English (machine translation)
Translation of 金剛般若經旨贊
- Language
- English
- Extent
- 391 passages, 74,586 words
- Text
- complete digital text
- Source
- pramana-mt · Machine translation by Gemini 3.8 Flash (2026-10-21) of in.bauddha.taisho.2735 · Machine output without human authorship: no copyright is claimed (CC0 1.0). The original text keeps its own…
Contents
Text
1.1
Composed by the Śramaṇa Tankuang of Ximing Monastery in the capital.
1.2
The reality limit is beyond words, yet one must rely on words to discern reality. The true principle has no marks, yet one must borrow marks to reveal the truth. Because words are themselves reality, though spoken, nothing is spoken; because marks are themselves truth, though forms are manifested, they are formless. Being spoken without speaking, what verbal expression is not exhausted? Being the form of formlessness, what manifested form is not comprehensive? Therefore, it is said that […] possesses names, and […] there is no Dharma to be spoken—this is the speaking of the Dharma. This is indeed the true principle of prajñā, the teacher and mother of the Awakened Ones. Hence, it causes the four modes of birth to […] accumulated confusions; causes [practitioners of] the two vehicles to awaken gradually and sever the deep and secret ignorance; causes the Buddhas to personally realize and accomplish the indestructible four bodies; and causes bodhisattvas to accord with cultivation and […] the three wisdoms that sever [defilements]. Revealing this wondrous function, it stands far above all other sūtras; borrowing the metaphor of the vajra, it illuminates wondrous wisdom. Since the Buddhas of the past and the Buddhas of the future abide in this manner, and both the great sages and lesser sages should cultivate in this manner, Subhūti initiated the inquiry into the true teaching-vehicle, and the Tathāgata set forth the profound purport. The three questions and nine metaphors illuminate it from beginning to end; the eight attachments and five wrong [views] are completely swept away in mind and word. Is this not truly the protective mindfulness and entrustment that keeps the Buddha-seed unbroken? Being the central pivot of the vaipulya scriptures and the key to the great sūtras, its words are concise yet its meaning is far-reaching; its text is compact yet its principle is all-inclusive. Those who expound it fail to attain its primal source, and those who recite and retain it merely practice its verses and sentences. Therefore, our [Bodhisattva] Maitreya, who is in the position of succession, first composed verses to praise its profundity, providing a guide for preaching and a model for commentators. This enabled the primal sage Asaṅga to arrange the stages of practice; Vasubandhu, who was adjacent to the [Buddha] stage, to dispel manifold doubts regarding the reality limit; the commentary of Vajrariṣi to reconcile the one reality within existence and emptiness; and the treatise of Guṇaprabha to generate the two wisdoms regarding the ultimate and conventional. Each presented their elegant insights, together interpreting this text. Although their approaches differed, all attained the utmost wonder. If one does not harmonize and synthesize these diverse expositions, how could one thoroughly praise this profound school? Gathering different paths […] following the same […], using unifying principles to open the mysterious gateway. As for the title Vajracchedikā Prajñāpāramitā Sūtra: [Prajñāpāramitā] means arriving at the other shore, the teaching of wisdom that can cut off [delusion], harmonizing principle and phenomena across stages of practice; hence it is called wisdom. It shatters firmly amassed doubts and attachments, taking the vajra as its metaphor. Transcending birth-and-death to reach nirvāṇa is called arriving at the other shore. Threading together the principles of Dharma and gathering all classes of beings, it is designated a sūtra. Therefore, it is called the Vajracchedikā Prajñāpāramitā Sūtra.
1.3
Praising and explaining this sūtra is divided into five sections: first, explaining the reasons for the arising of the teaching; second, setting forth the central purport of the sūtra; third, revealing the mighty power of the sūtra; fourth, clarifying those who are addressed by the sūtra; fifth, praising the main text of the sūtra. First, explaining the arising of the teaching: based on the sūtras and treatises, this is generally opened into four meanings: first, to extract suffering; second, to bestow joy; third, to cause practice to arise; fourth, to cause the attainment of the fruit. As for extracting suffering: this is to eliminate the impermanent suffering of birth, old age, sickness, and death for sentient beings. A sūtra states: 'Due to these three matters, the Samyaksaṃbuddha appears in the world to teach the realized Dharma and so forth to sentient beings.' Although this is a general statement, it also applies specifically: because the Dharma realized by the Buddha is solely true prajñā, this sūtra is taught to eliminate these three matters, causing the four modes of birth and others to enter [the nirvāṇa] without remainder, merely extinguishing their rebirth, so that there is no old age and so forth; by not abiding in form and so forth when giving rise to the mind, mental thoughts do not arise, because they are free from the causes of rebirth. As for bestowing joy: this refers to the joy of the Buddha's vision and knowledge for sentient beings. Vision and knowledge are precisely bodhi and nirvāṇa. In the fruit and in the cause, this sūtra is taught to open and show the subject and object of vision and knowledge. Thus the Lotus Sūtra says: 'It is for one great matter alone that the Buddhas appear in the world: to open, show, awaken to, and enter the Buddha's vision and knowledge, and so forth.' All Buddhas and their Dharmas are born from this sūtra. The Tathāgata is the meaning of the tathatā of all dharmas; that marks are not marks is to see the Tathāgata; being free from all marks is called the Buddhas. In sequence, these correspond to opening, showing, awakening to, and entering. The sūtra passages are numerous and should be consulted and cited. As for causing practice to arise: this is to cause external persons and others to give rise to practice and stages in accordance with what is appropriate. Therefore, Asaṅga's commentary states six causes, saying: 'To sever doubts, to give rise to faith-and-understanding, to enter the profound meaning, to attain non-retrogression, to generate joy, and to cause the true Dharma to abide long.' This means prajñāpāramitā keeps the Buddha-seed unbroken. How does it keep this seed unbroken? Severing the doubts of the two vehicles and others who think they have no share [in Buddhahood], causing them to enter the Great Dharma, is called severing doubts. When first entering, one grasps marks and the mind is not yet settled; generating settled faith is called giving rise to faith-and-understanding. Causing settled faith means causing entry into the unconditioned principle of twofold emptiness, which is called entering the profound. Thinking that having attained an exalted state, one might delight in abiding in quiescence; causing them to advance in cultivation is called non-retrogression. Having advanced in cultivation, attaining without attainment, one rejoices in oneself; this is called generating joy. Rejoicing and being comforted upon hearing the Dharma, one explains it to others to circulate it everywhere; this is called causing the Dharma to abide long. Due to this Dharma, the benefit extends universally to oneself and others; hence it is said that prajñā keeps the Buddha-seed unbroken. One should consult the broad commentary's meanings following the cited passages. As for attaining the fruit: this is to attain the non-abiding fruit based on the two truths. Bodhisattva Guṇaprabha's treatise states: 'The Dharma taught by the Buddha all resolves into the two truths: first, conventional truth, which consists of the differentiated provisional marks of persons and phenomena; second, ultimate truth, which is the emptiness without self-nature of these very persons and phenomena.' These ultimate and conventional [truths] are not separate in essence. Because the conventional is the ultimate, existence is non-existence; because the ultimate is the conventional, emptiness is non-emptiness. Neither existence nor emptiness is the principle of the middle way. Attaining the middle way, one does not abide in the two extremes. Thereby not abiding in saṃsāra or extinction, one accomplishes the unlocated mahāparinirvāṇa. Therefore, the Buddha spoke the sūtra to cause awakening to the two truths. Observing the ultimate through the conventional, because one is free from all marks, correct wisdom arises. Observing the conventional through the ultimate, because there is nothing one does not penetrate, subsequent wisdom arises. Because compassion arises through subsequent wisdom, the four modes of birth and the three realms are all led to extinction. Because there is non-abiding through true wisdom, in reality no sentient being attains extinction. Generating wisdom and non-abiding, one does not abide in birth-and-death; giving rise to compassion and delivering beings, one does not abide in nirvāṇa. This accomplishes the fruit of unlocated mahānirvāṇa. The passages below are all like this and should be consulted and cited. The explanation of the arising is concluded.
1.4
Explaining the central purport is again divided into two: first, revealing that which is taken as the principle; second, clarifying that toward which it aims. That which is taken as the principle has three aspects, namely the three prajñās. Although elsewhere five kinds are taught, here we follow the Treatise on Wisdom and the treatises' metaphors. The first is true-mark [prajñā], which is the wondrous, markless principle of tathatā. The second is contemplative [prajñā], which is the wondrous markless wisdom arising based on the true. The third is literary [prajñā], which consists of the names, phrases, and words that can express this. The first is the nature, the second is the mark, and the third is the cause. Because wisdom and the locus of wisdom are both called prajñā, adding the objective realm and the retinue makes five; since these are not the principle of the sūtra, they are taught elsewhere. Although there are three kinds, that which is taken as the primary principle here is strictly the first two, while also encompassing the literary. Without the true mark, contemplative wisdom does not arise; without contemplation, the principle of the true mark is not revealed. Therefore, objective realm and wisdom are taken as the primary principle. The literary is merely a provisional vessel; when realization is attained, the teaching is forgotten, so it is not what is primarily clarified. Yet since it is the cause of realization, it is also encompassed in the principle. That toward which it aims has four aspects: first, teaching prajñā, which refers to the expressive names and so forth that are spoken without speaking, being a true and skillful vessel that accords with reality; second, principle prajñā, which refers to the expressed wondrous principle of attainment without attainment, realized as possessing non-inverted marks just as it is expressed; third, practice prajñā, which refers to practicing the markless six perfections without practicing, being the unsurpassed cause that can induce and realize [fruition]; fourth, fruit prajñā, which refers to attaining bodhi and nirvāṇa without attainment, being the unsurpassed fruit expressed and realized. Among these four kinds toward which it aims, the teaching is shallow while the principle is profound; practice is partial while the fruit is complete. What is spoken here is primarily the principle and the fruit, which are the profound and perfect dharmas expressed and aimed toward; it also encompasses teaching and practice, for though called shallow and partial, they are also that to which the practitioner has recourse. Explaining the central purport is concluded.
1.5
As for mighty power: this sūtra is briefly shown to possess ten mighty powers, like a vajra, whence it derives this name. First, the supreme mighty power: it is the highest, foremost, and rarest Dharma, and wherever it is found, it must be venerated; just as that vajra is superior to all precious objects. Thus the Mahāparinirvāṇa Sūtra says: 'Just as the vajra is the most supreme among all gems, conforming to their matrices and producing those gems.' Second, the difficult-to-see mighty power: the sūtra's meaning and karmic retribution are both inconceivable, and those who delight in lesser teachings cannot accept it; just as that vajra cannot be seen by others. Thus the Nyāyānusāra states: 'The gem atop Śakra's crown is named vajra; it cannot be seen by others because its brilliant radiance overwhelms them.' Third, the disaster-dispelling mighty power: when an inferior practitioner retains this sūtra, even though they are despised by others, the sinful karma of past lives is eliminated; just as that vajra can eliminate disasters and poisons. As Paramārtha's notes state: 'There are six kinds of gems, all named vajra; the blue and dark blue ones eliminate disasters and poisons.' Fourth, the wish-fulfilling mighty power: having eyes, one can see, universally benefiting sentient beings, adorning the pure lands, and attaining bodhi; just as that vajra fulfills human wishes. As with the remaining four colors among the six gems—yellow, red, white, and clear—which roam through space as needed, yielding water and fire. Fifth, the firm and solid mighty power: it can crush the marks of self, person, sentient being, life-span, dharma, and non-dharma, without being destroyed by them; just as that vajra cannot be ruined by other objects. Thus the Mahāparinirvāṇa Sūtra says: 'Wherever the vajra strikes, no object is not broken, yet the vajra itself suffers no damage.' Sixth, the sharp utility mighty power: penetrating selflessness, one attains forbearance, knowing and seeing all with the Buddha-eye and so forth; just as that vajra penetrates all objects. Thus the Liang translation of the Mahāyānasaṃgraha says: 'For example, the vajra's substance is sharp, capable of piercing and cutting all things.' Seventh, the uninterrupted mighty power: practicing giving without abiding, giving rise to a non-abiding mind, marks are immediately non-marks, with nothing to be attained; just as that vajra is not mixed with other objects. Thus the Abhidharmasamuccaya says: 'For example, the vajra has no gaps in its substance, and is not intermingled with sand, stones, and the like.' Eighth, the single-taste mighty power: all differences are made through the unconditioned, and the meaning of the tathatā of all dharmas is all the Buddha Dharma; just as that vajra is pure and uniform in substance. Thus the Abhidharmasamuccaya says: 'For example, the vajra is of one uniform kind, pure, unmixed, and unalterable.' Ninth, the attractive mighty power: all Buddhas and their Dharmas are born from this, accomplishing inconceivable, boundless merit; just as that vajra can attract all gems. Thus the Liang translation of the Mahāyānasaṃgraha says: 'The vajra can attract all precious objects; wherever a vajra is found, gems gather of themselves.' Tenth, the all-pervading mighty power: its merit is vast as space, benefiting all, transcending all marks, and delivering all; just as that vajra pervades all things. Thus the Abhidharmasamuccaya says: 'For example, the vajra pervades all places, as the vajra-wheel and so forth pervade the world.' There are further texts that should be cited and expounded accordingly. Revealing the mighty power is concluded.
1.6
The capacities and suitabilities that are covered: herein there are two parts. First, distinguishing the gotras; next, clarifying the coverage of the teaching. In distinguishing the gotras, it is again divided into two: first, the ultimate, remote nature of the direct cause; second, the differentiated, proximate nature of the contributory causes. As for the ultimate, remote nature of the direct cause: that is the thorough permeation of tathatā and original enlightenment; fundamentally, ordinary beings and noble ones truly have no dual substance. Sentient beings and buddhas share an equal, single cause; through this, there is truly no difference in gotra. It is only because the thickness and thinness of ignorance differ, the doctrines heard have differences between heterodox and orthodox, and the causes and conditions of the Buddhadharma involve the great, the small, the sudden, and the gradual, that sentient beings are said to have diverse realms. Due to this single substance of the buddha-nature as the direct cause, through the force of perfuming by internal and external causes and conditions, they all ultimately attain unexcelled bodhi; therefore it is said that sentient beings all possess the buddha-nature. As for the differentiated, proximate nature of the contributory causes: that is the five gotras proximate and specifically perfumed in a horizontal sense. First, the gotra-less: this refers to the class whose ignorance is thick and heavy; through the force of causes and conditions such as defilement by heterodox teachings, they slander the true Dharma, deny cause and effect, and burn up all seeds of good roots, so that the time of their transcendence of the world cannot yet be prophesied; this refers to the icchantikas, named the gotra-less. Second, the śrāvaka gotra: this refers to those who once heard the teaching of the four truths explained, and through the force of joy and aspiration, perfumed and formed seeds in consciousness; through the force of the causal seeds, they deeply loathe saṃsāra, seek their own liberation, and do not wish to benefit others; through this, they will attain the small fruit of the śrāvaka; this seed is called the śrāvaka gotra. Third, the pratyekabuddha gotra: this refers to those who once heard the teaching of the twelve links explained, and through the force of joy and aspiration, perfumed and formed seeds; through the force of the seeds, they delight in their own quiescence, contemplate the principle of dependent origination, and abandon the mind of speaking and listening; through this, they will achieve the middling fruit of the pratyekabuddha; this seed is called the pratyekabuddha gotra. Fourth, the bodhisattva gotra: this refers to those who once heard the complete teaching of the Mahāyāna explained—tathatā of identical substance, and compassionately benefiting self and other; through the force of joy and aspiration, they perfumed and formed seeds; through the force of causes and conditions, they can generate the great mind; through this, they will achieve the ultimate fruit of buddhahood; this seed is called the bodhisattva gotra. Fifth, the indeterminate gotra: this refers to those who hear the world-transcending orthodox teachings of the three vehicles, have joyful aspiration toward the fruits of the three vehicles, delight in cultivating all the dharmas of the three vehicles, and are not fixed in seeking after the fruits of the three vehicles; through this, they may attain the noble fruits of the three vehicles; this seed is called the indeterminate gotra. The clarification of the gotras is concluded. Next, regarding the coverage of the teaching: if based on the ultimate, remote nature of the direct cause, this sūtra comprehensively covers all sentient beings, using the great external conditions to perfume the internal nature and characteristics, causing them to emerge from ignorance; therefore, regardless of faith or slander, it causes all to hear it—how could it exclude the five vehicles, whether possessing or lacking a fixed nature? For great compassion has no difference based on the substance. If based on the differentiated, proximate nature of the contributory causes, this sūtra is primarily for those of the Mahāyāna; because it expounds the complete-letter teaching, it covers the great nature, causing them to give rise to the great practice and achieve the great fruit; those who delight in lesser dharmas cannot receive it; for the Dharma taught by the Buddha is never established in vain. If taken in terms of secondary coverage, it also extends to the four vehicles: because prajñā can distinguish the stages of the two vehicles, can induce the inconceivable fruits of humans and devas, and can cause those of indeterminate nature to turn toward the Mahāyāna; and because the initial and final audiences are not solely the Mahāyāna. Based on both secondary and primary, it comprehensively covers the five vehicles. The coverage of the teaching is clarified.
