The Pedagogical Arc of Merit Comparisons

I. Introduction

The Diamond Sūtra contains a pedagogical device that appears again and again: the merit comparison. Every few sections, the Buddha asks Subhūti the same type of question — if someone were to fill the entire universe with the seven treasures and give them away, would their merit be great? Subhūti always answers "very great." Then the Buddha always delivers the same verdict: but if someone upholds even a four-line verse of this sūtra and explains it to others, the merit surpasses the former.

This scenario begins at §4 and recurs at §8, §11, §15, §24, §28, and §32. Each time the scale of material giving escalates — from jewels filling a trichiliocosm, to jewels filling Ganges-sand-number trichiliocosms, to giving away one's body three times daily for immeasurable kalpas, to piles of jewels as tall as Mount Sumeru, to jewels filling immeasurable asaṃkhyeya worlds. The scale increases exponentially; the conclusion never wavers: dharma-offering prevails.

First-time readers tend to read the merit comparisons as a ranking chart — "dharma-offering scores higher, so I should do more dharma-offering." But this is precisely the conceptual reification (parikalpita) that the merit comparisons are designed to dismantle. Vasubandhu already noted: "The phrasing is similar but the meaning differs — therefore it is not repetition"¹ — each recurrence cuts a different layer of attachment in a different doctrinal context.

This paper asks: if the six merit comparisons are not a simple ranking, what are they? What is their pedagogical logic? Why do they need to repeat six times? What doctrinal progression occurs between iterations? And why does the sequence ultimately dismantle itself?

S5-P04 established the "right use of paratantra" framework — giving is a raft, used for crossing the river (wholesome action) but not carried on one's back (attachment). This paper unfolds that framework specifically within the merit comparisons: jewel-giving is a concrete instance of the raft; "much merit" is the Buddha's skillful device for guiding practitioners onto the raft; and "this merit is precisely non-merit in nature" is the disclosure — after you board the raft — that the raft is not the destination. S5-P07 revealed the Diamond Sūtra's dual-layer structure (with §17 as pivot: the first half addresses afflictive obstruction, the second half cognitive obstruction). The merit comparisons are the only pedagogical device that spans both layers — their teaching function differs qualitatively between the two halves, and this difference itself confirms the dual-layer structure.

II. Scriptural Foundations

A. Sūtra Sources

2.1 The Six Merit Comparisons: Full Text and Progression

The Diamond Sūtra's merit comparisons are not isolated passages scattered throughout the text but a complete pedagogical arc. The following presents each of the six comparisons, marking the progression in giving-scale and dharma-offering threshold.

First comparison (§4) — jewels filling a trichiliocosm vs. upholding a four-line verse:

"Subhūti, what do you think? If someone filled a trichiliocosm with the seven treasures and gave them in charity, would the merit gained by this person be great?" Subhūti said: "Very great, World-Honored One. Why? This merit is precisely non-merit in nature; therefore the Tathāgata says the merit is great." "If someone, within this sūtra, upholds even a four-line verse and explains it to others, the merit surpasses the former. Why? Subhūti, all Buddhas and all Buddhas' anuttarā samyaksaṃbodhi dharma — all emerge from this sūtra. Subhūti, what is called Buddha-dharma is precisely non-Buddha-dharma."²

（「須菩提！於意云何？若人滿三千大千世界七寶以用布施，是人所得福德，寧為多不？」須菩提言：「甚多，世尊！何以故？是福德即非福德性，是故如來說福德多。」「若復有人，於此經中受持乃至四句偈等，為他人說，其福勝彼。何以故？須菩提！一切諸佛及諸佛阿耨多羅三藐三菩提法，皆從此經出。須菩提！所謂佛法者，即非佛法。」）

The first comparison already contains a compressed preview of the entire pedagogical arc. Subhūti does not simply answer "very great" — he spontaneously responds with the jífēi structure: "This merit is precisely non-merit in nature; therefore the Tathāgata says the merit is great." Merit has no intrinsic nature; precisely because it lacks intrinsic nature can the Tathāgata conventionally designate it as "great." Kuiji interprets directly: "This merit is separate from the intrinsic nature of merit; therefore it is called great."³ Subhūti has already grasped the prajñā principle in the very first comparison — he is not speaking of the quantity of merit but of the fact that merit, being empty of self-nature, can only be conventionally designated as "great" by the Tathāgata.

The closing statement reveals the fundamental reason dharma-offering prevails: "All Buddhas and all Buddhas' dharma of anuttarā samyaksaṃbodhi emerge from this sūtra" — this sūtra is the generative source of all Buddha-dharma.

