金剛般若經贊述 1

English (machine translation) 1

Language: English

1.1

Preface to the Publication of the Jingang bore jing zanshu

Of the six hundred fascicles of the Prajñā[pāramitā], the Vajracchedikā is the quintessence. What is said—that it is "deep, marvelous, profound, and concise, such that even the host of sages remain bewildered"—is no empty claim.

1.3

In antiquity, Asaṅga received the verses from Maitreya, and Vasubandhu received the purport from his worthy elder brother; the appearance of these two treatises in the world was like the sun and the moon hanging together, illuminating the darkness. When the Dharma gradually spread eastward, translations and commentaries were indeed numerous.

1.4

Tradition says that our Tripiṭaka Master was a later rebirth of Sadāprarudita Bodhisattva. Truly one can believe this of his resolution—his longstanding aspiration to break his bones and draw out the marrow, forgetting his physical frame to sacrifice himself for the Dharma, entrusting himself to destiny and praying for passage! His translation of the various scriptures concluded with this teaching. Through this, auspicious omens were greatly manifested; and when he ascended on high, he also passed away while reciting the true text. That he had a great karmic connection to the Prajñā[pāramitā] and uniquely attained its central purport can already be seen. And toward this scripture, he paid the greatest attention.

1.5

For this reason, the master of the commentary [Kuiji] received his instructions and specially composed three commentaries: the Xuanji, the Zanshu, and the Huishi. Yet among them, that which directly takes up the sūtra text to explain it is exclusively the Zanshu. Nevertheless, people only know of the existence of this book, but none have laid eyes upon it, let alone been able to investigate and seek into it!

1.6

Master Gei of Echizen once lamented this, wishing to carve the printing blocks and circulate it in the world. He searched in all quarters and obtained five copies. After he had collated and corrected them among each other, he considered that our Kōfuku[-ji] had a still better copy; in the summer of the guiyou year [1813], he came to consult me. I praised his aspiration and brought out a copy to show him—namely, that handed down through successive generations of head instructors. Master Gei was overjoyed, took it, and went away. Coming to the end of autumn, he returned to announce that his collation was completed, and begged me for an inscription. I deeply feared placing my vulgar words at the head of an ancestral classic, an offense of presumption from which I could not escape, so I firmly declined and did not dare.

1.7

In the summer of the yihai year [1815], the engraving was completed. He again brought it and requested that I must write a word to attest to the impartiality of the critical collation. Moved by his sincere aspiration, and furthermore rejoicing in the propagation of the Dharma, I set aside my presumption and briefly recounted the circumstances, so as to fulfill my responsibility.

1.8

Respectfully recorded on the fifth day of summer in the yihai year, the twelfth year of the Bunka era [1815], by Daisōzu Kin'ei of the Annex of Kōfuku[-ji].

1.9

Preface to the Engraving of the Jingang bore jing zanshu

1.10

We sentient beings, from the beginningless boundary, have been submerged in the ocean of birth and death, bobbing up and down without any time of escape. The Great Sage, the Bhagavat, pitied them and proclaimed the Mahāyāna teaching, and within it expounded the teaching that refutes existence. The Mahāprajñāpāramitā Sūtra was spoken in four places and sixteen assemblies; and this Vajracchedikā Prajñā[pāramitā] was spoken in the second place, the ninth assembly, and is truly the essential ford across the ocean of awakening, the precious portal for entering the Path. For this reason, the great worthies of China and Japan who commented upon this scripture—such as Sengzhao and [Huiyuan of] Jingying—number no fewer than several tens of masters; those engraved on printing blocks and circulated in the world in our realm are also quite numerous. Only Dharma Master Kuiji of Ci'en of the Great Tang has a commentary in two fascicles, titled Zanshu in the Eastern Catalogues; since its transmission to our realm, more than a thousand years have passed, yet it has never been printed and circulated in the world. Scholars have lamented this; how could this not be a deficiency?

1.11

My countryman and society colleague Tansan-shi—whose Dharma taboo name is Jun'gei—is endowed with sharp intelligence and is exceedingly devoted to the love of learning. He has traveled and studied at our academy for years up to this point. Grieved that this text was not currently circulating in the world, he sought out its good editions and painstakingly collated them; after quite a long period of time, he added Japanese reading marks beside [the characters]. Delivering it to the carvers, when it was about to be put onto woodblocks, he asked me to compose a preface. Although I am unskillful, how could I not rejoice that this text will flow to future generations and spread throughout the realm?

1.12

Furthermore, concerning this scripture: Great Master Zhizhe, the founder of the Tiantai school, had a commentary in one fascicle; Great Master Zhixiang, the founder of the Huayan school, had a commentary in two fascicles; Dharma Master Jizang, the founder of the Sanlun school, had a commentary in four fascicles. Now this work was composed by Master Ji, the founder of the Faxiang school. Thus the commentaries of the masters of the four Mahāyāna traditions, with the acquisition of this, are just now complete! I privately consider: if the gentlemen of our society study and investigate in reliance on this scripture and commentary, then the doctrinal meanings of the One Vehicle and the Three Vehicles, and the Dharma portals of the two schools of nature and characteristics, can be attained while sitting. This is my deep hope! Tansan-shi's undertaking also has this intention.

1.13

Not ashamed of my vulgar clumsiness, I have thus briefly recounted the circumstances of the printing to set forth at the beginning of the volume.

1.14

Recorded in the intercalary month of mid-winter in the guiyou year, the tenth year of the Bunka era [1813], by Śākya Jinrei of the Kōgetsu-in in Esshū, at the Takakura Gakuryō in the capital.

1.15

Six Editorial Principles for the Collation

1.16

—For this book, I searched for and obtained six copies in all. Three of them are ancient copies from the Southern Capital [Nara], and that handed down through generations of head instructors of Kōfuku-ji is moreover the most reliable among them. Therefore, I now take this as the primary text, collating other copies against it. Where readings are equally possible, both are preserved; furthermore, where a reading is doubtful but all copies agree, I tentatively follow the original text, not daring to judge arbitrarily—and I have placed notes in the upper margin, awaiting further good copies.

1.17

—When this scripture was newly translated [by Xuanzang], it had not yet undergone stylistic polishing; thus this commentary explains it following Kumārajīva's translation, presumably because his translation was the earliest and most widely circulated. However, where there were one or two lacunae in Kumārajīva's text and they were supplemented from other versions, I have now circled them on the right side and noted them in the upper margin.

1.18

—The sūtra text cited in this commentary usually quotes only the beginning and the end, omitting the middle. I have now supplemented and filled in the full text according to the current canon to facilitate reading.

1.19

—There are several editions of this scripture published by various masters. I have now extracted this scripture directly from the Tripiṭaka to collate it. Regarding what is cited in the commentary, I compared their variants. The Tripiṭaka text was also collated against the Song, Ming, and Korean editions, and [variants] are noted in the upper margin. As for the two treatises cited in the commentary, their texts also differ from the aforementioned three editions; since they are not the primary texts being commented upon, I did not trouble to add collated notes, and readers should look them up and understand for themselves.

1.20

—The six copies I obtained all had some Japanese reading glosses, but none were complete. I have now requested the Vinaya Master Tenshu to review them, and through consultation and shared discussion, we have appended Japanese reading marks throughout to assist beginners. If ancient pointed editions are found later that can be relied upon, these should be corrected.

1.21

—Whenever books are put onto woodblocks, scribes must be employed, and omissions and errors are often unavoidable. Now, disregarding my clumsy hand, I personally copied and perfected the manuscript to hand over to the engravers. Although it may lack visual elegance, I hope it will not lead people astray.

1.22

Respectfully recorded in the tenth month, winter of the guiyou year, the tenth year of the Bunka era [1813], by the rustic monk Jun'gei (Shidō) of Tansan.

1.23

Composed by Ji of the Mahāyāna

1.24

First, explaining the origins and circumstances; second, clarifying the year and the masters; third, explaining the main text.

1.25

Within the first, there are two parts.

1.26

First, explaining the origins and circumstances of the scripture: that is to say, because of the two causes of emptiness and existence, there was Asaṅga, who, nine hundred years after the Buddha's parinirvāṇa, ascended to beseech Maitreya to expound the Middle Way. The Seventeen Stages of the Yogācāryabhūmi, the Madhyāntavibhāga, and so forth were all spoken by Maitreya, all as explained in the extensive chapters, with slight differences, as [recorded] on a separate sheet.

1.27

Second, as for explaining the origins and circumstances of the treatise: the Mahāyānasaṃgraha states that there are two kinds of piṭakas: first, the śrāvaka piṭaka; second, the bodhisattva piṭaka. Within them there are three, namely sūtra, abhidharma, and vinaya. That is to say, the Avataṃsaka, Prajñā[pāramitā], and so forth are called the sūtra within the bodhisattva piṭaka; the Saṃdhinirmocana and the Abhidharma Sūtra are called the abhidharma piṭaka; the Vinayaghoṣa Sūtra is called the third piṭaka. However, the above scriptures were each composed of many verses based solely on Sanskrit manuscripts; because they gradually fell into obscurity, their scrolls became smaller, or because the translators in this land were partial to brevity, they thus gradually became concise. That is to say, in the Abhidharma Sūtra there is the "Chapter on the Mahāyānasaṃgraha," spoken by a bodhisattva empowered by the Buddha. More than nine hundred years after the Buddha's parinirvāṇa, Bodhisattva Asaṅga gathered various scriptures and summarized their meanings, composing twenty-seven thousand verses named the Abhidharmasamuccaya. Later, he had a disciple named Buddhasiṃha—translated here as Awakened Lion—who composed an explanatory commentary of sixty-three thousand verses, which circulated separately from the work composed by the earlier master. Later, a bodhisattva named Sthiramati blended them into a single work, and hence it is called the Abhidharmasamuccayavyākhyā; it is one of the ten branches of the Yogācārabhūmi, just as the Triṃśikā-vijñaptimātratā and others each constitute a branch. This is like Kātyāyana composing the Jñānaprasthāna three hundred years [after the Buddha], after which there were the treatises of the Six Pādas, and so forth.

1.28

Vajracchedikā Prajñāpāramitā Sūtra

1.29

Translated by Kumārajīva, Tripiṭaka Master of the Yao Qin

1.30

As for the second, clarifying the year and the masters, there are two: first, clarifying the scripture; second, clarifying the treatise.

1.31

Regarding the scripture: from ancient times down to the present, there have been five translations in all of this Prajñā[pāramitā]; the statement of their dates is fully given in the Xuanji. When the Tripiṭaka Master [Xuanzang] first arrived from the West in the nineteenth year of Zhenguan [645], he initially translated treatises, with the Abhidharmasamuccaya coming first. In the twenty-third year of Zhenguan [649], the Tripiṭaka Master accompanied the imperial retinue to Yuhua. The late Emperor [Taizong] was in poor health and repeatedly performed meritorious deeds, translating treatises together with the Tripiṭaka Master and ordaining five persons everywhere. When he further asked about wholesome causes, the Tripiṭaka Master urged him to broadly praise [the teaching], whereupon he composed a preface to the Prajñā[pāramitā], entitled the Preface to the Holy Teachings of the Tripiṭaka Master. At that time, the Crown Prince also composed a preface to the Prakaraṇāryavācā. They agreed to translate miscellaneous sūtras and treatises and to praise the subtle and profound spirit; but since the Emperor was indisposed, there was no leisure to compose extensively. At that time, the Emperor asked the Tripiṭaka Master, saying, "What other good deeds can be cultivated?" The Tripiṭaka Master replied, "You may take up the brush to compile the Prajñā[pāramitā]." The Emperor having consented, the Tripiṭaka Master proceeded to translate it out; on that night at the third point of the fifth watch, the translation was finished. The Emperor asked to read it, and immediately dispatched the relevant office to copy ten thousand copies. Since it was not revised again, the phrasing and syntax were somewhat unpolished. Later, when he wished to re-translate it, there was no way to alter or select from what had previously been distributed. At that time, Sanskrit texts accumulated over successive generations were all delivered to the Tripiṭaka Master. The Tripiṭaka Master investigated the various editions: the Kucha Sanskrit text was Kumārajīva's translation, identical to the Kunlun edition and Paramārtha's translation, and so forth. However, the sūtra texts were discrepant; only following the text could one know the true and the erroneous. The titles were different: the Tripiṭaka Master alone called it "Vajracchedikā" (Able to Cut); and in what was previously translated, Asaṅga's root treatise was also called "Vajracchedikā." What is the meaning of this?

1.32

His intention was to say that vajra has three meanings. First, the meaning of being that which is broken: Asaṅga's root treatise states, "the practice of right view, the practice of wrong view." The explanation says: although right and wrong are different, their functioning as conceptualization is the same; therefore "practice" encompasses both kinds of views. This is an analogy: although the diamond is one, that which can [cut] and that which is [cut] are distinct. Although it is called a diamond, there are also things that can break it; thus, just as a white ram's horn can break a diamond.

1.33

Second, the meaning of being able to destroy: Asaṅga says, "First, it is subtle, because it is the cause of wisdom; second, it is solid, because it cannot be destroyed." The explanation says: because the two wisdoms of hearing and reflection can subdue defilement, they gradually give rise to the wisdom of cultivation; therefore it is called "able to destroy" and spoken of as the "cause of wisdom." Second, "solid": this refers to the wisdom of cultivation; since it is a concentrated mind, it is directly able to destroy obstacles, and hence is called "solid." Alternatively, within the wisdom of cultivation there are two distinctions, defiled and undefiled, by which subtle and solid are distinguished; or, in terms of the undefiled, there are the path of subduing and the path of severing delusion, and a two-fold division is also workable. However, the affliction obstacle is subdued through both contemplation of principles and contemplation of phenomena, because it is subdued through desiring the higher and detesting the lower; the cognitive obstacle is subdued solely through contemplation of principles, as can be known. Furthermore, in terms of the unobstructed [path] and [the path of] liberation, subtle and solid are also differentiated: what is called "severing" in the path of liberation at the stage of the Buddha-fruit means that, among the three kinds of severing, it is the nature of severing and the category of severing that are called severing, and not the function of severing nor the substance of severing; because they are not what is severed, they are not called severing, and because the substance is already severed and not actively severing, it is not called "able to sever."

1.34

Third, the meaning of wide and narrow: Asaṅga's commentary states that it is like a painted diamond shape, broad at the two ends and narrow in the middle. The explanation says: The stages prior to the bhūmis and the fruit of Buddhahood are compared to the broad, while the ten bhūmis are compared to the narrow, because in each bhūmi one practice in particular is cultivated as foremost; or, the stages prior to the seventh bhūmi are the broad part—these are all determined according to the meaning. One should know that here, if that which is broken is called 'diamond', it is the prajñā of the diamond; if that which can break and destroy is called 'diamond', the diamond is itself prajñā. Furthermore, when the sūtras say *prajñā*, it is the wisdom in the causal stage; when they say *sarvajñā*, here translated as 'all-knowledge', it is the wisdom in the resultant stage; when they say *prajñā* [rendered as prajñā-śamana], it is the wisdom that cuts off afflictions—namely, what is designated here, and hence it is called 'the ability to cut'.

1.35

Regarding the treatises: At present in the Tang dynasty, three versions circulate in the world. The first was composed by Vasubandhu, translated in either two or three fascicles. The second was composed by Asaṅga, in either one or two fascicles. The third was composed by Jinaxian (Vajrarṣi), who was a person of Wu from the southern regions and not authentic holy teaching; this consists of either eleven or thirteen fascicles.

1.36

If one studies only existence and negates emptiness, the mind of false conceptualization will increase further; if one studies only emptiness and negates existence, true wisdom will have no cause from which to arise. One eliminates false conceptualization at the gate of emptiness, and gives rise to the true mind in the storehouse of existence: existence and emptiness are mirrored together. In expounding the teachings, there are two kinds: first, in accord with faculties, such as the principles of the four noble truths and the two kinds of emptiness; second, directly manifesting the principle in its suchness, expounding the signless, the real sign, and so forth. As for the Buddha using a single voice and so forth, the *Avataṃsaka Sūtra* says that from a single word of the Tathāgata an infinite ocean of sūtras flows forth; the *Lotus Sūtra* only clarifies subsumption and entry so as to display the One Vehicle; the *Śrīmālādevī Sūtra* covers both generation and subsumption/entry. Furthermore, the *Lotus Sūtra* states that if a person practices the five pāramitās, it does not equal receiving, upholding, or hearing the *Lotus Sūtra*. Taking bodhi and nirvāṇa together, they are collectively termed the One Vehicle; hence the ox cart is a metaphor for bodhi. The sūtra says: 'I have made this cart for you, and so with an impartial mind each should be given one.' Therefore the *Śrīmālādevī Sūtra* says that practicing the six pāramitās does not equal holding the sūtra in hand. That relies upon tathatā as the vehicle, as the text of that sūtra fully reveals its characteristics.

1.37

Thus have I heard. At one time, the Buddha was staying in Śrāvastī, at the Jeta Grove in Anāthapiṇḍada's Park.

1.38

Third, regarding the structural division of the root text: this sūtra has three divisions from beginning to end. First, the division of the circumstantial occasion preceding the text. Second, from 'At that time, Subhūti arose from his seat' downward, the division of initiating the request and extensive explanation. Third, from 'After the Buddha had spoken this sūtra' downward, the division of joyful awakening and practice. The first division has two parts: first, clarifying the common circumstantial occasions; second, from 'At that time, the Bhagavat' downward, the particular circumstantial occasions.

1.39

The first part has five items. First, to engender faith, by generally indicating what has been heard, it says 'Thus have I heard.' Second, the speaker and the listeners gathered together with no distinction of time, generally stated as 'at one time.' Third, teaching must have a teacher; if the teacher is superior, the Dharma is to be venerated, hence it designates 'the Buddha.' Fourth, teaching must have a place, relying necessarily on an excellent location to preach the wondrous Dharma, hence it says 'in Śrāvastī, at the Jeta Grove in Anāthapiṇḍada's Park.' Fifth, clarifying the audience addressed by the teaching, namely 'together with a great community of monks, twelve hundred and fifty in all.' In reality there was also an assembly of bodhisattvas, as the Bhagavat stated, and there were also the assemblies of the eight classes, as stated below in the transmission section; here, being abbreviated, it only mentions the śrāvakas. The remaining text can be understood.

1.40

Regarding the place where it was spoken: *Fasu* is a light pronunciation for *Indu*. The old term 'Five Indias' (Tianzhu) was an error. Now explaining *Indu*: here it is translated as 'the Moon Clan' (Yuezhi). In these five regions there are many sages and wise ones; like the moon illuminating the darkness, they are able to dispel burning heat, hence it is so named. The old rendering 'Yuezhi' and the like were all incorrect. 'Śrāvastī' was an error; it should be Śrāvastīpura, which means 'City of Abundant Virtue', meaning abundant in extensive learning, abundant in sensual pleasures, and abundant in liberation. The lord of this city was King Prasenajit, here translated as 'Conquering Army' (Shengjun), which is the name of the capital city of Central India. The kingdom was named Kośala; to distinguish it from Kośala south of the Ganges, it is designated by the city's name. The capital city of that Southern Kośala kingdom had no distinct designation and was named after the kingdom itself. 'Jeta's Grove' refers to the forest of Crown Prince Jeta. 'Jeta' is here translated as 'victorious in battle'. 'Anāthapiṇḍada's Park' refers to what Sudatta purchased from the prince. Now, being designated together, both are cited. The extensive narrative of this origin is set forth in other commentaries.

1.41

together with a great community of monks, twelve hundred and fifty in all.

1.42

The commentary says: This is the fifth item, displaying the audience addressed by the teaching. The Buddha coming together and gathering with them is called 'together with'. Nāgārjuna explains that [this involves six shared aspects]: first, same place—the City of Abundant Virtue; second, same time—together engaged in this speaking and listening, culminating in the single time; third, same mind—jointly partaking of the Dharma of a single flavor; fourth, same view—together realizing the single principle of liberation; fifth, same precepts—each endowed with the prātimokṣa precepts; sixth, same liberation—the three vehicles sitting together on the seat of liberation. Being endowed with such meanings is collectively called 'together with'.

1.43

'Great' has five meanings: first, great in renown, being known by the great assembly and great men; second, great in station, all abiding in noble fruition and not in ordinary worldly status; third, great in merit, having exhausted all defilements and realized knowledge and eradication; fourth, great in practice, seeking great bodhi and cultivating extensive deeds; fifth, great in retinue, numbering twelve hundred and fifty. Nāgārjuna explains: where there are seven treasures, gold is the greatest; even in a place without fine objects, an iron hoe is the greatest; just as when the Three Jewels exist, the Buddha is the greatest, even so in the final period, a precept-breaking monk is the greatest. Therefore the sūtra states: 'Although the campaka flower is withered, it still surpasses other flowers in their fresh bloom; monks who break the precepts and act evilly still surpass non-Buddhists who keep their precepts.' Here, 'great' is spoken provisionally in contrast to those in training.

1.44

'Bhikṣu' has five meanings: First, frightening Māra: when first resolving to go forth, the four Māras are frightened. Second, mendicant: sustaining oneself by alms, equalizing self and others. Third, pure livelihood: leaving behind the five wrong livelihoods and rectifying the three karmas. The five wrong livelihoods are: 1. displaying the extraordinary for the sake of material gain, such as a practitioner sitting and counting prayer beads; 2. speaking of one's own virtues for the sake of material gain; 3. divining good and bad fortune for the sake of material gain; 4. speaking in a loud voice to display authority for the sake of material gain; 5. speaking of what was previously gained in order to sway people's minds for the sake of material gain. Fourth, keeping the precepts: deportment is never deficient. Fifth, destroying evil: cultivating the path, obtaining the fruit, and severing afflictions.

1.45

The saṅgha is called 'community' (assembly) because they are in harmony in both realizing principle and performing dharmic duties.

