English (machine translation)
Translation of 金剛般若波羅蜜經註解
- Language
- English
- Extent
- 294 passages, 17,683 words
- Text
- complete digital text
- Source
- pramana-mt · Machine translation by Gemini 3.8 Flash (2026-10-21) of in.bauddha.taisho.1703 · Machine output without human authorship: no copyright is claimed (CC0 1.0). The original text keeps its own…
Contents
- 1 — 294 parts
Text
1.1
Translated under imperial order by Tripiṭaka Master Kumārajīva of the Later Qin
1.2
Annotated together under imperial order by the subject monk Zongle, Abbot of the Great Ming Tianjie Shanshi Chan Monastery, and the subject monk Ruqi, Abbot of Yanfu Lecture Monastery
1.3
This sūtra takes metaphor and dharma as its title, the true mark as its substance, non-abiding as its fundamental principle, the severing of doubts as its function, and the Mahāyāna as its doctrinal character.
1.4
First, explaining the title 'metaphor and dharma': 'Vajra' is the metaphor; 'prajñā' is the dharma. The most refined diamond among metals is supremely hard and supremely sharp, able to crush all things. This sūtra is able to cut through the doubts and attachments of sentient beings; taking this as a metaphor, the sixteen sections of the Pañcaviṃśatisāhasrikā Prajñāpāramitā name this sūtra the 'Section That Can Sever'.
1.5
'Pāramitā' is Sanskrit, translated into Chinese as 'arrived at the other shore'. Sentient beings in the sea of birth and death have no end to it; practicing this prajñā, they reach the other shore of nirvāṇa. Because the Mahāyāna bodhisattva realizes that birth and death are themselves nirvāṇa, it is crossing over without crossing over, arriving without arriving.
1.6
As for 'sūtra' (jing), it glosses both 'standard' (fa) and 'constant' (chang). In Sanskrit it is 'sūtra', translated here as 'tallying scripture' (qijing), meaning that it tallies with principle and tallies with capacity.
1.7
Second, discriminating the substance of the true mark: it is precisely the principle of the one true mark. The sūtra says: 'If a person hears this sūtra, they will instantly give rise to the true mark.'
1.8
Third, clarifying non-abiding as the fundamental principle: 'fundamental principle' means the essential point. The sūtra says: 'One should have nothing on which to abide.' The sūtra frequently uses non-abiding to shatter attachment; therefore it takes non-abiding as its fundamental principle.
1.9
Fourth, discussing the severing of doubts as the function: because the power and function of the sūtra can sever deluded attachments, it takes the severing of doubts as its function.
1.10
Fifth, judging the Mahāyāna as its doctrinal character: the sūtra says, 'Spoken for those who set out upon the supreme vehicle.' Therefore it takes the Mahāyāna as its doctrinal character.
1.11
This sūtra was translated by Tripiṭaka Master Kumārajīva of the Later Qin. Its division into thirty-two sections is traditionally said to have been established by Crown Prince Zhaoming of the Liang; it is absent from early translations, differs from the analytical outlines of the original treatises, and fractures the meaning of the sūtra, so it is not adopted here. The present commentary is based on the treatises of Vasubandhu and others, taking their meaning without using all of their words, because their language is deep and difficult, so as to facilitate beginning students.
1.12
Thus have I heard: At one time the Buddha was staying in Śrāvastī, at the Jetavana Anāthapiṇḍadārāma, together with a great assembly of bhikṣus, twelve hundred and fifty in all.
1.13
'Thus' refers to the substance of the Dharma heard throughout the whole sūtra.
1.14
'Have I heard': Ānanda says that this Dharma was heard by me from the Buddha.
1.15
'At one time' is the time when the Tathāgata's teaching and the capacities [of beings] harmoniously joined.
1.16
'Buddha' means 'awakened'. The Buddha is the Lord of the Teachings; being supremely venerated, he is called 'Buddha'.
1.17
'Śrāvastī' is the name of a kingdom, translated into Chinese as 'abundant virtue'.
1.18
As for 'Jetavana Anāthapiṇḍadārāma': Prince Jeta gave the trees and the elder Anāthapiṇḍada purchased the grove; together they established the vihāra and invited the Buddha to dwell there. This is the place of preaching the Dharma.
1.19
'Together with a great assembly of bhikṣus' are the companions who heard the Dharma. 'Bhikṣu' is Sanskrit, translated into Chinese as 'alms-seeker': above, seeking the Dharma to sustain the life of wisdom; below, seeking food to sustain the physical body.
1.20
'Twelve hundred and fifty in all': these disciples always followed and attended the Buddha wherever he preached the Dharma.
1.21
These six matters above precede all sūtras and are called the general preface. When the Tathāgata was approaching parinirvāṇa, Ānanda asked the Buddha: 'What words should be placed at the head of all sūtras?' The Buddha said: 'You should place words such as "Thus have I heard". Not only is my Dharma thus, but the Dharma of all buddhas of the three periods of time is thus.'
1.22
Then, at mealtime, the Bhagavat donned his robes, took his bowl, and entered the great city of Śrāvastī to beg for food in that city. Having begged from house to house, he returned to his original place. Having finished his meal, he put away his robes and bowl, washed his feet, spread his seat, and sat down.
1.23
This is the specific preface, also called the initiating preface. It uses begging for food as the initiation because the Buddha wished to preach giving without marks of abiding, and so first begged for food to manifest and express it. Moreover, although the Buddha takes the joy of dhyāna and the bliss of Dharma as his food, his going begging shows him to be identical with ordinary monks, wishing to cause them to break the banner of pride in themselves and produce merits in others.
1.24
'Then' means at that time.
1.25
'Bhagavat' is one of the ten titles venerated by the world.
1.26
'Mealtime' is the hour of the dragon (chen, 7:00–9:00 a.m.).
