金剛般若論會釋 1.71

1.71

次明第六行，文分二，初、徵，後、釋。天親論云，「此中有疑，若離施等相想，云何能成就施福？」謂有疑云，「三事不空，施可有福，既空三事，施福應無」。故此論云，「或有菩薩貪福德故，於此不堪」，由貪福德，能行於施，聞此三事空，不能堪忍而行施等，故次徵云，「何以故？」後釋經文分三，論中分二，初、釋法，後、解喻，不解法說。解喻中初因不住相施，如空遍滿，相、無相果皆得依故；住相施不然，不得無相，故非遍滿。次因寬曠，無住相施，後得果時，形上下高，無漏之法過三界故，形橫曠大，滿十方故；住相施不然，後得果時，但在三界，非十方故。或含容故，名為寬曠，後因無盡，順無相理，廣運眾生，無窮盡故；住相不然，不順真理，非遍益故。經結說中，真諦無「但應」等文，與中天梵本同，餘本皆有。此論牒經不解，故知亦無其結。無住相施，福德皆多，諸本同有。

Next, the sixth line is clarified; the text is divided into two: first, the question; later, the explanation. Vasubandhu's treatise states: "Herein there is a doubt: if one is separated from the notions of characteristics of giving and so forth, how can one accomplish the merit of giving?" That is, there is a doubt saying: "If the three factors are not empty, giving may have merit; since the three factors are empty, the merit of giving should be absent." Therefore this treatise states: "Or there are bodhisattvas who, because of craving merit, cannot bear this." Because of craving merit, they are able to practice giving; upon hearing that these three factors are empty, they cannot endure practicing giving and so forth; hence it next asks: "Why is this?" Later, the explanation of the sūtra text is divided into three parts; in the treatise, it is divided into two: first, explaining the Dharma; later, explaining the simile, without explaining the exposition of Dharma. In explaining the simile: first, because giving without abiding in characteristics is all-pervading like space, both characterized and uncharacterized fruits can rely upon it; giving that abides in characteristics is not so, as it does not obtain the uncharacterized, and therefore is not all-pervading. Next, because of its vastness: when giving without abiding in characteristics later obtains its fruit, vertically it is high above, because untainted phenomena surpass the three realms; horizontally it is vast and great, because it fills the ten directions; giving that abides in characteristics is not so, for when it later obtains its fruit, it is only within the three realms and not in the ten directions. Or, because of containing and accommodating, it is called vast; thereafter, because it is inexhaustible: it accords with the uncharacterized principle, vastly carrying sentient beings without end; abiding in characteristics is not so, as it does not accord with the true principle and does not universally benefit. In the concluding statement of the sūtra, Paramārtha lacks the text "one should only..." and so forth, being identical with the Central Indian Sanskrit manuscript, while all other editions have it. This treatise cites the sūtra without explaining it, so we know it also lacked that conclusion. That giving without abiding in characteristics yields much merit is commonly found in all editions.