是正式說明捨棄如恒河沙數般的身軀，第二部分是正式衡量。現在先說捨棄如恒河沙數般的身軀，是指今生捨棄一個身命來佈施，下一生又捨棄一個身命來佈施，像這樣捨棄如恒河沙數般的身命來佈施。在接受佈施的人中，有三種情況。第一種是需要身體但不需要性命，例如只需要食用肉。第二種是需要性命但不需要身體，例如仇家只想得到性命。第三種是身體和性命都需要，這包括了以上兩種情況。『若復有人下』，是第二部分正式衡量。然而，受持和解說都能得到功德，就像經文所說的那樣。《金剛波若經義疏》卷第三完大正藏第33冊 No. 1699 《金剛般若疏》《金剛般若疏》卷第四胡吉藏法師撰『爾時須菩提聞說是經下』，是第二部分引導解釋疑惑。文字分為兩部分。第一部分是引導理解，第二部分是解釋疑惑。引導理解又分為兩部分。第一部分是引導理解，第二部分是佛陀陳述肯定。第一部分引導理解又分為四個方面。第一，自己引導理解。第二，說明他人引導理解。第三，說明自己引導理解容易。第四，說明他人引導理解困難。第一部分引導理解又分為兩部分。第一，經家敘述他領悟理解的相貌。第二，正式說明引導理解。首先敘述相貌，有四個方面。一，標明引導理解的人。二，說明所引導理解的法。三，正式說明引導理解。四，引導理解的相貌。問：得到理解應該歡喜，為什麼反而悲泣呢？答：引導理解的相貌不同，總共有三種情況。第一種是得到理解而歡喜，如《法華經》中舍利弗踴躍歡喜。第二種是得到理解而悲泣，就像本文。第三種是得到理解既歡喜又悲泣，如善集王悲喜交加。喜是欣喜現在領悟，悲是慨嘆過去迷惑。悲喜雙兼兩種情況。『希有世尊下』，是第二部分說明得到理解。『我從昔來所得慧眼未曾得聞者』，古來解釋經文前後不同，一家之言。

【English Translation】 English version: Inner giving is middle giving. Therefore, it progresses from the level of lower giving to the level of middle giving. This passage is divided into two parts. The first part is to formally explain the level, and the second part is to guide and explain doubts. The first part is further divided into two parts. The first part is to formally explain the giving away of bodies as numerous as the sands of the Ganges, and the second part is to formally measure. Now, let's first talk about giving away bodies as numerous as the sands of the Ganges, which means giving away one's life in this life as an act of giving, and then giving away another life in the next life as an act of giving. It is like this, giving away lives as numerous as the sands of the Ganges. Among those who receive giving, there are three situations. The first is needing the body but not the life, such as only needing to eat meat. The second is needing the life but not the body, such as an enemy only wanting to obtain the life. The third is needing both the body and the life, which includes the above two situations. 'If there is someone below', is the second part of formally measuring. However, upholding and explaining both can obtain merit, just as the scripture says. 《Vajracchedika Prajna Paramita Sutra Commentary》 Volume 3 Complete Taisho Tripitaka Volume 33 No. 1699 《Vajracchedika Prajna Paramita Sutra Commentary》《Vajracchedika Prajna Paramita Sutra Commentary》 Volume 4 Composed by Dharma Master Hu Jizang 'At that time, Subhuti, hearing this sutra below', is the second part of guiding and explaining doubts. The text is divided into two parts. The first part is to guide understanding, and the second part is to explain doubts. Guiding understanding is further divided into two parts. The first part is to guide understanding, and the second part is the Buddha's statement of affirmation. The first part of guiding understanding is further divided into four aspects. First, self-guided understanding. Second, explaining others' guided understanding. Third, explaining that self-guided understanding is easy. Fourth, explaining that others' guided understanding is difficult. The first part of guiding understanding is further divided into two parts. First, the sutra writer narrates his appearance of comprehension and understanding. Second, formally explaining guided understanding. First, narrating the appearance, there are four aspects. One, indicating the person who guides understanding. Two, explaining the Dharma that is guided to be understood. Three, formally explaining guided understanding. Four, the appearance of guided understanding. Question: One should be happy to gain understanding, why is there weeping instead? Answer: The appearance of guided understanding is different, there are three situations in total. The first is gaining understanding and being happy, such as Shariputra leaping with joy in the 《Lotus Sutra》. The second is gaining understanding and weeping, just like this text. The third is gaining understanding and being both happy and sad, such as King Shanjiji being filled with mixed emotions of joy and sorrow. Joy is rejoicing in the present enlightenment, and sorrow is lamenting the past delusion. Joy and sorrow combine two situations. 'Rare is the World Honored One below', is the second part explaining gaining understanding. 'What I have obtained from the past, the eye of wisdom, I have never heard of', the interpretation of the scriptures in ancient times is different before and after, one family's saying.

云。此經在大品初說以此文為證。既云未曾聞般若。故知在前。第二師云。此經在大品后說。既在大品后。何得善吉云昔來未曾得聞耶。彼釋云。前于大品中。雖善吉已悟而中下根人未悟。今同其未悟故云未曾得聞。中下根人於今得悟故同其得悟。故言今始得聞耳。此事已如前明。今更開一意。上外施格量竟如來自稱歎經勸物受持。今內施格量竟善吉自稱歎經勸物受持。是故師弟互文勸緣信悟耳。若復有人得聞是經下。第二陳他得解。則生實相者。他云。世諦生真諦不生。即問。實相即是真諦。既生實相。何不生真諦耶。彼釋云。生實相之慧耳。實相不可生。但慧從境作名稱為實慧。境從慧作名。故生慧言生境耳。今明二諦俱生不生。如義中釋。斯文即證也。但一師有觀發中中發觀義此明生實相。即是觀發中。正觀明瞭則實相現前。故名生實相。此約迷悟為論。于迷者不現前名實相不生。悟者現前名為生實相。令生實相既爾。佛性等例然。至論實相未曾生不生也。是實相者則非實相者。他還以二諦釋此文。如常彈。今依論釋簡成實相義。是實相者。獨佛法大乘有此實相故云實相。即非實相者。天魔外道無實相故言非實相。是名實相者。論經長有一句。雲實相實相。此句簡二乘。實相有二種。一大乘實相。二小乘實相。

【現代漢語翻譯】現代漢語譯本：云（註釋：指《勝天王般若經》）。此經在大品（註釋：《摩訶般若波羅蜜經》）開始時被引用，以此文作為證據。既然說『未曾聞般若』，所以知道此經在前。第二位法師說，此經在大品之後說。既然在大品之後，為何善吉（註釋：須菩提，佛陀的弟子）說過去未曾聽聞呢？他的解釋是，之前在大品中，雖然善吉已經領悟，但中下根器的人尚未領悟。現在與那些未領悟的人相同，所以說『未曾得聞』。中下根器的人現在得以領悟，所以與那些得以領悟的人相同，所以說『現在才開始聽聞』。這件事已經在前面說明白了。現在再闡述一個意思。前面是以外在的佈施來衡量，然後如來（註釋：佛陀的稱號）自稱讚嘆經典，勸人受持。現在是以內在的佈施來衡量，然後善吉自稱讚嘆經典，勸人受持。所以師徒互相用不同的方式勸導，促成人們的信心和領悟。如果再有人聽聞這部經（註釋：《勝天王般若經》）以下的內容，第二部分陳述他人得到理解，就會產生實相（註釋：事物的真實面貌）。他人說，世俗諦（註釋：相對真理）產生，真諦（註釋：絕對真理）不產生。於是提問，實相就是真諦，既然產生實相，為何不產生真諦呢？他的解釋是，產生的是認識實相的智慧。實相是不可產生的，只是智慧從對境而生，因此被稱為實慧。境從慧而得名，所以說產生智慧，實際上是說產生對境的認識。現在說明二諦都是既產生又不產生，就像在義理中的解釋一樣，這段文字就是證據。但有一位法師有觀（註釋：觀察）啓發中，中啓發觀的說法，這裡說明產生實相，就是觀啓發中。正觀（註釋：正確的觀察）明瞭，那麼實相就會顯現，所以叫做產生實相。這是從迷惑和覺悟的角度來說的。對於迷惑的人來說，實相不顯現，所以說實相不產生。對於覺悟的人來說，實相顯現，所以叫做產生實相。使實相產生既然如此，佛性等等也同樣可以類推。至於說到實相，未曾產生也不曾不產生。這實相，就不是實相。他還用二諦來解釋這段文字，像平常一樣彈斥。現在依據論典來解釋，簡要地成就實相的意義。是實相，只有佛法大乘（註釋：佛教的一個主要流派）才有這種實相，所以說是實相。即非實相，天魔外道沒有實相，所以說不是實相。是名實相，論經中有一句很長的話，說『實相實相』，這句話是爲了區別二乘（註釋：聲聞乘和緣覺乘）。實相有兩種，一種是大乘實相，一種是小乘實相。

【English Translation】 English version: It is said that this sutra (note: referring to the Surya-garbha Samadhi Sutra) is cited at the beginning of the Mahaprajnaparamita Sutra as evidence. Since it says 'never heard of prajna,' it is known that this sutra comes before. The second teacher says that this sutra is spoken after the Mahaprajnaparamita Sutra. Since it is after the Mahaprajnaparamita Sutra, how could Subhuti (note: a disciple of the Buddha) say that he had never heard of it before? His explanation is that although Subhuti had already realized it in the Mahaprajnaparamita Sutra, people of middle and lower faculties had not yet realized it. Now, they are the same as those who have not realized it, so it is said 'never heard of'. People of middle and lower faculties are now able to realize it, so they are the same as those who are able to realize it, so it is said 'now they are beginning to hear'. This matter has already been explained clearly before. Now, let's explain another meaning. Before, it was measured by external giving, and then the Tathagata (note: an epithet of the Buddha) praised the sutra himself and encouraged people to uphold it. Now, it is measured by internal giving, and then Subhuti praises the sutra himself and encourages people to uphold it. Therefore, the teacher and disciples encourage each other in different ways to promote people's faith and understanding. If someone else hears this sutra (note: referring to the Surya-garbha Samadhi Sutra) below, the second part states that others have gained understanding, then the true nature (note: the real aspect of things) will arise. Others say that conventional truth (note: relative truth) arises, but ultimate truth (note: absolute truth) does not arise. Then they ask, 'True nature is ultimate truth, since true nature arises, why doesn't ultimate truth arise?' His explanation is that it is the wisdom of recognizing true nature that arises. True nature cannot be produced, it is just that wisdom arises from the object, so it is called true wisdom. The object is named from wisdom, so saying that wisdom arises actually means saying that the recognition of the object arises. Now it is explained that both conventional truth and ultimate truth both arise and do not arise, just like the explanation in the meaning, this passage is the evidence. But one teacher has the saying that contemplation (note: observation) inspires the middle, and the middle inspires contemplation. Here it is explained that the arising of true nature is the inspiration of contemplation in the middle. When right contemplation (note: correct observation) is clear, then true nature will appear, so it is called the arising of true nature. This is from the perspective of delusion and enlightenment. For those who are deluded, true nature does not appear, so it is said that true nature does not arise. For those who are enlightened, true nature appears, so it is called the arising of true nature. Since the arising of true nature is like this, Buddhahood and so on can also be inferred in the same way. As for true nature, it has never arisen nor not arisen. This true nature is not true nature. He also uses the two truths to explain this passage, as usual. Now, according to the treatises, the meaning of true nature is briefly achieved. True nature is that only the Buddhadharma Mahayana (note: a major branch of Buddhism) has this true nature, so it is called true nature. That which is not true nature is that the heavenly demons and heretics do not have true nature, so it is said that it is not true nature. It is called true nature, there is a long sentence in the sutra, saying 'true nature, true nature', this sentence is to distinguish the Two Vehicles (note: Sravakayana and Pratyekabuddhayana). There are two kinds of true nature, one is Mahayana true nature, and the other is Hinayana true nature.

今明是大乘實相非二乘實相。故云實相實相。前句簡外實相。此句簡內實相。所以二簡者。以獨佛法有實相。及獨大乘有實相。生實相之慧。方是希有耳。世尊我今得聞下。第三述自悟為易。所以易者。一者明過去久殖三多。二者現在者值佛。內因外緣具足故信受為易也。又就跡中為論。須菩提是大阿羅漢。如大品云。般若甚深。誰能信解。答云。正見成就人漏盡阿羅漢能信。今須菩提既是羅漢。所以信解不難也。若就本為論。須菩提內秘菩薩行。或可是往古如來。示同眾迷。所以悟解為易。若當來世下。第四陳他悟為難。所以難者。良由生在末世后五百歲故也。睿法師云。前五百歲得道者多不得道者少。后五百歲不得道者多得道者少。前五百歲信無生者多不信者少。后五百歲不信者多信者為少。是以前五百年名正法。后五百年名像法。能于像法中信。所以為難也。又明此時眾生不久殖三多。不久值佛。無內因外緣。能于中生信。是故為難。何以故下。此釋信為難意也。若言有人能信般若所信。則是人法之見。不名為信也。此信亦不難也。明若不見我是能信。即是人空。即是無有人見。不見般若是所信即是法空。即是無法見。所以者何。我相即是非相者。所以不取我等相者。非有我相。是故不取我相。以實無我故無所

【現代漢語翻譯】現代漢語譯本『今明是大乘實相，而非二乘實相。』所以說『實相，實相』。前一句是簡別外道的實相，這一句是簡別內道的實相。之所以要兩次簡別，是因為只有佛法才有實相，並且只有大乘佛法才有實相。能夠生出實相智慧，才是稀有難得的。『世尊，我今得聞』以下，第三部分是陳述自己領悟很容易。之所以容易，一是說明過去很久以來就種植了很多善根福德因緣，二是現在值遇佛陀，內因外緣都具足，所以信受很容易。又從跡象上來說，須菩提是大阿羅漢。如《大品般若經》所說：『般若甚深，誰能信解？』回答說：『正見成就的人，漏盡的阿羅漢能夠信解。』現在須菩提既然是阿羅漢，所以信解並不難。如果從本源上來說，須菩提內心隱藏著菩薩的行持，或許是往昔的如來，爲了示現和大眾一樣迷惑，所以領悟理解很容易。『若當來世』以下，第四部分是陳述他人領悟很難。之所以難，是因為生在末法時代的后五百年。睿法師說：『前五百年得道的人多，不得道的人少；后五百年不得道的人多，得道的人少。前五百年相信無生的人多，不相信的人少；后五百年不相信的人多，相信的人少。』所以前五百年稱為正法時代，后五百年稱為像法時代。能夠在像法時代相信，所以是很難得的。又說明這個時候的眾生，不久遠地種植善根福德因緣，不久遠地值遇佛陀，沒有內因外緣，能夠從中生起信心，所以是很難的。『何以故』以下，這是解釋相信很難的原因。如果說有人能相信般若所信的，這就是人法二見的執著，不稱為真信。這樣的相信也不難。說明如果不見『我』是能信的主體，就是人空，就是沒有人見。不見般若是所信的客體，就是法空，就是沒有法見。『所以者何？我相即是非相者』，之所以不執取我等相，是因為沒有真實的我相，所以不執取我相。因為實際上沒有我，所以沒有……

【English Translation】 English version 'Now, it is clear that the true reality (shixiang) is of the Mahayana (Dacheng), not of the Two Vehicles (Ercheng).' Therefore, it is said 'true reality, true reality.' The previous sentence distinguishes it from the external true reality, and this sentence distinguishes it from the internal true reality. The reason for the two distinctions is that only the Buddha Dharma (Fofa) has true reality, and only the Mahayana has true reality. To generate the wisdom of true reality is rare and precious. 'World Honored One (Shizun), I now hear...' The third part describes one's own enlightenment as easy. The reason it is easy is firstly, it is clear that in the past, one has long cultivated the three many (san duo), and secondly, now one encounters the Buddha, with both internal causes and external conditions complete, so belief and acceptance are easy. Also, from the perspective of the traces (ji), Subhuti (Xūpútí) is a great Arhat (A luohan). As the Great Perfection Sutra (Da pin) says, 'Prajna (Bore) is very profound, who can believe and understand?' The answer is, 'A person who has achieved right view, an Arhat who has exhausted all outflows, can believe.' Now that Subhuti is an Arhat, belief and understanding are not difficult. If from the perspective of the origin (ben), Subhuti secretly practices the Bodhisattva path, or perhaps he was a Tathagata (Rulai) in the past, showing himself to be confused like the masses, so enlightenment and understanding are easy. 'If in the future world...' The fourth part describes others' enlightenment as difficult. The reason it is difficult is because they are born in the last five hundred years of the Dharma-ending Age (mo shi hou wu bai sui). Dharma Master Rui (Rui Fashi) said, 'In the first five hundred years, those who attain the Way are many, and those who do not attain the Way are few; in the last five hundred years, those who do not attain the Way are many, and those who attain the Way are few. In the first five hundred years, those who believe in non-birth (wu sheng) are many, and those who do not believe are few; in the last five hundred years, those who do not believe are many, and those who believe are few.' Therefore, the first five hundred years are called the Age of the Right Dharma (zheng fa), and the last five hundred years are called the Age of the Semblance Dharma (xiang fa). To be able to believe in the Age of the Semblance Dharma is therefore difficult. It also explains that the sentient beings (zhong sheng) at this time do not cultivate the three many for long, nor do they encounter the Buddha for long, lacking internal causes and external conditions, and to be able to generate faith in this situation is therefore difficult. 'Why is this so...' This explains the reason why belief is difficult. If it is said that someone can believe in what Prajna believes, then this is the view of self and Dharma, and it is not called true faith. This kind of belief is also not difficult. It explains that if one does not see 'I' as the subject who believes, then it is emptiness of self (ren kong), which means there is no view of self. If one does not see Prajna as the object that is believed, then it is emptiness of Dharma (fa kong), which means there is no view of Dharma. 'Why is this so? The self-appearance (wo xiang) is the non-appearance (fei xiang)' The reason for not grasping onto the appearance of self and others is that there is no real self-appearance, so one does not grasp onto the self-appearance. Because in reality there is no self, therefore there is no...

取耳。故云我相即是非相也。又道理若實有我人之相則不可離。以道理實無我人之相。但眾生妄謂為有故我相可離多。故云我相即是非相也。大品云。眾生所著若有一毫末之可有則不可離。以所著處無如毛髮許有可離也。他云。所謂之我見是無耳。能謂之心是有此不無也。如所謂陽炎是無。能謂之心是有。今明能謂之心如所謂不異也。若依論釋者。此明人法兩空。前云無我人相。此是人空。今云我相即是非相。此則明法空。問若言此明法空。應云法相即是非法相。何云我相即是非相耶。答無我有二種。一者人無我。二法無我。今法無我也。何以故離一切諸相則名諸佛者。此重釋無相所以也。若有諸相佛應見之。以離一切諸相名為諸佛故。則知諸法無此相也。問佛何故離一切相耶。答有一切相則是有所得。無一切相則是無所得。有所得故是生死凡夫。無所得名為涅槃。名為諸佛也。佛告須菩提下第二佛述成。前領解有四章。今但述第四陳他悟難。明無始以來習有所得久。昔日又稟小乘有所得教。忽聞般若無人無法多生怖畏。是故今明能不怖畏此則為難。所言不驚不怖者。一往怛愕謂之為驚。內心怯弱名之為畏。一向深惡前事稱之為怖也。如來說第一波羅蜜者。他云。般若是六度中第一故言第一。則非第一者。真諦遣第一

也。是名第一者。世諦假名說第一也。依論解。此般若一經勝餘修多羅。故名此經為第一波羅蜜。非第一波羅蜜者。余修多羅非第一。是名第一。還結此經為第一也。所以有此文來者。是近遠二義。近者成上希有之言。以此經第一故信此經。方是希有耳。此經若非第一。信之不足稱為希有也。遠成上者。上來所明內外二施不及持經四句者。由此經是諸經中之第一法也。須菩提忍辱下。第二釋疑念也。問何因緣故次般若。明忍辱耶。依六度數前後並非次第。今有何次第生此文耶。答開善解云。三門說般若。前就體名二門說竟。今次第三功用門說。明般若功用無窮。能生諸佛能示世間能斷煩惱。又攝用導用忘用諸用非一。今此明忘懷。忍辱之用者。以得此用故。則逢苦不憂值樂不喜。其功最要故偏明之。又解云。忍與般若俱是慧。與慧同體。故共明也。今明無方之意不妨此義。若依論意釋疑故來。眾所以疑者。遠從前捨身命格量生。上云捨身施不及持經四句。所以不及者。為捨身是有所得顛倒苦因還得有所得苦果故不及持經。眾即疑。佛昔來種種苦行亦應是顛倒之因。應得顛倒之果不得菩提也。故今釋云。佛昔行苦行。此是無生忍心。雖復捨身而不苦惱。非但無苦而還更有樂。故論偈云。苦樂有慈悲如是苦行果。以修無所

【現代漢語翻譯】現代漢語譯本：也。這就是所謂的『第一』。從世俗諦的角度來說，這只是一個假名，稱之為『第一』。根據論典的解釋，這部《般若經》勝過其他的修多羅（Sutra，經），所以稱這部經為『第一波羅蜜』（Paramita，到彼岸）。如果不是『第一波羅蜜』，那麼其他的修多羅就不是『第一』，所以這部經被稱為『第一』。這是對這部經是『第一』的總結。之所以有這段文字，是因為它有近和遠兩種含義。從近的方面來說，是爲了成就前面所說的『希有』之言。因為這部經是『第一』，所以相信這部經才是『希有』的。如果這部經不是『第一』，那麼相信它就不值得被稱為『希有』。從遠的方面來說，是爲了成就前面所說的，內外兩種佈施都比不上受持此經四句。之所以比不上，是因為捨身是有所得的顛倒苦因，最終還是會得到有所得的苦果，所以比不上受持此經。須菩提（Subhuti，佛陀的弟子）忍辱下。這是第二次解釋疑惑。有人問，為什麼在般若之後要說明忍辱呢？按照六度（Paramita，六種到彼岸的方法）的順序，前後並非依次排列。現在為什麼會有這樣的順序，產生這段文字呢？答：開善的解釋是，用三個門來說明般若。前面已經用體和名兩個門說明完畢，現在是第三個功用門。說明般若的功用無窮，能夠產生諸佛，能夠昭示世間，能夠斷除煩惱。又有攝用、導用、忘用等多種功用。現在這裡說明忘懷，忍辱的功用。因為得到了這種功用，所以遇到苦不憂愁，遇到樂不歡喜。這種功用最為重要，所以特別說明它。還有一種解釋是，忍與般若都是智慧，與智慧同體，所以共同說明。現在說明無方（沒有固定的方法）的意義，不妨礙這種解釋。如果按照論典的意義來解釋，是爲了解釋疑惑而來的。大眾所疑惑的是，從前面捨身命的格量產生。前面說捨身佈施比不上受持此經四句。之所以比不上，是因為捨身是有所得的顛倒苦因，應該得到顛倒的苦果，而不能得到菩提（Bodhi，覺悟）。所以現在解釋說，佛過去所行的苦行，這是無生忍心。雖然捨身，但並不感到苦惱。非但沒有苦，反而更有快樂。所以論典的偈頌說：苦樂有慈悲，如此苦行果。以修無所問：何因緣故次般若。明忍辱耶？答：眾所以疑者。遠從前捨身命格量生。上云捨身施不及持經四句。所以不及者。為捨身是有所得顛倒苦因還得有所得苦果故不及持經。眾即疑。佛昔來種種苦行亦應是顛倒之因。應得顛倒之果不得菩提也。故今釋云。佛昔行苦行。此是無生忍心。雖復捨身而不苦惱。非但無苦而還更有樂。

【English Translation】 English version: Also. This is what is called 'the first'. From the perspective of conventional truth, it is merely a provisional name, called 'the first'. According to the commentary, this Prajna Sutra (Prajna, wisdom; Sutra, scripture) surpasses other Sutras, therefore this scripture is called 'the first Paramita' (Paramita, perfection, to the other shore). If it is not 'the first Paramita', then other Sutras are not 'the first', so this scripture is called 'the first'. This is a conclusion that this scripture is 'the first'. The reason for this passage is that it has two meanings, near and far. From a near perspective, it is to fulfill the aforementioned words of 'rare'. Because this scripture is 'the first', believing in this scripture is 'rare'. If this scripture is not 'the first', then believing in it is not worthy of being called 'rare'. From a far perspective, it is to fulfill the aforementioned, that both internal and external giving are not as good as upholding the four lines of this scripture. The reason why it is not as good is that giving up the body is a cause of inverted suffering with attachment, and ultimately one will still obtain the result of suffering with attachment, so it is not as good as upholding this scripture. Subhuti (Subhuti, a disciple of the Buddha) forbearance below. This is the second explanation of doubts. Someone asks, why is forbearance explained after Prajna? According to the order of the six Paramitas (Paramita, six perfections), the order is not sequential. Why is there such an order now, producing this passage? Answer: Kaishan explains that Prajna is explained using three doors. The first two doors of substance and name have already been explained, and now it is the third door of function. It explains that the function of Prajna is infinite, capable of producing all Buddhas, capable of illuminating the world, and capable of cutting off afflictions. There are also various functions such as gathering function, guiding function, and forgetting function. Now, this explains forgetting, the function of forbearance. Because one obtains this function, one is not worried when encountering suffering, and one is not happy when encountering joy. This function is the most important, so it is specifically explained. Another explanation is that forbearance and Prajna are both wisdom, and are of the same substance as wisdom, so they are explained together. Now, explaining the meaning of no fixed method does not hinder this explanation. If interpreted according to the meaning of the commentary, it is to explain doubts. What the masses doubt arises from the previous comparison of giving up one's life. The previous passage said that giving up one's body is not as good as upholding the four lines of this scripture. The reason why it is not as good is that giving up one's body is a cause of inverted suffering with attachment, and one should obtain the inverted result of suffering, and not obtain Bodhi (Bodhi, enlightenment). So now it is explained that the ascetic practices that the Buddha practiced in the past were the mind of non-arising forbearance. Although giving up the body, one does not feel distressed. Not only is there no suffering, but there is also more joy. Therefore, the verse in the commentary says: Suffering and joy have compassion, such is the result of ascetic practices. By cultivating without Question: What is the reason for explaining forbearance after Prajna? Answer: What the masses doubt arises from the previous comparison of giving up one's life. The previous passage said that giving up one's body is not as good as upholding the four lines of this scripture. The reason why it is not as good is that giving up one's body is a cause of inverted suffering with attachment, and one should obtain the inverted result of suffering, and not obtain Bodhi. So now it is explained that the ascetic practices that the Buddha practiced in the past were the mind of non-arising forbearance. Although giving up the body, one does not feel distressed. Not only is there no suffering, but there is also more joy.

得忍故得菩提也。故云如來說忍辱波羅蜜也。非忍辱者。非是有得捨身忍辱也。又非忍辱者。此無所得忍不可稱量也。故論云彼忍辱岸難量也。何以故我于爾時無我相者。此二義故來。一者反釋無瞋義。若有我相則應生瞋。以無我相故令誰瞋耶。復瞋者誰耶。二者明無忍義。即是不忍不瞋為忍波羅蜜。若有能忍之人則應生瞋。今尚不見能忍之人。何由有他起瞋之者。此是跨節釋也。歌利王者。引事證因緣。歌利王即是陳如本身。昔曾害仙人。仙人發願。汝今無罪害我我得道時要前度汝。如出毗婆娑文。是故須菩提菩薩應離一切相下。所以有此文者。為成前忍辱義。新發意菩薩既聞歷世修忍得於菩提。彼既見有身心或生退轉。如身子六十劫行菩薩行。后因舍眼遂退成聲聞。故今勸云。欲不退菩提心者。應離一切相發三菩提心也。問從上來三處明不住何異。釋云。初不住為成檀度義勸行無得施也。次不住為成凈土因義。若心有住則心有穢。心穢故則土穢。以心無所住故心凈。心凈故土凈也。今明不住為成菩提心勸不住發心。若心有住則乖正道。豈是道心耶。菩提是正道。今發道心故名菩提心耳。若心有住則為非住者。若心有住則是住顛倒。則為非住。不住般若也。如大經。不住一切法即是住般若。不信一切法是名信般若。

【現代漢語翻譯】現代漢語譯本因為能夠安忍才能證得菩提（Enlightenment）。所以說，如來說忍辱波羅蜜（Patience Perfection）。如果不是忍辱，就不是那種有得有舍的捨身忍辱。又如果不是忍辱，這種無所得的忍辱是不可稱量的。所以《瑜伽師地論》說，忍辱的彼岸是難以估量的。為什麼呢？因為我在那時沒有我相。這是兩個方面的含義。一是反過來解釋沒有嗔恨的意義。如果存在我相，就應該產生嗔恨。因為沒有我相，所以讓誰去嗔恨呢？又是誰在嗔恨呢？二是說明沒有忍的意義，也就是不忍不嗔才是忍辱波羅蜜。如果存在能夠忍耐的人，就應該產生嗔恨。現在尚且看不見能忍之人，又怎麼會有他人來引發嗔恨呢？這是一種跨越段落的解釋。歌利王（Kali, a cruel king）的故事，是引用事例來證明因緣。歌利王就是陳如（Kaundinya, one of the first five disciples of the Buddha）本身。過去曾經傷害仙人，仙人發願說：『你現在沒有罪過地傷害了我，我得道的時候要先度化你。』如同出自《毗婆沙論》的記載。所以須菩提（Subhuti, one of the principal disciples of the Buddha），菩薩應該遠離一切相。之所以有這段經文，是爲了成就前面的忍辱的意義。新發意的菩薩聽聞經歷累世修忍才能證得菩提，他們如果看見有身心，或許會產生退轉。如同舍利弗（Sariputra, one of the two chief disciples of the Buddha）在六十劫中修行菩薩行，後來因為捨棄眼睛而退轉成為聲聞。所以現在勸導說，想要不退轉菩提心的人，應該遠離一切相，發起三菩提心。問：從上面來看，三處說明不住有什麼不同？解釋說：最初的不住是爲了成就佈施度義，勸導實行無所得的佈施。其次的不住是爲了成就凈土的因，如果心中有所住，那麼心中就會有污穢，心有污穢，那麼國土就會污穢。因為心中沒有住所，所以心是清凈的，心清凈所以國土清凈。現在說明不住是爲了成就菩提心，勸導不住于發心。如果心中有所住，那麼就違背了正道，怎麼能說是道心呢？菩提是正道，現在發起道心，所以名為菩提心。如果心中有所住，那就是非住。如果心中有所住，那就是住在顛倒之中，那就是非住，不住于般若（Prajna, wisdom）。如同《大般涅槃經》所說，不住於一切法，就是住于般若。不信一切法，就叫做信般若。

【English Translation】 English version One attains Bodhi (Enlightenment) through forbearance. Therefore, it is said that the Tathagata (Buddha) speaks of the Ksanti Paramita (Perfection of Patience). That which is not forbearance is not the kind of self-sacrificing forbearance where one gives up the body. Furthermore, that which is not forbearance is this immeasurable forbearance of non-attainment. Therefore, the Shastra (treatise) says that the shore of forbearance is difficult to measure. Why is this so? Because at that time, I had no self-image. This comes from two meanings. First, it is a reverse explanation of the meaning of non-anger. If there were a self-image, then anger should arise. Since there is no self-image, who is there to be angry? And who is the one being angry? Second, it clarifies the meaning of non-forbearance, which is that not forbearing and not being angry is the Ksanti Paramita. If there were a person capable of forbearance, then anger should arise. Now, even a person capable of forbearance is not seen, so how could there be another who provokes anger? This is a cross-sectional explanation. The story of King Kali (Kali, a cruel king) is cited as an example to prove the cause and condition. King Kali is Kaundinya (Kaundinya, one of the first five disciples of the Buddha) himself. In the past, he harmed a sage, and the sage made a vow: 'You have harmed me without guilt, and when I attain the Way, I will liberate you first,' as stated in the Vibhasa (commentary). Therefore, Subhuti (Subhuti, one of the principal disciples of the Buddha), a Bodhisattva should be apart from all forms. The reason for this passage is to fulfill the meaning of forbearance mentioned earlier. Newly initiated Bodhisattvas, upon hearing that they can attain Bodhi through cultivating forbearance over many lifetimes, may become discouraged upon seeing their own body and mind. Like Sariputra (Sariputra, one of the two chief disciples of the Buddha), who practiced the Bodhisattva path for sixty kalpas (eons) and then regressed to become a Sravaka (Hearer) after giving up his eyes. Therefore, they are now advised that those who wish not to regress from the Bodhi mind should be apart from all forms and generate the three Bodhi minds. Question: From the above, what is the difference between the three places that explain non-abiding? The explanation is: The initial non-abiding is to fulfill the meaning of Dana Paramita (Perfection of Giving), encouraging the practice of giving without attainment. The second non-abiding is to fulfill the cause of Pure Land. If the mind has abiding, then the mind will have defilement. If the mind is defiled, then the land will be defiled. Because the mind has no abiding, the mind is pure, and because the mind is pure, the land is pure. Now, explaining non-abiding is to fulfill the Bodhi mind, encouraging non-abiding in generating the mind. If the mind has abiding, then it goes against the right path. How can it be called the mind of the Way? Bodhi is the right path, and now generating the mind of the Way is called the Bodhi mind. If the mind has abiding, then it is non-abiding. If the mind has abiding, then it abides in inversion, which is non-abiding, not abiding in Prajna (Prajna, wisdom). As the Mahaparinirvana Sutra says, not abiding in all dharmas (teachings) is abiding in Prajna. Not believing in all dharmas is called believing in Prajna.

生義亦爾。是故佛說菩薩心不應住下。前明勸無住發菩提心。今勸無住修菩薩行。如善財之言也。問經初已明發心修行。今何得更說。答前明建廣大等四心名發心。就不住義以明修行。今此中通就不住即明發心之與修行。故前離明。今是合辨也。但舉佈施者。佈施居六度之初。又檀義攝六也。如論偈云云。須菩提菩薩為利益一切眾生者。前既明無住發心無住修行。人便謂。既無所住何故發心何故修行耶。即釋曰。為利眾生故發心修行也。又無住修行方能利眾生耳。有所住修行不能自利利人也。如來說一切諸相下。此為成上修行及為眾生。既言修行。便有行可修。既言利益眾生。有眾生可利。便是人法見耳。故今明如來說一切相則非一切相。故雖修萬行無行可修。雖利眾生實無眾生可利。又引佛誠言勸菩薩如說修行。佛說眾生與法皆不可得。菩薩亦須如此而學也。須菩提如來是真語者下。此文來有近遠。遠意成前內外二施格量義。何者。前明雖舍內外二施終不及持經四句。人聞此生疑。諸法實相絕言。云何名字文句能表實相。而受持四句頓有如此福耶。故今釋云。實相雖絕言。言是無言因。因言故得表無言。故受持此言功德無量。問此乃釋言能表道。云何是釋五語文耶。答以言必能表道故。佛言是實由能表道故。受持福

【現代漢語翻譯】現代漢語譯本：『生義』（解釋經文的意義）也是如此。因此佛說菩薩的心不應該有所執著。前面說明勸導不執著地發起菩提心，現在勸導不執著地修菩薩行，就像善財童子所說的那樣。有人問：經文開頭已經說明了發心修行，現在為什麼還要再說？回答：前面說明建立廣大的四種心，稱之為發心，就從不執著的意義來闡明修行。現在這裡總括地從不執著來闡明發心和修行。所以前面是分開說明，現在是合在一起辨析。只舉佈施為例，是因為佈施位於六度之首，而且佈施的意義涵蓋了六度。就像論中的偈頌所說的那樣。須菩提，菩薩爲了利益一切眾生。前面已經說明了不執著地發心，不執著地修行，人們就會認為，既然沒有執著，為什麼還要發心，為什麼還要修行呢？於是解釋說：爲了利益眾生，所以才發心修行。而且不執著地修行才能利益眾生。有所執著地修行不能自利利人。如來說一切諸相等等。這是爲了成就上面的修行以及爲了眾生。既然說修行，便有行可以修；既然說利益眾生，便有眾生可以利益，這就是人法二見。所以現在說明如來說一切相，就不是一切相，所以雖然修萬行，卻沒有行可以修；雖然利益眾生，實際上沒有眾生可以利益。又引用佛的誠實之言，勸導菩薩像佛所說的那樣修行。佛說眾生與法都不可得，菩薩也必須這樣學習。須菩提，如來是真語者等等。這段文字有遠近的含義。從長遠來看，是爲了成就前面內外二施的比較衡量。為什麼呢？前面說明即使捨棄內外二施，最終也比不上受持經文中的四句偈。人們聽到這裡產生疑問，諸法的實相是無法用語言表達的，為什麼名字文句能夠表達實相，而受持四句偈就能有如此大的福報呢？所以現在解釋說：實相雖然無法用語言表達，但語言是無言的原因，因為有語言才能表達無言，所以受持這些語言功德無量。有人問：這只是解釋語言能夠表達道，怎麼是解釋五種語言呢？回答：因為語言必定能夠表達道，所以佛的語言是真實的，因為能夠表達道，所以受持它有福報。

【English Translation】 English version: The 'meaning of arising' (explaining the meaning of the scriptures) is also like this. Therefore, the Buddha said that the mind of a Bodhisattva should not dwell on anything. The previous section explained encouraging the generation of Bodhi mind without attachment, and now encourages the practice of Bodhisattva conduct without attachment, just as Sudhana said. Someone asks: The beginning of the scripture has already explained the generation of mind and practice, why is it being said again now? The answer is: The previous section explained establishing the four great minds, calling it the generation of mind, and elucidating practice from the meaning of non-attachment. Now, this section comprehensively elucidates both the generation of mind and practice from non-attachment. Therefore, the previous section explained them separately, and now they are analyzed together. The reason for only citing giving as an example is that giving is at the beginning of the six perfections, and the meaning of giving encompasses all six. It's like the verse in the treatise says. Subhuti, the Bodhisattva is for the benefit of all beings. The previous section has already explained the generation of mind without attachment and the practice without attachment, so people will think, since there is no attachment, why generate the mind and why practice? So it is explained: For the benefit of beings, that's why the mind is generated and practice is undertaken. Moreover, only practice without attachment can benefit beings. Practice with attachment cannot benefit oneself or others. 'The Tathagata says that all characteristics are not all characteristics,' etc. This is to accomplish the above practice and for the sake of beings. Since it speaks of practice, there is practice to be done; since it speaks of benefiting beings, there are beings to be benefited, which is the dualistic view of self and phenomena. Therefore, it is now explained that the Tathagata says that all characteristics are not all characteristics, so although one cultivates myriad practices, there is no practice to be done; although one benefits beings, in reality there are no beings to be benefited. Furthermore, the Buddha's truthful words are cited to encourage Bodhisattvas to practice as the Buddha said. The Buddha said that beings and phenomena are both unattainable, and Bodhisattvas must also learn in this way. Subhuti, the Tathagata is a speaker of truth, etc. This passage has meanings both near and far. In the long run, it is to accomplish the previous comparison and measurement of inner and outer giving. Why? The previous section explained that even abandoning inner and outer giving is ultimately not as good as upholding the four-line verse in the scripture. People hear this and have doubts, the true nature of all dharmas cannot be expressed in words, why can names and sentences express the true nature, and why can upholding the four-line verse have such great blessings? So it is now explained: Although the true nature cannot be expressed in words, words are the cause of non-words, because there are words that can express non-words, so upholding these words has immeasurable merit. Someone asks: This only explains that words can express the Tao, how is it explaining the five kinds of language? The answer is: Because words must be able to express the Tao, so the Buddha's words are true, because they can express the Tao, so upholding them has blessings.

多。近意者。上引佛說一切諸相則是非相。說一切眾生則非眾生。勸菩薩如說而行。今重釋所以。須信佛說者。良由佛語不虛故也。真語者依真諦說也。實語者依世諦說也。所以舉二語者。為如來常依二諦說法故也。如語者。如十方三世諸佛依二諦說法。此上同諸佛也。不誑語者。佛不誑眾生。如大經言。何緣當誑如子想者令墮地獄也。不異語者。為釋疑故來。人疑。若不誑眾生。何得一佛作種種異說。初三后一。乃至今常昔無常耶。故釋云。雖有諸說為成一道。所以不異。如經云。智者終不謂我二語。我於是人亦不二語。法華云。雖說種種乘皆為一乘也。次依論釋。唯有四語。故偈云。實智及小乘說摩訶衍法。記於三世事。是名四種語。實智即真語。謂說佛菩提也。及小乘說四諦即實語。說摩訶衍法為菩提。即是如語也。記三世事合後二為不異語也。此四語含小大理事因果。真語是果也。如語是因。此二是大。實語為小。記三世是事也。三語是理。須菩提如來所得法者。有此文來者。上來至此凡有三文。引佛語勸信。初引如來說一切相則非相。說一切眾生則非眾生。此勸菩薩舍人法見令信無所住教。次引五語證佛語不虛。勸菩薩信佛說無所住教也。今第三引佛所證得法。復勸信無所住教。以佛親依無所住教證得菩提

【現代漢語翻譯】現代漢語譯本多。接近含義的是，前面引用的佛說一切諸相即是非相，說一切眾生即是非眾生，勸導菩薩按照這樣去修行。現在重新解釋這樣說的原因，必須相信佛所說的話，是因為佛說的話真實不虛。『真語』是依據真諦而說的，『實語』是依據世俗諦而說的。之所以舉出這兩種說法，是因為如來常常依據二諦說法。『如語』，就像十方三世諸佛依據二諦說法一樣，這一點上與諸佛相同。『不誑語』，佛不欺騙眾生，就像《大般涅槃經》里說的，怎麼會欺騙把我看作兒子的人，讓他們墮入地獄呢？『不異語』，是爲了解釋疑惑而說的。有人疑惑，如果不欺騙眾生，為什麼一佛會有種種不同的說法，有時說三有時說一，有時說常有時說無常呢？所以解釋說，雖然有各種說法，都是爲了成就唯一的佛道，所以不是不同的說法。如經中所說，智者最終不會認為我說的話是兩種，我對這樣的人也不會說兩種話。《法華經》說，雖然說了種種乘，都是爲了一個佛乘。其次依據論典來解釋，只有四種語，所以偈頌說：『實智及小乘，說摩訶衍法，記於三世事，是名四種語。』『實智』就是真語，指的是說佛的菩提。『及小乘說四諦』就是實語。『說摩訶衍法為菩提』，就是如語。『記三世事』，把後面的兩個合併起來就是不異語。這四種語包含了小乘、大乘、事、理、因、果。真語是果，如語是因，這兩種是大乘。實語是小乘，記三世是事。前三種語是理。須菩提，如來所得的法，有這段經文的來歷是，從前面到現在總共有三段經文，引用佛語勸人相信。最初引用如來說一切相則非相，說一切眾生則非眾生，這是勸菩薩捨棄人法二見，相信無所住的教導。其次引用五種語來證明佛語不虛，勸菩薩相信佛所說的無所住的教導。現在第三次引用佛所證得的法，再次勸人相信無所住的教導，因為佛親自依靠無所住的教導證得了菩提。

【English Translation】 English version Much. The close meaning is that the Buddha previously quoted saying that all characteristics are non-characteristics, and saying that all sentient beings are non-sentient beings, encourages Bodhisattvas to practice accordingly. Now, to re-explain the reason for saying this, one must believe what the Buddha says, because the Buddha's words are true and not false. 'True speech' is spoken according to the ultimate truth (Paramārtha-satya), and 'real speech' is spoken according to the conventional truth (Saṃvṛti-satya). The reason for citing these two types of speech is that the Tathāgata always teaches according to the two truths. 'As-it-is speech' (如語) is like the Buddhas of the ten directions and three times teaching according to the two truths, which is the same as all the Buddhas. 'Non-deceptive speech', the Buddha does not deceive sentient beings, just as the Mahāparinirvāṇa Sūtra says, how could I deceive those who regard me as their son, causing them to fall into hell? 'Non-different speech' is spoken to resolve doubts. Some people doubt, if one does not deceive sentient beings, why does one Buddha have various different teachings, sometimes saying three, sometimes saying one, sometimes saying permanent, sometimes saying impermanent? Therefore, it is explained that although there are various teachings, they are all for the sake of accomplishing the one Buddha-path, so they are not different teachings. As it is said in the sutra, the wise will ultimately not think that my words are of two kinds, and I will not speak two kinds of words to such people. The Lotus Sutra says that although various vehicles are taught, they are all for one vehicle. Secondly, according to the commentary, there are only four kinds of speech, so the verse says: 'The wisdom of reality and the Small Vehicle, teach the Mahāyāna Dharma, record the affairs of the three times, these are called the four kinds of speech.' 'The wisdom of reality' is true speech, referring to the teaching of Buddha's Bodhi. 'And the Small Vehicle teaching the Four Noble Truths' is real speech. 'Teaching the Mahāyāna Dharma as Bodhi' is as-it-is speech. 'Recording the affairs of the three times', combining the latter two is non-different speech. These four kinds of speech include the Small Vehicle, the Great Vehicle, phenomena, principle, cause, and effect. True speech is the fruit, as-it-is speech is the cause, these two are the Great Vehicle. Real speech is the Small Vehicle, recording the three times is phenomena. The first three kinds of speech are principle. Subhuti, the Dharma attained by the Tathāgata, the origin of this passage is that there are a total of three passages from the beginning to here, quoting the Buddha's words to encourage belief. Initially, it quotes the Tathāgata saying that all characteristics are non-characteristics, and saying that all sentient beings are non-sentient beings, this is to encourage Bodhisattvas to abandon the views of self and Dharma, and to believe in the teaching of non-abiding. Secondly, it quotes the five kinds of speech to prove that the Buddha's words are not false, encouraging Bodhisattvas to believe in the Buddha's teaching of non-abiding. Now, for the third time, it quotes the Dharma attained by the Buddha, again encouraging people to believe in the teaching of non-abiding, because the Buddha personally relied on the teaching of non-abiding to attain Bodhi.