1.27
'Donned his robes' means putting on the saṃghāṭī robe.
1.28
'Took his bowl' means holding the vessel of appropriate measure.
1.29
'Begged from house to house': the Buddha's mind is impartial, not choosing between rich and poor.
1.30
'Original place' means Anāthapiṇḍada's grove.
1.31
'Washed his feet': having finished eating, he washed his feet.
1.32
'Spread his seat and sat down' means spreading his sitting cloth and sitting cross-legged.
1.33
At that time the Elder Subhūti was in the great assembly. He immediately arose from his seat, bared his right shoulder, knelt with his right knee on the ground, joined his palms respectfully, and said to the Buddha: 'Rare, Bhagavat! The Tathāgata skillfully protects and keeps in mind the bodhisattvas, and skillfully entrusts the bodhisattvas.'
1.34
The Elder Subhūti is the person who initiates this sūtra. He is called 'Elder' because his virtue is great and his years are advanced. In Sanskrit, 'Subhūti'; in Chinese, 'Born of Emptiness' (Kong sheng), also called 'Good Manifestation' (Shan xian).
1.35
From 'arose from his seat' to 'respectfully' is the respectful etiquette for requesting the Dharma.
1.36
'Rare' is an expression praising the Buddha.
1.37
'Skillfully protects and keeps in mind' means that for the sake of protecting and keeping in mind present bodhisattvas whose faculties are mature, he grants them the power of wisdom to enable them to accomplish their own practice, and grants them the power of instruction to enable them to gather in sentient beings.
1.38
'Skillfully entrusts' means that for the sake of entrusting future bodhisattvas whose faculties are not yet mature, for those who have already attained the Mahāyāna, he causes them not to abandon it; for those who have not yet attained the Mahāyāna, he causes them to make superior progress.
1.39
Protecting, keeping in mind, and entrusting are precisely the 'rare' things. Of the greatness of the Buddha's virtue, nothing surpasses saving sentient beings; yet, although his intention was set upon saving sentient beings through prajñā, he had to wait for a formal request. Therefore Subhūti, seeing his countenance and knowing his intention, first praised him as rare and then made his request.
1.40
'Bhagavat, if good sons and good daughters generate the mind of anuttarā samyaksambodhi, how should they abide? How should they subdue their minds?'
1.41
This is the outset of the question. 'Anuttarā samyaksambodhi' is translated into Chinese as 'unexcelled, perfect, complete awakening'. The intent of the question is: since the Tathāgata protects, keeps in mind, and entrusts present and future bodhisattvas to bring them to the fruition of buddhahood, though these bodhisattvas have generated the resolve for the Way, vowed to save sentient beings, and seek to achieve the Buddha Way, they do not yet know how their minds should peacefully abide in the Mahāyāna, nor how they should subdue their deluded minds so as to reach the fruition of buddhahood without backsliding.
1.42
The Buddha said: 'Excellent, excellent! Subhūti, it is just as you have said: the Tathāgata skillfully protects and keeps in mind the bodhisattvas, and skillfully entrusts the bodhisattvas. Listen attentively now, and I will explain it for you. Good sons and good daughters who generate the mind of anuttarā samyaksambodhi should thus abide, should thus subdue their minds.' 'Yes, Bhagavat, we eagerly wish to hear.'
1.43
Since Subhūti had offered praise and asked the question, wonderfully conforming to the Buddha's mind, the Buddha approved him, saying: 'Excellent, excellent! I will explain it for you.' And he further gave an instruction: 'They should thus abide, should thus subdue their minds.' Subhūti immediately understood the Buddha's intention, and so responded affirmatively: 'We wish to hear this Dharma.'
1.44
However, the great essence of the whole sūtra is nothing other than Subhūti's questions on peacefully abiding in the Mahāyāna and subduing the deluded mind; and the method of cultivation that the Tathāgata replied with also does not go beyond the two practices of principle and phenomena, shattering attachments, and severing doubts, as seen fully in the text below.
1.45
The Buddha told Subhūti: 'All bodhisattva mahāsattvas should thus subdue their minds:'
1.46
Subhūti asked both about abiding and subduing, yet the Tathāgata only answered regarding subduing their minds because subduing the deluded mind necessarily entails abiding peacefully in the Mahāyāna; mentioning subduing subsumes abiding.
1.47
'As for all classes of sentient beings, whether born from eggs, born from a womb, born from moisture, or born apparitionally;'
1.48
Humans and animals possess all four kinds of birth; the devas, hell beings, and the intermediate state are solely born apparitionally; pretas encompass both womb and apparitional birth. All of these belong to the desire realm.
1.49
'whether having form,'
1.50
The devas of the form realm.
1.51
'or formless;'
1.52
The devas of the formless realm.
1.53
'whether with perception,'
1.54
The devas of the sphere of consciousness.
1.55
'or without perception;'
1.56
The devas of the sphere of nothingness.
1.57
'or neither with nor without perception—'
1.58
The devas of the sphere of neither-perception-nor-non-perception.
1.59
'I cause them all to enter nirvāṇa without remainder and be crossed over into extinction. When immeasurable, countless, and boundless sentient beings have thus been crossed over into extinction, in reality no sentient beings have attained extinction. 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 life-span, they are not a bodhisattva.'
1.60
This passage is the contemplation of principle practiced by the bodhisattva, which is complete with four minds: the vast mind, the superior mind, the constant mind, and the non-inverted mind. Maitreya's verse says: 'Vast, supreme, constant, / and their mind is non-inverted.' 'Supreme' is precisely the superior mind.
1.61
When the sūtra says, 'as many classes of sentient beings as there are,' the realm embraced is vast; this is the vast mind.
1.62
When it says, 'I will cause them all to enter nirvāṇa without remainder,' this is the supreme mind; nirvāṇa without remainder is precisely the Tathāgata's ultimate other shore.
1.63
When it says, 'yet in reality no sentient beings achieve extinction,' understanding that sentient beings and Buddhas are identical as suchness, this is the constant mind.
1.64
Being without [the marks of] a self, a person, a sentient being, or a life-span, this is the non-inverted mind.
1.65
If one has the four marks, they are called the four inversions. If one does not cause a single sentient being to attain extinction, or if one sees sentient beings as truly attaining extinction, then one has failed to thoroughly penetrate the original source, and consequently the four marks of a self, a person, a sentient being, and a life-span arise, so that one is not called a bodhisattva.
1.66
'Self' means falsely reckoning within the five aggregates that there is a self and what belongs to a self. 'Person' means falsely reckoning that I am born among humans, distinct from other realms of rebirth. 'Sentient being' means falsely reckoning that one is born through the combination of the five aggregates. 'Life-span' means falsely reckoning that I undergo a single period of karmic retribution. A single period of karmic retribution refers to a life-span whether long or short. These are all inverted false conceptions, also called the four views.
1.67
When a bodhisattva can use the wondrous wisdom of prajñā to illuminate and understand the emptiness of nature, so that fundamentally there are no four marks, this is called subduing their minds; otherwise, one is not a bodhisattva.
1.68
"Furthermore, Subhūti, a bodhisattva should practice giving without abiding in dharmas: that is to say, giving without abiding in form, and giving without abiding in sound, scent, taste, touch, or dharmas. Subhūti, a bodhisattva should practice giving in this way, not abiding in marks."
1.69
This section combines principle-contemplation with practical engagement: non-abiding is the principle-contemplation, and giving is the practical engagement.
1.70
'In dharmas' refers to the dharmas of the six sense-objects. 'Distributing' (bu) means universally; 'giving' (shi) means relinquishing. Among the six perfections and ten thousand practices cultivated by bodhisattvas, giving is the first perfection, which subsumes the remaining five perfections.
1.71
For giving has three kinds: giving of material support, giving of fearlessness, and giving of the Dharma. Giving of material support means giving wealth and goods to sustain the lives of others. Giving of fearlessness means observing the precepts so as not to harm those without enmity, and practicing patience so as not to retaliate against those with enmity. Giving of Dharma means tirelessly explaining the Dharma with vigor, explaining the Dharma with meditative concentration without missing the faculties [of listeners], and explaining the Dharma with wisdom without inversion. However, all giving does not go beyond the six sense-objects; what are called the six sense-objects are things such as couches, bedding, food and drink, and medicines. When worldly people practice giving, their minds hope for karmic reward, which is attachment to marks; when bodhisattvas practice giving, they thoroughly comprehend that the three wheels are fundamentally empty, and therefore they can avoid abiding in marks.
1.72
The three wheels refer to the giver, the recipient, and the gift given.
1.73
When the Buddha tells Subhūti, 'One should practice giving in this way without abiding in marks,' it is because he wishes for bodhisattvas to subdue their deluded minds.
1.74
"Why is this? If a bodhisattva practices giving without abiding in marks, their merit cannot be measured. Subhūti, what do you think? Can the space in the eastern direction be measured?" "No, Bhagavat." "Subhūti, can the space in the south, west, north, the four intermediate directions, above, and below be measured?" "No, Bhagavat." "Subhūti, when a bodhisattva practices giving without abiding in marks, the merit is also like this: it cannot be measured. Subhūti, a bodhisattva should simply abide as instructed."
1.75
This section anticipates someone suspecting: 'Since giving is divorced from marks, there is no karmic reward of merit.' Therefore the Buddha declares: 'The merit of giving divorced from marks is all the greater.' Because giving without abiding in marks accords with the emptiness of nature, and the emptiness of nature is boundless, the merit of giving is boundless; hence he adduces space in the ten directions as an analogy. The treatise says: 'Its meaning has three aspects: first, it pervades all places; second, it is broad, vast, high, and great; third, it is ultimate and inexhaustible.' The above concludes the answer to the questions on subduing and abiding.
1.76
1. Severing the doubt regarding seeking the Buddha and practicing giving while abiding in marks. This doubt arises from the preceding passage on giving without abiding in marks.
1.77
"Subhūti, what do you think? Can one see the Tathāgata by means of physical marks?" "No, Bhagavat, one cannot see the Tathāgata by means of physical marks. Why is this? The physical marks spoken of by the Tathāgata are not physical marks." The Buddha said to Subhūti, "All that has marks is empty and false; if one sees that all marks are non-marks, one sees the Tathāgata."
1.78
The preceding section explained that giving without abiding in marks and subduing one's mind are the cause for attaining buddhahood; fearing that Subhūti might doubt whether the fruit of buddhahood is a conditioned physical mark, the Buddha therefore asked: 'Can one see the Tathāgata by means of physical marks?' Subhūti understood the intent of the Buddha's question, and thus replied: 'One cannot see [him] by means of physical marks.' Now, that which has marks is the nirmāṇakāya; that which lacks marks is the dharmakāya. The dharmakāya is the substance, and the nirmāṇakāya is the function; if one knows that the function arises from the substance, the nirmāṇa is precisely the Dharma, which is why it lacks marks. Hence the treatise says: 'The marks spoken of by the Tathāgata are precisely non-marks; if one can thoroughly penetrate this meaning, then all worldly marks are nothing other than the unconditioned buddha-body of suchness.' Therefore the Buddha confirmed Subhūti's words, saying: 'If one sees that all marks are non-marks, one sees the Tathāgata.'
1.79
2. Severing the doubt that because both cause and fruit are profound, there will be no faith. This doubt arises from the two preceding passages of the sūtra on practicing giving without abiding and seeing the Buddha through non-marks.
1.80
Subhūti said to the Buddha: "Bhagavat, will there be sentient beings who, hearing such words, lines, and verses, produce true faith?"
