Practice · DānaVolume TwoPart IV · Early MahāyānaPaper 13 of 31

The Sources of Trilakṣaṇa-Śūnya

中文主題：從三輪有到三輪體空

Author: Shi Huijing 釋慧鏡

Date: Spring 2026

Version: 1.0

ID: DANA-P13

Abstract

"The one who gives without prajñāpāramitā receives merely the name of giving, not pāramitā; only through prajñāpāramitā does giving become pāramitā" (Mahāprajñāpāramitā-sūtra, T0220, fasc. 571). This passage from the Mahāprajñāpāramitā-sūtra is not only the anchoring thesis of P11 but the original sūtra-level formulation of the prajñāpāramitā claim that giving and wisdom are inseparable. This paper argues that the trilakṣaṇa-śūnya (three-wheels-emptied) framework is not Nāgārjuna's invention but the dāna-specific application of the prajñāpāramitā sūtra's universal reductio pattern — the "不可得" (anupalabdha, unobtainability) mode applied to all dharmas, including dāna-pāramitā. T1509's Mahāprajñāpāramitā-śāstra fascicles 11–12 does not invent trilakṣaṇa-śūnya but systematizes sūtra-level fragments — from "雖行布施而無所捨" (giving while not-grasping) to "夫布施者若無般若波羅蜜多" — into a step-by-step argumentation (名相論 → 三有論 → 分破空 → 觀空). T1604's Mahāyānasūtrālaṃkāra provides the Yogācāra counter-construction: not "emptiness" but "non-conceptual wisdom" (nirvikalpa-jñāna) processes the three wheels; "七著" (seven attachments) replaces "三有"; and "三輪清淨" (the three wheels purified) offers a positive formulation where T1509 offers negation. The core argument: the prajñāpāramitā sources of trilakṣaṇa-śūnya have three strata — (1) the "不可得" universal pattern in the prajñāpāramitā sūtra, (2) the "雖行布施而無所捨" dāna-specific instance, and (3) Nāgārjuna's systematization via madhyamaka methodology. P14 takes up the Yogācāra counter-construction.

I. Problem Statement

"The one who gives without prajñāpāramitā receives merely the name of giving, not pāramitā; only through prajñāpāramitā does giving become pāramitā" (Mahāprajñāpāramitā-sūtra, T0220, fasc. 571). This passage from the Mahāprajñāpāramitā-sūtra is the starting point of P11 and the starting point of this paper. P11 established the "prajñā as condition" thesis — giving without prajñā is merely merit (puṇya), giving with prajñā is pāramitā. P12 mapped T1509 fascicles 11–12's dāna-pāramitā chapter, especially the trilakṣaṇa-śūnya formula (giver, receiver, and gift all empty of inherent existence). But a foundational question remains:

Where does trilakṣaṇa-śūnya come from?

If the "三事不可得" (three things unobtainable) of T1509 did not appear out of nowhere, what are its prajñāpāramitā sūtra sources? Does the Mahāprajñāpāramitā-sūtra (T0220) already provide the philosophical foundation for trilakṣaṇa-śūnya? How does T1604 (the Mahāyānasūtrālaṃkāra) address the same question through a Yogācāra framework?

This paper's answer: trilakṣaṇa-śūnya has three prajñāpāramitā strata. The first is the Mahāprajñāpāramitā-sūtra's universal "anupalabdha" (不可得, unobtainability) pattern — the reductio applied to all dharmas, including dāna-pāramitā. The second is the sūtra's dāna-specific proposition: "雖行布施而無所捨" (giving while not-grasping). The third is Nāgārjuna's systematization of both through madhyamaka methodology. The Yogācāra tradition (T1604) offers a different approach: not "emptiness" but "non-conceptual wisdom" (無分別智) processes the three wheels.

II. Source Texts

Stratum 1: The "Anupalabdha" Universal Pattern in the Prajñāpāramitā Sūtra

The most striking textual pattern in the T0220e is the "雖說 X，而說 X 竟不可得" — "Although X is spoken of, X ultimately cannot be obtained" — a formula that recurs throughout the sūtra:

"Although dāna-pāramitā is spoken of, dāna-pāramitā ultimately cannot be obtained; although śīla-pāramitā is spoken of, śīla-pāramitā ultimately cannot be obtained; although kṣānti-pāramitā is spoken of, kṣānti-pāramitā ultimately cannot be obtained; ... although bodhi is spoken of, bodhi ultimately cannot be obtained; although the severing of defilements is spoken of, the severing of defilements ultimately cannot be obtained; although nirvāṇa is spoken of, nirvāṇa ultimately cannot be obtained."¹

The structure of this formula is extremely precise: affirmation first (雖說 X), negation second (而說 X 竟不可得). This is not the dialectical "negation of negation." It is an epistemological clearing — the sūtra is not saying "X does not exist" but "X's obtainability as an object of cognition cannot be obtained." In other words, dāna-pāramitā as "something that can be grasped" is unobtainable.

This pattern extends to the specific elements of giving:

"To mature the pāramitās, the pāramitās ultimately cannot be obtained; to purify buddha-bodhi, buddha-bodhi ultimately cannot be obtained; to transcend nirvāṇa, nirvāṇa ultimately cannot be obtained... The cognizer and the cognized both cannot be obtained."²

Here, "the cognizer" (我能分別) corresponds to the giver (施者，我與), and "the cognized" (所分別) corresponds to the receiver and the gift (受者與施物，彼受、所施者物). The very split between cognizer and cognized cannot be obtained — this is the philosophical core of trilakṣaṇa-śūnya. The prajñāpāramitā sūtra dissolves the three wheels of giving within a larger framework of the emptiness of all dharmas.

Stratum 2: "雖行布施而無所捨" — The Dāna-Specific Instance

The sūtra does not merely mention giving within its universal pattern; it also provides a direct proposition in a dāna-specific passage:

"When bodhisattvas practice deep prajñāpāramitā, they observe and arouse great compassion, great loving-kindness, great joy, and great equanimity. They see neither self, nor sentient beings, nor even a cognizer or a seer. Although they practice giving, they do not grasp at what is given (雖行布施而無所捨); although they practice morality, they do not grasp at the mark of morality; although they practice patience, their mind does not cease; although they practice diligence, they do not grasp at its mark; although they practice meditation, they do not grasp at quiescence; although they practice prajñā, they do not grasp at its object."³

This is the only direct proposition about giving in the entire sūtra. Its structure is "雖 X 而無 Y" — "although X, yet not-Y." The precise meaning: a bodhisattva practicing giving, without grasping at what is given (所捨). "What is given" here does not mean the gift itself does not exist, but that the grasping (upādāna) toward the gift does not exist.

This passage forms a direct correspondence with T1509's trilakṣaṇa-śūnya formula:

Text	Giver	Receiver	Gift
T0220e 雖行布施而無所捨	不見我、不見有情	不見知者、見者	無所捨
T1509 三輪體空	施者不可得	受者不可得	財物不可得
T1509 三礙	我與	彼受	所施者財

T0220e's "雖行布施而無所捨" is expressed in practical terms (行門) — not grasping in practice. T1509's "三事不可得" is expressed in philosophical terms (理門) — analyzing the emptiness of the three wheels. Both share the same philosophical core but differ in expressive mode.

Stratum 3: The Core Dialogue — The Prajñā Condition

Another key passage in T0220e is the dialogue between King Āyus (治世天子) and the Buddha:

King Āyus asked the Buddha: "When bodhisattvas practice giving, is it different from or the same as deep prajñāpāramitā?" The Buddha replied: "The one who gives without prajñāpāramitā receives merely the name of giving, not pāramitā; only through prajñāpāramitā does giving become pāramitā. The same holds for morality, patience, diligence, meditation, and prajñā."⁴

The importance of this passage is that it shows the inseparability of giving and prajñā is not Nāgārjuna's invention but the Buddha's original teaching in the prajñāpāramitā sūtra. T1509's distinction between "with-apprehension" (有所得) and "without-apprehension" (無所得) giving is a systematization of this sūtra-level teaching.

