御注金剛般若波羅蜜經宣演 2.132

2.132

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.