御注金剛般若波羅蜜經宣演 2.31

2.31

經。須菩提若菩薩至則無所見　演曰。大段第三對治乏受用苦因緣。由著未來果事行施心有相故。果有限量。受用便乏。即心住著。是乏受用因緣所乏受用是外資具增上果攝。依此論解前不住於事行施是布施度。今於未來果說不依彼論自身名事。此中說是乏受用故。若不住施外資不就。外資不就因乏與果翻前可知故為對除有此文起。彼論自下為斷第十證如不證疑論云。若聖人以無為真如得名。彼真如一切時一切處有。云何不住心。得佛菩提。佛菩提則非不住。若一切時一切處實有真如。何故有人能得有不得者。此中得佛菩提四字。通上下用。依彼新論云。如何佛果以無住心方能證得非有住心也。此有二問。一問有得不得。二問不住心得住心不得。總舉一頌以答二疑云。

Sūtra: "Subhūti, if a bodhisattva [...] then sees nothing at all." / Exposition: The third major section counteracts the causes and conditions of the suffering of lacking enjoyment and use. Because one gives while clinging to future fruit-phenomena, one's mind has marks; therefore, the fruit is limited, and enjoyment and use will be lacking. Namely, the mind's dwelling and attachment is the cause and condition of lacking enjoyment and use; the enjoyment and use that is lacked belongs to the dominant fruit of external resources and requisites. Relying on the explanation of this treatise, previously giving without abiding in phenomena was the perfection of giving; now, speaking of not relying on future fruits, in that treatise one's own body is called a "phenomenon." Here it speaks of lacking enjoyment and use; if one does not give without abiding, external resources will not be accomplished. If external resources are not accomplished, the lack of cause and fruit can be known by reversing the former; therefore, to counteract and eliminate this, this passage arises. From here onward, that treatise aims to sever the tenth doubt, on realizing tathatā or not realizing it. The treatise says: "If noble ones obtain their name through unconditioned tathatā, that tathatā exists at all times and in all places. How can an unabiding mind attain the Buddha's bodhi, while the Buddha's bodhi is not unabiding? If tathatā really exists at all times and in all places, why are there some who can attain it and some who cannot?" Here, the four characters "attain the Buddha's bodhi" apply to both what precedes and what follows. According to that new treatise, it says: "How is the Buddha-fruit realized only through an unabiding mind and not through an abiding mind?" Here there are two questions: the first asks about there being attainment and non-attainment; the second asks about an unabiding mind attaining while an abiding mind does not attain. It brings up a single verse in summary to answer both doubts, saying: