T85n2733_御注金剛般若波羅蜜經宣演
大正藏第 85 冊 No. 2733 御注金剛般若波羅蜜經宣演
No. 2733 [cf. No. 235]
御注金剛般若波羅蜜經宣演捲上
敕隨駕講論沙門道氤集
稽首善逝大仙雄 智斷慈悲眾德備 演說金剛清凈句 理深功妙福難思 稽首□時能發請 具壽觀空善現尊 補處極喜與明增 開釋此教諸菩薩 今為自他生福惠 佛種不斷法流通 採集□義贊真文 愿以威神見加護
敘曰。真際寥廓。理□□□□覺杳冥。本亡言論。而起說于無說之域。立名于不名之境者。寔由昏衢未曉。見海長論。將以燈炬。幽關津航。庶品教之興也。其功大哉。況般若諸佛之母。金剛難壞之句。括眾部以獨立。冠群經而迥翥。三問九喻。終始發明八執五耶。心言蕩滅。護念付囑。道豈虛行者歟。
大唐開元中。歲次大泉獻皇帝御天下之二十三載。四門允穆。百揆時敘。至化洽于無垠。玄風昌于有截。乃凝睿思。暢述儒道。仍懷妙覺。注訣斯經。直照精微。洞開秘密。天章發耀。佛日增輝。映千古以首出超百王以垂範。既而雄都上京。刊勒金石。溥天率土。班宣句味。洗生靈之耳目。裂魔著之籠樊。曠劫未逢。今茲何幸。氤臥病林藪。杜跡彌年。伏覽
【現代漢語翻譯】 現代漢語譯本 大正藏第 85 冊 No. 2733 御注金剛般若波羅蜜經宣演 No. 2733 [cf. No. 235] 御注金剛般若波羅蜜經宣演捲上 敕隨駕講論沙門道氤集 稽首善逝大仙雄（對逝去的美好事物致敬） 智斷慈悲眾德備 演說金剛清凈句（宣講《金剛經》清凈的語句） 理深功妙福難思 稽首□時能發請（對能及時發起請求的人致敬） 具壽觀空善現尊（具有壽命、觀察空性的善現尊者） 補處極喜與明增（彌勒菩薩和明增菩薩） 開釋此教諸菩薩 今為自他生福惠（現在爲了自己和他人產生福報和智慧） 佛種不斷法流通 採集□義贊真文（收集精妙的意義來讚美真實的經文） 愿以威神見加護 敘曰。真際寥廓。理□□□□覺杳冥。本亡言論。而起說于無說之域。立名于不名之境者。寔由昏衢未曉。見海長論。將以燈炬。幽關津航。庶品教之興也。其功大哉。況般若諸佛之母。金剛難壞之句。括眾部以獨立。冠群經而迥翥。三問九喻。終始發明八執五耶。心言蕩滅。護念付囑。道豈虛行者歟。 大唐開元中。歲次大泉獻皇帝御天下之二十三載。四門允穆。百揆時敘。至化洽于無垠。玄風昌于有截。乃凝睿思。暢述儒道。仍懷妙覺。注訣斯經。直照精微。洞開秘密。天章發耀。佛日增輝。映千古以首出超百王以垂範。既而雄都上京。刊勒金石。溥天率土。班宣句味。洗生靈之耳目。裂魔著之籠樊。曠劫未逢。今茲何幸。氤臥病林藪。杜跡彌年。伏覽
【English Translation】 English version Taisho Tripitaka Volume 85, No. 2733, Imperial Commentary on the Diamond Prajna Paramita Sutra - Exposition No. 2733 [cf. No. 235] Imperial Commentary on the Diamond Prajna Paramita Sutra - Exposition, Volume 1 Collected by the Shramana Dao Yin, who accompanied the emperor in lecturing and debating I bow to the Sugata, the great and heroic sage (respect to the departed good things), endowed with wisdom, discernment, compassion, and all virtues. Expounding the pure verses of the Diamond Sutra (proclaiming the pure sentences of the Diamond Sutra), its principles are profound, its merits wonderful, and its blessings are inconceivable. I bow to the one who can promptly make requests at the right time (respect to the person who can make requests in time), the venerable Subhuti, who observes emptiness (the venerable Subhuti who has longevity and observes emptiness). Maitreya Bodhisattva and Mingzeng Bodhisattva (Bodhisattvas who are in the position to succeed and bring joy and increased wisdom), and all the Bodhisattvas who expound this teaching. Now, for the sake of generating blessings and wisdom for oneself and others (now to generate blessings and wisdom for oneself and others), may the seed of Buddhahood never be cut off, and may the Dharma flow freely. Collecting the profound meanings to praise the true text (collecting the subtle meanings to praise the true text), may you, with your divine power, see and protect us. Preface: The realm of truth is vast and boundless. The principle is [missing characters] and enlightenment is profound and obscure. Originally, there were no words, yet speech arises in the realm of no-speech. Names are established in the realm of no-names. This is because the dark paths have not been illuminated, and the sea of views is full of lengthy debates. Lamps and torches will be used to guide through the dark passes and ferry across. This is the hope for the flourishing of teachings for all beings. Its merit is great! Moreover, Prajna is the mother of all Buddhas, and the Diamond Sutra contains indestructible verses. It encompasses all sections and stands alone, towering above all sutras. Through three questions and nine metaphors, it fully elucidates the eight attachments and five errors. The mind and words are cleansed away. It is protected, cherished, and entrusted. How can the path be a futile endeavor? During the Kaiyuan era of the Great Tang Dynasty, in the twenty-third year of Emperor Xuanzong's reign, the four gates were harmonious, and all affairs were well-ordered. His supreme influence reached the boundless, and the profound teachings flourished in the finite. He concentrated his wise thoughts, eloquently expounding Confucianism and Taoism. He also cherished the wonderful enlightenment and annotated this sutra, directly illuminating its essence and revealing its secrets. His heavenly writings shone brightly, and the sun of Buddhism increased its radiance, surpassing all others throughout the ages and setting an example for hundreds of kings. Subsequently, in the magnificent capital, the text was engraved on metal and stone. Throughout the land, the meaning of the verses was proclaimed, cleansing the ears and eyes of sentient beings and tearing apart the cages and fences of demonic attachments. Such an opportunity has not been encountered for countless eons. How fortunate we are now! I, Dao Yin, have been ill and living in the forests, secluded for many years. I humbly read
聖謨載懷拚躍。旋荷明詔。濫預弘揚。力課疲朽之餘虔。敷幽奧之跡。才微任重。覆餗增尤處座之辰詎忌詞費竊惟。君唱臣和。絲髮輪行。若不廣引教文。何以委明。注意是用。提撕眾論。對會六經。適自唇吻。彰乎翰墨。頓犀象而輸牙角。括川澤而薦珠珍。所以附贊天文所以莊嚴義府涓波赴海。豈益洪溟之深。螢爝呈光。未助太陽之景。恭申罔極俯效忠勤者也。開釋經題注分為四。一釋喻。即金剛真寶。能碎堅積。二釋智。即般若正智。能破煩惱。三辯德。即無住無取。證波羅而舍筏。即色即空。契菩提于中道。四釋經。即如是降伏。可以稱常。故言金剛般若波羅蜜經。
讚揚經注。略啟五門。一敘教興由。二明經體性。三攝歸宗旨。四所被根宜。五依文正解。教興由致。曲作兩門。初敘教興意。後傳譯年代。初中復二。先依論釋。后總料簡。依論釋者。無著菩薩釋三問意。論云何故上座須菩提。發斯問耶。有六因緣。且一部宗旨。在在乎三問。善現為發教之主。既有斯意。世尊順問。而答其意必同故。六緣即教興意。其六者何。論云。為斷疑故。為起信解故。為入甚深義故。為不退轉故。為生歡喜故。為正法久住故。即是般若波羅蜜。令佛種不斷。云何以此令佛種不斷耶。若有疑者。得斷疑故。有樂福德。
【現代漢語翻譯】 現代漢語譯本： 我懷著崇敬的心情，努力奉獻自己。有幸承蒙皇上的英明詔令，得以參與弘揚佛法。我竭盡自己疲憊衰朽的餘力，虔誠地闡述幽深奧妙的佛法真諦。我才識淺薄卻責任重大，深怕不能勝任。在這陳述己見的時刻，我並不顧忌言辭的繁瑣。我私下認為，君主倡導，臣子響應，如同細小的絲線也能帶動車輪運轉。如果不廣泛引用佛教經典，又如何能夠充分闡明我的觀點呢？因此，我專注於此，提綱挈領地引導大家的討論，對照六經，恰如其分地表達我的觀點。我的闡述如同犀牛和大象貢獻它們的牙角，如同從江河湖泊中選取珍珠寶玉來進獻。我所做的，是爲了讚美天道的執行，是爲了莊嚴佛法的義理。涓涓細流匯入大海，難道能增加大海的深度嗎？螢火蟲的光芒，也無法幫助太陽增添光輝。我恭敬地表達我無限的敬意，盡力效忠職守。
現在開始解釋經題，分為四個部分： 一、解釋比喻。即『金剛』是真正的寶物，能夠摧毀堅硬的物體。 二、解釋智慧。即『般若』是真正的智慧，能夠破除煩惱。 三、辨析功德。即『無住無取』，證得波羅蜜后就要捨棄筏子；『即色即空』，契合菩提的中道。 四、解釋經文。即『如是降伏』，可以稱之為常。所以稱為《金剛般若波羅蜜經》。
讚揚經注，大致分為五個方面： 一、敘述佛法興起的緣由。 二、闡明經文的體性。 三、概括歸納經文的宗旨。 四、說明經文所教化的根基和對象。 五、依據經文進行正確的解釋。
關於佛法興起的緣由，分為兩個方面： 首先敘述佛法興起的意義，然後說明翻譯的年代。 在敘述佛法興起的意義中，又分為兩個方面： 首先依據論典進行解釋，然後進行總體的分析。 依據論典進行解釋，無著（Asanga）菩薩解釋了須菩提（Subhuti）提出的三個問題的意義。論典中說：『為什麼上座須菩提要提出這些問題呢？』有六個因緣。整部經的宗旨，都在這三個問題中。善現（Subhuti的另一個名字）是發起教義的主導者，既然有這樣的意圖，世尊（Buddha）順應他的提問，而回答的內容必定與他的意圖相同。這六個因緣就是佛法興起的意義。這六個因緣是什麼呢？論典中說：『爲了斷除疑惑，爲了生起信心和理解，爲了進入甚深的義理，爲了不退轉，爲了產生歡喜，爲了正法長久住世。』這就是般若波羅蜜（Prajnaparamita），使佛種不會斷絕。如何用這些來使佛種不斷絕呢？如果有人有疑惑，因為斷除了疑惑，就會有樂於修習福德的心。
【English Translation】 English version: With reverence and dedication, I strive to offer my utmost. Fortunate to receive the enlightened decree of the Emperor, I am privileged to participate in propagating the Dharma. I exhaust my weary and declining strength to sincerely elucidate the profound and subtle truths of the Buddha's teachings. My talent is meager, yet the responsibility is great, and I fear I may not be up to the task. At this moment of presenting my views, I do not hesitate to be verbose. I privately believe that the ruler initiates, and the subject responds, just as a fine thread can drive the wheel. If we do not widely cite Buddhist scriptures, how can we fully clarify my views? Therefore, I focus on this, providing a concise guide to lead everyone's discussion, comparing it with the Six Classics, appropriately expressing my views. My exposition is like rhinoceroses and elephants offering their tusks and horns, like selecting pearls and gems from rivers and lakes to present. What I do is to praise the workings of the heavens and to adorn the principles of the Dharma. A trickle flowing into the sea, can it increase the depth of the ocean? The light of a firefly cannot help the sun add to its brilliance. I respectfully express my boundless reverence and strive to be loyal to my duty.
Now, let's begin to explain the title of the scripture, dividing it into four parts: 1. Explaining the metaphor. 'Vajra' (Diamond) is a true treasure that can destroy hard objects. 2. Explaining wisdom. 'Prajna' (Wisdom) is true wisdom that can eliminate afflictions. 3. Discriminating merits. 'Non-abiding and non-grasping' means abandoning the raft after attaining Paramita; 'Form is emptiness' means conforming to the Middle Way of Bodhi. 4. Explaining the scripture. 'Thus subdue' can be called constant. Therefore, it is called the 'Vajra Prajnaparamita Sutra'.
Praising the commentary on the scripture, roughly divided into five aspects: 1. Narrating the reasons for the rise of Buddhism. 2. Clarifying the essence of the scripture. 3. Summarizing and generalizing the purpose of the scripture. 4. Explaining the foundation and objects of the scripture's teachings. 5. Providing a correct interpretation based on the scripture.
Regarding the reasons for the rise of Buddhism, it is divided into two aspects: First, narrate the meaning of the rise of Buddhism, and then explain the era of translation. In narrating the meaning of the rise of Buddhism, it is further divided into two aspects: First, explain according to the treatises, and then conduct an overall analysis. Explaining according to the treatises, Asanga Bodhisattva explained the meaning of the three questions raised by Subhuti. The treatise says: 'Why did the venerable Subhuti raise these questions?' There are six causes. The entire purpose of the scripture lies in these three questions. Subhuti is the leader in initiating the teachings, and since he has such intentions, the Buddha complies with his questions, and the content of the answers must be the same as his intentions. These six causes are the meaning of the rise of Buddhism. What are these six causes? The treatise says: 'To eliminate doubts, to generate faith and understanding, to enter into profound meanings, to not regress, to generate joy, and for the long-term existence of the Right Dharma.' This is Prajnaparamita, which prevents the Buddha-seed from being cut off. How can these be used to prevent the Buddha-seed from being cut off? If someone has doubts, because the doubts are eliminated, they will have a heart that is happy to cultivate merits.
而心未成熟。諸菩薩等。聞多福德于般若波羅蜜。起信解故。已成熟心者。入甚深義故。已得不輕賤者。由貪受持修行。有多功德。不復退轉故。已得順攝及凈心者。於法自入及見生歡喜故。能令未來世。大乘教久住者故。演曰。初五為利樂眾生。后一為正法久住。前五之中。初二。佛法外人以有疑惑。不生定信。次二。已入佛法者。雖欣正法。未解進修。后一已進修者。未能證達。由教但為未解者解。未度者度。若已證悟。言教都亡。是故此中為令眾生。不信者信。未修者修。未達者達。然此六因。攝為三對。初二除疑起信對。次二生智攝福對。后二悟理興教對。又前前因。能引後後由。疑斷故信解生。信解生故入深法。入深法故不退轉。不退轉故生歡喜。歡喜故法久住。其配位地。至文當釋。又依功德施菩薩論云。佛所說法。咸歸二諦。一者俗諦。二者真諦。俗諦者。謂諸凡夫。聲聞。獨覺。菩薩。如來乃至名義智境。業果相屬。演曰。俗諦之中。人法不同。人中凡聖。聖中三乘。大乘因果。如是差別法中。能詮所詮。能緣所緣。能感所感。各相系屬。是謂俗諦。論又云。真諦者。謂即於此都無所得。如說第一義。非智之所行。何況文字。乃至無業無業果諸聖種性。論釋二諦已次屬當。經云。是故此般若中。說不
【現代漢語翻譯】 而內心尚未成熟。諸位菩薩等，聽聞般若波羅蜜（Prajnaparamita，智慧到彼岸）具有眾多福德，因此生起信心和理解。對於已經成熟內心的人來說，他們能夠進入甚深義理。對於已經獲得不輕賤（指受到尊重和重視）的人來說，由於他們貪求受持和修行，擁有眾多功德，因此不會再退轉。對於已經獲得順攝（指被佛法攝受）和清凈心的人來說，他們能夠自己深入佛法，並且見到真理而生起歡喜。因此，能夠使未來世的大乘佛教長久住世。演曰：最初五個原因是利益和安樂眾生，最後一個原因是使正法長久住世。在前五個原因中，最初兩個原因是佛法之外的人因為存在疑惑，所以不生起堅定的信心。其次兩個原因是已經進入佛法的人，雖然欣慕正法，但尚未理解如何進修。最後一個原因是已經進修的人，未能證悟通達。因為佛陀的教法只是爲了給未理解的人解惑，給未得度的人得度，如果已經證悟，言教就失去了作用。因此，這裡是爲了使眾生，不信的人產生信心，未修行的人開始修行，未通達的人得以通達。然而這六個原因，可以歸納為三對：最初兩個是消除疑惑，生起信心的對治；其次兩個是生起智慧，攝取福德的對治；最後兩個是悟入真理，弘揚佛法的對治。而且，前一個原因能夠引導后一個結果，因為疑惑斷除，所以信解產生；信解產生，所以能夠進入甚深佛法；進入甚深佛法，所以不會退轉；不會退轉，所以生起歡喜；生起歡喜，所以佛法長久住世。其在菩薩修行位地的對應，到後面的經文會解釋。另外，依據功德施菩薩的論述，佛陀所說的法，都歸於二諦：一是俗諦（Samvriti-satya，世俗諦），二是真諦（Paramartha-satya，勝義諦）。俗諦是指，所有的凡夫、聲聞（Sravaka，聽聞佛法者）、獨覺（Pratyekabuddha，獨自覺悟者）、菩薩（Bodhisattva，追求覺悟的修行者）、如來（Tathagata，佛陀的稱號），乃至名義智境，業果相屬。演曰：在俗諦之中，人和法不同。人中有凡夫和聖人，聖人中有聲聞乘、緣覺乘、菩薩乘三種。大乘有因和果。像這樣的差別。法中，有能詮釋的和所詮釋的，能緣的和所緣的，能感應的和所感應的，各自相互關聯，這就是所謂的俗諦。論中又說：真諦是指，對於這一切都無所得。如所說的第一義，不是智慧所能到達的，更何況是文字。乃至無業無業果的諸聖種性。論述解釋了二諦之後，接下來屬於當經的內容。經文說：因此，在這部般若經中，說不。
【English Translation】 And the mind is not yet mature. All Bodhisattvas (Bodhisattva, beings on the path to enlightenment), hearing of the many merits and virtues of Prajnaparamita (Prajnaparamita, the perfection of wisdom), thus generate faith and understanding. For those whose minds are already mature, they can enter into profound meanings. For those who have already attained 'non-contempt' (referring to being respected and valued), because they greedily embrace, uphold, and practice, possessing many merits and virtues, they will no longer regress. For those who have already attained 'being subdued' (referring to being subdued by the Dharma) and a pure mind, they can personally enter the Dharma and see the truth, giving rise to joy. Therefore, they can enable the Mahayana (Mahayana, the Great Vehicle) teachings to abide long in the future world. Yan said: The first five reasons are for the benefit and happiness of sentient beings, and the last one is for the long-lasting existence of the Dharma. Among the first five reasons, the first two are because those outside the Buddha's teachings have doubts and do not generate firm faith. The next two are because those who have already entered the Buddha's teachings, although admiring the Dharma, have not understood how to advance in practice. The last one is because those who have already advanced in practice have not been able to realize and attain enlightenment. Because the Buddha's teachings are only to resolve doubts for those who have not understood and to deliver those who have not been delivered, if one has already attained enlightenment, the teachings become unnecessary. Therefore, here it is to enable sentient beings, those who do not believe to generate faith, those who have not practiced to begin practicing, and those who have not attained to attain. However, these six causes can be summarized into three pairs: the first two are the antidote to eliminate doubts and generate faith; the next two are the antidote to generate wisdom and gather merit; the last two are the antidote to realize the truth and promote the teachings. Moreover, the previous cause can lead to the subsequent result, because doubts are eliminated, faith and understanding arise; faith and understanding arise, so one can enter into profound Dharma; entering into profound Dharma, so one will not regress; not regressing, so joy arises; joy arises, so the Dharma abides long. Its correspondence in the stages of Bodhisattva practice will be explained in the following sutras. In addition, according to the treatise of the Bodhisattva of Merit Giving, the Dharma spoken by the Buddha all returns to the Two Truths: one is the Conventional Truth (Samvriti-satya, the truth of convention), and the other is the Ultimate Truth (Paramartha-satya, the highest truth). The Conventional Truth refers to all ordinary beings, Sravakas (Sravaka, listeners of the Dharma), Pratyekabuddhas (Pratyekabuddha, solitary Buddhas), Bodhisattvas (Bodhisattva, beings on the path to enlightenment), Tathagatas (Tathagata, a title of the Buddha), and even the realm of names, meanings, wisdom, and the relationship of karma and its results. Yan said: Within the Conventional Truth, people and Dharma are different. Among people, there are ordinary beings and sages, and among sages, there are the three vehicles of Sravaka Vehicle, Pratyekabuddha Vehicle, and Bodhisattva Vehicle. Mahayana has cause and effect. Such are the differences. In the Dharma, there are the explainer and the explained, the object of cognition and the cognizer, the cause and the effect, each related to each other, this is what is called the Conventional Truth. The treatise also says: The Ultimate Truth refers to that in which nothing can be obtained. As the First Principle is said, it is not attainable by wisdom, let alone by words. Even the noble lineages without karma and without the results of karma. After the treatise explains the Two Truths, what follows belongs to the content of the present sutra. The sutra says: Therefore, in this Prajna Sutra, it speaks of not.
住相。佈施一切法無相。不可取。不可說。生法無我。無所得。無能證。無成就。無來無去等。此釋真諦。又說內外。世間出世間。一切法相。及諸功德。此建立俗諦。如是應知。演曰。六塵外五眼內。色外心內。眾生器為世間。無漏無為為出世間。總說此等名。一切法相所有。校量身命資財。持經福等及諸功德。論意。眾生不識二諦。常處沉淪。為令眾生識達二諦。發生勝智。當得解脫。如有頌言。非不見真如。而能了諸行。皆如幻士等。雖有而非真。由觀勝義。而生正智。以悟真空。由達世俗發生后得。而知緣起。略有六對。理智。事智。一切智。一切種智。如睡夢覺智。如蓮花開智。空智。有智。自利智。利他智。如所有智。盡所有智。諸佛菩薩無量功德。二智為本因識真俗有此智生。是故說經令悟二諦。又由證真故。生智而不住生死。由悟俗故。興慈而不住涅槃。或無住處涅槃資糧。永出二乘。利樂無盡故說經也。上依論釋。次總料簡者。無著菩薩依教起行。功德施論。依境生智。各據一義。亦不相違。然總參詳經之與論起一至六。攝意周盡。言一意者為令佛種不斷絕故。無著菩薩總結六因云。即是般若波羅蜜。令佛不斷。此意若翻六因疑不住等勝智不生。如理不顯。佛種永斷。由說經故。除疑生信。入法不
【現代漢語翻譯】 現代漢語譯本： 安住于表象（住相），以無表象（無相）的方式佈施一切法。不可執取，不可言說。諸法無我，無所得，無能證，無成就，無來無去等等。這是解釋真諦（ परमार्थसत्य, Paramārthasatya）。又說內外，世間出世間，一切法相，以及各種功德。這是建立俗諦（ संवृतिसत्य, Saṃvṛtisatya）。應當這樣理解。
演曰：六塵（ षड्विषय, Ṣaḍviṣaya）在外，五眼（ पञ्च चक्षु, Pañca cakṣu）在內；色（ रूप, Rūpa）在外，心（ चित्त, Citta）在內；眾生和器世間為世間；無漏（ अनास्रव, Anāsrava）和無為（ असंस्कृत, Asaṃskṛta）為出世間。總的說來，這些都叫做一切法相所有。校量身命資財，持經的福報等等以及各種功德。
論意：眾生不認識二諦（ द्वे सत्ये, Dve satye），常常處於沉淪之中。爲了讓眾生認識通達二諦，產生殊勝的智慧，應當得到解脫。如有頌言：『不是不見真如（ तथता, Tathatā），而能瞭解諸行，都如幻術師等，雖有但並非真實。』由於觀察勝義（ परमार्थ, Paramārtha），而生起正智。以領悟真空（ शून्यता, Śūnyatā）。由於通達世俗（ लोकव्यवहार, Lokavyavahāra）而發生后得智，從而知曉緣起（ प्रतीत्यसमुत्पाद, Pratītyasamutpāda）。
略有六對：理智和事智；一切智（ सर्वज्ञता, Sarvajñatā）和一切種智（ सर्वप्रकारज्ञता, Sarvaprākārajñatā）；如睡夢覺智；如蓮花開智；空智和有智；自利智和利他智；如所有智（ यथाभूतज्ञान, Yathābhūtajñāna）和盡所有智（ यावत्सर्ववस्तुज्ञान, Yāvatsarvavastujñāna）。諸佛菩薩無量功德，二智為根本，因為認識真俗才有此智產生。因此說經是爲了讓人領悟二諦。又由於證得真諦的緣故，生起智慧而不執著于生死；由於領悟俗諦的緣故，興起慈悲而不執著于涅槃。或者說，是爲了無住涅槃（ अप्रतिष्ठित निर्वाण, Apratiṣṭhita nirvāṇa）的資糧，永遠超出二乘（ श्रावकयान，प्रत्येकबुद्धयान, Śrāvakayāna, Pratyekabuddhayāna），利益安樂沒有窮盡，所以才說這部經。以上是依據論典的解釋。
其次是總體的簡要分析：無著（ असङ्ग, Asaṅga）菩薩依據教義而起修行，功德施論，依據境界而生智慧，各自依據一個方面，也不互相違背。然而總的參詳經和論，從一起到六，攝取意義周全詳盡。說『一意』是爲了讓佛種不斷絕的緣故。無著菩薩總結六因說：『就是般若波羅蜜（ प्रज्ञापारमिता, Prajñāpāramitā），讓佛種不斷絕。』這個意思如果翻譯六因，懷疑不住等等殊勝智慧不生起，如理不如實顯現，佛種永遠斷絕。由於說經的緣故，消除疑惑，產生信心，進入佛法不（退轉）。
【English Translation】 English version: Dwelling in appearances (住相, Zhù xiàng), one should practice giving (佈施, Bùshī) all dharmas without appearances (無相, Wú xiàng). They are not to be grasped, not to be spoken of. Dharmas are without self (無我, Wú wǒ), without attainment (無所得, Wú suǒdé), without capable witness (無能證, Wú néng zhèng), without accomplishment (無成就, Wú chéngjiù), without coming or going (無來無去, Wú lái wú qù), and so on. This explains the ultimate truth (真諦, Zhēndì). Furthermore, it speaks of inner and outer, mundane and supramundane, all characteristics of dharmas (法相, Fǎ xiàng), and all merits. This establishes the conventional truth (俗諦, Súdì). Thus, it should be understood.
Yan said: The six sense objects (六塵, Liù chén) are external, the five eyes (五眼, Wǔ yǎn) are internal; form (色, Sè) is external, mind (心, Xīn) is internal; sentient beings and the vessel world are mundane; the unconditioned (無為, Wúwéi) and undefiled (無漏, Wúlòu) are supramundane. Generally speaking, these are all called the characteristics of all dharmas. Weighing the body, life, wealth, the merit of upholding the sutras, and all merits.
The meaning of the treatise: Sentient beings do not recognize the two truths (二諦, Èr dì) and are constantly in a state of sinking and drowning. In order to enable sentient beings to recognize and understand the two truths and generate supreme wisdom, they should attain liberation. As a verse says: 'It is not that one does not see Suchness (真如, Zhēnrú), but is able to understand all actions, all like illusionists, though existing, are not real.' Because of observing the ultimate meaning (勝義, Shèngyì), correct wisdom arises. With the realization of emptiness (真空, Zhēnkōng). Because of understanding the conventional (世俗, Shìsú), subsequent wisdom arises, thereby knowing dependent origination (緣起, Yuánqǐ).
There are roughly six pairs: wisdom of principle and wisdom of affairs; all-knowing wisdom (一切智, Yīqiè zhì) and wisdom of all aspects (一切種智, Yīqiè zhǒng zhì); like the wisdom of awakening from a dream; like the wisdom of a lotus flower opening; wisdom of emptiness and wisdom of existence; wisdom of self-benefit and wisdom of benefiting others; wisdom of suchness (如所有智, Rú suǒyǒu zhì) and wisdom of the extent of all things (盡所有智, Jìn suǒyǒu zhì). The immeasurable merits of all Buddhas and Bodhisattvas, the two wisdoms are the root, because recognizing the true and conventional is how this wisdom arises. Therefore, speaking the sutra is to enable people to understand the two truths. Moreover, because of realizing the truth, wisdom arises without attachment to birth and death; because of understanding the conventional, compassion arises without attachment to Nirvana. Or rather, it is for the provision of non-abiding Nirvana (無住涅槃, Wú zhù nièpán), forever surpassing the two vehicles (二乘, Èr shèng), benefiting and delighting without end, therefore this sutra is spoken. The above is based on the explanation of the treatise.
Secondly, a general brief analysis: Bodhisattva Asaṅga (無著, Wúzhe) arises practice based on the teachings, the treatise on the giving of merits, arises wisdom based on the realm, each based on one aspect, and do not contradict each other. However, generally considering the sutra and the treatise, from one to six, the meaning is comprehensively and thoroughly captured. Saying 'one intention' is for the sake of ensuring that the Buddha-seed is not cut off. Bodhisattva Asaṅga concludes the six causes by saying: 'It is Prajñāpāramitā (般若波羅蜜, Bōrěbōluómì), ensuring that the Buddha-seed is not cut off.' If this meaning translates the six causes, doubting that non-abiding and other supreme wisdoms do not arise, the truth is not manifested as it is, the Buddha-seed is forever cut off. Because of speaking the sutra, doubts are eliminated, faith arises, and entering the Dharma does not (regress).
退。歡喜弘通。當成正覺。故云佛種不斷。言二意者。即向論說二諦者。是開為三者。一為悟教理之深微。二為起斷修之妙行。三為識果德之真化。初門復二。初教深。后理妙。言教深者。佛說般若波羅蜜。即非般若波羅蜜。一切諸佛從此經生。須菩提深解義趣。涕淚悲泣。我從昔來。所得惠眼。未曾得聞。如是之經。無著論云。令大乘教久住於世。由斯廣贊持說功德勝。以無量身財佈施令知教深。其福勝大專心受學。言理妙者。為顯真如無相。法身究竟之理。雖說真理。不壞俗諦。故功德施論。依經制名。由破取著。得入真諦。不壞假名。悟達俗諦。廣百論第十云。然佛所說無不甚深。二諦法門。最為難測。唯識論云。撥無二諦。是惡取空。諸佛說為不可治者。由此有云。般若經說一切空者。非盡理也。二起斷修之妙行。亦為二。初所斷。后所修。言所斷者。欲入佛法。以信為先。猶預懷疑。障生凈信。依初入法論說斷疑理實。此經兼斷余障。障有二種。煩惱所知。尋其根源。二執為本。此經正除我法二執。根本既盡。支末隨亡。如經若有我人眾生壽者相。即非菩薩等。是除我執。無法相亦無非法相等。是除法執。又障有三。即三雜染。我于往昔節節支解時。若有我相。人相。眾生相。壽者相。應生嗔恨等。除煩惱
【現代漢語翻譯】 退。歡喜弘通。當成正覺（Samyak-saṃbuddha，正等覺）。故云佛種不斷。言二意者。即向論說二諦（two truths，勝義諦和世俗諦）者。是開為三者。一為悟教理之深微。二為起斷修之妙行。三為識果德之真化。初門復二。初教深。后理妙。言教深者。佛說般若波羅蜜（Prajnaparamita，般若波羅蜜多）。即非般若波羅蜜。一切諸佛從此經生。須菩提（Subhuti，解空第一的佛陀弟子）深解義趣。涕淚悲泣。我從昔來。所得惠眼。未曾得聞。如是之經。無著（Asanga，瑜伽行唯識學派創始人之一）論云。令大乘教久住於世。由斯廣贊持說功德勝。以無量身財佈施令知教深。其福勝大專心受學。言理妙者。為顯真如無相。法身究竟之理。雖說真理。不壞俗諦。故功德施論。依經制名。由破取著。得入真諦。不壞假名。悟達俗諦。廣百論第十云。然佛所說無不甚深。二諦法門。最為難測。唯識論云。撥無二諦。是惡取空。諸佛說為不可治者。由此有云。般若經說一切空者。非盡理也。二起斷修之妙行。亦為二。初所斷。后所修。言所斷者。欲入佛法。以信為先。猶預懷疑。障生凈信。依初入法論說斷疑理實。此經兼斷余障。障有二種。煩惱所知。尋其根源。二執為本。此經正除我法二執。根本既盡。支末隨亡。如經若有我人眾生壽者相。即非菩薩等。是除我執。無法相亦無非法相等。是除法執。又障有三。即三雜染。我于往昔節節支解時。若有我相。人相。眾生相。壽者相。應生嗔恨等。除煩惱 退隱之後，要歡喜地弘揚傳播佛法，這樣才能成就正等覺（Samyak-saṃbuddha）。所以說佛種不會斷絕。所說的兩種意義，就是前面討論的二諦（two truths，勝義諦和世俗諦）。將其展開為三種意義：一是領悟教理的深刻精微之處；二是生起斷除煩惱、修習善行的微妙行為；三是認識果報功德的真實變化。最初的方面又分為兩個部分：一是教義深奧，二是理體精妙。說到教義深奧，佛陀所說的般若波羅蜜（Prajnaparamita），即非真正的般若波羅蜜。一切諸佛都是從這部經中產生的。須菩提（Subhuti）深刻理解其中的意義和趣味，感動得涕淚悲泣。他說：『我從過去到現在，所獲得的智慧之眼，從未聽聞過如此殊勝的經典。』無著（Asanga）的論著中說，爲了使大乘佛教長久住世，所以要廣泛讚歎受持和宣講此經的殊勝功德，以無量的身命和財物來佈施，使人知道教義的深奧，這樣所獲得的福報勝過專心受持學習。說到理體精妙，是爲了彰顯真如無相、法身究竟的道理。雖然宣說真理，但不破壞世俗諦。所以功德施論依據經典來制定名稱，通過破除執著，得以進入真諦，不破壞假名，從而悟達世俗諦。《廣百論》第十中說：『然而佛陀所說的一切都非常深奧，二諦法門最為難以測度。』《唯識論》中說：『否定二諦，是惡取空，諸佛認為這是不可救治的。』因此有人說，《般若經》所說的一切皆空，並非窮盡了真理。二是生起斷除煩惱、修習善行的微妙行為，也分為兩個方面：一是所要斷除的，二是所要修習的。說到所要斷除的，想要進入佛法，以信心為先導。猶豫懷疑，會阻礙清凈信心的產生。依據《初入法論》所說，斷除懷疑是符合真理的。此經同時也能斷除其他的障礙。障礙有兩種：煩惱障和所知障。追尋它們的根源，都是以執著為根本。此經正是要去除我執和法執。根本既然斷盡，枝末也隨之消亡。如經中所說：『若有我相、人相、眾生相、壽者相，即非菩薩等。』這是去除我執。『無法相，亦無非法相』等，這是去除法執。另外，障礙有三種，即三種雜染。例如，我于往昔被節節肢解身體的時候，如果有我相、人相、眾生相、壽者相，就應該產生嗔恨等等，這就是去除煩惱。
【English Translation】 Retreating and joyfully propagating the Dharma will lead to achieving Samyak-saṃbuddha (Perfect Enlightenment). Therefore, it is said that the Buddha-seed will not be cut off. The 'two meanings' refer to the two truths (two truths, ultimate truth and conventional truth) discussed earlier. These are expanded into three: first, to understand the profound and subtle aspects of the teachings; second, to generate the wonderful practice of cutting off afflictions and cultivating virtues; and third, to recognize the true transformation of the fruits of merit. The first aspect is further divided into two: first, the depth of the teachings; second, the subtlety of the principles. Regarding the depth of the teachings, the Buddha spoke of Prajnaparamita (Perfection of Wisdom), which is not the ultimate Prajnaparamita. All Buddhas are born from this scripture. Subhuti (Subhuti, foremost disciple in understanding emptiness) deeply understood the meaning and significance, weeping with sorrow. He said, 'Since the past, with the eye of wisdom I have attained, I have never heard such a scripture.' Asanga (Asanga, one of the founders of the Yogacara school) stated in his treatise that to ensure the long-lasting presence of the Mahayana teachings in the world, one should widely praise the merits of upholding and reciting this scripture, and generously give with body and wealth to make people aware of the depth of the teachings. The merit of this surpasses wholeheartedly receiving and studying. Regarding the subtlety of the principles, it is to reveal the ultimate truth of true thusness without characteristics and the ultimate principle of the Dharmakaya. Although the ultimate truth is spoken, it does not destroy the conventional truth. Therefore, the Gunashila Sutra establishes names based on the scriptures. By breaking attachments, one can enter the ultimate truth without destroying conventional names, thereby realizing the conventional truth. The tenth chapter of the Extensive Commentary states, 'However, everything the Buddha said is extremely profound, and the doctrine of the two truths is the most difficult to fathom.' The Vijnaptimatrata-siddhi states, 'Denying the two truths is a perverse grasp of emptiness, which the Buddhas consider incurable.' Therefore, it is said that the Prajnaparamita Sutra's statement that everything is empty does not exhaust the truth. Second, generating the wonderful practice of cutting off afflictions and cultivating virtues is also divided into two aspects: first, what is to be cut off; second, what is to be cultivated. Regarding what is to be cut off, to enter the Buddha-dharma, faith comes first. Hesitation and doubt hinder the generation of pure faith. According to the Initial Entry into the Dharma Treatise, cutting off doubt aligns with the truth. This scripture also cuts off other obstacles. There are two types of obstacles: afflictive and cognitive. Tracing their roots, both are based on attachment. This scripture specifically removes the attachment to self and the attachment to phenomena. Once the root is exhausted, the branches will naturally wither away. As the scripture says, 'If there is an appearance of self, person, sentient being, or life-span, then one is not a Bodhisattva.' This is to remove the attachment to self. 'There is no appearance of phenomena, nor is there an appearance of non-phenomena,' etc., which is to remove the attachment to phenomena. Furthermore, there are three types of obstacles, namely the three contaminations. For example, when I was dismembered in the past, if there were appearances of self, person, sentient being, or life-span, I should have generated anger, etc. This is to remove afflictions.
障。善男子善女人。受持讀誦此經。為人輕賤。先世罪業。即為消滅等。除其業障。當知是經義不可思議。果報亦不可思議等。是除報障。又準寶性論。障有四種。一闡提不信。二外道著我。三聲聞畏苦。四緣覺舍心。今于經中。隨文取義。具除四障。如經一念凈信。曾於多佛。久種善根。信心清凈。則生實相等。皆初障。是故論云。有樂福德。而心未成熟。諸菩薩等聞多福德于般若波羅蜜起信解故。上下經文。說無我等。除第二障。忍辱波羅蜜。即非忍辱波羅蜜等。論中判為忍苦住處。除第三障。廣大第一。常其心不顛倒等。四恩之心。除第四障。若樂小法者。則于經不能受讀誦。為人解說等。及無住涅槃文。通除后二。又依無著菩薩八住處中。攝彼十二為離障礙。一一對除謂少聞等故。為除障而說斯經。二所修者。萬行雖殊不過六度。世親論云。檀度攝於資生無畏法。此中一二三。名為修行住。又捨身財等為檀。后五百歲。持戒修福等為戒。又離一切相等。為攝律儀戒。修一切善法得阿耨菩提等。為攝善法戒。為利益一切眾生等為攝眾生戒。是三聚凈戒。亦瑜伽厭有為等。三種發心為三德因。是名為戒。忍辱可知。五百世中。長時修習。是為精進。前後諸文。所修觀行。論判以為三摩跋提。毗缽舍那等。是為空惠
【現代漢語翻譯】 現代漢語譯本 業障。善男子善女人，如果有人受持讀誦此經，卻被人輕賤，這是因為他前世的罪業，因此得以消滅等等，從而消除他的業障。應當知道此經的意義不可思議，果報也不可思議等等，這是消除報障。又根據《寶性論》所說，障有四種：一、一闡提（icchantika，斷善根者）不信；二、外道執著於我（ātman）；三、聲聞（śrāvaka，小乘修行者）畏懼痛苦；四、緣覺（pratyekabuddha，獨覺）捨棄慈悲心。現在根據經文，隨文取義，可以消除這四種障礙。比如經中所說，『一念凈信，曾於多佛，久種善根，信心清凈，則生實相等』，這都是針對第一種障礙。所以《寶性論》說，有人雖然喜歡福德，但心性尚未成熟，諸菩薩（bodhisattva）等聽到般若波羅蜜（prajñāpāramitā，智慧到彼岸）的眾多福德，從而生起信心和理解。上下經文所說的『無我』等等，是消除第二種障礙。忍辱波羅蜜（kṣānti-pāramitā，忍耐到彼岸），即『非忍辱波羅蜜』等等，在《瑜伽師地論》中被判為忍苦的住處，是消除第三種障礙。『廣大第一，常其心不顛倒』等等，四恩之心，是消除第四種障礙。如果有人喜歡小法，那麼他就不能受持讀誦此經，為人解說等等，以及『無住涅槃』的經文，可以通除后兩種障礙。又根據無著（Asaṅga）菩薩的《瑜伽師地論·八住處品》中，將彼十二種障礙攝為遠離障礙，一一對應消除，比如少聞等等。所以爲了消除障礙而宣說此經。 二、所修之行：萬行雖然不同，但不過六度（ṣaṭpāramitā，六種到彼岸的方法）。世親（Vasubandhu）的論典中說，佈施度（dāna-pāramitā）包含資生布施、無畏佈施和法佈施。這其中的一、二、三，名為修行住。又捨身財等等是佈施。后五百歲，持戒修福等等是持戒。又『離一切相』等等，是攝律儀戒。修一切善法，得到阿耨多羅三藐三菩提（anuttarā-samyak-saṃbodhi，無上正等正覺）等等，是攝善法戒。『為利益一切眾生』等等，是攝眾生戒。這是三聚凈戒。也如《瑜伽師地論》所說，厭離有為等等，三種發心是三德之因，這稱為戒。忍辱可以理解。『五百世中，長時修習』，這是精進（vīrya，努力）。前後諸文所修的觀行，論典判為奢摩他（śamatha，止）和毗缽舍那（vipaśyanā，觀）等等，這是空慧（śūnyatā-jñāna，空性的智慧）。
【English Translation】 English version Obstacles. Good men and good women, if they receive, uphold, read, and recite this sutra, and are despised by others, it is because of the sins and karmic obstacles from their past lives, which are thus eliminated. It should be known that the meaning of this sutra is inconceivable, and the karmic rewards are also inconceivable. This is the elimination of retribution obstacles. Furthermore, according to the Ratnagotravibhāga (寶性論), there are four types of obstacles: 1. Icchantikas (闡提, those who have severed their roots of goodness) lack faith; 2. Heretics are attached to the self (ātman); 3. Śrāvakas (聲聞, Hearers) fear suffering; 4. Pratyekabuddhas (緣覺, Solitary Buddhas) abandon compassion. Now, according to the sutra, taking the meaning as it is, these four obstacles can be eliminated. For example, the sutra says, 'With a single thought of pure faith, having planted good roots for a long time with many Buddhas, with pure faith, one will generate true reality,' all of which address the first obstacle. Therefore, the Ratnagotravibhāga says that some enjoy blessings but their minds are not yet mature. When bodhisattvas (菩薩) hear of the many blessings of the Prajñāpāramitā (般若波羅蜜, Perfection of Wisdom), they arise with faith and understanding. The sutra texts above and below speak of 'no-self' and so on, which eliminate the second obstacle. The Kṣānti-pāramitā (忍辱波羅蜜, Perfection of Patience), that is, 'not Kṣānti-pāramitā' and so on, is judged in the Yogācārabhūmi-śāstra (瑜伽師地論) as the dwelling place of enduring suffering, which eliminates the third obstacle. 'Vast and foremost, the mind is constantly not inverted' and so on, the mind of the four kinds of gratitude, eliminates the fourth obstacle. If one enjoys the small Dharma, then one cannot receive, uphold, read, and recite this sutra, explain it to others, and so on, and the text of 'non-abiding Nirvana' universally eliminates the latter two obstacles. Furthermore, according to Asaṅga's (無著) Yogācārabhūmi-śāstra, in the section on the Eight Abodes, these twelve are included as being free from obstacles, eliminating them one by one, such as little learning and so on. Therefore, this sutra is spoken to eliminate obstacles. 2. What is cultivated: Although the myriad practices are different, they are nothing more than the Six Pāramitās (六度, Six Perfections). Vasubandhu's (世親) treatise says that the Dāna-pāramitā (佈施度, Perfection of Giving) includes giving of necessities, giving of fearlessness, and giving of Dharma. These one, two, and three are called the dwelling of practice. Furthermore, giving up body and wealth and so on is giving. In the latter five hundred years, upholding precepts and cultivating blessings and so on is upholding precepts. Furthermore, 'being apart from all appearances' and so on is the Saṃvara-śīla (攝律儀戒, Precepts of Restraint). Cultivating all good dharmas and attaining Anuttarā-samyak-saṃbodhi (阿耨多羅三藐三菩提, unsurpassed, complete and perfect enlightenment) and so on is the Kuśala-dharma-saṃgraha-śīla (攝善法戒, Precepts of Gathering Good Dharmas). 'For the benefit of all sentient beings' and so on is the Sattva-artha-kriyā-śīla (攝眾生戒, Precepts of Benefiting Sentient Beings). These are the Three Pure Precepts. Also, as the Yogācārabhūmi-śāstra says,厭離有為等等, the three kinds of aspiration are the cause of the three virtues, which is called precepts. Patience can be understood. 'In five hundred lifetimes, practicing for a long time' is Vīrya (精進, diligence). The contemplative practices cultivated in the texts before and after are judged by the treatises as Śamatha (奢摩他, calming) and Vipaśyanā (毗缽舍那, insight) and so on, which is Śūnyatā-jñāna (空慧, wisdom of emptiness).
。六度圓滿。大經最後六明度。此略舉標明無相修引生后故。三為識果德之真化者。善現三問雖在因中因。必有趣無上果。色聲求我。不見如來是真法身。行住坐臥是應化身。應化非真佛。亦非說法者。令識化身。求趣真佛。又功德施論釋。云何住者。於何相果心住愿求。云何修行者。當修何行而得其果。云何降伏者。降伏等心使因清凈。諸法先因而後果。何故先說果。先贊果德令彼欣求而修因故。無著菩薩中開三因理包行果。其二諦境通在果因上三意訖。開為四者。一為令聞無說至教。二為令知無生勝理。三為令修無得妙行。四為令得無為極果。具如經。應尋引之。若開五意。前四更加。為令攝得無相妙福。言六意者。即論六因惑。即於前三意之中。各開為二。一者教。二理。三斷。四修。五真。六化。故依經論總意欲令除疑斷障。生信起行。識真俗理。攝福惠德。證法身果。佛種不斷。斯經起也。
明傳譯年代者。自漢明感夢。摩騰振錫。世高赴洛之後。僧會游吳之前。微言雖被于中州。茲典未流於震域。始從符秦之日。暨乎皇運之年通應有期。凡經六譯。第一後秦弘始四年。鳩摩羅什法師。于長安草堂寺譯(十一紙)名舍衛國。第二元魏天平二年。菩提流支三藏。于洛陽譯(十四紙)名婆伽婆。於時並譯
【現代漢語翻譯】 現代漢語譯本：六度圓滿。《大般若經》最後闡明六種明度。這裡簡略地列舉出來，是爲了標明無相之修，引導產生後來的果報。三是爲了使人認識果德的真化。善現（Subhuti）的三次提問，雖然是在因地中，但必定會趣向無上果。執著於色聲求我，就不能見到如來（Tathagata）的真法身。行住坐臥是應化身。應化身不是真佛，也不是說法者。使人認識化身，從而追求真佛。又功德施論解釋說：『如何安住？』於何種相、果、心安住，愿求什麼？『如何修行？』應當修何種行才能得到果報？『如何降伏？』降伏平等心，使因清凈。諸法先有因而後有果，為何先說果？先讚美果德，使他們欣然追求，從而修因。無著（Asanga）菩薩在《中論》中開示三因，理包含行果。其二諦境通在果因上，三意完畢。開為四意：一是為使人聽聞無說的至教；二是為使人知曉無生的殊勝道理；三是為使人修習無得的妙行；四是為使人證得無為的極果。具體內容如經文所示，應當尋閱並加以引用。如果開為五意，在前四意的基礎上，再加上為使人攝得無相妙福。說到六意，即是論六因惑，即在前三意之中，各開為二：一者教，二者理，三者斷，四者修，五者真，六者化。所以依據經論的總意，想要使人消除疑惑，斷除障礙，生起信心，開始修行，認識真俗之理，攝取福慧之德，證得法身之果，佛種不斷絕。這部經由此而興起。
闡明傳譯年代：自從漢明帝感夢，摩騰（Kasyapa Matanga）振錫，迦葉摩騰和竺法蘭來到洛陽之後，僧會（Kang Senghui）遊歷吳地之前，精妙的佛法雖然在中原傳播，但這部經典尚未流傳到震旦（中國）。開始於符秦時期，到皇運之年才得以流通，應有定數。總共經歷了六次翻譯。第一次是後秦弘始四年，鳩摩羅什（Kumarajiva）法師在長安草堂寺翻譯（十一紙），名為《舍衛國》。第二次是元魏天平二年，菩提流支（Bodhiruci）三藏在洛陽翻譯（十四紙），名為《婆伽婆》（Bhagavan）。當時一起翻譯
【English Translation】 English version: The perfection of the six paramitas. The Great Sutra concludes by clarifying the six kinds of clarity. This briefly lists them to indicate the cultivation of non-form, guiding the generation of later results. Three, it is to enable people to recognize the true transformation of the fruit's virtue. Subhuti's three questions, although in the causal ground, will surely lead to the unsurpassed fruit. Attachment to form and sound in seeking the self prevents seeing the true Dharmakaya (Dharma body) of the Tathagata (Thus Come One). Walking, standing, sitting, and lying down are transformation bodies. Transformation bodies are not the true Buddha, nor are they the ones who preach the Dharma. It enables people to recognize the transformation body, thereby seeking the true Buddha. Furthermore, the Commentary on the Merit of Giving explains: 'How to abide?' In what form, fruit, and mind does one abide, and what does one aspire to seek? 'How to cultivate?' What kind of practice should one cultivate to attain the fruit? 'How to subdue?' Subdue the mind of equality, making the cause pure. All dharmas have a cause first and then a result, so why speak of the result first? First, praise the virtue of the fruit, causing them to joyfully seek it, thereby cultivating the cause. Asanga Bodhisattva, in the Madhyamaka-karika, reveals the three causes, the principle encompassing practice and result. The realm of the two truths is universally present in the fruit and cause. The three intentions are complete. Opening into four intentions: first, to enable people to hear the ultimate teaching of no-speaking; second, to enable people to know the supreme principle of no-birth; third, to enable people to cultivate the wonderful practice of no-attainment; fourth, to enable people to attain the ultimate fruit of non-action. The specific content is as shown in the sutra, which should be sought and cited. If opened into five intentions, on the basis of the previous four intentions, add enabling people to gather the wonderful blessings of non-form. Speaking of six intentions, it is to discuss the six causes of delusion, that is, within the previous three intentions, each is opened into two: first, teaching; second, principle; third, severance; fourth, cultivation; fifth, truth; sixth, transformation. Therefore, according to the overall intention of the sutras and commentaries, the aim is to enable people to eliminate doubts, cut off obstacles, generate faith, begin practice, recognize the truth of the mundane and the ultimate, gather the virtues of blessings and wisdom, and realize the fruit of the Dharmakaya, so that the Buddha-seed is not cut off. This sutra arises from this.
Clarifying the era of transmission and translation: Since Emperor Ming of the Han Dynasty had a dream, Kasyapa Matanga shook his staff, and Kasyapa Matanga and Dharmaraksa came to Luoyang, before Kang Senghui traveled to the Wu region, although the subtle Dharma was spreading in the Central Plains, this scripture had not yet spread to China. It began in the Fu Qin period, and it was not until the year of the imperial fortune that it was able to circulate, which was destined. In total, it underwent six translations. The first time was in the fourth year of the Hongshi era of the Later Qin Dynasty, when Dharma Master Kumarajiva translated it at the Caotang Temple in Chang'an (eleven sheets), named 'Sravasti'. The second time was in the second year of the Tianping era of the Northern Wei Dynasty, when Tripitaka Master Bodhiruci translated it in Luoyang (fourteen sheets), named 'Bhagavan'. At that time, they were translated together
天親菩薩論三卷。金剛仙記十卷。第三陳太康元年。真諦三藏。于南朝譯(十五紙)名祇陀樹林。並出本記四卷。第四隋開皇十年。達摩笈多譯(十六紙)名剛斷割。並譯無著菩薩論兩卷。第五大唐三藏玄奘法師。貞觀年。于玉華宮譯(十八紙)名能斷金剛。又有三藏地婆訶羅。此云日照。譯功德施菩薩論兩卷。第六大周義凈三藏。聖歷二年于佛授記寺譯(十二紙)亦云能斷金剛。文云薄伽梵在名稱大城戰勝林等。並再譯世親菩薩論三卷。前後傳燈。異代俱美。文雖少別。法寶無差。良由所得梵本。互有不同。或翻之人。廣略有異。遞相參照。理義思圓。若乃經論合舉。則周魏各分。唐梵不虧則貞觀最備。至於文約義著當根赴緣。書寫盛于寰區。持誦周于道俗者。期惟舍衛國乎。聖札光輝諒在茲矣。故今用隋魏之論附姚秦之經。問。經本可知諸家論請申作者。答。佛滅度后九百年中。無著初地之聖人。世親暖頂之高士。俗則昆季。法乃師資。各制論文。贊弘此典。然金剛仙記判世親論云。長行是彌勒菩薩。為無障礙菩薩說。無障礙轉授世親。世親后尋經論意。更作偈頌 廣興問答。以釋此經者。不然眾論之作偈頌為主長行釋之。豈有先釋后偈。亦猶子先父后。又尋長行屢牒偈文。豈補處慈尊。引地前菩薩偈頌為證。故
【現代漢語翻譯】 現代漢語譯本 天親菩薩論三卷。 金剛仙記十卷。 第三次是陳朝太康元年，真諦三藏在南朝翻譯（十五紙），地點在祇陀樹林（Jeta Grove，佛教寺院），並翻譯了本記四卷。 第四次是隋朝開皇十年，達摩笈多（Dharmagupta，印度佛教僧侶）翻譯（十六紙），名為《剛斷割》，並翻譯了無著菩薩（Asanga，瑜伽行唯識學派創始人）的論兩卷。 第五次是大唐三藏玄奘法師（Xuanzang，唐代著名僧人），在貞觀年間，于玉華宮翻譯（十八紙），名為《能斷金剛》。又有三藏地婆訶羅（Divakara，印度僧人），此云日照，翻譯了功德施菩薩論兩卷。 第六次是大周義凈三藏（Yijing，唐代著名僧人），聖歷二年于佛授記寺翻譯（十二紙），也稱為《能斷金剛》。文中說薄伽梵（Bhagavan，世尊）在名稱大城戰勝林等。 並再次翻譯了世親菩薩（Vasubandhu，瑜伽行唯識學派論師）的論三卷。前後傳燈，不同時代都很完美。文字雖然略有不同，但法寶沒有差別。這是因為得到的梵本，互相之間有所不同，或者翻譯的人，詳略有所差異。互相參照，道理和意義就考慮得周全了。如果經和論一起舉出，那麼周朝和魏朝的譯本各有側重，唐朝的梵文原本沒有缺失，那麼貞觀年間的譯本最為完備。至於文字簡練意義明確，適合不同根器的眾生，書寫盛行於天下，持誦普及於僧俗大眾的，大概只有舍衛國（Sravasti，古印度城市）的譯本了吧。聖人的手札光輝，大概就在這裡了。所以現在用隋朝和魏朝的論，附在姚秦的經文之後。 問：經本的作者可以知道，各家的論請說明作者。 答：佛滅度后九百年中，無著（Asanga）是初地（First Ground of Bodhisattva）的聖人，世親（Vasubandhu）是暖位和頂位的修行者。世俗來說是兄弟，佛法上來說是師資。各自製作論文，讚揚弘揚這部經典。然而金剛仙記（Vajrasena，印度佛教論師）判斷世親的論說，長行是彌勒菩薩（Maitreya，未來佛）為無障礙菩薩（Asanga）說的，無障礙轉授給世親。世親後來尋繹經論的意義，又作偈頌，廣泛地進行問答，來解釋這部經。不然的話，眾論的作法是以偈頌為主，長行來解釋它。哪有先解釋後作偈的，也好像兒子先於父親。又尋繹長行，屢次引用偈文，難道彌勒菩薩會引用地前菩薩的偈頌作為證據嗎？
【English Translation】 English version Treatise by Bodhisattva Vasubandhu in three volumes. Commentary by Vajrasena in ten volumes. The third translation was by Tripitaka Master Paramartha during the first year of the Tai Kang era of the Chen Dynasty in the Southern Dynasties (15 folios), at the Jeta Grove (Gītavana, Buddhist monastery), along with the translation of the original commentary in four volumes. The fourth translation was by Dharmagupta (Dharmagupta, Indian Buddhist monk) in the tenth year of the Kaihuang era of the Sui Dynasty (16 folios), named 'Diamond Cutter', and also translated two volumes of treatises by Bodhisattva Asanga (Asanga, founder of the Yogacara school). The fifth translation was by Tripitaka Master Xuanzang (Xuanzang, famous monk of the Tang Dynasty) during the Zhenguan era of the Great Tang Dynasty, at the Yuhua Palace (18 folios), named 'Diamond Sutra'. There was also Tripitaka Master Divakara (Divakara, Indian monk), which means 'Sun Illuminating', who translated two volumes of treatises by Bodhisattva Gunashri. The sixth translation was by Tripitaka Master Yijing (Yijing, famous monk of the Tang Dynasty) in the second year of the Shengli era of the Great Zhou Dynasty at the Buddha Prediction Temple (12 folios), also called 'Diamond Cutter'. The text says that Bhagavan (Bhagavan, the Blessed One) was in the Great City of Name, the Victorious Forest, etc. And again translated three volumes of treatises by Bodhisattva Vasubandhu (Vasubandhu, Yogacara school master). The transmission of the lamp continued, and all eras were beautiful. Although the texts are slightly different, the Dharma treasure is the same. This is because the obtained Sanskrit texts are different from each other, or the translators have different levels of detail. By referring to each other, the principles and meanings are considered comprehensively. If the Sutra and Treatise are mentioned together, then the translations of the Zhou and Wei Dynasties each have their emphasis, and the Sanskrit original of the Tang Dynasty is not missing, then the translation of the Zhenguan era is the most complete. As for the concise text and clear meaning, suitable for sentient beings of different capacities, the writing is prevalent throughout the world, and the recitation is popular among monks and laypeople, it is probably only the translation of Shravasti (Sravasti, ancient Indian city). The brilliance of the sage's writings is probably here. Therefore, now we use the treatises of the Sui and Wei Dynasties, attached to the Sutra of the Yaoqin. Question: The author of the Sutra can be known, please explain the authors of the various treatises. Answer: Nine hundred years after the Buddha's Parinirvana, Asanga (Asanga) was a sage of the first ground (First Ground of Bodhisattva), and Vasubandhu (Vasubandhu) was a practitioner of the stages of warmth and peak. In secular terms, they were brothers, and in terms of Dharma, they were teacher and disciple. Each made treatises to praise and promote this scripture. However, Vajrasena's (Vajrasena, Indian Buddhist commentator) commentary judges that Vasubandhu's treatise, the prose section, was spoken by Bodhisattva Maitreya (Maitreya, the future Buddha) for Bodhisattva Asanga (Asanga), and Asanga transmitted it to Vasubandhu. Vasubandhu later explored the meaning of the Sutra and Treatise, and also composed verses, extensively conducting questions and answers, to explain this Sutra. Otherwise, the method of the various treatises is to take the verses as the main part, and the prose to explain it. How can there be first explanation and then composition of verses, it is like the son before the father. Also, exploring the prose, repeatedly quoting the verses, would Bodhisattva Maitreya cite the verses of a Bodhisattva before the ground as evidence?
不可依今據慈恩三藏等所傳八十行。誦是彌勒菩薩造。西方具有傳記。若爾何故凈三藏譯論題云。無著造頌。世親作釋。答。偈頌定是慈尊所說。以授無著。無著傳授世親。世親得之造長行釋。故彼論初歸敬頌云。大智通達教我等。歸命無量功德身。應當敬彼如是等。頭面禮足而頂戴。即是通敬本論大師。及傳授者而後論本題云。無著造者。據傳授說。亦不相違。問。慈尊造頌。理為準的因。何無著更自造論。別起異端。答。法歸分別。理有多途。前論所無。更補其闕。尋文雖異。據理不差。待至釋文。一一通會。若唯依無著。斷疑之旨未明。必獨天親行位之門蓋闕。兼而雙辨類曦舒之。合耀或乃偏棄。惜珠寶之不全。勿怖廣聞當勤勉勵。其功德施論依附天親時。有異釋不乖于本。總是第一教興門訖。
第二明經體性者。先體。后性。出諸教體。凡有五重。一能詮性用體。名詮自性。句詮差別。文即是字。為二所依。此三依聲。假實合明。聲名句文四法為體。十地論說。說者聽者。皆以二事而得究竟。一者善聲。二者善字(字為所依亦攝名句)成唯識云。此三離聲雖無別體而假實異。亦不即聲。由此法詞二無礙解境有差別。法緣名等詞緣于聲。二隱假談實。體雖名句文。約用假立。然無別體。不離於聲。但說聖
【現代漢語翻譯】 現代漢語譯本：不應依據現在流傳的由慈恩三藏等人所傳的八十行本。此頌是彌勒菩薩所造。西方有相關的傳記記載。如果這樣，為何凈三藏翻譯的論題說是無著菩薩造頌，世親菩薩作釋呢？回答是：偈頌一定是慈尊（Maitreya，彌勒菩薩的尊稱）所說，然後傳授給無著（Asanga）。無著傳授給世親（Vasubandhu）。世親得到后，作了長行釋。所以那部論的開頭的歸敬頌說：『大智慧通達，教導我們，歸命無量功德身。應當敬彼如是等，頭面禮足而頂戴。』這就是普遍地尊敬本論的大師以及傳授者。然後論的本題說是無著造，是根據傳授來說的，並不矛盾。問：慈尊造頌，理應是準則，為何無著還要自己造論，另外創立異端呢？答：法義歸於分別，道理有很多途徑。前論所沒有的，可以補充它的缺失。尋文雖然不同，但根據道理沒有差別。等到解釋經文時，一一融會貫通。如果只依據無著，斷除疑惑的宗旨還不明確。必定世親的行位之門有所缺失。兼而雙重辨析，如同曦舒（太陽）的合耀。或者偏廢，可惜珠寶的不完整。不要害怕廣聞，應當勤奮勉勵。其功德施論依附世親時，有不同的解釋，但不違背原本的意義。總之，這是第一教興門結束。 第二，闡明經的體性。先說體，后說性，列出各種教的體性。大致有五重：一、能詮性用體。名詮釋自性，句詮釋差別，文就是字，是前兩者的所依。這三者依附於聲音，假和實合起來說明。聲音、名、句、文四法為體。《十地論》說：『說者和聽者，都以兩件事而得到究竟。一是善聲，二是善字（字是所依，也包括名句）。』《成唯識論》說：『這三者離開聲音雖然沒有別的體性，但假和實不同，也不就是聲音。』由此，法無礙解和詞無礙解的境界有差別。法緣于名等，詞緣于聲音。二、隱假談實。體雖然是名、句、文，但從作用上說是假立的。實際上沒有別的體性，不離開聲音。只是說聖
【English Translation】 English version: It is not appropriate to rely on the eighty-line version transmitted by Ci En Sanzang (慈恩三藏) and others. This verse was composed by Bodhisattva Maitreya (彌勒菩薩). The West has related biographical records. If so, why does the title of the treatise translated by Jing Sanzang (凈三藏) say that it was composed by Bodhisattva Asanga (無著), with commentary by Bodhisattva Vasubandhu (世親)? The answer is: The verses must have been spoken by the venerable Maitreya (慈尊, an honorific for Maitreya), who then transmitted them to Asanga. Asanga transmitted them to Vasubandhu. After obtaining them, Vasubandhu wrote a prose commentary. Therefore, the opening homage verse of that treatise says: 'Great wisdom penetrates, teaching us, we take refuge in the body of immeasurable merit. We should respect such as him, bowing our heads and prostrating at his feet.' This is to universally respect the master of this treatise and the transmitter. Then the title of the treatise says it was composed by Asanga, which is based on the transmission and is not contradictory. Question: Since the verses were composed by the venerable Maitreya, which should be the standard, why did Asanga compose his own treatise and create a different doctrine? Answer: The meaning of the Dharma returns to differentiation, and there are many paths to the truth. What the previous treatise lacked can be supplemented. Although the wording is different, the meaning is not different according to the principle. When it comes to explaining the scriptures, everything will be integrated and understood. If one only relies on Asanga, the purpose of resolving doubts is not clear. Certainly, Vasubandhu's path of practice is lacking. Combining and distinguishing both is like the combined radiance of the sun. Or neglecting one side is like regretting the incompleteness of a jewel. Do not be afraid of extensive learning, and strive diligently. When the Merit Bestowal Treatise relies on Vasubandhu, there are different interpretations, but they do not violate the original meaning. In short, this is the end of the first teaching establishment gate. Second, clarifying the nature of the sutra. First the substance, then the nature, listing the natures of various teachings. There are roughly five levels: 1. The substance of the expressive nature and function. 'Name' explains the self-nature, 'sentence' explains the differences, and 'text' is the character, which is the basis for the former two. These three rely on sound, and the false and the real are combined to explain. Sound, name, sentence, and text are the four dharmas that constitute the substance. The Ten Stages Sutra says: 'Both the speaker and the listener attain ultimate understanding through two things: one is good sound, and the other is good character (character is the basis, also including name and sentence).' The Treatise on Establishing Consciousness-Only says: 'Although these three have no separate substance apart from sound, the false and the real are different, and they are not simply sound.' Therefore, there is a difference in the realm of unobstructed understanding of Dharma and unobstructed understanding of words. Dharma is related to name, etc., and words are related to sound. 2. Concealing the false and discussing the real. Although the substance is name, sentence, and text, it is nominally established in terms of function. In reality, there is no separate substance, and it does not depart from sound. It simply says that the holy
教聲為體性故。對法有成所引。聲不說名等為成所引。唯識亦云。若名句文離聲實有。應如色等非實能詮。三能所詮顯體。瑜伽八十一出契經體。略有二種。一文二義。由能詮文義得顯等。此體合取能詮所詮。聖教必有所詮義。故四攝法從心體。花嚴等說。三界唯心。又契經說。諸識所緣。唯識所現。論說心心所。色不相應行。及諸無為。皆不離心故。唯識心為此教體。若就根本能說者心。若取于末亦能聞者識心為體。故二十唯識展轉增上力。二識成決定謂余相續。識差別故。令余相續。差別識生展轉互為增上緣故。五攝事歸如體。凈名經云。一切法皆如也。眾聖賢亦如也等。又云。文字性雖無有文字。是則解脫。又云。法非見聞覺知等處處非一。事相如波。理性如水。波不離水。事法皆如故。教唯以真如為體。上來出體。從未向本。從淺至深。但說所不違余義。后明性者。復有三門。一圓成等性。二漏無漏性。三善等三性。圓成等者。攝事歸如。即圓成性。攝法從心亦依他性。其前二門。亦即依他。若第三門。通屬三性。由計所執。雖無實體。亦所詮故。漏無漏者。據本質教。如來所說。一切無漏言十五界是有漏者。隨小乘宗。非大乘義。大乘佛身。十八界等。皆無漏故。十地菩薩。及二乘人說聽教者。應須分別。
【現代漢語翻譯】 現代漢語譯本：教法的體性是聲音。根據對法論的觀點，聲音是成就所引生的。聲音不被稱為名稱等，而是成就所引生的。唯識論也說，如果名稱、語句、文字脫離聲音而真實存在，那麼就應該像色法等一樣，不是真實能表達意義的。能詮釋和所詮釋三者共同顯現教法的體性。《瑜伽師地論》第八十一卷引用的契經中提到教法的體性略有二種：一是文字，二是義理。通過能詮釋的文字，義理才能得以顯現等。這種體性結合了能詮釋和所詮釋。聖教必然有所詮釋的義理，所以四攝法從心體出發。《華嚴經》等經典說，三界唯心。還有契經說，諸識所緣，唯識所現。論典說，心和心所、色法、不相應行，以及諸無為法，都不離心，所以唯識論以心作為教法的體性。如果就根本的能說者而言，是心；如果取末端的能聽聞者而言，也是識心作為體性。所以《二十唯識論》說，展轉增上力，二識成就決定，意思是說，由於其餘相續的識的差別，使得其餘相續產生差別識，展轉互相成為增上緣。五攝事歸如體。《維摩詰經》說，一切法皆是如，眾聖賢也是如等等。又說，文字的自性雖然沒有文字，這就是解脫。又說，法不是見聞覺知等，處處都不是一。事相如波浪，理性如水，波浪不離水，事法皆是如，所以教法唯以真如為體。以上是從末端向根本，從淺到深地闡述教法的體性，只是說明了不違背其他義理的內容。後面闡明教法的自性，又有三個方面：一是圓成實性等，二是漏和無漏性，三是善等三種自性。圓成實性等，攝事歸如，就是圓成實性。攝法從心，也是依他起性。前面的兩個方面，也是依他起性。如果就第三個方面來說，則通屬於三種自性。由於遍計所執性雖然沒有實體，但也是所詮釋的對象。漏和無漏性，根據本質教法，如來所說的一切無漏，而言十五界是有漏的，這是隨順小乘宗的觀點，不是大乘的義理。大乘佛身，十八界等，都是無漏的。對於十地菩薩以及二乘人來說，說教者和聽教者，應該加以分別。 教聲為體性故。對法有成所引。聲不說名等為成所引。唯識亦云。若名句文離聲實有。應如色等非實能詮。三能所詮顯體。瑜伽八十一出契經體。略有二種。一文二義。由能詮文義得顯等。此體合取能詮所詮。聖教必有所詮義。故四攝法從心體。花嚴等說。三界唯心。又契經說。諸識所緣。唯識所現。論說心心所。色不相應行。及諸無為。皆不離心故。唯識心為此教體。若就根本能說者心。若取于末亦能聞者識心為體。故二十唯識展轉增上力。二識成決定謂余相續。識差別故。令余相續。差別識生展轉互為增上緣故。五攝事歸如體。凈名經云。一切法皆如也。眾聖賢亦如也等。又云。文字性雖無有文字。是則解脫。又云。法非見聞覺知等處處非一。事相如波。理性如水。波不離水。事法皆如故。教唯以真如為體。上來出體。從未向本。從淺至深。但說所不違余義。后明性者。復有三門。一圓成等性。二漏無漏性。三善等三性。圓成等者。攝事歸如。即圓成性。攝法從心亦依他性。其前二門。亦即依他。若第三門。通屬三性。由計所執。雖無實體。亦所詮故。漏無漏者。據本質教。如來所說。一切無漏言十五界是有漏者。隨小乘宗。非大乘義。大乘佛身。十八界等。皆無漏故。十地菩薩。及二乘人說聽教者。應須分別。
【English Translation】 English version: The nature of the teaching (教聲) is its sound. According to the Abhidharma (對法), sound is what is produced by accomplishment (成所引). Sound is not referred to as name (名) etc., but is produced by accomplishment. The Vijnaptimatrata (唯識) also states that if name, sentence (句), and word (文) exist independently of sound, then they should be like form (色) etc., not truly capable of expressing meaning. The three, the expresser (能詮), and the expressed (所詮), manifest the nature (體) of the teaching. The Yogacarabhumi-sastra (瑜伽師地論), in its eighty-first fascicle, cites a sutra (契經) stating that the nature of the teaching is briefly of two kinds: one is word (文), and the other is meaning (義). Through the expressive word, meaning can be manifested, etc. This nature combines the expresser and the expressed. The sacred teaching (聖教) must have an expressed meaning, therefore the four means of conversion (四攝法) originate from the nature of mind (心體). The Avatamsaka Sutra (花嚴經) and others state that the three realms (三界) are only mind. Also, a sutra states that what the consciousnesses (識) perceive is only what is manifested by consciousness. The treatise (論) states that mind (心) and mental factors (心所), form (色), non-associated formations (不相應行), and all unconditioned dharmas (無為), are inseparable from mind, therefore the Vijnaptimatrata takes mind as the nature of this teaching. If we consider the fundamental speaker, it is mind; if we consider the listener at the end, it is also consciousness-mind (識心) that is the nature. Therefore, the Twenty Verses on Vijnaptimatra (二十唯識論) states that through mutual enhancing power (展轉增上力), the two consciousnesses (二識) achieve determination, meaning that due to the difference in the consciousnesses of other continuums (余相續), the differentiated consciousnesses arise in other continuums, mutually becoming enhancing conditions (增上緣). The five, gathering affairs returning to suchness (五攝事歸如體). The Vimalakirti Sutra (凈名經) states that all dharmas are suchness (如), the sages (眾聖賢) are also suchness, etc. It also states that although the nature of words has no words, this is liberation (解脫). It also states that dharma is not in the realm of seeing, hearing, perceiving, and knowing (見聞覺知), and is not one in all places. Phenomena are like waves, and reason is like water; waves are inseparable from water, and all phenomena are suchness, therefore the teaching only takes true suchness (真如) as its nature. The above explains the nature from the end to the root, from shallow to deep, only explaining what does not contradict other meanings. Later, explaining the nature, there are three aspects: one is the perfected nature (圓成實性) etc., two is the defiled and undefiled nature (漏無漏性), and three is the three natures of good etc. (善等三性). The perfected nature etc., gathering affairs returning to suchness, is the perfected nature. Gathering dharmas from mind is also the dependent nature (依他起性). The previous two aspects are also the dependent nature. If we consider the third aspect, it generally belongs to the three natures. Although the imagined nature (遍計所執性) has no substance, it is also what is expressed. The defiled and undefiled nature, according to the essential teaching, what the Tathagata (如來) said, that all undefiled, saying the fifteen realms (十五界) are defiled, this follows the view of the Hinayana (小乘) school, not the meaning of the Mahayana (大乘). The Mahayana Buddha-body (佛身), the eighteen realms (十八界) etc., are all undefiled. For the Bodhisattvas of the ten grounds (十地菩薩) and the two vehicles (二乘人), the speaker and listener of the teaching should be distinguished.
菩薩第八有漏性收。所變聲等。亦唯有漏。若於無漏心中。說聽通第六七。此影像教。亦唯無漏。由見相分性類同故。二乘雖有遊觀無漏入滅定等。少不足言說聽法時。唯是有漏。異生可知。善等三性者。無漏所變。一向善性。其有漏心所說聽者。所變聲等。皆唯無記。是性境故。問。第八所變可唯無記。若約六識。善等位中所變如何。答。見分善等所變無記以許見相離引生故。論說色聲。非善惡性。隨能發心。假說善惡。問。聲唯無記。名等如何。答。若隨所詮。假通三性。隨所依聲亦唯無記。若爾何故世親論云。我法是善。汝唯無記。答。汝小乘師。聲界有漏。名唯無記。我大乘宗。佛聲無漏。故唯是善。
第三攝歸宗旨者。初辨攝歸。后明宗旨。攝歸有五。一歸藏。二歸分。三歸乘。四歸時。五歸會。初歸藏者。藏有二種。一聲聞藏。二菩薩藏。獨覺教少入聲聞中。此經即菩薩攝。由滿字教。被大根性。又藏有三。謂奈耶。素呾纜。阿毗達磨。如次詮于戒定惠學。各據增說不爾。三藏俱詮三故。今此經是素呾纜藏。又準十二分。有論議經等。可通三攝。非別部帙。第二歸分者。十二分義。具如別章。今應列名。略配經說。一契經。相有通有別。通即十二俱名契經。別謂長行綴緝。略所應說義。此經俱通。
【現代漢語翻譯】 現代漢語譯本 菩薩的第八識（Alaya-識，根本識）所包含的只是有漏的性質。第八識所變現的聲等（色聲香味觸法中的聲），也只是有漏的。如果在無漏的心中，進行說法和聽法，並且通達第六識（意識）和第七識（末那識），那麼這種影像教（通過影像或比喻來傳達的教義），也只是無漏的。這是因為見分（能見的主體）和相分（所見的客體）的性質種類相同。二乘（聲聞乘和緣覺乘）雖然有遊觀無漏、進入滅盡定等境界，但這些很少，不足以談論。他們在說法和聽法的時候，心識都只是有漏的。這一點異生（凡夫）也能夠理解。關於善、惡、無記這三種性質：無漏心所變現的，一向是善的性質。而有漏心所說和聽的，所變現的聲等，都只是無記的，因為這是性境（不帶主觀判斷的客觀境界）。 問：第八識所變現的可以只是無記，如果就六識（眼耳鼻舌身意）來說，在善等狀態下所變現的又如何呢？答：見分（能見的主體）的善等狀態所變現的無記，是因為允許見分和相分分離而產生。論中說，色和聲，不是善的性質，也不是惡的性質，而是隨著能發心（發起心念的主體）而假說為善或惡。 問：聲只是無記，那麼名等（名稱等）又如何呢？答：如果隨著所詮釋的內容，可以假通於三種性質（善、惡、無記）。但隨著所依據的聲，也只是無記。如果這樣，為什麼世親論說：『我（大乘）的法是善的，你（小乘）的法只是無記的』呢？答：你小乘的老師，認為聲界是有漏的，名只是無記的。我大乘宗，認為佛的音聲是無漏的，所以只是善的。
第三，攝歸宗旨：首先辨別攝歸，然後闡明宗旨。攝歸有五種：一、歸藏；二、歸分；三、歸乘；四、歸時；五、歸會。首先是歸藏：藏有兩種，一是聲聞藏，二是菩薩藏。菩薩的覺悟教義很少進入聲聞藏中。這部經屬於菩薩藏所攝，因為它是滿字教（圓滿的教法），被大根性（具有深厚根基的人）所接受。藏又有三種，即奈耶（毗奈耶，律藏）、素呾纜（修多羅，經藏）、阿毗達磨（阿毗達摩，論藏），依次詮釋戒、定、慧三學。各自根據增上的方面來說，否則，三藏都詮釋戒定慧三學。現在這部經是素呾纜藏（經藏）。又根據十二分教，有論議經等，可以通於三藏所攝，而不是單獨的部帙。 第二，歸分：十二分教的意義，詳細的在別的章節中說明。現在應該列出名稱，略微配合經文來說明。一、契經（Sutra）：相有通相和別相。通相是十二分教都稱為契經。別相是指長行（散文形式的經文）和綴緝（偈頌形式的經文），簡略地說明所應該說的意義。這部經都具備通相和別相。
【English Translation】 English version The eighth consciousness (Alaya-vijnana, the storehouse consciousness) of a Bodhisattva contains only defiled (with outflows) nature. The sound, etc., transformed by the eighth consciousness are also only defiled. If, in an undefiled mind, teaching and listening are conducted, and the sixth (consciousness) and seventh (Manas consciousness) are understood, then this image teaching is also only undefiled. This is because the nature and kind of the seeing-aspect (subjective aspect) and the object-aspect (objective aspect) are the same. Although the Two Vehicles (Sravaka Vehicle and Pratyekabuddha Vehicle) have experiences such as contemplating the undefiled and entering cessation samadhi, these are few and not worth mentioning. When they teach and listen to the Dharma, their minds are only defiled. This can be understood even by ordinary beings. Regarding the three natures of good, evil, and neutral: that which is transformed by the undefiled mind is always of a good nature. But the sound, etc., transformed by what is spoken and heard by the defiled mind are all only neutral, because this is the objective realm (Svabhava-bhumi). Question: What the eighth consciousness transforms can only be neutral, but if we consider the six consciousnesses (eye, ear, nose, tongue, body, and mind), what is transformed in states of goodness, etc.? Answer: The neutral that is transformed by the good states, etc., of the seeing-aspect is because the separation of the seeing-aspect and the object-aspect is allowed to occur. The treatise says that form and sound are neither good nor evil in nature, but are provisionally said to be good or evil depending on the mind that initiates them. Question: Sound is only neutral, so what about names, etc.? Answer: If it follows what is being explained, it can provisionally encompass the three natures (good, evil, and neutral). But following the sound on which it is based, it is also only neutral. If so, why does Vasubandhu's treatise say: 'My (Mahayana) Dharma is good, while your (Hinayana) is only neutral'? Answer: Your Hinayana teachers believe that the sound realm is defiled, and names are only neutral. Our Mahayana school believes that the Buddha's voice is undefiled, so it is only good.
Third, Gathering into the Main Point: First, distinguish the gathering; then, clarify the main point. There are five types of gathering: 1. Gathering into the Canon (Tripitaka); 2. Gathering into Divisions; 3. Gathering into Vehicles; 4. Gathering into Time; 5. Gathering into Assemblies. First, Gathering into the Canon: There are two types of canons: one is the Sravaka Canon, and the other is the Bodhisattva Canon. The Bodhisattva's teachings of enlightenment rarely enter the Sravaka Canon. This sutra is included in the Bodhisattva Canon because it is a complete teaching (Purna-varna), accepted by those with great capacity. There are also three types of canons, namely, Vinaya (discipline), Sutra (discourses), and Abhidharma (higher knowledge), which explain the three learnings of morality, concentration, and wisdom, respectively. Each is based on the aspect of increase; otherwise, all three canons explain the three learnings. This sutra is now the Sutra Canon. Second, Gathering into Divisions: The meaning of the twelve divisions of teachings is explained in detail in other chapters. Now, the names should be listed and briefly matched with the sutra's explanation. 1. Sutra (aphorism): The characteristics have both general and specific aspects. The general aspect is that all twelve divisions are called Sutras. The specific aspect refers to prose (long passages) and verses (gatha), which briefly explain the meaning that should be said. This sutra has both general and specific aspects.
二應頌。應重述頌。謂長行已說後重頌明。如下經云。若色見我等。三記別。此有三相。一記大人當成佛。第二記弟子死此生彼。三為記諸法之義。今經可通。第三記別。雖釋迦汝當成佛談往佛事非今記。他故非彼。又但經詮。即彼分故。今非要佛。四諷訟。謂前未說。直以偈明。可諷誦故。最後偈是。五自說。謂不待請。觀機即說令法久住。惑顯悲深。今此經中。令生企敬故。無自說。六緣起。此有三相。因一犯制戒。二因事說法。三因請說法。此通第三。七譬喻。謂以喻況曉所說義。如說虛空喻施福等。八本事。謂除自身說。於過去弟子。及法名本事。今經無此。九本生。說佛自身在過去世。方彼所若死若生。行菩薩行等。即說過去作忍辱仙等。十方廣。此有二相。一說行菩薩道。二法廣多極高大故。此經具有。十一希法。謂說八眾所有共不共德。及余最勝殊特驚異之法。如說日舍三恒河沙身命不及信經。十二論義。謂諸經典循環研核。磨怛理迦。一切了義經。皆名磨怛理迦。今者此經雖無顯文。準天親論。乘前起后。所有疑請佛為斷除。循環而說。亦是論議。即通十分。唯無自說及本事經。三歸乘者。或唯一乘。如法花言唯有一乘法無二亦無三。或立二乘。如攝論云上乘下乘有差別故。或立三乘。如法花云爲求
【現代漢語翻譯】 現代漢語譯本 二應頌（Geya）。應重述頌文。即長行文已經說完之後，再用頌文來重新闡明。如下經文所說：『若以色相見我等。』 三記別（Vyakarana）。這有三種相：第一種是記別大人將來成佛；第二種是記別弟子死後往生何處；第三種是記別諸法的意義。此經可以歸於第三種記別。雖然『釋迦汝當成佛』是談論過去的佛事，並非現在的記別，因為是談論他事，所以不屬於此。而且只是經文的詮釋，是那一部分的內容，現在並非重要的佛事。 四諷頌（Udana）。即前面沒有說過，直接用偈頌來闡明，可以諷誦的。最後的偈頌就是。 五自說（Ityuktaka）。即不等待請求，觀察時機就說，爲了使佛法長久住世，顯示佛的悲心深切。現在這部經中，爲了使眾生生起企慕和恭敬之心，所以沒有自說。 六緣起（Nidana）。這有三種相：一是因犯戒而制定戒律；二是因事而說法；三是因請求而說法。此經屬於第三種。 七譬喻（Avadana）。即用比喻來曉喻所說的意義。例如用虛空來比喻佈施的福報等。 八本事（Itihasa）。即除了說自身之外，說過去弟子以及法的名稱的本事。此經沒有。 九本生（Jataka）。說佛自身在過去世，在那個地方或死或生，行菩薩行等等。即說過去世做忍辱仙人等。 十方廣（Vaipulya）。這有兩種相：一是說行菩薩道；二是佛法廣大眾多極其高大。此經具有這兩種相。 十一希法（Adbhuta-dharma）。即說八部眾所有共同和不共同的功德，以及其餘最殊勝、特別、令人驚異的佛法。例如說用三恒河沙數的生命來佈施，也不及相信此經的功德。 十二論義（Upadesha）。即諸經典循環研核，磨怛理迦（Matrika，論母）。一切了義經，都叫做磨怛理迦。現在這部經雖然沒有明顯的文字，但根據天親菩薩的論述，承前啓後，所有疑問都請佛來斷除，循環而說，也是論議，即通達十分。唯獨沒有自說和本事經。 三歸依乘的人，或者只有一乘。如《法華經》所說：『唯有一乘法，無二亦無三。』或者立二乘，如《攝大乘論》所說：『上乘下乘有差別故。』或者立三乘，如《法華經》所說：『為求
【English Translation】 English version Two, Geya (Repetition in Verse). It means repeating what has already been said in prose, clarifying it again in verse. As the sutra says, 'If one sees me by form, etc.' Three, Vyakarana (Prediction). This has three aspects: first, predicting that a great person will become a Buddha; second, predicting where a disciple will be reborn after death; and third, predicting the meaning of all dharmas. This sutra can be categorized under the third type of prediction. Although 'Shakyamuni, you will become a Buddha' discusses past Buddha-events, it is not a present prediction because it discusses something else, and it is merely an explanation of the sutra, a part of that content, not an important Buddha-event now. Four, Udana (Spontaneous Utterance). It refers to what has not been said before, directly clarified in verses, which can be recited. The last verse is an example. Five, Ityuktaka (Thus Said). It means speaking without being asked, observing the opportunity to speak, in order to make the Dharma abide long, showing the Buddha's deep compassion. In this sutra, to inspire aspiration and reverence in beings, there is no 'Thus Said'. Six, Nidana (Causation). This has three aspects: first, establishing precepts due to violations; second, teaching the Dharma due to events; and third, teaching the Dharma due to requests. This sutra belongs to the third type. Seven, Avadana (Parable). It means using parables to explain the meaning of what is being said, such as using space to illustrate the merit of giving, etc. Eight, Itihasa (Narrative of Past Events). It refers to narrating past events of disciples and the names of dharmas, apart from oneself. This sutra does not have this. Nine, Jataka (Birth Story). It tells of the Buddha himself in past lives, where he died or was born, practicing the Bodhisattva path, etc. It tells of past lives as the Sage of Patience, etc. Ten, Vaipulya (Extensive Sutra). This has two aspects: first, speaking of practicing the Bodhisattva path; second, the Dharma is vast, numerous, and extremely high. This sutra has both aspects. Eleven, Adbhuta-dharma (Miraculous Dharma). It refers to speaking of the common and uncommon merits of the eight assemblies, and other most supreme, special, and astonishing dharmas, such as saying that giving away bodies and lives as numerous as three Ganges sands is not as good as believing in this sutra. Twelve, Upadesha (Doctrinal Instruction). It refers to the cyclical examination and investigation of the sutras, Matrika (Matrix). All sutras of definitive meaning are called Matrika. Although this sutra does not have explicit text, according to Vasubandhu's treatise, it connects the preceding and following, and all doubts are resolved by asking the Buddha, speaking cyclically, which is also doctrinal instruction, thus encompassing ten aspects. Only 'Thus Said' and Itihasa are missing. Those who take refuge in the Three Jewels, there may be only one vehicle. As the Lotus Sutra says, 'There is only one Buddha vehicle, no second, and no third.' Or establish two vehicles, as the Samgraha-vastu says, 'The upper vehicle and the lower vehicle have differences.' Or establish three vehicles, as the Lotus Sutra says, 'For seeking'
聲聞者說應四諦法等。如是乃至立五乘等。如常具辯。今此經者。即一乘故。下文云爲發大乘者說。勝鬘經云。一乘即大乘故。二三乘中上乘所攝。為發最上乘者說故。四歸時者。古立教時。多少不定。皆無憑據。廣如慈恩法師法苑敘破。今者唯敘正義。釋云。慈恩三藏依解深密經。立教三時。彼經廣為勝義生菩薩說三無性。皆依遍計所執。以勝義生菩薩深生領解。世尊讚歎善解所說。勝義生菩薩白佛言世尊。初於一時波羅痆斯仙人墮處施鹿林中。唯為發趣聲聞乘者。以四諦相轉正法輪。雖是甚奇。甚為希有。一切世間諸天人等。先無有能。如法轉者。而於彼時。所轉法輪。有上有容。是未了義是諸諍論。安足處所。世尊在昔。第二時中。唯為發趣修大乘者。依一切法無自性。無生無滅。本來寂靜。自性真如。以隱密相。轉正法輪。雖更甚奇。甚為希有。而於彼時所轉法輪。亦是有上有所容受。猶未了義。是諸諍論。安足處所。世尊於今。第三時中。普為發趣一切乘者。依一切法皆無自性。無生無滅。本來寂靜。自性涅槃。無自性性以顯了相。轉正法輪。第一甚奇最為希有。於今世尊所轉法輪。無上無容。是真了義。非諸諍論安足處所。此同涅槃經。初教服乳。次教總斷。后教有服有不服者。亦同金光明經所說。轉照
【現代漢語翻譯】 現代漢語譯本 聲聞乘的修行者說應當修習四聖諦（苦、集、滅、道）等法門，乃至建立五乘（人天乘、聲聞乘、緣覺乘、菩薩乘、佛乘）等等，這些道理通常都已詳細闡述過。而這部經（指目前所講的經）所講的是唯一佛乘，所以下文說，是為發大乘心的人說的。《勝鬘經》說，一乘即是大乘，也包含二乘、三乘中的上乘，是為發最上乘心的人說的。 關於佛陀說法時期的劃分，古人立教時，說法時期長短不定，都沒有可靠的依據。慈恩法師（窺基）在《法苑》的序文中對此進行了駁斥。現在只敘述正確的觀點。解釋說，慈恩三藏（玄奘）依據《解深密經》劃分了佛陀說法的三個時期。該經廣泛地為勝義生菩薩宣說了三種無自性，都是依據遍計所執性而說的。因為勝義生菩薩深刻地領悟和理解了這些道理，所以世尊讚歎他善於理解所說的法義。勝義生菩薩對佛說：『世尊，最初，您在波羅奈城的仙人墮處鹿野苑中，僅僅是爲了引導趣向聲聞乘的人，以四聖諦的法相來轉法輪。雖然這非常奇特，非常稀有，一切世間的天人和人等，先前沒有誰能夠像您這樣如法地轉法輪。但是在那個時候，所轉的法輪，還有可以增補和容納的空間，是未了義的，是各種爭論可以安立的地方。世尊在過去，第二個時期中，僅僅是爲了引導修習大乘的人，依據一切法無自性、無生無滅、本來寂靜、自性真如的道理，以隱秘的方式來轉法輪。雖然這更加奇特，更加稀有，但是在那個時候所轉的法輪，也還是有可以增補和容納的空間，仍然是未了義的，是各種爭論可以安立的地方。世尊現在，在第三個時期中，普遍地爲了引導趣向一切乘的人，依據一切法皆無自性、無生無滅、本來寂靜、自性涅槃、無自性性的道理，以顯了的方式來轉法輪。這是第一等奇特，最為稀有。現在世尊所轉的法輪，沒有可以增補和容納的空間，是真正的了義，不是各種爭論可以安立的地方。』 這與《涅槃經》所說的相似，最初的教法如同服乳，其次的教法是完全斷絕（指斷絕煩惱），最後的教法是有服有不服（指對某些事物可以接受，對某些事物不接受）。也與《金光明經》所說的相似，如同轉動光明來照亮一切。
【English Translation】 English version Those who practice as Shravakas (listeners, disciples) say that one should practice the Four Noble Truths (suffering, its cause, its cessation, and the path), and so on, even establishing the Five Vehicles (Human-Deva Vehicle, Shravaka Vehicle, Pratyekabuddha Vehicle, Bodhisattva Vehicle, and Buddha Vehicle), etc. These principles are usually explained in detail. However, this sutra (referring to the current sutra being discussed) speaks of the One Vehicle, so the following text says that it is spoken for those who aspire to the Great Vehicle. The Shrimala Sutra says that the One Vehicle is the Great Vehicle, and it also includes the highest vehicle among the Two Vehicles and Three Vehicles, and is spoken for those who aspire to the Supreme Vehicle. Regarding the division of the Buddha's teaching periods, in ancient times, when establishing the teachings, the length of the periods was uncertain, and there was no reliable basis. The Dharma Master Ci'en (Kuiji) refuted this in the preface to the Fayuan. Now, only the correct view is narrated. The explanation says that the Tripitaka Master Ci'en (Xuanzang) divided the Buddha's teachings into three periods based on the Samdhinirmocana Sutra. That sutra extensively explained the three natures of non-self-existence to the Bodhisattva Sheng Yi Sheng (Paramarthasamudgata), all based on the Parikalpita (completely imputed nature). Because the Bodhisattva Sheng Yi Sheng deeply understood these principles, the World Honored One praised him for being good at understanding the meaning of what was said. The Bodhisattva Sheng Yi Sheng said to the Buddha: 'World Honored One, initially, in the Deer Park at the place where the immortals fell in Varanasi, you only turned the Dharma wheel with the characteristics of the Four Noble Truths to guide those who aspire to the Shravaka Vehicle. Although this was very extraordinary and very rare, none of the gods and humans in all the worlds had previously been able to turn the Dharma wheel in such a way. But at that time, the Dharma wheel that was turned still had room for addition and acceptance, was not definitive, and was a place where various disputes could be established. In the past, in the second period, the World Honored One only turned the Dharma wheel in a hidden way to guide those who practice the Great Vehicle, based on the principles that all dharmas are without self-nature, without arising or ceasing, are originally quiescent, and are the Suchness of self-nature. Although this was even more extraordinary and even more rare, the Dharma wheel that was turned at that time still had room for addition and acceptance, was still not definitive, and was a place where various disputes could be established. Now, in the third period, the World Honored One universally turns the Dharma wheel in a clear way to guide those who aspire to all vehicles, based on the principles that all dharmas are without self-nature, without arising or ceasing, are originally quiescent, are Nirvana of self-nature, and are the nature of non-self-nature. This is the most extraordinary and the most rare. The Dharma wheel that the World Honored One is turning now has no room for addition or acceptance, is truly definitive, and is not a place where various disputes can be established.' This is similar to what the Nirvana Sutra says, that the initial teaching is like taking milk, the next teaching is complete cessation (referring to the cessation of afflictions), and the final teaching is taking some and not taking others (referring to accepting some things and not accepting others). It is also similar to what the Golden Light Sutra says, like turning the light to illuminate everything.
持三種法輪。法花經信解品。亦有明說大意論之對不定性。大由小起。漸次而被。可有三時。解深密等。約此而說。若唯頓悟大不由。小則無三時前後次第。亦非年月定製。后先但以義類。相從而說。若不爾者。花嚴經等最初宣說。豈即初時。遺教最後第三時。問。若爾何故法花經。唯說二時。彼云昔于波羅奈。轉四諦法輪。乃至今復輪最妙無上大法輪。答。彼以大小相對。隱第二時但說前後。實即三時。今者此經隨頓發性。總不立時。若約漸根。第二時攝。以初時教。唯說于有。此不唯有。故非彼時。若第三時顯說空有。普為發趣一切乘者。此經下云。唯為發趣最上乘者故。第二時又無著釋。不驚不怖等。約三無性。然三無性。是佛密意說諸法空。問。解深密經雖說三時。文中不說第二時教。是般若等。準何得知。答。即彼經云。唯為發趣修大乘者。此經亦云。如來為發大乘說。為最上乘者說等。其文正同。若不爾者。更有何經。唯為發趣修大乘者。隱密相轉。況大般若數處有文。如來說已。諸天喜贊。皆云。我今見世尊第二轉法輪等。問。準深密經說。第二時隱密相轉。若爾此經非了義耶。又準此經。持說修行。其福無量。不可思議。而解深密以不了義。持說讀誦所有功德。如牛跡中水。比大海水等。勝劣懸殊。
【現代漢語翻譯】 現代漢語譯本 持三種法輪。《法華經·信解品》也有明確說明，大意是針對不定性的說法。『大』由『小』而起，逐漸被接受，可以分為三個階段。如《解深密經》等，就是根據這個理論而說的。如果只有頓悟，『大』不是由『小』開始的，那麼就沒有三個階段的前後次第，也不是按年月來定製的先後，只是按照義理的類別，相因而說。如果不是這樣，那麼《華嚴經》等最初宣說，難道就是最初的階段嗎？《遺教經》是最後第三個階段嗎？ 問：如果這樣，為什麼《法華經》只說了兩個階段？經中說，過去在波羅奈，轉四諦法輪（four noble truths），直到現在又轉最微妙無上的大法輪（great Dharma wheel）。 答：那是用『大』和『小』相對比，隱藏了第二個階段，只說了前後兩個階段，實際上是三個階段。現在這部經是隨著頓悟的根性，總的來說不立階段。如果按照漸悟的根性，就屬於第二個階段。因為最初階段的教義，只說『有』（existence），這部經不只說『有』，所以不屬於那個階段。如果第三個階段明顯地說『空』（emptiness）和『有』，普遍地爲了引導趣向一切乘（vehicle）的人，這部經下面說，『只為引導趣向最上乘（supreme vehicle）的人』。所以屬於第二個階段。又，無著（Asanga）解釋說，『不驚不怖』等，是根據三無性（three natures）而說的。然而三無性，是佛（Buddha）的秘密意圖，說諸法皆空（all dharmas are empty）。 問：《解深密經》（Saṃdhinirmocana Sūtra）雖然說了三個階段，但文中沒有說第二個階段的教義是《般若經》（Prajñāpāramitā Sūtra）等，根據什麼知道的？ 答：就是那部經說的，『只為引導趣向修大乘（Mahāyāna）的人』。這部經也說，『如來（Tathāgata）為發大乘說，為最上乘者說』等，文句完全相同。如果不是這樣，還有什麼經，只為引導趣向修大乘的人，隱秘地轉法輪（Dharma wheel）呢？況且《大般若經》（Mahāprajñāpāramitā Sūtra）多處有文，如來說完后，諸天（Devas）歡喜讚歎，都說，『我今見世尊（Bhagavan）第二次轉法輪』等。 問：根據《解深密經》說，第二個階段是隱秘相轉法輪，如果這樣，這部經不是了義經（definitive meaning）嗎？又根據這部經，受持、演說、修行，其福德無量，不可思議。而《解深密經》認為不了義經，受持、演說、讀誦所有的功德，就像牛蹄印中的水，比大海水等，勝劣懸殊。
【English Translation】 English version Holding the three Dharma wheels. The 'Faith and Understanding' chapter of the Lotus Sutra also clearly explains the main idea, which addresses the concept of indeterminacy. 'Greatness' arises from 'smallness', gradually being accepted, and can be divided into three stages. The Saṃdhinirmocana Sūtra (解深密經) and others are based on this theory. If there is only sudden enlightenment, and 'greatness' does not originate from 'smallness', then there is no sequential order of the three stages, nor is the order determined by years and months; the sequence is only described according to the categories of meaning. If it were not so, would the initial teachings of the Avataṃsaka Sūtra (華嚴經) be considered the very first stage? Is the Sūtra of the Buddha's Last Teachings (遺教經) the final, third stage? Question: If this is the case, why does the Lotus Sutra (法華經) only mention two stages? It states that in the past, in Varanasi (波羅奈), the Dharma wheel of the Four Noble Truths (四諦法輪) was turned, and now again, the most subtle and unsurpassed Great Dharma wheel (大法輪) is turned. Answer: That is using 'great' and 'small' in comparison, concealing the second stage and only mentioning the front and back stages; in reality, there are three stages. This sutra now, following the nature of sudden enlightenment, does not establish stages in general. If based on the nature of gradual enlightenment, it belongs to the second stage. Because the teachings of the initial stage only speak of 'existence' (有), this sutra does not only speak of 'existence', so it does not belong to that stage. If the third stage clearly speaks of 'emptiness' (空) and 'existence', universally guiding those who aspire to all vehicles (乘), this sutra states below, 'only to guide those who aspire to the supreme vehicle (最上乘)'. Therefore, it belongs to the second stage. Furthermore, Asaṅga (無著) explains that 'not being startled or afraid' etc., is based on the three natures (三無性). However, the three natures are the Buddha's (佛) secret intention, stating that all dharmas are empty (諸法皆空). Question: Although the Saṃdhinirmocana Sūtra (解深密經) speaks of three stages, it does not mention in the text that the teachings of the second stage are the Prajñāpāramitā Sūtra (般若經) etc. How is this known? Answer: That is, that sutra states, 'only to guide those who aspire to cultivate the Mahāyāna (大乘)'. This sutra also states, 'The Tathāgata (如來) speaks for the sake of developing the Mahāyāna, speaks for the sake of those of the supreme vehicle' etc.; the wording is exactly the same. If it were not so, what other sutra would there be that only guides those who aspire to cultivate the Mahāyāna, secretly turning the Dharma wheel (Dharma wheel)? Moreover, in many places in the Mahāprajñāpāramitā Sūtra (大般若經), there are texts stating that after the Buddha (Bhagavan) spoke, the Devas (諸天) rejoiced and praised, all saying, 'I now see the World Honored One (世尊) turning the Dharma wheel for the second time' etc. Question: According to the Saṃdhinirmocana Sūtra, the second stage is the secret turning of the Dharma wheel. If so, is this sutra not of definitive meaning (了義經)? Furthermore, according to this sutra, upholding, speaking, and practicing it brings immeasurable and inconceivable merit. However, the Saṃdhinirmocana Sūtra considers sutras of non-definitive meaning, and the merit of upholding, speaking, and reciting them is like water in a cow's hoofprint compared to the water of the great ocean, with a vast difference in superiority and inferiority.
既爾此福即應狹劣。答。河南法師釋云據乘以辨名爲了義。非約顯密。又彼約漸悟當隱密門。此約頓悟。即成顯了。又復具說五位。修習豈唯空也。演曰。深密經中。說第二時。隱密等者。以隨漸悟多分佈而說。以多覆相說皆空故。理實般若。亦以有義何以知者。準此二論釋。經文中皆約中道。離空離有。非一向空。至下當悉。又準唐攝論。辨中邊論。皆引般若證。彼三性通有及無。非一向空。況說諸佛從此經生究竟法身。離一切相。寧非了義。而深密經。校量福德。有勝劣者。若隨多分執空爲了。而持說等功德為劣。若解空有離相。契真而受持者。與彼深密福德是同。於此義中。當審思察。五歸會者。大般若經。總依四處十六會說。言四處者。一王舍城鷲峰山。二室羅筏給孤獨園。三他化天宮摩尼寶藏殿。四王舍城竹林園白鷺池側。其十六會初之五分。更無別名。但以標其分目。第六最勝天王分。第七曼殊室利分。第八那伽室利分。此之三分從請主為名。下八分名隨所詮立。謂第九能斷金剛分。第十般若理趣分。及后六分如此六度以題分名。此經即是第九分攝。四處之中。給孤園說。準據梵本。有三百頌。大經部中第五百七十七卷也。然古說有八部般若。謂大品。小品。放光。光贊。道行。勝天王。文殊。金剛。由
【現代漢語翻譯】 既是這樣，如果認為此經的福德狹隘低劣，是不對的。回答：河南的法師解釋說，依據『乘以辨名爲了義』的說法，這是從了義的角度來辨析，而不是從顯密的角度。而且，《深密經》是針對漸悟者說的，屬於隱密之門；而《金剛經》是針對頓悟者說的，所以是顯了的。並且，此經還詳細地講述了五位修習，怎麼能說是空呢？ 演法師說：《深密經》中說第二時教是隱密等，是因為它是隨著漸悟的次第而分佈解說的，並且因為多用覆相的方式來說一切皆空。但實際上，般若也包含有義，這是為什麼呢？根據這兩部論的解釋，經文都是從中道的角度來說的，既不執著于空，也不執著于有，不是一味地說空。這一點在後面會詳細說明。而且，根據唐朝的《攝大乘論》和《辨中邊論》，都引用《般若經》來證明，這三性（遍計所執性、依他起性、圓成實性）既可以是有，也可以是無，不是一味地說空。更何況說諸佛都是從此經中產生，最終成就法身，遠離一切相，怎麼能說不是了義呢？ 而《深密經》校量福德時，有勝劣之分。如果隨順大多數人執著于空爲了義，那麼認為受持、讀誦此經的功德就低劣了。如果理解空有不二，離一切相，契合真如實相而受持此經，那麼與《深密經》的福德是相同的。對於這個道理，應當仔細思考。 關於五歸會，《大般若經》總共依據四個地點，分為十六會來說。這四個地點是：一、王舍城鷲峰山（Rajagrha Vulture Peak Mountain），二、室羅筏給孤獨園（Sravasti Jetavana Vihara），三、他化自在天宮摩尼寶藏殿（Parinirmita-vasavartin Deva Palace Mani Treasure Hall），四、王舍城竹林園白鷺池側（Rajagrha Bamboo Grove Vihara White Heron Pond Side）。這十六會中，最初的五分沒有特別的名稱，只是用數字來標明。第六會是最勝天王分（Sublime Heavenly King Section），第七會是曼殊室利分（Manjushri Section），第八會是那伽室利分（Naga Shri Section），這三分是從請法者的名字來命名的。後面的八分則根據所詮釋的內容來命名，比如第九會是能斷金剛分（Diamond Cutter Section），第十會是般若理趣分（Prajna Principle Section），以及後面的六分都是用六度來命名。這部《金剛經》就是第九會所攝，在給孤獨園所說。根據梵文版本，有三百頌，在大經部中是第五百七十七卷。然而，古人說有八部般若，即大品（Mahaprajnaparamita Sutra），小品（Small Perfection of Wisdom Sutra），放光（Astasahasrika Prajnaparamita Sutra），光贊（Larger Prajnaparamita Sutra），道行（Pancavimsatisahasrika Prajnaparamita Sutra），勝天王（Sri-paramita-raja-parivarta Sutra），文殊（Manjusri Prajnaparamita Sutra），金剛（Vajracchedika Prajnaparamita Sutra）。
【English Translation】 If one considers the merit of this Sutra to be narrow and inferior, that is incorrect. Answer: The Dharma Master from Henan explains that according to the statement 'multiplying to distinguish names is for ultimate meaning,' this is analyzed from the perspective of ultimate meaning, not from the perspective of exoteric and esoteric teachings. Moreover, the Sandhinirmocana Sutra is spoken for those who gradually awaken and belongs to the esoteric door; while the Diamond Sutra is spoken for those who awaken suddenly, so it is exoteric. Furthermore, this Sutra also explains the Five Stages of Practice in detail, how can it be said to be empty? Dharma Master Yan said: In the Sandhinirmocana Sutra, the second turning of the Dharma wheel is said to be esoteric, etc., because it is distributed and explained according to the gradual stages of awakening, and because it mostly uses concealed ways to say that everything is empty. But in reality, Prajna also contains meaning, why is that? According to the interpretation of these two treatises, the Sutras are all speaking from the perspective of the Middle Way, neither clinging to emptiness nor clinging to existence, not just saying emptiness one-sidedly. This will be explained in detail later. Moreover, according to the Mahayana-samgraha and the Madhyantavibhaga-karika of the Tang Dynasty, both quote the Prajna Sutra to prove that the Three Natures (Parikalpita, Paratantra, and Parinispanna) can be both existent and non-existent, not just saying emptiness one-sidedly. Moreover, it is said that all Buddhas arise from this Sutra and ultimately attain the Dharmakaya, which is free from all characteristics, how can it be said to be not of ultimate meaning? When the Sandhinirmocana Sutra measures merit, there are distinctions of superior and inferior. If one follows the majority of people who cling to emptiness as ultimate meaning, then they consider the merit of upholding, reciting, and explaining this Sutra to be inferior. If one understands the non-duality of emptiness and existence, is free from all characteristics, and accords with Suchness while upholding this Sutra, then the merit is the same as that of the Sandhinirmocana Sutra. One should carefully consider this principle. Regarding the Five Assemblies, the Mahaprajnaparamita Sutra is generally spoken based on four locations, divided into sixteen assemblies. These four locations are: 1. Rajagrha Vulture Peak Mountain (Rajagrha Vulture Peak Mountain), 2. Sravasti Jetavana Vihara (Sravasti Jetavana Vihara), 3. Parinirmita-vasavartin Deva Palace Mani Treasure Hall (Parinirmita-vasavartin Deva Palace Mani Treasure Hall), 4. Rajagrha Bamboo Grove Vihara White Heron Pond Side (Rajagrha Bamboo Grove Vihara White Heron Pond Side). Among these sixteen assemblies, the first five sections do not have special names, they are only marked with numbers. The sixth assembly is the Sublime Heavenly King Section (Sublime Heavenly King Section), the seventh assembly is the Manjushri Section (Manjushri Section), and the eighth assembly is the Naga Shri Section (Naga Shri Section), these three sections are named after the person requesting the Dharma. The following eight sections are named according to the content being explained, such as the ninth assembly being the Diamond Cutter Section (Diamond Cutter Section), the tenth assembly being the Prajna Principle Section (Prajna Principle Section), and the following six sections are all named using the Six Paramitas. This Diamond Sutra is included in the ninth assembly and was spoken at Jetavana Vihara. According to the Sanskrit version, there are three hundred verses, and it is the 577th volume in the Great Sutra Collection. However, the ancients said there are eight Prajna Sutras, namely the Large Perfection of Wisdom Sutra (Mahaprajnaparamita Sutra), the Small Perfection of Wisdom Sutra (Small Perfection of Wisdom Sutra), the Astasahasrika Prajnaparamita Sutra (Astasahasrika Prajnaparamita Sutra), the Larger Prajnaparamita Sutra (Larger Prajnaparamita Sutra), the Pancavimsatisahasrika Prajnaparamita Sutra (Pancavimsatisahasrika Prajnaparamita Sutra), the Sri-paramita-raja-parivarta Sutra (Sri-paramita-raja-parivarta Sutra), the Manjusri Prajnaparamita Sutra (Manjusri Prajnaparamita Sutra), and the Vajracchedika Prajnaparamita Sutra (Vajracchedika Prajnaparamita Sutra).