1.81
The treatise says: 'Practicing giving without abiding is profound in cause; seeing the Buddha through non-marks is profound in fruit. Since the dharmas of cause and fruit are profound, one doubts whether dull-rooted sentient beings mired in delusion in the final age will be able to produce faithful minds like this.'
1.82
The Buddha told Subhūti: "Do not speak like this. After the Tathāgata's parinirvāṇa, in the final five hundred years, there will be those who uphold the precepts and cultivate merit who can produce faith in these lines and verses, taking them to be true.
1.83
The Buddha answered: 'In the final age there will naturally be people possessing merit and wisdom who, hearing this prajñā, can produce true faith.'
1.84
As for the expression 'the final five hundred years,' the Mahāsaṃnipāta Sūtra says: 'There are five five-hundred-year periods; now is precisely the time of the final five-hundred-year period.' Upholding precepts is morality; cultivating merit is meditative concentration; producing faith is wisdom. When the three trainings are fully complete, one is able to produce true faith.
1.85
"You should know that these people have not planted roots of goodness under one Buddha, two Buddhas, three, four, or five Buddhas, but have already planted roots of goodness under immeasurable thousands of myriads of Buddhas.
1.86
When they hear these lines and verses, even for a single thought-moment they produce pure faith." If one considers the cause of true faith, it is because they have planted roots of goodness under many Buddhas that they are able to produce faith upon hearing this Mahāyāna Dharma; even to produce faith for the brief span of a single thought-moment likewise occurs because they have planted roots of goodness under Buddhas.
1.87
"Subhūti, the Tathāgata fully knows and fully sees that these sentient beings attain such immeasurable merit.
1.88
When a faithful mind arises for a single thought-moment, the Buddhas all know it completely. Whenever there are sentient beings who hear these lines and verses and produce pure faith even for a single thought-moment, there is nothing that the Buddha's wisdom and the Buddha's eye do not know and see; therefore the merit they attain is immeasurable.
1.89
"Why is this? These sentient beings no longer have the mark of a self, the mark of a person, the mark of a sentient being, or the mark of a life-span; they have no mark of dharmas, nor any mark of non-dharmas."
1.90
This explains straightforwardly the reason why producing faith gains merit, embracing both the emptiness of sentient beings and the emptiness of dharmas. The treatise says: 'Those with wisdom thoroughly understand both the selflessness of sentient beings and the selflessness of dharmas.' It also says: 'Sentient beings and dharmas each have four kinds of notions.' Notions are marks. Saying that they no longer have the four marks of a self, a person, a sentient being, and a life-span refers to the emptiness of sentient beings. Saying that they have no mark of dharmas nor any mark of non-dharmas—in other translations there is additionally 'having no marks and also not non-marks'—refers to the emptiness of dharmas. The commentary says: 'First it lists four marks for the emptiness of sentient beings; next it lists only two phrases for the emptiness of dharmas, namely dharmas and non-dharmas, because the translator simply abbreviated it.'
1.91
"Why is this? If the minds of these sentient beings grasp at marks, they will be attached to a self, a person, a sentient being, and a life-span. If they grasp at the marks of dharmas, they will be attached to a self, a person, a sentient being, and a life-span. Why is this? If they grasp at the marks of non-dharmas, they will be attached to a self, a person, a sentient being, and a life-span."
1.92
This shows inversely that transgressing the sūtra is not merit. Saying 'if their minds grasp at marks' and so forth refers to attachment to sentient beings; saying 'if they grasp at the marks of dharmas' and so forth refers to attachment to dharmas.
1.93
"Therefore, one should not grasp at dharmas, nor should one grasp at non-dharmas. For this reason, the Tathāgata always says: 'You bhikṣus, know that my teaching of the Dharma is like the raft parable; even dharmas should be abandoned, how much more so non-dharmas?'"
1.94
This concludes the above text and provides verification and exhortation. Not grasping at dharmas empties the wisdom that can contemplate; not grasping at non-dharmas empties the object that is contemplated. The treatise says: 'Dharmas having nature and marks should not even be grasped, how much less non-dharmas that fundamentally lack nature and marks?' It also says: 'Even good that accords with Dharma is not grasped, how much less unwholesome non-dharmas?' The commentary says: 'Speaking of dharmas now, stating that the five aggregates are empty is Dharma, while the marks of the five aggregates are non-Dharma. Thus taking the emptiness of the aggregates as medicine is named Dharma-aggregates, and taking existence as disease is named non-Dharma. Once the disease of the aggregates is eliminated, the medicine of emptiness is also dismissed; once non-Dharma has ceased, being in Dharma is also lost.' This corresponds exactly with the treatise's meaning.
1.95
Regarding the raft parable, the treatise says: 'Just as when one wishes to cross a river, one should first take a raft, and having reached the other shore, abandon it and go on.' Furthermore, the Mahāprajñāpāramitopadeśa quotes the Raft Parable Sūtra, saying: 'If you understand my raft parable teaching, at that time even wholesome dharmas should be discarded, how much more so unwholesome dharmas?' This is the essential method of having nothing to attain, ensuring that one does not become fixated on things.
1.96
3. Severing the doubt: If there are no marks, how can there be preaching? This doubt arises from the statement in the first doubt that one cannot see the Tathāgata by means of physical marks.
1.97
"Subhūti, what do you think? Has the Tathāgata attained anuttarā samyaksambodhi? Does the Tathāgata have any Dharma that he has spoken?"
1.98
Earlier it was said that one cannot see the Buddha by marks, and that the Buddha is not conditioned; fearing someone might doubt: 'Why then did Śākyamuni attain the Way under the tree and teach the Dharma in various assemblies?'
1.99
Subhūti said: "As I understand the meaning of what the Buddha has said, there is no fixed dharma called anuttarā samyaksambodhi, nor is there any fixed dharma that the Tathāgata can speak. Why is this? The dharmas spoken by the Tathāgata are all ungraspable and ineffable; they are neither dharmas nor non-dharmas. Why is this so? All noble and holy ones are distinguished by unconditioned dharmas."
