金剛般若疏 3.2.2

3.2.2

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.