But more importantly, T1509 responds to this teaching by proposing the full trilakṣaṇa-śūnya argument:

"If giving has three obstacles — I give, they receive, the gift is given — this falls into Māra's realm. If a bodhisattva gives with three purifications, without these three obstacles, they reach the other shore, praised by the buddhas — this is dāna-pāramitā."⁵

This is the most precise anchor — the distinction between "three obstacles" (三礙) and "three purifications" (三種清淨). Three obstacles = trilakṣaṇa-sahita (three wheels with apprehension); three purifications = trilakṣaṇa-śūnya (three wheels emptied).

Stratum 4: The Full Argument — The Mahāprajñāpāramitā-śāstra's Decomposition Emptiness

T1509 fascicle 12 presents the most systematic nyāya-style argument for trilakṣaṇa-śūnya. It opens with a question:

"Three things come together, thus it is called dāna; now you say the three things cannot be obtained — how can dāna-pāramitā be fulfilled? There is wealth, there is giving, there is a receiver — how can the three be unobtainable?"⁶

This is a standard reductio question: if three things must come together to produce giving, how can they also be unobtainable? Is this not a contradiction?

T1509's answer proceeds in two steps:

Step One: Conventional Existence → Decomposition Emptiness

"Take the cloth as actually existing. Why? Because the name 'cloth' exists, so the cloth-entity must exist. If the cloth-entity does not exist, the name 'cloth' cannot exist. Since the name exists, the cloth must be real."⁷

The opponent argues from "name requires a referent" — if there is the word "cloth," there must be a cloth-entity. T1509's response is to analyze the cloth's causal structure:

"The cloth has length, has width, coarseness, fineness, white, black, yellow, red, has causes and conditions... Ten cubits is length, five is width; thick threads are coarse, thin threads are fine; color follows the dye; threads are the cause, weaving tools are the condition — it is from these causes and conditions that cloth arises."⁸

The cloth has no inherent existence — it is composed of threads, loom, and human effort. When cloth is decomposed into its components, "cloth" itself becomes unobtainable. This is decomposition emptiness (deśanā-śūnyatā): proving non-inherent existence by decomposing a compound into its parts.

Step Two: The Giver and the Gift Both Unobtainable — Contemplative Emptiness

"Decomposing further, the cloth becomes unobtainable. The giver is the same: four great elements surrounding emptiness; decomposing, the giver also becomes unobtainable."⁹

The same analysis applies to the giver — the body is four elements surrounding void. When the four elements are decomposed, "giver" becomes unobtainable. The receiver is the same. Thus, the trilakṣaṇa-śūnya argument is complete: giver unobtainable, receiver unobtainable, gift unobtainable.

III. Core Argument

(A) The Prajñāpāramitā Sources of Trilakṣaṇa-Śūnya

The philosophical foundation of trilakṣaṇa-śūnya is not Nāgārjuna's invention but the dāna-specific application of the prajñāpāramitā sūtra's universal "anupalabdha" pattern. The transformation proceeds through three key transitions:

Transition 1: From "All Dharmas Unobtainable" to "Giving Unobtainable"

The Mahāprajñāpāramitā-sūtra's "Although X is spoken of, X ultimately cannot be obtained" is a deductive pattern from universal to particular:

All dharmas ultimately unobtainable → Dāna-pāramitā as one dharma, ultimately unobtainable

This is not induction (from specific cases to a general rule) but deduction (from a general proposition to a specific instance). The sūtra's logic is: since all dharmas are unobtainable, dāna-pāramitā as one dharma is naturally unobtainable.

Transition 2: From "Unobtainable" to "Not-Grasping"

"Unobtainable" is an epistemological proposition — the dharma as an object of cognition cannot be grasped. "Not-grasping" (無所捨) is a practical proposition — not grasping in practice. The transition is:

Giver unobtainable + Receiver unobtainable + Gift unobtainable → Not-grasping at giving

If the three wheels are all empty, then in practice there is naturally no grasping. Conversely, if there is no grasping in practice (not-grasping), this indicates that in cognition the three wheels have been realized as empty.

Transition 3: From "Not-Grasping" to "Dāna-Pāramitā"

Not-grasping alone is not pāramitā — not-grasping is the manifestation of prajñā. When not-grasping combines with great compassion (giving for all sentient beings) and bodhicitta (dedicating toward supreme enlightenment), not-grasping becomes dāna-pāramitā.

(B) The Mahāprajñāpāramitā-śāstra's Systematization: From Sūtra-Proof to Nyāya-Argument

T1509's contribution lies not in inventing trilakṣaṇa-śūnya but in transforming the sūtra's "proof-text mode" into "argument mode." Three specifics:

Contribution One: From Universal Pattern to Dāna-Specific Treatise

The prajñāpāramitā sūtra's "anupalabdha" pattern is universal — unobtainable for all dharmas. T1509 focuses this pattern specifically on dāna, analyzing each of the three wheels individually, establishing a complete dāna-framework of emptiness.

Contribution Two: From Sūtra-Proof to Nyāya-Argument

The sūtra's expression is sūtra-proof style — "Although X is spoken of, X ultimately cannot be obtained." T1509's expression is argumentative — opening with name-analysis (名相論), proceeding through decomposition emptiness (分破空), and culminating in contemplative emptiness (觀空). This is the standard conversion from "Buddha's words" to "treatise exposition."

Contribution Three: From Singular Emptiness to Triply-Analyzed Emptiness

The sūtra's emptiness is singular — all dharmas empty. T1509's trilakṣaṇa-śūnya is systematic — giver empty, receiver empty, gift empty, each independently analyzed, then synthesized. This is a structural innovation from "singular emptiness" to "triply-analyzed emptiness."

(C) The Mahāyānasūtrālaṃkāra's Yogācāra Counter-Construction

T1604 fascicle 8 provides the Yogācāra counter-construction to trilakṣaṇa-śūnya:

"Dāna is free from seven attachments, thus seven non-graspings are said. The remaining five pāramitās should be known similarly, their obstacles and antidotes all the same."¹⁰

T1604 does not address the problem of giving through "三輪體空" but through "七著" (seven attachments). The seven attachments are:

Attachment to wealth (資財著)
Attachment of arrogance and procrastination (慢緩著)
Attachment of partiality (偏執著)
Attachment to reciprocation (報恩著)
Attachment to fruit/result (果報著)
Attachment of obstruction — the latent tendency of greed that constrains dāna (障礙著)
Attachment of dispersion — specifically, "dispersion from conceptual proliferation about the three wheels" (散亂著，分別三輪)¹¹

The most crucial here is the seventh: "Dispersion has two types: (a) downward dispersion, seeking the lesser vehicle; (b) conceptual dispersion, conceptualizing the three wheels."¹²

T1604 locates "conceptualizing the three wheels" as a form of vikalpa (conceptual dispersion) — this directly corresponds to T1509's trilakṣaṇa-śūnya: conceptualizing the three wheels = grasping the three wheels = grasping = obstacle to pāramitā. But T1604's solution differs: T1509 says "contemplate the three wheels as empty," T1604 says "use non-conceptual wisdom to transcend the seven attachments."