1.46

Regarding the 'twelve hundred and fifty': when the Buddha first attained enlightenment, during the first period he delivered the five men including Kauṇḍinya; in the second period, he delivered Yaśas and others, fifty men; in the third period, he delivered Śāriputra and others, one hundred men; in the fourth period, he delivered Maudgalyāyana and others, one hundred men; in the fifth period, he delivered Uruvilvā-Kāśyapa and others, five hundred men; in the sixth period, he delivered Gayā-Kāśyapa and others, two hundred and ninety-five men; in the seventh period, he delivered Nadī-Kāśyapa and others, two hundred men. Thus there were twelve hundred and fifty in all; this mentions his regular retinue. By following what comes below, there was also a community of bhikṣuṇīs and others, which is omitted here for brevity.

1.47

However, the *Āgama* sūtras were preached solely for those setting out to seek the śrāvaka vehicle; the prajñā teachings of emptiness were preached solely for those setting out to seek the Great Vehicle—hence it says below: 'preached for those of the Great Vehicle, preached for those of the Supreme Vehicle'; the *Mahāparinirvāṇa Sūtra*, the *Lotus Sūtra*, the *Saṃdhinirmocana Sūtra*, and so forth, were preached comprehensively for those setting out to seek all vehicles, namely explaining the conditioned and unconditioned as 'existence', and the self and what belongs to self as 'emptiness'. Therefore, listing the śrāvaka assembly here is precisely in order to cause them to set out to seek the Great Vehicle; the bodhisattvas had already set out, and hence are omitted here and not indicated.

1.48

The above explanation of the common circumstantial occasions is concluded.

1.49

At that time, when it was mealtime, the Bhagavat put on his robe, took up his bowl, and entered the great city of Śrāvastī to beg for food. Having begged successively from house to house within that city, he returned to his original place. Having finished eating his meal, he put away his robe and bowl, washed his feet, prepared his seat, and sat down.

1.50

The commentary says: Second, clarifying the particular circumstantial occasions. This passage has ten points: 1. clarifying the master of conversion, namely 'the Bhagavat'; 2. distinguishing the time of conversion, namely 'when it was mealtime'; 3. indicating his clothing, namely 'put on his robe'; 4. showing his holding of the vessel, namely 'took up his bowl'; 5. describing the ground of conversion, namely 'entered the great city of Śrāvastī'; 6. clarifying the seeking of sustenance, namely 'to beg for food'; 7. distinguishing the universality and impartiality, namely 'having begged successively from house to house within that city'; 8. indicating the gathering-in of conversion, namely 'returned to his original place'; 9. showing the washing of feet, namely 'having finished eating his meal, he put away his robe and bowl, washed his feet'; 10. describing the peaceful abiding, namely 'prepared his seat, and sat down'.

1.51

The word 'Bhagavat' means one endowed with six virtues and who has destroyed the four Māras. The four Māras are known; as for the six virtues, the *Buddhabhūmiśāstra* states: 1. sovereign mastery, because he is forever unbound by any afflictions; 2. radiance, because he has been tempered by the blazing fire of wisdom; 3. majesty, because he is adorned with all the marks and signs; 4. renown, because all supreme merits are complete and universally known; 5. auspiciousness, because all the world draws near, makes offerings, and praises him; 6. venerability, because possessing all virtues, he constantly generates skillful means to benefit and bring peace and happiness to all sentient beings without remiss or neglect.

1.52

Regarding 'mealtime', it refers to the time for the midday meal. Below, each of these symbolizes something, as the *Vimalakīrtinirdeśa Sūtra* states: the Buddha told Ānanda that all the deportment and movements of the Buddhas are nothing other than Buddha-work. Why does it now say 'mealtime'? This shows that when the meal is finished and the sūtra is expounded, the sun is exactly at midday, symbolizing that the Mahāyāna principle of the signless that is expounded abandons attachment to the two extremes of emptiness and existence; hence 'mealtime' refers to the distinctive time for preaching the sūtra. This symbolizes that when about to preach the signless teaching, one first contemplates the signless principle, just as when about to preach the *Innumerable Meanings Sūtra*, [the Buddha] first entered the samādhi of the station of innumerable meanings and contemplated the principle of the station of innumerable meanings. The Buddha takes wisdom as life and the signless as food; wishing to preach the signless teaching, he first contemplates the wondrous signless principle with wisdom and only then expounds it; hence it says 'mealtime'.

1.53

Regarding 'put on his robe': phenomenal robes are of three kinds: saṃghāṭī, uttarāsaṅga, and antarvāsa. Among these, the first robe is worn when entering royal cities and villages; the next robe is worn when preaching the Dharma in an assembly; the third robe can be understood. Now, wishing to enter the city, it indicates wearing the first robe. In terms of the Dharma, there are also three robes: first, vigor, also called armor, meaning being able to exert oneself in proclaiming beneficial and joyful matters without avoiding cold, heat, and so forth, just like putting on a robe; second, the robe of gentle forbearance, meaning that through forbearance external harms cannot invade, just like putting on clothing so that cold and heat do not touch one; third, the supreme garment of shame and modesty, having the characteristic of revering the worthy and good, scorning and resisting violent evil, and feeling shame, hence being like clothing. Here, this symbolizes the Buddha exerting himself to preach the wondrous signless Dharma; therefore it says 'put on his robe'.

1.54

"Holding the bowl" means [holding] the vessel of appropriate capacity: first, because it is appropriate to the capacity of one's own food; second, because it is appropriate to the capacity of what is given by others outside; being neither too large nor too small, it is called of "appropriate capacity". This symbolizes the Buddha's non-conceptual wisdom internally realizing the principle, just as a bowl receives food; when the mind gives rise to wisdom, it is thus also called "holding".

1.55

"Entering the great city of Śrāvastī" symbolizes wishing to enter the great city of the true Dharma to partake of the food of signlessness. Alternatively, the true Dharma is like a city, so the Vimalakīrtinirdeśa says, "to protect the Dharma city", for bodhisattvas are like city guardians; or, the true Dharma is like the people in the city and bodhisattvas are like the city, which is "to protect the Dharma city"; or, entering the great city of the dharmadhātu to drink the flavor of signlessness—it is to symbolize this that it says "entering the great city of Śrāvastī".

1.56

"Begging for food" specifically symbolizes using non-conceptual wisdom to internally realize the principle of signlessness.

1.57

"Begging in succession" means going from one lane to another, from one house to another, and so on; it is to show that regarding each and every phenomenon, one universally realizes and reaches the principle of signlessness.

1.58

"Returning to his original place" symbolizes that when about to preach the teaching of signlessness, he must also give rise to subsequent wisdom to expound it extensively for others.

1.59

"Washing his feet" is to show that where there is external dirt, washing the feet immediately removes it; where there is defilement in the internal mind, hearing the Dharma will naturally extinguish it.

1.60

"Spreading his seat and sitting down" means that wishing to show the Dharma to be preached is supreme, the Bhagavat spreads his own seat; just as when beholding a venerated position, he does not let other people spread the seating gear. Regarding "sitting down", Asaṅga's commentary explains that it shows only one who is tranquil is able to awaken to and preach the Dharma. Therefore, this shows that the Bhagavat's upright body and right mindfulness symbolize that internally he can awaken to the true principle and externally he can preach the signless Dharma. The Vajracchedikā says "dwelling in mindfulness facing away and toward": "facing away" has the meaning of estrangement, and "facing toward" has the meaning of gazing toward; that is, using wisdom to contemplate the principle, like a mirror reflecting a face. What is called "facing away" turns away from saṃsāra; "facing toward" turns toward nirvāṇa. "Facing away" abandons afflictions; "facing toward" realizes the true principle. "Facing away" is free from existence and emptiness; "facing toward" abides in the middle way. It should be known in this way. Or it is said "mindfulness facing directly", which has the meaning of gazing upon, meaning that one penetrates the principle with wisdom, just like gazing upon one's face.

1.61

At that time, the Venerable Subhūti was in the great assembly. He immediately arose from his seat, bared his right shoulder, placed his right knee upon the ground, joined his palms respectfully, and addressed the Buddha, saying:

1.62

The commentary says: This second major section is "Formulating the Request". In the section of "Directly Expounding", according to Vasubandhu's division of the text, there are two parts: from this utterance up to "the fruit and retribution are also inconceivable" is the first cycle of preaching; next, from "At that time, Subhūti…" down to "how should one abide…" through to "one should view it thus" is the second cycle of preaching. In the first cycle there are three questions: how those who have not yet generated the mind can successfully generate it, down to how those who have already practiced can sever obstacles. What is spoken in the second cycle is: if a bodhisattva gives rise to such a thought regarding the three kinds of practice in his own person, saying "I can generate the mind", down to saying "I can sever obstacles", it is in order to eliminate such arrogance that there is the second cycle of preaching. That is, the teaching of the first cycle clarifies instructing those who have not yet generated the mind to generate it; the teaching of the second cycle is preached because those who have already generated the mind say "I can generate it". Alternatively, the two cycles are explained separately as practice and the severing of obstacles. The older explanation says that the first cycle is to give rise to this goodness, and the second cycle is to sever obstacles, obstacles being the cognitive [obstruction]; thus the subsequent treatise says: "Practicing within the internal mind, retaining a self as a bodhisattva", which obstructs the non-abiding path. That is, when a bodhisattva is on the non-abiding path, non-conceptual wisdom is internally fused with the true principle, and only then is it realized; one does not give rise to the thought of "I can". Another explanation is that it is for the two types of capacities—the sharp and the dull—and the two assemblies, the initial and the subsequent, that the two cycles are preached.

1.63

Within the first cycle there are two: from "one should thus subdue…" down to "abide as instructed" is the main thesis; from "can the Tathāgata be seen by means of bodily marks or not?" downward clarifies severing doubts, meaning the path of prajñā that is able to sever, while what is severed refers to the two obstructions.

1.64

In the former part there are four: first, Subhūti's devout and respectful praising and requesting; second, the Tathāgata's praise, endorsement, and permission to speak; third, the respectful assent and desire to listen; fourth, the separate answers following the questions.

1.65

In the former part there are again three: first, clarifying devotion and respect; second, clarifying praise; third, directly presenting the request. This is the first passage.

1.66

Now, the Bodhisattva Asaṅga stated that when seven kinds of semantic topics are established, this prajñāpāramitā is then established, namely, the lineage being uninterrupted, and so on. The first three of these seven classify this sūtra into three sections in total; the latter four illuminate the meanings contained within this sūtra and do not separately classify the text. The three textual sections are: first, Subhūti's praise is called "the lineage being uninterrupted"; second, Subhūti's request is called "giving rise to the marks of practice", because it raises questions about the marks of cultivating practice; third, the Tathāgata's endorsement and reply up to "one should view it thus" is called "the dwelling places of practice", meaning that practicing one's practice by relying on the meaning of this one entire scripture is precisely the dwelling places of practice.

1.67

"Antidotes", the fourth, does not have a separate text; rather, within the dwelling places of practice, there are the antidotes and what is counteracted. Therefore, the treatise says: "When one practices the dwelling places in accordance with these marks, it should be known that there are two kinds of antidotes, namely, wrong practice and right practice with clinging views." Here, "clinging views" means conceptualization. Within the first dwelling place, if it says that a bodhisattva should give rise to such a thought: "all sentient beings...", this is the antidote to wrong practice; for giving rise to such a thought is a bodhisattva's wrong practice. If it further says, "if a bodhisattva has the conception of a sentient being...", this is the antidote to right practice with clinging views; this conceptual grasping must also be severed by a bodhisattva, namely, [thinking] "I should liberate sentient beings". Within the second dwelling place, if it says "one should practice dāna", this is the antidote to wrong practice; not practicing dāna is a bodhisattva's wrong practice. If it further says "abiding in things...", this is the antidote to right practice with clinging views; this conceptual grasping must also be severed by a bodhisattva, namely, [thinking] "one should practice dāna". Within this, there are the antidote and what is counteracted, which should be explained accordingly.

1.68

"Non-loss", the fifth, means not losing the right path; this refutes the graspings of addition and subtraction. Grasping that there are persons and phenomena within the dwelling places of practice is called the grasping of addition; repudiating the wonderful Dharma of tathatā is called the grasping of subtraction. If one does this, one will lose the right path; now both graspings are refuted, hence it is called "non-loss". Therefore, the treatise says: within this, if it says, "what the Tathāgata speaks of as the nature of merit is not the nature of merit", this refutes the extreme of addition, because that accumulation of merit lacks a conceptually differentiated intrinsic nature; if it further says, "therefore the Tathāgata speaks of the Tathāgata's accumulation of merit", this refutes the extreme of subtraction, because although it does not have intrinsic nature as words suggest, there is an expressible entity, since the Tathāgata speaks of the accumulation of merit; down to saying "what are called buddhadharmas are not buddhadharmas"—all such passages should be explained accordingly as being called "non-loss".

1.69

"Stages", the sixth, are of three kinds: first, the stage of practicing through faith, which is the stage of practice for ordinary beings, starting from the recitation up to "these are called all dharmas"; second, the stage of pure mind, which refers to the ten stages, starting from "for instance, suppose a person's body were huge..." downward; third, the buddha stage, from "if a bodhisattva makes this statement: 'I shall adorn the buddha-lands'" down to the end of the sūtra.

1.70

"Establishing the name", the seventh, means explaining the name Vajracchedikā, which can be understood.

1.71

However, in the southern region there is the Jin'gangxian shi, which divides this treatise into twelve sections in total; this is merely a reckless speculation born of ordinary sentiments in this land, and cannot be relied upon.

1.72

"At that time, the Venerable": in the Western regions, one of senior age and honor is called a venerable (āyuṣmat); if one is young yet possesses virtue, one has the title "great virtue" (bhadanta), which is not the same as in this land. "Subhūti" is an erroneous transcription; it should be Subhūti, translated here as "Shanxian" (Good Manifestation), who was foremost among the Bhagavat's disciples in understanding emptiness. That is, corresponding to the Buddha's era, he was immediately able to manifest birth; or he was well able to manifest before him and thoroughly penetrate the meaning of emptiness; or when he was first born and manifested, his chamber was empty and serene, and a physiognomist divined it and named him Shanxian. "Xian" means to appear: when he was born, all within the chamber was empty and serene, symbolizing that when grown up he would be adept at understanding the meaning of emptiness, hence he was named Shanxian. In the newly translated Vajracchedikā, he is called "the Long-Lived Shanxian" (āyuṣmat Subhūti). There are two kinds of life: first, supramundane life, which is wisdom; second, mundane life, which is the continuous holding of the succession of form and mind. If one only designates the life of wisdom, it does not subsume the mundane; if one speaks only of longevity, it does not extend to the supramundane; showing that he is endowed with both, it says "endowed with life" (āyuṣmat). That is, Shanxian has two aspects: first, attaining the supramundane life of wisdom; second, attaining mundane long life; therefore he is also called "the Venerable" (āyuṣmat).

1.73

"Immediately arose from his seat" symbolizes abandoning the non-actuality of the two vehicles and proceeding toward the ultimate of the One Vehicle. "Bared his right shoulder" displays a mark of respect, because there the right is considered auspicious, symbolizing that prajñā can bring auspicious fortune to beings. "Placed his right knee upon the ground" displays the subjugation of the faults of saṃsāra, meaning that from beginningless time one has committed manifold sins with the right hand and foot, symbolizing that this Dharma can subdue the suffering of saṃsāra. "Joined his palms" symbolizes that the listener's mind is harmoniously fused with the Dharma. "Respectfully" symbolizes that the Dharma is worthy of reverence.

1.74

Asaṅga's treatise states that there are six reasons why Subhūti asked: First, to sever doubts, meaning that sentient beings, having possessed ignorance in their persons from beginningless time, are deluded and obscured by afflictions and give rise to doubts, doubting the four truths or the three jewels and being unable to generate faith; when the question is posed, all these doubts are completely severed. Second, to give rise to faith and understanding, meaning that although having faith, they do not know with regard to what to give rise to faith and understanding in the scriptures and Dharmas; therefore he asks the question to cause them to give rise to faith and understanding in prajñā. Third, to enter the profound, meaning that although having generated faith and understanding in prajñā, they have not yet been able to advance in understanding the profound meaning; therefore he asks the question to cause them to understand the profound meaning. Fourth, for the sake of non-retrogression, meaning that although having attained understanding of the profound, when encountering conditions such as gnats, mosquitoes, disputes, or weariness, they might regress at times; once the question is posed, there is never any retrogression. Fifth, to give rise to joy, meaning that sentient beings, long planted in saṃsāra, constantly harbor immeasurable, manifold worries and sufferings; once the question is posed, worries and sufferings are forever eliminated, and thus they give rise to joy. Sixth, for the true Dharma to abide long, meaning that if such prajñā were not spoken, the true Dharmas might quickly disappear and be obscured with no one to uphold them; once the question is posed, it will cause the true Dharma to abide long forever.

