金剛般若經贊述 1.121

1.121

又論云，從此已下，「有五種隨所相應而解釋應知」者，謂從第二住處已去也。五種者，謂一者、依義，依謂所依，即以所對治為所依也。二者、說相，相謂狀也。三者、攝持，謂依處所得當來菩提果，名為攝持也。四者、安立，謂安立處真如妙理也。五者、顯示，謂顯示相應三摩鉢帝及折伏散時也。然就此正明淨心住處中，云「不住於事」者，是依義，依所對治住有能對治。不住故行布施者，是說相，亦是攝持，欲願當來菩提果故。不住行施者，是第四安立，謂不著自體等三事，即是安立第一義故，以第一義為無住也。故《無垢稱》云，「無住即無本」也。謂行施時，安立於心，住於無住，故云不住行施也。「不住相想」者，此是顯示也。謂相應三摩鉢提及攝散心，於此二時不住相想，故判文如此。

Furthermore, the treatise says that from this point forward, "one should know that there are five kinds of explanations according to what is appropriate," referring to what follows from the second ādhāra onwards. The five kinds are: first, based on meaning—"based on" refers to that which is relied upon, namely taking what is to be counteracted as the basis; second, explaining the characteristics—"characteristics" refers to the manner or form; third, retention—referring to the future fruit of bodhi obtained through relying on the locus, which is called retention; fourth, establishing—referring to establishing the locus of the wondrous principle of tathatā; fifth, revealing—referring to revealing the concordant samāpatti and the time of subduing distraction. Now, concerning this direct clarification of the ādhāra of the purified mind, saying "not abiding in things" is the based-on meaning: relying on what is to be counteracted, there abides that which can counteract. Practicing dāna because of not abiding is explaining the characteristics, and is also retention, because of desiring the future fruit of bodhi. Practicing giving without abiding is the fourth, establishing, meaning that not being attached to the three matters such as one's own entity is indeed establishing the ultimate truth, taking the ultimate truth as non-abiding. Therefore the Vimalakīrtinirdeśa says, "Non-abiding is indeed rootless." That is, when practicing giving, one establishes the mind and abides in non-abiding; hence it says practicing giving without abiding. "Not abiding in the ideation of marks" is the revealing: that is, during the concordant samāpatti and when collecting the distracted mind—at these two times, one does not abide in the ideation of marks; hence the text is analyzed like this.