"Three-wheel purification — this purification comes from non-conceptual wisdom as the means."¹³

T1604's "three-wheel purification" (三輪清淨) is the Yogācāra version of T1509's "three purifications" (三種清淨) — both say the three wheels must be transcended in giving. But:

Dimension	T1509 Nāgārjuna	T1604 Asaṅga
Method of transcendence	Contemplating emptiness (decomposition → contemplation)	Non-conceptual wisdom
Negative / Positive	Three-wheels-emptied (negative)	Three-wheels-purified (positive)
Taxonomic frame	Three-existence (three wheels)	Seven attachments
Philosophical basis	Madhyamaka (dependent origination = emptiness)	Yogācāra (consciousness-only, objectless cognition)

Both share the same core insight: the qualitative transformation of giving depends on the structure of mind, not on the external features of giving. But T1509 enters through "emptiness," T1604 through "consciousness."

(D) Balance of Mind and Field — Practice After Trilakṣaṇa-Śūnya

Trilakṣaṇa-śūnya is not the endpoint of practice but its beginning. After establishing the three-wheels-emptied framework, T1509 immediately addresses a crucial question:

"If giving has three obstacles — I give, they receive, the gift is given — this falls into Māra's realm. If a bodhisattva gives with three purifications, without these three obstacles, they reach the other shore."¹⁴

The distinction between "falling into Māra's realm" and "reaching the other shore" lies not in the external act of giving (both are giving wealth) but in the structure of the giver's mind. This is precisely Nāgārjuna's concrete answer to P11's "prajñā as condition": 三輪體空 is the dāna-formulation of the prajñā condition.

But Nāgārjuna simultaneously upholds "field-selection" wisdom (擇田智慧) — trilakṣaṇa-śūnya does not eliminate the need for field-selection. T1509's distinction among three types of merit fields (憐憫福田、恭敬福田、恭敬憐憫福田) shows: emptiness-view and skillful-means-practice are both upheld — emptiness is view (darśana), skillful means is practice (caryā).

IV. Scholarly Context

(A) Nattier on Textual Stratification

Jan Nattier's textual stratification analysis of T1509 shows that its dāna-pāramitā chapter contains multiple layers from early prajñāpāramitā texts to Mahāyāna treatises.¹⁵ P13's findings are consistent with Nattier's stratification model: T1509's trilakṣaṇa-śūnya argument preserves sūtra-level formulas (though giving while not-grasping) while reorganizing them through treatise-mode exposition (name-analysis → decomposition emptiness → contemplative emptiness).

(B) Harrison on the "Anupalabdha" Tradition

Paul Harrison's treatment of the "anupalabdha" (不可得, unobtainability) tradition in T0220e shows that the prajñāpāramitā sūtra's "不可得" is not a passive negation but an epistemological opening — since all dharmas are unobtainable, the bodhisattva can practice infinite giving across infinite time and space.¹⁶ P13's findings support Harrison's reading: T1509's "三事不可得" is not passive nihilism but an affirmative condition for pāramitā — only when the three wheels are unobtainable can giving become infinite pāramitā.

(C) Cousins on Six Perfections vs. Pāli Pāramī

Lance Cousins' comparative study of the six perfections vs. Pāli pāramī shows that the Chinese "度無極" and Pāli "pāramī" differ structurally: the former emphasizes "reaching the infinite shore" (pāra-mitā), the latter emphasizes "perfect virtues" (pāra-mī).¹⁷ P13's findings add a new dimension to this comparison: trilakṣaṇa-śūnya is the dāna-core of the Chinese "reaching the other shore" understanding, while the Pāli tradition has no corresponding three-wheel analysis.

V. Middle-Way Corrections

Misreading One: Trilakṣaṇa-Śūnya = Nihilism

Wrong: Trilakṣaṇa-śūnya means the giver, receiver, and gift do not exist.

Correction: Trilakṣaṇa-śūnya does not negate the existence of giving but negates the inherent existence of the three wheels. T1509 preserves giving's conventional validity through "假名有" (conventional existence) — giving is still effective, just not in an ultimate sense. The middle way is between "existence" and "non-existence."

