金剛般若疏 1.13

1.13

Third, explaining prajñā. Prajñā is a foreign word. The Treatise (*Mahāprajñāpāramitopadeśa) contains two passages [on it]: First, "Prajñā in the language of Qin is 'wisdom' (zhīhuì)"—Kaishan followed this. The next passage states, "Prajñā is profound and weighty, while zhīhuì is slight and superficial; one cannot weigh profound and weighty prajñā with slight and superficial zhīhuì." Dharma Master Zhuangyan stated: "The name prajñā contains five meanings; zhīhuì is only one of them, not the standard translation." However, in explaining zhīhuì (knowledge and wisdom), sūtras and treatises differ. The Vimalakīrtinirdeśa Sūtra explains the two characters separately: knowing sentient beings' thoughts and preaching the Dharma according to their needs gives rise to the activities of jñāna (zhī); neither grasping nor discarding, entering the gateway of the single characteristic, gives rise to the activities of prajñā (huì). Former commentators explained this text as: zhī is the understanding of existence, huì is the understanding of emptiness; or zhī is transforming others, huì is one's own practice. The Pañcaviṃśatisāhasrikā Prajñāpāramitā Sūtra speaks of: the wisdom of the path (mārgajñatā / dàohuì), the wisdom of the aspects of the path (mārgākārajñatā / dàozhǒnghuì), knowledge of all phenomena (sarvajñatā / yīqièzhī), and knowledge of all aspects (sarvākārajñatā / yīqièzhǒngzhī). Here, then, the names zhī and huì apply to both emptiness and existence. Furthermore, the cause is named huì and the fruit is termed zhī, as the cause is called the wisdom of the path and the wisdom of the aspects of the path, and the fruit is termed knowledge of all phenomena and knowledge of all aspects. Furthermore, the name zhī applies to both cause and fruit, as in the doctrine of the three wisdoms: the śrāvakas' knowledge of all phenomena, the bodhisattvas' knowledge of the aspects of the path, and the Buddhas' knowledge of all aspects. Furthermore, the name huì applies to both cause and fruit, as the Lotus Sūtra speaks of "the equal great wisdom of all Buddhas." A passage in the *Tattvasiddhi-śāstra combines and explains the two characters zhīhuì, stating, "True huì is called zhī," and also states, "Huì is named a person of zhī." It also says regarding the meaning of huì, "The sūtra says that the wisdom (zhī) of liberation is the meaning of huì"; hence zhī is equivalent to huì. Moreover, the *Mahāprajñāpāramitopadeśa also has two passages: "Prajñā in the language of Qin is huì," and also "in the language of Qin is zhīhuì." Question: Why in sūtras and treatises are the expressions sometimes explicit and sometimes implicit, suddenly combined and suddenly separated, rather than clearly showing people a single path so that they can definitely attain understanding? Answer: It is not that the sages are unable to clearly show people a single path; that they now use both explicit and implicit statements has a profound meaning. Because sentient beings originally possess grasping minds, due to these conditions they are tied to Māra, saṃsāra does not cease, constantly turning like a wheel, and they do not awaken to the middle way, Buddha-nature, and prajñā of correct contemplation. Now, if they were to make one definite, real exposition, this would only increase their mind of reliance and attachment; therefore, they do not fix [the teaching] as explicit or implicit, but stir their root consciousness of saṃsāra to cause them to profoundly awaken to the correct Dharma. Thus, the unfixed teachings provide profound benefit. If scholars obstinately grasp a single passage from the sūtras and treatises to establish the doctrine of a single school, they are all people tied to Māra. Furthermore, sentient beings do not share a single land, a single capacity, or a single spiritual friend; therefore, the Buddhas preach the Dharma in various ways. Question: Having learned the name of prajñā, what is the essence of prajñā? Answer: Masters of the Daśabhūmika School state that there are two kinds of prajñā: first, prajñā cultivated through the real, which is the eighth consciousness; second, prajñā cultivated through conditions, which is the seventh consciousness. Masters of the *Tattvasiddhi state: the mind taking the ultimate truth as condition, forgetting concerns and terminating marks—they take this understanding mind to be the essence of prajñā. Abhidharma masters state: taking the principle of the four noble truths as condition, the mark of undefiled wisdom is the essence of prajñā. These three explanations are widespread in the world; all must be refuted and washed away, which will be expounded in detail in the Mysterious Meaning of the Pañcaviṃśatisāhasrikā. However, since many people in the world chant this sūtra, I now venture to state its essential points, hoping that gentlepersons delving into the mysterious may grasp what lies beyond the words. Question: Now, what do you consider prajñā to be? Answer: If a practitioner fully realizes delusions and suddenly awakens to understanding, this is conventionally designated prajñā. Question: Is this sudden awakening and understanding not the mind? Answer: This understanding and awakening is neither mind nor apart from mind. Question: Why is it neither mind nor apart from mind? Answer: Since it is called the mind's awakening and understanding, how could it be apart from the mind? Yet this awakened mind ultimately does not give rise to the existence of mind or non-existence of mind; how could it be identical to the mind? Question: If one says the mind awakens, that is still identical to the mind; if one says it awakens to this mind without apprehending the existence or non-existence of mind, that is being apart from mind. Answer: If you still speak of identity and separation, you are still unawakened. If you attain awakening, what identity or separation could there be after all? Question: Since it is neither identical nor separate, there should be neither delusion nor awakening. Answer: Because of delusion one speaks of identity and separation; because of awakening one completely realizes there is neither identity nor separation. Since there is neither identity nor separation, how after all could there be delusion and awakening? One should grasp its intention and not cling to its words.