English (machine translation)
Translation of 御注金剛般若波羅蜜經宣演
- Language
- English
- Extent
- 280 passages, 79,115 words
- Text
- complete digital text
- Source
- pramana-mt · Machine translation by Gemini 3.8 Flash (2026-10-21) of in.bauddha.taisho.2733 · Machine output without human authorship: no copyright is claimed (CC0 1.0). The original text keeps its own…
Contents
Text
1.1
Compiled by Daoyin, śramaṇa lecturing and debating by imperial decree in attendance on the chariot.
1.2
I bow my head to the Sugata, the Great Hero of the Maharṣis, / endowed with all virtues—wisdom, abandonment, and compassion. / He preached the pure phrases of the Vajra, / profound in principle, wondrous in efficacy, of inconceivable merit. / I bow my head to the one who could make requests [in fitting] times, / the venerable, observer of emptiness, the honored Subhūti; / to the bodhisattvas of the stage of succession, of the stage of Pramuditā, and of increasing illumination, / who unfolded and explained this teaching. / Now, to generate merit and wisdom for myself and others, / that the lineage of the Buddha may not be broken and the Dharma may circulate, / I gather the […] meanings to praise the true text; / I pray that through your majestic spiritual power you will bestow your protection.
1.3
The preface states: The ultimate reality is vast and boundless; its principle is […] the sublime enlightenment is deep and mysterious, fundamentally devoid of words and speech. Yet that discourse was raised in the realm of no-discourse, and names were established in the sphere of no-names, is truly because the dark road has not yet dawned and the sea of views has long been submerged; thus [the teachings] are used as a torch [for the night], as a ford and boat [for] the dark barrier and all beings. How great indeed is the efficacy of the arising of the teaching! How much more so is this true for Prajñā, the mother of all Buddhas, and the indestructible phrases of the Vajra! Encompassing all divisions, it stands alone; surpassing the multitude of sūtras, it soars far above. Through the three questions and nine similes, it elucidates from beginning to end; through [dispelling] the eight attachments and five perversions, mind and speech are swept away and extinguished. With [the Buddha’s] mindful protection and entrustment, how could the Way be walked in vain?
1.4
In the Great Tang, during the Kaiyuan era, in the year Daquanxian, the twenty-third year of the Emperor's reign over the realm: The four quarters were harmonious and peaceful, and the hundred offices were well-ordered in their seasons; the utmost transformation extended without bound, and the profound way flourished throughout the land. Thereupon, [His Majesty] concentrated his sagacious contemplation and fully expounded the Confucian and Daoist traditions. Continuing to cherish marvelous enlightenment, he annotated and clarified this sūtra, directly illuminating its subtle essence and penetrating its esoteric depths. The celestial writings shone forth, and the sun of the Buddha increased its radiance, surpassing a thousand ages to emerge foremost, transcending a hundred kings to bequeath a model. Thereupon, in the mighty capitals and imperial cities, it was carved into stone and bronze; throughout the entire realm under heaven, its phrases and meanings were promulgated, washing the ears and eyes of living beings and tearing asunder the cages and snares of demonic attachment. Unencountered across vast kalpas, how fortunate we are in this present day! I, Daoyin, lay ill in the woods and marshes, keeping out of sight for years. Prostrating to peruse the sacred plan, I was filled with leaps of joy. Soon receiving the brilliant imperial edict, I unworthily took part in this propagation. Exerting the remainder of my exhausted and decrepit strength, I reverently unfold the traces of its profound mysteries. My talent is slight and the responsibility heavy, and the fear of spilling the cauldron only increases my fault; when ascending the seat, how could I shrink from multiplying words? I humbly reflect that the sovereign sings and the ministers join in harmony; as silk threads are cast forth, the wheel of the law revolves. If I do not extensively cite doctrinal texts, how could I fully illuminate the imperial intention? For this reason, I adduce various treatises and harmonize them with the Six Classics, giving voice through my lips and manifesting it in ink, laying down the rhinoceros and elephant to yield their ivory and horn, and dredging the rivers and marshes to offer their pearls and gems. Thus I assist in praising the celestial compositions, and thus I adorn the mansion of meaning. A trickling wave flowing into the sea—how could it add to the depth of the great ocean? A firefly’s spark presenting its glow cannot enhance the light of the sun. Yet I respectfully express my boundless gratitude and humbly exert my loyalty and diligence. The explanation of the sūtra title in the imperial commentary is divided into four: First, explaining the simile: that is, the true jewel of the vajra can shatter hard accumulations. Second, explaining the wisdom: that is, the correct wisdom of prajñā can destroy the afflictions. Third, discerning the virtue: that is, non-abiding and non-grasping, realizing the pāramitā and abandoning the raft; form itself being emptiness, it accords with bodhi in the Middle Way. Fourth, explaining the sūtra: that is, subduing [the mind] in such a way can be called eternal. Therefore it is called the Vajracchedikā Prajñāpāramitā Sūtra.