各異譯。未見廣本。故云八部今即不然。若約部帙六百卷經唯是部。若依部分乃有十六。況復八部多是重譯。如放光。光贊合入大品。道行般若即是小品。故言八部未可為依此在諸分處中而說。蓋般若之鈴鍵。大經之開軸。文句盤錯。意象精微。包真俗攝行位。有慢斯遣無執不除。破相忌情修心之極。鎖災極厄攝福之最。是以西方造論二十餘家。此地弘宣不可稱數。雖窮劫讚美。碎身護持。豈是荷難思之力。報莫大之恩歟。上攝歸訖。明宗旨者。先通后別且通辯宗。此方先德總攝諸教以立四宗。一立性宗。安立五蘊界處有體。如婆沙雜心迦延論等。二破性宗。破彼三科所有實性。而言諸法但有于相。如成實論等。三破相宗。言一切法非但性。無相亦非有。如般若等。四顯實宗。明一切法真實道理。隨其所應。若空若有。如花嚴涅槃等。準彼所判。此經即是破相宗收。然立四宗攝藏非盡。如一說部。世出世間但有言說。都無性相。其說假部。立蘊是實處界門中。法皆是假。不唯立性。復非皆相說出世部。世間非實。皆虛妄故。出世可實。非虛妄故。凡此等類。四內何收。又復小乘二十部。計宗類不同。計法各殊。豈唯性相故分四宗。未為準的。又有法師立三宗義。一法相宗。二破相宗。三法性宗。謂深密佛地等經。瑜伽
【現代漢語翻譯】 現代漢語譯本： 各異的翻譯版本。沒有見過廣本（指內容更廣泛的版本）。所以說八部現在就不對了。如果按照部帙（佛教典籍的分類單位），六百卷的經書也只是一部。如果按照部分來分，那就有十六部。況且八部大多是重譯的。例如《放光般若經》、《光贊般若經》應該合併到《大品般若經》中，《道行般若經》就是《小品般若經》。所以說八部不可作為依據，這在各個部分中都有所說明。大概是般若經的鈴鍵，大經的開軸。文句盤旋交錯，意象精妙細微，包含真諦和俗諦，涵蓋修行和果位。有傲慢就去除傲慢，有執著就消除執著。破除表象，戒除情慾，是修心的極致。鎖住災難和困厄，攝取最大的福報。因此，西方有二十餘家造論，此地弘揚宣講不可計數。即使窮盡時間來讚美，粉身碎骨來護持，又怎能報答這難以思議的力量，報答這莫大的恩情呢？以上是總括歸納。闡明宗旨的人，先通達後區別，先通達宗義。此地的先德總括各種教義，建立了四宗。一是立性宗，安立五蘊、十二處、十八界是有實體的，如《婆沙論》、《雜心論》、《迦延論》等。二是破性宗，破斥上述三科（五蘊、十二處、十八界）所有的實體性，認為諸法只有現象，如《成實論》等。三是破相宗，認為一切法不僅沒有實體性，現象也不是實有，如《般若經》等。四是顯實宗，闡明一切法真實的道理，根據情況，有時說是空，有時說是有，如《華嚴經》、《涅槃經》等。按照他們的判斷，這部經屬於破相宗。然而，建立四宗來涵蓋所有教義並不全面。例如一說部，認為世間和出世間只有言說，都沒有實體和現象。其說假部，認為五蘊是真實的，但在十二處、十八界中，法都是虛假的。不僅是立性宗，也不是都屬於現象。說出世部，認為世間不是真實的，都是虛妄的，出世間是真實的，不是虛妄的。凡是這些，四宗中如何收攝？另外，小乘二十部，計較宗派類別不同，計較法義各不相同，豈止是實體和現象才分為四宗，這還不夠準確。又有法師建立三宗義：一法相宗，二破相宗，三法性宗。如《深密經》、《佛地經》等，《瑜伽師地論》等。
【English Translation】 English version: Different translations exist. I haven't seen the 'Guang Ben' (referring to a more extensive version). Therefore, the statement about 'eight sections' is now incorrect. If classified by 'Buzhi' (a unit for classifying Buddhist scriptures), even six hundred volumes of scriptures would only constitute one section. If classified by parts, there would be sixteen. Moreover, many of the 'eight sections' are re-translations. For example, 'Fang Guang Ban Ruo Jing' (放光般若經, Sutra of the Release of Light) and 'Guang Zan Ban Ruo Jing' (光贊般若經, Sutra of Praise of Light) should be merged into 'Da Pin Ban Ruo Jing' (大品般若經, Larger Perfection of Wisdom Sutra), and 'Dao Xing Ban Ruo Jing' (道行般若經, Sutra of the Path of Wisdom) is the 'Xiao Pin Ban Ruo Jing' (小品般若經, Smaller Perfection of Wisdom Sutra). Therefore, the statement about 'eight sections' cannot be relied upon; this is explained in various parts. It is probably the bell and key of the Prajna Sutra, the opening axis of the great sutras. The sentences are winding and intricate, the imagery is exquisite and subtle, encompassing both truth and convention, covering both practice and attainment. If there is arrogance, remove it; if there is attachment, eliminate it. Breaking through appearances, abstaining from desires, is the ultimate in cultivating the mind. Locking in disasters and calamities, gathering the greatest blessings. Therefore, in the West, there are more than twenty families who have created treatises, and here, the propagation and explanation are countless. Even if one exhausts time to praise, shattering one's body to protect it, how can one repay this inconceivable power, repay this immense kindness? The above is a summary and conclusion. Those who clarify the purpose, first understand generally, then distinguish specifically; first understand the tenets generally. The virtuous predecessors in this land summarized various teachings and established four schools. First is the 'Li Xing Zong' (立性宗, School of Establishing Nature), which establishes that the 'five skandhas' (五蘊, five aggregates), 'twelve ayatanas' (十二處, twelve sense bases), and 'eighteen dhatus' (十八界, eighteen elements) have substance, such as the 'Vibhasa' (婆沙, Great Commentary), 'Samuccaya-hrdaya' (雜心, Compendium of the Abhidharma), and 'Katyayana's treatises' (迦延論, Katyayana's treatises). Second is the 'Po Xing Zong' (破性宗, School of Negating Nature), which refutes the substantiality of all three categories (five skandhas, twelve ayatanas, eighteen dhatus), and believes that all dharmas only have phenomena, such as the 'Tattvasiddhi-sastra' (成實論, Treatise on the Establishment of Truth). Third is the 'Po Xiang Zong' (破相宗, School of Negating Phenomena), which believes that all dharmas not only lack substantiality, but also that phenomena are not real, such as the 'Prajna Sutras' (般若經, Perfection of Wisdom Sutras). Fourth is the 'Xian Shi Zong' (顯實宗, School of Revealing Reality), which clarifies the true principles of all dharmas, sometimes saying they are empty, sometimes saying they exist, depending on the situation, such as the 'Avatamsaka Sutra' (華嚴經, Flower Garland Sutra) and 'Nirvana Sutra' (涅槃經, Nirvana Sutra). According to their judgment, this sutra belongs to the 'Po Xiang Zong' (破相宗, School of Negating Phenomena). However, establishing four schools to encompass all teachings is not comprehensive. For example, the 'Eka-vyavaharika' (一說部, Ekavyavaharika School) believes that there are only words in the world and beyond, and there is no substance or phenomenon. The 'Bahusrutiya' (說假部, Bahusrutiya School) believes that the five skandhas are real, but in the twelve ayatanas and eighteen dhatus, dharmas are all false. It is not only the 'Li Xing Zong' (立性宗, School of Establishing Nature), nor do they all belong to phenomena. The 'Lokottaravada' (說出世部, Lokottaravada School) believes that the world is not real, all are illusory, and the world beyond is real, not illusory. How can all these be included in the four schools? In addition, the twenty schools of Hinayana (小乘, Lesser Vehicle) differ in their calculations of sectarian categories, and their calculations of dharma are different. It is not only substance and phenomena that are divided into four schools; this is not accurate enough. There are also Dharma masters who establish three schools: first, the 'Fa Xiang Zong' (法相宗, Dharma Characteristics School); second, the 'Po Xiang Zong' (破相宗, School of Negating Phenomena); and third, the 'Fa Xing Zong' (法性宗, Dharma Nature School), such as the 'Samdhinirmocana Sutra' (深密經, Sutra Unraveling the Thought), 'Buddhabhumi Sutra' (佛地經, Sutra on the Buddha-land), and 'Yogacarabhumi-sastra' (瑜伽師地論, Treatise on the Stages of Yoga Practice).
等論。皆法相宗。依三性門。建立諸法。為究竟故。大般若等經。智度。中。百等論。皆破相宗。依勝義門。破遣諸法。為究竟故。花嚴。涅槃。楞伽等經。寶性。起信等論。皆法性宗。彼依法性如來藏門。融會諸法。為究竟故。乃至立一味之理。非言不顯。顯理之言。不能稱實。由斯皆隨空有等邊始自諸佛。下至凡夫。所設言教。無有異也。是故諸教有此三別者。法師所雄名絕代。英識邁時。學富五乘。理高於葉。艤惠舟於法海。桂掉翻波。揮智劍于義山霜鋒切玉。判斯宗旨。誠可軌摸。有所未明。聊為質問。何者。法雖離言。本無名相。然假詮召許得法體不爾聖教應非定量表蘊等法遮勝性等。又諸凡夫盲無惠日說不稱法。可墮諸邊。諸佛聖智。親證法體。如其所證。無倒宣說。說空定空。說有亦爾契會中道。豈可同凡。若不爾者。如何得有稱教生解。發真勝智而得解脫。若以不稱實故。隨所發言。墮空有等。是則應有八萬四千無量諸宗。何唯有三。又分三宗。無教空說。如何自意分判聖教。又云。法相存依圓破相被三性法或存破各為究竟樂。了不了者。便令教理。遞相乖違。亦違究竟一實中道。以許佛說。三種究竟。猶豫多端。若為證會。又依深密。佛自會釋諸說空教。唯依遍計。說諸法空。如何可言。破相宗中
【現代漢語翻譯】 現代漢語譯本 等論都屬於法相宗。他們依據三自性門（Paratantra-svabhava, Parikalpita-svabhava, and Parinispanna-svabhava），建立諸法，以此為究竟的目標。《大般若經》等經書，《智度論》、《中論》、《百論》等論著，都屬於破相宗。他們依據勝義門（Paramārtha-satya），破除諸法，以此為究竟的目標。《華嚴經》、《涅槃經》、《楞伽經》等經書，《寶性論》、《起信論》等論著，都屬於法性宗。他們依據法性如來藏門（Tathāgatagarbha），融合諸法，以此為究竟的目標。乃至樹立一味之理，沒有言語不能闡明的；而闡明真理的言語，又不能完全表達真理的實相。因此，所有隨順空有等邊（Śūnyatā and Astitva）的言教，從諸佛到凡夫，都沒有區別。所以，如果說諸教有這三種區別，那麼法師您的雄辯蓋世無雙，英明的見識超越時代，學識淵博，通達五乘佛法，義理高深，超過了慧遠大師。您將智慧之舟停靠在佛法之海，桂槳翻動波浪；您揮舞智慧之劍，在義理之山上，劍鋒如霜，切割美玉。對這些宗旨的判斷，確實可以作為準則和楷模。但有些地方我還不明白，想請教一下： 佛法雖然離於言語，本來沒有名稱和相狀，但如果假借言語來詮釋，是否可以獲得佛法的本體？如果不是這樣，那麼聖教經典就不應成為衡量真理的標準，表蘊等法（Rūpa-skandha）也無法遮止勝性等（Svabhāva）。而且，凡夫愚昧無知，沒有智慧的光芒，所說的話不符合佛法，可能會墮入各種邊見。而諸佛以聖智親證佛法的本體，如實地宣說自己所證悟的境界，說空即是空，說有也是如此，完全契合中道。這怎麼能和凡夫的言論相提並論呢？如果不是這樣，又怎麼能通過聽聞佛法而產生正確的理解，生起真實的智慧，從而獲得解脫呢？如果因為佛法不符合實相，而隨隨便便地發表言論，就會墮入空有等邊見。那麼，應該有八萬四千無量法門，為什麼只有三種宗派呢？而且，劃分這三種宗派，如果沒有佛經的依據，只是空口白說，又怎麼能用自己的想法來判斷聖教呢？ 您還說：『法相宗執著于所依，圓成實性；破相宗破除遍計所執性；三種自性，或者執著，或者破除，各自爲了究竟的目標。』如果這樣理解不了，就會導致教義和義理相互矛盾，也違背了究竟的一實中道。因為您認為佛陀說了三種究竟的教義，這讓人猶豫不決，不知如何是好。而且，根據《深密解脫經》，佛陀親自解釋了諸說空教，只依據遍計所執性（Parikalpita-svabhava）來說諸法皆空。怎麼能說在破相宗中...
【English Translation】 English version The Deng Lun (treatises) all belong to the Faxiang School (Yogācāra). They establish all dharmas based on the Three Natures (Trisvabhāva) for the sake of ultimate truth. The Great Prajñāpāramitā Sūtra and other scriptures, along with the Mahāprajñāpāramitopadeśa, Mūlamadhyamakakārikā, and Śataśāstra, all belong to the Poxiang School (emptiness school). They refute all dharmas based on the Ultimate Truth (Paramārtha-satya) for the sake of ultimate truth. The Avataṃsaka Sūtra, Nirvana Sūtra, Laṅkāvatāra Sūtra, and other scriptures, along with the Ratnagotravibhāga and Awakening of Faith in the Mahayana, all belong to the Faxing School (Tathāgatagarbha school). They integrate all dharmas based on the Tathāgatagarbha for the sake of ultimate truth. Even establishing the principle of one flavor, there is no language that cannot reveal it; however, the language that reveals the principle cannot fully express the reality. Therefore, all teachings that follow the extremes of emptiness and existence, from the Buddhas down to ordinary beings, are no different. So, if the teachings have these three distinctions, then the Dharma Master's eloquence is unparalleled, his brilliant insight surpasses the times, his knowledge is vast, encompassing the Five Vehicles, and his reasoning is profound, exceeding Huiyuan. You moor the boat of wisdom in the sea of Dharma, the cassia oar stirs the waves; you wield the sword of wisdom on the mountain of meaning, the frosty blade cuts jade. The judgment of these tenets can indeed serve as a standard and model. But there are some things I don't understand, and I would like to ask: Although the Dharma is beyond words, originally without names and forms, if we borrow words to interpret it, can we obtain the essence of the Dharma? If not, then the sacred teachings should not be the standard for measuring truth, and the Rūpa-skandha (form aggregate) cannot prevent Svabhāva (inherent existence). Moreover, ordinary people are ignorant and lack the light of wisdom, and their words do not conform to the Dharma, and they may fall into various extreme views. But the Buddhas personally realize the essence of the Dharma with their sacred wisdom, and truthfully proclaim the realm they have realized, saying emptiness is emptiness, and saying existence is also so, completely in accordance with the Middle Way. How can this be compared with the words of ordinary people? If not, how can one generate correct understanding by hearing the Dharma, give rise to true wisdom, and thus attain liberation? If, because the Dharma does not conform to reality, one makes casual remarks, one will fall into extreme views such as emptiness and existence. Then, there should be eighty-four thousand immeasurable Dharma gates, why are there only three schools? Moreover, dividing these three schools, if there is no basis in the Buddhist scriptures, but only empty talk, how can one judge the sacred teachings with one's own ideas? You also said: 'The Faxiang School clings to the Parinispanna-svabhava (perfected nature); the Poxiang School refutes the Parikalpita-svabhava (imputed nature); the three natures, either clinging or refuting, each for the sake of the ultimate goal.' If this is not understood, it will lead to contradictions between doctrines and meanings, and it will also violate the ultimate One Reality Middle Way. Because you believe that the Buddha spoke of three ultimate teachings, which makes people hesitate and not know what to do. Moreover, according to the Saṃdhinirmocana Sūtra, the Buddha himself explained the teachings of emptiness, only relying on the Parikalpita-svabhava to say that all dharmas are empty. How can it be said that in the Poxiang School...
。三性俱遣餘一一義。有多妨礙。略舉可知。不能繁廣。當知瑜伽補處宣說。乃通解釋一切諸經。勿謂但釋深密等教。故彼論釋。歸敬頌云。此論殊勝若蓮花。猶如寶藏如大海。具顯諸乘廣大義。善釋其文無有遺。又云。今說此論。所因云何。謂諸有情。無始時來。於一切法。處中實相。無知疑惑顛倒僻執。乃至如來出世隨其所宜。方便為說種種妙法。處中實相。令諸有情。知一切法。法如是如是空。故非如是如是有。故非空了達諸法非空非有。遠離疑惑顛倒僻執。修行滅障。得三菩提。證寂滅樂。佛涅槃后。魔事紛起。部執竟興。多著有見。龍猛菩薩。證極喜地。採集大乘。無相空教。造中論等。究暢真要。除彼有見。聖提婆等諸大論師。造百論等。弘闡大義。由是眾生。復著空見。無著菩薩。位登初地證法先定。得大神通。事大慈尊。請說此論。理無不窮。事無不盡。文無不釋。義無不詮。疑無不遣。執無不破。行無不修。果無不證。正為菩薩。令于諸乘境行果等。皆得善巧。勤修大乘。證大菩提。廣為有情。常無倒說。兼為余乘。令依自法。修自分行。得自果證。如是略說。此論所由。故知。通釋一切聖教。除空有見。起處中行。寧說瑜伽。唯法相宗。問。豈不諸經。多說法相。或多破相。或復融會。寧不分宗
【現代漢語翻譯】 現代漢語譯本 三性（遍計所執性，依他起性，圓成實性）都捨棄，其餘一一的意義，有很多妨礙。這裡略微舉例說明，不能詳細展開。應當知道《瑜伽師地論》的補處宣說，是通達解釋一切經書的。不要認為它只是解釋《深密解脫經》等教義。所以那部論的歸敬頌說：『這部論殊勝如蓮花，猶如寶藏如大海，全面顯現諸乘的廣大意義，善於解釋經文沒有遺漏。』又說：『現在說這部論，原因是什麼呢？因為眾生從無始以來，對於一切法的處中實相，無知、疑惑、顛倒、偏執。乃至如來出世，根據眾生的情況，方便地為他們宣說種種妙法，處中實相，使眾生知道一切法，法是這樣這樣空，所以不是這樣這樣有，所以不是空，通達諸法非空非有，遠離疑惑、顛倒、偏執，修行滅除障礙，得到三菩提（聲聞菩提，緣覺菩提，無上菩提），證得寂滅之樂。』佛陀涅槃后，魔事紛紛興起，各部執著競爭，大多執著于有見。龍樹菩薩，證得極喜地（菩薩初地），採集大乘無相空教，造《中論》等，徹底闡明真要，去除他們的有見。聖提婆等各位大論師，造《百論》等，弘揚闡述大義。因此眾生又執著于空見。無著菩薩，位登初地，證得法先定，得到大神通，侍奉大慈尊（彌勒菩薩），請他宣說這部論，道理沒有不窮盡的，事情沒有不完備的，經文沒有不解釋的，意義沒有不詮釋的，疑惑沒有不消除的，執著沒有不破除的，修行沒有不修習的，果位沒有不證得的。主要是爲了菩薩，使他們對於諸乘的境界、修行、果位等，都能善巧通達，勤奮修習大乘，證得大菩提，廣泛地為眾生，常常沒有顛倒地說法。兼顧其餘各乘，使他們依據自己的法門，修習自己的行持，得到自己的果證。這樣簡略地說這部論的由來。所以知道，它通達解釋一切聖教，去除空有之見，發起處中之行。怎麼能說《瑜伽師地論》只是法相宗的呢？問：難道不是很多經書，要麼多說法相，要麼多破除法相，要麼融合會通嗎？怎麼能不分宗派呢？
【English Translation】 English version Having abandoned all three natures (Parikalpita-svabhava, Paratantra-svabhava, and Parinispanna-svabhava), and considering each and every other meaning, there are many obstacles. I will briefly mention them so they can be understood, but I cannot elaborate extensively. It should be known that the pronouncements of Maitreya in the Yogacarabhumi-sastra are a thorough explanation of all sutras. Do not think that it only explains the teachings of the Samdhinirmocana Sutra and other texts. Therefore, the homage verse of that treatise says: 'This treatise is as excellent as a lotus flower, like a treasure trove, like a great ocean, fully revealing the vast meaning of all vehicles, skillfully explaining its text without omission.' It also says: 'Now, what is the reason for explaining this treatise? It is because sentient beings, from beginningless time, have been ignorant, doubtful, deluded, and stubbornly attached to the middle true nature of all dharmas. Even when the Tathagata appears in the world, he expediently teaches various wonderful dharmas according to their needs, the middle true nature, so that sentient beings may know all dharmas, that dharmas are thus and thus empty, therefore they are not thus and thus existent, therefore they are not empty, understanding that all dharmas are neither empty nor existent, abandoning doubt, delusion, and stubborn attachment, cultivating and eliminating obstacles, attaining the three Bodhis (Sravaka-bodhi, Pratyekabuddha-bodhi, and Anuttara-samyak-sambodhi), and realizing the bliss of Nirvana.' After the Buddha's Nirvana, demonic activities arose in confusion, and sectarian attachments competed, with many clinging to the view of existence. Bodhisattva Nagarjuna, having attained the Joyful Ground (the first Bhumi of a Bodhisattva), collected the Mahayana teachings of non-appearance and emptiness, and composed the Mulamadhyamakakarika and other texts, thoroughly elucidating the true essence and removing their view of existence. The venerable Aryadeva and other great masters composed the Catuhsataka and other texts, propagating and elucidating the great meaning. As a result, sentient beings again became attached to the view of emptiness. Bodhisattva Asanga, having attained the first Bhumi, realized the Dharma-first Samadhi, obtained great supernatural powers, served the Great Compassionate One (Maitreya Bodhisattva), and requested him to explain this treatise, in which no principle is not exhausted, no matter is not completed, no text is not explained, no meaning is not interpreted, no doubt is not dispelled, no attachment is not broken, no practice is not cultivated, and no fruit is not attained. It is primarily for Bodhisattvas, so that they may be skillful in the realms, practices, and fruits of all vehicles, diligently cultivate the Mahayana, attain great Bodhi, and constantly teach without error for the benefit of sentient beings. It also benefits other vehicles, enabling them to cultivate their own practices according to their own Dharma and attain their own fruit. This is a brief explanation of the origin of this treatise. Therefore, it is known that it thoroughly explains all sacred teachings, removes the views of emptiness and existence, and initiates the practice of the middle way. How can it be said that the Yogacarabhumi-sastra is only of the Dharmalaksana school? Question: Are there not many sutras that either mostly teach Dharma characteristics, or mostly refute Dharma characteristics, or integrate and harmonize them? How can they not be divided into schools?
。答。誰言諸教無此三義。但說定判如是如是經與論。彼彼宗攝。即為不可。皆不空故。是故應說大乘如理。隨何等經。皆有法相。破相融會。雖有偏明一義多處。理實此三不相舍離。以辯法體除執會通義皆遍故。問。若爾何故。于大乘中中宗邊宗。清辨護法。無相法相。諸宗各別。答。但由釋者製作不同。隨能釋意。說宗有異。非是佛語。墮諸邊故。先別立宗。由此應說于大乘中宗分有二。一勝義皆空宗。二應理圓實宗。初宗即是龍猛菩薩。下至清辯論師。依無相教。說勝義中一切皆空。世俗是有。掌珍。頌云。真性有為空如幻緣生故無為無有實不起似空花。乃至不立三性。唯識等后宗。即是慈氏如來。乃至護法菩薩。依深密等顯了言教。說勝義諦。非空非不空。辯中邊論慈尊頌云。虛妄分別有於此二都無此中唯有空于彼亦有此故說一切法非空非不空。有無及有故。是則契中道。三性之中。遍計性無依圓。是故有二宗別。問。所言勝義及世俗諦。其相如何。答。還依二宗。所說有異。且勝空宗真勝義諦一切都空。世俗諦中。可有色心修斷等。法如經說云。凡所有相。皆是虛妄。此世俗諦。諸相非相則見如來。此勝義諦。四生三界。所有眾生。是世俗諦。實無眾生得滅度者。是勝義諦。應理宗說。真俗二諦。二義不同
。一依人辯諦。二約法辯諦。二種二諦。俱通空有。且依人者。涅槃經云。上智所知名勝義。中智所知名世俗。二智所知通空有。故知二諦空有。俱通言依法者。法有勝劣。互相形待。而為真俗。此有四重。一虛實二諦。瓶軍林等。虛為世俗。蘊處界等。實為勝義。二理事二諦。蘊等事法。粗為世俗。四諦道理細為勝義。三淺深二諦。四諦安立淺為世俗。二空真如深為勝義。四詮旨二諦。二空真如帶詮世俗。一真法界亡詮勝義。總有五法。初軍林等俗而非真。后真法界真而非俗。中間三法亦真亦俗。互相形故。廣如唯識第九。顯揚第六。大論等說。然初一種。世間共執以為實有。我法性故空而非有。余之四法。通是依他圓成性。故有而非空。故說二諦。體通空有。非如前說。勝義皆空。既知二宗所說二諦。次應徴問空有所由。勝空者曰。大經說云。設有一法過涅槃者。我亦說為如幻如化。般若云。色即是空。空即是色。受相行識。亦復如是。此經亦云。般若波羅蜜即非般若波羅蜜。乃至無法可說等。準此等教。諸法皆空。又立理云。法若有體。自可能生。既藉眾緣。明知非有。如結手巾為兔等像。無兔等性。應理者曰。即準此經。福聚無量如何非有。又說如來有五眼等。又發阿耨菩提者。於法不說斷滅相等。又復經云
。有為無為名為有。我及我所名為無。又云。無我無造受者善惡之業。亦不亡等。雖說藉緣。豈幻化體。都無所有。由應理者。亦以幻化。喻依他故。星翳燈幻喻有為故。又說眾生我。皆令入無餘涅槃。滅度若皆空者。何假令空花而般于涅槃。勝空者云。此等諸文。皆據俗諦。非真空中。有造修等。應理難曰。汝之俗諦。與勝義諦。為一為異。若言一者。有空相違。不見苦樂。及冷熱等得為一故。若言異者。二諦本俱。如何一有而一非有彼。答。二諦其體無別。俗諦體有。可苦樂等。非同體過。二諦相對。妄情是有。真理皆空。今隨妄情。說俗諦有。就實而談。俗諦亦空。難曰。世俗妄故。令舍俗諦。入真空者。豈無諸法斷滅相過。答。體既是無。可斷滅故。言不說法斷滅相。此與應理。解釋全別。問。依勝空說。妄有真無。二諦體一。未審應理所說二諦。為一為異。答。應理所說。非一非異。何以故。義用別故非一。無別體故非異。即如瓶軍林等五法相望展轉皆爾。既非一異。翻此即說。或異或一。皆無有妨。仁王經云。有無本自二。譬如牛二角。照解見無二。二諦常不即。解心見無二。求二不可得。非謂二諦一非二何可得。于解常自一。于諦常自二。通達此無二。入真第一義。頌意。真如為勝義諦。依他遍計為世
【現代漢語翻譯】 有為和無為，都被稱為『有』。『我』以及『我所』，被稱為『無』。又說，沒有『我』，沒有造作者，也沒有承受善惡業報的人，但也不是完全斷滅。雖然說是憑藉因緣而生，但又像是幻化之體，實際上什麼都沒有。按照應理的說法，也用幻化來比喻依他起性。就像星翳、燈幻，比喻有為法。又說，要讓眾生之『我』，都進入無餘涅槃。如果滅度之後一切皆空，又何必用空花來比喻涅槃呢？勝空論者說，這些經文，都是依據世俗諦而說的，在真空中，沒有造作、修行等等。應理反駁說，你的世俗諦和勝義諦，是一還是異？如果說是一，那麼有和空相互矛盾，看不到苦樂以及冷熱等，怎麼能說是一呢？如果說是異，那麼二諦本來就同時存在，為什麼一個『有』，一個『非有』呢？回答說，二諦的本體沒有區別，世俗諦的本體是『有』，可以感受到苦樂等，所以沒有本體上的過失。二諦相對而言，妄情認為『有』，真理認為一切皆『空』。現在順著妄情，說世俗諦是『有』；就真實而言，世俗諦也是『空』。反駁說，因為世俗是虛妄的，所以要捨棄世俗諦，進入真空，難道沒有諸法斷滅的過失嗎？回答說，本體既然是『無』，怎麼會有斷滅呢？所以說沒有法斷滅的現象。這和應理的解釋完全不同。問：依據勝空論的說法，妄是『有』，真是『無』，二諦本體是一。那麼請問應理所說的二諦，是一還是異？答：應理所說的二諦，非一非異。為什麼呢？因為義用不同，所以非一；沒有不同的本體，所以非異。就像瓶、軍、林等五法，相互觀待，都是這樣。既然非一非異，那麼反過來說，或異或一，都沒有妨礙。《仁王經》說：『有無本來就是二，譬如牛的兩隻角。照見理解到無二，二諦常常不即不離。理解的心見到無二，尋求二諦不可得。不是說二諦是一，如果不是二，又怎麼能得到呢？在理解上常常是自一，在諦理上常常是自二。通達這個無二，就進入了真第一義。』頌的意思是，真如是勝義諦，依他起性和遍計所執是世 The existence and non-existence are both called 'existence'. 'I' and 'what belongs to me' are called 'non-existence'. It is also said that there is no 'I', no creator, and no one who receives the karmic retribution of good and evil, but it is not complete annihilation either. Although it is said to arise from conditions, it is like an illusory body, and in reality, there is nothing. According to the principle of reason, illusion is also used to describe dependent origination. Just like stars, cataracts, and illusory lamps, they are metaphors for conditioned phenomena. It is also said that the 'I' of all beings should enter Nirvana without remainder. If everything is empty after extinction, why use empty flowers to describe Nirvana? The proponent of ultimate emptiness says that these scriptures are based on conventional truth, and in ultimate truth, there is no creation, practice, etc. The principle of reason refutes, saying, 'Is your conventional truth and ultimate truth the same or different? If they are the same, then existence and emptiness contradict each other, and one cannot see suffering, pleasure, cold, heat, etc., so how can they be the same? If they are different, then the two truths exist simultaneously, so why is one 'existence' and the other 'non-existence'?' The answer is, 'The essence of the two truths is not different. The essence of conventional truth is 'existence', and one can feel suffering, pleasure, etc., so there is no fault in essence. Relative to the two truths, delusion thinks there is 'existence', and truth thinks everything is 'empty'. Now, following delusion, we say that conventional truth is 'existence'; in reality, conventional truth is also 'empty'.' The refutation says, 'Because conventional truth is false, one must abandon conventional truth and enter emptiness. Isn't there the fault of annihilation of all dharmas?' The answer is, 'Since the essence is 'non-existence', how can there be annihilation? Therefore, it is said that there is no phenomenon of dharma annihilation.' This is completely different from the explanation of the principle of reason. Question: According to the theory of ultimate emptiness, delusion is 'existence', truth is 'non-existence', and the essence of the two truths is the same. Then, what is the nature of the two truths according to the principle of reason, the same or different? Answer: The two truths according to the principle of reason are neither the same nor different. Why? Because the meaning and function are different, so they are not the same; there is no different essence, so they are not different. Just like the five dharmas of a pot, an army, and a forest, they are all like this in mutual dependence. Since they are neither the same nor different, then conversely, saying they are either different or the same is not an obstacle. The Benevolent King Sutra says: 'Existence and non-existence are originally two, like the two horns of a cow. Illumination and understanding realize non-duality, and the two truths are always neither identical nor separate. The understanding mind sees non-duality, and seeking the two truths is unattainable. It is not said that the two truths are one; if they are not two, how can one attain them? In understanding, it is always self-one; in truth, it is always self-two. Penetrating this non-duality, one enters the true first meaning.' The meaning of the verse is that Suchness is the ultimate truth, and dependent origination and completely conceptualized are the conventional
【English Translation】 The conditioned and unconditioned are both named 'existence'. 'I' and 'what belongs to me' are named 'non-existence'. It is also said that there is no 'I', no creator, and no one who receives the karmic retribution of good and evil, but it is not complete annihilation either. Although it is said to arise from conditions, it is like an illusory body, and in reality, there is nothing. According to the principle of reason, illusion is also used to describe dependent origination. Just like stars, cataracts, and illusory lamps, they are metaphors for conditioned phenomena. It is also said that the 'I' of all beings should enter Nirvana without remainder (nirvāna: a state of perfect peace). If everything is empty after extinction, why use empty flowers to describe Nirvana? The proponent of ultimate emptiness says that these scriptures are based on conventional truth (saṃvṛti-satya), and in ultimate truth (paramārtha-satya), there is no creation, practice, etc. The principle of reason refutes, saying, 'Is your conventional truth and ultimate truth the same or different? If they are the same, then existence and emptiness contradict each other, and one cannot see suffering, pleasure, cold, heat, etc., so how can they be the same? If they are different, then the two truths exist simultaneously, so why is one 'existence' and the other 'non-existence'?' The answer is, 'The essence of the two truths is not different. The essence of conventional truth is 'existence', and one can feel suffering, pleasure, etc., so there is no fault in essence. Relative to the two truths, delusion thinks there is 'existence', and truth thinks everything is 'empty'. Now, following delusion, we say that conventional truth is 'existence'; in reality, conventional truth is also 'empty'.' The refutation says, 'Because conventional truth is false, one must abandon conventional truth and enter emptiness, isn't there the fault of annihilation of all dharmas (dharma: the teachings of the Buddha)?' The answer is, 'Since the essence is 'non-existence', how can there be annihilation? Therefore, it is said that there is no phenomenon of dharma annihilation.' This is completely different from the explanation of the principle of reason. Question: According to the theory of ultimate emptiness, delusion is 'existence', truth is 'non-existence', and the essence of the two truths is the same. Then, what is the nature of the two truths according to the principle of reason, the same or different? Answer: The two truths according to the principle of reason are neither the same nor different. Why? Because the meaning and function are different, so they are not the same; there is no different essence, so they are not different. Just like the five dharmas of a pot, an army, and a forest, they are all like this in mutual dependence. Since they are neither the same nor different, then conversely, saying they are either different or the same is not an obstacle. The Benevolent King Sutra (Ren Wang Jing) says: 'Existence and non-existence are originally two, like the two horns of a cow. Illumination and understanding realize non-duality, and the two truths are always neither identical nor separate. The understanding mind sees non-duality, and seeking the two truths is unattainable. It is not said that the two truths are one; if they are not two, how can one attain them? In understanding, it is always self-one; in truth, it is always self-two. Penetrating this non-duality, one enters the true first meaning.' The meaning of the verse is that Suchness (tathātā) is the ultimate truth, and dependent origination (paratantra) and completely conceptualized (parikalpita) are the conventional
俗諦。二智境故名為諦異。唯約真智。即稱解。或異或一。皆無有違。唯識亦云。故此與依他非異非不異。如無常等性非不見此彼。瑜伽七十五云。于大乘中。或有一類惡取。故作如是言。由世俗故一切皆有。由勝義故一切皆無。應告彼言。何者世俗。何者勝義。彼若。答言。若一切法皆無自性。是名勝義。若於諸法無自性中。自性可得。是名世俗。何以故。無所有中。建立世俗。假名言而起說故。應告彼云。汝何所欲名言世俗為從因有自性可得為唯名言世俗說有若名言世俗。從因有者名言世俗。從因而生非是有。不應道理。又應告言。長老何緣諸可得者。此無自性(此難俗有勝義即無)彼若答言顛倒事故(謂心顛倒于天謂有如見空花)復應告言。汝何所欲此顛倒事為有為無若言有者說一切法由義故。皆無自性。不應道理。若言無者顛倒事故。諸可得者。此無自性不應道理(既無顛倒從何起執而言顛倒事故諸可得者此自性)勝空者曰。大菩薩藏經第二捲雲。空與菩薩性無有二。由無二故。不可言說。又云。遠離取執勝義諦中。無法可得。由性無故。說名為空由此說空為極了義。應理者曰。此亦非證為依瞬若遍計無故與覺無二。又瞬若多空性真如與覺無二。不言菩提體即空無若實皆空何空何覺。若云隨破妄情空覺無二。
【現代漢語翻譯】 現代漢語譯本 俗諦（Samvriti-satya，世俗諦）。因為二智（兩種智慧）的境界不同，所以稱為諦異（真諦和俗諦的差別）。唯獨依據真智（Paramartha-jnana，勝義智），就稱為解（解脫）。或者說異，或者說一，都沒有違背。唯識宗也這樣說，所以這（世俗諦）與依他起性（Paratantra，緣起性）並非完全相同，也並非完全不同。例如無常等自性，並非不能同時見到此和彼。《瑜伽師地論》第七十五卷說：『在大乘中，或者有一類人錯誤地理解，所以這樣說：由於世俗諦的緣故，一切都是有的；由於勝義諦（Paramartha-satya，真實諦）的緣故，一切都是無的。』應該告訴他們：『什麼是世俗諦？什麼是勝義諦？』他們如果回答說：『如果一切法都沒有自性（Svabhava，自體），這叫做勝義諦；如果在諸法沒有自性之中，自性可以得到，這叫做世俗諦。』為什麼呢？因為在無所有中，建立世俗，通過假名言而開始述說。應該告訴他們：『你們想要的名言世俗，是從因緣而有自性可以得到，還是僅僅是名言世俗說有？』如果是名言世俗從因緣而有，名言世俗從因緣而生，並非是有的，這不應道理。又應該告訴他們：『長老，因為什麼緣故，那些可以得到的事物，這裡沒有自性？』（這是在詰難世俗諦有，勝義諦即無）他們如果回答說：『因為顛倒事故。』（意思是說，心顛倒，把空中的花看成是真實存在的）又應該告訴他們：『你們想要這個顛倒事，是有還是無？』如果說有，那麼說一切法由於義的緣故，都沒有自性，這不應道理。如果說無，那麼因為顛倒事故，那些可以得到的事物，這裡沒有自性，這不應道理。（既然沒有顛倒，從何而起執著，說因為顛倒事故，那些可以得到的事物沒有自性？） 勝空者說：《大菩薩藏經》第二卷說：『空（Sunyata，空性）與菩薩性沒有二。由於沒有二的緣故，不可言說。』又說：『遠離取執，在勝義諦中，沒有法可以得到。由於自性沒有的緣故，說名為空。』由此說空為極了義（究竟意義）。 應理者說：這也不能證明是依據瞬若（Ksanika，剎那）遍計所執（Parikalpita，虛妄分別）沒有的緣故，與覺悟沒有二。又瞬若多空性真如（Tathata，如如）與覺悟沒有二。不說是菩提（Bodhi，覺悟）的本體就是空無。如果真實都是空，那麼什麼空？什麼覺？如果說是隨著破除虛妄情識，空與覺悟沒有二，
【English Translation】 English version Samvriti-satya (Conventional Truth). Because the realms of the two wisdoms (two kinds of wisdom) are different, it is called the difference of truths (the difference between the ultimate truth and the conventional truth). Only based on Paramartha-jnana (Ultimate Wisdom), it is called liberation. Whether it is different or the same, there is no contradiction. The Vijnanavada (Consciousness-only school) also says this, so this (conventional truth) is neither completely the same nor completely different from Paratantra (dependent origination). For example, the nature of impermanence, etc., is not that one cannot see both this and that at the same time. Yoga-bhumi-sastra (Treatise on the Stages of Yoga Practice) Volume 75 says: 'In Mahayana, there may be a kind of person who misunderstands, so they say: Because of conventional truth, everything exists; because of Paramartha-satya (Ultimate Truth), everything does not exist.' One should tell them: 'What is conventional truth? What is ultimate truth?' If they answer: 'If all dharmas (phenomena) have no Svabhava (self-nature), this is called ultimate truth; if in the absence of self-nature in all dharmas, self-nature can be obtained, this is called conventional truth.' Why? Because in non-existence, conventional truth is established, and it begins to be spoken through provisional names. One should tell them: 'Do you want the conventional truth of names to be obtained from causes and conditions with self-nature, or is it merely said to exist as conventional truth of names?' If the conventional truth of names comes from causes and conditions, the conventional truth of names arises from causes and conditions and is not existent, which is unreasonable. One should also tell them: 'Elder, for what reason is it that those things that can be obtained have no self-nature here?' (This is questioning that conventional truth exists, and ultimate truth does not exist). If they answer: 'Because of inverted events.' (Meaning that the mind is inverted, and it sees flowers in the sky as real). One should also tell them: 'Do you want this inverted event to be existent or non-existent?' If it is said to be existent, then saying that all dharmas have no self-nature because of meaning is unreasonable. If it is said to be non-existent, then because of inverted events, those things that can be obtained have no self-nature here, which is unreasonable. (Since there is no inversion, from where does attachment arise, saying that because of inverted events, those things that can be obtained have no self-nature?) The advocate of superior emptiness says: The second volume of the Mahabodhisattvaghosha-sutra (Great Bodhisattva Treasury Sutra) says: 'Sunyata (Emptiness) and the nature of Bodhisattva are not two. Because they are not two, they cannot be spoken of.' It also says: 'Away from grasping and attachment, in the ultimate truth, no dharma can be obtained. Because self-nature is absent, it is called emptiness.' Therefore, it is said that emptiness is the ultimate meaning. The advocate of reason says: This also cannot prove that it is based on the absence of Ksanika (momentary) Parikalpita (conceptual construction), so it is not two with enlightenment. Also, the Ksanika multitude, the emptiness of Tathata (Suchness), is not two with enlightenment. It is not said that the essence of Bodhi (Enlightenment) is emptiness. If everything is truly empty, then what is empty? What is enlightenment? If it is said that following the breaking of false emotions, emptiness and enlightenment are not two,
據勝義諦無覺無空。即應分別兔角長短此既不爾。彼云何然。又云。遠離取執勝義諦中無法可得。不言非報勝義諦中亦空無法。又若二諦體性是一而非有者。應無凡聖染凈作業人天五趣即無三惡。悲所度生。菩薩徒自行於勤苦。以空無故。誰為誰說何法何求不應智者為除幻敵求石女兒用為軍旅。又凡夫妄倒。可有世俗色心等法。諸佛如來妄倒已斷。何有色身凈妙土等。若言以佛悲心。為眾生故。示現身土。眾生妄倒。若已斷盡。諸佛身土。無不立者。勝義既空。悲智之心。亦應非有。誰為能度眾生之本。故言空者是密意說。教理既然。故與前說掌珍比量。作聖教相違過。以違法教。不空義故。唯識亦云。彼特違害。前所引經。
勝空者曰。我亦有教引前所說。大般若等為證成。故應理者曰。教有顯了及不了義違顯了教故汝為過。謂深密經。說第二時。以隱密相。轉正法輪。說一切空。非真了義。又云。相生勝義無自性如是我皆已顯示。若不知佛此密意失壞正道不能往經既自說。諸法無性。是隱密相。非真了義。今判說空。為第一說。是故為過。問曰。龍猛。無著俱登極喜。同證法性。智見不殊。因何二宗所說有異。答。據其至理平等無差。佛對根宜。顯密異說。菩薩亦爾。對根宜聞。所弘各異。由著有見。龍猛
【現代漢語翻譯】 現代漢語譯本： 根據勝義諦，如果一切皆無覺無空，那就應該可以分辨兔角的長短，但事實並非如此，那又該如何解釋呢？而且，經中說：『遠離取執，在勝義諦中無法可得。』並沒有說在非報勝義諦中也是空無一物。再者，如果二諦的體性是一而非有，那就應該沒有凡夫和聖人，沒有染污和清凈，沒有作業，沒有人天五趣，也就沒有三惡道。菩薩度化眾生只是徒勞，只是在白白地勤苦修行。因為一切皆空無所有，誰為誰說法？求什麼法？智者不應該爲了去除虛幻的敵人，而去尋求石女的兒子來當軍隊使用。而且，凡夫因為有妄想顛倒，所以有世俗的色心等法。諸佛如來已經斷除了妄想顛倒，哪裡還有色身和清凈的妙土等？如果說佛以悲心，爲了眾生的緣故，示現身土。如果眾生的妄想顛倒已經斷盡，諸佛的身土就無法安立。勝義諦既然是空，悲智之心也應該是不存在的。誰又能成為度化眾生的根本呢？所以說『空』是密意之說。教理既然如此，所以與前面所說的《掌珍論》的比量，構成聖教相違的過失，因為違背了不空的教義。唯識宗也說：『這特別違害了前面所引用的經文。』 勝空論者說：『我也有教證，引用前面所說的大般若經等作為證明。』所以應理論者說：『教證有顯了義和不了義之分，你違背了顯了義的教證，所以有過失。』深密經說，佛在第二時，以隱秘之相，轉正法輪，說一切皆空，並非真正的了義。又說：『相生勝義無自性，如是，我皆已顯示。』如果不知道佛的這個密意，就會失去正道，不能前往。經文已經自己說明，諸法無自性，是隱秘之相，並非真正的了義。現在你判定說空是第一義，所以有過失。問：龍猛（Nāgārjuna，中觀宗創始人）和無著（Asaṅga，瑜伽行者）都登上了極喜地（Pramudita，菩薩十地中的第一地），共同證悟了法性，智慧見解沒有差別，為什麼二宗所說卻有差異？答：就其至理而言，平等無差別。佛陀爲了適應眾生的根器，有顯說和密說的不同。菩薩也是如此，爲了適應眾生的根器和聞法意樂，所弘揚的教法各有不同。由於執著于有見，龍猛（Nāgārjuna）...
【English Translation】 English version: According to the ultimate truth (Paramārtha-satya), if everything is without awareness and emptiness, then one should be able to distinguish the length of a rabbit's horn. Since this is not the case, how can it be explained? Moreover, it is said: 'Away from grasping and attachment, in the ultimate truth, nothing can be obtained.' It does not say that in the non-retributive ultimate truth, there is also nothing empty. Furthermore, if the nature of the two truths is one and not existent, then there should be no ordinary beings and sages, no defilement and purity, no actions, no beings in the five realms of existence, and thus no three evil destinies. Bodhisattvas would be merely engaging in diligent practice in vain. Because everything is empty and without substance, who is speaking the Dharma to whom? What Dharma is being sought? A wise person should not seek the son of a barren woman to use as an army in order to eliminate illusory enemies. Moreover, ordinary beings have worldly phenomena such as form and mind because of their delusions. The Buddhas and Tathāgatas have already severed their delusions, so where are the physical bodies and pure, wonderful lands? If it is said that the Buddha, out of compassion, manifests bodies and lands for the sake of sentient beings, and if the delusions of sentient beings have already been completely eradicated, then the Buddhas' bodies and lands cannot be established. Since the ultimate truth is empty, the heart of compassion and wisdom should also not exist. Who can be the foundation for liberating sentient beings? Therefore, the statement 'emptiness' is a statement of secret meaning. Since the doctrine is thus, it constitutes a fault of contradiction with the holy teachings, compared to the inference of the Palm Treatise (Kara-tala-ratna), because it violates the doctrine of non-emptiness. The Consciousness-Only school (Vijñānavāda) also says: 'This particularly contradicts the sutras quoted earlier.' The proponent of emptiness (Śūnyatā) says: 'I also have scriptural authority, citing the Great Perfection of Wisdom Sutra (Mahāprajñāpāramitā Sūtra) and others as proof.' Therefore, the proponent of reason says: 'Teachings have explicit and implicit meanings. You violate the teachings of explicit meaning, so you have a fault.' The Saṃdhinirmocana Sūtra says that the Buddha, in the second turning of the wheel of Dharma, turned the wheel of Dharma with a hidden aspect, saying that everything is empty, which is not the true definitive meaning. It also says: 'The arising of phenomena in the ultimate truth is without self-nature; thus, I have already revealed it.' If one does not know this secret meaning of the Buddha, one will lose the right path and be unable to proceed. The sutra itself has already stated that phenomena are without self-nature, which is a hidden aspect and not the true definitive meaning. Now you judge that saying emptiness is the first meaning, so there is a fault. Question: Nāgārjuna (founder of the Madhyamaka school) and Asaṅga (a Yogācāra master) both ascended to the Joyful Ground (Pramudita, the first of the ten Bhūmis of a Bodhisattva), and jointly realized the nature of reality. Their wisdom and views are not different, so why are the teachings of the two schools different? Answer: In terms of the ultimate truth, they are equally without difference. The Buddha, in order to suit the capacities of sentient beings, has different explicit and secret teachings. Bodhisattvas are also like this, in order to suit the capacities and inclinations of sentient beings, the teachings they propagate are different. Because of attachment to the view of existence, Nāgārjuna...
菩薩。密弘于空空見若生。亦成其病故。須雙說非有非空。遠離二邊。契會中道。如向瑜伽釋論等說。又復大乘無相空教。依真智境。遣一切相。密說皆空。諸大菩薩。對著有病。弘斯密教。非於中道。而不證悟。末葉不悟。廣興乖諍。豈大菩薩有所相違。上通辯宗。隨其勝空。及應理者。所弘二諦。並此經明。如功德論。咸歸二諦。通二宗解。智者當悉。別明宗者。題名般若故即為宗般若有三。實相觀照。及與文字。慈恩三藏。依諸經論更加二種。謂即境界。及以眷屬。通有五種。一般若性。二般若相。三般若因。四般若境。五般若伴。克性相從。俱名般若。有義此經觀照為宗。說能斷故。如大經說。六度之中。其般若度為洲。為渚。為道。為目。為燈炬等。故此唯以惠相為宗。即無分別本后二智通生法空。或取加行。亦不違理由十八住。通攝地前地上住故有義。亦以實相般若。為經所宗。能斷性故。真理為本。智方生故。金寶亦喻如來藏故經中廣明無相直理法身極果是無相。智正所觀故。答辯如體。諸釋不同。如凈業障經疏述。問。何故不取文字等三。答。非經正明彼是末故。此二本故。菩薩涅槃二種故。即五法性。攝三身故。能緣所依若性若相。功德本故。第三問訖。
第四所被根宜者。初辨根性。后以
【現代漢語翻譯】 現代漢語譯本：菩薩（Bodhisattva）。如果秘密地弘揚空性，卻產生了空見，這也會成為一種弊病。因此，必須同時宣說非有非空，遠離有和空這兩種極端，才能契合中道。正如《瑜伽師地論釋》等所說。此外，大乘的無相空教，依據真實的智慧境界，遣除一切相。秘密地宣說一切皆空。諸位大菩薩，針對執著于有的病癥，弘揚這種秘密教義。如果不是處於中道，就不能證悟。末法時代的修行者如果不明白這個道理，就會廣泛地興起乖戾的爭論。難道大菩薩之間會有所違背嗎？上面已經貫通地辨析了各宗派，無論是推崇空性，還是應合道理的宗派，他們所弘揚的二諦，都與這部經所闡明的一致。如《功德論》所說，最終都歸於二諦，這是貫通兩個宗派的解釋。智者應當明白這些道理。如果特別說明本經的宗，因為經題名為《般若》，所以就以般若為宗。般若有三種：實相般若、觀照般若，以及文字般若。慈恩三藏（玄奘法師）依據諸經論，又增加了兩種，即境界般若和眷屬般若。總共有五種。一般若的體性，二般若的相狀，三般若的因，四般若的境界，五般若的伴侶。從體性和相狀來說，都可稱為般若。有一種觀點認為，這部經以觀照般若為宗，因為它宣說了能斷除煩惱。如《大般涅槃經》所說，在六度之中，般若度就像洲渚、道路、眼睛、燈炬等。因此，這部經僅僅以智慧的相狀作為宗。即無分別智，包括根本智和后得智，貫通了生空和法空。或者取加行位，也不違背理由，因為十八住貫通攝持了地前和地上之住位。有一種觀點認為，也以實相般若作為經的宗，因為它能斷除煩惱的體性。真理是根本，智慧才能產生。金寶也比喻如來藏。經中廣泛地闡明了無相的直接道理，法身是最高的果位，是無相的，是智慧所真正觀察的對象。這些問答辯論就像經的體性一樣。各種解釋不同，如《凈業障經疏》所述。問：為什麼不取文字等三種般若？答：因為經中沒有明確說明它們是根本，而是末端。實相和觀照是根本。菩薩和涅槃是兩種根本。即五法性攝持了三身。能緣和所依，無論是體性還是相狀，都是功德的根本。第三個問題結束。 第四，所教化的根機和適宜的法門。首先辨別根性，然後以...
【English Translation】 English version: Bodhisattva. If one secretly propagates emptiness, but gives rise to a view of emptiness, it also becomes a fault. Therefore, it is necessary to simultaneously teach neither existence nor non-existence, to stay away from the two extremes, and to accord with the Middle Way. As stated in the Yogācārabhūmi-śāstra and other texts. Furthermore, the Mahāyāna teaching of signlessness and emptiness, based on the realm of true wisdom, eliminates all signs. It secretly teaches that all is empty. The great Bodhisattvas, in response to the sickness of attachment to existence, propagate this secret teaching. If one is not in the Middle Way, one cannot attain enlightenment. If practitioners in the degenerate age do not understand this principle, they will widely give rise to perverse disputes. How could there be contradictions among the great Bodhisattvas? The above has comprehensively analyzed the various schools, whether they promote emptiness or accord with reason, the two truths they propagate are consistent with what this sutra clarifies. As stated in the Guṇakaraṇḍavyūha Sūtra, they ultimately return to the two truths, which is an interpretation that connects the two schools. Wise individuals should understand these principles. If we specifically state the doctrine of this sutra, because the title of the sutra is 'Prajñā,' it is based on Prajñā. Prajñā has three types: Reality Prajñā, Contemplation Prajñā, and Verbal Prajñā. The Tripiṭaka Master Ci'en (Xuanzang) added two more based on the sutras and treatises, namely, Realm Prajñā and Retinue Prajñā. In total, there are five types. One, the nature of Prajñā; two, the characteristics of Prajñā; three, the cause of Prajñā; four, the realm of Prajñā; five, the companions of Prajñā. From the perspective of nature and characteristics, all can be called Prajñā. One view holds that this sutra is based on Contemplation Prajñā because it proclaims the ability to cut off afflictions. As stated in the Mahāparinirvāṇa Sūtra, among the six perfections, the perfection of Prajñā is like an island, a road, an eye, a lamp, etc. Therefore, this sutra only takes the aspect of wisdom as its doctrine. That is, non-discriminating wisdom, including fundamental wisdom and subsequent wisdom, connects the emptiness of beings and the emptiness of dharmas. Or, taking the stage of application is not contrary to reason, because the eighteen abodes comprehensively encompass the abodes before and after the ground. One view holds that Reality Prajñā is also taken as the doctrine of the sutra because it can cut off the nature of afflictions. Truth is the root, and wisdom can arise. Gold and jewels also symbolize the Tathāgatagarbha. The sutra extensively clarifies the direct principle of signlessness, the Dharmakāya is the highest fruit, is signless, and is the true object of wisdom's observation. These questions and answers are like the nature of the sutra. The various interpretations differ, as described in the Commentary on the Sutra of Pure Karma Obstacles. Question: Why not take the three types of Prajñā such as verbal Prajñā? Answer: Because the sutra does not explicitly state that they are the root, but rather the end. Reality and Contemplation are the root. Bodhisattva and Nirvana are the two roots. That is, the five dharmic natures encompass the three bodies. The object and the basis, whether nature or characteristics, are the root of merit. The third question ends. Fourth, the capacities and suitable teachings of those to be taught. First, distinguish the capacities, then with...
教被且初根性差別不同。一乘五性。自故紛諍。今略敘之。三說不同。一云眾生皆有佛性。決定無有定性二乘及無性者。涅槃經第二十七云。師子吼者。是決定說一切眾生悉有佛性。又云。一切眾生悉皆有心。凡有心者。悉當得阿耨多羅三藐三菩提。是故我說一切眾生悉有佛性。又第三十七云。為非佛性。說于佛性。非佛性者。所謂墻壁瓦石無情之物。離如是等無情之物。是名佛性。準此經文。非是唯理。有情五蘊。不被簡故。亦非少分離無情。是佛性故。豈可為非佛性。說于佛性。佛性之中有佛性。如說離有為法。說于無為。無為之中有有為耶。又涅槃云。一切眾生。皆有三定。謂上中下。上者佛性。中者初禪。下者大地。中定數下中二定非是少分故知上定。亦是一切同一文故。既云。是定故非唯理說。首楞嚴定。為佛性故。法花經云。一大事因緣。出現於世。欲令眾生開佛知見。使得清凈等。又云。十方佛土中。唯有一乘法。無二亦無三。除佛方便說。但以假名字。引道于眾生。佛性論云。二空真如名應得因。以應得佛果故。名應得因。故知有理性者。定有行果理既一切皆有行果故非少分。若謂法花二乘無滅悉當成佛此說不定二乘。非是定性者。不然不定。亦成佛教。起初轉法輪。今說與昔說若同。何故慇勤三請
【現代漢語翻譯】 現代漢語譯本 教義根據眾生最初的根性差別而有所不同，從而產生了一乘和五性的爭論。現在我簡要地敘述一下，主要有三種不同的說法： 第一種說法認為，一切眾生都具有佛性（Buddha-nature），絕對不存在沒有確定性的二乘（Śrāvakayāna and Pratyekabuddhayāna）以及沒有佛性的人。《涅槃經》（Nirvāṇa Sūtra）第二十七卷說：『獅子吼（siṃhanāda）』，就是決定性地宣說一切眾生都具有佛性。又說：『一切眾生都具有心識，凡是有心識的，都應當證得阿耨多羅三藐三菩提（anuttarā-samyak-saṃbodhi，無上正等正覺）。』因此我說一切眾生都具有佛性。』 《涅槃經》第三十七卷又說：『爲了說明非佛性，才說到佛性。』什麼是非佛性呢？就是指墻壁、瓦片、石頭等無情之物。離開了這些無情之物，才叫做佛性。』按照這段經文，佛性不僅僅是理性的存在，因為有情眾生的五蘊（pañca-skandha）並沒有被排除在外。而且，佛性也不是少部分，因為無情之物不是佛性。怎麼能爲了說明非佛性，才說到佛性呢？難道佛性之中還有佛性嗎？就像爲了說明有為法（saṃskṛta），才說到無為法（asaṃskṛta），難道無為法之中還有有為法嗎？』 《涅槃經》又說：『一切眾生，都具有三種禪定，即上、中、下。上等的是佛性，中等的是初禪（prathama-dhyāna），下等的是大地。』中等禪定和下等禪定不是少部分，由此可知上等禪定也是一切眾生都具有的，因為經文是一致的。既然說是『禪定』，就不僅僅是理性的存在。《首楞嚴定》（Śūraṅgama Samādhi）就是佛性。 《法華經》（Lotus Sūtra）說：『一大事因緣（ekasmin mahatī kāraṇe），出現於世，想要讓眾生開啟佛的知見，從而得到清凈等等。』又說：『十方佛土中，唯有一乘法（ekayāna），沒有二乘也沒有三乘，除非是佛陀爲了方便而說，只是用假的名字，引導眾生。』 《佛性論》（Buddhatā-prakaraṇa）說：『二空真如（dvisūnyatā-tathatā）名為應得因，因為能夠證得佛果，所以名為應得因。』由此可知，具有理性者，必定具有修行和果報。理性既然一切眾生都具有，修行和果報就不是少部分。 如果認為《法華經》中二乘最終都會滅盡，最終成佛，這說明二乘是不確定的，不是定性的。這種說法是不對的。即使是不確定的，也能成就佛教。當初佛陀開始轉法輪（dharma-cakra-pravartana）時，現在所說的和過去所說的如果相同，為什麼還要慇勤地三請（tri-yācana）呢？
【English Translation】 English version The teachings differ based on the initial differences in the faculties of sentient beings, leading to disputes about the One Vehicle (ekayāna) and the Five Natures. Now, I will briefly describe them, focusing on three different views: The first view asserts that all sentient beings possess Buddha-nature (Buddhatā), and there are absolutely no beings of the Two Vehicles (Śrāvakayāna and Pratyekabuddhayāna) or those without Buddha-nature. The twenty-seventh chapter of the Nirvāṇa Sūtra states: 'The Lion's Roar (siṃhanāda) is the definitive declaration that all sentient beings possess Buddha-nature.' It also says: 'All sentient beings have minds, and all who have minds will attain Anuttarā-samyak-saṃbodhi (unexcelled complete enlightenment). Therefore, I say that all sentient beings possess Buddha-nature.' The thirty-seventh chapter of the Nirvāṇa Sūtra further states: 'To explain non-Buddha-nature, we speak of Buddha-nature.' What is non-Buddha-nature? It refers to inanimate objects such as walls, tiles, and stones. Separating from such inanimate objects is what is called Buddha-nature.' According to this passage, Buddha-nature is not merely a rational principle, because the five aggregates (pañca-skandha) of sentient beings are not excluded. Furthermore, Buddha-nature is not a small part, because inanimate objects are not Buddha-nature. How can we speak of Buddha-nature to explain non-Buddha-nature? Is there Buddha-nature within Buddha-nature? Just as we speak of the unconditioned (asaṃskṛta) to explain the conditioned (saṃskṛta), is there the conditioned within the unconditioned?' The Nirvāṇa Sūtra also states: 'All sentient beings possess three types of samādhi (concentration): superior, intermediate, and inferior. The superior is Buddha-nature, the intermediate is the first dhyāna (prathama-dhyāna), and the inferior is the earth.' The intermediate and inferior samādhis are not small parts, thus it is known that the superior samādhi is also possessed by all sentient beings, because the text is consistent. Since it is called 'samādhi,' it is not merely a rational principle. The Śūraṅgama Samādhi is Buddha-nature. The Lotus Sūtra states: 'Due to one great cause (ekasmin mahatī kāraṇe), [the Buddha] appears in the world, desiring to enable sentient beings to open up the knowledge and vision of the Buddha, thereby attaining purity, etc.' It also says: 'In the Buddha-lands of the ten directions, there is only the One Vehicle (ekayāna), there are neither Two Vehicles nor Three Vehicles, except for the Buddha's expedient teachings, using only provisional names to guide sentient beings.' The Buddhatā-prakaraṇa states: 'The Twofold Emptiness and Suchness (dvisūnyatā-tathatā) is called the cause for attainment, because it can lead to the attainment of Buddhahood, therefore it is called the cause for attainment.' From this, it is known that those who possess rationality certainly possess practice and its results. Since rationality is possessed by all sentient beings, practice and its results are not a small part. If it is argued that in the Lotus Sūtra, the Two Vehicles will eventually be extinguished and ultimately attain Buddhahood, indicating that the Two Vehicles are uncertain and not fixed in nature, this is incorrect. Even if they are uncertain, they can still achieve Buddhism. If what the Buddha said when he first turned the Wheel of Dharma (dharma-cakra-pravartana) is the same as what is being said now, why was there a diligent three-fold request (tri-yācana)?
許說增上慢人。起誑驚怖。舍利弗等。疑佛為魔良由今昔懸殊。有斯疑謗故。經云。所以未曾說。說時未至故。今正是其時。決定說大乘。故知今說非先說也。又云。種性有五。一聲聞性。二緣覺性。三如來性。四不定性。五無種性。問云。何得知有無種性。答。四卷八卷二楞伽經。皆云。大悲菩薩一闡提人。畢竟不成正覺。若有性眾生。即應有成佛盡。如何大悲。畢竟不作。又勝鬘經云。離善知識無聞非法眾生以人天善根而成熟之。善戒經云。無種性人。無種性故。雖復發心勤行精進。終不能得無上菩提。地持瑜伽亦同此說。又涅槃經。三種病人。第三若遇不遇。一良醫決定不善。若是有性。如何不差。又恒河七人第一常沒七人各一。即無種性。大莊嚴論第一說闡提有二種。一時邊。二畢竟。時邊有四。一者一向行惡。二者普斷諸善法。三者無解說分善根。四者善根不具足。畢竟無涅槃法者。無因故。彼無般若涅槃性。謂但求生死不樂涅槃。然有釋云。畢竟者。一約所斷兼善生得善斷三世因盡。名為畢竟。無涅槃法。兩約時以有鈍根長時流轉。不能生信。名為畢竟。無涅槃法不言。盡未來際。決定無性。名為畢竟。此釋不然。諸斷善根。但斷生約非方便善。又伏現行。非無種子。如何無因。又與時邊。普斷善法。應
【現代漢語翻譯】 現代漢語譯本： 許說增上慢人，會製造虛假的驚恐。舍利弗（佛陀十大弟子之一，以智慧著稱）等人，懷疑佛陀被邪魔附身，是因為現在和過去差異太大，才會有這樣的懷疑和誹謗。所以經中說，『之所以未曾說，是因為時機未到。』現在正是時候，決定宣說大乘佛法。因此可知現在所說，並非先前所說。又說，眾生的根性有五種：一是聲聞乘根性，二是緣覺乘根性，三是如來乘根性，四是不定根性，五是無根性。有人問：『如何得知有無根性？』回答：四卷本和八卷本的《楞伽經》都說，大悲菩薩和一闡提人（斷絕一切善根的人），最終不能成就正覺。如果一切眾生都有佛性，就應該都能成佛，為何大悲菩薩最終不能成就？又《勝鬘經》說，遠離善知識、沒有聽聞佛法的眾生，以人天善根來使其成熟。《善戒經》說，沒有根性的人，因為沒有根性，即使發心勤奮修行，最終也不能證得無上菩提。地持瑜伽也同樣這樣說。又《涅槃經》說，有三種病人，第三種病人，無論遇到良醫與否，都無法痊癒。如果一切眾生都有佛性，為何不能痊癒？又恒河七人中，第一種常沒之人，就屬於無根性。《大莊嚴論》第一卷說，一闡提有兩種：一是時邊一闡提，二是畢竟一闡提。時邊一闡提有四種：一是隻做惡事，二是普遍斷絕一切善法，三是沒有解說善根的因緣，四是善根不具足。畢竟沒有涅槃之法的人，是因為沒有涅槃的因。他們沒有般若智慧和涅槃的自性，只求生死輪迴，不樂於涅槃。然而有解釋說，『畢竟』是指，從所斷的方面來說，兼斷了善和生得的善，斷盡三世的因，稱為『畢竟』，沒有涅槃之法。從時間上來說，因為有鈍根，長期流轉，不能生起信心，稱為『畢竟』，沒有涅槃之法。這裡沒有說盡未來際，決定沒有佛性，稱為『畢竟』。這種解釋是不對的。斷絕善根，只是斷絕了生得的善，而不是方便善。而且只是伏藏了現行的惡，並非沒有種子，怎麼能說是沒有因呢？又與時邊一闡提一樣，普遍斷絕善法，應該
【English Translation】 English version: It is said that those with increased arrogance create false fear. Shariputra (one of the ten great disciples of the Buddha, known for his wisdom) and others suspect that the Buddha is possessed by demons because the present is so different from the past, leading to such doubts and slanders. Therefore, the sutra says, 'The reason it was not said before is because the time had not yet come.' Now is the right time to definitively proclaim the Mahayana Dharma. Thus, it is known that what is being said now is not what was said before. Furthermore, it is said that there are five types of natures: first, the Shravaka nature; second, the Pratyekabuddha nature; third, the Tathagata nature; fourth, the indeterminate nature; and fifth, the natureless nature. Someone asks, 'How do we know there is a natureless nature?' The answer is that both the four-fascicle and eight-fascicle Lankavatara Sutras say that the Bodhisattva of Great Compassion and the Icchantika (one who has severed all roots of goodness) ultimately cannot attain perfect enlightenment. If all beings had the Buddha-nature, they should all be able to attain Buddhahood. Why can't the Bodhisattva of Great Compassion ultimately attain it? Furthermore, the Shrimālādevi Sutra says that beings who are far from good teachers and have not heard the Dharma are matured by the roots of goodness of humans and devas. The Śīlaskandha Sutra says that those without nature, because they have no nature, even if they aspire and diligently practice, ultimately cannot attain Anuttara-samyak-sambodhi (unsurpassed complete enlightenment). The Yogācārabhūmi-śāstra also says the same. Furthermore, the Nirvana Sutra says that there are three types of sick people; the third type cannot be cured whether they encounter a good doctor or not. If all beings had the Buddha-nature, why can't they be cured? Furthermore, among the seven types of people in the Ganges River, the first type, who are constantly submerged, belong to the natureless nature. The first chapter of the Mahāyāna-sūtrālaṃkāra says that there are two types of Icchantikas: the temporary Icchantika and the ultimate Icchantika. There are four types of temporary Icchantikas: first, those who only do evil; second, those who universally sever all good dharmas; third, those who have no conditions to explain good roots; and fourth, those whose good roots are incomplete. Those who ultimately have no Dharma of Nirvana are because they have no cause for Nirvana. They have no Prajna wisdom or Nirvana nature, seeking only samsara (the cycle of birth and death) and not delighting in Nirvana. However, there is an explanation that 'ultimate' refers to, from the aspect of what is severed, also severing the good and the naturally acquired good, exhausting the causes of the three times, which is called 'ultimate,' having no Dharma of Nirvana. From the aspect of time, because they have dull roots, transmigrating for a long time, unable to generate faith, it is called 'ultimate,' having no Dharma of Nirvana. It does not say that for the rest of the future, they definitely have no Buddha-nature, which is called 'ultimate.' This explanation is incorrect. Severing good roots only severs the naturally acquired good, not the expedient good. Moreover, it only suppresses the manifest evil, not eliminating the seeds, so how can it be said that there is no cause? Furthermore, like the temporary Icchantika, universally severing good dharmas should
無差別。又斷善根。大小經論。俱是利根者。畢竟之與盡未來際。文別義同。若不爾者。究竟如虛空。應非遍法界。又瑜伽第六十七。更有五難六答。廣成無性。此應撿敘。上來無性。次成定性。依大般若五百九十三。善勇猛請言。唯愿世尊哀愍我等。為具宣說如來境智。若有情類。于聲聞乘性決定者。聞此法已。速能證。問。自無漏地于獨覺乘性決定者。聞此法已。速于自乘。而得出離。乃至云若有情類。雖未已入正性離生而於三乘性不定者。聞此法已。速證無上正等覺。心既決定。外別說不定。明知別有決定聲聞。又瑜伽七十六。解深密第二。皆說一向趣寂聲聞花嚴第四十。說定性緣覺。大莊嚴經第一。亦爾。涅槃第三十言。我于經中。為諸比丘。說一乘一道一行一緣。乃至我諸弟子。聞是說已。不解我意。唱言如來說須陀洹乃至阿羅漢。皆得作佛。若皆作佛。無決定性。是解佛意。何須此說。若爾如何法花經中。唯說一乘而為究竟。答。如攝論中。以十義會深密。亦有會一乘父。總依經論。佛性有三。聲聞有四。闡提有三。佛性三者。一理性謂真如。二行性謂無漏種子。三隱密性。即塵勞之疇。聲聞四者。一應化。二退菩提心。三增上慢。四趣寂。闡提三者。一大悲。二斷善。三無種性。上來兩家所引教文。並
【現代漢語翻譯】 現代漢語譯本 無差別，又斷絕善根。大小乘經典和論著，都說是利根之人。『畢竟』和『盡未來際』，文字不同，意義相同。如果不是這樣，『究竟』就像虛空一樣，應該不是遍佈法界。 又，《瑜伽師地論》第六十七卷，更有五難六答，廣泛闡述了無性。這裡應該檢查並敘述。上面講的是無性，接下來是成定性。依據《大般若經》第五百九十三卷，善勇猛請問說：『唯愿世尊憐憫我們，為我們詳細宣說如來的境界和智慧。如果眾生屬於聲聞乘性決定者，聽聞此法后，能夠迅速證悟。』 問：『從無漏地開始，對於獨覺乘性決定者，聽聞此法后，能夠迅速在自己的乘中得出離。』乃至說『如果眾生尚未進入正性離生，但對於三乘性不定者，聽聞此法后，能夠迅速證得無上正等覺。』既然內心已經決定，外面又特別說不定，明顯可知另有決定性的聲聞。 又，《瑜伽師地論》第七十六卷，《解深密經》第二卷，都說一向趣寂的聲聞。《華嚴經》第四十卷，說定性緣覺。《大莊嚴經》第一卷，也是如此。《涅槃經》第三十卷說：『我在經中，為眾比丘說一乘、一道、一行、一緣，乃至我的弟子們，聽了這些話后，不理解我的意思，宣揚說如來說須陀洹（Sotapanna，入流果）乃至阿羅漢（Arhat，無學）都能成佛。』如果都能成佛，就沒有決定性。這樣理解佛意，何須這樣說？ 如果這樣，為什麼《法華經》中，只說一乘才是究竟？答：如《攝大乘論》中，用十種意義來會通《解深密經》，也有會通一乘的說法。總的來說，依據經典和論著，佛性有三種，聲聞有四種，闡提（Icchantika，斷善根者）有三種。佛性三種：一是理性，指真如（Tathata，如如）；二是行性，指無漏種子；三是隱密性，即塵勞的範疇。 聲聞四種：一是應化，二是退菩提心，三是增上慢，四是趣寂。闡提三種：一是大悲，二是斷善，三是無種性。上面兩家所引用的經文，都...
【English Translation】 English version Without distinction, and also severing roots of goodness. Both the Mahayana and Hinayana sutras and treatises say they are people of sharp faculties. 'Ultimately' and 'until the end of future aeons,' the words are different, but the meanings are the same. If it were not so, 'ultimate' would be like empty space, and should not be pervasive throughout the Dharma Realm. Furthermore, in the Yogacarabhumi-sastra (瑜伽師地論) , volume 67, there are five difficulties and six answers, extensively explaining the absence of nature (無性). This should be examined and narrated. Above, it spoke of the absence of nature; next is the establishment of fixed nature. According to the Mahaprajnaparamita Sutra (大般若經), volume 593, Good Courage asked, 'May the World Honored One have compassion on us and explain in detail the realm and wisdom of the Tathagata (如來). If sentient beings are determined in their nature for the Sravaka Vehicle (聲聞乘), upon hearing this Dharma, they can quickly attain enlightenment.' Question: 'From the ground of non-outflows, for those determined in their nature for the Pratyekabuddha Vehicle (獨覺乘), upon hearing this Dharma, they can quickly attain liberation in their own vehicle.' And so on, saying, 'If sentient beings have not yet entered the stage of rightness and separation from birth, but are undetermined in their nature for the three vehicles, upon hearing this Dharma, they can quickly attain Anuttara-samyak-sambodhi (無上正等覺, unsurpassed perfect enlightenment).' Since the mind is already determined, and it is specifically said to be undetermined externally, it is clear that there are separate Sravakas (聲聞) with determined nature. Furthermore, the Yogacarabhumi-sastra, volume 76, and the Samdhinirmocana Sutra (解深密經), chapter 2, both speak of Sravakas who are solely inclined towards quiescence. The Avatamsaka Sutra (花嚴經), chapter 40, speaks of Pratyekabuddhas (緣覺) with fixed nature. The Mahavyutpatti (大莊嚴經), chapter 1, is also like this. The Nirvana Sutra (涅槃經), chapter 30, says, 'In the sutras, I speak to the Bhiksus (比丘) of one vehicle, one path, one practice, one cause, and so on. However, my disciples, after hearing these words, did not understand my meaning and proclaimed that the Tathagata said that Srotapannas (須陀洹) and even Arhats (阿羅漢) can all become Buddhas.' If all can become Buddhas, there is no determined nature. If this is understanding the Buddha's meaning, why is it necessary to say this? If so, why does the Lotus Sutra (法花經) only speak of the One Vehicle as ultimate? Answer: As in the Mahayana-samgraha (攝大乘論), the Samdhinirmocana Sutra is reconciled with ten meanings, and there is also a reconciliation of the One Vehicle. In general, according to the sutras and treatises, there are three types of Buddha-nature (佛性), four types of Sravakas, and three types of Icchantikas (闡提). The three types of Buddha-nature are: first, the nature of principle, referring to Suchness (真如); second, the nature of practice, referring to seeds of non-outflows; and third, the hidden nature, which is the category of defilements. The four types of Sravakas are: first, those who appear through transformation; second, those who retreat from the Bodhi-mind; third, those with increased arrogance; and fourth, those who are inclined towards quiescence. The three types of Icchantikas are: first, great compassion; second, severance of goodness; and third, absence of seed nature. The scriptural passages cited by the two schools above, all...
有明說。其釋難及會違父。一一研究。廣如別記。樂廣言論勤說法者。皆應敘之。三云此有種性及無種性。乃是如來秘密境界。散在諸經。佛不定說如何前釋欲定是非此十力中。種種界力之所知故。唯佛與佛。乃能證了。涅槃第十七云。三乘之法。說言一乘。一乘之法。隨宜說三。乃至如來明見眾生根故。終無虛妄。斷罪過故。雖無虛妄。若知眾生因虛妄說。得法利者。隨宜方便。則為說之。是則諸佛甚深境界。非二乘知。準此經文。豈可下凡謬為商略。又彼三十四云。善男子。如來世尊。為眾生故。廣中說略。略中說廣。乃至云。是故隨人隨意隨時。故名如來知諸根力。善男子。我若當於如是等義。作定說者。則不得稱我為如來具知根力。三十五云。善男子。如是諍訟。是佛境界。非諸聲聞緣覺所知。若人於是生疑心者。猶能摧壞。無量煩惱。如須彌山。若於是中。生決定者。是名執著。乃至善男子。如是執著不名為善。何以故。不能摧壞諸疑網故。迦葉復言世尊。如是人者。本自不疑。云何說言不壞疑網。善男子。其不疑者。即是疑也。三十六云。善男子。我雖說言一切眾生悉有佛性。眾生不解佛如是等隨自意語。善男子如是語者。後身菩薩尚不能知。況於二乘其餘菩薩。又覆文云。若有說言一切眾生定有佛性。
【現代漢語翻譯】 現代漢語譯本 有明確的說明。其中解釋疑難和會通矛盾之處，一一加以研究，詳細情況見其他記錄。喜歡廣為言論、勤于說法的人，都應該敘述他們的事蹟。經中三次提到『此有種性及無種性』，這乃是如來（Tathagata，佛的稱號之一）秘密的境界，散佈在各種經典中。佛不作固定的說法，如何事先確定是非呢？這是十力（Tathagata的十種力量）中的種種界力所能瞭解的，只有佛與佛才能完全證悟。 《涅槃經》（Nirvana Sutra）第十七卷說：『三乘（Three Vehicles，聲聞乘、緣覺乘、菩薩乘）的法，有時說為一乘（One Vehicle，佛乘）；一乘的法，隨順情況說為三乘。』乃至如來明瞭地見到眾生的根器，所以終究沒有虛妄。爲了斷除罪過，即使沒有虛妄，如果知道眾生因為虛妄的說法而得到法的利益，就隨順情況方便地為他們說。這正是諸佛甚深的境界，不是二乘（Two Vehicles，聲聞乘、緣覺乘）所能瞭解的。按照這段經文，怎麼可以由凡夫俗子來妄加評論呢？ 又《涅槃經》第三十四卷說：『善男子，如來世尊爲了眾生的緣故，在廣闊的說法中作簡略的概括，在簡略的說法中作廣闊的闡述。』乃至說：『因此，隨順人的意願，隨順時機，所以名為如來知諸根力。善男子，我如果對這些意義作固定的說法，就不能稱為如來具足知根力。』第三十五卷說：『善男子，這樣的爭論是佛的境界，不是諸聲聞（Sravaka，聽聞佛法而修行的人）、緣覺（Pratyekabuddha，靠自己覺悟的人）所能瞭解的。如果有人對此產生懷疑，還能摧毀無量煩惱，如同須彌山（Mount Sumeru，佛教宇宙觀中的聖山）。如果對此產生確定的執著，就叫做執著。』乃至『善男子，這樣的執著不稱為善，為什麼呢？因為不能摧毀各種疑網。』迦葉（Kasyapa，佛陀的弟子）又說：『世尊，這樣的人，本來就沒有懷疑，為什麼說不能摧毀疑網呢？』善男子，那不懷疑，就是懷疑啊。 第三十六卷說：『善男子，我雖然說一切眾生都有佛性（Buddha-nature，成佛的可能性），眾生不理解佛像這樣隨順自己意願所說的話。善男子，像這樣的話，後身菩薩（Bodhisattva，發願成佛的修行者）尚且不能瞭解，更何況二乘和其他菩薩。』經文又說：『如果有人說一切眾生一定有佛性，』
【English Translation】 English version There is clear explanation. Its explanation of difficulties and reconciliation of contradictions are studied one by one, as detailed in other records. Those who enjoy extensive discussions and diligently preach the Dharma should have their deeds narrated. It is mentioned three times in the sutra that 'this has nature and no nature,' which is the secret realm of the Tathagata (one of the titles of the Buddha), scattered throughout various scriptures. The Buddha does not make fixed statements; how can one predetermine right and wrong? This is known by the various realm-powers among the Ten Powers (the ten powers of the Tathagata), and only Buddhas can fully realize it. The Nirvana Sutra, Volume 17, says: 'The Dharma of the Three Vehicles (Sravaka Vehicle, Pratyekabuddha Vehicle, Bodhisattva Vehicle) is sometimes said to be the One Vehicle (Buddha Vehicle); the Dharma of the One Vehicle is expediently said to be the Three Vehicles.' Even the Tathagata clearly sees the faculties of sentient beings, so there is ultimately no falsehood. To eliminate transgressions, even if there is no falsehood, if it is known that sentient beings benefit from the Dharma through false teachings, then one should expediently teach them accordingly. This is precisely the profound realm of the Buddhas, which is not understood by the Two Vehicles (Sravaka Vehicle, Pratyekabuddha Vehicle). According to this sutra passage, how can ordinary people presumptuously comment on it? Furthermore, Nirvana Sutra, Volume 34, says: 'Good man, for the sake of sentient beings, the Tathagata World-Honored One makes brief summaries in extensive teachings and makes extensive elaborations in brief teachings.' It even says: 'Therefore, according to people's wishes and according to the time, it is called the Tathagata knowing the powers of the faculties. Good man, if I were to make fixed statements about these meanings, I could not be called the Tathagata fully possessing the knowledge of the powers of the faculties.' Volume 35 says: 'Good man, such disputes are the realm of the Buddha, not known by the Sravakas (those who hear the Buddha's teachings and practice) and Pratyekabuddhas (those who awaken on their own). If someone has doubts about this, they can still destroy countless afflictions, like Mount Sumeru (the sacred mountain in Buddhist cosmology). If one develops a fixed attachment to this, it is called attachment.' Even 'Good man, such attachment is not called good, why? Because it cannot destroy various nets of doubt.' Kasyapa (a disciple of the Buddha) further said: 'World-Honored One, such people originally have no doubts, why say they cannot destroy nets of doubt?' Good man, that which is not doubting is doubt. Volume 36 says: 'Good man, although I say that all sentient beings have Buddha-nature (the potential to become a Buddha), sentient beings do not understand the Buddha's words spoken according to their own wishes. Good man, such words are not understood even by Bodhisattvas (practitioners who vow to become Buddhas) in their later bodies, let alone the Two Vehicles and other Bodhisattvas.' The text also says: 'If someone says that all sentient beings definitely have Buddha-nature,'
定無佛性。是人皆名謗佛法僧。準此等文。推功歸佛謹述而以故於諸釋隨所愛樂。任情取捨。以有教理各齊均故不應于中起用。執心強生偏見。謂契佛言。無有是處。然應具敘諸家教理。欲令學者知所在故。問。理有一長。不應俱示。開釋教藏。須定指歸。今但和光作不定說。將令後學何所承稟。答。義有可定不可定者。不決定義理通多解。豈可一向要令定釋。佛尚不定誰敢定乎。問。秘密難知誠如所道。此土眾生樂聞佛性。何故如來不作定說答。誰言一向樂聞說有。然諸眾生自有二類。一聞佛性欣樂有憑。勇猛進趣若聞無性。無所因托。息進求心。二者若聞一分無性。恐墮此流。加功進習。若聞皆有恃此佛性。卻生怠墮。由對機異教不定。明但應精勤堅集行愿。面奉金顏當自知矣。上來解釋根性不同。以經被者。若依初釋。更無異論。五性之家。應須料簡。約正所被。唯是上乘。經云。為發大乘者。說故即余經云。為諸菩薩。說應六波羅蜜。令得一切種智。若約兼。被通諸二乘及以無性。下列四眾及於八部。無所簡故。大般若云。般若波羅蜜多。能辯聲聞及獨覺地。即前所引善勇猛文。亦被二乘。此下菩薩廣大之心。三界四生俱令滅度。無著菩薩問云。何故愿釋者有二。初釋題目。后解經文。釋經題者。秦魏梁本。
俱題金剛般若。唐周兩本。同號能斷金剛隋朝所翻。準彼論。后乃名金剛斷割。前三本略。后三具足。舉體攝用。但標法喻之名。體用雙彰。兼陳能斷之因。廣略雖異義則無違。初離釋。后合釋。梵云。跛阇羅。此云金剛。寶中最勝。體類多種。正理論云。帝釋有寶。名為金剛。不為餘眾生見。真諦記云。有六種寶。皆名金剛。一青色能除一切災厄。二黃色能隨人所須。出種種物。三赤色能令人遊行空中。四白色能出水亦能清濁水。五空色能出火。六碧色能消諸毒。上釋喻體。次舉義用。先依諸教。后據此論。先諸教如涅槃第二十四。廣贊金剛三昧。譬如金剛所擬之處。無不碎壞。而是金剛無所折損。又云。如諸寶中金剛最勝。依梁攝論天親菩薩釋。金剛定四義為喻。一能破煩惱。二能引無餘功德。三堅實不可破。四利用通達。一切法定既如是。準智亦然。對法論第十二。釋金剛定有四義。一無間。非世間行所間缺故。二堅固能壞一切障。非障所壞故。三一味無分別性。純一味故。四遍滿緣一切法。共相真如為境界故。金剛亦四。一體無間隙。非沙石所雜。二可知。三純一類不變不異。四遍滿世界。如金剛山。金剛杵等總攬。諸文金剛十義。一最勝。二難見。三除災。四堅實。五稱求。六能引。七利用。八無間。九一
【現代漢語翻譯】 現代漢語譯本 《俱題金剛般若》（Gujia Jingang Bore，金剛般若的音譯）。唐朝和周朝有兩個版本。同名的《能斷金剛》（Nengduan Jingang）是隋朝翻譯的。根據相關論著，後來被稱為《金剛斷割》（Jingang Duange）。前三個版本比較簡略，后三個版本比較完整。前三個版本側重於用譬喻來闡釋佛法，后三個版本則體用雙彰，既闡釋了佛法本體，又闡釋了佛法的功用，並且陳述了能夠斷除煩惱的原因。雖然詳略不同，但意義沒有違背。開始是分開解釋，後來是合併解釋。梵語『跛阇羅』（vajra），這裡翻譯為『金剛』，是寶物中最殊勝的。金剛的種類有很多。正理論中說，帝釋天（釋迦提桓因，佛教的護法神）有一種寶物，名為金剛，不被其他眾生所見。真諦（Paramārtha，古印度佛教僧侶）的記載說，有六種寶物，都名為金剛：一是青色的，能消除一切災厄；二是黃色的，能隨人的需求，產生各種物品；三是赤色的，能使人在空中飛行；四是白色的，能產生水，也能凈化渾濁的水；五是空色的，能產生火；六是碧色的，能消除各種毒素。以上解釋了金剛的譬喻本體。接下來闡述金剛的意義和功用。先依據各種經典，后依據此論。先說各種經典，如《涅槃經》（Nirvana Sutra）第二十四品，廣泛讚歎金剛三昧（Vajra Samadhi，一種禪定狀態），譬如金剛所觸及之處，沒有不被摧毀的，但是金剛本身卻不會受到任何損傷。又說，如同各種寶物中金剛最為殊勝。依據梁朝《攝大乘論》（Mahāyānasaṃgraha）中天親菩薩（Vasubandhu，古印度佛教僧侶）的解釋，金剛定（Vajra Samadhi）用四種意義來比喻：一能破除煩惱，二能引生無餘功德，三堅實不可破，四利用通達一切法。既然佛法是這樣，那麼智慧也是這樣。對法論第十二品解釋金剛定有四種意義：一無間，因為不是世俗的行為所能間斷的；二堅固，能摧毀一切障礙，不會被障礙所摧毀；三一味，沒有分別性，純粹是一種味道；四遍滿，緣於一切法，以共相真如為境界。金剛也有四種意義：一體無間隙，沒有沙石摻雜；二可知；三純一類，不變不異；四遍滿世界，如金剛山、金剛杵等。總而言之，諸經論中金剛有十種意義：一最勝，二難見，三除災，四堅實，五稱求，六能引，七利用，八無間，九一
【English Translation】 English version 'Gujia Jingang Bore' (俱題金剛般若, Gujia Jingang Bore, a transliteration of Vajra Prajna). There are two versions from the Tang and Zhou dynasties. 'Nengduan Jingang' (能斷金剛), with the same name, was translated in the Sui Dynasty. According to relevant treatises, it was later called 'Jingang Duange' (金剛斷割). The first three versions are relatively brief, while the latter three are more complete. The former three focus on using metaphors to explain the Dharma, while the latter three emphasize both the essence and function, explaining both the Dharma's essence and its function, and stating the reasons for being able to cut off afflictions. Although the details differ, the meaning is not contradictory. Initially, they are explained separately, and later they are explained together. The Sanskrit word 'vajra' (跛阇羅) is translated here as 'diamond' (金剛), which is the most supreme among treasures. There are many types of vajra. The Zhengli Lun (正理論) states that Indra (帝釋天, Shijia Ti Huan Yin, a Buddhist protector deity) has a treasure called vajra, which is not seen by other beings. The record of Paramārtha (真諦, an ancient Indian Buddhist monk) states that there are six types of treasures, all called vajra: first, the blue one, which can eliminate all disasters; second, the yellow one, which can produce various items according to people's needs; third, the red one, which can make people fly in the air; fourth, the white one, which can produce water and also purify turbid water; fifth, the space-colored one, which can produce fire; sixth, the emerald green one, which can eliminate all poisons. The above explains the metaphorical essence of vajra. Next, the meaning and function of vajra are elaborated. First, according to various scriptures, and then according to this treatise. First, let's talk about various scriptures, such as the twenty-fourth chapter of the Nirvana Sutra (涅槃經), which extensively praises Vajra Samadhi (金剛三昧, a state of meditation), just as wherever the vajra touches, nothing is not destroyed, but the vajra itself will not be damaged in any way. It also says that among all treasures, vajra is the most supreme. According to the explanation of Bodhisattva Vasubandhu (天親菩薩, an ancient Indian Buddhist monk) in the Mahāyānasaṃgraha (攝大乘論) of the Liang Dynasty, Vajra Samadhi is used to symbolize four meanings: first, it can break through afflictions; second, it can generate unsurpassed merits; third, it is solid and unbreakable; fourth, it is beneficial and penetrates all dharmas. Since the Dharma is like this, so is wisdom. The twelfth chapter of the Abhidharma-samuccaya (對法論) explains that Vajra Samadhi has four meanings: first, uninterrupted, because it cannot be interrupted by worldly actions; second, solid, able to destroy all obstacles, and will not be destroyed by obstacles; third, one taste, without discrimination, purely one taste; fourth, pervasive, related to all dharmas, with the common characteristic of Suchness as the realm. Vajra also has four meanings: one, the body is without gaps, without sand and stone mixed in; two, knowable; three, purely one kind, unchanging and not different; four, pervasive throughout the world, such as Mount Vajra, Vajra pestle, etc. In summary, the vajra in the scriptures and treatises has ten meanings: one, the most supreme; two, difficult to see; three, eliminates disasters; four, solid; five, fulfilling requests; six, able to generate; seven, beneficial; eight, uninterrupted; nine, one
味。十遍滿。此經文義亦有十種。最上第一希有法故。義及果報不思議故。罪業障惱為消滅故。能破堅執非彼破故。利生嚴土得菩提故。能生諸佛集善法故。通達無我智見凈故。非住相心之取故。諸法如義體無為故。福惠如空叵思量故對前十喻。如此配釋。此雖義具。非本論意。本論四義。一細。二罕。三能斷。四相似。初三共義。觀照實相。遍在諸教。后一不共。文字般若。唯在此經論。先標云。金剛能斷者。此名有二義相應。應知如說。入正見行。入邪見行。然釋此文。諸說不同。慈恩解云。二義相應者。此顯金剛通能所治。如說已下是舉例釋。正見謂正定聚。邪見謂邪定聚。行善惡行。能入彼聚名彼二行。或泛指言如說。善惡二人行善惡行。此行入正見聚類。此行入邪見聚類。邪正雖殊。俱名見行。今者能持三惠。所持二障。染善雖殊。俱名金剛。如涅槃經云。金剛極堅萬物不能壞除。白羊角以龜甲意以二障隨其所應凡夫二乘所不能斷。唯發大菩提心。三惠方能折伏。或斷此以所斷喻于金剛如入邪見行。又如玉石性極堅牢非物所壞。唯有金剛。能摧破之。二障亦爾。非凡夫俗智二乘真知之所摧壞二乘不斷惑障習故大乘三惠如彼金剛方能伏斷究竟斷位金剛修惠故經唯說金剛喻定即此能斷喻金剛如入正見行故言二義
【現代漢語翻譯】 味。十遍滿。此經文義亦有十種。最上第一希有法故。義及果報不思議故。罪業障惱為消滅故。能破堅執非彼破故。利生嚴土得菩提故。能生諸佛集善法故。通達無我智見凈故。非住相心之取故。諸法如義體無為故。福惠如空叵思量故對前十喻。如此配釋。此雖義具。非本論意。本論四義。一細。二罕。三能斷。四相似。初三共義。觀照實相。遍在諸教。后一不共。文字般若。唯在此經論。先標云。金剛能斷者。此名有二義相應。應知如說。入正見行。入邪見行。然釋此文。諸說不同。慈恩解云。二義相應者。此顯金剛通能所治。如說已下是舉例釋。正見謂正定聚（正確的見解，導向正定的群體）。邪見謂邪定聚（錯誤的見解，導向邪定的群體）。行善惡行。能入彼聚名彼二行。或泛指言如說。善惡二人行善惡行。此行入正見聚類。此行入邪見聚類。邪正雖殊。俱名見行。今者能持三惠。所持二障。染善雖殊。俱名金剛。如涅槃經云。金剛極堅萬物不能壞除。白羊角以龜甲意以二障隨其所應凡夫二乘所不能斷。唯發大菩提心。三惠方能折伏。或斷此以所斷喻于金剛如入邪見行。又如玉石性極堅牢非物所壞。唯有金剛。能摧破之。二障亦爾。非凡夫俗智二乘真知之所摧壞二乘不斷惑障習故大乘三惠如彼金剛方能伏斷究竟斷位金剛修惠故經唯說金剛喻定即此能斷喻金剛如入正見行故言二義 此經的意義有十種圓滿：是最上第一的稀有之法，意義和果報不可思議，能消滅罪業和障礙煩惱，能破除堅固的執著而不會被其他所破除，有利於眾生莊嚴國土而證得菩提，能產生諸佛聚集善法，通達無我的智慧和清凈的見解，不執著于表相，諸法的本體如其義一樣是無為的，福德和智慧如虛空一樣難以衡量。以上對應前面的十個比喻來解釋。雖然意義完備，但不是本論的本意。本論有四種意義：細微，稀有，能斷，相似。前三種是共同的意義，觀照實相遍佈于各種教義中。后一種是不共同的，文字般若唯有在此經論中。先前標明『金剛能斷』，這個名稱有兩個意義相應。應該知道，如所說，進入正見之行，進入邪見之行。然而解釋這段文字，各種說法不同。慈恩的解釋是：『兩個意義相應』，這顯示金剛既能作為能治者，也能作為所治者。『如說』以下是舉例解釋。正見指的是正定聚，邪見指的是邪定聚。行善惡之行，能進入那些群體就被稱為進入了那兩種行。或者泛指說，如所說，善人和惡人行善惡之行，這種行為進入正見聚的範疇，那種行為進入邪見聚的範疇。邪正雖然不同，都可稱為見行。現在能持有三種智慧，所要對治的是兩種障礙。染污和善良雖然不同，都可以稱為金剛。如《涅槃經》所說：『金剛極其堅硬，萬物都不能破壞它。』白羊角和龜甲的意義是，兩種障礙根據情況，凡夫和二乘都不能斷除。只有發起大菩提心，三種智慧才能折服。或者用所斷的事物來比喻金剛，就像進入邪見之行。又如玉石的性質極其堅牢，不是其他事物所能破壞的，只有金剛才能摧毀它。兩種障礙也是如此，不是凡夫的世俗智慧和二乘的真知所能摧毀的，因為二乘沒有斷除迷惑的習氣。大乘的三種智慧就像金剛一樣，才能降伏和斷除，在究竟斷除的階段，用金剛修習智慧。因此經中只說用金剛來比喻禪定，這就是能斷，用金剛來比喻進入正見之行，所以說有兩個意義。 味 (wei). 十遍滿 (shi bian man). 此經文義亦有十種。最上第一希有法故。義及果報不思議故。罪業障惱為消滅故。能破堅執非彼破故。利生嚴土得菩提故。能生諸佛集善法故。通達無我智見凈故。非住相心之取故。諸法如義體無為故。福惠如空叵思量故對前十喻。如此配釋。此雖義具。非本論意。本論四義。一細。二罕。三能斷。四相似。初三共義。觀照實相。遍在諸教。后一不共。文字般若。唯在此經論。先標云。金剛能斷者。此名有二義相應。應知如說。入正見行。入邪見行。然釋此文。諸說不同。慈恩解云。二義相應者。此顯金剛通能所治。如說已下是舉例釋。正見謂正定聚 (correct views, leading to right concentration). 邪見謂邪定聚 (wrong views, leading to wrong concentration). 行善惡行。能入彼聚名彼二行。或泛指言如說。善惡二人行善惡行。此行入正見聚類。此行入邪見聚類。邪正雖殊。俱名見行。今者能持三惠。所持二障。染善雖殊。俱名金剛。如涅槃經云。金剛極堅萬物不能壞除。白羊角以龜甲意以二障隨其所應凡夫二乘所不能斷。唯發大菩提心。三惠方能折伏。或斷此以所斷喻于金剛如入邪見行。又如玉石性極堅牢非物所壞。唯有金剛。能摧破之。二障亦爾。非凡夫俗智二乘真知之所摧壞二乘不斷惑障習故大乘三惠如彼金剛方能伏斷究竟斷位金剛修惠故經唯說金剛喻定即此能斷喻金剛如入正見行故言二義
【English Translation】 The flavor. Tenfold perfection. The meaning of this scripture also has ten aspects: It is the supreme and foremost rare Dharma; its meaning and karmic rewards are inconceivable; it eliminates sins, obstacles, and afflictions; it can break firm attachments without being broken by others; it benefits sentient beings, adorns the land, and attains Bodhi; it can generate all Buddhas and gather good Dharmas; it penetrates the wisdom of no-self and purifies views; it does not grasp onto the mind dwelling in appearances; the essence of all Dharmas is non-action, just as their meaning is; blessings and wisdom are immeasurable like the sky. These correspond to the previous ten metaphors for explanation. Although the meaning is complete, it is not the intention of this treatise. This treatise has four meanings: subtle, rare, capable of cutting, and similar. The first three are common meanings; contemplating reality is present in all teachings. The last one is uncommon; the Prajna of words is only in this scripture and treatise. It is first stated that 'Vajra (diamond) can cut,' this name has two corresponding meanings. It should be known, as it is said, entering the path of right view, entering the path of wrong view. However, there are different interpretations of this text. Ci En explains: 'Two meanings correspond,' this shows that Vajra encompasses both the agent and the object to be treated. 'As it is said' below is an example explanation. Right view refers to the group of right concentration, wrong view refers to the group of wrong concentration. Practicing good and evil deeds, being able to enter those groups is called entering those two paths. Or generally speaking, as it is said, good and evil people practice good and evil deeds, this action enters the category of the group of right view, that action enters the category of the group of wrong view. Although right and wrong are different, both can be called views and actions. Now, being able to hold the three wisdoms, what is to be treated are the two obstacles. Although defilement and goodness are different, both can be called Vajra. As the Nirvana Sutra says: 'Vajra is extremely hard, and nothing can destroy it.' The meaning of the ram's horn and tortoise shell is that, according to the circumstances, the two obstacles cannot be cut off by ordinary people and the two vehicles (śrāvaka and pratyekabuddha). Only by generating the great Bodhi mind can the three wisdoms subdue them. Or use what is to be cut off as a metaphor for Vajra, like entering the path of wrong view. Also, like jade, its nature is extremely firm and cannot be destroyed by other things, only Vajra can destroy it. The two obstacles are also like this, they cannot be destroyed by the mundane wisdom of ordinary people and the true knowledge of the two vehicles, because the two vehicles have not cut off the habits of delusion. The three wisdoms of the Mahayana (Great Vehicle) are like Vajra, and can subdue and cut them off. In the stage of ultimate cutting off, wisdom is cultivated with Vajra. Therefore, the sutra only says that Vajra is used as a metaphor for Samadhi (concentration), this is the ability to cut, and Vajra is used as a metaphor for entering the path of right view, so it is said that there are two meanings.
。一所破義。二能破義。若唯能破邪正二見喻不相應然論文略不解出所治金剛于能斷中庵含方顯何南又釋金剛但喻三惠及教。所以然者。涅槃經云。喻如金剛極堅。無能損壞。除龜甲等。彼經亦爾。唯除闡提。不能令立菩提之因。既羊角等。以喻闡提。明非所斷。名為金剛。而言二義者。一證真如理。如入正見行。二斷諸惑。如入邪見行。此金剛智。能破大乘有善根人根熟之者二重障惑。不能除彼斷善根人身中惑。故又有釋云。準此論。初金剛難壞句義聚明非所斷雖有別處說煩惱難斷猶若金剛此處說其可斷不合以金剛為喻如說闡提難化以燋谷為喻若說闡提可治即不用此喻而言二義相應者金剛能斷堅不堅物名為二義演曰。初釋為勝順論文故正以金剛喻能智兼喻所斷障顯智功能。十輪經第二云。云何破相續。如金剛煩惱理有多途喻亦何定如說虛空以喻佛性亦有以喻二障粗金如正理門門通理智舉障難斷猶若金剛以表智慧殊勝超絕非喻所喻誰要令觀煩惱堅硬起觀行耶。若爾涅槃經曰羊角等喻不相應。當云何通。答。涅槃文意。非釋此經。今借彼喻。以顯金剛。是彼二物對所礙而喻所治非謂涅槃障喻金剛上解金剛通能所斷論下別釋唯就能斷乃有四義。如前所列。論云。細者智因故。牢者不可壞故隋朝諱堅故翻為細。取堅密義智因
【現代漢語翻譯】 現代漢語譯本 一、破除（煩惱的）意義。二、能夠破除（煩惱的）意義。如果僅僅是能夠破除邪見和正見這兩種見解，那麼比喻就不恰當了。然而，《論文》簡略，沒有解釋所要對治的『金剛』（vajra，比喻堅利之物，能破一切，但不為一切所破），在『能斷』（指般若智慧）中稍微顯露。河南的解釋又認為，『金剛』只是比喻三種智慧以及教法。為什麼這樣說呢？《涅槃經》（Nirvana Sutra）說：『比喻如同金剛一樣極其堅硬，沒有什麼能夠損壞它，除了龜甲等物。』那部經也是這樣，唯獨除了斷善根（icchantika）的人，不能使他們種下菩提（bodhi，覺悟）的因。既然用羊角等物來比喻斷善根的人，就表明它們不是所要斷除的對象。稱為『金剛』，而說它具有兩種意義，一是證悟真如（tathata，事物的真實如是之相）之理，如同進入正見之行；二是斷除各種迷惑，如同進入邪見之行。這種金剛智慧，能夠破除大乘（Mahayana）有善根的人，根器成熟之人的兩種障礙和迷惑，但不能夠去除那些斷了善根的人身中的迷惑。所以又有解釋說，根據這部論，最初的『金剛難以破壞』這句話，表明（煩惱）不是所要斷除的。雖然在別的地方說煩惱難以斷除，猶如金剛，但這裡說它是可以斷除的，不應該用金剛來比喻。如同說斷善根的人難以教化，用燒焦的穀子來比喻。如果說斷善根的人可以被教化，就不用這個比喻了。說這兩種意義是相應的，是因為金剛能夠斷除堅硬和不堅硬的物體，這被稱為兩種意義。演曰：最初的解釋更為殊勝，順應《論文》的意義，所以正確地用金剛來比喻能斷的智慧，兼比喻所要斷除的障礙，彰顯智慧的功能。《十輪經》（Dasacakra Sutra）第二卷說：『如何破除相續？』如同金剛煩惱的道理有很多途徑，比喻又有什麼一定呢？如同說用虛空來比喻佛性（Buddha-nature），也有用它來比喻兩種障礙的粗顯之處，如同《正理門論》（Nyayapravesa）一樣，門門都通向理智，舉出障礙難以斷除，猶如金剛，以此來表示智慧的殊勝超絕，不是比喻所能比喻的。誰要讓人們觀察煩惱的堅硬，從而生起觀行呢？如果這樣，那麼《涅槃經》所說的羊角等比喻就不恰當了，應當如何解釋呢？回答： 《涅槃經》的文意，不是解釋這部經的。現在借用那個比喻，來顯示金剛，是那兩種東西針對所障礙的事物而作的比喻，不是說《涅槃經》用障礙來比喻金剛。上面解釋金剛，貫通能斷和所斷，下面的論述分別解釋僅僅是能斷，有四種意義，如前面所列。論中說：『細微的是智慧的因，堅固的是不可破壞的。』隋朝避諱『堅』字，所以翻譯為『細』，取其堅固細密的意義，是智慧的因。
【English Translation】 English version First, the meaning of destroying (afflictions). Second, the meaning of being able to destroy (afflictions). If it were only capable of destroying the two views of wrong and right, then the metaphor would not be appropriate. However, the 'Treatise' is brief and does not explain the 'vajra' (diamond, a metaphor for something strong and sharp that can break everything but cannot be broken by anything) that is to be treated. It is slightly revealed in 'The Diamond Cutter' (referring to prajna wisdom). The Henan interpretation also believes that 'vajra' only symbolizes the three wisdoms and the teachings. Why is this so? The 'Nirvana Sutra' says: 'The metaphor is like a vajra, which is extremely hard and cannot be damaged by anything except tortoise shells, etc.' That sutra is also like this, except for those who have severed their roots of goodness (icchantika), it cannot cause them to plant the cause of bodhi (enlightenment). Since horns, etc., are used to symbolize those who have severed their roots of goodness, it shows that they are not the objects to be cut off. It is called 'vajra', and it is said to have two meanings: one is to realize the truth of tathata (the true suchness of things), like entering the practice of right view; the other is to cut off various delusions, like entering the practice of wrong view. This vajra wisdom can break the two obstacles and delusions of those Mahayana practitioners who have good roots and are mature, but it cannot remove the delusions in the bodies of those who have severed their roots of goodness. Therefore, there is another explanation that, according to this treatise, the initial sentence 'vajra is difficult to destroy' shows that (afflictions) are not what is to be cut off. Although it is said elsewhere that afflictions are difficult to cut off, like vajra, here it is said that they can be cut off, and vajra should not be used as a metaphor. It is like saying that those who have severed their roots of goodness are difficult to teach, and burnt grains are used as a metaphor. If it is said that those who have severed their roots of goodness can be taught, then this metaphor is not used. Saying that these two meanings are corresponding is because vajra can cut off hard and non-hard objects, which is called two meanings. Yan said: The initial explanation is more superior and conforms to the meaning of the 'Treatise', so it is correct to use vajra to symbolize the wisdom that can cut off, and also to symbolize the obstacles to be cut off, highlighting the function of wisdom. The second volume of the 'Dasacakra Sutra' says: 'How to break the continuum?' Like the principle of vajra afflictions, there are many ways, so what is certain about the metaphor? It is like saying that emptiness is used to symbolize Buddha-nature, and it is also used to symbolize the obvious aspects of the two obstacles, just like in the 'Nyayapravesa', every door leads to reason and wisdom, and it is said that obstacles are difficult to cut off, like vajra, to show the supreme transcendence of intelligence, which cannot be compared by metaphors. Who wants people to observe the hardness of afflictions and thus generate contemplation? If so, then the metaphor of horns, etc., mentioned in the 'Nirvana Sutra' would not be appropriate. How should it be explained? Answer: The meaning of the 'Nirvana Sutra' is not to explain this sutra. Now, that metaphor is borrowed to show vajra, which is a metaphor for those two things against the obstructed things, not that the 'Nirvana Sutra' uses obstacles to symbolize vajra. The above explanation of vajra connects the cutter and the cut, and the following discussion explains separately that it is only the cutter, which has four meanings, as listed above. The treatise says: 'The subtle is the cause of wisdom, and the firm is indestructible.' The Sui Dynasty avoided the word 'firm', so it was translated as 'subtle', taking its meaning of firm and dense, which is the cause of wisdom.
即種子不可壞即現行智超惑除明暗不併故不可壞又釋智慧證如了因性故名為智因以無間隙非世間行所相雜故名之細密又以細妙非二乘等粗所緣故二名細密言不可壞者顯所治障性堅難壞若依此釋論中四義通能所斷。論又云。能斷者般若波羅蜜中聞思修所斷如金剛斷處而斷故此以智如金剛可斷二障如玉石等名為斷處。即舉所斷以顯能斷。若作二障喻金剛解者。此舉能斷以顯所斷。猶若金剛謂聞思修所斷之障乃如金剛斷處而斷然準論意即釋題名金剛能斷般若以初標之金剛能斷者后又結云是名金剛能斷。釋中亦爾先釋金剛后斷釋能斷此順西域語。若言能斷金剛。則順此方語。皆不相違。總以能詮之教。所詮之理智。及所斷障。喻于金剛。論釋第四義云。又如畫金剛形。初后闊中則狹。如是般若波羅蜜中。狹者謂凈心地。初后闊者謂信行地。如來地。此顯示不共義也。演曰。依此經教。文字般若初后廣明。中間即狹。不同余經。名不共義。是故此經獨名金剛。亦即余分不同。所以一如畫金剛神。膊跨則闊。在腰則狹。有動作故。喻令進趣。亦如畫金剛杵。兩頭闊。中腰狹。極堅勝故。令知深妙。問何故廣明信行佛地。略凈心耶。答。此經意令發心修行佛種不斷。廣談果德。勸彼欣樂而能發心。地前初修有退轉故。廣示行相。令其
【現代漢語翻譯】 現代漢語譯本： 『即種子不可壞』，是指現行智慧超越了迷惑，消除了明暗的對立，所以不可破壞。另一種解釋是，智慧能夠證得如所有因的自性，因此稱為『智因』。因為它沒有間隙，不與世俗的行為混雜，所以稱為『細密』。又因為它精細微妙，不是二乘等粗淺的境界所能緣取的，所以又名『細密』。說『不可壞』，是爲了顯示所要對治的障礙，其性質堅固難以破壞。如果按照這種解釋，論中的四種含義都貫通了能斷和所斷。 論中又說：『能斷』是指在般若波羅蜜中，通過聞、思、修所斷除的障礙，就像金剛斷裂之處一樣斷除。這裡用智慧比喻金剛，可以斷除二障，二障就像玉石等容易被斷開的東西，稱為『斷處』。這是舉出所斷的障礙來顯示能斷的智慧。如果把二障比喻為金剛，把智慧比喻為解開金剛的東西，那麼這是舉出能斷的智慧來顯示所斷的障礙。就像金剛一樣，聞、思、修所斷除的障礙就像金剛斷裂之處一樣被斷除。然而，根據論的意義，這是解釋題名『金剛能斷般若』，以最初標示的『金剛能斷』，後面又總結說『是名金剛能斷』。解釋中也是先解釋『金剛』，后解釋『斷』，解釋『能斷』，這符合西域的語序。如果說『能斷金剛』，就符合此地的語序，兩者並不矛盾。總而言之，用能詮釋的教法、所詮釋的理智，以及所斷除的障礙，來比喻金剛。 論中解釋第四種含義說：『又如畫金剛形，初后闊，中間則狹。如是般若波羅蜜中，狹者謂凈心地，初后闊者謂信行地、如來地。』這顯示了不共的含義。演曰：依據這部經教，文字般若最初和最後廣為闡明，中間則狹窄，不同於其他經典，這稱為不共的含義。因此這部經單獨名為『金剛』，也即與其他部分不同。所以就像畫金剛神一樣，肩膀和胯部寬闊，在腰部則狹窄，因為有動作的緣故，比喻令人前進。也像畫金剛杵一樣，兩頭寬闊，中間腰部狹窄，極其堅固殊勝的緣故，令人知道深妙。問：為什麼廣為闡明信行佛地，而略寫凈心呢？答：這部經的用意是令人發心修行，使佛種不斷，廣談果德，勸導他們欣樂而能發心。地前初修有退轉的緣故，廣為展示行相，使他們……
【English Translation】 English version: 'That the seed is indestructible' refers to the fact that the wisdom of present action transcends delusion and eliminates the duality of light and darkness, hence it is indestructible. Another explanation is that wisdom can realize the nature of 'as-is' cause, therefore it is called 'Wisdom-cause'. Because it has no gaps and is not mixed with worldly actions, it is called 'Subtle and Close'. Furthermore, because it is subtle and wonderful, not something that the coarse realms of the Two Vehicles can grasp, it is also named 'Subtle and Close'. Saying 'indestructible' is to show that the obstacles to be overcome are firm in nature and difficult to destroy. If according to this explanation, the four meanings in the treatise all connect the able-to-cut and the cut. The treatise also says: 'The able-to-cut' refers to the obstacles that are cut off through hearing, thinking, and cultivating in Prajna Paramita, just as cutting at the point where a diamond breaks. Here, wisdom is likened to a diamond, which can cut off the two obstacles, and the two obstacles are like jade and other things that are easily cut, called 'the place of cutting'. This is to show the able-to-cut wisdom by citing the obstacles to be cut. If the two obstacles are likened to a diamond, and wisdom is likened to something that can unlock the diamond, then this is to show the obstacles to be cut by citing the able-to-cut wisdom. Just like a diamond, the obstacles cut off by hearing, thinking, and cultivating are cut off like the place where a diamond breaks. However, according to the meaning of the treatise, this is to explain the title 'Vajra Cutter Prajna', with the initially marked 'Vajra Cutter', and later concluding 'is named Vajra Cutter'. The explanation also first explains 'Vajra', then explains 'cutter', explaining 'able-to-cut', which conforms to the order of the Western Regions. If it is said 'able-to-cut Vajra', it conforms to the order of this place, and the two are not contradictory. In short, the teaching that can explain, the rational intellect that is explained, and the obstacles that are cut off are all likened to a diamond. The treatise explains the fourth meaning by saying: 'Also, like drawing the shape of a Vajra, wide at the beginning and end, narrow in the middle. Thus, in Prajna Paramita, the narrow refers to the Pure Mind Ground, and the wide at the beginning and end refers to the Ground of Faith and Practice, and the Ground of the Tathagata.' This shows the uncommon meaning. Yan said: According to this scripture, the Prajna of words is widely explained at the beginning and the end, and narrow in the middle, which is different from other scriptures, and this is called the uncommon meaning. Therefore, this scripture is uniquely named 'Vajra', which is also different from other parts. So, just like drawing a Vajra deity, the shoulders and hips are wide, and the waist is narrow, because there is movement, which is a metaphor for encouraging progress. It is also like drawing a Vajra pestle, wide at both ends, narrow in the middle, extremely firm and superior, causing people to know the profound and wonderful. Question: Why is the Ground of Faith and Practice and the Ground of the Buddha widely explained, while the Pure Mind is briefly written? Answer: The intention of this scripture is to cause people to generate the mind of cultivation, so that the Buddha-seed is not cut off, widely discussing the virtues of the fruit, and persuading them to be happy and able to generate the mind. Because the initial cultivation before the ground has regression, the aspects of practice are widely shown, so that they...
