勝鬘寶窟 3.17

3.17

就文為二：初一章明二乘依有量諦，若無智、無聖、無諦；佛依無量諦，故有此三法。次三章於無量中說如來藏法身空義隱覆，故無量甚深。即顯有量諦不說此三法，故有量非甚深。始終論之，有量無六法故。佛依無量諦故究竟，二乘依有量故不究竟。此章名無邊聖諦，宜依章名以開文。又為二：前明有聖無聖、次明有諦無諦。初又二：初明有聖法無聖法、次明有聖人無聖人。如《涅槃》云「以何義故名聖人耶？有聖法故、有聖戒故、有聖定故、有聖慧故、常觀諸法性空寂故。以是義故，諸佛菩薩為聖人也。」是故前論聖法、次明聖人。聖法乃多，今正論慧。慧中四對明量無量智異：初一對，顯諦有漸至非漸至；第二「金剛喻」下一對，顯第一非第一；三「以無二聖諦智」下一對，明思識不思議；四「若壞一切煩惱藏」下一對，顯究竟不究竟。初對中，前明觀有量諦智漸至、後明觀無量無漸至。問：此中約如來智以明無邊諦，何須說彼二乘智耶？答：凡有三義，一舉小以顯於大、二欲簡小取於大故、三欲令小入於大故。問：四對中，何故初明漸至非漸至耶？答：漸至無漸至，即是漸見四諦、頓見四諦。二乘人漸見四諦、大乘頓見四諦，今欲明大小二種見諦不同，是故今初論有漸至無漸至義。前有四句：一「初觀聖諦」者，明二乘中聲聞緣覺初觀聖諦。總以標舉，對後如來無作諦觀，說彼為初。故經云「聲聞見諦之始，佛見諦之終」也。問：緣覺觀十二緣，今此何故說言觀諦？答：緣覺所觀因緣是苦集攝，故名觀諦。又復緣覺就十二緣作四十四智觀，此亦是四諦觀故。四十四者，十二因緣次第相生有十一對，一一對中各觀四諦，名四十四也。又須解小乘法中明悟道義，雖言為聲聞說四諦、為緣覺說十二因緣、為菩薩說六度，此教有三耳。若入道斷惑，終觀四諦；若不觀四諦，無斷惑法。今據此義，故聲聞緣覺同觀四諦也。故《智度論》云「菩薩若證四諦，成辟支佛。」二「以一智斷諸住地」者，明二乘人，單用初一有作諦智斷四住地，不用無作斷無明地，故名一智。一智者，靈味寺諒法師及馥師悉云：以一平等智斷四住地。今不用，如向釋也。第三「以一智四」者，明二乘人，單就初一有作智中約境歷分，故成四智，名一智四也。從「斷」下，別列也。「斷」者斷集，「知」者知苦，「功德」者修道，「作證」者證滅。餘經論中，前果後因；今依順觀，所以前因後果。此則四智漸至。有人言：以一智者，上直言以一智斷諸住地，猶未識是何智，為用有智斷惑、為用空智斷惑？是故釋云：非用有智斷，正用一空平等智斷，故云一智也。四斷智者，四住地煩惱斷也。智乃非斷，以智斷煩惱，故說斷知。此因智得斷，果中說因，故名斷智。如《毘曇》說九斷知，《婆沙》亦云斷知。《阿含》亦云斷知，故名善逝。此皆以惑斷因智而得，故云斷知也。「功德作證」者，煩惱斷處無為功德也，聲聞證此無為功德為果也。「善知此四法義」者，此第四顯善知有量四諦義。上一智四，明四智漸至；今明四緣漸至。無量中既言無漸至，故知有量有漸至。有人言：亦善知此四法義者，出空觀，緣四諦差別分明，故言善知四法義也。當在無生空平等理觀時，不見四諦苦集之異。若得四諦空解者，識有中便分明，故云亦善知此法也。顯無漸至中有二：一辨上上智無漸至；二從「如是出世間上上智」，此明無漸至者是上上智，如此翻覆相成說也。「無有出世間上上智、四智漸至、四緣漸至」者，對二乘人觀有作聖諦，有四智漸至及四緣漸至；是故今明出世間上上智，無有四智漸至及四緣漸至，此對有明無也。而言「上上智」者，二乘觀有作諦之智，對凡名上；對觀有作之上，明觀無作是上上智。又菩薩智慧是出世，佛智過彼，名上上智。如《涅槃經》言「上智觀故，得菩薩菩提。上上智觀故，得佛菩提。」故名上上也，正對二乘也。「無有出世間上上智」，此明上上智無漸至義。無漸至者，明佛果起時，無有前得苦智不得餘三，故言無出世間上上智四智漸至也。「及四緣漸至」者，一切境界於佛心內顯現，故言無四緣漸至也。以佛頓得四智，頓見四境故也。「無漸至法」者，總結一切諸佛同無漸至法。「如是出世間上上智」者，此出無漸至智斷也。有人言：有二種四諦解也。其止得一種，是得智之漸，故云四智漸至。境是發智之緣，其止得一智之境，故亦云漸至。若金剛行滿，照八諦佛心頓了，為無漸至，乃是出世上上智也。今不用此釋；但二乘漸見四諦、佛頓見也。有人言：小乘宗有二，一次第見諦、二一時見諦。次第見諦則有四諦漸至及四緣漸至，故有漸至法；一時見諦無四智漸至及四緣漸至，無漸至法。今勝鬘評量道理無漸至，不用有漸至，即是對有漸至明無漸至，故言無有出世間上上智、四智漸至及四緣漸至。無漸至家凡有二種：見諦道前，次第見諦，故有漸至；見諦已去，空平等頓見四諦，無有漸至。見諦道前，從四念處至世第一法，名之為上；見諦已去，過於彼上，故云上上。今撿《佛性論》，聲聞有二種：一利根人，於一念中等觀四諦，八十八惑一時俱斷，皆名為見諦。若鈍根人，次第觀，即初念見苦，不見餘三諦，但苦下四諦名為見諦。今明前解，以聲聞為漸見、佛為頓見，以聲聞多漸見諦也。第二對中，前明佛智是第一義，却明二乘非第一義。有人言：金剛心惑盡照圓，名金剛能斷。如說得佛時，猶有首楞嚴定及金剛定，故說金剛心為金剛也。今明佛智是常，不為生滅所壞，類同金剛堅固不為物壞，故云「金剛喻者」。又金剛無惑不摧，如云無明住地，佛菩提智斷。又徹窮際，本非際不停。佛智亦然，徹窮無作諦理，非住有作四諦而停也。能滅無明，見第一義，故名第一義智。「非聲聞緣覺」者，此明二乘無第一義智。初非之一字，對上是起。上明金剛喻者，是第一義智；今對彼是，故明二乘非也。須長牽非字向下，謂非聲聞緣覺不斷無明初聖諦智是第一義諦智也。「聲聞緣覺不斷無明住地」，此句明二乘不斷無明，謂斷惑不盡。「初聖諦智」，此明二乘初觀有作聖諦，謂見理未周。「是第一義諦智」者，結非也。不用二乘斷惑不盡、見理未周之智為第一義諦智也。「世尊以無二聖諦智斷諸住地」，此第三對，承言便故。前明二乘斷障不窮，是可思議。第二明佛斷盡，是不可思議。明二乘中，「以無二聖諦智斷諸住地」者，二乘但得一有作智，斷四住地；不得第二無作智，故不滅無明。有人言：二乘無有作及無作二聖智斷五住煩惱，故無第一義智。諸住地者，總五住地，故言諸也。有人言：此語承前文。前云二乘既非第一義智，今何者是第一義諦智？是故言以無二聖諦智斷諸地。無二者，是一實智，故能斷五住惑。惑盡，故言以無二聖諦智斷諸住地也。有人言：以之言用，謂用無作智觀理盡。以境非二，故言無二也。後之二解，語雖小異，無二之言同約佛智也。「世尊如來應等正覺」，若依前門，無二聖諦辨二乘不盡；今明佛盡。如來等覺，舉能斷之人。「非聲聞」下，明能斷智。就此智中，言「非聲聞緣覺境界」者，對劣顯勝。「不思議空智」，正明智體。「斷一切」下，明能盡障。五住皆滅，名斷一切。問：何故言不思議空智耶？答：佛乃雙照有無；然斷煩惱，要是實相之智。然實相實非空有，但對有故名之為空。問：但應言空智，何故言不思議？馥師云：「佛智能照空照有，而非空非有，故名不思議空智。得此空智，故一切惑斷。」龍樹云：「空有三：一外道邪見空；二者但空，謂二乘空智；三者無所得空智，謂菩薩空智也。」今是無所得空智，非二乘所知，故言不思議。問：何故言煩惱藏？答：四住及無明，攝一切煩惱皆在其內，故名為藏。又此惑能藏如來法身，故名為藏。「世尊若壞一切煩惱藏」，此第四對，承前便故。前明如來果德究竟，後明二乘果德不究竟。明佛智中，「壞一切煩惱」者，牒前起後。「究竟智」者，正明其相。是名第一舉境以結。「初聖諦智」下，第二明二乘果不究竟。「初聖諦智」，牒二乘智。「非究竟」者，正辨其相。「向菩提」者，顯不究竟義。

Regarding the text, there are two parts: First, one chapter explains that because the two vehicles rely on the measured truths, it is as though there is no wisdom, no noble person, and no truth; whereas the Buddha relies on the immeasurable truths, and therefore possesses these three dharmas. Next, three chapters explain that within the immeasurable, the empty meaning of the tathāgatagarbha and dharmakāya is concealed and hidden, and therefore the immeasurable is extremely profound. This reveals that the measured truths do not explain these three dharmas, and therefore the measured is not extremely profound. Discussing it from beginning to end, it is because the measured lacks the six dharmas. Because the Buddha relies on the immeasurable truths, he is ultimate; because the two vehicles rely on the measured, they are not ultimate. This chapter is entitled "Boundless Noble Truths"; the text should properly be opened according to the chapter title. This again has two parts: first, explaining the presence of the noble and the absence of the noble; next, explaining the presence of the truths and the absence of the truths. The first part also has two sections: first, explaining the presence of noble dharmas and the absence of noble dharmas; next, explaining the presence of noble persons and the absence of noble persons. As the Mahāparinirvāṇa-sūtra says: "For what reason are they called noble persons? Because they possess noble dharmas, because they possess noble moral discipline, because they possess noble concentration, because they possess noble wisdom, and because they constantly contemplate the inherent emptiness and stillness of all dharmas. For this reason, the buddhas and bodhisattvas are noble persons." Therefore, noble dharmas are discussed first, and noble persons are explained next. Noble dharmas are numerous indeed, but here wisdom is principally discussed. Within wisdom, four pairs explain the difference between measured and immeasurable wisdom: The first pair reveals that the truths involve gradual arrival versus non-gradual arrival; the second pair, beginning from "vajra simile" onwards, reveals the supreme versus the non-supreme; the third pair, beginning from "through wisdom without duality in the noble truths" onwards, explains the conceivable versus the inconceivable; the fourth pair, beginning from "if one destroys the entire store of afflictions" onwards, reveals the ultimate versus the non-ultimate. In the first pair, the former explains that the wisdom contemplating the measured truths involves gradual arrival, while the latter explains that contemplating the immeasurable involves no gradual arrival. Question: Here, boundless truths are explained with reference to the Tathāgata's wisdom; why is it necessary to speak of the wisdom of the two vehicles? Answer: There are three reasons altogether: first, to adduce the small so as to reveal the great; second, from the desire to distinguish the small and grasp the great; third, from the desire to cause the small to enter into the great. Question: Among the four pairs, why is gradual arrival versus non-gradual arrival explained first? Answer: Gradual arrival and non-gradual arrival are precisely seeing the four truths gradually versus seeing the four truths suddenly. People of the two vehicles see the four truths gradually, while the Mahāyāna sees the four truths suddenly. Wishing now to explain the difference between these two ways of seeing the truths in the Great and Small, the meaning of possessing gradual arrival and lacking gradual arrival is discussed first. Preceding this are four phrases: First, "initially contemplating the noble truths" explains that the śrāvakas and pratyekabuddhas among the two vehicles initially contemplate the noble truths. This is a general heading, stated as "initial" in contrast to the Tathāgata's subsequent contemplation of the non-conditioned