金剛般若經疏 1.6

Fifth, as for directly explaining [the sūtra] relying on the text, there are two parts: first, explaining the title, and then explaining the text of the sūtra. Regarding the explanation of the sūtra title: The translations of the Qin, Wei, and Liang all have the title *Vajra-prajñā*. The two versions of the Tang dynasty are both entitled *Vajracchedikā* [Vessel That Can Cut Diamond / Vajra-Cutter]. The translation made in the Sui dynasty, according to its treatise, was entitled *Vajra-Cutter* [Vajracchedikā]. The first two versions are abbreviated, whereas the latter three are complete. [The former] adduce the essence to subsume the function, merely presenting the names of the phenomenon and the simile; [the latter] illuminate both essence and function, concurrently setting forth the cause of cutting off. Although broad and abbreviated differ, their meaning does not conflict. First comes the separate explanation, followed by the combined explanation. In Sanskrit it is called *vajra*; here translated as *jingang* (diamond / adamantine). It is the most supreme among jewels, and its substance and types are manifold. The *Nyāyānusāra* says: "Śakra has a jewel named *vajra*, which cannot be seen by other sentient beings." The records of Paramārtha say: "There are six kinds of jewels, all named *vajra*: First, mostly blue, which can eliminate all disasters and perils; second, yellow, which can produce various things according to what people need; third, red, which can enable people to travel through the sky; fourth, white, which can produce water and purify turbid water; fifth, sky-coloured, which can produce fire; sixth, emerald green, which can neutralize all poisons." The above explains the substance of the simile. Next, we bring up the meaning and function. First relying on various teachings, and then based on this treatise: Among various teachings, as the twenty-fourth fascicle of the *Mahāparinirvāṇa-sūtra* extensively praises the vajra-samādhi: "Just as wherever a vajra is struck, nothing is not shattered and destroyed, yet the vajra itself suffers no damage"; and it also says: "Just as vajra is the most supreme among all jewels." According to the Liang translation of the *Mahāyānasaṃgraha*, Vasubandhu Bodhisattva explains the four meanings of the vajra-concentration as similes: First, it can destroy afflictions; second, it can induce remainingless merit; third, it is solid and indestructible; fourth, its sharp function penetrates all dharmas. Concentration being like this, by analogy wisdom is also the same. The twelfth fascicle of the *Abhidharmasamuccayavyākhyā* explains four meanings of the vajra-concentration: First, uninterrupted, because it is not interrupted or deficient due to worldly practice; second, firm, because it can destroy all obstacles and is not itself destroyed; third, of one taste, because its non-conceptual nature is purely of one taste; fourth, all-pervading, because it takes the common-characteristic tathatā of all dharmas as its cognitive sphere. Vajra also has four [meanings]: First, its substance is without gaps, not impeded by sand or stone; second, it is knowable; third, it is of one pure kind, unchanging and undifferentiated; fourth, it pervades the world, as in the vajra-wheel, vajra-mountains, vajra-seat, vajra-sceptre, and so forth. Comprehensively gathering the various texts, vajra has ten meanings: 1. Most supreme; 2. Difficult to see; 3. Eliminating disasters; 4. Solid; 5. Granting wishes; 6. Capable of leading [to merit]; 7. Sharp function; 8. Uninterrupted; 9. Of one taste; 10. All-pervading. The text and meaning of this sūtra also have ten kinds: Because it is the utmost, primary, and rare teaching; because its meaning and fruition are inconceivable; because sinful karma and obstructive afflictions are eradicated; because it can shatter firm attachments to what is not that; because it benefits sentient beings, adorns buddha-lands, and attains bodhi; because it can generate all buddhas and gather good dharmas; because it penetrates selflessness and its vision of wisdom is pure; because it is not mixed with conceptualized marks; because the meaning of 'thusness' of all dharmas is unconditioned in essence; because its merit and wisdom are like space and immeasurable. Corresponding to the preceding ten similes, they are matched and explained in sequence. Although these meanings are complete, they are not the intention of the root treatise. The root treatise has four meanings: 1. Subtle; 2. Firm; 3. Capable of cutting; 4. Similar. The first three are common meanings: contemplation of the true mark pervades all teachings. The last one is uncommon: the text-prajñā is unique to this sūtra and treatise. First, marking that it says 