故。菩薩須信無所住教門也。論經長有一句。謂如來所得法如來所說法。如來所得法釋已如向也。如來所說無實無虛者。上來三過勸信語。但恐鈍根守語而住故。今明佛語非實非虛。以正道絕言。若守言則失道。故言則非實。非不因言表道。故言則非虛。指月之譬即其事也。斯乃貫一化之意。豈一章經耶。須菩提如人入闇下。依流支十二分。前格量分竟。今是顯性分。今三種彈之。一者顯性分。經論無文故所以不用。二者若就佈施以明得失判顯性分者。前明忍辱修行亦應是分也。三者內外格量中各有二格。今內格中止一章竟。余有一格量在。何得合取后格量為顯性分耶。今明二意故有此文來。一者近生。上來至此凡有三處勸修不住舍于住義。未知住有何失不住有何得。勸修不住舍于住耶。故今最後釋其得失。心有所得則如外無光明內有黑暗。故不見正道。心無所住如外有光明內有眼目。能見正道。為此得失故有上來三勸也。依無住之教。如外有光明。得無所住觀解。如內有眼目。如此之人見正道也。有住之失反此可知也。依論生起。云真如一切處一切時常有。何故眾生有得如有不得如耶。論師云。真如即是佛性。一切凡聖眾生皆有佛性。何故聖見凡不見耶。即用經文釋之。如雖常有一色。若外有光明內有眼目則見。無

【現代漢語翻譯】現代漢語譯本因此，菩薩必須相信無所住的教法。經論中有一句話很長，即『如來所得法，如來所說法』。『如來所得法』的解釋如前所述。『如來所說無實無虛』，是前面三次勸人相信的話語，只是擔心遲鈍的人執著于言語而停滯不前，所以現在說明佛所說的話並非真實也非虛假。因為真正的道理是超越言語的，如果執著于言語就會失去真道，所以說言語並非真實。但又不能說不借助言語來表達真道，所以說言語並非虛假。用手指指月的比喻就是這個道理。這乃是貫穿整個教化的意義，豈止是一章經文呢？須菩提，就像人進入黑暗中一樣。依據流支的十二分科判，前面的格量分已經結束，現在是顯性分。現在有三種方式來駁斥這種觀點：第一種是顯性分，因為經論中沒有明確的文字說明，所以不採用。第二種是如果根據佈施來闡明得失，從而判斷為顯性分，那麼前面關於忍辱修行的內容也應該屬於這一分。第三種是內外格量中各有兩種格量，現在內格量中只結束了一章，還剩一種格量，怎麼能把後面的格量合併起來作為顯性分呢？現在說明有兩個用意，所以才有這段文字的出現。第一，是就近而言。從前面到現在，總共有三處勸人修習不住，捨棄住著的意義。但還不知道住著有什麼過失，不住著有什麼好處，為什麼要勸人修習不住，捨棄住著呢？所以現在最後解釋其中的得失。心中有所得，就好像外面沒有光明，裡面一片黑暗，所以看不見正道。心中無所住，就好像外面有光明，裡面有眼睛，能夠看見正道。爲了說明這種得失，所以才有前面三次勸說。依據無住的教法，就像外面有光明一樣。得到無所住的觀解，就像裡面有眼睛一樣，這樣的人就能看見正道。有住著的過失，反過來就可以知道了。依據論典的生起，說真如在一切處、一切時都是常有的，為什麼眾生有得到真如的，也有沒有得到真如的呢？論師說，真如就是佛性，一切凡夫和聖人都具有佛性，為什麼聖人能看見，凡夫卻看不見呢？就用經文來解釋這個問題，就像顏色雖然始終如一，但如果外面有光明，裡面有眼睛就能看見，如果沒有光明和眼睛就看不見。

【English Translation】 English version Therefore, Bodhisattvas must believe in the teaching of non-abiding. There is a lengthy statement in the scriptures, namely, 'The Dharma attained by the Tathagata, the Dharma spoken by the Tathagata.' The explanation of 'The Dharma attained by the Tathagata' is as previously stated. 'The Tathagata's words are neither real nor unreal' refers to the three previous exhortations to believe, simply because of the fear that dull-witted individuals would cling to the words and become stagnant. Therefore, it is now explained that the Buddha's words are neither real nor unreal, because the true path transcends language. If one clings to language, one will lose the true path, so the words are not real. However, one cannot say that the true path is not expressed through language, so the words are not unreal. The analogy of pointing at the moon illustrates this principle. This is the meaning that runs through the entire teaching, not just a single chapter. Subhuti, it is like a person entering darkness. According to the twelve-part division of the Liuzhi, the previous 'comparative division' is finished, and now it is the 'manifestation division'. Now there are three ways to refute this view: The first is the 'manifestation division', which is not adopted because there is no explicit textual explanation in the scriptures. The second is that if the 'manifestation division' is judged based on clarifying gains and losses through giving, then the previous content on the practice of forbearance should also belong to this division. The third is that there are two types of comparison in both internal and external comparisons. Now, only one chapter has been completed in the internal comparison, and there is one comparison remaining. How can the subsequent comparison be combined as the 'manifestation division'? Now, it is explained that there are two intentions, which is why this passage appears. First, it is in the immediate sense. From the beginning up to this point, there are a total of three places where people are exhorted to practice non-abiding, abandoning the meaning of attachment. But it is not yet known what the faults of attachment are, what the benefits of non-abiding are, and why people should be exhorted to practice non-abiding and abandon attachment. Therefore, now the gains and losses are finally explained. If there is something gained in the mind, it is like there is no light outside and darkness inside, so one cannot see the right path. If there is no abiding in the mind, it is like there is light outside and eyes inside, so one can see the right path. To explain these gains and losses, there are the three previous exhortations. According to the teaching of non-abiding, it is like there is light outside. Obtaining the understanding of non-abiding is like having eyes inside, and such a person can see the right path. The faults of having attachment can be known by reversing this. According to the arising of the Shastra, it is said that Tathata (真如) [Suchness] is always present everywhere and at all times. Why do some sentient beings attain Tathata and others not? The Shastra master says that Tathata is Buddha-nature (佛性) [Buddha-nature], and all ordinary and noble beings possess Buddha-nature. Why can noble beings see it, but ordinary beings cannot? The scriptures are used to explain this question, just as color is always the same, but if there is light outside and eyes inside, it can be seen, and if there is no light and eyes, it cannot be seen.

此內外則不見也。雖常有真如佛性。心無所住則見。有所住則不見也。顯性之言事在斯也。今明作此意亦于義無失。大智論云。或名如或名實相法性涅槃。但約眾生悟迷故有得不得。至論佛性涅槃。未曾得失隱顯也。問依論乃明見如不見如。似無次第便是孤生此文。答此文即接前佈施得失生。故有住佈施則不見如。無住佈施則便見如。故非無次第也。但講論者不見其近。便謂孤生為顯性分耳。講經師雖見其近文兩施之得失。不得見其因施得失遠明皆有佛性。為有方便無方便故有見不見異也。若取近遠兩義。則經論皆成也。須菩提若當來世下。有此一章來者。還成上舍失從得之義也。菩薩若舍失從得者。要須受持讀誦般若故也。問信受門已明若生一念凈信。則為佛智見得無量功德竟。今何故重說為佛智見得無量功德耶。答此般若經有三門明功德。一自信門。二自受持讀誦復為他說門。三但自受持讀誦門也。初明一念信為佛智見得無量功德。是自信門明功德也。從三千七寶施至恒沙身命施。此明自行化他門明功德也。今此章明受持讀誦自行門功德。故非重說也。此三門攝一切般若經明功德也。初日分下。第二三時捨身格量功德也。為二。初明格量。第二稱歎勸修。格量中為二。初正舉捨身。第二格量也。異上舍身者有二義

【現代漢語翻譯】現代漢語譯本此內外則不見也。即使常有真如佛性（Tathata-buddha-nature，指事物本來的真實如是的性質，與佛性相通）。心無所住（non-abiding mind，指不執著于任何事物的心）則見（見真如佛性），有所住（abiding mind，指執著於事物的心）則不見也。顯性（manifestation of nature，指佛性的顯現）之言事在此也。今明作此意亦于義無失。《大智度論》（Mahaprajnaparamita-sastra，龍樹菩薩所著的解釋《般若經》的論書）云：或名如（Tathata，如），或名實相（Reality，事物的真實面貌），法性（Dharmata，法的本性），涅槃（Nirvana，解脫）。但約眾生悟迷故有得不得。至論佛性涅槃，未曾得失隱顯也。問：依論乃明見如不見如，似無次第便是孤生此文。答：此文即接前佈施得失生。故有住佈施則不見如，無住佈施則便見如。故非無次第也。但講論者不見其近，便謂孤生為顯性分耳。講經師雖見其近文兩施之得失，不得見其因施得失遠明皆有佛性。為有方便無方便故有見不見異也。若取近遠兩義，則經論皆成也。『須菩提若當來世』下。有此一章來者，還成上舍失從得之義也。菩薩若舍失從得者，要須受持讀誦般若（Prajna，智慧）故也。問：信受門已明若生一念凈信，則為佛智見得無量功德竟。今何故重說為佛智見得無量功德耶？答：此般若經有三門明功德。一自信門。二自受持讀誦復為他說門。三但自受持讀誦門也。初明一念信為佛智見得無量功德。是自信門明功德也。從三千七寶施至恒沙身命施。此明自行化他門明功德也。今此章明受持讀誦自行門功德。故非重說也。此三門攝一切般若經明功德也。『初日分』下。第二三時捨身格量功德也。為二。初明格量。第二稱歎勸修。格量中為二。初正舉捨身。第二格量也。異上舍身者有二義。

【English Translation】 English version This inner and outer is not seen. Although there is always true Suchness Buddha-nature (Tathata-buddha-nature, referring to the original true nature of things, which is connected to Buddha-nature), it is seen when the mind has no abiding (non-abiding mind, referring to a mind that is not attached to anything), and not seen when there is abiding (abiding mind, referring to a mind that is attached to things). The statement of manifesting nature (manifestation of nature, referring to the manifestation of Buddha-nature) lies in this. Now, clarifying this meaning is also without loss in meaning. The Mahaprajnaparamita-sastra (a treatise written by Nagarjuna Bodhisattva explaining the Prajna Sutra) says: Sometimes it is called Suchness (Tathata), sometimes Reality (Reality, the true face of things), Dharmata (Dharmata, the nature of Dharma), Nirvana (Nirvana, liberation). But it is based on sentient beings' enlightenment and delusion that there is gain and no gain. As for Buddha-nature and Nirvana, there has never been gain or loss, concealment or manifestation. Question: According to the treatise, it clearly shows seeing Suchness and not seeing Suchness, it seems that there is no order and this text is isolated. Answer: This text is connected to the previous giving, gain and loss. Therefore, abiding in giving, one does not see Suchness; without abiding in giving, one sees Suchness. Therefore, it is not without order. But the lecturer does not see its proximity, and thus considers the isolated birth as a manifestation of nature. Although the sutra lecturer sees the gain and loss of the two givings in the nearby text, they do not see that because of the gain and loss of giving, it is clearly shown that all have Buddha-nature. Because there is skillful means and no skillful means, there is a difference in seeing and not seeing. If we take both the near and far meanings, then both the sutra and the treatise will be complete. 『Subhuti, if in the future world』 below. If this chapter comes, it will still become the meaning of losing from giving up and gaining from it. If a Bodhisattva loses from giving up and gains from it, they must uphold, recite, and study the Prajna (Prajna, wisdom). Question: The door of faith and acceptance has already clarified that if one generates a single thought of pure faith, then one will have gained immeasurable merit through the Buddha's wisdom. Why is it now repeated that one gains immeasurable merit through the Buddha's wisdom? Answer: This Prajna Sutra has three doors to clarify merit. First, the door of self-faith. Second, the door of self-upholding, reciting, and also speaking for others. Third, only the door of self-upholding and reciting. The initial clarification that a single thought of faith gains immeasurable merit through the Buddha's wisdom is the door of self-faith clarifying merit. From giving three thousand seven treasures to giving lives as numerous as the Ganges sands, this clarifies the merit of the door of self-practice and transforming others. This chapter now clarifies the merit of the door of self-practice of upholding and reciting. Therefore, it is not a repetition. These three doors encompass all the Prajna Sutra's clarification of merit. 『The first part of the day』 below. The second is the merit of giving up the body in the three times of the day. It is divided into two. First, clarifying the measurement. Second, praising and encouraging cultivation. The measurement is divided into two. First, directly mentioning giving up the body. Second, measuring. There are two meanings different from the above giving up the body.

。一者施多。謂日三時捨身。此日初分日中分日後分。非是三日為三分也。二者時節久。謂無量千萬億劫常行捨身事也。次格量般若。直明信心不逆其福已勝。況自受持讀誦為他說耶。此則格量轉高。般若之福轉重也。又此文所以來者。上信受門中。直明信心為佛知見得無量功德。猶未格量信心功德少多。今欲格量信心功德少多故有此文來也。問何故須格量信心功德耶。答既三門明功德。則三門明格量。上已三處格量自行化他功德門竟。謂三千佈施恒沙佈施捨身佈施。皆自行化他門。猶未格量信心門。故今明之也。問何故格量自信門功德多上自行化他功德耶。答格量自信門功德尚多。自行化他則不可量。故今文云信心不逆其福勝彼。何況受持讀誦為他說耶。故此文來有其深旨。欲講誦者當依此意也。須菩提以要言之下。第二稱歎勸修。開文為四。第一嘆法。第二嘆人。第三重嘆法。第四重嘆人。今初嘆法。前格量竟既稱歎。今格量竟亦稱歎也。如來為發大乘者說下。第二嘆人。問大乘與最上乘何異。答通論不異。此種種嘆耳。別者大包含廣博義。最上高絕取超出二乘義。廣博等即是得義。出二乘即是離義。又大是其始義。據淺行之人。最上是其終義。據深行人也。如來悉知是人者。問前已二處明知見竟。今復明者有何

異耶。解云。初知見自信功德。次知見自受持讀誦功德。今知見受持復為人說得功德。故三知見異也。若樂小法者。此明舉失顯得。嘆此中舉二人。樂小法者此是小乘。著我見者此是外道。此二人不能聽受。小乘之人所以不能聽受者。以是有所得故不信無得。又此經明如來法身常住。小乘人謂佛無常畢竟滅故不信。故大智論云。五百歲五百部聞大乘法說畢竟空。如刀傷心。睿法師喻疑論云。外國三十六國皆小乘學不信大乘。問小乘亦明空。大乘亦明空。小乘人何意不信大耶。答大論云。空有二種。一者但空二者不但空。小乘唯得但空不得不但空。此經明不但空。故不信空也。又小乘人但得生空不得法空。大智論云。佛滅後分為二分。一信眾生空不信法空。二俱信二空。今此經具明二空。故小乘人不信也。外道著我見不信則易知也。須菩提在在處處下。第三重嘆法。問此嘆法與初何異。答初直嘆經法。今嘆法所在之處故異也。問上已嘆經在處則處貴。猶如塔廟竟。今何故復嘆如塔耶。答前略嘆。今廣嘆。前直云如塔廟故是略。今云種種供養故是廣。前略嘆人。今廣嘆人。前略嘆處。今廣嘆處也。又前嘆經所在處則處貴也。今嘆非但經所在處處貴。即持此經人行住坐臥之處皆如塔廟。皆應恭敬供養。如法華云。持法華經人

【現代漢語翻譯】現代漢語譯本『異耶』（這是疑問語氣詞）。解釋說：最初的知見是自信的功德，其次的知見是自己受持讀誦的功德，現在知見是受持並且為他人宣說的功德。所以這三種知見是不同的。如果有人喜歡小法（小乘佛法），這裡是舉出他們的缺失來顯明此經的功德。這裡特別提到了兩種人：喜歡小法的人，指的是小乘修行者；執著於我見的人，指的是外道。這兩種人都不能聽受此經。小乘之人不能聽受的原因，是因為他們有「所得」的觀念，不相信「無所得」。而且，這部經闡明如來法身常住，而小乘之人認為佛是無常的，最終會滅度，所以不相信。因此，《大智論》中說，五百部小乘佛法在聽聞大乘佛法宣講畢竟空時，如同刀割心一樣痛苦。睿法師用疑論來比喻說，外國三十六國都學習小乘佛法，不相信大乘佛法。有人問：小乘也講空，大乘也講空，為什麼小乘之人不相信大乘的空呢？回答說：《大智論》中說，空有兩種：一種是但空，一種是不但空。小乘只證得但空，不能證得不但空。這部經闡明的是不但空，所以小乘不相信。而且，小乘之人只證得生空，不能證得法空。《大智論》中說，佛滅度后，佛法分為兩部分：一部分人相信眾生空，不相信法空；另一部分人則兩種空都相信。現在這部經完整地闡明了兩種空，所以小乘之人不相信。外道執著於我見，不相信此經，這是很容易理解的。『須菩提，在在處處』以下，是第三重讚歎此經的功德。有人問：這次讚歎與最初的讚歎有什麼不同？回答說：最初只是直接讚歎經法，現在是讚歎經法所在之處，所以不同。有人問：前面已經讚歎了經在之處，那個地方就變得尊貴，就像佛塔寺廟一樣，現在為什麼又要讚歎像佛塔一樣呢？回答說：前面是略略地讚歎，現在是廣闊地讚歎。前面只是說像佛塔寺廟，所以是略略地讚歎；現在說用種種供養來供養，所以是廣闊地讚歎。前面是略略地讚歎人，現在是廣闊地讚歎人。前面是略略地讚歎處所，現在是廣闊地讚歎處所。而且，前面是讚歎經所在之處，那個地方就變得尊貴。現在是讚歎不僅僅是經所在之處尊貴，就連受持此經的人，他的行住坐臥之處，都像佛塔寺廟一樣，都應該受到恭敬供養。就像《法華經》中說，受持《法華經》的人

【English Translation】 English version 『Is it different?』 (This is an interrogative particle). The explanation is: The initial knowledge and vision (知見, zhijian) is the merit of self-confidence; the next knowledge and vision is the merit of personally receiving, upholding, reading, and reciting; now the knowledge and vision is the merit of receiving, upholding, and further explaining it to others. Therefore, these three knowledges and visions are different. If someone delights in the Small Vehicle (小法, xiaofa, Hinayana Buddhism), this clarifies their shortcomings to highlight the merits of this scripture. Here, two types of people are specifically mentioned: those who delight in the Small Vehicle, referring to Hinayana practitioners; and those who are attached to the view of self (我見, wojian), referring to externalists (外道, waidao). Neither of these two can receive and uphold this scripture. The reason why those of the Small Vehicle cannot receive and uphold it is because they have a concept of 『attainment』 (所得, suode) and do not believe in 『non-attainment』 (無所得, wusuode). Moreover, this scripture elucidates that the Dharma-body (法身, fashen) of the Tathagata (如來, Rulai) is permanent, while those of the Small Vehicle believe that the Buddha is impermanent and will ultimately be extinguished, so they do not believe it. Therefore, in the Mahaprajnaparamita-sastra (大智論, Dazhilun), it is said that when five hundred sections of Hinayana Buddhism hear the Great Vehicle (大乘, dacheng, Mahayana Buddhism) teaching the ultimate emptiness (畢竟空, bijingkong), it is like a knife cutting their hearts. Dharma Master Rui used the Treatise on Doubt to compare it, saying that the thirty-six countries abroad all study Hinayana Buddhism and do not believe in Mahayana Buddhism. Someone asked: The Small Vehicle also speaks of emptiness, and the Great Vehicle also speaks of emptiness, so why do those of the Small Vehicle not believe in the emptiness of the Great Vehicle? The answer is: In the Mahaprajnaparamita-sastra, it is said that there are two types of emptiness: one is mere emptiness (但空, dankong), and the other is not mere emptiness (不但空, budankong). The Small Vehicle only attains mere emptiness and cannot attain not mere emptiness. This scripture elucidates not mere emptiness, so the Small Vehicle does not believe it. Moreover, those of the Small Vehicle only attain the emptiness of beings (生空, shengkong) and cannot attain the emptiness of phenomena (法空, fakong). In the Mahaprajnaparamita-sastra, it is said that after the Buddha's extinction, the Dharma is divided into two parts: one part believes in the emptiness of beings but does not believe in the emptiness of phenomena; the other part believes in both emptinesses. Now this scripture fully elucidates both emptinesses, so those of the Small Vehicle do not believe it. It is easy to understand that externalists are attached to the view of self and do not believe in this scripture. 『Subhuti, in every place』 below, is the third layer of praising the merit of this scripture. Someone asked: What is the difference between this praise and the initial praise? The answer is: Initially, it was only directly praising the Dharma of the scripture; now it is praising the place where the Dharma of the scripture is located, so it is different. Someone asked: Earlier, it was already praised that where the scripture is, that place becomes noble, like a pagoda or temple, so why is it praised again as being like a pagoda? The answer is: Earlier, it was a brief praise; now it is a broad praise. Earlier, it was only said to be like a pagoda or temple, so it was a brief praise; now it is said to make various offerings, so it is a broad praise. Earlier, it was a brief praise of people; now it is a broad praise of people. Earlier, it was a brief praise of places; now it is a broad praise of places. Moreover, earlier, it was praising that where the scripture is, that place becomes noble. Now it is praising that not only is the place where the scripture is located noble, but even the places where those who receive and uphold this scripture walk, stand, sit, and lie down are like pagodas and temples, and should all be respectfully offered to. Just like in the Lotus Sutra (法華經, Fahua Jing), it says that those who receive and uphold the Lotus Sutra