1.7
Next below, fifth, explaining the text of the sūtra: herein there are two parts. First, explaining the title; next, explaining the text of the sūtra. Explaining the title has five parts: first, explaining 'vajra'; second, clarifying 'prajñā'; third, clarifying 'pāra'; fourth, revealing 'mitā'; fifth, analyzing the word 'sūtra'. Regarding 'vajra': there are general and specific explanations. Generally speaking, 'vajra' reveals the meaning of being able to sever. Yet in severing the two hindrances, it is necessary to possess both principle and wisdom. That is, if there were no principle, wisdom would definitely not arise; when wisdom arises relying on principle, only then can it sever afflictions. Therefore the treatise says: 'The two meanings correspond.' Fearing that some would think the ability to sever belongs solely to wisdom, it says 'two meanings' to reveal that it also encompasses principle. Just as those two practices, heterodox and orthodox, although different, are both called 'views'; so too here, although the nature and characteristics of principle and wisdom are different, both are like the vajra. Since it is admitted that the central tenets extend to the true mark, it would be inappropriate for the vajra to be an analogy solely for contemplative [prajñā]; therefore, extending it to both principle and wisdom is closer to the treatise's doctrine. As for the specific, there are three meanings: first, subtle and firm; second, able to sever; third, similarity. As ordered, these are analogies respectively for true-mark, contemplative, and literary prajñā. 'Subtle and firm': that which is analogized is the true mark, which serves as the cause of wisdom and cannot be destroyed. That is, this true mark is real in substance; through realization, it can generate real, correct wisdom, and therefore the true mark is called the cause of wisdom. It is not admixed with conditioned characteristics, just as the vajra is not admixed with sand and pebbles; therefore it is called 'subtle'. Furthermore, it cannot be impaired or destroyed by the two hindrances, just as the vajra is hard in substance and cannot be destroyed by other things; therefore it is called 'firm'. Because the meanings of subtle and firm are distinct, the treatise explains them separately; now, because the substance of that which is analogized is identical, they are combined into one; this deeply accords with the treatise's original intent. 'Able to sever': this refers to the hindrances severed by the wisdoms of listening, reflection, and cultivation within prajñāpāramitā, which are severed just as the place cut by a vajra is severed. These hindrances severed by contemplative [prajñā] and the three wisdoms of listening and so forth are like jade and stone, which are precisely the places cut by a vajra; because they are severed by the wisdom of contemplation, contemplative [prajñā] is called 'able to sever'. 'Similarity': this refers to being just like the image of a vajra. If it is a vajra-pestle, the two ends are broad while the middle is narrow, possessing a firm and superior function; if it is a vajra-deity, the shoulders and arms are broad while the waist is narrow, possessing the meaning of movement. Literary prajñā is also like this: the front and back are broad, while the middle is narrow. Being broad at the front and back refers to the stages of faithful practice and buddhahood; being narrow in the middle refers to the stage of the pure mind, because it is the superior support and the place of advancement. This reveals the uncommon meaning: under the first two meanings, what is called 'vajra' applies to other prajñās as well, for the true mark and contemplation extend to all sections. If relying on the latter meaning, it is found only in this sūtra, for the breadth and narrowness of the text does not belong to other sūtras; being unlike other sūtras, it is called the uncommon meaning. Therefore this sūtra alone is named 'Vajra'. Regarding 'prajñā': this is a Sanskrit sound, translated into the language of the Hua as non-conceptual wisdom. This has two kinds: emptiness of persons and of dharmas. Both extend to the preparatory, fundamental, and subsequently attained [wisdoms], and correspond to the contaminated or uncontaminated as appropriate. However, between *hui* (prajñā/wisdom) and *zhi* (jñāna/knowledge), there are general and specific aspects: generally, *zhi* and *hui* are not different in substance, for both are subsumed under the mental factor of *prajñā* within the object-determining factors; therefore the sixth is called the perfection of *prajñā-wisdom*. Specifically, *zhi* and *hui* are not uniform in function, for discerning dharmas and making definitive determinations differ in function; therefore the ten perfections differentiate *zhi* and *hui*. Earlier, by mutual association, it was open to three or five kinds; now, according to its exact nature, it is translated as *prajñā-wisdom*, because it can sever and subdue the two heavy hindrances; therefore the vajra is used as an analogy. Question: The title mentions prajñā, which is said to be the central tenet; why, then, in the practices, does it rather bring forward giving? Answer: In terms of the earlier leading to the later, it is subsumed under the perfection of giving; in terms of the later purifying the earlier, it is subsumed under the perfection of wisdom. When one of the five is raised, in principle they are all equal. If so, should it be named 'Vajra Giving'? Answer: Giving is the beginning of the myriad practices, coarse and easy to practice; wisdom is the culmination of the hundred dharmas, supreme and difficult to achieve. The title causes one to look up with reverence, so it marks the supreme name of prajñā; the practice guides those of initial capacity, so it raises the foremost name of dāna. Therefore the title and the practice differ in what they bring forward; both are analogized to the vajra, with no contradiction in principle. Regarding 'pāra': here it is translated as 'the other shore', which is the fruit of buddhahood: bodhi and nirvāṇa. Because it is contrasted with this shore, it attains that name. That is, suffering and origination already arisen are this shore; suffering and origination about to arise are the middle of the stream; the wonderful practices of the six perfections are the raft; the buddhas, bodhisattvas, and so forth are those who take across; and the practitioners are those taken across. Having transcended saṃsāra and arrived at bodhi, the fruit of buddhahood is called the other shore. Regarding 'mitā': it has the meaning of 'departing' and the meaning of 'arriving'. It requires cultivating supreme giving and so forth to depart from this shore of saṃsāra and the middle of the stream, and arrive at the other shore of bodhi and nirvāṇa; therefore giving and so forth are said to be 'departing and arriving'. What is spoken of here are the non-abiding six perfections; hence the Saṃdhinirmocana says that giving and so forth are without taint, without longing, without fault, without conceptualization, and are correctly dedicated. Through this, they only then attain the name 'gone to the other shore'. Regarding 'sūtra': in Sanskrit it is *sūtra*, which denotes four meanings: cloth, thread, mat, and warp. Here we take the meaning of thread, and also the meaning of warp. Just as a thread strings flowers together so that the wind cannot scatter them, so the teaching strings together the meanings so that heterodoxy cannot destroy them; just as the warp holds the weft so that the fabric is woven, so the teaching gathers sentient beings to let them attain the noble fruit; therefore the teaching of Dharma is designated 'sūtra'. In the *Tattvasiddhi-śāstra*, five meanings are explained: first, a gushing spring; second, a plumb line; third, a garland; fourth, giving birth; fifth, revealing. If according to this land [of China], *jing* means constant, standard, and path: unchanging through past and present, determining the orthodox and heterodox, and serving as a conduit for the principles of things; the Buddhist teaching accords with this, and there is no error. In summary: what is now expressed is like the vajra wisdom, able to sever the two hindrances and reach the other shore; with its doctrine stringing together and gathering [beings], it is the path constantly practiced by ordinary beings and noble ones; hence it is called the *Vajracchedikā Prajñāpāramitā Sūtra*.
1.8.1
Sūtra: Thus have I heard: [at one time the Bhagavān was dwelling in Śrāvastī, in the Jeta Grove, in Anāthapiṇḍada's Park,] together with [a great assembly of monks, twelve hundred] and fifty people. / Praise: Above, the title was explained. Next, the text of the sūtra is explained. Relying on the *Buddhabhūmi-śāstra* and Master Mitian, the text of the sūtra is broadly divided into three sections. First, from "Thus have I heard" to "having arranged the seat, he sat down"—the causal conditions for the arising of the teaching, the circumstances of the sūtra being spoken—is named the "preface section". Next, from "At that time the Elder Subhūti" to "one should view [all conditioned dharmas] thus"—what is spoken by the holy teaching, directly discussing the substance of the sūtra—is named the "main body section". Finally, from "When the Buddha had spoken this sūtra" to the end of the sūtra, "having relied on the teaching and undertaken to practice it, [they] rejoiced and widely propagated it"—is named the "transmission section". Within the preface there are two parts. This passage of sūtra text is shared in common by all sūtras, hence it is named the "common preface". From "At that time" onward is the particular circumstance of this specific text, hence it is named the "particular preface". The first, by the transmitter of the Dharma, adduces verification to inspire faith; it is also named the "preface of verified faith". The latter, through the particular circumstances of the preacher's position, initiates [the discourse]; it is also named the "initiating preface". In explaining this, there are three gateways of distinction: first, the causes and conditions of its arising; second, the reasons for its statement; third, directly explaining its text. As for the causes and conditions of its arising: when the Buddha's converting conditions were finished and he was about to return to nirvāṇa, the attendant Ānanda, whose personal affection [for the Buddha] had not yet been eliminated, fainted and beat his chest on the ground, unable to revive himself. At that time, Aniruddha sprinkled water on his face and spoke to him, saying: "The Buddha entrusted the Dharma to you. Now, in your stupor and distress, you lose track of the matters for this time of entrustment. How could you be called one who protects the true Dharma? The Great Master, the World-Honoured One, is here today, but tomorrow he will be gone. If there be those who have doubts, to whom shall they ask? Relying on my words, you should ask the Buddha: When the Tathāgata was in the world, we took the Buddha as our teacher; after the World-Honoured One passes away, what shall we take as our teacher? When the Tathāgata was in the world, we dwelt relying on the Buddha; after the World-Honoured One passes away, relying on what shall we dwell? When the World-Honoured One was in the world, he himself disciplined wicked persons; after his extinction, how should we dwell together with them? When the Tathāgata was alive, he could himself preach the sūtras; after his extinction, what words should be placed at the beginning of all sūtras to cause sentient beings to have faith?" At that time, Ānanda, as if awakening from a dream, thereupon questioned the Tathāgata. The World-Honoured One told him: "After my nirvāṇa, take the precepts as your teacher; sever all evil and cultivate all good. Even if I were in the world, there would be no difference from this. Relying on the four stations of mindfulness, dwell with concentrated mind: contemplate the body as impure, contemplate feelings as suffering, contemplate the mind as impermanent, and contemplate dharmas as non-self. Thereby you will be able to eradicate the four inversions, such as permanence. Having transcended birth-and-death, you will attain the accomplishment of the holy path. Therefore, you should always dwell relying on them. Deal with wicked monks by the brahmadanda punishment: simply do not speak with them, and they will naturally be subdued. At the head of all sūtras, you should place such words as 'Thus have I heard', and then sentient beings will have faith." Because of Ānanda's request, this text was placed [here]; this is the causes and conditions of its arising here. Explaining the reasons [for its statement]: briefly, there are four meanings: first, to remove doubt; second, to cause faith to arise; third, to distinguish from the heterodox; fourth, to reveal the correct. As for removing doubt: the *Sūkṣma-vinaya* states that at the time of the council, Ānanda mounted the seat, and through the majesty and power of the Dharma, his appearance suddenly resembled that of the Buddha. The assembly gave rise to three doubts: first, they doubted that the Great Compassionate One had arisen from nirvāṇa; second, they doubted that another Buddha had come from another direction; third, they doubted that Ānanda had transformed his body and become a Buddha. By speaking "Thus [have I heard]" and so forth, the three doubts were all severed. As for generating faith: the *Mahāprajñāpāramitōpadeśa* states that stating the time, place, and persons causes faith to arise. In the great ocean of the Buddha-Dharma, faith is that by which one can enter; furthermore, it is the source of the path and the mother of merits. Moreover, to pull sentient beings out of the mire of birth-and-death, one must raise the hand of faith and extend it to the hand of teaching: the preface generates the hand of faith, while the main body is the hand of teaching; when the two hands join, one is pulled out of the mire. It is like a person who has hands going to a mountain to take jewels: if one has no hands, one returns empty-handed with nothing gained. A person with a faithful mind enters the Dharma and attains realization; if one lacks it, even though one understands, there is no benefit. Therefore, at the beginning of a sūtra, pure faith is caused to arise. As for distinguishing from the heterodox: wherever these six phrases of the sūtra text are absent, one should know that they are all subsumed under heterodox teachings. For instance, there are heterodox paths that invariably place the two words *a* and *oṃ* at the head of all teachings: *a* signifies nonexistence, and *oṃ* signifies existence, meaning that the purport of their teaching does not depart from existence and nonexistence. Now, these six phrases are placed to distinguish from them. Hence the *Mahāprajñāpāramitōpadeśa* states: "What words should be placed at the head of all sūtras to distinguish them from the heterodox?" As for revealing the correct: the *Tattvasiddhi-śāstra* states that because the Three Jewels are the most auspicious, at the beginning of our sūtras we speak of the Buddha as the Buddha Jewel; "I heard", Ānanda, and the assembly of monks are named the Saṅgha Jewel; and "Thus", "at one time", "in the state of Śrāvastī", and so forth—the time and place spoken of—are all the Dharma Jewel. It is through these four meanings that "Thus" and so forth are established. Explaining the reasons is finished. Directly explaining the text: according to the *Mahāprajñāpāramitōpadeśa*, it is divided into the six fulfillments: first, faith; second, hearing; third, time; fourth, host; fifth, place; sixth, assembly. As for "Thus": adducing the Dharma that was heard to cause sentient beings to have faith is named the fulfillment of faith. Now, gathering the various explanations, it is explained with three meanings: first, glossing and explaining the two characters separately; next, stating the general meaning of the two characters; finally, taking along "have I heard" to explain "Thus". As for explaining separately: since antiquity there have been many explanations, but their general meaning does not depart from teaching, principle, practice, and fruit; hence I now explain it according to these four meanings. The teaching being able to reveal the principle is "thus" (*ru*); the text not contradicting the meaning is "accordant/correct" (*shi*). The principle according with the teaching being revealed is "thus"; the meaning not deviating from the text is "accordant". Giving rise to practice relying on the teaching is "thus"; according with the principle and obliterating marks is "accordant". Attaining the fruit relying on the vow is "thus"; the fruit corresponding to the cause is "accordant". As for stating generally: it reveals that the speaking of this sūtra is free from four kinds of faults, hence it says "Thus": first, free from speaking of one's own accord, because the Dharma spoken by the Buddha is precisely thus; second, free from discrepancy, because the text and meaning are definitive, all being thus; third, free from lack of faith, because if there are those who have faith, they say "It is thus"; fourth, free from what is not the Dharma, because if it is the true Dharma, it matches with "Thus". Finally, as for taking along "have I heard" to explain "Thus": relying on the *Buddhabhūmi-śāstra* and the intention of various commentaries, the collective phrase "Thus" functions according to four meanings: first, relying on question and answer.
1.8.2
[First,] to manifest freedom from the fault of passing on hearsay based on one's own fabrication: namely, at the time of the compilation, the assembly all asked, "Was what you are about to speak definitely heard by you in the past?" Therefore he answered, "Thus have I heard." Second, based on metaphor, to manifest freedom from the fault of disparity by adding or omitting: namely, "The phrases of the text about to be spoken are just as I heard in the past; up to this extent I shall speak, and there is definitely no discrepancy." Third, based on permission, to manifest the virtue of sovereign capability: the assembly all requested, "Just as you have heard, you should speak thus," whereupon he assented to them, saying, "Thus shall I speak, just as I have heard." Fourth, based on instruction, to manifest the virtue of inspiring reverent faith and acceptance: namely, addressing the assembled multitude at the time of the compilation, he said, "Thus should you listen, just as I have heard; having listened correctly, you should practice in accord with the principle." One should know that all the various meanings spoken by Guṇaprabha and others are subsumed under these four meanings. In saying "I heard," bringing forward the person who can hear manifests that he personally heard it himself; this is called the accomplishment of hearing. That is, the transmitter of the Dharma points to himself, saying, "Such Dharma I personally heard myself." "I" refers to the nominal agent formed by the aggregation of the skandhas, which is called "I" because it has sovereign agency. "Heard" refers to the ear faculty generating consciousness to listen to sound, and the mental consciousness, following the ear consciousness, grasping the names and the like produced by the sound; these perfume consciousness and gather to appear [therein], and are collectively designated "hearing." Setting aside the particulars to focus on the whole answers and reveals that it relies on a multitude of conditions. That is, hearing the essentials of the Dharma is therefore called "I heard." Question: Why is it necessary to set aside the particulars and focus on the whole in this way? Answer: It reveals that it relies on a multitude of conditions. That is, when hearing the Dharma, one must possess eight conditions. If each were presented individually, it would become excessively verbose; if only one were brought forward, its meaning and function would be incomplete. To manifest that the nominal agent possesses these conditions, it says, "I heard." If so, why does it not say "non-self heard"? Answer: To remove the mind of fear. It is feared that various non-Buddhists, ordinary beings, and the like, hearing the words "non-self," [would think,] "Since it says non-self, who hears and who learns?" and being terrified of the Buddha's Dharma, they would refuse to enter. If so, why does it not say "Ānanda heard"? Answer: To manifest the virtue of sovereignty. "I" has the meaning of sovereign agency; it manifests that the transmitter of the Dharma possesses capability, retaining the vast teachings of the three vehicles as a whole. Were he to state his personal name, it would lack this meaning. If so, how does this differ from the false graspings of ordinary fools? Answer: Because it conforms to worldly convention. In the world, everyone speaks of self, other, that person, and this person, defiled and pure causes and fruits, and activities performed. Now the transmitter of the Dharma, although free from false grasping, conforms to the world in order to lead them to generate a mind of resolute faith-and-understanding and enter the true Dharma; therefore, conforming to conventional usage, he nominally says "I." If so, why does it point solely to Ānanda? Answer: Because he is the transmitter of the Dharma. In the past, he made offerings to a novice who recited the scriptures; now he has attained the foremost status in listening extensively and holding dhāraṇī, so that the oceanic treasury of the Buddha's Dharma flowed into his mind like pouring