'vajra capable of cutting', one should know that this designation corresponds to two meanings, just as it is said of 'entering the practice of right view' and 'entering the practice of wrong view'. However, in explaining this text, doctrinal accounts differ. Ci'en explains: Corresponding to two meanings reveals that vajra extends to both that which counteracts and that which is counteracted. The phrase 'just as it is said' below is an explanation by giving an example. Right view refers to the group determined in correctness; wrong view refers to the group determined in falsehood. Practicing good or bad deeds capable of entering those groups is called those two practices. Or, pointing generally, it means: Just as it is said that two persons, good and bad, practice good and bad deeds, this practice enters the category of right views, and this practice enters the category of wrong views. Though right and wrong are distinct, both are called 'practices of view'. Here, the counteracting three wisdoms and the counteracted two obstacles, although defiled and wholesome differ, are both named vajra. Just as the *Mahāparinirvāṇa-sūtra* says: "A vajra is extremely firm, and ten thousand things cannot destroy it, except for a white ram's horn and a turtle's shell." The intention is that, corresponding to their states, the earthly obstacles cannot be cut off by ordinary beings and the two vehicles; only the three wisdoms that have aroused the great mind of bodhi can subdue them, either by subduing or cutting them off. This takes what is cut off as the simile of the vajra, like 'entering the practice of wrong view'. Furthermore, just as the nature of jade and stone is extremely solid and not destroyed by objects, and only a vajra can shatter it, the two obstacles are also like this: they are not shattered by the conventional wisdom of ordinary beings or the true wisdom of the two vehicles, because the two vehicles do not cut off the latent propensities of the afflictive obstacles. Only the three wisdoms of the Great Vehicle, like that vajra, can subdue and cut them off. Since at the stage of ultimate cutting off there is the cultivation-wisdom of vajra, the sūtra only speaks of vajra as a simile for concentration. This is taking that which can cut off as the simile of the vajra, like 'entering the practice of right view'. Hence it is said there are two meanings: first, the meaning of what is broken; second, the meaning of what can break. If it were only what can break, the simile of the two views, wrong and right, would not correspond. However, the text of the treatise is brief and does not explicitly bring out the counteracted vajra; it is only revealed by being contained within 'capable of cutting'. Henan explains again: Vajra is only a simile for the three wisdoms and the teaching. Why so? The simile of the *Mahāparinirvāṇa-sūtra* is that vajra is extremely firm and nothing can destroy it, except turtle shells, etc. That sūtra is also like this: only an icchantika is excepted, whose cause of bodhi cannot be established. Since the ram's horn and the like are used as similes for the icchantika, it is clear that what cannot be cut off is called vajra. And as for saying 'two meanings': first, realizing the principle of tathatā, like entering the practice of right view; second, cutting off all afflictions, like entering the practice of wrong view. This vajra-wisdom can break [the obstacles of] people of the Great Vehicle who possess roots of goodness and whose faculties are mature; it cannot remove the two heavy obstacles and afflictions in the bodies of those persons whose roots of goodness are cut off. There is yet another explanation saying: According to the phrase 'vajra is difficult to break' in the topic-collection at the beginning of this treatise, it is clear that it is not what is cut off. Although it is said in other places that afflictions are hard to cut off just like a vajra, here, saying that they can be cut off, it is inappropriate to use vajra as a simile. Just as an icchantika is said to be difficult to convert using the simile of scorched grain; if an icchantika were said to be treatable, this simile would not be used. And as for the correspondence to two meanings: vajra can cut both firm and non-firm objects, which is called the two meanings. The commentary [by Yan] says: The first explanation is superior, because it accords with the treatise's text. Primarily, it takes the vajra as a simile for the wisdom capable of cutting, and secondarily as a simile for what is cut off to reveal the function of wisdom. The second fascicle of the *Daśacakra-sūtra* says: "How can one break continuity like a vajra?" Afflictions have many pathways in principle; how could the simile be fixed?

Just as space is spoken of as a metaphor for the Buddha-nature, it is also used as a metaphor for the coarse heaviness of the two obscurations. As in the Nyāyamukha: through reasoning and wisdom, the obscurations are brought up as being difficult to sever. If [one proceeds] from [interpreting] vajra as signifying that wisdom's supreme excellence is extraordinary and beyond any metaphor, who would need to contemplate the hardness of afflictions now in order to generate contemplative practice? If so, the metaphors in the Mahāparinirvāṇa-sūtra, such as that of the white ram, would not correspond; how should this be resolved? Answer: The intent of the text of the Mahāparinirvāṇa-sūtra is not to explain this sūtra. Here, that metaphor is merely borrowed to elucidate the vajra: it is what is opposed and obstructed by those two things, and thus serves as a metaphor for the object of remediation; it does not mean that the Mahāparinirvāṇa-sūtra uses the vajra as a metaphor for the obscurations. The above explains that 'vajra' applies to both the severer and the severed. Below, the treatise distinguishes them separately: taking it solely in the sense of the severer, there are four meanings. As the treatise cited earlier says: '"Subtle" is because it is the cause of wisdom; "firm" is because it is indestructible.' Because the Sui dynasty observed an imperial naming taboo on the character jian ('firm'), it translated it as xi ('subtle'). But its real meaning is 'firm and dense'. 'The cause of wisdom' refers to the seeds. 'Indestructible' refers to active wisdom: when it arises, delusions are eliminated; because light and darkness cannot coexist, it is indestructible. Alternatively, it is explained: wisdom can realize tathatā, which is of the nature of a revealing cause, hence it is called 'the cause of wisdom.' Because it has no gaps and is unmixed with worldly conduct, it is called 'subtle and dense.' Moreover, because it is subtle and wondrous, and not the coarse object of the two karmas and so forth, it is also called 'subtle and dense.' When it says 'indestructible,' it reveals that the nature of the obscuration to be remediated is firm and difficult to destroy. If one relies on this explanation, the four meanings in the treatise apply to both the severer and the severed. The treatise also says: 'That which can sever is hearing, contemplation, and cultivation within the prajñāpāramitā; that which is severed is severed just as the place where a diamond cuts is severed.' Here, the diamond of wisdom can sever the two obscurations, just as jade and stone are called the 'place of cutting.' That is, it brings up that which is severed to reveal that which severs. For those who interpret the two obscurations themselves as the metaphor of the vajra, this brings up that which severs to reveal that which is severed as being like a vajra; that is, the obscurations severed by hearing, contemplation, and cultivation are severed just like the cutting point of a diamond. However, in accordance with the treatise's intent, it explains the title as 'Vajracchedikā Prajñā' (Diamond-Cutter Prajñā): because it initially states 'the diamond that can sever,' and later concludes 'this is called the diamond that can sever.' In the commentary it is also like this: first it explains 'diamond,' and then it explains 'able to sever.' This follows the Western Regions' word order. If one says 'the diamond-cutter' [nengduan jingang], it follows this [Chinese] word order; neither is contradictory. In general, the teaching of the expresser, the principle and wisdom of the expressed, and the severed obscurations are all compared to a diamond. The treatise explains the fourth meaning, saying: 'Furthermore, it is like the painted shape of a vajra: broad at the beginning and the end, and narrow in the middle. So it is in the prajñāpāramitā: the "narrow" refers to the ground of the pure mind; the "broad at the beginning and end" refers to the ground of practice in faith and the ground of the Tathāgata. This reveals the uncommon meaning.' The expansion states: according to the written prajñā of this sūtra's teaching, it explains extensively at the beginning and end, but is narrow in the middle; differing from other sūtras, this is called the 'uncommon meaning.' Therefore, this sūtra alone is named 'Vajra,' and it also differs from the other sections [of the Prajñāpāramitā]. Thus, first, it is like the painted shape of a Vajra deity: broad across the shoulders and hips, but narrow at the waist; because there is a rank of movement, it uses this metaphor to encourage progress. Second, it is like a painted vajra pestle: broad at both ends and narrow at the waist, being extremely firm and supreme; this is to make one know its profound subtlety. Question: Why explain the practice in faith and the Buddha-ground extensively, but treat the pure mind briefly? Answer: The intent of this sūtra is to cause one to generate the mind, cultivate practice, and not sever the Buddha-lineage. It extensively speaks of the fruit's virtues to encourage joyful aspiration so that one can generate the mind. Because practitioners before the grounds who are newly cultivating might regress, it extensively shows the aspects of practice to cause them to advance. From the first ground onward, because they realize it for themselves and do not regress, there is no need for extensive explanation; therefore, it is broad at the beginning and end, and brief in the middle. Furthermore, from the stage of an ordinary person one inherits the Buddha-lineage, and arriving at the Buddha-fruit, the meaning of non-interruption is accomplished. The intermediate stages can be understood, so why trouble to explain them extensively? Hence the sūtra's text and meaning differ in breadth and narrowness. Although some commentators explain the 'ground of the Tathāgata' as subsuming the ten grounds, this sūtra does not explain the characteristics of the ten grounds, but points back to all the virtues possessed by the Buddha-fruit as the 'ground of the Tathāgata.' Therefore, this explanation is made. This should be understood below. Question: The Suvikrāntavikramiparipṛcchā-prajñāpāramitā-sūtra says: 'In the prajñāpāramitā, there is not a single dharma that can serve as a metaphor.' Why now say that wisdom is compared to a vajra? Answer: That text reveals that the excellence of wisdom surpasses all myriad dharmas, so nothing can compare to it in its entirety. Here, [a metaphor is drawn] based on a minor similarity in meaning and function, hence it is compared to a vajra; for the wise understand through metaphors. The Dharma relies on metaphors to be clarified and verified: by showing what is already seen to verify what has not yet been seen, harmonizing them into one place so that their meanings are equivalent, all correct statements are called metaphors; that is, using the evident part to clarify the unclarified part. 'Prajñā' is the Sanskrit sound; here it is translated as 'wisdom' (zhihui). In total, there are five kinds: the written, which is the teaching of the expresser; the contemplative, which is the essence of wisdom; the real mark, which is the realm of true nature, namely, the two truths of emptiness and existence, the three non-natures, and so forth; the retinue, which is the nature of the associated four aggregates and the companion five aggregates, corresponding to the two kinds of precepts: those concurrent with concentration and those concurrent with the path. However, because this name 'prajñā' is broad, there are five kinds in principle; but in terms of excellence, it takes only the real mark and contemplation, as distinguished in our school. In explaining this 'zhihui' (wisdom), first we treat them separately, then comprehensively. As for their separate characteristics: the complete Sanskrit sound should be prajñā, translated here as hui; in Sanskrit it is jñāna, translated here as zhi. Although their essence is identical—both being the specific mental factor of discernment (mati)—their functions differ, hence they obtain distinct names, because selecting dharmas and decisive judgment are two different things. This accords with the Pañcaviṃśatisāhasrikā, the Mahāparinirvāṇa-sūtra, and so forth. The syllable jñā is the root (dhātu) for both words zhi and hui. The two syllables pra and [na] are their affixes (pratyaya): with pra aiding jñā, it is hui (prajñā); with [na] aiding jñā, it is zhi (jñāna). Therefore, the various sūtras distinguish the two perfections of zhi and hui among the ten pāramitās. The Suvikrāntavikramiparipṛcchā says: 'A bodhisattva possessing the gate of prajñā and possessing the gate of jñāna can enter the sharp and dull faculties of sentient beings, and obtains the gate of prajñā to discriminate phrases and meanings.' As for their comprehensive characteristic: because their essence is identical, hui is spoken of in place of zhi, and zhi is spoken of in place of hui, without any contradiction. Thus, the sixth [perfection] is called the perfection of zhi, and so forth. Question: The title has the name Prajñā; why then does the practice explain giving (dāna)? Answer: In terms of the former leading to the latter, it is subsumed under the perfection of giving; in terms of the latter purifying the former, it is subsumed under the perfection of wisdom. Bringing up either one, in principle and reality they correspond. Furthermore, establishing the name is based on supremacy, while cultivation is summarized; giving and wisdom are brought up separately. As for pāra, here it means 'the other shore.' Dharmas are of four kinds: principle, teaching, practice, and fruit. We take only the fruits of bodhi and nirvāṇa as the other shore. Teaching and principle span both cause and effect; practice is solely in the cause. Unarisen suffering and origin are the deep river; currently arisen origin and suffering are this shore. The six perfections are the raft, and the practitioner as a nominal person of the five aggregates is the one ferried across. As for mita (ita), it has the meanings of 'separation' and 'arriving.' Through cultivating giving and so forth,

leaving behind birth and death and reaching the other shore. In the ninth [fascicle] of the *Vijñaptimātratāsiddhi*, [it states that] a pāramitā can only be established when embraced by seven excellences: first, excellence of abiding, meaning one must abide in the bodhisattva lineage; second, excellence of support, meaning one must rely upon the mind of great awakening (bodhicitta); third, excellence of aspiration; [fourth, excellence of practice,] meaning one must fully practice all undertakings; fifth, excellence of skillful means, meaning one must be embraced by non-conceptual wisdom; sixth, excellence of dedication, meaning one must dedicate toward unexcelled awakening; seventh, excellence of purity, meaning one must not be intermingled with the two hindrances. If not embraced by these seven, practiced giving and the rest do not reach the other shore. Hence, giving and the rest in relation to pāramitā should each be analyzed through the four alternatives (catuṣkoṭi). The second [fascicle] of the *Madhyāntavibhāga-śāstra* has twelve excellences, and thus all attain the name of 'reaching the other shore'. The eleventh [fascicle] of the *Abhidharmasamuccayavyākhyā* has five meanings; the *Saṃdhinirmocana Sūtra* [explains it] through five causes and conditions. How these subsume one another is distinguished in a separate chapter. As for 'sūtra', the Sanskrit sound is *sūtra*. *Xiū-duō-luó* and *xiū-gòu-lù* are both errors; correctly it is *sūtra* (sùdǎnlǎn). It is due to four meanings: warp threads for cloth, warp threads for mats, just as the name *gauḥ*, *saindhava*, and so forth. Here we take the meaning of 'warp' (jīng) and also the meaning of 'thread'. Why? The *Caturvargika Vinaya* states: 'It is like various flowers placed on a table; if the wind blows on them [they scatter], but if they are bound together with a thread, they are not scattered and lost.' The capacities and lineages of sentient beings are like the table; the teaching and meaning spoken by the Buddha are like the flowers. If not bound together, the violent wind of false views would scatter them. Now, the compilation and stringing together of the Buddha's words is like a thread stringing flowers, or like a warp holding [the weave]. The *Buddhabhūmyupadeśa* states: 'Because the Buddha's holy teaching threads through and holds together the meanings to be spoken and the sentient beings to be transformed, one may respectively take the two meanings of thread and warp.' Moreover, the character *jīng* here shares its name with the secular *jīng* (classics/warp) of this land. The secular explanation of *jīng* in this land is: constancy (cháng) and norm (fǎ). What does not change from antiquity to the present is 'constant'; what definitively determines right and wrong is 'norm'; what guides things according to principle is *jīng*. The Buddhist teaching accords with this without error. In the treatises of the Lesser Vehicle, the *Saṃyuktābhidharmahṛdaya* gives five meanings, such as an upwelling spring and so forth, as is commonly explained. Although 'sūtra' pertains to the verbal teaching, in identifying the essence of a sūtra according to the *Yogācārabhūmi-śāstra*, it inclusively takes in what is expressed; therefore, in general, 'sūtra' applies to both the teaching and the principle. *Vajracchedikā Prajñāpāramitā* above applies to both principle and teaching. Accordingly, considering them in relation to 'sūtra', there are four alternatives in total. That is, *Vajracchedikā Prajñāpāramitā* is itself the sūtra (karmadhāraya), or [the sūtra of the Vajracchedikā Prajñāpāramitā] (tatpuruṣa), explained as appropriate. In explaining the text of the sūtra, there is first the structural outline and then the explanation. Following Bodhisattva Asaṅga's outline and explanation of this sūtra, there are seven topics and eighteen abodes. The other two commentaries provide no separate outline. Tripiṭaka Master Paramārtha divides the main body of the text into four: first, protecting, mindfulness, and entailing; second, abiding; third, cultivating; fourth, severing doubts; together with the preface and the dissemination, these make six sections. Bodhiruci, relying on the records of Jinagangxian, divided it into twelve sections. Because such proliferation does not represent the intent of the treatises, it is not adopted here. However, in the Jin dynasty, Master Dao'an (whom people called 'Bodhisattva of the Jewel Seal Hand') divided all sūtras into three sections: preface, main body, and dissemination. Later, when the *Buddhabhūmyupadeśa* was translated, Bodhisattva Bandhuprabha's explanation of the *Buddhabhūmi Sūtra* had the exact same three sections. From this, one knows that the subtle principle was secretly communicated and the mind of wisdom mysteriously coincided; how could the title 'Covering the Sky' (Mitīan) have been in vain? As for the three sections: first, the section on the causes and conditions for the arising of the teaching; second, the section on what is stated by the holy teaching; third, the section on the practice of following the virtuous teaching. Although the names differ slightly, the meaning is identical. Relying on this division, the text of the sūtra has three parts: from 'Thus' up to 'having arranged the seat, he sat down' is the preface; from 'At that time, the Venerable Subhūti was in the great assembly' up to 'one should view it thus' is the main body; the remainder is called the dissemination. The preface is again twofold: first, the general preface, namely 'Thus' and so forth; second, the specific preface, namely the text from 'At that time, the World-Honoured One' downward. Now, these two prefaces have five pairs of names: 1. The general versus specific pair: because [the general] is shared by all sūtras, while [the specific] consists of the particular circumstances of this text. 2. The preface confirming faith versus the preface initiating the teaching pair: the former is cited by the transmitter of the Dharma to inspire trust and abiding; the latter initiates the teaching through the particular circumstances of the preacher of the Dharma. 3. The preface placed after the sūtra versus the preface placed before the sūtra pair: because the former was instructed to be placed after the sūtra, while the latter arose naturally before the sūtra. 4. Ānanda's preface versus the Tathāgata's preface pair: named after the request [by Ānanda] and the skillful means spoken [by the Tathāgata]. 5. The future preface versus the present preface pair: because Ānanda requested it for the future, while the other was the origination at that present time. Although there are many names, the first two pairs are complete in meaning. Yet each establishes two names according to what is prominent; otherwise, would confirming faith and initiating not be pervasive? Before explaining the general preface that confirms faith, it is first analyzed through three gateways: 1. The origin of its arising. 2. The rationale for its establishment. 3. Differences in division and combination. As for the origin of its arising, texts such as the *Mahāmāyā Sūtra*, *Mahākāruṇika Sūtra*, and *Mahāprajñāpāramitopadeśa* fully recount this matter. However, the *Mahākāruṇika Sūtra* states that Upāli instructed Ānanda to ask, while the *Mahāmāyā Sūtra* and others state that Aniruddha instructed him; both instructed him together, and each text mentions one of them. Furthermore, regarding the four matters: 1. After the Buddha's parinirvāṇa, whom should the monks take as their teacher? 2. What should they dwell in reliance upon? 3. How should evil-natured monks be subdued? 4. What words should be placed at the beginning of all sūtras? The Buddha instructed him, saying: 'After my parinirvāṇa, take the prātimokṣa as your great teacher; dwell in reliance on the four applications of mindfulness; [how should evil-natured monks be subdued? What words should be placed at the beginning of all sūtras? The Buddha instructed him, saying: "After my parinirvāṇa, take the prātimokṣa as your great teacher; dwell in reliance on the four applications of mindfulness;] evil-natured monks should be treated with the brahmadanda (Brahma-punishment).' Since *brahma* means silent, one should not beat or scold them, but leave them aside in silence. 'At the beginning of all sūtras, one should place words such as "Thus have I heard".' Question: Did Ānanda merely put forward these four questions without adding or subtracting anything? Answer: Precepts enable upward progress and can serve as the teacher; the applications of mindfulness overturn perversions and serve as the main support for practice and learning; the Brahma-method of silence can subdue evil persons. The first clarifies correct practice; the second clarifies correct understanding; the third clarifies the removal of obstacles. These three gateways must rely on the holy teaching. Hence, what was asked neither decreases nor increases. Furthermore, to cure the illness of birth and death, four matters must be present: 1. One needs a renowned physician. 2. One seeks wonderful medicine. 3. One recognizes violations. 4. One is skilled in canonical prescriptions. The four meanings correspond respectively. After the Buddha, the Great King of Physicians, enters parinirvāṇa, these four are essential. Therefore he asked about them. When these are present, the Three Jewels remain unbroken: taking the precepts as teacher corresponds to the Buddha Jewel; when evil-natured monks are subdued, the assembly attains harmony, which is the Saṅgha Jewel; the remaining two do not break the Dharma Jewel; mindfulness dwelling pervades both the Dharma of principle and the Dharma of practice.

When the Dharma of teaching and principle are compiled, unbroken, the Dharma of fruition is naturally accomplished. Therefore, the four matters have neither increase nor decrease. Later, at the time of the compilation, Ānanda, following the instruction, placed 'Thus' and so forth [at the head].