金剛般若疏 2.5.2

2.5.2

This is corroborated by both the sūtras and the treatises; how could it be an empty fabrication? Question: The compositions of the sages are profound in their principles and subtle in their phrasing; how could a single scroll of a sūtra contain the verbosity and redundancy of two cycles? Answer: Although there are said to be two cycles, their purports are each different; they are not redundant. Why is this? It is like the two cycles of the Pañcaviṃśatisāhasrikā Prajñāpāramitā Sūtra, where the former cycle explains real wisdom and the latter cycle distinguishes skillful means. The two cycles here are also different in their meaning: the former cycle purifies the objective condition, and the latter cycle exhausts the subjective contemplation. However, it is essential that the condition be purified and the contemplation be exhausted—neither conditioning nor contemplating, having nothing upon which to rely—before one can awaken to prajñā. Therefore Master Zhao said: "Dharmas have no categories of existence and non-existence; the sage has no cognition of existence and non-existence. If dharmas have no categories of existence and non-existence, then there are no categories externally; if the sage has no cognition of existence and non-existence, then there is no mind internally. With no categories externally and no mind internally, when both of these are quiescent, one then ascends to that subtlety." Master Ying said: "The myriad transformations are not without a source, but what sources them is without marks; the empty source is not without accord, but what accords with it is without mind. Therefore the ultimate person, with the wondrous wisdom of no-mind, accords with that markless empty source; this is when both internal and external are darkened together, and both condition and cognition are quiescent—how could names and categories be admitted between them?" The words of these two or three masters chime with the sūtra; "trusting and loving antiquity," how could I differ from them? Question: How do we know that the former cycle exhausts the condition and the latter cycle exhausts the contemplation? Answer: The sūtra has clear passages and the treatises have truthful statements. The earlier sūtra text simply says that although one liberates sentient beings, there are no sentient beings to be liberated, directly praising the bodhisattva's arousal of the mind of non-apprehension and, extending up to, the practice of non-apprehension relying on prajñā. And although the sūtra's intent is that both condition and contemplation are stilled, the text has not yet explicitly and clearly demolished the subject of contemplation. Therefore, those of dull faculties still say that there is a bodhisattva who skillfully liberates sentient beings and is skillfully able to practice. Hence the text of the latter cycle then stills the four minds: there is no person who arouses the mind, extending up to no practitioner. Thus, the former cycle directly encourages the arising of the four minds, while the latter cycle explains that the four minds are also stilled; how could it not be so? The treatise verse says: "Practicing in the internal mind, retaining a self as a bodhisattva—this obstructs the mind and contradicts the path of non-abiding." By this meaning, one should know that this text directly stills contemplation to the point of exhausting the subject of contemplation; the text and meaning are radiant, admitting of no doubt. These two cycles are not merely the main purport of a single sūtra; they are the ultimate destination of the Vaipulya teachings and the wondrous art of the ultimate person within the ring. Furthermore, the former cycle is the former assembly and the latter cycle is the latter assembly, as will be distinguished below. In terms of the text of the former cycle, it is divided into two sections: first, Subhūti puts the question; second, the Tathāgata answers. Within the question, it is further divided into two: first, the compiler of the sūtra introduces the demeanor of the interrogator; second, the formulation of the question itself. The initial introduction also has two parts: first, identifying the interlocutor; second, introducing the etiquette of requesting the Dharma. "At that time": this is the time when the Tathāgata bestowed his empowerment upon Subhūti, and also the time when the assembly at that moment experienced awakening; hence it says "at that time." Question: How does the meaning of bestowal in this sūtra differ from that in the Pañcaviṃśatisāhasrikā Prajñāpāramitā Sūtra? Answer: The Pañcaviṃśatisāhasrikā Prajñāpāramitā Sūtra possesses both verbal and mental empowerment: speaking words to command someone to explain is called verbal empowerment; bestowing wisdom and eloquence upon them is called mental empowerment. Now this sūtra only bestows wisdom and eloquence upon him, which is mental empowerment; it does not command him to explain, so there is no verbal empowerment. However, the subsequent text also contains the sense of an interlocution, but lacks an explicit command to explain; therefore it is not the same as the Pañcaviṃśatisāhasrikā Prajñāpāramitā Sūtra. "Subhūti": as for this person's original [state] and traces, the matter is difficult to fathom. The Tripiṭaka master says: originally, he was the Buddha Candana of the eastern world, casting his shadow in echo of Śākyamuni to act as a disciple to transform others, following the example of Mañjuśrī. Some sūtras say: he was a transformationally created person. The Mahāyānasaṃgraha explains that Śāriputra was a transformation person, and Subhūti is an example of the same kind. Another sūtra says: he was the son of an elder in Śrāvastī whose attainment reached the stage of Yiyan. "Yiyan" means a dharmakāya bodhisattva surpassing the stage of avaivartika. It is also said: in Śrāvastī there was a brahmin named Jūliú who had no son and prayed to a heavenly deity. The heavenly deity said, "Your family is exceedingly wealthy, and no one is worthy of being born [there]." Thereupon, seeing a person of great virtue descend, he took rebirth in that family. When the child had grown up, he had his parents invite the Buddha to return to their home, and later accompanied the Buddha back to the Jetavana, whereupon he attained the fruit of arhatship. Still other sūtras explain: in the past he was a layperson who saw a monk begging for food and receiving nothing, returning with an empty bowl; he then gave him food, and consequently for ten kalpas was constantly born in heaven, which is why his merit and virtue were incomparably deep and thick. It is also said that he was the crown prince of King Jìngyīnxiàng. Such accounts mostly come from the Za piyu jing on karmic retributions. Subhūti is translated as Shan-ye (Good Action), or as Shan-xue (Good Learner); formerly it was rendered as Shan-ji (Good and Auspicious). Shan-ji's birth differed from that of Sudhana. How so? When Sudhana was born, the seven treasures welled up, hence he was named Sudhana (Good Wealth). When Subhūti was born, the entire room was empty; his parents were bewildered and consulted a diviner. The diviner said, "Only good, only auspicious." Hence he was named Shan-ji. He is also called Kongsheng (Born of Emptiness), taking his name from the circumstances of his birth. Inwardly this person concealed the bodhisattva practice, outwardly manifesting as a śrāvaka; his status was elevated and venerable, so he is addressed as "Elder." "Then rose from his seat": second, this explains the etiquette of requesting the Dharma. Here there are five phrases: first, leaving one's seat to show reverence. The proper conduct of a disciple is to revere the person and respect the Dharma, so one cannot remain seated at ease; thus, wishing to request the path, he leaves his seat. "Bared his right shoulder": this shows the demeanor of master and disciple, indicating the sign of perpetual service. It also accords with the law of the country, hence he bares his shoulder to pay reverence. "Knelt on his right knee": this shows bending in submissive obedience, displaying the master-disciple attitude of offering no resistance. "Joined his palms toward the Buddha": this is collecting and composing one's countenance, single-mindedly receiving the path. "And addressed the Buddha, saying": the text above has presented his physical actions; this phrase presents his vocal action. "Rare, World-Honoured One!": this begins the second section, the direct questioning. Within this there are two parts: first, praising; second, inquiring. Regarding the words "Rare, World-Honoured One!", the twenty-fourth fascicle of the Madhyama Āgama says: "The great king of former times was none other than myself. From son to son, from grandson to grandson, from clan to clan, eighty-four thousand wheel-turning kings, together with shaving their hair and topknots, leaving home to go forth into the homeless state."