金剛般若論會釋 2.27

2.27

三破味著利養有懈怠過，生慚愧為離退精進中分四，初、牒經釋來意，次、顯生慚愧相，次、釋無二取，後、釋成離退精進，文意可解。此牒經云，若分別若信解下文之中釋，餘經皆無，唯此本有。天親云，又此法門堅實深妙，何以故？受、持此經，思量、修習，不起我等想故。由經深妙，當來有持，便無我相。此中別配經文無二我相，彼論少別。不起我相等者，示所取境界不倒相故。我等相即非相者，示能取境界不倒相故。此二通明我空、法空無我智，當來持經生此二智。故會二論，二義解經，以佛證成此義云，「何以故？離一切相，則名諸佛」，故合為一文。今此分二，《能斷經》云，若當來世後時後分後五百歲正法將滅時分轉時，羅什譯同，即是行法將欲滅時。如何前二解經持及說，俱是行故，十種法行皆攝故。至末法時，無此行故，不須為問，正證之時有行無疑，行法初器有行無惑，故說行法將欲滅時，餘本皆略，總言當來。此論作言，當來一受持，流支、羅什云二，信解、受持，信解即是十法行中聽聞行也。真諦本三，恭敬，受持、為他人說，恭敬即身供養也。《能斷經》亦云，一、領悟信解，聽聞也，二、受持，三、讀，四、誦遂究竟通利，五、為他說，六、如理作意，誦有略廣也。釋為離退精進中分三，初、釋經說云，離一切相令菩薩學，相謂取像，言說因故，分別因故，即七倒中一相倒也，相當想倒極使，此想分別乃為廣也。次、釋經起所因，後、方釋前第三文中經言若分別若信解等。羅什、流支云信解、受持，真諦但言信解，《能斷》云，領悟信，亦無受持。此牒經無釋中，既解受、持之義，故攝即持，應言持者攝義，文傳錯寫，信解即分別，後句釋前句。

Third, regarding dispelling the fault of indolence due to relishing gain and producing shame in order to avoid regressing in vigor, there are four parts: first, citing the sūtra to explain the reason for its coming; next, revealing the characteristics of producing shame; next, explaining the absence of the two apprehensions; and finally, explaining and establishing the avoidance of regressing in vigor. The meaning of the text is intelligible. Here, citing the sūtra's phrase "if discerning or if having faith and understanding" is explained in the text below; it is absent in all other sūtras and present only in this recension. Vasubandhu says: "Moreover, this Dharma-gate is solid, profound, and subtle. Why? Because those who accept, uphold, reflect upon, and practice this sūtra do not give rise to notions of a self and so forth." Because the sūtra is profound and subtle, future upholders of it will lack the characteristic of a self. Here, the two characteristics of selflessness are specifically coordinated with the sūtra text, whereas that treatise is slightly different. The phrase "not giving rise to notions of a self and so forth" indicates the non-perverted characteristic of the objective realm that is grasped. The phrase "the notion of a self and so forth is itself non-characteristic" indicates the non-perverted characteristic of the subjective apprehension of the objective realm. Both of these together illuminate the wisdom of selflessness in the emptiness of self and the emptiness of phenomena; future upholders of the sūtra will generate these two wisdoms. Thus, synthesizing the two treatises, the sūtra is interpreted with two meanings. The Buddha confirms this meaning, saying: "Why? Freedom from all characteristics is named 'all Buddhas'"; hence, they are combined into a single passage. Now, here it is divided into two. The Vajracchedikā-sūtra says: "If in the future time, in the final era, in the final period, in the final five hundred years, when the True Dharma is about to be destroyed and the periods turn..." Kumārajīva's translation is the same, which refers to when the Dharma of practice is about to be destroyed. Why did the preceding two explain the sūtra in terms of upholding and expounding? Because both are practices, and all ten Dharma practices are subsumed therein. When the time of the Final Dharma arrives, because such practice is absent, there is no need to question it. At the time of direct realization, there is practice without doubt; for the initial vessel of the Dharma of practice, there is practice without delusion. Therefore, it speaks of when the Dharma of practice is about to be destroyed. Other recensions are all abbreviated, stating generally "in the future." This treatise states: "In the future, one accepts and upholds"; Bodhiruci and Kumārajīva say two: "faith and understanding, and accepting and upholding." Faith and understanding is indeed the practice of hearing among the ten Dharma practices. Paramārtha's recension has three: "reverencing, accepting and upholding, and explaining to others"; reverencing is bodily offering. The Vajracchedikā-sūtra also says: first, "comprehending with faith and understanding," which is hearing; second, "accepting and upholding"; third, "reading"; fourth, "reciting, so as to attain ultimate mastery"; fifth, "explaining to others"; and sixth, "appropriate mental engagement." The recitations have both abbreviated and expanded versions. The explanation of avoiding regressing in vigor is divided into three parts: first, explaining the sūtra's statement that freedom from all characteristics leads bodhisattvas to train—"characteristic" refers to grasping appearances, which is the cause of verbal discourse and the cause of conceptual differentiation; that is, it is the perversion of characteristic among the seven perversions, corresponding to the ultimate deployment of the perversion of ideation, and such ideational differentiation is extensive; next, explaining the causes that give rise to the sūtra; and finally, explaining the sūtra's words "if discerning or if having faith and understanding" from the third section above. Kumārajīva and Bodhiruci state "having faith and understanding, and accepting and upholding"; Paramārtha states only "having faith and understanding"; the Vajracchedikā states "comprehending and having faith," also lacking "accepting and upholding." Since the explanation of the meaning of accepting and upholding is given in the citation of the sūtra without a separate commentary, "embracing" is indeed "upholding"; it should say that upholding has the meaning of embracing. The text was erroneously copied in transmission. "Faith and understanding" is indeed "discerning"; the latter clause explains the former clause.