金剛般若疏 3.2.2

3.2.2

論云「不空以有實，菩薩三德備」，第三即是智慧人也。 前之二人，名為聞信； 若智慧人，此是證信也。 又言能信之人既是勝人，故舉止行二善，物情所貴，以褒歎之，令得信受。 持戒是止善、修福是行善，此二攝一切善盡，則諸惡莫作、諸善奉行，故舉此二攝一切人也。 於此章句下，第三、明所信之法，即上因果法門名為章句也。 「能生信心」下，此第四、正辨於經生信。 「以此為實」者，即是無所得實信。 若有所得信，雖異小乘不信； 若望無所得信，還成不信。 故《大品》有信毀之品，欲明有所得信，此即成毀。 今此是無所得實相正信，故言以此為實； 亦信波若是法之實相，故云以此為實也。 「當知是人」下，此第五、明信之所由。 所以聞經決能信者，良以殖因積久，故能信受。 故《涅槃》云「熙連河沙諸如來所發菩提心，然後乃能於惡世中不謗是經。 」今亦爾，三多久殖，故能信而不謗。 文有二句：前句明非值少佛； 「以於」下，第二句明值於多佛也。 「聞是章句，乃至一念生淨信者」下，第六章明信得利益。 凡有二益：一者、外為諸佛知見； 二者、內得無邊功德。 然信波若之利，難可稱量，今舉一念之信尚獲無邊功德，始終之信故復難言。 如來懸鑒，信謗皆知，而今偏舉信人者，略有三義：一者、此經是諸佛之母，為佛守護故，若生希向，則為佛所記錄。 故《大品》云「佛常以佛眼觀此經卷，若受持者，則為佛護念。 」為如來之所齒錄，直置世間為天王，貴勝知友尚自歡喜，況為如來之所親愛耶？ 二者、此福與虛空等，豈下地所能知？ 唯佛窮其邊底。 三者、佛無二言，言必可信，今明信得多福，故其福必知多。 問：何因緣故，名為知見？ 答：論云「如來願智力知，非是比智知。 佛眼所見，非肉眼見。 」又佛知此人行菩提因，見此人得菩提果，故言知見。 「何以故」下，此是第七、廣釋淨信之義。 若依論師釋，上來通明三種人信，此的辨第三智慧人信。 今明此言，即通上釋於信得德福無邊； 今釋無邊所以，良由得無生信故，其福無邊。 但無生信自具二種：一者、聞信； 二者、證信。 就此釋中有三。 何以故大開三別？ 第一、明得； 第二、明失； 第三、勸捨失從得。 此是初。 自有兩句：初句明眾生空，次句明諸法空。 所以明此二空釋信義者，《大智論》云「知眾生及法不生，故名無生法忍。 」雖渡眾生，眾生畢竟不可得，即是無眾生。 雖行萬行，諸法畢竟不可得，此即無生法忍，是故今辨此二空為無生淨信。 又眾生空故，是無果患； 諸法空故，即無因患。 所以者何？ 會法已成人故。 法因而人果，因果兩患雙離，故其福無邊。 又無人見故，超凡夫地。 凡夫著我，不知無我； 今辨無我，即離凡夫地。 又知法空故，離二乘地。 二乘之人但得人無我，不得法無我。 又以無人故，離煩惱障； 已無法故，離於智障。 超凡越聖，兼二障俱盡，是故其福無邊。 離人見中，具無十六，今但略故，止言無四。 五陰中起我、我所心，故名為我。 不斷不絕，相續住世，名為眾生。 計有一根之命不斷，猶有我故，稱為命者，亦名為人。 外道計有神我，死此生彼，經遊六道，故名壽者也。 「無法相，無非法相」者，第二句明法空。 雖不見我，猶見有五陰之法，故今明亦無法相。 五陰之法既無，五陰本無，名為非法，空病亦空，故云無非法相。 此應如《淨名》三種次第：初不見我，為眾生空； 次不見法，名為法空，不見非法，亦名空病亦空。 所以明此三空者，我見是眾結之根本，故明我見。 次有見無見，又是斷常之本，乖道事深，故明有無見也。 有人言：修善離惡，以善為法，惡為非法。 又有人言：以空遣有，以空為法，有為非法。

The treatise says: "Because it is not empty, it possesses reality; the bodhisattva is complete in the three virtues." The third is precisely a person of wisdom. The previous two persons are designated as possessing faith from hearing; as for the person of wisdom, this is faith through realization. Furthermore, because a person capable of faith is already an exceptional person, [the sūtra] cites the two kinds of goodness—cessation and practice—which are esteemed by ordinary sentiments, in order to praise and extol them so that [others] may accept it with faith. Upholding precepts is the goodness of cessation, and cultivating merit is the goodness of practice. These two encompass all goodness entirely, so that "none of the evils are committed, and all goods are put into practice"; therefore, it cites these two to encompass all people. Below "in these verses and phrases," the third part clarifies the Dharma that is believed, namely the aforementioned Dharma gate of cause and effect, which is designated as "verses and phrases." Below "can generate faith," this fourth part directly explains generating faith in the sūtra. "Regarding this as true" refers to the true faith of non-apprehension. If it is faith involving apprehension, although it differs from the unbelief of the Hīnayāna, if viewed from the perspective of faith of non-apprehension, it still constitutes non-faith. Therefore the Pañcaviṃśatisāhasrikā Prajñāpāramitā Sūtra contains a chapter on faith and slander; it intends to clarify that faith involving apprehension turns out to be slander. Now this is the correct faith in the dharmatā of non-apprehension, which is why it says "regarding this as true"; it also means believing that prajñā is the dharmatā of phenomena, and thus it is said to "regard this as true." Below "one should know that this person," this fifth part clarifies the origin of such faith. Why is it that, upon hearing the sūtra, they are definitely able to believe? It is precisely because they have planted causes and accumulated them for a long time that they are able to accept it with faith. Therefore