金剛般若經贊述 1.214

1.214

謂外有疑曰：「上言聖人以無為差別故，無說無取，何故釋迦於燃燈所而取法？定光復為說耶？」今為破此疑故以為問也。言有所得者，謂分別心妄所執法也。無所得者，謂智證真時無彼分別之心所得法也。但言無彼分別心之所得名無所得，不遮智內冥真亦為所得也。此意云，佛於定光所聞法時，無於分別所執有所得法，但智內冥真如，於所執中都無所得，證智不可說、不可取故，亦無說、無取也。故今問言佛於燃燈佛所智證於法時，為有所得不？

This addresses an outside doubt that asks: "Earlier it was said that noble ones are distinguished by the unconditioned, so there is neither preaching nor grasping; why did Śākyamuni grasp the Dharma at Dīpaṃkara's place, and why did Dingguang preach it for him?" Now, in order to refute this doubt, he poses the question. Saying 'having something attained' refers to dharmas falsely grasped by the conceptualizing mind. 'Having nothing attained' means that when wisdom realizes the real, there are no dharmas attained by that conceptualizing mind. Merely stating that there is nothing attained by that conceptualizing mind is called 'nothing attained'; it does not preclude that the secret accord with reality within wisdom is also an attainment. The meaning is: when the Buddha heard the Dharma at Dingguang's place, he had no dharma attained through conceptual grasping; rather, wisdom secretly accorded with tathatā, and among the objects of grasping there was completely nothing attained; because the realized wisdom is ineffable and ungraspable, there is also neither preaching nor grasping. Therefore, he now asks whether the Buddha, when his wisdom realized the Dharma at Dīpaṃkara Buddha's place, had anything attained or not.