truths. Therefore the sūtra says: "The śrāvaka is the beginning of seeing the truths; the Buddha is the completion of seeing the truths." Question: The pratyekabuddha contemplates the twelve links of dependent origination; why is it said here that they contemplate the truths? Answer: The causes and conditions contemplated by the pratyekabuddha are subsumed under suffering and origination; hence it is called contemplating the truths. Furthermore, regarding the twelve links of dependent origination, the pratyekabuddha performs contemplation through forty-four kinds of wisdom, which is likewise a contemplation of the four truths. "Forty-four" means that in the sequential arising of the twelve links of dependent origination there are eleven pairs, and within each pair the four truths are contemplated, which is called forty-four. Moreover, one must understand that in the Hīnayāna Dharma, when the meaning of awakening to the Path is explained, although it is said that the four truths are taught for the śrāvakas, the twelve links of dependent origination are taught for the pratyekabuddhas, and the six pāramitās are taught for the bodhisattvas, this teaching merely has three varieties. When it comes to entering the Path and severing delusion, they ultimately contemplate the four truths; if they did not contemplate the four truths, there would be no method for severing delusion. Now relying on this meaning, śrāvakas and pratyekabuddhas together contemplate the four truths. Therefore the Mahāprajñāpāramitopadeśa says: "If a bodhisattva realizes the four truths, he becomes a pratyekabuddha." Second, "severing the dwelling-grounds through a single wisdom" explains that people of the two vehicles exclusively employ the first wisdom of conditioned truths to sever the four dwelling-grounds, and do not employ the non-conditioned to sever the dwelling-ground of ignorance; hence it is called "a single wisdom." Regarding "a single wisdom," both Master Liang and Master Fu of Lingwei Monastery said: The four dwelling-grounds are severed through a single impartial wisdom. This is not adopted here, which follows the preceding explanation. Third, "by a single wisdom, four" explains that, for people of the two vehicles, looking exclusively within that first conditioned wisdom and dividing it according to the objective spheres, it constitutes four wisdoms; hence it is called "by a single wisdom, four." From "severing" onward, they are listed separately: "Severing" is severing origination; "knowing" is knowing suffering; "merit" is cultivating the Path; "realizing" is realizing cessation. In other sūtras and treatises, the fruit precedes and the cause follows; here, following direct contemplation, the cause precedes and the fruit follows. This, then, is the gradual arrival of the four wisdoms. Someone said: Regarding "by a single wisdom," above it merely said "severing the dwelling-grounds through a single wisdom," and it was not yet known what wisdom this is—whether delusion is severed using wisdom of existence or using wisdom of emptiness. Therefore it is explained: It is not severed using wisdom of existence, but is severed precisely using a single impartial wisdom of emptiness; hence it says "a single wisdom." The fourth, "wisdom of severing," refers to the severing of the afflictions of the four dwelling-grounds. Wisdom is not itself severing; because afflictions are severed by means of wisdom, it is spoken of as severing and knowing. Here, severing is obtained due to wisdom; the cause is spoken of within the fruit, so it is called the wisdom of severing. As the Abhidharma speaks of nine knowledges of severing, the Mahāvibhāṣā also speaks of knowledge of severing. The Āgamas also speak of knowledge of severing, on which account [the Buddha] is called Sugata. These are all attained due to the wisdom that is the cause of severing delusion; hence it is called the wisdom of severing. "Realizing merit" refers to the unconditioned merit at the place where afflictions are severed; the śrāvaka realizes this unconditioned merit as the fruit. "Well knowing the meaning of these four dharmas": this fourth phrase reveals the meaning of well knowing the measured four truths. The "by a single wisdom, four" above explained the gradual arrival of the four wisdoms; here it explains the gradual arrival of the four conditions. Since it is said that in the immeasurable there is no gradual arrival, we know that in the measured there is gradual arrival. Someone said: "Also well knowing the meaning of these four dharmas" means that upon emerging from the contemplation of emptiness, one's conditioning of the differences among the four truths is distinct and clear; hence it is said to well know the meaning of the four dharmas. While engaged in the contemplation of the impartial principle of unarisen emptiness, one does not see the differences of suffering and origination among the four truths. If one attains an understanding of the emptiness of the four truths, one discerns them clearly within existence; hence it says "also well knowing these dharmas." Within revealing the absence of gradual arrival there are two parts: first, distinguishing that the supreme wisdom has no gradual arrival; second, from "such supramundane supreme wisdom" onwards, explaining that that which has no gradual arrival is the supreme wisdom. Thus they are explained as mutually reinforcing each other back and forth. "There is no supramundane supreme wisdom with gradual arrival of the four wisdoms or gradual arrival of the four conditions": in contrast to people of the two vehicles contemplating the conditioned noble truths having the gradual arrival of the four wisdoms and the gradual arrival of the four conditions, it is now explained that the supramundane supreme wisdom has no gradual arrival of the four wisdoms or gradual arrival of the four conditions; this clarifies non-existence in contrast to existence. As for the words "supreme wisdom," the wisdom of the two vehicles contemplating the conditioned truths is called superior in contrast to ordinary beings; in contrast to that superior contemplation of the conditioned, contemplating the non-conditioned is the supreme wisdom. Furthermore, the wisdom of bodhisattvas is supramundane, and the Buddha's wisdom surpasses it, so it is called supreme wisdom. As the Mahāparinirvāṇa-sūtra says: "Because of contemplation by superior wisdom, one attains bodhisattva bodhi. Because of contemplation by supreme wisdom, one attains buddha bodhi." Hence it is called supreme, standing in direct contrast to the two vehicles. "There is no supramundane supreme wisdom": this explains the meaning of supreme wisdom having no gradual arrival. Having no gradual arrival means that when the buddha-fruit arises, there is no such thing as first obtaining the wisdom of suffering and not obtaining the remaining three; therefore it says there is no supramundane supreme wisdom with the gradual arrival of the four wisdoms. "And gradual arrival of the four