[Pramāṇa](https://indike.org/pramana/) › [Indian literature](https://indike.org/pramana/in) › [Buddhist Literature](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha) › [Taishō Tripiṭaka (Chinese Buddhist canon)](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho) › [御注金剛般若波羅蜜經宣演](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.2733) › 1.13 # 御注金剛般若波羅蜜經宣演 1.13 御注金剛般若波羅蜜經宣演 1.13 - **Language:** Classical Chinese ### [1.13](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.2733.1.13) 經。我聞　演曰。第二能聞傳法菩薩自指己身言如是。法親從佛聞故名我聞。非為我者。定屬一人。所言聞者。且小乘宗薩婆多師耳聞非識。經部翻此譬喻師說。心心所法和合能聞。依大乘宗。根識心所和合為聞。雜集第二。問。為眼見色為識等耶。答。非眼見色亦非識等。以一切法無作用故。由和合假立為見。耳等亦爾。然諸聖教就勝所依。或說根聞以能分別。或說識聞具前二義。說根識聞皆不相違。又依世俗耳等能聞依勝義理耳非能聞亦非識等。瑜伽五十六說。法自性眾緣生故剎那滅故無作用故。智度亦云。非耳及識意等能聞。從多緣故得聲聞。乃至云佛法中無有一法能作能見能知等。又耳根識唯聞於聲而不聞教。若約名句唯意識聞故。瑜伽言聞謂比量。然由耳識親聞於聲。與意為問意方得聞耳。意為緣熏習在識因聞所成。總說名聞廢別耳等總名我聞故。佛地論云。我謂諸蘊世俗假者。聞謂耳根發識聽受。廢別就總故說我聞一。問何須廢別而就於總。答若不言我不顯自他耳。通一切是誰耳聞。又復聞時非唯耳等待緣極多。若一一陳遂成煩廣。若唯說一義用不周。顯和合聞總標假者然我有三。一妄所執我。謂外道等所橫計我二假施設我。謂大涅槃樂淨常我。除二乘倒強施設故。三世流布我。謂世共傳天授詞授等。今傳法者。隨順世間自指稱我。不同前二。即是無我之大我也。遍計無體圓成無相無不可說。聞然就依他亦無聞。因緣和合假說名聞。二問諸佛說法本除我執。何故不稱無我乃言我聞。答瑜伽第六。四義釋之。一言說異故。若說無我通蘊處界知此說誰。二順世間故。三除無我怖故。言無我者。為誰修學。四為宣說自他染淨因果事業令生決定信解心故。所以稱我。智論第一。四悉檀中。依世界悉檀。說我無過。即當瑜伽順世間故。又云世間語言有三。一根本見。二慢。三名字。前二不淨。後一通淨一切凡夫三種語言。見道學人二種除見。今依第三說我無失。三問既依名字何故不言阿難聞。答有五義。一示不乖俗宗雖顯。真諦不乖俗理。雖顯妙言。不乖麁欲。顯真諦不離俗故。二我聞者。主宰自在之義。佛地論云。顯示聞者。有所堪能集法。傳云有三阿難。一阿難此云慶喜。持聲聞藏。二阿難跋陀此云喜賢。持獨覺藏。三阿難伽羅此云喜海。持菩薩藏。但爾一人隨得名別阿難於教總持自在若稱名字雖順正理。無於諸法得自在義。由斯稱我不道阿難。三表親聞。世間共言我見我聞。此將為親證。若言阿難聞或非親聞以破疑網。四不識阿難者。謂言誰聞。五有同名者。為言彼聞。四問慶喜于時親見覺。何唯說聞。答有四義。一名等詮義非色等故。欲證深理要聞法故。二此界以聲而為佛事。聲為所依名等有故。三希證菩提要聞熏習。由聞熏習成出世故。四顯非現證故。有釋云。諮承有所無自信之過。即推功歸佛。表己因位。未現見法。但聞而已。若言見覺。謂言同佛。五問為佛說法言我能聞為佛不說言我聞耶。答有二解。一者龍軍無性等說諸佛唯有三法。謂大定智悲久離戲論。曾不說法。由佛慈悲本願緣力。眾生識上文義相生雖親依自善根力起。而就強緣名佛說。譬如天等增上力故令於夢中得呪論等。佛地一師亦同此解。二者親光等言。佛身具有蘊處界等。由分別名無戲論。謂從聞者善根本願緣力。如來識上文義相生。是佛利他善根所起名為佛說。聞者識心雖不親得。然似彼相分以顯現。故名我聞。應智說此如是我聞意避增減異分過失。謂如是法我從佛聞。非他展轉。顯是聞者有所堪能。諸有所聞皆離增減異分過失。為令眾生恭敬信受。文義決定無所增減。是故聞者應正聞已。如理思惟當勤修學。六問阿難是佛成道日生。二十年後方為侍者。已前諸教何得親聞。答有六義。一本願力故。過去作長供養誦經沙彌今得總持。龍樹讚云。面如淨滿月。眼如青蓮花。佛法大海水流入阿難心。二展轉聞。智度論第二說。佛初轉法輪。爾時我不見。如是展轉聞。三佛加持故。報恩經云。佛入世俗心令阿難知。四佛為略說故。亦出報恩經。佛粗舉其端。而能盡解。五三昧力故。金剛花經說。阿難得法性覺性自在。六聞法力故。觀佛三昧海經第五。阿難見佛聞法。說菩薩行即憶過去九十億佛所說經藏。法花經第四云。自開受記等即時憶念過去無量千萬億諸佛法藏通達無礙而說偈言世尊甚希有等。上來六緣由本願力得成後五。七問有無量故唯付阿難持法。答諸菩薩等各各怱務莊嚴眷屬調伏自身不能宣通。阿難寫瓶有寄所以傳燈是屬。又復阿難常隨如來。人天所識傳必生信。諸菩薩等形異處疎非眾皆識或容不信。八問諸經皆如是我聞。何故溫室經云。阿難曰吾從佛聞。藥師經云。聞如是等。答隨方置言。其意無別。如阿難昇座說經已。大眾欲言無常力大無常力大如此等法我於佛所親自聽聞。今者乃言我聞如是。 > Sūtra: Thus have I heard. > > Exposition: Second, the bodhisattva transmitting the Dharma who can hear refers to his own person, saying, "Such \[Dharma\] I personally heard from the Buddha"; hence it is called "I have heard." "I" does not fixatedly belong to one single person. As for what is called "heard": first, in the Hīnayāna traditions, the Sarvāstivāda masters hold that the ear hears, not consciousness; the Sautrāntikas reverse this, the Dṛṣṭāntika masters stating that the conjunction of mind and mental factors is able to hear. According to the Mahāyāna tradition, the conjunction of faculty, consciousness, and mental factors constitutes hearing. In the second \[fascicle of the\] Abhidharmasamuccaya-vyākhyā, it asks: "Does the eye see form, or does consciousness, and so forth?" It answers: "Neither does the eye see form, nor does consciousness, and so forth. Because all dharmas lack active function, seeing is only nominally established based on conjunction. The ear and the rest are also like this." However, the holy teachings, in terms of the superior basis, sometimes state that the faculty hears, because it can discern; or state that consciousness hears, possessing both of the previous two senses. Saying that the faculty or consciousness hears does not involve any contradiction. Furthermore, according to conventional truth, the ear and so forth can hear; according to ultimate truth, neither the ear can hear, nor consciousness and the rest. The fifty-sixth \[fascicle of the\] Yogācārabhūmi says: "Because the intrinsic nature of dharmas is produced from multiple conditions, is destroyed in an instant, and lacks active function." The Mahāprajñāpāramitopadeśa also says: "Neither the ear, nor consciousness, nor the intellect can hear. Because of multiple conditions, hearing of sound is attained," and so forth, down to: "Within the Buddha's Dharma, there is not a single dharma that can act, see, know, and so on." Furthermore, the