金剛般若經贊述 2

English (machine translation) 2

Language: English

The Buddha told Subhūti: "So it is, so it is! If, moreover, there is someone who gets to hear this sūtra and is not startled, not terrified, and not afraid, one should know that this person is extremely rare."

2.3

The Commentary states: This is the second, the Buddha's answer. First, he states it, and next he explains it; this is the first. In Vasubandhu's intention: 'startled' refers to shock and panic, meaning there are sentient beings who fear that this classic is not the practice of the correct path; 'terrified' refers to fright, [fearing] that cultivating and studying in reliance on prajñā cannot sever doubts; 'afraid' refers to refusing to cultivate and study in the end because of being startled and terrified. If there is someone who stays far away from these states, they are called 'not startled, not terrified, and not afraid.'

2.4

Asaṅga says: in the Śrāvakayāna, the Bhagavat taught that there are dharmas and there is emptiness; when hearing this sūtra, hearing that dharmas do not exist, one is startled; hearing that emptiness does not exist, one is terrified; when reflecting, within the principle that neither exists, being unable to conform to it, one is afraid. Furthermore, there is another explanation: one should know this is on account of the three kinds of non-self-nature, namely the non-self-nature of marks, of arising, and of the ultimate. The explanation says: being free from essential marks in the imagined nature is called 'not startled'; being without a spontaneous nature of arising in the dependent nature is called 'not terrified'; and being without those grasped persons and dharmas in the perfected nature is called 'not afraid.'

2.5

"Why is this? Subhūti, the foremost pāramitā spoken of by the Tathāgata is precisely not the foremost pāramitā; it is called the foremost pāramitā."

2.6

The Commentary states: This is the second, praising and explaining its superiority. Vasubandhu says: 'the foremost pāramitā spoken of by the Tathāgata' means that all the Buddhas of the ten directions speak of it together, praising it as able to be the great cause, hence it is called 'foremost,' manifesting that this sūtra surpasses other sūtras. 'Is not the foremost pāramitā' means that it is not what other people can attain; non-conceptual wisdom realizes the principle of selflessness, which only the Buddhas of the ten directions attain, while other people cannot. 'Is called the foremost pāramitā' means that it is attained solely by Buddhas. Asaṅga's commentary states: 'the foremost pāramitā' means that prajñā is the most supreme among the other five.

2.7

"Subhūti, the kṣāntipāramitā, the Tathāgata says is not the kṣāntipāramitā."

2.8

The Commentary states: Vasubandhu says that the second major section above is concluded; from here below is the third section, the fourth comparison, within which first doubts are resolved, and next the comparison is directly made.

2.9

Within resolving doubts there are three parts: first, a doubt arises concerning the previous relinquishing of body and life. That is, someone doubts, saying: 'Earlier it was said that that body is suffering, and because of relinquishing that suffering body, the retribution of merit is inferior. If so, then when bodhisattvas practice austerities in receiving, upholding, and expounding according to this Dharma-gate, those austerities are also a fruition of suffering; why would this Dharma-gate not result in a fruition of suffering?' The meaning here is: earlier it was said that relinquishing body and life is suffering, and in return one obtains a body that is a fruition of suffering, so the merit obtained is inferior. If that is so, when bodhisattvas practice various austerities for the sake of this Dharma-gate, they also induce the fruition of a suffering body; why then would their merit be superior? For instance, when Bodhisattva Sadāprarudita, seeking the prajñāpāramitā at the place of Bodhisattva Dharmodgata, broke his bones and extracted his marrow to make an offering, this was suffering and the merit obtained should be little. The intention of the present answer is: if one relinquishes the body for the practice of wisdom, the merit obtained is great; if, although relinquishing the body, one does not perform the practice of wisdom to seek bodhi, because it is a cause for saṃsāra, its merit is low and inferior. Within this text, there are four major parts: first, directly refuting the previous doubt; second, pointing to an event to clarify it; third, from 'a bodhisattva should leave behind all [marks]' onward, citing first-ground bodhisattvas to show the non-abiding principle; fourth, from 'a bodhisattva, to benefit [all beings]' onward, encouraging the benefiting of sentient beings by abiding in the principle of the two kinds of emptiness. This is the first.

2.10

'Kṣāntipāramitā' means that which is attained together by the Buddhas of the ten directions, or the patience of seeking the practice of wisdom. 'The Tathāgata says is not' means that because it is not what other people can attain, or because it is not seeking the practice of wisdom, it is not called a pāramitā. This means that the previously mentioned relinquishing of body and life was not the practice of wisdom, and therefore is not called a pāramitā; hence it says that it is spoken of as not being patience.

2.11

"Why is this? Subhūti, as when in the past my body was cut and severed by King Kali, at that time I had no mark of a self, no mark of a person, no mark of a sentient being, and no mark of a lived life. Why is this? When my limbs and joints were severed piece by piece in the past, if I had the mark of a self, the mark of a person, the mark of a sentient being, or the mark of a lived life, I would have produced anger and resentment."

2.12

The Commentary states: This is the second, pointing to an event, within which first he cites a single life in the past, and next cites many other lives; this is the first. Therein, first he clarifies that leaving behind marks accomplishes patience, and next he argues in reverse to establish the former.

2.13

"King Kali" also means "suffering and torment," because he frequently inflicted cruel and agonizing punishments. This refers to when the Tathāgata in the past was the hermit Kṣāntivādin cultivating the Way in the mountains. That king took his harem women into the mountains on a hunt. The king grew weary and fell asleep, and the women went to the hermit seeking to hear the true Dharma. When the king awoke, he looked around and saw them surrounding the hermit. The king then asked the hermit, "Who are you?" and further went on to ask, "Are you an ordinary person who has abandoned desire, or not?" [The hermit] answered, "I have not yet abandoned desire." Hearing this, the king grew angry and dismembered him. Because he was free of any lakṣaṇa of self, [his body] was then restored as before. This is cited now.