conditions" means that all objective realms appear manifested within the Buddha's mind; hence it says there is no gradual arrival of the four conditions. This is because the Buddha suddenly attains the four wisdoms and suddenly sees the four objective realms. "No dharma of gradual arrival" concludes generally that all buddhas equally have no dharma of gradual arrival. "Such supramundane supreme wisdom" identifies this wisdom and severing that have no gradual arrival. Someone said: There are two kinds of understanding of the four truths. When one attains only one kind, that is a gradualness in attaining wisdom; hence it is called gradual arrival of the four wisdoms. The objective sphere is the condition that generates wisdom; when one attains only the objective sphere of a single wisdom, it is likewise called gradual arrival. If the diamond-like practice is perfected, and the Buddha's mind illuminates the eight truths with sudden comprehension, that constitutes the absence of gradual arrival, which is the supramundane supreme wisdom. We do not use this explanation now; it is simply that the two vehicles see the four truths gradually, while the Buddha sees them suddenly. Someone said: The Hīnayāna traditions have two models: first, seeing the truths sequentially; second, seeing the truths simultaneously. Seeing the truths sequentially involves the gradual arrival of the four truths and the gradual arrival of the four conditions, so there is a dharma of gradual arrival; seeing the truths simultaneously has no gradual arrival of the four wisdoms and no gradual arrival of the four conditions, so there is no dharma of gradual arrival. Now Queen Śrīmālā appraises the principle as having no gradual arrival, rejecting the presence of gradual arrival; that is, in contrast to having gradual arrival she reveals the absence of gradual arrival, and therefore says there is no supramundane supreme wisdom with gradual arrival of the four wisdoms or gradual arrival of the four conditions. Those who hold the view of non-gradual arrival generally have two positions: prior to the path of seeing the truths, one sees the truths sequentially, and therefore there is gradual arrival; from the seeing of the truths onward, one sees the four truths suddenly in the impartiality of emptiness, and there is no gradual arrival. Prior to the path of seeing the truths, from the four applications of mindfulness up to the mundane supreme dharma, is called superior; from the seeing of the truths onward, it surpasses that superior, and is thus called supreme. Now examining the Buddhadhātuvāda, there are two types of śrāvakas: First are people of sharp faculties, who in a single thought-moment contemplate the four truths equally, severing the eighty-eight delusions all at once; both are called seeing the truths. If they are people of dull faculties, they contemplate sequentially: in the first thought-moment they see suffering and do not see the other three truths, and only the four truths under suffering are called seeing the truths. We now maintain the former explanation: that the śrāvaka sees gradually and the Buddha sees suddenly, because śrāvakas mostly see the truths gradually. In the second pair, it is first explained that the Buddha's wisdom is the supreme meaning, and then conversely explained that the two vehicles are not the supreme meaning. Someone said: When delusions are exhausted and illumination is complete in the vajra-like mind, it is called diamond-like in its capacity to sever. For