English (machine translation)
Translation of 般若心經略疏連珠記
- Language
- English
- Extent
- 93 passages, 26,744 words
- Text
- complete digital text
- Source
- pramana-mt · Machine translation by Gemini 3.8 Flash (2026-10-21) of in.bauddha.taisho.1713 · Machine output without human authorship: no copyright is claimed (CC0 1.0). The original text keeps its own…
Contents
Text
1.1
In establishing this title, I demonstrate that none of this derives from my own mind. That is to say, this text of notes consists entirely of the wondrous gems and night-shining pearls of the Buddhas and patriarchs, the vermilion fields and cinnabar depths, the waning and waxing full moons; it merely strings them together with red thread and golden cords to form a record, resembling the pearl mounds of Cangwu.
1.2
Composed by the Śramaṇa Shihui of Yufeng under the Song dynasty.
1.3
In explaining this commentary, the text has two parts: first, the title; second, [...]. The first has two: first, setting forth the title of the commentary. Now, there are two kinds of titles: placed at the head of a sūtra, it is called a sūtra title; set forth before a commentary, it is called a commentary heading. Here, it is the commentary title. "Prajñā," and so forth, is the sūtra explained; "Brief Commentary" is the commentary that explains it. Taking the title of the explained sūtra together with the portion of the explaining commentary, taking the name of another, is a bahuvrīhi compound (possessive compound). If one says "the commentary of [the Heart Sūtra]," it is a tatpuruṣa compound (dependent determinative compound). "Brief" means brief as in essential and concise; it does not mean there is separately an extensive commentary. "With Preface" means it includes an accompanying preface. Second, showing the honorable title and the translation of the scriptures: after the interlinear commentary on the sūtra carved by Master Jin of Jingkou, the ancestral master's own inscription was engraved, stating: "In the second year of the Chang'an reign-period [702 CE], in the leisure moments between translating scriptures at Qingchan Monastery in the capital, Fazang was repeatedly and earnestly requested by Lord Zheng of Xingyang, Director of the Ministry of Rites and concurrently Acting Administrator of Yongzhou, to produce a brief commentary." Since it says "in the leisure moments between translating scriptures," it does not mean he had never participated in the translation bureau. "Śramaṇa" is translated here as "one who strives to put [afflictions] to rest." The following two characters are the commentary master's esteemed name. "Composed" (shu) is a modest term meaning "to transmit without originating."
1.4
Second, the main text has three parts: first, generally indicating the meaning of the name; second, opening the sections to explain the text; third, rejoicing, praising, and dedication of merit. The first has two: first, comprehensively stating the profound framework to reveal the great doctrine of prajñā; second, [...]. The first has two: first, directly stating its unfathomable depth; which has three: first, transcending words to point to the essence; which has two: first, the profundity of the essence. "Now, regarding..." and so forth: "now" is an introductory particle, and "regarding" signifies "by means of" or "deriving from." "True source": that which is not false conceptual thought is called "true"; the essential nature of all phenomena is called "source"; this is the signless tathatā of true-mark prajñā. Qingliang, in explaining the samādhi of the limit of an instant, says: "It means plumbing the true source of dharmas, which is to say that when one plumbs the temporal marks of that instant, all is completely still; thus the instant is without limit. This is because one has realized that pure tathatā is fundamentally signless." Thus, he takes signless tathatā to be the true source. The Zhenyuan [commentary] says: "Delusion shifts according to objects; the essence moves following marks; they beat upon the true source, vast and boundless." That [text] takes the secret store of the pearl in the garment to be the true source of the nature of things. Caotang says: "The mind of prajñā is the essence of the myriad dharmas." He also says: "True emptiness is the numinous and wondrous source of the mind. Precisely because it is fundamentally the one mind of tathatā, which when combined with arising and ceasing is named ālayavijñāna, producing through transformation the sense faculties, bodies, receptacle world, form, and all other phenomena—when investigated, these lack an essence and return to the emptiness of the true mind; thus paramārtha-śūnyatā is the primal source of all phenomena, hence it is called the true source." The treatise states: "Because there is the principle of emptiness, all dharmas can be established." The sūtra says: "From the non-abiding basis, all dharmas are established." Zhenguo says: "Non-abiding, emptiness of intrinsic nature, and tathatā are all different names for dharmatā." The commentary master also says: "To cause those with capacity to realize the true source and enter the ocean of fruition." Thus he takes the ocean of fruition to be the true source. "Pure model": "pure" indicates absence of blemish; "model" holds to intrinsic nature. It means its essence is like ice and frost, its nature is like pearls and jade, and within the mire of afflictions it does not change its unyielding purity. The treatise says: "Because all defiled phenomena that exceed the sands of the Ganges are completely empty, without anything existing within the essence of tathatā." The commentary master says: "The pure model transcends emotion; emptiness and existence are thereby mutually eradicated." "Vast and quiet": "vast" means deep and profound; "quiet" means broad and far-reaching. The commentary master also says: "Vast without boundaries, it transcends seeing and hearing; deep without limit, it resists thought and deliberation." The treatise says: "Transcending the sphere of reflection, cutting off the realm of peering glimpses—how could this ever be captured by fish traps or hare nets?" A fish trap is an implement for catching fish; a hare net is a mesh for hares. These serve as metaphors for the separation between words, thought, and true principle.
1.5
From "wondrous awakening" down, second is the wondrousness of function, which is contemplative prajñā. Zhenguo says: "Being free from the perceiver and the perceived, it is therefore called wondrous awakening." The sūtra says: "The Tathāgata has now attained the wondrous, empty, luminous awakening." The treatise says: "Because one awakens to the source of the mind, it is called ultimate awakening." Another treatise says: "The wisdom of sarvajñā has only awareness and illumination, for there is not a single dharma that is not awakening." The commentary master immediately says: "It is the wisdom that wondrously realizes the true source." "Profound path": you means "path" and "cause." It means this wondrous awakening is the correct path for entering the true source and the deep cause for achieving the wondrous fruit. Therefore the commentary below states: "By means of this wondrous wisdom, overturning the faults of saṃsāra completely, one reaches the limit of true emptiness." "Deep and mysterious": this means the abyssal ocean of prajñā is deep and unfathomable. The Dazhidulun says: "The great ocean of wisdom can only be plumbed to the bottom by a Buddha." "Transcending words and images": the sūtra says, "The meaning of prajñā is without name and without explanation." It also says: "True prajñā is pure like empty space, without knowledge and without vision, without action and without conditions." The ancient virtuous ones said: "The essence is fundamentally free from duality; names and explanations are both quieted; therefore it transcends words and images." The earlier mention of fish traps and hare nets was a metaphor for words and images, and mentioning them interchangeably is merely to make the prose elegant. The Zhouyi lüeli says: "Words arise from images, therefore one can follow words to observe images; images arise from ideas, therefore one can follow images to observe ideas. Ideas are exhausted through images, and images are made manifest through words. Therefore, when one grasps the idea, one forgets the images; when one grasps the images, one forgets the words. It is like the hare net exists for the sake of the hare; when one catches the hare, one forgets the net. The fish trap exists for the sake of the fish; when one catches the fish, one forgets the trap. Those who preserve words do not grasp the images; those who preserve images do not grasp the idea." However, that [work] intended for students to abandon the explanation and seek the import. The present commentator, however, means that the wondrously empty, true awakening is perfect in principle while words are one-sided, and its marks are ultimately ineffable. Therefore the commentary master says: "Vast is the profound path: names and words can rarely fathom its limits; boundless is the pure model: marks and views cannot exhaust its source." Thus, one forgets words precisely within words, and forgets marks precisely within marks; it does not mean that one only attains the true after sweeping away the myriad things, shutting off seeing and hearing, and entering desolate, empty voidness.
1.6
Question: "One speaks only when it is time; to speak when it is not the time is called errant speech. Furthermore, this teaching arose in order to cause practitioners to generate the great aspiration, cultivate vast practices, refute non-Buddhists, turn away from the Hīnayāna, sever obstacles, attain the fruit, and benefit sentient beings. On what grounds does the commentary master hastily set forth [the topic] by reference to that source of myriad dharmas and ultimate fruit of wondrous awakening?" Answer: "It is because he wishes to reveal that the cultivation of causes is identical to the awakening on the ground of fruition. Mañjuśrī initially asked about the fundamental cause, while the Utmost Sage first brought up the ultimate fruit. If the nature is not gold or jade, even if carved it will not become a precious vessel. Therefore the sūtra says: 'If one cannot understand one's own mind, how can one know the correct path?'"
1.7
Question again: "If one were setting forth profound sūtras of the sudden teaching such as the Śūraṅgama or the Perfect Enlightenment, it might accord with your lofty discourse. But as for this sūtra, it is clearly classified under the gradual teaching among the five periods. Why directly set forth the true source and wondrous awakening, blurring the sudden with the gradual—is there not an error in this?" Answer: "Our ancestral master's mind roamed within the great teaching and wondrously awakened to the perfect school; every line causes one to understand one's own mind, and every character pays homage to the sudden import. As the master of the perfect and sudden school and the ancestral master of Huayan, how could he be spoken of in the same breath as those scholars of the three periods and five periods, or those gradualists who converge provisional teachings to return to the real? What is more, it is what a single sūtra takes as its core doctrine, and that from which the myriad practices are born."
1.8
From "although the true..." down, second is using the three truths to reveal the profound. The commentary below states: "To cause them to awaken to the middle way of the two truths and generate right view." Emptiness and the provisional are both the middle; form and emptiness have no fixed locus; only this constitutes the true emptiness of paramārtha-satya, which this sūtra takes as its core doctrine. In this there are two parts: first, the preservation and eradication of the two truths. The text has two clauses: the first clause means that through their contradictory aspect, they are mutually eradicated; the second clause means that through their mutually producing and non-obstructing aspect, they are mutually preserved. Zhenguo says: "When form and emptiness are viewed in relation to each other, there are three meanings in total: first, the meaning of contradiction; second, the meaning of non-obstruction; third, the meaning of mutual production." He concludes: "Only when these three are unhindered is it called true emptiness, and it is also termed the meaning of wondrous existence." The Subcommentary says: "The reason why the ultimate and conventional are mutually eradicated is that the ultimate is the principle of true emptiness, constituting the ultimate truth; the conventional refers to form and all other dharmas, constituting the conventional truth." It also says: "Merely in terms of the myriad distinctions of dependent origination, it is conventional; in terms of the single taste of lacking intrinsic nature, it is ultimate. 'Mutually eradicated' means that because the two truths are not one, through the meaning of contradiction, the conventional harms the ultimate, so the ultimate is eradicated; the ultimate contradicts the conventional, so the conventional perishes. When they mutually negate and both perish, this is called mutual eradication." It also says: "Because these dependently originated dharmas are empty of intrinsic nature, they cause that illusory existence to be ungraspable as existence; therefore, all is solely true emptiness." The sūtra says: "All dharmas are ultimately empty, without the slightest mark of a tip of hair." It also says: "All dharmas are empty, like the burning at the end of an eon," and so forth. The Mahāprajñāpāramitā Sūtra says: "Because form and the rest are empty, within emptiness there is no form." Relying on that approach wherein illusory existence is non-existence, and relying on that approach wherein true emptiness is not non-empty, it is taught that true emptiness perpetually negates illusory existence; hence it causes conventional marks to be perpetually extinguished, constituting the ultimate truth. Furthermore, because these dependently originated dharmas have the mark of illusory existence, they cause that true emptiness also to become non-empty, being solely the distinctions of dependently originated illusory existence. Therefore the Laṅkāvatāra says: "It is not that after destruction they arise again; they arise through continuous causes and conditions." In texts such as the Mahāyānasaṃgraha and Yogācārabhūmi, it is clarified that paratantra dharmas are never non-existent. These are all based on the approach wherein true emptiness is non-empty, and on the approach wherein illusory existence is not non-existent, teaching that conditioned existence is perpetually non-empty; only then does it constitute conventional truth. Only when the two truths thus extremely define and negate each other do they establish their proper positions. The Yingluo [sūtra] says: "Because the conventional truth exists, it is not empty; because the ultimate truth is empty, it does not exist." Therefore they are mutually eradicated. As for "the two truths are constantly preserved": the Zongzhi says: "Because if they were not dependently produced, they would not lack intrinsic nature; conditioned existence demonstrates that things do not exist of themselves. That which does not exist of itself lacks intrinsic nature; furthermore, that which lacks intrinsic nature demonstrates that things do not exist of themselves, and that which does not exist of itself is conditioned existence." The sūtra below says: "Form is emptiness, emptiness is form." The treatise says: "The obstacle of wisdom is utterly blind and dark, meaning the separate attachment to the ultimate and the conventional. Nor may one, because of emptiness of intrinsic nature, deny dependent production, for without dependent production, emptiness cannot be established." The treatise says: "Conditioned dharmas are empty because they are produced from conditions. Furthermore, this is true emptiness, not nihilistic emptiness. If one had to wait for the destruction of dependent production before it became empty, that would be the evil nihilistic emptiness of emotional views." Therefore, when the ultimate negates the conventional, the conventional is extinguished yet the conventional is constantly preserved. Furthermore, one also cannot allow conditioned existence to contradict and harm true emptiness, for if it were not empty, it would not be conditioned existence, since if it existed of itself it would not be produced from conditions. Therefore, when the conventional harms the ultimate, the ultimate is eradicated yet the ultimate is constantly preserved. Furthermore, only emptiness that is not different from existence is true emptiness, and only existence that is not different from emptiness is illusory existence. Therefore these two are non-dual, with preservation and eradication occurring simultaneously.
1.9
From "emptiness and existence" down, second is the complete manifestation of the single taste. Guifeng says: "It means the nature of the one true mind is neither empty nor form, yet capable of emptiness and capable of form, like the brightness of a mirror." This adds the paramārtha-satya after the two truths: because it lacks intrinsic nature, it is dependently produced, so emptiness perishes; because it is dependently produced, it lacks intrinsic nature, so existence perishes. When emptiness and existence both perish, it is the dharma of a single taste; therefore it is said to be 'constantly manifest.' The commentary below states: 'The preservation and perishing of illusory form do not obstruct true emptiness; concealment and manifestation are free and sovereign, combining into a single taste; perfect, unobstructed, and without fixed locus—such is its dharma.'"
1.10
From "Truly because" onward is the third [section]: revealing the wondrous by means of the Middle Way. Qingliang said: "The intention is to clarify that both emptiness and existence here are the Middle Way. However, although illusory existence and true emptiness pertain to the three natures, when ancestral masters explained their meanings, they mostly relied on the paratantra to recount how the various schools formulated their tenets differently, and how the various teachings differed profoundly. Yet since the Xuanhe and Zhenghe eras, the profound meanings have faded into obscurity, causing those who spout empty talk to demean deep sūtras as provisional and shallow." Now I shall first set forth the emptiness and existence upheld by the various schools so that they are clearly apparent before us, and afterwards explain the text of the commentary. First, what is called "illusory existence" is also termed "pratītyasamutpanna existence," "wondrous existence," "provisional existence," and "apparent existence." The Zongzhi states: "Within this Mahāyāna, there is heated debate between two schools regarding pratītyasamutpanna dharmas. First, the Faxiang School states that this pratītyasamutpāda is definitely not empty; because it is produced by causes and conditions, just like an illusion, it cannot be called non-existent. If one were to call it empty, it would not be pratītyasamutpanna, like rabbit horns and the like. Furthermore, they say that the Sanlun only refutes the real self and real dharmas of the parikalpita posited by Hīnayāna and non-Buddhists, but does not refute the paratantra nature of the Mahāyāna, because illusory existence is not an error. If this too were refuted, it would fall into annihilationism and the emptiness of the evil destinies, and would not be the true Dharma. Since this would be a grave fault, one clearly knows that pratītyasamutpāda is definitely not non-existent. The Saṃgraha, the Yogācārabhūmi, the Saṃdhinirmocana Sūtra, and others definitely teach that it is existent and cannot be contradicted. This is what the Faxiang School of the Initial Teaching states: it does not allow this illusory existence to be identical with emptiness. Second, the Emptiness School states that this pratītyasamutpanna dharma is definitely empty; because it is produced from conditions, it must be devoid of intrinsic nature (niḥsvabhāva); just like an illusion, it cannot be called existent. If one were to call it existent, it would not arise from conditions; not arising from conditions, it would not be a pratītyasamutpanna dharma. Furthermore, they say that even if the paratantra posited by treatises such as the Yogācārabhūmi were considered, the Sanlun also refutes it, because all pratītyasamutpāda is invariably empty. If this were not refuted, views would not be eradicated and principle would not be fully realized. This is what the Emptiness School of the Initial Teaching states: this illusory existence cannot be called existent; if one were to call it existent, it would be apprehended by foolish people with diseased eyes, and attachment to dharmas would not yet be exhausted. Third, the Dharmatā School states that this illusory existence is produced from conditions and lacks intrinsic nature, like an illusory phantom person; it is not that there is no phantom person, but the phantom person is not real, hence it is called illusory existence. It is also called wondrous existence: because it takes non-existence as existence, it is named wondrous existence. Furthermore, it says: taking form that is identical with emptiness as wondrous form, form manifests because one understands that there is no form; thus it constitutes wondrous form. Furthermore, it says: only the existence that is identical with emptiness is an existence endowed with virtue. Furthermore, it says: as for the meaning of illusory existence, it is neither existent nor non-existent; hence it is named illusory existence. Furthermore, it says: not falling to one side is the Middle Way of conventional truth, and so forth. This is the Dharmatā School revealing the meaning of illusory existence by virtue of the mutual identity of emptiness and existence." Next, regarding true emptiness: First, the Faxiang School, by virtue of the esoteric intention regarding what is grasped by the parikalpita, states that the intrinsic nature of all dharmas is empty, overturning the Hīnayāna to empty the six consciousnesses. The paratantra and pariniṣpanna are existent and cannot be directly empty; the parikalpita is empty, but it is merely empty non-existence; it is also termed true emptiness. Second, the Emptiness School states that mind and objects are both empty, equal and of one taste. Guifeng said: "Because all dharmas lack intrinsic nature, they are called true principle; just as illusory flowers have no substance, they are simply empty space." He also cited the Twelve Gate Treatise: "'The great and profound meaning is what is called emptiness.' Provisional names and the Middle Way are explained solely in terms of emptiness." Qingliang said: "The Sanlun School states: existence is falsely posited; because of ultimate truth, it is empty. Paratantra and parikalpita are conventional; because they are conventional, they are existent. Pariniṣpanna is ultimate; because it is ultimate, it is empty. Dharmas produced from conditions definitely have no intrinsic nature; therefore, it is called true emptiness. If one says they are existent, that is an attachment to dharmas." This is what Masters Zhiguang, Zhu Daoji, Kang Senglang, and others took as their tenet. Master Daoji's Treatise on Fundamental Non-Existence states: "What is not existent, though existent, is non-existent; what is not non-existent, though non-existent, is non-existent." Therefore, it is called true emptiness. That is why Master Sengzhao composed the Treatise on Emptiness of the Non-Absolute (Buzhenkong lun); the Commentary on the Meaning explains its title: "The true emptiness here is not the true emptiness that is opposed to wondrous existence; this true emptiness is the illness to be refuted, because they held that ultimate truth is utterly without things and regarded that as true emptiness. Master Sengzhao negated it with 'non-', stating that it is not utterly without things; hence it is called 'the non-true emptiness.'" It also says: "This merely captures a one-sided meaning of emptiness of the Sanlun." Caotang said: "They do not even establish the true, how much less the delusive! They take ultimate truth as true emptiness." Third is the true emptiness taught by the Dharmatā School. Zhenguo said: "Only the emptiness that is identical with form is called true emptiness, and it is also termed wondrous existence. Furthermore, it must be the emptiness identical with existence to be an emptiness endowed with virtue." It also says: "Only the emptiness that is not empty is endowed with virtue." This is the true emptiness of the Middle Way revealed by the Dharmatā School.
1.11
Next, explaining the text of the commentary. The text has four sections: First, the pairing that comprehensively fuses emptiness and existence to reveal the Middle Way. The reason why the preceding section on the three truths had perfect interpenetration and emptiness and existence were of one taste, is truly because illusory existence and true emptiness are non-dual as the Middle Way. The commentary concludes it into the Middle Way, saying: "Neither empty nor existent is the meaning of the Middle Way." The Sub-commentary says: "However, its true intention is that combining the two meanings of true emptiness is collectively called 'not empty'; combining the two meanings of illusory existence is collectively called 'not existent'; because emptiness and existence are non-dual, it constitutes the Middle Way." The two meanings of true emptiness are empty and not empty. The two meanings of illusory existence are existent and not existent. Regarding true emptiness, Qingliang said: "Being empty because of lack of intrinsic nature is the meaning of empty. Being empty because of pratītyasamutpāda is the reason for being empty; the reason is causes and conditions. Question: Why does lack of intrinsic nature establish the meaning of empty? Explanation: Because it arises from conditions, it therefore lacks intrinsic nature; hence pratītyasamutpāda and lack of intrinsic nature are the reason for being empty. Since dharmas produced from conditions are empty because they lack intrinsic nature, it is called true emptiness. Moreover, one does not wait until destroying the substance of those differentiated dharmas and only then have emptiness; therefore, true emptiness has never not been existent. Furthermore, this very existent dharma, being pratītyasamutpanna and lacking intrinsic nature, is precisely named true emptiness. Hence it is said: distinguishing emptiness directly through existence." Regarding illusory existence, Qingliang said: "Being existent because of pratītyasamutpāda is the meaning of existent. Being existent because of lack of intrinsic nature is the reason for being existent." He also said: "Why does pratītyasamutpāda constitute the meaning of existent? Explanation: Precisely because it has no fixed nature, it only then follows conditions to form illusory existence; therefore, lack of intrinsic nature is the reason for being existent. Since it is an existence that is from conditions and lacks intrinsic nature, this existence is constantly devoid of intrinsic nature; hence it is said that illusory existence has never not been empty. Furthermore, this very lack of intrinsic nature, in its entirety, follows conditions to form existence; hence existence is clarified directly through emptiness." Thus this commentary directly clarifies that true emptiness is the true emptiness that is identical with illusory existence, and illusory existence is the illusory existence that is identical with true emptiness; hence it is said that it comprehensively fuses emptiness and existence to reveal the Middle Way.
1.12
From "Being empty" onward is the second [section]: separately fusing emptiness and existence to reveal the Middle Way. That is, upon both illusory existence and true emptiness, it reveals a meaning of the Middle Way for each. First, "existent" refers to the substance of the illusory dharma itself, which is the meaning of "not non-existent" on illusory existence. Next, saying "empty existence" means that this illusory dharma arises from conditions and lacks intrinsic nature; existence that is identical with emptiness is the existence belonging to emptiness, hence it is called "empty existence." "Therefore it is not existent": because its entire substance is completely empty and non-existent, this is the meaning of "not existent" on illusory existence. "Not existent" and "not non-existent" are non-dual, forming a single illusory existence. The Zongzhi states: "First, the meaning of 'not existent' refers to its entire substance being completely empty, having nothing that exists."
1.13
"Second, the meaning of 'not non-existent' refers to not waiting to destroy those differentiated marks. The Pañcaviṃśatisāhasrikā states: 'All dharmas are non-existent, yet exist in this way'; therefore, neither existent nor non-existent is called illusory existence." Next, saying "empty" refers to the meaning of "not non-empty" on true emptiness. Saying "existent emptiness" means that this true emptiness is the emptiness of pratītyasamutpāda and lack of intrinsic nature; emptiness that is identical with existence is the emptiness belonging to existence, hence it is called "existent emptiness." "Therefore it is not empty": because one does not wait to annihilate pratītyasamutpāda before it becomes empty. The emptiness of complete existence is therefore not empty; this is the meaning of "not empty" on true emptiness. "Not empty" and "not non-empty" are non-dual, forming a single true emptiness. The Zongzhi states: "Second, within the true there are also two meanings: first, the meaning of 'not empty,' because emptiness lacks the mark of emptiness; second, the meaning of 'not non-empty,' because all other marks are without exception exhausted. Therefore, neither empty nor non-empty is called true emptiness." A sūtra states: "Emptiness and non-emptiness are unobtainable; this is named true emptiness." The Madhyamakaśāstra states: "Dharmas without intrinsic nature are also non-existent, because all dharmas are empty." The Zongzhi combines these into a fivefold Middle Way: First, non-existence is precisely not non-existence; taking these as non-dual constitutes illusory existence. The Mahāyānasūtrālaṃkāra states: 'It has no substance, yet is not without substance; being not without substance is precisely substance; having no substance and substance are non-dual; therefore it is said to be an illusion.' This takes having no substance as the illusory substance, hence it speaks of non-duality; because this non-duality does not fall to one extreme, it is called the Middle Way. This is the Middle Way of conventional truth. Second, within the true, not empty is precisely not non-empty; taking these as non-dual constitutes true emptiness; departing from both extremes is called the Middle Way. This is the Middle Way of ultimate truth. Third, non-existence within the illusory is precisely the meaning of not non-empty within the true; not non-existence within the illusory is precisely the meaning of not empty within the true, because both are non-dual. Since this non-duality and the previous non-duality are further non-dual, the two truths are both harmonized and do not fall to one extreme; this is called the Middle Way. This is the Middle Way of the two truths. Fourth, non-existence within the illusory and not empty within the true fuse into non-duality; hence it is called the Middle Way. This is the Middle Way of neither existent nor empty. A sūtra states: 'Neither existent nor non-existent is called the Middle Way.' Fifth, not non-existence within the illusory is precisely not non-empty within the true; this is the Middle Way of neither non-existent nor non-empty, which means the Middle within the absolute. Therefore, the two truths are fused and blended, wondrously transcending the middle and the extremes; that is the meaning. Among these, the first two Middle Ways are the separate fusion of emptiness and existence; the latter three are the mutual interlacing of the two truths to reveal the Middle Way.
1.14
From "Not empty" onward is the third [section]: revealing the correct and eliminating the incorrect to clarify the Middle Way. The words "not empty" and so forth refer to: because of lack of intrinsic nature, it is empty; because of pratītyasamutpāda, it is empty; this constitutes true emptiness. Zhenguo said: "It reveals the correct." "Empty yet not annihilated" means that it is not the emptiness of the view of non-existence or the view of annihilation. Zhenguo said: "It eliminates the incorrect." The non-existence of the view of annihilation is a non-existence of fixed nature; a fixed non-existence clings to annihilation. Now, being empty because of pratītyasamutpāda is not a fixed non-existence. Being empty because of lack of intrinsic nature is also not a fixed non-existence. A fixed non-existence is utterly without things, like turtle fur and rabbit horns. Now, it merely lacks intrinsic nature from conditions, so it is not a fixed non-existence; therefore, it is empty yet not annihilated. "Not existent" and so forth also first reveals the correct and afterwards eliminates the incorrect. "The existence of non-existence" means: existence because of lack of intrinsic nature, and existence because of pratītyasamutpāda; these two kinds of existence are by no means the existence of eternalism. The existence of eternalism is an existence of fixed nature. Now, the existence that is from conditions and lacks intrinsic nature is not an existence of fixed nature; it reveals that it is illusory existence, which reveals the correct. Since it is not an existence of fixed nature, it says "existent yet not permanent," which eliminates the incorrect. Thus it is true emptiness and wondrous existence, the Middle Way that departs from annihilation and permanence.
1.15
From "the four attachments" onward: fourth, leaving behind slanders and possessing virtues to reveal the Middle Way. Zhenguo said: "As for the Middle Way, not only are 'neither existence nor non-existence' [the Middle Way], but 'neither annihilation nor permanence' and so forth are all the Middle Way." The four attachments are also called the four slanders. Zhenguo said: "Definite existence is the slander of superimposition. Definite non-existence is the slander of deprecation. Both existence and non-existence is the slander of contradiction. Neither existence nor non-existence is the slander of frivolous proliferation. One and different, both and neither, permanent and impermanent, and so forth, are all called the four slanders." Grasping and clinging definitively to the four propositions according to emotional attachment—these all therefore constitute slanders. Prajñā is free from the four propositions, because it cannot be apprehended through existence or non-existence. Now, once the four attachments are extinguished, they immediately become the four virtues. Our Ancestral Master also said: "Yet all possess virtues and do not constitute the four slanders." This means that these four propositions are themselves possessing virtues because they correspond to reality, not being the same as emotional calculation. He also said: "The emptiness that exhausts existence and the existence that exhausts emptiness only then constitute possessing virtues. Furthermore, in each case, the emptiness that is identical with existence only then is the emptiness that possesses virtue; the existence that is identical with emptiness only then is the existence that possesses virtue. Moreover, whichever single proposition is taken, it must possess the remaining three; if any is missing, then it does not possess virtues." As for "the hundred negations are hereby dispelled," the treatise says: "The hundred negations are not negations; the thousand affirmations are not affirmations. Negate the hundred negations, turn back from the thousand affirmations; negation of negation is the center, turning back from turning back is heaven." Talk of pouring water ceases when the feet are severed; the measure of deliberate thought halts when the hands are lost. This may well be called the great lineage of the Middle Way of the two truths in prajñā. An ancient said: "Object and wisdom do not penetrate the remaining sections; the meaning seems not yet settled, so I do not wish to follow in their tracks." The formal narrative of the abstruse and profound above is now completed.
1.16
From "Prajñā" onward: second, concluding by returning to the profound intent. Prajñā's emptiness and profundity is indeed the ultimate exemplar of all expositions and the non-difference of the true oneness. It is the standard speech of the sixteen assemblies and the elegant pronouncements of twenty-four years. Its essential principle is hidden and subtle. Transcending emotional view and departing from grasping, it stands alone beyond the realm of named existence and breaks free from the muddy path of trailing the tail. Abstruse though it is, wondrous though it is again, is it not fully exhausted in this preface! Therefore it says, "Is it not this that is meant?"
1.17
From "If traversing" onward: second, separately praising the true exposition to reveal the subtle purport fully exhausted, divided into two: first, universally clarifying the extensive and the condensed, divided into two: first, showing the text. "If traversing" and so forth means that if one traverses the matters of form, mind, and so forth to set forth the correct principle comprehensively, there are eight divisions and two hundred thousand verses. There are four kinds of verses: first, anuṣṭubh, translated here as "counted-character verse"—without regard to prose, simply counting thirty-two syllables is called one verse. Second, gāthā, translated here as "chanted verse" or "direct verse", because it directly uses verses to praise the beauty of the Dharma gates. Third, geya, translated here as "responsive verse", because it responds to the preceding prose in verse. Fourth, collected-giving verse, because it accumulates the meanings of the Dharma to enable recitation and retention. The present case is the first. From "If grasping" onward refers to the condensed sūtra. "Pivot" refers to a door-hinge. The Erya says: "Constructing panels to frame the side of the door is called a pivot." That is what popular speech calls the door-pin. Furthermore, speech and action are the pivot and mechanism of the exemplary person, meaning the essential of a grand hall and the foundation of the four limbs, which is used to illustrate the sudden and real purport expounded by the eight divisions. This sūtra completely covers it; therefore it says, "Grasping its essentials, the principle is exhausted in fourteen lines." A line is simply a line of seventeen characters. The Preface to the Adhyardhaśatikā Prajñāpāramitā says: "This sūtra thoroughly examines the purport and destination of all assemblies, and gathers up the main threads of accumulated chapters." Qingliang said: "It clearly refers to the Adhyardhaśatikā of the six hundred fascicles." The present sūtra is also the essential pivot of the six hundred fascicles.
1.18
From "From this it is known" onward: second, revealing the intent, divided into two: first, extensive and condensed depend on capacity. The commentary master said: "As capacities and conditions respond differently, the holy responses therefore differ." The treatise says that the extensive arises from the capacity of faculties, and the condensed arises from the faculties' capacity. The Tathāgata then responds to them with the extensively spoken sūtras and the concisely spoken sūtras; therefore it says, "Extensive and condensed follow conditions." Conditions are the conditions of capacity. From "transcending words" onward: second, the principle being perfect, they appear together. The commentary master also said: "Though the holy responses differ, they are inconceivably one." A sūtra says: "Like a foolish man who fears empty space and runs away, though he passes through eons numerous as the sands of the Ganges, he cannot escape; wherever he reaches, he does not depart from empty space." Truly because the wondrous lineage of true emptiness has a nature that is nowhere absent, it can appear together.
1.19
From "Prajñā" onward: second, separately narrating the present sūtra, divided into two: first, wondrous praise answering the capacity. "Dark thoroughfare" and "sea of suffering" serve as metaphors for sentient beings rushing through birth and death without the light of wisdom, unable to find the boundaries or bottom of the five sufferings and eight sufferings. "High torch" and "swift vessel" illustrate this sūtra's wisdom of the three non-characteristics, which rescues and meets the capacities of living beings, guiding those who have gone astray; among the crowd of sūtras, none can compare to this foremost one. From "However" onward: second, briefly showing the title of the sūtra, divided into two: first, briefly setting forth the essentials. Regarding "prajñā" and so forth, Master Zhao said: "However, wisdom has the scrutiny that plumbs the depths yet is without knowledge; spirit has the functioning that responds to encounters yet is without thought. Because spirit is without thought, it can reign uniquely beyond the world; because wisdom is without knowledge, it can mystically illuminate outside of affairs." A sūtra says: "Prajñā is without knowledge, yet there is nothing it does not know." This is contemplating dharmatā. From "pāramitā" onward: "function" means functioning, namely straining humans, devas, and nāgas across the sea of birth and death to place them on the shore of nirvāṇa; this is the function of this wondrous wisdom. As for "the heart reveals" and so forth, it praises how the text that can expound, being condensed, can wonderfully and superbly subsume the extensive. Just as in the title of the Perfect Enlightenment Sūtra, the five characters "complete-meaning sūtra" appear, so Guifeng's outline assigned the lower six characters entirely to the text that can expound. The Subcommentary says: "The above five characters praise this sūtra's supremacy in comparison with other sūtras, intending to show that the single scripture of Perfect Enlightenment is a sūtra of complete meaning within the basket of sūtras." Now the commentary master specifically highlights fourteen lines as the essential marvel within the six hundred fascicles, intending to say that it is the heart within the prajñā division, just as the human heart is the essential of the whole body. Having earlier extensively narrated the profound depth of what is expounded, he here specifically shows that the nominal prajñā of the text that can expound is like refined luminescence and vaporous silk. This accords with the translator's sole focus on illuminating it through metaphor. Regarding "A sūtra is..." and so forth, a thread can string flowers together, and a warp can maintain the woof; the sage proclaims the Dharma meanings, and the sūtra strings them together. From "Following Dharma" onward: second, concluding by meaning to form the Dharma of prajñā. The heart is the metaphor; the Heart Sūtra is the exposition and prajñā is the intent, concluded as the title.
1.20
From "About to explain" onward: second, opening the chapters to explain the text, divided into two: first, identifying and listing the chapter headings. Regarding "five headings", the commentary follows the brevity of the sūtra, restricting the headings to five. The first three are headings of meaning, and the latter two are the actual explanation, because the title of the sūtra is itself the source text. However, these five headings arise in an orderly sequence. First, the arising of the teaching: words of the sage are not uttered in vain; his actions invariably have a reason. Were it not for a great causal condition, this teaching would not arise. Although teachings are limitless, they do not exceed the two baskets, the three baskets, and the teaching gates of provisional and real. Although one knows the profound intent, one does not yet understand what is revered. Once the ancestral purport is clarified, one must know the title. Once the essential outline has been revealed, the text is still difficult to understand. The sequence of the five chapters is briefly like this. From "First, the teaching..." onward: second, explaining according to the headings, divided into five: first, the arising of the teaching, divided into two: first, the general idea of its arising. Regarding "the arising of the teaching", the treatise asks: "For what causal condition did the Buddha speak the Prajñāpāramitā Sūtra? The Buddhas do not spontaneously utter words for no reason or for minor causal conditions, just as Sumeru, king of mountains, does not move for no reason or for minor causal conditions. Now for what great causal condition did he speak the Prajñāpāramitā Sūtra?" Therefore the commentary cites this to initiate the general idea of the teaching's arising.
1.21
From "First, it is said" onward: second, opening the chapters to explain separately, divided into two: first, the correct explanation, in four parts: first, refuting heterodoxy and turning back the lesser [vehicle]. This means that Makkhali and others extensively produced views of existence and non-existence, operating outside of principle. The World-Honoured One spoke the Prajñā and other sūtras to refute a real self and dharmas, transforming and causing them to enter the Path. Second, the vessels of the Deer Park, having gradually matured through the rebukes of the Vaipulya teachings—the Prajñā sūtras extensively expounded that all dharmas are in their own nature empty, overturning that lesser vehicle and leading them to enter the Great Vehicle. Therefore the Pañcaviṃśatisāhasrikā says: "If a person wishes to attain the fruit of an arhat, they should train in the Prajñāpāramitā," and so forth. The commentary master said: "Ninety-five kinds [of heterodox teachers] vied in fanning the winds of error, and the eighteen schools competed in brandishing the flame of a torch; consequently the sun of wisdom of true emptiness concealed its radiance behind dark clouds, and the mysterious pearl of prajñā was mistaken for a fish eye."
1.22
From "Third, causing..." onward: second, revealing the principle and perfecting practice. The first two reveal the principle; the next three perfect practice. Regarding "causing the small..." and so forth, these are the people of the three confused thoughts below. For their sake prajñā was spoken, causing their minds to be purified and enter principle. From "Fourth, causing awakening..." onward: as for "right view", causing them to have correct faith and understanding, comprehending the middle and the true, not clinging definitively to real form or emptiness—only this is called right view. "Middle Way of the two truths": because it is what this sūtra expounds. The Meaning Notes say: "The Sanlun school takes prajñā as its basis, universally taking the Middle Way of the two truths as its ancestral purport. That text fully displays ultimate and conventional, emptiness and existence, yielding and taking, preservation and destruction, to clarify dependent existence and essential emptiness. Either they take from each other to complete exhaustion, or they grant each other complete preservation, or they destroy themselves and preserve themselves without obstruction. In the gate of granting each other, the emptiness that does not destroy existence and that existence which does not destroy emptiness do not mix in principle; therefore it forms the gate of non-oneness. In the gate of taking from each other, this emptiness that destroys existence and the existence that exhausts emptiness completely take from each other; therefore they are not one. In the gate of each preserving itself, they do not affirm each other; therefore they are not one. In the gate of each destroying itself, there is no oneness that can be one; therefore they are not one. Because preservation and destruction are unobstructed and the two principles do not mix, not falling into extremes, they do not lose the Middle Way; this is called the Middle Way of the two truths. The meaning of non-difference is as clarified there. Furthermore, non-oneness and non-difference are again not two, because pratītyasamutpāda is without duality. Because the emptiness that destroys existence is identical with the existence that exhausts emptiness without obstruction, being extremely contrary they are still extremely harmonious; therefore taking and granting are again not two, interpenetrating without obstruction. Because non-oneness is identical with non-difference, the two truths are immediately the Middle Way. Because non-difference is identical with non-oneness, the Middle Way is immediately the two truths. Furthermore, non-oneness and non-difference are also not one; therefore non-difference which is identical with non-oneness and non-oneness which is identical with non-difference do not mix in meaning, and are thus not one. This means that the two within non-difference and the middle within the non-different two interpenetrate without mixing; therefore, neither middle nor two, they fully possess the middle and the two; this is called the Middle Way where middle and extremes are without impediment and without obstruction." To cause this awakening, this teaching arose. From "Fifth, revealing..." onward: below this, desiring to perfect supreme practice, he therefore expounded this sūtra. Because pure faith and the great mind are the root of the myriad practices, and generating the three minds to cultivate the ten faiths is itself practice. As for "the Buddha's virtues", the four virtues of permanence and so forth, as well as the truly pure merits numerous as the sands of the Ganges on the Buddha stage, in meaning are identical to the Huayan presenting the fruition to encourage joyful generation of the mind of faith.
1.23
Question: The Notes on Awakening says that the emptiness school holds the Buddha's virtues to be empty, saying that in the various divisions of Prajñā and throughout the Hundred Verse Treatise and the Twelve Gate Treatise from beginning to end, this is so, and it also cites "with nothing to attain" and so forth in this sūtra, all calling it their doctrine. On what basis do you now speak of the virtues of permanence, bliss, and so forth? Answer: That was to complete the position of Zhiguang; this accords with the commentary master. Because below, in determining what is attained, it says "no virtue is not complete", it is not that the Buddha's virtues are empty.
First 23 of 95 passages. Read on