into a vessel without any loss. Furthermore, he personally attended the Buddha for more than twenty years, being well known to humans and gods; what he transmits will certainly inspire faith, and so the Buddha entrusted the Dharma to him. Since the master of transmitting the teaching points to himself, "I heard" is entrusted to Ānanda. If so, there is still the fault of hearing via transmission. Answer: Because the Buddha restated them for him. Ānanda requested the Buddha to speak the sūtras preached prior to his attendance. Moreover, for the holy ones, in principle there are no repetitive words; when the Buddha briefly raised their beginning, he thoroughly understood everything. How much more so when he heard the prophesied bodhisattva practices and attained the samādhi of sovereignty in awakening to the nature of phenomena: he was even able to remember and retain the treasuries of the Dharma of all buddhas, so how could he fail to thoroughly comprehend the sūtras preached previously? Although it was only after twenty years that he attended the Buddha and heard the sūtras, saying "I heard" in principle does not conflict with this. If so, he should say, "I saw and perceived." Answer: Because he attributes the achievement to the Buddha. This transmitted teaching belongs to the Buddha, the World-Honoured One; it was spoken by the Tathāgatas through direct awakening. Ānanda is in the causal stage, where the path of awakening is not yet complete. If he claimed to know and see, people would say he spoke it himself; fearing that others would not believe it, he only says "heard." What is more, in this world, sound serves as the Buddha-work; names and so forth explain the Dharma, and one does not rely on form or fragrance to hope for the realization of bodhi. One must hear the profound Dharma, and perfuming through extensive listening serves as the cause for leaving the world; therefore, he only says "heard" and does not say "saw and perceived." There are further questions and answers, as clarified elsewhere. Saying "at one time" manifests that the Dharma heard appropriately accords with the right occasion without the fault of mistiming; this is the accomplishment of time. That is, it clarifies that when this single scripture was spoken, it was spoken at a certain time and in a certain place, which reveals that while this scripture was being spoken, countless other scriptures were also spoken at other times. The faculties of sentient beings were ripe, evoking the Tathāgata to respond to their capacities; matching the medicine to the disease, they obtained benefit following his words. The speaker and the listeners had no discrepancy in timing, meeting together; this is called "at one time." The secular scriptures of non-Buddhists have no such capability; therefore our Buddha's teaching calls it "at one time." The former delimits the time of speaking and listening to other scriptures, while the latter delimits the times before and after speaking and listening, manifesting the supremacy of the Buddha's teaching to inspire faith. If so, all phenomena would not be consciousness-only, because speaking of "one" and "time" would be phenomena external to the mind. Answer: Although it says "at one time," it is not separate from the mind-consciousness. That is, this consciousness-mind, following the boundaries of form, falsely establishes the designations of "one" and "time." If separated from form and mind, they cannot be found; therefore, they should not be grasped and subsumed under the saṃskāra-skandha. The Mahāyānasaṃgraha explains them as the worldly consciousness and numerical consciousness. Even the Dharma heard is not separate from the mind, so how could "one" and "time" exist separately? If so, the three times should all exist, because speaking of "at one time" is contrasted with the past and future. Answer: The phenomena of the five skandhas perish immediately after arising. Arising requites the prior, and perishing leads to the subsequent. What is requited is the past, and what is led to is the future. Having perished and not yet arisen, although unobtainable, the present is nominally spoken of in contrast to these two. Just as to know past causes one should observe present results, and to know future results one should observe present causes, how could one person have three bodies? It is merely a single thought of the deluded mind in the present. Now, the speaker and the listeners, according to the limits of their minds, transform it into short or long; when the matter has reached its conclusion, it is collectively called "at one time." Just as in a dream one sees what is taken to be many lifetimes, after waking it is mind only and completely lacks reality. If so, why does it differ from the scripture below and the like?
1.8.3
[Question: Why does it not] say the four or eight periods, the twelve periods, and so on? Answer: To show the superiority of the Buddhist teaching and distinguish it from non-Buddhist paths. The teachings of non-Buddhists are all spoken by ordinary fools; their teachings are entirely inverted and false. The faculties and conditions of the speakers and listeners do not correspond. Though they have doctrinal tenets, they do not serve as medicine; in vain they increase evil karma and fruitlessly foster wrong views. Since there is no awakening and realization, how could they ascend to the noble path? Therefore, at the head of their teachings, they do not say 'at one time'. Here, to distinguish from the erroneous, it says 'at one time'. If it spoke of the four or eight [periods], how would it differ from erroneous texts? As for not speaking of the four periods, the twelve periods, and so on, there are further questions and answers, but as they are not essential, they are not explained here.
As for 'the Buddha', this reveals the master who spoke the sūtra. He is the most supreme and venerable, signifying that the sūtra is trustworthy and free of the fault of lacking a master; this is the master accomplishment. If it did not say 'Buddha', one would not know by whom this sūtra was spoken, and everyone would give rise to doubt. Furthermore, the Mahāprajñāpāramitā-śāstra states that there are five kinds of speakers: first, the Buddha, the World-Honoured One; second, the noble disciples; third, devas, nāgas, and so forth; fourth, divine ṛṣis and so forth; fifth, apparitional creations and so forth. If it did not say 'Buddha', it was feared that it would be thought to have been spoken by others. Now saying that the Buddha spoke it shows that it can be revered and trusted.
