[Pramāṇa](https://indike.org/pramana/) › [Indian literature](https://indike.org/pramana/in) › [Buddhist Literature](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha) › [Taishō Tripiṭaka (Chinese Buddhist canon)](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho) › [金剛三昧經論](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.1730) › 2.17 # 金剛三昧經論 2.17 金剛三昧經論 2.17 - **Language:** Classical Chinese ### [2.17](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.1730.2.17) 論曰：此下第六為釋。於中有四：先開無得道理、次示無生道理、三者舉非、四者明是。初中有三，謂法、喻、合。初言無忍無生心者，是牒正在法忍之心。言心無形段者，顯心無所得。形之言體、段之言分，就諸緣中求心體分，若即若離皆無所得。由是道理故無形段，非謂無色形段相也。喻中火性雖處木中者，喻於忍心雖處理中。其在無所者，就此木中有諸極微，於中都無火性所在。如是理中有恒沙法門，於中求心永無所在。如是火性無處道理，有佛無佛法性常爾，故言決定性故。火性名下義不可得。如是火性雖不可得，而其木中非無火性，欲詮此理說火性名。推析此名但有諸字，轉求諸字皆無所得。忍心名相當知亦爾，故次合言心相亦爾。得忍菩薩知心如是，何得於中能取心生？以之故言則無生心。 > The commentary states: From here below is the sixth \[division\], providing the explanation. Therein are four parts: first, disclosing the principle of non-attainment; next, showing the principle of non-arising; third, presenting the incorrect; and fourth, clarifying the correct. In the first part, there are three: dharma, metaphor, and application. The initial statement 'As for the mind devoid of tolerance and devoid of arising' cites the mind that directly abides in the tolerance of dharmas. The statement 'the mind has no shape or parts' reveals that the mind has nothing to be attained. 'Shape' refers to essence; 'parts' refers to divisions. Seeking the essence and divisions of the mind among various conditions, whether identical or separate, they are entirely unobtainable. It is by this principle that it lacks shape or parts, not referring to marks of material shape and parts. In the metaphor, 'the nature of fire, although dwelling in wood' illustrates that the mind of tolerance, although dwelling in principle, 'has no location': within this wood there are subtle atoms, but among them there is completely no location for the nature of fire. Likewise, within principle there are Dharma-doors as numerous as the sands of the Ganges, but seeking the mind among them, there is utterly no location. Such a principle of the nature of fire being without location is eternally so in the nature of dharmas, whether Buddhas appear or not; hence it says 'because it is of a determinate nature'. Under the designation 'nature of fire', the referent is unobtainable. Although such a nature of fire is unobtainable, it is not that the wood lacks the nature of fire; wishing to express this principle, the designation 'nature of fire' is spoken. Analyzing this designation, there are only letters; seeking these letters in turn, they are entirely unobtainable. The marks and designations of the mind of tolerance should be understood to be likewise; hence next it applies it, saying 'The marks of the mind are also like this.' A bodhisattva who has attained tolerance, knowing the mind to be like this, how could an apprehension of the mind arise within it? For this reason, it says: 'there is then no arising mind.' > — English (machine translation) (machine translation) - [Previous: 2.16](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.1730.2.16) - [Next: 2.18](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.1730.2.18) - [Up: 2](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.1730.2) ## Translations (1) - [English (machine translation)](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.1730~en-mt.2.17) — English, machine translation --- Source: [https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.1730.2.17](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.1730.2.17) · Pramāṇa