所在方面皆應為作禮也。論意作此釋勿不信也。複次須菩提若善男子善女人受持此經若為人輕賤下。此是第四重嘆人。問今嘆人與前何異。答上就得門嘆。今就離門嘆。何以知之。前文云持經得無邊功德。今言持經離於惡道。此即是金剛能摧諸患難。次意釋疑故來。自上以來並明持經之人無邊功德。今那見持經之人。有諸障礙所謂疾病遭官橫得打罵不如意事耶。為釋此疑故。明此人先世罪業應墮八難。以持經力故現世輕受也。我念過去下。第三舉釋迦往因格量。前內外兩施具舉現世也。今明往因。此就過去世格量現在世。前就所化功德格量。今就能化功德格量。如此格量方盡格量之極也。問何意舉能化所化功德格量皆不及持經耶。答此終是有所得功德不及持經。問何以得知皆是舉有所得功德格量耶。答經論皆有證。論釋初三千施云。二能趣菩提福不趣菩提。所言二者。即是自能受持復為他說。此二能趣菩提也。施福是有漏有所得不能趣菩提也。經證者此取然燈佛前。爾前是有所得故未得無生。故知取有所得施也。又一意所以舉釋迦往因格量者。三門明功德。上來已格量兩門功德竟。未格量自受持讀誦功德。今嘆格自受持讀誦功德故有此文也。問格自受持讀誦何故功德轉重耶。答自受持讀誦其福尚重具自行化他。豈可稱

【現代漢語翻譯】現代漢語譯本：在所有方面都應該行禮。根據這個意義來解釋，不要不相信。再者，須菩提，如果善男子善女人受持這部經，卻被人輕賤。這是第四重讚歎受持經書的人。問：現在讚歎人和前面有什麼不同？答：前面是從『得』的方面來讚歎，現在是從『離』的方面來讚歎。為什麼知道呢？前面的經文說，受持經書能得到無邊的功德，現在說受持經書能遠離惡道。這就是《金剛經》能夠摧毀各種患難。接下來的意思是解釋疑惑。從上面以來，都在說明受持經書的人有無邊的功德。現在為什麼看到受持經書的人，有各種障礙，比如疾病、官司、意外、打罵、不如意的事情呢？爲了解釋這個疑惑，說明這個人前世的罪業應該墮入八難（指八種難以修行佛法的處境），因為受持經書的力量，所以今生輕輕地承受了。『我念過去』以下，第三是舉釋迦牟尼佛（釋迦，Śākya，釋迦族；牟尼，Muni，聖人）往昔的因緣來衡量。前面內外兩種佈施都舉了現世的例子，現在說明往昔的因緣。這是用過去世來衡量現在世。前面是用所教化眾生的功德來衡量，現在是用能教化眾生的功德來衡量。這樣衡量才能窮盡衡量的極致。問：為什麼用能教化和所教化的功德來衡量，都比不上受持經書呢？答：這終究是有所得的功德，比不上受持經書。問：怎麼知道都是用有所得的功德來衡量呢？答：經和論都有證據。論中解釋最初的三千佈施說：『二能趣菩提，福不趣菩提。』所說的『二』，就是自己能夠受持，又為他人解說。這兩種能夠趨向菩提（菩提，Bodhi，覺悟）。佈施的福報是有漏的、有所得的，不能趨向菩提。經文的證據是取自燃燈佛（燃燈佛，Dīpaṁkara，錠光佛）之前。燃燈佛之前是有所得的，所以沒有得到無生法忍（無生，Anutpāda，不生不滅；法忍，Kṣānti，安忍）。所以知道取的是有所得的佈施。又一個意思是，之所以舉釋迦牟尼佛往昔的因緣來衡量，是用三個方面來說明功德。上面已經衡量了兩方面的功德，還沒有衡量自己受持讀誦的功德。現在讚歎衡量自己受持讀誦的功德，所以有這段經文。問：衡量自己受持讀誦，為什麼功德更加重大呢？答：自己受持讀誦，它的福報尚且重大，如果兼具自行化他，怎麼能稱量呢？

【English Translation】 English version: In all aspects, one should pay homage. Interpret it according to this meaning, and do not disbelieve. Furthermore, Subhuti, if a good man or good woman upholds this sutra but is despised by others, this is the fourth emphasis on praising the person. Question: How is this praise of the person different from the previous one? Answer: The previous one praised from the aspect of 'attaining,' while this one praises from the aspect of 'departing.' How do we know this? The previous text said that upholding the sutra attains boundless merit, while this one says that upholding the sutra departs from evil paths. This is because the Diamond Sutra can destroy all calamities. The following meaning is to resolve doubts. From above, it has been explaining that the person who upholds the sutra has boundless merit. Why do we now see that the person who upholds the sutra has various obstacles, such as illness, lawsuits, unexpected events, beatings, and unsatisfactory matters? To resolve this doubt, it explains that this person's past sins should have caused them to fall into the Eight Difficulties (八難, bā nán, eight unfavorable conditions for practicing the Dharma), but because of the power of upholding the sutra, they lightly endure it in this life. 'I remember in the past' below, the third is to cite Shakyamuni Buddha's (釋迦, Śākya, the Shakya clan; 牟尼, Muni, sage) past causes to measure. The previous two kinds of giving, internal and external, both cited present-life examples. Now, it explains past causes. This is using the past life to measure the present life. The previous one measured the merit of those who are taught, while this one measures the merit of those who can teach. Only by measuring in this way can one exhaust the ultimate of measurement. Question: Why is it that measuring the merit of those who can teach and those who are taught is not as good as upholding the sutra? Answer: This is ultimately because the merit of what is attained is not as good as upholding the sutra. Question: How do we know that it is all measuring the merit of what is attained? Answer: Both the sutras and treatises have evidence. The treatise explains the initial three thousand givings, saying: 'Two can lead to Bodhi, but blessings do not lead to Bodhi.' The 'two' that are mentioned are that one can uphold it oneself and also explain it to others. These two can lead to Bodhi (菩提, Bodhi, enlightenment). The blessings of giving are with outflows and what is attained, and cannot lead to Bodhi. The evidence from the sutra is taken from before Dipamkara Buddha (燃燈佛, Dīpaṁkara, the Lamp Lighting Buddha). Before Dipamkara Buddha, it was what was attained, so one had not attained the Acceptance of the Non-origination of Dharmas (無生, Anutpāda, non-arising and non-ceasing; 法忍, Kṣānti, acceptance). Therefore, we know that it takes the giving of what is attained. Another meaning is that the reason for citing Shakyamuni Buddha's past causes to measure is to explain merit from three aspects. Above, it has already measured the merit of two aspects, and has not yet measured the merit of oneself upholding and reciting. Now, it praises and measures the merit of oneself upholding and reciting, so there is this passage of scripture. Question: Why is the merit even greater when measuring oneself upholding and reciting? Answer: If one upholds and recites oneself, its blessings are already great. If one also combines self-practice and teaching others, how can it be measured?

量耶。此是顯功德之重故格自行。講誦者須細看經。不爾不覺也。問三門明功德格量三門何異耶。答云。自行化他門則功德即格量。從三千至恒沙身命是也。自信門自受持門此二門前明功德后格量。故文有開合之異也。問三門明功德何異耶。答即是三品。但生信心為下品。受持讀誦不為他說為中品。次受持復為他說為上品。又前是自行。后一具自他也。須菩提善男子善女人下。大章第二。前第一明格量。今明格量所不能格量。會不格量所及。若其更格則人不信。故云不思議也。爾時須菩提白佛下。二週說法中此是第二。依論師十二分此是第十斷疑。今所不用。何故爾耶。論云。從如來非有為分下皆是斷生疑。何得言此中始是斷疑。復有人言。上來始答住問降伏心問。今次答菩提心問。今明前具答四問竟。云何於此始答菩提心問耶。又前答后答無異。云何前非答菩提心今始是答耶。其人見近不見遠也。次有人言。前明因空今明果空。彼謂修行等是因。前辨修行空故是因空。菩提是果。今雲實無菩提可得故是果空。此亦不然。上已具說因果深義竟。何得上言因空此亦是果空。今明此是第二週說。何以知耶。以前後四問皆同佛答亦同故知是二週說也。問二週說何異。答前廣說今略說。前為前會眾說。后為後會眾說。故大智論

【現代漢語翻譯】現代漢語譯本：格量嗎？這是爲了彰顯功德的重大，所以才特別衡量自身修行。講解和誦讀的人需要仔細研讀經文，否則不會察覺到這一點。問：三門（指自行門、化他門、自信門）闡明功德的衡量標準，這三門有什麼不同呢？答：自行門和化他門，功德就是衡量標準，從三千到恒河沙數的生命就是例證。自信門和自受持門，這兩門先闡明功德，后衡量標準，所以經文有開合的不同。問：三門闡明功德有什麼不同呢？答：就是指三品（下品、中品、上品）。生起信心是下品，受持讀誦但不為他人說是中品，受持讀誦又為他人說是上品。而且前面是自身修行，後面一個包含了自身修行和為他人說。『須菩提，善男子善女人』以下，是大章第二。前面第一部分闡明衡量標準，現在闡明衡量標準所不能衡量的，以及不衡量標準所能達到的。如果再衡量，人們就不會相信，所以說『不可思議』。『爾時，須菩提白佛』以下，是二週說法中的第二部分。按照論師的十二分科判，這是第十分，斷除疑惑，現在不用這種分法。為什麼呢？論中說，從『如來非有為分』以下，都是斷除對『生』的疑惑，怎麼能說這裡才開始斷除疑惑呢？又有人說，前面才回答了『住心』和『降伏其心』的問題，現在才回答『菩提心』的問題。現在說明前面已經完整地回答了四個問題。怎麼能說現在才開始回答『菩提心』的問題呢？而且前面回答和後面回答沒有區別，怎麼能說前面不是回答『菩提心』，現在才是回答呢？這些人只見近處，不見遠處。還有人說，前面闡明『因空』，現在闡明『果空』。他們認為修行等是『因』，前面辨析修行是空，所以是『因空』。菩提是『果』，現在說實際上沒有菩提可以得到，所以是『果空』。這也是不對的。上面已經完整地說了因果的深刻含義。怎麼能說上面是『因空』，這裡才是『果空』呢？現在說明這是第二週說法。怎麼知道呢？因為前後四個問題都相同，佛的回答也相同，所以知道是第二週說法。問：兩週說法有什麼不同？答：前面廣說，現在略說。前面為前來的聽眾說，後面為後來的聽眾說。根據《大智度論》的說法

【English Translation】 English version: Is it a measurement? This is to highlight the importance of merit, so it specifically measures self-cultivation. Those who lecture and recite must carefully study the scriptures, otherwise they will not realize this. Question: The three doors (referring to the door of self-cultivation, the door of transforming others, and the door of self-confidence) clarify the measurement standards of merit. What are the differences between these three doors? Answer: For the door of self-cultivation and the door of transforming others, merit is the measurement standard. From three thousand to countless lives like the sands of the Ganges are examples. For the door of self-confidence and the door of self-acceptance, these two doors first clarify merit and then measure the standard, so the text has different openings and closings. Question: What are the differences in how the three doors clarify merit? Answer: It refers to the three grades (lower grade, middle grade, upper grade). Generating faith is the lower grade, upholding and reciting but not speaking for others is the middle grade, and upholding and reciting and also speaking for others is the upper grade. Moreover, the former is self-cultivation, and the latter includes both self-cultivation and speaking for others. 'Subhuti, good men and good women' below, is the second major chapter. The first part clarifies the measurement standard, and now it clarifies what the measurement standard cannot measure, and what the non-measurement standard can achieve. If it is measured again, people will not believe it, so it is said to be 'inconceivable'. 'Then, Subhuti said to the Buddha' below, is the second part of the second round of teachings. According to the twelve-part classification of the commentators, this is the tenth part, eliminating doubts, but this classification is not used now. Why? The treatise says that from 'Tathagata is not a conditioned division' below, all are eliminating doubts about 'birth', how can it be said that it is only here that doubts are eliminated? Also, some people say that the questions of 'dwelling mind' and 'subduing the mind' were answered earlier, and now the question of 'Bodhi mind' is answered. Now it is explained that the four questions have been completely answered earlier. How can it be said that it is only now that the question of 'Bodhi mind' is answered? Moreover, there is no difference between the previous answer and the later answer, how can it be said that the previous was not answering 'Bodhi mind', and only now is it answering? These people only see the near, not the far. Others say that the previous clarifies 'emptiness of cause', and now clarifies 'emptiness of effect'. They believe that cultivation etc. is the 'cause', and the previous analysis of cultivation being empty is therefore 'emptiness of cause'. Bodhi is the 'effect', and now it is said that there is actually no Bodhi to be obtained, so it is 'emptiness of effect'. This is also incorrect. The profound meaning of cause and effect has already been completely explained above. How can it be said that the above is 'emptiness of cause', and only here is it 'emptiness of effect'? Now it is explained that this is the second round of teachings. How do we know? Because the four questions before and after are the same, and the Buddha's answers are also the same, so we know it is the second round of teachings. Question: What are the differences between the two rounds of teachings? Answer: The previous was explained extensively, and now it is explained briefly. The previous was spoken for the audience who came earlier, and the latter was spoken for the audience who came later. According to the Mahaprajnaparamita Shastra

解無生品云。問曰前已說般若竟。今何得更說。答云前為前來眾說。后為後來眾說也。如清涼池前來者飲竟而去後來者更飲也。問大經云爲後來眾生以偈頌說。今何故不作偈耶。答說法多體不可一勢。自有前會長行後來者偈。自有二俱偈二俱長行。如大智論說。即是證也。問今何故不作偈耶。答諸般若多不作偈。以偈安字有限。于深義不能曲盡也。次明還是一會而有二週說。初周為利根人說。鈍根未悟更為後周說也。問前說后說無異。云何前說為利根人後說為鈍根人耶。答大意乃同。其中轉易形勢故鈍根聞之仍得了悟。如一種義作此語說之不解。更作異門釋之則悟。猶如一米作一種食不能食。更作異食則能食也。雖是近事斯乃聖人制作之大體也。般若是一法佛說種種名。隨諸眾生力為之立異字。即其證也。次意前周盡緣後周盡觀。前周盡緣者。正教菩薩無所得發心破有所得發心。乃至無所得修行破有所得修行。故是盡緣也。今此章明無有發菩提心人。亦無有修行人。故是盡觀也。論云。于內心修行存我為菩薩。此即障於心違于不住道。斯經論之作。豈空稱哉。盡緣故無緣。盡觀故無觀。無緣無觀不知何以目之。嘆美強名正觀。正觀即是般若即是金剛也。又前周正明觀行。後周除觀主。故大智論釋習應品云。問曰前已明

【現代漢語翻譯】現代漢語譯本《解無生品》中說：有人問，前面已經講完了《般若經》，現在為什麼還要再說？回答說，前面是為先來的大眾說的，後面是為後來的人說的。就像清涼池，先來的人喝完就走了，後來的人又來喝。有人問，《大經》中說，為後來的眾生用偈頌來說，現在為什麼不做偈頌呢？回答說，說法有很多種形式，不能只用一種。有的法會前面用長行文，後面的人用偈頌；有的法會兩種都用偈頌，兩種都用長行文。就像《大智論》所說，這就是證明。有人問，現在為什麼不做偈頌呢？回答說，很多的《般若經》都不做偈頌，因為偈頌的字數有限，對於深刻的含義不能完全表達。接下來闡明還是同一個法會，但有兩週說法。第一週是為利根的人說的，鈍根的人沒有領悟，所以又為他們說了第二週。有人問，前面說的和後面說的沒有什麼不同，為什麼前面說是為利根的人說的，後面說是為鈍根的人說的呢？回答說，大意是相同的，但其中轉換了形式，所以鈍根的人聽了之後仍然能夠領悟。就像一種道理，用這種語言說不明白，換一種方式解釋就明白了。就像一種米，做成一種食物不能吃，換一種做法就能吃了。雖然這是很平常的事情，但卻是聖人制作的大體。般若（Prajna，智慧）是一種法，佛（Buddha）說了種種不同的名稱，隨著眾生的能力而為它設立不同的名稱，這就是證明。其次，前面的那周是盡緣，後面的這周是盡觀。前面那周是盡緣，是說，正面教導菩薩（Bodhisattva）以無所得的心發心，破除有所得的心，乃至以無所得的修行破除有所得的修行，所以是盡緣。現在這一章闡明沒有發菩提心（Bodhi-citta，覺悟之心）的人，也沒有修行的人，所以是盡觀。《論》中說，在內心修行，存有『我』是菩薩的想法，這就會障礙內心，違背不住之道。這些經論的製作，難道是空說的嗎？盡緣所以無緣，盡觀所以無觀，無緣無觀，不知道用什麼來稱呼它，讚美它，勉強稱之為正觀。正觀就是般若，就是金剛（Vajra，比喻堅固銳利，能斷一切煩惱）。另外，前一週正面闡明觀行，后一週去除觀行之主。所以《大智論》解釋《習應品》時說：有人問，前面已經闡明了。

【English Translation】 English version It says in 'Chapter on Understanding Non-Origination': Someone asks, 'The Prajna (Prajna, wisdom) has already been discussed before, so why is it being discussed again now?' The answer is, 'The previous discussion was for the audience who came earlier, and the latter discussion is for those who came later. It's like a cool and refreshing pond; those who came earlier drank and left, and those who came later drink again.' Someone asks, 'The Great Sutra says that verses are used to speak to later sentient beings, so why are there no verses now?' The answer is, 'There are many forms of Dharma teaching, and one form cannot be used exclusively. Some Dharma assemblies use prose first, and then verses for those who come later; some use verses and prose for both.' As stated in the Mahaprajnaparamita-sastra (Great Treatise on the Perfection of Wisdom), this is the proof. Someone asks, 'Why are there no verses now?' The answer is, 'Many Prajna Sutras do not use verses because the number of words in verses is limited, and they cannot fully express the profound meaning.' Next, it clarifies that it is still the same assembly, but there are two rounds of teachings. The first round is for people with sharp faculties, and the second round is for those with dull faculties who have not yet understood. Someone asks, 'There is no difference between the previous teaching and the later teaching, so why is the previous teaching for people with sharp faculties and the later teaching for people with dull faculties?' The answer is, 'The general meaning is the same, but the form is transformed, so people with dull faculties can still understand after hearing it. It's like a principle that cannot be explained with one kind of language, but can be understood when explained in a different way. It's like a type of rice that cannot be eaten when made into one kind of food, but can be eaten when made into a different kind of food.' Although this is a common thing, it is the general principle of the sages' creations. Prajna (Prajna, wisdom) is one Dharma, and the Buddha (Buddha) spoke of it with various names, establishing different terms for it according to the abilities of sentient beings, and this is the proof. Next, the previous round is 'exhausting conditions,' and the later round is 'exhausting contemplation.' The previous round is 'exhausting conditions,' which means that it positively teaches Bodhisattvas (Bodhisattva) to generate the mind of non-attainment, to break the mind of attainment, and even to use the practice of non-attainment to break the practice of attainment, so it is 'exhausting conditions.' This chapter now clarifies that there is no one who generates the Bodhi-citta (Bodhi-citta, mind of enlightenment), and there is no one who practices, so it is 'exhausting contemplation.' The Treatise says that practicing in the inner mind and having the thought of 'I' as a Bodhisattva will obstruct the mind and violate the path of non-abiding. Are the creations of these sutras and treatises empty words? 'Exhausting conditions' therefore means no conditions, and 'exhausting contemplation' therefore means no contemplation. Without conditions and without contemplation, what can we call it? We praise it and forcibly call it Right Contemplation. Right Contemplation is Prajna, which is Vajra (Vajra, a metaphor for firmness and sharpness, capable of cutting off all afflictions). In addition, the previous round positively clarifies the practice of contemplation, and the later round removes the master of contemplation. Therefore, the Mahaprajnaparamita-sastra explains the 'Practice and Response Chapter' by saying: Someone asks, 'The previous chapter has already clarified.'

生法二空。今何故復辨生空。答前為破生法二病明生法二空。今為破觀空人也。若無論經有十五章。有論經凡有十六章。有長信受一章經也。問前周說既開三門。一般若體門。二信受門。三功德門。今後周為後會。亦得如此以不。答依論經亦得如此。初即般若體門。信受即第二門。三千世界須彌山七寶聚去是功德門也。今觀形勢小異於上。故不開三門。但依十五章鉤鎖相生。故釋疑解難以為次第也。初章為二。前問次答。若約後會為論。則問意同前。昔來未依般若不成發心修行。故今請問發心修行之義也。若約空觀為論。則前問成發心修行。后問請佛泯發心泯修行故也。問前為成發心修行。后泯發心修行。將不相違耶。答終為成一意耳。由泯發心乃成發心耳。若見有發心不成發心耳。故前來成發心即是泯發心。今泯發心即是發心也。佛答中為二。初牒問明。發心即是緣盡義。從何以故實無發心者。明盡觀也。問佛答與上何異。答上但盡緣。今緣觀俱盡。即是異也。又上是廣答具答四問。今是略答但答發心。發心既爾三問例然。為顯後周是略說故也。又意初發心尚緣觀俱息。況復修行等猶存有所得耶。于意云何如來於然燈佛所下第二章來者。論生起云。若無發心菩薩。今那得有受記菩薩耶。既有受記之人必有發心之者。

以受記是果發心是因。何容有果而無因耶。此終是歷破有所得我人見耳。前已破發心人見。今破受記人見也。就文有八菩提。開為二。初五菩提引昔時了悟無受記菩薩以釋疑。次有三菩提引現在佛果得菩提以釋疑。初中為三。一佛問二須菩提答。三佛述成。初二如文。第三佛述釋中有三菩提句。開為四意。一直述理實無相故無所得也。二從若有法下。此是反釋。若有所得則不得記也。三以實無有法下。順釋。以無所得故乃得記耳。何以故下。第四釋無所得故得記之義也。言何以故無所得乃得記耶。釋云。如來者即諸法如義。以體如故名如來。亦體如故名得記。如中豈有法可得耶。若有得則不體如。不體如不名如來。亦不得受記也。若有人言下。第二引現在得果時以釋疑也。疑雲。無得受記之菩薩。今寧有得菩提之佛耶。以實有佛果得菩提。則實有菩薩得受記及發心也。此終是曆法破有所得我人見耳。故經云菩提心見受記見佛見菩提見斷見常見等。猶是一例義耳。實無佛得菩提者。初發菩提心及受記時尚了悟無所得。況至佛時猶有我人得菩提耶。如來所得三菩提無實無虛者。上破有見今破無見也。明佛得三菩提無所得為得。何故不得耶。肇師云。玄道在乎絕域。不得以得之。即其義也。無實無虛者。前各彈有無見。此雙

結非有非無也。無有有得之得故言無實。非無無得之得故言非虛。論意爾也。是故如來說一切法皆是佛法者。此成上非實非無義虛非有耳以體一切諸法如故名為如來。故一切法如即是如來。故云一切皆是佛法也。即非一切法者。一切顛倒之法此非如來所證。故云則非一切法也。以一切如是如來故非無。一切顛倒非如來故非有。故成上非有無也。此猶是大經有所無無所有義耳。以無所有名大涅槃。故是如來也有所無是顛倒生死。故非如來也。是名一切法者。還結一切諸法如也。問上兩句已足。何用下更結耶。答初句直明一切法是如來。次下兩句簡其有無。初句明無一切顛倒。次句明有一切法如也。問上明然燈佛與今何異。答上為成不可取不可說義來也。今為成菩薩無義故來也。又上是略明義。此下八菩提是廣明義也。依論釋佛答中論偈。云以後時受記然燈行非上。論師釋云。有四時然燈四時受記。謂習種性種道種及初地。前然燈是習種時也。今此是性種道種二時然燈。此中但是名字受記未得真無生記。故云無有法得菩提。若此時已得真無生記者。后一然燈不更與受記也。今謂此釋無所出。論直云以後時受記然燈行非上。此言自難解。亦無四時受記四時然燈也。又設有此義于文義相皆不順。故於今無取也。譬如人身長大下

【現代漢語翻譯】現代漢語譯本結非有非無也。意思是說，事物既不是完全存在，也不是完全不存在。因為『無』是通過『有』的獲得而顯現的，所以說它不是真實的。因為『非無』是通過『無』的獲得而顯現的，所以說它不是虛假的。這便是論述的意義。因此，如來說一切法皆是佛法，這成就了上面所說的『非實非無』的意義，虛幻而非實在。因為體悟一切諸法的如如不動，所以名為如來（Tathagata）。所以一切法的如如不動，就是如來。所以說一切皆是佛法。『即非一切法』，指的是一切顛倒的法，這些不是如來所證悟的。所以說『則非一切法』。因為一切如如不動是如來，所以不是『無』；一切顛倒不是如來，所以不是『有』。因此成就了上面所說的『非有非無』。這就像《大般涅槃經》中所說的『有所無』和『無所有』的意義。因為『無所有』名為大涅槃（Mahaparinirvana），所以是如來；『有所無』是顛倒生死，所以不是如來。『是名一切法者』，還是總結一切諸法的如如不動。問：上面兩句已經足夠，為什麼還要用下面的話來總結呢？答：第一句直接說明一切法是如來。下面的兩句是爲了區分『有』和『無』。第一句說明沒有一切顛倒。第二句說明有一切法的如如不動。問：上面所說的然燈佛（Dipamkara Buddha）與現在有什麼不同？答：上面是爲了成就不可取、不可說的意義。現在是爲了成就菩薩（Bodhisattva）無義的緣故。而且，上面是簡略地說明意義，下面的八菩提（Bodhi）是廣泛地說明意義。依據論典解釋佛陀在中論偈（Madhyamaka-karika）中的回答，說『以後時受記，然燈行非上』。論師解釋說，有四時然燈，四時受記，即習種性、種道種及初地。前面的然燈是習種時。現在這是性種、道種二時然燈。這裡只是名字上的受記，還沒有得到真正的無生記。所以說『無有法得菩提』。如果此時已經得到真正的無生記，那麼後面一次然燈就不再給予受記了。現在我認為這種解釋沒有依據。論典直接說『以後時受記，然燈行非上』，這句話本身就難以理解，也沒有四時受記、四時然燈的說法。而且即使有這種意義，在文義上也不順暢，所以現在不採納這種說法。譬如人身長大下。

【English Translation】 English version The conclusion is neither existence nor non-existence. It means that things are neither completely existent nor completely non-existent. Because 'non-existence' is revealed through the attainment of 'existence,' it is said to be not real. Because 'non-non-existence' is revealed through the attainment of 'non-existence,' it is said to be not false. This is the meaning of the discussion. Therefore, the Tathagata (Rulai) says that all dharmas are Buddha-dharmas, which achieves the meaning of 'neither real nor non-existent' mentioned above, illusory rather than real. Because of realizing the suchness (tathata) of all dharmas, it is called Tathagata. Therefore, the suchness of all dharmas is the Tathagata. Therefore, it is said that everything is Buddha-dharma. 'That is not all dharmas' refers to all inverted dharmas, which are not realized by the Tathagata. Therefore, it is said 'then not all dharmas.' Because all suchness is the Tathagata, it is not 'non-existence'; all inversion is not the Tathagata, so it is not 'existence.' Therefore, it achieves the 'neither existence nor non-existence' mentioned above. This is like the meaning of 'something non-existent' and 'nothing existent' in the Mahaparinirvana Sutra. Because 'nothing existent' is called Great Nirvana (Mahaparinirvana), it is the Tathagata; 'something non-existent' is inverted samsara, so it is not the Tathagata. 'This is called all dharmas' still concludes the suchness of all dharmas. Question: The above two sentences are sufficient, why use the following words to conclude? Answer: The first sentence directly states that all dharmas are the Tathagata. The following two sentences are to distinguish 'existence' and 'non-existence.' The first sentence states that there is no inversion. The second sentence states that there is the suchness of all dharmas. Question: What is the difference between the Dipamkara Buddha mentioned above and the present? Answer: The above is to achieve the meaning of ungraspable and unspeakable. Now it is for the sake of achieving the meaning of no self of Bodhisattva. Moreover, the above is a brief explanation of the meaning, and the following eight Bodhis (Bodhi) are a broad explanation of the meaning. According to the commentary, the Buddha answered in the Madhyamaka-karika, saying 'Later prediction, the act of lighting the lamp is not superior.' The commentator explains that there are four times of lighting the lamp and four times of prediction, namely the stage of habituation, the stage of nature, the stage of path, and the first ground. The previous lighting of the lamp was the stage of habituation. Now this is the stage of nature and the stage of path. Here is only the prediction in name, and the true unborn prediction has not been obtained. Therefore, it is said 'there is no dharma to obtain Bodhi.' If the true unborn prediction has been obtained at this time, then the subsequent lighting of the lamp will no longer give the prediction. Now I think this explanation has no basis. The commentary directly says 'Later prediction, the act of lighting the lamp is not superior,' this sentence itself is difficult to understand, and there is no saying of four times of prediction and four times of lighting the lamp. Moreover, even if there is such a meaning, it is not smooth in terms of textual meaning, so this statement is not adopted now. For example, the human body grows tall below.

。第三章。經論無生起。觀此文舉山王譬法身。成上菩提非有非無義耳。法身無一切患故非有。具一切功德故非無。然菩提既非有無。故法身亦非有無也。文有二。初佛舉大身為問如文。次須菩提答云。如來說人身長大者。論云。佛以真如為身。二義故名大。一者遍一切處。二者具一切功德。問法身云何遍一切處耶。答華嚴云。無盡平等妙法界皆悉充滿如來身。如來身未曾大小遍與不遍。為眾生嘆美為大耳。即非大身者。無一切患累故也。論云。遠離煩惱障及智障故云非身也。是名大身者。具一切功德也。初句直明大身耳。次句無患累故非有。次句明有眾德故非無也。問與上明山王何異。答前為前會後為後會。又上為成無取說義來。今為成菩提非有無義來也。上明報佛今明法身佛也。上惑者謂初得佛時言有菩提可取。故是報佛。今直明法身體非有無故是法身也。菩薩亦如是下。此第四章經來者。論生起云。若上來明無發心菩薩受記菩薩。又無諸佛得無上菩提。若因果皆不可得者。眾生亦不應入涅槃。亦無凈佛土事。菩薩何故欲成就眾生令入涅槃。修凈土行耶。此終是有所得心曆法生疑。故曆法破未竟。故生此章。菩薩亦如是者。此是成就眾生菩薩。凈佛土菩薩也。亦如上發心受記菩薩不可得。故云亦如是也。是亦上求

菩提法身有無不可得。故求菩薩有無亦不可得。故云亦如是也。此中三句經。一破成就眾生菩薩。二破凈佛土菩薩。三結正菩薩之義。問上已二處明滅度眾生。與今何異。答經初且明滅度眾生。為答菩提心故來。次第二週初答泯菩提心故來。今為破成就眾生菩薩義故來也。問上已明凈土。與今何異。答上為成無取無說之義。今為明無凈土之菩薩故異也。若菩薩通達無我法者。此第三句結正菩薩之名。此文意有近有遠。近者從第二週初已來。云無發菩提心菩薩。無受記菩薩。乃至今明無成就眾生凈佛土菩薩。人聞生疑。若爾應都無菩薩也。故釋云。由了悟無菩薩故始是菩薩耳。見有菩薩則非菩薩也。遠即貫於一經。此經始終皆明無菩薩破我人之見。若能了悟無菩薩。方是菩薩。見有菩薩見有則是凡夫我見非菩薩也。問了悟無菩薩者此是知無有我。二乘亦悟無我。何故不名菩薩。答論云。悟二種無我故名菩薩。聲聞但悟人無我故不名菩薩也。又菩薩知我無我不二故名菩薩。二乘見我無我異。是二見之人非菩薩也。五眼下。第五章經文來有二。一者近生。還從上四章生。前來四章並不見菩薩。時會即疑。若如來云無所見者則應無眼。若有眼何故不見。故舉五眼答。今言不見者。非無眼故不見。五眼見宛然而無所見。如凈名阿

【現代漢語翻譯】現代漢語譯本：菩提法身的存在與否是不可得的。所以，探求菩薩的存在與否也是不可得的。因此說，也是如此。這裡的三句經文，第一句是破除成就眾生的菩薩，第二句是破除凈佛土的菩薩，第三句是總結真正的菩薩的意義。問：前面已經有兩處說明度化眾生，與現在有什麼不同？答：經文開始只是說明度化眾生，是爲了回答菩提心的緣故而來。其次，第二週開始回答泯滅菩提心的緣故而來。現在是爲了破除成就眾生的菩薩的意義而來。問：前面已經說明凈土，與現在有什麼不同？答：前面是爲了成就無取無說的意義。現在是爲了說明沒有凈土的菩薩，所以不同。如果菩薩通達無我之法，這第三句是總結真正的菩薩的名號。這段文字的意義有近有遠。近的來說，是從第二週開始，說沒有發菩提心的菩薩，沒有受記的菩薩，乃至現在說明沒有成就眾生、凈佛土的菩薩。人們聽了會產生懷疑，如果這樣，那麼應該都沒有菩薩了。所以解釋說，因爲了悟沒有菩薩，才開始是菩薩。見到有菩薩，就不是菩薩了。遠的來說，是貫穿整部經。這部經始終都在說明沒有菩薩，破除我人（ātman, person）的見解。如果能夠了悟沒有菩薩，才是菩薩。見到有菩薩，見到有，那就是凡夫的我見，不是菩薩。問：了悟沒有菩薩，這是知道沒有我。二乘（Śrāvakayāna and Pratyekabuddhayāna, the two vehicles of Hinayana Buddhism）也悟到無我，為什麼不稱為菩薩？答：論中說，悟到兩種無我，所以稱為菩薩。聲聞（Śrāvaka, a disciple of the Buddha）只是悟到人無我，所以不稱為菩薩。又，菩薩知道我與無我不二，所以稱為菩薩。二乘見到我與無我不同，是二見之人，不是菩薩。五眼（pañca cakṣūṇi, five kinds of vision）以下。第五章經文的來由有兩種。一是近生，還是從上面四章產生。前面四章都沒有見到菩薩，當時法會的人就懷疑，如果如來說沒有所見，那麼應該沒有眼。如果有眼，為什麼不見？所以舉出五眼來回答。現在說不見，不是因為沒有眼所以不見，五眼見到清清楚楚，但是沒有所見。如同《維摩詰經》（Vimalakīrti Nirdeśa Sūtra）阿現代漢語譯本：現代漢語譯本：

【English Translation】 English version: The existence or non-existence of the Bodhi Dharmakāya (the body of the Dharma, enlightenment) is unattainable. Therefore, seeking the existence or non-existence of a Bodhisattva (an enlightened being) is also unattainable. Hence, it is said, 'It is also thus.' These three sentences of scripture, the first negates the Bodhisattva who achieves sentient beings, the second negates the Bodhisattva of the pure Buddha-land, and the third concludes the meaning of the true Bodhisattva. Question: Previously, there were two instances explaining the liberation of sentient beings. How is it different from now? Answer: The scripture initially explains the liberation of sentient beings, coming because of the Bodhicitta (the mind of enlightenment). Secondly, the second week begins by answering that they come because of the annihilation of the Bodhicitta. Now, it is to negate the meaning of the Bodhisattva who achieves sentient beings. Question: Previously, the Pure Land (Sukhāvatī, the Western Pure Land of Amitābha Buddha) has been explained. How is it different from now? Answer: Previously, it was to achieve the meaning of non-grasping and non-speaking. Now, it is different because it explains the Bodhisattva without a Pure Land. If a Bodhisattva understands the Dharma of non-self (anātman), this third sentence concludes the name of the true Bodhisattva. The meaning of this passage has near and far implications. In the near sense, it is from the beginning of the second week, saying there is no Bodhisattva who generates the Bodhicitta, no Bodhisattva who receives prediction, and now explaining there is no Bodhisattva who achieves sentient beings and a pure Buddha-land. People will hear this and become suspicious. If that is the case, then there should be no Bodhisattvas at all. Therefore, it is explained that only by realizing there is no Bodhisattva does one begin to be a Bodhisattva. Seeing that there is a Bodhisattva is not a Bodhisattva. In the far sense, it runs through the entire scripture. This scripture always explains that there is no Bodhisattva, negating the view of self and others. If one can realize there is no Bodhisattva, then one is a Bodhisattva. Seeing that there is a Bodhisattva, seeing that there is existence, that is the self-view of an ordinary person, not a Bodhisattva. Question: Realizing there is no Bodhisattva, this is knowing there is no self. The Two Vehicles (Śrāvakayāna and Pratyekabuddhayāna, the two vehicles of Hinayana Buddhism) also realize no-self. Why are they not called Bodhisattvas? Answer: The treatise says that realizing two kinds of no-self is why one is called a Bodhisattva. A Śrāvaka (Śrāvaka, a disciple of the Buddha) only realizes the no-self of persons, so they are not called Bodhisattvas. Furthermore, a Bodhisattva knows that self and no-self are not two, so they are called Bodhisattvas. The Two Vehicles see self and no-self as different, they are people with dualistic views, not Bodhisattvas. Below, regarding the Five Eyes (pañca cakṣūṇi, five kinds of vision). There are two origins of the scripture text in the fifth chapter. One is near origin, still arising from the previous four chapters. The previous four chapters did not see a Bodhisattva, so the assembly at that time doubted, if the Tathāgata (the thus-gone one, an epithet of the Buddha) says there is nothing seen, then there should be no eyes. If there are eyes, why are they not seen? Therefore, the Five Eyes are brought up to answer. Now, saying that they are not seen is not because there are no eyes, so they are not seen. The Five Eyes see clearly, but there is nothing seen. Like the Vimalakīrti Nirdeśa Sūtra (Vimalakīrti Nirdeśa Sūtra), A English version: English version:

那律章云。有佛世尊得真天眼常見諸法。不以二相。大品復云。我五眼尚不見諸法。況凡夫無目而言得菩提耶。二者遠生。經初已來皆明無得無見。故有今文。又上破有見故云無見。今破無見故有見未曾見不見也。五眼義別須釋。今且示數意。然五眼具得約五人有五。謂人有肉眼。天有天眼。二乘見四諦有慧眼。菩薩照三乘根性說三乘法有法眼。佛有佛眼。次約二人。因人四眼。果人一眼。因人四眼如仁王經嘆菩薩得四眼五通。果人一眼即佛有佛眼也。次明一人具足五眼。即是佛。問何故具足五眼。答此是無差別差別用。舉障內境約佛智故名肉眼。舉障外境目佛智故名天眼。約二慧境名慧眼。無量壽經言。慧眼見真境。見真境名慧眼。大品往生品中雲。慧眼無法不見。又云。而無所見。大智論言。具總相慧別相慧名眼。故知慧眼具二慧也。法眼可知。四眼不了。佛眼具了。故名佛眼。亦見佛性故名佛眼也。須菩提恒河中有沙者。此章為成五眼。依論師生起。明五眼既少而境多。何得以少眼知多境。境既多眼亦應多。而今眼少。何能盡知多境。為此疑故。今明眼雖少而能遍知一切境也。論既無文。今明亦復無妨也。但知前既辨五眼。今出所照之境也。問前舉恒河今明恒河何異耶。答前為成格量四句偈故舉恒河。今為五眼

所照境故舉恒河也。問境既多。何獨云知心。答有二意。一者廣略。前明能照之眼廣故具明五眼。今辨所照之境略故止言心也。二者心無形觸最難知。今舉其難知。尚知易可明也。如來說諸心者。明如來見一切眾生心唯在顛倒中行也。則為非心不在正觀中行也。是名為心者。結顛倒心也。三世心來者。釋成顛倒心義。何故名顛倒心耶。以三世求心不可得。而眾生見有心。此是無而謂有。故名顛倒也。須菩提滿三千世界七寶者。文來為釋疑。上言佛知眾生心皆顛倒。則顛倒心所作佈施等眾行皆是顛倒。若爾應無佛因。既無佛因應無佛果。故釋此疑明。無所得心佈施等則是佛因。既有佛因則有佛果。問曰。何由有不顛倒。為從顛倒得不顛倒。為從不顛倒得不顛倒。二俱有過。若從顛倒生不顛倒。則倒為不倒因。若從不顛倒生不顛倒。則不顛倒便無因。答大品三慧品佛答此問。不從有得生無得。不從無得生無得。得無得平等故是無所得。即其事也。問前已明三千世界七寶。與今何異。答前七寶為格四句偈。今七寶為成佛因也。若福德有實。此便釋疑。疑雲。上亦三千七寶。今亦爾。何故是佛因耶。故釋云。若福德有實此明有得福德。以福德無故此明無得福德。故是佛因也。須菩提于意云何佛可以具足色身下第六章經。上來至

此三處明色身何異。答初為明相好身異法身。相好身有三相。法身無三相也。次文為成兩因優劣義。二身兩果既優劣。二身兩因亦應優劣。成格量經義故來。今文為破二身一異見故來。上兩處明二身異。尋語之流即云。有相好身與法身異。如從來本跡異三佛異義。故此章經破一異見。論有二偈。上半云。法身畢竟體非彼相好身。此即破其二身一見。明相好身有相好法身無相好。二身有異何得一耶。次偈上半云。不離於法身此二非不佛。此破異見。何處離相好有別法身耶。故云此二非不佛也。問二身定一。定異。非一非異耶。答諸法無有定相。而具有三句。昔日明相好身亦生滅五分法身亦生滅故。二身同生滅。則是一義。次此經上來兩處開二身之異。相好身有生滅。法身無為無生滅。此是異義。今此一章雙破一異。故佛具有三種方便。問昔何故說一方便。乃至今何故說不一不異。答昔為破常見故明佛二身皆生滅無常。故二身是一。小乘人便作一解故。經初開二身生不生異。時會便云。小乘二身是一。大乘二身是異。故今具破一異。得意者三俱會道利物。不達者皆是顛倒戲論也。破二身一異見既爾。破法身有色無色亦然。論云。此亦無亦有。法身絕相不可言有相好。離相好無別法身。不可言法身無相好也。所言具足色身者

【現代漢語翻譯】現代漢語譯本這三處所說的明色身（指佛的報身或應身）與法身有何不同？回答是，最初是爲了說明相好身（具有種種殊勝相好的佛身）與法身的不同。相好身具有三相（生、住、異），而法身則沒有這三相。其次，前文是爲了成就兩種因的優劣之義。既然兩種身（相好身和法身）和兩種果（由這兩種身所證得的果位）有優劣之分，那麼兩種因（導致這兩種身產生的因）也應該有優劣之分。這是爲了成就格量經的意義。而現在的這段經文是爲了破除對二身（相好身和法身）的一異之見。前面兩處經文說明了二身的差異。那些追逐言語表面意義的人就會說，有相好身與法身是不同的，就像從來本跡（佛的本地和垂跡）不同、三佛（法身佛、報身佛、應身佛）不同一樣。因此，這一章經文是爲了破除一異之見。《大乘起信論》中有兩句偈頌，上半句說：『法身畢竟體非彼相好身。』這便是破除認為二身是一的見解，說明相好身有相好，而法身沒有相好。二身有差異，怎麼能說是一呢？偈頌的下半句說：『不離於法身此二非不佛。』這是破除異見。哪裡有離開相好而存在別的法身呢？所以說『此二非不佛』。有人問：二身是決定為一，還是決定為異，還是非一非異呢？回答是：諸法沒有決定的相狀，而是具有三種說法。過去說相好身也是生滅的，五分法身（由戒、定、慧、解脫、解脫知見五部分組成的法身）也是生滅的，所以二身在生滅這一點上是相同的，這便是一的意義。其次，這部經的前面兩處經文闡述了二身的差異，相好身有生滅，而法身無為無生滅，這是異的意義。現在這一章經文同時破除一和異，所以佛具有三種方便說法。有人問：過去為什麼說一的方便，而現在又為什麼說不一不異呢？回答是：過去是爲了破除常見的緣故，說明佛的二身都是生滅無常的，所以二身是一。小乘人便執著於一的解釋，因此經文一開始就闡述二身有生滅和不生滅的差異。當時聽法的人便說，小乘認為二身是一，大乘認為二身是異，所以現在同時破除一和異。領會其中意義的人，三種說法都能融會貫通，利益眾生。不領會的人，所說的都是顛倒戲論。破除對二身一異的見解是這樣，破除法身有色無色的見解也是這樣。《大乘起信論》說：『此亦無亦有。』法身超越一切相狀，不能說有相好；離開相好就沒有別的法身，不能說法身沒有相好。所說的具足色身（具有圓滿色相的佛身）是指……

【English Translation】 English version How are these three kinds of manifest form bodies (Mingse Shen, referring to the Sambhogakaya or Nirmanakaya of the Buddha) different from the Dharmakaya? The answer is that initially, it is to explain the difference between the form body with excellent characteristics (Xianghao Shen, the Buddha's body with various auspicious marks and qualities) and the Dharmakaya. The form body with excellent characteristics has three characteristics (birth, dwelling, change), while the Dharmakaya does not have these three characteristics. Secondly, the previous text is to establish the meaning of the superiority and inferiority of the two causes. Since the two bodies (the form body with excellent characteristics and the Dharmakaya) and the two fruits (the results attained by these two bodies) have superiority and inferiority, then the two causes (the causes that lead to the arising of these two bodies) should also have superiority and inferiority. This is to establish the meaning of the Gelang Sutra. And the current passage of scripture is to refute the view of oneness or difference regarding the two bodies (the form body with excellent characteristics and the Dharmakaya). The previous two passages of scripture explained the difference between the two bodies. Those who pursue the superficial meaning of words will say that the form body with excellent characteristics is different from the Dharmakaya, just as the original ground and manifested traces (Benji, the Buddha's original nature and manifested traces) are different, and the three Buddhas (Dharmakaya Buddha, Sambhogakaya Buddha, Nirmanakaya Buddha) are different. Therefore, this chapter of scripture is to refute the view of oneness or difference. The 'Awakening of Faith in the Mahayana' has two verses, the first half of which says: 'The Dharmakaya's ultimate essence is not that of the form body with excellent characteristics.' This refutes the view that the two bodies are one, explaining that the form body with excellent characteristics has excellent characteristics, while the Dharmakaya does not have excellent characteristics. The two bodies are different, how can they be said to be one? The second half of the verse says: 'Without departing from the Dharmakaya, these two are not non-Buddhas.' This refutes the view of difference. Where is there a separate Dharmakaya that exists apart from the excellent characteristics? Therefore, it is said that 'these two are not non-Buddhas.' Someone asks: Are the two bodies definitely one, or definitely different, or neither one nor different? The answer is: All dharmas do not have a definite characteristic, but rather have three ways of speaking. In the past, it was said that the form body with excellent characteristics is also subject to birth and death, and the five-part Dharmakaya (Wufen Fashen, the Dharmakaya composed of the five parts of precepts, concentration, wisdom, liberation, and liberation knowledge and vision) is also subject to birth and death, so the two bodies are the same in that they are subject to birth and death, which is the meaning of oneness. Secondly, the previous two passages of scripture in this sutra elaborated on the difference between the two bodies, the form body with excellent characteristics is subject to birth and death, while the Dharmakaya is unconditioned and not subject to birth and death, which is the meaning of difference. Now this chapter of scripture simultaneously refutes oneness and difference, so the Buddha has three expedient ways of speaking. Someone asks: Why did you speak of the expedient of oneness in the past, and why do you now speak of neither one nor different? The answer is: In the past, it was to refute the view of permanence, explaining that the Buddha's two bodies are both subject to birth and death and are impermanent, so the two bodies are one. Those of the Small Vehicle (Hinayana) then clung to the interpretation of oneness, so the scripture initially elaborated on the difference between the two bodies having birth and death and not having birth and death. At that time, those who listened to the Dharma then said that the Small Vehicle believes that the two bodies are one, and the Great Vehicle (Mahayana) believes that the two bodies are different, so now oneness and difference are refuted simultaneously. Those who understand the meaning can integrate all three ways of speaking and benefit sentient beings. Those who do not understand, what they say is all inverted and playful talk. Refuting the view of oneness or difference regarding the two bodies is like this, and refuting the view of the Dharmakaya having form or not having form is also like this. The 'Awakening of Faith in the Mahayana' says: 'This is also neither existent nor non-existent.' The Dharmakaya transcends all characteristics, and it cannot be said to have excellent characteristics; without departing from the excellent characteristics, there is no other Dharmakaya, and it cannot be said that the Dharmakaya does not have excellent characteristics. What is said to be the complete form body (Juzu Sese Shen, the Buddha's body with complete form and characteristics) refers to...

。唯佛一人盡形相之美。故言具足。餘人乃至輪王相不明瞭。故不具足也。如來說具足即非具足者。破一見。明色身非法身。何得為一。是名具足。此破異見。何處離相好別有法身也。可以諸相見不下。意與前同。但身總相別相為異耳。于意云何如來有所說法不下。此第七章來者。此破法身有說法疑。疑雲。若具足色身非法身者。云何言如來有所說法耶。故佛破云。須菩提汝勿言如來法身有所說。若言如來法身有所說則謗法身。法身非色故法身非說也。何以故說此一句。破法身無說疑。若言法身不說相好身說。此亦不然。上明不可離相好身別有法身。便謂法身無相好。亦不可離相好身說別有法身說。而謂法身無說。問何以知經文如此。答論偈云如佛法亦然。故舉佛例法也。無法可說是名說法者。此更破疑。人聞法身有說便言有法可說。故今釋云。雖復說法無法可說。假名說法耳。論次此章后長有信受一章經。問上信今信何異。答上明信信因果深義。今明信信上如來雖說無所說也。問何等人能信此法耶。答論偈云。非眾生眾生非聖非不聖。此人非凡夫眾生故言非眾生。而是聖體眾生故言眾生也。非眾生故非聖。是聖體眾生故非不聖也。問若言凡夫不信不可為凡。聖人能信不須為聖。今說此經竟為何人耶。答觀此論意。具

【現代漢語翻譯】現代漢語譯本：只有佛陀一人才具備所有形相之美，所以說『具足』。其餘的人，乃至轉輪聖王，相貌都不夠明瞭，所以說『不具足』。如來說『具足即非具足』，是爲了破除『一』的見解，說明色身不是法身，怎麼能說是一個呢？這叫做『具足』。這是爲了破除『異』的見解，哪裡有離開相好之外，另外存在一個法身呢？『不可以諸相見如來』，意思和前面相同，只是身的總相和別相有所不同罷了。『于意云何如來有所說法』，這第七章的內容，是爲了破除法身有說法的疑惑。疑惑在於：如果具足色身不是法身，怎麼能說如來有所說法呢？所以佛陀破斥說：『須菩提，你不要說如來法身有所說。』如果說如來法身有所說，那就是誹謗法身。法身不是色相，所以法身沒有說法。為什麼說這一句呢？爲了破除法身沒有說法的疑惑。如果說相好身說法，法身不說，這也是不對的。上面已經說明不可以離開相好身，另外存在一個法身，就認為法身沒有相好。也不可以離開相好身來說法，另外認為法身沒有說法。問：怎麼知道經文是這個意思呢？答：論中的偈頌說『如佛法亦然』，所以用佛來比喻法。『無法可說是名說法』，這是更進一步破除疑惑。人們聽到法身有說法，就認為有法可以被說。所以現在解釋說：雖然說法，但是沒有法可以被說，只是假名為說法罷了。論中將這一章放在『長有信受』一章之後。問：前面的信和現在的信有什麼不同？答：前面是說明相信因果的深刻含義，現在是說明相信如來雖然說，但是無所說。問：什麼樣的人能夠相信這個法呢？答：論中的偈頌說：『非眾生眾生非聖非不聖』。這種人不是凡夫眾生，所以說『非眾生』，而是聖體的眾生，所以說『眾生』。因為不是眾生，所以不是聖人。是聖體的眾生，所以不是不聖。問：如果說凡夫不相信，不能為凡夫說；聖人能夠相信，不需要為聖人說。現在說這部經，究竟是爲了什麼人呢？答：觀察這部論的意圖，具 English version: Only the Buddha alone possesses the complete beauty of all forms, therefore it is said to be 'complete'. Other people, even a Chakravartin King (Wheel-Turning King), do not have clear enough features, so it is said to be 'incomplete'. The Tathagata (Thus Come One) says 'completeness is non-completeness' in order to dispel the view of 'oneness', explaining that the Rupakaya (form body) is not the Dharmakaya (dharma body), so how can they be said to be one? This is called 'completeness'. This is to dispel the view of 'difference'; where is there a Dharmakaya that exists separately from the Lakshanas (signs) and Anuvyanjanas (minor marks)? 'One cannot see the Tathagata through these characteristics' has the same meaning as before, only the general and specific characteristics of the body are different. 'What do you think, does the Tathagata have something to say?' This seventh chapter comes to dispel the doubt that the Dharmakaya has something to say. The doubt lies in: if the complete Rupakaya is not the Dharmakaya, how can it be said that the Tathagata has something to say? Therefore, the Buddha refutes, saying: 'Subhuti (Good Length), do not say that the Tathagata's Dharmakaya has something to say.' If it is said that the Tathagata's Dharmakaya has something to say, then that is slandering the Dharmakaya. The Dharmakaya is not form, so the Dharmakaya does not speak. Why is this sentence said? To dispel the doubt that the Dharmakaya does not speak. If it is said that the Lakshanas and Anuvyanjanas body speaks, and the Dharmakaya does not speak, that is also incorrect. It has already been explained above that one cannot separate the Lakshanas and Anuvyanjanas body and have a separate Dharmakaya, and then think that the Dharmakaya has no Lakshanas and Anuvyanjanas. Nor can one separate the Lakshanas and Anuvyanjanas body to speak, and then think that the Dharmakaya has no speech. Question: How do we know that the sutra has this meaning? Answer: The verse in the treatise says, 'Like the Buddha's Dharma, it is also so,' so the Buddha is used as an analogy for the Dharma. 'There is no Dharma that can be spoken, this is called speaking Dharma,' this is to further dispel doubts. People hear that the Dharmakaya has something to say, and then think that there is a Dharma that can be spoken. Therefore, it is now explained that although Dharma is spoken, there is no Dharma that can be spoken; it is merely nominally called speaking Dharma. In the treatise, this chapter is placed after the chapter on 'Long Having Faith and Acceptance'. Question: What is the difference between the previous faith and the current faith? Answer: The previous one explains believing in the profound meaning of cause and effect, while the current one explains believing that although the Tathagata speaks, he has nothing to say. Question: What kind of person can believe in this Dharma? Answer: The verse in the treatise says: 'Not sentient beings, sentient beings, not holy, not unholy.' This kind of person is not an ordinary sentient being, so it is said 'not sentient beings', but is a sentient being of the holy body, so it is said 'sentient beings'. Because they are not sentient beings, they are not holy. They are sentient beings of the holy body, so they are not unholy. Question: If it is said that ordinary people do not believe, it cannot be spoken for ordinary people; holy people can believe, it does not need to be spoken for holy people. Now, for whom is this sutra being spoken? Answer: Observing the intention of this treatise, it possesses

【English Translation】 English version: Only the Buddha alone possesses the complete beauty of all forms, therefore it is said to be 'complete'. Other people, even a Chakravartin King (Wheel-Turning King), do not have clear enough features, so it is said to be 'incomplete'. The Tathagata (Thus Come One) says 'completeness is non-completeness' in order to dispel the view of 'oneness', explaining that the Rupakaya (form body) is not the Dharmakaya (dharma body), so how can they be said to be one? This is called 'completeness'. This is to dispel the view of 'difference'; where is there a Dharmakaya that exists separately from the Lakshanas (signs) and Anuvyanjanas (minor marks)? 'One cannot see the Tathagata through these characteristics' has the same meaning as before, only the general and specific characteristics of the body are different. 'What do you think, does the Tathagata have something to say?' This seventh chapter comes to dispel the doubt that the Dharmakaya has something to say. The doubt lies in: if the complete Rupakaya is not the Dharmakaya, how can it be said that the Tathagata has something to say? Therefore, the Buddha refutes, saying: 'Subhuti (Good Length), do not say that the Tathagata's Dharmakaya has something to say.' If it is said that the Tathagata's Dharmakaya has something to say, then that is slandering the Dharmakaya. The Dharmakaya is not form, so the Dharmakaya does not speak. Why is this sentence said? To dispel the doubt that the Dharmakaya does not speak. If it is said that the Lakshanas and Anuvyanjanas body speaks, and the Dharmakaya does not speak, that is also incorrect. It has already been explained above that one cannot separate the Lakshanas and Anuvyanjanas body and have a separate Dharmakaya, and then think that the Dharmakaya has no Lakshanas and Anuvyanjanas. Nor can one separate the Lakshanas and Anuvyanjanas body to speak, and then think that the Dharmakaya has no speech. Question: How do we know that the sutra has this meaning? Answer: The verse in the treatise says, 'Like the Buddha's Dharma, it is also so,' so the Buddha is used as an analogy for the Dharma. 'There is no Dharma that can be spoken, this is called speaking Dharma,' this is to further dispel doubts. People hear that the Dharmakaya has something to say, and then think that there is a Dharma that can be spoken. Therefore, it is now explained that although Dharma is spoken, there is no Dharma that can be spoken; it is merely nominally called speaking Dharma. In the treatise, this chapter is placed after the chapter on 'Long Having Faith and Acceptance'. Question: What is the difference between the previous faith and the current faith? Answer: The previous one explains believing in the profound meaning of cause and effect, while the current one explains believing that although the Tathagata speaks, he has nothing to say. Question: What kind of person can believe in this Dharma? Answer: The verse in the treatise says: 'Not sentient beings, sentient beings, not holy, not unholy.' This kind of person is not an ordinary sentient being, so it is said 'not sentient beings', but is a sentient being of the holy body, so it is said 'sentient beings'. Because they are not sentient beings, they are not holy. They are sentient beings of the holy body, so they are not unholy. Question: If it is said that ordinary people do not believe, it cannot be spoken for ordinary people; holy people can believe, it does not need to be spoken for holy people. Now, for whom is this sutra being spoken? Answer: Observing the intention of this treatise, it possesses

足顛倒有所得凡夫不能了。此是習無所得觀眾生則能信。此眾生望有所得人故非眾生。未具足了悟故非不眾生也。于意云何下。第八章經論生起　從上第二章經生。上第二章經云佛無菩提可得者。今云何有階級位行耶。如謂從十信至十住。從十住至十行。從十行至十回向十地等。既有進行階級則佛果應有所得也。近文生者。相好論身業。無所說辨口業。今得菩提明意業。佛既無所說應無所得。今實有所得應實有所說也。問初週中已明佛無所說無得菩提。與今何異。答前後兩會利鈍兩緣。此二義通貫十五章也。但今文與上有開合之別及來意不同。來意不同。上明釋迦是化佛破實說之疑。今明不可言法身有說。不可言無說。破法身有說法身無說之義疑。上明無得菩提破實得之疑。今明無得破舉因行階級證果實得疑也。又上云如來有所說耶。有菩提可得耶。此得說合論。今則開得說為二章經。前章經明無所說。此章明無所得也。文三。初佛牒疑情反問善吉。次善吉奉答。明佛無少法得菩提。若有一豪之得則不得道。以畢竟無得爾乃得道耳。以得果實無一法可得。行因實無一行可行。無所得故始得果。無所行故乃是行因也。次佛述四義釋無上菩提。初即述以無所得故名無上也。二以體悟法界平等義故名無上菩提。以無我無人故

【現代漢語翻譯】現代漢語譯本：凡夫俗子因為知見顛倒，所以不能理解『無所得』的道理。只有習慣於『無所得』的修行者觀察眾生，才能相信這個道理。這些眾生因為渴望有所得的人的教導，所以才被稱為『眾生』。他們尚未完全覺悟，所以才『非不眾生』（仍然是眾生）。『于意云何』以下是第八章經論生起的內容。這一章是從前面的第二章經文生髮出來的。前面的第二章經文說佛陀沒有菩提可以獲得。那麼，現在為什麼又有從十信到十住，從十住到十行，從十行到十回向，再到十地等等的階級位行呢？既然有進階的階級，那麼佛果應該是有所得的才對。從近處的經文來看，相好論述的是身業，無所說是辨別口業，現在得到菩提是明瞭意業。佛既然無所說，就應該無所得。現在確實有所得，就應該確實有所說。有人問：在初週中已經說明佛陀無所說，無得菩提，這和現在有什麼不同？回答是：前後兩次法會面對的是根器利鈍不同的兩種緣分。這兩種意義貫穿十五章經文。但是，現在的經文和前面的經文有開合的區別，以及來意的不同。來意不同在於，前面是說明釋迦牟尼（Śākyamuni）(釋迦族聖人的稱號)是化身佛，爲了破除對『實說』的疑惑。現在是說明不可說法身（Dharmakāya）(佛的法性身)有說，也不可說法身無說，爲了破除對法身有說法身無說的疑惑。前面是說明無得菩提，爲了破除對『實得』的疑惑。現在是說明無得，爲了破除舉因行階級證果實得的疑惑。另外，前面說『如來有所說嗎？有菩提可以獲得嗎？』這是將『得』和『說』合在一起討論。現在則是將『得』和『說』分開，分為兩章經文。前一章經文說明無所說，這一章說明無所得。經文分為三部分。首先，佛陀重複疑問，反問善吉（Subhūti）(須菩提，佛陀的十大弟子之一)。其次，善吉回答，說明佛陀沒有絲毫的法可以獲得菩提。如果有一絲一毫的獲得，就不能得道。因為畢竟是無所得，才能得道。因為獲得果實沒有一法可以獲得，修行因地沒有一行可以修行。因為無所得，所以才得到果實。因為無所行，所以才是修行因地。最後，佛陀闡述四種意義來解釋無上菩提（Anuttarā-samyak-saṃbodhi）(無上的正等正覺)。首先，就是闡述因為無所得，所以才稱為『無上』。其次，因為體悟法界平等之義，所以才稱為無上菩提。因為無我無人，所以才稱為無上菩提。

【English Translation】 English version: Ordinary people cannot understand the principle of 'no attainment' because of their inverted views. Only practitioners who are accustomed to 'no attainment' can believe this principle when observing sentient beings. These sentient beings are called 'sentient beings' because they long for the teachings of those who desire attainment. They have not yet fully awakened, so they are 'not non-sentient beings' (still sentient beings). The following, starting with 'What do you think?', is the content of Chapter 8, the arising of the sutra discussion. This chapter arises from the previous Chapter 2. The previous Chapter 2 said that the Buddha has no Bodhi to attain. Then, why are there stages and practices from the Ten Faiths to the Ten Dwellings, from the Ten Dwellings to the Ten Practices, from the Ten Practices to the Ten Dedications, and then to the Ten Grounds? Since there are progressive stages, the fruit of Buddhahood should be attainable. Looking at the nearby sutra text, the Treatise on Physical Characteristics discusses physical karma, 'no speaking' distinguishes verbal karma, and now attaining Bodhi clarifies mental karma. Since the Buddha has nothing to say, there should be no attainment. Now that there is indeed attainment, there should indeed be something to say. Someone asks: In the initial turning of the Dharma wheel, it was already explained that the Buddha has nothing to say and no Bodhi to attain. What is the difference between that and now? The answer is: The two Dharma assemblies, before and after, face two different kinds of affinities, those of sharp and dull faculties. These two meanings run through the fifteen chapters. However, the current sutra text has differences in opening and closing compared to the previous sutra text, as well as different intentions. The different intention is that the previous one explains that Śākyamuni (the title of the sage of the Shakya clan) is a manifestation Buddha, in order to dispel doubts about 'real speaking'. The current one explains that it cannot be said that the Dharmakāya (the Dharma body of the Buddha) has speaking, nor can it be said that the Dharmakāya has no speaking, in order to dispel doubts about the Dharmakāya having speaking and the Dharmakāya having no speaking. The previous one explains no attainment of Bodhi, in order to dispel doubts about 'real attainment'. The current one explains no attainment, in order to dispel doubts about citing causal practices, stages, and proving the real attainment of the fruit. In addition, the previous one said, 'Does the Tathagata have something to say? Is there Bodhi to be attained?' This discusses 'attainment' and 'speaking' together. Now, 'attainment' and 'speaking' are separated into two chapters. The previous chapter explains no speaking, and this chapter explains no attainment. The sutra text is divided into three parts. First, the Buddha repeats the doubt and asks Subhūti (one of the Buddha's ten great disciples) in return. Second, Subhūti answers, explaining that the Buddha has not the slightest Dharma to attain Bodhi. If there is even a trace of attainment, one cannot attain the Way. Because ultimately there is no attainment, one can attain the Way. Because attaining the fruit has no Dharma to attain, and cultivating the causal ground has no practice to cultivate. Because there is no attainment, one attains the fruit. Because there is no practice, it is the cultivation of the causal ground. Finally, the Buddha elaborates on four meanings to explain Anuttarā-samyak-saṃbodhi (unexcelled complete and perfect enlightenment). First, it is to elaborate that because there is no attainment, it is called 'unexcelled'. Second, because of realizing the meaning of the equality of the Dharma realm, it is called unexcelled Bodhi. Because there is no self and no person, it is called unexcelled Bodhi.

得菩提者。第三義。彼菩提體無二種我名無上也。上之二義就得門釋無上菩提。今就離門釋。謂菩提體有我人則非無上。以體無有我人故名無上菩提也。修一切善法者。上三門就果釋無上。此第四義就因門釋無上。以有無上方便修一切眾行滿足故是無上。余菩薩修因行不滿故非無上也。如來說善法則非善法者。簡上修善法義。今明是無所得善法耳。得非是有所善法故云則非善法。是名善法者。還結取無所得善法也。三千世界須彌七寶下。此第九章。問前周已舉內外兩施明格量竟。今何故更說。答上已明前後說為兩會之眾。不應問也。又上來明般若體門及信受門竟。今說經是功德門也。又依論生起。從上修一切善法得菩提文生。若言修善法得菩提者。受持此經章句不得菩提。何以故。薩婆多等諸部人云名字句是無記法故也。為破此疑故重舉也。明名字句雖是無記能表實相故。受持四句功德無邊。又汝法中言是無記。我法中明此是般若名字句。豈是無記。故受持四句勝大千廣施也。問等是破無疑。何故不舉恒沙七寶及舉恒沙身命耶。答三千寶是最初格故舉初章耳。又為後會人須漸次格。不得頓格超說恒沙。又今三千財與上為異。上但明三千財不及持經四句。今明百分不及一等也。依論經有四種勝。一者云百分不及一。乃至

【現代漢語翻譯】現代漢語譯本獲得菩提（Bodhi，覺悟）的第三種含義是：菩提的本體沒有我與人的分別，因此稱為『無上』。前面兩種含義是從『獲得』的角度解釋無上菩提，現在從『離』的角度解釋。如果菩提的本體有我與人的分別，就不能稱為『無上』。因為本體沒有我與人的分別，所以稱為『無上菩提』。『修一切善法』：前面三種含義是從『果』的角度解釋『無上』，這第四種含義是從『因』的角度解釋『無上』。因為有『無上』的方便來修習一切善行，使其圓滿，所以是『無上』。其他的菩薩修習因行的功德不圓滿，所以不是『無上』。『如來說善法則非善法』：這是爲了簡別上面所說的『修善法』的含義，現在說明這是『無所得』的善法。因為所得到的不是『有』的善法，所以說『則非善法』。『是名善法』：這是總結歸納『無所得』的善法。『三千世界須彌七寶下』：這是第九章。問：前面已經舉了內外兩種佈施，說明了功德的差別，現在為什麼還要再說？答：前面已經說明了前後兩次說法是為兩類聽眾，不應該有這樣的疑問。而且，前面已經說明了般若（Prajna，智慧）的本體和信受之門，現在說的是經的功德之門。另外，這是依據論典而生起的。從上面『修一切善法得菩提』的經文引申出來。如果說修善法就能獲得菩提，那麼受持此經的章句就不能獲得菩提嗎？為什麼呢？薩婆多（Sarvastivada，一切有部）等各部的人說，名字句是無記法（avyākrta，不記說，既非善也非惡）。爲了破除這種疑惑，所以再次舉例說明。說明名字句雖然是無記，但能表達實相（tathata，真如），所以受持四句的功德是無邊的。而且，你們的法中說是無記，我的法中說明這是般若的名字句，怎麼能說是無記呢？所以受持四句勝過用大千世界的財寶來佈施。問：既然是爲了破除疑惑，為什麼不舉恒河沙數的七寶，而舉恒河沙數的生命呢？答：三千世界的財寶是最初的例子，所以舉最初的章節。而且，爲了後來的聽眾，需要逐漸地說明功德的差別，不能一下子就超越到恒河沙數。而且，現在用三千世界的財寶與上面所說的不同。上面只是說明三千世界的財寶不如受持經的四句，現在說明百分之一都不及。依據論典，經有四種殊勝之處：一是說百分之一都不及，乃至

【English Translation】 English version The third meaning of attaining Bodhi (覺悟, enlightenment) is: the essence of Bodhi is without the distinction of 'self' and 'others', hence it is called 'unsurpassed'. The previous two meanings explained unsurpassed Bodhi from the perspective of 'attainment', while this one explains it from the perspective of 'detachment'. If the essence of Bodhi contains the distinction of 'self' and 'others', it cannot be called 'unsurpassed'. Because the essence is without the distinction of 'self' and 'others', it is called 'unsurpassed Bodhi'. 'Cultivating all good dharmas': The previous three meanings explained 'unsurpassed' from the perspective of 'result', while this fourth meaning explains 'unsurpassed' from the perspective of 'cause'. Because there is the 'unsurpassed' expedient to cultivate all good deeds and fulfill them, it is 'unsurpassed'. Other Bodhisattvas' cultivation of causal deeds is not complete, so it is not 'unsurpassed'. 'What the Tathagata (如來, Thus Come One) calls good dharmas are not good dharmas': This is to distinguish the meaning of 'cultivating good dharmas' mentioned above, now clarifying that it is the 'unattainable' good dharma. Because what is attained is not a 'existent' good dharma, it is said 'then it is not a good dharma'. 'Therefore, they are called good dharmas': This is to summarize and conclude the 'unattainable' good dharma. 'Three thousand worlds, Mount Sumeru (須彌, Sumeru), seven treasures, etc.': This is the ninth chapter. Question: Earlier, both internal and external giving were mentioned to illustrate the difference in merit, so why is it being discussed again now? Answer: It was already explained earlier that the two instances of teaching were for two different audiences, so there should be no such question. Moreover, the essence of Prajna (般若, wisdom) and the gate of faith have already been explained, and now the merit of the Sutra is being discussed. Furthermore, this arises based on the treatise. It is derived from the verse above, 'Cultivating all good dharmas attains Bodhi'. If it is said that cultivating good dharmas can attain Bodhi, then can reciting the phrases of this Sutra not attain Bodhi? Why? The Sarvastivadins (薩婆多, Sarvastivada, school of thought) and other schools say that the phrases are unrecordable (avyākrta, 無記法, neither good nor evil). To dispel this doubt, it is explained again. It clarifies that although the phrases are unrecordable, they can express the true nature (tathata, 真如, suchness), so the merit of upholding four lines is boundless. Moreover, in your Dharma it is said to be unrecordable, but in my Dharma it is clarified that these are the phrases of Prajna, so how can they be unrecordable? Therefore, upholding four lines surpasses giving with the treasures of a great chiliocosm. Question: Since it is to dispel doubt, why not mention the seven treasures of the Ganges River sands, but instead mention the lives of the Ganges River sands? Answer: The treasures of the three thousand worlds are the initial example, so the initial chapter is mentioned. Moreover, for the later audience, it is necessary to gradually explain the difference in merit, and it cannot be surpassed all at once to the Ganges River sands. Furthermore, the treasures of the three thousand worlds now are different from what was mentioned above. Above, it was only explained that the treasures of the three thousand worlds are not as good as upholding four lines of the Sutra, but now it is explained that even one percent is not as good. According to the treatise, the Sutra has four kinds of superiority: first, it says that even one percent is not as good, and so on.

百千分不及一。此是數勝。持經福不可數也。二者歌羅分不及一。此是力用勝。明經力用勝七寶施力用。三者優婆尼沙陀分不及一。此云不相似數勝。此是數中微細之數。乃至持經少許福德數無有與此數相似。故云數勝。四者因果勝。此經因果勝餘因果也。須菩提于意云何下。第十章經來者。論云。從上菩提無高下生。無高則諸佛不高。佛非能度。若無有下則眾生非下。不下度眾生。而佛是能度故佛為高。眾生是所度故眾生為下。不應無高下也。又從上為他說四句生者。時會既聞為他說四句功德無邊。便謂有眾生可為。故今破之也。前文止於疑念。次何以故釋止疑念所以。明實無眾生可度。汝不應唸佛度眾生也。若有眾生如來度者。此是反釋。若見有眾生可度。佛則有取我之過也。以眾生見眾生眾生名眾生。不能自度。何能度眾生。佛亦見眾生佛亦名眾生。不能自度。何能度眾生。佛若見眾生佛能度眾生。眾生亦見眾生眾生應能度佛。有如是大過故佛不應見有眾生也。如來說有我者則非有我。又釋疑。疑雲。若無眾生可度。佛口中何故自稱我耶。如雲我本行菩薩道等。故知有我。答云。如來隨俗說有我耳。實無有我可說。而凡夫之人以為有我者。更疑若無我者何故世間皆云我來我去我生我死等耶。即釋云。此是凡夫人

于無我中橫計有我耳。故云凡夫以為有我也。凡夫者如來說非凡夫。論經具足雲鬚菩提凡夫生者。如來說非生是名毛道凡夫生。所以有此語來者。上既云凡夫之人以為有我。故今釋凡夫義也。所以言凡夫生如來說非生者。以不生聖觀故名非生。生凡夫顛倒心故是名凡夫生也。問論經何故云毛道凡夫耶。答愚癡不解一毛端聖法故也。數人別有凡夫法凡夫性。凡夫性是非色非心不相應行無記法也。凡夫法通五陰通三性也。成論義無別凡夫性法。但無無漏聖法故名凡夫法耳。可以三十二相觀如來不下。此第十一章經。上已三章來各有其義。今復來者。上第三章中雖破如來法身有相無相一異等見。但耳眼之徒多言三十二相是佛。即更復生疑。以修三十二相業等故得三十二相身。有三十二相身即有法身。故知法身應有相好。為破此疑故有此章來。又初周兩過明相好。後周亦兩過明相好。二會之信亦不可失。又近接前章總明正法平等無有高下。次章明無眾生可度釋無下義。今了三十二相非佛釋無高義。此一章經凡五句。一佛牒疑情問。二須菩提同迷答。三佛舉輪王並破。四須菩提悟解。五佛說偈呵之。問觀佛三昧經云。若觀佛色聲皆滅重罪。今云何見色聞聲行邪道耶。答若得般若方便用。見色聞聲亦是佛。非色聲亦是佛。乃至非非

色聲亦是佛。若不得般若方便用。五句皆非佛。故觀般若偈云。若人見般若是則得解脫。若不見般若是亦得解脫。若人見般若是則為繫縛。若不見般若亦為繫縛也。汝若作是念下。第十二章經來者。論生起云。若言不以色相好見法身者。則修相好業不得菩提。若爾應無福德之因福德之果。為破此疑故明。汝勿言無福因及福果。佛有二種莊嚴。福因得相好果此是福莊嚴。修智慧因得智慧果是慧莊嚴。如來具有福慧二莊嚴。何故無相好果耶。汝若作是念發菩提心說諸法斷滅。又疑。菩薩得無生忍出世間智慧。爾時舍肉身受法身。則應無復福德因福德果。為破此疑故明。菩薩得無生忍得妙智慧妙福德。豈失福德因果墮斷滅中耶。問此中雲發菩提心。何故釋云得無生忍耶。答初得無生忍亦名初發心也。又此中明從初發心不習斷滅觀亦不起常觀。後心皆爾。故初后不二。如雲發心畢竟二不別也。前明佛果非有相非無相。今明因非斷非常。可謂因果皆是正觀皆離斷常。問若爾因果何異。答明晦不同故開因果耳。以滿恒河沙世界七寶佈施者。問上已恒沙格竟。何故重說。答前周從三千至恒沙。後周亦爾。兩會之義不失也。又來意異。前為格量持經四句。今為格量菩薩無我忍也。此是人法無我故名無我忍也。不受福德者。不受有所得福

【現代漢語翻譯】現代漢語譯本色和聲也是佛。般若的方便法門如果運用不得當，那麼五蘊（色、受、想、行、識）都不是佛。所以觀察般若的偈頌說：『如果有人見到般若，就能得到解脫；如果見不到般若，也能得到解脫。如果有人見到般若，就會被束縛；如果見不到般若，也會被束縛。』你如果這樣想，接下來的第十二章經文就來了。論中生起這樣的疑問：如果說不以色相好來見法身，那麼修習相好之業就不能得到菩提。如果這樣，就應該沒有福德之因和福德之果。爲了破除這個疑惑，所以說明：你不要說沒有福因和福果，佛有兩種莊嚴：修福因得到相好之果，這是福莊嚴；修智慧因得到智慧果，這是慧莊嚴。如來具有福慧兩種莊嚴，怎麼會沒有相好之果呢？你如果這樣想，發起菩提心，說諸法斷滅。又疑惑，菩薩得到無生忍，獲得出世間的智慧，這時捨棄肉身，接受法身，那麼就應該沒有福德之因和福德之果。爲了破除這個疑惑，所以說明：菩薩得到無生忍，得到妙智慧和妙福德，怎麼會失去福德因果而墮入斷滅之中呢？問：這裡說發起菩提心，為什麼解釋為得到無生忍呢？答：初次得到無生忍也叫做初發心。又，這裡說明從初發心就不習斷滅觀，也不起常觀，後來的心也是這樣，所以初后沒有分別，如雲『發心和畢竟二者沒有差別』。前面說明佛果不是有相也不是無相，現在說明因不是斷也不是常，可以說因果都是正觀，都遠離斷常。問：如果這樣，因果有什麼不同？答：明和暗不同，所以才開顯因果。以滿恒河沙世界七寶佈施。問：上面已經用恒河沙來比量過了，為什麼又重複說？答：前面一週是從三千世界到恒河沙，後面一週也是這樣，兩次法會的意義沒有缺失。又，來意不同，前面是爲了比量持經四句，現在是爲了比量菩薩的無我忍。這是人法無我，所以叫做無我忍。不受福德，是不受有所得的福德。

【English Translation】 English version Form and sound are also Buddha. If the expedient means of Prajna are not used properly, then all five skandhas (form, sensation, perception, volition, and consciousness) are not Buddha. Therefore, the verse observing Prajna says: 'If a person sees Prajna, then they will attain liberation; if they do not see Prajna, they will also attain liberation. If a person sees Prajna, then they will be bound; if they do not see Prajna, they will also be bound.' If you think this way, then the following Chapter Twelve will come. The Treatise raises this question: If it is said that the Dharmakaya (法身, Dharma body) is not seen by means of good physical characteristics, then cultivating the karma of good characteristics will not attain Bodhi. If so, there should be no cause of merit and no fruit of merit. To dispel this doubt, it is explained: Do not say that there is no cause of merit and no fruit of merit. The Buddha has two kinds of adornments: cultivating the cause of merit to obtain the fruit of good characteristics, this is the adornment of merit; cultivating the cause of wisdom to obtain the fruit of wisdom, this is the adornment of wisdom. The Tathagata (如來, Thus Come One) has both the adornments of merit and wisdom, how can there be no fruit of good characteristics? If you think this way, arouse the Bodhi mind and say that all dharmas are annihilated. Also, there is doubt that the Bodhisattva attains the patience of non-origination and obtains transcendental wisdom. At this time, abandoning the physical body and receiving the Dharma body, then there should be no cause of merit and no fruit of merit. To dispel this doubt, it is explained: The Bodhisattva attains the patience of non-origination and obtains wonderful wisdom and wonderful merit, how can they lose the cause and fruit of merit and fall into annihilation? Question: Here it says to arouse the Bodhi mind, why is it explained as attaining the patience of non-origination? Answer: Initially attaining the patience of non-origination is also called the initial arousing of the mind. Also, it is explained here that from the initial arousing of the mind, one does not practice the view of annihilation, nor does one arise the view of permanence. The subsequent minds are also like this, so the beginning and the end are not different, as it is said, 'The arousing of the mind and the ultimate are not different.' The previous explanation stated that the Buddha fruit is neither with form nor without form, and now it is explained that the cause is neither annihilated nor permanent. It can be said that both cause and effect are correct views, and both are far from annihilation and permanence. Question: If so, what is the difference between cause and effect? Answer: The difference between clarity and obscurity is why cause and effect are revealed. To give offerings of the seven treasures filling the Ganges River sand worlds. Question: The comparison with the Ganges River sand has already been made above, why is it repeated? Answer: The previous cycle was from three thousand worlds to the Ganges River sand, and the subsequent cycle is also like this. The meaning of the two assemblies is not lost. Also, the intention is different. The previous one was to compare the four lines of upholding the sutra, and now it is to compare the Bodhisattva's patience of no-self. This is the no-self of both person and dharma, so it is called the patience of no-self. Not accepting merit is not accepting merit with attachment.

德故此菩薩勝前菩薩。前菩薩受有得福德故不及后菩薩也。次問答料簡不受之義。問菩薩既作福德。云何不貪著耶。答菩薩以無受心作故不生貪心。多非作福德然復不貪也。若有人言如來若來若去下。第十三章來者。論生起云。菩薩既不受福德則不受世間人王天王。云何往來六道利益眾生耶。故今釋云。菩薩雖不受世間果。而化身往來六道作人王天王利益眾生。法身常住則無有去來。勿見化身去來利物便言法身亦有去來。勿見法身無去來謂生身亦無去來。此中正明化身有去來破法身有去來疑。故云。若言如來法身有去來者。不解法身之義也。問若化身有來去法身無來去。還是從來義耳。答此是不二二義。故開二身。無去來去來是化身。去來無去來是法身。皆是為物作此名字耳。至論。正般若未曾二不二去來不去來也。須菩提以三千世界碎為微塵下。第十四章經。前已明微塵。今復明。何異。釋有同有異有同者。同取為譬喻。異者來意各別。前舉有微塵譬有所得佈施。成格量優劣義故來。明有得佈施此是塵染因。還得塵染果故不及持經四句。今舉微塵喻破十方佛法身一異之疑。如世界碎末為塵。不可言一處住。以其各散故亦非異處。既無聚云何散耶。十方佛法身不可一處住。不可異處住。以不可一處住非是混成一法身。

不可異處住故不可各各有法身。故論偈云。於是法界處非一亦不異。此破由來兩解。或言十方佛混成一法身。或言各各有法身義也。問何故舉微塵喻破法身一異疑耶。答如微塵散滅故不可說一異處。如是十方佛煩惱盡故不可說法身一異處住。故論偈云。微塵碎為末。示現煩惱盡也。問何因緣故破法身一異疑耶。答上明化身有來去法身無有來去。法身無來去故時會生疑十方佛法身同爲無來去。為成一法身同處住。為各各有法身異處住耶。又上來廣破二身一異之見令識正果。今破微塵世界聚散之見令識依果故。令了悟不依不正畢竟空義故有此文來也。此中前牒彼疑。而頓舉三千世界微塵者。欲明十方一切佛法身同異義也。答云甚多者十方諸佛多也。說微塵者。舉微塵為喻也。假名微塵無所有故云非微塵也。是名微塵者。還結正假名義也。世界一合相者。若微塵世界相對。微塵喻十方法身不一。世界喻十方法身不異。但論意用微塵通喻不一異。世界偏喻不一也。問前微塵通喻不一異。何故舉世界別喻不一耶。答人聞十方法身皆無來去大小。應是一也。以多有一疑故偏破一也。一合相者合衆塵成世界也。一合相不可說者。聖人了合無所合。如破合品。是法不自合異法亦不合。合法及合時合者亦皆無。故無有合。但凡夫見有世界

【現代漢語翻譯】現代漢語譯本不可在不同的地方居住，所以不能各自有獨立的法身（Dharmakāya）。因此，《論》中的偈頌說：『在法界（Dharmadhatu）之處，非一亦非異。』這句話破斥了由來已久的兩種解釋：一種認為十方諸佛混合成一個法身，另一種認為各自有獨立的法身。問：為什麼用微塵（microscopic dust）的比喻來破除對法身是一還是異的疑惑呢？答：就像微塵散滅后，不可說它在一處還是異處一樣，十方諸佛的煩惱已經斷盡，所以不可說法身在一處還是異處。因此，《論》中的偈頌說：『微塵碎為末，示現煩惱盡。』問：因為什麼因緣要破除對法身是一還是異的疑惑呢？答：前面說明化身（Nirmāṇakāya）有來去，而法身沒有來去。因為法身沒有來去，所以當時會產生疑問：十方諸佛的法身都是沒有來去的，是成為一個法身同處而住，還是各自有法身異處而住呢？而且，前面廣泛地破斥了二身（指化身和法身）是一還是異的見解，是爲了讓人認識真正的果。現在破除微塵世界聚散的見解，是爲了讓人認識依果（dependent result），所以爲了讓人了悟不依不正的畢竟空（śūnyatā）的意義，所以才有這段文字。這裡，前面先提出他們的疑問，然後一下子舉出三千大千世界（Trisāhasra-mahāsāhasra-lokadhātu）的微塵，是爲了說明十方一切諸佛法身同異的意義。回答說『甚多』，是因為十方諸佛很多。說微塵，是舉微塵作為比喻。假名為微塵，實際上沒有所有，所以說『非微塵』。『是名微塵』，是還總結正假名的意義。『世界一合相』，如果微塵和世界相對，微塵比喻十方法身不一，世界比喻十方法身不異。但《論》的意圖是用微塵來普遍比喻不一和不異，而用世界來偏重比喻不一。問：前面微塵普遍比喻不一和不異，為什麼這裡用世界來特別比喻不一呢？答：人們聽到十方法身都沒有來去大小，應該認為是一個。因為很多人有一個的疑惑，所以偏重破除『一』的觀點。『一合相』，是眾多微塵合在一起形成世界。『一合相不可說』，是聖人瞭解了合而無合的道理，就像破合品（破除聚合的品）所說：『是法不自合，異法亦不合，合法及合時，合者亦皆無。』所以沒有聚合。但凡夫看到有世界。

【English Translation】 English version Because they cannot dwell in different places, they cannot each have their own Dharmakāya (法身, Dharma body). Therefore, the verse in the Treatise says: 'In the Dharmadhatu (法界, Dharma realm), there is neither oneness nor difference.' This refutes two long-standing interpretations: one that the Buddhas of the ten directions are mixed into one Dharmakāya, and the other that each has their own independent Dharmakāya. Question: Why is the analogy of microscopic dust (微塵) used to dispel doubts about whether the Dharmakāya is one or different? Answer: Just as it cannot be said whether microscopic dust is in one place or a different place after it is scattered and destroyed, the afflictions of the Buddhas of the ten directions have been exhausted, so it cannot be said that the Dharmakāya dwells in one place or a different place. Therefore, the verse in the Treatise says: 'Microscopic dust is crushed into powder, showing the exhaustion of afflictions.' Question: For what reason is it necessary to dispel doubts about whether the Dharmakāya is one or different? Answer: The previous explanation clarified that the Nirmāṇakāya (化身, manifestation body) has coming and going, while the Dharmakāya has no coming and going. Because the Dharmakāya has no coming and going, doubts may arise at that time: the Dharmakāyas of the Buddhas of the ten directions are all without coming and going, so do they become one Dharmakāya dwelling in the same place, or do they each have their own Dharmakāya dwelling in different places? Moreover, the previous extensive refutation of the view that the two bodies (referring to the Nirmāṇakāya and Dharmakāya) are one or different was to enable people to recognize the true result. Now, dispelling the view of the aggregation and dispersion of the microscopic dust world is to enable people to recognize the dependent result, so in order to enable people to realize the meaning of the ultimately empty (śūnyatā, 畢竟空) that does not rely on the incorrect, this passage comes about. Here, first presenting their doubts, and then suddenly citing the microscopic dust of the Trisāhasra-mahāsāhasra-lokadhātu (三千大千世界, great trichiliocosm), is to explain the meaning of the sameness and difference of the Dharmakāyas of all the Buddhas of the ten directions. The answer 'very many' is because there are many Buddhas in the ten directions. Saying 'microscopic dust' is using microscopic dust as an analogy. The name 'microscopic dust' is nominally designated, and in reality there is nothing possessed, so it is said 'not microscopic dust'. 'It is called microscopic dust' is to summarize the meaning of the correct nominal designation. 'The world as a single aggregation' means that if microscopic dust and the world are compared, microscopic dust is an analogy for the non-oneness of the Dharmakāyas of the ten directions, and the world is an analogy for the non-difference of the Dharmakāyas of the ten directions. However, the intention of the Treatise is to use microscopic dust to universally analogize non-oneness and non-difference, while using the world to particularly analogize non-oneness. Question: Why does the previous microscopic dust universally analogize non-oneness and non-difference, while here the world is used to specifically analogize non-oneness? Answer: People hear that the Dharmakāyas of the ten directions have no coming and going, no size, and should think that they are one. Because many people have the doubt of 'one', the viewpoint of 'one' is particularly refuted. 'A single aggregation' is that many microscopic dust particles are combined to form a world. 'A single aggregation cannot be spoken of' means that sages understand the principle of aggregation without aggregation, just as the chapter on breaking aggregation (破合品, chapter on refuting aggregation) says: 'This dharma does not aggregate itself, different dharmas also do not aggregate, the aggregating, the time of aggregation, and the aggregator are all non-existent.' Therefore, there is no aggregation. But ordinary people see that there is a world.

故起貪著心言有世界耳。若人言佛說我見者。此文近接前生明凡夫貪著其事生也。凡夫貪著由於我見。我見既無貪著何由有耶。又遠釋一經。上來處處嘆無我無人。但凡夫顛倒起我見人見耳。時會便疑。佛說凡夫起我見。故知有我見可起。若無我見佛不應說凡夫起我見。此是一疑也。又二乘人云。先有我見故斷我見故得無我智。是名得道。此是二疑。破初疑雲。若人言說我見便有我見可說者。則不解佛所說義。佛欲明我見是無故說我見耳。非說我見便有我見可說也。故中論最後偈云。一切諸法空。世間常等見何處於何時誰起是諸見。故非但正見不可得。邪見亦不可得。故知道門未曾邪正。此經將竟。上破昔有所得正見不可得。今破其邪見亦無得。顯正般若未曾邪正也。即是答二乘人亦不得言先有我見斷我見故得無我智。今乃明我本來畢竟不可得。何所斷故言無我耶。應如是知者。上明我見本來不可得。今明法見亦本來不可得。故舉我列法故云應如是知見信解不在法相也。所言法相者則非法相者。亦如我義佛說我既非我。說法相亦非法相也。問如是知見信解何異耶。答論偈云二智及三昧。知是世諦智。見是第一義諦智。信解者是二智所依三昧。依三昧故發生二智也。問何故明二智。答菩薩了人法空具足二智也。又始行菩

【現代漢語翻譯】現代漢語譯本所以才生起貪戀執著的心，說有世界存在。如果有人說佛陀說過『我見』（ātmadṛṣṭi，認為有『我』的見解）這種話，那麼這句話是緊接著前面所說的，說明凡夫貪戀執著於事物而產生。凡夫的貪戀執著是由於『我見』。如果『我見』不存在，貪戀執著又從何而來呢？這又進一步解釋了之前的經文。前面處處讚歎『無我』（anātman，沒有永恒不變的『我』）『無人』（nirudaka，沒有實體的人），只不過是凡夫顛倒，生起『我見』『人見』（pudgala-dṛṣṭi，認為有獨立的人格的見解）罷了。當時在場的人就疑惑了，佛陀說凡夫生起『我見』，所以知道有『我見』可以生起。如果沒有『我見』，佛陀不應該說凡夫生起『我見』。這是第一個疑惑。還有二乘人（śrāvaka-yāna and pratyekabuddha-yāna，聲聞乘和緣覺乘）說，先有『我見』，所以斷除『我見』，因此得到『無我智』（anātma-jñāna，認識到沒有『我』的智慧），這叫做得道。這是第二個疑惑。破除第一個疑惑說，如果有人說『我見』，就認為有『我見』可以被說，那麼就是不理解佛陀所說的含義。佛陀想要說明『我見』是虛無的，所以才說『我見』，不是說說了『我見』，就真的有『我見』可以被說。所以《中論》（Mūlamadhyamakakārikā）最後的偈頌說：『一切諸法空，世間常等見，何處於何時，誰起是諸見？』所以不僅僅是正見（samyag-dṛṣṭi，正確的見解）不可得，邪見（mithyā-dṛṣṭi，錯誤的見解）也是不可得的。所以知道道門中未曾有邪正之分。這部經快要結束了，前面破除了過去認為有所得的正見是不可得的，現在破除邪見也是沒有所得的，彰顯真正的般若（prajñā，智慧）未曾有邪正之分。這就是回答二乘人，也不得說先有『我見』，斷除『我見』，所以得到『無我智』。現在說明『我』本來畢竟是不可得的，斷除什麼才說是『無我』呢？應該這樣理解。上面說明『我見』本來是不可得的，現在說明法見（dharma-dṛṣṭi，對法的執著）也本來是不可得的。所以舉『我』來列舉『法』，所以說『應如是知見信解不在法相也』。所說的『法相』（dharma-lakṣaṇa，法的表相），就是『非法相』（adharma-lakṣaṇa，非法的表相）。也像『我』的含義一樣，佛陀說『我』既然不是真正的『我』，說法相也不是真正的法相。問：像這樣知、見、信、解有什麼不同呢？答：《論》中的偈頌說：『二智及三昧，知是世諦智，見是第一義諦智，信解者是二智所依三昧。』依靠三昧（samādhi，禪定），所以發生二智（dve jñāne，兩種智慧）。問：為什麼要說明二智？答：菩薩（bodhisattva，覺悟的有情）瞭解人法皆空，具足二智。又開始修行的菩

【English Translation】 English version Therefore, they give rise to a mind of greed and attachment, saying that there is a world. If someone says that the Buddha spoke of 'self-view' (ātmadṛṣṭi, the view that there is a 'self'), this passage closely follows the previous one, explaining that ordinary people are greedy and attached to things, which gives rise to it. The greed and attachment of ordinary people is due to 'self-view'. If 'self-view' does not exist, how can greed and attachment arise? This further explains the previous sutra. Earlier, it was praised everywhere that there is 'no-self' (anātman, no permanent 'self') and 'no person' (nirudaka, no substantial person), but ordinary people are deluded and give rise to 'self-view' and 'person-view' (pudgala-dṛṣṭi, the view that there is an independent personality). At that time, the assembly doubted, 'The Buddha said that ordinary people give rise to 'self-view', so we know that there is 'self-view' that can arise. If there is no 'self-view', the Buddha should not say that ordinary people give rise to 'self-view'.' This is the first doubt. Also, the followers of the Two Vehicles (śrāvaka-yāna and pratyekabuddha-yāna, the Hearer Vehicle and the Solitary Buddha Vehicle) say, 'First there is 'self-view', so they eliminate 'self-view', and therefore obtain 'no-self wisdom' (anātma-jñāna, the wisdom of realizing no 'self'), which is called enlightenment.' This is the second doubt. Refuting the first doubt, it says, 'If someone speaks of 'self-view' and thinks that there is 'self-view' that can be spoken of, then they do not understand the meaning of what the Buddha said. The Buddha wanted to explain that 'self-view' is empty, so he spoke of 'self-view', not that speaking of 'self-view' means that there is really 'self-view' that can be spoken of.' Therefore, the last verse of the Mūlamadhyamakakārikā says: 'All dharmas are empty, the world is seen as permanent, etc., where, when, and by whom do these views arise?' Therefore, not only is right view (samyag-dṛṣṭi, correct view) unattainable, but wrong view (mithyā-dṛṣṭi, incorrect view) is also unattainable. Therefore, know that in the path of the Way, there has never been right or wrong. This sutra is about to end. Earlier, it refuted that the right view that was thought to be attainable in the past is unattainable. Now it refutes that wrong view is also unattainable, revealing that true prajñā (wisdom) has never had right or wrong. This is the answer to the followers of the Two Vehicles, who cannot say that first there is 'self-view', and by eliminating 'self-view', they obtain 'no-self wisdom'. Now it is explained that 'self' is originally and ultimately unattainable. What is eliminated to say 'no-self'? It should be understood in this way. Above, it was explained that 'self-view' is originally unattainable. Now it is explained that dharma-view (dharma-dṛṣṭi, attachment to dharmas) is also originally unattainable. Therefore, 'self' is mentioned to list 'dharmas', so it says, 'One should know, see, believe, and understand that it is not in the characteristics of dharmas.' What is called 'dharma-lakṣaṇa' (the characteristics of dharmas) is also 'adharma-lakṣaṇa' (the characteristics of non-dharmas). It is also like the meaning of 'self'. The Buddha said that since 'self' is not a true 'self', the characteristics of dharmas are also not true characteristics of dharmas. Question: What is the difference between knowing, seeing, believing, and understanding in this way? Answer: The verse in the Treatise says: 'Two wisdoms and samādhi, knowing is worldly truth wisdom, seeing is ultimate truth wisdom, believing and understanding are the samādhi on which the two wisdoms rely.' Relying on samādhi (meditative concentration), the two wisdoms (dve jñāne, two kinds of wisdom) arise. Question: Why explain the two wisdoms? Answer: The bodhisattva (bodhisattva, an enlightened being) understands that both persons and dharmas are empty, and possesses the two wisdoms. Also, the bodhisattva who has just begun to practice

薩未得無生。了悟淺名世諦智。深行菩薩得無生忍。了悟二空名第一義諦智。三昧通是二人智所依也。若人以滿無量下。此第十五章經。上如來者無所從來。總明二身。微塵譬喻別料簡法身。今此一章經別料簡化身。疑雲。化佛既有去來。供養化佛持化佛所說。何如真佛耶。故今明。若能于化佛所發心受持化佛四句偈者功德。勝無量阿僧祇世界七寶施。云何為人演說。釋為他說義。明上來數勸為人說法。今經之慾竟示說法之方。當如如而說。下如字則是如法性之如。勸行者當如法性如而說。勿生心動念也。下偈即明說法之辭亦如十喻之說。故居士經云。說法者無說無示。譬如幻士為幻人說法。什法師云。十喻以喻空。空必持此喻。借言以會意。意盡無會處。既得出長羅住此無所住也。若依論經明之。經曰。云何為人演說而不名說。是名為說。此釋化佛說法義。化佛說法不自稱是化。若自稱是化則眾生不生信敬。故言不名為說。是名為說者。直化佛說法也。一切有為法偈來者。更釋疑。疑雲。諸佛常為眾生說法。何故復入涅槃。故明諸佛如來不住涅槃不住有為。以諸佛為利眾生化身說法故不住涅槃。觀有為如夢幻故不住世間也。論經廣有九喻。云一切有為法如星翳燈幻露泡夢電云。一者如星。日未出有用。日出則無用。

【現代漢語翻譯】現代漢語譯本薩未（Samadhi，三昧）得無生法忍（Anutpattika-dharma-kshanti，對法不生不滅的領悟）。了悟淺顯的名相，是世俗諦的智慧。深入修行的菩薩得到無生法忍，了悟人空和法空，這是第一義諦的智慧。三昧是這兩種智慧所依賴的基礎。如果有人用充滿無量世界的七寶來佈施，這對應的是第十五章的經文。上面所說的如來，無所從來，也無所去，總的說明了法身和應化身。用微塵的比喻來分別解釋法身。現在這一章經文是分別解釋應化身。疑問：應化佛既然有來去，那麼供養應化佛，受持應化佛所說的法，和供養真佛相比，哪個功德更大呢？所以現在說明，如果能對應化佛所說的法生起信心，受持應化佛所說的四句偈，這個功德勝過用無量阿僧祇世界的七寶來佈施。『云何為人演說』，解釋為替他人解說。說明上面多次勸人為人說法，現在經文將要結束，指示說法的正確方法。應當『如如』而說，下面的『如』字，就是如法性的『如』。勸修行者應當如法性之如而說，不要生起任何心念。下面的偈頌，就是說明說法的言辭，也像十種比喻所說的那樣。所以《維摩詰經》說：『說法者無說無示，譬如幻術師為幻人說法。』什法師（鳩摩羅什）說：『十喻用來比喻空性，領悟空性必須依靠這些比喻。』用語言來領會意境，意境領會完畢，語言也就沒有用處了。既然已經得到了長羅，就安住于無所住的境界。如果依據論和經來解釋，經文說：『云何為人演說而不名說？是名為說。』這是解釋應化佛說法的意義。應化佛說法，不自己宣稱是應化身。如果自己宣稱是應化身，那麼眾生就不會生起信心和恭敬心。所以說『不名為說』，『是名為說』，就是直接應化佛說法。『一切有為法偈』，再次解釋疑問。疑問：諸佛常常為眾生說法，為什麼還要進入涅槃？所以說明諸佛如來不住于涅槃，也不住于有為法。因為諸佛爲了利益眾生，化身說法，所以不住于涅槃。觀察有為法如夢幻泡影，所以不住於世間。論和經中廣泛地運用了九種比喻，說一切有為法如星、翳、燈、幻、露、泡、夢、電、云。第一種是如星，太陽沒有出來的時候有用，太陽出來就沒有用了。

【English Translation】 English version Savi (Samadhi) attained Anutpattika-dharma-kshanti (the realization of the non-arising and non-ceasing of dharmas). Understanding superficial names is the wisdom of mundane truth (Samvriti-satya). Bodhisattvas who practice deeply attain Anutpattika-dharma-kshanti, understanding the emptiness of persons and the emptiness of dharmas, which is the wisdom of ultimate truth (Paramartha-satya). Samadhi is the foundation upon which these two types of wisdom rely. If someone were to give offerings of the seven treasures filling countless worlds, this corresponds to the sutra in Chapter Fifteen. The Tathagata mentioned above, from whence does he come, and whither does he go, generally explains the Dharmakaya and the Nirmanakaya. The analogy of dust motes is used to separately explain the Dharmakaya. This chapter of the sutra now separately explains the Nirmanakaya. Question: Since the Nirmanabuddha has coming and going, which has greater merit: making offerings to the Nirmanabuddha and upholding the Dharma spoken by the Nirmanabuddha, or making offerings to the True Buddha? Therefore, it is now explained that if one can generate faith in the Dharma spoken by the Nirmanabuddha and uphold the four-line verse spoken by the Nirmanabuddha, this merit surpasses giving offerings of the seven treasures filling countless Asankhya worlds. 'How does one expound it for others?' This is explained as explaining it for others. It explains that the above repeatedly encourages people to expound the Dharma for others. Now that the sutra is about to conclude, it instructs the correct method of expounding the Dharma. One should speak 'as it is' (tathata), the 'as' below being the 'as' of suchness (dharmata). It encourages practitioners to speak according to the suchness of dharmata, without generating any thoughts. The verse below explains the words of expounding the Dharma, also like the ten analogies. Therefore, the Vimalakirti Sutra says: 'The expounder of the Dharma neither speaks nor shows, like a magician speaking Dharma to illusory people.' Master Kumarajiva says: 'The ten analogies are used to illustrate emptiness; understanding emptiness must rely on these analogies.' Use language to comprehend the meaning; once the meaning is comprehended, the language is no longer useful. Since one has already attained the long net, one abides in the state of non-abiding. If one explains according to the treatises and sutras, the sutra says: 'How does one expound it for others without naming it as expounding? This is named expounding.' This explains the meaning of the Nirmanabuddha expounding the Dharma. The Nirmanabuddha, when expounding the Dharma, does not proclaim himself to be a Nirmanakaya. If he proclaims himself to be a Nirmanakaya, then sentient beings will not generate faith and respect. Therefore, it is said 'not named expounding'; 'this is named expounding' is directly the Nirmanabuddha expounding the Dharma. 'The verse of all conditioned dharmas' further explains the question. Question: The Buddhas constantly expound the Dharma for sentient beings, so why do they still enter Nirvana? Therefore, it is explained that the Buddhas and Tathagatas do not abide in Nirvana, nor do they abide in conditioned dharmas. Because the Buddhas transform bodies to expound the Dharma for the benefit of sentient beings, they do not abide in Nirvana. Observing conditioned dharmas as dreams, illusions, bubbles, and shadows, they do not abide in the world. The treatises and sutras extensively use nine analogies, saying that all conditioned dharmas are like stars, cataracts, lamps, illusions, dew, bubbles, dreams, lightning, and clouds. The first is like a star, useful before the sun rises, but useless once the sun rises.

未有正觀日出則妄心有用。正觀日出則妄想不可得。第二翳喻。如眼有翳故見空有毛輪故可得。翳慧眼故無六塵妄見六塵也。第三如燈。還喻能見識法。如有油炷器三法合故有燈。根塵及貪受故有識生。燈和合有無所有。法亦和合有無所有。燈唸唸滅。識亦爾也。第四如幻喻。如幻師作種種物而無實。眾生業幻故見種種國土亦無實也。第五露喻。露少時住。身亦爾。第六泡喻如天雨渧成泡小兒謂之即為珠心生貪著。眾生三受亦爾。從根塵識生亦不實也。第七夢喻。過去法如昨夜夢見有了悟則無也。八者如電喻。才現即滅。現在法亦爾。第九云喻。空中凈忽然云生即時便滅。未來法亦爾。忽然而起即時散滅也。委曲須講釋。今略示耳。第三流通如文意云云。

金剛般若經義疏卷第四畢

【現代漢語翻譯】現代漢語譯本：如果沒有正確的觀察日出，那麼虛妄的心就會起作用。如果正確地觀察日出，那麼虛妄的念頭就無法產生。第二，用眼翳來比喻。就像眼睛有翳障，所以看到空中好像有毛髮形成的輪廓。因為有翳障遮蔽了智慧之眼，所以沒有色、聲、香、味、觸、法這六塵，也就不存在對六塵的虛妄見解。第三，用燈來比喻。這仍然是比喻能見之識法。就像有油、燈芯、燈器這三種條件聚合在一起，所以才會有燈。根、塵以及貪愛和接受這三種條件聚合在一起，所以才會有識的產生。燈的聚合存在是虛幻不實的，法的聚合存在也是虛幻不實的。燈光念念生滅，識也是如此。第四，用幻術來比喻。就像幻術師變現出種種事物，但這些事物都不是真實的。眾生因為業力的虛幻作用，所以看到種種國土，這些國土也不是真實的。第五，用露水來比喻。露水停留的時間很短，身體也是如此。第六，用水泡來比喻。就像下雨時，雨滴形成水泡，小孩子以為它是珍珠，心中生起貪戀執著。眾生的苦受、樂受、不苦不樂受也是如此。它們從根、塵、識產生，也不是真實的。第七，用夢境來比喻。過去的法就像昨夜夢見的事情，一旦醒悟，夢中的事物就不存在了。第八，用閃電來比喻。閃電才剛出現就立刻消失，現在的法也是如此。第九，用雲彩來比喻。晴朗的空中忽然生起雲彩，隨即又消散，未來的法也是如此。忽然生起，隨即消散。這些比喻需要詳細講解，現在只是簡略地說明一下。第三部分是流通分，就像經文的意思所表達的那樣。

《金剛般若經義疏》卷第四完

【English Translation】 English version: If there is no correct observation of the sunrise, then the deluded mind will be useful. If there is a correct observation of the sunrise, then deluded thoughts cannot arise. Second, the analogy of eye disease. It is like when the eye has an eye disease, one sees hair-like wheels in the sky. Because the wisdom eye is obscured by the disease, there are no six dusts (色、聲、香、味、觸、法 - form, sound, smell, taste, touch, and dharma), and thus no deluded views of the six dusts. Third, the analogy of a lamp. This still uses the ability to see as an analogy for the consciousness-dharma. It is like when oil, wick, and vessel, these three conditions come together, there is a lamp. Root (根 - sensory organs), dust (塵 - sensory objects), and greed and acceptance (貪受 - craving and acceptance) come together, and thus consciousness arises. The coming together of the lamp is empty and unreal. The coming together of dharmas is also empty and unreal. The lamp extinguishes moment by moment, and so does consciousness. Fourth, the analogy of illusion. It is like a magician creates various things that are not real. Because of the illusion of karma, sentient beings see various lands that are also not real. Fifth, the analogy of dew. Dew stays for a short time, and so does the body. Sixth, the analogy of a bubble. It is like when raindrops form bubbles, children think they are pearls and develop greed and attachment. The three feelings (三受 - three kinds of feelings: pleasant, unpleasant, and neutral) of sentient beings are also like this. They arise from root, dust, and consciousness, and are also not real. Seventh, the analogy of a dream. Past dharmas are like what one dreamed last night; once awakened, the things in the dream are gone. Eighth, the analogy of lightning. It appears and disappears immediately, and so are present dharmas. Ninth, the analogy of clouds. In the clear sky, clouds suddenly arise and then disappear immediately, and so are future dharmas. They suddenly arise and then scatter immediately. These analogies need to be explained in detail, but now I am just giving a brief explanation. The third part is the transmission section, just like the meaning expressed in the sutra.

The End of the Fourth Scroll of the Commentary on the Diamond Prajna Sutra (金剛般若經義疏)