金剛般若經旨贊 2.25

2.25

Sūtra: Subhūti, [...] that merit is extremely abundant. / Commentary: Next below is the eighth, abandoning the obstacle of savoring indolence, gain, and so forth, which is the twelfth abode: staying far away from gain, weariness, and feverish vexation, when vigor either retrogrades or fails to arise. Within that eighth division on resolving doubts, the comparative assessment of inner wealth demonstrates the superiority of the sūtra's merit, causing them to arouse vigor based on the sūtra. Previously, in order that they might fulfill the merit provision, when they studied and practiced based on the sūtra, making offerings to the Tathāgata and cultivating the cause of merit, they had to abandon indolence and gain, and constantly cultivate practices such as upholding and expounding. But when practicing, they savor gain, the body experiences weariness, and the mind suffers feverish vexation; thus indolence arises and vigor is not generated. Consequently, they are unable to practice the superior upholding and expounding, cannot draw near [to the Buddha], make offerings to the Tathāgata, their provisions remain incomplete, and bodhi is difficult to fulfill. Now, in order to counteract these faults and obstacles and cause them to diligently rely on the sūtra to cultivate superior meritorious practice, [the sūtra] raises inner wealth for comparative assessment. Since it is through the sūtra that one can abandon this obstacle, the two treatises each elucidate one meaning: Asaṅga refers to the obstacle removed, naming it "abandoning indolence and gain"; Vasubandhu refers to the superior teaching that can remove it, naming it "comparative assessment of inner wealth". The text is divided into five parts: 1. Contrasting the merit of renouncing the body to break indolent attachment to the body; 2. Breaking the grasping at the literal meaning of marks that arises after hearing of the merit; 3. Causing lesser bodhisattvas to generate shame and urge diligence; 4. Shattering the fright and lack of vigor of the practitioners of the two vehicles; 5. Causing them to generate non-negligence. The second is the place of shame. The first has two parts: first, the Tathāgata's comparative assessment; second, Subhūti's sorrowful response. This is the first. The meaning here is: although renouncing bodily life surpasses previous giving, in actual virtue it does not equal the merit of upholding a four-line verse of this sūtra. For presently renouncing the body causes suffering to body and mind; how much more so when one further seeks the fruit of future suffering dharmas and performs renunciation and giving! Cause and fruit are both suffering, so how could they compare with the superior merit of upholding the sūtra? Because this sūtra has seven kinds of superiority, when upholding and expounding the sūtra cause and fruit are both blissful; therefore it surpasses the virtue of renouncing the body. Therefore Vasubandhu's treatise verses this meaning, stating: