仁王護國般若經疏 3.14

3.14

「善男子若有菩薩」下，第二明得失。文二：初明邪觀是失也、二明正觀是得也。今初。若菩薩發心行學般若，見有法有眾生我人知見者，世間凡夫無異也。「於諸法而不動」下，二明正觀。文二：一明行、二明位。今初。言「不動」者，即色是空，非析色也。「不到」者，《大品》云「平等之法，一切聖人所不能到。須菩提白佛言：『乃可餘聖不到，佛何故不到？』佛言：『乃至佛亦不到。何以故？佛即平等、平等即佛，佛與平等無二故不到也。』」「不滅」者，空即是色也。「無相」者，色空空色皆無相也。「無無相」者，無相亦無也。下例諸法云云。

From "Good sons, if there is a bodhisattva" below is the second [part], clarifying gain and loss. The text has two parts: first clarifying that wrong contemplation is loss, second clarifying that right contemplation is gain. As for the first: If a bodhisattva arouses the mind to practice and study prajñā, and sees that there are phenomena, beings, a self, a person, a knower, or a seer, they are no different from worldly ordinary people. From "not moving with respect to all phenomena" below is the second [part], clarifying right contemplation. The text has two parts: 1. clarifying practice, 2. clarifying stages. As for the first: Saying "unmoving" means that form itself is empty, not that form is analyzed [into emptiness]. "Not arriving": the *Pañcaviṃśatisāhasrikā Prajñāpāramitā Sūtra* says, "The phenomenon of sameness cannot be reached by any noble ones. Subhūti addressed the Buddha: 'It may be that other noble ones do not arrive, but why does the Buddha not arrive?' The Buddha said, 'Even the Buddha does not arrive. Why is that? The Buddha is sameness; sameness is the Buddha; because the Buddha and sameness are non-dual, he does not arrive.'" "Unceasing": emptiness is itself form. "Signless": both form being empty and emptiness being form are signless. "Without signlessness": signlessness is also nonexistent. Below, the other phenomena are treated analogously.