Second comparison (§8) — Ganges-sand-number trichiliocosms of jewels vs. upholding a four-line verse:

"If a good man or woman filled Ganges-sand-number trichiliocosms with the seven treasures and gave them in charity, would the merit be great?" Subhūti said: "Very great, World-Honored One." The Buddha told Subhūti: "If a good man or woman, within this sūtra, upholds even a four-line verse and explains it to others, this merit surpasses the former."⁴

The giving-scale escalates from "a trichiliocosm" to "Ganges-sand-number trichiliocosms." But more noteworthy is the new element §8 introduces:

"Wherever this sūtra is spoken, even a four-line verse, know that this place should be honored by all beings of the world — devas, humans, and asuras — as if it were a Buddha-stūpa. How much more so if someone can fully uphold and recite it? Subhūti, know that this person has accomplished the supreme, foremost, rarest dharma. Wherever this sūtra is found, there is the Buddha."⁵

（「隨說是經，乃至四句偈等，當知此處，一切世間天、人、阿修羅皆應供養，如佛塔廟……若是經典所在之處，則為有佛，若尊重弟子。」）

"As if a Buddha-stūpa," "there is the Buddha" — wherever the sūtra is spoken, the dharmakāya has found its conditions for manifestation. This is not ceremonial reverence but doctrinal judgment.

Third and fourth comparisons (§11, §15) — the radical escalation to bodily sacrifice:

§11 escalates from external wealth (jewels) to internal wealth (one's body-and-life):

"If a good man or woman gave in charity bodies-and-lives as numerous as Ganges sands, and another person upheld even a four-line verse of this sūtra and explained it to others — the latter's merit is far greater."⁶

（「若有善男子、善女人，以恒河沙等身命布施；若復有人，於此經中，乃至受持四句偈等，為他人說，其福甚多。」）

§15 pushes giving to the absolute limit of language:

"If a good man or woman gave bodies as numerous as Ganges sands in charity three times daily — morning, noon, and evening — for immeasurable hundreds of thousands of millions of billions of kalpas, and another person, upon hearing this sūtra, believed without opposition — the latter's merit surpasses the former. How much more so if one copies, upholds, recites, and explains it to others."⁷

（「若有善男子、善女人，初日分以恒河沙等身布施，中日分復以恒河沙等身布施，後日分亦以恒河沙等身布施，如是無量百千萬億劫以身布施；若復有人，聞此經典，信心不逆，其福勝彼。」）

Two critical shifts. First, the giving-scale has reached the limits of what language can express — three times daily, Ganges-sand bodies, for immeasurable kalpas. One cannot imagine a more extreme scenario of bodily sacrifice. Second, the dharma-offering threshold drops: one no longer needs to "uphold, recite, and explain" — merely "hearing this sūtra with unwavering faith" already surpasses all material giving. As the giving-scale increases exponentially and the dharma-offering threshold decreases, they point toward the incommensurability of prajñā and merit — the two simply do not occupy the same order of magnitude.

§15 also contains the sūtra's highest praise of the scripture-upholder: "This sūtra has inconceivable, immeasurable, boundless merit," and the upholder "bears the burden of the Tathāgata's anuttarā samyaksaṃbodhi"⁸ — shouldering the Buddha's mission of awakening.

Fifth comparison (§24) — Sumeru-sized heaps of jewels vs. a four-line verse:

"If all the Mount Sumerus in a trichiliocosm were heaped into seven-treasure piles and someone gave them in charity, and another person upheld even a four-line verse of this Prajñāpāramitā Sūtra, recited it, and explained it to others — the former's merit does not reach a hundredth, a hundred-thousandth, a hundred-thousand-millionth, nor can calculation or analogy reach it."⁹

（「若三千大千世界中所有諸須彌山王，如是等七寶聚，有人持用布施；若人以此般若波羅蜜經，乃至四句偈等，受持、讀誦、為他人說，於前福德百分不及一，百千萬億分，乃至算數、譬喻所不能及。」）

§24 falls after the §17 pivot — it belongs to the second half (S5-P07's positioning: the dharma-emptiness layer, addressing cognitive obstruction). A new rhetorical strategy appears: instead of simply stating "the latter surpasses the former," the sūtra quantifies the gap — "not a hundredth," "beyond calculation or analogy." This quantification itself carries pedagogical irony: on one hand using numbers to emphasize the magnitude of the gap, on the other hand those very numbers point toward immeasurability — the gap is so vast that neither arithmetic nor metaphor can express it.