ear faculty and consciousness only hear sound, but do not hear the teaching. If viewed in terms of names and sentences, it is only the mental consciousness that hears; therefore, the Yogācārabhūmi states that hearing is inference (anumāna). However, because the ear consciousness directly hears sound, it raises an inquiry for the intellect, and only then is the intellect able to hear. Taking the ear and intellect as conditions, the habit-energy perfumes consciousness, which is accomplished due to hearing. Taken collectively, it is termed "hearing"; setting aside the specific ear and so forth, it is collectively called "I have heard." Therefore, the Buddhabhūmi-śāstra says: "'I' refers to the conventional designation of the aggregates. 'Heard' refers to the ear faculty giving rise to consciousness to listen and receive. Setting aside the specific to rely on the general, it is therefore said, 'I have heard.'" > > First, question: Why is it necessary to set aside the specific and rely on the general? > Answer: If one does not say "I," one does not distinguish oneself from others. The ear is common to all—whose ear heard it? Furthermore, at the time of hearing, it is not merely the ear and the rest; the conditions depended upon are exceedingly numerous. If one were to state each one individually, it would become cumbersome and broad. If one only stated one, its meaning and function would not be comprehensive. To reveal that hearing occurs in conjunction, the conventionally designated subject is collectively indicated. > However, there are three kinds of "I": 1. The falsely grasped "I," namely, the "I" erroneously conceptualized by non-Buddhists and the like; 2. The conventionally established "I," namely, the blissful, pure, permanent "I" of the Mahāparinirvāṇa, which is forcefully established to eliminate the perversions of the two vehicles; 3. The conventionally circulating "I," namely, Devadatta, Yajñadatta, and so forth, as commonly transmitted in the world. Now, the transmitter of the Dharma, conforming to the world, designates himself and says "I." Unlike the previous two, this is the "great self" of selflessness. The parikalpita lacks substantial reality, and the pariniṣpanna lacks characteristics and is ineffable. As for hearing, in terms of the paratantra, there is also no hearing; through the conjunction of causes and conditions, it is conventionally called "hearing." > > Second, question: The Buddhas preach the Dharma originally to eliminate the grasping at a self. Why not say "selflessness" instead of saying "I have heard"? > Answer: The sixth \[fascicle of the\] Yogācārabhūmi explains this with four meanings: 1. Because linguistic expressions differ: if one said "selflessness," which applies across the aggregates, bases, and elements, who would be known as speaking this? 2. To conform to the world; 3. To remove the fear of selflessness: if one says "selflessness," for whom does one cultivate and learn? 4. In order to proclaim the causes, effects, and activities of defilement and purification of oneself and others, so as to cause the mind of decisive faith and understanding to arise. Therefore, it is called "I." In the first \[fascicle of the\] Mahāprajñāpāramitopadeśa, among the four siddhāntas, based on the worldly siddhānta, stating "I" has no fault; this corresponds to conforming to the world in the Yogācārabhūmi. It also says that worldly language has three aspects: 1. Fundamental view; 2. Conceit; 3. Name. The first two are impure; the last is universally pure. All ordinary beings have three kinds of language; practitioners on the path of seeing have two, eliminating the view. Now, based on the third, saying "I" has no fault. > > Third, question: Since it relies on the name, why not say "Ānanda heard"? > Answer: There are five meanings: 1. To show no conflict with conventional truth: although the ultimate truth is revealed, it does not conflict with conventional principles; although subtle words are revealed, they do not conflict with the coarse. This is to show that ultimate truth is not separated from the conventional. 2. "I have heard" carries the meaning of mastery and sovereignty. The Buddhabhūmi-śāstra says: "It reveals that the hearer has the competence to collect the Dharma." A tradition says there are three Ānandas: first, Ānanda, here translated as "Rejoicing Joy," who retained the Śrāvakapiṭaka; second, Ānandabhadra, here translated as "Joyful and Worthy," who retained the Pratyekabuddhapiṭaka; third, Ānandasāgara, here translated as "Ocean of Joy," who retained the Bodhisattvapiṭaka. It was only one single person who received different names according to his attainments. Ānanda held total retention and sovereignty over the teachings. If he had stated his personal name, though conforming to correct convention, it would lack the meaning of having attained mastery over all dharmas. Because of this, he says "I" and does not speak the name Ānanda. 3. To express direct hearing: in the world, people commonly say "I saw" or "I heard" to indicate personal testimony. If he had said "Ānanda heard," it might seem not to be direct hearing; thus it breaks the net of doubt. 4. Those who do not know Ānanda would ask, "Who heard it?" 5. There may be others with the same name, and people would wonder if that other person heard it. > > Fourth, question: Ānanda at that time saw and perceived \[the Buddha\] in person; why does he only speak of hearing? > Answer: There are four meanings: 1. Names and sentences signify meaning, not physical form, and so forth; wishing to realize the profound truth, one must hear the Dharma. 2. In this world, sound is used to perform the Buddha's work; sound is the basis upon which names and so forth exist. 3. Aspiring to realize bodhi requires the perfuming of hearing; through the perfuming of hearing, the supramundane is accomplished. 4. To show that it is not direct realization. An explanation says: consulting and receiving from someone involves no fault of self-confidence; this attributes the merit to the Buddha and expresses one's own status on the causal stage, having not directly seen the Dharma, but merely heard it. If he said "saw and perceived," it would be thought that he was equal to the Buddha. > > Fifth, question: Did the Buddha preach the Dharma and \[Ānanda\] say "I was able to hear," or did the Buddha not preach and he said "I heard"? > Answer: There are two explanations: First, Nāgamitra, Asvabhāva, and others say that the Buddhas possess only three dharmas, namely, great samādhi, wisdom, and compassion; long free from conceptual proliferation, they never preach the Dharma. Through the conditioning power of the Buddha's compassion and fundamental vows, the images of words and meanings arise upon the consciousness of sentient beings; although directly arising from the power of their own wholesome roots, in terms of the predominant condition, it is called the Buddha's teaching. For instance, through the sovereign power of the gods and so forth, one is caused to obtain mantras, treatises, and the like in a dream. A master of the Buddhabhūmi\[-śāstra\] also shares this explanation. Second, Bandhuprabha and others say that the Buddha's body fully possesses the aggregates, bases, and elements, and because he discerns names, there is no conceptual proliferation. That is, from the conditioning power of the hearer's wholesome roots and fundamental vows, the images of words and meanings arise upon the Tathāgata's consciousness; this is produced by the Buddha's wholesome roots of benefiting others and is called the Buddha's teaching. Although the mind and consciousness of the hearer do not directly obtain it, an image resembling it appears as an objective aspect (nimittabhāga); hence it is called "I have heard." It should be known that speaking this "Thus have I heard" is intended to avoid the faults of addition, subtraction, or discrepancy. That is: "Such Dharma I heard from the Buddha, not transmitted through others"; this reveals that the hearer has competence, and all that was heard is free from the faults of addition, subtraction, or discrepancy. In order to cause sentient beings to respectfully believe and accept, the text and meaning are definitive without addition or subtraction; therefore, hearers, having heard correctly, should contemplate in accordance with principle and diligently cultivate and learn. > > Sixth, question: Ānanda was born on the day the Buddha attained bodhi, and only became his attendant twenty years later. How could he have directly heard the earlier teachings? > Answer: There are six meanings: 1. Due to the power of his past vows: in the past, he was a novice who long made offerings and recited sūtras, and now he attained dhāraṇī. Nāgārjuna praised him: "His face is like the pure full moon; / his eyes are like the blue lotus. / The great ocean water of the Buddha's Dharma / flows into Ānanda's heart." 