2.14

"I also recall that in the past, for five hundred lifetimes, I was the hermit Kṣāntivādin. In those lifetimes, I had no lakṣaṇa of a self, no lakṣaṇa of a person, no lakṣaṇa of a sentient being, and no lakṣaṇa of a soul."

2.15

The commentary says: This second [part] cites his many other embodiments.

2.16

"Therefore, Subhūti, a bodhisattva should give rise to the mind of anuttarā samyaksambodhi free from all lakṣaṇas."

2.17

The commentary says: This third [part] explains that because a bodhisattva on the first bhūmi attains patience, this is called the "non-abiding mind," thereby demonstrating the meaning of "giving rise to the mind without abiding." Herein, first there is a general presentation, followed by a specific presentation. This is the first.

2.18

Giving rise to the mind has five [stages]: First is giving rise to the mind of the lineage (gotra), which refers to before the bhūmis. Second is giving rise to the mind of faith, which refers to the first three bhūmis, because they are identical to the worldly cultivation of dāna, śīla, and kṣānti. Third is giving rise to the mind of illumination, which refers to the fourth, fifth, sixth, and seventh bhūmis, because they are identical to the supramundane: on the fourth bhūmi, one engages in contemplation of the bodhipakṣadharma, identical to a stream-enterer; on the fifth bhūmi, one engages in contemplation of the Four Noble Truths, identical to an arhat; on the sixth bhūmi, one engages in contemplation of dependent origination, identical to a pratyekabuddha; and on the seventh bhūmi, pure contemplation of animitta is truly [the practice of] a bodhisattva. Fourth is giving rise to the irreversible mind, which refers to the eighth, ninth, and tenth bhūmis. Fifth is giving rise to the unexcelled mind, which refers to the buddha-bhūmi. These are also called the five kinds of bodhi, named the lineage bodhi, and so forth. Here, "giving rise to the mind" refers to giving rise to the mind of faith; that is, because a bodhisattva on the first bhūmi inwardly contemplates the principle of tathatā that is non-abiding, it is called "giving rise to the mind without abiding."

2.19

"They should not give rise to a mind that abides in form; they should not give rise to a mind that abides in sound, fragrance, taste, touch, or dharmas."

2.20

The commentary says: This second [part] specifically presents what is within abiding. First, it causes them not to abide in lakṣaṇas; second, it causes them to abide in animitta; third, it explains the reason; finally, it concludes in summary. This is the first. Giving rise to a mind that abides in form and so forth constitutes having an abiding, which is grasping at self and person; therefore, one should not abide.

2.21

"They should give rise to a mind that does not abide."

2.22

The commentary says: This second [part] causes them to abide in animitta. Contemplating animitta is called "non-abiding." One must realize this principle in order to extinguish [the grasping at] self and person.

2.23

"If the mind has an abiding, that constitutes non-abiding."

2.24

The commentary says: This third [part] explains the reason for the above. If one gives rise to a mind that abides in form and so forth, it constitutes not truly abiding.

2.25

"Therefore, the Buddha teaches that a bodhisattva's mind should not abide in form when practicing dāna."

2.26

The commentary says: This fourth [part] is the general conclusion.

2.27

"Subhūti, a bodhisattva should practice dāna in this way to benefit all sentient beings."

2.28

The commentary says: This is the fourth major section, eliminating doubt and revealing the principle. Herein, first it causes them to practice non-abiding dāna; second, it directly refutes the doubt; third, it specifically explains the principle. A doubt arose, saying: "Earlier it was said to give rise to the mind without abiding; how can one cultivate practice to benefit sentient beings without that being called abiding in the affairs of sentient beings?" In order to sever this doubt, this text is presented.

2.29

"The Tathāgata teaches that all lakṣaṇas are indeed non-lakṣaṇas."

2.30

The commentary says: This second [part] specifically reveals the principle. Herein, first it clarifies the emptiness of dharmas, and second it clarifies the emptiness of persons. This is the first. Saying "all lakṣaṇas" refers to false lakṣaṇas; "are indeed non-lakṣaṇas" means there is no real lakṣaṇa, because the false is fundamentally empty.

2.31

"And teaches that all sentient beings are indeed non-sentient beings."

2.32

The commentary says: This reveals the emptiness of sentient beings. Saying "all sentient beings" refers to the reified sentient beings that are grasped; "are indeed not sentient beings" means they do not exist as real entities. Alternatively, one should understand this explained inversely. Up to this point, the explanation of the first doubt according to Vasubandhu is concluded.

2.33

According to Asaṅga, where the sūtra states below "The Tathāgata speaks of kṣāntipāramitā," this is the thirteenth [ādhāra], for the sake of enduring suffering. That is the ninth among the ādhāras for abandoning obstacles, which is for abandoning the obstacle of being unable to endure suffering. Because other people cannot endure generating diligent asceticism to practice this prajñāpāramitā, the Tathāgata cites his own past deeds to enable them to endure suffering and abandon the obstacle of non-endurance. Within this text there are two parts: first, clarifying the three kinds of patience in order to abandon the obstacle of the suffering of non-endurance; second, from "Subhūti! A bodhisattva should be free of all lakṣaṇas" onward, clarifying that the causes and conditions of non-endurance involve three kinds of suffering.