Sixth comparison (§28) — the climax and the Reward Paradox:

"Subhūti, if a bodhisattva filled Ganges-sand worlds with the seven treasures and gave them in charity, and another person realized that all dharmas are non-self and attained the patience [of non-arising], this bodhisattva's merit would surpass the former's. Subhūti, this is because bodhisattvas do not receive merit." Subhūti said to the Buddha: "World-Honored One, how is it that bodhisattvas do not receive merit?" "Subhūti, the merit a bodhisattva creates should not be clung to. Therefore it is said they do not receive merit."¹⁰

（「須菩提！若菩薩以滿恒河沙等世界七寶布施；若復有人知一切法無我，得成於忍，此菩薩勝前菩薩所得功德。須菩提！以諸菩薩不受福德故。」須菩提白佛言：「世尊！云何菩薩不受福德？」「須菩提！菩薩所作福德，不應貪著，是故說不受福德。」）

§28 represents the most radical qualitative shift in the entire merit-comparison sequence. What prevails is no longer "upholding a four-line verse" — an actionable behavior — but "knowing all dharmas are non-self and attaining patience" — an existential state. Bodhiruci's translation makes this explicit: "attaining the patience of non-arising of dharmas"¹¹ (anutpattika-dharma-kṣānti). What prevails is not what one does but what one has become.

More critically, the four words "bodhisattvas do not receive merit." Subhūti is confused — how can bodhisattvas not receive merit? The Buddha's reply is precise: "The merit a bodhisattva creates should not be clung to; therefore it is said they do not receive merit" — not that they do not act, but that they act without clinging. The one with the greatest merit is precisely the one who does not receive merit — this is the Reward Paradox: the reward is real (paratantra), but clinging to the reward invalidates it (parikalpita), and not clinging to the reward paradoxically actualizes the greatest reward (pariniṣpanna).

Seventh comparison (§32) — the final comparison and the self-dismantling device:

"If someone filled immeasurable asaṃkhyeya worlds with the seven treasures and gave them in charity, and a good man or woman who has aroused the bodhisattva-mind upholds even a four-line verse of this sūtra, recites it, and explains it to others — the latter's merit surpasses the former. How should one explain it to others? Without grasping at marks, with suchness unmoving. Why? All conditioned phenomena are like dreams, illusions, bubbles, shadows, like dew and like lightning — one should contemplate them thus."¹²

（「若有人以滿無量阿僧祇世界七寶持用布施，若有善男子、善女人發菩薩心者，持於此經乃至四句偈等，受持、讀誦、為人演說，其福勝彼。云何為人演說？不取於相，如如不動。何以故？一切有為法，如夢、幻、泡、影，如露亦如電，應作如是觀。」）

§32 is the final merit comparison and the final teaching. Three escalations merit attention.

First, the giving-scale reaches its series maximum — "immeasurable asaṃkhyeya worlds." The jewel-giving scale has expanded from §4's "trichiliocosm" through six escalations to "immeasurable × asaṃkhyeya × worlds" — completely beyond the boundaries of mathematics or imagination.

Second, the dharma-offering condition gains a new requirement: "one who has aroused the bodhisattva-mind." This is the first time in the merit-comparison sequence that bodhicitta is explicitly required as a prerequisite. §4–§15's dharma-offering subject is "a good man or woman"; §32 elevates this to "one who has aroused the bodhisattva-mind" — dharma-offering requires not just behavior (upholding and reciting) but aspiration (bodhicitta).

Third, "How should one explain it? Without grasping at marks, with suchness unmoving" — the manner of teaching matters more than the content. Then the six similes close the sūtra: "All conditioned phenomena are like dreams, illusions, bubbles, shadows, like dew and like lightning."

The six similes are the self-dismantling device. "All conditioned phenomena" includes: jewel-giving (conditioned), upholding and reciting (conditioned), the merit comparisons themselves (conditioned), the wholesome aspiration that arises when you read them (conditioned), and even the pedagogical declaration "much merit" (conditioned). All like dreams, illusions, bubbles, shadows. This is not negation of the preceding merit comparisons — P04 has already argued that the raft analogy does not negate the raft — but dimensional elevation: even the reward structure itself is a raft. Use it to cross the river; upon reaching the shore, set it down.

2.2 The Jífēi Structure of Merit

The term "merit" (fúdé 福德) in the Diamond Sūtra is not confined to the comparative framework — it is itself subjected to the jífēi structure. Four key formulations constitute a complete cognitive-praxis cycle.^2131014

The positive jífēi: "This merit is precisely non-merit in nature; therefore the Tathāgata says the merit is great" (§4) — merit has no intrinsic merit-nature; precisely because it lacks intrinsic nature, the Tathāgata can conventionally designate it as "great."

