金剛般若經旨贊 2.177

2.177

上之二句假設問答。雖是無記。且為佛因。以離所說不成佛故。下之二句據實理答。言無記者是小乘義。豈大乘者執無記耶。以所說法。從前流故。眾生但聞成出世故。故一法寶勝無量寶。令知教善為菩提因。顯彼疑心行法利故。故以財施而為較量。此文後三。初舉劣。次明勝。後校量。此初也。地前持說功德應少所舉較量財命極多。地上持說功德應廣所校財施都少者。何以施多少皆劣持經。地前難化多以勤勉。地上易知少之自達。隨舉並得據理皆齊。地上縱多無所喻故。

The upper two lines pose a hypothetical question and answer: although it is morally neutral, it is provisionally the cause of buddhahood, because apart from what is spoken, buddhahood is not achieved. The lower two lines answer according to the true principle: to call it neutral is a Hīnayāna doctrine; how could a Mahāyāna practitioner grasp it as neutral? Because the spoken Dharma flows forth from the preceding [realization], and sentient beings merely by hearing it accomplish transcendence of the world, therefore a single jewel of Dharma surpasses immeasurable jewels. This causes them to know that the wholesomeness of the teaching is a cause of bodhi, revealing that doubting mind so that they practice Dharma benefit; hence it is compared with material charity. This text has three subsequent parts: first, citing the inferior; next, clarifying the superior; and finally, the comparison. This is the first. For those below the grounds, the merit of retaining and explaining should be small, while the material wealth and lives cited for comparison are extremely numerous; for those on the grounds, the merit of retaining and explaining should be vast, while the material charity compared is quite small. Why is charity, whether much or little, inferior to retaining the sūtra? Those below the grounds are difficult to transform and mostly encouraged with diligence; those on the grounds are easy to enlighten and with little understand on their own. Citing either is acceptable, as according to principle they are equal; even if those on the grounds have much, there is nothing that can serve as a metaphor for it.