1.5
In praising and explaining the sūtra and its commentary, I briefly open five gates: first, recounting the causes and conditions for the teaching's arising; second, clarifying the essential nature of the sūtra; third, subsuming it under its essential tenet; fourth, the capacities and temperaments addressed; fifth, providing the correct interpretation according to the text. The causes and conditions for the teaching's arising are divided into two sections: first, recounting the intention behind the teaching's arising; second, the period of its transmission and translation. Within the first section, there are again two parts: first, explaining according to the treatises; second, a general evaluation. Explaining according to the treatises: Bodhisattva Asaṅga explains the intention behind the three questions. The treatise asks: 'For what reason did the elder Subhūti raise these questions?' There are six causes and conditions. Furthermore, the essential tenet of the entire text everywhere rests upon the three questions. Subhūti is the master who occasioned the teaching. Since he had this intention, the World-Honoured One answered in accordance with his questions; their intention was necessarily identical. Thus, the six conditions are the intention behind the teaching's arising. What are these six? The treatise says: 'To sever doubt; to generate faith and understanding; to enter the profound meaning; to prevent falling back; to give rise to joy; and to ensure the long abiding of the true Dharma.' This is the Prajñāpāramitā causing the lineage of the Buddhas not to be severed. How does it cause the lineage of the Buddhas not to be severed by this? If there are those with doubts, it is so that they may sever their doubts. For those bodhisattvas who delight in merit but whose minds have not yet matured, it is so that upon hearing of the abundant merit, they may give rise to faith and understanding regarding the Prajñāpāramitā. For those whose minds are already mature, it is so that they may enter the profound meaning. For those who have already attained not being despised, it is because through eagerly receiving, holding, and practicing [it], they possess much merit and will not fall back again. For those who have already attained compliant gathering and purity of mind, it is so that they may personally enter into the Dharma and, seeing it, give rise to joy. It is to cause the Great Vehicle teaching to abide long in future ages. The exposition states: The first five are to benefit and gladden sentient beings; the last one is to ensure the long abiding of the true Dharma. Among the first five: the first two are because those outside the Buddha's Dharma, having doubts, do not generate settled faith. The middle two are because those who have already entered the Buddha's Dharma, though rejoicing in the true Dharma, do not yet understand how to advance in practice. The last one is because those who have advanced in practice are not yet able to attain realization. For teaching is only to bring understanding to those who do not understand, and deliverance to those who are not yet delivered; if one has already realized and awakened, spoken teachings completely vanish. Therefore, here it is to cause sentient beings who do not believe to believe, those who have not practiced to practice, and those who have not attained realization to realize. Now, these six causes are subsumed into three pairs: the first two are the pair of eliminating doubt and generating faith; the middle two are the pair of giving rise to wisdom and gathering merit; the last two are the pair of awakening to the principle and promoting the teaching. Furthermore, each preceding cause leads to each subsequent condition: because doubt is severed, faith and understanding arise; because faith and understanding arise, one enters the profound Dharma; because one enters the profound Dharma, one does not fall back; because one does not fall back, joy is generated; because joy is generated, the Dharma abides long. Their correlation with the stages and grounds will be explained when we reach the text. Furthermore, according to the treatise of Bodhisattva Guṇaprabha: 'The Dharma spoken by the Buddha all resolves into two truths: the first is conventional truth, and the second is ultimate truth.' As for conventional truth, it refers to all ordinary beings, śrāvakas, pratyekabuddhas, bodhisattvas, and Tathāgatas, down to the mutual correlation of names, meanings, cognitive objects, and karmic retribution. The exposition states: Within conventional truth, persons and phenomena differ. Among persons, there are ordinary beings and noble ones; among noble ones, there are the three vehicles, and the causes and effects of the Great Vehicle—such distinctions. Among phenomena, signifiers and signified, apprehending consciousness and objective support, that which causes retribution and the retribution caused, are each bound to one another. This is called conventional truth. The treatise also says: 'As for ultimate truth, it refers to completely finding nothing to be apprehended within this. As it is said, "The highest truth is not the domain of discursive cognition, let alone words," down to the noble spiritual lineages lacking karma and karmic retribution.' The treatise, having explained the two truths, next applies them: 'The sūtra says: "Therefore in this prajñā, giving without abiding in marks is spoken of; all phenomena are markless, non-graspable, and non-expressible; beings and phenomena lack self; there is nothing to be attained, no one who realizes, no achievement, no coming, no going," and so forth. This explains ultimate truth. It also speaks of the internal and external, mundane and supramundane, the marks of all phenomena, and all merits. This establishes conventional truth. Thus should it be known.' The exposition states: The six sense objects are external, the five eyes are internal; form is external, mind is internal; sentient beings and the physical world are the mundane; the undefiled and unconditioned are the supramundane. Speaking comprehensively of these, they are called all marks of phenomena; all the weighing of life and wealth, the merit of upholding the sūtra, and all virtues. The intent of the treatise is: sentient beings do not recognize the two truths and constantly sink into cyclic existence. To cause sentient beings to recognize and penetrate the two truths, generate superior wisdom, and attain liberation, it is as a verse says: 'It is not without seeing tathatā / that one can comprehend that all conditioned factors / are all like illusory people and the like— / though existing, they are not real.' By contemplating ultimate truth, correct wisdom is born to awaken to true emptiness; by penetrating the conventional, pṛṣṭhalabdha-jñāna is generated to know dependent origination. Briefly, there are six pairs: wisdom of principle and wisdom of phenomena; sarvajñatā and sarvākārajñatā; wisdom like awakening from a dream and wisdom like a lotus blooming; wisdom of emptiness and wisdom of existence; wisdom of self-benefit and wisdom of benefiting others; yathāvad-bhāvikatājñāna and yāvadh-bhāvikatājñāna. The immeasurable merits of the Buddhas and bodhisattvas take the two wisdoms as their root. Because of recognizing the ultimate and conventional, these wisdoms arise. Therefore the sūtra is spoken to cause awakening to the two truths. Furthermore, because of realizing the ultimate, wisdom arises and one does not abide in saṃsāra; because of awakening to the conventional, compassion arises and one does not abide in nirvāṇa. Or, as the provisions for apratiṣṭhita-nirvāṇa, it forever surpasses the two vehicles, benefiting and gladdening boundlessly; hence the sūtra is spoken. The above was explaining according to the treatises. Next is the general evaluation: Bodhisattva