2.34

Within the former, there are three: First is clarifying the capacity for patience, which means comprehending the selflessness of dharmas, as the sūtra says: "The Tathāgata speaks of kṣāntipāramitā." Second is clarifying the lakṣaṇa of patience, which means that when others act malevolently toward oneself, because there is no lakṣaṇa of self and so on, one does not give rise to notions of anger, nor does one give rise to notions of existence regarding kṣāntipāramitā, nor does one give rise to notions of non-existence regarding what is not pāramitā, as the sūtra says: "Just as in the past when King Kali dismembered my body, at that time I had no lakṣaṇa of self, and so on." Third is the varieties of patience, meaning patience with extreme suffering and patience with continuous suffering, as the sūtra says: "Just as in the past when King Kali dismembered my body," and says: "I recall that in the past, for five hundred lifetimes, I was the hermit Kṣāntivādin," and so forth.

2.35

Under the second, the causes and conditions of non-endurance involve three [sufferings]: First is patience with the suffering of saṃsāra, meaning that through non-endurance one transmigrates in birth and death; to counteract this, [the Buddha] causes them to be free from all lakṣaṇas and give rise to the unexcelled mind, because if they abide in form and so forth, they will be exhausted in the suffering of saṃsāra and bodhicitta will not arise, as the sūtra says: "Therefore, Subhūti, a bodhisattva should give rise to the mind free from all lakṣaṇas," and so forth. Second is patience with the suffering of opposition from sentient beings, as the sūtra says: "A bodhisattva should practice dāna in this way to benefit all sentient beings," and so forth, meaning that since one practices non-abiding dāna for the sake of sentient beings, how could one give rise to anger toward them? Third is revealing the antidote to the cause and condition of patience with the suffering of lacking enjoyment, as the sūtra says: "Subhūti, if a bodhisattva's mind abides in dharmas when practicing dāna," and so forth, meaning that if one grasps at the karmic reward and the like when giving, one will then experience deficiency in what one obtains and uses; if one practices non-abiding dāna, pointing to the example of empty space, the precious jewels are immeasurable.

2.36

"Subhūti, the Tathāgata is a speaker of truth, a speaker of reality, a speaker of suchness, a speaker of non-deception, and a speaker of non-alteration."

2.37

The commentary says: According to Vasubandhu's commentary, this refutes the second doubt. A doubt arose, saying: "Earlier it was said that an animitta cause attains an animitta fruit, yet within the realization of the fruit there is no path; how can that [cause] serve as a cause for the fruit? The meaning of this text is: since the realized Dharma is animitta, how can practices such as empty quiescence and non-abiding serve as a cause?" It is to sever this doubt [that this is stated]. This text has two parts: first, clarifying non-false speech; second, dispelling external attachments. This is the first.

2.38

The treatise states that because of the Tathāgata's knowledge of reality, he does not speak falsely; the Buddha's bodhi, the Hīnayāna, the Mahāyāna, and matters of receiving prophecies are all spoken without falsity. Because of these four objects, he sequentially speaks the four statements. In this present sūtra, "speaker of non-deception" is added.

2.39

Asaṅga says: What does this demonstrate? It is intended to cause them to have faith in the Tathāgata so that they can endure. Herein, "speaker of truth" is to reveal the lakṣaṇa of saṃvṛtisatya. "Speaker of reality" is to reveal that the cultivation of saṃvṛtisatya has lakṣaṇas of defilement and purification; within that, what is real is that this practice is defilement and this practice is purification. "Speaker of suchness" is for the sake of the lakṣaṇa of paramārthasatya. "Speaker of non-alteration" is because cultivation in paramārthasatya has lakṣaṇas of defilement and purification, that he speaks this truth. The general meaning here is: The Tathāgata is the sole honored one in the three realms, the teacher of devas and humans; since he is the master of the dharmadhātu and acts as the physician for the five destinies, having cast off the supreme ornaments of the householder like discarded sandals, and abandoned the great throne of a cakravartin, his Way attained complete awakening and whatever he wished was accomplished. Since he neither aims for fame and gain, nor seeks comfort and pleasure, why would he suddenly utter false speech?

2.40

"Subhūti, as for the Dharma attained by the Tathāgata, this Dharma is neither real nor unreal."

2.41

The commentary says: This second [part] dispels external attachments. "The Dharma attained by the Tathāgata" refers to the principle realized. "Neither real" means that it cannot be grasped as real according to words. "Nor unreal" means that it also cannot be sought separately apart from words. Because it is not unreal, one cultivates and learns in reliance on the Buddha's teaching; because it is not real, one leaves behind false conceptualization and realizes the true. That is to say, because what ordinary beings grasp through false conceptualization does not exist, it is not real; because the Tathāgata speaks free of false conceptualization, it is not unreal.

2.42

"Subhūti, if a bodhisattva's mind abides in dharmas when practicing dāna, it is like a person entering darkness, who sees nothing. If a bodhisattva's mind does not abide in dharmas when practicing dāna, it is like a person with eyes in the shining light of the sun, who sees all kinds of forms."

2.43

The commentary says: Vasubandhu's commentary states that this refutes the third doubt. A doubt arose, saying: "If noble ones take their name from asaṃskṛta tathatā, and that tathatā exists at all times and places, why is it through a non-abiding mind? Attaining the Buddha's bodhi would then not be non-abiding. If tathatā truly exists at all times and places, why is it that some can attain it, while others cannot?" To sever this doubt, he speaks the simile of entering darkness and so forth. Herein there are two parts: first, clarifying that abiding in things is the cause of saṃsāra; second, revealing that non-abiding is supramundane activity. This is the first. The verse says:
"Although existing truly in time and space,
Yet tathatā is not attained;
Being without wisdom due to abiding in dharmas,
The others, possessing wisdom, attain it."
The meaning here is: "Although tathatā truly exists at all times and places, because they lack wisdom and their minds abide in dharmas, they do not understand how to transcend, just like entering darkness, not knowing where one is going. And not attaining it—those who do attain it are described inversely to this."

2.44

Asaṅga's commentary states that this is to reveal the antidote to the third [cause], the causes and conditions of patience with the suffering of lacking enjoyment.

2.45

"Subhūti, in future ages, if there are good sons or good daughters who can receive, uphold, read, and recite this sūtra, then they will be fully known by the Tathāgata with the Buddha's wisdom, and fully seen by him, and they will all accomplish immeasurable and boundless merit."

2.46

The commentary says: Vasubandhu states that within the fourth [part], comparative evaluation, of the third section, the distinct refutation of the three doubts above is now completed. Next, within the second [part], the direct comparative evaluation: first is the comparison of superior and inferior; next, from "In brief" onward, is the explanation of the reason. Within the former there are two: first, clarifying that the merit of practicing the three kinds of practice is exceedingly vast; second, presenting examples for comparative evaluation. This is the first. The three kinds of practice are: first, receiving; second, upholding; third, reading and reciting.

2.47

Asaṅga says: From here below is the fourteenth [ādhāra], for abandoning the relish of quiescence, which is the tenth among the twelve [ādhāras for] abandoning obstacles, which is for abandoning the lack of the provision of wisdom. That is, there are those who indulge in dhyāna-concentration and are unwilling to listen and cultivate wisdom, resulting in a lack of the provision of wisdom; now they are instructed to receive, uphold, read, and recite to generate wisdom, so that they may then attain bodhi. Because concentration is a gateway of merit, it merely assists the path.

2.48

Within this, the text has five [sections], which show that being in accord with the Dharma possesses five kinds of superior merit: first, being remembered and drawn near to by the Tathāgata, as in the sūtra passage: 'receiving, upholding, reading, reciting, and practicing, they are known by the Tathāgata with the Buddha’s wisdom,' and so forth; second, embracing merit, as in the sūtra passage: 'they will all attain and accomplish an immeasurable and boundless accumulation of merit,' and so forth; third, praising the Dharma and its practice, as in the sūtra passage: 'in brief, this sūtra possesses inconceivable,' and so forth; fourth, receiving offerings from devas and others, as in the sūtra passage: 'wherever this sūtra is located,' and so forth; fifth, eliminating transgressions, as in the sūtra passage: 'if someone who receives, upholds, reads, and recites this sūtra is despised by others,' up to 'will attain,' and so forth. This, then, is the first text. That is to say, those who receive, uphold, read, and recite this sūtra provide the true cause for the direct recompense of bodhi; it is the offering of true Dharma, which no offering of mundane wealth and jewels to the Tathāgatas can equal. Because of this, the Tathāgata constantly knows such persons with Buddha-wisdom, constantly sees such persons with the Buddha-eye, and draws near to and remembers them.

2.49

"Subhūti, if a good man or good woman in the morning were to give their bodies in charity as many times as the sands of the Ganges, and in the middle of the day were again to give their bodies in charity as many times as the sands of the Ganges, and in the afternoon were also to give their bodies in charity as many times as the sands of the Ganges, and gave their bodies in charity in this way for immeasurable hundreds of thousands of koṭis of kalpas; yet if another person hears this scripture with faithful mind and does not oppose it, their merit surpasses that [former], not to mention copying, receiving, upholding, reading, reciting, and explaining it to others!"

2.50

Commentary: Vasubandhu explains: this adduces facts to draw a comparison. Within it, first, it shows that giving one's life is exceedingly great; second, it reveals that the merit of having faith in the sūtra is superior. Renouncing one's body at the three periods of the day is a hypothetical assumption. 'With faithful mind and does not oppose it' means that if a person hears this scripture, even though they have not yet been able to receive, uphold, read, and recite it, if they merely generate pure faith and rejoice in its merit, by comparison, their merit surpasses the former. Why is this so? It is because, although one renounces one's body and life within saṃsāra, in the end one cannot thereby accord with the dharmakāya of bodhi; yet if one generates faith for a single lifetime, even though one has not yet produced the understanding of wisdom, nevertheless, because of that faith, one consequently listens, gives rise to and grows wisdom, and is certain to attain Buddhahood. Therefore, that merit is immense, because a mind of compliance has already arisen.

2.51

"Subhūti, in brief, this sūtra possesses inconceivable, incalculable, boundless merit. The Tathāgata has spoken it for those who have set out on the Great Vehicle; he has spoken it for those who have set out on the Supreme Vehicle."

2.52

Commentary: Vasubandhu says: from here down, the second part explains the reasons, within which there are six points. First, it displays the Dharma that is rarely heard yet capable of generating faith, meaning that those of great capacity can enter while those of small capacity cannot, as in the sūtra passage: 'in brief,' and so forth. Second, it displays the receiving and upholding of the true, sublime Dharma, meaning that receiving and upholding the sublime Dharma is just shouldering bodhi, as in the sūtra passage: 'such persons,' and so forth. Third, it displays that such persons are certain to accomplish immeasurable merit, meaning that wherever this sūtra is located, it is worthy of veneration, as in the sūtra passage: 'wherever,' and so forth. Fourth, it displays being far removed from all obstacles, meaning the overturning of obstacles, as in the sūtra passage: 'if someone who receives, upholds, reads, and recites this sūtra is despised by others,' and so forth. Fifth, it clarifies the swift realization of the Buddha's Dharma of bodhi, as in the sūtra passage: 'if another person in the final era,' and so forth. Sixth, it displays the accomplishment of various powers to attain the great, sublime fruit, meaning that it clarifies the mighty power of the sūtra, as in the sūtra passage: 'a good woman in the final era,' and so forth.

2.53

Within the first, there are two parts: first, revealing the greatness of the sūtra's virtue; second, the perfection of the merit of upholding and reciting it. This is the first. 'Inconceivable' means it cannot be deliberated by mundane thought. 'Incalculable' means it cannot be expressed or stated in words. 'Spoken for those of the Great Vehicle' means those with determinate Great Vehicle nature. 'Spoken for those of the Supreme Vehicle' means those with indeterminate Great Vehicle nature, who also possess the nature of the two vehicles. This sublime Dharma is exceedingly difficult to measure; the aspirations of the Small Vehicle are inferior, and they cannot set out toward this sūtra. Therefore it says it is spoken for those who set out on the Great Vehicle.

2.54

Asaṅga says: within this praise of the Dharma and its practice, there are three points: first, praising the teaching of the Dharma; second, praising the practitioners; third, from 'if one delights in lesser dharmas' downward, clarifying both together. This is the first, praising the Dharma. 'Spoken for those who have set out on the Great Vehicle' and so forth completes the previous 'inconceivable,' and so on.

2.55

"If there is anyone who can receive, uphold, read, recite, and explain it extensively to others, the Tathāgata fully knows this person, fully sees this person, and they all attain and accomplish inestimable, incalculable, boundless, inconceivable merit."

2.56

Commentary: Vasubandhu says: this is the second part, clarifying the perfection of the merit of upholding and reciting. It means that, because this Dharma is spoken for the Great Vehicle, those who receive, uphold, and so forth are certain to obtain the inconceivable merit of unexcelled bodhi; therefore, producing even a little faith in it surpasses the renunciation of many bodies and lives.

2.57

Asaṅga says: within this second part, praising the practitioners, there are three sections: first, being embraced by the Buddha due to upholding, reciting, and so on; second, clarifying that this person accomplishes superior virtues; third, clarifying the shouldering of the heavy burden of bodhi. These are the first two texts.

2.58

"Such persons, then, shoulder the Tathāgata's anuttarā samyaksaṃbodhi."

2.59

Commentary: Vasubandhu says: this is the second point, displaying the receiving and upholding of the true, sublime Dharma. Within it, first, it shows that those of great capacity who uphold and recite it shoulder bodhi; second, it shows that those of the two vehicles and ordinary beings cannot listen to and receive it. This is the first. Those who receive and uphold it will be able to realize and attain bodhi; although they have not yet attained it at present, they will certainly attain it in the future, and therefore it is called 'shouldering.' He means carrying upon the shoulder, and dan means bearing a burden: it means that those who receive and uphold it bear and carry the attainment of bodhi.

2.60

"Why is this? Subhūti, if one who delights in lesser dharmas is attached to the view of a self, the view of a person, the view of a sentient being, or the view of a soul, then regarding this sūtra, they cannot listen to, receive, read, recite, or explain it to others."

2.61

Commentary: Vasubandhu says: this is the second text. 'Those who delight in lesser dharmas' refers to the two vehicles; 'attached to a self' and so forth refers to ordinary beings.

2.62

Asaṅga says: this is the third major text, clarifying both preceding points together.

2.63

"Subhūti, wherever this sūtra is located, all worldly realms, devas, humans, and asuras should make offerings to it. You should know that this place is a stūpa, and all should pay reverence, make prostrations, circumambulate it, and scatter various flowers and incense at that place."

2.64

Commentary: Vasubandhu says: the third is that wherever it is located, it is worthy of veneration.

2.65

Asaṅga says: this is the fourth, receiving offerings from devas and others.

2.66

"Furthermore, Subhūti, if a good man or good woman receives, upholds, reads, and recites this sūtra, and if they are despised by others, this person has sinful karma from previous lives that ought to cause them to fall into the evil destinies; but because they are despised by others in the present life, the sinful karma from previous lives is extinguished, and they will attain anuttarā samyaksaṃbodhi."

2.67

Commentary: Vasubandhu says: this is the fourth point, the overturning of obstacles. As explained in the Abhidharmasamuccaya, there are five kinds of karma created with intention: first, by command of another, where one has no personal joy; second, by solicitation of another, where one acts hesitantly; third, through lack of understanding, such as infants and animals; fourth, out of fundamental attachment, where one acts knowing it is an offense, mostly like monastics; fifth, through inverted conceptualization, where one acts without recognizing it, mostly like householders. The karma created by the first three does not necessarily lead to hell; the karma created by the latter two definitely leads to hell. The karma of the latter two, once created, must be experienced. Because of being able to receive, uphold, read, and recite this sūtra, former heavy karma is overturned into being despised and disparaged by others in the present life, and the karma that should have led to falling into the evil destinies is thereby completely extinguished. This applies to those who receive and uphold it with a middling mind. If someone upholds and recites it with an elevated mind, the transgressions are extinguished all at once without even being despised by others, turning the heavy into the light. If someone receives and upholds it with an inferior mind, their transgressions are not necessarily extinguished. Another explanation: if both time and retribution are indefinite, it is entirely extinguished; if retribution is definite but time is indefinite, that which should be experienced in the future is overturned to be experienced lightly in the present life. Because of this, even receiving it with slight faith yields merit greater than the former renunciation of bodies and lives.

2.68

Asaṅga says: this is the fifth, the elimination of transgressions. Within it, there are three parts: first, clarifying the elimination of transgressions; second, showing great merit from 'in the final era' onward; third, showing that the essence and fruit of the merit cannot be measured from 'you should know this sūtra' onward. Within the first, there are two parts: first, clarifying the elimination of transgressions; second, showing mighty power from 'I remember the past' onward. This is the first. Because of hearing, upholding, and reciting this sūtra, one relies on practicing non-conceptual wisdom to realize the principle of the two emptinesses, and the two hindrances are completely eradicated, which is called true elimination of transgressions. Through delusion, conceptualization gives rise to bad karma and sins; if one hears the sūtra and attains wisdom, cutting off conceptualization, this means that sins arise from the mind and are extinguished from the mind as well. Because by upholding this sūtra one will attain the true elimination of transgressions, in the present one also converts the heavy into light retributions.

2.69

"Subhūti, I remember that in the past, immeasurable asaṃkhyeya kalpas ago, before Dīpaṅkara Buddha, I met eight hundred and four thousand myriad koṭis of nayutas of Buddhas, and I made offerings to and attended upon all of them without passing one by in vain."

2.70

Commentary: This is based on Vasubandhu's fifth text, the swift realization of the Buddha's Dharma of bodhi. Within it, first, it adduces the merit he attained himself; second, it compares the virtue of others receiving and upholding it. This is the first. An asaṃkhyeya kalpa: the Small Vehicle teaching says that from one to ten, ten tens make a hundred, ten hundreds make a thousand, ten thousands make a myriad, and ten myriads make a koṭi; accumulating numbers through sixty such stages is called one asaṃkhyeya. Now the Great Vehicle, following the Avataṃsaka, accumulates numbers through one hundred and twenty stages to make one asaṃkhyeya, continuing with myriad myriads making a koṭi, and koṭi koṭis making a trillion, and so on.

2.71

'Before Dīpaṅkara Buddha' refers to before the third asaṃkhyeya [kalpa], because at the beginning of the third asaṃkhyeya he encountered Dīpaṅkara Buddha. A nayuta is a number of ten million. It means that before Dīpaṅkara Buddha, he met eight hundred and four thousand myriad koṭis of nayuta Buddhas, and among them he made offerings to and attended upon each and every one without passing any in vain. However, this is only that number and does not speak of Ganges sands, which means that the Buddhas encountered were very few. This is only speaking according to the Buddhas encountered during a single stage, two stages, and so forth; it does not mean that throughout the previous two asaṃkhyeyas he only encountered that many Buddhas. And according to the old traditions handed down, Śākyamuni Buddha encountered five Ganges sands of Buddhas in the first asaṃkhyeya, six Ganges sands of Buddhas in the second asaṃkhyeya, and seven Ganges sands of Buddhas in the third asaṃkhyeya. If so, he encountered immeasurable Buddhas during the first two asaṃkhyeyas; why would it be only that many? Thus we know this is spoken only according to what was encountered during a particular period of time.

2.72

Furthermore, the Nirvāṇa [Sūtra] says that a bodhisattva of the first reliance encounters five Ganges sands of Buddhas, the second reliance six Ganges sands, up to the bodhisattva of the fourth reliance encountering eight Ganges sands of Buddhas; the fourth reliance is the tenth-bhūmi bodhisattva. Therefore we know that during two asaṃkhyeyas one encounters immeasurable Buddhas. However, the Sarvāstivāda school says that in the first asaṃkhyeya he encountered 75,000 Buddhas, in the second asaṃkhyeya 76,000 Buddhas, and in the third asaṃkhyeya 77,000 Buddhas.

2.73

Asaṅga says: This reveals the power, meaning that it is distantly transcendent, exalted, and superior, hence it is called 'power'. Within this there are two [sections]; this is the first passage.

2.74

"If, moreover, there is a person in the latter, final era who can receive, uphold, read, and recite this sūtra, the merit acquired by them, compared to the merit of my making offerings to all those Buddhas, does not equal one hundredth part, nor a thousandth part, nor a ten-thousandth part, nor a hundred-millionth part, up to being beyond what any calculation or metaphor can reach."

2.75

Commentary: Vasubandhu explains that this is the second [section], which makes a comparison using the merit of another person's receiving and upholding [the sūtra]. That is to say, making offerings to all Buddhas is merely an approach of merit, an auxiliary dharma to bodhi; whereas listening to, upholding, and reciting [this sūtra] can give rise to wisdom and understanding, tearing apart saṃsāra. That is, even though a bodhisattva may engage in hundreds of thousands of other practices, if they do not cultivate the prajñāpāramitā, they will ultimately never be able to comprehend principles, realize tathatā, or cut off the root of conceptualized saṃsāra. Therefore, by listening to it, one swiftly realizes bodhi.

2.76

Asaṅga says: This passage is the second passage.

2.77

"Subhūti! If a good man or good woman in the latter, final era receives, upholds, reads, and recites this sūtra, were I to speak fully of the merit they acquire, there might be someone who, upon hearing it, would become frenzied in mind, harbor suspicions, and not believe it."

2.78

Commentary: This is Vasubandhu's sixth passage. Within it, first, it explains that its force and power are vast, so that hearing it one might harbor suspicions; second, it reveals that the result obtained is wondrous and not a realm of cognitive reckoning. This is the first.

