金剛般若經旨贊 1.64

1.64

初句總顯我法二相。壽者亦是我總名故。次句顯離我法二相。其第三句。明能離心即釋。經言無我相等。其第四句。釋八所以。由依執八。能離八故。無我相者。謂無我性。以三世蘊。皆無實體。非主宰故。無人相者。其未來蘊。未生無體。非今至後可當得故。無壽者相者。現在諸蘊。念念不住。無有壽命性可得故。無眾生相者。其過去蘊。已滅無體。無有自性可至今故。無法相者。謂真如上。遠離能取所取二相。以真空無一切物故。亦無非法相者。謂真如理。雖無二取。而體不無。真如實有功德體故。言無相者。謂真如理。性離言說。非有非無。不可說為有空相故。亦非無相者。謂真如理。雖不可說。而為迷者。以依言辭而演說故。而此本經。但有二者。合彼無相。入無法相。同遣相故。合亦非無相。入亦無非法相。同遣無相故。是故二句。能攝四種。雖有此理。終譯者失。無著具釋我法二相。而不別顯無我相等。天親但顯四種我相。不顯無我及四法相。而但解釋無法相等。皆是影略互顯其義。故天親論。法空頌云。一切空無物。實有不可說。依言辭而說。是法相四種。然諸外道。內法凡夫。及二乘等。無戒定故。隨應不離五邪八執。既無智慧。不生實相。今此菩薩。由前四因能離我法。有智慧故。故能於經而生實相。是故要由三學行等。方能於經而生信解。故以此文。答前問也。

The first line broadly reveals the two marks of self and dharma, because life-span is also a general name for the self. The next line reveals freedom from the two marks of self and dharma. The third line clarifies the mind capable of separation, which explains the sūtra's words 'no mark of a self,' and so on. The fourth line explains the reason for the eight: because relying on the eight graspings, one is capable of abandoning the eight. 'No mark of a self' means having no nature of a self, because the aggregates of the three times are all devoid of real substance and are not a master. 'No mark of a person' means that the future aggregates are not yet produced and have no substance, and cannot be obtained as passing from the present to the future. 'No mark of a life-span' means that the present aggregates do not abide from moment to moment, and no nature of a life-span can be found. 'No mark of a sentient being' means that the past aggregates have already ceased and have no substance, with no intrinsic nature that can arrive at the present. 'No mark of dharmas' means that upon tathatā, one is far removed from the two marks of grasper and grasped, because true emptiness is devoid of all things. 'Nor mark of non-dharma' means that although the principle of tathatā lacks the two graspers, its substance is not non-existent, for tathatā is a substantial essence of virtuous qualities. 'No mark' means that the principle of tathatā by nature transcends words, is neither existent nor non-existent, and cannot be spoken of as having the mark of emptiness. 'Nor non-mark' means that although the principle of tathatā cannot be spoken, it is preached for those who are deluded relying on spoken words. That this root sūtra has only two is because it merges 'no mark' into 'no mark of dharmas,' as they both dispel marks; and it merges 'nor non-mark' into 'nor mark of non-dharma,' as they both dispel the mark of non-existence. Therefore, the two phrases are able to subsume all four kinds. Although this principle exists, it is ultimately an omission by the translator. Asaṅga fully explained the two marks of self and dharma, yet did not separately reveal 'no mark of a self' and so forth; Vasubandhu only revealed the four marks of a self, not revealing 'no self' and the four marks of dharmas, and only explained 'no mark of dharmas' and so forth. These are all omissions and abbreviations mutually illustrating their meaning. Therefore, Vasubandhu's commentary states in a verse on the emptiness of dharmas: 'All are empty and devoid of things, / Substantially existent yet ineffable; / Preached relying on spoken words: / These are the four marks of dharmas.' However, all non-Buddhists, ordinary worldlings within the internal teachings, and followers of the two vehicles, lacking morality and concentration, fail to abandon the five errors and eight graspings as appropriate. Having no wisdom, they do not give rise to the true mark. Now, these bodhisattvas, due to the previous four causes, are able to abandon self and dharmas; because they possess wisdom, they are able to give rise to the true mark regarding the sūtra. Therefore, it is strictly through the practice of the three trainings and the like that one can give rise to faith-and-understanding regarding the sūtra. Thus, this passage answers the previous question.