Asaṅga bases practice on the teaching; Guṇaprabha's treatise generates wisdom based on cognitive objects. Each relies on one meaning, yet they do not contradict each other. However, comprehensively comparing the sūtra and the treatises, opening from one to six completely subsumes the intentions. As for the 'one intention': it is to cause the lineage of the Buddhas not to be severed. Bodhisattva Asaṅga concludes the six causes, saying: 'This is the Prajñāpāramitā causing the lineage of the Buddhas not to be severed.' If this intention were reversed by the six causes—doubts not ceasing and so forth—superior wisdom would not arise, the true principle would not be manifest, and the lineage of the Buddhas would be severed forever. Because the sūtra is spoken, doubt is eliminated and faith is generated, one enters the Dharma without falling back, and with joy one propagates it, destined to achieve correct awakening; hence it says 'the lineage of the Buddhas is not severed.' As for the 'two intentions': these are the two truths spoken of in the treatise above. Opening them into three: first, to awaken to the profound subtlety of the teaching and its principle; second, to generate the wondrous practice of abandonment and cultivation; third, to recognize the ultimate and transformed aspects of the fruit's virtues. The first gate again has two: first, the profundity of the teaching; second, the subtlety of the principle. As for the profundity of the teaching: the Buddha said, 'Prajñāpāramitā is not Prajñāpāramitā. All Buddhas are born from this sūtra.' Subhūti deeply understood its meaning and wept tears of sorrow: 'From the past until now, with the eye of wisdom I have attained, I have never before heard such a sūtra.' Asaṅga's treatise says: 'To cause the Great Vehicle teaching to abide long in the world.' On this account, it extensively praises the merit of upholding and explaining [the sūtra] as surpassing the giving of immeasurable lives and wealth, to make known the profundity of the teaching, so that its surpassing and great merit will inspire dedicated study. As for the subtlety of the principle: it is to reveal the markless tathatā, the ultimate principle of the dharmakāya. Although it speaks of the ultimate principle, it does not destroy conventional truth. Therefore Guṇaprabha's treatise designates its title based on the sūtra: through destroying grasping and attachment, one enters ultimate truth; without destroying conventional designations, one awakens and penetrates conventional truth. The tenth fascicle of the Śataka-śāstra-vaipulya says: 'However, among what the Buddha taught, there is nothing that is not extremely profound; the Dharma-gate of the two truths is the most difficult to fathom.' The Vijñaptimātratā-śāstra says: 'Denying the two truths is an evil grasping of emptiness; the Buddhas speak of it as incurable.' Because of this, some say that the Prajñā sūtras' statement that all is empty does not exhaust the principle. Second, generating the wondrous practice of abandonment and cultivation also has two: first, that which is abandoned; second, that which is cultivated. As for that which is abandoned: wishing to enter the Buddha's Dharma, faith is foremost; hesitating and harbouring doubt obstructs the generation of pure faith. Explaining based on the initial entry into the Dharma, the treatise speaks of severing doubt. In truth, this sūtra also severs the remaining hindrances. There are two kinds of hindrances: kleśāvaraṇa and jñeyāvaraṇa. Tracing their source, the two graspings are the root. This sūtra directly eliminates the two graspings of self and phenomena. Once the root is exhausted, the branches and leaves perish with it. As the sūtra says: 'If there is a mark of self, person, sentient being, or life span, then one is not a bodhisattva,' and so forth—this is eliminating ātmagrāha. 'There is no mark of phenomena, nor mark of non-phenomena,' and so forth—this is eliminating dharmagrāha. Furthermore, there are three hindrances, which are the three defilements. 'When in the past my body was dismembered limb by limb, if I had had a mark of self, mark of person, mark of sentient being, or mark of life span, anger and hatred should have arisen,' and so forth—this eliminates kleśāvaraṇa. 'If a good man or good woman receives, upholds, reads, and recites this sūtra and is despised by others, their past sinful karma will be extinguished,' and so forth—this eliminates karmic hindrances. 'You should know that the meaning of this sūtra is inconceivable, and its fruit and retribution are also inconceivable,' and so forth—this eliminates retributive hindrances. Furthermore, according to the Ratnagotravibhāga, there are four kinds of hindrances: first, icchantikas' lack of faith; second, non-Buddhists' attachment to self; third, śrāvakas' fear of suffering; fourth, pratyekabuddhas' abandonment of [altruistic] mind. Now in the sūtra, deriving the meaning in accordance with the text, the four hindrances are fully eliminated. As the sūtra says: 'A single thought of pure faith; having long planted good roots under many Buddhas; when faith is pure, the true mark is generated,' and so forth—these all [eliminate] the first hindrance. Therefore the treatise says: 'For those bodhisattvas who delight in merit but whose minds have not yet matured, it is so that upon hearing of the abundant merit, they may give rise to faith and understanding regarding the Prajñāpāramitā.' The passages throughout the sūtra speaking of no self and so forth eliminate the second hindrance. 'The perfection of patience is not the perfection of patience,' and so forth, is determined in the treatise as the abiding place of enduring suffering, which eliminates the third hindrance. 'Vast, foremost, constant, their minds unperverted,' and so forth, the mind of the four kindnesses eliminates the fourth hindrance. 'If there are those who delight in lesser teachings, they cannot receive, read, recite, or explain it to others,' and so forth, along with the text on apratiṣṭhita-nirvāṇa, together eliminate the latter two. Furthermore, according to the eight abiding places of Bodhisattva Asaṅga, subsuming those twelve into the abandonment of obstacles, each is directly counteracted, namely having heard little and so forth; hence this sūtra is spoken to eliminate hindrances. Second, that which is cultivated: although the ten thousand practices are distinct, they do not exceed the six perfections. Vasubandhu's treatise says: 'The perfection of giving subsumes the necessities of life, fearlessness, and the Dharma. Here, one, two, and three are called the abiding place of practice.' Furthermore, relinquishing body and wealth and so forth is giving. 'In the latter five hundred years, upholding the precepts and cultivating merit,' and so forth, is morality. Furthermore, being free from all marks is the morality of restraint. Cultivating all wholesome dharmas to attain anuttarā samyaksaṃbodhi is the morality of embracing wholesome dharmas. Benefiting all sentient beings is the morality of embracing sentient beings. These are the three clusters of pure precepts. Also in the Yogācāra[-bhūmi], revulsion toward the conditioned and so forth, the three kinds of generating the aspiration, are the causes of the three virtues; these are called morality. Patience can be understood. Practicing for a long time over five hundred lifetimes is diligence. Throughout the text, the contemplative practices cultivated are determined by the treatise to be samāpatti, vipaśyanā, and so forth; this is the wisdom of emptiness. The six perfections are perfected. In the large sūtra, the last are the six luminous perfections; here they are briefly raised and indicated to clarify markless practice and lead into what follows. Third, recognizing the ultimate and transformed aspects of the fruit's virtues: although Subhūti's three questions pertain to the causal stage, the cause necessarily tends toward the unexcelled fruit. 'Those who seek me through form or sound do not see the Tathāgata'—this is the true dharmakāya. Walking, standing, sitting, and lying down are the nirmāṇakāya. The nirmāṇakāya is not the true Buddha, nor is it the preacher of the Dharma. This causes one to recognize the transformed body and seek the true Buddha. Furthermore, Guṇaprabha's treatise explains: 'How should one abide?' refers to: toward a fruit of what mark does the mind abide and make vows? 'How should one practice?' refers to: what practice should one cultivate to attain that fruit? 'How should one subdue?' refers to: subduing the equanimous mind to make the cause pure. All phenomena have causes first and fruits later; why is the fruit spoken of first? It is because praising the virtues of the fruit first causes them to rejoice and seek it, and thereby cultivate the cause. In Bodhisattva Asaṅga's [treatise], three causes are opened; the principle encompasses practice and fruit. The domain of the two truths applies to both fruit and cause. The above concludes the three intentions. Opening them into four: first, to cause hearing of the supreme teaching of non-expression; second, to cause knowing of the superior principle of non-arising; third, to cause cultivation of the wondrous practice of non-attainment; fourth, to cause attainment of the ultimate unconditioned fruit. These are fully present in the sūtra and should be investigated and cited. If opened into five intentions, to the previous four is added: to cause the gathering of markless wondrous merit. As for 'six intentions': these are the six causes of the treatise; or rather, within the previous three intentions, each is opened into two: first, teaching; second, principle; third, abandonment; fourth, cultivation; fifth, ultimate; sixth, transformed. Therefore, according to the overall intention of the sūtra and treatise, it is to eliminate doubt and sever hindrances, generate faith and initiate practice, recognize the principles of the ultimate and conventional, gather the virtues of merit and wisdom, realize the fruit of the dharmakāya, and keep the lineage of the Buddhas unsevered: thus this sūtra arose.
1.6
Regarding the explanation of the eras of translation: Ever since Emperor Ming of the Han was moved by his dream, Kāśyapa Mātaṅga brandished his monk's staff, and An Shigao arrived in Luoyang, down to before Kang Senghui traveled to the state of Wu, although subtle words were disseminated throughout the Central Plains, this scripture had not yet circulated in the Eastern Realm. From the days of Fu Qin down to the reign era of the August Dynasty, its transmission was destined for specific times, having undergone six translations in all. First, in the fourth year of the Hongshi era of the Later Qin, Dharma Master Kumārajīva translated it at the Caotang Monastery in Chang'an (eleven sheets), entitled *Śrāvastī*. Second, in the second year of the Tianping era of the Yuan Wei, Tripiṭaka Master Bodhiruci translated it in Luoyang (fourteen sheets), entitled *Bhagavat*. At that time he also translated Bodhisattva Vasubandhu's treatise in three fascicles and the *Vajrarṣi-ṭīkā* in ten fascicles. Third, in the first year of the Taikang era of the Chen, Tripiṭaka Master Paramārtha translated it in the Southern Dynasties (fifteen sheets), entitled *Jetavana*. He also produced an original commentary in four fascicles. Fourth, in the tenth year of the Kaihuang era of the Sui, Dharmagupta translated it (sixteen sheets), entitled *Vajracchedikā*. He also translated Bodhisattva Asaṅga's treatise in two fascicles. Fifth, Tripiṭaka Master Xuanzang of the Great Tang, in the Zhenguan era, translated it at the Yuhua Palace (eighteen sheets), entitled *Vajracchedikā*. Furthermore, there was Tripiṭaka Master Divākara (which translates as 'Sunlight'), who translated Bodhisattva Guṇaprabha's treatise in two fascicles. Sixth, Tripiṭaka Master Yijing of the Great Zhou, in the second year of the Shengli era, translated it at the Foshouji Monastery (twelve sheets), also entitled *Vajracchedikā*, with the text reading: "The Bhagavān was in the great city of Famous Renown, in the Victor's Grove...", and he also retranslated Bodhisattva Vasubandhu's treatise in three fascicles. Passing on the lamp successively, each different era was equally fine. Though the wording differs slightly, the Dharma-jewel is without disparity. This is truly because the Sanskrit manuscripts obtained were mutually different, or because the translators had differences in being extensive or abridged. By cross-referencing them with one another, the principles and meanings become completely clear. If scripture and treatise are cited together, the Zhou and Wei translations differ from each other; if [measuring by] the full preservation of Tang and Sanskrit [readings], then the Zhenguan translation is the most complete. Yet when it comes to concise phrasing and manifest meaning, answering capacities and meeting circumstances, where transcription flourished throughout the realm and upholding and recitation encompassed both monastics and laity, can it be any other than the *Śrāvastī* version? The brilliance of the imperial commentary indeed rests upon this! Therefore, we now employ the treatises of the Sui and Wei to accompany the scripture of the Yao Qin. Question: The scriptural texts may be known, but please explain the authors of the various treatises. Answer: Nine hundred years after the Buddha's parinirvāṇa, Asaṅga was an ārya of the first bhūmi, and Vasubandhu was an eminent master of the stages of warmth and peak. In worldly terms they were brothers; in the Dharma, master and disciple. Each composed treatises to praise and propagate this scripture. However, the *Vajrarṣi-ṭīkā* judges Vasubandhu's treatise by saying: "The prose was spoken by Bodhisattva Maitreya for Bodhisattva Apratihata. Apratihata transmitted it to Vasubandhu. Vasubandhu later investigated the meaning of the scripture and treatise, composed further verse stanzas, and extensively raised questions and answers to explain this scripture." This is not so. In the composition of treatises, verses are the principal text and the prose comments upon them. How could the commentary come first and the verses afterward? It would be like the son preceding the father. Furthermore, examining the prose, it repeatedly quotes the text of the verses; how could the Maitreya, the stage-bound successor [to the Buddha], cite the verses of a bodhisattva prior to the bhūmis as proof? Therefore, that cannot be relied upon. We now rely on the transmission of Tripiṭaka Master Ci'en and others, who hold that the eighty verses were composed by Bodhisattva Maitreya; this is fully recorded in the biographies in the Western Regions. If so, why does the title of Tripiṭaka Master Yijing's translation of the treatise say: "Verses composed by Asaṅga, commentary made by Vasubandhu"? Answer: The verse stanzas were definitely spoken by Maitreya, who transmitted them to Asaṅga, and Asaṅga transmitted them to Vasubandhu. Vasubandhu received them and composed the prose commentary. Therefore, the verse of homage at the beginning of that treatise says: "He of great knowledge fully mastered it and taught us; I take refuge in the body of immeasurable merit. One should venerate him and such others, bowing one's head at his feet and placing them on one's crown." This comprehensively pays homage to the master who authored the root treatise and to those who transmitted it. Thus, the title of the root treatise stating "composed by Asaṅga" is said in accordance with the transmission, and this does not conflict. Question: The verses composed by Maitreya are the definitive standard; why did Asaṅga independently compose another treatise, giving rise to divergent viewpoints? Answer: Phenomena reduce to differentiations, and principles have many paths. Where the previous treatise lacked something, he further supplemented the omission. Although their texts differ upon examination, based on principle there is no error. Awaiting the explanation of the text, each will be reconciled. If one relied solely on Asaṅga, the aim of severing doubts would not be illumined; if one solely followed Vasubandhu, the gate of practices and stages would surely be lacking. Examining both together is like the sun and moon shining in unison; if one were to favor one and abandon the other, one would regret the incompleteness of the gem. Do not fear broad learning; be diligent and strive onward. Guṇaprabha's treatise is based on Vasubandhu; though it occasionally has divergent explanations, it does not contravene the source. This concludes the first section on the origins of the teaching.
1.7
Second, concerning the explanation of the essence and nature of the scripture: first the essence, then the nature. In setting forth the essence of the teachings, there are five levels in all. 1. The essence of the signifier's nature and function. Names express self-nature; phrases express distinctions; words are syllables, serving as the support for both. These three depend on sound. Explaining the nominal and the real together, the four dharmas of sound, name, phrase, and word constitute the essence. The *Daśabhūmika-sūtra-śāstra* says: "Both speaker and listener achieve perfection through two things: first, wholesome sounds; second, wholesome syllables (syllables being the support also subsume names and phrases)." The *Vijñaptimātratāsiddhi* says: "Although these three have no separate essence apart from sound, they differ in being nominal or real, and are not identical with sound. Consequently, the objects of the two unobstructed understandings of dharmas and words differ: dharmas take names and the like as their objective support, while words take sound as their objective support." 2. Concealing the nominal and discussing the real. Although the essence consists of names, phrases, and words, they are nominally established based on function; they have no separate essence and are not apart from sound. It is merely said that the sound of the holy teaching constitutes the essence. Therefore, the *Abhidharmasamuccaya* speaks of "that which is elicited by accomplishment as sound," and does not speak of names and the like as that which is elicited by accomplishment. The *Vijñaptimātratā* also says: "If names, phrases, and words were real entities apart from sound, they should, like form and the like, not be real signifiers." 3. The essence of the manifest expression of signifier and signified. Fascicle 81 of the *Yogācārabhūmi* presents the essence of the sūtras as having two kinds in brief: first, the phrasing; second, the meaning. Through the expressive phrasing, the meaning is manifested. This essence takes both signifier and signified together, for the holy teaching must have signified meanings. 4. Subsuming dharmas under the mind as essence. The *Avataṃsaka* and other scriptures say that the three realms are mind-only. Furthermore, sūtras say that the objective supports of the consciousnesses are manifestations of consciousness only. The treatises say that mind, mental factors, form, non-concurrent conditioned dharmas, and all unconditioned dharmas are not apart from the mind. Therefore, the consciousness of mind-only constitutes the essence of this teaching. In terms of the root, it is the mind of the speaker; in terms of the branch, it also takes the cognitive consciousness of the listener as essence. Hence the *Viṃśikā-vijñaptimātratā* states that through mutual predominant influence, the two consciousnesses become determined; this refers to the differentiation of consciousness in other continuous series causing the arising of differentiated consciousness in another continuous series, as they mutually serve as predominant conditions for each other. 5. Subsuming phenomena into tathatā as essence. The *Vimalakīrtinirdeśa* says: "All dharmas are suchness; all the noble and wise are also suchness," and so on. It also says: "Although the nature of syllables is devoid of syllables, this is liberation." It also says: "Dharma is not seeing, hearing, perceiving, or knowing," and so forth, in numerous passages. Phenomenal marks are like waves; the nature of principle is like water. The waves are not apart from water; phenomenal dharmas are all suchness. Therefore, the teaching takes only tathatā as its essence. The above presentation of essence proceeds from branch to root, from shallow to deep, simply presenting the view that does not contradict other meanings. Next, regarding the explanation of the nature, there are again three gates: 1. The nature of pariniṣpanna and the others; 2. The nature of defiled or undefiled; 3. The three natures of wholesome and the rest. Regarding pariniṣpanna and the others: subsuming phenomena into tathatā is pariniṣpanna nature; subsuming dharmas under mind is paratantra nature. The first two gates are also paratantra. The third gate pertains to all three natures, since the parikalpita, though lacking real essence, is also what is signified. Regarding defiled or undefiled: based on the root teaching spoken by the Tathāgata, all are undefiled. The statement that the fifteen dhātus are defiled accords with the Hīnayāna tenets and is not the Mahāyāna meaning. In Mahāyāna, the Buddha's body, the eighteen dhātus, and so forth are all undefiled. When bodhisattvas of the ten bhūmis and persons of the two vehicles speak or listen to the teaching, distinctions must be made. The eighth consciousness of a bodhisattva is subsumed under the defiled nature, so the sounds and so forth manifested by it are also exclusively defiled. If speaking and listening occur within an undefiled mind, it involves the sixth and seventh consciousnesses, and this reflected teaching is also exclusively undefiled, because the seeing and form parts belong to the same category of nature. Although the two vehicles have undefiled contemplation, entry into the absorption of cessation, and so forth, these are minor and negligible; when speaking or listening to the Dharma, they are exclusively defiled. Worldlings can be understood accordingly. Regarding the three natures of wholesome and the rest: that which is manifested by the undefiled is unequivocally of wholesome nature. What is spoken and heard by a defiled mind—the manifested sounds and so forth—are all exclusively indeterminate, because they are direct perceptual objects. Question: That which is manifested by the eighth consciousness may be exclusively indeterminate, but with regard to the six consciousnesses, what is the status of that which is manifested during states of wholesome and the rest? Answer: While the seeing part may be wholesome and so on, that which is manifested is indeterminate, because the seeing and form parts are permitted to be generated separately. The treatises state that form and sound are of neither good nor bad nature; they are nominally called good or bad in accordance with the mind that generates them. Question: If sound is exclusively indeterminate, what of names and the like? Answer: If considered in accordance with what is signified, they nominally extend to the three natures; if considered in accordance with their supporting sound, they are also exclusively indeterminate. If that is so, why does Vasubandhu's treatise say: "My Dharma is wholesome; yours is exclusively indeterminate"? Answer: You, the Hīnayāna master, hold that the sound dhātu is defiled, and names are exclusively indeterminate. In my Mahāyāna tradition, the Buddha's sound is undefiled, and therefore it is exclusively wholesome.
1.8.1
Third, subsumption under [the teachings] and its central doctrine: first, we analyze the subsumption; next, we clarify the central doctrine. There are five modes of subsumption: first, subsumption under the baskets (piṭaka); second, subsumption under the divisions [of scripture] (aṅga); third, subsumption under the vehicles (yāna); fourth, subsumption under the periods [of teaching]; fifth, subsumption under the assemblies. First, regarding subsumption under the baskets: there are two kinds of baskets—first, the śrāvaka basket; second, the bodhisattva basket. The teachings for pratyekabuddhas are few and are included within the śrāvaka [basket]. This sūtra is subsumed under the bodhisattva [basket], because it is a teaching of complete letters and addresses those of great capacity. Furthermore, there are three baskets, namely the Vinaya, the Sūtra, and the Abhidharma, which respectively expound the trainings of discipline, concentration, and wisdom, based primarily on what is emphasized; otherwise, all three baskets expound all three. Now, this sūtra belongs to the Sūtra basket. Moreover, in accord with the twelve divisions, texts such as the discourse division (upadeśa) can permeate all three [baskets] and do not constitute a separate set of fascicles. Second, regarding subsumption under the divisions: the meaning of the twelve divisions is explained fully in a separate chapter; here we list their names and briefly match them with what is expounded in the sūtra. 1. Sūtra (契經): its characteristics have both general and specific [meanings]. In general, all twelve are termed sūtras; specifically, it refers to the sewn-together prose passages that briefly compile the intended meaning. This sūtra possesses both. 2. Geya (應頌, verses that reiterate): these are verses that reiterate, meaning that after the prose has spoken, verses reiterate and clarify it, as the sūtra states below: "If one sees me by form..." and so on. 3. Vyākaraṇa (記別, prophecy/exposition): this has three aspects: first, predicting that a great being will attain Buddhahood; second, explaining that a disciple has died here and been born there; third, elucidating the meanings of dharmas. The present sūtra admits of the third [meaning] of vyākaraṇa. Although [it mentions] "Śākyamuni, you will attain Buddhahood," this discusses a past Buddha's deed rather than a present prediction for another, and so is not the former; yet merely expounding [the doctrine] makes it belong to that division, so it does not necessarily require [predicting] a Buddha. 4. Gāthā (諷頌, isolated verse): this means what was not spoken before but is clarified directly in verse because it can be chanted, of which the final verse is an example. 5. Udāna (自說, spontaneous discourse): this means speaking without awaiting a request, perceiving the capacity and speaking straight away to ensure the long endurance of the Dharma, or revealing profound compassion. In this sūtra, in order to evoke reverence and longing, there is no spontaneous discourse. 6. Nidāna (緣起, circumstantial origin): this has three aspects: first, formulating a precept due to an offense; second, expounding the Dharma on account of an event; third, expounding the Dharma on account of a request. This sūtra shares in the third. 7. Avadāna (譬喻, metaphor/parable): this means using an analogy to illustrate the meaning expounded, such as the metaphor of empty space to illustrate the merit of giving. 8. Itivṛttaka (本事, stories of the past): this means, excluding oneself, speaking of the past disciples and teachings, termed itivṛttaka. The present sūtra lacks this. 9. Jātaka (本生, birth stories): this refers to the Buddha speaking of his own past lives, where he died or was born in other places, practiced the bodhisattva deeds, and so forth, as in the account of his past practice as the ascetic of forbearance. 10. Vaipulya (方廣, expansive teachings): this has two aspects: first, expounding the practice of the bodhisattva path; second, because the Dharma is extensive, vast, and exceedingly sublime. This sūtra possesses both. 11. Adbhutadharma (希法, marvelous phenomena): this refers to expounding the shared and unshared virtues of the eight assemblies, as well as other supreme, extraordinary, and wondrous phenomena, such as saying that relinquishing one's life as many times as the sands of three Ganges rivers every day does not match faith in this sūtra. 12. Upadeśa (論義, analytical discourse): this refers to circularly investigating and verifying various scriptures, which is the mātṛkā; all definitive scriptures are called mātṛkā. Now, although this sūtra lacks an explicit text [designated as such], according to Vasubandhu's commentary, building upon what came before to raise what follows, the Buddha eliminated all doubts and requests through circular exposition, which is also an analytical discourse. Thus it encompasses ten divisions, lacking only spontaneous discourses (udāna) and stories of the past (itivṛttaka). Third, regarding subsumption under the vehicles: one may posit only the One Vehicle, as the Lotus Sūtra says: "There is only the Dharma of the One Vehicle, neither two nor three"; or posit two vehicles, as the Mahāyānasaṃgraha says: "Because there is a distinction between the higher vehicle and the lower vehicle"; or posit three vehicles, as the Lotus Sūtra says: "For those who seek the śrāvaka vehicle, he expounds the Dharma conforming to the Four Noble Truths," and so forth; down to positing five vehicles and so forth, as is fully explained in standard accounts. Now, this sūtra belongs to the One Vehicle, because the text below states: "It is spoken for those who set out in the Great Vehicle"; and the Śrīmālādevī Sūtra states: "The One Vehicle is the Great Vehicle." Among the two or three vehicles, it is subsumed under the supreme vehicle, because it is spoken for those who set out in the most supreme vehicle. Fourth, regarding subsumption under the periods: the periods of teaching established by ancient masters were variable in number and all lacked firm proof, as is extensively narrated and refuted in Dharma Master Ci'en's Fayuan [yilinzhang]. Now we set forth only the correct doctrine. The explanation states: Tripiṭaka Master Ci'en, relying on the Saṃdhinirmocana Sūtra, established three periods of teaching. In that sūtra, for the sake of the Bodhisattva Paramārthasamudgata, he broadly expounded that the three non-natures are all based on the parikalpita nature. Because the Bodhisattva Paramārthasamudgata gained profound comprehension, the World-Honoured One praised his good understanding of what had been said. The Bodhisattva Paramārthasamudgata addressed the Buddha, saying: "World-Honoured One, formerly, at one time in Vārāṇasī, in the Deer Park at Ṛṣipatana, solely for those who set out in the śrāvaka vehicle, you turned the wheel of the True Dharma characterized by the Four Noble Truths. Although it was extremely wondrous, exceedingly rare, and no devas or humans in all the world had previously been able to turn it in accordance with the Dharma, the wheel of the True Dharma turned at that time was surpassable, had room for improvement, was of provisional meaning, and was a foothold for disputes. Formerly, in the second period, World-Honoured One, solely for those who set out to practice the Great Vehicle, relying on all dharmas being without self-nature, unarisen and unceasing, fundamentally tranquil, and by nature tathatā, you turned the wheel of the True Dharma with implicit characteristics. Although it was even more wondrous and exceedingly rare, the wheel of the True Dharma turned at that time was also surpassable, had room for improvement, was still of provisional meaning, and was a foothold for disputes. Now, in the third period, World-Honoured One, universally for those who set out in all vehicles, relying on all dharmas being without self-nature, unarisen and unceasing, fundamentally tranquil, by nature nirvāṇa, and having the nature of non-nature, you have turned the wheel of the True Dharma with explicit characteristics. It is supremely wondrous and most rare. The wheel of the True Dharma turned now by the World-Honoured One is unsurpassed, leaves no room for improvement, is of truly definitive meaning, and is not a foothold for disputes." This is identical to the Nirvāṇa Sūtra's teaching to consume milk first, then teaching total cessation, and finally teaching that some may consume it and some may not; it is also identical to the three kinds of wheels of the Dharma expounded in the Suvarṇaprabhāsa Sūtra—the turning, illuminating, and sustaining [wheels]. The "Belief and Understanding" chapter of the Lotus Sūtra also has a clear explanation. In terms of the overarching principle, when addressed to those of indeterminate nature, the great develops out of the small and is conferred gradually, so there can be three periods; the Saṃdhinirmocana and other scriptures speak in accordance with this. If it is purely sudden enlightenment where the great does not arise from the small, then there is no sequence of three periods before and after, nor is it a fixed system of years and months.
1.8.2
Earlier and later are spoken of merely in mutual association according to category of meaning. If it were not so, would the *Avataṃsaka Sūtra* and others, being expounded first of all, be the initial period, and the *Sūtra of the Buddha's Bequeathed Teaching*, being the very last, be the third period? Question: If that is so, why does the *Lotus Sūtra* speak only of two periods, saying: 'Formerly in Vārāṇasī I turned the wheel of the Dharma of the four truths,' down to 'Now I turn again the most wondrous, unsurpassed, great wheel of the Dharma'? Answer: That [sūtra] contrasts the Great with the Small, concealing the second period and mentioning only the earlier and later; in reality, there are indeed three periods. Now, as this sūtra accords with those whose natures are suddenly aroused, no period is established in general terms. But in terms of gradual capacities, it is subsumed under the second period. For the teaching of the first period spoke only of existence; this [sūtra] does not speak only of existence, hence it is not of that period. If it were the third period, which explicitly teaches both emptiness and existence universally for those setting out upon all vehicles—this sūtra states below: 'Only for those who set out upon the supreme vehicle.' Therefore it belongs to the second period. Furthermore, Asaṅga explains: 'Not being startled, not being terrified,' and so on in terms of the three non-natures. Yet the three non-natures are the Buddha's intentional speech declaring that all phenomena are empty. Question: Although the *Saṃdhinirmocana Sūtra* speaks of three periods, its text does not state that the teaching of the second period is the Prajñāpāramitā and so forth; based on what can this be known? Answer: That very sūtra says, 'Only for those who set out to cultivate the Great Vehicle,' and this sūtra likewise says, 'The Tathāgata speaks it for those who set out upon the Great Vehicle, speaks it for those of the supreme vehicle,' and so forth; their passages are precisely identical. If it were not so, what other sūtra would there be that turns [the wheel] with covert characteristics only for those who set out to cultivate the Great Vehicle? Moreover, the *Mahāprajñāpāramitā Sūtra* has passages in several places where, after the Tathāgata has finished speaking, the devas joyfully praise him, all saying: 'We now see the World-Honoured One turn the wheel of the Dharma for the second time,' and so forth. Question: According to the *Saṃdhinirmocana Sūtra*, the second period turns [the wheel] with covert characteristics; if so, is this sūtra not of definitive meaning? Furthermore, according to this sūtra, the merit of upholding, explaining, and cultivating it is measureless and inconceivable, whereas the *Saṃdhinirmocana*, taking it as non-definitive, [regards] all the merit of upholding, explaining, reciting, and chanting it as like water in an ox's footprint compared to the great ocean water, the superior and inferior being vastly apart. Since that is so, this merit should be narrow and inferior. Answer: Master Henan explains: Definitiveness