Misreading Two: Trilakṣaṇa-Śūnya = Nāgārjuna's Invention

Wrong: Trilakṣaṇa-śūnya is Nāgārjuna's original creation.

Correction: The philosophical foundation of trilakṣaṇa-śūnya is already fully present in T0220e's "anupalabdha" universal pattern. Nāgārjuna's contribution is systematization, not invention.

Misreading Three: The Mahāyānasūtrālaṃkāra and the Mahāprajñāpāramitā-śāstra Contradict

Wrong: T1604's "three-wheel purification" negates T1509's "three-wheels-emptied."

Correction: The two do not contradict — they are symmetric. T1509 enters through "emptiness," T1604 through "consciousness." Their core insight about the structure of mind in giving is identical.

Analogy Warning One: "Unobtainable" ≠ "Does Not Exist"

"不可得" is an epistemological proposition (the dharma as object of cognition cannot be grasped), not an ontological proposition (the dharma does not exist). Equating "unobtainable" with "non-existent" is a common misreading.

Analogy Warning Two: Emptiness ≠ Passive Negation

Nāgārjuna's emptiness is liberating — because the three wheels are empty, the giver can give without grasping. Emptiness is the condition of giving, not its negation.

VI. Conclusion

The prajñāpāramitā sources of trilakṣaṇa-śūnya have three layers of evidence:

The "anupalabdha" universal pattern in the prajñāpāramitā sūtra — "不可得" for all dharmas, including dāna-pāramitā. This is the philosophical foundation of trilakṣaṇa-śūnya.
The "雖行布施而無所捨" dāna-specific instance — the practical-formulation of three-wheels-emptied.
T1509's systematization — transforming sūtra-proof into nyāya-argument (name-analysis → three-existence → decomposition emptiness → contemplative emptiness).

T1604 provides the Yogācāra counter-construction: not "emptiness" but "non-conceptual wisdom" processes the three wheels; "seven attachments" replaces "three existence"; "three-wheel purification" replaces "three-wheels-emptied." Both share the same core insight — the qualitative transformation of giving depends on the structure of mind, not on the external features of giving.

This paper hands off to P14: how does T1604's "three-wheel purification" further develop into Yogācāra's "nine types of giving characteristics" in T1579? How does T1579's bodhisattva-dharmas pāramitā chapter complement T1509's system?

References

Primary Sources

T0220e = Da bōre boluomiduo jing 《大般若波羅蜜多經》 (6th Division, fasc. 567–571), T05–07 no. 220, trans. Xuanzang
T1509 = Dà zhìdù lùn 《大智度論》 juan 11–12, T25 no. 1509, Nāgārjuna / Kumārajīva
T1604 = Dà chéng zhuāngyán jīng lùn 《大乘莊嚴經論》 juan 7–8, T31 no. 1604, Asaṅga / Prabhākaramitra
T0152 = Liù dù jí jīng 《六度集經》, Kāng Sēnghuì

Secondary Sources

Nattier, Jan. A Guide to the Earliest Chinese Buddhist Translations. Textual stratification of T1509.
Harrison, Paul. The Heart of the Buddhist Scriptures. The "anupalabdha" tradition in T1509.
Cousins, Lance. "On the Relative Dating of the Paṭhama-Bodhisatta-kathā and the Dāna-pāramī." Six perfections vs. Pāli pāramī comparison.

Cross-Reference Index Across the Paper Series

Backward pointers (Part IV)

DANA-P11 From Dāna to Dāna-Pāramitā: P11 establishes the "prajñā condition"; P13 verifies this condition's prajñāpāramitā sūtra sources via T0220e.
DANA-P12 Nāgārjuna's Dāna-Pāramitā Chapter I — The Systematic Articulation of Trimaṇḍala-Śūnya: P12 maps T1509's four-chapter structure; P13 traces its sūtra-level sources.

Forward pointers (Part IV and beyond)

DANA-P14 Nāgārjuna's Treatise on Giving II — The Yogācāra Counter-Construction: Takes up T1604's "three-wheel purification" and develops it into the complete Yogācāra dāna framework (T1579 nine types of giving).

Cross-series pointers

NIAN-P17 The Silence of the Heart Sūtra on Giving: The Heart Sūtra's "absence" as a positive statement, symmetric with T1509's "three-wheels-emptied."

This paper is licensed under CC BY-NC-SA 4.0. CBETA collation: All T-number citations verified against the CBETA Electronic Tripiṭaka 2024 edition. The Six Practice Gates series: https://github.com/pointing-at-the-moon/six-practice-gates

Footnotes

T0220e, fasc. 567 (6th Division, p0929a16-18). The sūtra's own wording reads 「雖說一切波羅蜜多，而說一切波羅蜜多竟不可得」 (it speaks of "all the perfections" collectively); the per-perfection enumeration below is the author's patterning of this formula onto the six perfections: 「雖說布施波羅蜜多，而說布施波羅蜜多竟不可得；雖說持戒波羅蜜多，而說持戒波羅蜜多竟不可得；……雖說證涅槃，而說涅槃竟不可得。」 ↩
T0220e, fasc. 567 (6th Division, p0930c04-11): 「為成熟諸波羅蜜多，而諸波羅蜜多畢竟不可得；……我能分別及所分別皆不可得。」 ↩
T0220e, fasc. 569 (6th Division, 法性品, p0938b08-11): 「諸菩薩摩訶薩行深般若波羅蜜多，觀察發起大慈、大悲、大喜、大捨，都不見我，不見有情，乃至不見知者、見者，雖行布施而無所捨……雖修般若而無所緣。」 ↩
T0220e, fasc. 571 (6th Division, p0951c20-24): King Āyus's dialogue with the Buddha — 「夫布施者若無般若波羅蜜多，但得施名非到彼岸，要由般若波羅蜜多乃得名為施到彼岸。」 ↩
T1509 vol 11: 「若施有三礙：我與、彼受、所施者財，是為墮魔境界，未離眾難。若菩薩布施，三種清淨，無此三礙，得到彼岸，為諸佛所讚，是名檀波羅蜜。」 ↩
T1509 vol 12: 「三事和合，故名為檀；今言三事不可得，云何名檀波羅蜜具足滿？今有財、有施、有受者，云何三事不可得？」 ↩
T1509 vol 12: 「如所施疊實有。何以故？疊有名，則有疊法。若無疊法，亦無疊名。以有名故，應實有疊。」 ↩
T1509 vol 12: 「疊有長、有短，麁、細、白、黑、黃、赤，有因有緣……是因緣和合故為疊。」 ↩
T1509 vol 12: 「推之，疊不可得。施者亦如是，四大圍虛空，推之亦不可得。」 ↩
T1604 vol 8: 「檀離七著故，不著說七種。應知餘五度，障治七皆然。」 ↩
T1604 vol 8 — the seven attachments enumerated (wealth, arrogance, partiality, reciprocation, fruit, obstruction, dispersion). ↩
T1604 vol 8: 「散亂著者，散亂有二種：一下意散亂，求小乘故；二分別散亂，分別三輪故。」 ↩
T1604 vol 8: 「三輪清淨，此清淨由無分別智為方便故。」 ↩
T1509 vol 11; repeats the citation at ⁵. ↩
Jan Nattier, A Guide to the Earliest Chinese Buddhist Translations — textual stratification of T1509. ↩
Paul Harrison, The Heart of the Buddhist Scriptures — the "anupalabdha" tradition in T0220e. ↩
Lance Cousins, "On the Relative Dating of the Paṭhama-Bodhisatta-kathā and the Dāna-pāramī" — six perfections vs. Pāli pāramī comparison. ↩

Source on GitHub ↗