御注金剛般若波羅蜜經宣演 2.132

2.132

經。須菩提白佛至為無所得耶　演曰。心具足中。第二正覺所以。明此者前明念處大悲為首。慜念眾生故。先明之欲得利生。次自成覺故次明。又此前淨土智見身相語等。若非行圓果滿必無斯德故。具明佛行無上行證無上果。言正覺者。法報二佛覺性覺相俱名正覺。能所覺故。欲令菩薩覺佛具因及圓於果故有此文。彼論為斷第十九有得證果疑。論云。若如來不得一法得阿耨菩提者。云何離於上上證。轉轉得阿耨菩提。演曰。以前聞說然燈佛等無得證等。遂執於中無有一法可得。而無一行可修。能得菩提。復見如來三劫修因不無得行。遂復疑云。云何如來離無所得無所行。此上上證取於菩提。而依展轉行有得行而證正覺。下顯真理。雖無一法可得可修。若離俗諦修行方便無由獲證明佛方便修行具足證彼平等無上之法。方便善法即報身圓滿。無上平等即法身圓滿。即是顯佛行圓果滿意。令知已隨佛求證。與此無違。准餘本經下文分四。一佛問善現頗有少法得菩提不。二善現答無少法得。三如來印言如是如是。四佛廣釋。此經乃二。初善現問。後如是。如是下如來印答。梵本不同廣略故爾。此初問也。依此論問所成正覺為有所得為無所得。彼論意問三劫修因所得菩提豈無得耶。准論此中雙問因果。謂佛行因得果之時。為以有所得因得有所得果。為以無所得因得無所得果。下答因果俱無有得。論云。於中無有法者。為離有見過。已顯示菩提及菩提道故。論先總標菩提及菩提道。又下釋文果配菩提因配於道。故知此中總問因果。

Sūtra: Subhūti addressed the Buddha... "was nothing obtained?" Exposition: Within the mind's endowment, the second is correct awakening. Why this is explained: previously, the station of mindfulness was explained with great compassion as foremost, because of pitying sentient beings; therefore it was explained first. Desiring to benefit beings, he subsequently realized awakening for himself, so it is explained next. Furthermore, before this, regarding the pure land, wisdom-vision, bodily marks, verbal expression, and so forth, if practices were not rounded out and fruits not fulfilled, there would certainly be no such virtues; therefore it fully explains the Buddha's practice of supreme practice and realization of the supreme fruit. As for "correct awakening," the two Buddhas, dharma[kāya] and saṃbhoga[kāya], in their awakening nature and awakening marks are both called correct awakening, because of that which awakens and that which is awakened. Desiring to cause bodhisattvas to awaken to the Buddha's endowment with causes and fulfillment in the fruit, this text is therefore present. That commentary is for severing the nineteenth doubt, concerning obtaining and realizing the fruit. The commentary says: "If the Tathāgata does not obtain a single dharma to attain anuttara-bodhi, how is it that apart from the ever-higher realization, he progressively attains anuttara-bodhi?" Exposition: Previously hearing it said that Dīpaṃkara Buddha and others had no attainment or realization, they thereupon clung to the notion that within this there is not a single dharma that can be attained and not a single practice that can be cultivated to attain bodhi. Again seeing that the Tathāgata cultivated causes for three kalpas not without attainments and practices, they then further doubted: "How could the Tathāgata, apart from having nothing attained and nothing practiced, take bodhi through this ever-higher realization, while relying on successive practices of having attainment to realize correct awakening?" Below, the true principle is revealed: although there is not a single dharma that can be attained or cultivated, if one is apart from the conventional truth's cultivation of skillful means, there would be no way to acquire realization; this clarifies that the Buddha's skillful practice is endowed with qualities to realize that equal and supreme dharma. The skillful wholesome dharmas are the perfection of the saṃbhogakāya; the supreme equality is the perfection of the dharmakāya. That is, it reveals the Buddha's practices being rounded out and the fruit fulfilled, intending to make them know this and follow the Buddha in seeking realization, which does not contradict this. According to other recensions of the sūtra, the text below is divided into four: first, the Buddha asks Subhūti whether there is the slightest dharma by which bodhi is attained; second, Subhūti answers that there is not the slightest dharma attained; third, the Tathāgata seals it, saying, "So it is, so it is"; fourth, the Buddha explains it at length. In this sūtra, there are two: first, Subhūti asks; later, from "So it is, so it is" downward, the Tathāgata seals and answers. The Sanskrit recensions differed in being extensive or abridged, hence it is so. This is the initial question. Relying on this treatise, it asks whether the realized correct awakening has attainment or is without attainment. That commentary intends to ask: could the bodhi attained through three kalpas of cultivating causes be without attainment? According to the commentary, here it asks doubly about cause and fruit: namely, when the Buddha practices the cause and attains the fruit, is it with an attained cause that an attained fruit is attained, or is it with an unattained cause that an unattained fruit is attained? Below, the answer is that both cause and fruit are without attainment. The commentary says: "'Within it there is no dharma' is to leave behind the fault of views of existence, having already shown bodhi and the path of bodhi." The commentary first generally designates bodhi and the path of bodhi; furthermore, the explanatory text below matches the fruit to bodhi and the cause to the path. Therefore, we know that here it generally asks about cause and fruit.