The contrapositive: "If merit had substance, the Tathāgata would not say the merit is great; because merit has no [substance], the Tathāgata says the merit is great"¹³ — if merit possessed intrinsic nature, it could not be described as "great" (since intrinsically existent dharmas neither increase nor decrease). Because it is empty of intrinsic nature, it can be conventionally designated as "great."

The praxis dimension: "The merit a bodhisattva creates should not be clung to; therefore it is said they do not receive merit" (§28) — the jífēi structure shifts from epistemology to praxis. Not merely knowing merit is empty of self-nature but not receiving — acting without attachment.

The precursor form: "If a bodhisattva gives without abiding in marks, the merit is immeasurable" (§4)¹⁴ — non-abiding = the functional precursor of jífēi. The space analogy: "A bodhisattva's merit from markless giving is equally immeasurable" — boundless space = merit without self-nature = immeasurable.

2.3 The Terminological Distinction Between Fúdé and Gōngdé

Throughout the sūtra, fúdé (福德, puṇya, quantifiable merit) appears approximately sixteen times; gōngdé (功德, guṇa, qualitative virtue) approximately seven times. Their distribution reveals a three-phase pattern¹⁵:

The first half (§3–§13) uses exclusively fúdé in the comparative framework — oriented toward quantifiable karmic reward. The transitional segment (§14–§16) sees a dense cluster of gōngdé praising the scripture-upholder — oriented toward non-quantifiable inner quality, as in "accomplishing the foremost and rarest virtue" and "inconceivable, immeasurable, boundless virtue." The second half (§17–§32) returns to fúdé but adds deconstruction — "if merit had substance," "does not receive merit."

The pattern: wherever the comparative framework appears, fúdé; wherever the sūtra directly praises the inner qualities of upholding, gōngdé. The transitional segment (§14–§16) is the only gōngdé-dense passage in the entire sūtra — the turning point from comparative framework to direct praise — and it falls just before the §17 pivot, corroborating P07's dual-layer structural analysis.

B. Treatise Sources

2.4 Vasubandhu — Merit Comparisons in the Doubt-Resolution Framework

Vasubandhu uses "doubt-resolution" (chinna-saṃśaya) as the structural framework for the Diamond Sūtra, with each merit comparison resolving a specific "variant doubt."

For the first comparison at §4, Vasubandhu proposes a cause/fruit bifurcation¹⁶:

"Merit does not advance toward bodhi; these two can advance toward bodhi."

（「福不趣菩提，二能趣菩提。」）

"Merit" (the karmic reward of jewel-giving) does not advance toward great bodhi — it possesses only "accumulative meaning" (like bearing a heavy load) but lacks "progressive meaning" (advancing toward bodhi). "These two" (upholding and expounding) do advance toward great bodhi. Furthermore, Vasubandhu distinguishes revealing-cause (liǎoyīn) from generative-cause (shēngyīn):

"For the real, it is a revealing-cause; for the rest, a generative-cause."

（「於實名了因，亦為餘生因。」）

Upholding and expounding serve as the revealing-cause of the dharmakāya (the dharmakāya is originally complete; upholding reveals it) and the generative-cause of the reward-body (marks and adornments arise through cultivation). Jewel-giving can only serve as a generative-cause (ripening conditioned results) but never as a revealing-cause (it cannot reveal the dharmakāya). This is the root mechanism of dharma-offering's superiority.

For §28's "the bodhisattva does not receive merit," Vasubandhu's analysis is especially precise¹⁷:

"Receiving but not grasping" (shòu bù qǔ) — "receiving" acknowledges that merit exists (conventional truth); "grasping" means acting with attachment (pursuing conditioned fruition). The bodhisattva receives but does not grasp.

（「是福德無報，如是受不取。」）

Vasubandhu further judges jewel-giving as a "cause of defiled afflictions" — "the merit from jewel-giving is a cause of defiled afflictions, because it can sustain the conditions for afflictions"¹⁸ — not that giving itself is defiled, but that giving motivated by a contaminated mind yields results that remain within saṃsāra, providing sustenance for afflictions to continue operating.

2.5 Asaṅga — Dharma-Body, Receiving Without Grasping, Three Kinds of Giving

Asaṅga uses "eighteen abiding-places" as the structural framework for the Diamond Sūtra. The merit comparisons fall within the "merit-mark dharma-body abiding-place"¹⁹:

"How does it show that the verbal dharma-body gives rise to the Tathāgata's merit-mark dharma-body? Even speaking a single four-line verse generates much merit."