2. Heard through transmission: the second fascicle of the Mahāprajñāpāramitopadeśa says, "When the Buddha first turned the wheel of the Dharma, at that time I did not see it; thus I heard it through transmission." 3. Due to the Buddha's empowerment: the Sūtra on Repaying Kindness says that the Buddha entered a worldly mind to cause Ānanda to know. 4. Due to the Buddha's brief explanation: this also comes from the Sūtra on Repaying Kindness; the Buddha roughly raised the beginning, and he was able to fully understand. 5. Due to the power of samādhi: the Vajrapuṣpa Sūtra says that Ānanda attained sovereignty over the awareness of the nature of dharmas. 6. Due to the power of hearing the Dharma: the fifth fascicle of the Sūtra on the Ocean of Samādhi on the Contemplation of the Buddha says that when Ānanda saw the Buddha and heard the Dharma, preaching the bodhisattva practice, he immediately recollected the baskets of sūtras taught by ninety billion past Buddhas. The fourth fascicle of the Lotus Sūtra says: "Having personally heard the bestowal of prophecy, he immediately recollected the Dharma storehouses of immeasurable thousands of myriads of koṭis of past Buddhas, penetrating them without obstruction," and spoke a gāthā: "The World-Honoured One is extremely rare," and so forth. Among the six conditions above, due to the power of his past vows, the latter five were accomplished. > > Seventh, question: There being immeasurably many \[beings\], why was only Ānanda entrusted with holding the Dharma? > Answer: The bodhisattvas were each busy adorning their retinues and subduing their own persons, unable to proclaim and circulate it widely. Ānanda was like pouring from one vessel to another; thus the transmission of the lamp belonged to him. Furthermore, Ānanda constantly followed the Tathāgata and was known to humans and devas; his transmission would definitely give rise to faith. The bodhisattvas had different forms and dwelt in distant places, not known to all, and might not have been believed. > > Eighth, question: All sūtras say "Thus have I heard"; why does the Sūtra on the Bathhouse say, "Ānanda said: I heard from the Buddha," and the Bhaiṣajyaguru Sūtra say, "I heard thus," and so forth? > Answer: Words are placed according to regional conventions; their meaning is no different. Just as when Ānanda ascended the seat to preach the sūtras, the great assembly wished to say: "The power of impermanence is great, the power of impermanence is great! Dharmas such as these, I personally heard in the presence of the Buddha; now he says, 'I heard thus.'" > — English (machine translation) (machine translation) - [Previous: 1.12](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.2733.1.12) - [Next: 1.14](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.2733.1.14) - [Up: 1](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.2733.1) ## Translations (1) - [English (machine translation)](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.2733~en-mt.1.13) — English, machine translation ## Linked texts (8) - [妙法蓮華經玄贊](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.1723.1.42) — Classical Chinese - [宗鏡錄](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.2016.53.34) — Classical Chinese - [說無垢稱經疏](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.1782.1.22) — Classical Chinese - [仁王護國般若波羅蜜多經疏](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.1709.1.50) — Classical Chinese - [仁王經疏](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.1708.1.25) — Classical Chinese - [阿彌陀經通贊疏](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.1758.1.32) — Classical Chinese - [觀彌勒上生兜率天經贊](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.1772.1.24) — Classical Chinese - [金剛般若經疏](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.2741.1.11) — Classical Chinese --- Source: [https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.2733.1.13](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.2733.1.13) · Pramāṇa