金剛般若疏 4.5

4.5

From "A bodhisattva is also like this" onwards is the arrival of the fourth chapter of the sūtra text. The treatise introduces its arising by stating: "If the preceding passages have explained that there are no bodhisattvas who generate the mind and no bodhisattvas who receive prophecy, and furthermore that there are no Buddhas who attain unexcelled bodhi; and if both cause and effect are unobtainable, then sentient beings should also not enter nirvāṇa, nor should there be the matter of purifying Buddha-lands. Why, then, would a bodhisattva wish to bring sentient beings to completion to cause them to enter nirvāṇa, and cultivate the practices of the pure land? This, in the end, is because a mind with apprehension generates doubts across dharmas." Because the refutation of dharmas has not yet ended, this chapter arises. "A bodhisattva is also like this": this refers to the bodhisattva who brings sentient beings to completion and the bodhisattva who purifies Buddha-lands; just as the bodhisattvas who generate the mind and receive prophecy described above are unobtainable, so it says "is also like this". Furthermore, because seeking the existence or non-existence of bodhi and the dharmakāya above was unobtainable, seeking the existence or non-existence of a bodhisattva is also unobtainable, which is why it says "is also like this". Within this there are three sūtra phrases: first, refuting the bodhisattva who brings sentient beings to completion; second, refuting the bodhisattva who purifies Buddha-lands; third, concluding with the correct meaning of a bodhisattva. Question: The extinction and deliverance of sentient beings was already explained in two places above; how does it differ from the present passage? Answer: At the beginning of the sūtra, the extinction and deliverance of sentient beings was first explained to answer regarding bodhi-mind; next, at the beginning of the second cycle, it was presented to eliminate the bodhi-mind; now, it is presented to refute the notion of a bodhisattva who brings sentient beings to completion. Question: Pure lands were already explained above; how does it differ from the present passage? Answer: The earlier passage was to establish the meaning of non-grasping and non-preaching; the present passage is to clarify that there is no bodhisattva of a pure land, hence they differ. "If a bodhisattva thoroughly penetrates the dharma of non-self": this third phrase concludes with the correct designation of a bodhisattva. The import of this text has both a proximate and a distal meaning. The proximate meaning is that from the beginning of the second cycle onwards, it has been said that there are no bodhisattvas who generate bodhicitta, no bodhisattvas who receive prophecy, up to the present explanation that there are no bodhisattvas who bring sentient beings to completion or purify Buddha-lands. Hearing this, people develop doubts: if so, there should be no bodhisattvas at all. Therefore, it is explained: it is precisely by realizing that there is no bodhisattva that one is truly a bodhisattva; seeing that there is a bodhisattva means one is not a bodhisattva. The distal meaning runs through the entire sūtra: from beginning to end, this sūtra consistently clarifies that there is no bodhisattva in order to shatter the views of self and person. If one can realize that there is no bodhisattva, only then is one a bodhisattva; if one sees that there is a bodhisattva, seeing that there is one is simply the ordinary person's view of self, not a bodhisattva. Question: As for realizing that there is no bodhisattva, this is knowing that there is no self; the two vehicles also realize non-self, so why are they not called bodhisattvas? Answer: The treatise states: "One who realizes the twofold non-self is called a bodhisattva. Śrāvakas only realize the non-self of persons, and therefore are not called bodhisattvas." Furthermore, a bodhisattva knows that self and non-self are non-dual, and is therefore called a bodhisattva; the two vehicles see self and non-self as distinct, being persons of dualistic views, and are not bodhisattvas.