instance, it is taught that when attaining buddhahood, one still possesses the Śūraṅgama samādhi and the Vajrasamādhi; hence the vajra-like mind is spoken of as diamond. We now explain that the Buddha's wisdom is permanent and cannot be destroyed by arising and ceasing; like a diamond, it is solid and cannot be destroyed by anything; hence it says "the vajra simile." Furthermore, like a diamond, there is no delusion it cannot destroy, as when it is said that the dwelling-ground of ignorance is severed by the Buddha's bodhi wisdom. In addition, it penetrates to the utmost limit, and does not stop before the true limit. The Buddha's wisdom is likewise: it penetrates to the utmost limit of the principle of the non-conditioned truths, and does not halt by abiding in the conditioned four truths. Being able to extinguish ignorance and see the supreme meaning, it is called the wisdom of the supreme meaning. "Not the śrāvakas or pratyekabuddhas": this explains that the two vehicles do not possess the wisdom of the supreme meaning. The initial word "not" arises in contrast to the above "is." Above it was explained that the one likened to a diamond is the wisdom of the supreme meaning; now, in contrast to that affirmation, it explains that the two vehicles are not. One must carry the word "not" down through the sentence: it means that the initial noble truth wisdom of śrāvakas and pratyekabuddhas, which does not sever ignorance, is not the wisdom of the supreme truth. "The śrāvakas and pratyekabuddhas do not sever the dwelling-ground of ignorance": this phrase explains that the two vehicles do not sever ignorance, meaning that their severing of delusion is incomplete. "The initial noble truth wisdom": this explains that the two vehicles initially contemplate the conditioned noble truths, meaning that their seeing of the principle is not comprehensive. "Is the wisdom of the supreme truth": this concludes the negation. The wisdom of the two vehicles, which does not completely sever delusion and does not comprehensively see the principle, is not taken to be the wisdom of the supreme truth. "The World-Honoured One, through wisdom without duality in the noble truths, severs the dwelling-grounds": this is the third pair, following naturally from what preceded. The former explained that the two vehicles' severing of hindrances is not exhaustive, which is conceivable; the second explains that the Buddha severs them completely, which is inconceivable. In explaining the two vehicles, "through wisdom without duality in the noble truths, severs the dwelling-grounds" means: the two vehicles only attain a single conditioned wisdom, severing the four dwelling-grounds; they do not attain the second, non-conditioned wisdom, and therefore do not extinguish ignorance. Someone said: The two vehicles lack the two noble wisdoms, the conditioned and the non-conditioned, to sever the five dwelling-ground afflictions, and therefore lack the wisdom of the supreme meaning. "Dwelling-grounds" encompasses the five dwelling-grounds in their entirety, which is why it says "[various] dwelling-grounds." Someone said: These words follow the preceding text. Since it was previously stated that the two vehicles do not have the wisdom of the supreme meaning, what is the wisdom of the supreme truth now? Therefore it says that through wisdom without duality in the noble truths, one severs the dwelling-grounds. "Without duality" means the single real wisdom, which can therefore sever the delusions of