2.79

The meaning here is that from beginningless time, with minds bent on killing, stealing, and so forth toward all sentient beings, performing karma of killing, stealing, and the like, becoming their enemies and causing them harm—yet upon once hearing or once reading this sūtra, generating the bodhicitta, they permanently eliminate enmity and harm, forever having no thoughts of killing or stealing toward all sentient beings, acting as father and mother to all sentient beings, ferrying them across and instructing them, constantly serving as an excellent friend through expedient means; joining with them as relatives while practicing filial piety and righteousness; manifesting as friends while practicing consummate trust; manifesting as ministers and aides while possessing loyalty and goodness; manifesting as rulers while employing expedient means to comfort and rescue them; up to manifesting as men, women, or the lowly. If becoming an elder, they are the most venerable among elders, as extensively explained regarding their conduct in the Vimalakīrtinirdeśa; in the future they will achieve buddhahood with inexhaustible merit, able to exhaust the future in transforming categories of sentient beings. Because such vast and boundless merit is generated merely through hearing [this sūtra], therefore, were it to be spoken of fully, foolish ordinary beings lacking wisdom might, upon hearing it, become frenzied or suspicious. 'Frenzied in mind' means that either upon hearing the sūtra they do not believe it and instead give rise to hatred and slander because of being frenzied; or, due to their disbelief, in the future they will incur the karmic result of madness.

2.80

Asaṅga says: This is the third [section], revealing great merit. Within it there are also two [parts]: first, explaining that the merit is vast and difficult to believe, so that hearing it one might become frenzied or suspicious; second, explaining that the fruit of merit is extremely profound and impossible to measure. This is the first.

2.81

"Subhūti! You should know that the meaning of this sūtra is inconceivable, and its fruit and retribution are also inconceivable."

2.82

Commentary: This is the second passage. That is to say, the sūtra expresses the meaning of the signless (animitta), and those who uphold it will obtain the great fruit of bodhi; since the doctrinal meaning is itself difficult to measure, the retribution of its fruit is likewise difficult to conceive. Therefore, a sūtra says that there are three things which are fine when concealed but bad when exposed: foolish people, the scriptures of non-Buddhists, and women; and there are three things which are fine when exposed but bad when concealed: wise people, the scriptures of the Buddha's Dharma, and the sun and moon. That is, before this prajñā is unrolled, it is no different from external texts; but once unrolled, whether expounded or read, it can destroy hundreds of thousands of sinful obstacles of sentient beings and enable them to attain bodhi. Therefore, the merit of those who receive and uphold it is exceedingly great—even relinquishing many bodies and lives cannot compare to it.

2.83

At that time, Subhūti said to the Buddha: "Bhagavat! When good men and good women generate the mind for anuttarā samyaksaṃbodhi, how should they abide, and how should they subdue their minds?"

2.84

Commentary: Vasubandhu says that this is the second cycle of exposition. That is to say, previously, those who had not yet understood generating the mind were taught to proceed and generate it; those who had not yet understood practice were taught to practice; and those who had not yet been able to subdue and sever the obstacles were taught how to subdue them completely. Now, this cycle is for bodhisattvas who have already generated the mind, yet say, 'I am able to generate the mind,' up to the third [group], those who have already severed the obstacles, yet say, 'I am able to sever them.' Because of generating such conceptual discrimination, it obstructs bodhi. Conceptual discrimination refers to the cognitive obstacle (jñeyāvaraṇa), which directly obstructs the non-abiding path. That is, when generating the mind, practicing, and so forth, if one implicitly accords with the true reality through non-conceptual wisdom without generating discrimination and saying 'I am able to do so,' this is called the non-abiding path, because one abides neither in saṃsāra nor in nirvāṇa. If there is discrimination, then it is not realization, and hence it is called an obstacle.

2.85

Therefore, the two vehicles possess attachment to dharmas, and being bound by nirvāṇa, they immediately take hold of quiescence; ordinary beings possess attachment to birth, and being bound by saṃsāra, they cannot escape. Bodhisattvas are endowed with great compassion and wisdom, and therefore are not bound by the two extremes; hence they are called 'non-abiding'. If one practices yet has attachment, then one is bound by nirvāṇa; if one does not practice yet has attachment, one is bound by saṃsāra, and this is called 'having an abiding'. One must blaze forth in practicing the three while not giving rise to the attachment of 'I am able', before one can abide in the non-abiding path.

2.86

Alternatively, the former was for initial capacities and sharp capacities, while the latter is for subsequent capacities and dull capacities. Within this, first, the doctrine itself is directly elucidated; second, below 'Dīpaṃkara Buddha', various doubts are extensively resolved. In the first part there are two: first, Subhūti poses the question; second, the Tathāgata provides the answer. This is the first.

2.87

Asaṅga says: This is the fifteenth [topic], to keep far away from joy and agitation at the time of realizing the path; that is, within the ādhāra of leaving obstacles, it is the eleventh, to keep far away from grasping onto oneself, which is why there is this passage. That is, when the bodhisattva generates the mind and practices, they perceive their own superior attainment and think, 'I am able to generate the mind, practice,' and so on, thus grasping onto themselves as superior and saying others are not; in order to cause them to be far removed from this grasping, it is called 'keeping far away from grasping onto oneself'.

2.88

The Buddha told Subhūti: "Those good men and good women who generate the mind for anuttarā samyaksaṃbodhi should give rise to such a mind: 'I must bring all sentient beings to final nirvāṇa. Yet when all sentient beings have been brought to final nirvāṇa, not a single sentient being has in reality been brought to final nirvāṇa.' Why is this? Subhūti! If a bodhisattva has the mark of a self, the mark of a person, the mark of a sentient being, or the mark of a soul, then they are not a bodhisattva."

2.89

Commentary: Vasubandhu says that within this answer of the Buddha, first, he answers the first question, taking it as an example for the other two by citing one corner; second, he explains the meaning of violating non-abiding. This is the first.