進入初地已去。自證得故。非退轉故。不假多陳故。初后廣中間略說。又從凡位紹繼佛種。爰生佛果不斷義成。中間可知。何煩廣說。故經文義。闊狹不同。雖如來地釋者即是十地位收然經不明十地行相。還指佛果。所有功德。名如來地。故作是釋。至下當知。問。勝天王般若云。般若波羅蜜無有一法可為譬喻。如何今說智喻金剛。答。彼顯智勝超過萬法。無可全分相比況者。比約少分。義用相似故。譬金剛。諸有智者。以喻解故。法借喻明徴由顯著舉已見邊。證未見邊。和合一處。令義平等。所有政說名之為喻。即以顯了分。顯未顯了分也。般若梵音此云智慧。總有五種。文字即是能詮教法。觀照惠體實相。真性境界。即是空有二諦。三無性等。眷屬者相應四蘊性助伴五蘊性隨其所應。即定道共二種戒。故然此般若名寬通故。理該五種。就勝唯取實相觀照。如宗中辯釋。此智慧。初別後通。言別相者。具足梵音。應言波羅腎若。此翻為惠。梵云若那。此翻為智。體雖是同。俱別境惠。義用有異。故得名殊。擇法決斷二種異故。即準大品涅槃經等。若字通因智慧二義。此智慧二字界故般那兩字。是其因緣。以般助若為慧。以那助若為智。由是諸經十度之中。智慧二別。勝天王般若云。菩薩具足般若。具足阇那。又云。
【現代漢語翻譯】 現代漢語譯本 進入初地（菩薩修行階位的第一個階段）的菩薩已經離開了退轉的可能，因為他們已經親自證得了真理。他們不會再退轉，所以無需過多陳述。初地、最後成佛的階段、以及中間的修行過程，有的地方廣說，有的地方略說。又因為從凡夫的地位開始，繼承佛的種子，最終產生佛的果實，所以佛種不會斷絕。中間的修行過程可以推知，所以不必多說。因此，經文的意義，有的地方寬泛，有的地方狹窄。雖然如來地（佛的境界）的解釋包含了十地位（菩薩修行的十個階段），但是經文並沒有明確說明十地的修行狀態，而是直接指向佛果。所有佛果的功德，都稱為如來地。所以這樣解釋。下文將會明白。 問：勝天王般若經中說，『般若波羅蜜（達到智慧彼岸的方法）沒有一種法可以用來比喻。』為什麼現在說智慧可以比喻為金剛呢？ 答：那是因為般若經是爲了彰顯智慧的殊勝，它超越了一切事物，沒有完全相同的事物可以用來比喻。這裡只是比喻少部分，因為在意義和作用上有些相似，所以用金剛來比喻。有智慧的人，可以通過比喻來理解。法藉助比喻來變得明顯，通過已經看到的方面，來證明未看到的方面，將兩者結合在一起，使意義相等。所有正確的說法都稱為比喻，也就是用顯而易見的部分，來顯現不明顯的部分。般若（梵文）翻譯成漢語就是智慧。總共有五種：文字般若，指的是能詮釋教法的文字；觀照般若，指的是觀照真理的智慧；實相般若，指的是真性的境界，也就是空和有二諦；眷屬般若，指的是與智慧相應的四蘊；助伴般若，指的是五蘊，以及定道共戒。因此，般若這個名稱含義寬泛，包含了五種智慧。但從殊勝的角度來說，只取實相般若和觀照般若。就像宗派中的辨析一樣。這種智慧，開始時有區別，後來就融會貫通了。說到區別，完整的梵文應該是波羅腎若，翻譯成漢語是惠。梵文若那，翻譯成漢語是智。雖然本體相同，都是別境慧，但意義和作用不同，所以名稱不同。因為有選擇和決斷兩種不同的作用。就像大品涅槃經等經典所說，若字可以通用於因和智慧兩種含義。這裡的智慧二字是界限，般和那兩個字是它的因緣。用般來輔助若，就是惠；用那來輔助若，就是智。因此，在諸經的十度（菩薩修行的十個方面）中，智慧分為兩種。勝天王般若經中說，菩薩具足般若，具足阇那。又說：
【English Translation】 English version Entering the first Bhumi (the first stage of a Bodhisattva's path), one has already departed. Because of self-attestation. Because of non-retrogression. Because there is no need for much elaboration. The beginning, the end, and the middle are sometimes described extensively, sometimes briefly. Moreover, from the position of an ordinary being, one inherits the Buddha-seed, and thus the fruition of Buddhahood arises, ensuring the continuity of the Buddha-seed. The middle stages can be inferred, so there is no need for extensive explanation. Therefore, the meaning of the scriptures varies in breadth and narrowness. Although the 'Tathagata-bhumi' (Buddha-ground) as explained includes the ten Bhumis (ten stages of Bodhisattva practice), the scriptures do not explicitly describe the characteristics of the ten Bhumis, but rather directly point to the fruit of Buddhahood. All the merits of the Buddha-fruit are called the 'Tathagata-bhumi.' Hence this explanation. This will be understood below. Question: The 'Suratadeva-raja-prajna' (Perfection of Wisdom of King Surata) says, 'There is no dharma that can be used as a metaphor for Prajnaparamita (Perfection of Wisdom).' How is it that you now say that wisdom is like a diamond? Answer: That is because the Prajna Sutra aims to highlight the excellence of wisdom, which surpasses all things, and there is nothing completely identical to use as a metaphor. Here, only a small part is being compared, because there is some similarity in meaning and function, hence the metaphor of a diamond. Those with wisdom can understand through metaphors. Dharma becomes clear through metaphors, proving the unseen aspects through the seen aspects, combining the two in one place, making the meaning equal. All correct statements are called metaphors, that is, using the obvious to reveal the unobvious. Prajna (Sanskrit) translates to wisdom in Chinese. There are five types in total: textual Prajna, which refers to the texts that can interpret the teachings; contemplative Prajna, which refers to the wisdom of contemplating the truth; reality Prajna, which refers to the realm of true nature, that is, the two truths of emptiness and existence; retinue Prajna, which refers to the four aggregates corresponding to wisdom; companion Prajna, which refers to the five aggregates, as well as the two types of precepts of meditative path and common path. Therefore, the name Prajna has a broad meaning, encompassing five types of wisdom. But from the perspective of excellence, only reality Prajna and contemplative Prajna are taken. Just like the analysis in the schools. This wisdom, initially differentiated, later becomes integrated. Speaking of differentiation, the complete Sanskrit should be 'Parajnana,' which translates to 'Hui' in Chinese. The Sanskrit 'Jnana' translates to 'Zhi' in Chinese. Although the essence is the same, both are separate realm wisdom, but the meaning and function are different, so the names are different. Because there are two different functions of selection and decision. Just like the Mahaparinirvana Sutra and other scriptures say, the word 'Jna' can be used for both cause and wisdom. The two words 'wisdom' here are the boundary, and the two words 'Pra' and 'Jna' are its causes. Using 'Pra' to assist 'Jna' is 'Hui'; using 'Jna' to assist 'Jna' is 'Zhi.' Therefore, in the ten perfections (ten aspects of Bodhisattva practice) of the scriptures, wisdom is divided into two types. The Suratadeva-raja-prajna says, 'The Bodhisattva possesses Prajna, possesses Jnana.' It also says:
得阇那門。能入眾生諸根利鈍得般若門。分別句義。言通相者。由體同故。智處說慧。慧處說智。一切無違。即說第六名智度等。問。題名般若。何故行中乃明佈施。答。約前引后即檀度收后凈。於前即智度攝互舉一種理實相似又立名據勝修行約初故。檀智二所。舉各別言。波羅者。此云彼岸。法有四種理教行果。但取于果。菩提涅槃以為彼岸。教理通因果。行唯在因。故未起苦集以為河流。現起集苦以為此岸。六度為舟船。即以行人五蘊假者而為度。蜜多者。離義到義。由修施等。離出生死。達到彼岸。唯識第九。要七最勝之所。攝受方可建立波羅蜜多。一安住最勝。謂要安住菩薩種性。二依正最勝。謂要依止大菩提心。三意樂最勝。謂要悲愍一切有情。四事業最勝。謂要具行一切事業。五巧便最勝。謂要無相智所攝受。六回向最勝。謂要回向無上菩提。七清凈最勝。謂要不為二障間雜。若非此七所攝。受者所行施等。非到彼岸。由斯施等。對波羅蜜多。一一皆應。四句分別。辯中邊論第二。有十二最勝。是故皆得到彼岸。名對法論第十一。有五義。解深密經。由五因緣。此等相攝如別章。辯經者。梵音修多羅。修姤路皆訛也。正云素怛攬。乃目四義。衣綖席經。猶如瞿名。仙陀婆等。令取經義。亦取綖義。何者四
分律云。如種種花置於案上。風吹散落。以綖速持則不散失。眾生根性如案。佛說教義如花。若不連持。邪見異風惑當飄散。今結集家連。綴佛語如綖。貫花如經持緯。佛地論云。以聖教貫穿攝持。所應說義及所化生。如次可配綖經二義。然其經字即與此方經。誥名同此方俗釋。經者。常也法也經也。故今不易為常。揩定是非為法律。通物理為經。佛教同之。亦無有失。小乘論中。雜心五義。謂涌泉等義。如常說經雖在教。依瑜伽論。出經體中。通取所詮。故總言經通教及理。般若波羅蜜多亦通理教。由此對經綺互相望總有四句。謂金剛般若波羅蜜多即經等持業。依主隨應解釋。
解經文中先科判。后解釋。依無著菩薩判釋。此經有十義句十八住處。餘二論釋無別科判。真諦三藏。正宗分中分四。一護念付囑。二住。三修。四斷疑。兼序流通為六分。菩提流支金剛仙記。判為十二。一一廣多。既非論意。今並不取。然晉朝道安法師。時人稱為寶印手菩薩。科判諸經。以為三分。序分。正宗。流通。后譯佛地論。親先菩薩釋佛地經。三分正同是。知妙理潛通。惠心玄合彌天之稱。豈虛也哉。言三分者。一教起因緣分。二聖教所說分。三依教奉行分。名雖少差義理無別。即依此判經文有三。始從如是至敷坐而坐。為
序分。時長老須菩提在大眾中。至應作如是觀。為正宗分。餘名流通。序分又二。初通序。即如是等。后別敘。爾時世尊以下文是。經此二序有五對名。一通別對。諸經共有當部別緣故。二證信發起對。初傳法者引證令信。后說法者別緣發起。三經後序經前序對。經后教置經前自有故。四阿難序如來序對。從請得名為說方便故。五未來序現在序對。阿難后請當時緣起故。雖有多名。初二對名。義理周盡能。然各隨勝以立二名。不爾證起豈不遍也。將釋通序證信。先以三門分別。一起之因由。二建立所以。三開合不同。起之因由者。摩訶摩耶經。大悲經。智度論等。具述其事。然大悲經。優波離教阿難問。大術經等。阿泥樓豆教。二人共教互舉其一。請問四事者。一佛滅度后諸比丘等以誰為師。二依何住。三惡性比丘如何調伏。四一切經首當置何言。佛教之云。我滅度后。以波羅提木叉為汝大師。依四念處住。惡性比丘梵檀治之。梵默然故。不應打罵但擯默故。一切經首當置如是我聞等言。問。何故阿難但申四問。不增減耶。答。戒能止惡可以為師。念處破倒依之修學。梵法默然能伏惡人。初明正行。次明正解。次明除障。此之三門必依聖教。由斯所問不增不減。又破生死病。要具四事。一須名醫。二求妙藥。三識觸犯
【現代漢語翻譯】 現代漢語譯本 序分：當時，長老須菩提在大眾之中。（『序分』指經文的開端部分，用於引出正文。） 至於『應作如是觀』，這是正宗分。（『正宗分』是經文的核心部分，闡述主要教義。）其餘部分稱為流通分。（『流通分』是經文的結尾部分，用於勸誡聽眾信受奉行。） 序分又分為二：首先是通序，即『如是』等。（『通序』是所有佛經共有的序言。）其次是別序，即『爾時世尊』以下的內容。（『別序』是特定佛經所獨有的序言。） 經文的這兩個序分有五對名稱：一是通序與別序相對，因為諸經共有通序，而各部經有各自的別序。二是證信與發起相對，前者是傳法者引證以令人信服，後者是說法者因特定緣由而發起。三是經後序與經前序相對，經後序是教人安置的，而經前序是自然存在的。四是阿難序與如來序相對，因為經文因阿難的請問而得名，是爲了方便說法。五是未來序與現在序相對，阿難在後來請問，是當時因緣生起的。 雖然有很多名稱，但最初的兩對名稱，義理周全詳盡。然而，各自根據其側重點來確立這兩個名稱。否則，證信和發起豈不是普遍存在於所有序分中嗎？ 將要解釋通序的證信部分，首先用三個方面來分別說明：一是生起的原因，二是建立的緣由，三是開合的不同。 生起的原因是：《摩訶摩耶經》、《大悲經》、《智度論》等，都詳細敘述了這件事。然而，《大悲經》中，是優波離教阿難提問；《大術經》等，是阿泥樓豆教的。二人共同教導，互相舉出一個。 請問的四件事是：一、佛陀滅度后，諸位比丘等以誰為師？二、依靠什麼安住？三、惡性比丘如何調伏？四、一切經的首句應當放置什麼言語？ 佛陀教導說：我滅度后，以波羅提木叉（戒律）作為你們的大師。依靠四念處（觀身不凈、觀受是苦、觀心無常、觀法無我）安住。對於惡性比丘，用梵檀（沉默）來制裁他。因為梵是默然的，不應打罵，只是擯棄和沉默。一切經的首句應當放置『如是我聞』等言語。 問：為什麼阿難只提出這四個問題，不多也不少呢？ 答：戒律能夠止息惡行，可以作為老師。念處能夠破除顛倒，依靠它來修學。梵法（沉默）能夠制伏惡人。首先闡明正行，其次闡明正解，再次闡明去除障礙。這三個方面必須依靠聖教。由於這些原因，所問的問題不多也不少。 又，要破除生死大病，必須具備四件事：一是需要名醫，二是尋求妙藥，三是認識觸犯（禁忌）。
【English Translation】 English version Prologue: At that time, the Elder Subhuti was in the assembly. (The 'Prologue' refers to the beginning part of a sutra, used to introduce the main text.) As for 'one should observe thus,' this is the Main Doctrine section. (The 'Main Doctrine' section is the core part of a sutra, elaborating on the main teachings.) The remaining part is called the Circulation section. (The 'Circulation' section is the concluding part of a sutra, used to encourage listeners to believe and practice.) The Prologue is further divided into two: first, the General Prologue, which is 'Thus I have heard,' etc. (The 'General Prologue' is the prologue common to all sutras.) Second, the Specific Prologue, which is the text from 'At one time the Buddha' onwards. (The 'Specific Prologue' is the prologue unique to a particular sutra.) These two parts of the sutra have five pairs of names: one is the General versus Specific Prologue, because all sutras share a general prologue, while each sutra has its own specific prologue. Two is Faith-inspiring versus Initiating, the former being the transmitter of the Dharma providing evidence to inspire faith, the latter being the speaker initiating due to specific circumstances. Three is Sutra-ending versus Sutra-beginning Prologue, the sutra-ending prologue being placed by teaching, while the sutra-beginning prologue exists naturally. Four is Ananda's versus the Tathagata's Prologue, because the sutra is named after Ananda's request, for the sake of convenient teaching. Five is Future versus Present Prologue, Ananda asking later, arising from the circumstances at that time. Although there are many names, the first two pairs of names are comprehensive and exhaustive in meaning. However, each is established according to its emphasis. Otherwise, wouldn't faith-inspiring and initiating be universally present in all prologues? To explain the faith-inspiring part of the General Prologue, first use three aspects to distinguish: one is the cause of arising, two is the reason for establishing, and three is the difference in opening and closing. The cause of arising is: the Mahamaya Sutra, the Great Compassion Sutra, the Mahaprajnaparamita Sastra, etc., all describe this matter in detail. However, in the Great Compassion Sutra, Upali taught Ananda to ask; in the Great Art Sutra, etc., Aniruddha taught. The two taught together, each citing one. The four things asked were: 1. After the Buddha's passing, who should the monks and others take as their teacher? 2. What should they rely on to abide? 3. How should evil monks be subdued? 4. What words should be placed at the beginning of all sutras? The Buddha taught: After my passing, take the Pratimoksha (precepts) as your teacher. Rely on the Four Foundations of Mindfulness (contemplation of the impurity of the body, the suffering of feelings, the impermanence of the mind, and the non-self of phenomena) to abide. For evil monks, use Brahmadanada (silence) to discipline them. Because Brahma is silent, one should not beat or scold, but only banish and remain silent. The first sentence of all sutras should be 'Thus I have heard,' etc. Question: Why did Ananda only ask these four questions, no more and no less? Answer: The precepts can stop evil deeds and can be taken as a teacher. The foundations of mindfulness can break through delusions, and one can rely on them to study. Brahmadanada (silence) can subdue evil people. First, clarify right conduct; second, clarify right understanding; and third, clarify the removal of obstacles. These three aspects must rely on the holy teachings. For these reasons, the questions asked were neither more nor less. Also, to break through the great disease of birth and death, one must have four things: one is the need for a famous doctor, two is the search for wonderful medicine, and three is the recognition of violations (taboos).
。四善經方義。如次佛大醫王滅度之後。此四為要。是故問之。又此即是三寶不斷。以戒為師。即當佛寶。不斷惡性比丘。既調伏已。眾得和合。即僧寶。不斷餘二法寶。念住即通理行二法。結集教法。理等不斷果法自是故四義更無增減。后結集時。阿難依命置如是等。建立所以者。立如是等。自有四意。一為除疑。二為生信。三為簡邪。四為顯正。言除疑者。真諦引微細律。阿難升高座。眾有三疑。一疑佛大悲從涅槃起。二疑更有佛從他方來。三疑阿難轉身成佛為眾說法如是等。三疑並斷。二生信者。智度論云。說時方令人生信。故信為能入。智慧度故。問。信何功能最初令生。答。夫信體者。心凈為性。如水清珠。能清濁水能與一切善而為根本。故花嚴云。信為道元功德母。且如發心趣向三乘有善法欲信為欲依故初令生於大乘位。聖胎三十以信為首。五根五力及七聖財。皆信為初。入聖即證四不壞信。信三寶故能越惡道由信戒故離貧賤因。故論亦說有信現觀。又婆沙論說學佛法者如大龍象以信為首。以舍為牙。以念為頸。以惠為頭。于其兩肩擔集善法。像所飲啖以鼻為手。故學法者最初令生。又拔眾生出生死泥。須舉信首。后陳正宗。為佛教手。序令生信為眾生手。兩手相接出淤泥。故智度論云。如人有手至於寶
【現代漢語翻譯】 四善經方義：如次，佛大醫王（指佛陀）滅度之後，此四（指四善）為要。是故問之。又此即是三寶（指佛、法、僧）不斷。以戒為師，即當佛寶。不斷惡性比丘（指行為不端的僧侶），既調伏已，眾得和合，即僧寶。不斷餘二法寶（指佛法中的教義和真理），念住（指正念）即通理行二法。結集教法，理等不斷，果法自是，故四義更無增減。后結集時，阿難（佛陀的十大弟子之一，以記憶力超群著稱）依命置如是等。建立所以者，立如是等，自有四意：一為除疑，二為生信，三為簡邪，四為顯正。 言除疑者，真諦引微細律。阿難升高座，眾有三疑：一疑佛大悲從涅槃（指佛陀的圓寂）起，二疑更有佛從他方來，三疑阿難轉身成佛為眾說法如是等。三疑並斷。二生信者，智度論云：『說時方令人生信，故信為能入，智慧度故。』問：信何功能最初令生？答：夫信體者，心凈為性，如水清珠，能清濁水，能與一切善而為根本。故花嚴云：『信為道元功德母。』且如發心趣向三乘（指聲聞乘、緣覺乘、菩薩乘）有善法欲，信為欲依，故初令生於大乘位。聖胎三十以信為首，五根五力及七聖財，皆信為初。入聖即證四不壞信（指對佛、法、僧、戒的堅定信仰）。信三寶故能越惡道由信戒故離貧賤因。故論亦說有信現觀。又婆沙論說學佛法者如大龍象以信為首。以舍為牙，以念為頸，以惠為頭。于其兩肩擔集善法。像所飲啖以鼻為手。故學法者最初令生。又拔眾生出生死泥，須舉信首。后陳正宗，為佛教手。序令生信為眾生手。兩手相接出淤泥。故智度論云：『如人有手至於寶』
【English Translation】 The meaning of the Four Goodness Sutra: Accordingly, after the Great Physician King Buddha (referring to the Buddha) passed away, these four (referring to the four goodnesses) are essential. Therefore, they are questioned. Furthermore, this signifies the continuous existence of the Three Jewels (referring to the Buddha, Dharma, and Sangha). Taking the precepts as the teacher is equivalent to the Buddha Jewel. Continuously restraining the evil-natured Bhikkhus (referring to monks with improper conduct), once they are subdued, the community achieves harmony, which is the Sangha Jewel. Continuously upholding the remaining two Dharma Jewels (referring to the teachings and truths within Buddhism), mindfulness (referring to right mindfulness) encompasses both the principles and practices of the Dharma. The compilation of the teachings ensures the continuous existence of the principles, and the resultant Dharma naturally follows. Therefore, there is no increase or decrease in the meaning of the four goodnesses. During the subsequent compilation, Ānanda (one of the ten great disciples of the Buddha, known for his exceptional memory) followed the instructions and established these principles. The reason for establishing these principles is that there are four intentions: first, to dispel doubts; second, to generate faith; third, to distinguish between right and wrong; and fourth, to reveal the truth. Regarding dispelling doubts, the True Meaning quotes the subtle precepts. When Ānanda ascended the high seat, the assembly had three doubts: first, they doubted that the Buddha's great compassion would arise from Nirvana (referring to the Buddha's passing); second, they doubted that another Buddha would come from another realm; and third, they doubted that Ānanda would transform into a Buddha and preach to the assembly. All three doubts were dispelled. Regarding generating faith, the Mahaprajnaparamita Sastra states: 'Speaking at the right time generates faith, therefore faith is the means to enter, and wisdom is the means to cross over.' Question: What function of faith initially causes it to arise? Answer: The essence of faith is a pure mind, like a clear water pearl that can purify muddy water and serve as the foundation for all goodness. Therefore, the Avatamsaka Sutra states: 'Faith is the source of the path and the mother of merit.' For example, when one aspires to the Three Vehicles (referring to the Sravaka Vehicle, Pratyekabuddha Vehicle, and Bodhisattva Vehicle) and desires good Dharma, faith is the basis for that desire. Therefore, it initially arises in the position of the Mahayana. The thirty holy fetuses begin with faith, and the five roots, five powers, and seven holy treasures all begin with faith. Entering the holy stream means attaining the four indestructible faiths (referring to unwavering faith in the Buddha, Dharma, Sangha, and precepts). Faith in the Three Jewels enables one to transcend evil paths, and faith in the precepts enables one to avoid poverty. Therefore, the treatise also speaks of faith as direct perception. Furthermore, the Mahavibhasa Sastra states that those who study the Buddha's teachings are like great dragons and elephants, with faith as the head, generosity as the tusks, mindfulness as the neck, and wisdom as the head. They carry the collection of good Dharma on their shoulders. The elephant drinks and eats with its trunk as its hand. Therefore, faith is initially generated in those who study the Dharma. Furthermore, to pull sentient beings out of the mud of birth and death, one must raise the head of faith. Then, present the orthodox teachings as the hand of Buddhism. The introduction that generates faith is the hand for sentient beings. The two hands connect to pull out of the mud. Therefore, the Mahaprajnaparamita Sastra states: 'Like a person with hands reaching for treasure.'
山。隨意所取。若其無手空無所得。有信心人入佛法寶。能證道果。若無信心雖解文義。空無所得。是故經初令生凈信。三簡邪者。外道教初皆置阿漚二字云梵王有七十二字。以訓於世。眾生轉薄。梵王嗔怒吞啖諸字。唯此二字在口兩角。阿表于無。漚表于有置。彼教初令置六句。為簡于彼。故智論云。一切經首當置何言簡異外道。四顯正者。三寶最吉祥故。我經初說化為佛寶。我聞比丘為僧寶。如是一時及處為法寶。法寶三者。一所說法。二說時。三說處故。第三開合者真諦記中開為七事。一如是者標所聞法。二我者辯能聞人。三聞者親承音。四一時者。顯所聞法。善合時宜。五佛者。明能說主。六住處者。顯說有處。七大比丘等顯非獨聞。智度論中。合我聞為一。總說六義。一信。二聞。三時。四主。五處。六眾。世親菩薩般若燈論。亦有六義。故彼頌云。前三明弟子。后三證師說。一切修多羅。其事皆如是。有引法花論云。證信序中分六成就者謬也。或總分五。如佛地論。一總顯又聞。二說經時分。三明說經主。四說經處。五同聞眾。即合如是我聞為一。今又助釋可分為五。謂能說為一。然佛說法離四種失。一無非法即如是。二無非根即我聞比丘。三無非時即一時。四無非處在舍衛等。或總為四。真諦三藏所釋
【現代漢語翻譯】 山。隨意取用。如果他們沒有手，就什麼也得不到。有信心的人進入佛法寶藏，能夠證得道果。如果沒有信心，即使理解文字的意義，也是一無所得。因此，經典一開始就讓人產生純凈的信心。三種簡別邪說的方法是：外道的教義一開始都放置『阿』(A，表示無)和『漚』(O，表示有)兩個字，說梵天（Brahmā，印度教的創造之神）有七十二個字，用來教導世人。眾生越來越淺薄，梵天嗔怒，吞噬了所有的字，只剩下這兩個字在他的嘴角兩邊。『阿』表示『無』，『漚』表示『有』。在外道教義的開始放置這兩個字，爲了簡別他們。所以《大智度論》說，一切經典的開頭應當放置什麼言語來簡別外道？四種彰顯正法的方法是：三寶（Buddha, Dharma, Sangha）最吉祥。所以我的經典一開始就說變化為佛寶。『我聞』（Thus have I heard）比丘（bhikkhu，佛教僧侶）為僧寶。像這樣的一時和處所為法寶。法寶有三種：一是所說的法，二是說法的時機，三是說法的處所。第三種是開合，真諦（Paramārtha，南印度佛教僧侶和翻譯家）的記錄中開為七件事：一是『如是』（Thus），標明所聽聞的法；二是『我』（I），辨別能聽聞的人；三是『聞』（heard），親自承受聲音；四是『一時』（at one time），顯示所聽聞的法善於合乎時宜；五是『佛』（Buddha），表明能說的主；六是『住處』（dwelling place），顯示說法有處所；七是『大比丘等』（with great bhikshus, etc.），顯示不是獨自聽聞。《大智度論》中，將『我聞』合為一，總說六義：一信，二聞，三時，四主，五處，六眾。世親（Vasubandhu，公元4世紀或5世紀的佛教哲學家）菩薩（Bodhisattva）的《般若燈論》也有六義。所以他的頌文說：前三句說明弟子，后三句證明老師所說。一切修多羅（sutra，佛經），其事都像這樣。有人引用《法華論》說，證信序中分為六成就，這是錯誤的。或者總分為五，如《佛地論》：一總顯又聞，二說經時分，三明說經主，四說經處，五同聞眾。即將『如是我聞』合為一。現在又幫助解釋，可以分為五：能說為一。然而佛說法離開四種過失：一沒有非法，即『如是』；二沒有非根，即『我聞比丘』；三沒有非時，即『一時』；四沒有非處，即在舍衛（Śrāvastī，古代印度城市）等處。或者總分為四，真諦三藏（Paramārtha，南印度佛教僧侶和翻譯家）所解釋的。
【English Translation】 Mountains. Take them at will. If they have no hands, they will gain nothing. People with faith enter the treasure of the Buddha's Dharma and can attain the fruit of the Path. If they have no faith, even if they understand the meaning of the words, they will gain nothing. Therefore, at the beginning of the sutra, people are made to generate pure faith. The three ways to distinguish heresy are: the teachings of external paths all place the two words 'A' (representing emptiness) and 'O' (representing existence) at the beginning, saying that Brahmā (the Hindu god of creation) has seventy-two letters to teach the world. As sentient beings become more shallow, Brahmā becomes angry and devours all the letters, leaving only these two letters on the corners of his mouth. 'A' represents 'emptiness,' and 'O' represents 'existence.' Placing these two words at the beginning of external teachings is to distinguish them. Therefore, the Mahāprajñāpāramitāupadeśa says, 'What words should be placed at the beginning of all sutras to distinguish them from external paths?' The four ways to manifest the correct Dharma are: the Three Jewels (Buddha, Dharma, Sangha) are the most auspicious. Therefore, my sutra begins by saying that it transforms into the Buddha Jewel. 'Thus have I heard' (Evaṃ mayā śrutam) with the bhikkhus (Buddhist monks) is the Sangha Jewel. Thus, the time and place are the Dharma Jewel. There are three aspects of the Dharma Jewel: first, the Dharma that is spoken; second, the time of speaking the Dharma; and third, the place of speaking the Dharma. The third is opening and closing. Paramārtha's (South Indian Buddhist monk and translator) record opens into seven matters: first, 'Thus' (Evaṃ) indicates the Dharma that is heard; second, 'I' (mayā) distinguishes the person who can hear; third, 'heard' (śrutam) personally receives the sound; fourth, 'at one time' (ekasmin samaye) shows that the Dharma that is heard is well-suited to the time; fifth, 'Buddha' (Buddha) clarifies the master who can speak; sixth, 'dwelling place' (viharati) shows that there is a place for speaking; seventh, 'with great bhikshus, etc.' (mahata bhikṣu-saṃghena) shows that it is not heard alone. In the Mahāprajñāpāramitāupadeśa, 'Thus have I heard' is combined into one, summarizing six meanings: first, faith; second, hearing; third, time; fourth, master; fifth, place; sixth, assembly. Vasubandhu's (Buddhist philosopher of the 4th or 5th century CE) Pañcaskandhaprakaraṇa also has six meanings. Therefore, his verse says: The first three lines explain the disciples, and the last three lines prove what the teacher said. All sutras are like this. Some cite the Treatise on the Lotus Sutra, saying that the preface of verification of faith is divided into six accomplishments, which is incorrect. Or it is divided into five in total, as in the Buddhabhūmi Sūtra: first, generally showing hearing; second, dividing the time of speaking the sutra; third, clarifying the master who speaks the sutra; fourth, the place where the sutra is spoken; fifth, the assembly that hears together. That is, 'Thus have I heard' is combined into one. Now, with further explanation, it can be divided into five: the ability to speak is one. However, the Buddha's speaking of the Dharma is free from four faults: first, there is no non-Dharma, which is 'Thus'; second, there is no non-root, which is 'I heard with the bhikkhus'; third, there is no non-time, which is 'at one time'; fourth, there is no non-place, which is in Śrāvastī (ancient Indian city) and other places. Or it is divided into four in total, as explained by the Tripiṭaka Master Paramārtha (South Indian Buddhist monk and translator).
七事總唯有四。初如是者。明所聞法。次我聞者。辨能聞人。次二證所聞法。后二證能聞人。今又解云。能說能受所學依故分為四。佛為能說主。我聞比丘為受教人。如是為所學法。一時及處為說所。能依受弟子有眾別。故說法所依有時處。故或合為三。即前三寶。又依佛地義可分三。一總顯已聞及說教時。二別顯教主及說教處。三教所被根。或合為二。一人法人稟法以成得。法藉人以弘宣。兩相資成互為因果。一佛。二我聞。三比丘眾。此三屬人。一如是。二時。三處。此三屬法。人有師資。資中傳證。法有假實。假中時處。故總為二。成合為一。即證信通序。
經。如是 演曰。自古多釋。今敘三門。一別解如是。二合解如是。三帶我聞解。初即如是兩字。各別訓釋。次即總申二字之意。后將如是二字連我聞解非釋我聞。初別解者。唐梵道俗總有九釋。一安法師云。有無不二為如如。非有無為是如無所如是無所是故云如是。二友公云。教能顯理為如。智慧照理為是。三智者禪師云。以文為如。以理為是。文以巧詮為如。理以無非為是。四注法花云。如是者感應之端。如以順根受名是以無非立稱。眾生以無非為感。如來以順根為應。傳法者欲顯名教。出於感應。故建言如是。五注無量義經云。至人說法但為顯
【現代漢語翻譯】 現代漢語譯本：七事總括起來只有四種。第一，『如是』，是闡明所聽聞的佛法。第二，『我聞』，是辨別能夠聽聞佛法的人。第三和第四，是證明所聽聞的佛法。最後兩種是證明能夠聽聞佛法的人。現在又解釋說，能說、能受和所學依據這三方面，可以分為四種。佛是能說的主體，『我聞』的比丘是接受教導的人，『如是』是所學的佛法，『一時』和『處』是說法的地方。能夠接受教導的弟子有不同的群體，所以說法所依據的有時處。因此，或者可以合為三種，即前面的佛寶、法寶、僧寶。又依據佛地的意義，可以分為三種。第一，總的顯示已經聽聞和宣說的教法的時間。第二，分別顯示教主和宣說教法的地方。第三，教法所覆蓋的根基。或者可以合為兩種，即人和法，人稟受法而成道，法憑藉人來弘揚宣說，兩者互相資助，互為因果。一是佛，二是『我聞』，三是比丘眾，這三種屬於人。一是『如是』，二是『時』，三是『處』，這三種屬於法。人有師資，師資中傳遞證明，法有假有實，假法中有時間和處所。所以總括為兩種，最終合為一種，即證信序。
經：如是
演曰：自古以來有很多解釋，現在敘述三種。一是分別解釋『如是』，二是合併解釋『如是』，三是帶著『我聞』來解釋。第一種是把『如是』兩個字，各自單獨訓釋。第二種是總的闡述這兩個字的意思。第三種是將『如是』兩個字連著『我聞』來解釋，但不是解釋『我聞』。第一種分別解釋，唐朝的梵僧和道俗共有九種解釋。一，安法師說，有和無不二就是『如』，不是有也不是無就是『是』，因為無所『如』，所以無所『是』，因此叫做『如是』。二，友公說，教義能夠顯明真理就是『如』，智慧能夠照亮真理就是『是』。三，智者禪師說，用文字表達就是『如』，用道理表達就是『是』，文字用巧妙的詮釋就是『如』，道理用沒有錯誤就是『是』。四，註解《法華經》說，『如是』是感應的開端，用順應根基來接受名稱，用沒有錯誤來建立稱謂。眾生用沒有錯誤來感應，如來用順應根基來回應。傳法的人想要彰顯名教，出於感應，所以建立言語『如是』。五，註解《無量義經》說，至人說法只是爲了顯
【English Translation】 English version: The seven matters are summarized into only four. First, 'Thus (如是, Rúshì)', clarifies the Dharma that has been heard. Second, 'I have heard (我聞, Wǒ wén)', distinguishes the person who is able to hear the Dharma. The third and fourth prove the Dharma that has been heard. The last two prove the person who is able to hear the Dharma. Now, it is also explained that based on the ability to speak, the ability to receive, and what is learned, it can be divided into four. The Buddha is the main speaker, the Bhikshu (比丘, Bǐqiū) who 'I have heard' is the person who receives the teachings, 'Thus' is the Dharma that is learned, and 'at one time (一時, Yīshí)' and 'place (處, Chù)' are the locations where the Dharma is spoken. The disciples who are able to receive the teachings have different groups, so the Dharma is based on time and place. Therefore, it can be combined into three, which are the previous Buddha Jewel, Dharma Jewel, and Sangha Jewel. Also, according to the meaning of the Buddha-land, it can be divided into three. First, it generally shows the time when the teachings have been heard and spoken. Second, it separately shows the teaching master and the place where the teachings are spoken. Third, the roots covered by the teachings. Or it can be combined into two, namely people and Dharma, people receive the Dharma to achieve the Way, and the Dharma relies on people to promote and proclaim it, both supporting each other and being the cause and effect of each other. One is the Buddha, two is 'I have heard', three is the Bhikshu Sangha, these three belong to people. One is 'Thus', two is 'time', three is 'place', these three belong to the Dharma. People have teachers and resources, and transmission and proof are in the resources. The Dharma has the false and the real, and there are time and place in the false Dharma. Therefore, it is summarized into two, and finally combined into one, which is the Credence Preface.
Sutra: Thus
Commentary: Since ancient times, there have been many interpretations, now I will describe three. One is to separately interpret 'Thus', two is to combine and interpret 'Thus', and three is to interpret it with 'I have heard'. The first is to individually explain the two words 'Thus'. The second is to generally explain the meaning of the two words. The third is to explain the two words 'Thus' together with 'I have heard', but it is not to explain 'I have heard'. The first separate explanation, there are nine interpretations shared by the Tang Dynasty's Brahmin monks and Taoist laity. One, Dharma Master An said, the non-duality of existence and non-existence is 'Thus (如, Rú)', not existence and not non-existence is 'Is (是, Shì)', because there is nothing to be 'Thus', so there is nothing to be 'Is', therefore it is called 'Thus'. Two, Yougong said, the teaching can reveal the truth is 'Thus', the wisdom can illuminate the truth is 'Is'. Three, Chan Master Zhiyi said, using words to express is 'Thus', using reason to express is 'Is', words using skillful interpretation is 'Thus', reason using no error is 'Is'. Four, the commentary on the 'Lotus Sutra' says, 'Thus' is the beginning of interaction, using adapting to the roots to receive the name, using no error to establish the title. Sentient beings use no error to interact, the Tathagata (如來, Rúlái) uses adapting to the roots to respond. The person who transmits the Dharma wants to show the famous teachings, coming from interaction, so they establish the words 'Thus'. Five, the commentary on the 'Infinite Meaning Sutra' says, the perfect person speaks the Dharma only to reveal
如唯如為是故言如是。六澤州法師云。所說之法如於前事。故云如說事如事說理如理因果亦爾。此所說言。皆當道理。故稱如是乖法為非。如法為是。此約法解。又約人解。阿難道佛所說之法。如過去佛所說不異故名為如。正而非邪故稱為是。七梁武帝云。如即指法。是即定詞。如斯之言。是佛所說故言如是。八長耳三藏云。如是有三。一就佛。三世諸佛共說不異名如。是以同說故稱是。二就法。諸法實相古今不異故名為如如。如而說故稱為是。三就僧。以阿難聞望佛本教所傳不異為如。永離過非為是。由此同說稱理無謬故。經可信。九相傳釋。真不違俗為如。俗不違真為是。順理為如。遮妄為是。攝福為如。生惠為是。教順於理為如。依教起行為是。境如智是等。曆法廣說義乃無窮。次合解如是。復有六釋。一肇法師。如是者信順之詞。信則所言之理順。順則師資資道成詞無繁。約非信不傳。是故經初建言如是。二真諦記云。如是者決定義。決定有二。一文二理。三理興皇法師云。如是者無差異義。四法智注涅槃云。如是者阿難自明之詞也。金口所說旨深意遠。非所仰側而章句始未正自如是也。五瑤公云。以離五謗名為如是。第一句如是此經離執有增益謗。第二句如是此經離執無損減謗。第三句如是此經離執亦有亦
【現代漢語翻譯】 如唯如，因此才說『如是』。（六澤州法師）所說的法與之前的事實相符，所以說『如』，說事與事實相符，說理與道理相符，因果也是如此。這裡所說的言語，都符合道理，所以稱為『如是』，違背法則為『非』，符合法則為『是』。這是從法的角度解釋。又從人的角度解釋，阿難認為佛所說的法，與過去佛所說的沒有差異，所以稱為『如』，正而不邪，所以稱為『是』。（梁武帝）『如』是指法，『是』是確定的詞語，像這樣的話，是佛所說的，所以說『如是』。（長耳三藏）『如是』有三種含義：一是就佛而言，三世諸佛共同宣說沒有差異，稱為『如』，因為共同宣說，所以稱為『是』。二是就法而言，諸法的實相古今沒有差異，所以稱為『如』，如實而說，所以稱為『是』。三是就僧而言，阿難聽聞佛的本教所傳沒有差異為『如』，永遠遠離過失為『是』。由此共同宣說，符合道理沒有謬誤，所以經典可以相信。（相傳的解釋）真諦不違背世俗為『如』，世俗不違背真諦為『是』。順應道理為『如』，遮止虛妄為『是』。攝取福德為『如』，產生智慧為『是』。教義順應道理為『如』，依教奉行起行為『是』。境界如實，智慧正確等等。歷數法則廣泛解說，意義無窮。接下來綜合解釋『如是』，又有六種解釋：（肇法師）『如是』是信順的詞語，相信則所說的道理順暢，順暢則師徒之間傳授道義，言辭沒有繁瑣。如果不是因為相信，就無法傳授。因此經典開頭就建立『如是』。（真諦記）『如是』是決定的意思，決定有文和理兩種。（三理興皇法師）『如是』是沒有差異的意思。（法智注涅槃）『如是』是阿難自我表明的詞語，金口所說的旨意深遠，不是所能仰望揣測的，而文章句子的開始和結尾本來就是這樣。（瑤公）因為遠離五種誹謗，所以稱為『如是』。第一句『如是』，這部經遠離執著有增益的誹謗。第二句『如是』，這部經遠離執著沒有損減的誹謗。第三句『如是』，這部經遠離執著既有增益也有
【English Translation】 『Ru wei ru, shi gu yan ru shi.』 (Six Ze Zhou Dharma Master) The Dharma spoken is consistent with the previous facts, therefore it is said 『ru』 (suchness); speaking of matters consistent with the facts, speaking of principles consistent with the principles, and causality is also like this. The words spoken here all accord with reason, therefore it is called 『ru shi』 (thus it is); deviating from the Dharma is 『fei』 (not), and conforming to the Dharma is 『shi』 (is). This is explained from the perspective of the Dharma. Also explained from the perspective of people, Ananda (a disciple of the Buddha) believes that the Dharma spoken by the Buddha is no different from that spoken by the Buddhas of the past, therefore it is called 『ru』; correct and not evil, therefore it is called 『shi』. (Emperor Wu of Liang) 『Ru』 refers to the Dharma, 『shi』 is a definite term; words like these are spoken by the Buddha, therefore it is said 『ru shi』. (Long-eared Tripitaka Master) 『Ru shi』 has three meanings: first, with regard to the Buddha, the Buddhas of the three times speak together without difference, called 『ru』; because they speak together, it is called 『shi』. Second, with regard to the Dharma, the true nature of all dharmas is no different from ancient times to the present, therefore it is called 『ru』; speaking truthfully, therefore it is called 『shi』. Third, with regard to the Sangha (Buddhist monastic order), Ananda hearing the original teachings of the Buddha transmitted without difference is 『ru』, and being forever free from faults is 『shi』. Therefore, speaking together, in accordance with reason without error, the scriptures can be believed. (Transmitted explanation) Truth not violating the mundane is 『ru』, the mundane not violating the truth is 『shi』. Conforming to reason is 『ru』, preventing falsehood is 『shi』. Gathering blessings is 『ru』, generating wisdom is 『shi』. Teachings conforming to reason is 『ru』, practicing according to the teachings is 『shi』. The realm is as it is, wisdom is correct, and so on. Enumerating the laws and explaining them widely, the meaning is endless. Next, comprehensively explaining 『ru shi』, there are six explanations: (Dharma Master Zhao) 『Ru shi』 is a term of faith and obedience; believing, the spoken reason is smooth; smooth, the transmission of the Dharma between teacher and disciple, the words are not cumbersome. If it were not for belief, it could not be transmitted. Therefore, at the beginning of the scriptures, 『ru shi』 is established. (True Meaning Record) 『Ru shi』 is the meaning of determination, determination has two kinds: text and principle. (Three Principles Xinghuang Dharma Master) 『Ru shi』 is the meaning of no difference. (Fazhi's Commentary on Nirvana) 『Ru shi』 is a term of self-explanation by Ananda; the meaning spoken by the golden mouth is profound and far-reaching, not something that can be looked up to and speculated, and the beginning and end of the articles and sentences are originally like this. (Yao Gong) Because of being away from the five slanders, it is called 『ru shi』. The first sentence 『ru shi』, this sutra is away from the slander of attachment to increase. The second sentence 『ru shi』, this sutra is away from the slander of attachment to no decrease. The third sentence 『ru shi』, this sutra is away from the slander of attachment to both increase and
無相違謗。第四句如是此經離執非有非無愚癡謗。第五句如是此經離執非非有非非無戲論謗。六智度論第一云。如是義者即是信也。不信者言是事不如是。后帶我聞。以帶釋如是復有五釋。一光宅法師云。如是者將傳聞前顯舉一部。如是一部我親從佛聞。即為我聞作呼輒耳。二惠朗云。如是者直指之詞。謂如是之經。我從佛聞非自造也。三功德施論云。如是我聞者。顯示此經。是世尊現覺而說非自所作。四佛地論云。如是總言。依四義轉。一依譬喻。謂當所說如是文句。我昔聞。二依教誨。謂告時眾如是當聽我昔所聞。三依問答。謂有問言汝當所謂說昔定聞耶。故此答言如是我聞四依許可。結集時。諸菩薩眾咸共請言。如汝所聞當如是說傳法菩薩便許彼言如是。當說如我所聞。又如是言可審定。謂如是法我昔曾聞。此事如是齊此。當說定無有異。五菩提流支依金剛仙論。一發心如是。二教化如是。三譬喻如是四決定如是。發心如是者。自念我當如是發菩提心修諸善行。教化如是者。教示人言。汝當如是發菩提心修諸善行。譬喻如是者。是人如是威德熾盛如日光明。智惠深廣猶如大海。決定如是者。我如是見我如是聞等。今言如是但取第四決定如是。演曰。此之四種如次即當佛地所說許可教誨。譬喻。問答。思準可知。
【現代漢語翻譯】 現代漢語譯本：沒有互相違背的誹謗。第四句說，這部經離開了執著，既不是『有』也不是『無』的愚癡誹謗。第五句說，這部經離開了執著，既不是『非有非非有』也不是『非無非非無』的戲論誹謗。《六智度論》第一卷說：『像這樣的意義，就是信。』不相信的人會說這件事不是這樣的。後面帶著『我聞』。用『帶』來解釋『如是』，又有五種解釋。第一種是光宅法師的說法：『如是』是將傳聞的內容在前面提出來，顯示整部經。『如是』這一部經，我是親自從佛那裡聽來的，就為『我聞』作了呼應。第二種是惠朗的說法：『如是』是直接指代的詞，指的是『像這樣的經』，我是從佛那裡聽來的，不是自己編造的。第三種是功德施論的說法：『如是我聞』，顯示這部經是世尊現覺而說的，不是自己創作的。第四種是《佛地論》的說法：『如是』總括而言，依據四種意義而轉變。一是依據譬喻，意思是說，將要說的就像這樣的文句，我過去聽過。二是依據教誨，意思是說，告訴當時的大眾，像這樣應當聽我過去所聽到的。三是依據問答，意思是說，有人問，你應當說你過去確定聽到的嗎？所以這裡回答說『如是我聞』。四是依據許可，結集的時候，各位菩薩都共同請求說：『像你所聽到的，應當像這樣說。』傳法的菩薩便答應他們說：『如是，應當像我說我所聽到的那樣說。』而且『如是』這個詞可以審定，意思是說，像這樣的法，我過去曾經聽過，這件事就是這樣，到此為止，應當說得確定沒有差異。第五種是菩提流支依據《金剛仙論》的說法：一是發心如是，二是教化如是，三是譬喻如是，四是決定如是。發心如是，是自己想，我應當像這樣發起菩提心，修習各種善行。教化如是，是教導別人說，你應當像這樣發起菩提心，修習各種善行。譬喻如是，是說這個人像這樣威德熾盛，像太陽的光明一樣，智慧深廣，猶如大海。決定如是，是說我像這樣看見，我像這樣聽見等等。現在說的『如是』，只是取第四種『決定如是』。演曰：這四種『如是』，依次就是《佛地論》所說的許可、教誨、譬喻、問答，思考推斷就可以知道。
【English Translation】 English version: There is no mutually contradictory slander. The fourth sentence says that this sutra is free from attachment, and is neither the foolish slander of 'being' nor 'non-being'. The fifth sentence says that this sutra is free from attachment, and is neither the frivolous slander of 'neither being nor non-being' nor 'neither non-being nor non-non-being'. The first volume of the Mahaprajnaparamita Sastra says: 'Such meaning is faith.' Those who do not believe will say that this matter is not so. It is followed by 'I have heard'. Using 'followed by' to explain 'Thus', there are five explanations. The first is the saying of Dharma Master Guangzhai: 'Thus' is to bring up the content of the transmission in front, showing the entire sutra. 'Thus' this sutra, I personally heard from the Buddha, which echoes 'I have heard'. The second is the saying of Hui Lang: 'Thus' is a directly referring word, referring to 'such a sutra', I heard it from the Buddha, not fabricated by myself. The third is the saying of the Gunadevas' Commentary: 'Thus I have heard' shows that this sutra was spoken by the Bhagavan through direct realization, not created by himself. The fourth is the saying of the Buddhabhumi Sutra: 'Thus' is a general term, which changes according to four meanings. First, according to metaphor, it means that what is about to be said is like this sentence, I have heard it in the past. Second, according to teaching, it means telling the audience at that time that they should listen to what I have heard in the past like this. Third, according to question and answer, it means that someone asked, should you say what you have definitely heard in the past? So here it is answered 'Thus I have heard'. Fourth, according to permission, at the time of compilation, all the Bodhisattvas jointly requested: 'As you have heard, you should say it like this.' The Bodhisattva who transmits the Dharma then agreed to them and said: 'Thus, I should say as I have heard.' Moreover, the word 'Thus' can be examined and determined, meaning that I have heard such Dharma in the past, this matter is like this, and it should be said that there is definitely no difference. The fifth is the saying of Bodhiruci according to the Vajrasena Sutra: First, aspiration is thus, second, teaching is thus, third, metaphor is thus, and fourth, decision is thus. Aspiration is thus, is to think to oneself, I should thus arouse the Bodhi mind and cultivate various good deeds. Teaching is thus, is to teach others to say, you should thus arouse the Bodhi mind and cultivate various good deeds. Metaphor is thus, is to say that this person is thus mighty and prosperous, like the light of the sun, and his wisdom is deep and broad, like the sea. Decision is thus, is to say that I see it thus, I hear it thus, and so on. Now the 'Thus' mentioned here only takes the fourth type, 'Decision is thus'. Yan said: These four types of 'Thus' are in order the permission, teaching, metaphor, and question and answer mentioned in the Buddhabhumi Sutra, which can be understood by thinking and inferring.
總別凡有二十家釋。
經。我聞 演曰。第二能聞傳法菩薩自指己身言如是。法親從佛聞故名我聞。非為我者。定屬一人。所言聞者。且小乘宗薩婆多師耳聞非識。經部翻此譬喻師說。心心所法和合能聞。依大乘宗。根識心所和合為聞。雜集第二。問。為眼見色為識等耶。答。非眼見色亦非識等。以一切法無作用故。由和合假立為見。耳等亦爾。然諸聖教就勝所依。或說根聞以能分別。或說識聞具前二義。說根識聞皆不相違。又依世俗耳等能聞依勝義理耳非能聞亦非識等。瑜伽五十六說。法自性眾緣生故剎那滅故無作用故。智度亦云。非耳及識意等能聞。從多緣故得聲聞。乃至云佛法中無有一法能作能見能知等。又耳根識唯聞于聲而不聞教。若約名句唯意識聞故。瑜伽言聞謂比量。然由耳識親聞于聲。與意為問意方得聞耳。意為緣熏習在識因聞所成。總說名聞廢別耳等總名我聞故。佛地論云。我謂諸蘊世俗假者。聞謂耳根發識聽受。廢別就總故說我聞一。問何須廢別而就於總。答若不言我不顯自他耳。通一切是誰耳聞。又復聞時非唯耳等待緣極多。若一一陳遂成煩廣。若唯說一義用不周。顯和合聞總標假者然我有三。一妄所執我。謂外道等所橫計我二假施設我。謂大涅槃樂凈常我。除二乘倒強施設故。三世流佈
【現代漢語翻譯】 現代漢語譯本： 總共有二十家對『我聞』（Évam mayā śrutam）進行了解釋。
經文：我聞（Évam mayā śrutam）。
演述：第二，能夠聽聞並傳法的菩薩親自指著自己說『如是』。因為是親自從佛陀那裡聽聞佛法，所以稱為『我聞』。並非『我』就一定屬於某一個人。所說的『聞』，且以小乘宗派薩婆多部（Sarvāstivāda）的觀點來看，是耳朵聽聞而非意識。經量部（Sautrāntika）對此進行了解釋，譬喻師說，心和心所法（citta-caitta dharmas）和合才能聽聞。依照大乘宗派的觀點，根、識、心所和合才能聽聞。《雜集論》（Abhidharmasamuccaya）第二卷中提到：問：是眼睛看到顏色，還是識等看到顏色？答：不是眼睛看到顏色，也不是識等看到顏色。因為一切法（sarva dharma）沒有作用的緣故。由於和合而假立為『見』。耳朵等也是如此。然而，諸聖教是就殊勝的所依而說，或者說根能聽聞，因為根能分別；或者說識能聽聞，因為它具備前兩種含義。說根識聽聞，都是不相違背的。又，依照世俗的說法，耳朵等能夠聽聞；依照勝義的道理，耳朵不能聽聞，識等也不能聽聞。《瑜伽師地論》（Yogācārabhūmi-śāstra）第五十六卷說：法自性是眾緣所生，所以剎那生滅，沒有作用。 《智度論》（Mahāprajñāpāramitāśāstra）也說：不是耳朵以及識、意等能夠聽聞，而是從眾多因緣聚合才能聽到聲音。乃至說佛法中沒有一種法能夠作為、能夠見、能夠知等。又，耳根識只能聽聞聲音，而不能聽聞教法。如果就名句而言，只有意識才能聽聞，所以《瑜伽師地論》說『聞』是指比量（anumāna）。然而，由於耳識親自聽聞聲音，與意識為因緣，意識才能聽聞。意識作為因緣熏習在識中，因聽聞而成就。總的來說，稱為『聞』，廢除了個別的耳朵等，總稱為『我聞』。所以，《佛地論》（Buddhabhūmi-śāstra）說：『我』是指諸蘊（skandha）的世俗假立者，『聞』是指耳根發起識來聽受。廢除了個別，而就總的來說，所以說『我聞』。一問：為什麼需要廢除個別而就總的來說？答：如果不說『我』，就不能顯現自己和他人，耳朵通於一切，是誰的耳朵聽聞？又，聽聞的時候，並非只有耳朵，還需要等待極多的因緣。如果一一陳述，就會變得繁瑣冗長。如果只說一個，義用又不周全。顯現和合聽聞，總標示假立者。然而，『我』有三種：一、妄所執我，指外道等所橫加計度的我；二、假施設我，指《大涅槃經》（Mahāparinirvāṇa-sūtra）中的樂、凈、常我，爲了去除二乘的顛倒，而勉強施設；三、世間流佈的我。
【English Translation】 English version: There are twenty different explanations of 『Évam mayā śrutam』 (Thus have I heard).
Sūtra: Évam mayā śrutam (Thus have I heard).
Commentary: Secondly, the Bodhisattva who is able to hear and transmit the Dharma refers to himself when saying 『Thus』. Because it is personally heard from the Buddha, it is called 『Évam mayā śrutam』. It is not that 『I』 necessarily belongs to one person. The 『hearing』 mentioned, from the perspective of the Sarvāstivāda school of Hīnayāna, is the ear hearing, not consciousness. The Sautrāntika school explains this, with the example teacher saying that the mind and mental factors (citta-caitta dharmas) combine to hear. According to the Mahāyāna school, the root, consciousness, and mental factors combine to hear. The second volume of the Abhidharmasamuccaya mentions: Question: Does the eye see color, or does consciousness, etc., see color? Answer: It is not the eye that sees color, nor is it consciousness, etc., that sees color. Because all dharmas (sarva dharma) have no function. It is due to combination that 『seeing』 is falsely established. The same is true for the ear, etc. However, the holy teachings speak in terms of the superior basis, or say that the root can hear because it can distinguish; or say that consciousness can hear because it possesses the previous two meanings. Saying that the root and consciousness hear is not contradictory. Moreover, according to the mundane view, the ear, etc., can hear; according to the ultimate truth, the ear cannot hear, nor can consciousness, etc. The fifty-sixth volume of the Yogācārabhūmi-śāstra says: The nature of dharma arises from various conditions, so it is momentary and without function. The Mahāprajñāpāramitāśāstra also says: It is not the ear, consciousness, or mind that can hear, but sound is heard from the aggregation of many causes. It even says that in the Buddha's teachings, there is no dharma that can act, see, or know, etc. Furthermore, the ear-consciousness can only hear sounds, not teachings. If speaking in terms of names and sentences, only consciousness can hear, so the Yogācārabhūmi-śāstra says that 『hearing』 refers to inference (anumāna). However, because ear-consciousness personally hears the sound, it becomes a condition for consciousness to hear. Consciousness, as a condition, is imprinted in consciousness, accomplished through hearing. Generally speaking, it is called 『hearing』, abolishing the individual ear, etc., and collectively called 『Évam mayā śrutam』. Therefore, the Buddhabhūmi-śāstra says: 『I』 refers to the mundane, falsely established aggregates (skandha), and 『hearing』 refers to the ear-root initiating consciousness to listen and receive. Abolishing the individual and speaking in general, it is said 『Évam mayā śrutam』. Question: Why is it necessary to abolish the individual and speak in general? Answer: If 『I』 is not mentioned, it cannot reveal oneself and others. The ear is common to all; whose ear is hearing? Moreover, at the time of hearing, it is not only the ear, but also many conditions that must be awaited. If each is stated, it becomes tedious and lengthy. If only one is stated, the meaning is not comprehensive. Revealing combined hearing, generally indicating the falsely established. However, there are three types of 『I』: First, the falsely grasped 『I』, referring to the 『I』 that is arbitrarily conceived by externalists, etc.; second, the falsely established 『I』, referring to the blissful, pure, and permanent 『I』 in the Mahāparinirvāṇa-sūtra, which is forcibly established to remove the inversions of the two vehicles (śrāvaka and pratyekabuddha); third, the 『I』 that is prevalent in the world.
我。謂世共傳天授詞授等。今傳法者。隨順世間自指稱我。不同前二。即是無我之大我也。遍計無體圓成無相無不可說。聞然就依他亦無聞。因緣和合假說名聞。二問諸佛說法本除我執。何故不稱無我乃言我聞。答瑜伽第六。四義釋之。一言說異故。若說無我通蘊處界知此說誰。二順世間故。三除無我怖故。言無我者。為誰修學。四為宣說自他染凈因果事業令生決定信解心故。所以稱我。智論第一。四悉檀中。依世界悉檀。說我無過。即當瑜伽順世間故。又云世間語言有三。一根本見。二慢。三名字。前二不凈。后一通凈一切凡夫三種語言。見道學人二種除見。今依第三說我無失。三問既依名字何故不言阿難聞。答有五義。一示不乖俗宗雖顯。真諦不乖俗理。雖顯妙言。不乖粗欲。顯真諦不離俗故。二我聞者。主宰自在之義。佛地論云。顯示聞者。有所堪能集法。傳云有三阿難。一阿難此云慶喜。持聲聞藏。二阿難跋陀此云喜賢。持獨覺藏。三阿難伽羅此云喜海。持菩薩藏。但爾一人隨得名別阿難於教總持自在若稱名字雖順正理。無于諸法得自在義。由斯稱我不道阿難。三表親聞。世間共言我見我聞。此將為親證。若言阿難聞或非親聞以破疑網。四不識阿難者。謂言誰聞。五有同名者。為言彼聞。四問慶喜於時親見覺
【現代漢語翻譯】 現代漢語譯本 我：指的是世俗共同流傳的『天授』、『詞授』等說法。現在傳法的人，順應世間習慣，自己指稱『我』，這與前面兩種情況不同，這正是『無我』的最大的『我』。遍計所執性沒有實體，圓成實性沒有相狀，都是不可言說的。即使是依他起性，也沒有真正的『聞』，只是因緣和合，假名為『聞』。 二問：諸佛說法本來是爲了去除『我執』（Ahamkara，執著于自我的觀念）。為什麼不說『無我』，而說『我聞』呢？ 答：瑜伽師地論第六卷，用四種意義解釋這個問題。一、言說方式不同。如果說『無我』，那麼蘊、處、界（Skandha, Ayatana, Dhatu，構成個體的要素）都包括在內，這樣就不知道說的是誰了。二、順應世間習慣。三、爲了消除對『無我』的恐懼。如果說『無我』，那麼是誰在修行學習呢？四、爲了宣說自己和他人染污和清凈的因果事業，使聽者產生決定性的信念和理解。所以稱『我』。《大智度論》第一卷，在四悉檀（Catus-siddhanta，四種成就）中，依世界悉檀（Lokasiddhanta，順應世俗的成就）來說『我』，沒有過失。這與《瑜伽師地論》中順應世間的說法一致。又說，世間語言有三種：一、根本見（Dṛṣṭi，錯誤的見解），二、慢（Māna，傲慢），三、名字。前兩種是不清凈的，后一種通於清凈和不清凈。一切凡夫都有這三種語言，見道（Darśanamārga，證悟真理的道路）的修行人則除去了根本見和慢。現在依據第三種語言來說『我』，沒有過失。 三問：既然是依據名字，為什麼不說『阿難（Ānanda，慶喜）聞』呢？ 答：有五種意義。一、表示不違背世俗。宗門雖然顯揚真諦（Paramārtha，最高的真理），但不違背世俗的道理；雖然顯揚妙言，但不違背粗俗的慾望。這表明真諦不離世俗。二、『我聞』，有主宰自在的意義。《佛地論》說，顯示聽者有所堪能，能夠集結佛法。傳說有三個阿難：一、阿難，意為慶喜，持聲聞藏（Śrāvakapiṭaka，聲聞弟子的經典）；二、阿難跋陀（Ānanda-bhadra），意為喜賢，持獨覺藏（Pratyekabuddha-piṭaka，獨覺者的經典）；三、阿難伽羅（Ānanda-kara），意為喜海，持菩薩藏（Bodhisattva-piṭaka，菩薩的經典）。實際上是同一個人，只是隨所證得而有不同的名稱。阿難對於佛教的總體持守是自在的。如果稱呼名字，雖然順應正理，但沒有對於諸法得自在的意義。因此稱『我』，而不說『阿難』。三、表示親自聽聞。世俗共同說『我見我聞』，這是將『我』作為親身經歷的證明。如果說『阿難聞』，或許不是親自聽聞，以此來破除疑惑。四、爲了不認識阿難的人，會問是誰聽聞。五、有同名的人，會說是哪一個阿難聽聞。 四問：慶喜（阿難）當時親自見到覺...
【English Translation】 English version I: Refers to the commonly circulated notions of 'divinely inspired' or 'word-inspired'. Now, those who transmit the Dharma, in accordance with worldly customs, refer to themselves as 'I,' which is different from the previous two cases. This is precisely the greatest 'I' of 'no-self' (Anatta, absence of a permanent self). The Parikalpita (completely imputed nature) has no substance, the Pariniṣpanna (perfected nature) has no characteristics, and both are inexpressible. Even the Paratantra (dependent nature) has no real 'hearing'; it is merely a combination of causes and conditions, falsely named 'hearing'. Second question: The Buddhas teach the Dharma primarily to eliminate 'ego-grasping' (Ahamkara, the clinging to a sense of self). Why not say 'no-self' but instead say 'Thus I have heard'? Answer: The Yogācārabhūmi-śāstra, sixth fascicle, explains this with four reasons. First, the manner of speaking is different. If one says 'no-self,' it encompasses the Skandhas (aggregates), Āyatanas (sense bases), and Dhātus (elements), so it is unclear who is being referred to. Second, to accord with worldly customs. Third, to dispel fear of 'no-self.' If one says 'no-self,' then who is practicing and learning? Fourth, to proclaim the causes and effects of defilement and purification for oneself and others, so that listeners may generate decisive faith and understanding. Therefore, 'I' is used. The Mahāprajñāpāramitāśāstra, first fascicle, among the four Siddhantas (Catus-siddhanta, four kinds of accomplishments), according to the Lokasiddhanta (conventional accomplishment), there is no fault in saying 'I.' This aligns with the Yogācārabhūmi-śāstra's accordance with worldly customs. Furthermore, it is said that there are three types of worldly language: first, fundamental views (Dṛṣṭi, wrong views), second, conceit (Māna, arrogance), and third, names. The first two are impure, while the latter is common to both pure and impure. All ordinary beings have these three types of language, while those on the path of seeing (Darśanamārga, the path of insight) have eliminated fundamental views and conceit. Now, relying on the third type of language to say 'I' is without fault. Third question: Since it relies on names, why not say 'Ānanda (Ānanda, joy) heard'? Answer: There are five reasons. First, to show non-contradiction with worldly customs. Although the school of Zen reveals the ultimate truth (Paramārtha, the highest truth), it does not contradict worldly principles; although it reveals subtle words, it does not contradict coarse desires. This shows that the ultimate truth is not separate from the conventional. Second, 'Thus I have heard' has the meaning of mastery and freedom. The Buddhabhūmi-sūtra says that it shows the hearer is capable of gathering the Dharma. It is said that there are three Ānandas: first, Ānanda, meaning Joyful, who holds the Śrāvakapiṭaka (the collection of teachings for disciples); second, Ānanda-bhadra, meaning Joyful and Virtuous, who holds the Pratyekabuddha-piṭaka (the collection of teachings for solitary realizers); and third, Ānanda-kara, meaning Ocean of Joy, who holds the Bodhisattva-piṭaka (the collection of teachings for Bodhisattvas). In reality, it is the same person, but with different names according to what is attained. Ānanda's overall upholding of the Buddha's teachings is free and unhindered. If one uses the name, although it accords with correct reasoning, it lacks the meaning of being free and unhindered with regard to all Dharmas. Therefore, 'I' is used instead of 'Ānanda.' Third, to indicate personal hearing. The world commonly says 'I saw, I heard,' taking 'I' as proof of personal experience. If one says 'Ānanda heard,' it might not be personal hearing, thereby dispelling doubts. Fourth, for those who do not know Ānanda, they would ask who heard it. Fifth, there are people with the same name, so they would ask which Ānanda heard it. Fourth question: Joyful One (Ānanda) at that time personally saw the awakening...
。何唯說聞。答有四義。一名等詮義非色等故。欲證深理要聞法故。二此界以聲而為佛事。聲為所依名等有故。三希證菩提要聞熏習。由聞熏習成出世故。四顯非現證故。有釋云。咨承有所無自信之過。即推功歸佛。表己因位。未現見法。但聞而已。若言見覺。謂言同佛。五問為佛說法言我能聞為佛不說言我聞耶。答有二解。一者龍軍無性等說諸佛唯有三法。謂大定智悲久離戲論。曾不說法。由佛慈悲本願緣力。眾生識上文義相生雖親依自善根力起。而就強緣名佛說。譬如天等增上力故令于夢中得咒論等。佛地一師亦同此解。二者親光等言。佛身具有蘊處界等。由分別名無戲論。謂從聞者善根本願緣力。如來識上文義相生。是佛利他善根所起名為佛說。聞者識心雖不親得。然似彼相分以顯現。故名我聞。應智說此如是我聞意避增減異分過失。謂如是法我從佛聞。非他展轉。顯是聞者有所堪能。諸有所聞皆離增減異分過失。為令眾生恭敬信受。文義決定無所增減。是故聞者應正聞已。如理思惟當勤修學。六問阿難是佛成道日生。二十年後方為侍者。已前諸教何得親聞。答有六義。一本願力故。過去作長供養誦經沙彌今得總持。龍樹贊云。面如凈滿月。眼如青蓮花。佛法大海水流入阿難心。二展轉聞。智度論第二說。佛初
轉法輪。爾時我不見。如是展轉聞。三佛加持故。報恩經云。佛入世俗心令阿難知。四佛為略說故。亦出報恩經。佛粗舉其端。而能盡解。五三昧力故。金剛花經說。阿難得法性覺性自在。六聞法力故。觀佛三昧海經第五。阿難見佛聞法。說菩薩行即憶過去九十億佛所說經藏。法花經第四云。自開受記等即時憶念過去無量千萬億諸佛法藏通達無礙而說偈言世尊甚希有等。上來六緣由本願力得成后五。七問有無量故唯付阿難持法。答諸菩薩等各各匆務莊嚴眷屬調伏自身不能宣通。阿難寫瓶有寄所以傳燈是屬。又復阿難常隨如來。人天所識傳必生信。諸菩薩等形異處疏非眾皆識或容不信。八問諸經皆如是我聞。何故溫室經云。阿難曰吾從佛聞。藥師經云。聞如是等。答隨方置言。其意無別。如阿難升座說經已。大眾欲言無常力大無常力大如此等法我于佛所親自聽聞。今者乃言我聞如是。
經。一時 演曰。第三時成就無非時失。初明如實義。次泛敘解。后問答分別。明實義者。佛說眾經。前後多時。今者正指說此部時。於一時中在其處說。如涅槃經云。我於一時在尸國。我於一時在恒河岸屍首林等。功德論云。一時者。說此經時。余時復說無量經。故金剛仙論意同此說。問字名句等說聽多時如何言一。答佛地論云。
【現代漢語翻譯】 現代漢語譯本 轉法輪。爾時我不見。如是展轉聞。三佛加持故。《報恩經》云，佛入世俗心令阿難（Ananda，佛陀的十大弟子之一）知。四佛為略說故。亦出《報恩經》。佛粗舉其端，而能盡解。五三昧力故。《金剛花經》說，阿難得法性覺性自在。六聞法力故。《觀佛三昧海經》第五，阿難見佛聞法，說菩薩行即憶過去九十億佛所說經藏。《法華經》第四云，自開受記等即時憶念過去無量千萬億諸佛法藏通達無礙而說偈言世尊甚希有等。上來六緣由本願力得成后五。七問有無量故唯付阿難持法。答諸菩薩等各各匆務莊嚴眷屬調伏自身不能宣通。阿難寫瓶有寄所以傳燈是屬。又復阿難常隨如來。人天所識傳必生信。諸菩薩等形異處疏非眾皆識或容不信。八問諸經皆『如是我聞』。何故《溫室經》云，阿難曰『吾從佛聞』。《藥師經》云，『聞如是』等。答隨方置言。其意無別。如阿難升座說經已。大眾欲言無常力大無常力大如此等法我于佛所親自聽聞。今者乃言『我聞如是』。
經。一時 演曰。第三時成就無非時失。初明如實義。次泛敘解。后問答分別。明實義者。佛說眾經。前後多時。今者正指說此部時。於一時中在其處說。如《涅槃經》云，『我於一時在尸國。我於一時在恒河岸屍首林等』。《功德論》云，『一時者。說此經時。余時復說無量經。』故金剛仙論意同此說。問字名句等說聽多時如何言一。答《佛地論》云，
【English Translation】 English version 'Turning the Dharma Wheel'. At that time, I did not see. Thus, it was heard through transmission. Because of the blessing of the Three Buddhas. The Baoen Jing (Sutra of Gratitude) says that the Buddha entered the worldly mind to let Ananda (one of the ten great disciples of the Buddha) know. The Four Buddhas briefly explained it. It also comes from the Baoen Jing. The Buddha roughly mentioned the beginning, and yet it can be fully understood. Because of the power of the five Samadhis. The Vajra Flower Sutra says that Ananda attained the Dharma-nature, awakened nature, and freedom. Because of the power of hearing the Dharma. In the fifth volume of the Guanfo Sanmei Hai Jing (Sutra of Contemplating the Buddha Samadhi Sea), Ananda saw the Buddha, heard the Dharma, and spoke of the Bodhisattva's practice, immediately recalling the sutra collections spoken by ninety billion Buddhas in the past. The fourth volume of the Lotus Sutra says that upon receiving the prediction, he immediately recalled the Dharma collections of countless trillions of Buddhas in the past, attaining unobstructed understanding, and spoke a verse saying, 'The World-Honored One is extremely rare,' etc. The above six causes, due to the power of original vows, led to the accomplishment of the latter five. Question: Because there are countless [Dharmas], why was Ananda entrusted with upholding the Dharma alone? Answer: The Bodhisattvas, each being busy with adorning their retinues and subduing themselves, were unable to propagate [the Dharma]. Ananda's writing is entrusted, so the transmission of the lamp belongs to him. Moreover, Ananda always followed the Tathagata. He is known by humans and devas, so his transmission will surely generate faith. The Bodhisattvas have different forms and are distant, not recognized by all, so they might not be believed. Question: All sutras begin with 'Thus have I heard'. Why does the Wen Shi Jing (Sutra of the Warm Room) say, 'Ananda said, I heard from the Buddha'? The Bhaisajya-guru Sutra (Medicine Buddha Sutra) says, 'Heard thus,' etc. Answer: The words are placed according to the location. The meaning is not different. For example, after Ananda ascended the seat to speak the sutra, the assembly wanted to say, 'Impermanence is powerful, impermanence is powerful. I personally heard such Dharmas from the Buddha.' But now they say, 'Thus have I heard'.
Sutra: At one time. Yan said: The accomplishment of the third time is without non-time loss. First, clarify the meaning of reality. Second, broadly narrate the explanation. Third, distinguish through questions and answers. To clarify the meaning of reality: The Buddha spoke many sutras at different times. Now, it specifically refers to the time of speaking this scripture. At one time, he spoke it in that place. As the Nirvana Sutra says, 'At one time, I was in the country of Shishi. At one time, I was on the bank of the Ganges River, in the Shishou Forest, etc.' The Gongde Lun (Treatise on Merit) says, 'At one time means the time of speaking this sutra. At other times, countless sutras were spoken.' Therefore, the meaning of the Vajrasena Sutra is the same as this. Question: How can it be said to be one time when the words, names, and sentences were spoken and heard over many times? Answer: The Buddhabhumi Sutra (Sutra on the Buddha-land) says,
此就剎那相續無斷說聽究竟總名一時。若不爾者。字名句等說聽時異云何言一。彼論意說無問時之長短總說一部。說聽究竟名為一時。以有勝人得陀羅尼。或凈耳根于剎那須能說能受亦名為一。非唯相續。論又釋云。或相會遇時分無別。故名一時。即說聽共相會遇同一時義。演曰。彼論二義。一說聽究竟為一時。二說聽會遇為一時。前簡說餘部時。后簡說聽前後時。次敘異釋者。長耳三藏解有三種。一分段。二流轉時。三不思議變易時。上二即二種生死。三假名。假名時有三。一伽羅時。二三摩時。三世流佈時。伽羅時者。此云別相時。如制戒律大戒時。聞小戒時不聞出家時。聞在家時不聞國三得。餘人不得聞。三摩耶時者。此云破邪見時。謂五部阿含九分達摩。不簡白黑。一切得聞。此二與智論同。世流佈時者。即是世人語法。如言一時在恒河岸等。今依破邪見及世流佈時。改名一時。真諦三藏說時有十義。一佛出世時。二說正法時。三聽正法時。四持正法時。五思正法時。六修正法時。七下善種時。八成熟善根時。謂生中國修四念處。九解脫善根時。為聽法說法思法靜心修習具此五事。得入解脫。十心平等時。若下若高聽法不入。若作棄捨正法心。此是無時不平等心。聽亦不入。若能拔沉抑浮。念舍平等得入正法
【現代漢語翻譯】 現代漢語譯本 就『剎那』（ksana，極短的時間單位）相續不斷地說法和聽法，總稱為『一時』（ekasmim samaye）。如果不是這樣，那麼字、名、句等的說法和聽法時間不同，怎麼能說是一個『一時』呢？ 彼論的意義是說，無論提問的時間長短，總說一部（佛經），說法和聽法完畢就稱為『一時』。因為有殊勝之人得到『陀羅尼』（dharani，總持），或者清凈耳根，能在極短的時間內既能說法又能接受，也稱為『一時』，不僅僅是相續不斷。 論中又解釋說：或者（說法者和聽法者）相會的時間沒有差別，所以稱為『一時』，就是說法和聽法共同相會於同一時間的意義。 演法師說：彼論有兩種意義，一是說法和聽法完畢為『一時』，二是說法和聽法相會為『一時』。前者簡別于說法其餘部分的時間，後者簡別于說法和聽法的前後時間。 接下來敘述不同的解釋：長耳三藏解釋有三種『時』：一是分段時，二是流轉時，三是不思議變易時。前兩種就是兩種生死（分段生死和變易生死），第三種是假名。 假名時有三種：一是『伽羅時』（kala-samaya），二是『三摩耶時』（samaya），三是『世流佈時』。 『伽羅時』，這裡稱為『別相時』，如制定戒律中的大戒時，聽聞大戒時聽不到小戒時，出家時聽不到在家時，只有國王才能得到三種利益，其餘人不能聽聞。 『三摩耶時』，這裡稱為『破邪見時』，指五部阿含和九分達摩，不分白衣和黑衣，一切人都可以聽聞。這兩種『時』與《大智度論》相同。 『世流佈時』，就是世俗人的語法，如說『一時在恒河岸邊』等。現在依據破邪見和世流佈時，改名為『一時』。 真諦三藏說『時』有十種意義：一是佛出世時，二是說正法時，三是聽正法時，四是持正法時，五是思正法時，六是修正法時，七是下善種時，八是成熟善根時，指生在中國修習四念處。 九是解脫善根時，爲了聽法、說法、思法、靜心修習，具備這五件事，才能進入解脫。十是心平等時，如果心低下或高傲，聽法都不能入心。如果產生捨棄正法的心，這就是沒有『時』，是不平等心，聽法也不能入心。如果能去除沉沒和浮躁，念舍平等，才能進入正法。
【English Translation】 English version This refers to the continuous, uninterrupted succession of 'ksana' ( क्षण, a very short unit of time) in speaking and listening, collectively termed 'ekasmim samaye' (一時, at one time). If it were not so, how could it be called 'one time' when the times for speaking and listening to words, names, and sentences are different? The meaning of that treatise is that regardless of the length of the questioning time, the entirety of a scripture is referred to, and the completion of speaking and listening is called 'ekasmim samaye'. Because there are superior individuals who attain 'dharani' (陀羅尼, a mnemonic device, a collection of mantras and spells), or purify their ear faculties, they can both speak and receive within an extremely short time, which is also called 'ekasmim samaye', not just continuous succession. The treatise further explains: Or, the time of meeting (between the speaker and the listener) is without difference, hence it is called 'ekasmim samaye', which means the common meeting of speaking and listening at the same time. Master Yan said: That treatise has two meanings: first, the completion of speaking and listening is 'ekasmim samaye'; second, the meeting of speaking and listening is 'ekasmim samaye'. The former distinguishes the time of speaking from the rest, and the latter distinguishes the time before and after speaking and listening. Next, narrating different interpretations: Tripitaka Master Chang Er explains that there are three types of 'time': first, segmented time; second, flowing time; third, inconceivable transformative time. The first two are the two types of samsara (segmented samsara and transformative samsara), and the third is a nominal designation. There are three types of nominal time: first, 'kala-samaya' (伽羅時, time of occasion); second, 'samaya' (三摩耶時, time); third, 'worldly propagated time'. 'Kala-samaya' is referred to here as 'time of distinct characteristics', such as when establishing the major precepts in the Vinaya, one hears the major precepts but not the minor precepts, one hears the monastic precepts but not the lay precepts, and only the king can obtain the three benefits, while others cannot hear. 'Samaya' is referred to here as 'time of breaking wrong views', referring to the five Agamas and the nine-part Dharma, without distinguishing between laypeople and monastics, everyone can hear. These two types of 'time' are the same as in the Mahaprajnaparamita-sastra. 'Worldly propagated time' is the grammar of worldly people, such as saying 'at one time on the banks of the Ganges'. Now, based on the time of breaking wrong views and worldly propagated time, it is renamed 'ekasmim samaye'. Tripitaka Master Paramartha said that 'time' has ten meanings: first, the time when the Buddha appears in the world; second, the time when the correct Dharma is spoken; third, the time when the correct Dharma is heard; fourth, the time when the correct Dharma is upheld; fifth, the time when the correct Dharma is contemplated; sixth, the time when the correct Dharma is practiced; seventh, the time when the seeds of goodness are sown; eighth, the time when the roots of goodness mature, referring to practicing the Four Foundations of Mindfulness in China. Ninth, the time when the roots of goodness are liberated; in order to listen to the Dharma, speak the Dharma, contemplate the Dharma, and cultivate stillness, possessing these five things, one can enter liberation. Tenth, the time of equanimity of mind; if the mind is low or arrogant, listening to the Dharma cannot enter the mind. If the mind of abandoning the correct Dharma arises, this is without 'time', it is an unequal mind, and listening to the Dharma cannot enter the mind. If one can remove sinking and agitation, and contemplate equanimity, then one can enter the correct Dharma.
。故名平等舍心時。具此十義故名一時。后問答辨者。一問一之與時何法為體。答皆是假法。不相應行依色心立。即數與時二種為體。法處亦即數。識世識所收。二問大乘過未既非實。有。於三世中如何立時。答。時有二義。一道理即約法體。五蘊諸行剎那生滅。唯有一念現在之法。然有酬前引后之義。即以所酬假名過去。即以所引假名未來。對此二種說。為現在今說聽者五蘊之法。剎那生滅前後相續。事緒究竟。假立三世。總名一時。非一生滅之一時也。二唯識心之上。變作三時。相狀而起理實。唯有現一念心。今說聽者。隨心分限。變作短長。事緒終說。總名一時。如夢所見。謂有多生覺位。唯心都無實境。三問。說聽一念生已即滅。如何識上聚集解生答。雖唯一念。然前前聞者熏習成種。后識心上連帶解生。是故文義聚集顯現。如言諸惡者莫作。至作字時。前之四字一時聚集。乃至一偈一章一品連帶亦爾。雖無過未而說。受義成因。此應明五心之義。如別章說。四問如何不言四八等時。答一日一月照四天下。長短喧寒遠近晝夜諸方不定。恒二天下同起用故。又除已下上諸天等。無此四時及八時等。經擬上地諸方流通。若說四時流行不遍故亦不定。約成道已後年數時節。由三乘凡聖所見不同。佛身報化年與歲短長
。成道已來。近遠各不同故。經擬三乘。凡聖同聞故不定說。成道已后若干年歲。雖諸經典下別文中有說四時十二時等。即此經食時著衣持缽乃至敷坐而坐日正午時。或說成道近遠時等。皆隨一方。眾生聞見結集之象。且作是說然非一部。初總明時。今總明故。但言一。五問。時中凡聖殊今但總言一。處中凈穢別如何說定方。答處中唯凈穢標處可定知時中萬品差不準。唯言一一會。根宜凡聖勝劣利鈍長短有多差別。不可定準故處可定說而時但總言一。
經。佛 演曰第四化主成就。智度論第二。五種能說。一佛。二聖弟子。三諸天。四神仙。五變化。今明佛說。表可崇信。魏本名婆伽婆。梁本言佛。婆伽婆隋言世尊。貞觀名薄伽梵。周云佛婆伽梵。此但言佛。準經梵本皆稱大師。名薄伽梵。即十號中第十號也。佛地論云。具十種功德名號何故如來教傳法者。一切經但置如是。薄伽梵名謂此一名世咸尊重。故諸外道稱本師。名薄伽梵。又此一名總攝眾德 餘名不爾。此故置此名。準周梁本。加似佛名。為簡外道。餘本略也。今翻譯者更存省略。隨方生善但標佛名。梵云陀。此名覺。覺者具有三義。一自覺簡凡。二覺他簡二乘。三覺滿簡菩薩。佛地論云。具一切智一切種智。能自開覺。復能開覺一切有情。如睡夢覺
【現代漢語翻譯】 現代漢語譯本： 自證悟以來，由於距離遠近各有不同，經典擬設三乘（聲聞乘、緣覺乘、菩薩乘），凡夫和聖人都能聽聞，所以不能確定地說成道的時間。成道之後若干年歲，雖然在各種經典的不同章節中有關於四季、十二時辰等的說法，比如這部經中關於吃飯時穿衣持缽，乃至鋪設座位而坐，正午時分，或者說成道時間遠近等等，都是隨著一方眾生的見聞而結集的表象，姑且這樣說，但並非整部經典都如此。起初總的說明時間，現在也是總的說明，所以只說『一』。五個問題中，時間裡凡夫和聖人不同，現在只總的說『一』。處所中有清凈和污穢的區別，如何確定地說方位呢？回答是，處所中只有清凈和污穢可以標明，處所可以確定地知道，而時間中萬物千差萬別，沒有準則，只能說『一一會』。根器、稟賦、凡聖、優劣、利鈍、長短有很多差別，不可確定準則，所以處所可以確定地說，而時間只能總的說『一』。
經：佛 演曰第四化主成就。《智度論》第二：五種能說。一佛，二聖弟子，三諸天，四神仙，五變化。現在說明是佛說，表明可以崇尚信奉。魏譯本名為婆伽婆（Bhagavan，世尊），梁譯本說佛。婆伽婆，隋朝譯為世尊。貞觀譯為薄伽梵（Bhagavan，世尊）。周譯本說佛婆伽梵。這裡只說佛，依據經典梵文字都稱大師，名為薄伽梵，即十號（如來十種稱號）中的第十號。《佛地論》說，具有十種功德的名號，為什麼如來教導傳法者，一切經只放置這樣的薄伽梵名，是因為這個名字世間都尊重。所以各外道稱他們的本師名為薄伽梵。又這個名字總攝一切功德，其餘名字不是這樣，所以放置這個名字。依據周譯本和梁譯本，加上類似佛的名字，是爲了簡別外道，其餘版本省略了。現在翻譯的人更加省略，隨著各方產生善念，只標明佛名。梵語為佛陀（Buddha），這裡譯為覺，覺具有三種含義：一、自覺，簡別于凡夫；二、覺他，簡別於二乘（聲聞、緣覺）；三、覺滿，簡別于菩薩。《佛地論》說，具有一切智、一切種智，能自己開悟，又能開悟一切有情眾生，如同從睡夢中醒來。
【English Translation】 English version: Since enlightenment, due to the differences in distance, the scriptures propose the Three Vehicles (Śrāvakayāna, Pratyekabuddhayāna, Bodhisattvayāna). Ordinary people and sages can all hear them, so the time of enlightenment cannot be definitively stated. After several years since enlightenment, although there are statements about the four seasons, twelve time periods, etc., in different chapters of various scriptures, such as in this scripture regarding wearing robes and holding a bowl when eating, and even laying out a seat and sitting, at noon, or saying the time of enlightenment is near or far, etc., these are all manifestations of the collection of what beings in one region have heard and seen. Let's just say that, but it's not the case for the entire scripture. Initially, the time is generally explained, and now it is also generally explained, so only 'one' is said. Among the five questions, the time differs between ordinary people and sages, but now only 'one' is generally said. In places, there are distinctions between purity and impurity. How can the direction be determined? The answer is that only purity and impurity can be marked in places, and the place can be known definitively, while in time, all things are different and there is no standard. Only 'one assembly' can be said. There are many differences in faculties, dispositions, ordinary people, sages, superiority, inferiority, sharpness, dullness, length, and shortness, and there is no definite standard. Therefore, the place can be definitively stated, while time can only be generally said as 'one'.
Sūtra: The Buddha. Commentary: The fourth transformation body is accomplished. Mahāprajñāpāramitopadeśa (智度論) Chapter 2: Five kinds of speakers: 1. Buddha, 2. Holy disciples, 3. Devas, 4. Immortals, 5. Transformations. Now it is explained that the Buddha speaks, indicating that it is worthy of reverence and belief. The Wei translation is named Bhagavan (婆伽婆, World Honored One), the Liang translation says Buddha. Bhagavan, in the Sui dynasty, is translated as World Honored One. The Zhenguan translation is Bhagavan (薄伽梵, World Honored One). The Zhou translation says Buddha Bhagavan. Here it only says Buddha, according to the Sanskrit versions of the scriptures, all call him Great Teacher, named Bhagavan, which is the tenth of the ten titles (ten epithets of a Tathagata). Buddhabhūmi Sūtra (佛地論) says, having the names of ten kinds of merits, why does the Tathagata teach the Dharma transmitters to only place such a Bhagavan name in all scriptures? It is because this name is respected by the world. Therefore, various heretics call their original teacher Bhagavan. Also, this name encompasses all merits, other names are not like this, so this name is placed. According to the Zhou and Liang translations, adding a name similar to Buddha is to distinguish heretics, the other versions are omitted. Now the translators are even more omitting, following the generation of good thoughts in various regions, only marking the name of the Buddha. In Sanskrit, it is Buddha (佛陀), here translated as Awakened, Awakening has three meanings: 1. Self-awakening, distinguishing from ordinary people; 2. Awakening others, distinguishing from the Two Vehicles (Śrāvaka, Pratyekabuddha); 3. Complete awakening, distinguishing from Bodhisattvas. Buddhabhūmi Sūtra says, having all-wisdom, all-knowing wisdom, able to awaken oneself, and also able to awaken all sentient beings, like waking up from a dream.
。如蓮花開。故稱為佛。一切智者。能自開智如睡夢覺。智觀于空智。理智。真智。無分別智。如所有也。總相而言斷煩惱障得。一切種智者。覺有情智如蓮花開。智觀于有智。事智。俗智。后所得智。盡所有也。總相而言斷所知障得。又成實論。十義釋覺。大般若七義應檢敘之。薄伽梵者。唯佛地論以二義釋。一成德義。二破魔義。就成德中。復有六義。一自在。二熾盛。三端嚴。四名稱。五吉祥。六尊貴。其義云何。謂諸如來永不繫屬諸煩惱故。炎猛智火所燒練故 三十二大士相等所莊飾故。殊勝功德圓滿無不知故。一切世間親近供養咸稱贊故。具一切德常起方便利益安樂一切有情無懈廢故。初得后得四恩德如次配釋。二破魔義者彼論又云。或能破壞四魔怨故名薄伽梵。攝大乘論云。能破四種大魔怨故。名薄伽梵。又自在等功德相應。是故說佛名薄伽梵。二義正同。涅槃經第十八有七複次釋婆伽婆云。婆伽名破。婆名煩惱。能破煩惱故名婆伽婆。又能成就諸善法故。又能善解諸法義故。有大功德無能勝故。有大名聞遍十方故。又能種種大惠施故。又于無量阿僧祇劫吐女根故。初一離障。后六成德。如次配前佛地六義。瑜伽八十三云。薄伽梵者。坦然安座妙菩提座。任運摧滅一切魔軍大勢力故。演曰。佛地攝論及涅
【現代漢語翻譯】 現代漢語譯本： 如蓮花開放一般，因此被稱為佛（Buddha，覺悟者）。一切有智慧的人，能自己開啟智慧，就像從睡夢中醒來一樣。智慧觀察于空智（wisdom of emptiness），理智（reasoning wisdom），真智（true wisdom），無分別智（non-discriminating wisdom），這是如所有性（suchness）。總的來說，是斷除煩惱障而得到的。一切種智（wisdom of all kinds），覺悟有情眾生的智慧，就像蓮花開放一般。智慧觀察于有智（wisdom of existence），事智（wisdom of affairs），俗智（conventional wisdom），后得智（wisdom attained later），這是盡所有性（allness）。總的來說，是斷除所知障而得到的。另外，《成實論》用十種意義解釋『覺』（awakening），《大般若經》的七種意義應該查閱敘述。薄伽梵（Bhagavan，世尊）這個詞，只有《佛地論》用兩種意義解釋：一是成就功德的意義，二是破除魔怨的意義。就成就功德而言，又有六種意義：一、自在（freedom），二、熾盛（splendor），三、端嚴（beauty），四、名稱（name），五、吉祥（auspiciousness），六、尊貴（honor）。這些意義是什麼呢？是指諸如來永遠不被各種煩惱束縛，被猛烈的智慧之火所燒煉，被三十二大丈夫相（thirty-two major marks）等等所莊嚴，殊勝的功德圓滿無所不知，一切世間的人都親近供養並稱贊，具備一切功德，常常發起方便來利益安樂一切有情眾生而沒有懈怠。最初得到的和後來得到的四種恩德依次對應解釋。二是破除魔怨的意義，《佛地論》又說：『或者能夠破壞四種魔怨，因此名為薄伽梵。』《攝大乘論》說：『能破四種大魔怨，故名薄伽梵。』又自在等等功德相應，所以說佛名為薄伽梵。這兩種意義是相同的。《涅槃經》第十八有七種進一步的解釋婆伽婆（Bhagavat）：婆伽（Bhaga）是破的意思，婆（bha）是煩惱的意思，能破煩惱所以名為婆伽婆。又能成就各種善法，又能善於理解各種法的意義，有大的功德沒有誰能勝過，有大的名聲遍佈十方，又能進行種種大的惠施，又在無量阿僧祇劫（asamkhya kalpas，無數劫）中捨棄女根。最初一個意義是離障，後面六個意義是成就功德，依次對應前面的《佛地論》的六種意義。《瑜伽師地論》第八十三說：『薄伽梵，坦然安坐在美妙的菩提座上，任運摧滅一切魔軍的大勢力，因此被稱為薄伽梵。』演曰：《佛地攝論》和《涅
【English Translation】 English version: Like a lotus flower blooming, hence called Buddha (覺悟者, Awakened One). All wise ones can open their own wisdom, like waking from a dream. Wisdom contemplates emptiness (空智, wisdom of emptiness), reasoning wisdom (理智), true wisdom (真智), non-discriminating wisdom (無分別智), which is suchness (如所有性). Generally speaking, it is obtained by cutting off the obstacle of afflictions. Wisdom of all kinds (一切種智), the wisdom of enlightening sentient beings, is like a lotus flower blooming. Wisdom contemplates existence (有智, wisdom of existence), wisdom of affairs (事智), conventional wisdom (俗智), wisdom attained later (后得智), which is allness (盡所有性). Generally speaking, it is obtained by cutting off the obstacle of knowledge. Furthermore, the Chengshi Lun explains 'awakening' (覺) with ten meanings, and the seven meanings of the Great Perfection of Wisdom Sutra should be consulted and narrated. The term Bhagavan (薄伽梵, World-Honored One) is explained with two meanings only in the Buddhabhumi Sutra: one is the meaning of accomplishing virtues, and the other is the meaning of destroying demonic forces. Regarding the accomplishment of virtues, there are six meanings: 1. Freedom (自在), 2. Splendor (熾盛), 3. Beauty (端嚴), 4. Name (名稱), 5. Auspiciousness (吉祥), 6. Honor (尊貴). What are these meanings? They refer to the fact that the Tathagatas are never bound by various afflictions, are refined by the fierce fire of wisdom, are adorned by the thirty-two major marks (三十二大丈夫相), have perfect and complete virtues with nothing unknown, are approached and offered to by all in the world and praised, possess all virtues, and constantly initiate skillful means to benefit and bring happiness to all sentient beings without懈怠. The four kinds of grace obtained initially and later are explained in corresponding order. The second meaning is the destruction of demonic forces. The Buddhabhumi Sutra also says: 'Or, being able to destroy the four demonic forces, hence named Bhagavan.' The Mahayanasamgraha says: 'Being able to destroy the four great demonic forces, hence named Bhagavan.' Moreover, being in accordance with virtues such as freedom, the Buddha is therefore called Bhagavan. These two meanings are the same. The eighteenth chapter of the Nirvana Sutra has seven further explanations of Bhagavat (婆伽婆): Bhaga (婆伽) means 'to destroy,' bha (婆) means 'afflictions,' so being able to destroy afflictions is called Bhagavat. Also, being able to accomplish various good dharmas, being able to understand the meanings of various dharmas well, having great merit that no one can surpass, having great fame that spreads in all ten directions, being able to perform various great acts of generosity, and having relinquished the female organ in countless asamkhya kalpas (阿僧祇劫, countless eons). The first meaning is離障 (freedom from obstacles), and the latter six meanings are the accomplishment of virtues, corresponding to the six meanings of the Buddhabhumi Sutra mentioned earlier. The eighty-third chapter of the Yogacarabhumi-sastra says: 'Bhagavan, sitting serenely on the wonderful Bodhi seat, effortlessly destroys the great power of all demonic armies, hence called Bhagavan.' Yan said: 'The Buddhabhumi-samgraha and the *Nirvana
槃經。皆約二義。瑜伽論中。唯約破魔。廣略異故。由能離障德自成故。涅槃離障唯約煩惱。舉因攝果。即破四魔。問。佛有三身。此說何者。答。據標穢土。為聲聞說。即是化身論。其實義具足三佛。由空無相真如妙理。生智解故。名法身說。應化非真佛。亦非說法者。推功歸本即真報身。若約十地菩薩。 大正藏第 85 冊 No. 2733 御注金剛般若波羅蜜經宣演
金剛般若經宣演卷下
敕隨駕講論沙門道氤集
經。須菩提忍辱至說非忍辱波羅蜜 演曰。第九為離不忍苦障。即第十法界無量回向。第十三忍苦住處。前希當福以修勝因勸勵雖成須能忍苦。若修道時不耐他害。不能安受寒熱疲乏生老等苦。雖勤修道便舍眾生。又無福果。亦不長時便同二乘早入寂滅。若無諦察法忍。于無相理不能證悟。亦無前二以諦察法與前二忍作依止故。又若不能忍流轉苦。便樂涅槃不發大意。若不能忍眾生相違苦。便生恚心不能攝化。亦無相好四眾八部一切眷屬。若不能耐乏受用苦不能精進。數生退敗。于無上果如何克成。今為對除有此文起。其不能忍即是嗔恚。懈怠愚癡通二障攝。能忍即是無嗔。精進審惠三種忍流轉苦。及乏受用皆精進故修勝福因之良助也。前約能忍名忍苦住。今約斷障離不忍
【現代漢語翻譯】 現代漢語譯本： 《槃經》（Pan Jing，經典名稱）。都依據二義進行解釋。《瑜伽論》（Yoga Shastra，佛教論著名稱）中，只依據破除魔障來解釋。廣略有所不同。因為能夠遠離障礙，功德自然成就的緣故。《涅槃》（Nirvana，佛教術語，指解脫）遠離障礙，只依據煩惱來解釋。舉出原因，包含結果，即是破除四魔。問：佛有三身，這裡說的是哪一個？答：依據標示穢土（指充滿煩惱和痛苦的世界），為聲聞（指聽聞佛法而修行的人）所說，即是化身（Buddha's Transformation Body，佛的三身之一）。實際上，義理上具備三佛。因為從空無相（Sunyata and Anatta，佛教術語，指沒有實體和自我的概念）的真如妙理（Tathata，佛教術語，指事物的真實本性）中，產生智慧和理解的緣故，名為法身（Dharma Body，佛的三身之一）所說。應化身（Response Body，佛的三身之一）不是真佛，也不是說法者。推究功德歸於根本，即是真報身（Reward Body，佛的三身之一）。如果依據十地菩薩（Bodhisattvas of the Ten Stages，指修行達到很高層次的菩薩）。 《金剛般若經宣演卷下》（Diamond Sutra Commentary, Volume 2） 敕隨駕講論沙門道氤（Shramana Dao Yin，人名）集 經文：須菩提（Subhuti，佛陀的弟子）忍辱（Kshanti，佛教術語，指忍耐）乃至說非忍辱波羅蜜（Paramita，佛教術語，指到達彼岸）。演曰：第九是爲了遠離不忍的痛苦障礙，即第十法界（Dharmadhatu，佛教術語，指宇宙萬法所依的本體）無量回向（Parivarta，佛教術語，指將功德迴向給眾生）。第十三忍苦住處。之前希望獲得福報，以修習殊勝的因緣來勸勉，即使成就了，也必須能夠忍受痛苦。如果修道的時候，不能忍受他人的傷害，不能安然承受寒冷、炎熱、疲憊、衰老等痛苦，即使勤奮修道，也會捨棄眾生，又沒有福報的結果，也不能長久，便會像二乘（指聲聞和緣覺）一樣早早進入寂滅。如果沒有諦察法忍（Dharma-kshanti，佛教術語，指對佛法的深刻理解和忍耐），對於無相的道理不能證悟，也沒有前兩種忍，因為諦察法忍與前兩種忍作為依靠的緣故。又如果不能忍受流轉的痛苦，便會貪戀涅槃，不發大愿。如果不能忍受眾生互相違背的痛苦，便會產生嗔恨心，不能攝受教化，也沒有相好（Lakshana，佛教術語，指佛的莊嚴相貌）、四眾（指比丘、比丘尼、優婆塞、優婆夷）、八部（Devas and Nagas，佛教術語，指天龍八部）一切眷屬。如果不能忍耐缺乏受用的痛苦，就不能精進，多次產生退轉失敗。對於無上的果位，如何能夠剋期成就？現在爲了對治去除，才有此文的產生。那不能忍耐，就是嗔恚（Dvesha，佛教術語，指憎恨），懈怠（Kaushidya，佛教術語，指懶惰）愚癡（Moha，佛教術語，指迷惑）都包含在二障（指煩惱障和所知障）之中。能忍就是無嗔（Advesha，佛教術語，指不憎恨），精進（Virya，佛教術語，指努力）審惠（Prajna，佛教術語，指智慧）三種忍，流轉的痛苦，以及缺乏受用，都是精進的緣故，是修習殊勝福報因緣的良好幫助。之前依據能忍，名為忍苦住。現在依據斷除障礙，遠離不忍。
【English Translation】 English version: 《Pan Jing》 (Name of a Sutra). All are explained according to two meanings. In the 《Yoga Shastra》 (Name of a Buddhist Treatise), it is only explained according to breaking through demonic obstacles. The scope of detail varies. Because one can be separated from obstacles, merit naturally arises. 《Nirvana》 (Buddhist term, referring to liberation) being separated from obstacles is only explained according to afflictions. By citing the cause, the result is included, which is breaking through the four maras (Four Demons). Question: The Buddha has three bodies, which one is being discussed here? Answer: According to indicating the impure land (referring to the world full of afflictions and suffering), it is spoken for the Shravakas (those who hear and practice the Dharma), which is the Transformation Body (Buddha's Transformation Body, one of the three bodies of the Buddha). In reality, the meaning fully possesses the three Buddhas. Because from the wonderful principle of emptiness and no-self (Sunyata and Anatta, Buddhist terms, referring to the concept of no substance and no self) of True Suchness (Tathata, Buddhist term, referring to the true nature of things), wisdom and understanding arise, it is called the Dharma Body (Dharma Body, one of the three bodies of the Buddha) speaking. The Response Body (Response Body, one of the three bodies of the Buddha) is not the true Buddha, nor is it the one who speaks the Dharma. Tracing the merit back to the root is the true Reward Body (Reward Body, one of the three bodies of the Buddha). If based on the Bodhisattvas of the Ten Stages (Bodhisattvas of the Ten Stages, referring to Bodhisattvas who have reached a very high level of practice). 《Diamond Sutra Commentary, Volume 2》 Compiled by Shramana Dao Yin (Name of a person), a lecturer-monk who accompanied the emperor. Sutra: Subhuti (Name of a disciple of the Buddha), endurance (Kshanti, Buddhist term, referring to patience) and even saying non-endurance Paramita (Paramita, Buddhist term, referring to reaching the other shore). Commentary: The ninth is to be separated from the suffering obstacle of non-endurance, which is the immeasurable dedication (Parivarta, Buddhist term, referring to dedicating merit to sentient beings) of the tenth Dharmadhatu (Dharmadhatu, Buddhist term, referring to the essence on which all phenomena in the universe depend). The thirteenth is the dwelling place of enduring suffering. Previously, hoping to obtain blessings, using the cultivation of superior causes to encourage, even if accomplished, one must be able to endure suffering. If, when practicing the path, one cannot endure harm from others, cannot peacefully endure cold, heat, fatigue, aging, and other sufferings, even if diligently practicing the path, one will abandon sentient beings, and there will be no result of blessings, and one will not last long, and will enter Nirvana early like the Two Vehicles (referring to Shravakas and Pratyekabuddhas). If there is no Dharma-kshanti (Dharma-kshanti, Buddhist term, referring to deep understanding and endurance of the Dharma), one cannot realize the principle of no-self, and there are no previous two kinds of endurance, because Dharma-kshanti serves as the reliance for the previous two kinds of endurance. Furthermore, if one cannot endure the suffering of transmigration, one will be attached to Nirvana and will not make great vows. If one cannot endure the suffering of sentient beings contradicting each other, one will generate anger and will not be able to subdue and transform, and there will be no marks and characteristics (Lakshana, Buddhist term, referring to the Buddha's majestic appearance), the four assemblies (referring to monks, nuns, laymen, and laywomen), the eight divisions (Devas and Nagas, Buddhist term, referring to the eight kinds of non-human beings), and all relatives. If one cannot endure the suffering of lacking enjoyment, one cannot be diligent and will repeatedly regress and fail. How can one achieve the supreme fruit within a set time? Now, in order to counteract and remove this, this text arises. That which cannot be endured is anger (Dvesha, Buddhist term, referring to hatred), laziness (Kaushidya, Buddhist term, referring to laziness) and ignorance (Moha, Buddhist term, referring to delusion) are all included in the two obstacles (referring to the obstacle of afflictions and the obstacle of knowledge). Being able to endure is non-anger (Advesha, Buddhist term, referring to non-hatred), diligence (Virya, Buddhist term, referring to effort) and discernment (Prajna, Buddhist term, referring to wisdom), the three kinds of endurance, the suffering of transmigration, and the lack of enjoyment are all due to diligence, which is a good aid for cultivating superior causes of blessings. Previously, based on being able to endure, it was called the dwelling place of enduring suffering. Now, based on cutting off obstacles, one is separated from non-endurance.
苦。準前通釋彼論為斷。第八經成苦果。疑論云。向說彼身苦。以彼捨身苦身果報而彼福是劣。若爾依此法門受持演說。諸菩薩行彼苦行。行彼苦行即是苦果。云何此法門不成苦果。演曰。前說苦身以得苦果故福是劣。依經苦行亦是苦果。若爾此經應成苦果。如何福勝耶。下文意說。前捨身命有我法相。或有嗔恚不能忍苦。有疲懈故感於生死而福是劣。今有忍度及以慈悲能趣菩提故福為勝。舉彼能治不忍正行以答前疑不連此論。依此論判文則有四。一如所能忍即是忍體。二明忍相及生忍處。三如忍差別即種類忍。四對治不忍因緣此初也。論云。何者能忍。謂達法無我故。此論問略意言何者如所證境而為能忍。謂如其所證真境之能忍體即無瞋。勤惠無嗔。勤惠如其所證法無我理境而方能忍境。既無我忍心如何有我。故無瞋等得彼無我如所境也。又解如所對境之所行能忍。思對能行名所對諸境界名能。是修行者如所對境之所行能忍即忍體也。經言說忍辱波羅蜜者。正明此體。又言非波羅蜜等者。以無我等想及不著度想于非度中不住無想。如是行忍即安立第一義故名非波羅蜜。貞觀有結。是故如來說名忍度。餘本皆無彼論頌云。
能忍于苦行 以苦行有善 彼福不可量 如是寂勝義 離我及恚想 實無于苦惱
【現代漢語翻譯】 現代漢語譯本 苦（Dukkha，痛苦）。準前通釋彼論為斷。第八經成苦果。疑論云：『先前說彼身苦，因為彼捨身苦身果報，而彼福是劣。若果真如此，依據此法門受持演說，諸菩薩行彼苦行，行彼苦行即是苦果。為何此法門不成苦果？』演曰：『先前說苦身以得苦果，所以福是劣。依據經文，苦行也是苦果。若果真如此，此經應成苦果，如何福勝呢？』下文意說：『先前捨身命有我法相（Atman，自我的表象），或有嗔恚（Dvesha，憤怒）不能忍苦，有疲懈，所以感於生死，而福是劣。現在有忍度（Kshanti Paramita，忍辱波羅蜜）以及慈悲（Karuna，憐憫），能趣菩提（Bodhi，覺悟），所以福為勝。』舉彼能治不忍正行以答前疑，不連此論。依據此論判文則有四：一、如所能忍即是忍體；二、明忍相及生忍處；三、如忍差別即種類忍；四、對治不忍因緣，此初也。論云：『何者能忍？謂達法無我（Anatta，無我）故。』此論問略意言：『何者如所證境而為能忍？』謂如其所證真境之能忍體即無瞋。勤惠無嗔，勤惠如其所證法無我理境而方能忍境。既無我忍心如何有我？故無瞋等得彼無我如所境也。又解如所對境之所行能忍。思對能行名所對，諸境界名能。是修行者如所對境之所行能忍即忍體也。經言說忍辱波羅蜜者，正明此體。又言非波羅蜜等者，以無我等想及不著度想于非度中不住無想。如是行忍即安立第一義故名非波羅蜜。貞觀有結。是故如來說名忍度。餘本皆無彼論頌云： 能忍于苦行 以苦行有善 彼福不可量 如是寂勝義 離我及恚想 實無于苦惱
【English Translation】 English version Suffering (Dukkha). According to the previous explanation, that treatise is for refutation. The eighth sutra results in suffering. The commentary raises a question: 'Previously, it was said that the body is suffering because the act of sacrificing the body leads to suffering as a result, and the merit is inferior. If that is the case, according to this Dharma gate of upholding and expounding, the Bodhisattvas practice asceticism, and practicing asceticism is the result of suffering. Why doesn't this Dharma gate lead to suffering?' The explanation says: 'Previously, it was said that the suffering body leads to suffering as a result, so the merit is inferior. According to the sutra, asceticism is also the result of suffering. If that is the case, this sutra should result in suffering. How can the merit be superior?' The following text means: 'Previously, sacrificing the body and life involved the appearance of self (Atman) and Dharma, or there was anger (Dvesha) and inability to endure suffering, and there was fatigue, so one experienced birth and death, and the merit was inferior. Now, there is forbearance (Kshanti Paramita) and compassion (Karuna), which can lead to enlightenment (Bodhi), so the merit is superior.' Citing the correct practice that can cure impatience answers the previous doubt and is not connected to this treatise. According to this treatise, the judgment of the text has four aspects: first, being able to endure is the essence of forbearance; second, clarifying the characteristics of forbearance and where forbearance arises; third, the differences in forbearance, which are the types of forbearance; fourth, counteracting the causes and conditions of impatience. This is the first. The treatise says: 'What is able to endure? It means realizing the non-self (Anatta) of Dharma.' This treatise asks briefly: 'What is able to endure according to the realm of what is realized?' It means that the essence of being able to endure according to the true realm that is realized is the absence of anger. Diligence and wisdom are without anger. Diligence and wisdom are able to endure the realm according to the principle of the non-self of Dharma that is realized. Since there is no self in the mind of forbearance, how can there be self? Therefore, the absence of anger and so on attains that non-self according to the realm. Another explanation is that what is acted upon in relation to the realm is able to endure. Thinking about what is acted upon is called the object, and the various realms are called the ability. It is the practitioner who is able to endure what is acted upon in relation to the realm, which is the essence of forbearance. The sutra speaks of the Perfection of Forbearance, which clearly explains this essence. Furthermore, it says that it is not the Perfection, etc., because there is the thought of non-self, etc., and the thought of not being attached to crossing over, and there is no thought of not abiding in what is not crossing over. Practicing forbearance in this way establishes the first meaning, so it is called not the Perfection. Zhenguan has a conclusion. Therefore, the Thus Come One speaks of the Perfection of Forbearance. Other versions do not have that verse from the treatise: Able to endure suffering practices, because suffering practices have goodness, That merit is immeasurable, such is the supreme meaning of tranquility, Away from the thought of self and anger, there is truly no suffering.
苦樂有慈悲 如是苦行果
釋云。雖此苦行同于苦果。而此苦行不疲倦。以有忍度名為第一故。彼岸有二種義。一者波羅清凈善根體。二者彼岸功德不可量。如經即非波羅蜜故。非波羅蜜者。無人知彼功德岸故。演曰。經言如來說忍辱波羅蜜者。以有清凈善根體故。又言非者不可量故。由此二義名第一。余意可知。
經。何以故 演曰。自下第二明忍相及生忍處。初徴后辨。此初也。以何等處故能生忍。又行忍度而復言非何所以故。
經。須菩提至割截身體 演曰。下辨分二。初明生忍處。后正明忍相。此初也。即此他處忍度非度及餘一切法而為生處。謂於他處生耐怨害忍即無嗔。于忍度及諸法中不生有無想。即諦察法忍。是審惠故略無安受苦忍生處。此即耐怨害忍生處。言歌利者。此云忍害。以能安忍行損惱事故名忍害。西域傳云。斗諍王餘本音殊而名不異。說此因緣廣如余處。
經。我于爾時至壽者想 演曰。正明忍相有二。初順釋后返顯。順釋有三。初他害不瞋無人我想。二精勤行忍不著有想。三于非度等不著無想。初一耐怨。后二諦察法略無安受苦。或非勝不辨。或初中攝此文初也。論云。云何應知忍相。若他於己起惡等時。由無有我等想故不生嗔想。菩薩地說。若遇他害應
【現代漢語翻譯】 現代漢語譯本 苦與樂皆有慈悲之心，這便是苦行的果報。
釋義：雖然這種苦行類似於苦果，但這種苦行不會讓人感到疲倦，因為它具有忍辱的功德，所以堪稱第一。到達彼岸有兩種含義：一是波羅蜜（Paramita，意為到達彼岸）清凈的善根本體，二是彼岸的功德不可估量。正如經文所說，『即非波羅蜜』，之所以『非波羅蜜』，是因為沒有人知道彼岸功德的邊際。』演曰：經文說如來說忍辱波羅蜜，是因為它具有清凈的善根本體。又說『非』，是因為它的功德不可估量。基於這兩種含義，忍辱被稱為第一。其餘含義可以自行理解。
經文：『何以故？』 演曰：下面第二部分闡明忍辱的相狀以及產生忍辱的地方。先提出問題，再進行辨析。這是最初的提問。因為在什麼地方才能產生忍辱？又，既然已經修行忍辱的功德，又說『非』，這是什麼原因呢？
經文：『須菩提，乃至割截身體。』 演曰：下面進行辨析，分為兩部分：首先闡明產生忍辱的地方，然後正面闡明忍辱的相狀。這是第一部分。即在其他地方，忍辱的功德既是度，又非度，以及其餘一切法，都是產生忍辱的地方。也就是說，在其他地方產生忍耐怨恨損害的忍辱，就不會產生嗔恨。在忍辱的功德以及諸法之中，不產生有或無的念想，這就是諦察法忍（examining the truth of dharmas with patience）。因為這是審慎的智慧，所以略去了安受苦忍（enduring suffering with patience）的產生之處。這裡指的是耐怨害忍（patience with harm from enemies）的產生之處。歌利王（Kali，意為殘暴的國王）的意思是『忍害』，因為能夠安忍他人所行的損害惱怒之事，所以稱為忍害。西域的傳說稱之為斗諍王，其餘的稱呼雖然發音不同，但含義沒有差異。關於這個因緣的詳細說明，可以參考其他地方。
經文：『我于爾時，無我相、無人相、無眾生相、無壽者相。』 演曰：正面闡明忍辱的相狀，分為兩部分：首先是順著經文解釋，然後是反過來彰顯。順著經文解釋分為三點：一是他人加害時不生嗔恨，沒有我相、人相；二是精勤修行忍辱，不執著于有想；三是對非度等不執著于無想。第一點是耐怨害忍，后兩點是諦察法忍，略去了安受苦忍。或者說，因為不勝任而不辨析，或者說，將安受苦忍包含在前面兩點之中。這段經文是第一點。論中說：『應當如何瞭解忍辱的相狀？如果他人對自己產生惡意等情況時，由於沒有我等念想，所以不產生嗔恨的念想。』《菩薩地持經》（Bodhisattva Bhumi Sutra）中說：『如果遇到他人加害，應當……』
【English Translation】 English version Suffering and joy both have compassion; such is the fruit of ascetic practices.
Explanation: Although this ascetic practice is similar to the fruit of suffering, it does not cause fatigue because it possesses the merit of patience, thus being considered the foremost. Reaching the other shore has two meanings: first, the pure root of goodness that is Paramita (meaning 'to reach the other shore'); second, the immeasurable merit of the other shore. As the sutra says, 'It is not Paramita,' because no one knows the boundary of the merit of the other shore.' Commentary: The sutra says that the Tathagata speaks of the Paramita of patience because it possesses the pure root of goodness. It also says 'not' because its merit is immeasurable. Based on these two meanings, patience is called the foremost. The remaining meanings can be understood on your own.
Sutra: 'Why is that?'
Commentary: The second part below elucidates the characteristics of patience and the places where patience arises. First, a question is raised, and then an analysis is conducted. This is the initial question. Because in what place can patience arise? Also, since the merit of patience has already been cultivated, why is it said to be 'not'? What is the reason for this?
Sutra: 'Subhuti, even to the point of having my body cut to pieces.'
Commentary: The analysis below is divided into two parts: first, elucidating the places where patience arises; then, directly elucidating the characteristics of patience. This is the first part. That is, in other places, the merit of patience is both a crossing and not a crossing, and all other dharmas are places where patience arises. In other words, in other places, generating patience that endures resentment and harm will not generate anger. Within the merit of patience and all dharmas, not generating thoughts of existence or non-existence is examining the truth of dharmas with patience. Because this is prudent wisdom, the place where enduring suffering with patience arises is omitted. This refers to the place where patience with harm from enemies arises. Kali (meaning 'violent king') means 'harm of patience' because being able to patiently endure the harm and annoyance done by others is called the harm of patience. Western Region legends call him the King of Strife; other names may have different pronunciations, but the meanings are the same. A detailed explanation of this cause and condition can be found elsewhere.
Sutra: 'At that time, I had no thought of self, no thought of person, no thought of sentient being, and no thought of lifespan.'
Commentary: Directly elucidating the characteristics of patience is divided into two parts: first, explaining according to the sutra; then, revealing it from the opposite perspective. Explaining according to the sutra is divided into three points: first, not generating anger when others cause harm, having no thought of self or person; second, diligently cultivating patience, not clinging to thoughts of existence; third, not clinging to thoughts of non-existence regarding non-crossing, etc. The first point is patience with harm from enemies, and the latter two points are examining the truth of dharmas with patience, omitting enduring suffering with patience. Or, it is said that because it is not competent, it is not analyzed, or that enduring suffering with patience is included in the previous two points. This passage is the first point. The treatise says: 'How should one understand the characteristics of patience? If others generate malice, etc., towards oneself, because there is no thought of self, etc., thoughts of anger are not generated.' The Bodhisattva Bhumi Sutra says: 'If one encounters harm from others, one should...'
作是思。此我先業應合他害。今若不忍更增苦因。便非愛己成自苦縛。又自他身性皆行苦。彼無知故增害。我身我既有知。寧增彼苦。二乘自利尚不苦他。我既利他應忍他害。作是思已應修五想。一親善想。二唯法想。三無常想。四有苦想。五攝受想。此於他害不生我想。即五想中唯法想也。由修無我唯有法故不報彼怨生初忍也。唯此余忍應有起緣略故不辨。又解即前割截及耐怨忍是餘二種之所起處不離此故。由斯貞觀我于爾時都無有想亦非無想。此本經中闕無此文。準論釋者。亦不于羼提波羅蜜中生有想。于非波羅蜜中生無想。演曰。即餘二想于忍度中不執法有。及非忍中不起無執。而常修習合是諦察法忍想。若執法無總撥無體不斷不修不欣不厭不欲利樂。是故復令不住無想。維摩經云。但除其病而不除法。又非度者即前非忍辱波羅蜜非有別法。彼論云。此苦行勝彼捨身。何況離我相嗔恚想故。又此行無苦。不但無苦及有樂。以有慈悲故。如經我于爾時無我想乃至無想亦非無相故。此明慈悲心相應故如是說。演曰。彼離我相嗔恚相。釋經無我相等。又此行無苦等釋經無相。雖為苦行不見苦相。不但無苦及有樂等者。釋經非無相。以有慈悲共樂和合故與此論別。又解彼文不于忍度生有苦想故言無想。不于非波羅蜜外眾
【現代漢語翻譯】 作是思：『此我先業應合他害。今若不忍，更增苦因，便非愛己，成自苦縛。』（這樣思索：『這都是我過去所造的惡業，才應該遭受他的傷害。現在如果不能忍受，就會增加新的痛苦之因，那就不是愛護自己，而是給自己套上痛苦的枷鎖。』） 『又自他身性皆行苦。彼無知故增害，我身我既有知，寧增彼苦？』（『而且自己和他人的身體，其本性都是充滿痛苦的。他們因為無知才增加傷害，我的身體，我已經有了智慧，怎麼能再增加他們的痛苦呢？』） 『二乘自利尚不苦他，我既利他，應忍他害。』（『聲聞乘和緣覺乘爲了自己的利益尚且不傷害他人，我既然要利益他人，就應該忍受他人的傷害。』） 作是思已，應修五想：一、親善想（將對方視為親人朋友）；二、唯法想（只觀諸法實相）；三、無常想（觀一切皆是無常）；四、有苦想（觀一切皆是痛苦）；五、攝受想（以慈悲心攝受一切眾生）。 此於他害不生我想，即五想中唯法想也。（對於他人的傷害不產生『我』的執著，這就是五種觀想中的『唯法想』。） 由修無我，唯有法故，不報彼怨，生初忍也。（因為修習無我，只觀諸法實相，所以不報復對方的怨恨，生起最初的忍辱。） 唯此余忍應有起緣，略故不辨。（只有這種忍辱，其餘的忍辱應該也有生起的因緣，因為簡略所以不詳細說明。） 又解即前割截及耐怨忍，是餘二種之所起處，不離此故。（另一種解釋是，前面所說的被割截身體以及忍耐怨恨的忍辱，是其餘兩種忍辱生起的地方，不離這種忍辱。） 由斯貞觀我于爾時都無有想，亦非無想。（因此，真正觀察時，我于爾時都沒有『有』的執著，也不是『無』的執著。） 此本經中闕無此文，準論釋者，亦不于羼提波羅蜜（忍辱波羅蜜）中生有想，于非波羅蜜中生無想。（這個原本的經文中缺少這段文字，按照論典的解釋，也不在忍辱波羅蜜中產生『有』的執著，在非波羅蜜中產生『無』的執著。） 演曰：即餘二想于忍度中不執法有，及非忍中不起無執，而常修習合是諦察法忍想。（演法師說：其餘兩種觀想，在忍辱波羅蜜中不執著于『有』，在非忍辱中不起『無』的執著，而經常修習，合起來就是諦察法忍的觀想。） 若執法無，總撥無體，不斷不修，不欣不厭，不欲利樂，是故復令不住無想。（如果執著于『無』，完全否定一切，不修斷，不欣喜也不厭惡，不想要利益和快樂，所以又讓人不住在『無』的執著中。） 維摩經云：『但除其病，而不除法。』（《維摩詰經》說：『只是去除他的疾病，而不是去除法。』） 又非度者，即前非忍辱波羅蜜，非有別法。（又，非波羅蜜，就是前面所說的非忍辱波羅蜜，並非有另外的法。） 彼論云：『此苦行勝彼捨身，何況離我相嗔恚想故。』（那部論典說：『這種苦行勝過捨棄身體，更何況是遠離了我相和嗔恚的念頭。』） 又此行無苦，不但無苦及有樂，以有慈悲故。（而且這種修行沒有痛苦，不但沒有痛苦而且有快樂，因為有慈悲心的緣故。） 如經我于爾時無我想乃至無想亦非無相故。（如經文所說，我于爾時沒有『我』的執著，乃至沒有『無』的執著，也不是『非相』的執著。） 此明慈悲心相應故如是說。（這說明因為與慈悲心相應所以這樣說。） 演曰：彼離我相嗔恚相，釋經無我相等。（演法師說：遠離我相和嗔恚相，解釋經文中的『無我』等等。） 又此行無苦等釋經無相。不但無苦及有樂等者，釋經非無相。以有慈悲共樂和合故與此論別。（而且這種修行沒有痛苦等等，解釋經文中的『無相』。不但沒有痛苦而且有快樂等等，解釋經文中的『非無相』。因為有慈悲共同的快樂和合，所以與此論不同。） 又解彼文不于忍度生有苦想故言無想。不于非波羅蜜外眾（另一種解釋是，不在忍辱波羅蜜中產生『有苦』的念頭，所以說『無想』。不在非波羅蜜之外的眾）
【English Translation】 Thus he thinks: 'This is because of my past karma that I should suffer harm from others. If I cannot endure it now, I will increase the causes of suffering, which is not loving myself but binding myself with the fetters of suffering.' 'Moreover, the nature of both oneself and others is inherently suffering. They increase harm because of their ignorance. As for my body, since I have knowledge, how can I increase their suffering?' 'The Śrāvakas (Hearers) and Pratyekabuddhas (Solitary Realizers), even for their own benefit, do not cause suffering to others. Since I am benefiting others, I should endure harm from them.' Having thought thus, one should cultivate five thoughts: 1. The thought of friendliness (viewing the other as a relative or friend); 2. The thought of the Dharma only (observing only the true nature of phenomena); 3. The thought of impermanence (observing that everything is impermanent); 4. The thought of suffering (observing that everything is suffering); 5. The thought of embracing (embracing all beings with compassion). This not giving rise to the thought of 'I' in the face of harm from others is precisely the thought of the Dharma only among the five thoughts. Because of cultivating non-self, only the Dharma exists, so one does not retaliate against their resentment, giving rise to the initial forbearance. Only this, the remaining forbearances should have arising causes, but because it is brief, it is not explained in detail. Another explanation is that the aforementioned cutting and enduring resentment are the places where the other two types of forbearance arise, not separate from this one. Therefore, in true observation, I at that time have no attachment to 'existence' at all, nor is it an attachment to 'non-existence'. This original sutra lacks this passage. According to the commentary of the treatises, one also does not give rise to the thought of 'existence' in the Kṣānti-pāramitā (Perfection of Forbearance), and one gives rise to the thought of 'non-existence' in the non-pāramitā. Master Yan says: The remaining two thoughts, in the perfection of forbearance, do not cling to the existence of phenomena, and in non-forbearance, do not give rise to the clinging to non-existence, but constantly cultivate them, which together is the thought of discerning the Dharma and forbearance. If one clings to non-existence, completely denying everything, not cutting off, not cultivating, not rejoicing, not disliking, not desiring benefit and happiness, therefore one is again made not to dwell in the clinging to non-existence. The Vimalakīrti Sutra says: 'Only remove their illness, but do not remove the Dharma.' Moreover, the non-perfection is the aforementioned non-Kṣānti-pāramitā, not a separate Dharma. That treatise says: 'This ascetic practice surpasses abandoning the body, let alone being free from the thought of self and the thought of anger.' Moreover, this practice has no suffering, not only no suffering but also has happiness, because there is compassion. As the sutra says, I at that time have no thought of self, even no thought of non-existence, nor is it a thought of non-form. This explains that it is said in this way because it is in accordance with the mind of compassion. Master Yan says: Being free from the thought of self and the thought of anger explains the sutra's 'non-self' and so on. Moreover, this practice has no suffering, etc., explains the sutra's 'non-form'. Not only no suffering but also has happiness, etc., explains the sutra's 'non-non-form'. Because there is compassion, common joy and harmony, it is different from this treatise. Another explanation is that one does not give rise to the thought of 'having suffering' in the perfection of forbearance, so it is said 'no thought'. Not among the beings outside of the non-pāramitā
生中起于無想。不救不化。由見生苦而行拔濟與樂想。應而起慈悲云非無想。正當此同。又此三想如次能生彼三種忍。無相者安受苦忍。以不見苦有寒熱等想苦故。又此三相。初一離我執。后二離法執之中有無別故。皆令離之。非全執無即為真忍故言亦非無想。
經。何以故至應生嗔恨 演曰。返顯也。先徴后釋。何所以故知于彼時無有我等想耶。具徴之想釋但顯。初以影略故。嗔由我見生。若有我見應生嗔恨。恨依嗔立。懷惡不捨結怨為性。即隨煩惱嗔恨既無明無我想。由如是故行忍度時無我想等。
經。須菩提又念至無壽者相 演曰。第三明如忍差別。即種類忍。論云何者種類忍。謂極苦忍相續苦忍。此意極苦忍者。謂割截身份。相續忍者。謂於五百世作忍辱仙等。非唯一忍名為差別。生生常行前後相似名種類忍。論中欲辨忍差別故。更舉割截理實屬前。言忍辱仙者。慈悲人也。
經。是故須菩提至三菩提心 演曰。第四對治示忍因緣由三想生。一住流轉苦想。二住眾生相違苦想。三住乏受用苦想。由初想故不發菩提心。即不能忍生死流轉。不起安受苦忍。及諦察法忍。住眾生相違想故。見怨害苦。不起耐怨害忍住乏受用苦想。亦不能起安受苦忍。不能忍受寒熱饑乏等故。今為對治此三想故令
【現代漢語翻譯】 現代漢語譯本：
生起于無想（沒有念想的狀態）之中。既不能救度，也不能教化。因為見到眾生有生之苦，所以才發起拔濟（救助）與樂（快樂）的想法。爲了應和眾生的需求而生起慈悲之心，所以說並非完全沒有念想。這三種想法依次能夠產生那三種忍（安受苦忍、耐怨害忍、諦察法忍）。無相（沒有形相）指的是安受苦忍，因為不見苦有寒熱等想法，所以能忍受苦難。這三種相，第一個是遠離我執（對自我的執著），后兩個是遠離法執（對事物現象的執著），其中有有無的區別，但都是爲了讓人遠離執著。並非完全執著于沒有念想就是真正的忍，所以說也不是完全沒有念想。
經文：『何以故至應生嗔恨』
演曰：這是反過來顯示。先提出問題，然後解釋。為什麼知道在那個時候沒有我等的想法呢？詳細地提出問題，解釋時只顯示一部分。最初用影子來概括。嗔恨由我見（認為有『我』的觀念）產生。如果有我見，就應該產生嗔恨。怨恨依附於嗔恨而存在，懷有惡意不肯放下，結下怨仇是它的特性。也就是隨煩惱（隨著根本煩惱而產生的煩惱）中的嗔恨。既然沒有明（智慧）也沒有我想，因為這樣，所以在行忍辱的時候沒有我想等等。
經文：『須菩提又念至無壽者相』
演曰：第三是說明忍的差別，也就是種類忍。論中說什麼是種類忍？就是極苦忍和相續苦忍。這裡的意思是，極苦忍指的是割截身體，相續忍指的是在五百世中作為忍辱仙人等等。不是隻有一種忍叫做差別，生生世世常常修行，前後相似，叫做種類忍。論中想要辨別忍的差別，所以又舉了割截的例子，實際上屬於前面所說的。說到忍辱仙人，就是慈悲的人。
經文：『是故須菩提至三菩提心』
演曰：第四是對治，顯示忍的因緣是由三種想法產生的。一是安住于流轉苦的想法，二是安住于眾生互相違背的苦的想法，三是安住于缺乏受用的苦的想法。因為第一個想法，所以不發菩提心（覺悟之心），也就是不能忍受生死流轉，不能生起安受苦忍以及諦察法忍。安住于眾生互相違背的想法，見到怨恨傷害的苦，不能生起耐怨害忍。安住于缺乏受用的苦的想法，也不能生起安受苦忍，不能忍受寒冷炎熱飢餓匱乏等等。現在爲了對治這三種想法，所以讓
【English Translation】 English version:
Arising from non-thought (a state without thoughts). Neither saving nor transforming. Because seeing the suffering of beings, one then initiates the thought of rescuing and giving joy. Responding to the needs of beings, compassion arises, therefore it is said that it is not completely without thought. These three thoughts can sequentially generate those three types of forbearance (enduring suffering, enduring harm from enemies, and discerning the truth). 'Non-form' refers to enduring suffering, because not seeing suffering as having thoughts of cold, heat, etc., one can endure suffering. These three aspects, the first is to be free from ego-attachment (attachment to self), the latter two are to be free from attachment to phenomena (attachment to things and appearances), in which there is a difference between existence and non-existence, but all are for the purpose of making people free from attachment. It is not that completely clinging to non-thought is true forbearance, therefore it is said that it is also not completely without thought.
Sutra: 'Why is it that one should give rise to anger?'
Commentary: This is a reverse display. First, a question is raised, then explained. Why do we know that at that time there was no thought of self, etc.? The question is raised in detail, but the explanation only reveals a part. Initially, it was summarized with a shadow. Anger arises from the view of self (the concept of 'I'). If there is a view of self, then anger should arise. Resentment depends on anger for its existence, harboring malice and not letting go, forming grudges is its nature. That is, anger among the secondary afflictions (afflictions that arise along with the fundamental afflictions). Since there is no clarity (wisdom) and no thought of self, because of this, when practicing forbearance, there is no thought of self, etc.
Sutra: 'Subhuti, again, thinking of no life span.'
Commentary: The third is to explain the difference in forbearance, which is the forbearance of types. The treatise says, what is the forbearance of types? It is the forbearance of extreme suffering and the forbearance of continuous suffering. The meaning here is that the forbearance of extreme suffering refers to cutting off body parts, and the forbearance of continuous suffering refers to being a Kshanti (forbearance) immortal for five hundred lifetimes, etc. It is not that only one forbearance is called difference, but constantly practicing life after life, similar before and after, is called forbearance of types. The treatise wants to distinguish the difference in forbearance, so it also gives the example of cutting off, which actually belongs to what was said earlier. Speaking of Kshanti immortal, it is a compassionate person.
Sutra: 'Therefore, Subhuti, to the Bodhi mind.'
Commentary: The fourth is the antidote, showing that the cause of forbearance arises from three thoughts. One is to dwell on the thought of the suffering of transmigration, the second is to dwell on the thought of the suffering of beings contradicting each other, and the third is to dwell on the thought of the suffering of lacking enjoyment. Because of the first thought, one does not generate Bodhicitta (the mind of enlightenment), that is, one cannot endure the cycle of birth and death, and cannot generate enduring suffering and discerning the truth. Dwelling on the thought of beings contradicting each other, seeing the suffering of resentment and harm, one cannot generate enduring harm from enemies. Dwelling on the thought of the suffering of lacking enjoyment, one also cannot generate enduring suffering, and cannot endure cold, heat, hunger, scarcity, etc. Now, in order to counteract these three thoughts, so let
生勝忍。初流轉苦通三界。是行苦。后二苦唯欲界。色界已上無寒熱乏少等故。然依相增眾生相違是苦苦。乏受用是壞苦。又流轉攝五苦。謂生老病死五陰盛苦。眾生相違攝怨憎會苦。愛別離苦。乏受用攝求不得苦。前明忍相中論解有二耐怨諦察。今明對治不忍因緣方解安受苦忍。或初流轉苦相雖亦不能起安受忍。而今意即不起諦察法忍。由不諦察二空道理住流轉想。或一向厭求自滅度。或由住著流轉苦生皆障菩提故。正對治令不住著。以下第三別解對治之受用因安受苦故。問。準論下解明暗喻中。唯據當果名乏受用。亦無安受苦忍之相。如何說是安受苦忍。答。下有二意。一令當果不乏。二雖乏受用而不生苦。不住相故。故論說為忍苦住攝對治。此三即為三段。初對流轉苦因緣中分四。初總標二別釋三重成四結勸。此初也。論云發菩提心者。以三種苦想故則不欲發心故。說應離一切相等。此中一切想者。為顯如是等三苦想也。演曰。大發大心要起慈悲救濟。含識觀諸法空解苦無苦。方于生死長時救度共證菩提。永出流轉。若見三苦起逼迫想。如人畏時非人得。便如是菩薩畏生死故。六塵得便自受流轉。安能救人。或見苦想自求涅槃不能息他流轉之苦。或見苦相相縛縛深復增粗重。或全誹撥邪見流迷常處生死。不能自
【現代漢語翻譯】 現代漢語譯本 生勝忍（產生殊勝的忍耐）。最初的流轉之苦遍及三界（欲界、色界、無色界），這是行苦（由遷流動搖所產生的苦）。后兩種苦只在欲界。因為以上各界沒有寒冷、炎熱、缺乏等情況。然而，依據表相增加眾生相互違背是苦苦（由身心逼迫所生的苦）。缺乏受用是壞苦（樂境變壞所生的苦）。 又，流轉涵蓋五種苦，即生、老、病、死和五陰熾盛苦（由五蘊熾盛所生的苦）。眾生相互違背涵蓋怨憎會苦（和怨恨的人相聚所生的苦）。愛別離苦（和所愛的人分離所生的苦）。缺乏受用涵蓋求不得苦（求之不得所生的苦）。前面在明忍相中，論述解釋有二種：耐怨和諦察。現在說明對治不忍的因緣，才能理解安受苦忍（安然接受苦難的忍耐）。或者，最初的流轉苦相雖然也不能生起安受忍，但現在的意思是，不起諦察法忍（通過如實觀察法性而產生的忍耐）。由於不諦察二空（人空和法空）的道理，而停留在流轉的想法中。或者一味厭惡而尋求自我滅度。或者由於執著流轉之苦，這些都會障礙菩提（覺悟）。所以，正是爲了對治，使人不執著。以下第三部分，分別解釋對治受用的因，安受苦。問：按照論的下文解釋，在明暗的比喻中，僅僅根據當下的結果稱為缺乏受用，也沒有安受苦忍的表相。如何說這是安受苦忍呢？ 答：下文有兩種含義。一是使當下的結果不缺乏。二是即使缺乏受用，也不產生苦，因為不住相（不執著于現象）。所以，論中說這是忍苦住攝對治（通過安住于忍耐來攝伏煩惱）。這三點就是三個階段。最初對流轉苦的因緣中分為四個部分。首先是總標，其次是別釋，然後是重成，最後是結勸。這是最初的部分。論中說：『發菩提心（立志成佛）的人，因為有三種苦的想法，所以不想發心。』所以說應該離開一切相。這裡的一切想，是爲了顯示像這樣的三種苦的想法。演曰：『要發大心，就要生起慈悲心去救濟眾生。理解諸法皆空，明白苦的本質是空無自性，才能在生死輪迴中長久地救度眾生，共同證得菩提，永遠脫離流轉。如果見到三苦就產生逼迫的想法，就像人害怕的時候，被非人所趁。』如果菩薩害怕生死，六塵（色、聲、香、味、觸、法）就會趁虛而入，自己承受流轉之苦。又怎麼能救人呢？或者見到苦相就只求自我涅槃（寂滅），不能停止他人流轉之苦。或者見到苦相，被表相束縛，束縛越來越深，越來越粗重。或者完全誹謗，產生邪見，在生死中迷惑流浪，不能自拔。
【English Translation】 English version Generating Supreme Endurance. The initial suffering of transmigration pervades the Three Realms (Desire Realm, Form Realm, Formless Realm), which is the suffering of activity (suffering arising from constant change and movement). The latter two sufferings exist only in the Desire Realm, as the realms above lack cold, heat, scarcity, and the like. However, according to appearances, the increase in conflict among beings is the suffering of suffering (suffering arising from physical and mental oppression). Lack of enjoyment is the suffering of change (suffering arising from the deterioration of pleasurable states). Furthermore, transmigration encompasses five sufferings: birth, old age, sickness, death, and the suffering of the flourishing of the five aggregates (suffering arising from the intense activity of the five aggregates). Conflict among beings encompasses the suffering of encountering those one hates (suffering arising from meeting with those one resents). The suffering of separation from loved ones (suffering arising from separation from those one loves). Lack of enjoyment encompasses the suffering of not obtaining what one seeks (suffering arising from not getting what one desires). Earlier, in clarifying the characteristics of endurance, the discussion explained two aspects: enduring resentment and discerning truth. Now, it explains the causes and conditions for counteracting non-endurance, in order to understand the endurance of accepting suffering (endurance of accepting hardship peacefully). Or, although the initial appearance of the suffering of transmigration may not give rise to the endurance of acceptance, the present intention is not to give rise to the endurance of discerning the Dharma (endurance arising from truly observing the nature of reality). Because one does not discern the principles of the two emptinesses (emptiness of self and emptiness of phenomena), one remains in the thought of transmigration. Or one seeks self-extinction out of aversion. Or because of attachment to the suffering of transmigration, all these obstruct Bodhi (enlightenment). Therefore, it is precisely to counteract this, to prevent people from being attached. The following third part separately explains the cause of counteracting enjoyment, enduring suffering peacefully. Question: According to the explanation in the lower part of the treatise, in the metaphor of light and darkness, only the immediate result is called lack of enjoyment, and there is no appearance of enduring suffering peacefully. How can this be said to be enduring suffering peacefully? Answer: The following has two meanings. One is to prevent the immediate result from being lacking. The other is that even if enjoyment is lacking, suffering does not arise, because one does not dwell on appearances (not being attached to phenomena). Therefore, the treatise says that this is the counteraction of enduring suffering and abiding in it (subduing afflictions by abiding in endurance). These three points are three stages. Initially, the causes and conditions of the suffering of transmigration are divided into four parts. First is the general statement, second is the separate explanation, then the repeated establishment, and finally the concluding exhortation. This is the initial part. The treatise says: 'Those who generate the Bodhi mind (resolve to become a Buddha) do not want to generate the mind because of the thought of the three sufferings.' Therefore, it is said that one should leave all appearances. The 'all thoughts' here are to show the thought of the three sufferings like this. Yan said: 'To generate a great mind, one must generate compassion to save sentient beings. Understanding that all dharmas are empty and that the nature of suffering is empty and without self-nature, one can save sentient beings in the cycle of birth and death for a long time, jointly attain Bodhi, and forever escape transmigration. If one sees the three sufferings and generates the thought of being oppressed, it is like a person being afraid and being taken advantage of by non-humans.' If a Bodhisattva is afraid of birth and death, the six dusts (form, sound, smell, taste, touch, dharma) will take advantage of the opportunity, and one will endure the suffering of transmigration oneself. How can one save others? Or seeing the appearance of suffering, one only seeks self-Nirvana (extinction) and cannot stop the suffering of others' transmigration. Or seeing the appearance of suffering, one is bound by appearances, and the bondage becomes deeper and heavier. Or one completely slanders, generates wrong views, and wanders in delusion in birth and death, unable to extricate oneself.
息流轉之苦。是故發心不起三想免受流轉名為對治。其不發心是流轉苦之因緣也。問。此言邪三苦相障發大心勸離三相發菩提心。若爾應是三苦對治。如何唯說對治流轉苦因緣耶。答。理實發心能治三苦。由發心者起三妙觀。一厭生死即除流轉。二愍眾生即除相違。三求菩提即除乏受用。況此說為離三想故應治三苦。而言唯治流轉苦者。總別異故。謂發心是總離一切相。餘二是別各離相故。所治亦然。流轉是總。餘二苦別。以總除別故不相違。問。不發心障以何為體。答。即法執三想及癡貪等一切二障以為體性近流轉因正是無明。無明緣行故受流轉。癡之根本。即是智障。三相心是。由此離相發菩提心。癡等自滅無明滅故。乃至老死亦復隨滅。流轉自息故。彼論云。若有菩薩不離我相等。彼菩薩見苦行苦亦欲舍菩提心。為彼故說應離一切相發心等。偈言。
為不捨心起 修行及堅固 為忍波羅蜜 習彼能學心
演曰。準長行釋上二句問。下二句答。一問為何等故心得不捨菩提相。二問為何起行相而修行。下二句答。為忍等者。謂以無我等相而發心修行也。然準彼論初地以去證第一義。所得忍度名不住心。舉此為證勸。彼地前菩薩發心亦離一切相故云未生。第一菩提心者有如是過為防此過等。
【現代漢語翻譯】 現代漢語譯本：息止流轉之苦。因此，發起菩提心而不生起三種執著（三想）就能免受流轉之苦，這稱為對治。不發菩提心是流轉之苦的因緣。問：此文說邪見、三種苦相障礙發起大菩提心，勸人遠離三種執著而發起菩提心。如果這樣，應該說是對治三種苦。為什麼只說對治流轉苦的因緣呢？答：實際上，發起菩提心能對治三種苦。因為發起菩提心的人會生起三種妙觀：一、厭離生死，就能去除流轉；二、憐憫眾生，就能去除相違（嗔恨）；三、求證菩提，就能去除缺乏受用（匱乏）。何況這裡說的是爲了遠離三種執著，所以應該能對治三種苦。而只說對治流轉苦，是因為總和別的不同。發起菩提心是總的，能遠離一切執著。其餘兩種是對別的，各自遠離特定的執著。所對治的也是這樣，流轉是總的，其餘兩種苦是別的。以總的去除別的，所以不相違背。問：不發菩提心的障礙以什麼為體？答：就是法執、三種執著以及愚癡、貪婪等一切二障作為體性，接近流轉的因正是無明（avidya）。無明緣行，所以會遭受流轉。愚癡的根本就是智障。三種執著的心就是智障。因此，遠離執著而發起菩提心，愚癡等自然消滅，無明滅除，乃至老死也隨之滅除，流轉自然止息。所以，彼論說：『如果有菩薩不離我相等，這位菩薩見到苦行苦也想捨棄菩提心。爲了這些人，所以說應該遠離一切執著而發起菩提心等。』偈頌說： 『爲了不捨棄菩提心而發起，修行以及堅固；爲了忍辱波羅蜜（Kshanti Paramita），學習那些能夠學習的心。』 演曰：根據長行解釋上面兩句的提問，下面兩句是回答。一問：爲了什麼緣故，心得不捨菩提相？二問：爲了什麼生起行相而修行？下面兩句回答：爲了忍等，就是以無我等相而發起菩提心修行。然而，根據彼論，初地（Bhumis）以後證得第一義，所得的忍度名為不住心。舉這個作為證明勸勉，彼地前的菩薩發起菩提心也遠離一切相，所以說未生。第一菩提心有這樣的過失，爲了防止這種過失等。
【English Translation】 English version: To cease the suffering of transmigration. Therefore, generating the Bodhi mind without giving rise to the three attachments (three thoughts) can avoid the suffering of transmigration, which is called the antidote. Not generating the Bodhi mind is the cause and condition for the suffering of transmigration. Question: This text says that wrong views and the three aspects of suffering obstruct the generation of the great Bodhi mind, and it encourages people to stay away from the three attachments and generate the Bodhi mind. If so, it should be said to be the antidote to the three sufferings. Why only say that it is the antidote to the cause and condition of the suffering of transmigration? Answer: In reality, generating the Bodhi mind can counteract the three sufferings. Because those who generate the Bodhi mind will give rise to three wonderful contemplations: First, to be disgusted with birth and death can remove transmigration; second, to have compassion for sentient beings can remove conflict (hatred); third, to seek Bodhi can remove the lack of enjoyment (scarcity). Moreover, what is said here is to stay away from the three attachments, so it should be able to counteract the three sufferings. The reason for only saying that it counteracts the suffering of transmigration is because the general and the specific are different. Generating the Bodhi mind is general, which can stay away from all attachments. The other two are specific, each staying away from specific attachments. The same is true for what is being counteracted. Transmigration is general, and the other two sufferings are specific. Removing the specific with the general is not contradictory. Question: What is the substance of the obstacle to not generating the Bodhi mind? Answer: It is the attachment to the Dharma, the three attachments, and all the two obscurations such as ignorance and greed as the substance. The cause close to transmigration is precisely ignorance (avidya). Ignorance conditions action, so one will suffer transmigration. The root of ignorance is the obscuration of wisdom. The mind of the three attachments is the obscuration of wisdom. Therefore, staying away from attachments and generating the Bodhi mind, ignorance and so on will naturally disappear. When ignorance is extinguished, even old age and death will also be extinguished accordingly, and transmigration will naturally cease. Therefore, that treatise says: 'If there are Bodhisattvas who do not stay away from self-attachment, etc., these Bodhisattvas see suffering practices and also want to abandon the Bodhi mind. For these people, it is said that one should stay away from all attachments and generate the Bodhi mind, etc.' The verse says: 『In order not to abandon the mind, to arise, practice, and be firm; for the Paramita of patience (Kshanti Paramita), to learn those minds that can be learned.』 Yan said: According to the long line, the above two sentences are questions, and the following two sentences are answers. The first question is: For what reason does the mind not abandon the aspect of Bodhi? The second question is: For what reason does the aspect of practice arise and practice? The following two sentences answer: For patience, etc., that is, to generate the Bodhi mind and practice with the aspect of no-self, etc. However, according to that treatise, after the first Bhumi (Bhumis), one attains the first meaning, and the patience obtained is called the non-abiding mind. This is taken as proof to encourage that the Bodhisattvas before that Bhumi also stay away from all attachments when generating the Bodhi mind, so it is said that it is not yet born. The first Bodhi mind has such faults, in order to prevent such faults, etc.
經。不應住色至味觸法生心 演曰。二別釋不住。于相令離相縛及粗重縛。由執相故。使為境相之所拘礙。于生死中生粗重縛。粗重縛者。不安隱性。不調柔性。無堪任性。身心勞倦疲之性故。有經頌云。相縛縛眾生。亦由粗重縛善雙修止觀。方乃得解脫。如觀戲調境。相拘心耽嗜。不已便生勞倦后休息已方覺疲乏。此想拘心生乏亦爾。此相縛者。體通一切三世三性。有漏境相所生。粗重亦通一切有漏之性。故說三界皆是行苦。或此文意由執色等以為實有。便起希求追戀慳惜。于流轉苦更憎疲乏。永處生死。安能發心。為遮此等故勸不住色等生心。論云。若著色等。則于流轉苦中疲乏故菩提心不生。釋文如前。愿凈土解。論文云。不住非法者。謂非法無我也。于非法及法無我中皆不住故。演曰。貞觀不住六塵及非六塵。梁本及此論。但有不住前五塵無不住非五塵。其法非法即皆不住故。論逐難先解非法。然準論意。經言法者謂法無我。言非法者謂非法無我。即有法我故。總結云。于非法及法無我中皆不住故。謂於法無我及非法無我中皆不住也。
經。應生無所住心 演曰。第三重成。論云。為成就彼諸不住故說遮餘事。如經應生無所住心。何以故。若心有住則為非住等。此意遮餘事者遮心有住也。文分為二。初
【現代漢語翻譯】 現代漢語譯本： 經：不應住色至味觸法生心（不應該執著於色、聲、香、味、觸、法而產生心念）。演曰：二別釋不住。于相令離相縛及粗重縛（進一步解釋『不住』，在於使人脫離對錶象的執著以及粗重的束縛）。由執相故（因為執著于表象），使為境相之所拘礙（就會被外在的表象所束縛），于生死中生粗重縛（在生死輪迴中產生粗重的束縛）。粗重縛者（粗重的束縛是指），不安隱性（不安穩的性質），不調柔性（不柔順的性質），無堪任性（沒有能力承擔的性質），身心勞倦疲之性故（身心勞累疲憊的性質）。有經頌云（有經文偈頌說），相縛縛眾生（對錶象的執著束縛著眾生），亦由粗重縛（也因為粗重的束縛），善雙修止觀（如果能好好地修習止觀），方乃得解脫（才能得到解脫）。如觀戲調境（就像觀看嬉戲調笑的場景），相拘心耽嗜（心被表象所拘束而沉迷），不已便生勞倦（不止息就會產生勞累疲倦），后休息已方覺疲乏（之後休息了才能感覺到疲乏）。此想拘心生乏亦爾（這種被表象拘束而產生疲乏也是如此）。此相縛者（這種對錶象的束縛），體通一切三世三性（本體貫通一切過去、現在、未來三世以及善、惡、無記三性），有漏境相所生（由有缺陷的境界和表象所產生）。粗重亦通一切有漏之性（粗重也貫通一切有缺陷的性質），故說三界皆是行苦（所以說三界都是行苦）。或此文意由執色等以為實有（或者這段文字的意思是，因為執著於色等，認為它們是真實存在的），便起希求追戀慳惜（就會產生希望得到、追逐迷戀、吝嗇愛惜的心），于流轉苦更憎疲乏（對於流轉的痛苦更加厭惡疲憊），永處生死（永遠處於生死輪迴之中），安能發心（怎麼能發起菩提心呢）。為遮此等故勸不住色等生心（爲了阻止這些，所以勸導不要執著於色等而產生心念）。論云（論中說），若著色等（如果執著於色等），則于流轉苦中疲乏故菩提心不生（就會在流轉的痛苦中感到疲憊，所以菩提心就無法生起）。釋文如前（解釋的文字如前所述），愿凈土解（希望能夠理解凈土的教義）。論文云（論中說），不住非法者（不住于非法，是指），謂非法無我也（所謂的非法，就是沒有我）。于非法及法無我中皆不住故（對於非法以及法無我都不執著）。演曰（演曰），貞觀不住六塵及非六塵（貞觀年間翻譯的版本說，不住於六塵以及非六塵）。梁本及此論（梁朝的版本以及這部論），但有不住前五塵無不住非五塵（只有不住於前五塵，沒有不住于非五塵）。其法非法即皆不住故（法和非法都不執著）。論逐難先解非法（論爲了辯駁，先解釋非法）。然準論意（然而按照論的意義），經言法者謂法無我（經文中所說的『法』，是指法無我），言非法者謂非法無我（所說的『非法』，是指非法無我），即有法我故（也就是有法我）。總結云（總結說），于非法及法無我中皆不住故（對於非法以及法無我都不執著），謂於法無我及非法無我中皆不住也（也就是對於法無我以及非法無我都不執著）。 經：應生無所住心（應該生起不執著于任何事物的心）。演曰：第三重成。論云：為成就彼諸不住故說遮餘事（第三重成就。論中說：爲了成就那些不執著，所以說要遮止其他的事情），如經應生無所住心（就像經文所說，應該生起不執著于任何事物的心）。何以故（為什麼呢）？若心有住則為非住等（如果心有所執著，那就是非不住等）。此意遮餘事者遮心有住也（這個意思是要遮止其他的事情，就是要遮止心有所執著）。文分為二（文字分為兩部分），初
【English Translation】 English version: Sutra: One should not dwell on form, sound, smell, taste, touch, or dharma to give rise to thoughts (One should not be attached to form, sound, smell, taste, touch, or dharma to generate thoughts). Yan said: The second part explains 'non-dwelling' separately. Regarding appearances, it means to be free from the bondage of appearances and the bondage of coarseness. Because of attachment to appearances, one is constrained by external appearances and generates the bondage of coarseness in the cycle of birth and death. The bondage of coarseness refers to the nature of being unpeaceful, unyielding, and incapable, the nature of physical and mental weariness and fatigue. A sutra verse says: 'Attachment to appearances binds sentient beings, also by the bondage of coarseness. Only by cultivating both cessation and contemplation can one attain liberation. Like watching playful scenes, the mind is bound by appearances and indulges in them. If it doesn't stop, it will generate weariness and fatigue. Only after resting does one realize the fatigue. This is also the case with the mind being bound by thoughts and generating fatigue.' This bondage of appearances encompasses all three times (past, present, and future) and three natures (wholesome, unwholesome, and neutral), arising from flawed realms and appearances. Coarseness also encompasses all flawed natures, so it is said that the three realms are all suffering of conditioned existence. Or, the meaning of this passage is that because of attachment to form, etc., believing them to be real, one generates desires, pursuits, attachments, and miserliness, further hating fatigue in the suffering of transmigration, remaining forever in birth and death. How can one generate the Bodhi mind? To prevent these things, one is advised not to dwell on form, etc., to generate thoughts. The treatise says: 'If one is attached to form, etc., then one will be fatigued in the suffering of transmigration, so the Bodhi mind will not arise.' The explanation of the text is as before, hoping to understand the teachings of Pure Land. The treatise says: 'Not dwelling on non-dharma means that non-dharma is without self. One does not dwell on both non-dharma and dharma without self.' Yan said: The Zhenguan version says that one does not dwell on the six sense objects and non-six sense objects. The Liang version and this treatise only have not dwelling on the first five sense objects and not dwelling on non-five sense objects. Dharma and non-dharma are both not dwelled upon. The treatise first explains non-dharma to refute difficulties. However, according to the meaning of the treatise, the 'dharma' mentioned in the sutra refers to dharma without self, and the 'non-dharma' refers to non-dharma without self, which means there is a dharma-self. In conclusion, it says: 'One does not dwell on both non-dharma and dharma without self,' which means one does not dwell on both dharma without self and non-dharma without self. Sutra: One should generate a mind that dwells nowhere (One should generate a mind that is not attached to anything). Yan said: The third layer is accomplished. The treatise says: 'To accomplish those non-dwellings, it is said to prevent other things,' like the sutra says, 'One should generate a mind that dwells nowhere.' Why? If the mind has a dwelling, then it is non-dwelling, etc. This meaning of preventing other things is to prevent the mind from having a dwelling. The text is divided into two parts, the first
順成后返遮。此初也。上說不住色非色我無我等生心。為成此義住空住有皆不應故。故云應生無所住心。
經。若心有住即為非住 演曰。返遮也。餘本先徴無住所以。若心有住便是執著非為真住。真如理中無所住故。發心亦應順理無住故住。凈名經云。無住即無本從無住本立一切法。彼論云。示不住生心義故。若心住於色等法。彼心不住佛菩提。佛菩提者即真理也。
經。是故佛說至不應住色佈施 演曰。第四結勸。引前所說諸菩薩心不住佈施。此及魏經略舉於色。貞觀六塵皆稱不住。此舉經中初不住心起行方便以勸久學。或舉十地真行方便不住佈施。以勸地前不住修行。如勸離相發菩提心。問。何故引施證忍勸發心耶。答。彼論釋云。以檀波羅蜜攝六波羅蜜故。
經。須菩提菩薩至應如是佈施 演曰。第二對除眾生相違苦因緣。雖復發心不住流轉。若為眾生相違之時。便起勞倦不能濟度。而生退轉故為除此。問。準此應言流轉苦因緣對治等。或應言流轉苦不忍因緣對治等。如何論言流轉苦忍因緣對治。乃至乏受用苦忍因緣對治等。以忍非所治故。又論第二云。顯示對治眾生相違苦忍。即似以忍為所對治其義如何。答。論總說。此為對治不忍因緣故。非以忍為所對治。然總相言此忍因緣之中而為
【現代漢語翻譯】 現代漢語譯本：順成后返遮。這是第一點。上面說到不住於色、非色、我、無我等而生心，爲了成就這個意義，住于空或住于有都是不應該的。所以說應該生起無所住的心。
經文：『若心有住即為非住』 演曰：這是返過來遮止。其他版本先提出無住的原因。如果心有所住，便是執著，不是真正的住。因為真如理體中沒有可住的地方。發心也應該順應真理，無所住。凈名經說：『無住即無本，從無住本立一切法。』 彼論說：『顯示不住生心的意義。』 如果心住於色等法，那個心就不能安住于佛菩提（Buddha-bodhi，覺悟）。佛菩提就是真理。
經文：『是故佛說至不應住色佈施』 演曰：這是第四點，總結勸勉。引用前面所說的諸菩薩心不住于佈施。這裡和魏譯本一樣，只提到了色。貞觀譯本六塵都說不住。這裡舉經文中最初不住心而起行方便，來勸勉久學之人。或者舉十地（Bhumi，菩薩修行的十個階段）真行方便，不住于佈施，來勸勉地前不住修行。如同勸人離相發菩提心。問：為什麼引用佈施來證明忍，勸人發心呢？答：彼論解釋說：『因為檀波羅蜜（Dāna-pāramitā，佈施波羅蜜）攝持了六波羅蜜（Six Pāramitās，六度）。』
經文：『須菩提菩薩至應如是佈施』 演曰：這是第二點，對治去除眾生相違的苦因緣。即使發心不住于流轉，如果爲了眾生相違之時，便會感到勞累，不能救度，從而產生退轉，所以爲了去除這個。問：按照這個，應該說流轉苦因緣的對治等，或者應該說流轉苦不忍因緣的對治等。為什麼論中說流轉苦忍因緣的對治，乃至乏受用苦忍因緣的對治等？因為忍不是所要對治的。又論中第二點說：『顯示對治眾生相違的苦忍』，這好像是以忍為所對治，這個意義是什麼？答：論中總的來說，這是爲了對治不忍的因緣，不是以忍為所對治。然而總的來說，這個忍的因緣之中而為對治。
【English Translation】 English version: Following the establishment, there is a reversal. This is the first point. The above discusses generating a mind that does not dwell in form, non-form, self, non-self, etc. To achieve this meaning, dwelling in emptiness or existence is inappropriate. Therefore, it is said that one should generate a mind that dwells nowhere.
Sutra: 'If the mind has a dwelling, it is a non-dwelling.' Commentary: This is a reversal and negation. Other versions first raise the reason for non-dwelling. If the mind has a dwelling, it is attachment and not true dwelling, because there is no place to dwell in the true suchness principle. Generating the mind should also accord with the principle of non-dwelling. The Vimalakirti Sutra says: 'Non-dwelling is without origin; from the root of non-dwelling, all dharmas are established.' The treatise says: 'To show the meaning of generating a mind that does not dwell.' If the mind dwells in form and other dharmas, that mind cannot dwell in Buddha-bodhi (覺悟, enlightenment). Buddha-bodhi is the true principle.
Sutra: 'Therefore, the Buddha said to not dwell in form when giving.' Commentary: This is the fourth point, a concluding exhortation. It cites the previously mentioned fact that the minds of all Bodhisattvas do not dwell in giving. This and the Wei translation only mention form. The Zhenguan translation says that all six sense objects are non-dwelling. This uses the initial non-dwelling mind arising from skillful means in the sutra to encourage those who have studied for a long time. Or it uses the true practice of the ten Bhumis (菩薩修行的十個階段, ten stages of Bodhisattva practice), non-dwelling in giving, to encourage those before the ten Bhumis to practice without dwelling. It is like encouraging people to generate Bodhi-mind by abandoning characteristics. Question: Why is giving cited to prove forbearance and encourage the generation of the mind? Answer: The treatise explains: 'Because Dāna-pāramitā (佈施波羅蜜, perfection of giving) encompasses the six Pāramitās (六度, six perfections).'
Sutra: 'Subhuti, Bodhisattvas should give in this way.' Commentary: This is the second point, to counteract and remove the causes of suffering arising from opposition from sentient beings. Even if the mind is generated without dwelling in transmigration, if it is for the sake of opposition from sentient beings, one will feel weary and unable to save them, thus giving rise to regression. Therefore, this is to remove this. Question: According to this, it should be said that it counteracts the causes of suffering from transmigration, or that it counteracts the causes of suffering and lack of forbearance from transmigration. Why does the treatise say that it counteracts the causes of suffering and forbearance from transmigration, and even the causes of suffering from lack of enjoyment and forbearance? Because forbearance is not what is being counteracted. Also, the second point in the treatise says: 'To show the counteraction of suffering and forbearance arising from opposition from sentient beings,' which seems to take forbearance as what is being counteracted. What is the meaning of this? Answer: The treatise says in general that this is to counteract the causes of lack of forbearance, not to take forbearance as what is being counteracted. However, generally speaking, it is within this cause of forbearance that it is being counteracted.
對治。謂於此忍種種因緣而不能忍故對除之。文分有二。初正對除以令信受。后遣執著。初中復二。初總標對除。后別釋所以。此初也。論云。既為一切眾生而行於舍。云何于彼應生嗔也。舍即佈施。菩薩發心及行施等。本為眾生既為利樂。應當如是不住眾生相違苦想。不生瞋恚而行佈施。彼論疑雲。云何為利眾生修行。而不名住于眾生事。疑意修行利生應住生想。如何不住。偈云。
修行利眾生 如是因當識 眾生及事相 遠離亦應知
演曰。初二句修因所為。下兩句令除我法執。彼意只由不住能利眾生故除二執。眾生相違時便能忍受。正與此同彼麴生疑屬第八攝更不別開。
經。如來說至即非眾生 演曰。別釋所以。初法無我。後人無我。論云。由不能無眾生想。以此因緣故。眾生相違時即生疲乏。故顯示人無我法無我。此意既無實法及實眾生。何故於無妄生有想而行佈施。又亦不應起相違想。而生疲乏故應不住而修佈施。魏云。一切眾生相即是非相一切眾生即非眾生。梁隋唐周並初眾生想后但眾生。唯此本中初無眾生但言想即非相。彼論頌云。
假名及陰事 如來離彼相 諸佛無彼二 以見實法故
演曰。準彼釋意眾生事有二。一眾生名二五陰事。即彼眾生能詮名相非
【現代漢語翻譯】 現代漢語譯本 對治。指的是對於種種因緣而不能忍受的情況，通過對治來消除它。本文分為兩部分。首先是正式的對治，使人信服和接受；然後是去除執著。在第一部分中又分為兩部分：首先是總的標明對治，然後是分別解釋原因。這是第一部分。論中說：『既然爲了所有眾生而行佈施，為什麼還要對他們生嗔恨呢？』舍即是佈施。菩薩發心以及行佈施等，本來是爲了眾生的利益和快樂，應當這樣不住眾生之相，不思眾生違逆之苦，不生嗔恚而行佈施。論中提出疑問：『如何爲了利益眾生而修行，卻不名為住在眾生之事上呢？』疑問在於，修行利益眾生應該住在眾生之想上，如何才能不住呢？偈頌說： 『修行利眾生，如是因當識；眾生及事相，遠離亦應知。』 演曰：前兩句說明修行的因和所為，后兩句使人去除我法二執。其意在於，只有不住于能利益眾生，才能去除二執。當衆生違逆時，便能忍受。這與本文的觀點相同。他處曲折生疑，屬於第八識所攝，不再單獨展開。 經：如來說至即非眾生 演曰：分別解釋原因。首先是法無我，然後是人無我。論中說：『由於不能沒有眾生之想，因此，當衆生違逆時，就會感到疲憊。』所以顯示人無我、法無我。意思是既然沒有實在的法和實在的眾生，為什麼還要對虛妄生起有想而行佈施呢？又不應該生起相違之想，而感到疲憊，所以應該不住于相而修佈施。魏譯本說：『一切眾生相即是非相，一切眾生即非眾生。』梁、隋、唐、周的譯本都是先說眾生想，然後只說眾生。只有這個版本中，一開始沒有眾生，只說想即非相。論中的頌詞說： 『假名及陰事，如來離彼相；諸佛無彼二，以見實法故。』 演曰：按照他的解釋，眾生之事有二：一是眾生之名，二是五陰之事。即是眾生能詮釋的名相，並非真實存在。
【English Translation】 English version Antidote. This refers to using antidotes to eliminate the inability to endure various causes and conditions. This text is divided into two parts. The first is the formal antidote to inspire faith and acceptance; the second is to remove attachments. The first part is further divided into two: first, a general indication of the antidote; then, a separate explanation of the reasons. This is the first part. The treatise says: 'Since one practices giving for the sake of all sentient beings, why should one generate anger towards them?' Giving is dana (佈施, giving). The Bodhisattva's (菩薩, enlightened being) aspiration and practice of giving are originally for the benefit and happiness of sentient beings. One should thus not dwell on the characteristics of sentient beings, not think of the suffering of their opposition, and practice giving without generating anger. The treatise raises the question: 'How can one cultivate practice for the benefit of sentient beings without being said to dwell on the affairs of sentient beings?' The question is that cultivating practice to benefit sentient beings should dwell on the thought of sentient beings; how can one not dwell? The gatha (偈頌, verse) says: 'Cultivating practice benefits sentient beings; one should recognize this cause. One should also know to stay away from sentient beings and the characteristics of affairs.' Commentary: The first two lines explain the cause and purpose of cultivation; the last two lines cause people to remove the two attachments of self and dharma (法, teachings). The intention is that only by not dwelling on the ability to benefit sentient beings can one remove the two attachments. When sentient beings are contrary, one can endure. This is the same as the view in this text. The circuitous generation of doubt elsewhere is included in the eighth consciousness and is not separately elaborated. Sutra: The Tathagata (如來, thus-gone one) says that it is not sentient beings. Commentary: Separate explanation of the reasons. First is the non-self of dharma (法無我, absence of inherent existence of phenomena), then the non-self of persons (人無我, absence of inherent existence of a person). The treatise says: 'Because one cannot be without the thought of sentient beings, therefore, when sentient beings are contrary, one will feel tired.' Therefore, it shows the non-self of persons and the non-self of dharma (法, teachings). The meaning is that since there are no real dharmas (法, teachings) and no real sentient beings, why should one generate thoughts of existence towards the illusory and practice giving? One should also not generate thoughts of opposition and feel tired, so one should practice giving without dwelling on appearances. The Wei translation says: 'All characteristics of sentient beings are non-characteristics; all sentient beings are non-sentient beings.' The Liang, Sui, Tang, and Zhou translations all first say the thought of sentient beings, then only say sentient beings. Only in this version, there are no sentient beings at the beginning, only saying that thought is non-characteristic. The verse in the treatise says: 'False names and the affairs of the five skandhas (五陰, aggregates); the Tathagata (如來, thus-gone one) is apart from those characteristics. The Buddhas (諸佛, awakened ones) do not have those two because they see the real dharma (法, teachings).' Commentary: According to his explanation, there are two affairs of sentient beings: one is the name of sentient beings, and the other is the affairs of the five skandhas (五陰, aggregates). That is, the name and characteristics that sentient beings can explain are not truly existent.
實體相。以名自在無實體故。由是一切眾生相即非相。眾生名相無實體相故。能詮名成法無我。餘本云。想者由想起名。即顯名相。又以五陰假名眾生。於五陰中無眾生體。以無實故。由是一切眾生即非眾生。明人無我故。論結云。如是明法無我人無我。若依此經初法后我。文更明顯。梁週二本。此下云何以故者諸佛如來遠離一切相故。餘本並闕。準彼論引應合有之。論云。此句明彼二相不實。若彼二實有者。諸佛如來應有彼二相。何以故。諸佛如來實見故。演曰。顯佛說無由自內證如證而說。或前二無佛自證達令為汝說勸。彼發心修行之時。有眾生相違觀二我無勿生嗔恨。
經。須菩提如來至不異語者 演曰。次令信受而行於忍。世善賢良猶無諸誑。況乎大聖。對誘天龍有四諦語而為詭說。論云。真語者為顯世諦相故。實語者為顯世諦修行有煩惱及清凈相故。于中實者此行煩惱。此行清凈故。如語者為第一義諦相故。不異語者為第一義諦修行有煩惱及清凈相故。演曰。初總說俗諦。二別說俗諦。三總說真諦。四別說真諦。別說俗中。此有為行煩惱。此有為行清凈。或此行生煩惱如為名利行。此行增清凈如舍名利行。別說真中。依真修行有所斷煩惱有能斷清凈。或依真諦而修行時。此行生煩惱如有住心施。此行
【現代漢語翻譯】 現代漢語譯本 『實體相』（Satkaya-dṛṣṭi，認為五蘊和合的身體是真實存在的），因為『名』（Nāma，名稱）是自在的，沒有實體。因此，一切眾生相即非相，因為眾生之名相沒有實體相。能詮釋名相成就『法無我』（Dharma-nairātmya，諸法無自性）。其他版本說，『想』（Saṃjñā，想蘊）是由想起而得名，即顯現名相。又以五陰（Pañca-skandha，色、受、想、行、識五種聚合）假名為眾生，於五陰中沒有眾生之實體，因為沒有真實性。因此，一切眾生即非眾生，闡明『人無我』（Pudgala-nairātmya，補特伽羅無自性）。論中總結說，如此闡明法無我和人無我。若依據此經，先法后我，文義更加明顯。梁週二本，此下說『何以故』，是因為諸佛如來遠離一切相的緣故。其他版本都缺失。根據彼論的引用，應該有此句。論中說，此句闡明彼二相不實。若彼二相實有，諸佛如來應有彼二相。何以故？因為諸佛如來實見。演曰：顯現佛說無，由自內證，如證而說。或者前二無，佛自證達，令為汝說勸。彼發心修行之時，有眾生相違觀二我無，勿生嗔恨。
『須菩提，如來至不異語者』。演曰：接下來，使人信受而行於忍。世間的善良賢良之人尚且沒有虛誑之語，更何況是大聖。對誘惑天龍有四諦（Catvāri-ārya-satyāni，苦、集、滅、道四聖諦）之語而為詭說。論中說，『真語』（Satya-vādin）是爲了顯現世諦相（Saṃvṛti-satya，世俗諦）的緣故。『實語』（Tathya-vādin）是爲了顯現世諦修行有煩惱及清凈相的緣故。于中，『實』（Tathatā，如如）是指此行煩惱，此行清凈的緣故。『如語』（Yathā-vādin）是爲了第一義諦相（Paramārtha-satya，勝義諦）的緣故。『不異語』（Ananyathā-vādin）是爲了第一義諦修行有煩惱及清凈相的緣故。演曰：初總說俗諦，二別說俗諦，三總說真諦，四別說真諦。別說俗諦中，此有為行煩惱，此有為行清凈。或者此行生煩惱，如為名利行；此行增清凈，如舍名利行。別說真諦中，依真修行有所斷煩惱，有能斷清凈。或者依真諦而修行時，此行生煩惱，如有住心施；此行
【English Translation】 English version 'The aspect of a real entity' (Satkaya-dṛṣṭi, the view that the aggregation of the five skandhas is a real self), because 'name' (Nāma) is independent and without substance. Therefore, all aspects of sentient beings are not aspects, because the names and forms of sentient beings have no substantial form. The ability to explain names and forms accomplishes 'Dharma-nairātmya' (the selflessness of phenomena). Other versions say that 'thought' (Saṃjñā) is named by recollection, which manifests names and forms. Furthermore, the five skandhas (Pañca-skandha, the five aggregates of form, feeling, perception, volition, and consciousness) are nominally called sentient beings, but there is no entity of sentient beings within the five skandhas, because there is no reality. Therefore, all sentient beings are not sentient beings, clarifying 'Pudgala-nairātmya' (the selflessness of persons). The treatise concludes by saying that it clarifies the selflessness of phenomena and the selflessness of persons. If based on this sutra, first phenomena then self, the meaning is even clearer. In the Liang and Zhou versions, it says 'Why is this so?' because all Buddhas and Tathagatas are far from all aspects. Other versions are missing this. According to the quotation from that treatise, it should be included. The treatise says that this sentence clarifies that these two aspects are not real. If these two aspects were real, Buddhas and Tathagatas should have these two aspects. Why is this so? Because Buddhas and Tathagatas see the truth. Yan said: It shows that the Buddha speaks of non-existence, based on his own inner realization, speaking as he has realized. Or the first two non-existences, the Buddha realizes and conveys, encouraging you to speak. When they initiate the mind to practice, if there are sentient beings who oppose the view of the absence of the two selves, do not be angry.
'Subhuti, the Tathagata to not different words'. Yan said: Next, it causes people to believe and practice forbearance. Even the good and virtuous people of the world do not have deceitful words, let alone the great sage. To tempt the dragons, there are the words of the Four Noble Truths (Catvāri-ārya-satyāni, the four noble truths of suffering, origin, cessation, and path) and to speak deceptively. The treatise says that 'true speech' (Satya-vādin) is for the sake of revealing the aspect of conventional truth (Saṃvṛti-satya). 'Real speech' (Tathya-vādin) is for the sake of revealing that the practice of conventional truth has aspects of affliction and purity. Among them, 'reality' (Tathatā) refers to this practice being afflicted and this practice being pure. 'As-spoken speech' (Yathā-vādin) is for the sake of the aspect of the ultimate truth (Paramārtha-satya). 'Non-different speech' (Ananyathā-vādin) is for the sake of the practice of the ultimate truth having aspects of affliction and purity. Yan said: First, generally speaking of conventional truth, second, specifically speaking of conventional truth, third, generally speaking of ultimate truth, fourth, specifically speaking of ultimate truth. Specifically speaking of conventional truth, this conditioned practice is afflicted, this conditioned practice is pure. Or this practice generates affliction, such as practicing for fame and gain; this practice increases purity, such as abandoning fame and gain. Specifically speaking of ultimate truth, relying on true practice, there are afflictions to be severed, and there is purity that can sever. Or when practicing according to the ultimate truth, this practice generates affliction, such as giving with an attached mind; this practice
增清凈如無住心施。今勸菩薩依真諦修應信生忍。此不誑語者。即屬不異約口名誑約心名異。彼論自下為斷第九道非作因段。論云。此中有疑于證果中無道。云何彼于果能作因。頌云。
果雖不住道 而道能為因 以諸佛實語 彼智有四種
此有二釋。一云。謂諸聖人以無為法而有差別。即無聖道云何觀二無我。利益眾生道能為彼因。為破此疑故說四語。以佛真智證理無言后得如證而起言說真無取得。俗諦離妄方便因緣修二無我非不為因得佛果也。顯佛能知彼道為因故說四語。以斷情疑即令生信順修無我果之因道而生於忍與此同也。二云。證無為時。但用真智不用言說之道。即謂佛說持經功德為法身因。是其虛妄故。說四語除彼疑謗。前解疑從忍起。后解疑從經起。觀彼論意后釋為長。此由境四故有四智。由智有四故起四語。頌云。
實智及小乘 說摩訶衍法 及一切受記 以不虛說故
一實智即菩提。二小乘。三大乘。四受記。如次四境皆不妄說。以配四語。除此已外。或假設說。于小乘等說苦諦等。大乘中說法無我。如受記即是說三世事。決定無謬。如彼義而說不顛倒故。今說菩提及以大乘勸信佛語。
經。須菩提至無實無虛 演曰。后遣執著。論云。說此真語等已。于
【現代漢語翻譯】 現代漢語譯本： 增進清凈就像不住于相的佈施一樣。現在勸導菩薩依據真諦修行，應當相信並生起忍辱之心。這不欺騙的語言，是指不違背事實，用口說出與事實不符的稱為『誑』，內心與事實不符的稱為『異』。彼論從下面開始是爲了斷除第九道不是作為因的那一段。論中說：『這裡有人懷疑在證果的過程中沒有道，那麼它怎麼能對果起作用呢？』頌文說： 『果雖不住道，而道能為因，以諸佛實語，彼智有四種。』 這裡有兩種解釋。一種說法是：諸聖人以無為法而有差別，既然沒有聖道，如何觀二無我（人無我，法無我），利益眾生？道如何能成為果的因？爲了破除這個疑惑，所以說了四種語言。以佛的真智證悟真理，證悟后自然而然地用語言表達出來，真實不虛。俗諦遠離虛妄，以方便因緣修行二無我，並非不能作為獲得佛果的因。顯示佛能知曉彼道為因，所以說了四種語言。斷除情感上的疑惑，就能讓人產生信心，順著修行無我果的因道，從而生起忍辱之心，與此相同。另一種說法是：證悟無為的時候，只用真智，不用言說的道。如果說佛說持經功德是法身因，那是虛妄的。所以說四種語言來消除他們的疑惑和誹謗。前一種解釋的疑惑是從忍辱生起的，后一種解釋的疑惑是從經典生起的。觀察彼論的意義，后一種解釋更為合理。這是由於境界有四種，所以有四種智慧。由於智慧有四種，所以產生四種語言。頌文說： 『實智及小乘，說摩訶衍法，及一切受記，以不虛說故。』 第一是實智，即菩提（覺悟）。第二是小乘（聲聞乘）。第三是大乘（菩薩乘）。第四是受記（佛對菩薩的授記）。依次對四種境界都不虛妄地說。用以配合四種語言。除了這些以外，或者有假設性的說法。于小乘中說苦諦等，大乘中說法無我，如受記就是說三世的事情，決定沒有錯誤。如彼義而說，不顛倒。現在說菩提以及大乘，勸人相信佛語。 經文：須菩提至無實無虛 演曰：後面遣除執著。 論中說：說完這些真語等之後，于...
【English Translation】 English version: Increasing purity is like giving without dwelling in appearances. Now I exhort Bodhisattvas to cultivate according to the true meaning, and they should believe and generate forbearance. This 'non-deceitful speech' refers to not contradicting the facts; speaking something that does not accord with the facts is called 'deceitful,' and the mind not according with the facts is called 'different.' The following part of that treatise is to refute the section where the ninth path is not considered a cause. The treatise says: 'Here, someone doubts that there is no path in the process of attaining the fruit; then how can it act as a cause for the fruit?' The verse says: 'Although the fruit does not dwell in the path, the path can be a cause, because of the true words of all Buddhas, their wisdom has four kinds.' There are two explanations here. One explanation is: the sages have differences because of the unconditioned dharma. Since there is no noble path, how can they contemplate the two non-selves (non-self of person, non-self of dharma) and benefit sentient beings? How can the path be the cause of the fruit? To dispel this doubt, four kinds of speech are spoken. With the Buddha's true wisdom, one realizes the truth, and after realization, one naturally expresses it in words, which are true and not false. The mundane truth is free from falsehood; by means of expedient conditions, cultivating the two non-selves is not incapable of being the cause of attaining Buddhahood. It shows that the Buddha can know that path as the cause, so four kinds of speech are spoken. Eliminating emotional doubts can generate faith, and following the path of the cause of the fruit of non-self, one generates forbearance, which is the same as this. Another explanation is: when realizing the unconditioned, one only uses true wisdom and not the path of speech. If it is said that the merit of upholding the sutras is the cause of the Dharmakaya (Dharma body), that is false. Therefore, four kinds of speech are spoken to eliminate their doubts and slanders. The doubt in the former explanation arises from forbearance, and the doubt in the latter explanation arises from the sutras. Observing the meaning of that treatise, the latter explanation is more reasonable. This is because there are four kinds of realms, so there are four kinds of wisdom. Because there are four kinds of wisdom, four kinds of speech arise. The verse says: 'True wisdom and the Small Vehicle (Hinayana), speaking the Mahayana dharma, and all predictions, are spoken without falsehood.' First is true wisdom, which is Bodhi (enlightenment). Second is the Small Vehicle (Śrāvakayāna). Third is the Mahayana (Bodhisattvayāna). Fourth is prediction (Buddha's prediction of a Bodhisattva's future Buddhahood). In order, they speak truthfully about the four kinds of realms. Used to match the four kinds of speech. Apart from these, there may be hypothetical statements. In the Small Vehicle, they speak of the Four Noble Truths, etc.; in the Mahayana, they speak of the non-self of dharmas, such as predictions, which speak of the affairs of the three times, and are definitely not mistaken. Speaking according to that meaning is not inverted. Now speaking of Bodhi and the Mahayana, exhorting people to believe in the Buddha's words. Sutra: Subhuti reaches neither real nor unreal. Commentary: Later, eliminate attachments. The treatise says: After speaking these true words, etc., at...
此中如言說性起執著。為遣此故。經言如來正覺法及說于中無實無妄。無實者。如言說性非有故。無妄者不如言說自性有故。此意以見佛證二無我理。說二諦語。便執此言詮著彼法定實相屬故。今破之可言。之法無故名無實。離言智證不可名法有故名無虛。魏云所得法所說法。貞觀有二。所證所說所思智所契證言所詮說心所思慮。此中總云所得即所得法名為此法。彼論頌云。
隨順彼實智 說不實不虛 如聞聲取證 對治如是說
演曰。上二句正釋經文。下二句明遣執著。準彼釋者。以所說法不能得彼證法故無實。以所說法隨順彼證法故無虛。說此意者。不應如所聞聲而取證法。又亦不應離所說法而求證法以隨順故。
經。須菩提若菩薩至則無所見 演曰。大段第三對治乏受用苦因緣。由著未來果事行施心有相故。果有限量。受用便乏。即心住著。是乏受用因緣所乏受用是外資具增上果攝。依此論解前不住於事行施是佈施度。今于未來果說不依彼論自身名事。此中說是乏受用故。若不住施外資不就。外資不就因乏與果翻前可知故為對除有此文起。彼論自下為斷第十證如不證疑論云。若聖人以無為真如得名。彼真如一切時一切處有。云何不住心。得佛菩提。佛菩提則非不住。若一切時一切處實有
【現代漢語翻譯】 現代漢語譯本： 這裡說到對於言說之自性產生執著。爲了去除這種執著，經中說如來正覺之法以及所說的內容，既非真實也非虛妄。說『無實』，是因為言說之自性並非實有；說『無妄』，是因為不如言說之自性那樣存在。此意在於，因為見到佛所證悟的二無我之理，宣說二諦之語，卻執著于這些言語所詮釋的法，認為它們具有實在的體相。現在破除這種執著，可以說，被言說之法本身並不存在，所以稱為『無實』；而通過遠離言語的智慧所證悟的，不能用言語來描述其存在，所以稱為『無虛』。魏譯本說的是『所得法』和『所說法』，貞觀譯本分為兩種：『所證』和『所說』，『所思智』和『所契證』，『言所詮說』和『心所思慮』。這裡總的來說，『所得』就是所得之法，被稱為『此法』。那部論的頌文說：
『隨順彼實智，說不實不虛， 如聞聲取證，對治如是說。』
演曰：上面兩句正是解釋經文，下面兩句說明去除執著。按照那部論的解釋，因為所說法不能獲得那證悟之法，所以是『無實』；因為所說法隨順那證悟之法，所以是『無虛』。說這個意思，是不應該像聽到聲音就去獲取證悟之法，也不應該離開所說法而去尋求證悟之法，因為它們是隨順的。
經：須菩提，若菩薩至，則無所見。 演曰：這是第三大段，對治缺乏受用之苦的因緣。由於執著于未來果報之事，以有相之心行佈施，所以果報有**，受用就缺乏。即心住著，是缺乏受用的因緣，所缺乏的受用是外在資具增上的果報所攝。依照這部論來解釋，前面所說的『不住於事行施』是佈施的度。現在對於未來果報說『不依』，在那部論中自身被稱為『事』。這裡說的是缺乏受用，如果不住著于佈施，外在資具就不會成就，外在資具不成就，缺乏的因與果就與前面相反，所以爲了對治去除，才有這段經文的出現。那部論從下面開始，是爲了斷除第十『證如不證』的疑問。論中說：如果聖人以無為的真如得名，那麼真如在一切時一切處都存在，為什麼不住心就能得到佛菩提？佛菩提就不是不住了。如果一切時一切處都真實存在
【English Translation】 English version: Here it speaks of attachment arising from the nature of speech. To dispel this attachment, the sutra says that the Tathagata's (如來) (Thus Come One) perfect enlightenment (正覺) and the teachings (法) within are neither real nor unreal. 'Unreal' (無實) because the nature of speech is not existent; 'not false' (無妄) because it is not like the self-nature of speech that exists. The meaning here is that because one sees the principle of the two non-selves (二無我) realized by the Buddha (佛), and speaks the words of the two truths (二諦), one becomes attached to the dharmas (法) explained by these words, considering them to have a real substance. Now, to break this attachment, it can be said that the dharma spoken of does not exist, hence 'unreal'; and what is realized through wisdom that transcends words cannot be named as existing, hence 'not false'. The Wei translation speaks of 'what is attained' (所得法) and 'what is spoken' (所說法), while the Zhenguan translation distinguishes between 'what is realized' (所證) and 'what is spoken' (所說), 'wisdom that contemplates' (所思智) and 'what is attained through agreement' (所契證), 'words that explain' (言所詮說) and 'thoughts that contemplate' (心所思慮). Generally speaking, 'what is attained' is the dharma that is attained, called 'this dharma' (此法). The verse in that treatise says:
'Following that real wisdom, Speaking of what is not real, not false, Like hearing a sound and taking it for realization, This is said to counteract such [attachment].'
Yan (演曰) says: The first two lines directly explain the sutra text, and the last two lines explain the removal of attachment. According to that treatise's explanation, because what is spoken cannot attain that dharma of realization, it is 'unreal'; because what is spoken accords with that dharma of realization, it is 'not false'. The meaning of this is that one should not, like hearing a sound, take it for the dharma of realization, nor should one seek the dharma of realization apart from what is spoken, because they are in accordance.
Sutra: Subhuti (須菩提), if a Bodhisattva (菩薩) arrives, then there is nothing to see. Yan says: This is the third major section, counteracting the causes and conditions of the suffering of lacking enjoyment. Because of attachment to future karmic results, and giving with a mind of form, the karmic result has **, and enjoyment is lacking. That is, the mind dwelling in attachment is the cause and condition of lacking enjoyment; the lacking enjoyment is included in the increasing result of external resources. According to this treatise, the previous 'not dwelling in things while giving' is the perfection of giving (佈施度). Now, speaking of 'not relying' (不依) on future karmic results, in that treatise, oneself is called 'things' (事). Here it speaks of lacking enjoyment; if one does not dwell on giving, external resources will not be accomplished; if external resources are not accomplished, the cause and effect of lacking will be the opposite of what was said before, so in order to counteract and remove this, this passage of scripture arises. That treatise, from below, is to resolve the tenth doubt of 'realizing suchness or not realizing'. The treatise says: If a sage is named by the unconditioned Suchness (真如), then Suchness exists at all times and in all places, why can one attain Buddha's Bodhi (佛菩提) by not dwelling in the mind? Buddha's Bodhi is then not non-dwelling. If it truly exists at all times and in all places
真如。何故有人能得有不得者。此中得佛菩提四字。通上下用。依彼新論云。如何佛果以無住心方能證得非有住心也。此有二問。一問有得不得。二問不住心得住心不得。總舉一頌以答二疑雲。
時及處實有 而不得真如 無智以住法 餘者有智得
彼釋意云。真如雖復遍於時處。無智者住法故不得。有智者不住法故得。此答初問。又心住法者。不清凈故不得。不住法者清凈故得。此答后問。彼總結云。以是義故。諸佛如來清凈真如得名。是故住心不得佛菩提。彼破疑心以生文。此約修行以起說。既以不住得彼真如。當果無限不乏受用二論無違。文中有二。初法喻明無智不得。后法喻明有智證得。若依此論。初明有相著果報施即是所治乏受用因。后明無相不著事施即能治行。此初也。初法后喻。論云。若為果報佈施便著於事而行舍施。彼于異施欲樂苦受中不解出離。猶如入闇不知我何所趣。彼欣樂欲樂亦爾。演曰。欲樂苦受是當來果。與施異時名為異施。彼當欲樂是勝義苦。有漏皆苦故名苦受。非是三受之苦受也。經言如人喻。無智者由無智故著果行施名為入闇。無所見者喻不見真理故。不求出離如在闇室無所見故。盤旋在中莫知所趣。無智亦爾。由著相施當果有限受用匱乏。
經。若菩薩心
【現代漢語翻譯】 現代漢語譯本： 真如（Tathata，事物的真實本性）。為什麼有人能夠證得真如，而有人卻不能證得呢？這裡所說的『得佛菩提』（attaining Buddha's Bodhi，證悟成佛的智慧）這四個字，貫通上下兩方面來理解。依照《新論》（可能是指某種新的論著）所說，如何理解佛果（Buddha-fruit，成佛的果位）只能通過無住心（non-abiding mind，不執著的心）才能證得，而不是通過有住心（abiding mind，執著的心）證得呢？這裡有兩個問題。第一個問題是關於有人能證得，有人不能證得。第二個問題是關於不住心可以證得，而住心不能證得。總的來說，可以用一首偈頌來回答這兩個疑問： 『時及處實有，而不得真如，無智以住法，餘者有智得。』 這段偈頌的解釋是：真如雖然遍佈于所有時間和空間，但沒有智慧的人因為執著於法（dharma，佛法、規律），所以不能證得真如。有智慧的人因為不執著於法，所以能夠證得真如。這是對第一個問題的回答。另外，心執著於法的人，因為不清凈，所以不能證得真如；心不執著於法的人，因為清凈，所以能夠證得真如。這是對第二個問題的回答。總結來說，正因為這個道理，諸佛如來清凈的真如才得以顯現。因此，執著的心不能證得佛菩提。這裡通過破除疑慮來引出經文，這是從修行的角度來闡述。既然通過不住心可以證得真如，那麼其果報將是無限的，不會缺乏受用，這與兩種論點都沒有衝突。這段經文包含兩層含義。首先，通過法和比喻說明沒有智慧的人不能證得真如；其次，通過法和比喻說明有智慧的人能夠證得真如。如果按照這個論點，首先說明執著于有相的果報施（reward-oriented giving，爲了回報而進行的佈施）是需要對治的，是導致受用匱乏的原因。然後說明不執著于無相的事施（non-attached giving，不求回報的佈施）是能夠對治這種匱乏的修行。這是第一層含義。先說法后比喻。論中說：如果爲了果報而佈施，就會執著于所佈施的事物，從而進行舍施。這樣的人在不同的施捨、慾望的快樂和痛苦的感受中，不能理解如何解脫。這就好比進入黑暗中，不知道自己要去哪裡。他們欣然享受慾望的快樂也是如此。演曰：慾望的快樂和痛苦的感受是未來的果報，與佈施的時間不同，所以稱為『異施』。他們所追求的慾望的快樂實際上是勝義苦（ultimate suffering，究竟的痛苦），因為有漏皆苦，所以稱為『苦受』，但不是指三種感受中的苦受。經中用人來做比喻，沒有智慧的人因為沒有智慧，所以執著于果報而行佈施，這就像進入黑暗中一樣。『無所見者』比喻不能見到真理。不尋求出離，就像身處黑暗的房間里，什麼也看不見，只能在其中徘徊，不知道該去哪裡。沒有智慧的人也是如此，因為執著于有相的佈施，所以未來的果報是有限的，受用也會匱乏。 經：若菩薩心（Bodhisattva's mind，菩薩的心）。
【English Translation】 English version: Tathata (the true nature of things). Why are some able to attain it while others are not? The phrase 'attaining Buddha's Bodhi' (wisdom of enlightenment) here is used in a comprehensive sense. According to the 'New Treatise' (possibly referring to a new commentary), how can the Buddha-fruit (the state of Buddhahood) only be attained through a non-abiding mind (a mind free from attachments) and not through an abiding mind (an attached mind)? There are two questions here. The first question is about why some attain and some do not. The second question is about why a non-abiding mind can attain while an abiding mind cannot. In summary, a verse can be used to answer these two doubts: 'Time and place are indeed real, yet Tathata is not attained. The unwise abide in the Dharma, while the wise attain it.' The explanation of this verse is: Although Tathata pervades all time and space, the unwise cannot attain it because they abide in the Dharma (Buddhist teachings, principles). The wise attain it because they do not abide in the Dharma. This answers the first question. Furthermore, those whose minds abide in the Dharma cannot attain it because they are not pure; those whose minds do not abide in the Dharma can attain it because they are pure. This answers the second question. In conclusion, it is because of this reason that the pure Tathata of all Buddhas and Tathagatas is manifested. Therefore, an abiding mind cannot attain Buddha's Bodhi. Here, the text is introduced by dispelling doubts, and it is explained from the perspective of practice. Since Tathata can be attained through non-abiding, the resulting rewards will be limitless and there will be no lack of enjoyment, which does not contradict either viewpoint. This passage contains two layers of meaning. First, it uses Dharma and metaphors to explain that the unwise cannot attain Tathata; second, it uses Dharma and metaphors to explain that the wise can attain Tathata. According to this argument, first, it is stated that attachment to reward-oriented giving (giving with the expectation of returns) is what needs to be countered, as it is the cause of limited enjoyment. Then, it is stated that non-attached giving (giving without seeking returns) is the practice that can counter this limitation. This is the first layer of meaning. First the Dharma, then the metaphor. The treatise says: If one gives with the intention of receiving rewards, they will become attached to the things they give, and thus perform giving. Such a person, in the midst of different givings, the pleasures of desire, and painful sensations, cannot understand how to be liberated. It is like entering darkness and not knowing where one is going. They are also like this when they gladly enjoy the pleasures of desire. Yan said: The pleasures of desire and painful sensations are future rewards, and because they are different in time from the giving, they are called 'different givings'. The pleasures of desire they seek are actually ultimate suffering, because all that is conditioned is suffering, so it is called 'painful sensation', but it does not refer to the painful sensation among the three sensations. The sutra uses the analogy of a person. The unwise, because of their lack of wisdom, give with attachment to rewards, which is like entering darkness. 'Those who cannot see' are likened to those who cannot see the truth. Not seeking liberation is like being in a dark room, unable to see anything, and only wandering around in it, not knowing where to go. The unwise are also like this, because they are attached to giving with form, the future rewards are limited, and enjoyment will be lacking. Sutra: If a Bodhisattva's mind (the mind of a Bodhisattva).
不住法至見種種色 演曰。有智證如不著事施即能治行。初法后喻。論云。彼無明夜過惠日出已。種種爾涅槃如實見之。喻言如人即有智者言有目者。惠俱心等日光明照即喻智惠。種種色者喻真如等種種理事。所除闇相即前無智。餘本說。為夜分已盡由不住絕得無限果受用無乏。又釋若住於事執有實境不見過患而受用之。于中生忍如人入闇。若不住法不執境有。于中行忍如目得自見種種物。由見過患生知。是故雖乏不苦故。能對治乏受用苦。起安受苦忍。前釋據當果受用不乏。此解據現雖乏不苦。彼論頌云。
暗明愚無智 明者如有智 對法及對治 得滅法如是
頌初二字總舉明暗喻也。故長行雲彼暗明喻者相似法故已下。別釋闇喻無智。明喻有智。對法即是能對除。惠日喻惠體日喻惠用。雖俱是惠體用不同。分為二喻。頌言對治及滅法者。即所對治闇相滅也。故云夜分已盡者如所對闇法盡故。
經。須菩提當來之世至受持讀誦 演曰。第十為離闕少智資糧障。即第十四離寂靜味住處。前福資糧有三住處。初親近佛行供養因。次修因時少欲勸進。后勸行忍。所以然者。由供養等故。值佛聞法當得凈土珍饒樂。備由少欲等故。麾空出寶果報不斷。所作究竟好為勝事。由諦察忍故為他說法。所言誠
【現代漢語翻譯】 現代漢語譯本： 『不住法至見種種色』，演曰：有智慧證悟真如，不執著於事物，施行佈施，就能對治修行中的障礙。這是先說法理，後用比喻。論中說：『當無明的黑夜過去，智慧的太陽升起后，就能如實地見到種種涅槃境界。』比喻說，就像人有了智慧，就像有眼睛的人一樣。智慧和心識就像太陽的光明照耀，比喻智慧。『種種色』比喻真如等種種事理。所要去除的黑暗，就是之前的無智。另一種解釋是，因為不住于執著，斷絕了煩惱，才能得到無限的果報，受用無窮。又解釋說，如果執著於事物，認為有真實的境界存在，就看不到其中的過患而受用它，心中生起忍受，就像人進入黑暗中一樣。如果不執著於法，不認為境界是真實的，在這種狀態下修行忍辱，就像眼睛能夠自己看到各種事物一樣。因為看到了過患，所以生起了智慧。因此，即使缺乏，也不會感到痛苦。所以，能夠對治缺乏，忍受痛苦，生起安受苦忍。之前的解釋是根據當來果報受用不乏，而這裡的解釋是根據現在即使缺乏也不會感到痛苦。論中的偈頌說： 『暗明愚無智，明者如有智，對法及對治，得滅法如是。』 偈頌的前兩個字總括地用明暗來比喻。所以長行中說，『彼暗明喻者，相似法故』以下，分別解釋黑暗比喻無智，光明比喻有智。『對法』就是能夠對治和去除的。智慧的太陽比喻智慧的本體，太陽的光明比喻智慧的作用。雖然都是智慧，但體和用不同，所以分為兩個比喻。偈頌說『對治及滅法者』，就是所要對治的黑暗相滅除了。所以說『夜分已盡者』，就像所要對治的黑暗法消盡了一樣。 『經：須菩提，當來之世至受持讀誦。』演曰：第十是爲了遠離缺少智慧資糧的障礙，也就是第十四遠離寂靜的滋味和住處。之前的福德資糧有三個住處：首先是親近佛，行供養的因；其次是修因時少欲勸進；最後是勸行忍辱。之所以這樣，是因為通過供養等，值遇佛陀，聽聞佛法，將來能夠得到清凈的國土，珍寶豐饒，快樂無邊。通過少欲等，揮動虛空，就能出現寶物，果報不斷。所作所為都究竟美好，成為殊勝的事情。通過如實觀察和忍辱，為他人說法，所說的話真實可信。
【English Translation】 English version: 'Not dwelling in the Dharma, one sees various forms.' Yan said: Having wisdom to realize suchness, not being attached to things, and practicing giving, one can overcome obstacles in practice. This is first explaining the principle, then using a metaphor. The treatise says: 'When the night of ignorance has passed and the sun of wisdom has risen, one can truly see all kinds of Nirvana states.' The metaphor says, it's like a person having wisdom, like a person having eyes. Wisdom and consciousness are like the light of the sun shining, which is a metaphor for wisdom. 'Various forms' are metaphors for suchness and various principles and affairs. The darkness to be removed is the previous lack of wisdom. Another explanation is that because one does not dwell on attachments and cuts off afflictions, one can obtain infinite rewards and enjoy them endlessly. It is also explained that if one is attached to things, thinking that there are real realms, one cannot see the faults in them and enjoys them, giving rise to endurance in the mind, just like a person entering darkness. If one does not cling to the Dharma and does not think that the realm is real, practicing patience in this state is like the eyes being able to see various things by themselves. Because one sees the faults, wisdom arises. Therefore, even if there is a lack, one will not feel pain. Therefore, one can overcome the lack, endure suffering, and give rise to the patience of enduring suffering. The previous explanation was based on the future enjoyment of rewards without lack, while this explanation is based on the present, even if there is a lack, one will not feel pain. The verse in the treatise says: 'Darkness, light, ignorance, no wisdom, the enlightened are like those with wisdom, confronting the Dharma and overcoming it, one attains the Dharma of extinction thus.' The first two words of the verse summarize the metaphor of darkness and light. Therefore, the long passage says, 'The metaphor of darkness and light, because of similar Dharmas,' explains separately that darkness is a metaphor for ignorance, and light is a metaphor for wisdom. 'Confronting the Dharma' is what can be confronted and removed. The sun of wisdom is a metaphor for the essence of wisdom, and the light of the sun is a metaphor for the function of wisdom. Although both are wisdom, the essence and function are different, so they are divided into two metaphors. The verse says 'Overcoming and extinguishing the Dharma,' which means that the aspect of darkness to be overcome is eliminated. Therefore, it says 'The night has passed,' just like the Dharma of darkness to be overcome has been exhausted. 'The Sutra: Subhuti, in the future, up to upholding and reciting.' Yan said: The tenth is to stay away from the obstacle of lacking the resources of wisdom, which is the fourteenth to stay away from the taste and dwelling place of tranquility. The previous resources of merit have three dwelling places: first, approaching the Buddha and performing the cause of offerings; second, reducing desires and encouraging progress when cultivating the cause; and third, encouraging the practice of patience. The reason for this is that through offerings, etc., one encounters the Buddha, hears the Dharma, and in the future, one can obtain a pure land, rich in treasures, and boundless happiness. Through reducing desires, etc., waving in the void, treasures will appear, and the rewards will be continuous. What is done is ultimately good and becomes an excellent thing. Through truly observing and enduring, speaking the Dharma for others, what is said is true and trustworthy.
諦他皆信受。由耐他害故眷屬圍繞。相好莊嚴。由安受忍故。生死不拘隨類化物無苦逼惱。皆福德明故有三文。下修智因亦三住處。初舍定味。次離喜動。三求教授。初勤依經而舍靜味。持讀為因發生修惠。前資糧道雖復總為無相理觀而修。等至由耽定味尚未別修。從此已下是加行道。別修理觀。初得修惠在暖位中。次由得智名位。既高我慢便增遂生喜動。為離此故有第二文。喜動除已入于頂位。后為得入忍第一法。然外求良緣以希教授。此後鄰近即入初地證道住處非求第一法。后更求教授唯一剎那即入見故。故求教授在見位。前暖頂兩位觀所取無初作難故。今至忍位即所取無順觀能耶。世第一法二空雙印因成滿故。前修福德在四位。前諸迴向位。今修惠正入四位。即是第十回向未心。由此準前文亦三段。初文之中大分為二。初明五種殊勝功德勸舍味定以修修惠。后我念過去下重釋。五中第二福聚前離少聞多。是聞思障雖已令離猶有分別二障。微起俱生二障。多數現行未能別修無相修惠由闕。此故不得證真。今為令于修惠位中別觀真理。令分別障一向不行俱生二障亦能漸伏速入見道。故有此文。前言寂靜味者。愛味禪定體即是貪。由愛定故不肯修惠。此名智障即彼貪也。或此正邪所知障體名為智障。前煩惱障故。此所
【現代漢語翻譯】 現代漢語譯本 諦聽並信受這些教誨。因為能夠忍受他人的傷害，所以被眷屬圍繞，並且相貌莊嚴美好。因為能夠安然接受忍耐，所以在生死輪迴中不會被拘束，可以隨著不同的生命形態轉化，沒有痛苦的逼迫和煩惱。這些都是因為積累了福德和智慧，所以有三個階段。下面是修習智慧的原因，也有三個住處。首先是捨棄對禪定之樂的執著，其次是遠離喜悅和動搖，第三是尋求教授（Guru-yoga，上師瑜伽）。最初是勤奮地依據經典，從而捨棄對靜止之樂的執著，以聽聞和讀誦經典為因，從而生起修習智慧。之前的資糧道雖然總體上是爲了修習無相的理觀，但是因為耽於禪定的快樂，所以尚未分別修習。從這裡開始是加行道，分別修習理觀。最初獲得修習智慧是在暖位（指修行過程中出現的初步徵兆）。其次，因為獲得了智慧，名位既高，我慢便會增長，於是產生喜悅和動搖。爲了遠離這些，所以有第二段文字。喜悅和動搖消除后，就進入了頂位（指修行更進一步的階段）。之後爲了能夠進入忍位（指對真理有更深理解的階段），也就是第一法，所以向外尋求良好的因緣，以期獲得教授。此後鄰近初地（指菩薩道的第一個階段），也就是證道的住處，而不是尋求第一法。之後再次尋求教授，唯一剎那間就能進入見道（指對真理有直接體悟的階段），所以尋求教授是在見位。之前的暖位和頂位，觀所取（指被觀察的對象）沒有最初的困難，現在到了忍位，難道所取就沒有順應能觀（指能進行觀察的主體）的嗎？世第一法（指世間最高的智慧）二空（指人空和法空）雙印，原因成就圓滿。之前修習福德是在四個階段，之前的各個迴向位（指將功德迴向給眾生的階段）。現在修習智慧，正式進入四個階段，也就是第十回向未心（指菩薩修行過程中的一個重要階段）。由此推斷，前面的文字也分為三個部分。第一部分之中又分為兩大塊。首先闡明五種殊勝的功德，勸勉捨棄對禪定之樂的執著，從而修習修習智慧。之後『我念過去』以下是重新解釋。五種功德中，第二種福聚（指福德的聚集）之前是遠離少聞多，是聞思的障礙，雖然已經令其遠離，但仍然有分別二障（指俱生分別和我執分別）微弱地生起，俱生二障（指與生俱來的兩種障礙）多數現行，未能分別修習無相的修習智慧，因為缺少這些，所以不能夠證得真理。現在爲了令其在修習智慧的階段中，分別觀察真理，令分別障完全不行，俱生二障也能逐漸降伏，迅速進入見道，所以有這段文字。前面所說的寂靜之樂，愛戀禪定的本體就是貪。因為愛戀禪定，所以不肯修習智慧。這叫做智障（指智慧上的障礙），也就是那個貪。或者這種正邪所知障（指對事物認識上的障礙）的本體叫做智障，之前是煩惱障（指煩惱上的障礙），所以這裡是所知障。
【English Translation】 English version Listen and accept these teachings with faith. Because of enduring harm from others, one is surrounded by family and adorned with excellent features. Because of peacefully accepting patience, one is not bound by birth and death, transforming according to different life forms without the suffering of oppression and affliction. All of these are due to accumulating merit and wisdom, hence there are three stages. Below are the causes for cultivating wisdom, also with three abodes. First, abandoning the attachment to the pleasure of meditation; second, separating from joy and agitation; and third, seeking instruction (Guru-yoga). Initially, one diligently relies on the scriptures, thereby abandoning the attachment to the pleasure of stillness, using hearing and reciting scriptures as the cause to generate the wisdom of practice. Although the previous stage of accumulation is generally for cultivating the contemplation of non-appearance, due to being attached to the pleasure of meditation, one has not yet separately cultivated it. From here onwards is the stage of application, separately cultivating contemplation. Initially, obtaining the wisdom of practice is in the stage of warmth (referring to the initial signs appearing in the process of practice). Secondly, because of obtaining wisdom, one's status becomes high, and arrogance increases, thus generating joy and agitation. To separate from these, there is the second passage. After joy and agitation are eliminated, one enters the peak stage (referring to a further stage of practice). Afterwards, in order to enter the stage of forbearance (referring to a stage of deeper understanding of truth), which is the first Dharma, one seeks good conditions externally, hoping to receive instruction. Thereafter, nearing the first ground (referring to the first stage of the Bodhisattva path), which is the abode of enlightenment, rather than seeking the first Dharma. Afterwards, seeking instruction again, one can enter the path of seeing (referring to a stage of direct realization of truth) in a single moment, so seeking instruction is in the stage of seeing. In the previous stages of warmth and peak, there was no initial difficulty in observing the object to be observed (the object of contemplation). Now that one has reached the stage of forbearance, is there no compliance of the object to be observed with the observing subject (the subject capable of observing)? The World's First Dharma (referring to the highest wisdom in the world) is sealed with the two emptinesses (referring to the emptiness of self and the emptiness of phenomena), the cause is accomplished and complete. Previously, cultivating merit was in four stages, the various stages of dedication (referring to the stages of dedicating merit to sentient beings). Now, cultivating wisdom, one formally enters the four stages, which is the unarisen mind of the tenth dedication (referring to an important stage in the Bodhisattva's practice). From this, it can be inferred that the preceding text is also divided into three parts. Within the first part, there are two major sections. First, elucidating the five kinds of supreme merits, exhorting one to abandon the attachment to the pleasure of meditation, thereby cultivating the wisdom of practice. Afterwards, 'I remember the past' and below is a re-explanation. Among the five merits, the second accumulation of merit was previously separated from little hearing and much, which is the obstacle of hearing and thinking. Although it has been separated, there are still subtle arising of the two obstacles of discrimination (referring to innate discrimination and discrimination of self-attachment), and the two innate obstacles (referring to the two obstacles that come with birth) are mostly active. One has not been able to separately cultivate the wisdom of non-appearance, and because of lacking these, one is unable to attain the truth. Now, in order to enable one to separately observe the truth in the stage of cultivating wisdom, to completely prevent the discrimination obstacle from arising, and to gradually subdue the innate obstacles, quickly entering the path of seeing, there is this passage. The previously mentioned pleasure of tranquility, the essence of loving meditation is greed. Because of loving meditation, one is unwilling to cultivate wisdom. This is called the wisdom obstacle (referring to an obstacle in wisdom), which is that greed. Or the essence of this correct and incorrect object of knowledge obstacle (referring to an obstacle in the understanding of things) is called the wisdom obstacle. Previously, it was the affliction obstacle (referring to an obstacle in afflictions), so here it is the object of knowledge obstacle.
除通二障。攝彼論為斷。第十疑中大分有二。初正斷疑。后挍量顯勝。前斷疑訖自下挍量。彼先問起頌云。
於何法修行 得何等福德 覆成就何業 如是說修行
演曰。初句問修法。次句修益。次句修用。后句總結。即於此經讀誦受持以生修惠。修惠功德所作勝業而生。下文正與此同。先依此論總申經意云。此中為離三摩提攀緣顯示。與法相應有五種勝功德。演曰。三摩提者等持義。攀緣者作意義。對法論云。得定心者名得。作意與法相應者。法謂經教。此中令離不順教法一向專修等持作意貪著禪味。是菩薩縛故勸令離之。與經相順而修作意能除亂障。有五功德發生修惠。以愚斷癡非是總令不修于定意。欲令其順法修定。定生修惠故。行者必須止觀雙運故。五功德者。論云。一如來憶念親近二攝福德三讚歎法及修行四天供養五滅罪。明此五種即分為五。初中分二。初所修法行。后佛念親近。此初也。彼論於何法修行。即此如來憶念。次得何等福德。即此攝福德。后成就何業。即此嘆法修行乃至重解前福德文。皆屬第三。彼先答於何法修行。頌云。
名字三種法 受持聞廣說 修從他及內 得聞是修智
謂於此經名字教中三種修行得成聞惠。一受二持三讀誦。即頌中受持聞廣說如次
【現代漢語翻譯】 現代漢語譯本
消除兩種障礙（除通二障）。《攝大乘論》（攝彼論）認為這是爲了斷除疑惑。在第十個疑問中，主要分為兩部分（第十疑中大分有二）：首先是正式斷除疑惑（初正斷疑），然後是比較衡量以顯示殊勝（后挍量顯勝）。在前面斷除疑惑之後，接下來進行比較衡量（前斷疑訖自下挍量）。對方首先提問，頌文如下（彼先問起頌云）：
『對於什麼法進行修行（於何法修行），能獲得什麼樣的福德（得何等福德）？又成就什麼樣的事業（覆成就何業）？像這樣說修行（如是說修行）。』
演曰：第一句問的是修行的法門（初句問修法），第二句問的是修行的利益（次句修益），第三句問的是修行的作用（次句修用），最後一句是總結（后句總結）。也就是說，通過對此經的讀誦、受持，產生修行的智慧（即於此經讀誦受持以生修惠），修行的智慧、功德所成就的殊勝事業由此而生（修惠功德所作勝業而生）。下面的經文正是與此相同。首先依據此論總括經文的意義說（先依此論總申經意云）：這裡是爲了遠離三摩提（Samadhi，等持）的攀緣而顯示，與佛法相應的有五種殊勝的功德（此中為離三摩提攀緣顯示。與法相應有五種勝功德）。演曰：三摩提（Samadhi）就是等持的意思，攀緣就是作意的意思（三摩提者等持義。攀緣者作意義）。《對法論》中說：得到禪定之心叫做『得』，作意與佛法相應（對法論云。得定心者名得。作意與法相應者）。這裡是爲了讓人們遠離不順應經教的、一味專注于修習等持作意、貪戀禪定的滋味，因為這是菩薩的束縛，所以勸導人們遠離它（法謂經教。此中令離不順教法一向專修等持作意貪著禪味。是菩薩縛故勸令離之）。與經教相順而修習作意，能夠去除各種障礙，有五種功德發生，產生修行的智慧（與經相順而修作意能除亂障。有五功德發生修惠）。用智慧來斷除愚癡，並不是完全不修習禪定，而是要讓人們順應佛法來修習禪定，禪定產生修行的智慧（以愚斷癡非是總令不修于定意。欲令其順法修定。定生修惠故）。修行的人必須止觀雙運（行者必須止觀雙運故）。五種功德是（五功德者）：《論》中說：一、如來憶念親近，二、攝取福德，三、讚歎佛法及修行，四、天人供養，五、滅除罪業（論云。一如來憶念親近二攝福德三讚歎法及修行四天供養五滅罪）。明確這五種功德，可以分為五類。在第一類中又分為兩部分：首先是所修習的法行，然後是佛的憶念和親近（明此五種即分為五。初中分二。初所修法行。后佛念親近）。這是第一部分（此初也）。《彼論》中『對於什麼法進行修行』，就是這裡的如來憶念（彼論於何法修行。即此如來憶念）。其次，『能獲得什麼樣的福德』，就是這裡的攝取福德（次得何等福德。即此攝福德）。之後，『成就什麼樣的事業』，就是這裡的讚歎佛法修行，乃至重新解釋前面的福德文，都屬於第三類（后成就何業。即此嘆法修行乃至重解前福德文。皆屬第三）。對方首先回答『對於什麼法進行修行』，頌文如下（彼先答於何法修行。頌云）：
『名字三種法（名字三種法），受持聽聞廣為宣說（受持聞廣說），從他人處學習以及內心修習（修從他及內），聽聞佛法是修習智慧（得聞是修智）。』
意思是說，通過對此經的名字、教義這三種方式進行修行，可以成就聽聞的智慧（謂於此經名字教中三種修行得成聞惠）：一、受，二、持，三、讀誦。也就是頌文中的受持、聽聞廣為宣說，依次對應（一受二持三讀誦。即頌中受持聞廣說如次）。 English version
Eliminating the two obscurations (除通二障). The Mahāyānasaṃgraha (攝彼論) considers this to be for the purpose of dispelling doubts. In the tenth doubt, there are mainly two parts (第十疑中大分有二): first, the formal dispelling of doubts (初正斷疑), and then the comparative measurement to show superiority (后挍量顯勝). After dispelling the doubts in the previous section, the following is a comparative measurement (前斷疑訖自下挍量). The other party first raises a question, with the following verse (彼先問起頌云):
'By practicing what Dharma (於何法修行), what kind of merit can be obtained (得何等福德)? And what kind of deeds can be accomplished (覆成就何業)? Thus it is said to practice (如是說修行).'
Commentary: The first line asks about the Dharma to be practiced (初句問修法), the second line asks about the benefits of practice (次句修益), the third line asks about the function of practice (次句修用), and the last line is a summary (后句總結). That is to say, by reciting and upholding this sutra, the wisdom of practice arises (即於此經讀誦受持以生修惠), and the excellent deeds accomplished by the wisdom and merit of practice arise from this (修惠功德所作勝業而生). The following text is exactly the same as this. First, according to this treatise, the meaning of the sutra is summarized by saying (先依此論總申經意云): Here, it is shown to be away from the clinging of Samadhi (三摩提, equanimity), and there are five kinds of excellent merits corresponding to the Dharma (此中為離三摩提攀緣顯示。與法相應有五種勝功德). Commentary: Samadhi (三摩提) means equanimity, and clinging means intention (三摩提者等持義。攀緣者作意義). The Abhidharmasamuccaya says: Obtaining the mind of meditation is called 'obtaining', and intention corresponds to the Dharma (對法論云。得定心者名得。作意與法相應者). Here, it is to make people stay away from the teachings that do not conform to the scriptures, focusing solely on practicing equanimity and clinging to the taste of meditation, because this is a bondage for Bodhisattvas, so it is advised to stay away from it (法謂經教。此中令離不順教法一向專修等持作意貪著禪味。是菩薩縛故勸令離之). Practicing intention in accordance with the scriptures can remove various obstacles, and five kinds of merits arise, producing the wisdom of practice (與經相順而修作意能除亂障。有五功德發生修惠). Using wisdom to eliminate ignorance is not to completely stop practicing meditation, but to make people practice meditation in accordance with the Dharma, and meditation produces the wisdom of practice (以愚斷癡非是總令不修于定意。欲令其順法修定。定生修惠故). Practitioners must cultivate both cessation and contemplation (行者必須止觀雙運故). The five merits are (五功德者): The Treatise says: First, the Tathāgata (如來) remembers and approaches, second, gathers merit, third, praises the Dharma and practice, fourth, gods and humans make offerings, and fifth, eliminates sins (論云。一如來憶念親近二攝福德三讚歎法及修行四天供養五滅罪). Clarifying these five merits, they can be divided into five categories. In the first category, there are two parts: first, the Dharma practice to be cultivated, and then the Buddha's remembrance and approach (明此五種即分為五。初中分二。初所修法行。后佛念親近). This is the first part (此初也). In That Treatise, 'By practicing what Dharma', is the Tathāgata's remembrance here (彼論於何法修行。即此如來憶念). Secondly, 'What kind of merit can be obtained', is the gathering of merit here (次得何等福德。即此攝福德). Afterwards, 'What kind of deeds can be accomplished', is the praise of Dharma practice here, and even re-explaining the previous text on merit, all belong to the third category (后成就何業。即此嘆法修行乃至重解前福德文。皆屬第三). The other party first answers 'By practicing what Dharma', with the following verse (彼先答於何法修行。頌云):
'The three Dharmas of names (名字三種法), upholding, hearing, and widely expounding (受持聞廣說), learning from others and practicing internally (修從他及內), hearing the Dharma is practicing wisdom (得聞是修智).'
It means that by practicing the three ways of the name and teachings of this sutra, the wisdom of hearing can be achieved (謂於此經名字教中三種修行得成聞惠): first, receiving, second, upholding, and third, reciting. That is, the upholding, hearing, and widely expounding in the verse correspond in order (一受二持三讀誦。即頌中受持聞廣說如次).
【English Translation】 Eliminating the two obscurations. The Samgraha considers this to be for the purpose of dispelling doubts. In the tenth doubt, there are mainly two parts: first, the formal dispelling of doubts, and then the comparative measurement to show superiority. After dispelling the doubts in the previous section, the following is a comparative measurement. The other party first raises a question, with the following verse: 'By practicing what Dharma, what kind of merit can be obtained? And what kind of deeds can be accomplished? Thus it is said to practice.' Commentary: The first line asks about the Dharma to be practiced, the second line asks about the benefits of practice, the third line asks about the function of practice, and the last line is a summary. That is to say, by reciting and upholding this sutra, the wisdom of practice arises, and the excellent deeds accomplished by the wisdom and merit of practice arise from this. The following text is exactly the same as this. First, according to this treatise, the meaning of the sutra is summarized by saying: Here, it is shown to be away from the clinging of Samadhi, and there are five kinds of excellent merits corresponding to the Dharma. Commentary: Samadhi means equanimity, and clinging means intention. The Abhidharmasamuccaya says: Obtaining the mind of meditation is called 'obtaining', and intention corresponds to the Dharma. Here, it is to make people stay away from the teachings that do not conform to the scriptures, focusing solely on practicing equanimity and clinging to the taste of meditation, because this is a bondage for Bodhisattvas, so it is advised to stay away from it. Practicing intention in accordance with the scriptures can remove various obstacles, and five kinds of merits arise, producing the wisdom of practice. Using wisdom to eliminate ignorance is not to completely stop practicing meditation, but to make people practice meditation in accordance with the Dharma, and meditation produces the wisdom of practice. Practitioners must cultivate both cessation and contemplation. The five merits are: The Treatise says: First, the Tathāgata remembers and approaches, second, gathers merit, third, praises the Dharma and practice, fourth, gods and humans make offerings, and fifth, eliminates sins. Clarifying these five merits, they can be divided into five categories. In the first category, there are two parts: first, the Dharma practice to be cultivated, and then the Buddha's remembrance and approach. This is the first part. In That Treatise, 'By practicing what Dharma', is the Tathāgata's remembrance here. Secondly, 'What kind of merit can be obtained', is the gathering of merit here. Afterwards, 'What kind of deeds can be accomplished', is the praise of Dharma practice here, and even re-explaining the previous text on merit, all belong to the third category. The other party first answers 'By practicing what Dharma', with the following verse: 'The three Dharmas of names, upholding, hearing, and widely expounding, learning from others and practicing internally, hearing the Dharma is practicing wisdom.' It means that by practicing the three ways of the name and teachings of this sutra, the wisdom of hearing can be achieved: first, receiving, second, upholding, and third, reciting. That is, the upholding, hearing, and widely expounding in the verse correspond in order.
配之。三皆聞惠。前二聞惠依總持生。第三聞惠依廣聞生。彼云廣多讀習亦名聞惠。此簡有部。彼宗讀誦三部經是生得惠。大乘異彼故言亦名聞惠。切顯少讀不解義理生得惠攝。雖依名字而生三行復問。修行云何而得。即頌下二句答。謂外從他聞內持不忘數數思惟便生修惠。此中具足三惠四親近行。依中邊論十法行中開讀誦為二。合受持為一。與彼論不同者。彼論云。受持修行。依總持法故讀誦修行。依廣聞故。意以受持之行體即總持。初受后持故開為一。讀之與誦。但一廣聞故合為一。中邊約總持為依故合為一。對文皆句讀誦分二。又依此論法行者四。一受二持三讀四攝。論云。受者習誦故。持者不忘故。若讀若攝者。此說受持因故為欲受故。讀為欲持故攝又復讀者習誦故。攝者總攬義故。演曰。此論前文釋受者受文字攝者攝義也。準釋此者。于文字中先讀次誦后受。于義中初攝后持之論不同。各據義別。彼又頌云。
此為自淳熟 餘者化眾生 以事及時大 福中勝福德
上之二句釋前修行為自他利。論云。此義云何。彼名字聞惠修行為自身淳熟故。餘者化眾生。廣說法故下之二句釋得何等福德。
經。則為如來至悉見是人 演曰。后佛念親近。文如前釋。
經。皆得成就無量無邊功
德 演曰。第二攝福德分二。初標多后校量顯勝。此初也以此持經之福在於地前有漏熏習資無漏種。遠與佛果四智而為疏緣。近與十地無漏亦為增上緣。與十地位十王果報為異熟因故。彼論下解何福業中雲所謂攝受四天王釋提桓因等成就勢力故。中應敘十王果報所生之處故。言功德無量無邊。
經。須菩提若有善男子至恒河沙等身佈施 演曰。下校量顯勝。于中有二。初舉捨身多后校聞經福。初中復二。初施廣后時長。此初也。彼論得何等福德示現勝挍量故。頌云以事及時大。此即事大以一日中舍多身故。
經。如是至以身佈施 演曰。時長即彼論時大也。
經。若復有人至其福勝彼 演曰。校聞經福有二。初舉劣校量后況福勝行。此初也。于拾法行各起四行。一自作二教他三贊勵四慶慰。慶慰即隨喜。即是此中信心不逆。逆者謗也。餘本有勝彼無量無數。釋云。以第一百六數名無量數數一百四。又解但言無量無數何必即是彼之數也。上來至此四重校量。如彼論說漸化義故直聞說多。或生不信故。彼論云漸化眾生令生信心上妙義故。依此論中所對位地轉勝轉上故。校量福漸以深勝。是故已下不約身財。但依然燈行等而為校量。
經。何況至為人解說 演曰。況福勝行也。由此勝故不可將彼舍
【現代漢語翻譯】 現代漢語譯本： 德演說：第二攝福德分為二部分。首先標明福德之多，然後通過比較來彰顯其殊勝。這是第一部分，用此持經的福德，在於進入初地之前的有漏熏習，資助無漏種子的生髮，從長遠來看，與佛果的四智結下疏遠的因緣；從近處來看，對於十地的無漏境界，也作為增上緣。與十地位的十王果報作為異熟因。因此，《瑜伽師地論》下面解釋『何福業中』時說：『所謂攝受四天王、釋提桓因（Śakro devānām indraḥ，帝釋天）等，成就勢力』。中間應該敘述十王果報所生之處。所以說功德無量無邊。 經文：須菩提，若有善男子、善女人，以恒河沙等身佈施。 德演說：下面是比較來彰顯殊勝。其中分為兩部分。首先舉例捨身之多，然後比較聽聞經文的福德。首先是佈施的廣度，然後是佈施的時長。這是第一部分。《瑜伽師地論》中說，『得何等福德，示現殊勝比較』，所以頌文說『以事及時大』。這就是事大，因為在一天之中捨棄眾多的身體。 經文：如是乃至以身佈施。 德演說：時長，也就是《瑜伽師地論》中所說的時大。 經文：若復有人，於此經中，乃至受持四句偈等，為他人說，其福勝彼。 德演說：比較聽聞經文的福德分為兩部分。首先舉例較差的福德進行比較，然後說明福德勝過佈施的行為。這是第一部分。對於拾法行，各自發起四種行為：一是自己做，二是教導他人，三是讚歎勉勵，四是慶賀慰問。慶賀慰問也就是隨喜。也就是這裡所說的信心不逆。『逆』就是誹謗。其他版本有『勝彼無量無數』，解釋說：『以第一百六個數名為無量數數一百四』。又解釋說，『但說無量無數，何必就是那個數呢？』。從上面到這裡，是四重比較。如同《瑜伽師地論》所說，爲了逐漸教化，所以直接說聽聞的功德多，或者會產生不相信。因此，《瑜伽師地論》說：『逐漸教化眾生，令生信心，是上妙的意義』。依照這部論中所對應的位地，轉勝轉上。比較福德逐漸深厚殊勝。所以，下面不再侷限於身財，只是依照燃燈等行為來進行比較。 經文：何況有人，於此經中，乃至受持四句偈等，為人解說。 德演說：更何況福德勝過佈施的行為。因為這種殊勝，不可將捨身佈施與之相比。
【English Translation】 English version: De Yan said: The second section on accumulating merit is divided into two parts. First, it highlights the abundance of merit, and then it demonstrates its superiority through comparison. This is the first part, where the merit of upholding this sutra lies in the conditioned熏習(xūnxí, habitual influence) before entering the first ground (bhumi), aiding the generation of unconditioned seeds. In the long term, it forms a distant connection with the four wisdoms of the Buddha-fruit; in the near term, it also serves as a contributing condition for the unconditioned realms of the ten grounds. It serves as a ripening cause for the retributions of the ten kings in the ten positions. Therefore, the Yogācārabhūmi-śāstra explains below in 'What meritorious deeds': 'So-called embracing the Four Heavenly Kings, Śakro devānām indraḥ (帝釋天, the lord of devas), etc., achieving power.' In the middle, it should describe the places where the retributions of the ten kings are born. Therefore, it is said that the merits are immeasurable and boundless. Sutra: Subhuti, if a good man or good woman were to give away as many bodies as there are sands in the Ganges River... De Yan said: Below is the comparison to demonstrate superiority. It is divided into two parts. First, it gives an example of the abundance of giving away bodies, and then it compares the merit of hearing the sutra. First is the breadth of giving, then the length of giving. This is the first part. The Yogācārabhūmi-śāstra says, 'What kind of merit is obtained, showing a superior comparison,' so the verse says, 'With event and time great.' This is the greatness of the event, because many bodies are given away in one day. Sutra: ...even giving away bodies in this way... De Yan said: The length of time, which is what the Yogācārabhūmi-śāstra calls the greatness of time. Sutra: ...if someone else, within this sutra, were to receive and uphold even four lines of verse and explain it to others, their merit would surpass that. De Yan said: Comparing the merit of hearing the sutra is divided into two parts. First, it gives an example of inferior merit for comparison, and then it explains that the merit surpasses the act of giving. This is the first part. For each of the ten practices of Dharma, four actions arise: first, doing it oneself; second, teaching others; third, praising and encouraging; and fourth, celebrating and consoling. Celebrating and consoling is also rejoicing. That is what is meant here by 'faith without opposition.' 'Opposition' is slander. Other versions have 'surpasses them immeasurably and countless times,' explaining, 'Taking the 106th number as immeasurable, counting 104.' It also explains, 'But saying immeasurable and countless, why must it be that number?'. From above to here, there are four levels of comparison. As the Yogācārabhūmi-śāstra says, in order to gradually transform, it directly says that the merit of hearing is greater, or disbelief may arise. Therefore, the Yogācārabhūmi-śāstra says, 'Gradually transforming sentient beings, causing them to generate faith, is the supreme meaning.' According to the positions corresponded to in this treatise, it becomes increasingly superior. Comparing merit gradually becomes profound and superior. Therefore, below, it is no longer limited to body and wealth, but only relies on acts such as lighting lamps for comparison. Sutra: How much more so if someone, within this sutra, were to receive and uphold even four lines of verse and explain it to others! De Yan said: How much more so the merit surpasses the act of giving. Because of this superiority, the giving away of bodies cannot be compared to it.
身功德用。為校量故舉信心不謗少福。彼尚不如況心正法行。
經。須菩提以要言之至無邊功德 演曰。第三讚歎法及修行。初讚歎法勝后贊修行人。初中復二。初正贊後重成。此初也。論云不可思議者。唯自覺故。不可稱者無有等及勝故。此非十地菩薩所思。即法花經唯佛與佛乃能究盡。彼經論云等現難思故。思謂世間尋伺心等法。非彼境名不可思議。今經更加無邊功德。即通兩處為不可思議無邊功德。不可稱量無邊功德。彼論自下釋覆成就何業。頌云。
非餘者境界 唯依大人說 及希聞信法 滿足無上界 受持真妙法 尊重身德福 及遠離諸障 復能速證法 成種種勢力 得大妙果報 如是等勝業 於法修行知
兩行半頌有九種義。備在經文。下二句結。此即第一非餘者境界。彼云。不可思議者。示不可思議境界故。不可稱量者。謂唯獨大人不共。聲聞等亦同此論。
經。如來為發至最上乘者說 演曰。此重成也。論云。此成就不可稱義。于中余乘不及故。最上煩惱障所知障凈故名為最勝。此經名為大乘。簡小為稱。小乘不能凈二障故。問。何須說二。答。雖體無別。此中意說為頓悟大乘根性。所說之法名最上乘。希求此人名發趣最上乘者。為不定姓中大乘根性
【現代漢語翻譯】 現代漢語譯本：身功德用。爲了衡量（福德），舉出信心不誹謗（正法）的少量福德。那些（福德）尚且不如（正法功德），更何況是心懷正法並依此修行的人（所獲得的功德）呢？
經：須菩提，總而言之，（此功德）乃至是無邊功德。 演曰：第三（部分）讚歎法及修行。先讚歎法的殊勝，后讚歎修行的人。在讚歎法殊勝中又分為兩部分。先是正式讚歎，然後是再次強調。這是第一部分。論中說『不可思議』，是因為唯有自證才能瞭解。『不可稱量』，是因為沒有相等或更殊勝的。這不是十地菩薩所能思議的。就像《法華經》所說，只有佛與佛才能究竟通達。那部經論說，（諸佛）平等顯現，難以思議。『思』指的是世間的尋伺心等法，不是指（正法）的境界，所以稱為不可思議。現在這部經更加強調『無邊功德』，即貫通兩處，為不可思議的無邊功德，不可稱量的無邊功德。那部論自身解釋了成就了什麼事業，頌文說：
『非其餘（眾生）的境界，唯有依靠大人（佛）才能說；以及希望聽聞並相信此法，滿足無上的境界；受持這真實微妙的法，尊重（此法）自身所具有的功德福報；以及遠離各種障礙，又能迅速證得此法；成就種種勢力，得到廣大的妙果報；像這樣殊勝的功業，對於法和修行才能瞭解。』
這兩行半的頌文有九種含義，都包含在經文中。下面兩句是總結。這就是第一種『非其餘（眾生）的境界』。那部論說：『不可思議』，是爲了顯示不可思議的境界。『不可稱量』，是指唯獨大人（佛）不共（的境界）。聲聞等也同樣遵循此論。
經：如來是為發心趣向最上乘（Mahayana）者說（此法）。 演曰：這是再次強調。論中說：這是成就不可稱量的意義，因為其他的乘（如聲聞乘）無法企及。最上乘是因為煩惱障（Klesha-avarana）和所知障（Jneya-avarana）都清凈了，所以稱為最殊勝。這部經名為大乘（Mahayana），是爲了區別于小乘（Hinayana），因為小乘不能清凈這兩種障礙。問：為什麼需要說兩種障礙？答：雖然本體沒有區別，這裡的意思是說為頓悟大乘根性的人所說之法，名為最上乘。希望得到此法的人，名為發心趣向最上乘者，是為不定性的眾生中具有大乘根性的人所說。
【English Translation】 English version: 'The merit of body and virtue. For the sake of comparison, (the text) mentions the small merit of having faith and not slandering (the Dharma). Even that (merit) is not as good as (the merit of the Dharma), let alone the merit obtained by those who cherish the Dharma and practice accordingly?'
'Sutra: Subhuti, in short, (this merit) is even boundless merit.' 'Yan said: The third (part) praises the Dharma and practice. First, it praises the excellence of the Dharma, and then it praises the practitioners. The praise of the Dharma's excellence is further divided into two parts. First, there is formal praise, and then there is re-emphasis. This is the first part. The treatise says 'inconceivable' because only self-realization can understand it. 'Immeasurable' because there is nothing equal or superior to it. This is not something that the Bodhisattvas of the Tenth Ground can conceive. Just as the Lotus Sutra says, only the Buddha and the Buddha can fully understand it. That sutra and treatise say that (the Buddhas) appear equally, which is difficult to conceive. 'Conceiving' refers to worldly thoughts, such as seeking and contemplating, not referring to the realm (of the Dharma), so it is called inconceivable. Now this sutra further emphasizes 'boundless merit,' which connects the two places, referring to inconceivable boundless merit and immeasurable boundless merit. That treatise itself explains what achievements have been accomplished, and the verse says:'
'It is not the realm of other (beings), only relying on the Great Person (Buddha) can it be spoken; and hoping to hear and believe this Dharma, fulfilling the unsurpassed realm; receiving and upholding this true and wonderful Dharma, respecting the merit and blessings inherent in (this Dharma) itself; and being far away from all obstacles, and being able to quickly realize this Dharma; accomplishing various powers, obtaining great and wonderful rewards; such excellent deeds, one can understand the Dharma and practice.'
These two and a half lines of verse have nine meanings, all contained in the sutra. The following two sentences are a summary. This is the first type, 'not the realm of other (beings).' That treatise says: 'Inconceivable' is to show the inconceivable realm. 'Immeasurable' refers to the unique (realm) that is not shared by the Great Person (Buddha). The Shravakas also follow this treatise.
'Sutra: The Tathagata speaks (this Dharma) for those who aspire to the Supreme Vehicle (Mahayana).' 'Yan said: This is a re-emphasis. The treatise says: This is to achieve the meaning of immeasurable, because other vehicles (such as the Shravaka Vehicle) cannot reach it. The Supreme Vehicle is called the most excellent because both the Klesha-avarana (afflictive obscurations) and the Jneya-avarana (cognitive obscurations) are purified. This sutra is called the Mahayana (Great Vehicle) to distinguish it from the Hinayana (Small Vehicle), because the Hinayana cannot purify these two obscurations. Question: Why is it necessary to mention two obscurations? Answer: Although the essence is not different, the meaning here is that the Dharma spoken for those with the nature of sudden enlightenment in the Mahayana is called the Supreme Vehicle. Those who hope to obtain this Dharma are called those who aspire to the Supreme Vehicle, and it is spoken for those beings of uncertain nature who have the nature of the Mahayana.'
。所說之法名最勝乘。離二障故。若離惑障未離智障名為劣乘。今學一乘離二障盡名最勝乘。希求此人名趣最勝乘者。體雖無別。依所被根分為二種。此約正被不為二乘。兼亦無失。解深密經第二時中。唯為發趣大乘者。說亦同此會。今釋大乘及最上乘。但是義分未必對根分為二種。不爾一乘更無上乘等種種多名更對何根。由是依論余乘不及故。最上二障凈故。最勝不煩異解。彼論不可稱量。及此唯為大乘者說。並是第二唯依大人說也。第三及希聞信法。論云。以信小乘等則不能聞此。示希聞而能信法。又云希聞者謂不可思議等文句。新論說為難可得聞。
經。若有人能至不可思議功德 演曰。贊修行人有四。一舉修行。二成勝德。三荷正法。四簡非根。此初二也。如來悉知已下是第二文。問。前說佛知與此何別。答。前約憶念親近如說記念。如此人等。今約唯佛能知。行法行人所成福等余不能知。故二意別。釋文如前。即是彼論第四句滿足無上界。界者因義。
經。如是人等至三菩提 演曰。三荷正法無上菩提不過理智。以此教法詮菩提故亦名菩提。今持妙法蘊積在心。即為以肩荷擔菩提。或以念惠而為兩肩總持體故。令經文義集之。于彼此為如來二種菩提生了因故亦名菩提。以念惠二荷佛菩提。彼論
【現代漢語翻譯】 現代漢語譯本：所說的法名為最勝乘（Mahāyāna，大乘）。因為它遠離了兩種障礙（二障）：煩惱障（kleśāvaraṇa）和所知障（jñeyāvaraṇa）。如果只是遠離了煩惱障而沒有遠離所知障，就稱為劣乘（Hīnayāna，小乘）。現在所學的一乘（ekayāna，唯一乘）能夠完全遠離這兩種障礙，因此稱為最勝乘。希求這種法的人被稱為趣向最勝乘者。雖然本體上沒有區別，但根據所教化的根器可以分為兩種。這裡說的是主要教化對象，不包括二乘（聲聞乘和緣覺乘），兼顧他們也沒有問題。《解深密經》（Saṃdhinirmocana Sūtra）第二時中，只為發趣大乘者說法，也與此相同。現在解釋大乘和最上乘，只是意義上的區分，未必是針對根器分為兩種。否則，一乘再沒有上乘等種種名稱，又對應什麼根器呢？因此，依據本論，其他乘不及此乘，因為最上乘清凈了兩種障礙，所以是最殊勝的，不需要另外解釋。那部論典不可稱量，並且這裡只為大乘者說法，都是第二時中只為大人說法。《第三時》以及希望聽聞並相信佛法。論中說，如果相信小乘等，就不能聽聞此法，表明希望聽聞就能相信佛法。又說，希望聽聞者是指不可思議等文句。《新論》說這是難以聽聞的。
經文：如果有人能夠達到不可思議的功德 演曰：讚歎修行人有四個方面：一是舉出修行，二是成就殊勝功德，三是荷擔正法，四是簡擇非根器。這裡是前兩個方面。『如來悉知』以下是第二段文字。問：前面說的佛知道與這裡有什麼區別？答：前面說的是憶念親近，比如說是記念。像這些人等。現在說的是隻有佛才能知道，修行佛法的人所成就的福德等，其他人不能知道。所以兩種意思不同。解釋經文如前。就是那部論典中的第四句『滿足無上界』。界，是因的意思。
經文：像這些人等，直至三菩提 演曰：這是第三個方面，荷擔正法。無上菩提不外乎理智。因為這種教法詮釋菩提，所以也稱為菩提。現在將妙法蘊藏在心中，就是用肩膀荷擔菩提。或者用念和慧作為雙肩，總持其體，使經文的意義聚集於此。對於彼此來說，是如來兩種菩提的生起之因，所以也稱為菩提。用念和慧來荷擔佛的菩提。那部論典
【English Translation】 English version: The Dharma spoken of is called the Most Excellent Vehicle (Mahāyāna). It is because it is free from the two obscurations (dvi-āvaraṇa): the obscuration of afflictions (kleśāvaraṇa) and the obscuration of knowledge (jñeyāvaraṇa). If one is only free from the obscuration of afflictions but not free from the obscuration of knowledge, it is called the Inferior Vehicle (Hīnayāna). Now, the One Vehicle (ekayāna) that is being studied is able to completely remove these two obscurations, therefore it is called the Most Excellent Vehicle. Those who aspire to this Dharma are called those who are inclined towards the Most Excellent Vehicle. Although there is no difference in essence, they can be divided into two types according to the capacities of those being taught. This refers to the primary recipients, not including the Two Vehicles (Śrāvakayāna and Pratyekabuddhayāna), and there is no harm in including them as well. In the second period of the Saṃdhinirmocana Sūtra (Explanation of the Profound Secrets Sutra), the Dharma is only taught to those who are inclined towards the Mahāyāna, which is the same as this assembly. Now, explaining the Mahāyāna and the Supreme Vehicle is only a distinction in meaning, and it is not necessarily divided into two types according to the capacities of the recipients. Otherwise, the One Vehicle would not have various names such as the Supreme Vehicle, and what capacities would they correspond to? Therefore, according to this treatise, other vehicles are not as good as this one, because the Supreme Vehicle is pure from the two obscurations, so it is the most excellent and does not require further explanation. That treatise is immeasurable, and this is only taught to those of the Mahāyāna, which is the second period where it is only spoken for great beings. The Third Period and those who wish to hear and believe in the Dharma. The treatise says that if one believes in the Hīnayāna, etc., one cannot hear this Dharma, indicating that those who wish to hear can believe in the Dharma. It also says that those who wish to hear refer to phrases such as 'inconceivable'. The New Treatise says that this is difficult to hear.
Sutra: If someone is able to attain inconceivable merits Commentary: There are four aspects to praising practitioners: first, mentioning the practice; second, achieving excellent merits; third, bearing the Right Dharma; and fourth, distinguishing those who are not suitable recipients. These are the first two aspects. 'The Tathāgata knows all' below is the second section. Question: What is the difference between the Buddha's knowledge mentioned earlier and this? Answer: The earlier one refers to remembering and being close, such as saying 'remembering'. Like these people, etc. Now it says that only the Buddha can know, the merits achieved by those who practice the Dharma, etc., others cannot know. So the two meanings are different. The explanation of the Sutra is as before. It is the fourth sentence in that treatise, 'fulfilling the unsurpassed realm'. Realm means cause.
Sutra: Like these people, etc., until complete enlightenment (samyak-saṃbodhi) Commentary: This is the third aspect, bearing the Right Dharma. Unsurpassed enlightenment is nothing more than reason and wisdom. Because this teaching explains enlightenment, it is also called enlightenment. Now, storing the wonderful Dharma in the heart is like carrying enlightenment on the shoulders. Or using mindfulness and wisdom as the two shoulders, holding its essence, so that the meaning of the Sutra gathers here. For each other, it is the cause of the arising of the Tathāgata's two kinds of enlightenment, so it is also called enlightenment. Using mindfulness and wisdom to carry the Buddha's enlightenment. That treatise
第五句受持真妙法。
經。何以故須菩提若樂小法至為人解說 演曰。四簡非根。先徴后簡。總徴前意。何所以故法行可嘆。成大福聚為荷菩提。答中有二。一樂小乘法者。謂二乘人唯信人空不信法空。有法執故。志意狹劣不堪聞大。論云。不能聞者。謂聲聞獨覺乘者故。二著我見等。外道凡夫先執有我自謂菩薩人法執縛不求二空。亦不能受返顯能受是大乘人無人我者故能成就。如前功德。彼論不釋。此段文者。以前釋最上乘中因解信小乘等則不能聞。前已釋訖故不重釋。理必如是。不爾此文何故不解。
經。須菩提在在處處至而散其處 演曰。第四天等供養。論云。于中以花鬘等供養恭敬禮拜右繞故名支提。舉此意者。說聽之處他尚可尊。況持經者必成勝德。彼論第六句尊重身德福。釋云。在在處處供養者。當知是人必定成就無量功德。
經。複次至若為人輕賤 演曰。第五滅罪。初標輕毀后釋所由。此初也。言輕賤者。謂陵辱毀罵。餘本更有極輕毀。謂拘執朽縛。論云。此毀辱事有無量門為顯示。此故復言甚輕賤。
經。是人先世至則為消滅 演曰。釋所由中。餘本有徴說經之處。八部尚且虔恭持讀之人。理應凡聖稱讚返被輕毀。有何所由。釋中文二。初明滅罪后得菩提。此初也。彼論
【現代漢語翻譯】 現代漢語譯本：第五句，受持這真實而微妙的佛法。
經文：『須菩提，為什麼如果有人喜愛小乘佛法，甚至為他人解說……』
演義：這是爲了簡別四種不具備根器的人。先提出疑問，然後進行簡別。總括地提問是爲了引出前面的意思。為什麼佛法的弘揚值得讚歎，能夠成就廣大的福德，承擔菩提（覺悟）的重任？回答中有兩層含義：一是喜愛小乘佛法的人，指那些二乘人（聲聞乘和緣覺乘），他們只相信人空（人無我），不相信法空（法無我），因為有法執的緣故，志向和意願狹隘淺薄，不堪聽聞大法。《論》中說：『不能聽聞的人，指的是聲聞乘和獨覺乘的人。』二是執著於我見等的外道凡夫，他們首先執著于有『我』，自認為是菩薩，被法執束縛，不尋求人法二空，也不能接受（大乘佛法）。反過來顯示能夠接受大乘佛法的人，是沒有人我和法我執著的人，所以能夠成就像前面所說的功德。那部《論》沒有解釋這段經文，是因為前面解釋最上乘的時候，已經說明了如果理解和信奉小乘佛法等，就不能聽聞（大乘佛法）。前面已經解釋過了，所以這裡不再重複解釋。道理一定是這樣的，否則這段經文為什麼不解釋呢？
經文：『須菩提，在任何地方，只要有這部經……都應當以花香等供養，恭敬尊重。』
演義：這是第四種，天等供養。 《論》中說：『在這些地方，用花鬘等供養，恭敬禮拜，右繞，所以叫做支提（佛塔或聖地）。』 舉這個例子的意思是說，聽聞佛法的地方尚且應該尊重，更何況是受持這部經的人，必定能夠成就殊勝的功德。那部《論》在第六句『尊重身德福』中解釋說：『在任何地方都供養這部經的人，應當知道這個人必定能夠成就無量的功德。』
經文：『須菩提，再次，如果有人讀誦受持這部經，如果被人輕賤……』
演義：這是第五種，滅罪。首先標出被輕賤和譭謗，然後解釋其中的原因。這是開始。所說的『輕賤』，指的是凌辱和毀罵。其他的版本還有『極輕毀』，指的是拘泥於陳舊的束縛。《論》中說：『這種毀辱的事情有很多種，爲了顯示這一點，所以又說『甚輕賤』。
經文：『這是因為這個人前世的罪業，應當墮入惡道。由於今生被人輕賤的緣故，過去的罪業就得以消滅……』
演義：這是解釋其中的原因。其他的版本有『說經之處』，八部（天龍八部）尚且虔誠恭敬，持誦經典的人，理應受到凡人和聖人的稱讚，反而被輕賤和譭謗，這是什麼原因呢？解釋分為兩部分，首先說明滅罪，然後說明得到菩提。這是第一部分。《論》中說：
【English Translation】 English version: Fifth sentence: Receive and uphold this true and wonderful Dharma.
Sutra: 'Furthermore, Subhuti, if someone delights in the Lesser Vehicle and even explains it to others...'
Commentary: This is to distinguish the four types of people who do not have the capacity. First, a question is raised, and then distinctions are made. The general question is to introduce the previous meaning. Why is the propagation of the Dharma worthy of praise, able to accomplish great merit, and bear the responsibility of Bodhi (enlightenment)? There are two layers of meaning in the answer: First, those who delight in the Lesser Vehicle refer to the two vehicles (Sravaka and Pratyekabuddha), who only believe in the emptiness of persons (anatta) and do not believe in the emptiness of phenomena (dharmasunyata). Because they have attachment to phenomena, their aspirations and intentions are narrow and shallow, and they are not capable of hearing the Great Dharma. The Treatise says: 'Those who cannot hear refer to those of the Sravaka and Pratyekabuddha vehicles.' Second, those who are attached to views of self and other heretics and ordinary people, they first cling to the existence of 'self', consider themselves Bodhisattvas, are bound by attachment to phenomena, do not seek the emptiness of both person and phenomena, and cannot accept (the Great Vehicle). Conversely, it shows that those who can accept the Great Vehicle are those who have no attachment to self or phenomena, so they can accomplish the merits mentioned earlier. That Treatise does not explain this passage because it has already been explained when explaining the Supreme Vehicle that if one understands and believes in the Lesser Vehicle, etc., one cannot hear (the Great Vehicle). It has already been explained before, so it will not be repeated here. The principle must be like this, otherwise, why is this passage not explained?
Sutra: 'Furthermore, Subhuti, in any place where this Sutra is found... they should all offer flowers, incense, and so on, with respect and reverence.'
Commentary: This is the fourth, offerings from gods and others. The Treatise says: 'In these places, offerings are made with flower garlands, etc., with respect, reverence, bowing, and circumambulation to the right, so it is called a stupa (or sacred place).' The meaning of giving this example is that the place where the Dharma is heard should be respected, let alone the person who receives and upholds this Sutra, who will surely accomplish supreme merit. That Treatise explains in the sixth sentence 'Respect for the merit of the body': 'Those who offer this Sutra in any place should know that this person will surely accomplish immeasurable merit.'
Sutra: 'Furthermore, Subhuti, if someone recites and upholds this Sutra, if they are despised...'
Commentary: This is the fifth, extinguishing offenses. First, being despised and slandered is pointed out, and then the reason is explained. This is the beginning. The so-called 'despised' refers to humiliation and slander. Other versions also have 'extremely despised', which refers to being attached to old bonds. The Treatise says: 'There are many kinds of such humiliation, and to show this, it is said again 'very despised'.
Sutra: 'This is because the person's past karmic offenses should have caused them to fall into evil realms. Because they are despised in this life, their past offenses are extinguished...'
Commentary: This is to explain the reason. Other versions have 'the place where the Sutra is spoken', even the Eight Divisions (Devas, Nagas, etc.) are reverent and respectful, the person who recites the Sutra should be praised by ordinary people and sages, but instead they are despised and slandered, what is the reason? The explanation is divided into two parts, first explaining the extinguishing of offenses, and then explaining the attainment of Bodhi. This is the first part. The Treatise says:
第七及遠離諸障。釋云。何故為人輕賤。而離諸障以有大功德故。演曰。經言先世則過去世。一過去世生二讀誦經。前亦名先世。依前先世轉后報業。依后先世通轉生后及現報業。於此諸業之中。由持經力轉不定業。輕罪皆滅重罪令輕。被人罵等便為先當三惡重苦。業有四種。順現生后第四不定。不定有三。謂時定報不定。報定時不定。時報俱不定。此中所轉是第二句。所以者何。由報定故轉重令輕。由時不定墮惡道業人間受故。其餘二句一切都滅。對法論云。若作不增長不必受異熟。乃至業有五種。一他所教敕。二他所勸請。三無所了知。此之三業持經力故一切都滅。以業非是受報定故。四根本執著。五顛倒分別。此二業重作必增長定受異熟。由持經力轉此二業令成輕受。問。現後生業時報俱定者得轉以不。答。由持經故。一切皆轉。不爾如何速證菩提。若爾既皆得轉。何故名定。答。據不發心若發不定故。涅槃經云。未入我法名決定業。若入我法則不決定。又解。準阇王造五逆罪時報俱定。見佛懺悔聞小乘經。初懺悔故應入拍毬地獄轉重令輕。后聞大乘至誠懇悔逆罪消滅故。入佛法名不定業。若準此義。此中且說中庸受持轉重輕受。若心精懇一切都滅。問。準大般若唯除決定惡業應熟。如何今言定業亦轉等。答。
【現代漢語翻譯】 現代漢語譯本 第七，遠離諸障。解釋說：『為什麼被人輕賤，卻能遠離各種障礙呢？』因為有巨大的功德。演法師說：『經文中所說的「先世」，指的是過去世。』一是過去世，二是讀誦經典。前面的也稱為「先世」。依據之前的「先世」轉變後世的報應，依據之後的「先世」普遍轉變來世和現世的報應。在這些業力之中，由於持誦經典的力量，可以轉變不定的業力，輕的罪業全部消滅，重的罪業使其減輕。被人辱罵等等，就轉變為先前應當承受的三惡道重苦。業有四種：一是順現受報，二是順后受報，第四種是不定的。不定業有三種：一是時間確定，報應不確定；二是報應確定，時間不確定；三是時間和報應都不確定。這裡所轉變的是第二種情況。為什麼呢？因為報應是確定的，所以能將重的罪業轉為輕的罪業；因為時間是不確定的，所以原本應該墮入惡道的業，可以在人間承受。其餘兩種情況，一切都消滅。《對法論》說：『如果造作了不會增長的業，就不必承受異熟果報。』乃至業有五種：一是他人教唆，二是他人勸請，三是無所了知。這三種業，由於持誦經典的力量，一切都消滅了，因為這些業不是受報確定的。四是根本執著，五是顛倒分別。這兩種業很重，造作后必定增長，必定承受異熟果報。由於持誦經典的力量，可以轉變這兩種業，使其成為輕受。問：『現世和後世的業，時間和報應都確定的，可以轉變嗎？』答：『由於持誦經典的力量，一切都可以轉變。不然，怎麼能迅速證得菩提呢？』如果這樣，既然都可以轉變，為什麼還稱為「定業」呢？答：『這是就未發菩提心的人來說的，如果發了菩提心，就不定了。』《涅槃經》說：『未進入我的佛法，稱為決定業；如果進入我的佛法，就不決定了。』又一種解釋，參照阿阇世王造作五逆罪，當時時間和報應都是確定的，但他見到佛陀懺悔，聽聞小乘經典。最初懺悔，本應墮入拍毬地獄，轉重為輕；後來聽聞大乘佛法，至誠懇切地懺悔，逆罪消滅了。所以，進入佛法就稱為不定業。如果按照這個意義，這裡且說中等程度的受持，可以轉變重報為輕報。如果心意精誠懇切，一切都可以消滅。問：『按照《大般若經》所說，只有決定惡業應當成熟，為什麼現在說定業也可以轉變等等？』答：
【English Translation】 English version Seventh, to be far away from all obstacles. Explanation: 'Why is it that one who is despised by others can be far away from all obstacles?' It is because of having great merit. Dharma Master Yan said: 'The 「previous lives」 mentioned in the sutra refer to past lives.' One is past lives, and two is reading and reciting scriptures. The former is also called 「previous lives.」 Based on the previous 「previous lives,」 the retribution of later lives is transformed. Based on the later 「previous lives,」 the retribution of future and present lives is universally transformed. Among these karmic forces, due to the power of upholding and reciting scriptures, uncertain karmic forces can be transformed. Light sins are all eliminated, and heavy sins are made lighter. Being scolded by others, etc., is transformed into the heavy suffering of the three evil realms that one should have previously endured. There are four types of karma: one is to receive retribution in the present life, two is to receive retribution in the future life, and the fourth is uncertain. There are three types of uncertain karma: one is that the time is fixed, but the retribution is uncertain; two is that the retribution is fixed, but the time is uncertain; and three is that both the time and retribution are uncertain. What is being transformed here is the second situation. Why? Because the retribution is fixed, so heavy sins can be transformed into light sins; because the time is uncertain, the karma that should have led to falling into the evil realms can be endured in the human realm. The remaining two situations are all eliminated. The Abhidharma-samuccaya says: 'If one creates karma that does not increase, one does not necessarily have to endure the result of maturation.' Furthermore, there are five types of karma: one is being instructed by others, two is being persuaded by others, and three is being without knowledge. These three types of karma are all eliminated due to the power of upholding and reciting scriptures, because these karmas are not fixed to receive retribution. Four is fundamental attachment, and five is inverted discrimination. These two types of karma are very heavy, and after being created, they will definitely increase and definitely endure the result of maturation. Due to the power of upholding and reciting scriptures, these two types of karma can be transformed, making them lightly endured. Question: 'Can the karma of the present and future lives, where both the time and retribution are fixed, be transformed?' Answer: 'Due to the power of upholding and reciting scriptures, everything can be transformed. Otherwise, how can one quickly attain Bodhi?' If so, since everything can be transformed, why is it still called 「fixed karma」?' Answer: 'This is in reference to those who have not generated the mind of Bodhi. If they generate the mind of Bodhi, it is no longer fixed.' The Nirvana Sutra says: 'Before entering my Dharma, it is called fixed karma; if one enters my Dharma, it is not fixed.' Another explanation, referring to King Ajatashatru creating the five rebellious acts, at that time, both the time and retribution were fixed, but he saw the Buddha, repented, and heard the Hinayana scriptures. Initially, repenting, he should have fallen into the Tapana hell, transforming the heavy into light; later, hearing the Mahayana Dharma, sincerely and earnestly repenting, the rebellious sins were eliminated. Therefore, entering the Buddha's Dharma is called uncertain karma. If according to this meaning, here we are talking about the moderate level of upholding, which can transform heavy retribution into light retribution. If the mind is sincere and earnest, everything can be eliminated. Question: 'According to the Mahaprajnaparamita Sutra, only fixed evil karma should ripen, why do you now say that fixed karma can also be transformed, etc.?' Answer:
彼據定受受有輕重。此轉令輕非全不受。與彼無違。與涅槃經亦無乖返。持經即是入佛法故。此依前解。若依后解。彼亦據其中庸受持任意取捨。問。注云業若先定應墮惡道。即是鈍根聞必驚怖。安能信奉而讀誦此經耶。若后五百歲聞是章句能生信心者。此人已於千萬佛所種諸善根。復若為人輕賤乎。如何會釋。答。遽旨天懇叵難云興自非聖心玄鑒。何以發斯幽賾有難而無釋者。蓋欲推功歸論表佛意之深微耳。今依論宗奉宣其趣。此論五種殊勝功德。即當第五滅罪所收。彼論九種成就業因即當第七遠離諸障故。長行雲。示現遠離一切諸障故。何故為人輕賤而離諸障。以有大功德故。周本經云。此為善事。新論云。此為善事者。謂遭輕辱時顯被辱之人。有福德性故言此為善事。準此罪福各別有種。由福德故。能信此經令罪業滅。自下經文不但罪滅亦得菩提。
經。當得至菩提 演曰。此得菩提。論云。當得菩提者。顯示罪滅故。由前罪滅故得菩提。
經。須菩提我念過去至無空過者 演曰。上來別釋五種功德訖。自下大段重釋前第二攝福聚。于中準論分之為三。初顯經威力。次辨福德多。三何人能說。初中復二。初舉余福德。后校量顯勝。此初也。論初標云。應知威力者成熟熾然故。多者具足勝大故。配釋
【現代漢語翻譯】 現代漢語譯本：彼（指眾生）根據已定的業力承受果報，果報有輕重之分。通過修持此經，可以使重報轉為輕報，但並非完全不受報應。這與彼（指眾生的業力）並不矛盾。與《涅槃經》的教義也沒有衝突。受持此經就是進入佛法之門。這是依據前一種解釋。如果依據后一種解釋，彼（指眾生）也是根據其中庸的業力，受持經典可以任意取捨。問：註釋中說，如果業力已經註定要墮入惡道，那麼根器遲鈍的人聽了必定驚恐害怕，怎麼能信奉而讀誦此經呢？如果后五百歲有人聽聞此經的章句能夠生起信心，那麼這個人已經在千萬佛所種下了各種善根。又說如果為人輕賤，這又該如何解釋呢？答：佛的旨意深遠，天懇難以揣測，佛法的興起並非聖人的心能夠完全洞察。為什麼要闡發如此幽深玄妙的道理，有疑問卻沒有解釋呢？大概是想把功勞歸於論著，表明佛意的深微之處。現在依據論宗來宣揚其中的趣味。此論有五種殊勝的功德，就屬於第五種滅罪所包含的內容。彼論有九種成就業因，就屬於第七種遠離諸障。長行中說：『示現遠離一切諸障。』為什麼為人輕賤反而能遠離諸障呢？因為有大的功德。周本經中說：『這是善事。』新論中說：『這是善事，』是指遭受輕辱時，顯示被輕辱的人具有福德的性質，所以說是善事。按照這個說法，罪和福各有不同的種子。由於福德的緣故，能夠相信此經，使罪業消滅。從下面的經文來看，不但罪業消滅，而且還能證得菩提。 經：當得至菩提。 演曰：此得菩提。論云：當得菩提者，顯示罪滅故。由前罪滅故得菩提。 經：須菩提我念過去至無空過者。 演曰：上來別釋五種功德訖。自下大段重釋前第二攝福聚。于中準論分之為三。初顯經威力。次辨福德多。三何人能說。初中復二。初舉余福德。后校量顯勝。此初也。論初標云。應知威力者成熟熾然故。多者具足勝大故。配釋
【English Translation】 English version: They (referring to sentient beings) experience the consequences according to their fixed karma, and the consequences have varying degrees of severity. By practicing this sutra, heavy retribution can be transformed into lighter retribution, but it does not mean that one will not receive any retribution at all. This does not contradict 'they' (referring to the karma of sentient beings). It also does not conflict with the teachings of the Nirvana Sutra. Upholding this sutra is entering the gate of the Buddha's Dharma. This is based on the former interpretation. If based on the latter interpretation, 'they' (referring to sentient beings) also rely on their moderate karma, and upholding the sutra allows for arbitrary acceptance or rejection. Question: The commentary says that if karma has already destined one to fall into evil realms, then those with dull faculties will surely be frightened upon hearing this, how can they believe in and recite this sutra? If in the latter five hundred years, someone hears the phrases of this sutra and is able to generate faith, then this person has already planted various good roots in the presence of countless Buddhas. It also says if one is despised by others, how should this be explained? Answer: The Buddha's intention is profound, and heavenly requests are difficult to fathom. The rise of the Dharma is not something that the minds of sages can fully comprehend. Why expound such profound and subtle principles, with questions but no answers? It is probably to attribute the merit to the treatises, indicating the deep and subtle meaning of the Buddha's intention. Now, according to the treatise school, we proclaim its interest. This treatise has five kinds of supreme merits, which belong to the fifth kind of eliminating sins. That treatise has nine kinds of accomplished karmic causes, which belong to the seventh kind of being far away from all obstacles. The long passage says: 'Showing being far away from all obstacles.' Why can one be far away from all obstacles even when despised by others? Because one has great merit. The Zhou version of the sutra says: 'This is a good deed.' The new treatise says: 'This is a good deed,' which refers to when one is subjected to humiliation, it shows that the person being humiliated has the nature of merit, so it is said to be a good deed. According to this statement, sin and merit each have different seeds. Because of the merit, one is able to believe in this sutra, causing karmic sins to be eliminated. From the following sutra text, not only are sins eliminated, but one can also attain Bodhi (enlightenment). Sutra: One will attain Bodhi (enlightenment). Commentary: This attains Bodhi (enlightenment). The treatise says: 'One will attain Bodhi (enlightenment),' which shows that sins are eliminated. Because of the elimination of previous sins, one attains Bodhi (enlightenment). Sutra: Subhuti (one of the principal disciples of the Buddha), I remember the past until there was no empty passing. Commentary: The above separately explains the five kinds of merits. From here onwards, the large section re-explains the second gathering of blessings. Among them, according to the treatise, it is divided into three. First, it shows the power of the sutra. Second, it distinguishes the abundance of blessings. Third, who can speak it. Within the first, there are two. First, it cites other blessings. Second, it compares and shows superiority. This is the first. The treatise initially marks: 'It should be known that power is mature and blazing. Abundance is complete, superior, and great.' Matching explanation.
此文。即是福聚威力。以彼所有福聚遠絕高勝故。此中阿僧祇劫者。乃至燃燈佛故。應知過阿僧祇者更過前故。演曰。明經威力。所有福聚遠絕高勝。言過去無數劫者。謂金剛定乃至七地滿心為一阿僧祇。逢燃燈佛。非此所論。今取燃燈佛以前。二僧祇劫所修供養除持經外以用校量故。餘本經皆有兩重僧祇。燃燈前為一重。燃燈佛后為一重故。貞觀本云。先復過先此言無量阿僧祇劫。是總言也。以有經言未逢燃燈佛。心有所得不蒙受記將入八地逢燃燈佛得無生忍。無所得心方蒙受記是故不以燃燈佛后功德校量以無相修即惠度故。以前雖有學無相時而不相續。猶有加行故功德劣。故有論言。入第八地一剎那中所有功德勝前兩劫。正同於此。又說兩劫所修供佛色相功德。不如其中持經勝福。彼順世間有為之相。還招色身故福為劣。此生三惠。斷惑證理速證法身故福為勝。然彼劣福。皆七地前八地已去。純無相修福惠通故。所逢佛數經本不同。數有大小不相違也。那由他者。準法花經即是諺數。依此方數億兆。京諺十二而數。即為極少。依花嚴經。從一百洛叉為一俱胝。俱胝俱胝為一阿庾多。阿庾多阿庾多為一那由他。而法花經以此方大數目那由他理實應依花嚴經數。然此佛數且舉一位所逢之佛。據二僧祇非唯爾所。此古釋
【現代漢語翻譯】 現代漢語譯本 此文即是福聚（指福德的聚集）威力。因為此經所有福德的聚集遠遠超越，極其殊勝。此中『阿僧祇劫』（梵文asaṃkhya-kalpa，意為無數劫）指的是，乃至燃燈佛（Dīpaṃkara，過去佛之一）出世之前的時間。『過阿僧祇』指的是超過前述的阿僧祇劫。演曰，說明此經的威力，所有福德的聚集遠遠超越，極其殊勝。所說的過去無數劫，指的是從金剛定（Vajrasamādhi）乃至七地（菩薩修行階位第七階）滿心為一阿僧祇劫。遇到燃燈佛的情況，不在此處討論。現在取燃燈佛以前，二阿僧祇劫所修的供養，除去持經之外，來用作比較衡量。其餘版本的經文都有兩重阿僧祇劫，燃燈佛前為一重，燃燈佛后為一重。貞觀本說，『先復過先』，此言無量阿僧祇劫，是總體的說法。因為有經文說，未遇到燃燈佛時，心中有所得，不蒙受記別，將要進入八地（菩薩修行階位第八階）時，遇到燃燈佛才得到無生法忍（Anutpattika-dharma-kṣānti）。無所得的心才蒙受記別。因此不以燃燈佛后的功德來衡量，因為那是無相的修行，福慧雙修。以前雖然有學習無相的時候，但是不相續，仍然有加行，所以功德較差。所以有論說，進入第八地一剎那中的所有功德，勝過前面兩劫。正同於此。又說兩劫所修的供佛色相的功德，不如其中持經的殊勝福德。因為前者順應世間有為之相，還會招感色身，所以福德較差。後者產生三慧（聞、思、修三種智慧），斷除迷惑，證得真理，迅速證得法身，所以福德殊勝。然而那些較差的福德，都是七地之前的，八地之後，純粹是無相的修行，福慧相通。所遇到的佛的數量，經本不同，數量有大小，不相違背。『那由他』（nayuta），按照《法華經》的說法，就是諺語中的數字。按照此地的演算法，億兆京垓十二次計數，就是極少的數目。按照《華嚴經》的說法，從一百洛叉（laksha，十萬）為一俱胝（koṭi，千萬），俱胝俱胝為一阿庾多（ayuta，萬萬），阿庾多阿庾多為一那由他。而《法華經》用此地的大數目那由他，理應按照《華嚴經》的數目。然而此處的佛數只是舉一個位置所遇到的佛，根據二阿僧祇劫，並非只有這些。這是古釋。
【English Translation】 English version This text embodies the power of accumulated blessings (Fú jù, referring to the accumulation of merit). Because the accumulation of merit from this scripture far surpasses and is exceedingly sublime. Here, 'asaṃkhya-kalpa' (阿僧祇劫, meaning countless eons) refers to the time until the appearance of Dīpaṃkara Buddha (燃燈佛, one of the Buddhas of the past). 'Exceeding asaṃkhya' means surpassing the aforementioned asaṃkhya-kalpa. It is said that the power of this scripture, all the accumulated blessings, far surpasses and is extremely sublime. The countless eons of the past refer to the period from Vajrasamādhi (金剛定) up to the full mind of the seventh bhūmi (七地, the seventh stage of a Bodhisattva's path), which constitutes one asaṃkhya-kalpa. The encounter with Dīpaṃkara Buddha is not discussed here. Now, we take the offerings made in the two asaṃkhya-kalpas before Dīpaṃkara Buddha, excluding the upholding of this scripture, for comparison and measurement. Other versions of the scripture have two layers of asaṃkhya-kalpas, one before Dīpaṃkara Buddha and one after. The Zhenguan version says, 'First, again exceeding the first,' which refers to countless asaṃkhya-kalpas, a general statement. Because there are scriptures that say, before encountering Dīpaṃkara Buddha, if the mind has attachments, one will not receive prediction and will enter the eighth bhūmi (八地). Only upon encountering Dīpaṃkara Buddha does one attain Anutpattika-dharma-kṣānti (無生法忍, the patience with the non-arising of phenomena). Only then does the mind free from attachments receive prediction. Therefore, the merits after Dīpaṃkara Buddha are not used for measurement, because that is the practice of non-form, the dual cultivation of merit and wisdom. Although there was learning of non-form before, it was not continuous and still involved effort, so the merit was inferior. Therefore, some treatises say that all the merits in one instant of entering the eighth bhūmi surpass the previous two kalpas. This is exactly the same. It is also said that the merit of offering to the physical form of the Buddha cultivated in two kalpas is not as good as the supreme merit of upholding this scripture. Because the former conforms to the conditioned phenomena of the world and still invites physical form, the merit is inferior. The latter generates the three wisdoms (三慧, hearing, thinking, and cultivating), cuts off delusion, realizes the truth, and quickly attains the Dharmakāya (法身, the body of the Dharma), so the merit is supreme. However, those inferior merits are all before the seventh bhūmi; after the eighth bhūmi, it is purely the practice of non-form, with merit and wisdom interpenetrating. The number of Buddhas encountered differs in different versions of the scripture; the numbers are large and small, which do not contradict each other. 'Nayuta' (那由他) according to the Lotus Sutra, is a number in common parlance. According to the calculation here, counting by hundreds of millions, trillions, quadrillions twelve times is an extremely small number. According to the Avataṃsaka Sutra, from one hundred lakshas (洛叉, ten thousands) is one koṭi (俱胝, ten million), koṭi koṭis is one ayuta (阿庾多, ten thousand ten thousands), ayuta ayutas is one nayuta. And the Lotus Sutra uses the large number nayuta of this place, which should really follow the number in the Avataṃsaka Sutra. However, the number of Buddhas here only mentions the Buddhas encountered in one position; according to the two asaṃkhya-kalpas, it is not just these. This is the ancient explanation.
云。通舉因位三僧祇劫以用校量。若爾即但應云我念過去無量劫等。何須別舉燃燈佛前。亦有釋云。由供養佛但是福因持經智因故不為比者。不然若但智因而非福者。何故持經。二論解為攝福德聚。故知持經福智俱生。但順無相法身故為殊勝。若爾何故頌云福不趣菩提。答。以施等有相福不趣菩提。非為持經無相不趣以福智二菩提。正行感法身故。問。餘本燃燈皆言前先。何故梁經乃言佛后。答。彼譯經主取意有殊。以在過去故名為后。如說未來名之為前。約向背說未來。向前背過去故。論云親近者供養故不空過者。常不離供養故。即以常供養釋不空過。
經。若復有人至所不能及 演曰。校量顯勝下位有情惡世持說勝佛兩劫修因勝福顯經威力。所以如前彼論第八復能速證法。釋云。此是速證菩提法故。以多福德莊嚴速疾滿足。故與此意同。
經。須菩提若善男子至狐疑不信 演曰。第二辨福德多。以福廣多非情計境。若具說者。新學菩薩二乘凡夫。即便迷悶心發狂亂。論云。此顯示多故。或為狂因。或得亂心果。應知一為狂因生狂病故。二設不狂亦生亂心果。故不具說。彼論可解。
經。須菩提當知至不可思議 演曰。第三何人能說。論云。此三威力及彼多等何人能說。是故經言等。此顯示彼福
【現代漢語翻譯】 現代漢語譯本 云。如果僅僅用三僧祇劫（asamkhya-kalpa，極長的時間單位）來衡量因位的功德，那麼就應該說『我憶念過去無量劫』等等，為什麼還要特別提到燃燈佛（Dipamkara Buddha）之前呢？也有解釋說，因為供養佛只是福德之因，而受持經典是智慧之因，所以不能用來比較。但這種說法不對，如果僅僅是智慧之因而不是福德之因，那麼為什麼要受持經典呢？《二論》解釋說，受持經典是爲了攝取福德聚，所以知道受持經典能同時產生福德和智慧，只是順應無相法身，所以才顯得殊勝。如果這樣，為什麼偈頌說『福不趣菩提』呢？回答說，因為佈施等有相的福德不能趨向菩提，而不是說受持經典這種無相的福德不能趨向菩提，因為福德和智慧這兩種菩提的正行才能感得法身。問：其他版本的燃燈佛都說是『前』或『先』，為什麼梁朝翻譯的經典卻說是『后』呢？回答說，那些譯經的主持者所取的意義不同，因為是在過去，所以稱為『后』，就像說未來稱為『前』一樣。這是從面向和背向來說的，面向未來，背向過去。論中說，『親近者供養，所以不空過』，『常不離供養』，就是用常供養來解釋不空過。
經。『若復有人至所不能及』。演曰。校量顯示殊勝，下位有情在惡世受持宣說，勝過佛在兩劫中修因，勝過福德，顯示經典的威力。所以像前面《彼論》第八所說，又能快速證得法。解釋說，這是快速證得菩提的方法，因為用多福德來莊嚴，能快速圓滿，所以與此意相同。
經。『須菩提若善男子至狐疑不信』。演曰。第二辨別福德眾多，因為福德廣大眾多，不是有情能夠計量的境界。如果全部說出來，新學菩薩、二乘凡夫，就會迷惑昏亂，心發狂亂。《論》中說，這是顯示福德眾多，或者成為狂亂的原因，或者得到亂心的結果。應該知道，一是成為狂亂的原因，產生狂病，二是即使不狂，也會產生亂心的結果，所以不全部說出來。《彼論》可以解釋。
經。『須菩提當知至不可思議』。演曰。第三，什麼人能夠說清楚？《論》中說，這三種威力以及彼等眾多，什麼人能夠說清楚？所以經中說『等』。這是顯示那些福德。
【English Translation】 English version Cloud. If we merely use the three asamkhya-kalpas (asamkhya-kalpa, extremely long periods of time) of the causal stage to measure merit, then it should simply be said, 'I remember countless kalpas in the past,' etc. Why is it necessary to specifically mention before Dipamkara Buddha (Dipamkara Buddha)? There is also an explanation that because making offerings to the Buddha is only the cause of blessings, while upholding the scriptures is the cause of wisdom, they cannot be compared. However, this is not correct. If it were merely the cause of wisdom and not the cause of blessings, then why uphold the scriptures? The Two Treatises explain that upholding the scriptures is to gather accumulations of merit, so it is known that upholding the scriptures generates both merit and wisdom, but it is in accordance with the non-dual Dharmakaya (Dharmakaya, the body of the Dharma), so it appears especially supreme. If so, why does the verse say, 'Blessings do not lead to Bodhi'? The answer is that tangible blessings such as giving do not lead to Bodhi, but it is not that intangible blessings such as upholding the scriptures do not lead to Bodhi, because the correct practice of both blessings and wisdom, Bodhi, can bring about the Dharmakaya. Question: Other versions of Dipamkara all say 'before' or 'first,' why does the Liang Dynasty translation of the scriptures say 'after'? The answer is that the masters who translated those scriptures took different meanings. Because it is in the past, it is called 'after,' just like saying the future is called 'before.' This is spoken from the perspective of facing and turning away. Facing the future, turning away from the past. The treatise says, 'Those who are close make offerings, so they do not pass in vain,' 'They are always inseparable from offerings,' which is to use constant offerings to explain not passing in vain.
Sutra: 'If there is someone who reaches what cannot be reached.' Commentary: Comparing and displaying the supreme, sentient beings in a lower position upholding and proclaiming in an evil world, surpasses the Buddha cultivating causes in two kalpas, surpasses blessings, displaying the power of the scriptures. Therefore, as mentioned in the eighth chapter of the aforementioned treatise, one can also quickly attain the Dharma. Explanation: This is the Dharma of quickly attaining Bodhi, because it is adorned with abundant merit, quickly fulfilling it, so it has the same meaning.
Sutra: 'Subhuti, if a good man reaches doubt and disbelief.' Commentary: Secondly, distinguishing the abundance of merit, because merit is vast and abundant, not a realm that sentient beings can measure. If it were all spoken, newly learning Bodhisattvas, those of the Two Vehicles, and ordinary people would be confused and bewildered, their minds would become deranged. The treatise says, this displays the abundance of merit, or becomes the cause of derangement, or obtains the result of a confused mind. It should be known that one is the cause of derangement, producing madness, and two, even if not mad, it will produce the result of a confused mind, so it is not all spoken. That treatise can explain.
Sutra: 'Subhuti, you should know that it is inconceivable.' Commentary: Thirdly, who can explain it clearly? The treatise says, who can explain these three powers and their abundance? Therefore, the sutra says 'etc.' This displays those blessings.
體及果不可測量故。此意是經文義福因之體及所得果。皆離心言不可思議難可瞭解。誰能演說。唯佛能知非余所測勸。但持宣佈當勝果。彼論第九成種種勢力得大妙果報。釋云。所謂攝受四天王釋提桓因梵天王等。成就勢力故。總是覆成就何業訖。由如是事故持經勝。問。前說經力能斷有漏感得法身。如何今說得人天果。答。如無漏業資變易生。為斷于彼號斷。有漏據究竟說。何妨疏緣能感世果。
經。爾時至降伏其心 演曰。下第十一遠離自取障第十五遠離喜動住處。暖頂二位觀所取無作。四尋思觀時節稍長。前文為入暖位人說。彼位依修已得。修惠觀所取無安立有情而作利益。分別二執雖皆折伏。俱生二執猶有少起。我能住心。修行伏障。度眾生等名為自取。今為治此故有斯文。論云。何故復發起此初時問耶。將入證道菩薩自見得勝處作是念。我如是住如是修行如是降伏。我滅度眾生為對治此故。須菩提問。當於彼時。如所應住如所修行如所應降伏及其心世尊。答。應生如是心等。演曰。所住所行所降者是所取。及心者是能。所取未全除。能取全未伏。于執心中二取皆起有我能等。前卷名為于證道時喜動者。由能修惠。下品尋思觀無所取。遂生我能我得之慢。自恃高舉喜躍掉動正在暖位。斷此喜動即入頂位
【現代漢語翻譯】 現代漢語譯本：因為本體和果報是不可測量的。這裡的含義是經文所說的福德之因及其所得的果報，都超離了心和言語，是不可思議難以理解的。誰能夠演說呢？只有佛才能知道，不是其他人所能測度的。勸勉人們應當受持和宣揚，當能獲得殊勝的果報。彼論第九說成就種種勢力，得到極大的美妙果報。解釋說，就是攝受四天王、釋提桓因（Śakro devānām indraḥ，帝釋天）、梵天王等，成就勢力。總是又成就了什麼事業呢？因為這樣的緣故，受持經文是殊勝的。問：前面說經文的力量能夠斷除有漏，感得法身，為什麼現在又說得到人天果報呢？答：如同無漏業資助變易生死，爲了斷除它而稱之為斷。有漏是就究竟來說的。不妨礙疏遠的因緣能夠感得世間的果報。
經文：爾時至降伏其心。演曰：下面第十一遠離自取障，第十五遠離喜動住處。暖位和頂位，觀所取是無作。四尋思觀的時候稍長。前面的經文是為進入暖位的人說的。那個階段依靠修行已經得到。用修惠觀所取是無安立有情而作利益。分別二執雖然都已折伏，俱生二執還有少許生起。『我能住心，修行伏障，度眾生等』，這叫做自取。現在爲了對治這個，所以有這段經文。論中說：『為什麼又要發起這個最初時的問題呢？』將要進入證道的菩薩自己看到得到殊勝之處，就想：『我這樣安住，這樣修行，這樣降伏。我滅度眾生。』爲了對治這個，所以須菩提（Subhūti，佛陀的十大弟子之一，以解空第一著稱）問：『應當在那個時候，如所應住，如所修行，如所應降伏及其心。』世尊回答：『應生如是心等。』演曰：所住所行所降的是所取，及其心是能。所取沒有完全去除，能取完全沒有降伏。在執心中，二取都生起，有『我能』等等。前卷名為于證道時喜動者。因為能夠修惠，下品尋思觀無所取，於是產生『我能』『我得』的慢心。自恃高舉，喜悅掉動，正在暖位。斷除這個喜動，就進入頂位。
【English Translation】 English version: Because the substance and the fruit are immeasurable. The meaning here is that the cause of merit and its resulting fruit, as described in the scripture, are beyond the mind and words, inconceivable and difficult to understand. Who can expound on them? Only the Buddha knows, not others can fathom. It is advised that people should uphold and proclaim it, and they will obtain excellent rewards. The ninth chapter of that treatise says that one achieves various powers and obtains great and wonderful rewards. The explanation says that it is to gather and receive the Four Heavenly Kings, Śakro devānām indraḥ (Śakra, the lord of the gods), Brahma Kings, etc., and achieve power. What kind of deeds are ultimately accomplished? Because of this reason, upholding the scripture is superior. Question: Earlier it was said that the power of the scripture can cut off conditioned existence and bring about the Dharmakāya (法身, Dharma body), why is it now said that one obtains the rewards of humans and gods? Answer: It is like how unconditioned karma supports the transformation of birth and death, and it is called cutting off in order to cut it off. Conditioned existence is spoken of in terms of ultimate attainment. There is no harm in distant causes being able to bring about worldly rewards.
Scripture: At that time, until subduing their minds. Commentary: Below, the eleventh is to stay away from the obstacle of self-grasping, and the fifteenth is to stay away from the place of joy and agitation. In the stages of warmth and peak, the object of observation is non-action. The time for the four investigations is slightly longer. The previous text was spoken for those entering the stage of warmth. That stage relies on practice that has already been attained. Using the practice of wisdom to observe the object of observation is to benefit without establishing sentient beings. Although the two conceptual attachments have been subdued, the two innate attachments still arise slightly. 'I can abide in my mind, practice to subdue obstacles, liberate sentient beings, etc.,' this is called self-grasping. Now, in order to counteract this, there is this passage. The treatise says: 'Why is this initial question raised again?' The Bodhisattva (菩薩, Bodhisattva) who is about to enter the path of enlightenment sees that they have attained a superior position and thinks: 'I abide in this way, practice in this way, subdue in this way. I liberate sentient beings.' In order to counteract this, Subhūti (one of the Buddha's ten great disciples, known for his understanding of emptiness) asks: 'At that time, how should they abide, how should they practice, how should they subdue their minds?' The World Honored One answers: 'They should give rise to such a mind, etc.' Commentary: What is abided in, practiced, and subdued is the object of observation, and the mind is the subject. The object of observation has not been completely removed, and the subject has not been completely subdued. In the mind of attachment, both the object and subject arise, with 'I can' etc. The previous chapter is called 'joy and agitation at the time of enlightenment.' Because one is able to practice wisdom, the lower-grade investigation observes that there is no object of observation, and thus the arrogance of 'I can' and 'I have attained' arises. Relying on oneself and being high and mighty, joyful and agitated, one is in the stage of warmth. Cutting off this joy and agitation, one enters the stage of the peak.
。此卷初名離不自攝。以煩惱生放逸。其心不自修攝。攝持謹攝令入頂位。重觀所取無能作。上品尋思觀。即名自攝。彼論云。何故前說三種修行。今復重說此有何勝。頌曰。
于內心修行 存我為菩薩 此則障於心 違于不住道
釋意菩薩于自身修行生如是心。我住大乘等有此分別障于菩提行。又云。障何等心。偈言。違于不住道故。近違頂位遠違初地。不住之道即由暖位猶存。我心生如是慢障入聖道故今破之。故論偏指實無有法。名為菩薩發阿耨菩提等。此文正破我能如是與此論同。然彼略無別起疑文。謂有疑雲。前說菩薩都無所住修行施等。若爾則應一切無住。如何初說應如是住如是修行如是降伏為斷。此疑再興三問答。以雖說住不言我住即是為斷。第十一應無住修疑而有此文。問。觀此下經問之與答一同。前文既爾。即應是兩週說。如何前云非兩週耶。答。文雖似重所為對治其意全別。且如三問依此論說通凡聖位答亦如之。文皆有不名重說所為別故。又如於十行位多行勝行。遂有動生。我能如是故。將入十回向。先除彼慢為說修道得勝無慢。令其進入令得暖位亦復生慢故。令除之而進入頂。以此唯知。經初問者未入佛法。先有慢等。我能如是。住作業等故。初問答勸發勝心。先教無相令其發
【現代漢語翻譯】 現代漢語譯本：此卷最初名為『離不自攝』，因為煩惱產生放逸，使得內心無法自我約束和收攝。這裡的『攝』指的是攝持和謹慎收攝，使心進入頂位（頂位：指修行中的一個階段）。重新觀察所取之境，認識到沒有能動者，這就是上品尋思觀（上品尋思觀：一種高級的觀修方法），也稱為『自攝』。彼論（彼論：指其他相關論著）中說：『為什麼前面已經說了三種修行，現在又重複說，這有什麼殊勝之處？』頌（頌：佛經中的偈頌）說： 『于內心修行，存我為菩薩，此則障於心，違于不住道。』 解釋：菩薩在自身修行時，如果生起『我住在大乘』等念頭，就會因此分別而障礙菩提（菩提：覺悟）之行。又問：『障礙什麼心呢？』偈（偈：佛經中的偈頌）說：『違于不住道故』。這近則違背頂位，遠則違背初地（初地：菩薩修行的一個重要階段）。『不住之道』是因為暖位（暖位：修行中的一個階段）仍然存在『我』的心，從而產生傲慢，障礙進入聖道。所以現在破除它。因此，論中特別指出實際上沒有一個名為『菩薩發阿耨多羅三藐三菩提』（阿耨多羅三藐三菩提：無上正等正覺）的法。這段文字正是爲了破除『我能如此』的觀念，與此論相同。然而，彼論略去了另外生起疑問的文字，即有人會懷疑：『前面說菩薩都無所住地修行佈施等，如果這樣，那麼就應該一切都無所住。為什麼最初又說應該這樣住、這樣修行、這樣降伏？』爲了斷除這個疑問，再次提出三個問答。雖然說了『住』，但沒有說『我住』，這就是爲了斷除疑問。第十一應無住修疑，而有此文。問：『觀察此下經文，提問和回答都相同，前面的經文也是如此，就應該是兩週說（兩週說：指重複講述）了。為什麼前面說不是兩週說呢？』答：雖然文字看起來重複，但所要對治的內容和意義完全不同。比如三個問題，依據此論來說，貫通凡夫和聖人的位置，回答也是如此。文字都有，但不稱為重複說，因為所要對治的內容不同。又比如在十行位（十行位：菩薩修行的十個階段之一）中，多行勝行，於是產生動念，認為『我能如此』。因此，在將要進入十回向（十回向：菩薩修行的十個階段之一）時，先去除這種傲慢，為他們講述修道得勝而沒有傲慢，讓他們進入。讓他們得到暖位也會產生傲慢，所以讓他們去除傲慢而進入頂位。由此可知，經文最初提問的人還沒有進入佛法，先有傲慢等，認為『我能如此』，住在作業等等。所以最初的問答是爲了勸發殊勝之心，先教導無相，讓他們發起（殊勝之心：指殊勝的菩提心）。
【English Translation】 English version: This scroll was initially named 'Not Separating from Self-Control' because afflictions give rise to laxity, causing the mind to be unable to restrain and collect itself. Here, 'control' refers to holding and carefully collecting, causing the mind to enter the summit position (summit position: a stage in practice). Re-observing the object taken, recognizing that there is no agent, this is the superior contemplation of investigation (superior contemplation of investigation: an advanced method of contemplation), also called 'self-control'. The other treatise (other treatise: refers to other related treatises) says: 'Why have the three types of practice already been discussed earlier, and now they are repeated? What is the superiority of this?' The verse (verse: a verse in Buddhist scriptures) says: 'In practicing within the mind, retaining the self as a Bodhisattva, this obstructs the mind, contradicting the path of non-abiding.' Explanation: When a Bodhisattva practices within himself, if he gives rise to thoughts such as 'I dwell in the Mahayana', he will obstruct the practice of Bodhi (Bodhi: enlightenment) due to this discrimination. Furthermore, it is asked: 'What kind of mind does it obstruct?' The verse (verse: a verse in Buddhist scriptures) says: 'Because it contradicts the path of non-abiding.' This near contradicts the summit position, and far contradicts the first ground (first ground: an important stage in Bodhisattva practice). The 'path of non-abiding' is because the warmth position (warmth position: a stage in practice) still exists with the mind of 'I', thereby generating arrogance, obstructing entry into the holy path. Therefore, it is now eliminated. Therefore, the treatise specifically points out that there is actually no Dharma called 'Bodhisattva generating Anuttara-samyak-sambodhi' (Anuttara-samyak-sambodhi: unsurpassed perfect enlightenment). This passage is precisely to eliminate the concept of 'I am capable of this', which is the same as this treatise. However, the other treatise omits the text that gives rise to additional doubts, that is, some people will doubt: 'Earlier it was said that Bodhisattvas practice giving etc. without abiding anywhere, if so, then everything should be non-abiding. Why did it first say that one should abide in this way, practice in this way, and subdue in this way?' In order to eliminate this doubt, three questions and answers are raised again. Although 'abiding' is mentioned, it is not said 'I abide', which is to eliminate the doubt. The eleventh should be the doubt of non-abiding practice, and there is this text. Question: 'Observing the following scripture text, the questions and answers are the same, and the previous scripture text is also like this, it should be a two-week saying (two-week saying: refers to repeated narration). Why did it say earlier that it is not a two-week saying?' Answer: Although the text looks repetitive, the content and meaning to be treated are completely different. For example, the three questions, according to this treatise, run through the positions of ordinary people and saints, and the answers are also like this. The texts all exist, but it is not called repetitive saying, because the content to be treated is different. Also, for example, in the ten conduct positions (ten conduct positions: one of the ten stages of Bodhisattva practice), many practices are superior practices, so thoughts arise, thinking 'I am capable of this'. Therefore, when about to enter the ten dedications (ten dedications: one of the ten stages of Bodhisattva practice), first remove this arrogance, and tell them about cultivating the path to gain victory without arrogance, so that they can enter. Letting them obtain the warmth position will also generate arrogance, so let them remove the arrogance and enter the summit position. From this, it can be known that the person who initially asked the question in the scripture has not yet entered the Buddhadharma, and first has arrogance etc., thinking 'I am capable of this', dwelling in actions etc. Therefore, the initial question and answer are to encourage the supreme mind (supreme mind: refers to the supreme Bodhi mind), first teach non-appearance, and let them initiate.
趣。今將入聖。彼得勝道。斯慢更生。將欲革凡為障既重故再興問。令斷進修。彼論初問除其所度中慢見及所度無同己樂非恒救濟。今問除其我能度心。又前于所住所修所伏中不住。今于能住能修能伏中不住故 文似重意義全別。若謂彼論判二週者。何故經文唯有答住而無修行降伏。答處又準兩論。皆唯問此一段經文再說所由。答云以除我能住修等兩論相似。若從此去迄至經終為第二週。即應總相生起。第二週意。何故唯問此一段文。是故經文非兩週說。文分有二。初問后答。此問也。論云。將入證道菩薩自見得勝處。更作是念。我如是住如是修行如是降伏。心我滅度眾生準此應問。云何能滅度眾生。若別開者。三為自利一為利他。若合說之。三種俱通二利。所攝經據合說論據別開。此中問意菩薩住修降伏三心既能如是。為作我能住等修。為不作我能住等修。以居暖位。尚有二取。今令除之故發此問。彼論意同。
經。佛告須菩提至滅度一切眾生 演曰。下答分二。初答所住等三對治所取。后辨能行者無正治能取。待所立能。所亡能滅故。初中答三即為三段。此初答住佛引十地菩薩勝行。為欲除破彼能所執令進入頂故以為答也。
經。滅度一切至實滅度者 演曰。答修行問即不見有所度眾生。所取既無能
【現代漢語翻譯】 現代漢語譯本： 趣。現在將要進入聖位。他已經勝過了（修行之）道路。這種傲慢會再次產生。將要脫離凡夫俗子的狀態，但障礙非常嚴重，所以再次提問，爲了斷絕（傲慢）並繼續進修。之前的討論是爲了去除他所度化的眾生中的傲慢之見，以及所度化的眾生沒有和他自己一樣的快樂，並非恒常的救濟。現在提問是爲了去除『我能度化』的心。而且之前對於所居住的地方、所修行的法門、所降伏的煩惱中不住著，現在對於能住、能修、能伏也不住著，所以（雖然）文字相似，但意義完全不同。如果說之前的討論是判斷二週（兩次循環）的教義，那麼為什麼經文里只有回答『住』，而沒有修行和降伏呢？回答說，這裡又依據兩部論典，都只是問了這一段經文的原因。回答說，因為去除『我能住』、『我能修』等等，兩部論典相似。如果從這裡開始到經文結束是第二週，就應該總體的生起第二週的意義，為什麼只問這一段經文呢？所以經文不是兩週的說法。文章分為兩部分，先問后答。這是提問的部分。論典中說，將要進入證道的菩薩，自己看到自己得勝的地方，更加產生這樣的念頭：『我這樣住，這樣修行，這樣降伏。』心中想著『我滅度眾生』，按照這個應該問：『如何能滅度眾生？』如果分開來說，三種是爲了自利，一種是爲了利他。如果合起來說，三種都通於二利所攝。經文依據合說，論典依據別開。這裡提問的意思是，菩薩的住、修、降伏這三種心既然能這樣，是作『我能住』等想，還是不作『我能住』等想？因為處於暖位，尚有二取（能取和所取），現在爲了去除它，所以提出這個問題。那部論典的意思相同。 經：佛告須菩提至滅度一切眾生 演曰：下面回答分為兩部分。首先回答所住等三種對治所取，然後辨別能行者沒有正治能取。等待所立的能，所亡能滅，所以首先回答住，佛引用十地菩薩的殊勝行為，想要去除破除他們的能所執著，讓他們進入頂位，所以用這個來回答。 經：滅度一切至實滅度者 演曰：回答修行的問題，就是不見有所度化的眾生。所取既然沒有，能取也就沒有了。
【English Translation】 English version: 'Qu.' Now about to enter sainthood. He has overcome the path (of practice). This arrogance will arise again. About to leave the state of a mortal, but the obstacles are very serious, so ask again, in order to cut off (arrogance) and continue to practice. The previous discussion was to remove the arrogance of the beings he has liberated, and that the beings he has liberated do not have the same happiness as himself, and are not constant salvation. Now the question is to remove the 'I can liberate' mind. And previously, one did not dwell on the place of residence, the Dharma practiced, and the afflictions subdued, and now one does not dwell on the ability to dwell, practice, and subdue, so (although) the words are similar, the meaning is completely different. If it is said that the previous discussion was to judge the teachings of two cycles, then why are there only answers about 'dwelling' in the scriptures, and no practice and subduing? The answer is that here again, according to the two treatises, the reason for only asking this passage of scripture. The answer is that because removing 'I can dwell', 'I can practice', etc., the two treatises are similar. If from here to the end of the scripture is the second cycle, then the meaning of the second cycle should arise as a whole, why only ask this passage of scripture? Therefore, the scripture is not a two-cycle statement. The article is divided into two parts, first the question and then the answer. This is the question part. The treatise says that the Bodhisattva who is about to enter the path of enlightenment, seeing his own place of victory, further generates this thought: 'I dwell in this way, practice in this way, subdue in this way.' Thinking in his heart 'I liberate sentient beings', according to this, one should ask: 'How can one liberate sentient beings?' If separated, three are for self-benefit, and one is for benefiting others. If combined, the three are all included in the two benefits. The scripture is based on the combined statement, and the treatise is based on the separate statement. The meaning of the question here is, since the Bodhisattva's three minds of dwelling, practicing, and subduing can be like this, is it to think 'I can dwell', etc., or not to think 'I can dwell', etc.? Because it is in the warm position, there are still two grasps (the grasper and the grasped), and now in order to remove it, this question is raised. The meaning of that treatise is the same.' 'Sutra: The Buddha told Subhuti to liberate all sentient beings. Yan said: The following answer is divided into two parts. First, answer the three types of antidotes to what is grasped, such as dwelling, and then distinguish that the practitioner does not have the right to treat what is grasped. Waiting for the established ability, the lost ability can be destroyed, so first answer dwelling, the Buddha cited the supreme practice of the ten-ground Bodhisattvas, wanting to remove and break their attachment to ability and what is grasped, so that they can enter the top position, so use this to answer.' 'Sutra: Liberate all to the truly liberated. Yan said: Answering the question of practice means not seeing any sentient beings to be liberated. Since what is grasped is not there, the ability to grasp is also not there.'
取寧有。
經。何以故至則非菩薩 演曰。答降伏問。若住真道得無所得。則無我人眾生等相。是真菩薩。今勸地前既欲趣證彼真無住。應當如彼真無住者。不有此想而為降伏。論云。若菩薩眾生等想轉者。為顯我執取或隨眠故。此意眾生想轉者。顯是我執分別現行。設無現行由有種子亦名我執。二乘無學至此位中。雖無人我而有法我。現行種子由此等故非真住道故。應降伏而入真住。
經。所以者何至三菩提者 演曰。此正對治能取心也。真住菩薩不見有少法。是能行者亦不見有少法。而是可取生於喜動。我為能得彼為所得故。若有此能住所得心等現前應觀無有少法可名能發趣者。故此對治我是能住我能修伏等而生喜動。
經。須菩提于意云何至三菩提不 演曰。下第十二離無教授障第十六求教授住處。既住頂位觀所取無。將起忍及世第一法中。即無所取。觀能取無及單雙印入于真聖證道之位。若無教授不能進成。故引燃燈以顯教授。我住八地尚遇燃燈。以求教授。進入上位。況猶住頂不求教授規上法耶。不求教授。是所知障為離。此障說此經文。前據正行名求教授。今約所除離無教授。互舉能所亦不相違。彼論斷第十二菩薩修因疑論云。此中有疑若無菩薩。云何釋迦如來。于燃燈佛所行菩薩行
【現代漢語翻譯】 現代漢語譯本： 取寧有。
經：為什麼這樣說呢？如果（菩薩）執著于任何事物，那就不是真正的菩薩。演曰：這是回答關於如何降伏妄心的提問。如果安住于真實的道，達到無所得的境界，那麼就不會有我相、人相、眾生相等分別。這才是真正的菩薩。現在勸導初地之前的菩薩，既然想要趨向並證得那真實的無住境界，就應當像那些真正無住的菩薩一樣，心中不存有任何執著，以此來降伏妄心。《瑜伽師地論》中說：『如果菩薩心中眾生相的念頭轉變，那是因為顯現了我執的緣故，或者是因為隨眠的緣故。』這裡的意思是，眾生相的念頭轉變，顯現的是我執的分別念現行。即使沒有現行，由於有種子存在，也仍然可以稱為我執。二乘的無學之人，到了這個階段，雖然沒有人我和眾生我，但仍然有法我。現行和種子都存在，因此不是真正安住于道，所以應當降伏妄心，才能進入真正的安住。
經：這是什麼緣故呢？因為真正的菩薩，不認為自己能發起趨向無上正等正覺之心。演曰：這是爲了對治能取之心。真正安住于道的菩薩，不會認為有任何法是自己能夠修行的，也不會認為有任何法是可以被自己獲取的，因此不會產生喜悅和動搖，認為『我是能證得者，那是被我證得的』。如果心中有這種能取和所得的念頭，就應當觀照，實際上沒有任何法可以被稱為能發起趨向菩提之心。因此，這是爲了對治『我是能安住者，我能修行降伏』等念頭，從而產生的喜悅和動搖。
經：須菩提，你認為怎麼樣？如來在燃燈佛那裡，有所得於無上正等正覺嗎？演曰：下面第十二品是遠離無教授的障礙，第十六品是尋求教授的住處。既然安住在頂位，觀察所取之法為空，將要發起忍位和世第一法時，就沒有所取。觀察能取之法為空，以及單印和雙印，進入到真正的聖證道之位。如果沒有教授，就不能進步成就。所以引用燃燈佛的例子來顯示教授的重要性。我住在八地菩薩的果位，尚且要遇到燃燈佛，以尋求教授，進入更高的果位。更何況是住在頂位的菩薩，如果不尋求教授，又怎麼能規範更高的法呢？不尋求教授，是所知障。爲了遠離這種障礙，所以說這部經文。前面是根據正行來說的尋求教授，現在是根據所要去除的障礙來說的遠離無教授。互相舉出能和所，也不互相違背。《瑜伽師地論》斷定第十二菩薩修因疑論說：『這裡有疑問，如果沒有菩薩，釋迦如來怎麼會在燃燈佛那裡行菩薩行呢？』
【English Translation】 English version: Qu Ningyou.
Sutra: Why is this so? If (a Bodhisattva) clings to anything, then he is not a true Bodhisattva. Commentary: This answers the question of how to subdue the mind. If one abides in the true path and attains the state of no-attainment, then there will be no distinctions of self, person, sentient being, etc. This is a true Bodhisattva. Now, advising Bodhisattvas before the first ground, since they want to move towards and realize that true state of non-abiding, they should, like those truly non-abiding Bodhisattvas, not harbor any attachments in their minds, and use this to subdue their minds. The Yogacarabhumi-sastra says: 'If the thought of sentient beings changes in the mind of a Bodhisattva, it is because of the manifestation of self-attachment, or because of latent tendencies.' The meaning here is that the change in the thought of sentient beings manifests the active arising of the discriminating mind of self-attachment. Even if there is no active arising, because there are seeds present, it can still be called self-attachment. Arhats of the Two Vehicles, having reached this stage, although they have no self-attachment to persons or sentient beings, still have self-attachment to dharmas (法我). Active arising and seeds are both present, so they are not truly abiding in the path. Therefore, they should subdue their minds in order to enter true abiding.
Sutra: What is the reason for this? Because a true Bodhisattva does not think that he can initiate the mind towards Anuttara-samyak-sambodhi (無上正等正覺, unsurpassed, complete and perfect enlightenment). Commentary: This is to counteract the mind that grasps. A Bodhisattva who truly abides in the path does not think that there is any dharma that he can practice, nor does he think that there is any dharma that can be obtained by him. Therefore, he does not generate joy and agitation, thinking, 'I am the one who can attain, and that is what I have attained.' If there is this thought of the ability to grasp and the object to be attained in the mind, one should contemplate that there is actually no dharma that can be called the initiator of the mind towards Bodhi. Therefore, this is to counteract the thoughts of 'I am the one who can abide, I can practice subduing,' etc., which lead to joy and agitation.
Sutra: Subhuti, what do you think? Did the Tathagata (如來, Thus Come One) obtain anything from Dipankara Buddha (燃燈佛, the Buddha of the burning lamp) with respect to Anuttara-samyak-sambodhi? Commentary: Below, the twelfth chapter is about removing the obstacle of no instruction, and the sixteenth chapter is about seeking a place to abide for instruction. Since one abides in the peak position, observing that the object to be grasped is empty, when about to initiate the stage of forbearance and the highest mundane dharma, there is nothing to be grasped. Observing that the grasper is empty, as well as the single seal and double seal, one enters the position of true saintly attainment of the path. Without instruction, one cannot progress and achieve. Therefore, the example of Dipankara Buddha is cited to show the importance of instruction. I, residing in the eighth ground of a Bodhisattva, still had to meet Dipankara Buddha to seek instruction in order to enter a higher ground. How much more so should a Bodhisattva residing in the peak position seek instruction to regulate higher dharmas? Not seeking instruction is the obstacle of what is to be known. To remove this obstacle, this sutra passage is spoken. The former is based on correct practice to speak of seeking instruction, and the latter is based on the obstacle to be removed to speak of removing no instruction. Mutually citing the able and the object are not contradictory. The Yogacarabhumi-sastra determines in the twelfth chapter, 'Doubtful Questions on the Cause of Bodhisattvas' cultivation, saying: 'Here there is a doubt, if there are no Bodhisattvas, how could Sakyamuni Tathagata (釋迦如來, the founder of Buddhism) have practiced the Bodhisattva path with Dipankara Buddha?'"
。為斷此疑。以次前文實無有法發菩提心者。若實無菩薩。云何于燃燈如來所昔修因行。明燃燈所亦無有法。以答此疑。此論令求能教授人以希教授引生勝智。彼論約明教授之法無少可得。以破前疑。各據一義文分為三。初問次答后佛印成。此初也。于彼佛時。實道理中頗有少法為勝。修行而能所證佛菩提不。
經。不也至三菩提 演曰。答準問可知。
經。佛言如是至菩提 演曰。下佛印成文二。初總印后別成。此初也。
經。須菩提至牟尼 演曰。下別成中。依此論科展轉釋疑。文分有六。初無法得授記。二真如不可說。三佛不得菩提。四遮止增減執。五真如遍諸法。六安立第一義。初中有二。返釋順成。此初也。依彼論科有二。初法說斷疑。后譬如人身長大。下喻說斷疑。初中有六。即前六段其有異同。至文對辨。論云。此有何意。若正覺法可說。如彼燃燈如來所說者。我于彼時便得正覺。燃燈如來則不授記。言汝當得等。以彼法不可說故。我于彼時不得正覺。是故與我授記。演曰。若正覺法如言可說。有實體者。我于彼時有實勝行。何故不得良為正覺無如言體。我于彼時無實勝行。是故彼時不得正覺。但與我記當得菩提。彼論亦同。彼頌曰。
以後時授記 燃燈行非上 菩提彼行
【現代漢語翻譯】 現代漢語譯本：爲了消除這個疑惑，說明前面的經文實際上並沒有闡述任何能夠引發菩提心的方法。如果實際上沒有菩薩，那麼如何解釋我在燃燈如來（Dipamkara Buddha，過去佛之一）那裡過去所修的因行呢？爲了說明燃燈如來那裡也沒有任何固定的方法，以此來解答這個疑惑。此論旨在引導人們尋求能夠傳授佛法的人，通過希求教授來引發殊勝的智慧。而彼論則強調教授之法本身沒有任何可以執取之處，以此來破除之前的疑惑。各自依據不同的含義，將經文分為三個部分：首先是提問，然後是回答，最後是佛的印證。這是第一個部分。在燃燈如來那個時代，從真實的道理上來說，是否真的存在某種殊勝的法，通過修行而能夠證得佛菩提（Buddha's enlightenment，佛的覺悟）呢？
經文：『不也，乃至三菩提（Anuttara-samyak-sambodhi，無上正等正覺）』 演曰：回答可以根據問題來理解。
經文：『佛言：如是，乃至菩提（Bodhi，覺悟）』 演曰：下面是佛的印證，分為兩個部分：首先是總體的印證，然後是分別的成就。這是第一個部分。
經文：『須菩提（Subhuti，佛陀的十大弟子之一）乃至牟尼（Muni，聖者）』 演曰：在下面的分別成就中，依據此論的科判，層層解釋疑惑。分為六個部分：一是無法獲得授記，二是真如不可說，三是佛不得菩提，四是遮止增減的執著，五是真如遍及一切法，六是安立第一義。在第一個部分中，又分為兩個方面：反過來解釋，順著來成就。這是第一個方面。依據彼論的科判，分為兩個部分：首先是用法來說明，斷除疑惑；然後用譬如人身長大的比喻來說明，斷除疑惑。下面是用比喻來說明，斷除疑惑。在第一個部分中，有六個小部分，與前面的六段內容有相同也有不同，到後面的經文再進行對比辨析。論中說：『這有什麼意義呢？如果正覺之法可以用語言表達，就像燃燈如來所說的那樣，那麼我在那個時候就應該已經證得正覺了，燃燈如來也就不會給我授記，說你將來會證得等等。』因為那個法是不可說的，所以我那個時候沒有證得正覺，所以才給我授記。演曰：如果正覺之法可以用語言來表達，有實體存在，那麼我在那個時候就應該有真實的殊勝之行，為什麼沒有證得正覺呢？正是因為正覺沒有可以用語言表達的實體。我那個時候沒有真實的殊勝之行，所以那個時候沒有證得正覺，只是給我授記將來會證得菩提。彼論也是同樣的觀點。彼論的頌文說：
『以後時授記，燃燈行非上，菩提彼行。』
【English Translation】 English version: To dispel this doubt, it is explained that the preceding text does not actually describe any method that can generate Bodhicitta (the mind of enlightenment, the aspiration to achieve Buddhahood). If there are actually no Bodhisattvas, then how can we explain the past causal practices I performed at Dipamkara Buddha's (one of the past Buddhas) place? To explain that there was also no fixed method at Dipamkara Buddha's place, thereby answering this doubt. This treatise aims to guide people to seek those who can teach the Dharma, using the desire for instruction to generate supreme wisdom. The other treatise emphasizes that there is nothing to grasp in the method of instruction itself, thereby dispelling the previous doubt. Each based on different meanings, the text is divided into three parts: first, the question; then, the answer; and finally, the Buddha's confirmation. This is the first part. In the era of Dipamkara Buddha, from the perspective of true principle, was there really some supreme Dharma that, through practice, could lead to the attainment of Buddha's enlightenment (Buddha's enlightenment, the awakening of the Buddha)?
Sutra: 'No, even to Anuttara-samyak-sambodhi (Unsurpassed Perfect Enlightenment).' Commentary: The answer can be understood based on the question.
Sutra: 'The Buddha said: So it is, even to Bodhi (Enlightenment).' Commentary: Below is the Buddha's confirmation, divided into two parts: first, the overall confirmation; then, the separate accomplishment. This is the first part.
Sutra: 'Subhuti (one of the ten great disciples of the Buddha) even to Muni (Sage).' Commentary: In the separate accomplishment below, the doubts are explained layer by layer according to the classification of this treatise. It is divided into six parts: first, the inability to receive prediction; second, Suchness (Tathata, the true nature of reality) is inexpressible; third, the Buddha does not attain Bodhi; fourth, preventing the attachment to increase and decrease; fifth, Suchness pervades all Dharmas; and sixth, establishing the ultimate meaning. In the first part, there are two aspects: explaining it in reverse and accomplishing it in accordance. This is the first aspect. According to the classification of the other treatise, it is divided into two parts: first, using the Dharma to explain and dispel doubts; then, using the analogy of a person's body growing to explain and dispel doubts. Below is using the analogy to explain and dispel doubts. In the first part, there are six small parts, which have similarities and differences with the previous six sections, and will be compared and analyzed in the later text. The treatise says: 'What is the meaning of this? If the Dharma of Perfect Enlightenment could be expressed in words, as Dipamkara Buddha said, then I should have already attained Perfect Enlightenment at that time, and Dipamkara Buddha would not have given me a prediction, saying that you will attain it in the future, etc.' Because that Dharma is inexpressible, I did not attain Perfect Enlightenment at that time, so I was given a prediction. Commentary: If the Dharma of Perfect Enlightenment could be expressed in words and had a real substance, then I should have had real supreme practice at that time, why didn't I attain Perfect Enlightenment? It is precisely because Perfect Enlightenment does not have a substance that can be expressed in words. I did not have real supreme practice at that time, so I did not attain Perfect Enlightenment at that time, but was only given a prediction that I would attain Bodhi in the future. The other treatise has the same view. The verse of the other treatise says:
'Prediction in the future, Dipamkara's practice is not supreme, Bodhi is that practice.'
等 非實有為相
釋云。此義云何。于燃燈佛時非第一菩薩行。何以故。我于彼時所修諸行無有一法得阿耨菩提。若我于彼佛所已證菩提。則后時諸佛不授我記。是故我于彼時行未成佛。演曰。意同此論。然釋中雲。則后時諸佛不授我記者。譯家倒錯。應言則不與我授后時記故。新論頌云。授后時記故。燃燈行非勝。問。前言八地無所得故蒙佛授記。如何今言行非勝。上不得菩提。答。所望義別。前以八地得無生忍相續現前。無所得故而蒙授記。今據無生真實理中無勝上行。若實有者。何故當時不得菩提而蒙遠記。即是釋通前所疑問。以不得菩提故。明非第一菩薩行也。
經。以實無有法至號釋迦牟尼 演曰。順成此有二意。一者以實無有執著心故。行順於理故蒙授記。二者以實無勝行無實菩提可證得故。但蒙遠記。言釋迦牟尼。此云能寂。餘本有如來。此中文闕。又餘本呼摩納婆。此云儒童。梁本云婆羅門。此云凈行。據姓呼耳。
經。何以故如來者即諸法如義 演曰。第二真如不可說。論云。又何故彼法不可說。如經須菩提如來者即是真如故如清凈故名為如來。以如不可說故作此說。清凈者如名為真如。猶如真金。演曰。先徴意者。何故當授記時無法而言不可說耶。答。意所授如來記者。如
【現代漢語翻譯】 現代漢語譯本 等，非實有為相
解釋說：這個道理是什麼呢？在燃燈佛（Dipamkara Buddha）時，我不是第一菩薩行。為什麼呢？因為我在那時所修的各種修行，沒有一種能夠讓我證得阿耨多羅三藐三菩提（anuttara-samyak-sambodhi，無上正等正覺）。如果我在那位佛那裡已經證得菩提，那麼後來的諸佛就不會給我授記。所以我在那時所修的行，還沒有成就佛果。演曰：意思與此論相同。然而解釋中說：『那麼後來的諸佛就不會給我授記』，是翻譯的人弄顛倒了。應該說『那麼就不會給我授後來的記』。新論的頌說：『授后時記故，燃燈行非勝。』問：前面說八地（eighth bhumi）無所得，所以蒙佛授記，為什麼現在又說行非勝，上不得菩提呢？答：所期望的意義不同。前面是因為八地得到無生法忍（anutpattika-dharma-ksanti）相續現前，因為無所得，所以蒙受授記。現在是根據無生真實理中沒有殊勝的修行。如果真實有的話，為什麼當時不得菩提而蒙受遙遠的授記？這就是解釋並融通前面所疑問的。因為不得菩提，所以說明不是第一菩薩行。
經：以實無有法至號釋迦牟尼（Sakyamuni Buddha） 演曰：順成此有二意。一者以實無有執著心故，行順於理故蒙授記。二者以實無勝行無實菩提可證得故，但蒙遠記。言釋迦牟尼，此云能寂。餘本有如來（Tathagata），此中文闕。又餘本呼摩納婆（Manava），此云儒童。梁本云婆羅門（Brahmana），此云凈行。據姓呼耳。
經：何以故如來者即諸法如義 演曰：第二真如不可說。論云：又何故彼法不可說？如經須菩提（Subhuti）如來者即是真如故如清凈故名為如來。以如不可說故作此說。清凈者如名為真如，猶如真金。演曰：先征意者，何故當授記時無法而言不可說耶？答：意所授如來記者，如
【English Translation】 English version Equal to, not a real conditioned appearance.
Explanation: What is the meaning of this? At the time of Dipamkara Buddha (燃燈佛), I was not practicing the foremost Bodhisattva conduct. Why? Because among all the practices I cultivated at that time, none enabled me to attain anuttara-samyak-sambodhi (阿耨多羅三藐三菩提, unsurpassed perfect enlightenment). If I had already attained Bodhi with that Buddha, then the Buddhas of later times would not have bestowed a prediction upon me. Therefore, my practice at that time had not yet achieved Buddhahood. Yan said: The meaning is the same as this treatise. However, the explanation says: 'Then the Buddhas of later times would not have bestowed a prediction upon me,' which is a reversal by the translator. It should be said, 'Then they would not have given me a prediction of a later time.' The verse in the new treatise says: 'Because of the prediction of a later time, the practice with Dipamkara was not supreme.' Question: Earlier it was said that because the eighth bhumi (八地) is without attainment, one receives a prediction from the Buddha. How is it now said that the practice is not supreme, and one does not attain Bodhi above? Answer: The meanings of what is hoped for are different. Earlier, it was because the eighth bhumi attained the continuous manifestation of non-origination forbearance (anutpattika-dharma-ksanti, 無生法忍), and because of no attainment, one received the prediction. Now, according to the true principle of non-origination, there is no supreme practice. If it were truly existent, why would one not have attained Bodhi at that time but received a distant prediction? This is to explain and reconcile the previous question. Because one did not attain Bodhi, it shows that it was not the foremost Bodhisattva conduct.
Sutra: Because in reality there is no dharma, up to the name Sakyamuni (釋迦牟尼 Buddha). Yan said: This completion has two meanings. First, because in reality there is no clinging mind, the practice accords with principle, and therefore one receives the prediction. Second, because in reality there is no supreme practice and no real Bodhi to be attained, one only receives a distant prediction. The name Sakyamuni means 'capable of stillness.' Other versions have Tathagata (如來), which is missing in this text. Also, other versions call him Manava (摩納婆), which means 'Confucian youth.' The Liang version calls him Brahmana (婆羅門), which means 'pure conduct.' This is according to his surname.
Sutra: Why is it that the Tathagata is the 'suchness' meaning of all dharmas? Yan said: The second 'true suchness' is inexpressible. The treatise says: 'And why is that dharma inexpressible?' As the Sutra says, 'Subhuti (須菩提), the Tathagata is true suchness, therefore, because of such purity, he is called Tathagata.' Because 'suchness' is inexpressible, this statement is made. 'Purity' means 'suchness' is true suchness, like true gold. Yan said: First, the intention is questioned: Why is it that when the prediction is given, there is no dharma and it is said to be inexpressible? Answer: The meaning of the Tathagata predicted is 'suchness'.
來即是法身真。真如清凈而不可說。是故彼時無法可得。表如清凈無有垢染。是故諸教多以真如喻如真金。以性凈故。彼論云。若無菩提即無諸佛如來有如是謗。謂一向無佛。為斷此疑如經言等。實者非顛倒義故。真如者不異不變故。演曰。若準彼徴。何故菩提無實法耶。若無菩提佛亦非有。意云。既無能證之行。所證菩提亦無耶。經答由離相執稱之為無。不可如言。即撥非有。所以然者。實者非顛倒義。此簡所執人法二我。彼顛倒故。真如者。不異簡無漏。有為彼生滅故。此即如義。不變簡有漏。有為可對除故。此即真義。此經云諸法如義者。謂真如性遍一切故名諸法如義。義謂義理。此論明如不可說。彼論明如不倒變等。非一向無各辨一義。
經。若有人言至三菩提 演曰。第三佛不得菩提。論云。或言燃燈如來所於法不得正覺。世尊后時自得正覺為離此取故。經言等。或者以法不可說故。燃燈佛時不證菩提唯得遠記者。后成佛時既證菩提。應有實法得正覺耶。故破此疑得后菩提。亦無有法。彼論頌云。菩提彼行等。此義云何。彼菩薩行。若人言有實者。此則虛妄。如是如來阿耨菩提。若人言得者。此亦虛妄。故言菩提彼行等。演曰。前說無實菩薩能行。行者今菩提亦然。無有實法故。言菩提與彼行等正同
【現代漢語翻譯】 現代漢語譯本 『來』即是法身（Dharmakaya，佛的法性之身）的真實顯現。真如（Tathata，事物的真實本性）清凈而不可言說。因此，在那個時候，沒有任何法可以獲得，這表明真如清凈無染。所以，許多教義常用真如來比喻真金，因為它本性清凈。那部論典說：『如果沒有菩提（Bodhi，覺悟），就沒有諸佛如來』，這是一種誹謗，意味著完全沒有佛。爲了消除這種疑惑，如經文所說等等。『實』是指非顛倒的意義，『真如』是指不異不變的意義。演法師說：『如果按照他們的質疑，為什麼菩提沒有實在的法呢？如果沒有菩提，佛也不應該存在。』意思是說，既然沒有能證悟的修行，那麼所證悟的菩提也沒有嗎？經文回答說，因為遠離了對相的執著，所以稱之為『無』，不能按照字面意思理解，就否定它的存在。之所以這樣說，是因為『實』是指非顛倒的意義，這是爲了簡別所執著的人法二我，因為它們是顛倒的。『真如』是指不異，這是爲了簡別有漏法，因為它們是生滅的。這指的是『如』的意義。『不變』是爲了簡別有漏法，因為它們是可以被對治和去除的。這指的是『真』的意義。這部經文說『諸法如義』，是指真如的本性遍及一切，所以稱為『諸法如義』。『義』是指義理。這部論典闡明了『如』不可說，那部論典闡明了『如』不顛倒、不變等等，並非完全沒有，而是各自辨析一個意義。
經文：『如果有人說...乃至三菩提（Anuttara-samyak-sambodhi，無上正等正覺）』。演法師說：『第三佛（指未來佛）不得菩提。』論典說：『或者說燃燈如來（Dipamkara Buddha）在法上沒有得到正覺，世尊（釋迦牟尼佛）後來自己得到正覺。』爲了消除這種執著，經文說等等。或者因為法不可說，燃燈佛的時候沒有證得菩提，只是得到了遙遠的授記。後來成佛的時候既然證得了菩提，應該有實在的法得到正覺嗎？』所以爲了破除這種疑惑，即使得到後來的菩提，也沒有實在的法。那部論典的偈頌說：『菩提與彼行等等。』這是什麼意思呢？菩薩的修行，如果有人說是實在的，那就是虛妄的。如來的阿耨多羅三藐三菩提，如果有人說是得到的，那也是虛妄的。所以說菩提與彼行等等。演法師說：『前面說沒有實在的菩薩能夠修行，修行者現在的菩提也是這樣，沒有實在的法，所以說菩提與菩薩的修行是完全相同的。』
【English Translation】 English version 'Coming' is the true manifestation of the Dharmakaya (the Dharma body of the Buddha). Tathata (the true nature of things) is pure and inexpressible. Therefore, at that time, no Dharma can be obtained, which indicates that Tathata is pure and without defilement. Therefore, many teachings often use Tathata to compare to pure gold because it is pure in nature. That treatise says: 'If there is no Bodhi (Enlightenment), there are no Buddhas and Tathagatas,' which is a slander, meaning that there are no Buddhas at all. To eliminate this doubt, as the scriptures say, and so on. 'Real' refers to the meaning of non-inversion, and 'Tathata' refers to the meaning of non-difference and non-change. Dharma Master Yan said: 'If according to their questioning, why does Bodhi have no real Dharma? If there is no Bodhi, the Buddha should not exist either.' It means that since there is no practice that can be enlightened, then the Bodhi that is enlightened does not exist either? The scripture answers that because it is away from the attachment to appearances, it is called 'non-existent'. It cannot be understood literally and deny its existence. The reason for this is that 'real' refers to the meaning of non-inversion, which is to distinguish the two selves of person and Dharma that are attached to, because they are inverted. 'Tathata' refers to non-difference, which is to distinguish the contaminated Dharmas, because they are subject to birth and death. This refers to the meaning of 'suchness'. 'Unchanging' is to distinguish the contaminated Dharmas, because they can be treated and removed. This refers to the meaning of 'truth'. This scripture says 'all Dharmas are like meaning', which means that the nature of Tathata pervades everything, so it is called 'all Dharmas are like meaning'. 'Meaning' refers to the meaning of principle. This treatise clarifies that 'suchness' is inexpressible, and that treatise clarifies that 'suchness' is not inverted, unchanging, etc. It is not completely non-existent, but each distinguishes a meaning.
Scripture: 'If someone says... up to Anuttara-samyak-sambodhi (Unsurpassed Perfect Enlightenment)'. Dharma Master Yan said: 'The third Buddha (referring to the future Buddha) does not attain Bodhi.' The treatise says: 'Or it is said that Dipamkara Buddha (Dipamkara Buddha) did not attain perfect enlightenment in the Dharma, and the World Honored One (Sakyamuni Buddha) later attained perfect enlightenment himself.' To eliminate this attachment, the scriptures say and so on. Or because the Dharma is inexpressible, Dipamkara Buddha did not attain Bodhi at that time, but only received a distant prediction. Since he attained Bodhi when he later became a Buddha, should there be a real Dharma to attain perfect enlightenment?' Therefore, in order to eliminate this doubt, even if later Bodhi is attained, there is no real Dharma. The verse in that treatise says: 'Bodhi and that practice, etc.' What does this mean? The practice of the Bodhisattva, if someone says it is real, then it is false. The Anuttara-samyak-sambodhi of the Tathagata, if someone says it is attained, then it is also false. Therefore, it is said that Bodhi and that practice are the same. Dharma Master Yan said: 'It was said earlier that there is no real Bodhisattva who can practice, and the Bodhi of the practitioner now is also like this, there is no real Dharma, so it is said that Bodhi and the practice of the Bodhisattva are exactly the same.'
。此論以有難言因非勝上不得菩提果位殊勝得菩提耶。故有此文。又由次前云真如非一向無故。若爾佛有得耶。有此文起。
經。須菩提如來所得至無實無虛 演曰。第四遮止增減執。論云。顯示真如無二故。云何不實。謂言說故。不妄者謂彼正覺不無世間言說故。演曰。言無二者。謂虛實二也。于真如中無實言說遮增益執。不無隨順世間言教遮損減執。此由前說佛得菩提為不實。語即執一切言。皆是妄故有此文亦非虛說。彼論云。若如是有人謗言如來不得阿耨菩提。為斷此疑如經言等。此義云何。以如來得彼菩提故。演曰。此之謗言乘前文起。以前文言若得菩提不實語故。便謂如來不得菩提故有此文。亦同此論。彼又成立佛得菩提。頌云非實有為相故。有為相者謂五陰相。彼菩提法無色等相故。此復云何。頌云。
彼即非相相 以不虛妄說 是法諸佛法 一切自體相
上之二句正明菩提。雖非色等五陰之相。而有實相故不虛說明得菩提。言非實有為相者釋非實。彼即非相相等釋非虛。
經。是故如來至皆是佛法 演曰。第五真如遍諸法。論云。顯一切法法如清凈故。如者遍一切法故。由前文云佛得菩提。文外有疑佛修滿故能證法身。余無勝道不得正覺。便謂佛法唯在佛身故。此釋云。
【現代漢語翻譯】 現代漢語譯本：此論述是爲了駁斥以下觀點：如果認為菩提果位的獲得是殊勝的，那麼憑藉非殊勝的因，是否就無法獲得菩提果位？因此，才有了這段經文。另外，由於前面提到『真如並非完全空無』，那麼，佛是否有所得呢？因此，才有了這段經文的產生。
經文：須菩提，如來所得，至無實無虛。（須菩提（Subhuti）：佛陀的十大弟子之一。如來（Tathagata）：佛陀的稱號之一，意為『如實而來』。） 演曰：第四，遮止增益和損減的執著。論中說：『顯示真如沒有二元性。』為什麼說『不實』呢？因為是用言語表達的緣故。說『不妄』，是因為正覺者（指佛陀）並非沒有世間的言語教導。演曰：所說的『沒有二元性』，指的是虛和實這二元對立。在真如中，沒有真實的言說，是爲了遮止增益的執著；不捨棄隨順世間的言語教導，是爲了遮止損減的執著。這是因為前面說佛陀獲得菩提是不真實的言語，就執著於一切言語都是虛妄的，因此才有了這段經文，說明佛陀的言語並非虛妄。論中說：『如果有人誹謗說如來沒有獲得阿耨多羅三藐三菩提（Anuttara-samyak-sambodhi），爲了斷除這種疑惑，所以經文中這樣說。』這是什麼意思呢？因為如來已經獲得了那個菩提。演曰：這種誹謗是承接前面的文句而產生的。因為前面的文句說如果獲得菩提是不真實的言語，就認為如來沒有獲得菩提，因此才有了這段經文，與論述的觀點相同。論中又進一步成立佛陀獲得菩提的觀點，頌文說：『因為不是真實的有為相。』有為相指的是五陰（Skandha）的相狀。那個菩提法沒有色等相狀。這是什麼意思呢？頌文說：
『彼即非相相，以不虛妄說，是法諸佛法，一切自體相。』
上面的兩句正是說明菩提。雖然不是色等五陰的相狀，但是有真實的相狀，所以不虛妄地說獲得了菩提。說『不是真實的有為相』，是爲了解釋『非實』；說『彼即非相相等』，是爲了解釋『非虛』。
經文：是故如來，至皆是佛法。（如來（Tathagata）：佛陀的稱號之一，意為『如實而來』。） 演曰：第五，真如遍及一切法。論中說：『顯示一切法的法性都是清凈的。』『如』遍及一切法。由於前面的文句說佛陀獲得菩提，文句之外有人懷疑佛陀是因為修行圓滿才能證得法身（Dharmakaya），其他人沒有殊勝的道路就不能獲得正覺，就認為佛法只在佛陀的身上。這裡解釋說：
【English Translation】 English version: This discourse is to refute the following view: If the attainment of the Bodhi fruit is considered supreme, then, with a non-supreme cause, can one not attain the Bodhi fruit? Therefore, this passage exists. Also, because it was previously mentioned that 'Tathata (Suchness) is not entirely non-existent,' then, does the Buddha have any attainment? Therefore, this passage arises.
Sutra: 'Subhuti (One of the ten great disciples of the Buddha), what the Tathagata (One of the titles of the Buddha, meaning 'Thus Come One') has attained is neither real nor unreal.' Commentary: Fourth, to prevent clinging to augmentation and diminution. The treatise says: 'It shows that Suchness has no duality.' Why is it said to be 'unreal'? Because it is expressed in words. Saying 'not false' means that the Perfectly Awakened One (referring to the Buddha) does not lack worldly teachings. Commentary: The 'no duality' refers to the duality of false and real. In Suchness, there is no real speech, to prevent clinging to augmentation; not abandoning worldly teachings is to prevent clinging to diminution. This is because the previous statement that the Buddha's attainment of Bodhi is unreal speech leads to clinging to all speech as false. Therefore, this passage exists to explain that the Buddha's speech is not false. The treatise says: 'If someone slanders, saying that the Tathagata has not attained Anuttara-samyak-sambodhi (Supreme Perfect Enlightenment), to dispel this doubt, the Sutra says so.' What does this mean? Because the Tathagata has attained that Bodhi. Commentary: This slander arises from the previous sentences. Because the previous sentences said that if the attainment of Bodhi is unreal speech, it is thought that the Tathagata has not attained Bodhi. Therefore, this passage exists, which is the same as the view of the treatise. The treatise further establishes the view that the Buddha has attained Bodhi, with the verse: 'Because it is not a real conditioned appearance.' Conditioned appearance refers to the appearance of the five Skandhas (aggregates). That Bodhi Dharma has no form, etc. What does this mean? The verse says:
'That is neither appearance nor non-appearance, because it is spoken without falsehood, this Dharma is the Dharma of all Buddhas, the self-nature appearance of all.'
The above two sentences clearly explain Bodhi. Although it is not the appearance of the five Skandhas such as form, it has a real appearance, so it is not falsely said to have attained Bodhi. Saying 'not a real conditioned appearance' is to explain 'unreal'; saying 'that is neither appearance nor non-appearance' is to explain 'not false'.
Sutra: 'Therefore, the Tathagata, all are Buddha Dharma.' (Tathagata (One of the titles of the Buddha, meaning 'Thus Come One')) Commentary: Fifth, Suchness pervades all Dharmas. The treatise says: 'It shows that the Dharma nature of all Dharmas is pure.' 'Suchness' pervades all Dharmas. Because the previous sentences said that the Buddha attained Bodhi, someone outside the sentences doubts that the Buddha was able to attain the Dharmakaya (Dharma Body) because of perfect cultivation, and others without a supreme path cannot attain perfect enlightenment, and think that the Buddha Dharma is only in the Buddha's body. This explains:
真如遍有由前菩提是真如故有。是故言真如之體既遍一切故。一切法皆是佛法。欲令眾生知有佛性而進修習。彼論云。以如來得如是法。偈言是法諸佛法一切自體相故自體相者。非體自體故。此明何義。一切法真如體故。彼法如來所證。是故言一切法佛法故。演曰。非體自體者。如言非相為相。此顯如來能遍知法以一切法即真如故。
經。須菩提所言至名一切法 演曰。第六安立第一義。論云。又彼一切法法體不成就為安立第一義。前說一切皆是佛法真如遍彼恐存一切法體實有故。今遣之體不成就破相證真安立勝義。所言一切法者。謂俗諦法。即非一切法者。約真而談。無實體法是名一切法者。卻結俗諦。彼論云。彼處色等相不住故。彼一切色等諸法非法。如是諸法非法。即是諸法法以無彼法相。常不住持彼法相故。演曰。彼真如處無色等相故。彼色等非常住法。此解即非一切法。言如是諸法非法即是諸法法者。此解是名一切法。如是諸法非常住法故。即顯真如。是諸法家之常住法。餘本雙牒一切法。一切法者一謂世間妄取一切法。一謂如來所證一切法也。上依此論明求教受。說八地行及佛果中菩提無得。真如離相遮增減執。無能所得。令從頂位修無相觀引生忍及世第一法雙印二空趣見道智。若依彼論法說斷疑
【現代漢語翻譯】 現代漢語譯本： 『真如遍有』是因為之前的菩提是真如的緣故而存在。因此說，真如的本體既然遍及一切，那麼一切法都是佛法。這是爲了讓眾生知道自己具有佛性，從而精進修行。那部論典中說：『因為如來證得了這樣的法。』偈頌說：『此法是諸佛之法，一切都是自體相。』所謂『自體相』，並非指本體的自體。這說明了什麼意義呢？因為一切法都是真如的本體。那部法是如來所證悟的。所以說一切法都是佛法。演曰：『非體自體』，就像說『非相為相』。這顯示瞭如來能夠普遍地知曉一切法，因為一切法就是真如。
經文：須菩提所說的，乃至名為一切法。演曰：第六是安立第一義諦。論典中說：『又，那一切法的法體不成就，是爲了安立第一義諦。』前面說一切都是佛法，真如遍及一切，恐怕有人執著一切法的本體真實存在，所以現在遣除法體不成就的觀點，破除表相，證悟真如，安立勝義諦。所說的一切法，指的是世俗諦的法。『即非一切法』，是從真如的角度來說的，沒有實體法。『是名一切法』，卻是總結世俗諦。那部論典中說：『在那個地方，色等相不住留。』因此，一切色等諸法都不是法。像這樣，諸法非法，就是諸法的法，因為沒有那些法的相狀，不能常住保持那些法的相狀。演曰：在真如之處沒有色等相，所以那些色等不是常住之法。這解釋了『即非一切法』。說『如是諸法非法即是諸法法』，這解釋了『是名一切法』。像這樣，諸法不是常住之法，就顯示了真如是諸法之家的常住之法。其餘版本重複說『一切法』。一個『一切法』指的是世間妄取的一切法，另一個『一切法』指的是如來所證悟的一切法。上面依據這部論典，闡明了求教受，說明了八地菩薩的修行以及佛果中菩提的無所得，真如離相，遮止增減的執著，沒有能證悟的主體和所證悟的客體。使人從頂位開始修習無相觀，引生忍以及世第一法，同時印證二空，趨向見道之智。如果依據那部論典的法義，就能斷除疑惑。
【English Translation】 English version: 'True Suchness pervades all' because the preceding Bodhi is True Suchness. Therefore, it is said that since the substance of True Suchness pervades everything, all dharmas are Buddha-dharma. This is to enable sentient beings to know that they possess Buddha-nature and thus diligently cultivate. That treatise says: 'Because the Tathagata has attained such a dharma.' The verse says: 'This dharma is the dharma of all Buddhas; everything is the characteristic of the self-nature.' The so-called 'characteristic of the self-nature' does not refer to the self-nature of the substance. What meaning does this clarify? Because all dharmas are the substance of True Suchness. That dharma is what the Tathagata has realized. Therefore, it is said that all dharmas are Buddha-dharma. Yan said: 'Not the substance of the self-nature' is like saying 'non-form as form.' This shows that the Tathagata can universally know all dharmas because all dharmas are True Suchness.
Sutra: What Subhuti said, even to be named all dharmas. Yan said: Sixth is establishing the supreme truth. The treatise says: 'Also, that the substance of all dharmas is not accomplished is to establish the supreme truth.' Earlier, it was said that everything is Buddha-dharma, and True Suchness pervades everything, fearing that one might cling to the idea that the substance of all dharmas truly exists. Therefore, now the view that the substance of dharma is not accomplished is dispelled, phenomena are refuted, True Suchness is realized, and the supreme truth is established. The so-called all dharmas refer to the dharmas of conventional truth. 'That is not all dharmas' is spoken from the perspective of True Suchness, there is no substantial dharma. 'Is named all dharmas' concludes the conventional truth. That treatise says: 'In that place, the characteristics of form, etc., do not abide.' Therefore, all dharmas such as form are not dharmas. Thus, dharmas are not dharmas, which are the dharmas of dharmas, because there are no characteristics of those dharmas, and they cannot constantly maintain those characteristics. Yan said: In the place of True Suchness, there are no characteristics of form, etc., so those forms, etc., are not permanent dharmas. This explains 'that is not all dharmas.' Saying 'Thus, dharmas are not dharmas, which are the dharmas of dharmas' explains 'is named all dharmas.' Thus, dharmas are not permanent dharmas, which reveals that True Suchness is the permanent dharma of the home of all dharmas. Other versions repeat 'all dharmas.' One 'all dharmas' refers to all dharmas falsely grasped by the world, and the other 'all dharmas' refers to all dharmas realized by the Tathagata. The above, based on this treatise, clarifies seeking instruction and receiving it, explaining the practice of the eighth ground Bodhisattva and the non-attainment of Bodhi in the Buddha-fruit, True Suchness is free from characteristics, preventing the clinging to increase or decrease, there is no subject who can realize and no object to be realized. It enables people to cultivate the formless contemplation from the summit position, giving rise to forbearance and the supreme worldly dharma, while simultaneously sealing the two emptinesses, moving towards the wisdom of the path of seeing. If based on the meaning of the dharma in that treatise, doubts can be cut off.
問。前後三處說燃燈佛有何差別。又唯說燃燈不說余佛有何所以。答初問者依此論釋。初說燃燈在不離佛出時住處離少聞障為第二回向人說。次說燃燈在離寂靜味住處除智不具障為暖位菩薩說。今說燃燈在求教授住處除不求教授障為頂位菩薩說。若依彼論。初在斷第五佛有說受疑中。佛于燃燈語不取理實智。以是真實義成彼無取說。次在第十證如不證疑中。復能速證法校量福勝。覆在第十二菩薩修因疑中法說斷疑以後時授記燃燈行非上是故不同。答后問者。此經多說無相無生勝義之法。佛于燃燈任運相續以得此道。布發散花超於八劫。掩泥發跡今現由存。生信既多故唯稱說。上來已說信行地中。合十六處八住處中來之為四。一攝住處即是發心。二波羅蜜凈。三欲住處。四離障住處。合十二種以為第四。若據位地總為三文。初攝住處是十住位。次波羅蜜及欲住處是十行位。離障住處是迴向位。行相配屬如前應知。
經。須菩提譬如人身長大 演曰。下第十七證道住處三地之中是凈心地。已於地前無生而不願度。無行而不遍修。復以難得福身智身故伏二障。俱生漸除分別頓盡。于暖頂位希求教授觀無二取作安非安二諦無相唯識等觀。資糧加行二因具足。今為辨說初地之理。令求證道入真聖位。發無漏智斷分別障。親
【現代漢語翻譯】 現代漢語譯本：問：前面三處提到燃燈佛（Dipamkara Buddha，過去佛之一）有什麼區別？又為什麼只說燃燈佛而不說其他佛呢？答：第一個問題，根據此論的解釋，第一次說燃燈佛是在不離開佛出世的時候，所住的地方遠離了少聞的障礙，是為第二回向的人說的。第二次說燃燈佛是在離開寂靜味道的住處，去除智慧不具足的障礙，是為暖位的菩薩說的。現在說燃燈佛是在尋求教授的住處，去除不尋求教授的障礙，是為頂位的菩薩說的。如果依據那部論，第一次是在斷除第五佛有說受懷疑中，佛對於燃燈佛的說法不取理實智，因為這是真實義，成就了他沒有取說的說法。第二次是在第十證如不證懷疑中，又能快速證得法，校量福德殊勝。又在第十二菩薩修因懷疑中，法說斷除懷疑以後，授記燃燈佛的修行並非上等，所以不同。答：第二個問題，這部經多數說的是無相無生勝義的法。佛對於燃燈佛任運相續而得到此道，布發散花超過八劫，掩泥發跡現在依然存在。產生信仰的人很多，所以只稱說燃燈佛。上面已經說了信行地中，合十六處八住處中來的是四種。一是攝住處，就是發心。二是波羅蜜凈（Paramita，意為「到彼岸」），三是欲住處，四是離障住處。合十二種作為第四種。如果根據位地，總共有三段文字。初攝住處是十住位。次波羅蜜及欲住處是十行位。離障住處是迴向位。行相配屬應該像前面所說的那樣理解。 經：須菩提（Subhuti，佛陀的十大弟子之一），譬如人身長大。演曰：下面第十七證道住處三地之中是凈心地。已經在地前無生而不願度，無行而不普遍修行。又因為難得的福身智身，所以降伏二障。俱生漸除，分別頓盡。在暖頂位，希望尋求教授，觀察無二取，作安非安二諦無相唯識等觀。資糧加行二因具足。現在是爲了辨說初地的道理，令求證道的人進入真正的聖位，發起無漏智，斷除分別障，親近。
【English Translation】 English version: Question: What are the differences in the three mentions of Dipamkara Buddha (one of the past Buddhas)? And why only mention Dipamkara Buddha and not other Buddhas? Answer: Regarding the first question, according to the explanation in this treatise, the first mention of Dipamkara Buddha is when not departing from the time of a Buddha's appearance in the world, the place where one dwells is far from the obstacle of little learning, and it is spoken for the person of the second dedication. The second mention of Dipamkara Buddha is when departing from the dwelling place of the taste of tranquility, removing the obstacle of incomplete wisdom, and it is spoken for the Bodhisattva in the stage of warmth. The current mention of Dipamkara Buddha is when seeking the dwelling place of instruction, removing the obstacle of not seeking instruction, and it is spoken for the Bodhisattva in the stage of the peak. If according to that treatise, the first is in the doubt of the fifth Buddha having said to receive, the Buddha does not take the principle of true wisdom in the words about Dipamkara Buddha, because this is the true meaning, accomplishing his saying of no taking. The second is in the tenth, proving as not proving doubt, and again can quickly prove the Dharma, comparing and measuring the superiority of blessings. Again, in the twelfth, the doubt of the Bodhisattva cultivating causes, after the Dharma says to cut off doubt, the prediction that Dipamkara Buddha's practice is not superior, therefore it is different. Answer: Regarding the second question, this sutra mostly speaks of the Dharma of the unsurpassed meaning of no-form and no-birth. The Buddha attained this path through the effortless continuity of Dipamkara Buddha, spreading hair and scattering flowers exceeding eight kalpas, covering mud and revealing traces still exist today. Many people generate faith, so only Dipamkara Buddha is mentioned. It has already been said above that in the stage of faith and practice, the combination of sixteen places and eight dwelling places comes from four. First, the dwelling place of gathering is the aspiration of Bodhicitta. Second, the purity of Paramita (meaning 'to the other shore'), third, the dwelling place of desire, and fourth, the dwelling place of separation from obstacles. The combination of twelve kinds is the fourth. If according to the position, there are three sections of text in total. The initial dwelling place of gathering is the ten dwelling positions. The next Paramita and the dwelling place of desire are the ten practice positions. The dwelling place of separation from obstacles is the dedication position. The corresponding aspects of practice should be understood as mentioned before. Sutra: Subhuti (one of the Buddha's ten great disciples), for example, a person's body grows tall. Commentary: Below, the seventeenth dwelling place of proving the path, among the three grounds, is the pure mind ground. Already before the ground, there is no birth but no desire to liberate, no practice but no universal cultivation. Also, because of the rare body of blessings and the body of wisdom, the two obstacles are subdued. The co-arising is gradually removed, and the discrimination is completely exhausted. In the stages of warmth and peak, hoping to seek instruction, observing no dualistic grasping, making the contemplation of the two truths of affirmation and non-affirmation, no-form, and only consciousness. The two causes of accumulation and application are complete. Now it is to explain the principles of the first ground, so that those seeking to prove the path enter the true holy position, generate uncontaminated wisdom, cut off the obstacle of discrimination, and draw near.