the five dwelling-grounds. When delusions are exhausted, it therefore says that through wisdom without duality in the noble truths, one severs the dwelling-grounds. Someone said: "Through" means "employing," meaning that one employs the non-conditioned wisdom to contemplate the principle exhaustively. Because the objective realm is not dual, it is called "without duality." Although the latter two explanations differ slightly in phrasing, the phrase "without duality" equally refers to the Buddha's wisdom. "The World-Honoured One, the Tathāgata, the Arhat, the Fully and Perfectly Awakened One": according to the previous perspective, the noble truths without duality distinguished the non-exhaustiveness of the two vehicles; now it explains the Buddha's exhaustiveness. "Tathāgata, Fully and Perfectly Awakened One" adduces the person capable of severing. From "not the śrāvaka" downward, it explains the wisdom capable of severing. Within this wisdom, the phrase "not the realm of śrāvakas and pratyekabuddhas" reveals the superior in contrast to the inferior. "Inconceivable wisdom of emptiness" directly explains the essence of the wisdom. From "severing all" downward, it explains the ability to exhaust hindrances. When all five dwelling-grounds are extinguished, it is called severing all. Question: Why does it speak of inconceivable wisdom of emptiness? Answer: The Buddha indeed illuminates both existence and non-existence; however, for severing afflictions, it must be the wisdom of true reality. Yet true reality is truly neither empty nor existent; it is merely named empty in contrast to existence. Question: It should simply say wisdom of emptiness; why say inconceivable? Master Fu said: "The Buddha's wisdom can illuminate emptiness and illuminate existence, yet is neither empty nor existent; hence it is called inconceivable wisdom of emptiness. Attaining this wisdom of emptiness, all delusions are therefore severed." Nāgārjuna said: "Emptiness has three types: first, the emptiness of non-Buddhist wrong views; second, mere emptiness, which refers to the wisdom of emptiness of the two vehicles; third, the wisdom of emptiness of non-acquisition, which refers to the wisdom of emptiness of bodhisattvas." Here it is the wisdom of emptiness of non-acquisition, which cannot be known by the two vehicles; hence it is called inconceivable. Question: Why is it called the store of afflictions? Answer: The four dwelling-grounds and ignorance encompass all afflictions within them; hence it is called a store. Furthermore, because these delusions can conceal the Tathāgata's dharmakāya, they are called a store. "World-Honoured One, if one destroys the entire store of afflictions": this is the fourth pair, following naturally from what preceded. The former explains that the Tathāgata's fruition virtues are ultimate; the latter explains that the two vehicles' fruition virtues are not ultimate. In explaining the Buddha's wisdom, "destroys the entire store of afflictions" recapitulates what precedes to introduce what follows. "Ultimate wisdom" directly clarifies its characteristics. This is called the supreme, adducing the objective realm to conclude. From "the initial noble truth wisdom" downward, the second part explains that the fruition of the two vehicles is not ultimate. "The initial noble truth wisdom" recapitulates the wisdom of the two vehicles. "Is not ultimate" directly distinguishes its characteristics. "Heading toward bodhi" reveals the meaning of being non-ultimate.