金剛般若論會釋 1.78

1.78

The text is divided into three: first, matching the sūtra text; next, explaining the question's text; finally, explaining the answer's text. 'Desiring to obtain the verbal dharmakāya' reveals the intention behind the sūtra's introduction: Subhūti heard that the Dharma is profound and wondrous and the real mark is difficult to comprehend. While the Buddha is present, this may well be so, and those who have faith are extremely numerous; testing the superiority of the time, capacity, afflictions, and practice, it can be known. But after the Buddha is no longer present, could anyone possibly believe? For the time, capacity, afflictions, and practice will all be inferior. Subhūti wished that this teaching of the verbal dharmakāya would circulate in the world both in the present and in the future; therefore, he asked whether evil beings in the future evil age could believe. Looking forward to the Buddha's answer that there are, he pressed: if even in the final era they can still have deep faith, how much more so at present—why would they not believe? Therefore it is said that 'desiring to obtain the verbal dharmakāya'—this text comes from this. The first section has two parts: first, matching the sūtra; second, explaining the difficulty. In explaining the difficulty, 'the sūtra's phrase and exposition' refers to all the meanings: 'phrase' is the expressive vehicle, and the 'exposition of the seven topics' is the doctrine and principle expressed; that is, what Bodhiruci, Paramārtha, Kumārajīva, and others call 'sentences and phrases' (*padavyañjana*) is the principle made clear by the phrases of meaning, which here is called 'exposition'. The *Vajracchedikā* says 'classes of scripture phrases': 'classes' means categories, the categories of meaning expressed; not only is this *Vajracchedikā* asked about, but the *Mahāprajñāpāramitā* and others are all included in the question, hence it says 'classes'. 'Scripture phrases' are the expressive teachings. Concerning these categories of meaning and expressive sūtra phrases, can faith arise in the future evil age? Here there are two intentions: first, clarifying the cause of disbelief; second, formally raising the question. The cause of disbelief is twofold: first, the evil of the times; second, the profundity of the scripture. The times being evil, beings are evil; the scripture being profound, it concerns the real mark: toward these phrases of the sūtra, could they possibly generate faithful understanding of them as the real mark or not? This is formally raising the question. Thus Paramārtha's sūtra calls it the 'true mark', while this and the *Vajracchedikā* say 'generate true notions or not?' When the sūtra accords with correct principle, it is called 'true'; in this sūtra, could they possibly give rise to a true notion and understanding or not? A 'notion' is the faithful mind that grasps an image—has it grasped faith as the image of reality or not? Kumārajīva says, 'give rise to true faith or not?' The names differ, but the meaning is the same. In explaining the text of the question, Subhūti, taking evil beings in an evil age and the profound wonder of the scripture's meaning as reasons that no one could believe, therefore raised this question.