大乘玄論 4.6.3

4.6.3

Question: Engaging with existence without attachment—is this the function of skillful means, or the power of prajñā? Answer: Engaging with existence belongs to the power of skillful means; non-attachment is due to the power of prajñā. Because prajñā is without attachment, within the contemplation of prajñā there is the function of clever skillful means; hence this skillful means is able to be without attachment. Question: How is skillful means able not to realize [the limit of] emptiness? Answer: Prajñā illuminates the true nature of all phenomena; skillful means can illuminate all phenomena of the true nature. Therefore, one does not sink into the contemplation of emptiness, which is called 'not realizing [the limit of emptiness]'. As the Treatise [Mahāprajñāpāramitāśāstra] states: 'Prajñā leads one into ultimate emptiness without any conceptual proliferation; skillful means leads one out of ultimate emptiness to adorn the lands and transform people.' This confirms the above meanings of the powers. 'Leading one into ultimate emptiness' is illuminating the true nature. 'Without any conceptual proliferation' refers to the function of non-attachment and severing delusions. 'Skillful means leads one out of ultimate emptiness' is being guided by prajñā, and is also the power of skillful means to arise in practice by illuminating objects without realizing [the limit of emptiness]. Question: Prajñā illuminates the true nature of all phenomena; how is skillful means able to illuminate all phenomena of the true nature? Answer: They are designated 'the true nature of all phenomena' and 'all phenomena of the true nature': all phenomena appear vividly while being the true nature; the true nature appears vividly while being all phenomena. All phenomena and the true nature are non-dual yet dual, dual yet constantly non-dual. Since the cognitive object is thus, the two wisdoms are also thus. Therefore, prajñā illuminates the true nature of all phenomena, while skillful means is able to illuminate all phenomena of the true nature. Question: Although it is the true nature, all phenomena appear vividly; when upāya illuminates this, it is called clever. Likewise, although they are all phenomena, the true nature appears vividly; when prajñā illuminates it, why is it not called clever? Answer: Comprehensively speaking, it is analogously so, as explained above by concealing and revealing. Furthermore, prajñā illuminates the true nature and is able not to be attached, which the two vehicles also share in; thus the meaning of cleverness is not prominent, and so it is not named skillful means. Being able to illuminate existence right within emptiness—since this function is wonderful, śrāvakas are entirely excluded and bodhisattvas uniquely possess it; hence it is given the name skillful means. Question: If illuminating existence right within emptiness is called wonderful, then illuminating emptiness right within existence is also wonderful. Answer: If one is able to illuminate emptiness right within existence, one is immediately able to illuminate existence right within emptiness. This is wisdom possessing the understanding of skillful means, and skillful means possessing the understanding of wisdom. Between these two wisdoms, there is neither superior nor inferior. However, in contrast to the two vehicles, which illuminate emptiness but cannot engage with existence, it is explained that giving rise to the function of existence right within emptiness is wonderful, and is called skillful means. Furthermore, in contrast to the sixth bhūmi, where one only attains the contemplation of emptiness of prajñā and is not yet able to engage with existence right within emptiness, it is now explained that engaging with existence right within emptiness is skillful means. Question: Being unattached to existence and not realizing emptiness are both skillful; why is the skill of non-attachment named prajñā, with prajñā being inferior at the sixth bhūmi, while the skill of non-realization is named skillful means, with skillful means being superior at the seventh bhūmi? Answer: It has been explained above. Furthermore, existence is conventional truth, and leaving existence is easy; thus the skill of prajñā is inferior. Emptiness is ultimate truth, and escaping nothingness is difficult; thus skillful means is superior. Furthermore, entering the contemplation of the true nature without being attached to existence escapes the stage of ordinary beings; illuminating all phenomena right within the contemplation of the true nature without stagnating in emptiness departs from the stage of the two vehicles. Escaping ordinary beings is easy, so prajñā is inferior; surpassing the noble ones is difficult, so skillful means is superior. This is why there is the meaning of superiority and inferiority between the sixth and seventh [stages]. Question: If so, and the two wisdoms are not yet equal at the sixth bhūmi, how could it be said above that they are already parallel from the first bhūmi? Answer: Looking from the first bhūmi toward the pre-bhūmi stages, they are already parallel; comparing it to the seventh bhūmi, they are not yet parallel. The reason for this is that from the first bhūmi onward, one attains the unborn, and movement and stillness are unobstructed; however, the aspect of stillness is somewhat stronger, and active functioning is slightly weak, so it is said they are not yet parallel. When reaching the seventh bhūmi, movement and stillness are unobstructed and both wisdoms journey together, so they are called parallel. Question: How is this known? Answer: If from the sixth bhūmi downward they were not parallel—entering emptiness without seeing existence, and emerging into existence without seeing emptiness—the two vehicles would be the same; how would [the bodhisattva] differ from them? Thus we know that from the first bhūmi onward they are already able to be parallel, but with a slight imbalance of strong and weak, it is said they are not yet balanced. Question: What is the difference between non-attachment to emptiness and not realizing emptiness? Answer: When the two vehicles enter emptiness, they do not retain the catuṣkoṭi; this is merely non-attachment, but they cannot avoid realizing it. When a bodhisattva enters emptiness, not only is there nothing to retain, but he can also immediately engage with existence; hence it is called not realizing. Question: When the two vehicles and bodhisattvas enter emptiness, they equally have nothing to rely upon; why do śrāvakas abide in emptiness while bodhisattvas do not realize it? Answer: The two vehicles take emptiness as the ultimate wonder and rely upon this non-reliance; therefore they abide in emptiness. Bodhisattvas do not take emptiness as the ultimate wonder; knowing that emptiness is also empty, which is called unattainable emptiness, they do not rely upon this non-reliance, and thus are able not to realize it. As the Pañcaviṃśatisāhasrikā-prajñāpāramitā states: 'Practicing is not grasped, not practicing is also not grasped; practicing and not practicing, neither practicing nor not practicing, up to not grasping is also not grasped—this is called the bodhisattva's vast functioning of the samādhi of non-grasping, not shared with śrāvakas and pratyekabuddhas.' For this reason they are able not to realize emptiness. Furthermore, the two vehicles lack vows and practice to support emptiness, so upon entering emptiness they realize it; bodhisattvas support emptiness with great vows and great practice, so upon entering emptiness they do not realize it. Question: The Treatise states: 'In the cause it is called prajñā; upon reaching Buddhahood it is conversely called sarvajñā.' How can it also be said that at the sixth bhūmi it is called prajñā, and upon reaching the seventh bhūmi, prajñā being purified, it is conversely called skillful means? Answer: As explained before: at the time of the sixth bhūmi, the essence of prajñā is strong and the function of skillful means is weak; because its essence is strong, it is marvelous in quiet contemplation, so in contemplating emptiness it is without attachment; because its function is weak, it is not yet able to engage with existence right within emptiness without stagnation in existence. When reaching the seventh bhūmi, the essence and function are fully equal: being able to contemplate emptiness without taint, one is immediately able to engage with existence without attachment; hence it is called the stage of equalizing concentration and wisdom. In the stage of equalizing concentration and wisdom, the functioning of prajñā is skillful, so it is said to 'turn'; thus from the eighth bhūmi onward, both wisdoms are equally skillful. When reaching the stage of Buddhahood, both wisdoms equally turn: real wisdom conversely becomes sarvajñā, which means all-knowledge; skillful wisdom conversely becomes knowledge of all aspects. Question: If upon reaching the fruit they conversely become the two gnoses, then in the cause they are equally named the two wisdoms; why did you say earlier that prajñā is called wisdom, while skillful means is not called wisdom? Answer: The designations in cause and fruit each have their meaning. In the door of the fruit, illuminating all empty objects is named all-knowledge, and illuminating all existing objects is named knowledge of all aspects; both are named after the cognitive objects, so it is fitting to designate both as gnosis. In the door of the cause, real wisdom is based on the cognitive object, while skillful means is considered according to function; hence they cannot both be named wisdom. Question: If so, why are the bodhisattva's wisdom of the path and wisdom of the aspects of the path both called wisdom? Answer: Wisdom in the cause itself has many approaches, and the designations are various. Wisdom of the path and wisdom of the aspects of the path are also named after cognitive objects, so it is fitting to designate both as wisdom.