金剛般若疏 2.5.4

2.5.4

Next, replying to the question on abiding is also not substantial emptiness. If it were substantial emptiness, one should explain that there are no dharmas and no cultivation. Now it explains that one relies on and abides in nothing across all dharmas while cultivating the ten thousand practices such as dāna—how could it be one-sidedly substantial emptiness? Now, relying on the treatise and sūtra, altogether there are four questions: the first asks, "How should one bring forth the bodhicitta?"; the second asks, "How should one abide?"; the third asks, "How should one cultivate [the practices]?"; the fourth asks, "How should one subdue [one's thoughts]?" Why are there these four questions? Generally, to be a bodhisattva one must bring forth the bodhicitta; hence the first question asks about bringing forth the mind. If one does not bring forth the mind by relying on prajñā, one abides in inversion and does not abide in prajñā. Now, bringing forth the mind by relying on prajñā, one abides in prajñā and does not abide in inversion; hence the next question asks about abiding in the bodhicitta. Having attained abiding and establishment, one cultivates the ten thousand practices; hence the next question asks about cultivation. By cultivating non-apprehending practice, the inverted mind of apprehension is analysed and subdued, not arising; hence the next question asks about subduing. "The Buddha said: 'Excellent!'"—from here down is the second [part], the Tathāgata answering the questions. It opens into two sections: first, the circumstances of answering the questions; second, the direct answer. The circumstances of answering the questions again opens into two: first, praising his eulogy and request; second, promising to respond to his questions. Now, as for the Buddha praising Subhūti, it is truly because Subhūti's praise was timely and his question was aligned with the Way; therefore the Buddha praised him. Furthermore, Subhūti is a person of the śrāvakas, yet now he is able to ask about bodhisattva matters; this is rare, and therefore he praises him again. Furthermore, the assembly at the time feared that the bodhisattva path was deep while the wisdom of the Hīnayāna was shallow, so the questions might be deviant or mistaken; therefore he certifies and praises him, causing the assembly to revere the person and esteem the Dharma. From "Listen closely now" down is the second sentence, promising to answer his questions. Within the text there are two parts: first, the direct admonition and assent; next, receiving the instruction and wishing to hear it. These two are easy to understand, all laid out as in the text. From "The Buddha told Subhūti" down is the second [section], the Tathāgata's direct answer. Within the direct answer, if judged according to the treatise, it should open into two sections to respond to his four questions. Next, from "What do you think? Can the Tathāgata be seen by bodily marks?" down to the end of the sūtra is all the severing of doubts. Therefore the author of the treatise evaluates this section, saying: "From here down, throughout all the sūtra, doubts that arise are severed." Responding to the four questions earlier is called the brief explanation of prajñā; severing the many doubts later is the extensive explanation. Now, drawing upon the treatise's intention and following the layout of the sūtra, it is divided into three sections: first, the approach explaining the essence of prajñā; second, the approach explaining faithful reception; third, the approach explaining comparative merit. Explaining these three: since it is called the Vajracchedikā Prajñāpāramitā Sūtra, it first explains the essence of prajñā; having finished explaining the essence of prajñā, there must be persons who faithfully receive it, so next it explains the approach of faithful reception; if one faithfully upholds it, one obtains inexhaustible blessings, so next it explains the approach of comparative merit. Furthermore, earlier explaining prajñā in terms of cause and effect is the approach of the Dharma; next, explaining prajñā in terms of the approach of faithful reception is the approach of persons; later, explaining prajñā in terms of the approach of merit explains that when persons practice the Dharma, they therefore obtain merit. Within the former approach there are two: first, answering his four questions, which explains the approach of the cause; second, severing the many doubts, which next distinguishes the approach of the fruit. The cause is without reliance and non-abiding; the fruit is without lakṣaṇas and unconditioned. Prajñā has never been cause and effect; for the sake of sentient beings, it is spoken of under the names of cause and effect. Within answering his four questions in explaining the approach of the cause, there are only two chapters of sūtra text. Traditionally, the old commentators explained that the first chapter of the sūtra does not answer the approach of the bodhicitta, but rather answers the question on subduing the mind; the next chapter of the sūtra answers his question on abiding; later, adducing the Buddha's fruit answers the question on the bodhicitta. The treatise masters of the Northern regions said: "The first answers his question on abiding, not the question on the bodhicitta." I now say that none of this is correct. If you say that universally delivering the four kinds of births here is not answering the question on the bodhicitta, then by what dharma do you designate the bodhicitta? Furthermore, in the second cycle below, Subhūti again raises three questions, and the Buddha answers that one who brings forth the bodhicitta should give rise to such a mind: "I must cause all sentient beings to enter nirvāṇa, yet there is no one who enters nirvāṇa." This directly repeats the question on the bodhicitta and explains it; how can you say it does not answer the bodhicitta? We now clarify that although the sūtra has two chapters, together they respond to the four questions: the first chapter of the sūtra answers the question on abiding, which is itself answering the question on the bodhicitta; the next chapter of the sūtra answers the question on cultivation, which is itself answering the question on subduing the mind. Question: How does answering his question on abiding mean answering [the question on] the bodhicitta? Explanation: Because of bringing forth the bodhicitta, one is able to abide in the Mahāyāna Dharma. If one does not bring forth the bodhicitta, one does not abide in the Mahāyāna. Therefore the treatise says: "Abiding in the profound mind of benefiting, the merits of this vehicle are perfected." Within the text of the first sūtra [passage], it again opens into two: first, broadly exhorting the bodhisattva to bring forth the bodhicitta in address to Subhūti; second, directly clarifying the meaning of bringing forth the mind. The first is as in the text. Question: Now it directly distinguishes the bodhicitta; why does it say "one should thus subdue their mind"? Answer: Because of bringing forth the one bodhicitta, the minds of ordinary beings and the two vehicles do not arise, which is itself subduing. First, it explains universally delivering sentient beings; thus it differs from the minds of the two vehicles and subdues the two vehicles. Later, it explains delivering without anything delivered; this subdues the minds of ordinary beings. Subduing the two vehicles is using the other to subdue the self; subduing the minds of ordinary beings is using non-existence to subdue existence. Furthermore, subduing the two vehicles can also be using existence to subdue non-existence: the two vehicles lack the compassionate mind, while the bodhisattva has the compassionate mind; hence it uses existence to subdue non-existence, and again uses non-existence to subdue existence, as explained earlier. Furthermore, clarifying great kindness and great compassion here subdues the defilements of greed and anger; hence it is called subduing. Furthermore, although the bodhisattva delivers sentient beings, in reality there are no sentient beings to be delivered; this is subduing the view of sentient beings. Furthermore, if a bodhisattva says there are sentient beings to be delivered, this is eternalism; if they say there are no sentient beings to be delivered, this falls into annihilationism. Now, although delivering sentient beings, in reality there is nothing delivered, thus subduing eternalism; although there is nothing delivered, one constantly delivers sentient beings, thus subduing annihilationism. From "As for all classes of sentient beings" down is the second [part], directly clarifying bringing forth the bodhicitta. The verse of the treatise says: "Vast, supreme, constant, / and the mind is not inverted; / abiding in the profound mind of benefiting, / the merits of this vehicle are perfected." Therefore, the four minds are used to explain this sūtra text. The four minds are: first, the vast mind; second, the supreme mind; third, the constant mind; fourth, the non-inverted mind. Question: For what reason are the four minds established? Answer: Generally, to be a bodhisattva differs from ordinary beings and the two vehicles, who train themselves and deliver themselves. Saying here that one universally delivers the three realms and six destinies is called the vast mind.