證二空得無住道故。此文來彼論喻顯於前真如法身亦不違此。此論文二。初明證道得智。后明證道離慢。論云。如是顯示入證道時得智慧故離慢。前中有二。初如來喻告后善現答成。此初也。真如妙理唯內證知非其言相。即稱彼體。然諸智者因喻得明故。況大身以通玄旨。譬如人身洪滿端偉而無實體假名為身。所成理智攝領成就故名為身。如彼俗身。然在纏名如來藏。出纏已去與其法身名。仍寄喻顯。魏云其身妙大。貞觀云具身大身。周及此云長大。長即具妙。梁云遍身大身。依此論說得智之中。別釋妙大分為兩義。論云。云何得智有二種智故。謂攝種性智及平等智。若得智已得生如來家得決定紹佛種。此為攝種性智。得此智已能得妙身。若於此家長夜愿生既得生以便得彼身。是名妙身。演曰。此有二義。一得智二證理。若得智已至能得妙身。已來是為得智顯智功能。若於此家已下為證理理為妙身智慧得故亦名妙身。如來家者謂即真如畢竟空寂以為舍故。于中證會名之為生未證如時長夜愿證既得智已便得真如。是名妙身。雖身與家同是真如。而法性身依法性土故有差別。謂真見道正智起時。能證真如名為得已。若細分別。無間解脫正得已得。上解妙身。論又云。平等智復有五種平等因緣。謂粗惡平等。法無我平等。斷
相應平等。無悕望心相應平等。一切菩薩證道平等。得此等故得為大身。攝一切眾生大身故。演曰。此釋大身以智慧證五平等理。五平等理遍攝一切故名大身。理即真如平等分五者。從詮以辨。大莊嚴論亦說。平等有五而名稍異。一無我平等。二有苦平等。三所作平等。四不求平等。五同得平等。此中第一粗惡平等。真如遍在善惡之法故無自他別。即彼第二。以于自他身所有諸苦無差別故。二無我平等諸法無我性。即彼第一。三斷相應平等。離二取故。又斷自他如如無二。相應者相似義。他性相應非自性故。今斷自他故名平等。即彼第三。四無悕望心相應平等。悕望者攀緣義。行利他時不求返報。相應同前。即彼第四。五一切菩薩證道平等。共所證故。即彼第五。佛地論說。十地菩薩證得十種平等性理名平等性智。與此相攝思唯可知。若依此論。前卷科釋證道住處中雲。妙身者謂至得身成就身。得畢竟轉依故。大身者一切眾生身攝身故。演曰。由修二智乃至十地所應證理。皆悉圓證能得法身名至得身。報化二身名成就身。或自受用及真如理合名至得。依金光明經俱名法身故。他受變化名成就身。即攝四佛總名妙身。言大身者。由得五平等故攝一切生與己無別。以己自體能攝一切故名大身。妙身通攝理智二種大身。唯在
【現代漢語翻譯】 現代漢語譯本 相應平等。沒有希望心的相應平等。一切菩薩證道的平等。得到這些平等，所以能成為大身（Mahakaya，偉大的身體）。因為大身能攝受一切眾生。演曰：這裡解釋大身，是用智慧證悟五種平等之理。五種平等之理普遍攝受一切，所以名為大身。理就是真如，平等分為五種，從詮釋上辨別。大莊嚴論也說，平等有五種，而名稱稍有不同。一是無我平等（Anatta-samata，沒有自我的平等）。二是有苦平等（Dukkha-samata，有痛苦的平等）。三是所作平等（Kamma-samata，行為的平等）。四是不求平等（Apanihita-samata，不尋求回報的平等）。五是同得平等（Samanuprapta-samata，共同獲得的平等）。 這裡的第一種是粗惡平等，真如普遍存在於善惡之法中，所以沒有自他之別。就是彼論中的第二種，因為對於自身和他身所受的各種痛苦沒有差別。第二種是無我平等，諸法沒有我性，就是彼論中的第一種。第三種是斷相應平等，遠離二取（dualistic grasping，二元對立的執取）的緣故。又斷除自他和如如（Tathata，真如）沒有二致。相應，是相似的意思。他性相應不是自性，現在斷除自他，所以名為平等。就是彼論中的第三種。第四種是沒有希望心的相應平等。希望，是攀緣的意思。行利他之事時不求回報。相應同前。就是彼論中的第四種。第五是一切菩薩證道平等，因為是共同證悟的。就是彼論中的第五種。佛地論說，十地菩薩證得十種平等性理，名為平等性智。與此相攝，思惟可知。若依此論，前卷科釋證道住處中說：『妙身（Subhakaya，微妙之身）是指達到獲得身、成就身。因為得到畢竟轉依（parinivrtti，完全的轉化）。大身（Mahakaya，偉大的身體）是一切眾生身攝身。』演曰：由修二智乃至十地所應證的理，都完全證得，能得法身（Dharmakaya，法身），名為至得身。報身（Sambhogakaya，報身）和化身（Nirmanakaya，化身）名為成就身。或者自受用和真如理合名為至得。依據金光明經，都名為法身。他受變化名為成就身。總攝四佛，總名為妙身。說大身，是因為得到五種平等，所以攝受一切眾生與自己沒有差別。以自己的自體能攝受一切，所以名為大身。妙身通攝理智二種大身，唯在
【English Translation】 English version Corresponding equality. Corresponding equality without a mind of hope. The equality of all Bodhisattvas attaining enlightenment. Because of obtaining these equalities, one can become a Mahakaya (great body). Because the Mahakaya encompasses all sentient beings. Yan said: This explains the Mahakaya as using wisdom to realize the principle of five equalities. The principle of five equalities universally encompasses everything, therefore it is called Mahakaya. The principle is Tathata (suchness), equality is divided into five, distinguished from the interpretation. The Mahavyutpatti also says that there are five equalities, but the names are slightly different. First, Anatta-samata (equality of no-self). Second, Dukkha-samata (equality of suffering). Third, Kamma-samata (equality of action). Fourth, Apanihita-samata (equality of non-seeking). Fifth, Samanuprapta-samata (equality of common attainment). The first here is coarse and evil equality, Tathata is universally present in the laws of good and evil, so there is no distinction between self and other. That is the second in that treatise, because there is no difference in the various sufferings experienced by oneself and others. The second is Anatta-samata (equality of no-self), all dharmas have no self-nature, which is the first in that treatise. The third is equality corresponding to cessation, because it is far from dualistic grasping. Moreover, the cessation of self and other and Tathata are not different. Correspondence means similarity. Correspondence with otherness is not self-nature, now cessation of self and other is called equality. That is the third in that treatise. The fourth is equality corresponding to a mind without hope. Hope means clinging. When performing altruistic acts, one does not seek return. Correspondence is the same as before. That is the fourth in that treatise. The fifth is the equality of all Bodhisattvas attaining enlightenment, because it is commonly attained. That is the fifth in that treatise. The Buddhabhumi Sutra says that the ten Bhumi Bodhisattvas attain ten kinds of equality of nature and principle, called equality wisdom. It can be understood by contemplating its inclusion here. According to this treatise, the previous chapter explains the dwelling place of enlightenment, saying: 'Subhakaya (wonderful body) refers to attaining the body and accomplishing the body. Because one obtains complete parinivrtti (transformation). Mahakaya (great body) is the body that encompasses all sentient beings.' Yan said: By cultivating the two wisdoms and even the principles that should be attained by the ten Bhumis, all are completely attained, and one can obtain the Dharmakaya (Dharma body), called the attained body. The Sambhogakaya (enjoyment body) and Nirmanakaya (emanation body) are called the accomplished body. Or the combination of self-enjoyment and the principle of Tathata is called attainment. According to the Suvarnaprabhasa Sutra, both are called Dharmakaya. Transformation for others is called the accomplished body. The four Buddhas are collectively called the Subhakaya (wonderful body). Saying Mahakaya is because one obtains the five equalities, so one encompasses all sentient beings without difference from oneself. Because one's own essence can encompass everything, it is called Mahakaya. The Subhakaya universally encompasses the two kinds of Mahakaya, principle and wisdom, only in
平等真理。然非圓滿滿在佛地。此說分得能畢竟得非是已滿。彼論頌云。
依彼法身佛 故說大身喻 身離一切障 及遍一切境 功德及大體 故即說大身 非身即是身 是故說非身
演曰。已前說言一切諸法即是佛法。彼真如體如來所證。今顯如體即是法身。譬如有人其身妙大。即彰果位所證法身。此論證道能分得故。亦通因位兼能證智名妙大身。具義而論。因果理智俱法身故。彼論因前諸佛能證而有此喻。唯說果位真如法身各據義明不相違也。其釋頌文如彼。長行文易可解。上二句說喻之意。下六句正釋經文。于中分二。初四句釋大身。大身有二義。一者遍一切處。二者功德大。此二種義由離障證。后二句釋非身。非身者無有諸相。大者有真如體。
經。須菩提言世尊至是名大身 演曰。善現答成論云。于彼身中安立非自非他故。此意據相而說。唯是菩薩所得之妙大身。非余能得此妙大身。然于真理不可說。是菩薩之身非餘人身。以真如理遍一切故。言非身者非自他身故。故論云于彼身中安立非自非他。故上釋非身言是名大身者。以隨順世間施設言說名妙大身。彼論云。非身者無有諸相。是名非身。有真如體如是即名妙大身。問。此與山王何別。答。依此論前約報化成熟眾生。此
【現代漢語翻譯】 現代漢語譯本： 平等真理，然而並非圓滿地存在於佛的果位。這裡所說的『分得』是指能夠最終獲得，而不是已經圓滿。該論的偈頌說： 『依靠彼法身佛，所以說大身譬喻，身遠離一切障礙，及遍一切境界，功德及大體，所以就說大身，非身即是身，是故說非身。』 演曰：前面說過一切諸法即是佛法，那個真如本體是如來所證悟的。現在說明如如本體就是法身。譬如有人，他的身軀妙大，就彰顯了果位所證的法身。此論證說道，因為能夠分得，也通於因位，兼能證智，名為妙大身。總括來說，因果理智都是法身。該論因為之前的諸佛能夠證悟而有此譬喻，只說果位的真如法身，各自根據意義說明，不相違背。解釋偈頌的文字如上，長行文很容易理解。上面兩句說譬喻的意義，下面六句正式解釋經文。其中分為兩部分，前四句解釋大身。大身有兩種意義：一是遍一切處，二是功德大。這兩種意義由遠離障礙而證得。后兩句解釋非身。非身是沒有諸相。大身有真如本體。 經：須菩提言：世尊，乃至是名大身。 演曰：善現回答成論說：『于彼身中安立非自非他故。』這個意思是根據相來說的，只是菩薩所得的妙大身，不是其他人能夠得到的這個妙大身。然而對於真理，不可說這是菩薩的身，不是其他人的身，因為真如之理遍一切處。說非身，不是自他之身。所以論中說：『于彼身中安立非自非他。』所以上面解釋非身說，是名大身，是以隨順世間的施設言說，名為妙大身。該論說：『非身者，無有諸相，是名非身。有真如體，如是即名妙大身。』問：這與山王有什麼區別？答：依據此論，前面是關於報身和化身成熟眾生。
【English Translation】 English version: The truth of equality, yet not fully present in the Buddha's realm. The 'partial attainment' mentioned here refers to the ability to ultimately attain, not already being complete. The verse in that treatise says: 'Relying on that Dharmakaya (法身, Dharma Body) Buddha, therefore the metaphor of the great body is spoken. The body is free from all obstacles, and pervades all realms. Merit and great substance, therefore it is called the great body. Non-body is indeed body, therefore it is said to be non-body.' Yan said: Previously it was said that all dharmas are Buddha-dharma. That Suchness (真如, Truth) essence is what the Tathagata (如來, Thus Come One) realizes. Now it is shown that the Suchness essence is the Dharmakaya. For example, if someone's body is wonderfully large, it manifests the Dharmakaya realized in the fruition position. This treatise proves the path, because it can be partially attained, it also applies to the causal position, and also the wisdom that can realize, called the wondrously great body. In summary, cause, effect, principle, and wisdom are all Dharmakaya. That treatise has this metaphor because the Buddhas before were able to realize it, only speaking of the Suchness Dharmakaya of the fruition position, each explaining according to meaning, not contradicting each other. The explanation of the verse is as above, the prose is easy to understand. The above two sentences explain the meaning of the metaphor, the following six sentences formally explain the sutra text. Among them, it is divided into two parts, the first four sentences explain the great body. The great body has two meanings: one is pervading all places, and the other is great merit. These two meanings are attained by being free from obstacles. The last two sentences explain the non-body. Non-body is without all forms. The great body has the Suchness essence. Sutra: Subhuti (須菩提, One of the principal disciples of the Buddha) said: World Honored One (世尊, The title used to address the Buddha), even to be called the great body. Yan said: Sudhana (善現, A bodhisattva) replied to the Completion of the Treatise saying: 'In that body, establishing neither self nor other.' This meaning is based on form, it is only the wondrously great body attained by the Bodhisattva (菩薩, Enlightenment Being), not the wondrously great body that others can attain. However, regarding the truth, it cannot be said that this is the body of the Bodhisattva, not the body of others, because the principle of Suchness pervades all places. Saying non-body, it is not the body of self or other. Therefore, the treatise says: 'In that body, establishing neither self nor other.' Therefore, the above explanation of non-body says, it is called the great body, it is called the wondrously great body by following the worldly establishment of speech. That treatise says: 'Non-body is without all forms, it is called non-body. Having the Suchness essence, thus it is called the wondrously great body.' Question: What is the difference between this and Mount Sumeru (山王, King of Mountains)? Answer: According to this treatise, the previous is about the Reward Body (報身, Sambhogakaya) and Transformation Body (化身, Nirmanakaya) maturing sentient beings.
約證道通明理智。彼論前約報身明無取說。今依法身喻顯真如。
經。須菩提菩薩亦如是至不名菩薩 演曰。自下離慢非證真者。當隨於真無有能所。有能所者即障證真得聖證真理。應隨真不起我。能行菩薩行及度生等。若起此者必不見真如。以顛倒故。障后真理。由彼菩薩得真理。已於后散心起俱生慢云我能行得證真理。今為斷故有此文生。然此慢者是所知障。以煩惱名說第六識俱。八地以上方永不起。第七俱者。至金剛喻方永不行。此所說慢。且約第六起我能等非七行相故。前七地起慢之時必不證真。自謂證真為非菩薩。非不起時亦非菩薩。唯識論等皆說十地斷所知障不斷煩惱故。彼論自下為斷第十三行愿不成疑論云。若無菩薩者諸佛亦不成大菩提。眾生亦不入大涅槃。亦無清凈佛國土。若如是為何義故。諸菩薩發心欲令眾生入涅槃。起心修行凈佛國土明雖修行而無顛倒。以釋前疑故有此文。此約除慢彼除顛倒。倒即想倒亦所知障。既除慢倒以破疑情。同是一義。文分有四。初告二徴三釋四結。此初也。前說如來能證真如具妙大身非身名身。菩薩亦應稱彼真如不起慢倒故言亦如是。若言我能滅度眾生不稱真理非菩薩也。
經。何以故 演曰。徴非所由。
經。須菩提實無有法名為菩薩 演曰。
【現代漢語翻譯】 現代漢語譯本：約證道通明理智。彼論前約報身，明『無取』之說。今依法身，以譬喻顯真如。
經：須菩提菩薩亦如是至不名菩薩 演曰：從下文開始，是爲了破除慢心，說明真正證得真如的人，應當隨順於真如，心中沒有能、所的分別。有能、所分別的人，就被障礙而不能證得真如，不能獲得聖者的真理。應當隨順真如，不生起『我』的念頭，才能行菩薩行以及度化眾生等。如果生起這種念頭，必定不能見到真如，因為顛倒的緣故，障礙了後面的真理。因為那些菩薩得到真理之後，在後來的散亂心中生起俱生慢，認為『我』能修行而證得真理。現在爲了斷除這種慢心，所以有這段經文產生。然而這種慢心是所知障（Jnana-avarana），以煩惱的名稱來說，是與第六識（Mano-vijnana）相應。八地（Avicala-bhumi）以上的菩薩才能永遠不起這種慢心。與第七識（Manas-vijnana）相應的慢心，要到金剛喻定（Vajropama-samadhi）時才能永遠不起作用。這裡所說的慢心，只是針對第六識生起的『我能』等念頭，不是第七識的行相。在前七地生起慢心的時候，必定不能證得真如，自認為證得真如的就不是菩薩。不起慢心的時候，也不是菩薩。唯識論等都說十地（Dasabhumika）斷除所知障，不斷除煩惱障（Klesha-avarana）。 彼論從下文開始，是爲了斷除第十三行愿不成（指普賢菩薩的十大愿王）的疑惑，認為如果沒有菩薩，諸佛（Buddha）也不能成就大菩提（Mahabodhi），眾生（Sattva）也不能進入大涅槃（Mahaparinirvana），也沒有清凈的佛國土（Buddha-kshetra）。如果這樣，那麼諸菩薩發心想要令眾生進入涅槃，發起修行，清凈佛國土，又有什麼意義呢？說明雖然修行，卻沒有顛倒。爲了解釋前面的疑惑，所以有這段經文。這段經文是爲了去除慢心，那段經文是爲了去除顛倒。顛倒就是想倒，也是所知障。既然去除慢心和顛倒，就可以破除疑惑。這都是一個意思。這段經文分為四個部分：開始的告知，其次是征問，再次是解釋，最後是總結。這是第一部分。前面說如來（Tathagata）能夠證得真如，具有微妙廣大的身，非身而名為身。菩薩也應當傚法如來，不生起慢心和顛倒，所以說『亦如是』。如果說『我』能滅度眾生，就不符合真理，就不是菩薩。
經：何以故 演曰：征問原因。
經：須菩提實無有法名為菩薩 演曰：
【English Translation】 English version: This discusses using the wisdom of enlightenment to understand the principle. The previous discussion concerned the Reward Body (Sambhogakaya), clarifying the concept of 'non-grasping'. Now, it uses the Dharma Body (Dharmakaya) as a metaphor to reveal True Thusness (Tathata).
Sutra: 'Subhuti, Bodhisattvas are also like this, up to not being called Bodhisattvas.' Commentary: From here onwards, it's to eliminate arrogance, explaining that those who truly realize True Thusness should accord with it, without any sense of 'able' or 'what is done'. Those with such distinctions are obstructed from realizing True Thusness and attaining the truth of the sages. One should accord with True Thusness, not giving rise to the thought of 'I', in order to practice the Bodhisattva path and liberate beings. If such a thought arises, one will certainly not see True Thusness, due to delusion, which obstructs the subsequent truth. Because those Bodhisattvas, after attaining the truth, later give rise to innate arrogance in their scattered minds, thinking 'I' am able to practice and attain the truth. Now, to cut off this arrogance, this passage arises. However, this arrogance is the Knowledge Obscuration (Jnana-avarana), which, in terms of afflictions, corresponds to the sixth consciousness (Mano-vijnana). Only Bodhisattvas above the Eighth Ground (Avicala-bhumi) can permanently cease this arrogance. The arrogance associated with the seventh consciousness (Manas-vijnana) will not cease until the Diamond Samadhi (Vajropama-samadhi). The arrogance spoken of here refers only to the thought of 'I am able' arising from the sixth consciousness, not the characteristics of the seventh consciousness. When arrogance arises in the first seven grounds, one certainly cannot realize True Thusness; those who claim to have realized it are not Bodhisattvas. Even when arrogance does not arise, one is still not a Bodhisattva. The Consciousness-Only treatises all say that the Ten Grounds (Dasabhumika) cut off the Knowledge Obscuration but not the Affliction Obscuration (Klesha-avarana). The following part of that treatise is to dispel doubts about the unfulfilled thirteenth vow (referring to Samantabhadra Bodhisattva's Ten Great Vows), arguing that if there were no Bodhisattvas, the Buddhas could not attain Great Enlightenment (Mahabodhi), sentient beings (Sattva) could not enter Great Nirvana (Mahaparinirvana), and there would be no pure Buddha-fields (Buddha-kshetra). If so, what would be the meaning of Bodhisattvas making vows to lead sentient beings into Nirvana, initiating practice, and purifying Buddha-fields? It explains that although practice is undertaken, there is no delusion. To explain the previous doubts, this passage exists. This passage is to remove arrogance, while that passage is to remove delusion. Delusion is the inverted thought, which is also the Knowledge Obscuration. Since arrogance and delusion are removed, doubts can be broken. It's all the same meaning. This passage is divided into four parts: the initial announcement, followed by the inquiry, then the explanation, and finally the conclusion. This is the first part. Previously, it was said that the Tathagata is able to realize True Thusness, possessing a subtle and vast body, which is called a body but is not a body. Bodhisattvas should also emulate the Tathagata, not giving rise to arrogance and delusion, hence the saying 'also like this'. If one says 'I' am able to liberate sentient beings, it does not accord with the truth and is not a Bodhisattva.
Sutra: 'Why is that?' Commentary: Inquiring about the reason.
Sutra: 'Subhuti, in reality, there is no dharma called Bodhisattva.' Commentary:
釋云。以菩薩名聖教假說無有一法別名菩薩。欖五蘊成。又真如理中無菩薩相恃何起慢。
經。是故佛說至無壽者 演曰。結非但菩薩無其實法乘明一切諸法亦然。人法二我二俱無故。論云。若菩薩有眾生念則不得妙身大身故。彼論頌云。
不達真法界 起度眾生意 及凈佛國土 生心即是倒
演曰。由起倒故非真菩薩。此頌通釋凈國土文。問。上依此論證道住處訖。其此證道定是何位。答。此有二釋。一云此通十地說妙大身通十地故。其所離慢諸地所斷所知障故。又五平等與十相攝非唯初地有此行相。平等遍在十地中故。若爾如何前說凈心地狹初后闊耶。答。地前行愿弘廣佛果亦爾。十地位中近求后地有分齊修一如一行。分分修證故名為狹。其究竟地唯在佛果。一云凈心唯是見道。如來地者是修道。從果為名名究竟地。如圓滿持為證道故。起加行資糧為究竟故。修六具足如見修俱見理。見道得見名十地皆凈心。唯初凈心地。若十地皆是凈心。凈心地后更何所作。又應凈心闊信行地凈心二劫信解一劫故。三地闊狹非唯說教亦兼行故。評曰。后釋為勝。以究竟地凈佛國土等。多約菩薩以顯其行。若唯佛果何論菩薩。又既名為上求佛地。如何說是佛果位收。又準三問唯在因中不應答中。爾許經文唯
【現代漢語翻譯】 現代漢語譯本：釋義：以菩薩之名，在聖教中假說，實際上沒有一個獨立的法可以被稱為菩薩。菩薩只是五蘊（色、受、想、行、識）的聚合。而且，在真如（事物的真實本性）的道理中，沒有菩薩的相狀，又憑什麼生起我慢之心呢？ 經文說：『是故佛說乃至無壽者。』 窺基法師解釋說：總結來說，不僅菩薩沒有真實的自體，乘所闡明的世間一切諸法也是如此。人我與法我，二者都是空無的。論中說：『如果菩薩有眾生的念頭，就不能得到妙身和大身。』 因此論中的偈頌說： 『不達真法界，起度眾生意，及凈佛國土，生心即是倒。』 窺基法師解釋說：由於生起顛倒妄想，就不是真正的菩薩。這個偈頌可以用來解釋『凈佛國土』的經文。問：上面依據此論證成了道之住處，那麼這個證道究竟是哪個位次？答：對此有兩種解釋。一種說法是，這通於十地（菩薩修行的十個階段），因為妙大身通於十地。其所斷的慢心，是各個地所斷的煩惱障和所知障。而且，五種平等與十地相互包含，並非只有初地才有這種行相，平等遍在於十地之中。如果這樣，為什麼前面說凈心地狹窄，而初地之後的地界寬廣呢？答：地前（菩薩修行之前的階段）的行愿弘大，佛果也是如此。十地位中，接近求取后一地，有分齊地修習一種如如之行，分分修證，所以名為狹窄。而究竟地只在佛果。另一種說法是，凈心只是見道位（證悟真理的階段），如來地是修道位（在見道基礎上修行的階段），從果位來命名，名為究竟地。如圓滿持戒為證道，起加行資糧為究竟。修六度（佈施、持戒、忍辱、精進、禪定、智慧）具足，如見道和修道都見到真理。見道得見，名為十地皆是凈心，唯有初地是凈心地。如果十地都是凈心，那麼凈心地之後還要做什麼呢？又應該凈心寬廣，信行地凈心二劫，信解地一劫。三地的寬窄，不僅是說教義，也兼顧修行。窺基法師評論說：后一種解釋更為優勝。因為究竟地、凈佛國土等，大多是就菩薩來顯明其行。如果只是佛果，又何必討論菩薩呢？而且既然名為上求佛地，如何說是佛果位所攝？又按照前面的三個問題，都只在因地（修行階段）中，不應該在回答中引用如此多的經文。
【English Translation】 English version: Explanation: Using the name Bodhisattva, it is hypothetically stated in the sacred teachings that there is actually no independent dharma that can be called a Bodhisattva. A Bodhisattva is merely an aggregation of the five skandhas (form, feeling, perception, volition, and consciousness). Moreover, in the principle of Tathata (the true nature of things), there is no characteristic of a Bodhisattva, so what is there to give rise to arrogance? The sutra says: 'Therefore, the Buddha said, even to the point of no life-span.' Kuiji (a prominent Buddhist scholar) explains: In conclusion, not only does the Bodhisattva lack a real self, but so do all the dharmas expounded by the vehicle. The self of persons and the self of dharmas are both empty. The treatise says: 'If a Bodhisattva has thoughts of sentient beings, then they cannot attain the wonderful body and the great body.' Therefore, the verse in the treatise says: 'Not understanding the true realm of dharma, giving rise to the intention to liberate sentient beings, and purify the Buddha-lands, giving rise to such thoughts is delusion.' Kuiji explains: Because of giving rise to inverted thoughts, one is not a true Bodhisattva. This verse can be used to explain the sutra text 'purifying the Buddha-lands.' Question: Above, based on this treatise, the dwelling place of the attained path has been proven. Then, which stage is this attainment of the path ultimately? Answer: There are two explanations for this. One explanation is that this is common to the ten bhumis (the ten stages of a Bodhisattva's practice), because the wonderful great body is common to the ten bhumis. The arrogance that is severed is the afflictive obscurations and the cognitive obscurations that are severed by each bhumi. Moreover, the five equalities are mutually inclusive with the ten bhumis, and it is not only the first bhumi that has this practice; equality pervades the ten bhumis. If so, why was it said earlier that the pure mind ground is narrow, while the grounds after the first bhumi are broad? Answer: The vows and aspirations before the ground (the stage before Bodhisattva practice) are vast, and so is the Buddha-fruit. Within the ten bhumis, approaching the seeking of the next ground, there is a limited practice of one suchness practice, and the cultivation and realization are done in parts, so it is called narrow. And the ultimate ground is only in the Buddha-fruit. Another explanation is that the pure mind is only the stage of seeing the path (the stage of realizing the truth), and the Tathagata ground is the stage of cultivating the path (the stage of cultivating based on seeing the path), named the ultimate ground from the fruit position. Such as fully upholding the precepts is for attaining the path, and giving rise to the preliminary practices and resources is for the ultimate. Cultivating the six perfections (generosity, morality, patience, diligence, concentration, and wisdom) is complete, such as seeing the truth in both seeing the path and cultivating the path. Seeing the path and attaining sight is called the ten bhumis all being pure mind, only the first bhumi is the pure mind ground. If the ten bhumis are all pure mind, then what else needs to be done after the pure mind ground? Also, the pure mind should be broad, the pure mind of the faith-practice ground is two kalpas, and the faith-understanding ground is one kalpa. The breadth of the three grounds is not only about teaching, but also about practice. Kuiji comments: The latter explanation is superior. Because the ultimate ground, purifying the Buddha-lands, etc., are mostly about the Bodhisattva to show their practice. If it is only the Buddha-fruit, why discuss the Bodhisattva? And since it is called seeking the Buddha-ground above, how can it be said to be included in the Buddha-fruit position? Also, according to the previous three questions, they are all only in the cause ground (the stage of practice), and so much sutra text should not be quoted in the answer.
在佛果。佛果圓滿非所勸化。因何廣說。故廣說者對誘十地雖談果德。約所被人乃居因位。若不對因唯談果者。起懸崖想。何所造修。若爾平等通諸地有及說離慢如何通會。答。以初所證與后體同言得平等。非凈心地。可通於后。其所離慢在見位中理然非有經文指說見道無慢令前後位。諸菩薩等同證真位不起于慢故。文但是見道位收。問。何故此經廣明地前及以佛果。既對十地何不廣明十地行耶。答。經宗為明種性不斷果是所紹。發心已去是能紹繼。舉果令求地前難修。廣辨令學不斷義成故。修十地而不廣辨。由此名為金剛般若。以初后中闊狹異故。
經。須菩提若菩薩至不名菩薩 演曰。自下第十八上求佛地住處八中究竟三地之中是如來地。上明地前及凈心地。今辨果德令欣求趣十八之中。據能行人名為上求。八及三中據所求果名為究竟及如來地。唯論下文有六具足。一國土凈具足。此等文是。二明五眼等為無上見智凈具足。三佛可以具足色身見等名隨形好身具足。四如來可以具足諸相見不等為相身具足。五勿謂如來作是念我當有所說等為語具足。六佛得阿耨菩提為無所得耶等訖至經終為心具足。以此六種攝佛身中轉依具足。自利利他無不皆盡。將欲求佛先嚴凈心。嚴凈心故則佛土凈。佛土凈故則智見凈。境
【現代漢語翻譯】 現代漢語譯本：在佛的果位上，佛果的圓滿不是通過勸化就能達到的。那麼為什麼要廣泛地宣說呢？之所以廣泛宣說，是因為針對那些想要證得十地果位的菩薩，雖然談論的是佛果的功德，但就接受教化的人而言，他們仍然處於因位。如果不對因位的人講法，只談論佛果，就會讓他們產生高不可攀的想法，從而不知該如何修行。如果這樣，那麼（經中所說的）平等，普遍適用於各個階位，以及（經中所說的）斷除我慢，又該如何理解呢？回答是，因為最初所證悟的與後來的本體相同，所以說得到平等，而不是說凈心地可以貫通於後來的階位。至於斷除我慢，在見道位中，理應如此，並非沒有經文可以佐證，經文指出見道位中沒有我慢，從而使得前後各個階位的菩薩都能證得真如，不起我慢。因此，經文只是在見道位中才有效。問：為什麼這部經廣泛地闡明了地前和佛果，既然是針對十地菩薩，為什麼不廣泛地闡明十地的修行呢？答：這部經的宗旨在於闡明種性不會斷絕，佛果是種性所繼承的。發心之後就是能夠繼承種性。舉出佛果是爲了讓人們追求地前難以修行的部分，廣泛地辨析是爲了讓人們學習不斷絕種性的意義，從而成就佛果。不廣泛地闡明十地的修行。因此這部經被稱為《金剛般若》。因為初、后、中三個階段的廣狹不同。 經：須菩提，若菩薩至不名菩薩。演曰：從下面第十八品開始，向上尋求佛地的住處，在八個方面中究竟三個階段，這就是如來地。上面闡明了地前和凈心地，現在辨析佛果的功德，使人欣求趣向。在十八品中，從能修行的人的角度來說，叫做上求；在八個方面和三個階段中，從所求的佛果的角度來說，叫做究竟和如來地。只論下文有六種具足。一是國土清凈具足，比如『此等文是』。二是闡明五眼等，是無上見智清凈具足。三是佛可以通過具足色身見等，叫做隨形好身具足。四是如來可以通過具足諸相見等，叫做相身具足。五是『勿謂如來作是念我當有所說』等，是語具足。六是『佛得阿耨菩提為無所得耶』等，直到經文結束，是心具足。用這六種來攝佛身中的轉依具足，自利利他沒有不窮盡的。將要求得佛果，先要嚴凈其心。嚴凈其心，那麼佛土就清凈。佛土清凈，那麼智見就清凈。境
【English Translation】 English version: In the Buddha-fruit (Buddha-phala, the ultimate attainment of Buddhahood), the perfection of Buddha-fruit is not achieved through exhortation. Why then is it extensively expounded? The reason for extensive exposition is that, while discussing the merits of the Buddha-fruit, it is directed towards those Bodhisattvas who aspire to attain the Ten Bhumis (Daśa-bhūmi, the ten stages of Bodhisattva development), but in terms of those receiving the teachings, they are still in the causal stage (hetu-avasthā, the stage of practice leading to enlightenment). If one only talks about the Buddha-fruit without addressing the causal stage, it will give rise to the thought of an unattainable cliff, leaving them unsure of what to cultivate and practice. If so, how should we reconcile the 'equality' (samatā, the inherent equality of all beings) that universally applies to all stages, and the 'abandonment of pride' (māna-rahita, freedom from arrogance) mentioned in the sutra? The answer is that because what is initially realized is the same in essence as what comes later, it is said to be attaining equality, rather than saying that the pure mind-ground (viśuddha-citta-bhūmi, the pure state of mind) can pervade the later stages. As for abandoning pride, it is reasonable that it occurs in the stage of seeing the Path (darśana-mārga, the stage of direct insight into emptiness), and there is no sutra text indicating that there is no pride in the stage of seeing the Path, so that Bodhisattvas in all stages, before and after, equally attain true suchness (tathatā, the true nature of reality) without arising pride. Therefore, the text is only effective in the stage of seeing the Path. Question: Why does this sutra extensively elucidate the stages before the Ten Bhumis and the Buddha-fruit? Since it is directed towards the Bodhisattvas of the Ten Bhumis, why does it not extensively elucidate the practices of the Ten Bhumis? Answer: The purpose of this sutra is to clarify that the lineage (gotra, the potential for enlightenment) will not be cut off, and the Buddha-fruit is what the lineage inherits. After the arising of the aspiration (bodhicitta, the mind of enlightenment), one is able to inherit the lineage. Mentioning the Buddha-fruit is to encourage people to pursue the difficult-to-cultivate parts before the Ten Bhumis, and extensively analyzing it is to teach the meaning of not cutting off the lineage, thereby accomplishing the Buddha-fruit. The practices of the Ten Bhumis are not extensively elucidated. Therefore, this sutra is called the 'Diamond Sutra' (Vajracchedikā Prajñāpāramitā Sūtra, the Diamond Cutter Sutra). Because the breadth of the initial, final, and middle stages are different. Sutra: 'Subhuti, if a Bodhisattva arrives, he is not called a Bodhisattva.' (This refers to the concept that a Bodhisattva who clings to the idea of being a Bodhisattva is not truly a Bodhisattva.) Commentary: From the eighteenth chapter onwards, seeking the dwelling place of the Buddha-ground, culminating in the three stages within the eight aspects, this is the Tathagata-ground (Tathāgata-bhūmi, the ground of the Thus-Gone One). The above elucidates the stages before the Ten Bhumis and the pure mind-ground, and now analyzes the merits of the Buddha-fruit, causing people to rejoice and aspire towards it. In the eighteen chapters, from the perspective of the one who can practice, it is called 'seeking upwards'; in the eight aspects and three stages, from the perspective of the Buddha-fruit being sought, it is called 'ultimate' and 'Tathagata-ground'. Only the following text has six perfections. First, the perfection of pure land (kṣetra-viśuddhi, the purity of the Buddha-field), such as 'this text is'. Second, elucidating the five eyes (pañca-cakṣu, the five types of vision) and so on, is the perfection of unsurpassed seeing and wisdom (anuttara-darśana-jñāna-viśuddhi, the purity of supreme insight and knowledge). Third, the Buddha can, through possessing the physical body, be seen, and so on, is called the perfection of the body of secondary marks (anuvyañjana-kāya-sampad, the perfection of the body adorned with minor marks). Fourth, the Tathagata can, through possessing the marks, be seen, and so on, is called the perfection of the body of major marks (lakṣaṇa-kāya-sampad, the perfection of the body adorned with major marks). Fifth, 'Do not say that the Tathagata has the thought, 'I should say something,' and so on, is the perfection of speech (vāc-sampad, the perfection of eloquence). Sixth, 'Did the Buddha attain Anuttara-samyak-sambodhi (anuttarā-samyak-saṃbodhi, unsurpassed perfect enlightenment) without attaining anything?' and so on, until the end of the sutra, is the perfection of mind (citta-sampad, the perfection of mind). Using these six to encompass the transformation of the basis (āśraya-parāvṛtti, the transformation of the basis of consciousness) in the Buddha's body is complete, benefiting oneself and others without exception. To seek the Buddha-fruit, one must first purify one's mind. Purifying one's mind, then the Buddha-land is pure. The Buddha-land is pure, then wisdom and insight are pure. The state
能生心故。先明土心為土本故。次明心由心內凈外嚴色身得好及相。此四自利自利德圓。云可利他利他之中先粗后細。語先心后。又解此六皆為利他。即由利他還成自利。此釋為勝。理應先辨佛之身心方明凈土。先明土者。以諸菩薩多欣凈土愿求生故。最初明之。為眾生故愿取佛國依境令生能見之智。見智既滿現妙色身身不徒然。為生說法為他演說。須運慈心攝取法身施設大利。還令有情展轉證悟。種姓不斷義在於斯。是故佛地分之為六如是次第。上求之中應辨離障少故不明但明於行。又六具足初一依報后五正報。正報之中三業。隨智惠行故以見智為先。即所隨智惠。后四如次身語意業。即是能隨相好二具同身業故。有義雖此所被通於十地。然六具足對八地已去三地以明。所以然者。純無相修順經宗趣。是故前舉燃燈佛等。正對三地令七地前趣向修證。即有兩重。一對三地令學佛地。二令已前學彼三地。若不爾者果德極多。何故偏明六種具足。謂前四具足對第八地相土自在在此地故。其見智凈是能受用。語對第九地具四無礙法師位故。心對第十地大法智云金剛心故。初國土凈文分有四。初舉執顯非。二徴非所以。三正釋嚴土。四結真菩薩。此初也。論云。為凈國土三摩帝故。經言乃至則非菩薩。此義為于共見正行中轉
故為斷彼故。演曰。即是正修無分別智相應等至。除彼二執而作真嚴。言我當者是人我執。莊嚴佛土是法我執。二執既起不證於真則非心凈。豈能嚴土故非菩薩。依貞觀本此云菩薩亦如是。謂既一切法無我故。菩薩亦如是。應無我相也。
經。何以故至是名莊嚴 演曰。第二徴。何所以故非菩薩耶。第三正釋嚴土。貞觀雙牒單非雙結。魏本雙牒單非單結。此三皆單。其雙舉者謂有相無相二嚴。或能所嚴故。佛重牒無相為真。有相為妄故。佛單非於無相中言說安立令莊嚴故雙牒結之。論云。安立第一義俗諦可嚴。真中無嚴名第一義。是名莊嚴卻結俗諦。此中通嚴四身凈土名具足故。前凈土文為因位不名具足故。前愿凈佛土為地前故。說除小攀緣作念修道。是今在地上前障已除。但有俱生我法二執。復令除斷而求佛地故與前別。
經。若菩薩通達至真是菩薩 演曰。四結真菩薩。不言我能是達生空無土可嚴。是達法空如來說為是真菩薩。返顯有執不達二空非真菩薩。依餘本經有。二無我及二菩薩。準此論釋者。一者人無我。二法無我。即由二無我故顯二菩薩。今但總舉彼論云生心即是倒非菩薩者。起何等心名為菩薩。即指此文。又頌言。
眾生及菩薩 知諸法無我 非聖自智信 及聖以有智
【現代漢語翻譯】 現代漢語譯本 『故為斷彼故』，演曰：『即是正修無分別智（對事物沒有分別的智慧）相應等至（禪定的一種）。』 意思是去除人我執（對自我的執著）和法我執（對事物現象的執著），以此作為真正的莊嚴。『言我當者』，指的是人我執。『莊嚴佛土』，指的是法我執。如果這兩種執著產生，就無法證得真如（事物的真實本性），也就無法使心清凈。如果心不清凈，又怎麼能莊嚴佛土呢？所以說這不是菩薩（立志成佛的修行者）。依據貞觀本，這裡說菩薩也是如此，因為一切法都是無我的，所以菩薩也應如此，不應有我相（執著于自我的表象）。
『經：何以故至是名莊嚴』，演曰：第二是提問，『為什麼說這不是菩薩呢？』 第三是正面解釋莊嚴佛土。貞觀本是雙重提問，然後分別否定，最後雙重總結。魏本是雙重提問，然後分別否定，最後是單一總結。這裡的三種情況都是單一的。所謂雙重，指的是有相（有形可見的）和無相（無形不可見的）兩種莊嚴，或者是能莊嚴的和所莊嚴的。佛陀（佛教的創始人）再次強調無相才是真實的，有相是虛妄的。佛陀只是在無相中言說安立，使之成為莊嚴，所以雙重提問並總結。論中說：『安立第一義俗諦（基於世俗認知的真理）可以莊嚴，真諦（終極真理）中沒有莊嚴』，這就是第一義。『是名莊嚴』，最終總結的是俗諦。這裡統攝了莊嚴四身（佛的四種身）和凈土（清凈的國土），所以說是具足的。之前的凈土文是因為還在因位（修行的階段），所以不能說是具足的。之前發願清凈佛土是因為還在地前（菩薩十地之前的階段），所以說是爲了去除小的攀緣，作念修道。現在是在地上，之前的障礙已經去除，但還有俱生我法二執（與生俱來的對自我和事物的執著），所以再次去除斷滅，從而求得佛地（成佛的境界），因此與之前不同。
『經：若菩薩通達至真是菩薩』，演曰：第四是總結真正的菩薩。不說『我能』，是通達了生空（對自我的空性認知）；沒有佛土可以莊嚴，是通達了法空（對事物現象的空性認知）。如來說這就是真正的菩薩。反過來表明，有執著，不通達二空（生空和法空），就不是真正的菩薩。依據其他版本的經文，有二無我（人無我和法無我）和二菩薩（基於人無我和法無我的菩薩）。按照論的解釋，一是人無我，二是法無我。正是由於二無我，才顯現出二菩薩。現在只是總的舉例。論中說，生起心念就是顛倒，不是菩薩。那麼，生起什麼心念才能稱為菩薩呢？就是指的這段經文。還有頌說：
眾生及菩薩，知諸法無我 非聖自智信，及聖以有智
【English Translation】 English version 『Therefore, for the sake of severing that.』 Yan said: 『It is precisely the Samadhi (a state of meditative consciousness) corresponding to the correct cultivation of non-discriminating wisdom (wisdom without differentiation of phenomena).』 This means removing the attachment to the self (belief in a permanent, independent self) and the attachment to phenomena (belief in the inherent existence of phenomena), thereby creating true adornment. 『Saying 『I shall』』 refers to the attachment to the self. 『Adorning the Buddha-land』 refers to the attachment to phenomena. If these two attachments arise, one cannot realize Suchness (the true nature of reality), and thus the mind cannot be purified. If the mind is not purified, how can one adorn the Buddha-land? Therefore, it is said that this is not a Bodhisattva (one who aspires to Buddhahood). According to the Zhenguan version, it says that Bodhisattvas are also like this, because all dharmas (phenomena) are without self, so Bodhisattvas should also be like this, and should not have the appearance of self (attachment to the appearance of self).
『Sutra: Why is it so, up to this is called adornment.』 Yan said: The second is the question, 『Why is it said that this is not a Bodhisattva?』 The third is the direct explanation of adorning the Buddha-land. The Zhenguan version doubly questions, then individually negates, and finally doubly concludes. The Wei version doubly questions, then individually negates, and finally singularly concludes. These three situations are all singular. The so-called double refers to the two adornments of form (visible) and formlessness (invisible), or the adorner and the adorned. The Buddha (founder of Buddhism) emphasizes again that formlessness is true, and form is false. The Buddha only speaks and establishes in formlessness, making it adornment, so he doubly questions and concludes. The treatise says: 『Establishing the first truth of conventional truth (truth based on worldly understanding) can be adorned, but there is no adornment in ultimate truth (ultimate reality),』 this is the first truth. 『This is called adornment,』 ultimately concluding the conventional truth. Here, it encompasses the adornment of the four bodies (the four bodies of the Buddha) and the Pure Land (pure realm), so it is said to be complete. The previous text on the Pure Land is because it was still in the stage of cause (the stage of practice), so it cannot be said to be complete. The previous vow to purify the Buddha-land was because it was still before the ten grounds (stages before the ten Bodhisattva grounds), so it was to remove small attachments and cultivate the path with mindfulness. Now it is on the ground, and the previous obstacles have been removed, but there are still the two innate attachments to self and phenomena (innate attachment to self and phenomena), so they are removed and extinguished again, thereby seeking the Buddha-ground (the state of Buddhahood), therefore it is different from before.
『Sutra: If a Bodhisattva understands up to this is a true Bodhisattva.』 Yan said: The fourth is to conclude the true Bodhisattva. Not saying 『I can』 is understanding the emptiness of self (understanding the emptiness of self); there is no Buddha-land to adorn is understanding the emptiness of phenomena (understanding the emptiness of phenomena). The Tathagata (another name for the Buddha) says that this is the true Bodhisattva. Conversely, it shows that having attachment and not understanding the two emptinesses (emptiness of self and emptiness of phenomena) is not a true Bodhisattva. According to other versions of the Sutra, there are two non-selves (non-self of person and non-self of phenomena) and two Bodhisattvas (Bodhisattvas based on non-self of person and non-self of phenomena). According to the interpretation of the treatise, one is the non-self of person, and the other is the non-self of phenomena. It is precisely because of the two non-selves that the two Bodhisattvas are revealed. Now it is just a general example. The treatise says that generating a thought is inverted and not a Bodhisattva. So, what kind of thought must be generated to be called a Bodhisattva? It refers to this passage of scripture. There is also a verse that says:
Sentient beings and Bodhisattvas, know that all dharmas are without self. Non-saints believe in their own wisdom, and saints have wisdom.
演曰。詳新舊論釋此意者。一知所度眾生無我。二知能度菩薩自無我。故言無我。無我聖及非聖二種菩薩。以有智故。能以自智信解于彼二無我故名二菩薩。即彼凡天亦名世諦菩薩。聖人亦名出世諦菩薩。是故重說菩薩。菩薩問。彼論前說嚴凈佛土亦是斷疑。今亦斷疑。二文何別。答。前除無所取凈土疑。今除無能嚴凈土者疑。此等諸文由聞前說無菩薩故應無利生嚴土等事。即執有能行返疑說無能行。今答令知實我。是無假我修行緣和方便。此即是有然不見身土為能所嚴。以順無相當成佛果。真嚴凈土與求佛地亦不相違。
經。須菩提乃至如來有佛眼 演曰。下第二無上見智凈具足。前求佛土。佛土體通情與非情。如說眾生之類是菩薩。凈土七珍八寶是所受用。其中眾生是所化度。若無智見誰能受用及能化度。故凈智見為能受。化由達一切色與非色。理事等法亦能了知凈非凈土。所有眾生八萬四千心行差別。而為濟利故有此文見即五眼智即六通。論云。如來不唯有惠眼為令智見凈勝故。顯示有五種眼。若異此則唯求惠眼見凈故。演曰。令其求佛見及智凈。即是四智一切妙用略舉照境。及他心智利他中勝所以。偏舉其福自在具足。雖非是智因智所成。與智為依。明智必有所依之福故。合福惠名智見凈。又佛三身
【現代漢語翻譯】 現代漢語譯本： 演（作者）說：詳細的新舊論著解釋這個意思，一是知道所要度化的眾生沒有『我』（ātman）。二是知道能度化眾薩（bodhisattva）的自身也沒有『我』。所以說『無我』。『無我』有聖人和非聖人兩種菩薩。因為有智慧，能夠用自己的智慧相信和理解這兩種『無我』，所以稱為二菩薩。那些凡人和天人也稱為世俗諦菩薩，聖人也稱為出世俗諦菩薩。因此，再次提到菩薩。菩薩問：前面的論述中說嚴凈佛土也是爲了斷除疑惑，現在也是爲了斷除疑惑，這兩段文字有什麼區別？回答：前面是消除對『沒有所取凈土』的疑惑，現在是消除對『沒有能嚴凈土者』的疑惑。這些文字是因為聽到前面說沒有菩薩，所以應該沒有利益眾生、莊嚴佛土等事情，於是就執著于有能行者，反而疑惑說沒有能行者。現在回答是爲了讓他們知道真實的我（ātman）是沒有，只是假借我修行，因緣和合的方便。這就是有，但是不見身土作為能莊嚴和所莊嚴。爲了順應無相，成就佛果。真正莊嚴清凈的佛土與求佛的境界並不矛盾。
經：須菩提乃至如來有佛眼 演（作者）說：下面第二是無上見智清凈具足。前面是求佛土，佛土的本體貫通有情和非情。如說眾生之類是菩薩，清凈佛土的七寶八珍是所受用。其中的眾生是所化度的對象。如果沒有智慧和見識，誰能受用以及能化度眾生？所以清凈的智慧和見識是能受用和能化度的根本。通過通達一切色與非色，事與理等法，也能瞭解清凈與不清凈的佛土。所有眾生的八萬四千種心行差別，都是爲了濟度利益他們，所以有這段文字。『見』就是五眼，『智』就是六通。論中說：如來不僅僅有慧眼，爲了使智慧和見識更加清凈殊勝，所以顯示有五種眼。如果不是這樣，那就只是求慧眼見清凈了。演（作者）說：爲了讓他們求佛的見識和智慧清凈，這就是四智一切妙用的概括，舉出照境和他心智，在利益他人方面最為殊勝。所以偏舉其福德自在具足。雖然福德不是智慧的因，但是由智慧所成就，與智慧互為依靠。說明智慧必定有所依靠的福德，所以合福德和智慧稱為智見清凈。另外，佛有三身。
【English Translation】 English version: Yan (the author) said: Detailed old and new treatises explain this meaning. First, it is knowing that the beings to be liberated have no 'self' (ātman). Second, it is knowing that the Bodhisattvas who can liberate others themselves have no 'self'. Therefore, it is said 'no-self'. 'No-self' includes both saintly and non-saintly Bodhisattvas. Because they have wisdom, they can use their own wisdom to believe and understand these two types of 'no-self', so they are called two Bodhisattvas. Those ordinary people and gods are also called mundane truth Bodhisattvas, and saints are called supramundane truth Bodhisattvas. Therefore, Bodhisattvas are mentioned again. A Bodhisattva asks: The previous discussion about adorning and purifying Buddha lands was also to dispel doubts, and this is also to dispel doubts. What is the difference between these two passages? The answer is: The former eliminates the doubt about 'no pure land to be taken', and the latter eliminates the doubt about 'no one who can adorn and purify the land'. These passages are because they heard earlier that there are no Bodhisattvas, so there should be no benefiting beings, adorning Buddha lands, etc. So they cling to the idea that there are those who can act, and instead doubt that there are no actors. The current answer is to let them know that the true self (ātman) is non-existent, and is only a provisional self for cultivation, a convenient means of causes and conditions coming together. This is existence, but the body and land are not seen as the adorner and the adorned. In order to accord with non-appearance, the attainment of Buddhahood is achieved. Truly adorning and purifying the Buddha land is not contradictory to seeking the Buddha realm.
Sutra: Subhuti, even the Tathagata has the Buddha eye. Yan (the author) said: The second below is the complete perfection of unsurpassed seeing and wisdom. The previous was seeking the Buddha land, the essence of the Buddha land permeates both sentient and non-sentient beings. As it is said that the types of beings are Bodhisattvas, and the seven treasures and eight jewels of the pure land are what is enjoyed. The beings within are the objects to be transformed. If there is no wisdom and vision, who can enjoy and transform beings? Therefore, pure wisdom and vision are the root of being able to enjoy and transform. By thoroughly understanding all forms and formlessness, phenomena and principles, etc., one can also understand pure and impure Buddha lands. All the eighty-four thousand different mental activities of beings are for the sake of helping and benefiting them, so there is this passage. 'Seeing' is the five eyes, and 'wisdom' is the six superknowledges. The treatise says: The Tathagata not only has the wisdom eye, but in order to make wisdom and vision more pure and supreme, he reveals the five eyes. If it were not so, then one would only seek the wisdom eye to see purity. Yan (the author) said: In order to make them seek the purity of the Buddha's vision and wisdom, this is a summary of all the wonderful functions of the four wisdoms, highlighting the illumination of objects and the knowledge of others' minds, which is most supreme in benefiting others. Therefore, it particularly mentions the complete perfection of merit and freedom. Although merit is not the cause of wisdom, it is accomplished by wisdom and relies on wisdom. It explains that wisdom must rely on merit, so the combination of merit and wisdom is called pure wisdom and vision. Furthermore, the Buddha has three bodies.
具攝福智故。前令種福智資糧。今說果圓令欣求趣。彼論為斷第十四佛非能見疑。論云。前說菩薩不見彼是眾生。我為菩薩凈佛國土以不見諸法名為諸佛。若如是者或謂諸佛如來不見諸法。自下經文為斷此疑故說五種眼。此論意說凈土之中有能受化令起欣求。彼論有此能知見故。勿謂諸佛都無所見。以遣疑意疑除智有。即是上求二論無違。文分為三。初明見凈具足。次明智凈具足。三明福身具足。鑑照名見。決斷名智。可受名福。離障圓明名凈具足。見凈五眼即分為五。一段中先問后答。初中問云。頗同凡下見障內故有肉眼不。答。言有者雖以肉眼通見一切。且順淺知故答言有。又即諸佛利他德中亦有化身。父母所生清凈四大報得肉眼。其天眼中準例可知。二並色質涅槃經云。舍無常色獲得常色者。是問肉天二體為同爲別。答在因有別處果無差。皆唯無漏非實業感及修生別。不可佛身有粗細。眼照理名惠。觀教名法。緣真緣俗一智義分。或時別起佛眼。即前四眼為體遍緣一切總名佛眼。然唯論中束五為四。謂色攝第一義諦攝世諦攝一切種一切應知攝。色攝復有二種。謂法果修果此為五眼。粗境界故。是初色攝。演曰。此四皆從所緣得名。以有難言。如來五眼得一切境如何。此中但言色攝故。論釋言。此五眼中具依粗顯
同類境說言初色攝。理實亦能取非色境。由是業感故名法果。由彼業體是法塵故。法名雖通此肉別稱如言色處。別得總名天眼。依定起故名修果。因修得故如言修惠。若爾如何得有報得天眼。答。阿那律等名為修得。設生彼王報所得眼。因中亦由修定而得總名修得。論又釋惠法二眼次第云。第一義中智力故。世智不顛倒轉。是故第一義諦攝在法先非不見。如了諸行故。論又釋法佛二眼行相。如文可解。準論下釋智凈中雲。於此智凈中說心住即非心住。如是見凈中。何故不說眼即非眼。以一住處故。見智凈后安立第一義故。初亦得成就。演曰。以後例前應言。如來說肉眼即非肉眼。是名肉眼。由安立第一義故。彼法無實體故。無如其名有自體故。名之為非隨順世間。為令修證強立其名。是名肉眼。餘四準此而不說者。同一住處最後說故。例前亦爾。彼論頌云。
雖不見諸法 非無了境眼 諸佛五種實 以見彼顛倒
釋意以見顛倒故名非顛倒何者顛倒。偈言。
種種顛倒識 以離於實念 不住彼實智 是故說顛倒
經。須菩提至如來說是沙 演曰。下明智凈。前之見凈鑑照于境。此隨彼起抉擇。有情心行差別。染與非染倒與非倒皆悉了知。令彼彼心離諸散亂證真境故名智凈住。論云。為
【現代漢語翻譯】 現代漢語譯本： 關於同類境的說法，最初的色（Rūpa，色蘊）也被攝入其中。但實際上，它也能取非色境。這是由於業力所感，所以稱為法果。因為那個業的本體是法塵（Dharmadhātu），所以這樣說。雖然『法』這個名稱是通用的，但這裡特指肉眼所見的色處（Rūpadhātu），就像『色處』這個別名可以代表總體一樣。天眼（Divyacakṣus）依靠禪定而生起，所以稱為修果，因為它通過修行而獲得，就像『修慧』一樣。如果這樣，那麼報得的天眼又是如何產生的呢？回答：阿那律（Aniruddha）等人的天眼稱為修得。假設有人生於彼王，其所得的天眼是報得，但其根本原因也是通過修習禪定而得，所以總稱為修得。論中又解釋了慧眼（Prajñācakṣus）和法眼（Dharmacakṣus）的次第，說：在第一義諦中，由於智慧的力量，世俗的智慧不會顛倒運轉。因此，第一義諦被攝在法眼之前，並非不能見到。例如，因爲了解諸行（Saṃskāra）。論中又解釋了法眼和佛眼（Buddha-cakṣus）的行相，如經文所說可以理解。根據論的解釋，在智凈（Jñānadarśana-viśuddhi）中說：『於此智凈中，說心住即非心住。』像這樣，在見凈（Darśana-viśuddhi）中，為什麼不說『眼即非眼』呢？因為只有一個住處。在見凈和智凈之後，才能安立第一義諦，所以最初也能成就。演曰：以後面的例子推斷前面的，應該說：如來說肉眼即非肉眼，是名肉眼。由於安立第一義諦的緣故，那個法沒有實體，沒有像它的名稱那樣具有自體，所以稱之為『非』，這是隨順世間，爲了使修行證悟的人能夠堅定地建立這個名稱，所以稱為肉眼。其餘四種眼（天眼、慧眼、法眼、佛眼）可以依此類推，而不特別說明，是因為它們在同一個住處，最後一起說明的緣故，和前面的例子一樣。那部論的頌文說： 『雖然不見諸法，非無了境眼，諸佛五種實，以見彼顛倒。』 解釋這句偈頌的意思是：因為見到顛倒，所以稱為非顛倒。什麼是顛倒呢？偈頌說： 『種種顛倒識，以離於實念，不住彼實智，是故說顛倒。』 經文：須菩提（Subhuti）至如來說是沙（Vālukā）。演曰：下面說明智凈。前面的見凈是鑑照于境，這裡是隨之而起，抉擇有情心行上的差別，染與非染，顛倒與非顛倒，都完全瞭解。使他們的心遠離各種散亂，證得真實的境界，所以稱為智凈住。論中說：為...
【English Translation】 English version: Regarding the statement about homogeneous realms, the initial Rūpa (form aggregate) is also included. But in reality, it can also grasp non-form realms. This is due to the influence of karma, so it is called Dharma-fruit. Because the essence of that karma is Dharmadhātu (the realm of phenomena), that's why it is said so. Although the name 'Dharma' is general, here it specifically refers to the Rūpadhātu (sphere of form) seen by the physical eye, just as the specific name 'Rūpadhātu' can represent the whole. The Divyacakṣus (divine eye) arises relying on Samadhi (meditative concentration), so it is called cultivation-fruit, because it is obtained through cultivation, like 'cultivation-wisdom'. If so, then how does the retribution-obtained divine eye arise? Answer: The divine eye of Aniruddha (one of the Buddha's ten principal disciples) and others is called cultivation-obtained. Suppose someone is born as that king, the divine eye obtained is retribution-obtained, but its root cause is also obtained through cultivating Samadhi, so it is generally called cultivation-obtained. The treatise further explains the sequence of Prajñācakṣus (wisdom eye) and Dharmacakṣus (Dharma eye), saying: In the ultimate truth, due to the power of wisdom, worldly wisdom does not operate perversely. Therefore, the ultimate truth is included before the Dharma eye, it is not that it cannot be seen. For example, because one understands all Saṃskāra (conditioned phenomena). The treatise further explains the characteristics of the Dharma eye and Buddha-cakṣus (Buddha eye), which can be understood as stated in the text. According to the treatise's explanation, in Jñānadarśana-viśuddhi (purity of knowledge and vision) it says: 'In this Jñānadarśana-viśuddhi, it is said that the mind abides and yet does not abide.' Like this, in Darśana-viśuddhi (purity of vision), why isn't it said 'the eye is and yet is not'? Because there is only one dwelling place. Only after Darśana-viśuddhi and Jñānadarśana-viśuddhi can the ultimate truth be established, so it can also be achieved initially. Yan said: Inferring the former from the latter, it should be said: The Tathagata (如來，another name for Buddha) says the physical eye is and yet is not the physical eye, this is called the physical eye. Because of establishing the ultimate truth, that Dharma has no substance, it does not have self-nature like its name, so it is called 'not', this is in accordance with the world, in order to enable those who cultivate and realize to firmly establish this name, so it is called the physical eye. The remaining four eyes (divine eye, wisdom eye, Dharma eye, Buddha eye) can be inferred by analogy, without special explanation, because they are in the same dwelling place, and are explained together at the end, like the previous example. The verse in that treatise says: 'Although one does not see all Dharmas, there is no lack of an eye that understands the realm, the five realities of all Buddhas, are because they see that reversal.' Explaining the meaning of this verse is: Because one sees reversal, it is called non-reversal. What is reversal? The verse says: 'Various reversed consciousnesses, because they are separated from real thought, do not abide in that real wisdom, therefore it is said to be reversal.' Sutra: Subhuti (one of the Buddha's ten principal disciples) to as the Tathagata says is sand (Vālukā). Yan said: Below explains Jñānadarśana-viśuddhi. The previous Darśana-viśuddhi is discerning the realm, here it arises following it, deciding the differences in sentient beings' mental activities, defiled and non-defiled, reversed and non-reversed, all are completely understood. Causing their minds to be away from various distractions, realizing the true realm, so it is called Jñānadarśana-viśuddhi. The treatise says: For...
應知中證故安立見為教。彼彼眾生寂靜心故安立智。演曰。見為令知智為利益故。彼論不分見與智別。但由五眼見彼眾生種種心住。即是前明能見之智。后明所見之境。是故頌云。諸佛五種實以見彼顛倒。余同此論。文分為三。初舉智所緣境。次明佛能知。后徴釋。所以初中有四。初因河辨沙。二依沙數界。三因界說生。四依生說心。此初也。先問后答。如來依俗有此言說故。說是沙善現知心故說如是。
經。須菩提于意云何如一恒河至甚多世尊 演曰。依沙數界。
經。佛告須菩提至若干種心 演曰。第三因界說生。第四依生說心。
經。如來悉知 演曰。大文第二明佛能知。一則數多。二心法難見。佛智明瞭悉能知之。
經。何以故至是名心住 演曰。第三徴釋。所以于中有四問答徴釋此。初徴問。多心難見。而悉知者有何所以。答中魏本云。如來說諸心住皆為非心住。是名為心住。貞觀云心流注。心流注者如來說非流注。是故如來說名心流注。心流注論云。心流注者謂三世心。若干種心者應知有二種。為染及凈。即是共欲心離欲心等。世者謂過去等分。於此二中安立第一義故。
經。言心住者即為非住乃至過去心不可得等 演曰。此初所知心通染及凈。染心共欲。與欲俱故凈心
【現代漢語翻譯】 現代漢語譯本 應當知道，爲了確立正確的見解，所以安立『見』為教義（應知中證故安立見為教）。爲了使那些眾生獲得寂靜的心，所以安立『智』（智慧）的概念。演述說：『見』是爲了讓人知曉，『智』是爲了利益眾生。那部論典沒有區分『見』與『智』的差別，只是通過佛的五眼，見到那些眾生種種不同的心念狀態，這就是前面所說的能夠洞見的智慧（前明能見之智），後面所說的是所見的境界（后明所見之境）。所以頌文說：諸佛以五種真實的智慧，見到他們的顛倒之處（諸佛五種實以見彼顛倒）。其餘部分與此論相同。文章分為三個部分。首先，舉出智慧所緣的境界；其次，說明佛能夠知曉；最後，征問並解釋原因。所以，在第一部分中有四個方面：首先，因恒河而辨別沙子；其次，依據沙子的數量來界定世界；第三，因為世界而說明眾生；第四，依據眾生來說明心。這是第一個方面。先提問，后回答。如來依據世俗的約定而有這些言說，所以說這些沙子，善現（須菩提）知道心，所以這樣說（如來依俗有此言說故。說是沙善現知心故說如是）。
經文：須菩提，你認為怎麼樣？如果一條恒河，乃至很多條恒河（須菩提于意云何如一恒河至甚多世尊）。演述說：依據沙子的數量來界定世界（依沙數界）。
經文：佛告訴須菩提，乃至若干種心（佛告須菩提至若干種心）。演述說：第三，因為世界而說明眾生；第四，依據眾生來說明心（第三因界說生。第四依生說心）。
經文：如來完全知曉（如來悉知）。演述說：大文的第二部分，說明佛能夠知曉。一是數量眾多，二是心法難以見到，佛的智慧光明澄澈，完全能夠知曉這些（大文第二明佛能知。一則數多。二心法難見。佛智明瞭悉能知之）。
經文：為什麼呢？乃至這叫做心住（何以故至是名心住）。演述說：第三，征問並解釋原因。所以在其中有四個問答，征問並解釋這個。首先征問，多種心難以見到，而完全知曉的原因是什麼？回答中，魏譯本說：如來說的諸心住，都是非心住，這叫做心住（如來說諸心住皆為非心住。是名為心住）。貞觀譯本說是心流注，心流注，如來說不是流注，所以如來說名叫心流注（貞觀云心流注。心流注者如來說非流注。是故如來說名心流注）。《心流注論》說：心流注，指的是三世的心。若干種心，應當知道有兩種，為染污和清凈。就是共欲心、離欲心等。世，指的是過去等分。在這兩種心中，安立第一義（心流注論云。心流注者謂三世心。若干種心者應知有二種。為染及凈。即是共欲心離欲心等。世者謂過去等分。於此二中安立第一義故）。
經文：所說的心住，就是非住，乃至過去心不可得等（言心住者即為非住乃至過去心不可得等）。演述說：這最初所知的心，包括染污和清凈。染污心是共欲，與慾望同在；清凈心（此初所知心通染及凈。染心共欲。與欲俱故凈心）
【English Translation】 English version It should be known that 'seeing' is established as the teaching in order to establish correct views (Ying zhi zhong zheng gu an li jian wei jiao). 'Wisdom' (zhi) is established in order to bring peaceful minds to those beings. Yan (commentator) says: 'Seeing' is for making people know, and 'wisdom' is for benefiting beings. That treatise does not distinguish the difference between 'seeing' and 'wisdom', but through the Buddha's five eyes, it sees the various mental states of those beings, which is the aforementioned wisdom that can see (qian ming neng jian zhi zhi), and the latter refers to the realm of what is seen (hou ming suo jian zhi jing). Therefore, the verse says: The Buddhas see their inversions with five kinds of true wisdom (Zhu fo wu zhong shi yi jian bi dian dao). The rest is the same as this treatise. The article is divided into three parts. First, it cites the realm that wisdom depends on; second, it explains that the Buddha can know; and finally, it questions and explains the reasons. Therefore, there are four aspects in the first part: first, distinguishing the sand because of the Ganges River; second, defining the world according to the number of sands; third, explaining beings because of the world; and fourth, explaining the mind according to beings. This is the first aspect. First ask, then answer. The Tathagata has these statements based on worldly conventions, so he says these sands, Subhuti knows the mind, so he says this (Ru lai yi su you ci yan shuo gu. Shuo shi sha shan xian zhi xin gu shuo ru shi).
Sutra: Subhuti, what do you think? If one Ganges River, or even many Ganges Rivers (Xuputi yu yi yun he ru yi heng he zhi shen duo Shi Zun). Yan (commentator) says: Defining the world according to the number of sands (Yi sha shu jie).
Sutra: The Buddha told Subhuti, even several kinds of minds (Fo gao Xuputi zhi ruo gan zhong xin). Yan (commentator) says: Third, explaining beings because of the world; fourth, explaining the mind according to beings (Di san yin jie shuo sheng. Di si yi sheng shuo xin).
Sutra: The Tathagata knows completely (Ru lai xi zhi). Yan (commentator) says: The second part of the main text explains that the Buddha can know. One is the large number, and the other is that the mind-dharma is difficult to see. The Buddha's wisdom is bright and clear, and he can completely know these (Da wen di er ming Fo neng zhi. Yi ze shu duo. Er xin fa nan jian. Fo zhi ming liao xi neng zhi zhi).
Sutra: Why? Even this is called mind-abiding (He yi gu zhi shi ming xin zhu). Yan (commentator) says: Third, questioning and explaining the reasons. So there are four questions and answers in it, questioning and explaining this. First, questioning, what is the reason why many minds are difficult to see, but they are completely known? In the answer, the Wei translation says: The mind-abiding that the Tathagata speaks of is all non-mind-abiding, and this is called mind-abiding (Ru lai shuo zhu xin zhu jie wei fei xin zhu. Shi ming wei xin zhu). The Zhenguan translation says it is mind-flow, mind-flow, the Tathagata says it is not flow, so the Tathagata says the name is mind-flow (Zhen guan yun xin liu zhu. Xin liu zhu zhe Ru lai shuo fei liu zhu. Shi gu Ru lai shuo ming xin liu zhu). The 'Treatise on Mind-Flow' says: Mind-flow refers to the minds of the three times. Several kinds of minds, it should be known that there are two kinds, defiled and pure. That is, the mind of common desire, the mind of detachment from desire, etc. Time refers to the past, etc. In these two kinds of minds, the first meaning is established (Xin liu zhu lun yun. Xin liu zhu zhe wei san shi xin. Ruo gan zhong xin zhe ying zhi you er zhong, wei ran ji jing. Ji shi gong yu xin, li yu xin deng. Shi zhe wei guo qu deng fen. Yu ci er zhong an li di yi yi gu).
Sutra: What is said to be mind-abiding is non-abiding, even the past mind is unattainable, etc. (Yan xin zhu zhe ji wei fei zhu nai zhi guo qu xin bu ke de deng). Yan (commentator) says: This initially known mind includes defilement and purity. The defiled mind is common desire, being with desire; the pure mind (Ci chu suo zhi xin tong ran ji jing. Ran xin gong yu. Yu yu ju gu jing xin)
離欲。言非心住等。以住三世住染及凈名之為住。據第一義說為非住真勝義中無有染凈心住相故。此意由佛見心非心得真實理故。故能遍知。若取心相觸途生礙不能遍知眾生心也。是答前問。不爾疏略無所結歸。彼論重約能知染心說顛倒故。何所以者。以彼染心能為障礙。正是所度。是故偏說不違此論彼云如來說諸心住皆為非心住者。此句示現遠離四念處故。此以何義心住者。住彼念處以離彼念處故云不住。演曰。泛論心住自有二義。一者愚夫于境染著名住。二者賢聖觀四念處住亦名為住。今說染心離彼念住故云不住。是名為心住者。總結凡愚住于顛倒也。彼又云。又住不動根本名異義一。金剛仙釋云。以四念處棲心真如理中故名為住。不為五欲所壞。又不為二乘所壞故曰不動。能與菩提為基故名根本。演曰。三名雖異然其所詮同目念住故云名異義一。此即泛解念住異名也。新論稍別應勘彼文。
經。所以者何 演曰。第三徴。既名心住複名非住有何所以。
經。過去心至不可得 演曰。第四釋。論云過去心不可得者。以滅故。未來者未有故。現在者第一義故。彼論大同。然云現在心虛妄分別故不可得。如是示彼心住顛倒諸識虛妄以無世觀故。此論現在真無分別。彼論現在妄有分別。皆不可得。言無世觀
【現代漢語翻譯】 現代漢語譯本 離欲。說的是心不住于任何事物等等。因為『住』指的是心執著於三世（過去、現在、未來）的染污或清凈狀態。但從第一義諦來說，『非住』才是真勝義，因為在真勝義中沒有染污或清凈的心住之相。這個意思是因為佛見到心並非真實存在，從而證得真實之理。因此能夠遍知一切。如果執著於心相，就會處處受阻礙，不能遍知眾生的心。這是回答前面的問題。否則就顯得疏漏，沒有結論。那部論典側重於能知染污心，是因為染污是顛倒的緣故。為什麼這麼說呢？因為染污心能夠成為障礙，正是需要被度化的對象。所以偏重於說明染污心，並不違背此論。那部論典說，如來說一切心住都是非心住，這句話表明要遠離四念處（四種觀照方法）。這是什麼意思呢？心住，就是住在四念處上，因為離開了四念處，所以說不住。『是名為心住者』，總結了凡夫愚人執著于顛倒。那部論典又說，『又住不動根本名異義一』。金剛仙（Vajrasena）解釋說，因為用四念處安住于真如理中，所以名為『住』。不被五欲（色、聲、香、味、觸）所破壞，也不被二乘（聲聞、緣覺）所破壞，所以說『不動』。能夠成為菩提的基礎，所以名為『根本』。演曰：這三個名稱雖然不同，但它們所詮釋的都是指念住，所以說『名異義一』。這只是泛泛地解釋了念住的不同名稱。新論的說法稍有不同，應該參考那部論典的原文。 經：所以者何？演曰：第三個提問。既然名為心住，又名為非住，這是什麼原因呢？ 經：過去心至不可得。演曰：第四個解釋。論典說，過去心不可得，是因為已經滅去了。未來心不可得，是因為還沒有產生。現在心不可得，是因為第一義諦的緣故。那部論典的意思大致相同。但那部論典說，現在心是虛妄分別，所以不可得。這樣就顯示了心住是顛倒的，諸識是虛妄的，因為沒有用世俗的觀點來看待。此論認為現在心是真正沒有分別的，彼論認為現在心是虛妄有分別的，都是不可得的。『言無世觀』
【English Translation】 English version 『Detachment.』 This refers to the non-dwelling of the mind, etc. 『Dwelling』 implies the mind's attachment to the defiled or pure states of the three times (past, present, and future). However, according to the ultimate truth (paramārtha), 『non-dwelling』 is the true supreme meaning, because in the true supreme meaning, there is no appearance of a defiled or pure mind dwelling. This meaning arises because the Buddha sees that the mind is not real, thereby realizing the true principle. Therefore, he is able to know everything universally. If one clings to the appearance of the mind, one will be obstructed everywhere and unable to know the minds of sentient beings universally. This answers the previous question. Otherwise, it would seem incomplete and without a conclusion. That treatise emphasizes the ability to know the defiled mind because defilement is the cause of delusion. Why is this so? Because the defiled mind can become an obstacle and is precisely what needs to be liberated. Therefore, it focuses on explaining the defiled mind, which does not contradict this treatise. That treatise says, 『The Tathāgata says that all mind-dwellings are non-mind-dwellings.』 This sentence indicates the need to distance oneself from the four foundations of mindfulness (smṛtyupasthāna). What does this mean? 『Mind-dwelling』 means dwelling on the four foundations of mindfulness; because one has left the four foundations of mindfulness, it is said to be 『non-dwelling.』 『This is called mind-dwelling』 summarizes that ordinary, foolish people cling to delusion. That treatise also says, 『Moreover, dwelling, immobility, and foundation have different names but the same meaning.』 Vajrasena (金剛仙) explains that because one uses the four foundations of mindfulness to abide in the principle of Suchness (tathatā), it is called 『dwelling.』 It is not destroyed by the five desires (pañca kāmaguṇāḥ: forms, sounds, smells, tastes, and tactile objects), nor is it destroyed by the Two Vehicles (śrāvakayāna and pratyekabuddhayāna), so it is called 『immobility.』 It can become the basis for Bodhi (enlightenment), so it is called 『foundation.』 Yan said: Although these three names are different, what they explain all refers to mindfulness, so it is said that 『the names are different but the meaning is the same.』 This is just a general explanation of the different names of mindfulness. The new treatise has slightly different statements, which should be consulted in the original text. Sūtra: 『What is the reason?』 Yan said: This is the third question. Since it is called mind-dwelling and also called non-dwelling, what is the reason for this? Sūtra: 『The past mind is ultimately unattainable.』 Yan said: This is the fourth explanation. The treatise says that the past mind is unattainable because it has already ceased. The future mind is unattainable because it has not yet arisen. The present mind is unattainable because of the ultimate truth. The meaning of that treatise is roughly the same. However, that treatise says that the present mind is false discrimination, so it is unattainable. This shows that mind-dwelling is deluded and that the consciousnesses are false because they do not use the conventional view to perceive things. This treatise believes that the present mind is truly without discrimination, while that treatise believes that the present mind is falsely with discrimination, and both are unattainable. 『Speaking of no conventional view』
者。以彼妄心無三世法為所觀境故。能取心成虛妄性。新論云。此顯流轉之心。是虛妄識性所緣無有三世性故。演曰。非但心於三世不可得。其三世境亦不可得。
經。須菩提至以是因緣得福多不 演曰。智見凈中第三福自在具足。所以智后明福身者。智為能導福為所導。福為能資智為所資。以二相須故次明之。又顯見智別有總依福。若不具見智無總所依處故。有以此文屬下好身相身者。不然以前卷科配無上見智凈云乃至。若此三千大千世界如是等。又科隨形好身具足。但牒應以色身成就見如來等文論自配屬。故知此文定屬智見。彼論自下為斷第十五福得非善疑。論云。向說心住顛倒。若如是福德亦是顛倒 若是顛倒何名善法。為斷此疑示現心住。雖顛倒福德非顛倒。頌云。
佛智惠根本 非顛倒功德 以是福德相 故重說譬喻
演曰。意明有漏福聚。有所住故可是顛倒。無相福聚唯住念處不住染相。能與佛智作根本故非為顛倒不遣。此論文中有三。初問次答后佛釋成。問以寶供佛生無量福當得成佛福身自在。可為多不。貞觀云。奉施如來。
經。如是至甚多 演曰。答也。問既總。問通真俗諦答亦如之。
經。須菩提至福德多 演曰。如來釋成。魏及貞觀但有上返釋文無以福德
【現代漢語翻譯】 現代漢語譯本：
『者。』因為他們虛妄的心認為沒有過去、現在、未來這三世的法作為所觀察的境界。所以能取之心就成了虛妄的性質。《新論》說：『這顯示了流轉的心，是虛妄的識性所緣，沒有三世的性質。』 慧演法師說：『不只是心在三世中不可得，這三世的境界也是不可得的。』 『經。須菩提至以是因緣得福多不』 慧演法師說：『在智慧和見解清凈中，第三種福德是自在具足的。之所以在智慧之後說明福身，是因為智慧是能引導的，福德是所引導的；福德是能資助的，智慧是所資助的。因為這兩者互相需要，所以接著說明。』 又顯示見和智分別有總體的所依是福德。如果不具備見和智，就沒有總體的所依之處。有人把這段文字歸屬於下面關於好身相身的討論，是不對的。因為前面已經按照章節分配了『無上見智凈』，乃至『如果這三千大千世界是這樣等等』。又按照隨形好身具足來劃分，只是抄錄『應以色身成就見如來』等文字進行自我歸屬。所以知道這段文字一定屬於智慧和見解。那部論從下面開始是爲了斷除第十五種福德不是善的疑惑。《論》說：『前面說心住在顛倒之中，如果這樣，福德也是顛倒的嗎？』『如果是顛倒的，為什麼稱為善法？』爲了斷除這個疑惑，示現心住。雖然顛倒，福德卻不是顛倒的。頌說： 『佛智惠根本，非顛倒功德，以是福德相，故重說譬喻。』 慧演法師說：『意思是說，有漏的福聚，因為有所住處，所以可以說是顛倒的。無相的福聚只住在念處，不住在染相上，能夠作為佛智慧的根本，所以不是顛倒，不應該捨棄。』 這段論文中有三個部分：首先是提問，然後是回答，最後是佛的解釋。提問以寶物供養佛，產生無量的福德，應當能夠成就佛的福身自在，可以算作多嗎？ 貞觀法師說：『奉獻給如來。』 『經。如是至甚多』 慧演法師說：『這是回答。』提問既是總體的，提問貫通真諦和俗諦，回答也是這樣。 『經。須菩提至福德多』 慧演法師說：『如來解釋說明。』魏譯本和貞觀譯本只有上面的反問解釋文，沒有『以福德』
【English Translation】 English version:
'者 (zhě).' Because their deluded mind considers the absence of the three times—past, present, and future—as the object of observation. Therefore, the perceiving mind becomes of a deluded nature. The New Treatise states: 'This reveals that the transmigratory mind is conditioned by a deluded consciousness, which does not possess the nature of the three times.' Huiyan (慧演) says: 'Not only is the mind unattainable in the three times, but the realms of these three times are also unattainable.' 'Sūbhūti (須菩提) to 'Is it because of this cause that one obtains much merit?' Huiyan (慧演) says: 'In the purity of wisdom and insight, the third merit is freely and fully possessed. The reason for explaining the meritorious body after wisdom is that wisdom is the guide, and merit is what is guided; merit is the support, and wisdom is what is supported. Because these two are mutually dependent, they are explained in sequence.' It also shows that seeing and wisdom separately have a general reliance on merit. If one does not possess seeing and wisdom, there is no general place of reliance. Some attribute this passage to the discussion below regarding the good physical characteristics, which is incorrect. Because the previous chapter has already allocated 'Unsurpassed Seeing and Wisdom Purity,' up to 'If these three thousand great thousand worlds are like this, etc.' It also divides according to the complete possession of the minor marks, merely copying the text 'One should see the Tathāgata (如來) by the accomplishment of the physical body,' etc., for self-attribution. Therefore, it is known that this passage definitely belongs to wisdom and insight. That treatise begins below to dispel the doubt that the fifteenth merit is not good. The Treatise says: 'Previously, it was said that the mind dwells in delusion. If so, is merit also delusion?' 'If it is delusion, why is it called good dharma?' To dispel this doubt, the dwelling of the mind is shown. Although it is delusion, merit is not delusion. The verse says: 'The root of Buddha's wisdom and insight, is non-deluded merit, because of this meritorious aspect, the metaphor is repeated.' Huiyan (慧演) says: 'The meaning is that the meritorious accumulation with outflows, because there is a dwelling place, can be said to be deluded. The merit without characteristics only dwells in the place of mindfulness, not dwelling in the aspect of defilement, and can serve as the root of Buddha's wisdom, so it is not delusion and should not be abandoned.' This passage of the treatise has three parts: first is the question, then the answer, and finally the Buddha's explanation. The question is whether offering treasures to the Buddha produces immeasurable merit, which should be able to accomplish the Buddha's meritorious body freely, can it be considered much? Zhenguan (貞觀) says: 'Offering to the Tathāgata (如來).' 'Sūbhūti (須菩提) to 'So it is, very much.' Huiyan (慧演) says: 'This is the answer.' The question is both general, the question penetrates both the true and conventional truths, and so is the answer. 'Sūbhūti (須菩提) to 'Much merit.' Huiyan (慧演) says: 'The Tathāgata (如來) explains and clarifies.' The Wei (魏) translation and the Zhenguan (貞觀) translation only have the above interrogative explanation, without 'with merit.'
無故下順結文。論云。于中亦安立第一義故。經言須菩提若福聚有實等。此意三輪體空不見實故說福德多。若住三輪見實施等有限量故不福福多。如是名為安立勝義。彼論意說有漏福聚是其顛倒。由住三輪得有漏果。但積聚義而非進趣。是故如來不說彼是進趣福聚。其無相福以是諸佛智慧根本故。說彼為進趣福聚。依彼釋經如文可解。
經。須菩提至具足身見不 演曰。第三隨形好身具足。前來既說有凈見智及無相福必有所變所生圓滿相好之身故此明之。又前嚴土學佛見智求福身已此須嚴佛所有形相。然雖上求不能稱實除彼局執。但謂佛有八十隨好三十二相即為圓滿。然法身體具恒沙德。報佛相好如所證性無量無邊不可形相。求不可執心取故。有經云。文殊師利菩薩云。如來相好無窮無邊說不可盡。順世間法。是以略說三十二相八十種好。是故今者欲令真嚴及以真觀須無分別稱實相嚴意如嚴土故有此文。彼論謂斷第十六相好非佛疑。若諸佛以無為法得名。云何諸佛成就八十種好三十二相而名為佛。是故說非成就色身非成就諸相得見如來。此論觀無相以上求。彼論中即法身。而是佛二論俱明法報二身義不相違。文分為四問答徴釋。此問也。可以色身即究竟圓實觀如來不準上諸文。皆說真如以為如來。以相求真失真
【現代漢語翻譯】 現代漢語譯本 無故下順結文。《論》中說：『于其中也安立第一義的緣故。』經中說：『須菩提，如果福德積聚有實體等。』此意是說三輪體性本空，不見有實體，所以說福德多。如果執著於三輪，認為有實體等，因此不是福德多。這樣名為安立勝義。那部《論》的意思是說，有漏的福德積聚是顛倒的，因為執著於三輪而得到有漏的果報，只是積聚的意義，而不是進步。所以如來說那不是進步的福德積聚。而無相的福德，因為是諸佛智慧的根本，所以說那是進步的福德積聚。依照那部《論》來解釋經文，可以按照字面意思理解。
經：『須菩提乃至具足身見不？』演曰：第三是隨形好身具足。前面既然說了有清凈的見智以及無相的福德，必定有所變化，所生的是圓滿相好的身，所以這裡說明這一點。而且前面已經學習了莊嚴國土、學佛的見智、求福身，這裡需要莊嚴佛所有的形相。然而即使向上求，也不能符合實相，除去那些侷限的執著。只是說佛有八十隨形好、三十二相就是圓滿。然而法身本體具有恒河沙數般的功德。報身的相好如同所證悟的自性，無量無邊，無法用形相來描述。因為求不可執著，用心去體會。有經中說：文殊師利菩薩說：如來的相好無窮無邊，說也說不盡，這是順應世間法。所以略說三十二相、八十種好。因此現在想要真正地莊嚴以及真正地觀想，必須沒有分別，符合實相地莊嚴，意如莊嚴國土，所以有這段文字。那部《論》認為斷除第十六相好，並非對佛的懷疑。如果諸佛以無為法得名，為什麼諸佛成就八十種好、三十二相而名為佛？所以說非成就色身，非成就諸相，才能得見如來。這部《論》從無相以上求。那部《論》中即是法身。而是佛，兩部《論》都闡明了法報二身的意義，並不相違背。文分為四部分：問答征釋。這是提問。可以用色身來究竟圓滿地觀如來嗎？不準許像上面的文章那樣，都說真如是如來。以相求真，會失去真。 須菩提(Subhuti): 佛陀的弟子，以擅長理解空性而聞名。 如來(Tathagata): 佛陀的稱號之一，意為『如實而來者』。 法身(Dharmakaya): 佛陀的法性之身，是真理和智慧的體現。 報身(Sambhogakaya): 佛陀的受用身，是為菩薩展現的莊嚴之身。
【English Translation】 English version The text below concludes the previous section without a stated reason. The Treatise says: 'Because the ultimate meaning is also established within it.' The sutra says: 'Subhuti (Subhuti), if the accumulation of merit has substance, etc.' This means that the nature of the three wheels (three aspects of giving: giver, receiver, and gift) is empty, and no substance is seen, therefore it is said that merit is abundant. If one clings to the three wheels, seeing substance, etc., then it is not abundant merit. This is called establishing the ultimate meaning. That Treatise means that the accumulation of conditioned merit is inverted because one obtains conditioned results by clinging to the three wheels. It is merely accumulation, not progress. Therefore, the Tathagata (Tathagata) does not say that it is progressive merit. The merit of non-appearance is the root of the wisdom of all Buddhas, so it is said to be progressive merit. According to that Treatise's explanation of the sutra, it can be understood literally.
Sutra: 'Subhuti, up to having complete physical perception, or not?' Commentary: The third is the complete possession of the secondary marks of physical excellence. Since it was said earlier that there is pure seeing-wisdom and merit of non-appearance, there must be some transformation, and what is produced is a body with complete marks and qualities, so this clarifies that point. Moreover, having previously studied the adornment of the land, learning the Buddha's seeing-wisdom, and seeking a body of merit, here it is necessary to adorn all the Buddha's forms. However, even seeking upwards cannot match reality, removing those limited attachments. It is merely said that the Buddha has eighty secondary marks and thirty-two major marks, which is complete. However, the Dharmakaya (Dharmakaya) possesses virtues like the sands of the Ganges. The marks and qualities of the reward body (Sambhogakaya) are like the nature of what is realized, immeasurable and boundless, and cannot be described by forms. Because seeking cannot be grasped, it is understood with the mind. There is a sutra that says: Manjushri Bodhisattva said: The Tathagata's marks and qualities are endless and boundless, and cannot be fully described; this is in accordance with worldly dharma. Therefore, the thirty-two marks and eighty secondary marks are briefly described. Therefore, now, wanting to truly adorn and truly contemplate, there must be no discrimination, adorning in accordance with reality, the meaning is like adorning the land, so there is this passage. That Treatise believes that cutting off the sixteenth secondary mark is not a doubt about the Buddha. If the Buddhas are named by unconditioned dharma, why do the Buddhas achieve eighty secondary marks and thirty-two major marks and are called Buddhas? Therefore, it is said that not achieving the physical body, not achieving the marks, can one see the Tathagata. This Treatise seeks from above non-appearance. That Treatise is the Dharmakaya. And is the Buddha, both Treatises clarify the meaning of the Dharmakaya and Sambhogakaya, and are not contradictory. The text is divided into four parts: question, answer, inquiry, and explanation. This is the question. Can one use the physical body to ultimately and completely contemplate the Tathagata? It is not allowed to be like the above articles, which all say that Suchness is the Tathagata. Seeking truth with form will lose the truth.
而不得。故舉為問欲令斷執稱實求也。問。若爾云何名好身具足。答。由內真圓外好自滿故也。又欲令其即色觀空若也唯見色身執形相而不融真理。唯觀空理住寂滅而闕利眾生。除其執情獲彼常色。此如欲得色身住處中解。問。地前化身相好可樂為化地上何唯爾所。答。正為地上兼為地前隨粗且爾。又解經論總言相好不顯別說 隨其位地應見不同。然依彼論說八十等隨淺識疑故無有失。
經。不也世尊至色身見 演曰。善現據真理以答。
經。何以故至具足色身 演曰。徴及釋也。言即非者非稱執情。而是實有據真理中無色相故。論云。亦以安立第一義故。此言色身雖通相好。而論以好別屬色身。猶如色處故。彼論云。色身攝得八十種好三十二相。如經等偈言。
法身畢竟體 非彼相好身 以非相成就 非彼法身故 不離於法身 彼二非不佛 故重說成就 亦無二及有
演曰。初二句顯法身非相好身。次二句顯相好身非是法身。次三句顯相好身不離法身亦得名。佛言彼二者一色身即隨好。二諸相具足。言重說者。謂色身成就諸相成就。后一句顯相及好。亦有亦無。尋彼釋意。色身相好報化成就。不離法身亦得名佛。若推入真為真如觀。二亦非有性相別觀可有相好。故云亦無二。
【現代漢語翻譯】 現代漢語譯本 而不得。故舉此發問，意在使其斷除對色身的執著，從而探求真實的意義。問：如果這樣，那麼怎樣才能稱得上是『好身具足』呢？答：因為內在的真如圓滿，外在的相好也自然具足。此外，也想讓他們能夠即色觀空，如果只看到色身，執著于外在的形相，而不能融會貫通真理，或者只觀空理，停留在寂滅的狀態，而缺少利益眾生的行為，那麼就要去除這種執著之情，從而獲得那常住不變的色身。這就像想要獲得色身，就必須安住于中道之解一樣。問：地上菩薩之前的化身，其相好令人喜樂，為何化身到地上之後，相好只有那麼一點點呢？答：主要是爲了地上的眾生，同時也兼顧地上的菩薩，所以相好顯得粗略一些。還有一種解釋是，經論中總的來說相好，沒有詳細地分別說明，所以隨著所處的位地不同，所見到的相好也應該有所不同。然而，根據相關論典的說法，八十種隨形好等，是根據淺薄的認識而產生的疑惑，實際上並沒有缺失。
經：『不也，世尊（Bhagavan），乃至色身見。』演曰：善現（Subhuti）根據真理來回答。
經：『何以故，乃至具足色身。』演曰：這是提問和解釋。所說的『即非』，並非是指否定執著之情，而是說色身是真實存在的，但從真理的角度來看，是沒有色相的。論中說：『也是爲了安立第一義諦的緣故。』這裡所說的色身，雖然包括了相好，但論典中將好單獨歸屬於色身，就像色處一樣。所以，論典中說：『色身攝得了八十種隨形好和三十二相。』就像經文中的偈頌所說：
法身畢竟體，非彼相好身； 以非相成就，非彼法身故； 不離於法身，彼二非不佛； 故重說成就，亦無二及有。
演曰：前兩句說明法身不是相好之身。中間兩句說明相好之身不是法身。中間三句說明相好之身不離法身，也可以稱為佛，這裡所說的『彼二』，一是色身，即隨形好，二是諸相具足。所說的『重說』，是指色身成就，諸相成就。最後一句說明相和好，既可以說有，也可以說沒有。探尋其解釋的含義，色身相好是報身和化身所成就的，不離法身，也可以稱為佛。如果推入真如的層面，以真如的觀點來看，二者都不是實有，如果從性相分別的角度來看，則可以有相好。所以說『亦無二』。
【English Translation】 English version And cannot obtain it. Therefore, this question is raised to encourage the severance of attachment to the physical body, thereby seeking its true meaning. Question: If that's the case, then how can one be said to have a 'perfect body'? Answer: Because the inner true nature is complete, the outer marks of excellence are naturally complete as well. Furthermore, it is also intended to enable them to observe emptiness in form. If they only see the physical body, clinging to its external appearance without integrating the truth, or if they only observe the principle of emptiness, dwelling in a state of stillness and lacking actions that benefit sentient beings, then they must remove this attachment to obtain that permanent physical body. This is like wanting to obtain the physical body, one must abide in the middle way of understanding. Question: The manifested bodies before the Bhumi (stages of Bodhisattva) have pleasing marks and qualities, why are there so few when manifested on the Bhumi? Answer: It is mainly for the beings on the Bhumi, while also accommodating those before the Bhumi, so the marks and qualities appear coarser. Another explanation is that the sutras and treatises generally speak of marks and qualities without detailed distinctions, so depending on the position one is in, the marks and qualities seen should also be different. However, according to the relevant treatises, the eighty minor marks, etc., arise from doubts based on shallow understanding, and are not actually missing.
Sutra: 'No, Bhagavan (World-Honored One), even the perception of the physical body.' Commentary: Subhuti (Venerable Subhuti) answers based on the truth.
Sutra: 'Why is that, even the complete physical body.' Commentary: This is the question and explanation. The 'not being' does not refer to negating attachment, but rather that the physical body is real, but from the perspective of truth, it has no form or appearance. The treatise says: 'It is also for the sake of establishing the first principle.' The physical body mentioned here includes the marks and qualities, but the treatise separately attributes the qualities to the physical body, just like the realm of form. Therefore, the treatise says: 'The physical body encompasses the eighty minor marks and the thirty-two major marks.' Just like the verses in the sutra say:
The Dharmakaya (Dharma Body) is ultimately the essence, It is not that body with marks and qualities; Because it is not achieved through marks, It is not the Dharmakaya; Not separate from the Dharmakaya, Those two are not not-Buddha; Therefore, it is said again to be achieved, Also neither two nor existent.
Commentary: The first two lines explain that the Dharmakaya is not a body with marks and qualities. The middle two lines explain that the body with marks and qualities is not the Dharmakaya. The middle three lines explain that the body with marks and qualities is not separate from the Dharmakaya and can also be called Buddha. The 'those two' refers to the physical body, which is the minor marks, and the complete set of marks. The 'said again' refers to the achievement of the physical body and the achievement of all the marks. The last line explains that marks and qualities can be said to exist or not exist. Exploring the meaning of the explanation, the marks and qualities of the physical body are achieved by the reward body and the manifested body, and are not separate from the Dharmakaya, and can also be called Buddha. If we delve into the realm of true suchness, from the perspective of true suchness, the two are not truly existent. If viewed from the perspective of distinguishing between nature and appearance, then there can be marks and qualities. Therefore, it is said 'neither two'.
及有法身不爾。一向無相故。論云而法身不如是說。以身非彼體故。
經。須菩提至是名諸相具足 演曰。第四相身具足。問答徴釋。一準於前。但相好別分之為二。若依彼論同是一文釋前疑故。
經。須菩提至莫作是念 演曰。第五語具足。前明相好求佛身業依身說法。次明語業。既離執以求身亦亡銓而學說故有此文。彼論斷第十七佛有所說疑 疑雲。若如來色身相好不可得見云何言如來說法。演曰。以情見佛宣說於法。謂有所說法義。離如今聞所緣相好。不離法身不可得見。若爾所說文義不離法身不可得聞。既現可聞文義之相。明有所說故有此疑。答意相好不離如俗見真無見。文義不離如俗說真無說故。約無說以斷疑情。彼約無說以破疑。此據上求而遣執。問。與前如來有所說法耶何別。答。此論前為地前約智相法身明無得說。今為地上上求佛語離執而求。彼論前約能說生疑故。論答言應化非真佛亦非說法者等。今約所說法疑故。論答言所說二差別。不離於法界等文分有五門。遮徴釋成。此初二也。初言物謂又言莫作是念。文言似重。尋義不爾。以準餘本上是問辭勿應是頗汝頗謂如來作是念我當有所說法耶。此論問意謂我真中及以俗諦有實說耶。彼論問意我有離如所說法耶。言莫作是念者。第二遮心
【現代漢語翻譯】 現代漢語譯本 以及法身也是如此嗎？並非如此。因為法身一向沒有形相的緣故。《瑜伽師地論》說，法身不能這樣說，因為（佛的應化）身不是法身的本體。
經文：『須菩提，這叫做諸相具足。』 演曰：第四是相身具足。用問答來征釋。一如前面所說。只是相和好有所區別，分為兩種。如果依照《瑜伽師地論》，這和前面是同一段文字，都是爲了解釋之前的疑惑。
經文：『須菩提，你不要這樣想。』 演曰：第五是語具足。前面說明相好，是爲了求佛的身業，依靠佛身說法。這裡說明語業。既然已經遠離執著來求佛身，也應該忘記詮釋而學習佛說，所以有這段經文。《瑜伽師地論》斷除了第十七個『佛有所說』的疑惑。疑惑是：如果如來的色身相好不可得見，怎麼說如來說法呢？演曰：用情見佛，宣說佛法，認為有所說法義，離開如今所聞的所緣相好，不離法身不可得見。如果這樣，所說的文義不離法身，不可得聞。既然現在可以聽聞文義之相，說明有所說，所以有這個疑惑。回答的意思是，相好不離如俗見真無見，文義不離如俗說真無說。用無說來斷除疑情。彼論用無說來破除疑惑，這裡根據上求佛法來遣除執著。問：這和前面『如來有所說法耶』有什麼區別？答：這部論的前面是為地上菩薩之前的人，根據智相法身說明無得說。現在是為地上菩薩，上求佛語，遠離執著而求。那部論的前面是根據能說而產生疑惑，所以論中回答說，應化身不是真佛，也不是說法者等。現在是根據所說法而產生疑惑，所以論中回答說，所說有兩種差別，不離於法界等文，分為五門：遮、徴、釋、成。這是最初的兩個部分。最初說『物謂』，又說『莫作是念』，文字上看起來重複，尋究意義並非如此。因為依照其他版本，上面是問辭，『勿』應該是『頗』，『汝頗謂如來作是念我當有所說法耶』。這部論的問意是，我在真諦中以及俗諦中，有真實的說嗎？那部論的問意是，我有離開如來所說的法嗎？說『莫作是念』，是第二遮心。
【English Translation】 English version And is it the same with the Dharmakaya (法身, Dharma body)? It is not. Because the Dharmakaya is always without form. The Yogacarabhumi-sastra (瑜伽師地論) says that the Dharmakaya cannot be described in this way, because the (Nirmanakaya (應化身, manifested body) or Sambhogakaya (報身, reward body)) is not the substance of the Dharmakaya.
Sutra: 『Subhuti (須菩提), this is called the perfection of all characteristics.』 Commentary: The fourth is the perfection of the body of characteristics. It is explained through questions and answers, just like before. Only the characteristics and marks are different, divided into two. According to the Yogacarabhumi-sastra, this is the same passage as before, both explaining the previous doubts.
Sutra: 『Subhuti, do not think like this.』 Commentary: The fifth is the perfection of speech. The previous explanation of characteristics and marks was to seek the Buddha's bodily karma, relying on the Buddha's body to expound the Dharma. This explains verbal karma. Since one has already abandoned attachment to seek the Buddha's body, one should also forget interpretation and learn the Buddha's teachings, hence this passage. The Yogacarabhumi-sastra dispels the seventeenth doubt, 『The Buddha has something to say.』 The doubt is: If the Rupakaya (色身, form body) of the Tathagata (如來, Thus Come One) with its characteristics and marks cannot be seen, how can it be said that the Tathagata expounds the Dharma? Commentary: Using emotional perception to see the Buddha, expounding the Dharma, believing that there is something to be said, apart from the perceived characteristics and marks, inseparable from the Dharmakaya, which cannot be seen. If so, the meaning of the words is inseparable from the Dharmakaya, which cannot be heard. Since the appearance of the meaning of the words can now be heard, it indicates that there is something to be said, hence this doubt. The meaning of the answer is that characteristics and marks are inseparable, like seeing the truth without seeing it in conventional terms, and the meaning of the words is inseparable, like speaking the truth without speaking it in conventional terms. Use non-speaking to dispel doubts. That treatise uses non-speaking to break doubts, while this relies on seeking the Dharma to dispel attachments. Question: What is the difference between this and the previous 『Does the Tathagata have something to say?』 Answer: The former in this treatise is for those before the Bhumi (地, stages of Bodhisattva), explaining that there is nothing to be said based on the wisdom aspect of the Dharmakaya. Now it is for Bodhisattvas on the Bhumi, seeking the Buddha's words, abandoning attachments to seek. The former in that treatise raises doubts based on the ability to speak, so the treatise answers that the manifested body is not the true Buddha, nor is it the one who expounds the Dharma, etc. Now it raises doubts based on what is being said, so the treatise answers that there are two differences in what is being said, inseparable from the Dharmadhatu (法界, Dharma Realm), etc., divided into five aspects: negation, inquiry, explanation, and completion. These are the first two parts. The first says 『object meaning,』 and also says 『do not think like this,』 which seems repetitive in wording, but the meaning is not so. Because according to other versions, the above is a question, 『Do not』 should be 『Perhaps,』 『Perhaps you think that the Tathagata thinks, I should have something to say?』 The meaning of the question in this treatise is, do I have something real to say in the truth and in conventional truth? The meaning of the question in that treatise is, do I have Dharma that is separate from what the Tathagata says? Saying 『do not think like this』 is the second negation of the mind.
以真無說俗諦假說離如無法故。遮莫作有實說念。
經。何以故 演曰。徴。
經。若人言至所說故 演曰。釋以真中絕相俗幻非實。若言如來於真有說實能所詮如言為實。即為謗佛增益謗也。依彼論頌釋此文云。
如佛法亦然 所說二差別 不離於法界 說法無自相
演曰。以佛法身體即真如法亦如是不離真如故言亦然。二謂文義以所說法離於真法界不可得自相見故。故言說法無自相。釋經文云。若言如來有離真如所說法者。亦增益謗不解我義。
經。須菩提說法者至是名說法 演曰。第五成余言說法說法依彼論釋。即由所說二差別故。重言說法無法可說者。以真中無可說法俗中無實有法。無名義定相。屬法無離真如可說法。二論隨應釋此文意。是名說法者俗有說故。此論自下明心具足。是第六文。于中分六。一念處。二正覺。三施設大利法。四攝取法身。五不住生死涅槃。六行住凈。然此經中闕念處文。餘本皆有。魏云。爾時惠命須菩提白佛言。世尊。頗有眾生於未來世。聞說是法生信心不。佛言須菩提。彼非眾生非不眾生。何以故。須菩提。眾生眾生者。如來說非眾生。是名眾生。論云。此處於諸眾中顯示如世尊念處故。彼非眾生者第一義故。非不眾生者世諦故。演曰。此
【現代漢語翻譯】 現代漢語譯本：以真諦來說，沒有所謂的俗諦，因為它是虛假的假設，遠離了如（Tathata，真如），所以不能執著于認為它是真實存在的說法。
經文：為什麼呢？ 演述：提問。
經文：如果有人說如來有所說法，因此而說… 演述：解釋說，以真諦而言，一切相皆已斷絕，俗諦如幻，並非真實。如果說如來在真諦中有所說法，並且所說之言是真實能詮釋的，那麼這就是誹謗佛陀，是增益謗。依據《彼論》的偈頌來解釋這段經文：
『如佛法亦然，所說二差別，不離於法界，說法無自相。』
演述：佛法的本體即是真如法，也同樣不離真如，所以說『亦然』。『二』指的是文和義，因為所說法離開了真法界，不可得其自相，所以說『說法無自相』。解釋經文說：如果說如來有離開真如的所說法，這也是增益謗，是不瞭解我的意思。
經文：須菩提，所謂說法者…這叫做說法。 演述：第五部分，成就其餘的說法。所謂說法，依據《彼論》的解釋，就是由於所說的文和義的差別。重言說法，是因為沒有法可說。因為在真諦中無可說法，在俗諦中沒有真實存在的法，沒有名義的固定相。屬於法，沒有離開真如可以說的法。二論隨應地解釋這段經文的意思。『是名說法』，是因為俗諦中有說法。此論從下面開始闡明心具足。這是第六部分，分為六個方面：一、念處（Smrtyupasthana）；二、正覺（Sambodhi）；三、施設大利法；四、攝取法身（Dharmakaya）；五、不住生死涅槃；六、行住清凈。然而此經中缺少念處文，其餘版本都有。魏譯本說：『爾時，慧命須菩提問佛說：世尊，頗有眾生於未來世，聞說是法生信心不？』佛言：『須菩提，彼非眾生非不眾生。何以故？須菩提，眾生眾生者，如來說非眾生，是名眾生。』論中說：『此處於諸眾中顯示如世尊念處故。』『彼非眾生』，是第一義諦的緣故。『非不眾生』，是世俗諦的緣故。 演述：這裡…
【English Translation】 English version: In terms of the true reality (Paramartha-satya), there is no such thing as conventional reality (Samvriti-satya), because it is a false assumption, far from Suchness (Tathata), so one should not cling to the idea that it is a real statement.
Sutra: Why is that? Commentary: A question.
Sutra: If someone says that the Tathagata has something to say, therefore says... Commentary: Explains that, in terms of the true reality, all characteristics have been cut off, and conventional reality is like an illusion, not real. If it is said that the Tathagata has something to say in the true reality, and what is said is truly able to explain it, then this is slandering the Buddha, an increase in slander. According to the verses of 'That Treatise' to explain this passage:
'Like the Buddha-dharma is also thus, the two differences of what is said, not apart from the Dharma-realm (Dharmadhatu), the Dharma-teaching has no self-nature.'
Commentary: The body of the Buddha-dharma is Suchness-dharma, and it is also thus not apart from Suchness, so it is said 'also thus'. 'Two' refers to text and meaning, because what is taught is apart from the true Dharma-realm, and its self-nature cannot be obtained, so it is said 'Dharma-teaching has no self-nature'. Explaining the Sutra says: If it is said that the Tathagata has something to say that is apart from Suchness, this is also an increase in slander, not understanding my meaning.
Sutra: Subhuti, what is called Dharma-teaching... this is called Dharma-teaching. Commentary: The fifth part, accomplishing the remaining Dharma-teaching. What is called Dharma-teaching, according to the explanation of 'That Treatise', is due to the difference between the text and meaning of what is said. Repeatedly saying Dharma-teaching is because there is no Dharma to be taught. Because in the true reality there is nothing to be taught, and in the conventional reality there is no real Dharma, there is no fixed characteristic of name and meaning. Belonging to Dharma, there is no Dharma that can be taught apart from Suchness. The two treatises explain the meaning of this passage accordingly. 'This is called Dharma-teaching' because there is Dharma-teaching in the conventional reality. This treatise begins to clarify the completeness of the mind from below. This is the sixth part, divided into six aspects: 1. Mindfulness (Smrtyupasthana); 2. Perfect Enlightenment (Sambodhi); 3. Establishing great beneficial Dharma; 4. Gathering the Dharma-body (Dharmakaya); 5. Not dwelling in Samsara and Nirvana; 6. Pure conduct in walking and dwelling. However, this Sutra lacks the text on mindfulness, which is present in other versions. The Wei translation says: 'At that time, the wise Subhuti asked the Buddha: World Honored One, are there any sentient beings in the future who, upon hearing this Dharma, will generate faith?' The Buddha said: 'Subhuti, they are neither sentient beings nor non-sentient beings. Why is that? Subhuti, what is called sentient beings, the Tathagata says are not sentient beings, this is called sentient beings.' The treatise says: 'Here, among all beings, it shows the mindfulness of the World Honored One.' 'They are not sentient beings' is because of the ultimate truth (Paramartha-satya). 'Not non-sentient beings' is because of the conventional truth (Samvriti-satya). Commentary: Here...
顯眾生是佛慈悲所念之處故名念處。如三念住對眾生立。然佛常緣眾生之時。依真俗理非有非無。勸諸菩薩亦如是觀故。言如世尊念處故。問。此中善現問有眾生生信心不。應答有無。何故乃言非眾生等。乍似問答兩不相應。答。準離懈怠中雲。后五百歲眾生信持是人則為第一希有。此中亦應作如是說。由前既說。今但約真諦顯非眾生。是不共義。又約俗諦非不眾生。是相應義。是故論云。此文如前說。指離懈怠中說也。即顯能如佛念處者。信受此經。問。欲得言說中亦明後世能信離懈怠中亦明今此又說。三文何別。答。初顯言說法身。次勸發精進。此令求佛地故有差別。若依彼論。初破能說八不說法疑。次挍量經勝堅實解深義。后破無能信人疑。是故此文為斷第十八何人能信疑。論云。復有疑。若言諸佛說者。是無所說法不離於法身。亦是其無有何等人。能信如是甚深法界。偈曰。
所說說者深 非無能信者 非眾生眾生 非聖非不聖
準彼論釋意能說所說雖復甚深。亦有大乘種性能信。非眾生者非凡夫體故。非不眾生者以有聖性故。彼人非凡夫眾生。非不是聖體眾生。此論約真俗諦釋。彼論據凡聖釋。地上菩薩能深信故所望義別。或約無性有性以解言。聖體者通種及現。或約發心未發釋。以發心
【現代漢語翻譯】 現代漢語譯本：顯現眾生是佛陀慈悲所念之處，所以叫做念處。例如三念住是針對眾生而設立的。然而，佛陀常常觀照眾生的時候，依據真諦和俗諦的道理，既非有也非無。勸導各位菩薩也像這樣觀察，所以說『如世尊念處』。問：這裡善現（Subhuti）問是否有眾生生起信心，應該回答有或者沒有。為什麼卻說『非眾生等』，乍一看好像問答兩者不相應。答：依照《離懈怠經》中所說，后五百歲的眾生能夠信受奉持此經的人，就是第一希有之人。這裡也應該這樣說。因為前面已經說過，現在只是依據真諦來顯示『非眾生』，這是不共之義；又依據俗諦來說，並非不是眾生，這是相應的意義。所以論中說，這段文字如同前面所說，指的是《離懈怠經》中所說的。這就能顯現能夠像佛陀一樣念處的人，就能信受此經。問：在《欲得言說》中也說明後世能夠信受，在《離懈怠經》中也說明現在，這裡又說，這三段文字有什麼區別？答：最初是顯現言說法身，其次是勸發精進，這裡是令眾生求佛地，所以有差別。如果依照那部論，最初是破除能說八不說法的疑惑，其次是校量經的殊勝和堅實解深義，最後是破除沒有能信之人的疑惑。所以這段文字是爲了斷除第十八種『何人能夠信受』的疑惑。論中說：『又有人懷疑，如果說是諸佛所說，是無所說法不離於法身，也是其沒有何等人，能夠信受如此甚深的法界。』偈頌說： 『所說說者深，非無能信者，非眾生眾生，非聖非不聖。』 依照那部論的解釋，意思是能說和所說雖然非常深奧，也有大乘種性的人能夠信受。『非眾生』，是因為不是凡夫之體；『非不眾生』，是因為有聖性。那個人不是凡夫眾生，也不是不是聖體的眾生。這部論是依據真俗二諦來解釋，那部論是依據凡聖來解釋。地上菩薩能夠深信，所以所期望的意義不同。或者可以依據無性和有性來解釋。『聖體』，包括種性和現行。或者可以依據發心和未發心來解釋，因為發心。
【English Translation】 English version: Manifesting sentient beings is where the Buddha's compassion dwells, hence it's called the 'place of mindfulness' (念處, niànchù). For example, the three foundations of mindfulness (三念住, sān niànzhù) are established for sentient beings. However, when the Buddha constantly contemplates sentient beings, he relies on the principles of ultimate truth (真諦, zhēndì) and conventional truth (俗諦, súdì), being neither existent nor non-existent. He encourages all Bodhisattvas to observe in the same way, hence the saying 'like the place of mindfulness of the World Honored One'. Question: Here, Subhuti (善現) asks whether there are sentient beings who generate faith. The answer should be either yes or no. Why then is it said 'not sentient beings, etc.'? At first glance, the question and answer seem inconsistent. Answer: According to the Leaving Laziness Sutra, those sentient beings in the latter five hundred years who can believe in and uphold this sutra are the rarest of all. The same should be said here. Because it has already been stated before, now it is only based on the ultimate truth to reveal 'not sentient beings', which is the uncommon meaning. And based on the conventional truth, it is not that they are not sentient beings, which is the corresponding meaning. Therefore, the treatise says that this passage is as stated before, referring to what is said in the Leaving Laziness Sutra. This reveals that those who can be mindful like the Buddha can believe in and accept this sutra. Question: In Desiring to Speak, it is also stated that future generations can believe, and in the Leaving Laziness Sutra, it is also stated now, so what is the difference between these three passages? Answer: Initially, it reveals the Dharma body (法身, fǎshēn) of speech; secondly, it encourages diligence; here, it causes sentient beings to seek the Buddha-ground, so there is a difference. If according to that treatise, initially it refutes the doubt of being able to speak but not speaking eight times; secondly, it compares the sutra's superiority and the solid understanding of profound meaning; finally, it refutes the doubt of there being no one who can believe. Therefore, this passage is to cut off the eighteenth doubt of 'who can believe'. The treatise says: 'Again, there is doubt. If it is said that the Buddhas speak, it is speaking of nothing that is not apart from the Dharma body, and also there is no one who can believe in such a profound Dharma realm.' The verse says: 'What is spoken is profound, yet there are those who can believe; not sentient beings, sentient beings; not holy, not unholy.' According to the interpretation of that treatise, it means that although what is spoken and what is said are very profound, there are also those with the seed of Mahayana (大乘, Dàchéng) who can believe. 'Not sentient beings' is because it is not the body of ordinary beings; 'not not sentient beings' is because they have the nature of a sage. That person is not an ordinary sentient being, nor is he not a sentient being with the body of a sage. This treatise explains according to the two truths, ultimate and conventional; that treatise explains according to ordinary and holy. Bodhisattvas on the ground can deeply believe, so the meaning of what is hoped for is different. Or it can be explained according to no-nature and nature. 'The body of a sage' includes both seed and manifestation. Or it can be explained according to those who have generated the aspiration and those who have not, because of generating the aspiration.