2.90

The meaning here is that generating the mind, practicing, and so forth were originally intended to remove sickness, but if self-grasping persists, the sickness only grows further. The intention is that although one generates the mind, inwardly one obliterates the self and does not think 'I am able'; the same applies to practice, and subduing is likewise by analogy. Hence he answers the first question, causing the rest to be understood by analogy. However, in this passage, according with what was stated earlier, there are also four minds: saying 'I must bring to final nirvāṇa' is the first mind; 'all sentient beings' is the vast mind; the remaining two can be easily understood by examining the text in accordance with this.

2.91

Asaṅga explains: Within this, the preceding three questions are answered. That is, 'should give rise to such a mind' answers the first question. 'Yet when all sentient beings have been brought to final nirvāṇa, not a single sentient being has in reality been brought to final nirvāṇa' answers the second question, meaning that when liberating sentient beings, one does not give rise to grasping onto oneself by saying 'I am able to do so'; it is essential that externally one does not construct the mark of having sentient beings, and internally one does not give rise to the attachment of 'I am able', liberating sentient beings while according with true reality—only then is it called 'practice'. 'If a bodhisattva has the mark of a self, and so on' answers the third question: one must realize the principle of the two emptinesses of persons and dharmas so that the two obstacles can be removed—only then is it called 'subduing'; if one says 'I am able', then one does not accord and unite with it.

2.92

"Why is this? Subhūti! In reality there is no dharma that generates the mind for anuttarā samyaksaṃbodhi."

2.93

Commentary: Vasubandhu says: This explains the meaning of obstructing the non-abiding path. That is, at the time of inward realization through non-conceptual wisdom, self and dharmas are fundamentally empty and completely non-existent, and one does not make the thought 'I am able to generate the mind'; therefore it is said that there is no dharma that generates the mind.

2.94

"Subhūti! What do you think? Did the Tathāgata, in the presence of Dīpaṃkara Buddha, have any dharma by which he attained anuttarā samyaksaṃbodhi, or not?"

2.95

Commentary: Vasubandhu says: Within this second part, extensively refuting various doubts, there are six [doubts]. The first doubt says: 'Since it is said that in reality there is no dharma called a bodhisattva, how did the Tathāgata Śākyamuni, in the presence of Dīpaṃkara Buddha, make offerings with flowers and spread his hair to cover the mud, practicing the bodhisattva path in such a manner?' The second, below 'Subhūti! A bodhisattva is also like this,' doubts: 'If there are no bodhisattvas, then Buddhas also do not achieve great bodhi, and sentient beings also do not enter great nirvāṇa, and so forth. If that is the case, for what purpose does a bodhisattva generate the mind wishing to cause sentient beings to enter nirvāṇa and so forth?' These two kinds of doubts arise on the basis of the earlier direct elucidation of the doctrine itself. Below there are four doubts that arise sequentially from resolving doubts, which will be understood below. This [passage] is precisely to refute the first doubt, and within it there are three [sections].

2.96

First, it refutes the slander that there are no bodhisattvas. That is, someone thinks: 'If in reality there is no dharma that generates the bodhicitta, then there are no bodhisattvas; how could the Tathāgata have practiced the bodhisattva path in the presence of Dīpaṃkara Buddha?' as the sūtra says: 'the Tathāgata, in the presence of Dīpaṃkara Buddha,' and so forth.

2.97

Second, it is to eliminate the slander that there are no Buddhas. The treatise says: 'If there are no bodhisattvas, who becomes a Buddha? In that case, there would also be no Buddhas.' Therefore the treatise says: 'If there are no bodhisattvas, then there are no Buddhas.' There is such a slander, claiming that there are unequivocally no Buddhas, as the sūtra says: '"Tathāgata" means the reality of all dharmas,' and so forth.

2.98

Third, it is to refute the slander that there is no bodhi. The treatise says: 'If there are no Buddhas, then there is no bodhi that can be attained, and Buddhas do not attain bodhi,' as the sūtra says: 'The anuttarā samyaksaṃbodhi attained by the Tathāgata is, in this, neither real nor unreal,' and so forth.

2.99

Within the former there are three parts: first, the Buddha questions; second, Subhūti answers; third, the Buddha ratifies. This is the first question. Bodhisattva Asaṅga says that this is the sixteenth [topic], for seeking instruction; that is, within the ādhāra of leaving obstacles, it is the twelfth, for leaving the lack of instruction. That is, if it was previously said that in reality there is no dharma called a bodhisattva, what did he seek in the presence of Dīpaṃkara Buddha? There would also be no verbal teaching that could be sought or heard; to leave this obstacle, this text is present. Within this, the text has five parts: first, to leave the lack of instruction, as the sūtra says: 'the Tathāgata, in the presence of Dīpaṃkara Buddha,' and so forth; second, explaining that bodhi cannot be spoken of, and Dīpaṃkara Buddha's words did not correspond to bodhi, because it is not as words express, as the sūtra says: 'if there were a dharma that the Tathāgata attained,' and so forth; third, explaining the meaning of all dharmas being beyond words, as the sūtra says: '"Tathāgata" means the reality of all dharmas,' and so forth; fourth, there being those who say that Śākyamuni did not attain bodhi in the presence of Dīpaṃkara Buddha, but later attained proper enlightenment on his own—in order to leave this grasping, the sūtra says: 'if someone says the Tathāgata attained bodhi,' and so forth; fifth, revealing that tathatā is non-dual, as the sūtra says: 'Subhūti! That which is attained by the Tathāgata,' and so forth. In the former there are also three parts, matching Vasubandhu's division; this is the first question.

First 99 of 348 passages. Read on

Linked texts (1)

金剛般若經贊述 — Classical Chinese