1.75

"How rare, Bhagavat! The Tathāgata is well mindfully protective of the bodhisattvas, and well entrusts the bodhisattvas."

1.76

The commentary says: According to Vasubandhu's division, within the first cycle there are two: first, the section of requesting the exposition of the essential doctrine; second, from "can [the Tathāgata] be seen by bodily marks" downward, the section of extensively demolishing manifold doubts.

1.77

Within the first part there are four: first, devoutly and respectfully praising and requesting; second, praising, endorsing, and permitting to speak; third, respectfully assenting and desiring to listen; fourth, answering separately in accordance with the questions.

1.78

In the first part, there are four aspects: first, revealing the location, namely amidst the great assembly; second, displaying devout respect; third, articulating praise; fourth, properly formulating the request. The preceding two sections of text are concluded; this is the third, the praise. As for the words "Rare, O Bhagavat!", this means that only during the decreasing periods of a kalpa of abiding do Buddhas appear in the world. Just as among the thousand Buddhas of the Fortunate Kalpa (Bhadrakalpa), four Buddhas have already appeared in the world: during this kalpa of abiding, during the first five small kalpas no Buddha appeared in the world; in the sixth kalpa, when human lifespan was forty thousand years, Krakucchanda Buddha appeared in the world; in the seventh kalpa, when human lifespan was thirty thousand years, Kanakamuni Buddha appeared in the world; in the eighth kalpa, when human lifespan was twenty thousand years, Kāśyapa Buddha appeared in the world; in the ninth kalpa, when human lifespan was one hundred years, Śākyamuni Buddha appeared; in the tenth kalpa, at the beginning of the decreasing kalpa when human lifespan is eighty thousand years, Maitreya Buddha will appear; up to the fifteenth kalpa, nine hundred and ninety-four Buddhas will appear together in one kalpa; until the final kalpa of abiding, the single Buddha Rocana (Rucika) will appear alone in one kalpa of abiding. After this, a further twelve great kalpas must elapse before the very first Buddha of the Constellation Kalpa (Nakṣatrakalpa), Prabhāsa Buddha, appears; after this, a further three hundred kalpas must elapse before the remaining Buddhas appear in the world. Therefore the Lotus Sūtra says, "The Buddhas appear in the world; infinitely remote, they are difficult to encounter," and so forth.

1.79

Regarding "well protects and is mindful of", Vasubandhu says: "assisting their person and their companions"; first, assisting their person; second, assisting their fellow practitioners of the brahma-conduct. That is, when there are bodhisattvas who have already aroused the resolve [for awakening], have encountered Buddhas, and whose faculties and roots are already mature, the Tathāgata protects and is mindful of them, assisting their persons in every way so as to make them attain self-benefit and cause wholesome dharmas to increase. Second, assisting fellow practitioners means that if that bodhisattva has companions who share in the brahma-conduct, [the Tathāgata] causes him to instruct them in turn, assisting his benefiting of others.

1.80

Regarding "well entrusts", this refers to bodhisattvas whose faculties are not yet mature; that is, although they have already aroused the resolve, their capacities and faculties are not yet mature. There are two kinds of these: first, those who have never previously acquired merits; second, those who, though they previously had merits, have solely regressed and lost them. Entrusting these two kinds of persons to the bodhisattvas of mature faculties causes [the latter] to guide and teach them: causing those who have not yet attained to attain, and causing those who have previously attained but regressed to advance in cultivation; hence it is called "entrusting". Furthermore, causing those who have attained non-regression not to abandon the Mahāyāna: whereas previously those of immature faculties were entrusted to those whose faculties were already mature, now the Bhagavat entrusts those of immature faculties with the Dharma, causing them not to abandon the Mahāyāna and wishing them to achieve superior progress in the Mahāyāna; this is called "entrusting". Vasubandhu says that according to the treatise, entrusting has two [aspects]: first, among bodhisattvas there are those who have regressed and those who have not yet regressed; simply causing them not to abandon the Mahāyāna and causing them to make superior progress is called "entrusting". However, the sense of Asaṅga's commentary differs slightly from this. His intention states that when the Tathāgata first achieved the path, there were bodhisattvas who had already accumulated wholesome roots in the past and whose faculties were already mature; the Buddha then taught them the abiding-places (ādhāra) of that practice, and within those abiding-places taught the noble path as the antidote and conceptual discrimination as that which is to be remedied. He also taught the eradication of the two grasps of increase and decrease, not straying from the correct path, the cultivation of ordinary beings, the cultivation of bodhisattvas, and the Buddha-ground. He also taught the establishment of the designation "prajñā"; thus this is called "well protecting and being mindful of". "Well entrusting" refers to bodhisattvas whose faculties are not yet mature and who are not yet able to arouse the resolve and cultivate the practice; therefore, when the Tathāgata is about to enter nirvāṇa, he entrusts them to the bodhisattvas whom he has already gathered in, causing them to expound these five kinds of meanings for their sake, and also causing them to mature the Buddha-dharmas. "Those who have been gathered in" refers specifically to the bodhisattvas of mature faculties.

First 80 of 284 passages. Read on

Linked texts (1)

金剛般若經贊述 — Classical Chinese