者六名聖胎故。
經。須菩提白佛至為無所得耶 演曰。心具足中。第二正覺所以。明此者前明念處大悲為首。慜念眾生故。先明之慾得利生。次自成覺故次明。又此前凈土智見身相語等。若非行圓果滿必無斯德故。具明佛行無上行證無上果。言正覺者。法報二佛覺性覺相俱名正覺。能所覺故。欲令菩薩覺佛具因及圓于果故有此文。彼論為斷第十九有得證果疑。論云。若如來不得一法得阿耨菩提者。云何離於上上證。轉轉得阿耨菩提。演曰。以前聞說然燈佛等無得證等。遂執于中無有一法可得。而無一行可修。能得菩提。復見如來三劫修因不無得行。遂復疑雲。云何如來離無所得無所行。此上上證取于菩提。而依展轉行有得行而證正覺。下顯真理。雖無一法可得可修。若離俗諦修行方便無由獲證明佛方便修行具足證彼平等無上之法。方便善法即報身圓滿。無上平等即法身圓滿。即是顯佛行圓果滿意。令知已隨佛求證。與此無違。準餘本經下文分四。一佛問善現頗有少法得菩提不。二善現答無少法得。三如來印言如是如是。四佛廣釋。此經乃二。初善現問。后如是。如是下如來印答。梵本不同廣略故爾。此初問也。依此論問所成正覺為有所得為無所得。彼論意問三劫修因所得菩提豈無得耶。準論此中雙問因果。謂
【現代漢語翻譯】 者六名聖胎故。
經。須菩提（Subhuti，佛陀的弟子）白佛至為無所得耶 演曰。心具足中。第二正覺所以。明此者前明念處大悲為首。慜念眾生故。先明之慾得利生。次自成覺故次明。又此前凈土智見身相語等。若非行圓果滿必無斯德故。具明佛行無上行證無上果。言正覺者。法報二佛覺性覺相俱名正覺。能所覺故。欲令菩薩（Bodhisattva）覺佛具因及圓于果故有此文。彼論為斷第十九有得證果疑。論云。若如來（Tathagata，佛陀的稱號）不得一法得阿耨多羅三藐三菩提（Anuttara-samyak-sambodhi，無上正等正覺）者。云何離於上上證。轉轉得阿耨多羅三藐三菩提。演曰。以前聞說然燈佛（Dipankara Buddha）等無得證等。遂執于中無有一法可得。而無一行可修。能得菩提（Bodhi，覺悟）。復見如來三劫修因不無得行。遂復疑雲。云何如來離無所得無所行。此上上證取于菩提。而依展轉行有得行而證正覺。下顯真理。雖無一法可得可修。若離俗諦修行方便無由獲證明佛方便修行具足證彼平等無上之法。方便善法即報身圓滿。無上平等即法身圓滿。即是顯佛行圓果滿意。令知已隨佛求證。與此無違。準餘本經下文分四。一佛問善現（Subhuti的另一個名字）頗有少法得菩提不。二善現答無少法得。三如來印言如是如是。四佛廣釋。此經乃二。初善現問。后如是。如是下如來印答。梵本不同廣略故爾。此初問也。依此論問所成正覺為有所得為無所得。彼論意問三劫修因所得菩提豈無得耶。準論此中雙問因果。謂
【English Translation】 These six are called holy embryos.
Sutra: Subhuti (Subhuti, a disciple of the Buddha) asked the Buddha whether it ultimately means 'nothing is attained'? Commentary: In the completeness of the mind, the second perfect enlightenment is the reason. To clarify this, the previous explanation of the mindfulness of the four foundations, with great compassion as the head, is out of compassion for sentient beings. Therefore, it is first clarified to benefit beings, and then to achieve enlightenment oneself. Furthermore, the previous pure land, wisdom, views, physical characteristics, speech, etc., would not have such virtues if the practice were not complete and the fruit were not full. Therefore, it fully explains the Buddha's practice, the supreme practice, and the attainment of the supreme fruit. 'Perfect enlightenment' refers to both the Dharma body Buddha and the Reward body Buddha, whose enlightened nature and enlightened form are both called perfect enlightenment, because they are capable of perceiving and being perceived. This passage is intended to enable Bodhisattvas (Bodhisattva) to realize that the Buddha has complete causes and perfect fruits. That treatise aims to resolve the nineteenth doubt about attaining the fruit. The treatise says: 'If the Tathagata (Tathagata, an epithet of the Buddha) does not attain a single Dharma to attain Anuttara-samyak-sambodhi (Anuttara-samyak-sambodhi, unsurpassed perfect enlightenment), how can he attain Anuttara-samyak-sambodhi by transcending the highest attainment?' Commentary: Because it was previously heard that Dipankara Buddha (Dipankara Buddha) and others did not attain anything, it was then insisted that there is not a single Dharma that can be attained, and there is not a single practice that can be cultivated to attain Bodhi (Bodhi, enlightenment). Seeing again that the Tathagata cultivated causes for three kalpas and did not lack attainment practices, it was then doubted: 'How can the Tathagata attain Bodhi by transcending non-attainment and non-practice? This supreme attainment takes Bodhi, and relies on gradual practice to attain perfect enlightenment through attainment practices.' The following reveals the true principle: although not a single Dharma can be attained or cultivated, if one departs from conventional truth and skillful means of practice, there is no way to obtain proof that the Buddha's skillful means of practice are complete and prove that equal and unsurpassed Dharma. Skillful means and virtuous Dharma are the perfection of the Reward body, and unsurpassed equality is the perfection of the Dharma body. This reveals that the Buddha's practice is complete and the fruit is satisfactory, so that one knows to follow the Buddha to seek proof, which is not contrary to this. According to other versions of the sutra, the following is divided into four parts: first, the Buddha asks Subhuti (another name for Subhuti) whether there is any Dharma that can attain Bodhi; second, Subhuti answers that there is no Dharma that can be attained; third, the Tathagata confirms, 'Thus, thus'; fourth, the Buddha explains in detail. This sutra is in two parts: first, Subhuti asks; then, 'Thus, thus,' the Tathagata confirms the answer. The Sanskrit versions differ in length. This is the first question. According to this treatise, the perfect enlightenment attained by the question is either something attained or nothing attained. The treatise intends to ask whether the Bodhi attained by cultivating causes for three kalpas is not attained. According to the treatise, this question asks about both cause and effect, saying:
佛行因得果之時。為以有所得因得有所得果。為以無所得因得無所得果。下答因果俱無有得。論云。于中無有法者。為離有見過。已顯示菩提及菩提道故。論先總標菩提及菩提道。又下釋文果配菩提因配于道。故知此中總問因果。
經。如是如是至乃至無有少法可得 演曰。下答有二。初明菩提果無所得。二修一切善法。下明菩提道因無所得。初中復二。初法身果。后複次下明報身果。論云。彼復顯示菩提有二種因緣。謂阿耨多羅語故。三藐三佛陀語故。于中經言微塵許法不可得不可有者。此為阿耨多羅語故。此顯示菩提自相故。菩提解脫相故。演曰。二種因緣如次法報二菩提也。所言語者明法離言非上無上。約于別義言假安立故名為語。如言增語。此中二佛俱名菩提。菩提斷俱名菩提。說智及智處。皆名為般若。雖此二語通法報身。然隨相增各配其此文即是阿耨多羅語法身菩提。于中復三。初印次釋無得后結名。此初二也。乘前問詞無所得耶。故今印言如是如是。實無所得。釋文可知。此論云。彼中無微塵許法有體。是故亦無可得亦無所有。
經。是名阿耨至菩提 演曰。后結也。由證真理無所得法障盡理圓名得菩提。若有所得不名證得。若依彼論如來答中大分有二。初標法身無得無證。后一切善法下
【現代漢語翻譯】 現代漢語譯本：
當佛陀修行因地並獲得果報時，是以有所得的因獲得有所得的果，還是以無所得的因獲得無所得的果？下面的回答是因和果都無所得。論中說：『其中沒有法』，是爲了遠離有見的過失，已經顯示了菩提（bodhi，覺悟）和菩提道（bodhimārga，通往覺悟的道路）。論中先總標菩提和菩提道，又在下面的解釋中將果對應菩提，因對應于道。因此可知，這裡總的提問是關於因和果的。 經：『如是如是，乃至沒有絲毫法可以獲得。』演曰：下面的回答分為兩部分。首先闡明菩提果是無所得的，其次是修一切善法。下面闡明菩提道因是無所得的。初中又分為兩部分。首先是法身果（dharmakāya，佛的法性之身），然後『複次』下面闡明報身果（saṃbhogakāya，佛的報應身）。論中說：『這又顯示了菩提有兩種因緣，即阿耨多羅（anuttara，無上）語故，三藐三佛陀（samyaksaṃbuddha，正等覺）語故。』其中經文說微塵許的法不可得不可有，這是阿耨多羅語故，這顯示了菩提的自相故，菩提的解脫相故。演曰：兩種因緣依次對應法身和報身兩種菩提。所說的『語』，闡明法離於言語，並非至上無上，而是就不同的意義而言，假安立所以稱為『語』，如言增語。這裡兩個佛都名為菩提，菩提斷也名為菩提，說智和智處，都名為般若（prajñā，智慧）。雖然這兩個語通法報身，然而隨著相的增益，各自對應其文，即是阿耨多羅語法身菩提。其中又分為三部分。首先是印證，其次是解釋無得，最後是總結名稱。這是最初的兩個部分。承接前面的問詞『無所得耶』，所以現在印證說『如是如是』，確實是無所得。解釋的文字可以理解。此論說：『其中沒有微塵許的法有實體，因此也沒有可得也沒有所有。』 經：『是名阿耨多羅三藐三菩提（anuttarā-samyak-saṃbodhi，無上正等正覺）。』演曰：這是最後的總結。由於證悟真理，無所得法，障礙消除，真理圓滿，名為獲得菩提。如果有所得，就不能稱為證得。如果依據彼論，如來的回答中大體分為兩部分。首先標明法身無得無證，然後是一切善法下。
【English Translation】 English version:
When the Buddha practices the cause and attains the result, is it with the cause of something obtained that one obtains the result of something obtained, or is it with the cause of nothing obtained that one obtains the result of nothing obtained? The following answer is that both cause and result are unobtainable. The treatise says: 'There is no dharma (法，phenomena) in it,' in order to be free from the fault of having views, and has already revealed Bodhi (菩提，awakening) and the Bodhi-path (菩提道，path to awakening). The treatise first generally indicates Bodhi and the Bodhi-path, and then in the following explanation, the result corresponds to Bodhi, and the cause corresponds to the path. Therefore, it can be known that the general question here is about cause and result. Sutra: 'Thus, thus, to the point that there is not even the slightest dharma that can be obtained.' Commentary: The following answer is divided into two parts. First, it clarifies that the Bodhi-result is unobtainable, and second, it is to cultivate all good dharmas. The following clarifies that the Bodhi-path cause is unobtainable. The first part is further divided into two parts. First is the Dharmakaya-result (法身，Dharma body of the Buddha), and then 'furthermore' below clarifies the Sambhogakaya-result (報身，Reward body of the Buddha). The treatise says: 'This further shows that Bodhi has two kinds of causes and conditions, namely, because of the term Anuttara (阿耨多羅， unsurpassed), and because of the term Samyak-sambuddha (三藐三佛陀，perfectly enlightened one).' Among them, the sutra says that even a particle-like dharma is unobtainable and non-existent, this is because of the term Anuttara, which shows the self-nature of Bodhi, and the liberation aspect of Bodhi. Commentary: The two kinds of causes and conditions correspond to the Dharmakaya and Sambhogakaya two kinds of Bodhi in order. The so-called 'term' clarifies that the dharma is apart from language, not supreme or unsurpassed, but is established provisionally in terms of different meanings, so it is called 'term,' such as the term augmentation. Here, both Buddhas are named Bodhi, and the cessation of Bodhi is also named Bodhi, saying that wisdom and the place of wisdom are all named Prajna (般若，wisdom). Although these two terms are common to the Dharmakaya and Sambhogakaya, however, with the increase of aspects, each corresponds to its text, which is the Anuttara term Dharmakaya Bodhi. Among them, it is further divided into three parts. First is the confirmation, second is the explanation of unobtainability, and finally is the conclusion of the name. These are the first two parts. Continuing the previous question 'is it unobtainable?', so now it is confirmed by saying 'Thus, thus,' it is indeed unobtainable. The explanatory text can be understood. This treatise says: 'There is not even a particle-like dharma that has substance in it, therefore there is nothing obtainable and nothing possessed.' Sutra: 'This is named Anuttara-samyak-sambodhi (阿耨多羅三藐三菩提， unsurpassed perfect enlightenment).' Commentary: This is the final conclusion. Because of realizing the truth, the unobtainable dharma, the obstacles are eliminated, and the truth is perfected, it is named obtaining Bodhi. If there is something obtained, it cannot be called realization. If according to that treatise, the Buddha's answer is generally divided into two parts. First, it indicates that the Dharmakaya is without obtaining and without realization, and then all good dharmas below.
明報身方便修生。初中復二。初明法身無得以釋前疑。后釋成前無上之義。此等初也。
經。複次須菩提至三菩提 演曰。下報身果。論云爲三藐三佛陀語故顯示菩提者人平等相者。謂假者即報佛也。于中有二。初明菩提平等。后釋平等所由。此初也。論云。于中平等者。以菩提法故得知是佛。此中經言無有高下者。顯示一切諸佛第一義中。壽命等無高下故。演曰。若凡若聖。無我真如平等之理雖皆齊有。由佛能證此平等理故名為佛故名以菩提法故得知是佛。又由同證平等理故諸佛平等。是故說為人平等相。又由諸佛證此平等無高下理第一義故。得壽命等亦無高下。雖他受化身壽等不齊。據自受用真佛而說故無高下。或攝化歸真他受變化亦無高下。彼論頌云。
彼處無少法 知菩提無上 法界不增減 凈平等自相 有無上方便 及離於漏法 是故非凈法 即是清凈法
演曰。初頌法身非證而證。后頌報身修生。初中上之二句。解前經標無所得文。下二句釋成前無上之義。于中法界不增減句正釋此文。彼長行雲。不增減者。是法平等。是故名無上。以更無上上故。此以法界中功德起非增煩惱滅非減。更無有法能過此故名為無上。若有增減即非無上。彼論攝相歸性故屬法身。此論性相別論
【現代漢語翻譯】 現代漢語譯本： 明瞭報身，方便修持以證得果位。分為初中復二部分。首先闡明法身的不可得，以解釋之前的疑惑；然後解釋成就之前的無上之義。這些是開始的部分。
經文：『複次，須菩提，乃至三菩提。』 演述：以下闡述報身之果。論中說，因為是『三藐三菩提』（Samyak-sambuddha，正等覺）的語言，所以顯示菩提之人具有平等之相。所謂的『假者』，就是報佛（Sambhogakaya，報身佛）。其中分為兩部分：首先闡明菩提的平等性；然後解釋平等性的由來。這是第一部分。論中說：『其中的平等，是因為菩提之法才能得知是佛。』這裡經文所說的『無有高下』，顯示一切諸佛在第一義諦中，壽命等沒有高下。演述：無論是凡夫還是聖人，無我真如的平等之理雖然都具備，但因為佛能夠證悟這種平等之理，所以才被稱為佛，所以說『以菩提法故得知是佛』。又因為共同證悟平等之理，所以諸佛平等，因此說為『人平等相』。又因為諸佛證悟這種平等無高下之理的第一義諦，所以得到的壽命等也沒有高下。雖然其他受化身（Nirmanakaya，化身佛）的壽命等不一致，但這是根據自受用真佛而說的，所以沒有高下。或者將化身攝歸真如，其他受化身也沒有高下。那部論的偈頌說：
『彼處無少法，知菩提無上； 法界不增減，凈平等自相； 有無上方便，及離於漏法； 是故非凈法，即是清凈法。』
演述：第一首偈頌說的是法身並非通過證悟而證悟。第二首偈頌說的是報身通過修持而證得果位。第一首偈頌中上面的兩句，解釋了前面經文中標示的『無所得』之文。下面的兩句解釋成就之前的無上之義。其中『法界不增減』一句正是解釋此文。那部長行文說：『不增減，是法平等，所以名為無上。因為沒有比這更高的了。』這是說法界中的功德生起並非增加，煩惱滅除並非減少，沒有其他法能夠超過這個，所以稱為無上。如果有增減，就不是無上了。』那部論將相攝歸於性，所以屬於法身。這部論將性和相分別論述。
【English Translation】 English version: Clearly explaining the Sambhogakaya (報身, reward body), conveniently cultivating to attain the fruit. Divided into initial, middle, and repeated two parts. First, clarifying the unobtainability of the Dharmakaya (法身, dharma body) to resolve previous doubts; then explaining the meaning of achieving the unsurpassed before. These are the beginning parts.
Sutra: 'Furthermore, Subhuti, up to Samyak-sambuddha (三藐三菩提, perfect enlightenment).' Commentary: Below explains the fruit of the Sambhogakaya. The treatise says that because it is the language of 'Samyak-sambuddha,' it shows that those who have Bodhi (菩提, enlightenment) have equal characteristics. The so-called 'provisional' is the Sambhogakaya Buddha. Among them, there are two parts: first, clarifying the equality of Bodhi; then explaining the origin of equality. This is the first part. The treatise says: 'The equality in it is because the Dharma (法, law) of Bodhi can know that it is a Buddha.' Here, the Sutra says 'without high or low,' showing that in the first principle of all Buddhas, life spans, etc., have no high or low. Commentary: Whether ordinary people or sages, the equal principle of non-self and true suchness is possessed by all, but because the Buddha can realize this equal principle, he is called a Buddha, so it is said that 'because of the Dharma of Bodhi, it can be known that it is a Buddha.' Also, because of the common realization of the equal principle, all Buddhas are equal, so it is said to be 'equal characteristics of people.' Also, because all Buddhas realize this first principle of equality without high or low, the life spans, etc., obtained also have no high or low. Although the life spans, etc., of other Nirmanakaya (化身, emanation body) are not the same, it is said according to the true Buddha of self-enjoyment, so there is no high or low. Or, if the emanation bodies are brought back to true suchness, there is also no high or low. That treatise's verse says:
'In that place, there is no little Dharma, Knowing that Bodhi is unsurpassed; The Dharmadhatu (法界, dharma realm) does not increase or decrease, Pure, equal, and self-nature; There is unsurpassed convenience, And freedom from defiled Dharmas; Therefore, it is not pure Dharma, But is pure Dharma.'
Commentary: The first verse says that the Dharmakaya is not realized through realization. The second verse says that the Sambhogakaya is cultivated to attain the fruit. The upper two sentences in the first verse explain the text of 'no attainment' marked in the previous Sutra. The lower two sentences explain the meaning of achieving the unsurpassed before. Among them, the sentence 'The Dharmadhatu does not increase or decrease' is precisely explaining this text. That long text says: 'Not increasing or decreasing is the equality of Dharma, so it is called unsurpassed. Because there is nothing higher than this.' This is to say that the arising of merits in the Dharmadhatu is not an increase, and the extinction of afflictions is not a decrease. There is no other Dharma that can surpass this, so it is called unsurpassed. If there is an increase or decrease, it is not unsurpassed.' That treatise brings the characteristics back to the nature, so it belongs to the Dharmakaya. This treatise discusses the nature and characteristics separately.
故屬報身。亦不相違。
經。以無我無人無眾生無壽者 演曰。此釋平等所由。準余經本及論。應言以無我人眾生壽者得平等阿耨多羅三藐三菩提。此文中略此。論云顯示菩提于生死法中平等相故。演曰。所證真如具恒沙德。在纏名如來藏。出纏名法身。位別名殊。體無差異。我人眾生是生死法無彼我等。是名法身。故云于生死法中平等相也。彼頌凈平等自相。釋意由法無我清凈平等真實自體無有勝者。故名無上。
經。修一切善法至三菩提 演曰。下第二明菩提道。即因無所得。若依彼論下明報身方便修生。釋曰有二。初直明後料簡。此初也。一切善法六度萬行。若望法身能爲了因。若望報身即為生因故。此論云顯示菩提道也。此明具修一切善法方證菩提。非如二乘少修善法故。貞觀能斷云一切善法無不現證一切善法無不妙覺。彼論唯約報身明方便修生。彼云又彼法有無上方便以一切善根滿。是故說阿耨菩提者。余菩提善法不滿足。更有上方便。演曰。明佛報身。因無上故果成無上。又釋彼論唯明法身。頌初二句總標無上。下釋無上別有之義。一不增減。二凈平等。三無上因。由此六句三種義故得成無上。此釋為優。以彼長行初總釋云。示現非證法名為得阿耨菩提。后釋因中猶解無上。亦無分明。釋報
【現代漢語翻譯】 現代漢語譯本： 因此，這屬於報身（Sambhogakāya，享受報酬之身），兩者並不矛盾。
經文：以無我、無人、無眾生、無壽者——演曰：這是解釋平等的原因。參照其他經本和論著，應為『以無我、人、眾生、壽者得平等阿耨多羅三藐三菩提（Anuttarā-samyak-saṃbodhi，無上正等正覺）』。此文中省略了這些。論中說，顯示菩提（Bodhi，覺悟）在生死法中是平等的相。演曰：所證悟的真如（Tathātā，如實）具有恒河沙數般的功德。在纏縛時名為如來藏（Tathāgatagarbha，如來藏），脫離纏縛時名為法身（Dharmakāya，法性之身）。位階不同，名稱各異，但本體沒有差異。我、人、眾生是生死之法，沒有彼此之分，這就是法身。所以說在生死法中是平等的相。那首偈頌讚嘆清凈平等自性。解釋說，因為法無我，清凈平等，真實自體沒有勝過它的，所以名為無上。
經文：修一切善法至三菩提（saṃbodhi，正覺）——演曰：下面第二部分說明菩提道，也就是因無所得。如果依據那部論，下面說明報身方便修生。解釋說，有兩種，先直接說明，後加以簡別。這是第一種。一切善法，包括六度萬行。如果從法身來看，能作爲了因；如果從報身來看，就作為生因。所以這部論說，顯示菩提道。這說明必須修一切善法才能證得菩提，不像二乘（Śrāvaka-yāna and Pratyekabuddha-yāna，聲聞乘和緣覺乘）只修少許善法。貞觀能斷說，一切善法無不現證，一切善法無不妙覺。那部論只就報身說明方便修生。那部論說，而且那法有無上方便，以一切善根圓滿。所以說阿耨菩提的人，其餘菩提的善法不圓滿，還有更上的方便。演曰：說明佛的報身，因為因是無上的，所以果也成就無上。又解釋那部論只說明法身。偈頌的前兩句總標無上，下面解釋無上別有的意義：一是不增不減，二是清凈平等，三是無上因。因為這六句有三種意義，所以能成就無上。這種解釋更好。因為那部長行一開始總解釋說，示現非證法名為得阿耨菩提。後來解釋因中仍然解釋無上，也沒有分明。解釋報身。
【English Translation】 English version: Therefore, it belongs to the Sambhogakāya (reward body), and there is no contradiction between the two.
Sutra: 'With no self, no person, no sentient being, no life span'—Yan said: This explains the reason for equality. According to other sutra versions and treatises, it should be 'With no self, person, sentient being, or life span, one attains equal Anuttarā-samyak-saṃbodhi (unsurpassed, complete, perfect enlightenment).' This passage omits these. The treatise says, 'It shows that Bodhi (enlightenment) is equal in the Dharma of birth and death.' Yan said: The Suchness (Tathātā, thusness) that is realized possesses virtues like the sands of the Ganges. When entangled, it is called the Tathāgatagarbha (womb of the Thus Come One); when free from entanglement, it is called the Dharmakāya (Dharma body). Different positions have different names, but the essence is the same. Self, person, and sentient being are the Dharma of birth and death, without distinction between them. This is the Dharmakāya. Therefore, it is said to be equal in the Dharma of birth and death. That verse praises the pure, equal, self-nature. It explains that because the Dharma is without self, pure and equal, and the true self has no superior, it is called unsurpassed.
Sutra: 'Cultivate all good Dharmas to Samyaksaṃbodhi (perfect enlightenment)'—Yan said: The second part below explains the Bodhi path, which is the cause of non-attainment. If based on that treatise, the following explains the expedient cultivation for the Sambhogakāya. The explanation says that there are two types: first, a direct explanation, and then a distinction. This is the first type. All good Dharmas include the six perfections and myriad practices. If viewed from the Dharmakāya, they can serve as the determining cause; if viewed from the Sambhogakāya, they serve as the generating cause. Therefore, this treatise says that it shows the Bodhi path. This explains that one must cultivate all good Dharmas to attain Bodhi, unlike the Two Vehicles (Śrāvaka-yāna and Pratyekabuddha-yāna, Hearer Vehicle and Solitary Realizer Vehicle), which only cultivate a few good Dharmas. Zhenguan Nengduan says, 'All good Dharmas are immediately realized, and all good Dharmas are wonderfully awakened.' That treatise only explains the expedient cultivation for the Sambhogakāya. That treatise says, 'Moreover, that Dharma has unsurpassed expedients, with all good roots fulfilled. Therefore, those who speak of Anuttara Bodhi have incomplete good Dharmas for other Bodhis, and there are even higher expedients.' Yan said: It explains the Sambhogakāya of the Buddha. Because the cause is unsurpassed, the result also becomes unsurpassed. It also explains that the treatise only explains the Dharmakāya. The first two lines of the verse generally indicate unsurpassedness, and the following explains the meaning of unsurpassedness as distinct: first, no increase or decrease; second, pure equality; and third, unsurpassed cause. Because these six lines have three meanings, they can achieve unsurpassedness. This explanation is better because that long passage initially explains generally, 'Manifesting non-realization of Dharma is called attaining Anuttara Bodhi.' Later, it explains unsurpassedness in the cause, but it is not clear. Explaining the Sambhogakāya.
身文故。唯法身於理為勝。若依此判如來答中大分有二。初總標無上。即當此論法身菩提三段文是。二別釋無上。后諸文是。于中有三。一不增減。二凈自相。三無上因。前二當體無上。后一由因無上果亦無上。隨應配頌文易可知。
經。須菩提所言善法至是名善法 演曰。下料簡。貞觀雙牒單非雙結。魏本雙牒單非單結。此三俱單。其雙牒者。福智二因事理二智。隨應為二。言非善法者。真勝義中無實法故。是名善法者。于方便道寄言安立令證得故。故論雲安立第一義故。彼論下三句釋此經文。長行雲。偈言及離於漏法。是故彼漏非是凈法故。此即是清凈法故。依彼釋經善法。善法者雙牒有漏無漏善法。即非善法者非有漏善。彼有漏法望無上果不能為因故此不取。雖為遠緣非親證故。是名善法者結無結善故。論云以決定無漏善法故。貞觀雙結者。以福智理事二門別故。此約同善故合為一。
經。須菩提若三千至持用佈施 演曰。下第三施設大利法。前已學佛證得正覺法報二身。次當學佛以所得法施與群生設大福利。前語具足。但令于語不執定能詮著於法未教被生。今此令自得勝覺。已廣為餘生施大法利故有此文。彼論為斷第二十無記非因疑。疑雲。若一切善法滿足得阿耨菩提者。則所說法不能得大菩提
【現代漢語翻譯】 身文的緣故。只有法身在真理上才是最殊勝的。如果按照這種方式來判斷，如來的回答大致可以分為兩部分。首先是總標無上，對應於此論中的法身、菩提三段文字。其次是分別解釋無上，對應於後面的文字。其中有三點：一是不增不減，二是清凈自相，三是無上因。前兩者是本體上的無上，後者是因為因無上，所以果也無上。根據情況對應頌文，很容易理解。
經文：須菩提所說的善法，乃至是名善法。演曰：下面進行辨析。貞觀疏中是雙重牒出，單重否定，雙重總結。魏譯本是雙重牒出，單重否定，單重總結。這裡的三種情況都是單重總結。所謂雙重牒出，指的是福德和智慧兩種因，以及事和理兩種智慧，根據情況分為兩種。說『非善法』，是因為在真勝義中沒有實在的法。說『是名善法』，是因為在方便道中，假借言語來安立，使人證得。所以《瑜伽師地論》說，爲了安立第一義。該論下面的三句話解釋此經文。長行中說：偈頌說及遠離於有漏法，所以那些有漏法不是清凈法。這才是清凈法。根據該論解釋經文中的善法，善法指的是雙重牒出有漏和無漏的善法。『即非善法』指的是非有漏善。那些有漏法對於無上果來說，不能作為原因，所以這裡不取。雖然是遠因，但不是親證的原因。『是名善法』是總結無結善。論中說：因為決定是無漏善法。貞觀疏中是雙重總結，因為福德和智慧、事和理兩個方面是不同的。這裡是按照同是善法，所以合為一體。
經文：須菩提，如果有人用充滿三千大千世界的七寶來佈施，如果有人受持乃至為他人解說此《金剛經》，後者獲得的福德勝過前者。 演曰：下面是第三種施設大利益的方法。前面已經學習了佛證得正覺的法身和報身，接下來應當學習佛，用所證得的法佈施給眾生，設定大的福利。前面的話已經很完整了，只是讓人不要執著于語言的固定含義，執著於法，還沒有教化眾生。現在這是讓人自己獲得殊勝的覺悟，已經廣泛地為其他眾生布施大法利益，所以有這段文字。《瑜伽師地論》是爲了斷除第二十種無記非因的疑惑。疑惑說：如果一切善法都圓滿才能得到阿耨多羅三藐三菩提（anuttara-samyak-sambodhi，無上正等正覺），那麼所說的法不能得到大菩提。
【English Translation】 Because of the body text. Only the Dharmakaya (法身, Dharma Body) is superior in truth. If judged in this way, the Tathagata's (如來, Thus Come One) answer can be roughly divided into two parts. The first is the general mark of unsurpassed, corresponding to the three paragraphs of text on Dharmakaya, Bodhi (菩提, Enlightenment) in this treatise. The second is the separate explanation of unsurpassed, corresponding to the following texts. There are three points: first, no increase or decrease; second, pure self-nature; and third, unsurpassed cause. The former two are unsurpassed in essence, and the latter is because the cause is unsurpassed, so the result is also unsurpassed. Corresponding to the verses according to the situation, it is easy to understand.
Sutra: 'Subhuti (須菩提), what is said to be good Dharma (善法, virtuous qualities), even is named good Dharma.' Yan said: The following is a distinction. In the Zhenguan commentary, it is a double mention, a single negation, and a double conclusion. The Wei translation is a double mention, a single negation, and a single conclusion. The three situations here are all single conclusions. The so-called double mention refers to the two causes of merit and wisdom, and the two wisdoms of phenomena and principle, which are divided into two according to the situation. Saying 'not good Dharma' is because there is no real Dharma in the true supreme meaning. Saying 'is named good Dharma' is because in the expedient path, language is borrowed to establish, so that people can attain it. Therefore, the Yogacarabhumi-sastra (瑜伽師地論) says, 'For the sake of establishing the first meaning.' The three sentences below in that treatise explain this sutra text. The long passage says: 'The verses say and are free from defiled Dharma, so those defiled Dharmas are not pure Dharma. This is pure Dharma.' According to that treatise's explanation of the good Dharma in the sutra, good Dharma refers to the double mention of defiled and undefiled good Dharma. 'That is, not good Dharma' refers to non-defiled good. Those defiled Dharmas cannot be the cause for the unsurpassed result, so they are not taken here. Although it is a distant cause, it is not a directly realized cause. 'Is named good Dharma' is a conclusion of undefiled good. The treatise says: 'Because it is definitely undefiled good Dharma.' The Zhenguan commentary is a double conclusion because the two aspects of merit and wisdom, phenomena and principle, are different. Here, it is according to the same good Dharma, so it is combined into one.
Sutra: 'Subhuti, if someone were to give away the seven treasures filling three thousand great thousand worlds, and if someone were to receive, uphold, and even explain this Diamond Sutra (金剛經) to others, the latter's merit would surpass the former's.' Yan said: The following is the third method of establishing great benefits. Previously, one has learned that the Buddha (佛) attained the Dharmakaya and Sambhogakaya (報身, Reward Body) of perfect enlightenment. Next, one should learn from the Buddha, using the Dharma that has been realized to give to sentient beings, establishing great benefits. The previous words are already complete, but they prevent people from clinging to the fixed meaning of language, clinging to the Dharma, and not yet teaching sentient beings. Now, this is to allow people to attain supreme enlightenment themselves, and to widely give the benefit of the great Dharma to other sentient beings, so there is this passage. The Yogacarabhumi-sastra is to eliminate the twentieth doubt of unrecordable non-cause. The doubt says: 'If all good Dharmas are fulfilled to attain Anuttara-samyak-sambodhi (阿耨多羅三藐三菩提, unsurpassed, complete and perfect enlightenment), then the Dharma that is spoken cannot attain great Bodhi.'
。何以故。以所說法無記法故。演曰。小乘師等執名句等性無記故。故有此疑。云何修學無記教法得大菩提 頌曰。
雖言無記法 而說是彼因 是故一法寶 勝無量珍寶
準釋上二句隨他義答。雖是無記而能為彼大菩提因。以遠離所說法不能得大菩提故。下二句據自我答。汝小乘等教法無而記我大乘性是其善故。一法寶勝無量寶。令知教善為菩提因成大勝利。亦與此同。此文分二。初施設法利。后安立第一義教授。初中分三。初舉劣次明勝后校量意明持經既有勝福應將此法。以利群生。此初也。問。何故地前四重校量捨身命等所況極多。此中唯說三千須彌所校卻劣有何所以。答。有三釋。一云。對所化生隨舉爾所。地前難化不舉勝福。而作校量難以發心希求持學。地上根勝少聞即悟知經福勝而行法施。是故不同。二云。前後文中隨舉勝劣為顯經福非彼世福。所能校量故。彼偈言。一切世間法不可得為喻。下更校量。皆應準知。三云。承前校量不分。經福以為多分。此分經福故。與前文亦無勝劣。
經。若人以此至為他人說 演曰。次明勝文準前釋。
經。於前福德百分至所不能及 演曰。此正校量分持經福以為百分全舉施福不及其一。千等亦爾。此中文略。魏本云。百分千分百千萬分
【現代漢語翻譯】 何以故（為什麼這樣說呢）？以所說法無記法故（因為所說的法是無記法）。演曰（演法師說）：小乘師等執名句等性無記故（小乘的法師們認為名句等的自性是無記的），故有此疑（所以有這樣的疑問）：云何修學無記教法得大菩提（如何修學無記的教法才能獲得大菩提）？頌曰（偈頌說）： 雖言無記法（雖然說是無記法），而說是彼因（但說是大菩提的因）；是故一法寶（所以這一個法寶），勝無量珍寶（勝過無量的珍寶）。 準釋上二句隨他義答（根據解釋，以上兩句是隨順他人的觀點來回答）。雖是無記而能為彼大菩提因（雖然是無記，但能作為大菩提的因）。以遠離所說法不能得大菩提故（因為遠離所說的法就不能獲得大菩提）。下二句據自我答（以下兩句是根據自己的觀點來回答）。汝小乘等教法無而記我大乘性是其善故（你們小乘等的教法是無記的，而我大乘的自性是善的）。一法寶勝無量寶（一個法寶勝過無量的珍寶）。令知教善為菩提因成大勝利（使人知道教法善妙是菩提的因，成就巨大的勝利）。亦與此同（也與此相同）。此文分二（這段文字分為兩部分）：初施設法利（首先是施設法的利益），后安立第一義教授（然後是安立第一義的教授）。初中分三（第一部分又分為三部分）：初舉劣次明勝后校量意明持經既有勝福應將此法（首先舉出較差的，其次說明殊勝的，然後校量說明持經既然有殊勝的福報，就應該將此法），以利群生（用來利益眾生）。此初也（這是第一部分）。問（提問）：何故地前四重校量捨身命等所況極多（為什麼在初地之前的四重校量中，捨身命等所比況的極多）？此中唯說三千須彌所校卻劣有何所以（這裡只說用三千須彌山來校量卻顯得遜色，這是什麼原因）？答（回答）：有三釋（有三種解釋）。一云（第一種說法是）：對所化生隨舉爾所（針對所要教化眾生的根器，隨機舉出相應的例子）。地前難化不舉勝福（初地之前難以教化，不舉出殊勝的福報），而作校量難以發心希求持學（而進行校量難以使人發心希望持誦學習）。地上根勝少聞即悟知經福勝而行法施（地上菩薩根器殊勝，稍微聽聞就能領悟，知道經的福報殊勝而行法施）。是故不同（所以不同）。二云（第二種說法是）：前後文中隨舉勝劣為顯經福非彼世福（前後文句中隨機舉出殊勝或遜色的例子，是爲了顯示經的福報不是世間的福報），所能校量故（所能校量的）。彼偈言（那首偈頌說）：一切世間法不可得為喻（一切世間法都不能作為比喻）。下更校量（下面再進行校量），皆應準知（都應該依此準則來理解）。三云（第三種說法是）：承前校量不分（承接前面的校量不分），經福以為多分（經的福報作為多分）。此分經福故（這裡是分經的福報），與前文亦無勝劣（與前面的文句也沒有勝劣之分）。 經（經文）：若人以此至為他人說（如果有人用這些乃至為他人說）。演曰（演法師說）：次明勝文準前釋（接下來是說明殊勝的文句，按照前面的解釋）。 經（經文）：於前福德百分至所不能及（比之前的福德，百分乃至都不能及）。演曰（演法師說）：此正校量分持經福以為百分全舉施福不及其一（這是正式的校量，將持經的福報分為百分，完全舉出佈施的福報也不及其一）。千等亦爾（千分等等也是如此）。此中文略（這段文字比較簡略）。魏本云（魏譯本說）：百分千分百千萬分（百分、千分、百千萬分）。
【English Translation】 Why is that? Because the Dharma spoken is an indeterminate (avyākrta) Dharma. Yan (Yan Dharma Master) said: The Small Vehicle (Hinayana) masters, etc., hold that the nature of names, phrases, etc., is indeterminate, hence this doubt: How can one attain Great Bodhi (Anuttara-samyak-sambodhi) by studying and practicing the indeterminate teachings? The verse says: Although it is said to be an indeterminate Dharma, it is said to be its cause; therefore, this one Dharma treasure is superior to countless treasures. According to the interpretation, the above two lines answer according to others' views. Although it is indeterminate, it can be the cause of that Great Bodhi. Because one cannot attain Great Bodhi by being apart from the Dharma spoken. The following two lines answer according to my own view. Your Small Vehicle, etc., teachings are indeterminate, but my Great Vehicle's nature is good. One Dharma treasure is superior to countless treasures. It makes people know that the goodness of the teachings is the cause of Bodhi, achieving great victory. It is also the same as this. This text is divided into two parts: first, establishing the benefit of the Dharma; second, establishing the teaching of the first principle. The first part is divided into three parts: first, mentioning the inferior; second, explaining the superior; third, comparing and measuring, indicating that since holding the Sutra has superior blessings, one should use this Dharma to benefit sentient beings. This is the first part. Question: Why in the fourfold comparison before the ground (bhumi), the examples of sacrificing body and life, etc., are extremely numerous? Here, only saying that the comparison with three thousand Sumeru mountains is inferior, what is the reason? Answer: There are three explanations. First, it is said: According to the beings to be transformed, examples are given accordingly. Before the ground, it is difficult to transform, so superior blessings are not mentioned, and making comparisons makes it difficult to generate the aspiration to seek to hold and study. Bodhisattvas on the ground have superior roots, and upon hearing a little, they immediately realize that the blessings of the Sutra are superior and practice Dharma giving. Therefore, it is different. Second, it is said: In the preceding and following texts, superior and inferior examples are given to show that the blessings of the Sutra are not worldly blessings, which can be compared. That verse says: All worldly Dharmas cannot be used as metaphors. Further comparisons below should all be understood accordingly. Third, it is said: Continuing the previous comparison without dividing, the blessings of the Sutra are considered as many parts. Here, the blessings of the Sutra are divided, so there is no superiority or inferiority compared to the previous text. Sutra: If a person uses this to speak to others. Yan said: Next, explaining the superior text, according to the previous explanation. Sutra: Compared to the previous blessings, even a hundred parts cannot reach. Yan said: This is the formal comparison, dividing the blessings of holding the Sutra into a hundred parts, and even if all the blessings of giving are taken, they do not reach one part. The same is true for a thousand parts, etc. This text is brief. The Wei version says: A hundred parts, a thousand parts, a hundred thousand parts.
。歌羅分數分憂波尼沙陀分。乃至算數譬喻所不能及。貞觀等本廣略有異。教法不同不可一準。彼論偈云。
數力無似勝 無似因亦然 一切世間法 不可得為喻
準彼釋意上之二句明四種勝。下之兩句由四勝故非喻所喻。一者數勝。如經百分不及一。乃至算數譬喻所不能及。故以數無限齊故攝得餘數。應知。演曰。由無漏福無盡法故數亦無限。論以譬喻等數文同。所以合舉理實譬喻非數勝攝。此乃百千萬億等數不及。是為數勝也。二者力勝。如經不及一歌羅分故。流支釋云。梵音歌羅。如折一毛以為百分。一分分一歌羅。此我翻為力勝。新論名勢勝。勢即力義。以無漏善斷。或證理非有漏善力所比並故云力勝。三者無似勝。論指如經數不能及。以此福德不可數故。演曰。準此數字應上聲呼。故新論云。由品類別言此福類元不比數。前之福類如貴賤人不相比數故。梁本經說為品類。此言無似即品類勝。四者因勝。論云。因果不相似。以此因果勝彼因果故。如經乃至憂波尼沙陀分不及一故。梵云鄔波尼殺曇。義譯為因。舉因攝果。施因能招三界果報。因果俱劣。經福出世因果俱勝故言因勝。論云因果不相似。此因果勝彼因果故。問。力類及因此三種勝。何故經中皆言不及一耶。答。謂以初百千等數數彼
【現代漢語翻譯】 現代漢語譯本：歌羅分數（Kalā-bhāga，極小的分數）分憂波尼沙陀分（Upaniṣad-bhāga，奧義書部分）。乃至算數譬喻所不能及。貞觀等本廣略有異。教法不同不可一準。彼論偈云：
『數力無似勝，無似因亦然，一切世間法，不可得為喻。』
準彼釋意，上之二句明四種勝。下之兩句由四勝故非喻所喻。一者數勝。如經百分不及一。乃至算數譬喻所不能及。故以數無限齊故攝得餘數。應知。演曰：由無漏福無盡法故數亦無限。論以譬喻等數文同。所以合舉理實譬喻非數勝攝。此乃百千萬億等數不及。是為數勝也。二者力勝。如經不及一歌羅分故。流支釋云：梵音歌羅，如折一毛以為百分，一分分一歌羅。此我翻為力勝。新論名勢勝。勢即力義。以無漏善斷，或證理非有漏善力所比並故云力勝。三者無似勝。論指如經數不能及。以此福德不可數故。演曰：準此數字應上聲呼。故新論云：由品類別言此福類元不比數。前之福類如貴**不相比數故。梁本經說為品類。此言無似即品類勝。四者因勝。論云：因果不相似。以此因果勝彼因果故。如經乃至憂波尼沙陀分不及一故。梵云鄔波尼殺曇（Upaniṣad），義譯為因。舉因攝果。施因能招三界果報，因果俱劣。經福出世因果俱勝故言因勝。論云因果不相似。此因果勝彼因果故。問：力類及因此三種勝，何故經中皆言不及一耶？答：謂以初百千等數數彼
【English Translation】 English version: Kalā-bhāga (a minute fraction) part of Upaniṣad-bhāga (part of the Upanishads). Even calculations and analogies cannot reach it. The versions of the Zhenguan era, etc., differ in length and detail. The teachings are different and cannot be uniformly relied upon. The verses in that treatise say:
'Number and power are unsurpassed, unsurpassed is also the cause, all worldly dharmas cannot be used as metaphors.'
According to that interpretation, the first two lines explain the four kinds of superiority. The last two lines indicate that because of the four superiorities, it cannot be described by metaphors. First is the superiority of number. As the sutra says, one hundred parts is not equal to one. Even calculations and analogies cannot reach it. Therefore, because the number is infinitely equal, it encompasses the remaining numbers. It should be known. Yan says: Because of the inexhaustible dharma of non-outflow blessings, the number is also infinite. The treatise uses the same text for metaphors and other numbers. Therefore, it combines the truth and metaphors, which are not included in the superiority of number. This is because numbers like hundreds of thousands of millions are not equal. This is the superiority of number. Second is the superiority of power. As the sutra says, it is not equal to one Kalā-bhāga. Liuzhi explains: The Sanskrit sound is Kalā, like breaking one hair into one hundred parts, and one part dividing into one Kalā. This I translate as the superiority of power. The new treatise calls it the superiority of influence. Influence is the meaning of power. Because of the non-outflow good severance, or the proof that the principle is not comparable to the power of outflow good, it is called the superiority of power. Third is the unsurpassed superiority. The treatise refers to the sutra that numbers cannot reach it. Because this merit is uncountable. Yan says: According to this number, it should be called in the rising tone. Therefore, the new treatise says: Because of the category of items, this type of blessing is originally incomparable to numbers. The previous type of blessing is like noble ** incomparable to numbers. The Liang version of the sutra says it is a category of items. This saying of unsurpassed is the superiority of category. Fourth is the superiority of cause. The treatise says: Cause and effect are not similar. Because this cause and effect is superior to that cause and effect. As the sutra says, even the Upaniṣad-bhāga is not equal to one. The Sanskrit is Upaniṣad, which is translated as cause. It encompasses the effect by mentioning the cause. The cause of giving can bring about the results of the three realms, and both cause and effect are inferior. The sutra's blessings are superior in both cause and effect of going beyond the world, so it is called the superiority of cause. The treatise says that cause and effect are not similar. This cause and effect is superior to that cause and effect. Question: Why do the sutras say that the three superiorities of power, category, and cause are not equal to one? Answer: It means using the initial numbers of hundreds of thousands, etc., to count them.
勢力品類及因以為多分施福勢等。不如持經一分勢等也。論釋譬喻文易可知。梁本經云。窮於算數乃至威力品類相應譬喻所不能及言。相應者謂因果也。
經云。須菩提至我當度眾生 演曰。下安立第一義教授。謂設法利度眾生時勿起生見。依第一義教授。地上諸菩薩類。應如如來度諸眾生無實生想故有此文。彼論為斷第二十一佛能度生疑。疑雲。若是法平等相無有高下者。云何如來名為度眾生。疑意佛及眾生不離真如。真如平等說無高下。如何說佛度彼下類諸眾生耶。頌云。
平等真法界 佛不度眾生 以名共彼陰 不離於法界
釋意眾生假名與五陰共。謂於五陰共立假名。一名為眾生名及五陰不離法界故。法界中無生可度。此依久機以教授。彼約初根以斷疑。此論二諦彼唯真諦。皆不相違。文分為四問遮徴釋此問也。
經。須菩提莫作是念 演曰。遮止。
經。何以故至如來度者 演曰。三徴四釋。釋中有三。初順成次返顯后簡異。此初也。真如理中一相不存。若依俗諦但有五蘊無實眾生。以天我故無實可度。依彼論解如次前引問。設謂實有而生度想有何過失而遮止耶。
經。若有眾生至我人眾生壽者 演曰。返顯也。此中雖無執字意顯則有我人等執故。論云如來如爾
【現代漢語翻譯】 現代漢語譯本：關於勢力品類以及因為這些而進行的大量佈施所帶來的福報和勢力等等，都不如僅僅受持《金剛經》哪怕一部分所帶來的福報和勢力等等。《金剛經論》的解釋和譬喻文都很容易理解。梁朝版本的《金剛經》說，即使窮盡算術，乃至威力品類的相應譬喻，都無法企及受持《金剛經》的功德。這裡所說的『相應』，指的是因果關係。
經文說：『須菩提，不要認為我會度眾生。』 演述說：這是安立第一義諦的教授。意思是說，在設法利益和度化眾生的時候，不要產生『有眾生可度』的見解。依據第一義諦的教授，地上菩薩這類修行者，應該像如來一樣度化一切眾生，心中沒有真實的『眾生』的念頭，所以才有這段經文。彼論是爲了斷除第二十一品中『佛能度眾生』的疑惑。疑惑在於：如果一切法的體性都是平等一相，沒有高下之分，那麼為什麼如來還被稱為『度眾生』呢？疑惑的意思是，佛和眾生都不離真如。真如是平等的，所以說沒有高下。那麼，如何說佛度化那些下劣的眾生呢？頌文說：
『平等真法界，佛不度眾生；以名共彼陰，不離於法界。』
解釋的意思是，眾生的假名是與五蘊共同安立的。也就是說，在五蘊的基礎上共同安立一個假名，這個名稱就叫做『眾生』。這個名稱以及五蘊都不離法界，所以在法界中沒有『生』可以被度化。這裡是依據長久修行的根基來進行教授，而彼論是針對初學者的根基來斷除疑惑。此論述及二諦（真諦和俗諦），而彼論只講真諦。這些都不相違背。這段經文可以分為四個部分：問、遮、征、釋。這裡是提問的部分。
經文：『須菩提，莫作是念。』 演述說：這是遮止。
經文：『何以故至如來度者。』 演述說：這是三征四釋。在解釋中有三個層次：首先是順成，其次是返顯，最後是簡異。這裡是第一個層次。在真如理中，一相都不存在。如果依據俗諦，則只有五蘊，沒有真實的眾生。因為有『天我』的緣故，所以沒有真實可以被度化的對象。依據彼論的解釋，就像前面引用的問題一樣。假設認為眾生是真實存在的，並且產生了『度化』的想法，那麼有什麼過失需要遮止呢？
經文：『若有眾生至我人眾生壽者。』 演述說：這是返顯。這段經文中雖然沒有『執』字，但意思卻顯示存在我、人等執著。所以，《金剛經論》說，如來如爾。
【English Translation】 English version: Regarding the categories of power and the merits and influence, etc., resulting from extensive giving based on these, they are not equal to the merit and influence, etc., of merely upholding even a portion of the Vajra Sutra. The explanations and metaphorical texts in the Vajra Sutra Commentary are easily understood. The Liang Dynasty version of the Vajra Sutra states that even exhausting arithmetic, and even corresponding metaphors of categories of power, cannot reach the merit of upholding the Vajra Sutra. The 'corresponding' here refers to the relationship of cause and effect.
The sutra says: 'Subhuti (a disciple of the Buddha), do not think that I will deliver sentient beings.' The commentary says: This establishes the teaching of the first principle. It means that when establishing methods to benefit and deliver sentient beings, do not give rise to the view that 'there are sentient beings to be delivered.' According to the teaching of the first principle, bodhisattvas (enlightenment beings) on the ground should deliver all sentient beings like the Tathagata (another name for the Buddha), without the thought of real sentient beings, hence this passage. That treatise is to dispel the doubt in the twenty-first chapter that 'the Buddha can deliver sentient beings.' The doubt is: If the nature of all dharmas (teachings) is equal and without high or low, then why is the Tathagata called 'delivering sentient beings'? The meaning of the doubt is that the Buddha and sentient beings are inseparable from tathata (suchness). Tathata is equal, so it is said that there is no high or low. Then how can it be said that the Buddha delivers those inferior sentient beings? The verse says:
'In the equal and true dharmadhatu (realm of dharma), the Buddha does not deliver sentient beings; because the name is shared with their skandhas (aggregates), it is not separate from the dharmadhatu.'
The meaning of the explanation is that the provisional name of sentient beings is jointly established with the five skandhas. That is to say, a provisional name is jointly established on the basis of the five skandhas, and this name is called 'sentient beings.' This name and the five skandhas are inseparable from the dharmadhatu, so there is no 'birth' to be delivered in the dharmadhatu. This is teaching based on the foundation of long-term practice, while that treatise is to dispel doubts for beginners. This treatise discusses the two truths (conventional truth and ultimate truth), while that treatise only speaks of the ultimate truth. These are not contradictory. This passage can be divided into four parts: question, negation, inquiry, and explanation. This is the part of the question.
The sutra says: 'Subhuti, do not think this way.' The commentary says: This is negation.
The sutra says: 'Why is it that the Tathagata delivers?' The commentary says: This is three inquiries and four explanations. There are three levels in the explanation: first, affirmation; second, reverse manifestation; and third, differentiation. This is the first level. In the principle of tathata, not a single characteristic exists. If based on conventional truth, then there are only the five skandhas, and there are no real sentient beings. Because of the 'heavenly self,' there is no real object to be delivered. According to the explanation of that treatise, it is like the question quoted earlier. Suppose it is thought that sentient beings are real and the idea of 'delivering' arises, then what fault is there that needs to be negated?
The sutra says: 'If there are sentient beings, to the perception of self, others, sentient beings, and life.' The commentary says: This is reverse manifestation. Although there is no word 'attachment' in this passage, the meaning shows that there are attachments to self, others, etc. Therefore, the Vajra Sutra Commentary says, 'The Tathagata is like that.'
炎而知。是故若有眾生如來則為有我耶。此意佛一切智稱理而知無中。謂有即為妄執違爾炎境。既無妄執。是故不見有少眾生如來度者。彼偈云。
取我度為過 以取彼法是 取度眾生故 不取取應知
演曰。上之三句正釋此文初句。五陰中有眾生可度者。此是取相過。次句以取五陰是眾生故。次句欲令眾生得解脫有如是相。即初句標餘二句釋。故為過也。
經。須菩提至為有我 演曰。第三簡異有三。初佛知無次凡執有後破凡愚。此初二也。言有我者。即是有我執。如來說為非執者。若實有我可有執取。我體既無故非實執。即是我無之執名為非執。而諸凡愚見道以前起分別見妄。謂為有橫生實執故。貞觀云善現我等執者。如來說為非執故名我等執。而諸愚夫強有此執。此論云。若實無我而言有我取為離此著故。經言須菩提我取者即為非取。如是等彼論偈言不取取應知故。此以何義。以彼不實義。是故彼不取。以不取者。即是毛道凡夫取而即是不取故言不取取故。演曰。無實可取名為不取。即當非執。又言取者凡愚取故二論意同。
經。須菩提凡夫者如來說即非凡夫 演曰。此破凡愚。因辨妄執勿謂實有起執之人故便破之。真諦無生何凡之有。俗諦幻有亦非實故名非凡夫。此略無結。余
本結云。是名凡夫。魏唐本云。如來說為非生彼論釋云。不生聖人法故言非生。若依彼釋。即非凡夫者即是非生聖法之凡夫也。梁經此論俱云小兒凡夫。魏本云毛道凡夫生。流支釋云。毛道領法心小如毛孔道即愚小義。此譯者謬。梵云縛(去聲)羅。此云愚。以二聲相近遂錯云毛。正應云婆羅畢栗托(魚訖反)那。婆羅云愚。畢栗托云異。仡那云生。總云愚夫異生。此言凡夫順方俗耳。問。此非凡夫。與前眾生即非眾生何別。答。前是能信經人。此是法利所化。破執義同。
經。須菩提至觀如來不 演曰。第四攝取法身。前正覺處雖相法身而非正明具顯報佛。是無上覺因顯無上故明法身。又前雙明法報二身。以法身是本。今令攝取正觀正證故此明之。其欲得色身。住中雖明法身。因求色身令欣真理而不取相說。是欲得色身住處非欲法身。其欲得法身中所明三種言說及福。與此懸殊。智相法身為明智相。兼辨無為非正明理。其供養給侍如來住處。雖明無相。彼約所供佛身而說非明自得。今明自得亦明上求佛地法身令自攝取。及明法身非以相比知非相福因得故有此文。彼論意同爲斷第二十二比知法體疑。及斷第二十三相福成因疑。論云。復有疑。雖相成就不可得見如來。以非彼體。以如來法身為體。而如來法身以見
【現代漢語翻譯】 現代漢語譯本：
這裡總結說，這就是所謂的凡夫。魏譯本和唐譯本都說，如來說這是『非生』。論釋中說，因為不生聖人的法，所以稱為『非生』。如果按照這個解釋，那麼『非凡夫』就是指沒有生出聖法的凡夫。梁譯本和這部論都說是『小兒凡夫』。魏譯本說是『毛道凡夫生』。流支的解釋是：『毛道』領悟的法很小，像毛孔一樣狹窄，意思是愚昧渺小。這個翻譯是錯誤的。梵語是『縛(去聲)羅』，意思是『愚』。因為兩個音相近，所以錯誤地說是『毛』。正確的應該是『婆羅畢栗托(魚訖反)那』。『婆羅』是『愚』的意思，『畢栗托』是『異』的意思，『仡那』是『生』的意思。總的來說就是『愚夫異生』。這裡說『凡夫』只是順應當地的習俗罷了。問：這個『非凡夫』，和前面說的『眾生即非眾生』有什麼區別？答：前面說的是能夠相信經典的人，這裡說的是被佛法利益所教化的人。破除執著的意義是相同的。 經：須菩提至觀如來不
演曰：第四部分是攝取法身。前面在正覺之處雖然提到了相法身，但並沒有明確地、完整地顯現報佛。因為無上覺是因，所以顯現無上果，因此闡明法身。而且前面同時闡明了法身和報身，因為法身是根本。現在是爲了讓人們攝取、正確地觀察、正確地證悟，所以在這裡闡明法身。想要獲得色身，住在其中，雖然闡明了法身，但因為是尋求色身，是爲了讓人欣慕真理，而不是爲了執取相，所以說那是想要獲得色身的地方，而不是想要獲得法身的地方。想要獲得法身中所闡明的三種言說和福報，與這裡所說的截然不同。智相法身是爲了闡明智相，兼顧辨別無為，而不是爲了明確地闡明真理。供養侍奉如來住處，雖然闡明了無相，但那是針對所供養的佛身而說的，而不是爲了闡明自己獲得。現在是爲了闡明自己獲得，也是爲了闡明向上尋求佛地的法身，讓人們自己攝取。並且闡明法身不是通過相比知，也不是通過相福因獲得的，所以才有這段文字。這部論的意圖相同，是爲了斷除第二十二個通過相比知法體的疑惑，以及斷除第二十三個相福成就因的疑惑。論中說：『還有疑惑，即使相成就了，也不可能見到如來，因為不是如來的本體。因為如來的本體是法身，而如來的法身可以通過見』
【English Translation】 English version:
This concludes that this is what is called an ordinary person (fanfu). The Wei and Tang versions both say that the Tathagata (Rulai) calls this 'non-birth' (feisheng). The commentary says that it is called 'non-birth' because it does not give rise to the Dharma of sages. If according to this explanation, then 'non-ordinary person' means an ordinary person who has not given rise to the Dharma of sages. The Liang version and this treatise both say 'childish ordinary person'. The Wei version says 'ordinary person born from the hair path'. Liuzhi explains that the Dharma understood by the 'hair path' is very small, like the narrowness of a pore, meaning ignorant and small. This translation is wrong. The Sanskrit is 'va(pronounced with a departing tone)ra', which means 'foolish' (yu). Because the two sounds are similar, it is mistakenly said to be 'hair' (mao). The correct one should be 'varapṛthagjana'. 'Vara' means 'foolish', 'pṛthag' means 'different', and 'jana' means 'birth'. Overall, it means 'foolish different birth'. Saying 'ordinary person' here is just to conform to local customs. Question: What is the difference between this 'non-ordinary person' and the previously mentioned 'sentient beings are not sentient beings'? Answer: The former refers to people who can believe in the scriptures, and the latter refers to people who are taught and benefited by the Buddha's Dharma. The meaning of breaking attachments is the same. Sutra: Subhuti (Xūpútí) [one of the principal disciples of the Buddha] to observe the Tathagata (Rulai) [another name of Buddha] or not.
Commentary: The fourth part is to gather the Dharmakaya (fǎshēn) [the body of the Dharma, the ultimate nature of reality]. Although the appearance of the Dharmakaya was mentioned earlier at the place of perfect enlightenment, the Reward Body (baoshen) [the body of bliss or reward] was not clearly and completely revealed. Because the unsurpassed enlightenment is the cause, the unsurpassed fruit is revealed, thus clarifying the Dharmakaya. Moreover, the Dharmakaya and the Reward Body were explained simultaneously earlier, because the Dharmakaya is the root. Now, in order to allow people to gather, correctly observe, and correctly realize, the Dharmakaya is clarified here. Wanting to obtain the physical body (se shen), residing within it, although the Dharmakaya is clarified, it is because one is seeking the physical body, in order to make people admire the truth, not to cling to appearances, so it is said that that is the place to obtain the physical body, not the place to obtain the Dharmakaya. The three kinds of speech and blessings explained in wanting to obtain the Dharmakaya are completely different from what is said here. The Wisdom Appearance Dharmakaya is to clarify the Wisdom Appearance, taking into account the distinction of non-action (wuwei), not to clearly clarify the truth. Offering service to the place where the Tathagata resides, although non-appearance (wuxiang) is clarified, it is said in relation to the Buddha's body being offered, not to clarify one's own attainment. Now it is to clarify one's own attainment, and also to clarify the Dharmakaya of seeking the Buddha-land upwards, allowing people to gather it themselves. And clarifying that the Dharmakaya is not obtained through comparison and knowledge, nor through the cause of appearance and blessings, so there is this passage. The intention of this treatise is the same, to eliminate the twenty-second doubt of knowing the Dharma body through comparison, and to eliminate the twenty-third doubt of the cause of the accomplishment of appearance and blessings. The treatise says: 'There is still doubt, even if the appearance is accomplished, it is impossible to see the Tathagata, because it is not the Tathagata's essence. Because the Tathagata's essence is the Dharmakaya, and the Tathagata's Dharmakaya can be seen.'
相成就。比知則知如來法身為福相成就。自下經文為斷此疑。演曰。此敘二疑。一者如來法身雖不可以相成就。現證應言可以相成就比知。二者如來法身應由福相成就所得。此下論文有三行偈。初后兩偈答第一疑。中間一偈答第二疑。然中一偈及諸長行。應在後明以此偈文釋經頌。后可以相成就得阿耨菩提文故。而作論者以此二疑義相連帶故。前敘疑合一處問。逐便釋之後引經文遂更不釋前已釋故。又轉輪王為例相似故一處明古今諸德謂翻譯錯。理未必然。以前後譯次第皆示菩提流支譯文。依論論主意然。何謂翻譯錯。如下文中真化一異疑。長行及頌隔越而解。至下當知。此亦如是。文中有二。初明觀相不可識真后明相因非得真體。即是如次答前二疑。初文又二。長行及頌。故長行文四問答質領。此即佛問。可以三十二相比知如來法性身不。
經。須菩提至觀如來 演曰。第二答。然準供侍如來住中善現答言不應相見。何故此答與前不同。又餘五本經皆言不應以諸相觀如來。何故此文獨異餘本。答。梵本有別義則無違。何者前實理答。今假設答。顯發如來真妙義故。又理有二。一俗二真。真雖無相。于俗諦中可以分明三十二相觀如來故。佛依真問。此據俗答。
經。佛言須菩提至則是如來 演曰。第三質
【現代漢語翻譯】 現代漢語譯本 相成就。如果可以通過（三十二）相來認知，那麼就可以通過（三十二）相來認知如來的法身是福德之相成就的。（以下）經文是爲了斷除這個疑惑。（演曰：）這裡敘述了兩個疑惑。一是如來的法身雖然不可以通過（三十二）相成就，但根據現證，應該說可以通過（三十二）相成就來認知。二是如來的法身應該由福德之相成就所得。下面的論文有三行偈頌，最初和最後的兩偈回答第一個疑惑，中間一偈回答第二個疑惑。然而，中間一偈以及諸長行，應該在後面說明，用這偈文來解釋經文的頌詞，因為後面有『可以通過（三十二）相成就得到阿耨多羅三藐三菩提』的文句。但是，作者認為這兩個疑惑的意義相互關聯，所以前面敘述疑惑，合併在一處提問，然後就順便解釋，之後引用經文，於是就不再解釋前面已經解釋過的（內容）了。又因為以轉輪王為例很相似，所以在一處說明。古今諸位德高望重的人認為翻譯錯了，但這個道理未必如此。因為前後翻譯的次第都顯示了菩提流支翻譯的文字，依據論文的論主的意願。怎麼能說是翻譯錯了呢？如下文中的真化一異的疑惑，長行和頌詞隔開來解釋，到下面就知道了。這裡也是這樣。文中有兩部分，首先說明觀察（三十二）相不能認識真如，然後說明（三十二）相的因不是得到真如本體。也就是依次回答前面的兩個疑惑。最初的文又分為兩部分，長行和頌詞。所以長行文有四問答質領。這就是佛的提問：可以通過三十二相來認知如來的法性身嗎？ （經）須菩提乃至觀如來。（演曰：）第二（部分是）回答。然而，根據供侍如來住在（世間）之中，善現回答說不應該以（三十二）相見（如來）。為什麼這個回答與前面不同？而且其餘五個版本的經文都說不應該以諸相來觀察如來，為什麼這個文字唯獨與其餘版本不同？回答：梵文字有區別，意義上沒有違背。什麼（意思）呢？前面是根據實理回答，現在是假設回答，顯發如來真妙的意義。而且理有二種，一是俗諦，二是真諦。真諦雖然沒有（三十二）相，但在俗諦中，可以分明地以三十二相來觀察如來。佛依據真諦提問，這裡根據俗諦回答。 （經）佛言須菩提乃至則是如來。（演曰：）第三（部分是）質問。
【English Translation】 English version Accomplishment of characteristics. If it can be known through the (thirty-two) characteristics, then it can be known through the (thirty-two) characteristics that the Dharmakaya of the Tathagata (one of the titles of the Buddha, meaning 'the one who has thus come' or 'the one who has thus gone') is accomplished by the characteristics of merit. The following scripture is to dispel this doubt. (Yan Yue:) This narrates two doubts. First, although the Dharmakaya of the Tathagata cannot be accomplished through (thirty-two) characteristics, according to present evidence, it should be said that it can be known through the accomplishment of (thirty-two) characteristics. Second, the Dharmakaya of the Tathagata should be obtained through the accomplishment of meritorious characteristics. The following treatise has three lines of verses, the first and last two verses answering the first doubt, and the middle verse answering the second doubt. However, the middle verse and the long lines should be explained later, using these verses to explain the verses of the scripture, because later there is the sentence 'can attain Anuttara-samyak-sambodhi (supreme enlightenment) through the accomplishment of (thirty-two) characteristics'. However, the author believes that the meanings of these two doubts are interconnected, so the doubts are narrated in the front, combined into one question, and then explained accordingly, and then the scripture is quoted, so the previously explained (content) is no longer explained. Also, because the example of the Chakravartin (universal monarch) is very similar, it is explained in one place. The venerable figures of ancient and modern times believe that the translation is wrong, but this reasoning is not necessarily the case. Because the order of the previous and subsequent translations all shows the text translated by Bodhiruci (translator of Buddhist scriptures), according to the intention of the author of the treatise. How can it be said that the translation is wrong? As in the following doubts about the truth, transformation, oneness, and difference, the long lines and verses are explained separately, as will be known below. This is also the case here. There are two parts in the text, first explaining that observing the (thirty-two) characteristics cannot recognize the true nature, and then explaining that the cause of the (thirty-two) characteristics is not obtaining the true essence. That is, answering the previous two doubts in order. The initial text is divided into two parts, long lines and verses. Therefore, the long line text has four questions and answers. This is the Buddha's question: Can the Dharmakaya of the Tathagata be known through the thirty-two characteristics? (Sutra) Subhuti (one of the principal disciples of the Buddha) and even observe the Tathagata. (Yan Yue:) The second (part) is the answer. However, according to serving the Tathagata residing in (the world), Subhuti replied that one should not see (the Tathagata) with (thirty-two) characteristics. Why is this answer different from the previous one? Moreover, the other five versions of the scripture all say that one should not observe the Tathagata with various characteristics. Why is this text unique from the other versions? Answer: The Sanskrit version is different, but there is no contradiction in meaning. What (does it mean)? The previous one was answered according to the true principle, and now it is answered hypothetically, revealing the true and wonderful meaning of the Tathagata. Moreover, there are two kinds of principles, one is the mundane truth, and the other is the ultimate truth. Although the ultimate truth does not have (thirty-two) characteristics, in the mundane truth, the Tathagata can be clearly observed with thirty-two characteristics. The Buddha asked according to the ultimate truth, and this is answered according to the mundane truth. (Sutra) The Buddha said, 'Subhuti, and even then it is the Tathagata.' (Yan Yue:) The third (part) is questioning.
由轉輪王亦具相故。彼論頌云。
非是色身相 可比知如來 諸佛唯法身 轉輪王非佛
彼論長行但釋頌意不釋其文相易故。意謂約果而說。既不可以色相比知如來。約因而談。亦不可以福相因得菩提果。若以感相福因得菩提者。轉輪聖王亦有相福能感相好。即彼輪王應是如來因果雖殊。為難相似細尋論文其意彌遠。
經。須菩提白佛至觀如來 演曰。第四領悟。
經。爾時世尊至不能見如來 演曰。偈頌重成。此中文略。貞觀云。
諸以色觀我 以音聲求我 彼生履邪斷 不能當見我 應觀佛法性 即導師法身 法性非所識 故彼不能了
魏經初頌即此經文。后頌云。
彼如來妙體 即法身諸佛 法體不可見 彼識不能知
論云。初偈顯示如所不應見不可見。演曰。謂若求見法身而尋色聲。乃是所不應見。依彼色聲求見法身不可得。故論云。第二偈顯示如彼不應見及不見因緣。謂初分次分。演曰。后偈之中上二句為初分。如彼不應見。謂是彼前行偈之所不應見。法即法身是也。下二句為次分。即不見因緣。由以粗識不見細境。是為因緣。因緣者所以也。由此依論分之為三。一如所不應見不可見。二如彼不應見。三不見因緣。初中論云。云何
【現代漢語翻譯】 現代漢語譯本： 因為轉輪王（Chakravartin，統治世界的理想君主）也具備（如來）的某些相好，所以《彼論》中有頌文說：
『不能通過觀察（如來）的色身（Rupa-kaya，佛的化身）來了解如來（Tathagata，佛的稱號）， 諸佛（Buddhas，覺悟者）唯有法身（Dharma-kaya，佛的真身），轉輪王不是佛。』
《彼論》的長行部分只是解釋頌文的含義，沒有解釋其文字，因為文字容易理解。意思是說，這是從結果的角度來說的。既然不能通過觀察色身來了解如來，那麼從原因的角度來說，也不能通過積累福德的相好來獲得菩提（Bodhi，覺悟）的果實。如果認為通過積累福德的相好就能獲得菩提，那麼轉輪聖王也有積累相好福德的能力，那麼這位轉輪王就應該是如來了。雖然原因和結果不同，但這種為難之處在於兩者相似，仔細研究論文，其含義更加深遠。
經：須菩提（Subhuti，佛陀的弟子）對佛說……觀察如來……演曰：第四次領悟。
經：爾時世尊（Bhagavan，佛的稱號）……不能見如來……演曰：用偈頌再次說明。這裡文字省略了。貞觀（唐朝年號）的譯本說：
『凡是以色相觀察我，以音聲尋求我的人， 此人行的是邪道，不能真正見到我。 應當觀察佛的法性（Dharma-nature，佛法的本質）， 那就是導師（佛陀）的法身。 法性不是可以通過意識來認識的， 所以他們不能瞭解。』
魏經（指較早的佛經譯本）的第一首頌就是這部經文的內容。後面的頌文說：
『如來微妙的身體，就是諸佛的法身， 法身是不可見的，他們的意識無法認識。』
論中說：第一首偈顯示了不應該見和不可見。演曰：如果想要求見法身而通過色聲來尋找，那就是不應該見的。依靠色聲來求見法身是不可得的。所以論中說：第二首偈顯示了不應該見和不見的原因。指的是初分和次分。演曰：後面的偈頌中，前兩句是初分，如彼不應見，指的是前面偈頌所說的不應該見的，法就是法身。后兩句是次分，即不見的原因，因為用粗糙的意識無法見到細微的境界，這就是原因。因緣就是原因。因此，根據論典，可以分為三點：一，如所不應見不可見；二，如彼不應見；三，不見因緣。初中論云：什麼是……
【English Translation】 English version: Because the Chakravartin (ideal universal ruler) also possesses certain characteristics (of the Tathagata), the 'Treatise' contains the following verse:
'It is not through observing the Rupa-kaya (form body of the Buddha) that one can know the Tathagata (title of the Buddha), The Buddhas (enlightened ones) only have the Dharma-kaya (Dharma body, the true body of the Buddha), the Chakravartin is not a Buddha.'
The prose section of the 'Treatise' only explains the meaning of the verse, not the words themselves, because the words are easy to understand. The meaning is that this is spoken from the perspective of the result. Since one cannot know the Tathagata by observing the Rupa-kaya, then from the perspective of the cause, one also cannot obtain the fruit of Bodhi (enlightenment) by accumulating meritorious characteristics. If it is thought that one can obtain Bodhi by accumulating meritorious characteristics, then the Chakravartin also has the ability to accumulate meritorious characteristics, then this Chakravartin should be the Tathagata. Although the cause and result are different, the difficulty lies in the similarity between the two. Carefully examining the treatise, its meaning is even more profound.
Sutra: Subhuti (a disciple of the Buddha) said to the Buddha...observe the Tathagata...Commentary: Fourth realization.
Sutra: At that time, the Bhagavan (title of the Buddha)...cannot see the Tathagata...Commentary: Re-emphasized with a verse. Here the text is abbreviated. The Zhenguan (era name of the Tang Dynasty) translation says:
'Those who observe me through form, and seek me through sound, That person practices a wrong path, and cannot truly see me. One should observe the Dharma-nature (essence of the Dharma) of the Buddha, That is the Dharma-kaya of the Teacher (the Buddha). Dharma-nature cannot be known through consciousness, Therefore, they cannot understand.'
The first verse of the Wei Sutra (referring to earlier translations of Buddhist scriptures) is the content of this sutra. The following verse says:
'The subtle body of the Tathagata is the Dharma-kaya of all Buddhas, The Dharma-kaya is invisible, their consciousness cannot know it.'
The treatise says: The first verse shows what should not be seen and what cannot be seen. Commentary: If one seeks to see the Dharma-kaya and searches through form and sound, that is what should not be seen. It is impossible to seek to see the Dharma-kaya by relying on form and sound. Therefore, the treatise says: The second verse shows the reason for what should not be seen and what is not seen. Refers to the initial part and the subsequent part. Commentary: In the following verse, the first two lines are the initial part, such as what should not be seen, referring to what the previous verse said should not be seen, Dharma is the Dharma-kaya. The last two lines are the subsequent part, that is, the reason for not seeing, because coarse consciousness cannot see subtle realms, this is the reason. The cause is the reason. Therefore, according to the treatise, it can be divided into three points: one, what should not be seen and what cannot be seen; two, what should not be seen; three, the reason for not seeing. The initial part of the treatise says: What is...
不可見諸見世諦故。謂見色力聞說法聲。是見俗諦法身真諦故不得見。履謂游履。即此行義。斷謂禪定。即此道義。依其事定見色聞聲之時。非緣于理故不見我真實法身。名之為邪。非同外道所有邪定。論云是人行邪靜者。定名為靜。以得禪者。說名寂靜者故。又復禪力思惟修故。于中思者意所攝。修者識所攝。言寂靜者。即說意及識。此意明依世間禪定以思量分別故。名之為意。了別粗境故。名之為識但依世俗見色聞聲不能見真。或可斷者即有漏觀。以有漏中定強慧劣。此論云定理實有智故。秦魏梁本總名為道。周本名勤。隋名邪解脫。名別義同。彼論云不能見者。謂凡夫人即地前菩薩。小乘異生皆此所攝。言應觀佛法性。即導師法身者。此如彼不應見也。觀色聲心所不得見者即法身。是謂有問言。既色聲心不能見。我如何可見。是故此中令起真觀應觀法性。法性即真如。真如即是導師法身。何以故。以真如體眾德所依。即是出纏清凈法身故。佛真身不可相見故。論云以如為緣故出生諸佛凈身。此不可見。但應見法故。言法性非所識故。彼不能了者。此第三不見因緣也。論云。彼不應見。復何因緣故不可見。以彼法真如相故。非如言說而知。唯自證知故。不如言說者。非見實不能知故。演曰。以彼真如非是分別思量
【現代漢語翻譯】 現代漢語譯本 因為（修行者）不能通過世俗的見解看到真諦，所以說『不可見諸見世諦故』。這裡說的『見』，是指看到顏色、聽到說法聲音等。因為見到的是世俗諦，而不是法身真諦，所以說『不得見』。『履』的意思是行走，就是指這種行為。『斷』是指禪定，也就是指修道的意義。依據這些事情（見色聞聲）來確定（修行方向），是因為緣於事相而不是道理，所以不能見到我的真實法身，這叫做『邪』。但這和外道所有的邪定不同。《論》中說『是人行邪靜者』，這裡的『定』叫做『靜』，因為得到禪定的人，可以被稱為『寂靜者』。而且，通過禪定的力量進行思惟和修習，其中『思』由意所攝，『修』由識所攝。說『寂靜』，就是指意和識。這裡明確說明，依靠世間的禪定進行思量和分別，所以叫做『意』；了別粗略的境界，所以叫做『識』。僅僅依靠世俗的見色聞聲，不能見到真諦。或者，『斷』可以指有漏的觀想。因為在有漏的境界中，定力強而智慧弱。《論》中說『定理實有智故』。秦、魏、梁三個版本都叫做『道』，周版本叫做『勤』，隋版本叫做『邪解脫』，名稱不同但意義相同。那部《論》中說『不能見者』，是指凡夫，也就是指十地前的菩薩和小乘的異生都包括在內。說『應觀佛法性』，也就是指導師（Buddha）的法身，這就像他們不應該見到（法身）一樣。觀察顏色、聲音和心都不能見到（的），就是法身。這就是所謂的提問：既然顏色、聲音和心都不能見到，那我如何才能見到（法身）呢？所以這裡讓人發起真正的觀想，應該觀察法性。法性就是真如（Tathata）。真如就是導師的法身。為什麼呢？因為真如的本體是眾多功德所依之處，也就是脫離纏縛的清凈法身。佛的真身是不能通過相來見到的。《論》中說『以如為緣故出生諸佛凈身』，這是不可見的，只能見到法。所以說『法性非所識故』。他們不能瞭解的，這是第三個不能見到的因緣。《論》中說：『他們不應該見到。』又是什麼因緣導致不可見呢？因為那個法的真如相，不是像言語所能表達而知曉的，只能通過自己證悟來了解。不如言語所能表達的，是因為不是通過見（色聞聲）就能真正瞭解的。演曰：因為那個真如不是分別思量（所能及的）。
【English Translation】 English version Because (practitioners) cannot see the ultimate truth through worldly views, it is said '不可見諸見世諦故 (cannot be seen through worldly truths)'. Here, '見 (see)' refers to seeing colors, hearing the sound of Dharma being preached, etc. Because what is seen is the conventional truth (Samvriti-satya), not the ultimate truth of the Dharmakaya (法身, Dharma-body), it is said '不得見 (cannot be seen)'. '履 (walk)' means walking, referring to this kind of behavior. '斷 (cut off)' refers to Dhyana (禪定, meditation), which also refers to the meaning of cultivating the path. Relying on these things (seeing colors and hearing sounds) to determine (the direction of practice) is because it is based on phenomena rather than principles, so one cannot see my true Dharmakaya, which is called '邪 (wrong)'. But this is different from the wrong Samadhi (三昧, concentration) of all external paths. The 《論 (Treatise)》 says '是人行邪靜者 (this person practices wrong stillness)', where '定 (Samadhi)' is called '靜 (stillness)', because those who attain Samadhi can be called '寂靜者 (the quiet ones)'. Moreover, through the power of Samadhi to contemplate and practice, where '思 (contemplation)' is governed by the mind (意), and '修 (practice)' is governed by the consciousness (識). Saying '寂靜 (stillness)' refers to both mind and consciousness. This clearly states that relying on worldly Samadhi to contemplate and discriminate is called '意 (mind)'; distinguishing rough realms is called '識 (consciousness)'. Merely relying on worldly seeing colors and hearing sounds cannot see the ultimate truth. Or, '斷 (cut off)' can refer to the contemplation of the contaminated (有漏, with outflows). Because in the contaminated realm, the power of Samadhi is strong and wisdom is weak. The 《論 (Treatise)》 says '定理實有智故 (the principle of Samadhi truly has wisdom)'. The Qin, Wei, and Liang versions are all called '道 (path)', the Zhou version is called '勤 (diligence)', and the Sui version is called '邪解脫 (wrong liberation)', the names are different but the meanings are the same. That 《論 (Treatise)》 says '不能見者 (those who cannot see)' refers to ordinary people, that is, Bodhisattvas (菩薩) before the tenth Bhumi (地, stage) and Sravakas (聲聞, Hearers) who are different beings are all included. Saying '應觀佛法性 (should contemplate the Dharma-nature of the Buddha)' refers to the Dharmakaya of the guide (Buddha), just as they should not see (the Dharmakaya). Observing colors, sounds, and mind cannot see (it), which is the Dharmakaya. This is the so-called question: Since colors, sounds, and mind cannot be seen, how can I see (the Dharmakaya)? Therefore, here it prompts people to initiate true contemplation, and should observe the Dharma-nature. Dharma-nature is Suchness (真如, Tathata). Suchness is the Dharmakaya of the guide. Why? Because the essence of Suchness is the place where many merits rely, which is the pure Dharmakaya that is free from entanglements. The true body of the Buddha cannot be seen through form. The 《論 (Treatise)》 says '以如為緣故出生諸佛凈身 (because of Suchness as the cause, the pure bodies of all Buddhas are born)', this is invisible, and only the Dharma can be seen. Therefore, it is said '法性非所識故 (Dharma-nature is not knowable)'. They cannot understand, this is the third reason why it cannot be seen. The 《論 (Treatise)》 says: 'They should not see.' What is the reason why it cannot be seen? Because the Suchness aspect of that Dharma is not knowable as expressed in words, it can only be understood through one's own realization. It cannot be expressed in words because it cannot be truly understood through seeing (colors and hearing sounds). Yan said: Because that Suchness is not something that can be reached by discrimination and contemplation.
識之所了非言說。說唯內證知故。彼緣色等識不能解了。彼偈云。
唯見色聞聲 是人不知佛 以真如法身 非是識境故
長行雲。以何等人不能見。謂凡夫不能見故。
經。須菩提汝若作是念至莫作是念 演曰。上明觀相不可識真訖。不明相因非得真體。彼斷福相成因疑也。論結前云。於此住處中約顯示。以法身應見如來非以相具足故。又生起此文云。若爾如來雖不應以相具足見。應以相具足為因。得阿耨菩提。為離此著故經言等。彼論引經文雖在後義屬於前。然準餘本。須菩提于意云何。可以相成就得阿耨菩提耶。須菩提莫作是念。不以相成就得阿耨菩提等。諸本經文雖少有異。大意皆遮以相成就得彼菩提。唯此經文加其不字乃遮。不以相成就得便與二論意不符會。故初文中剩一不字譯家誤耳。或可此中意言不以者。謂豈不以具足相得菩提。即以相得菩提。莫作是念。亦不須除。不字文中有三。初問次遮后結示正義。此初二也。論初卷釋攝取法身中。指此文云。此義明相具足體非菩提。亦不以相具足為因也。以相是色自性故。演曰。相為色性自招色身相好之報。法身菩提體性非色。如何乃以相為因也。彼論頌云。
非相好果報 依福德成就 而得真法身 方便異相故
釋
【現代漢語翻譯】 現代漢語譯本： 『識』所能瞭解的，並非可以通過言語表達的。之所以這樣說，是因為只有通過內在的證悟才能真正瞭解。『識』通過外緣，比如『色』等，是無法真正理解真理的。正如偈頌所說： 『僅僅看見色相，聽聞聲音，這樣的人並不瞭解佛，因為真如法身並非是『識』所能達到的境界。』 長行中說：什麼樣的人不能見到（真如法身）呢？是凡夫不能見到。 經文：『須菩提，你如果這樣想……不要這樣想……』 演述說：上面已經說明了觀察色相無法認識真如。如果不明白（佛的）色相併非獲得真如法身的根本原因，就會對（斷除）福德之相是否能成就（獲得真如法身的）原因產生疑惑。論在總結前文時說：『在此處所安住的意義在於顯示，應該以法身來見如來，而不是以具足色相來見如來。』 又生起此文說：『如果這樣，如來雖然不應該以具足色相來見，但應該以具足色相作為獲得阿耨多羅三藐三菩提的原因。』 爲了消除這種執著，經文才說『等』。論中引用的經文雖然在後面，但其意義屬於前面。然而根據其他版本，（經文應該是）『須菩提，你認為怎麼樣？可以憑藉色相的成就而獲得阿耨多羅三藐三菩提嗎？須菩提，不要這樣想，不能憑藉色相的成就而獲得阿耨多羅三藐三菩提』等等。各個版本的經文雖然略有不同，但大意都是爲了阻止人們認為可以通過色相的成就來獲得菩提。只有這個版本的經文加了一個『不』字，變成了阻止『不以色相成就而獲得菩提』，這與二論的意義不符。所以最初的經文中多了一個『不』字，是翻譯者的錯誤。或者可以這樣理解，這裡的意思是『不以』，難道不是憑藉具足色相而獲得菩提嗎？（如果認為）就是憑藉色相而獲得菩提，就不要這樣想。也不需要刪除這個『不』字。文中共有三個『不』字，第一個是提問，第二個是遮止，第三個是揭示正義。這裡是前兩個。論的第一卷在解釋攝取法身時，指出了這段經文說：『這個意義說明具足色相的體性不是菩提，也不能以具足色相作為（獲得菩提的）原因。』 因為色相是色的自性。演述說：色相是色的自性，自然會招來色身的相好果報。法身菩提的體性不是色，怎麼能以色相作為原因呢？論中的偈頌說： 『不是（因為）相好果報，依靠福德的成就，才能獲得真法身，（因為）方便和（色）相是不同的。』 解釋完畢。
【English Translation】 English version: What 'consciousness' can understand cannot be expressed through words. The reason for this is that only through inner realization can it be truly understood. 'Consciousness', through external conditions such as 'form' (rupa), cannot truly comprehend the truth. As the verse says: 'Those who only see form and hear sounds do not understand the Buddha, because the Dharmakaya of Suchness (Tathata) is not a realm that 'consciousness' can reach.' The prose section says: What kind of people cannot see (the Dharmakaya of Suchness)? It is ordinary people who cannot see it. Sutra: 'Subhuti, if you think like this... do not think like this...' Yan states: The above has explained that observing forms cannot recognize Suchness. If it is not understood that (the Buddha's) forms are not the fundamental cause of attaining the Dharmakaya of Suchness, doubts will arise about whether (eliminating) the characteristics of merit can lead to (attaining the Dharmakaya of Suchness). The treatise, in summarizing the previous text, says: 'The meaning of dwelling in this place lies in showing that the Tathagata should be seen through the Dharmakaya, not through the perfection of forms.' It also raises this text, saying: 'If so, although the Tathagata should not be seen through the perfection of forms, the perfection of forms should be the cause of attaining Anuttara-Samyak-Sambodhi.' To eliminate this attachment, the sutra says 'etc.' Although the sutra passage quoted in the treatise comes later, its meaning belongs to the earlier part. However, according to other versions, (the sutra should be) 'Subhuti, what do you think? Can Anuttara-Samyak-Sambodhi be attained through the perfection of forms? Subhuti, do not think like this; Anuttara-Samyak-Sambodhi cannot be attained through the perfection of forms,' and so on. Although the sutra texts vary slightly, the general meaning is to prevent people from thinking that Bodhi can be attained through the perfection of forms. Only this version of the sutra adds a 'not', becoming preventing 'Bodhi from being attained not through the perfection of forms', which is inconsistent with the meaning of the two treatises. Therefore, the initial sutra text has an extra 'not', which is a translator's error. Or it can be understood as meaning 'not through', isn't it through the perfection of forms that Bodhi is attained? (If one thinks) that Bodhi is attained through forms, then do not think like this. There is no need to remove the 'not'. There are three 'not's in the text, the first is a question, the second is a negation, and the third is a revelation of the correct meaning. Here are the first two. The first volume of the treatise, in explaining the embracing of the Dharmakaya, points to this passage, saying: 'This meaning explains that the nature of the perfection of forms is not Bodhi, nor can the perfection of forms be the cause (of attaining Bodhi).' Because form is the nature of form. Yan states: Form is the nature of form, and it naturally attracts the karmic reward of the excellent characteristics of the form body. The nature of the Dharmakaya Bodhi is not form, so how can form be the cause? The verse in the treatise says: 'Not (because of) the karmic reward of excellent characteristics, but relying on the accomplishment of merit, can the true Dharmakaya be attained, (because) skillful means and (form) are different.' Explanation complete.
云。此明何義。法身者是智相身。福德者是異相身故。演曰。智爲了因。得法身果福為生因。成相好報故。說相好為異相身。佛問善現。汝作是念。如來豈不以相具足得阿耨菩提耶。謂以具足福相而得。次遮止云。莫作是念。約情破也。此中亦應云。若以相具足因故得無上覺。轉輪聖王亦應得證。以具相故。以前影后經不重言。彼論因解轉輪聖王在前文釋。此亦不解。
經。如來不以至三菩提 演曰。第三結示正義。但由具無相智現證菩提。不以福相具足為因證無上覺。梁本云。如來不由具相得阿耨菩提。雖彼福業為證疏緣非親了因故不說得。
經。須菩提若至說諸法斷滅 演曰。心具足中。自下第五不住生死涅槃。即無住涅槃也。向說法身非福因得便舍于福而求涅槃。若爾便同二乘寂滅或樂取福不求涅槃。便於生死受諸苦惱。為除此著令成佛德無住涅槃。故此文起論云。此中為遮一向寂靜故顯示不住涅槃。若不住涅槃應受生死苦。為離此著等。彼論為斷第二十四失福及果疑。論云。有人起如是心。若不依福德得大菩提。如是諸菩薩則失福德及失果報。此意既以福一相非法身之因。則證法身時福德應失。福德既失。應無所感果報之身故成斷滅。尋彼釋意。雖不得法身菩提。而亦不失福德及彼果報。以能成
【現代漢語翻譯】 現代漢語譯本：云：『此明何義？』（云：『這說明了什麼意義？』）法身者是智相身，（法身是智慧之相的身體，）福德者是異相身故。（福德是不同於法身的色相之身。）演曰：『智爲了因，得法身果；（演法師說：『智慧是了因，能得到法身之果；）福為生因，成相好報故。（福德是生因，能成就相好之果報。）』說相好為異相身。（所以說相好是不同於法身的色相之身。）佛問善現：『汝作是念，如來豈不以相具足得阿耨菩提耶？』（佛問須菩提：『你這樣想嗎？如來難道不是因為具足了各種相好才證得阿耨多羅三藐三菩提的嗎？』）謂以具足福相而得。（意思是說因為具足了福德之相而證得。）次遮止云：『莫作是念。』（接著佛就制止說：『不要這樣想。』）約情破也。（這是從情理上破斥這種觀點。）此中亦應云：『若以相具足因故得無上覺，轉輪聖王亦應得證，以具相故。』（這裡也應該說：『如果因為具足相好的原因就能證得無上覺悟，那麼轉輪聖王也應該證得，因為他們也具足各種相好。』）以前影后經不重言。（因為前面的經文已經暗示了這一點，所以這裡不再重複。）彼論因解轉輪聖王在前文釋，此亦不解。（相關的論著解釋說轉輪聖王的內容已經在前面的經文中解釋過了，這裡也不再解釋。） 經：『如來不以至三菩提。』（經文說：『如來不是因為具足相好而證得阿耨多羅三藐三菩提。』）演曰：『第三結示正義。（演法師說：『第三是總結並揭示正確的含義。）但由具無相智現證菩提，（只是因為具有無相的智慧才能親證菩提，）不以福相具足為因證無上覺。（不是因為具足福德之相而證得無上覺悟。）』梁本云：『如來不由具相得阿耨菩提。（梁朝的譯本說：『如來不是因為具足相好而證得阿耨多羅三藐三菩提。』）』雖彼福業為證疏緣非親了因故不說得。（雖然福德之業是證得菩提的間接助緣，但不是直接的原因，所以不能說是因為福德而證得。） 經：『須菩提，若至說諸法斷滅。』（經文說：『須菩提，如果有人認為諸法是斷滅的。』）演曰：『心具足中，自下第五不住生死涅槃，即無住涅槃也。（演法師說：『在心具足中，從這裡開始是第五個方面，不住生死涅槃，也就是無住涅槃。）向說法身非福因得便舍于福而求涅槃。（前面說了法身不是因為福德而證得，所以就捨棄福德而只求涅槃。）若爾便同二乘寂滅或樂取福不求涅槃。（如果這樣，就和二乘的寂滅一樣，或者只喜歡追求福德而不求涅槃。）便於生死受諸苦惱。（這樣就會在生死輪迴中遭受各種苦惱。）為除此著令成佛德無住涅槃。（爲了去除這種執著，成就佛的功德，達到無住涅槃。）故此文起論云：『此中為遮一向寂靜故顯示不住涅槃。（所以這段經文引發的論述說：『這裡是爲了防止一味追求寂靜，所以才顯示不住涅槃。）』若不住涅槃應受生死苦，為離此著等。（如果不住涅槃，就應該承受生死之苦，爲了遠離這種執著等等。）彼論為斷第二十四失福及果疑。（那篇論著是爲了斷除第二十四種失去福德和果報的疑惑。）論云：『有人起如是心，若不依福德得大菩提，如是諸菩薩則失福德及失果報。（論著說：『有人產生這樣的想法，如果不依靠福德而證得大菩提，那麼這些菩薩就會失去福德和果報。』）此意既以福一相非法身之因，則證法身時福德應失。（這種想法認為，既然福德之相不是法身的原因，那麼在證得法身的時候，福德就應該失去。）福德既失，應無所感果報之身故成斷滅。（福德既然失去，就應該沒有能夠感應果報的身體，因此就成了斷滅。）尋彼釋意，雖不得法身菩提，而亦不失福德及彼果報。（探究那篇論著的解釋，雖然不能因為福德而證得法身菩提，但也不會失去福德以及福德所帶來的果報。）以能成
【English Translation】 English version: Cloud: 'What does this clarify?' The Dharmakaya (法身) [Dharma body] is the body of wisdom aspect, and merit (福德) [blessings and virtues] is the body of different aspects. Yan said: 'Wisdom is the cause for understanding, obtaining the fruit of Dharmakaya; merit is the cause for birth, accomplishing the reward of excellent marks.' Therefore, saying that excellent marks are the body of different aspects. The Buddha asked Subhuti (須菩提): 'Do you think that the Tathagata (如來) [Thus Come One] attained Anuttara-Samyak-Sambodhi (阿耨菩提) [unsurpassed complete enlightenment] by possessing complete marks?' Meaning that it was attained by possessing complete blessed marks. Then, he stopped him, saying: 'Do not think like that.' This is refuted based on sentiment. Here, it should also be said: 'If one attains supreme enlightenment because of the cause of possessing complete marks, then the Chakravartin (轉輪聖王) [Wheel-Turning King] should also attain it, because they possess complete marks.' Because the previous foreshadowing and subsequent sutras do not repeat the same words. The commentary explains that the Chakravartin was explained in the previous text, so it is not explained here either. Sutra: 'The Tathagata does not attain Samyak-Sambodhi (三菩提) [right and universal knowledge] because of marks.' Yan said: 'The third concludes and reveals the correct meaning. Only by possessing the wisdom of no-form can one directly realize Bodhi (菩提) [enlightenment], not by possessing complete blessed marks as the cause for attaining supreme enlightenment.' The Liang version says: 'The Tathagata does not attain Anuttara-Samyak-Sambodhi because of possessing marks.' Although that blessed karma is a distant condition for realization, not a direct cause, it is not said to be attained because of it. Sutra: 'Subhuti, if one says that all dharmas (諸法) [all phenomena] are annihilated.' Yan said: 'In the completeness of mind, from here onwards is the fifth aspect, not dwelling in Samsara (生死) [birth and death] or Nirvana (涅槃) [liberation], which is non-abiding Nirvana. Previously, it was said that the Dharmakaya is not attained because of merit, so one abandons merit and seeks Nirvana. If so, it would be the same as the extinction of the two vehicles (二乘) [Shravakas and Pratyekabuddhas], or one would enjoy taking merit and not seek Nirvana. Then, one would suffer all kinds of afflictions in Samsara. To remove this attachment and accomplish the Buddha's virtue of non-abiding Nirvana, this text arises. The commentary says: 'Here, to prevent one-sided tranquility, it is shown that one does not abide in Nirvana.' If one does not abide in Nirvana, one should suffer the pain of Samsara, to be free from this attachment, etc. That commentary is to dispel the twenty-fourth doubt of losing merit and its fruit. The commentary says: 'Some people have such a thought: if one does not rely on merit to attain great Bodhi, then these Bodhisattvas will lose merit and lose the reward of fruit.' This means that since the aspect of merit is not the cause of the Dharmakaya, then the merit should be lost when realizing the Dharmakaya. Since merit is lost, there should be no body that can sense the reward of fruit, thus becoming annihilation. Examining the meaning of that explanation, although one cannot attain the Dharmakaya Bodhi because of merit, one does not lose merit and its reward. Because it can accomplish
就智慧莊嚴功德莊嚴得報身菩提故。由有報身非同二乘。一向寂滅即不住涅槃。由受無漏福不取有漏福故。不住生死。彼因斷疑亦顯不住。與此無違。文分為二。初不住涅槃后不住流轉。初文有四問遮徴釋此問也。此雖教誡十地菩薩令求佛果無住涅槃。然說一切發趣大乘初心菩薩。尚不欲住生死涅槃。況于如來。故令菩薩知佛果德。而以愿求。然諸菩薩意願虛空法界等盡。我願方盡故不可說。同於二乘有其斷盡。況同外道撥無因果起于斷見空見等耶。
經。莫作是念 演曰。第二遮止莫作是念。趣菩薩乘無餘涅槃得真法身。諸勝無漏一切皆滅。論云。於法不說斷滅者。謂如所住法而通達。不斷一切生死影像法。于涅槃自在行利益眾生事。此中為遮一向寂靜故。顯示不住涅槃。演曰。所住法者謂即真如。真如雖在生死不為苦逼。雖處涅槃不同惑斷。故云如所住法而通達也。不斷一切生死法者。非如二乘厭苦欣滅。從初發心多劫生死廣行妙行。若至佛果示現生死以利群生即是不住無為不盡有為。此應料簡無住涅槃菩薩得不。
經。何以故至不說斷滅相 演曰。徴及解釋。相謂狀貌體相行相。余如上釋。彼論頌云。
不失功德因 及彼勝果報 得勝忍不失 以得無垢果 示勝福德相 是故說譬喻
【現代漢語翻譯】 現代漢語譯本 就智慧莊嚴和功德莊嚴而獲得報身菩提的緣故。因為具有報身，所以不同於二乘（聲聞乘和緣覺乘）。不會一味地追求寂滅，因此不住于涅槃。由於接受無漏的福報，而不接受有漏的福報，所以不住于生死。斷除疑惑的原因也顯示了不住于涅槃和生死，與此沒有衝突。文章分為兩部分，首先是不住涅槃，然後是不住流轉。第一部分有四個方面：提問、遮止、征釋。這是提問。雖然這是教誡十地菩薩，讓他們尋求佛果，不住于涅槃，但也是在說一切發心趣向大乘的初心菩薩，尚且不願安住于生死和涅槃，更何況是如來呢？所以讓菩薩瞭解佛果的功德，從而發願求取。然而，諸位菩薩的意願如同虛空和法界一樣無盡，我的願望才可能窮盡，所以不能說如同二乘那樣有斷盡的時候。更何況是像外道那樣否定因果，產生斷見和空見等邪見呢？
經文：『莫作是念』 演曰：第二是遮止『莫作是念』。趣向菩薩乘，獲得無餘涅槃，得到真法身，諸種殊勝的無漏功德都會滅盡。論中說：『對於法，不說斷滅』，是指安住於法而通達，不斷一切生死影像法，在涅槃中自在地行事，利益眾生。這裡是爲了遮止一味地追求寂靜，所以顯示不住于涅槃。 演曰：所住的法，是指真如。真如雖然在生死中，卻不會被痛苦所逼迫；雖然處於涅槃中，卻不同於斷除煩惱。所以說『如所住法而通達』。不斷一切生死法，不是像二乘那樣厭惡痛苦而欣求寂滅，而是從最初發心，經歷多劫生死，廣行妙行。如果到達佛果，示現生死來利益眾生，就是不住于無為，不窮盡有為。這裡應該簡要地討論一下，無住涅槃的菩薩是否能得到（這種境界）。
經文：『何以故至不說斷滅相』 演曰：征問以及解釋。相，是指狀貌、體相、行相。其餘的解釋如上文。那部論的偈頌說：
不失功德因，以及殊勝的果報； 獲得殊勝的忍辱，不會失去，因為獲得了無垢的果實； 示現殊勝的福德之相，所以說了譬喻。
【English Translation】 English version It is because of the wisdom adornment and merit adornment that one attains the Reward Body Bodhi (Bao Shen Puti, the Sambhogakaya enlightenment). Because of having a Reward Body, it is different from the Two Vehicles (Sheng Wen Cheng and Yuan Jue Cheng, the Hearer Vehicle and the Solitary Realizer Vehicle). One does not seek only quiescence, therefore one does not abide in Nirvana. Because one receives uncontaminated blessings, and does not take contaminated blessings, one does not abide in Samsara (Sheng Si, the cycle of birth and death). The reason for cutting off doubts also shows that one does not abide. There is no contradiction with this. The text is divided into two parts: first, not abiding in Nirvana; second, not abiding in transmigration. The first part has four aspects: question, refutation, inquiry, and explanation. This is the question. Although this is an admonition to the Ten Bhumi Bodhisattvas (Shi Di Pusa, the ten stages of Bodhisattvas) to seek the Buddha fruit and not abide in Nirvana, it is also saying that even the initial Bodhisattvas who aspire to the Mahayana (Da Cheng, the Great Vehicle) do not want to abide in Samsara and Nirvana, let alone the Tathagata (Ru Lai, Thus Come One). Therefore, let Bodhisattvas know the virtues of the Buddha fruit, and thus make vows to seek it. However, the vows of the Bodhisattvas are as endless as space and the Dharma realm, and my vows can only be exhausted then, so it cannot be said that it is the same as the Two Vehicles in having an end. Moreover, how can it be like the heretics who deny cause and effect, and give rise to nihilistic views and empty views?
Sutra: 『Do not have such thoughts.』 Yan said: The second is to refute 『Do not have such thoughts.』 Approaching the Bodhisattva Vehicle, obtaining Nirvana without remainder, attaining the True Dharma Body, all the superior uncontaminated merits will be extinguished. The Treatise says: 『Regarding the Dharma, it does not speak of annihilation,』 which means abiding in the Dharma and understanding, not cutting off all the images of Samsara, acting freely in Nirvana, and benefiting sentient beings. Here, it is to refute the pursuit of only quiescence, so it shows not abiding in Nirvana. Yan said: The Dharma in which one abides refers to Suchness (Zhen Ru, the true nature of reality). Although Suchness is in Samsara, it is not forced by suffering; although it is in Nirvana, it is different from cutting off afflictions. Therefore, it is said 『abiding in the Dharma and understanding.』 Not cutting off all the Dharmas of Samsara is not like the Two Vehicles who dislike suffering and rejoice in extinction, but from the initial aspiration, experiencing many kalpas of Samsara, widely practicing wonderful practices. If one reaches the Buddha fruit, showing Samsara to benefit sentient beings is not abiding in non-action, and not exhausting action. Here, it should be briefly discussed whether the Bodhisattva of non-abiding Nirvana can attain (this state).
Sutra: 『Why is it so, to not speak of the aspect of annihilation?』 Yan said: Questioning and explanation. Aspect refers to appearance, substance, and conduct. The rest of the explanation is as above. The verse of that treatise says:
Not losing the cause of merit, and the superior reward; Obtaining superior forbearance, not losing it, because obtaining the stainless fruit; Showing the aspect of superior blessings, therefore speaking of metaphors.
是福德無報 如是受不取
初頌說斷疑。即當此論不住涅槃。后頌廣釋所以。即當此論不住生死。彼初長行文易可解。此論生下云。若不住涅槃應受生死苦惱。為離此著故。
經。須菩提若菩薩至七寶佈施 演曰。下明不住流轉。文分有二。初明受福德非苦所惱。次明受報而不住著。初中又二。初舉劣后顯勝。此初也。貞觀云。奉施如來應正等覺明凡夫人施佛勝因感得輪王釋梵等報。尚非苦逼。況佛菩薩勝福德耶。凈名經云。轉輪聖王以少福故尚無病等。
經。若復有人至所得功德 演曰。顯勝也。論云無我無生法忍者何義。如來於有為法得自在故。無彼生死法。我又非業煩惱力生故名無我。無生者此中雲何得顯示。如說攝取余福。尚于生死中不受苦惱。何況菩薩。于無我無生法中得忍。已所生福德勝多於彼。演曰。此中且以菩薩校量意顯佛果所受福報。定無有苦勸令攝取。彼論釋無我得無生云有三種。無我不生者。謂本性無生忍。自然無生忍。惑苦無生忍。言二種無我相者。謂人無我法無我也。問若福田不滅雖感果報不受苦迫。如梵釋等。應處生死不住涅槃。
經。須菩提至不受福德故 演曰。此明受報而不住著也。雖福因不滅。由不取著不住生死。若取著福住生死故。亦是釋前福
【現代漢語翻譯】 現代漢語譯本 『是福德無報，如是受不取』——這句經文說明了福德沒有相應的果報，因此不應該執著于接受它。 初頌解釋了斷除疑惑。即說明此論點是不停留在涅槃（Nirvana，佛教術語，指解脫生死輪迴的境界）的。后頌廣泛解釋了原因。即說明此論點是不停留在生死（Samsara，佛教術語，指眾生在六道中輪迴）的。前面的長行文很容易理解。此論在下文說：『若不住涅槃應受生死苦惱』，是爲了遠離這種執著。
『經。須菩提若菩薩至七寶佈施』——下面說明不住于流轉。文分為兩部分。首先說明接受福德不會被痛苦所困擾。其次說明接受果報而不執著。第一部分又分為兩部分。先舉出較差的例子，然後顯示殊勝的例子。這是第一部分。貞觀（人名）說：『奉獻佈施給如來應正等覺（Tathagata Arhat Samyak-sambuddha，如來的稱號，指徹底覺悟的佛陀）表明凡夫俗人佈施給佛能感得轉輪王（Chakravartin，擁有統治世界的輪寶的理想君主）、釋梵（梵天之王，印度教神祇）等的果報。尚且不會被痛苦逼迫。更何況佛菩薩的殊勝福德呢？』《凈名經》（Vimalakirti Sutra，佛教經典）說：『轉輪聖王因為少許福德尚且沒有疾病等痛苦。』
『經。若復有人至所得功德』——顯示殊勝的例子。論中說：『無我無生法忍者何義？』（Anatta-anutpada-dharma-ksanti，對無我無生之法的忍耐，是菩薩的境界）如來（Tathagata，佛的稱號）對於有為法（Samskrta，由因緣和合而成的法）得到自在的緣故。沒有那些生死之法。我又不是由業和煩惱的力量所生，所以名為無我。無生（Anutpada，不生不滅的真理）在這裡如何顯示呢？就像說攝取其餘的福報。尚且在生死中不受痛苦困擾。何況菩薩在無我無生法中得到忍耐。已經所生的福德勝過他們很多。』這裡且用菩薩來衡量，意在顯示佛果所受的福報。一定沒有痛苦，勸令攝取。那部論解釋無我得到無生有三種。無我不生者。指的是本性無生忍。自然無生忍。惑苦無生忍。所說的兩種無我相。指的是人無我法無我也。問：如果福田（Punya-ksetra，指值得佈施的對象，如佛、僧）不滅，雖然感得果報，但不受痛苦逼迫。如梵釋等。應該處於生死，不停留在涅槃。
『經。須菩提至不受福德故』——這裡說明接受果報而不執著。雖然福德的因不滅。由於不取著，所以不停留在生死。如果取著福德，就停留在生死。這也是解釋前面的福德。
【English Translation】 English version 『It is that merit has no reward; thus, it is not accepted.』 This verse explains that merit has no corresponding retribution, so one should not be attached to accepting it. The initial verse explains the cutting off of doubts, indicating that this argument does not dwell in Nirvana (the state of liberation from the cycle of birth and death). The subsequent verse extensively explains the reason, indicating that this argument does not dwell in Samsara (the cycle of birth and death). The preceding prose passage is easily understood. This treatise states below: 『If one does not dwell in Nirvana, one should endure the suffering of birth and death,』 in order to be free from this attachment.
『Sutra: Subhuti, if a Bodhisattva even gives the seven treasures in charity...』 The following explains not dwelling in transmigration. The text is divided into two parts. First, it explains that receiving merit is not troubled by suffering. Second, it explains receiving retribution without attachment. The first part is further divided into two parts. First, it cites an inferior example, then reveals a superior example. This is the first part. Zhenguan (person's name) said: 『Offering charity to the Tathagata Arhat Samyak-sambuddha (title of the Buddha, referring to the fully enlightened Buddha) shows that ordinary people giving to the Buddha can bring about the retribution of a Chakravartin (ideal monarch with a world-ruling wheel) or Sakra-Brahma (king of the Brahma heaven, Hindu deity). They are not even oppressed by suffering. How much more so the superior merit of Buddhas and Bodhisattvas?』 The Vimalakirti Sutra (Buddhist scripture) says: 『A Chakravartin king, because of a little merit, still has no illness or other suffering.』
『Sutra: If there is someone who... to the merit obtained...』 This reveals a superior example. The treatise says: 『What is the meaning of Anatta-anutpada-dharma-ksanti (patience with the dharma of no-self and no-birth, the realm of the Bodhisattva)?』 The Tathagata (title of the Buddha) has obtained freedom regarding conditioned dharmas (Samskrta, dharmas compounded by causes and conditions). There are no such dharmas of birth and death. I am also not born from the power of karma and afflictions, so I am called no-self. How is no-birth (Anutpada, the truth of non-arising and non-ceasing) shown here? It is like saying that taking up other merits still does not suffer in birth and death. How much more so a Bodhisattva who has attained patience in the dharma of no-self and no-birth. The merit already produced is much greater than theirs.』 Here, the Bodhisattva is used as a measure to show the merit received by the Buddha-fruit. There is certainly no suffering, encouraging one to take it up. That treatise explains that obtaining no-birth from no-self has three types. Those who do not give rise to no-self refer to the patience of no-birth by nature. Natural patience of no-birth. Patience of no-birth from delusion and suffering. The two aspects of no-self that are spoken of refer to the no-self of persons and the no-self of dharmas. Question: If the field of merit (Punya-ksetra, referring to worthy objects of charity, such as the Buddha and Sangha) does not perish, although one receives retribution, one is not oppressed by suffering, like Sakra-Brahma and others. One should be in birth and death, not dwelling in Nirvana.
『Sutra: Subhuti... therefore, not accepting merit.』 This explains receiving retribution without attachment. Although the cause of merit does not perish, because of not grasping, one does not dwell in birth and death. If one grasps merit, one dwells in birth and death. This is also an explanation of the preceding merit.
