金剛經疏 1.2.1

1.2.1

次下當釋趣究竟地。 無住般若。 如來功德。 於此分中。 初善現略問。 次如來廣說。 於中有二。 先舉初文。 舉　爾時須菩提。 白佛言世尊。 善男子善女人。 發阿耨多羅三藐三菩提心。 云何應住。 云何降伏其心者。 初略問也。 善男子者。 是發心人。 發阿耨多羅三藐三菩提者。 是發大心。 此為依也。 發心有四。 一發信心。 二發解心。 三發行心。 四發證心。 前三發心。 前文以說。 從此入證。 釋迦答。 舉　佛告須菩提。 善男子善女人。 發阿耨多羅三藐三菩提者。 當生如是心。 我應滅度一切眾生者。 眾生不能自滅度故。 菩薩應作滅度眾生。 是佛大事。 是故菩薩。 應住此心。 如來廣說。 作何等度。 若為度脫。 舉　滅度一切眾已。 而無有一眾生實滅度者。 答降伏心也。 於中有三。 一行菩薩行。 降伏我相。 心入無我故。 二於如來地。 降伏法相心入於法空故。 三於生死涅槃地。 降伏有住。 心得無住故。 證了我空。 如來不滅故　何以故徵。 於徵隱文。 未得義故。 據何事不得名眾生舉　若菩薩。 有我相人相。 眾生相受者相。 則非菩薩者。 是可滅度非實眾生也　所以者何者。 以未證真。 不了俗故。 從此示現證義。 舉　須菩提。 實無有法。 發阿耨多羅三藐三菩提者。 無一眾實滅度故。 十八界聚。 名一眾生。 十八界中。 無一定主。 不可謂有一眾生故。 十八界法。 無一獨用。 不可說有實法發心。 說有眾生。 及發心者。 皆是方便。 隨俗說也。 上來諸文不同。 降伏我相。 心入於我空智了。 從此以下。 降伏法相。 於中三段經文。 先舉初文。 舉　須菩提。 於意云何。 如來於然燈佛所。 有法得阿耨多羅三藐三菩提不。 為表聖賢知證同故。 有法得不言言。 無實法也。 有法得無法得。 不也世尊。 善現此答為成佛義。 故言不也。 從此須菩提釋答。 看舉　如我解佛所說義。 佛於然燈佛所。 無有法得阿耨多羅三藐三菩提。 阿耨多羅三藐三菩提者。 一切法性無住。 住尚不自得。 何能得餘。 況然燈佛時。 釋迦未有。 既無所得。 能得亦無為釋迦時。 然燈已滅。 能得已無所得。 寧有不道法都無。 但無能所得。 從此釋迦聊述。 舉　佛言如是。 如是。 須菩提。 實無有法。 如來得阿耨多羅三藐三菩提者。 實無有法。 如來得菩提者述彼所說。 言當義故。 從此以下辨。 看舉　須菩提。 若有如來。 得阿耨多羅三藐三菩提者。 然燈佛。 則不與我受記。 汝於來世。 當得作佛。 號釋迦牟尼者。 辨也　先番後順。 此即番也。 若有法得菩提者。 即應與法記。 不合與我記。 我謂世俗假者。 如終一性故。 得與記法。 謂執持念念不住。 無受記者。 故名與記。 釋迦是性。 釋之為能。 上代先祖能為王故。 又明現在能化眾生。 善療眾病。 得已利故。 牟尼者寂滿義。 身口意滿大寂靜故　釋迦牟尼佛。 是西音譯。 就中言能人寂滿覺。 釋迦者能人也。 種種捨施。 故名能人。 現在者所以不能人捨施。 故名不能人。 從此順釋。 看舉　以實無有法。 得阿耨多羅三藐三菩提。 然燈佛。 與我受記。 作是言。 汝於來世。 當得作佛。 號釋迦牟尼者。 順辨也。 十八界中。 無得記者。 是故然燈。 不受法記。 佛語無有不如我故。 是故然燈。 與我受記者。 知有假者。 無斷滅故。 諸有所說皆如實故。 汝於來世者。 以非常故。 雖念念滅。 無失懷故。 當作佛者。 於受記時。 未得作故。 所化根機。 當成覺道。 後當滿故。 號釋迦牟尼者。 佛眼明見。 無錯謬故。 會須自然燈。 即得成佛。 看他然燈。 無有是處。 會須自照。 何以故者。 徵也。

Next below, there should be an explanation of proceeding to the ultimate ground, unsupported prajñā, and the Tathāgata's merit. In this section, first Subhūti briefly inquires, and next the Tathāgata explains at length. Within this, there are two [parts]. First, citing the opening text:

Citing: "At that time Subhūti addressed the Buddha, saying: 'Bhagavat, when a kulaputra or kuladhitā sets their mind on anuttarā-samyak-saṃbodhi, how should they abide, and how should they subdue their mind?'" This is the initial brief inquiry. "Kulaputra" refers to a person who makes the cittotpāda. Setting the mind on anuttarā-samyak-saṃbodhi means generating the great mind. This serves as the basis. There are four kinds of cittotpāda: first, generating the mind of faith; second, generating the mind of understanding; third, generating the mind of practice; fourth, generating the mind of realization. The preceding three kinds of cittotpāda have been explained in the previous text; from this point on, one enters into realization. Śākyamuni replies:

Citing: "The Buddha told Subhūti: 'A kulaputra or kuladhitā who has set their mind on anuttarā-samyak-saṃbodhi should give rise to a mind such as this: "I must bring all sentient beings to parinirvāṇa."'" Because sentient beings cannot bring themselves to parinirvāṇa, the bodhisattva must undertake the parinirvāṇa of sentient beings. This is the great matter of the Buddha; therefore, a bodhisattva should abide in this mind. The Tathāgata explains at length: what kind of deliverance is made, and how are they delivered?

Citing: "'Yet when all sentient beings have thus been brought to parinirvāṇa, there is not a single sentient being who has truly been brought to parinirvāṇa.'" This answers subduing the mind. Within this, there are three [aspects]: first, practicing the bodhisattva practice, subduing the ātmasaṃjñā, because the mind enters into selflessness; second, in the Tathāgata ground, subduing the dharmasaṃjñā, because the mind enters into the emptiness of dharmas; third, in the ground of saṃsāra and nirvāṇa, subduing abiding [in them], because the mind attains non-abiding. One realizes the emptiness of self, because the Tathāgata does not perish.

"Why is this?" raises a question. In this questioning, the text's meaning is concealed because the sense has not yet been grasped. On the basis of what matter are they not entitled to be called sentient beings?

Citing: "'If a bodhisattva has an ātmasaṃjñā, a pudgalasaṃjñā, a sattvasaṃjñā, or a jīvasaṃjñā, they are not a bodhisattva.'" This means that those who can be brought to parinirvāṇa are not real sentient beings.

"Why is this?" Because they have not yet realized the real and do not comprehend the conventional. From here on, the meaning of realization is shown.

Citing: "'Subhūti, in truth there is no dharma by which one sets their mind on anuttarā-samyak-saṃbodhi.'" Because not a single sentient being is truly brought to parinirvāṇa. An aggregation of the eighteen dhātus is called a sentient being; within the eighteen dhātus, there is no fixed master, so one cannot say that there is a sentient being. The dharmas of the eighteen dhātus do not function singly on their own, so one cannot say that there is a real dharma that sets the mind. Stating that there are sentient beings and cittotpāda is all an expedient means, stated in accordance with convention. The various passages above differ; subduing the ātmasaṃjñā and the mind entering into the wisdom of the emptiness of self are concluded.

From here below, subduing the dharmasaṃjñā [is discussed], within which there are three passages of sūtra text. First, citing the initial text:

Citing: "'Subhūti, what do you think? Did the Tathāgata have any dharma attained in anuttarā-samyak-saṃbodhi in the presence of Dīpaṃkara Buddha or not?'" This is to show that the realization of knowledge by sages and worthies is identical. "Having any dharma attained or not" means that there is no real dharma. Is there a dharma attained, or is there no dharma attained? "No, Bhagavat." Subhūti makes this reply in order to establish the meaning of buddhahood; hence he says, "No." From here, Subhūti explains his reply, see:

Citing: "'As I understand the meaning of what the Buddha has said, the Buddha had no dharma attained in anuttarā-samyak-saṃbodhi in the presence of Dīpaṃkara Buddha.'" As for anuttarā-samyak-saṃbodhi: the nature of all dharmas is unsupported; when abiding itself cannot be attained, how could it attain anything else? Furthermore, at the time of Dīpaṃkara Buddha, Śākyamuni did not yet exist; since there was no that which is attained, that which attains was also absent. When it was Śākyamuni's time, Dīpaṃkara had already passed away; that which attains was already absent, so how could that which is attained exist? It does not mean that dharmas are entirely nonexistent, but merely that there is no that which attains and that which is attained. From here, Śākyamuni briefly confirms:

Citing: "The Buddha said: 'So it is, so it is, Subhūti. In truth there is no dharma by which the Tathāgata attained anuttarā-samyak-saṃbodhi.'" "In truth there is no dharma by which the Tathāgata attained bodhi" confirms what he said, because the words accord with the meaning. From here below, it discriminates, see:

Citing: "'Subhūti, if there were a dharma by which the Tathāgata attained anuttarā-samyak-saṃbodhi, Dīpaṃkara Buddha would not have bestowed upon me the vyākaraṇa: "In a future age you will become a buddha named Śākyamuni."'" This is the discrimination. First the contrapositive, then the direct: this is the contrapositive. If there were a dharma by which bodhi was attained, then he should have bestowed the vyākaraṇa on that dharma; he ought not to have bestowed the vyākaraṇa upon me. "I" refers to the worldly conventional person, whose nature is ultimately unified; thus the vyākaraṇa could be bestowed upon him. Dharmas refer to grasping and retaining, not abiding from moment to moment; having no recipient of vyākaraṇa, it is called bestowing vyākaraṇa. "Śākya" is the clan name; "Śāk" means "capable," because his ancestors of old were capable of being kings, and also to clarify that in the present he is capable of transforming sentient beings, skillfully curing manifold illnesses, and bringing about their benefit. "Muni" means "the fullness of stillness," because body, speech, and mind are full of great quiescence. Śākyamuni Buddha is a transliteration of a Western sound; in Chinese it means "the capable, fully stilled, awakened one." Śākya means a capable person; because of practicing various givings, he is called a capable person. As for those in the present, because they cannot act as capable persons in giving, they are called incapable persons. From here, the direct explanation follows, see:

Citing: "'Because in truth there is no dharma by which anuttarā-samyak-saṃbodhi is attained, Dīpaṃkara Buddha bestowed upon me the vyākaraṇa, speaking these words: "In a future age you will become a buddha named Śākyamuni."'" This is the direct discrimination. Within the eighteen dhātus, there is none that attains the vyākaraṇa; therefore Dīpaṃkara did not grant vyākaraṇa to dharmas. Because the Buddha's words have nothing that does not accord with the [conventional] self, Dīpaṃkara bestowed the vyākaraṇa upon me, knowing that the conventional person exists and is without annihilation, and that whatever is said is completely true to reality. "You in a future age": because of impermanence, although there is destruction moment to moment, there is no loss of continuity. "Will become a buddha": because at the time of receiving the vyākaraṇa, he had not yet become one; the capacities of those to be transformed would attain the path of awakening, to be fulfilled later. "Named Śākyamuni": because the Buddha eye sees clearly without error. One must light one's own lamp, and then one will attain buddhahood; relying on another's lighting of the lamp is not possible—one must illuminate oneself. "Why is this?" raises a question.