金剛般若經贊述 1.198

1.198

述曰，依世親說，此下有二校量，合二為一文。於中二，初、釋疑，次、校量。釋疑有三，一者、約二乘以生疑，謂前說一切聖人以無為法得名，無為法中無說無取者，何故預流等云我能取自果，復云我得我證耶？第二疑云，若言無說無取者，何故如來昔於燃燈佛所聞法故從七地入八地耶？是即有說有取故。第三、若無說無取者，何故菩薩取莊嚴淨國土等耶？此三種疑皆於前說一切聖人以無為法而有差別故生疑也。不同前段校量中所生疑者，皆於應不住相、想以生也。就此破初疑之中有四，一一文中皆佛問，次、善現答，此為初問也。

The commentary states: According to Vasubandhu, below there are two comparisons combined into a single passage. Within it there are two: first the resolution of doubts, then the comparison. The resolution of doubts has three [parts]: first, raising a doubt in terms of the two vehicles—it was previously said that all noble ones are designated by unconditioned phenomena, and within unconditioned phenomena there is neither teaching nor grasping; why then do srotāpannas and the rest say 'I can grasp my own fruit', and furthermore say 'I have attained, I have realised'? The second doubt says: if one says there is neither teaching nor grasping, why did the Tathāgata in the past, upon hearing the Dharma in the presence of Dīpaṅkara Buddha, advance from the seventh bhūmi to the eighth bhūmi? This would mean there is teaching and grasping. Third: if there is neither teaching nor grasping, why do bodhisattvas grasp the adornment of pure lands, and so forth? These three doubts are all raised concerning the previous statement that all noble individuals are distinguished by unconditioned phenomena. They differ from the doubts raised in the previous comparison section, which were all raised regarding non-abiding in signs and conceptualisations. Regarding the refutation of the first doubt, there are four [sections]; in each passage there is first the Buddha's question, then Subhūti's answer; this is the first question.