勝所由。只緣不著所以成勝。文分為三。初標次問后釋。此初也。
經。須菩提白佛至不受福德 演曰。正申問也。善現以佛前說求福資糧。次前復言福勝於前。今後說言不受福德故問所以。論云以世尊于余處說應受福聚故。
經。須菩提菩薩所作福德至不受福德 演曰。第三為釋。魏本云。言須菩提菩薩受福德不取福德。是故菩薩取福德。論云。以方便故應受而不應取。受之與取通名相似。若依別義。受謂領受。取謂貪著。故經論中隨舉取受。或別或通故。貞觀云。所應攝受不應攝受是故說名所應攝受。演曰。與魏本經文別義同。雖受福德。而不取著取著福德即同有漏。沉淪生死故。受福德故。不住涅槃。非如二乘永寂滅故。不取福德不住生死。不同凡夫增染著故。前卷論釋此云。受者說有故。取者修彼道故。如福聚及果中皆不應著。更勘餘論。彼論頌文。
是福德無報 如是受不取
取者彼福德得有漏果報。以有漏果故。彼福德可訶。如是取者名之為取。如取非道故。此福德無報。無報者。無彼有漏報。是故此福德受而不取。演曰。因取福德而生有漏故。是可訶無漏福德不招漏果。是故可受大意同此。
經。須菩提若有人至不解我所說義 演曰。心具足中第六行住凈。為化有情往
【現代漢語翻譯】 現代漢語譯本：勝出的原因。僅僅因為不執著於此，所以才能成就勝出。這段經文分為三個部分。首先是標示，其次是提問，最後是解釋。這是第一部分。
經文：『須菩提稟告佛說……乃至不受福德。』 演曰：這是正式地提出疑問。善現（須菩提的另一個名字）因為佛陀之前說過求福的資糧，之後又說福勝過之前所說的，現在又說不受福德，所以才問其中的原因。論中說，因為世尊在其他地方說過應該接受福聚的緣故。
經文：『須菩提，菩薩所作的福德……乃至不受福德。』 演曰：這是第三部分，用來解釋。魏譯本說：『須菩提，菩薩接受福德但不執取福德。因此，菩薩獲取福德。』 論中說：『因為方便的緣故，應該接受但不應該執取。』 接受和執取，從字面上看意思相近。如果按照不同的含義來理解，接受是指領受，執取是指貪著。因此，經論中根據情況，有時用『取』，有時用『受』，有時通用。』 貞觀的解釋是：『所應該攝受的，不應該執取的，所以稱為所應該攝受。』 演曰：與魏譯本的經文含義相同。雖然接受福德，但不執取福德，執取福德就等同於有漏，會沉淪於生死之中。接受福德，所以不住于涅槃，不像二乘那樣永遠寂滅。不執取福德，所以不住于生死，不同於凡夫增加染著。』 前卷的論釋中說：『接受，是說有；執取，是修彼道。』 比如福聚以及果報中，都不應該執著。更需要參考其他的論著。那部論的頌文是：
『這福德沒有報應，像這樣接受而不執取。』
執取的人，他的福德會得到有漏的果報。因為是有漏的果報，所以這種福德是應該呵斥的。像這樣執取的人，就叫做執取，因為執取了非正道。這種福德沒有報應，沒有報應，是指沒有那種有漏的報應。所以這種福德是接受而不執取的。 演曰：因為執取福德而產生有漏，所以是應該呵斥的。無漏的福德不會招來有漏的果報，所以是可以接受的。大意與此相同。
經文：『須菩提，如果有人……不理解我所說的意義。』 演曰：心具足中的第六行，是行住清凈，爲了教化有情眾生前往。
【English Translation】 English version: The reason for surpassing. It is only because of not being attached that one achieves surpassing. This text is divided into three parts. First, the indication; second, the question; and third, the explanation. This is the first part.
Sutra: 'Subhuti said to the Buddha... up to not accepting merit.' Commentary: This is the formal raising of the question. The worthy Subhuti, because the Buddha previously spoke of the resources for seeking merit, and then said that merit surpasses what was previously said, and now says not accepting merit, therefore asks the reason for it. The treatise says, because the World Honored One said elsewhere that one should accept the accumulation of merit.
Sutra: 'Subhuti, the merit made by a Bodhisattva... up to not accepting merit.' Commentary: This is the third part, used for explanation. The Wei version says: 'Subhuti, a Bodhisattva accepts merit but does not grasp at merit. Therefore, a Bodhisattva obtains merit.' The treatise says: 'Because of skillful means, one should accept but should not grasp.' 'Accepting' and 'grasping' have similar meanings in general terms. If understood according to different meanings, 'accepting' means receiving, and 'grasping' means being attached. Therefore, in the sutras and treatises, 'grasping' and 'accepting' are used according to the situation, sometimes separately, sometimes generally.' Zhenguan explains: 'What should be embraced, should not be grasped, therefore it is called what should be embraced.' Commentary: It has the same meaning as the Wei version of the sutra. Although accepting merit, one does not grasp at merit; grasping at merit is the same as having outflows (leaks), and one will sink into birth and death. Accepting merit, therefore one does not abide in Nirvana, not like the two vehicles (śrāvakas and pratyekabuddhas) who are eternally extinguished. Not grasping at merit, therefore one does not abide in birth and death, not like ordinary people who increase defilement and attachment.' The commentary in the previous chapter says: 'Accepting, is saying there is; grasping, is cultivating that path.' For example, in the accumulation of merit and in the results, one should not be attached. Further reference should be made to other treatises. The verse in that treatise is:
'This merit has no retribution, like this accepting without grasping.'
The one who grasps, their merit will obtain the fruit of outflows. Because it is the fruit of outflows, this merit is to be censured. The one who grasps like this is called grasping, because they have grasped the wrong path. This merit has no retribution, no retribution means there is no retribution of outflows. Therefore, this merit is accepted without grasping. Commentary: Because grasping at merit produces outflows, it is to be censured. Merit without outflows does not attract the fruit of outflows, therefore it can be accepted. The general meaning is the same as this.
Sutra: 'Subhuti, if someone... does not understand the meaning of what I have said.' Commentary: The sixth practice in the perfection of mind is pure conduct, to transform sentient beings to go forth.
來行住神通方便說法流轉有為之事。此勝惠行名之為行安處。如是名之為住。而無諸染故複名凈。前第五心總明不住生死涅槃。而未別明方便化用。今為明之有此文起。于中有三。一威儀行住。二破名色身自在行住。三不染行住。明隨感應似有往來。往來之中觀性不執成大神通。復于說法及生死法而無染著。今具足說令諸菩薩上求學故。次第如是。初文來者以諸菩薩上求佛地所有事業化眾生等。乃謂如來實有來去而生習學故。今為說實無去來令知修學故有此文。彼論為釋第二十五化無受用疑。疑雲。若諸如來不受彼果報。云何諸菩薩福德眾生受用。疑意既云是福德無報無有漏報。云何得於十方世界出沒往來。現身說法令生睹見而受用耶。既爾法身應有來去。由不悟化而迷於真也。文言菩薩意說如來從因為名 解中雲。佛就果為語。不爾問答文不相應。釋此疑者化有來去不妨受用。然據真理本無去來。此論除報已上求彼論遣疑而識化亦不相違。文分為三。初牒報顯非。次徴非所以。后釋義所由。此初也。先牒后非。此論但云 于中行者謂去來。住者餘威儀。餘威儀者攝餘三種。謂住坐臥。餘本有住。此中略無。彼論偈云。
是福德應報 為化諸眾生 自然如是業 諸佛現十方
釋云。明諸佛化身有用。
彼法身諸佛不去不來故。依彼釋經若言真身如來有來去等。彼不解我所說義也。而化有用不妨往來眾生受用以釋前疑。
經。何以故至故名如來 演曰。徴及釋也。何故說為不解。我意以真法身無所從來無所至去。湛然常住故說來去不解。我意彼頌云。
去來化身佛 如來常不動 于彼法界處 非一亦非異
釋云。若如來有去來差別即不得言常。如是住常。如是住者。不變不異義故。演曰。頌初句化有去來。次句真無去來。后之二句明化。與真不一不異。性相別論故不一。攝相歸性故不異。問。自受用身由遍滿故亦無來去。何故不約自受用說唯據法身。答。彼論前後多依法身。具約真如說無來去不障自受。亦無來去又無去來。約法報化因緣唯識無相真如。此等觀門皆來去。經中且依法身真如理實報化。唯識等門皆可通說。
經。須菩提若善男子至寧為多不 演曰。下第二破名色身自在行住。以諸菩薩見佛化身有去來像執為實有前。且約真言無來去。于形相身來得自在惠行而住。離真見有去來之相。今令觀折諸佛相身五蘊無實故無所見。所見者妄謂有來去。除所見已即證於真。真無去來故。于名色得自在惠行住。今為明此故斯文起。又前明威儀實無去來。以顯法身常住不動。而未廣顯神通
【現代漢語翻譯】 現代漢語譯本： 因為法身諸佛沒有來去。如果依據解釋經典的說法，認為真身如來有來去等等，那麼他們是不理解我所說的含義。而化身有作用，不妨礙往來，眾生可以受用，以此來解釋之前的疑惑。
經文：『何以故至故名如來』 演曰：這是提問和解釋。為什麼說是不理解我的意思呢？我的意思是，真正的法身無所從來，無所至去，湛然常住，所以說來去是不理解我的意思。那首偈頌說：
『去來化身佛，如來常不動，于彼法界處，非一亦非異。』
解釋說：如果如來有去來差別，就不能說是常住。像這樣安住常住，是因為不變不異的緣故。演曰：偈頌的第一句說化身有去來，第二句說真身沒有去來。後面的兩句說明化身與真身不一不異。從性相分別的角度來說，所以不一；從攝相歸性的角度來說，所以不異。問：自受用身由於遍滿的緣故，也沒有來去，為什麼不從自受用身來說，而只說法身呢？答：那部論典前後多是依據法身。完全依據真如來說沒有來去，不妨礙自受用身也沒有來去。又沒有去來，從法、報、化、因緣、唯識、無相真如這些觀門來說，都有來去。經文中且依據法身真如的道理，實際上報身、化身、唯識等門都可以通用來說。
經文：『須菩提若善男子至寧為多不』 演曰：下面第二段是破除對名色身的自在行住的執著。因為諸位菩薩見到佛的化身有去來的形象，就執著認為是真實存在的。之前且說法身沒有來去，對於形相身能夠自在地來去惠行而住。離開真如而見到有去來的形象。現在讓他們觀察折損諸佛的相身，五蘊沒有實性，所以沒有什麼可見的。所見到的都是虛妄的，認為有來去。去除所見到的，就證悟了真如。真如沒有來去。對於名色能夠自在地惠行住。現在爲了說明這個道理，所以才有了這段經文。又之前說明威儀實際上沒有來去，是爲了顯示法身常住不動，而沒有廣泛地顯示神通。
【English Translation】 English version: Because the Dharmakaya (法身) [Dharma body] Buddhas neither go nor come. If, according to the interpretation of the scriptures, it is said that the true body Tathagata (如來) [Thus Come One] has coming and going, etc., then they do not understand the meaning of what I say. However, the transformation body (化身) [Nirmanakaya] has a function, and it does not hinder coming and going, so that sentient beings can benefit from it, in order to explain the previous doubts.
Sutra: 'Why is it so, hence the name Tathagata (如來)?' Commentary: This is questioning and explaining. Why is it said that they do not understand my meaning? My meaning is that the true Dharmakaya (法身) [Dharma body] has nowhere to come from and nowhere to go to, it is serenely abiding, therefore I say that coming and going is not understanding my meaning. That verse says:
'The transformation body (化身) [Nirmanakaya] Buddha comes and goes, the Tathagata (如來) [Thus Come One] is always unmoving, in that Dharmadhatu (法界) [Dharma Realm], it is neither one nor different.'
Explanation: If the Tathagata (如來) [Thus Come One] has coming and going differences, then it cannot be said to be constant. Abiding in constancy like this is because of the meaning of unchanging and undifferentiated. Commentary: The first line of the verse says that the transformation body (化身) [Nirmanakaya] has coming and going, the second line says that the true body has no coming and going. The last two lines explain that the transformation body (化身) [Nirmanakaya] and the true body are neither one nor different. From the perspective of distinguishing between nature and characteristics, they are not one; from the perspective of subsuming characteristics into nature, they are not different. Question: The self-enjoyment body (自受用身) [Sambhogakaya] also has no coming and going because of its pervasiveness, why not speak from the self-enjoyment body (自受用身) [Sambhogakaya], but only speak of the Dharmakaya (法身) [Dharma body]? Answer: That treatise mostly relies on the Dharmakaya (法身) [Dharma body] from beginning to end. Completely relying on Suchness (真如) [Tathata] to say that there is no coming and going does not hinder the self-enjoyment body (自受用身) [Sambhogakaya] from also having no coming and going. Moreover, there is no coming and going. From the perspectives of Dharma, Reward, Transformation, conditions, Consciousness-only, No-characteristics, and Suchness (真如) [Tathata], there is coming and going in these contemplation methods. The Sutra relies on the principle of Dharmakaya (法身) [Dharma body] Suchness (真如) [Tathata], but in reality, the Reward body (報身) [Sambhogakaya], Transformation body (化身) [Nirmanakaya], and Consciousness-only, etc., can all be universally spoken of.
Sutra: 'Subhuti (須菩提), if a good man, etc., would it be many or not?' Commentary: The second section below is to break the attachment to the free conduct and dwelling of the name and form body. Because the Bodhisattvas see the transformation body (化身) [Nirmanakaya] of the Buddha having the appearance of coming and going, they cling to it as being truly existent. Previously, it was said that the Dharmakaya (法身) [Dharma body] has no coming and going, and that the form body can freely come and go, bestowing benefits and dwelling. Separating from Suchness (真如) [Tathata] and seeing the appearance of coming and going. Now, let them observe and diminish the form body of the Buddhas, the five aggregates have no real nature, so there is nothing to be seen. What is seen is illusory, thinking that there is coming and going. Removing what is seen, one then realizes Suchness (真如) [Tathata]. Suchness (真如) [Tathata] has no coming and going. One can freely bestow benefits and dwell in name and form. Now, in order to explain this principle, this passage arises. Moreover, previously explaining that the deportment actually has no coming and going was to show that the Dharmakaya (法身) [Dharma body] is constantly abiding and unmoving, but the supernormal powers were not extensively shown.
化用巧便自在。今令學佛觀彼五陰細末不念空無所得。發起神通所化自在故有此文。問。前第十住處色及眾生身摶取中觀破相應行。與此何別。答。前化地前令除法執自不造業及生死輪迴。今化地上令求佛地利他事中神通作用故有差別。若依彼論前明施福生染如塵以辯校量。今斷第二十六真化一異疑。謂聞前說化有去來及說法等真無。此事有二疑生。一疑真化為一為異。二疑化佛非真所說之法應不得益。論無疑詞。準釋合有為斷初疑有此文來。以見有化不了相無方疑一異說。塵界喻曉法無我悟證於真不見實相。何有一異。故於名色得自在行住與此不異。人界喻法性塵喻化身喻中塵界既非一異。法中真化亦非一異。此論據法以生智。彼論約喻以除疑。不相違也。依此論科文分為六。一無所見方便。二如所不分別即無能見。三何人無分別。四於何法不分別。五何方便不分別即何智證。六云何不分別即何行相。初一總明破折方便。后五別釋意義所由。初中有二。初明蘊非實。后約二諦辨。初中復三。初破色二破名后雙破。依彼論科大分為二。初舉喻。后須菩提若人言下法合。喻中復二。初如來以微塵喻告。后善現以世界喻領。初文即此折破色身。就中有六。一問二答三徴四釋五難六通。此初佛問。但以三千世界碎為微塵。依
魏本經乃有兩重複以示許微塵世界碎為微塵阿僧祇。貞觀亦示自餘四經。皆唯一重其兩重者顯折塵多更無別義。論云。于中細末方便無所得方便。無所得如前說。此即細末方便。成唯識云。于粗色相漸次除折至不可折。假立極微梁本微塵亦名鄰虛。即極微也。彼論云碎微塵喻示現何義。偈言。
世界作微塵 此喻示彼義 微塵碎為末 示現煩惱盡
釋意示彼義者。示彼前偈。於是法界處非一亦非異義故。彼諸佛如來。于真如法界中。非一處住。亦非異處位。為示此義故。演曰。微塵碎為末者。即是碎末為微塵。謂破粗色以作細塵。非謂折塵以成其末。塵不可折如何成。示此之喻意。總聚粗色以況真如。折為細塵以喻化相法身。一而喻總化身。多而比塵起化之。能要由障盡故云微塵碎為末。示現煩惱盡也。文言煩惱亦攝所知。新論云。應知諸佛世尊。於法界中煩惱障盡非一處性亦作異性。此問善現數量多不。
經。甚多世尊 演曰。第二答多。準餘本經。自下三段並善現說成佛塵喻。此論既有多塵。何有其實色身之體。彼論由煩惱盡證真如理故起化彌多。然此名眾餘本名聚故。貞觀云。彼微塵聚甚多世尊。此及魏經聚名為眾。餘四本經眾名為聚。明知眾聚其義是同。
經。何以故 演曰。
【現代漢語翻譯】 現代漢語譯本：魏本經中有兩重含義，用以表示許許多多的微塵世界破碎成無數的微塵（A僧祇，asaṃkhya，意為無數）。貞觀本也顯示，其餘四部經都只有一重含義，這兩重含義明顯表示微塵眾多，沒有其他意義。論中說：『于中細末方便無所得方便。』『無所得』如前所說，這就是細末方便。《成唯識論》中說：『于粗色相漸次除折至不可折，假立極微。』梁本微塵也稱為鄰虛，也就是極微。該論中說，破碎微塵的比喻顯示了什麼意義？偈語說： 『世界作微塵，此喻示彼義；微塵碎為末，示現煩惱盡。』 解釋：『示彼義者』，指的是示彼前偈。因此，在法界之處，非一亦非異，因此，諸佛如來在真如法界中，不住於一處，也不位於異處，爲了顯示這個意義。演曰：『微塵碎為末者』，就是將碎末變為微塵，指的是破除粗色以作成細塵，而不是指折斷微塵以成為碎末，塵不可折，如何能成？顯示這個比喻的意義，總聚粗色來比況真如，折為細塵來比喻化相法身，一而比喻總化身，多而比擬塵起化，能夠做到這一點，是因為障礙消盡，所以說『微塵碎為末，示現煩惱盡也』。文中說的煩惱也包括所知。新論中說：『應知諸佛世尊，於法界中煩惱障盡非一處性亦作異性。』這裡問善現數量是否眾多。 經文：『甚多世尊』。演曰：第二是回答眾多。按照其他版本的經文，從下面三段都是善現所說，成就佛的微塵比喻。此論既然有很多微塵，哪裡有其實色身的本體？該論認為，由於煩惱消盡，證悟真如之理，所以化身眾多。然而，此經名為眾，其他版本名為聚，所以貞觀本說：『彼微塵聚甚多世尊』。此經和魏經的聚名為眾，其餘四本經的眾名為聚，明確知道眾和聚的意義是相同的。 經文：『何以故』。演曰：
【English Translation】 English version: The Wei version of the Sutra has two layers of meaning, indicating that countless microcosm worlds are broken into numerous fine dust particles (asaṃkhya, meaning countless). The Zhenguan version also shows that the other four Sutras have only one layer of meaning. These two layers clearly indicate that there are many fine dust particles, with no other meaning. The commentary says: 'Among them, subtle and minute expedient means are unobtainable.' 'Unobtainable' is as previously stated; this is the subtle and minute expedient means. The Vijñaptimātratāsiddhi says: 'In coarse material appearances, gradually reduce and break them down until they cannot be broken down further, hypothetically establishing the ultimate particle.' The Liang version of fine dust is also called linxu, which is the ultimate particle. That commentary says, what meaning does the analogy of breaking fine dust illustrate? The verse says: 'Worlds made into fine dust, this analogy illustrates that meaning; fine dust broken into powder, manifesting the exhaustion of afflictions.' Explanation: 'Illustrating that meaning' refers to illustrating the previous verse. Therefore, in the realm of Dharma, it is neither one nor different. Thus, the Tathāgatas, in the realm of Suchness, do not dwell in one place, nor are they located in a different place, in order to illustrate this meaning. Yan said: 'Fine dust broken into powder' means turning broken powder into fine dust, referring to breaking down coarse matter to create fine dust, not referring to breaking fine dust to become powder. How can dust, which cannot be broken, be formed? It illustrates the meaning of this analogy, gathering coarse matter to compare it to Suchness, breaking it into fine dust to compare it to the manifested Dharma body, one to compare it to the total manifested body, many to compare it to the arising of manifestations from dust. Being able to do this is because obstacles are exhausted, so it is said, 'Fine dust broken into powder, manifesting the exhaustion of afflictions.' The afflictions mentioned in the text also include what is knowable. The new commentary says: 'It should be known that the Buddhas, the World Honored Ones, in the realm of Dharma, the exhaustion of afflictive obstructions is not of one nature, nor is it of a different nature.' Here, Subhuti is asked whether the quantity is numerous. Sutra: 'Very many, World Honored One.' Yan said: The second is answering 'many.' According to other versions of the Sutra, the following three sections are all spoken by Subhuti, completing the analogy of the Buddha's fine dust. Since this commentary has many fine dust particles, where is the essence of its actual material body? That commentary believes that because afflictions are exhausted and the principle of Suchness is realized, the manifested bodies are numerous. However, this Sutra is named 'multitude,' while other versions are named 'collection,' so the Zhenguan version says: 'That collection of fine dust is very many, World Honored One.' In this Sutra and the Wei Sutra, 'collection' is named 'multitude,' while in the other four Sutras, 'multitude' is named 'collection,' clearly knowing that the meanings of 'multitude' and 'collection' are the same. Sutra: 'Why is that?' Yan said:
第三徴云微塵。若實有便同外道。既無實體。何故言多。
經。若是微塵眾至佛則不說是微塵眾。演曰。第四釋也。論指此文。是為無所見方便。此說有何義。若微塵聚第一義是有者。世尊即不說非聚世尊說微塵聚非聚。是名微塵聚者。以此聚體不成就故。若異此者。雖不說亦自知。是聚何義須說 演曰。此明佛說微塵與外道異。若同外道是實有者不說自知何須佛說。今既佛說明微無體。但令折觀非實故也。故唯識云。為執粗色有實體者。佛說極微令其除折。非謂諸色實有極微。彼即正釋此等文意。此約觀行勝道理故名第一義。非據真諦。又解依真名第一義。以彼極微依俗觀察入真無故若依此解。便與唯識意稍不同。思之可解。彼論釋云。若實有一物聚集如來則不說微塵聚集。演曰。釋喻同此法合意者化身假相非真佛故還同假塵。
經。所以者何 演曰。第五難。微若實佛何故說之所以者何謂也。
經。佛說微塵至是名微塵眾 演曰。第六通。佛雖說塵但假非實。非實之理依俗。依真已如前解。結假名微彼論頌云。
非聚集故集 非唯是一喻 聚集處非彼 非是差別喻
上二句喻非一義。下二句喻非異義。彼長行釋非一云。如微塵碎為末非一處住。以無有聚集物故。演曰。粗聚體
【現代漢語翻譯】 現代漢語譯本： 第三個論證是關於微塵的。如果微塵是真實存在的，那就和外道（指不信佛教的宗教）的觀點一樣了。既然微塵沒有實體，為什麼還要說那麼多呢？
經文：『如果是微塵聚集到佛的程度，佛就不會說那是微塵聚集了。』 演述：這是第四個解釋。論典引用這段經文，是爲了方便說明『無所見』的道理。這種說法有什麼意義呢？如果微塵的聚集在第一義諦（指最高的真理）上是真實存在的，世尊就不會說『非聚集』了。世尊說微塵聚集『非聚集』，這就是所謂的微塵聚集，因為這種聚集的本體是不成立的。如果不是這樣，即使不說，自己也應該知道那是聚集，又何必佛來說明呢？ 演述：這說明佛所說的微塵與外道的觀點不同。如果和外道一樣認為是真實存在的，不說自己也知道，何須佛來說明。現在既然佛說明微塵沒有本體，只是爲了讓人破除執著，並非真實存在。所以《唯識論》說：『爲了破除那些執著粗色有實體的人，佛才說極微，讓他們破除執著。並非說諸色真實存在極微。』 這就是對這些經文的正確解釋。這是從觀行（指佛教的修行方法）殊勝的道理來說的，所以稱為第一義，並非依據真諦（指真實的道理）。另一種解釋是，依據真理而稱為第一義，因為那些極微依據世俗的觀察而存在，進入真諦則不存在。如果依據這種解釋，就和《唯識論》的觀點稍有不同，可以仔細思考理解。那部論典解釋說：『如果真實存在一個物體聚集，如來就不會說微塵聚集。』 演述：這個比喻和前面的法義結合，意思是化身是假象，不是真佛，所以和虛假的微塵一樣。
經文：『為什麼呢？』 演述：這是第五個提問。如果微塵是真實的，佛為什麼還要問『為什麼呢』？
經文：『佛說微塵……這就是所謂的微塵聚集。』 演述：這是第六個回答。佛雖然說了微塵，但那是虛假的，不是真實的。非真實的道理，依據世俗來說是這樣，依據真諦來說，前面已經解釋過了。總結來說，微塵是假名安立的。那部論典的偈頌說：
『不是因為聚集而聚集， 不是僅僅是一個比喻； 聚集之處不是那裡， 不是差別的比喻。』
上面兩句是比喻非一的含義，下面兩句是比喻非異的含義。那部論典的長行解釋非一說：『比如微塵碎裂成粉末，不是在一個地方停留，因為沒有聚集的物體。』 演述：粗大的聚集體。
【English Translation】 English version: The third argument concerns minute dust particles (微塵, wēichén). If they truly exist, it would be the same as the views of externalists (外道, wàidào) [non-Buddhist religions]. Since they have no substance, why is so much said about them?
Sutra: 'If a multitude of minute dust particles were to reach the Buddha, it would not be said to be a multitude of minute dust particles.' Commentary: This is the fourth explanation. The treatise refers to this passage as a convenient way to explain the principle of 'no seeing.' What is the meaning of this statement? If the aggregation of minute dust particles truly exists in the ultimate truth (第一義諦, dìyīyìdì) [highest truth], the World-Honored One would not say 'non-aggregation.' The World-Honored One says that the aggregation of minute dust particles is 'non-aggregation,' which is called the aggregation of minute dust particles because the substance of this aggregation is not established. If it were otherwise, even without saying it, one would know that it is an aggregation, so why would the Buddha need to explain it? Commentary: This explains that the minute dust particles spoken of by the Buddha are different from the views of externalists. If they were the same as the externalists' view that they truly exist, one would know it without being told, so why would the Buddha need to explain it? Now that the Buddha explains that minute dust particles have no substance, it is only to cause people to break through attachments, not because they truly exist. Therefore, the Yogācāra-bhūmi-śāstra says: 'For those who are attached to coarse forms as having substance, the Buddha speaks of extremely minute particles to cause them to break through attachments. It is not that all forms truly have extremely minute particles.' This is the correct explanation of these passages. This is spoken from the perspective of the superior principle of contemplation and practice (觀行, guānxíng), so it is called the ultimate truth, not based on the true reality (真諦, zhēndì) [true principle]. Another explanation is that it is called the ultimate truth based on the true reality, because those extremely minute particles exist based on conventional observation, but do not exist when entering true reality. If based on this explanation, it is slightly different from the view of the Yogācāra-bhūmi-śāstra, which can be carefully considered and understood. That treatise explains: 'If a thing truly exists in aggregation, the Tathagata would not say that minute dust particles are aggregated.' Commentary: This metaphor combined with the preceding Dharma meaning means that the manifested body is an illusion, not the true Buddha, so it is the same as illusory dust.
Sutra: 'Why is that?' Commentary: This is the fifth question. If minute dust particles are real, why does the Buddha ask 'Why is that?'
Sutra: 'The Buddha said minute dust particles... this is called the aggregation of minute dust particles.' Commentary: This is the sixth answer. Although the Buddha spoke of minute dust particles, they are illusory, not real. The principle of non-reality is like this according to convention, and according to true reality, it has been explained before. In conclusion, minute dust particles are established by false names. The verse in that treatise says:
'Not aggregated because of aggregation, Not merely a metaphor; The place of aggregation is not there, Not a metaphor of difference.'
The above two lines are a metaphor for the meaning of non-oneness, and the below two lines are a metaphor for the meaning of non-difference. The long commentary in that treatise explains non-oneness by saying: 'For example, minute dust particles are broken into powder and do not stay in one place, because there is no aggregated object.' Commentary: The coarse aggregate.
無而微是有。各各別住故。望總聚名為不一。又釋非異義云。以聚集微塵差別不可得故。以差別不住故。演曰。即攬極微以為總聚。離微無聚故不可說異處。而住名為不異余文可知。
經。世尊如來所說至是名世界 演曰。下破名身如前文。釋言世界者。亦是為明眾生世故。彼論自下善現以世界喻領。于中有二。初善現說喻。后如來釋成。前文有四。一標二徴三破實四存假。此初標也。前說微塵喻以化對真辨非一異。今說世界喻以真對化辨非一異。言三千大千世界者。謂總聚世界積微所成言即非世界者。以彼所成無實體故。言是名世界者。結成如來假說相也。故彼論云。如是三千世界一合相喻。非聚集故。新論亦云。此即兼述三千大千世界不是聚性及是聚性其喻亦同。演曰。由所成無體。望彼極微非一非異。即喻真如。望彼化身非一異耳。問。準彼論世界喻法身。此論此文世界乃是名身所攝。而經前文以三千界折為微塵。豈以心法折為色耶。答。不爾。前世界者器及眾生總在其內。謂取其中根塵色蘊而破折之。此文世界唯是名身。其下雙破名色之中雲。若世界實有。則是一合相。亦是名色兩種總名世界總相為破色及名相實。
經。何以故 演曰。此論自下雙破名色。先徴后釋。此即雙徴色及名身。皆說無
【現代漢語翻譯】 現代漢語譯本：『無而微是有』，意思是說，極小的微塵是存在的。因為每個微塵都各自獨立存在，所以當它們聚集在一起時，我們稱之為『不一』。進一步解釋『非異』的含義是，因為聚集的微塵之間的差別是無法確定的，而且這些差別也不是固定不變的。演法師說，這是將極微聚集在一起形成總聚，離開微塵就沒有總聚，所以不能說它們是不同的。『而住名為不異』，其餘的文字可以理解。
經文：『世尊如來所說，是名世界。』演法師說，下面破斥名身，如同前面的文章。解釋『世界』這個詞，也是爲了說明眾生的世間。彼論中，善現用世界來比喻領悟。其中有兩部分，首先是善現說比喻，然後是如來解釋並完成。前面的文章有四個部分：一、標明；二、征問；三、破斥實體；四、儲存假名。這是最初的標明。前面用微塵的比喻，用化相對真理，辨別非一非異。現在用世界的比喻，用真理相對化身，辨別非一非異。『三千大千世界』，是指總聚的世界由微塵積累而成。『即非世界』，是因為它所形成的沒有實體。『是名世界』，是總結如來的假說之相。所以彼論說，『如是三千世界一合相喻，非聚集故。』新論也說，『此即兼述三千大千世界不是聚性及是聚性，其喻亦同。』演法師說，由於所形成的沒有實體，相對於極微來說，非一非異，這就比喻真如。相對於化身來說，非一異。問：按照彼論，世界比喻法身，此論此文世界乃是名身所攝。而經前文以三千界折為微塵，難道是以心法折為色法嗎？答：不是的。前面的世界包括器世界和眾生世界，是取其中的根塵色蘊而破折之。此文的世界只是名身。其下雙破名色之中說，『若世界實有，則是一合相。』也是名色兩種總名世界總相，爲了破斥色和名相的實體。
經文：『何以故？』演法師說，此論下面雙破名色，先征問后解釋。這裡是雙重征問色和名身，都說沒有實體。
【English Translation】 English version: 『Non-existent yet subtle is existent,』 meaning that extremely small particles (paramāṇu) exist. Because each particle exists independently, when they gather together, we call it 『not one』 (aneka). Further explaining the meaning of 『not different』 (ananya) is because the differences between the gathered particles cannot be determined, and these differences are not fixed. Master Yan said, this is gathering extremely small particles to form a total aggregate (samudāya), without particles there is no aggregate, so it cannot be said that they are different. 『And abiding is called not different,』 the remaining text can be understood.
Sūtra: 『The World Honored One, the Tathāgata, said, this is called a world (loka).』 Master Yan said, below, the refutation of the name-body (nāmakāya) is like the previous text. Explaining the word 『world』 is also to explain the world of sentient beings. In that treatise, Subhūti uses the world as a metaphor for understanding. There are two parts, first Subhūti speaks of the metaphor, and then the Tathāgata explains and completes it. The previous text has four parts: 1. Statement; 2. Inquiry; 3. Refutation of substance; 4. Preservation of provisional names. This is the initial statement. The previous metaphor of particles, using the phenomenal (rūpa) relative to the truth (satya), distinguishes non-one and non-different. Now using the metaphor of the world, using the truth relative to the manifested body (nirmāṇakāya), distinguishes non-one and non-different. 『Three thousand great thousand worlds』 (trisāhasra-mahāsāhasra-loka-dhātu), refers to the total aggregate of worlds formed by the accumulation of particles. 『Is not a world,』 because what it forms has no substance. 『Is called a world,』 is summarizing the aspect of the Tathāgata's provisional teaching. Therefore, that treatise says, 『Thus, the three thousand worlds are a metaphor for a single aggregate, not a collection.』 The new treatise also says, 『This also describes that the three thousand great thousand worlds are not of a collective nature and are of a collective nature, the metaphor is the same.』 Master Yan said, because what is formed has no substance, relative to the extremely small particles, it is neither one nor different, which is a metaphor for Suchness (tathatā). Relative to the manifested body, it is neither one nor different. Question: According to that treatise, the world is a metaphor for the Dharma-body (dharmakāya), this treatise and this text, the world is included in the name-body. And the previous text of the sūtra breaks down the three thousand worlds into particles, is it breaking down the mind-dharma (citta-dharma) into form-dharma (rūpa-dharma)? Answer: No. The previous world includes the container world (bhājana-loka) and the sentient being world (sattva-loka), taking the roots (indriya), dust (viṣaya), and form aggregates (rūpa-skandha) within it and breaking them down. The world in this text is only the name-body. Below, in the double refutation of name and form, it says, 『If the world really exists, then it is a single aggregate.』 It is also the general name of both name and form, the general aspect of the world, in order to refute the substance of form and name.
Sūtra: 『Why is that?』 Master Yan said, this treatise below doubly refutes name and form, first inquiring and then explaining. Here is a double inquiry into form and name-body, both saying that they have no substance.
實有何所以。彼論徴云世界無實何所以故。
經。若世界實有者則是一合相 演曰。雙釋所由。論云若世界是實有者。即為有摶取者。于中為並說。若世界若微塵界故。有二種摶取。謂一摶取及差別摶取。眾生類眾生世界有者。此為一摶取。微塵有者。此為差別摶取。以取微塵聚集故。演曰。四蘊無形執為是實。冥然一故但名一摶。微塵眾多執為一摶。實有差別故名差別摶取。一及差別此中總名為一合相。經言世界似唯名身其一合相即兼微塵。是故雙破。問。執彼五蘊為一合相有何過耶。答。便同外道數勝論等執器身等積微所成而是實有。亦同小乘心心所實皆是法執。是故為過。彼論第三破界實有故。論云若實有一世界。如來則不說三千大千世界。問。彼以世界喻真法身。今說界無有何所以。答。法身無相總界亦無法喻相似。又界若實有可喻塵異。今既非實便成與塵非一非異。
經。如來說一合相至是名一合相 演曰。此論第二約二諦辨。初善現辨。后佛重成。此初也。梁唐本名一合執據能執心。此但言相依所執境。言如來說一合相者。于俗諦中有言說故。即說彼情名一合執情所執境名一合相。又釋此執行相相執無別。言即非一合相者。以勝義中情有理無。成真諦中情亦非有故。論云此上座須菩提安立第
【現代漢語翻譯】 現代漢語譯本：
『實有』的原因是什麼？他們的論證是：如果世界沒有『實性』，那又是什麼原因呢？ 經文：如果世界是『實有』的，那麼它就應該是一個『一合相』（Ekikarana-samjna，統一的整體）。演述：這裡同時解釋了原因。論中說，如果世界是『實有』的，那麼就應該有『摶取』（Pinda，聚集）的存在。這裡同時說了世界和微塵界，因此有兩種『摶取』，即『一摶取』和『差別摶取』。眾生種類和眾生世界是『一摶取』，微塵是『差別摶取』，因為微塵是聚集而成的。演述：如果將無形的四蘊執著為『實有』，因為它們是冥然一體的，所以稱為『一摶』。如果將眾多的微塵執著為『一摶』，因為它們實際上是有差別的，所以稱為『差別摶取』。『一』和『差別』在這裡總稱為『一合相』。經文說世界似乎只是一個名稱，而『一合相』也包括微塵，所以同時破斥了這兩種觀點。問：如果執著五蘊為『一合相』，會有什麼過失呢？答：這就會和外道的數論等同，他們認為器身等是由微塵積聚而成，並且是『實有』的。也和小乘一樣，認為心和心所都是『實有』的法執。所以這是過失。他們的論證第三部分是破斥『界』（Dhatu，元素）的『實有』。論中說，如果真的有一個『世界』，如來就不會說三千大千世界了。問：他們用世界來比喻真法身（Dharmakaya，法性之身），現在說『界』沒有『實性』，又是什麼原因呢？答：法身沒有形象，總的來說，『界』也沒有法可以比喻，只是相似而已。而且，如果『界』是『實有』的，就可以比喻為和微塵不同。現在既然不是『實有』的，就和微塵既不是一體，也不是異體。 經文：如來說『一合相』，這就是『一合相』。演述：這裡的論證第二部分是根據二諦（Satya-dvaya，兩種真理）來辨析。首先是善現（Subhuti，須菩提）辨析，然後是佛陀再次確認。這是開始。梁唐譯本將『一合』執著于能執的心，這裡只是說依附於所執的境。說如來說『一合相』，是因為在俗諦（Samvrti-satya，世俗諦）中有言說，所以說他們的情識名為『一合執』，情識所執著的境名為『一合相』。又解釋說，這種執著、行相和相的執著沒有區別。說『即非一合相』，是因為在勝義諦（Paramartha-satya，勝義諦）中，情識有理而無實。成就真諦（Tathata，真如）中，情識也不是『有』。論中說，這位上座須菩提安立第一。
【English Translation】 English version:
What is the reason for 'substantial existence'? Their argument is: if the world has no 'reality', then what is the reason? Sutra: If the world were 'substantially existent', then it would be a 'Ekikarana-samjna' (unified whole). Commentary: Here, the reason is explained simultaneously. The treatise says that if the world is 'substantially existent', then there should be 'Pinda' (aggregation). Here, both the world and the realm of dust particles are mentioned, so there are two types of 'Pinda', namely 'one Pinda' and 'differentiated Pinda'. Sentient beings and the world of sentient beings are 'one Pinda', and dust particles are 'differentiated Pinda', because dust particles are formed by aggregation. Commentary: If the formless four Skandhas (aggregates) are clung to as 'substantially existent', because they are obscurely one, they are called 'one Pinda'. If numerous dust particles are clung to as 'one Pinda', because they are actually different, they are called 'differentiated Pinda'. 'One' and 'differentiated' are collectively called 'Ekikarana-samjna' here. The Sutra says that the world seems to be just a name, and 'Ekikarana-samjna' also includes dust particles, so both views are refuted simultaneously. Question: If the five Skandhas are clung to as 'Ekikarana-samjna', what fault would there be? Answer: This would be the same as the Samkhya school of externalists, who believe that the body and other things are formed by the accumulation of dust particles and are 'substantially existent'. It is also the same as the Hinayana, which believes that the mind and mental factors are all 'substantially existent' Dharma-clinging. So this is a fault. The third part of their argument is to refute the 'substantial existence' of 'Dhatu' (elements). The treatise says that if there really is one 'world', the Tathagata would not have spoken of three thousand great thousand worlds. Question: They use the world to metaphorize the Dharmakaya (body of Dharma), and now they say that 'Dhatu' has no 'reality', what is the reason? Answer: The Dharmakaya has no form, and in general, 'Dhatu' has no Dharma to be compared to, it is just similar. Moreover, if 'Dhatu' were 'substantially existent', it could be compared to being different from dust particles. Now that it is not 'substantially existent', it is neither one nor different from dust particles. Sutra: The Tathagata speaks of 'Ekikarana-samjna', this is 'Ekikarana-samjna'. Commentary: The second part of the argument here is to analyze according to the two Satyas (truths). First, Subhuti analyzes, and then the Buddha confirms again. This is the beginning. The Liang-Tang translation clings to 'Ekikarana' in the mind that can cling, here it only speaks of relying on the object that is clung to. Saying that the Tathagata speaks of 'Ekikarana-samjna' is because there is speech in Samvrti-satya (conventional truth), so it is said that their emotions are called 'Ekikarana-grasping', and the object grasped by emotions is called 'Ekikarana-samjna'. It is also explained that there is no difference between this clinging, characteristics, and clinging to characteristics. Saying 'not Ekikarana-samjna' is because in Paramartha-satya (ultimate truth), emotions have reason but no reality. In achieving Tathata (suchness), emotions are also not 'existent'. The treatise says that this Elder Subhuti establishes the first.
一義故結文可知。彼論第四存假謂顯如來說一合相大千界等非有實體但相無差名一合耳。
經。佛言須菩提一合相者即是不可說 演曰。后佛重成有二。初明勝義無。后明俗諦有。此即初也。謂佛了達色及名身摶取之相勝義中無不可以言說說及分別戲論心之所分別以心言路絕故。貞觀云。不可言說不可戲論。此論云。世尊成就如是義故說摶取者。即是不可以言說說等。此何所顯示。世諦言說故。有彼摶取第一義故。不可說。彼論第二如來釋成有二。初體實無。后妄執有。此初也。以聚集相無實體性故不可說。
經。但凡夫之人貪著其事 演曰。明俗諦有凡夫不了法體無故妄生法執。法執起故我執亦生增愛貪等。論云。彼小兒凡夫如言說取非第一義。彼論妄執意亦同此頌云。
但隨於音聲 凡夫取顛倒
釋意以彼聚集無物可取。但隨於聲虛妄分別故是顛倒。若有實者即是正見。上來彼論非但喻顯。真化一異亦是因破我法二見所緣境無即同此論。此論第一無所見方便訖。
經。須菩提若人言至所說義不 演曰。下第二明如所不分別。即無能見。前破我法所緣之境令知不實。今破能緣我法見心見心乃是所起分別。今翻令作無分別心故。言如所不分別也。論云。已說無所見方便。破義未說。無
所見等入相應三昧時不分別。謂如所不分別等。云何得顯示如外道說我如來說。為我見故安置人無我。又為說有此我見故安置法無我。若有彼我見是見所攝。如是觀察。菩薩入相應三昧時不復分別。即此觀察。為入方便。演曰。由執我者。說彼為見明人無我名無我見也。執有此見名為法執明見亦是法無我。彼論自下明其法合文亦為二。初離我執。后離法執。所以然者。前喻中雲。微塵碎為末。示現煩惱盡。雖言煩惱亦兼所知二障乃以二執為本。今明斷執障盡理圓證真起化非一非異故。說此文名為法合。頌云。
非無二得道 遠離於我法
釋云。非無我無法。離此二事而得菩提。云何得菩提。遠離彼二見故。偈言遠離於我法者。意令不起我法見也。又復此經承前唯破我法等想。息我等見令起正見。未明我見體非實有。今經將終明起邪見亦非實見。于真理中無邪無正。此文有四問答徴釋。此初也。餘本此上徴云。何以故。若一合執云不可說。凡夫妄者。何所以故。如來說有我見等耶。然佛為遮外道我故說有我見等。佛亦不說我見實有故。佛卻問有人。謂佛說實我見解我意不。
經。世尊是人至所說義 演曰。第二答。佛為利生說假我見。非如凡夫說有實真故。說實見名不解意。
經。所以者何
【現代漢語翻譯】 現代漢語譯本 『所見等入相應三昧時不分別』，意思是說，如同『所不分別』等等。如果像外道那樣說『我』，如來如何才能顯示真理呢？因為有『我見』，所以才安置『人無我』；又因為有人說有這個『我見』，所以才安置『法無我』。如果存在那個『我見』，它也是被『見』所包含的。像這樣觀察，菩薩進入相應三昧時就不再分別。這種觀察，是進入三昧的方便。演曰：因為執著于『我』，所以說破除這種執著是『見』，明白『人無我』就叫做『無我見』。執著于這種『見』，就叫做『法執』，明白『見』也是『法無我』。彼論從下面開始闡明其法合，文分為二：首先是遠離『我執』，然後是遠離『法執』。之所以這樣，是因為前面的比喻中說：『微塵碎為末，示現煩惱盡』，雖然說的是煩惱，但也兼顧了所知二障，而二障的根本在於二執。現在說明斷除執著，障礙消除，真理圓滿證得，應化之身非一非異，所以說這段文字叫做『法合』。頌曰： 『非無二得道，遠離於我法』 解釋說：不是沒有『我』，沒有『法』，而是遠離這兩種事物才能得到菩提（Bodhi，覺悟）。如何才能得到菩提呢？遠離那兩種『見』的緣故。偈語說『遠離於我法』，意思是讓人不要生起『我見』和『法見』。而且，這部經承接前面只是破除『我』、『法』等想，止息『我』等見，讓人產生正見，並沒有說明『我見』的本體並非真實存在。現在這部經將要結束，說明生起邪見也不是真實的見。在真理中沒有邪也沒有正。這段文字有四個問答，這是第一個。其他版本在這上面提問說：『為什麼呢？如果一概執著說不可說，凡夫妄想，那又是什麼緣故，如來說有我見等等呢？』然而佛陀爲了遮止外道的『我』，所以說有『我見』等等，佛陀也沒有說『我見』是真實存在的，所以佛陀反問有人，說佛陀說的是真實『我見』，這樣理解我的意思對嗎？ 經：『世尊是人至所說義』 演曰：第二個回答。佛陀爲了利益眾生，說的是虛假的『我見』，不是像凡夫那樣說有真實的『我』，所以說『實見』是不理解佛陀的意思。 經：『所以者何』
【English Translation】 English version 『When what is seen and so on enters into Samadhi (concentration) in accordance, there is no differentiation.』 This means, like 『what is not differentiated』 and so on. If one speaks of 『self』 as the heretics do, how can the Tathagata (the thus-gone one) reveal the truth? Because of 『self-view』, 『no-self of person』 is established; and because someone says there is this 『self-view』, 『no-self of dharma』 is established. If that 『self-view』 exists, it is also contained within 『view』. Observing in this way, the Bodhisattva (enlightenment being) no longer differentiates when entering into Samadhi in accordance. This observation is a convenient means for entering Samadhi. Yan said: Because of attachment to 『self』, it is said that breaking this attachment is 『view』, and understanding 『no-self of person』 is called 『no-self view』. Attachment to this 『view』 is called 『dharma attachment』, and understanding 『view』 is also 『no-self of dharma』. The treatise below begins to explain its dharma combination, the text is divided into two parts: first, to be apart from 『self-attachment』, and then to be apart from 『dharma-attachment』. The reason for this is that the previous metaphor said: 『Dust is crushed into powder, showing the end of afflictions』, although it speaks of afflictions, it also takes into account the two obscurations of what is knowable, and the root of the two obscurations lies in the two attachments. Now it explains that cutting off attachments, eliminating obstacles, perfectly realizing the truth, and the manifested body is neither one nor different, so it is said that this passage is called 『dharma combination』. The verse says: 『Not without two, one attains the Way, far away from self and dharma.』 The explanation says: It is not without 『self』 and without 『dharma』, but by being apart from these two things that one can attain Bodhi (enlightenment). How can one attain Bodhi? Because of being apart from those two 『views』. The verse says 『far away from self and dharma』, meaning to prevent the arising of 『self-view』 and 『dharma-view』. Moreover, this sutra continues from the previous one, only breaking the thoughts of 『self』, 『dharma』, etc., stopping the views of 『self』, etc., and causing the arising of right view, without explaining that the substance of 『self-view』 is not actually existent. Now this sutra is about to end, explaining that the arising of wrong view is also not a real view. In truth, there is neither wrong nor right. This passage has four questions and answers, this is the first one. Other versions ask above this: 『Why? If one insists that it cannot be said, and ordinary people are delusional, then why does the Tathagata say there are self-views, etc.?』 However, the Buddha said there are 『self-views』 etc. in order to stop the heretics' 『self』, and the Buddha did not say that 『self-view』 is actually existent, so the Buddha asked someone in return, saying that the Buddha said it was a real 『self-view』, is this understanding my meaning correctly? Sutra: 『World-Honored One, this person understands the meaning of what was said.』 Yan said: The second answer. The Buddha speaks of false 『self-views』 for the benefit of sentient beings, not like ordinary people who say there is a real 『self』, so saying 『real view』 is not understanding the Buddha's meaning. Sutra: 『What is the reason?』
演曰。徴意無實我見有何所以而佛說耶。
經。佛說我見人見至壽者見 演曰。釋也。此文有三。初牒次非后結。初牒佛說我見等者。隨順世俗為欲對除令息虛妄。是故說也。次文非者。非如外道及諸凡夫說有實我而起實見。亦異小乘雖無有我而有實見。今大乘宗說我等見無始世界虛妄分別。于真理中本無實見。是故非也。后結可知。彼論頌云。
見我即不見 無實虛妄見 此是微細障 見真如遠離
釋云。是故如來說彼我見即是不見。以其無實。無實者即是無物。以是義故說我見即是虛妄見。演曰。準彼釋。經說我見等者。說虛妄見。即非等者。非實見也。是名等者。結虛妄見。上依此論以彼我見是人無我。即我見體虛妄不實。是法無我。一我見言具含二義。今者非之明二我見。一切都妄令息分別。即是如所不分別破能見心。然論說此名入方便。因觀二妄能證真理故名方便。以證如時不作我無我解故。彼論上來唯破人我見。下破法我見。
經。發阿耨多羅三藐三菩提心者 演曰。此論第三何人無分別。此簡凡夫外道二乘有學我法二見俱是實有。二乘無學雖無我見法見未亡不能悟入二空之理。唯菩薩者有勝智慧欲趣大覺斷二障故。
經。於一切法 演曰。此論第四於何法無分別。
【現代漢語翻譯】 現代漢語譯本： 演曰：如果所執著的『我』沒有實體，那麼佛陀所說的『我見』又是什麼呢？
經：佛說我見、人見、至壽者見。 演曰：解釋如下。這段經文分為三部分：首先是引述，其次是否定，最後是總結。首先，引述佛陀所說的『我見』等，是爲了隨順世俗，爲了對治和消除虛妄，所以這樣說。其次，『非』是指：不是像外道和凡夫那樣，認為有真實的『我』而生起真實的見解；也不同於小乘，雖然沒有『我』，卻有真實的見解。現在大乘宗義認為，『我』等見解是無始以來世界的虛妄分別，在真理中本來就沒有真實的見解，所以要否定它。最後的總結部分，意思顯而易見。論中偈頌說：
『見我即不見，無實虛妄見，此是微細障，見真如遠離。』
解釋說：因此，如來說，執著于『我見』就是『不見』，因為它沒有實體。沒有實體就是沒有事物。因為這個緣故，說『我見』就是虛妄的見解。演曰：根據這個解釋，經文所說的『我見』等，是說虛妄的見解；『非』等，是否定真實的見解。這就是所謂的『等』，總結為虛妄的見解。上面依據此論，認為『我見』是人無我，即『我見』的本體是虛妄不實的；『法無我』，一個『我見』的說法就包含了兩種含義。現在否定它，是爲了表明兩種『我見』都是虛妄的，從而止息分別。這就是如實地不分別，破除能見的心。然而，論中說這叫做進入方便，因為觀察兩種虛妄，能夠證悟真理，所以叫做方便。因為在證悟真如的時候，不會再作『我』或『無我』的理解。論中上面只是破除了人我見，下面將要破除法我見。
經：發阿耨多羅三藐三菩提心者。 演曰：這是論中的第三個問題，什麼人沒有分別？這是爲了簡別凡夫、外道和二乘有學之人，他們的我法二見都是真實存在的。二乘無學之人雖然沒有我見，但法見還沒有消失，不能領悟進入二空的道理。只有菩薩具有殊勝的智慧，想要趨向大覺，斷除兩種障礙。
經：於一切法。 演曰：這是論中的第四個問題，對於什麼法沒有分別？
【English Translation】 English version: Yan said: If the 'self' that is clung to has no substance, then what is the 'self-view' that the Buddha speaks of?
Sutra: The Buddha speaks of self-view, person-view, and life-span-view. Yan said: The explanation is as follows. This passage is divided into three parts: first, citation; second, negation; and third, conclusion. First, citing the 'self-view' and so on spoken by the Buddha is to accord with worldly customs, to counteract and eliminate falsehoods, and therefore it is said. Second, 'negation' means: it is not like the externalists and ordinary people who believe in a real 'self' and give rise to real views; nor is it like the Hinayana, which, although there is no 'self', has real views. Now, the Mahayana doctrine believes that 'self'-views and so on are false discriminations of the world from beginningless time, and there are no real views in the truth, so it must be negated. The final conclusion is self-evident. The verse in the treatise says:
'Seeing self is not seeing, unreal and false view, this is a subtle obstacle, seeing Suchness is far away.'
The explanation says: Therefore, the Tathagata says that clinging to 'self-view' is 'not seeing', because it has no substance. No substance means no thing. For this reason, it is said that 'self-view' is a false view. Yan said: According to this explanation, the 'self-view' and so on mentioned in the sutra refer to false views; 'not' and so on negate real views. This is what is called 'and so on', concluding as false views. Based on this treatise, it is believed that 'self-view' is the non-self of persons, that is, the substance of 'self-view' is false and unreal; 'non-self of phenomena', one statement of 'self-view' contains two meanings. Now, negating it is to show that both 'self'-views are false, thereby ceasing discrimination. This is truly not discriminating, breaking the mind that can see. However, the treatise says that this is called entering the expedient, because observing the two falsehoods can realize the truth, so it is called expedient. Because at the time of realizing Suchness, one will no longer make the understanding of 'self' or 'non-self'. The treatise above only refutes the person-self-view, and below it will refute the phenomena-self-view.
Sutra: Those who have aroused the mind of Anuttara-samyak-sambodhi (unexcelled, complete enlightenment). Yan said: This is the third question in the treatise, who has no discrimination? This is to distinguish ordinary people, externalists, and Hinayana learners, whose two views of self and phenomena are real. Although Hinayana non-learners have no self-view, the phenomena-view has not disappeared, and they cannot comprehend and enter the principle of the two emptinesses. Only Bodhisattvas have superior wisdom and want to move towards great enlightenment, cutting off the two obstacles.
Sutra: In all dharmas (phenomena). Yan said: This is the fourth question in the treatise, for what dharmas is there no discrimination?
二乘之人非於一切而求遍智菩薩異彼。於一切法觀無我法以除二見。
經。應如是知至如是信解 演曰。第五何方便不分別。即何智定。前第二文翻彼能見總無分別。今此別明所有智定。論云。若智依止奢摩他故知。依止毗缽舍那故見。此二依止三摩提故。勝解以三摩提自在故。解內攀緣影像。彼名勝解。演曰。因止生智名知。因觀生智名見。如次即本后智止之與觀皆依等持。由智離障觀彼影像有勝惠解。定為此依故名勝解。故論云以三摩地自在故解內攀緣影像彼名勝解。彼論云。如是示現我見不見故。見法者亦是不見。如經發菩薩心等者乃至不住法相故。此復何義。以見法相即不見相。如彼我見即非見故。何故此二見說名不見。偈云。此是微細障見真如遠離故。此復云何。彼見我見法。此是微細障。以不見彼二故。是以見法而得遠離。偈言見真如遠離故。演曰。言不見彼二者。以于無我法處妄起其見。是以見真而得遠離。彼論又釋知見信之。偈云。
二智及三昧 如是得遠離
長行雲。示現世智第一義智。及依止三昧得遠離彼障。與此論同。
經。不生法相 演曰。第六云何不分別。即何行解。論云。而不住法相者。此正顯示無分別。彼論意說若生法相亦是見真所遠離法。文分有二。謂標
【現代漢語翻譯】 現代漢語譯本： 聲聞乘和緣覺乘的人不會在一切事物上尋求一切智智（sarvajñāna，遍知一切的智慧），菩薩與他們不同。菩薩觀察一切法皆為無我之法，以此來去除我見和法見這兩種錯誤的見解。
經文：應當如是知，乃至如是信解。 窺基法師的《演秘鈔》解釋說：第五，用什麼方便才能做到不分別？也就是用什麼智慧和禪定？前面第二段經文已經翻譯了能見的總無分別，這裡特別說明所有的智慧和禪定。《瑜伽師地論》中說：如果智慧依止於奢摩他（śamatha，止），就能知；依止於毗缽舍那（vipaśyanā，觀），就能見。這二者都依止於三摩地（samādhi，等持），因此能勝解，因為以三摩地自在的緣故，能理解內在攀緣的影像，這叫做勝解。窺基法師解釋說：因為止而生智慧，名為知；因為觀而生智慧，名為見。像這樣，次第就是根本智和后得智，止和觀都依于等持。由於智慧遠離了障礙，觀察那些影像，有殊勝的智慧理解。禪定是智慧的所依，所以名為勝解。所以《瑜伽師地論》說，以三摩地自在的緣故，能理解內在攀緣的影像，這叫做勝解。該論又說：像這樣示現我見和不見的緣故，見法的人也是不見。如同經文所說，發菩薩心等等，乃至不住於法相的緣故。這又是什麼意思呢？因為見到法相就是不見相，如同我見就不是見。為什麼這兩種見解被稱為不見呢？偈頌說：『這是微細的障礙，遠離了見真如的緣故。』這又是什麼意思呢？他們所見到的我見和法見，這是微細的障礙。因為不見這二者，所以能見到真如而得遠離。偈頌說：『見真如遠離的緣故。』窺基法師解釋說：說不見這二者，是因為在無我法之處妄起見解。因此見到真如才能遠離。該論又解釋了知、見、信，偈頌說：
二智及三昧， 如是得遠離。
長行文中說：示現世俗智、第一義智，以及依止三昧，才能遠離那些障礙。與此論相同。
經文：不生法相。 窺基法師解釋說：第六，怎樣才能做到不分別？也就是用什麼行和理解？《瑜伽師地論》中說：不住於法相，這正是顯示了無分別。該論的意思是說，如果生起法相，也是見真如所要遠離的法。文句分為兩部分，就是標示。
【English Translation】 English version: Those of the Two Vehicles (śrāvakayāna and pratyekabuddhayāna) do not seek all-knowing wisdom (sarvajñāna) in all things; Bodhisattvas are different from them. Bodhisattvas observe that all dharmas are without self (anātman), thereby eliminating the two views of self and dharma.
Sutra: One should know thus, up to such faith and understanding. Kuiji's commentary, the Yanbishao, explains: Fifth, by what means can one achieve non-discrimination? That is, with what wisdom and samādhi? The second passage earlier has already translated the general non-discrimination of seeing. Here, it specifically clarifies all wisdom and samādhi. The Yogācārabhūmi-śāstra says: 'If wisdom relies on śamatha (calm abiding), it knows; if it relies on vipaśyanā (insight), it sees.' These two rely on samādhi (concentration), therefore, one can have confident understanding (adhimokṣa), because one is free in samādhi, one can understand the images of inner clinging, which is called confident understanding. Kuiji explains: 'Because of calm abiding, wisdom arises, called knowing; because of insight, wisdom arises, called seeing.' Thus, the order is fundamental wisdom and subsequent wisdom; both calm abiding and insight rely on samādhi. Because wisdom is free from obstacles, observing those images, there is superior wisdom and understanding. Samādhi is the basis for this, so it is called confident understanding. Therefore, the Yogācārabhūmi-śāstra says, 'Because one is free in samādhi, one can understand the images of inner clinging, which is called confident understanding.' That treatise also says: 'Showing thus the seeing and not-seeing of self, the one who sees the dharma also does not see.' As the sutra says, 'Generating the Bodhisattva mind,' etc., 'up to not abiding in the characteristics of dharmas.' What does this mean? Because seeing the characteristics of dharmas is not seeing the characteristics. Like the view of self, it is not seeing. Why are these two views called not-seeing? The verse says: 'This is a subtle obstacle, because it is far from seeing Suchness.' What does this mean? Their seeing of self-view and dharma-view, this is a subtle obstacle. Because not seeing these two, one can see Suchness and be far away. The verse says: 'Because seeing Suchness is far away.' Kuiji explains: 'Saying not seeing these two, is because of falsely arising views in the place of non-self dharma. Therefore, seeing Suchness can be far away.' That treatise also explains knowing, seeing, and believing, the verse says:
Two wisdoms and samādhi, Thus one obtains distance.
The prose passage says: 'Showing worldly wisdom, ultimate wisdom, and relying on samādhi, one can be far away from those obstacles.' This is the same as that treatise.
Sutra: Not generating the characteristics of dharmas. Kuiji explains: Sixth, how can one achieve non-discrimination? That is, with what practice and understanding? The Yogācārabhūmi-śāstra says: 'Not abiding in the characteristics of dharmas, this precisely shows non-discrimination.' The meaning of that treatise is that if one generates the characteristics of dharmas, it is also a dharma that is to be distanced from seeing Suchness. The text is divided into two parts, which is the indication.
及釋。此初也。
經。須菩提所言法相至是名法相 演曰。釋也。有牒非結。論云。此顯示法相中不共義。及相應義。如前已說。法即是境相即是心。雙牒能所緣。說非相者。于勝義中說為非相。是名等者。于俗諦中說有能所相也。彼論以見法相即不見相。如彼我見。即非見故法合已訖。
經。須菩提若有人以滿至持用佈施 演曰。下明不染行住。于中復二。初說法不染。複流轉不染。此初也。前語具足不取言說。所詮體義與名相屬真俗雙明。明所取無。今此處明不取教法。取教法者即為法取法取即染。此能取心令不染彼體故。又不令求供養信敬等。復云不染其施設大利法總明法施未明不染。今此明之故與前別。文分為二。初校量說勝。二正明不染。前文又二。初舉施福后正校量。彼論為斷第二十七化說無量福疑。疑雲。前說化身有去來故既非真佛。又前頌言非說法者。既爾化佛所說之經持說無福故。為斷此疑而有斯文。明化雖示現所說之法持說經等非無盡福故。重以喻而為校量。論雖不敘疑起所由。準頌及釋當知定爾故頌云。
化身示現福 非無無盡福
何故。得福以得二智。三昧能遠離障而起化身。是故獲福文乘前起有。是故言而別破疑說非無福。于中有二。初示現有福。后明有敬信。
【現代漢語翻譯】 現代漢語譯本： 及釋。此初也。
經。須菩提所言法相至是名法相 演曰。釋也。有牒非結。論云。此顯示法相中不共義。及相應義。如前已說。法即是境相即是心。雙牒能所緣。說非相者。于勝義中說為非相。是名等者。于俗諦中說有能所相也。彼論以見法相即不見相。如彼我見。即非見故法合已訖。
經。須菩提若有人以滿至持用佈施 演曰。下明不染行住。于中復二。初說法不染。複流轉不染。此初也。前語具足不取言說。所詮體義與名相屬真俗雙明。明所取無。今此處明不取教法。取教法者即為法取法取即染。此能取心令不染彼體故。又不令求供養信敬等。復云不染其施設大利法總明法施未明不染。今此明之故與前別。文分為二。初校量說勝。二正明不染。前文又二。初舉施福后正校量。彼論為斷第二十七化說無量福疑。疑雲。前說化身有去來故既非真佛。又前頌言非說法者。既爾化佛所說之經持說無福故。為斷此疑而有斯文。明化雖示現所說之法持說經等非無盡福故。重以喻而為校量。論雖不敘疑起所由。準頌及釋當知定爾故頌云。
化身示現福 非無無盡福
何故。得福以得二智。三昧能遠離障而起化身。是故獲福文乘前起有。是故言而別破疑說非無福。于中有二。初示現有福。后明有敬信。
解釋到此。這是第一部分。
經文：須菩提所說的『法相』，到『是名法相』。演曰：這是解釋。有承接而非總結。論中說：『這顯示了法相中不共的意義，以及相應的意義。』如前已說，法即是境，相即是心。雙重承接能緣和所緣。說『非相』，是在勝義諦中說為『非相』。『是名』等，是在俗諦中說有能所的相。那部論典認為，見到法相即是沒見到相，如同彼我之見，即是非見，所以法合已經完畢。
經文：須菩提，如果有人用充滿…到…來持用佈施。演曰：下面說明不染著於行為和住處。其中又分為二：一是說法不染著，二是流轉不染著。這是第一部分。前面已經完整地說過不取著言說，所詮釋的本體意義與名稱相連屬，真諦和俗諦都已明白，說明所取著的並無實。現在這裡說明不取著教法。取著教法，就是法取，法取就是染著。這能取的心，使它不染著那個本體。又不令人尋求供養、信敬等。又說不染著其施設大利法，總的說明法施，但未明白說明不染著。現在這裡明白說明，所以與前面不同。文分為二：一是校量說明殊勝，二是正式說明不染著。前文又分為二：一是舉出施福，二是正式校量。那部論典是爲了斷除第二十七化身說無量福的疑惑。疑惑說：『前面說化身有來去，所以不是真佛。又前面頌說不是說法者。既然如此，化佛所說的經典，持誦解說沒有福德。』爲了斷除這個疑惑，所以有這段經文。說明化身雖然示現，所說的法、持誦解說的經典等，並非沒有無盡的福德。再次用比喻來校量。論典雖然沒有敘述疑惑產生的原因，但根據頌和解釋，應當知道一定是這樣，所以頌說：
化身示現的福德，並非沒有無盡的福德。
為什麼呢？得到福德是因為得到二智。三昧能夠遠離障礙而生起化身。因此獲得福德，文句承接前面而產生。因此特別用言語來破除疑惑，說並非沒有福德。其中分為二：一是顯示現有福德，二是說明有敬信。
【English Translation】 English version: And explanation. This is the beginning.
Sutra: 'The Dharmalakshana (法相, characteristics of Dharma) mentioned by Subhuti (須菩提, one of the principal disciples of the Buddha) up to 'is called Dharmalakshana'.' Commentary: This is an explanation. There is a connection but not a conclusion. The treatise says: 'This shows the uncommon meaning and the corresponding meaning in Dharmalakshana. As mentioned before, Dharma is the object, and Lakshana is the mind.' It doubly connects the perceiver and the perceived. Saying 'non-Lakshana' means it is said to be 'non-Lakshana' in the ultimate truth. 'Is called' and so on, means that in conventional truth, there are perceiver and perceived aspects. That treatise believes that seeing Dharmalakshana is not seeing aspects, like the view of self and others, which is not seeing, so the Dharma combination is complete.
Sutra: 'Subhuti, if someone uses a full... to... to uphold and give alms.' Commentary: Below explains not being attached to conduct and dwelling. Among them, there are two: first, explaining that Dharma is not attached; second, that circulation is not attached. This is the first part. The previous words fully expressed not grasping at speech. The meaning of the explained substance is connected to the name, clarifying both truth and convention, showing that what is grasped is non-existent. Now, this place explains not grasping at the teaching Dharma. Grasping at the teaching Dharma is Dharma grasping, and Dharma grasping is attachment. This grasping mind prevents it from being attached to that substance. It also does not cause one to seek offerings, faith, respect, etc. It also says not being attached to its establishment of great benefit Dharma, generally explaining Dharma giving, but not clearly explaining non-attachment. Now this clarifies it, so it is different from before. The text is divided into two: first, comparing and explaining superiority; second, formally explaining non-attachment. The previous text is also divided into two: first, mentioning the merit of giving; second, formally comparing. That treatise is to dispel the doubt of immeasurable merit in the twenty-seventh transformation body. The doubt says: 'The previous saying that the transformation body has coming and going means it is not a true Buddha. Also, the previous verse said not a Dharma speaker. Since this is the case, the sutras spoken by the transformation Buddha, upholding and explaining them have no merit.' To dispel this doubt, there is this passage. Explaining that although the transformation body manifests, the Dharma spoken, the sutras upheld and explained, etc., are not without endless merit. Again, using a metaphor to compare. Although the treatise does not narrate the cause of the doubt, according to the verse and explanation, it should be known that it is definitely so, so the verse says:
The manifested merit of the transformation body is not without endless merit.
Why? Obtaining merit is because of obtaining two wisdoms. Samadhi (三昧, a state of meditative consciousness) can remove obstacles and give rise to the transformation body. Therefore, obtaining merit, the text arises from the previous. Therefore, especially using words to dispel doubt, saying it is not without merit. Among them, there are two: first, showing existing merit; second, explaining having respect and faith.
既由敬信。是故福生。此初舉劣。
經。若有善男子至其福勝彼 演曰。正校量。論云。以有如是大利益故。決定應演說。如是演說而無所染。彼論云。雖諸佛自然化身作業。而彼諸佛化身說法。有無量無盡無漏功德故。
經。云何為人演說 演曰。正明不染。一問二答。問。如何演說而得生福。彼論自下明有敬信。問意既是化說非正實故無人敬信。何能生福。
經。不取于相如如不動 演曰。此答也。準余經本云。而不名說。是名為說。貞觀云。如不為他宣說開示故名為他宣說。開示此經無結不取于相。即是餘本不宣說義。更加如如不動。釋此所由。論云。此有何義。顯示不可言說故不演說。彼法有何說體。應如是演說。若異此者。則為染說。以顛倒義故。又如是說時不求信敬等。亦為無染說法。演曰。一無可言說體故名不演說。二不求信敬等無染說故亦名不說。彼論頌云。
諸佛說法時 不言是化身 以不如是說 是故彼說正
釋云。若化身諸佛說法時不言我是化身。是故彼所說是正說。若不如是說者。可化眾生。不生敬心。何以故。不能利益眾生故。即說彼是不正說。是故不說我是化佛。演曰。釋經意不言我是化佛故。名而不演說。是故彼說正故。是名為說。問曰。諸小乘
【現代漢語翻譯】 現代漢語譯本：因為有恭敬和信心，所以產生福報。這最初是舉出一個比較差的情況。
經文：『如果有善男子乃至其福勝彼』 演曰：這是正式的校量。論中說：『因為有這樣大的利益，所以決定應該演說。』 像這樣演說而沒有任何染著。論中說：『即使諸佛自然化身在作業，但那些諸佛化身說法，有無量無盡的無漏功德。』
經文：『云何為人演說』 演曰：這是正式說明不染著。一問二答。問：如何演說才能產生福報？論中從下面開始說明有恭敬和信心。問的意思是既然是化身說法，不是真實，所以沒有人恭敬和相信，怎麼能產生福報？
經文：『不取于相，如如不動』 演曰：這是回答。參照其他經本說：『而不名說，是名為說。』 貞觀本說：『好像不為他人宣說開示，所以名為為他人宣說開示此經沒有結尾，不取于相。』 就是其他版本不宣說的意思。更加『如如不動』，解釋這個原因。論中說：『這有什麼意義？顯示不可言說，所以不演說。』 那個法有什麼可說的本體？應該這樣演說。如果不是這樣，就是染著了的演說，因為是顛倒的意義。』 又像這樣說的時候不求信敬等，也是沒有染著的說法。演曰：一，因為沒有可以言說的本體，所以名叫不演說。二，不求信敬等沒有染著的說，所以也名叫不說。論中的偈頌說：
『諸佛說法時，不言是化身，以不如是說，是故彼說正。』
解釋說：如果化身諸佛說法的時候不說『我是化身』，所以他所說的是正說。如果不是這樣說，可以教化的眾生，不會產生恭敬心。為什麼呢？因為不能利益眾生。』 也就是說那是不正說。所以不說『我是化佛』。演曰：解釋經文的意思是不說『我是化佛』，所以名叫不演說。所以他說的是正的，所以名叫說。問：各位小乘
【English Translation】 English version: Because of reverence and faith, blessings arise. This initially cites an inferior situation.
Sutra: 'If there are good men, even their blessings surpass those.' Commentary: This is a formal comparison. The treatise says: 'Because there are such great benefits, it is determined that it should be expounded.' Expounding in this way without any defilement. The treatise says: 'Even though the natural manifestations of the Buddhas are working, those Buddhas' manifestations of teaching have immeasurable, endless, and undefiled merits.'
Sutra: 'How does one expound for others?' Commentary: This is a formal explanation of non-attachment. One question and two answers. Question: How does one expound in order to generate blessings? The treatise begins below to explain having reverence and faith. The meaning of the question is that since it is a manifestation teaching, not real, so no one reveres and believes, how can blessings arise?
Sutra: 'Not grasping at appearances, remaining as such, unmoving.' Commentary: This is the answer. According to other sutra versions, it says: 'And not called speaking, this is called speaking.' The Zhenguan version says: 'It seems like not proclaiming and revealing to others, so it is called proclaiming and revealing this sutra to others without end, not grasping at appearances.' That is the meaning of not proclaiming in other versions. Adding 'remaining as such, unmoving' explains this reason. The treatise says: 'What is the meaning of this? Showing the unspeakable, therefore not expounding.' What is the essence of that Dharma that can be spoken? It should be expounded in this way. If it is not like this, then it is a defiled exposition, because it is a reversed meaning.' Also, when speaking like this, not seeking faith and reverence, etc., is also undefiled teaching. Commentary: First, because there is no essence that can be spoken, it is called not expounding. Second, not seeking faith and reverence, etc., is undefiled speaking, so it is also called not speaking. The verse in the treatise says:
'When the Buddhas teach the Dharma, they do not say they are manifestations, because not speaking like this, therefore their speaking is correct.'
Explanation: If the manifestation Buddhas do not say 'I am a manifestation' when teaching the Dharma, then what they say is correct. If it is not said like this, the sentient beings that can be taught will not generate reverence. Why? Because it cannot benefit sentient beings.' That is to say that is incorrect speaking. Therefore, do not say 'I am a manifestation Buddha.' Commentary: Explaining the meaning of the sutra is not saying 'I am a manifestation Buddha,' so it is called not expounding. Therefore, what he says is correct, so it is called speaking. Question: All the Hinayana
經不說是化。然大乘經佛皆自說我是化佛如何不言。答。雖說是化不言離真迥然別有皆是真說。是故為正。又解對不生敬信者言非化身。若生敬信亦說我化。梁本亦有如如不動。謂不取實能所詮相心如真如而不動故。名為不染而是正說。
經。何以故至應作如是觀 演曰。言何以故者。準此論生下經文。何以說法。能不染者以諸有為如幻等故。非如所見有自性故。故說法時能不染也。非但說法不染亦即是流轉不染。彼論答徴意以諸有為如幻等故。即真而說不言化相離真而有也。準彼論疑即何以故釋九喻。略以七門分別。一說意。二開合。三次第。四屬當法喻。五建立。六問答。七說喻勝益。初說意者。此論流轉不染明佛示現受于生死。常在三界化利眾生。以了有為如幻等故。不為所染故有此文。彼論為斷二十八佛涅槃疑。論云。若諸佛如來常為眾生說法。云何言如來入涅槃。為斷此疑。是故說彼偈。此義云何。偈言。
非有為非離 諸如來涅槃 九種有為法 妙智正觀故
上二句明無住道以答前疑。下二句釋此所由。正觀故示初文。論云。以諸佛得涅槃。化身說法示現世間行。為利益眾生故。此明諸佛以不住涅槃不住世間故。此意非有為故不住生死。不離有為故不住涅槃。何故能示耶。以觀有
{ "translations": [ "現代漢語譯本：經文說，如果佛經不說佛是應化之身，那麼大乘經典中佛都自己說『我是應化之佛』，這又該如何解釋呢？回答：雖然說是應化之身，但並沒有說脫離真如而迥然不同，都是從真如而說的，所以是正說。另一種解釋是，對不生敬信的人說不是應化身，如果生起敬信，也會說『我是應化』。梁譯本也有『如如不動』的說法，意思是說不執取能詮、所詮的實相，心如真如而不動，所以稱為不染，而是正說。", "", "經文：『何以故』到『應作如是觀』。演曰：『何以故』這三個字，是承接下面的經文。『何以說法，能不染者？』是因為諸有為法如幻如化等，不像所見那樣有自性，所以在說法時能不被染著。不僅僅是說法不染著，也就是流轉生死也不染著。那部論典回答提問的意圖是，因為諸有為法如幻如化等，即真而說，不說應化之相脫離真如而存在。根據那部論典的疑問，『何以故』解釋了九喻。大致用七個方面來分別：一是說明意圖，二是開合，三是次第，四是歸屬對應的法喻，五是建立，六是問答，七是說明比喻的殊勝利益。首先說意圖，這部論典的流轉不染，說明佛示現受生死，常在三界化度利益眾生，因為明瞭有為法如幻如化等，所以不被染著，因此有這段經文。那部論典是爲了斷除二十八佛涅槃的疑惑。論中說：『如果諸佛如來常為眾生說法，為什麼又說如來入涅槃呢？』爲了斷除這個疑惑，所以說了那首偈頌。這其中的含義是什麼呢？偈頌說：", "", "『非有為非離，諸如來涅槃，九種有為法，妙智正觀故。』", "", "上面兩句說明無住之道，用來回答前面的疑問。下面兩句解釋這樣做的原因。『正觀故』是顯示最初的文句。論中說：『因為諸佛得到涅槃，應化身說法，示現在世間行事，爲了利益眾生。』這說明諸佛不住于涅槃，也不住於世間。這樣做的意圖是，不因為有為而住于生死，不脫離有為而住于涅槃。為什麼能夠示現呢？因為觀察有為法" ], "english_translations": [ "English version: The sutra says, 'If the sutras do not say that the Buddha is a manifested body (Nirmanakaya), how can it be explained that the Buddha in the Mahayana sutras all say, \'I am a manifested Buddha\'?' The answer is: Although it is said to be a manifested body, it is not said that it is completely different from the true nature (Tathata). All are spoken from the true nature, so it is the correct teaching. Another explanation is that it is said not to be a manifested body to those who do not have faith. If faith arises, it will also be said, \'I am a manifested body.\' The Liang version also has the saying \'Thus Thus Unmoving,\' which means not clinging to the real characteristics of the subject and object, the mind is like the true nature and does not move, so it is called undefiled and is the correct teaching.", "", "Sutra: \'Why is it so\' to \'should be viewed in this way.\' Yan said: The words \'Why is it so\' are connected to the following sutra text. \'Why does the Dharma not defile when spoken?\' It is because all conditioned phenomena (Samskrta) are like illusions (Maya), etc., and do not have self-nature (Svabhava) as seen, so they are not defiled when speaking the Dharma. Not only is speaking the Dharma not defiled, but also the cycle of birth and death (Samsara) is not defiled. The intention of that treatise in answering the question is that because all conditioned phenomena are like illusions, etc., they are spoken from the true nature, and it is not said that the appearance of manifestation exists apart from the true nature. According to the doubts in that treatise, \'Why is it so\' explains the nine metaphors ( दृष्टान्त drstanta). Roughly, it can be distinguished in seven aspects: first, to explain the intention; second, to open and close; third, the order; fourth, to attribute the corresponding Dharma metaphors; fifth, to establish; sixth, questions and answers; seventh, to explain the superior benefits of the metaphors. First, to explain the intention, this treatise on undefiled transmigration explains that the Buddha manifests to receive birth and death, and constantly transforms and benefits sentient beings in the three realms (Triloka), because he understands that conditioned phenomena are like illusions, etc., so he is not defiled, hence this passage. That treatise is to dispel the doubts about the Nirvana of the twenty-eight Buddhas. The treatise says: \'If all the Buddhas and Tathagatas constantly preach the Dharma for sentient beings, why is it said that the Tathagata enters Nirvana?\'. To dispel this doubt, that verse was spoken. What is the meaning of this? The verse says:", "", "\'Not conditioned, not apart, the Nirvana of the Tathagatas, the nine kinds of conditioned dharmas, are due to the correct view of wonderful wisdom.\'", "", "The above two lines explain the path of non-abiding (Apratisthita), used to answer the previous question. The following two lines explain the reason for doing so. \'Correct view\' is to show the initial sentence. The treatise says: \'Because all the Buddhas attain Nirvana, the manifested body preaches the Dharma, manifesting actions in the world, for the benefit of sentient beings.\' This explains that the Buddhas do not abide in Nirvana, nor do they abide in the world. The intention of doing so is that they do not abide in birth and death because of conditioned phenomena, and they do not abide in Nirvana by being apart from conditioned phenomena. Why are they able to manifest? Because they observe conditioned phenomena" ] }
為如幻等故。疑意以佛受生說法應拘生死。云何言佛入涅槃耶。若入涅槃應同二乘如何。復言受生說法。答以佛般涅槃非有為法。亦不離有為法。何故能然得無住道。由何得無住道。以正觀有為故。二開合者。總名有為由滯三相表是有為緣起之法。此論為四。一自性相。謂初三喻。二著所住味相。謂次一喻。三隨順過失相。謂露泡二喻。四隨順出離相。謂后三喻。彼論為三。一觀相謂初三。二觀受用謂次三。三觀三世事謂后三。故頌云。
觀相及受用 觀於三世事
合此第二第三為觀受用。彼以能受身及能受用並所用境。能受所受同名受故。此以能所性別故離為二。亦不相違故。彼長行雲。一觀有為法。以觀見相識。二者觀受用。以觀器世間等。以何處住。以何等身受用何等。三者觀有為行。以何等法三世差別轉。三次第者。且自性相總談世間外道邪妄所執能執一切自性及二所依。次明由有自性而生味著。次明由味著故過失隨起。后明除彼過失而修出離。彼論為三開合雖異。義與此同。就初自性相中有其三喻。一星二翳三燈。此論初相如星。次見如翳。彼論初見次喻于相。何故爾耶。法喻義多。而作論者所取意別。謂此論中境心次第。先相后見。是故第二著所住味以境為初方說能受。彼論生起次第見為根
【現代漢語翻譯】 現代漢語譯本 因為諸法如幻等，所以產生疑問，認為佛陀的受生和說法應該受到生死的拘束。為什麼說佛陀入涅槃呢？如果入涅槃，應該和聲聞、緣覺二乘一樣，為什麼又說受生說法呢？回答說，佛陀的般涅槃不是有為法，但也不離開有為法。為什麼能夠證得無住道呢？因為正確地觀察有為法。 二、開合方面：總的來說，『有為』是因為執著于生、住、滅三相，表明是有為的緣起之法。此論分為四部分：一、自性相，即最初的三個比喻；二、著所住味相，即接下來的一個比喻；三、隨順過失相，即露珠和水泡兩個比喻；四、隨順出離相，即最後的三個比喻。彼論分為三部分：一、觀相，即最初的三個比喻；二、觀受用，即接下來的三個比喻；三、觀三世事，即最後的三個比喻。所以頌文說： 『觀相及受用，觀於三世事』 將此論的第二和第三部分合併爲觀受用。彼論認為能受的身和能受用的以及所用的境界，能受和所受都稱為受。此論因為能受和所受有區別，所以分為二。也不互相違背。彼論的長行文說：一、觀察有為法，通過觀察見相識；二、觀察受用，通過觀察器世間等，在何處居住，以何種身體受用何物；三、觀察有為行，以何種法在三世中差別流轉。 三、次第方面：自性相總的來說是談論世間外道邪妄所執著的能執的一切自性以及二所依。其次說明因為有自性而產生味著。其次說明因為味著而產生過失。最後說明去除那些過失而修習出離。彼論分為三部分，開合雖然不同，但意義與此相同。就最初的自性相中有三個比喻：星、翳、燈。此論最初的相如星，其次的見如翳。彼論最初的見，其次比喻于相。為什麼這樣呢？法和比喻的意義很多，而作論者所取的意義不同。此論中是境和心的次第，先相后見，所以第二著所住味以境為初，然後說能受。彼論是生起的次第，以見為根本。
【English Translation】 English version Because phenomena are like illusions (maya) and so on, doubts arise, thinking that the Buddha's birth and teaching should be bound by birth and death. Why is it said that the Buddha enters Nirvana (Nirvana)? If entering Nirvana, it should be the same as the two vehicles of Sravakas (Sravaka) and Pratyekabuddhas (Pratyekabuddha), why then is it said that he is born and teaches? The answer is that the Buddha's Parinirvana (Parinirvana) is not a conditioned (Samskrta) dharma, but it is also not separate from conditioned dharmas. Why is it possible to attain the path of non-abiding (anupalabdhi)? Because of the correct observation of conditioned dharmas. 2. In terms of opening and closing: Generally speaking, 'conditioned' is because of attachment to the three characteristics of arising, abiding, and ceasing, indicating the conditioned arising of dharmas. This treatise is divided into four parts: 1. The characteristic of self-nature (svabhava-laksana), which is the first three metaphors; 2. The characteristic of attachment to dwelling and taste (asraya-rasa-laksana), which is the next metaphor; 3. The characteristic of following faults (dosha-anugata-laksana), which is the two metaphors of dewdrop and bubble; 4. The characteristic of following liberation (moksha-anugata-laksana), which is the last three metaphors. That treatise is divided into three parts: 1. Observing characteristics, which is the first three metaphors; 2. Observing enjoyment, which is the next three metaphors; 3. Observing the affairs of the three times, which is the last three metaphors. Therefore, the verse says: 'Observing characteristics and enjoyment, observing the affairs of the three times.' Combining the second and third parts of this treatise into observing enjoyment. That treatise considers the body that can receive, what can be enjoyed, and the objects that are used, the receiver and the received are both called enjoyment. This treatise separates them into two because the receiver and the received are different. They are not contradictory. The prose of that treatise says: 1. Observe conditioned dharmas, through observing the appearance of consciousness; 2. Observe enjoyment, through observing the world of vessels (bhajana-loka) and so on, where one dwells, with what body one enjoys what; 3. Observe conditioned actions, with what dharma the three times are differentiated and transformed. 3. In terms of sequence: The characteristic of self-nature generally discusses all the self-natures and the two supports that are clung to by the heretical and deluded of the world. Secondly, it explains that attachment to taste arises because of self-nature. Thirdly, it explains that faults arise because of attachment to taste. Finally, it explains that liberation is cultivated by removing those faults. That treatise is divided into three parts, although the opening and closing are different, the meaning is the same as this. In the initial characteristic of self-nature, there are three metaphors: star, illusion, and lamp. In this treatise, the initial characteristic is like a star, and the next seeing is like an illusion. In that treatise, the initial seeing is then compared to the characteristic. Why is this so? The meanings of dharma and metaphor are many, and the meaning taken by the author is different. In this treatise, it is the sequence of object and mind, first characteristic then seeing, so the second attachment to dwelling and taste takes the object as the beginning, and then speaks of the receiver. That treatise is the sequence of arising, with seeing as the root.
本。依心變境故相為后。問。法中可爾。在喻如何。答。喻亦多義。且星在夜中為他所見。亦能明照。晝則俱無。此論取為他所見義。彼論取能照明義。俱有隱顯。翳有二義。一者由翳體故實無見有此喻于見。二者由翳見毛輪等彼喻于相。若爾彼相應喻毛輪。答。毛輪無體。不離於翳故但喻翳。四屬當法喻者。論云于中自性相者共相見識。演曰。此為總標三喻所喻。一共相二見三識。一星。論云。此相如星。無智闇中有彼光故。有智明中無彼光故。演曰。未見真如。彼相可有真智。既起都不現前。彼論云。譬如星宿為日所映有而不現。能見心法亦復如是。二翳。此論云。人法我見如翳。以取無義故。彼論云。如目有翳則見毛輪等色。觀有為法亦復如是。以顛倒見故。三燈。此論云。識如燈。以渴愛潤取緣故熾然。彼論亦云。依止貪愛法住故。演曰。此明報識。由業所引愛潤熾然而生。四幻。此論云。于中著所住味者。味著顛倒境界故。以顛倒見故。彼論云。又如幻所住處亦復如是。以器世間種種差別無一體實故。問。彼論如幻唯器世間此論境界與相何別。答。相通一切染凈俱論。此中境界唯顛倒境五露。此論云。于中隨順過失相者。無常等隨順故。彼露譬喻者。顯示相體無有。以隨順無常故。彼論云。又如露身亦如是
【現代漢語翻譯】 本。因為心能改變外境，所以『相』是後起的。問：在『法』中可以這樣說，但在比喻中又該如何解釋呢？答：比喻也有多種含義。比如，星星在夜晚能被他人看見，也能發光照明；但在白天，星星的光芒就消失了。此論採用的是『被他人看見』的含義，而彼論採用的是『能照明』的含義，兩者都有隱顯的特性。『翳』有兩種含義：一是由於『翳』的本體，實際上沒有看見卻好像看見了，這個比喻適用於『見』；二是由於『翳』而看見毛髮輪等，這個比喻適用於『相』。如果這樣，彼論中相應的比喻應該是毛髮輪嗎？答：毛髮輪沒有實體，不離於『翳』，所以只用『翳』來比喻。四種屬於當法（當下之法）的比喻是：論中說，『于中自性相者共相見識』。演曰：這是總括了三種比喻所要比喻的內容：一是共相，二是見，三是識。一、星。論中說：『此相如星，無智闇中有彼光故，有智明中無彼光故』。演曰：未見真如（Tathātā，真如）時，『相』是存在的；一旦生起真智，『相』就不再顯現。彼論說：『譬如星宿為日所映有而不現，能見心法亦復如是』。二、翳。此論說：『人法我見如翳，以取無義故』。彼論說：『如目有翳則見毛輪等色，觀有為法亦復如是，以顛倒見故』。三、燈。此論說：『識如燈，以渴愛潤取緣故熾然』。彼論也說：『依止貪愛法住故』。演曰：這說明報識（Vipāka-vijñāna，異熟識），由業力所牽引，被愛慾滋潤而熾盛生起。四、幻。此論說：『于中著所住味者，味著顛倒境界故，以顛倒見故』。彼論說：『又如幻所住處亦復如是，以器世間種種差別無一體實故』。問：彼論中『如幻』只指器世間，而此論中的『境界』與『相』有什麼區別？答：『相』可以通指一切染凈之法，而此論中的『境界』僅指顛倒之境。五、露。此論說：『于中隨順過失相者，無常等隨順故』。彼露的譬喻是：顯示『相』的本體是空無的，因為它隨順於無常。彼論說：『又如露身亦如是』。
【English Translation】 Original. Because the mind transforms the environment, 'characteristics' arise later. Question: This may be so in 'Dharma' (法, the teachings of the Buddha), but how can it be explained in metaphors? Answer: Metaphors also have multiple meanings. For example, stars can be seen by others and can illuminate at night; but during the day, the light of the stars disappears. This treatise adopts the meaning of 'being seen by others,' while that treatise adopts the meaning of 'being able to illuminate,' both having the characteristic of being hidden and revealed. '翳' (ì, cataract or obscured vision) has two meanings: first, due to the substance of '翳,' one actually does not see but seems to see; this metaphor applies to 'seeing.' Second, due to '翳,' one sees hair-like wheels, etc.; this metaphor applies to 'characteristics.' If so, should the corresponding metaphor in that treatise be hair-like wheels? Answer: Hair-like wheels have no substance and are inseparable from '翳,' so only '翳' is used as a metaphor. The four metaphors belonging to the Dharma (法, the teachings of the Buddha) are: The treatise says, 'Among these, the self-nature characteristics are the common characteristics of seeing and consciousness.' Commentary: This is a general summary of what the three metaphors are meant to represent: first, common characteristics; second, seeing; third, consciousness. 1. Star. The treatise says, 'These characteristics are like stars, having light in the darkness of ignorance, and having no light in the brightness of wisdom.' Commentary: Before seeing Tathātā (真如, suchness), 'characteristics' exist; once true wisdom arises, 'characteristics' no longer appear. That treatise says, 'Just as stars are obscured by the sun and exist but do not appear, so too is the mind-Dharma (心法, mental phenomena) that can see.' 2. Cataract. This treatise says, 'The view of self in persons and phenomena is like a cataract, because it takes what is meaningless.' That treatise says, 'Just as eyes with cataracts see hair-like wheels and other colors, so too is the observation of conditioned phenomena, due to inverted views.' 3. Lamp. This treatise says, 'Consciousness is like a lamp, blazing because of thirst and love nourishing the conditions.' That treatise also says, 'Because it relies on greed and love, the Dharma (法, the teachings of the Buddha) abides.' Commentary: This explains Vipāka-vijñāna (異熟識, resultant consciousness), which is drawn by karmic force and arises intensely, nourished by desire. 4. Illusion. This treatise says, 'Among these, those who cling to the taste of what they dwell in, taste and cling to inverted realms, due to inverted views.' That treatise says, 'Also, just like the place where illusions dwell, so too is it, because the various differences in the container world have no single real substance.' Question: In that treatise, 'like an illusion' refers only to the container world, while what is the difference between 'realm' and 'characteristic' in this treatise? Answer: 'Characteristic' can refer to all defiled and pure Dharmas (法, the teachings of the Buddha), while 'realm' in this treatise refers only to inverted realms. 5. Dew. This treatise says, 'Among these, those who follow the characteristics of faults, follow impermanence, etc.' The metaphor of dew is: to show that the substance of 'characteristic' is empty and non-existent, because it follows impermanence. That treatise says, 'Also, just like a body of dew, so too is it.'
。以少時住故。演曰。彼論唯身。此論通喻有為無常。六泡。此云顯示隨順苦體以受如泡故。若有受皆是苦故。隨有應知。彼苦生故是苦苦。破滅故是壞苦。不相舍離故是行苦。復于第四禪及無色中。立不苦不樂受以勝故。演曰。彼釋行苦。由與生滅不相離故。又依舍立四禪以上。依增勝故。理實舍受亦通。下有問。若爾無漏智應名行苦。由有生滅及舍受故。答。性非順染故不立苦。由有生滅。有漏性者順於染著方立苦故。彼論云。又如泡所受用事亦如是。以受想因三法不定故。演曰。以假者能受故說受體名所受事。所言三法謂根境識。由三易脫速起速滅受亦如是。七夢。此論云。于中隨順出離相者。隨順人法無我。以攀緣故。得其出離故。說無我以為出離。演曰。攀緣者作意義者。此言屬下意觀三世遷流不定。除人法執而得出離。此總釋也。論文云。彼過去行。以所念處故如夢。演曰。過去無體如夢所見。唯有其念而無實法。唯自心故。八電。論云。現在者不久時住故。九云。論云。未來者彼粗惡種子似虛空引心出故如雲。演曰。種子在識。但是功能而無體相故喻虛空。所生現行即有相狀故喻于云。彼論云。以于子時阿梨耶識。與一切法為種子根本故。亦與此同。空本無雲云在來設至現在。須臾變滅觀未來法亦復如
是。有云。云能含雨雨在未來者。若爾即應舉雨為喻故為不可。五建立者。問。何故唯立九種譬喻不減不增。答。由法有九故唯九喻。何者依此論說自性有三。謂相見識。著所住味有一。謂顛倒境界。隨順過失有二。謂無常苦隨順。出離有三。謂即三世。是為九法。若依彼論。觀相有三。謂見相識。受用有三。一器二身三能受用。約世有三。論總名為九種境界。頌云。
見相及於識 器身受用事 過去現在法 亦觀未來世
功德施論觀察有為九種體相。頌云。
觀自在境物 遷動及體性 少盛壽作者 觀心並有無
觀察自在。譬如星等著像于空隨方執行。光色熾盛。假令久住終隨劫盡。如是人天受諸福報。豐財重位眾所瞻仰。雖久自在會亦歸空。觀察境物如翳。譬如翳目于凈空中見有毛輪飛花二月。無明翳識亦復如是。于真實理無物之處。而見內外世出世間種種諸法。觀察遷動如燈。譬如燈焰。即生處滅不至余處。然因此焰余處焰生。如有遷動。諸蘊亦爾。觀察體性如幻。變作女人容貌。可觀體性非有。不了之者取為真實。諸法亦爾。觀察少盛如露。露見日晞。盛年容色。一遇無常已從遷謝。觀察壽如泡。譬如水泡。或有始生未成體相。或才生已或暫停住即歸壞滅。壽生亦爾。始生
【現代漢語翻譯】 現代漢語譯本： 問：經文說，『云能含雨，雨在未來』。如果這樣，就應該用雨來作比喻，所以（用云作比喻）是不恰當的。 五、建立（九種譬喻）： 問：為什麼只建立九種譬喻，不多也不少？ 答：因為法有九種，所以只有九種譬喻。哪九種呢？如果按照這部論典所說，自性有三種，即相、見、識。著、所住、味有一種，即顛倒境界。隨順過失有兩種，即無常、苦隨順。出離有三種，即過去、現在、未來三世。這就是九法。如果按照另一部論典，觀相有三種，即見、相、識。受用有三種，即器、身、能受用。約世有三種，總名為九種境界。頌文說： 『見相及於識，器身受用事，過去現在法，亦觀未來世。』 功德施論觀察有為法的九種體相。頌文說： 『觀自在境物，遷動及體性，少盛壽作者，觀心並有無。』 觀察自在，譬如星辰（stars）的執行，就像眼睛被遮蔽后看到空中的影像，隨著方向執行，光色熾盛。即使長久存在，最終也會隨著劫數而消盡。就像人天（humans and devas）享受各種福報，擁有豐厚的財富和重要的地位，受到眾人瞻仰，即使長久自在，最終也會歸於空無。觀察境物，如翳（cataract）。譬如眼睛被翳障蔽，在晴朗的空中看到毛輪和飛花。無明（ignorance）遮蔽了意識也是這樣，在真實理體本無一物的地方，卻看到內外世間和出世間的種種諸法。觀察遷動，如燈（lamp）。譬如燈焰，在產生的地方熄滅，不會到達其他地方，然而因為這個燈焰，其他地方的燈焰得以產生，好像有遷動。諸蘊（skandhas）也是這樣。觀察體性，如幻（illusion）。幻術變作女人，容貌可觀，但體性並非真實存在。不明白的人卻認為它是真實的。諸法也是這樣。觀察少盛，如露（dew）。露水見到太陽就消失。盛年的容貌，一旦遇到無常（impermanence），就會迅速衰謝。觀察壽命，如泡（bubble）。譬如水泡，有的剛產生還沒有成形，有的才產生或暫停一會兒就破滅。壽命的產生也是這樣，剛產生
【English Translation】 English version: Question: The scripture says, 'Clouds can contain rain, and rain is in the future.' If so, rain should be used as a metaphor, so (using clouds as a metaphor) is inappropriate. Five, Establishing (Nine Metaphors): Question: Why are only nine metaphors established, no more and no less? Answer: Because there are nine types of dharmas, there are only nine metaphors. What are the nine? According to this treatise, there are three types of self-nature: appearance (相, appearance), seeing (見, seeing), and consciousness (識, consciousness). There is one type of attachment, dwelling, and taste: the inverted realm. There are two types of following faults: impermanence (無常, impermanence) and suffering (苦, suffering). There are three types of liberation: the three times of past, present, and future. These are the nine dharmas. According to another treatise, there are three aspects of observing appearances: seeing, appearance, and consciousness. There are three types of enjoyment: vessel (器, vessel), body (身, body), and the ability to enjoy (能受用, the ability to enjoy). There are three types related to time, collectively called the nine realms. The verse says: 'Seeing, appearance, and consciousness, vessel, body, and the matter of enjoyment, past and present dharmas, also observe the future world.' The 'Treatise on the Merit of Giving' observes the nine characteristics of conditioned dharmas. The verse says: 'Observing self-existence, objects, movement, and nature, youth, prosperity, lifespan, the maker, observing the mind, and existence and non-existence.' Observing self-existence, like the movement of stars (星辰, stars), like the images in the sky seen after the eyes are covered, moving with direction, the light and color are blazing. Even if they exist for a long time, they will eventually be exhausted with the kalpa. Just like humans and devas (人天, humans and devas) enjoy various blessings, possessing abundant wealth and important positions, admired by all, even if they are self-existent for a long time, they will eventually return to emptiness. Observing objects, like a cataract (翳, cataract). For example, when the eyes are obscured by a cataract, one sees hair-wheels and flying flowers in the clear sky. Ignorance (無明, ignorance) obscuring consciousness is also like this, in the place where the true principle has no thing, one sees all kinds of dharmas of the inner and outer world and beyond the world. Observing movement, like a lamp (燈, lamp). For example, the flame of a lamp, extinguished where it is produced, does not reach other places, but because of this flame, the flame in other places is produced, as if there is movement. The skandhas (蘊, skandhas) are also like this. Observing nature, like an illusion (幻, illusion). A magic trick transforms into a woman, whose appearance is observable, but whose nature is not truly existent. Those who do not understand take it as real. All dharmas are also like this. Observing youth and prosperity, like dew (露, dew). Dew disappears when it sees the sun. The appearance of youth, once it encounters impermanence (無常, impermanence), will quickly decline. Observing lifespan, like a bubble (泡, bubble). For example, a water bubble, some are just produced and have not yet taken shape, some are just produced or pause for a while and then break. The production of lifespan is also like this, just produced.
胎藏乃至衰老歸於滅壞。觀作者如夢。夢中隨先見聞。憶念分別熏習住故。雖無作者諸境現前。無始時來諸煩惱業熏習住故。雖無有我是能作者。而現無涯生死等事。觀心如電。生時即滅剎那必謝觀有無如雲。如空中雲。先無後有須臾變滅。有為亦爾。體性本空從妄緣有。有緣既散還復歸無。功德更有多。複次釋煩不具引。六問答者。問。遍計等三性之中此喻何性。答。此喻依他。言有為故。由觀依他如幻等故。能除遍計執實有心所顯真理即圓成實故。由此觀悟入三無性。問。亦有經中色如聚沫乃至識如幻化。與此何殊。答。法有多途。喻亦多義。隨舉為喻。不可一準。亦有水月光影谷響變化。或總喻有為或別喻諸法。此中所舉是其別喻。然據二論說九喻為正。此經闕四。星翳燈云。而加影喻。梁本闕星而加於暗。彼以星光暗中現故。或譯者意別或梵本殊不可和會。七說喻勝益者。依此論說作是觀故。于有為流轉生死而無染著故得出離。若爾九觀皆得出離。何故后三獨名出離。答。理實俱能得於出離。然於前喻別顯余義。此無人法出離義增又順滅諦。即彼所觀出離相故。是故言之。彼論頌云。
觀相及受用 觀於三世事 于有為法中 得無垢自在
上料簡訖。次釋經文者。初一句法。次二句喻。后一
【現代漢語翻譯】 現代漢語譯本 胎藏乃至衰老歸於滅壞。觀察作者如同夢境。夢中隨著先前見聞，憶念分別熏習而停留的緣故。即使沒有作者，各種境象也會顯現於前。這是因為無始以來各種煩惱業力的熏習停留的緣故。即使沒有『我』作為能作者，也會顯現無邊無際的生死等事。觀察心念如同閃電。生起之時即已滅去，剎那之間必定消逝。觀察有和無如同雲彩。如同空中的雲彩，先前沒有而後來出現，須臾之間變幻滅去。有為法也是如此。體性原本是空，從虛妄的因緣而生。有為的因緣一旦消散，便又迴歸于無。功德還有更多。再次解釋煩惱不完全引用，六個問答是：問：在遍計所執性、依他起性、圓成實性這三種自性之中，這個比喻屬於哪種自性？答：這個比喻屬於依他起性。因為說的是『有為』的緣故。由於觀察依他起性如同幻象等，所以能夠去除遍計所執的執著實有的心，所顯現的真理就是圓成實性。由此觀察領悟而進入三無自性。問：也有經中說色蘊如聚沫，乃至識蘊如幻化，這與此處的比喻有什麼不同？答：佛法有多條途徑，比喻也有多種含義。隨便舉出一個作為比喻，不能完全以此為準。也有水月、光影、谷響、變化等，或者總的來比喻有為法，或者分別來比喻各種法。這裡所舉的比喻是其中的個別比喻。然而根據《攝大乘論》和《顯揚聖教論》的說法，九個比喻是正確的。這部經缺少四個比喻，即星、翳、燈、云，而增加了影的比喻。梁譯本缺少星的比喻而增加了暗的比喻。他們認為星光在黑暗中顯現的緣故，或許是譯者的意思不同，或許是梵文字不同，無法調和。七、說明比喻的殊勝利益是：依據這部論的說法，作這樣的觀察的緣故，對於有為法的流轉生死而沒有染著，所以能夠得出離。如果這樣，九種觀察都能夠得出離，為什麼後面的三種觀察單獨稱為出離？答：道理上說，全部都能夠得到出離。然而前面的比喻分別顯示其餘的意義。這裡無人法出離的意義增加，又順應滅諦，就是所觀察的出離相的緣故。所以這樣說。《攝大乘論》的偈頌說：
觀察相和受用，觀察於三世之事， 于有為法之中，得到無垢的自在。
上面的解釋和簡擇完畢。接下來解釋經文，第一句是法，接著兩句是比喻，最後一句是……
【English Translation】 English version The womb and even old age return to destruction. Observe the creator as a dream. In a dream, following previous sights and sounds, memories, discriminations, and habitual tendencies reside. Even without a creator, various realms appear before us. This is because beginningless afflictions and karmic forces reside as habitual tendencies. Even though there is no 'I' as the creator, boundless matters such as birth and death appear. Observe the mind as lightning. It vanishes as it arises, and inevitably disappears in an instant. Observe existence and non-existence as clouds. Like clouds in the sky, they appear after not existing, and transform and vanish in a moment. Conditioned phenomena are also like this. Their nature is originally empty, arising from false conditions. Once these conditions dissipate, they return to non-existence. There are even more merits. Furthermore, explaining afflictions without fully quoting, the six questions and answers are: Question: Among the three natures of parikalpita (completely conceptualized nature), paratantra (dependent nature), and parinispanna (perfected nature), to which nature does this metaphor belong? Answer: This metaphor belongs to the paratantra nature. Because it speaks of 'conditioned phenomena.' Because observing the paratantra nature as illusion, etc., can remove the mind that clings to the parikalpita nature as truly existent, the truth revealed is the parinispanna nature. Through this observation and realization, one enters the three natures of non-self-existence. Question: Some sutras say that form is like foam, and even consciousness is like illusion. How is this different from this metaphor? Answer: The Dharma has many paths, and metaphors have many meanings. Any example can be used as a metaphor, but it cannot be taken as the only standard. There are also water reflections, light shadows, valley echoes, and transformations, which can either generally represent conditioned phenomena or specifically represent various dharmas. The metaphor used here is a specific metaphor. However, according to the Mahāyānasaṃgraha (Compendium of the Mahayana) and Asaṅga's Yogācārabhūmi-śāstra (Treatise on the Stages of Yoga Practice), the nine metaphors are correct. This sutra lacks four metaphors: stars, cataracts, lamps, and clouds, and adds the metaphor of shadows. The Liang translation lacks the metaphor of stars and adds the metaphor of darkness. They believe that starlight appears in the darkness, perhaps because the translators had different intentions, or perhaps the Sanskrit texts were different, making it impossible to reconcile. Seven, explaining the superior benefits of the metaphor: According to this treatise, because of making such observations, one is not attached to the cycle of conditioned phenomena and birth and death, and therefore can attain liberation. If so, all nine observations can lead to liberation. Why are the last three observations specifically called liberation? Answer: In principle, all can attain liberation. However, the previous metaphors separately reveal other meanings. Here, the meaning of liberation from the non-self of persons and dharmas is increased, and it accords with the cessation of suffering, which is the aspect of liberation being observed. Therefore, it is said. The verse in the Mahāyānasaṃgraha says:
Observing appearances and experiences, observing the affairs of the three times, In conditioned phenomena, one attains stainless freedom.
The above explanation and selection are completed. Next, explaining the sutra text, the first sentence is the Dharma, the next two sentences are metaphors, and the last sentence is...
句勸。
經。佛說是經已至信受奉行 演曰。流通分有三。初標佛化畢。次明眾同聞。后歡喜信奉優婆塞等義如常說。準魏周經有菩薩摩訶薩。貞觀具引八部。此中文略。此論頌云。
若聞如是法 于大乘無覺 我念過於石 究竟無因故 下人於此深大法 不能覺知及信向 世間眾生多如此 是以此法成荒廢
演曰。初偈明不悟解者無菩提因。后偈明不信向故法成湮滅。前令人發心。后希法久住。彼論頌云。
諸佛希有總持法 不可稱量深句義 從尊者聞及廣說 回此福德施群生
上二句嘆佛法殊妙。次一句繼軌傳燈。下一句發願回施。歡喜奉行者。智度論云。為生智也。文殊師利所問經云。有三種義歡喜奉行。有云伽耶山頂經亦同。此說應檢之。一說者清凈以于諸法得自在故。意明不為取執利養所染。二所說清凈以如實知清凈法體故。意明說彼所證實理離虛妄執說教理根性皆相應故。又初中后善等十種凈勝故。三得清凈果。意明受者隨所聞說境行果三。起行得果證彼境故。所以歡喜。以其聽者根器宜聞佛正為說無不信悟。領納在心敬順修學。由斯故說歡喜奉行。
妙理非愚測 憑論略敷宣 福善共含生 速證無所證
建中四年年正月二十日僧義琳
【現代漢語翻譯】 現代漢語譯本： 句勸。
經。佛說完這部經后，大家至誠地信受奉行。
演曰：流通分有三個部分。首先標明佛的教化完畢，其次說明大眾共同聽聞，最後是歡喜信奉優婆塞（Upasaka，男居士）等的意義，和通常所說的一樣。參照魏、周兩代的經書，有菩薩摩訶薩（Bodhisattva-Mahasattva，大菩薩）。貞觀年間的譯本完整地引用了八部眾，這裡經文有所省略。此論的頌文說：
『如果聽聞這樣的佛法，對於大乘佛法卻沒有覺悟，我認為（此人）比石頭還要頑固，因為他最終沒有（成佛的）因緣。』 『下等根器的人對於這種深奧的佛法，不能覺悟、理解和信奉。世間的眾生大多如此，所以這種佛法變得荒廢。』
演曰：第一個偈頌說明不領悟佛法的人沒有菩提（Bodhi，覺悟）的因緣。第二個偈頌說明不信奉佛法，所以佛法變得湮滅。前者令人發起菩提心，後者希望佛法長久住世。那部論的頌文說：
『諸佛希有難得的總持法門，不可稱量，深奧的語句和意義，從尊者那裡聽聞並且廣泛宣說，將這功德迴向給一切眾生。』
上面兩句讚歎佛法的殊勝和美妙。中間一句是繼承前人的事業，將佛法像燈一樣傳遞下去。最後一句是發願將功德迴向給眾生。歡喜奉行，智度論（Mahaprajnaparamita-sastra）中說，是爲了生起智慧。文殊師利所問經（Manjushri-pariprccha-sutra）中說，有三種意義的歡喜奉行。有人說伽耶山頂經（Gayasirsa Sutra）也相同，這需要查證。一種說法是清凈，因為對於諸法（Dharma，佛法）得到了自在，意思是說不被貪圖執著利益供養所污染。第二種說法是所說清凈，因為如實地知道清凈法體，意思是說所說的都是他所證實的真理，遠離虛妄的執著，所說的教理和眾生的根性都相應。還有初善、中善、后善等十種清凈殊勝。第三種是得到清凈的果報，意思是說接受佛法的人隨著所聽聞和宣說的境、行、果三方面，開始修行並得到果報，從而證得那個境界，所以歡喜。因為聽法者的根器適合聽聞佛的正法，佛為他們宣說，沒有不信悟的，領納在心中，恭敬順從地修學，因此說歡喜奉行。
精妙的道理不是愚笨的人可以猜測的，憑藉論典來略微地敷陳宣揚。愿福德和善行與一切眾生共同擁有，迅速證得無所得的境界。
建中四年正月二十日，僧人義琳。
【English Translation】 English version: A sentence of exhortation.
Sutra: After the Buddha finished speaking this sutra, everyone sincerely accepted and practiced it.
Yan said: The distribution section has three parts. First, it indicates that the Buddha's teaching is complete. Second, it explains that the assembly jointly heard the teachings. Finally, it covers the meaning of joyfully believing and practicing, like the Upasakas (male lay devotees), etc., as usually explained. According to the sutras of the Wei and Zhou dynasties, there are Bodhisattva-Mahasattvas (Great Bodhisattvas). The Zhenguan translation fully cites the Eight Classes of beings, but this text is abbreviated. The verse in this treatise says:
'If one hears such a Dharma (teachings) but has no awakening to the Mahayana (Great Vehicle), I consider them more stubborn than stone, for they ultimately have no cause (for Buddhahood).' 'Inferior people cannot awaken to, understand, or believe in this profound Dharma. Most sentient beings in the world are like this, so this Dharma becomes desolate.'
Yan said: The first verse explains that those who do not understand the Dharma have no cause for Bodhi (enlightenment). The second verse explains that because they do not believe in the Dharma, it becomes obscured. The former encourages people to generate the Bodhi mind, and the latter hopes that the Dharma will abide in the world for a long time. The verse in that treatise says:
'The Buddhas' rare Dharani (total retention) Dharma, with immeasurable profound phrases and meanings, heard and widely proclaimed from the Venerable One, may this merit be dedicated to all beings.'
The above two lines praise the Dharma's rarity and excellence. The middle line continues the tradition, passing on the Dharma like a lamp. The last line makes a vow to dedicate the merit to all beings. 'Joyfully practice' means, according to the Mahaprajnaparamita-sastra (Great Wisdom Sutra), to generate wisdom. The Manjushri-pariprccha-sutra (Manjushri's Questions Sutra) says that there are three meanings of joyful practice. Some say the Gayasirsa Sutra (Gaya Mountain Top Sutra) is the same, which needs to be verified. One explanation is purity, because one has attained freedom regarding all Dharmas (teachings), meaning one is not tainted by greed for gain or offerings. The second explanation is that what is said is pure, because one truly knows the pure Dharma body, meaning that what is said is the truth that one has realized, free from false attachments, and the teachings and the faculties of beings are all in accordance. There are also the ten kinds of pure excellence, such as initial goodness, intermediate goodness, and final goodness. The third is obtaining pure results, meaning that those who receive the Dharma, following the realm, practice, and result of what they hear and proclaim, begin to cultivate and obtain results, thereby realizing that realm, so they are joyful. Because the faculties of the listeners are suitable for hearing the Buddha's true Dharma, the Buddha proclaims it for them, and none fail to believe and understand, accepting it in their hearts, respectfully following and studying it, therefore it is said to be joyful practice.
Subtle principles cannot be guessed by the foolish; relying on treatises, they are briefly explained. May merit and goodness be shared with all beings, quickly realizing the state of no attainment.
Written on the 20th day of the first month of the fourth year of Jianzhong (783 AD) by the monk Yilin.
寫勘記
金剛般若宣演卷下
（朱） 貞元十九年聽得一遍
又至癸未年十二月一日聽第二遍訖
庚寅年十一月二十八日聽第三遍了
義琳聽
常大德法師說
【現代漢語翻譯】 現代漢語譯本： 《金剛般若宣演》卷下勘記
（朱）：貞元十九年聽了一遍。
又于癸未年十二月一日聽完第二遍。
庚寅年十一月二十八日聽完第三遍。
義琳聽記
常大德法師說
【English Translation】 English version: Colophon to the Vajra Prajna Explanation, Volume 2
(Zhu): Heard once in the 19th year of Zhenyuan (貞元, reign period of Emperor Dezong of Tang Dynasty).
Heard the second time on the first day of the twelfth month of the year Guiwei (癸未, a year in the sexagenary cycle).
Heard the third time on the twenty-eighth day of the eleventh month of the year Gengyin (庚寅, a year in the sexagenary cycle).
Recorded by Yilin (義琳, a name).
Spoken by Dharma Master Chang Dade (常大德法師, a title and name).