the Nirvāṇa Sūtra says: "Only after having generated bodhicitta under as many Tathāgatas as the sands of the Hiraṇyavatī River can one then refrain from slandering this sūtra in an evil age." Here it is also like this: having long planted [causes] under the three [periods], they are able to believe without slandering. The text has two clauses: the preceding clause clarifies that they have not encountered merely a few Buddhas; below "because," the second clause clarifies that they have encountered many Buddhas. Below "hearing these verses and phrases, even giving rise to a single thought of pure faith," the sixth section clarifies the benefits gained through faith. In all, there are two benefits: first, externally, being known and seen by all Buddhas; second, internally, attaining boundless merit. Now, the benefit of faith in prajñā is difficult to measure; here, citing faith for a single thought still attains boundless merit, so faith from beginning to end is all the more difficult to describe. The Tathāgata possesses distant perception, knowing both faith and slander; yet the reason he single-mindedly cites people of faith here roughly has three meanings: First, this sūtra is the mother of all Buddhas and is protected by the Buddhas; therefore, if one generates aspiration toward it, one is recorded by the Buddha. Hence the Pañcaviṃśatisāhasrikā Prajñāpāramitā Sūtra says: "The Buddha constantly observes this sūtra scroll with the Buddha eye, and if someone receives and upholds it, they are protected and kept in mind by the Buddha." To be acknowledged and recorded by the Tathāgata—leaving aside the worldly realm where one would already rejoice at being recognized and befriended by a heavenly king or noble personage—how much more so to be intimately cherished by the Tathāgata! Second, this merit is equal to empty space; how could those of lower bhūmis know it? Only the Buddha fully plumbs its limits and depths. Third, the Buddha has no deceitful words, and his words are certainly trustworthy; now, clarifying that faith yields abundant merit, that merit is certainly known to be vast. Question: For what reason is it called "knowing and seeing"? Answer: The treatise says: "The Tathāgata knows through the power of the cognition of vows, not through inferential cognition. It is seen by the Buddha eye, not by the fleshy eye." Furthermore, the Buddha knows that this person is practicing the cause of bodhi, and sees that this person will attain the fruit of bodhi; thus it is called "knowing and seeing." Below "Why is this?", this is the seventh part, an extensive explanation of the meaning of pure faith. If following the treatise master's explanation, what came before broadly clarified the faith of the three kinds of persons, whereas this specifically explains the faith of the third, the person of wisdom. Now it is clarified that these words broadly connect to the preceding explanation that one who has faith attains boundless virtue and merit; here it explains the reason why it is boundless, which is precisely because having attained faith in non-arising, one's merit is boundless. Yet faith in non-arising itself comprises two kinds: first, faith from hearing; second, faith through realization. Within this explanation, there are three parts. Why are there broadly three divisions? First, clarifying attainment; second, clarifying loss; third, exhorting to abandon loss and follow attainment. This is the first. It naturally has two clauses: the first clause clarifies the emptiness of sentient beings, and the next clause clarifies the emptiness of all dharmas. Why are these two emptinesses clarified to explain the meaning of faith? The Mahāprajñāpāramitopadeśa says: "Knowing that sentient beings and dharmas do not arise is called the forbearance of the non-arising of dharmas." Although one liberates sentient beings, sentient beings are ultimately unapprehendable, which is the absence of sentient beings. Although one practices the myriad practices, all dharmas are ultimately unapprehendable; this is the forbearance of the non-arising of dharmas. Therefore, it now explains these two emptinesses as the pure faith of non-arising. Furthermore, because of the emptiness of sentient beings, there is no affliction of result; because of the emptiness of all dharmas, there is no affliction of cause. Why is this? Because phenomena assemble to constitute the person. Dharmas are the cause and the person is the result; when the two afflictions of cause and result are both abandoned, one's merit is boundless. Furthermore, because of the absence of a view of a person, one transcends the bhūmi of ordinary people. Ordinary people cling to a self and do not know non-self; now, explaining non-self, one departs from the bhūmi of ordinary people. Furthermore, because of knowing the emptiness of dharmas, one departs from the bhūmi of the two vehicles. Persons of the two vehicles only attain the non-self of persons, and do not attain the non-self of dharmas. Furthermore, through the absence of a person, one is freed from the affliction obstacle; through the absence of dharmas, one is freed from the cognitive obstacle. Transcending the ordinary and surpassing the noble, both obstacles are completely exhausted; therefore, one's merit is boundless. In departing from the view of a person, there are fully sixteen absences; here, for brevity, it merely mentions the absence of four. Generating the thought of "self" and "mine" within the five aggregates is called "self." Existing continuously without break or severance in the world is called "sentient being." Conceiving that there is a continuous single faculty of life, still having a self, is called "living soul," and also called "person." Non-Buddhists conceive that there is a spiritual self that dies here and is born there, wandering through the six destinies; thus it is called "life-span." "No lakṣaṇa of dharmas and no lakṣaṇa of non-dharmas": the second clause clarifies the emptiness of dharmas. Although one does not see a self, one still sees the dharmas of the five aggregates; thus it now clarifies that there is also no lakṣaṇa of dharmas. Since the dharmas of the five aggregates are absent, the fundamental absence of the five aggregates is called "non-dharma"; the illness of emptiness is also empty, hence it says "no lakṣaṇa of non-dharmas." This should correspond to the three stages in the Vimalakīrtinirdeśa: first, not seeing a self is the emptiness of sentient beings; next, not seeing dharmas is called the emptiness of dharmas; not seeing non-dharmas is also called the illness of emptiness being empty. Why are these three emptinesses clarified? The view of self is the root of all fetters, which is why it clarifies the view of self. Next, the view of existence and the view of non-existence are again the roots of annihilation and eternity, which deeply diverge from the Way; hence it clarifies the view of existence and non-existence. Some say: cultivating goodness and departing from evil takes goodness as dharma and evil as non-dharma. Others say: expelling existence by means of emptiness takes emptiness as dharma and existence as non-dharma.