of meaning is distinguished on the basis of the vehicle, not in terms of the overt and the covert. Furthermore, that [sūtra] pertains to the covert approach with respect to gradual enlightenment, whereas this [sūtra] is explicit with respect to sudden enlightenment. In addition, it fully expounds the cultivation of the five stages; how could it be merely empty? The exposition states: In the *Saṃdhinirmocana Sūtra*, the statement that the second period is covert, and so forth, is because it was spoken largely in a distributed manner in accordance with gradual enlightenment, largely concealing characteristics to say that all are empty. In truth and reality, Prajñā also possesses the meaning of existence. How is this known? According to the commentaries of these two treatises, the passages of the sūtra are all understood in terms of the Middle Way, apart from emptiness and apart from existence, not exclusively empty. This will be made clear below. Furthermore, according to the Tang *Mahāyānasaṃgraha* and the *Madhyāntavibhāga-śāstra*, both cite Prajñā to prove that the three natures encompass both existence and non-existence, and are not exclusively empty. How much more so when it is said that all Buddhas are born from this sūtra, and that the ultimate dharmakāya is free from all marks—how could it not be of definitive meaning? As for the *Saṃdhinirmocana Sūtra* comparing merits and finding superior and inferior: if one mostly grasps emptiness as definitive, then the merit of upholding, explaining, and so on is inferior; but if one understands emptiness and existence as free from marks and upholds it in accord with truth, one's merit is identical to that of the *Saṃdhinirmocana*. On this point of meaning, one should examine and reflect carefully. Fifth, subsumption under assemblies: The *Mahāprajñāpāramitā Sūtra* was expounded relying generally upon four places and sixteen assemblies. As for the four places: first, Vulture Peak in Rājagṛha; second, Anāthapiṇḍada's park in Śrāvastī; third, the Palace of the Maṇi Jewel Repository in the Paranirmitavaśavartin Heaven; fourth, beside the White Heron Pond in the Bamboo Grove of Rājagṛha. Of its sixteen assemblies, the first five sections have no distinct names, but are designated merely by their section headings. The sixth is the Most Excellent Heavenly King Section; the seventh is the Mañjuśrī Section; the eighth is the Nāgaśrī Section; these three sections take their names from the invokers. The names of the subsequent eight sections are established according to what is signified: namely, the ninth is the Vajracchedikā Section, the tenth is the Prajñānaya Section, and the subsequent six sections take their section titles from the six perfections in this way. This sūtra is subsumed under the ninth section. Among the four places, it was spoken in Anāthapiṇḍada's park. According to the Sanskrit text, it consists of three hundred verses; in the great corpus of the sūtra, it is fascicle 577. However, the ancients said there were eight divisions of Prajñā: the Large Division, the Small Division, the *Fangguang*, the *Guangzan*, the *Daoxing*, the *Sheng tianwang*, the *Wenshu*, and the *Vajra*. Because each was a different translation and the expanded text had not yet been seen, they spoke of eight divisions. Now, this is not so. If measured by volume, the six-hundred-fascicle sūtra is just one division; if according to sections, there are sixteen. Moreover, the eight divisions were mostly retranslations: for instance, the *Fangguang* and *Guangzan* merge into the Large Division, and the *Daoxing banruo* is precisely the Small Division. Therefore, speaking of eight divisions cannot be relied upon. This [sūtra] was expounded among the various sections and places: it is indeed the key to Prajñā, the pivotal axis of the great scripture. Its phrases are interwoven, its conceits subtle and refined. It encompasses the ultimate and the conventional, gathers the practices and stages; where there is conceit, it is dispelled, and no attachment is left unpurged. It is the utmost in breaking marks and cutting off emotional attachments to cultivate the mind, the supreme means to eliminate disasters and terminate adversity, and to gather blessings. For this reason, more than twenty masters in the Western Regions composed treatises upon it, and those who propagated it in this land are beyond counting. Even if one were to exhaust kalpas in praise and crush one's body to uphold it, how could that ever repay its inconceivable power or requite its boundless grace? Subsumption has been completed above. As for explaining the central doctrine: first generally and then specifically. For now, distinguishing the central doctrine in general: Ancient worthies of this land comprehensively subsumed all teachings to establish four doctrines. First, the doctrine establishing intrinsic nature: establishing that the five aggregates, realms, and bases possess substantial reality, as in the *Vibhāṣā*, *Abhidharmahṛdaya*, Kātyāyana's treatise (*Jñānaprasthāna*), and so forth. Second, the doctrine refuting intrinsic nature: refuting all real intrinsic nature in those three categories, and stating that all phenomena possess only marks, as in the *Satyasiddhi-śāstra* and so forth. Third, the doctrine refuting marks: stating that all phenomena are not only devoid of intrinsic nature, but their marks are also non-existent, as in the Prajñā [texts] and so forth. Fourth, the doctrine revealing the real: clarifying the genuine principle of all phenomena, according to what is appropriate, whether empty or existent, as in the *Avataṃsaka*, *Mahāparinirvāṇa*, and so forth. According to their classification, this sūtra is included under the doctrine refuting marks. However, establishing four doctrines does not exhaust the canon: for instance, the Ekavyāvahārika school holds that mundane and supramundane [things] are mere conventional designations and possess neither intrinsic nature nor marks; the Prajñaptivāda school establishes that the aggregates are real, whereas among the bases and realms...
First 9 of 284 passages. Read on