1.100
The substance of the Dharma of suchness is divorced from the marks of existence and non-existence, and divorced from the marks of words and speech; how could it be grasped by the ear hearing it or the mind conceiving it? One should know that attaining the Way under the tree and teaching the Dharma in various assemblies belong only to the nirmāṇakāya; his saṃbhogakāya and dharmakāya have no attainment and no teaching. Yet the nirmāṇa is precisely the Dharma and saṃbhoga, and teaching is precisely non-teaching; therefore one cannot grasp it as existent, nor can one grasp it as non-existent.
1.101
Subhūti understood the intent of the Buddha's question, and immediately answered that there is no Way to be realized and no Dharma to be spoken. Under 'Why is this?' he further investigated and explained on his own: because they are ungraspable and ineffable, neither dharmas nor non-dharmas.
1.102
Saying 'neither dharmas' means they cannot be grasped as existent; saying 'nor non-dharmas' means they cannot be grasped as non-existent. Because they are ungraspable, they are ineffable; yet when the Tathāgata manifests responsiveness with realization and teaching, it is because he has attained the substance that is neither existent nor non-existent.
1.103
'All noble and holy ones' refers to the Buddhas and bodhisattvas of the three times and ten directions. 'By' means 'by using.'
1.104
The unconditioned is the principle of self-realization, the ultimate truth; distinction is the function of transforming others, the conventional truth. The Buddhas' teaching of the Dharma never departs from the two truths, and our Buddha is also thus.
1.105
"Subhūti, what do you think? If a person filled a trichiliocosm with the seven treasures to use in giving, would the merit obtained by this person be much?" Subhūti said, "Very much, Bhagavat! Why is this? This merit is not of the nature of merit; therefore the Tathāgata speaks of the merit as much." "If there were again a person who received and upheld even as little as a four-line verse from this sūtra and explained it for others, their merit would surpass that. Why is this? Subhūti, all the Buddhas and all the Buddhas' dharmas of anuttarā samyaksambodhi emerge from this sūtra. Subhūti, what are called Buddha dharmas are not Buddha dharmas."
1.106
This compares and weighs the merit of upholding and explaining [the sūtra].
1.107
The Buddha asked, "Suppose a person practiced giving with the seven treasures filling a great trichiliocosm, would their merit be much?" Subhūti understood the meaning and answered, saying, "Very much." Because this merit is free from the intrinsic nature of merit, it is therefore spoken of as much.
1.108
The Buddha also said, "Although the karmic reward of giving free from [attachment to] nature is great, receiving and upholding this sūtra and expounding it for others can lead toward bodhi; its merit surpasses that."
1.109
Saying 'even as little as a four-line verse' brings up the least to illustrate the most. The merit of upholding the sūtra surpasses it because the bodies of all Buddhas and the dharmas they realize are all born from this prajñā; that prajñā is called the 'Mother of Buddhas' is truly with good reason. Yet still fearing that one might grasp and attach to this, he therefore again told him, 'What are called Buddha dharmas are not Buddha dharmas.'
1.110
4. Severing the Doubt that Śrāvakas Grasp at Attaining the Fruition: This doubt arises from the preceding statement that unconditioned dharmas cannot be grasped or spoken of.
1.111
"Subhūti, what do you think? Can a srotāpanna form the thought: 'I have attained the fruition of a srotāpanna'?" Subhūti said, "No, Bhagavat. Why is this? A srotāpanna is called a stream-enterer, yet there is nowhere entered; not entering forms, sounds, scents, tastes, tangible objects, or dharmas—this is called a srotāpanna."
1.112
In Sanskrit 'srotāpanna', in Chinese 'stream-enterer'. This is the first fruition realized by a śrāvaka. Having severed the delusions of view and departed from birth in the four destinies, one enters in advance into the stream of noble ones; hence it is called 'stream-enterer'.
1.113
Saying 'there is nowhere entered' means that one does not attach to the stream that is entered, nor does one attach to the realms of the six dusts; hence it is said that there is 'no entering'.
1.114
"Subhūti, what do you think? Can a sakṛdāgāmin form the thought: 'I have attained the fruition of a sakṛdāgāmin'?" Subhūti said, "No, Bhagavat. Why is this? A sakṛdāgāmin is called a once-returner, yet in reality there is no returning or going—this is called a sakṛdāgāmin."
1.115
In Sanskrit 'sakṛdāgāmin', in Chinese 'once-returner'. This is the second fruition of a śrāvaka. In the desire realm there are nine grades of delusions of thought; the first six grades have been severed, and the latter three grades are not yet severed, so one must undergo birth once more in the desire realm; hence it is called 'once-returner'.
1.116
Saying 'in reality there is no returning or going' means not attaching to the marks of returning and going.
1.117
"Subhūti, what do you think? Can an anāgāmin form the thought: 'I have attained the fruition of an anāgāmin'?" Subhūti said, "No, Bhagavat. Why is this? An anāgāmin is called a non-returner, yet in reality there is no non-returning; therefore it is called an anāgāmin."
1.118
In Sanskrit 'anāgāmin', in Chinese 'non-returner'. This is the third fruition of a śrāvaka. Having severed all delusions of thought of the desire realm, one does not come to receive birth in the desire realm; hence it is called 'non-returning'.
1.119
Saying 'in reality there is no non-returning' means not attaching to the mark of non-returning.
1.120
"Subhūti, what do you think? Can an arhat form the thought: 'I have attained the path of an arhat'?" Subhūti said, "No, Bhagavat. Why is this? In reality there is no dharma named arhat. Bhagavat, if an arhat forms the thought, 'I have attained the path of an arhat,' that would be an attachment to a self, a person, a sentient being, and a life-span."
1.121
In Sanskrit 'arhat', in Chinese 'no-more-learning' (aśaikṣa). This is the fourth fruition of a śrāvaka. At this stage, all afflictions of the three realms are completely severed, and one fully realizes the true principle; having no dharma left to learn, it is named 'no-more-learning'.
1.122
Saying 'in reality there is no dharma named arhat' means that there is no mark of what is realized by one of no-more-learning. If one says there is realization, one is attached to the four marks.
1.123
This section is called 'The Four Fruitions Free from Attachment'. The treatise says: "Previously it was said that there is no Buddha-fruition to be achieved and no Buddha-dharma to be preached; how then could each of the four fruitions grasp at what they realize and speak of it? Fearing that this doubt would arise, the Buddha therefore inquired according to this, and Subhūti answered them all in terms of freedom from attachment, deeply according with the Buddha's intent."
1.124
"Bhagavat, the Buddha said that I have attained the samādhi of non-contention and am the foremost among humans, the foremost arhat free from desire. I do not form the thought: 'I am an arhat free from desire.' Bhagavat, if I formed the thought, 'I have attained the path of an arhat,' the Bhagavat would not say that Subhūti is one who delights in the practice of araṇā. Because Subhūti in reality has no practice, it is named 'Subhūti delights in the practice of araṇā.'"
1.125
Here, Subhūti cites his own realization as being free from attachment to engender faith in people. Yet the fruition that Subhūti realized was merely that of no-more-learning, and that the Bhagavat uniquely praised him as foremost was due to non-contention.
1.126
In Sanskrit 'araṇā', in Chinese 'non-contention'. Non-contention means being free from the two hindrances: first, the hindrance of delusion, and second, the hindrance of knowledge. Free from delusion, one does not attach to the mark of existence; free from knowledge, one does not attach to the mark of nonexistence; hence there is no contention.
1.127
'Having no practice' means not attaching to the practice that is practiced.
1.128
5. Severing the Doubt Concerning Śākyamuni and Dīpaṃkara Regarding Grasping and Preaching: This doubt also arises from the third doubt regarding 'cannot be grasped and cannot be spoken of'.
1.129
The Buddha told Subhūti, "What do you think? When the Tathāgata was formerly with Dīpaṃkara Buddha, did he attain anything with respect to the Dharma?" "No, Bhagavat. When the Tathāgata was with Dīpaṃkara Buddha, he in reality attained nothing with respect to the Dharma."
1.130
This severs the doubt regarding the transmission between Śākyamuni and Dīpaṃkara. That is, Subhūti, in not being confused about his own realization being free from attachment, had already grasped it; yet the Tathāgata also feared that Subhūti might doubt whether, when the Buddha formerly received the prediction from Dīpaṃkara, he in reality had attained something with respect to the Dharma; therefore he raised this question. Subhūti answered that in reality he attained nothing, so there is no doubt.
1.131
Regarding Dīpaṃkara, the *Mahāprajñāpāramitopadeśa* says: "When Dīpaṃkara was born, his bodily light was like a lamp, up until his attainment of Buddhahood; he was therefore named Dīpaṃkara (Burning Lamp)."
1.132
6. Severing the Doubt that Adorning Lands Contradicts Non-grasping: This doubt also arises from 'cannot be grasped' in the third doubt.
1.133
"Subhūti, what do you think? Does a bodhisattva adorn Buddha lands?" "No, Bhagavat. Why is this? One who adorns Buddha lands does not adorn; this is named adorning." "Therefore, Subhūti, all bodhisattva mahāsattvas should give rise to a pure mind in this way: they should not give rise to a mind abiding in forms; they should not give rise to a mind abiding in sounds, scents, tastes, tangible objects, or dharmas; they should give rise to a mind that does not abide in anything."
1.134
The intent of the question is: since bodhisattvas cultivate the six perfections and myriad practices to adorn pure lands and manifest bodies to preach the Dharma, this is having something grasped; how can there be non-grasping? The intent of the answer is: although bodhisattvas cultivate practices to adorn lands, the practice is unconditioned (non-contrived) and the land is also not adorned; not adorning and yet adorning, hence it says, 'does not adorn; this is named adorning.'
1.135
Thereupon the Tathāgata further told Subhūti, "One who is a bodhisattva should give rise to a pure mind in this way." This is grasping through non-grasping. As the *Vimalakīrti Sūtra* says, "In accordance with the purity of their minds, the Buddha land is pure." This is what it means. If one gives rise to attachment toward the six dusts, it is not called purity; therefore it also says, "They should give rise to a mind that does not abide in anything."
1.136
7. Severing the Doubt that Attaining the Reward Body Involves Grasping: This doubt also arises from 'cannot be grasped' in the third doubt.
1.137
"Subhūti, suppose a person had a body like Sumeru, king of mountains; what do you think? Would this body be large?" Subhūti said, "Very large, Bhagavat! Why is this? The Buddha said that a non-body is named a large body."
1.138
Regarding Mount Sumeru, in Sanskrit 'Sumeru', in Chinese 'wonderfully high'. This mountain is composed of the four treasures and rises high above all mountains; hence it is called the king of mountains.
1.139
The Buddha's reward body is far removed from all outflows, so it is named 'non'; it is venerated and extraordinary, so it is named 'large'. The intent of the Buddha's question is: since the noble ones' dharmas are unconditioned and ungrasped, is not the attained reward body grasped? Fearing that there might be this doubt, he set up the metaphor to question.
1.140
And Subhūti immediately knew that Sumeru itself is without discrimination that 'I am the king of mountains,' and thus it is able to be large. The reward body's freedom from attachment is also like this; hence he said: "The Buddha said that a non-body is named a large body."
1.141
"Subhūti, as many sands as there are in the Ganges, if there were as many Ganges Rivers as those sands, what do you think? Would the sands in all those Ganges Rivers be many?" Subhūti said, "Very many, Bhagavat! All those Ganges Rivers would alone be innumerably many, how much more so their sands?" "Subhūti, I now tell you in truth: if a good man or good woman filled as many trichiliocosms as the sands of those Ganges Rivers with the seven treasures to use in giving, would they obtain much merit?" Subhūti said, "Very much, Bhagavat!" The Buddha told Subhūti, "If a good man or good woman receives and upholds from this sūtra even as little as a four-line verse and explains it for others, this merit surpasses the previous merit."
1.142
The Ganges is a river in India, forty leagues in circumference; the Buddha often preached the Dharma near it, so he took it as an analogy.
1.143
Previously, giving the seven treasures of one great trichiliocosm was spoken of to illustrate that the merit of upholding and explaining [the sūtra] surpasses it; now, giving the seven treasures of immeasurable great trichiliocosms is not equal to upholding and explaining four lines of this sūtra, its merit turning out to surpass that. This is to treat it by augmenting and increasing, evaluating the efficacy of upholding and explaining.
1.144
"Furthermore, Subhūti, wherever this sūtra is expounded, even as little as a four-line verse, you should know that this place should be revered by all devas, humans, and asuras in the world like a Buddha stupa or temple; how much more so if there is someone who can completely receive, uphold, read, and recite it? Subhūti, you should know that this person achieves the most supreme, foremost, and rarest dharma. If it is a place where this classic is located, then there is a Buddha or revered disciples."
1.145
A place where the Buddha's relics are enshrined is called a stupa; a place where the Buddha's images are venerated is called a temple. In a place where a four-line verse of this sūtra is expounded, devas and humans should certainly revere it like a Buddha stupa or temple; how much more so one who can fully uphold and recite it?
1.146
'Achieving the most supreme, foremost, and rarest dharma' refers to achieving the unexcelled Buddha-fruition of bodhi.
1.147
Regarding 'If it is a place where this classic is located', where the classic is located is where the Buddha is located, and the person who upholds and expounds it is a disciple of the Buddha; how could one not revere and respect them?
1.148
At that time, Subhūti addressed the Buddha, saying, "Bhagavat, by what name should this sūtra be called? How should we uphold it?" The Buddha told Subhūti, "This sūtra is named the 'Vajracchedikā Prajñāpāramitā'; by this name you should uphold it. Why is this? Subhūti, what the Buddha speaks of as prajñāpāramitā is not prajñāpāramitā. Subhūti, what do you think? Does the Tathāgata have any dharma that was preached?" Subhūti addressed the Buddha, saying, "Bhagavat, the Tathāgata has nothing preached."
1.149
Subhūti, having heard that upholding the sūtra accomplishes a rare dharma, therefore asked: "What is this sūtra called? How should we receive and uphold it?" The Buddha answered: "This sūtra is named 'Vajra Prajñā', because it can sever all doubts and attachments; thus you should receive and uphold it." Although the wisdom of prajñā is used to sever attachments, yet the dharma-nature is fundamentally empty and cannot be grasped at; therefore he said: "is not prajñāpāramitā."
1.150
The Tathāgata, moreover, was concerned that Subhūti had not yet realized that prajñā is empty in nature and would think that there is spoken discourse; therefore he asked again: "Has the Tathāgata expounded any dharma?" But Subhūti completely understood that expounding is non-expounding, and thus answered: "The Tathāgata has expounded nothing."
1.151
"Subhūti! What do you think? Are the motes of dust in a trichiliocosm many?" Subhūti said: "Very many, Bhagavat!" "Subhūti! All motes of dust, the Tathāgata says are not motes of dust; this is called motes of dust. The Tathāgata says worlds are not worlds; this is called worlds."
1.152
The meaning of this text arises from the previous mention of giving treasures to obtain merit. Previously, giving the seven treasures of boundless trichiliocosms, though the merit obtained is great, is yet not separate from [conditioned] nature; thus it is an afflicted, defiled cause of greed and the like, being a conditioned retribution of merit. Here, then, worlds and motes of dust are used as a metaphor. Dust and worlds are insentient objects that do not give rise to the afflicted, defiled causes of greed and the like; as such, conditioned retributions of merit do not even measure up to the insentience of dust and worlds, so how could upholding and expounding this sūtra—which is the cause of being far removed from afflictions and able to attain bodhi—fail to surpass them?
1.153
"Not motes of dust" and "not worlds" means that they are not motes of dust and worlds that are the defiled causes of afflictions. "This is called motes of dust" and "this is called worlds" means that they are unspecified motes of dust and worlds. "Unspecified" is like "insentient", meaning that they do not give rise to good or evil.
1.154
"Subhūti! What do you think? Can the Tathāgata be seen by means of the thirty-two marks?" "No, Bhagavat! The Tathāgata cannot be seen by means of the thirty-two marks. Why is this? The thirty-two marks spoken of by the Tathāgata are in fact non-marks; this is called the thirty-two marks."
1.155
The thirty-two marks are the marks of the nirmāṇakāya; non-marks are the marks of the dharmakāya. "This is called the thirty-two marks": since the nirmāṇa is identical to the dharma and the dharma is entirely the nirmāṇa, there is no harm in speaking of the thirty-two marks. This means that the merit of giving treasures, even if it can accomplish the physical marks of a Buddha, is only the nirmāṇakāya, falling short of the virtue of upholding and expounding, which can accomplish the dharmakāya.
1.156
"Subhūti! If there were a good man or good woman who gave their bodies and lives as many times as the sands of the Ganges in giving; and if there were again a person who, from within this sūtra, even receives and upholds as little as a four-line verse and expounds it for others, their merit would be far greater."
1.157
Giving the seven treasures is external wealth; giving body and life is internal wealth. Giving the body is like King Śibi substituting for the dove; giving life is like the Mahāsattva feeding the tigress. Comparing them in terms of lightness and heaviness, external wealth is light and easy, while internal wealth is heavy and difficult. Yet both of these givings are causes and effects that are conditioned and contaminated; altogether they do not match upholding and expounding four lines, which can attain the wonderful fruit of bodhi.
1.158
At that time, Subhūti, having heard the expounding of this sūtra and deeply understanding its meaning, wept tears of sorrow and said to the Buddha: "Rare, Bhagavat! The Buddha has spoken such a profoundly deep sūtra. From the past until now, with the wisdom eye I have attained, I have never before heard such a sūtra. Bhagavat! If there is again a person who gets to hear this sūtra, whose faith is pure, then the true mark will arise; one should know that this person will accomplish the foremost, rare virtue. Bhagavat! This true mark is indeed non-mark; therefore the Tathāgata speaks of it as the true mark. Bhagavat! For me now to hear such a sūtra, to believe, understand, receive, and uphold it, is not difficult. If in the future age, in the last five hundred years, there are sentient beings who get to hear this sūtra, believe, understand, receive, and uphold it, these persons will be the foremost and rare. Why is this? These persons are without the mark of a self, the mark of a person, the mark of a sentient being, and the mark of a life-span. Why is this? The mark of a self is indeed non-mark; the mark of a person, the mark of a sentient being, and the mark of a life-span are indeed non-marks. Why is this? Leaving behind all marks is called the Buddhas."
1.159
Subhūti, knowing that the merit induced by relinquishing body and life does not equal the superiority of upholding and expounding, and having heard this Dharma, felt deep gratitude for the Buddha's kindness; thereupon weeping tears of sorrow, he praised it as rare, saying of himself that from the past until now he had never heard such a sūtra. If a person hears the sūtra and their faith is pure, then the true mark can arise. He also said that for him now to encounter the Buddha and get to hear this sūtra was not considered difficult, but for future sentient beings to get to hear this Dharma is truly rare. The reason they are rare is that by cultivating according to this sūtra, the four marks of self, person, sentient being, and life-span do not arise, which is indeed non-mark; non-mark is itself the true mark. Leaving behind these marks, one immediately accomplishes right awakening; hence it says: "is called the Buddhas."
1.160
The Buddha told Subhūti: "So it is, so it is. If there is again a person who gets to hear this sūtra and is not startled, not terrified, and not afraid, you should know that this person is exceedingly rare. Why is this? Subhūti! What the Tathāgata speaks of as the foremost pāramitā is not the foremost pāramitā; this is called the foremost pāramitā."
1.161
"So it is, so it is" is an expression of assent. The Mahāyāna Dharma is fundamentally difficult to believe and difficult to understand; if those who are not vessels of the Mahāyāna suddenly hear this Dharma, they cannot avoid astonishment, doubt and terror, and fear; one who can hear this Dharma without fear or dread is truly rare. This rare Dharma is without equal, and therefore is called the foremost. Yet the Dharma is fundamentally without spoken discourse; being concerned that they would grasp at the Dharma, he therefore said: "is not the foremost pāramitā"; because there are causes and conditions, it can also be spoken, and therefore he said: "this is called the foremost pāramitā."
1.162
8. Severing the doubt that upholding and expounding does not escape suffering retributions
This doubt arises from the above relinquishing of the body in giving.
1.163
"Subhūti! The kṣāntipāramitā, the Tathāgata says, is not the kṣāntipāramitā. Why is this? Subhūti! In the past, when King Kali cut my body to pieces, 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 life-span. Why is this? In the past, when I was dismembered joint by joint and limb by limb, if I had the mark of a self, the mark of a person, the mark of a sentient being, or the mark of a life-span, I should have given rise to anger and resentment. Subhūti! I also recall that in the past, for five hundred lifetimes, I was an ascetic of patience; in those lifetimes I had no mark of a self, no mark of a person, no mark of a sentient being, and no mark of a life-span."
1.164
Patience (kṣānti) is one of the six perfections. To endure peacefully is called kṣān; to be harmed is called ti. Previously it was said that the merit and retribution of relinquishing body and life is a cause of the suffering of birth and death, and falls short of the merit of upholding and expounding. Why is it that here the practice of patience also involves relinquishing body and life, yet does not become a cause of suffering? It is because one is able to realize that dharmas lack a self and reach the other shore. Saying "is not the kṣāntipāramitā" is precisely to dispel attachment. Such practice of patience was practiced by the Buddha in the past; therefore he cited the matter of King Kali as proof. The Sanskrit Kali is translated into Chinese as 'extremely wicked'. In a past lifetime, the Buddha was once an ascetic cultivating the path in the mountains. The king, out hunting, saw him and was displeased; he then cut off his ears and nose, and severed his hands and feet. At that time, the ascetic had not the slightest anger or resentment; through the power of compassion and patience, his body was restored as before. It is because he was able to fully realize that the four marks of self, person, sentient being, and life-span are all empty that not only was there no suffering, but there was indeed joy. Moreover, citing that he was an ascetic of patience for five hundred lifetimes in the past as proof clarifies that practicing the conduct of patience was not for only one lifetime.
1.165
"Therefore, Subhūti, a bodhisattva should leave behind all marks and give rise to the mind of anuttarā samyaksambodhi. They should not give rise to a mind abiding in form; they should not give rise to a mind abiding in sound, scent, taste, touch, or dharmas; they should give rise to a mind that does not abide anywhere. If the mind has an abiding, it is non-abiding. Therefore the Buddha says that the bodhisattva's mind should not give rise to giving while abiding in form. Subhūti! Bodhisattvas, for the benefit of all sentient beings, should give in this manner. The Tathāgata says that all marks are indeed non-marks, and also says that all sentient beings are indeed not sentient beings."
First 165 of 295 passages. Read on