'Buddha' is a Sanskrit word; it should be said as 'Buddha'. He awakens himself, awakens others, and is consummate in awakened practice; because he possesses the three awakenings, he is called the Awakened One. That is, awakening from affliction and possessing omniscience, he is forever free of birth and death, like waking from a dream; thus it is called 'awakening himself'. Severing the cognitive obscurations and obtaining knowledge of all aspects, he speaks the teaching of his own awakening to cause others to awaken, like a lotus opening; thus it is called 'awakening others'. All obscurations are completely severed, all practices completely cultivated, all cognitive objects completely known, and all fruits completely realized, surpassing all noble ones; thus it is called 'consummate awakening'. The first [awakening] surpasses the thief of human perception, differing from ordinary worldlings; the next awakening surpasses the heavenly drum, differing from the śrāvakas; the final awakening surpasses a thousand suns, differing from the bodhisattvas. Possessing all three, he receives the name 'Buddha'.
However, the Buddha, the World-Honoured One, has three bodies. Through which body was this present sūtra spoken? If addressed to those before the bhūmis, it was spoken by the transformation body; if addressed to those on the bhūmis, it was spoken by the reward body. As for the dharma and reward bodies [themselves], they do not preach the Dharma; because they enjoy the bliss of the Dharma for themselves, they do not preach the Dharma; because buddhas do not preach the Dharma to one another; and because they are not bodies seen by ordinary bodhisattvas. Yet since the three bodies are not distinct in essence, the three bodies are both neither speaking nor not speaking.
Various sūtras say 'Bhagavat' and the like, translated following the Sanskrit texts. Now saying 'Buddha' generates goodness according to regional custom. Some sūtras also say 'Buddha Bhagavat' to distinguish him from pratyekabuddhas and non-Buddhist paths.
As for 'dwelling in Śrāvastī, in the Jeta Grove, and so forth', this is the place where the sūtra was spoken, revealing that the preaching of this sūtra must have had its place, free from the fault of lacking a place; this is the place accomplishment. If the place were not mentioned, one would not know where this sūtra was spoken, and everyone would give rise to doubt. To bring about faith, its place is spoken. 'Śrāvastī' is a Sanskrit sound, translated here as 'Abundant Virtue', meaning abundant in wealth and treasures, feminine beauty, wide learning, and liberation—possessing these four virtues, it is called 'Abundant Virtue'. It is also called 'Renowned Things', because its abundance of precious goods and human figures was renowned in all directions. Correctly it is Śrāvastī; mistakenly it is said as Shepoti. It is the name of the capital city of the kingdom of Kosala; because it is the royal capital, it is called a kingdom. 'Jeta' refers to Jeta, translated here as 'Conqueror in Battle'; he was the crown prince of King Prasenajit. On the day the crown prince was born, the king routed the enemy army, and so named him 'Conqueror in Battle'. Jeta had a park whose land encompassed ten li, more than five or six li to the south of the city. Flowers and plants grew lushly, and springs and ponds intermingled their reflections; among gardens and parks, it was extraordinarily supreme. 'Anāthapiṇḍada' was a great minister of the kingdom; his original name was Sudatta, translated here as 'Good Giving'. He practised benevolence, was intelligent and discerning, and could dispense what he had accumulated, relieving destitution, aiding the poor, and pitying orphans and the aged. The people of the time praised his virtue and titled him Anāthapiṇḍada. He had seven sons, six of whom were already married. Because of his youngest son, seeking a marriage arrangement he came to the great city of Rājagṛha. When the Buddha first attained the Way, he was staying in that kingdom. [Sudatta] saw the Buddha, heard the Dharma, and realized the fruit of stream-entry. He then requested the World-Honoured One to descend to Śrāvastī. Once the Tathāgata agreed, he vowed to build a monastery. The Buddha ordered Śāriputra to accompany him and inspect [a site]. Only this place was fit to build a monastery. So he went to the crown prince and earnestly sought to purchase it. The prince spoke in jest: 'Only when gold covers it entirely will I sell.' When Sudatta heard this, his heart opened with joy; he immediately brought forth his treasury gold and spread it on the ground according to his words. Moved, the prince said to him: 'If the Buddha were not a fertile field of merit, how could you hold gold so light and soil so dear? For me to plant good seeds, this is also the right time. The land is for you to take; the trees I will donate myself.' Having obtained the land, Sudatta built a great monastery. When the adornments were complete, he invited the Buddha from afar to descend. The Great Compassionate Noble One saw this from afar and arrived riding on supernormal powers. Having reached the saṅghārāma, he addressed the great assembly: 'The grove of trees was donated by Jeta himself; the garden land was bought and donated by Sudatta. The two men being of one mind, thus they have exalted this meritorious work. The prince above and the minister below—this is an exemplary model for worldly norms. From this day forward, this place should be called the Jeta Grove, Anāthapiṇḍada's Park.'
'Dwelling' refers to roaming to convert and abiding with mind intent. Roaming to convert was in the city; abiding with mind intent was in the park. Raising both city and park reveals these two meanings. Although the two meanings differ, both are called 'dwelling'; hence it is called 'dwelling in the kingdom of Śrāvastī, and so forth'. This mentions the transformation buddha's residence, the transformation land, for those of lesser faculties to cause faith to arise, revealing the Buddha's compassion in rescuing those with heavy obscurations. In principle and actuality, there are also the two bodies and the real land; between the pure and defiled realms, there is no different substance.
As for 'together with the great [assembly], and so forth', this mentions the assembly of fellow listeners, revealing that the preaching of this sūtra necessarily accorded with what was fitting for their faculties, free of the fault of lacking an assembly; this is the assembly accomplishment. If the assembly were not listed, one would not know with whom this sūtra was heard, and everyone would give rise to doubt. To bring about faith, the assembly of fellow listeners is cited. 'With' has the meaning of combining together and reaching along with: namely, along with Ānanda, inquiring at one time, in the same single assembly, with the same uncontaminated mind, equally free of all evils, with the same non-learner's view, on the same path of self-emptiness, equally severing afflictions.
First 10 of 394 passages. Read on