金剛般若疏 4.8

4.8

From "What do you think? Does the Tathāgata have any Dharma taught?" onward, this seventh section comes to refute the doubt that the dharmakāya preaches the Dharma. The doubt runs: If the complete form body is not the dharmakāya, why is it said that the Tathāgata has taught a Dharma? Therefore the Buddha refutes it, saying: "Subhūti, you must not say that the Tathāgata's dharmakāya has something taught. If one says that the Tathāgata's dharmakāya has something taught, one slanders the dharmakāya; because the dharmakāya is not form, the dharmakāya is not preaching." Why is this single line spoken to refute the doubt that the dharmakāya has no preaching? If one says that the dharmakāya does not preach and the body of marks and signs preaches, this is also not so. Above, it was clarified that one cannot say that apart from the body of marks and signs there is a separate dharmakāya, and thereby claim the dharmakāya lacks marks and signs; likewise, one cannot say that apart from the preaching of the body of marks and signs there is a separate dharmakāya preaching, and thereby claim the dharmakāya lacks preaching. Question: How is it known that the sūtra text is like this? Answer: The verse in the commentary says, "As with the Buddha, so it is with the Dharma"; thus the Buddha is cited as an analogy for the Dharma. "There being no Dharma that can be taught is called preaching the Dharma": this further refutes the doubt of people who, hearing that the dharmakāya has preaching, then say there is a Dharma that can be taught. Therefore it is now explained: although preaching the Dharma, there is no Dharma that can be taught; it is merely conventionally called preaching the Dharma. Following this section, the commentary has a long section of the sūtra on faithful acceptance. Question: What is the difference between the previous faith and the present faith? Answer: The previous explanation of faith was faith in the profound meaning of cause and effect; the present explanation of faith is faith that above, although the Tathāgata preaches, nothing is preached. Question: What kind of person is able to have faith in this Dharma? Answer: The verse in the commentary says: "Neither sentient beings nor non-sentient beings, neither noble nor non-noble." This person is not an ordinary sentient being, and is therefore said to be "not a sentient being"; yet they are a sentient being of the noble substance, and are therefore called a "sentient being." Because they are not an [ordinary] sentient being, they are not [yet fully] noble; because they are a sentient being of the noble substance, they are not non-noble. Question: If ordinary beings do not believe, they cannot be spoken to as ordinary beings; if noble beings can believe, they need not be spoken to as noble beings. For whom ultimately is this sūtra now taught? Answer: Looking at the meaning of this commentary, ordinary beings who are fully inverted and possess apprehension cannot comprehend it; it is sentient beings who practice the contemplation of non-apprehension who can have faith. These sentient beings, compared to persons with apprehension, are therefore not [ordinary] sentient beings; yet not having fully and completely awakened, they are therefore not non-sentient beings.