（「云何顯示即彼所有言說法身，出生如來福相至得法身？」）

Asaṅga also establishes the mapping of three kinds of giving onto the six pāramitās²⁰: material giving = dāna-pāramitā; fearlessness-giving = śīla + kṣānti pāramitā; dharma-giving = vīrya + dhyāna + prajñā pāramitā. Dharma-giving requires all three of the latter pāramitās — it is not merely the act of "teaching" but the crystallization of vigor, concentration, and wisdom working in concert.

For §28, Asaṅga's interpretation is especially critical²¹:

"The bodhisattva receives merit, does not grasp merit; therefore the bodhisattva obtains merit."

（「菩薩受福德，不取福德，是故菩薩取福德。」）

"Receiving" means acknowledging existence at the conventional level; "grasping" means pursuing with a contaminated mind. The bodhisattva's skillful means is "receiving through expedience without grasping" — operating within conventional truth (receiving) without attachment at the ultimate level (not grasping).

2.6 Kuiji — Five-Tier Calibration and the Dharma-Body Criterion

Kuiji organizes the merit comparisons into a "five-tier calibration"²²: external wealth small (§4) → external wealth large (§8) → internal wealth small (§11) → internal wealth large (§15) → buddha-cause (§16). Post-tier comparisons (§24, §28, §32) are classified as "special-purpose doubt-resolutions"²³ — no longer part of the formal progression but each serving a unique doctrinal purpose.

Kuiji locates the root reason for dharma-offering's superiority in the quality of cause and fruit²⁴:

"Because the cause of upholding is superior, the fruit attains the dharma-body. Because the cause of jewel-giving is inferior, the fruit attains the form-body."

（「持說因勝故，果中獲法身。寶施因劣故，果中獲色身。」）

"The dharma-body is the unconditioned, true nature; the form-body is the conditioned, shadow-like appearance." The ultimate criterion: "The root of superiority lies in nothing other than this gate — the ability to accomplish the pure dharma-body."²⁵

Kuiji further summarizes §28's twofold adornment of the bodhisattva²⁶: "Wisdom is the true body; merit is the response-body" — true bodhi requires both adornments complete. "Merit cultivated with a non-self mind surpasses merit cultivated with a self-referential mind, because the former ultimately adorns the dharma-body without loss."

C. Yogācāra Doctrinal Foundations

2.7 The Mental Factor of Aspiration and Wholesome Aspiration

The Cheng weishi lun defines chanda (aspiration)²⁷:

"What is aspiration? Hoping with regard to a pleasing object is its nature; serving as the basis for vigor is its function."

（「云何為欲？於所樂境，希望為性，勤依為業。」）

Aspiration is one of the five determinative mental factors — it does not accompany every cognitive event but arises under specific conditions. Dharmapāla adopts the broadest interpretation: aspiration arises wherever there is an intention to observe. "Serving as the basis for vigor" — aspiration is the foundation of effort; without it, no action begins.

Wholesome aspiration is the special form aspiration takes when directed toward wholesome dharmas. The Cheng weishi lun states explicitly²⁸:

"Wholesome aspiration can generate right effort. Because it assists in accomplishing all wholesome deeds, the treatise says its function is to serve as the basis for vigor."

（「善欲能發正勤。由彼助成一切善事，故論說此勤依為業。」）

The Cheng weishi lun positions wholesome aspiration as the entry condition for the entire path of cultivation²⁹:

"The accumulation stage: from the point of giving rise to definitive, superior wholesome aspiration aimed at attaining direct realization of the truths, up to all wholesome roots prior to attaining the preparatory stages — this is called the accumulation stage."

（「資糧位，謂從為得諦現觀故，發起決定勝善法欲，乃至未得順決擇分所有善根名資糧位。」）

Without wholesome aspiration, one cannot even enter the accumulation stage. The complete trajectory: wholesome aspiration → accumulation stage → preparatory stage (warmth, summit, patience, supreme worldly dharma) → path of seeing.

The Yogācārabhūmi reveals the generative mechanism of wholesome aspiration³⁰:

"What is wholesome aspiration? Suppose someone hears the true dharma from the Buddha or his disciples and gains pure faith. Having gained pure faith… in the wholesome dharma one gives rise to such aspiration — this is called wholesome aspiration."

（「云何善法欲？謂如有一，或從佛所、或弟子所，聞正法已，獲得淨信……於善法中生如是欲，名善法欲。」）

The causal chain: hearing the true dharma → gaining pure faith → giving rise to wholesome aspiration → practice → liberation. This is precisely the complete causal mechanism by which dharma-offering surpasses material giving in the Diamond Sūtra — dharma-offering provides the initial condition of "hearing the true dharma," which triggers the generative chain of wholesome aspiration in the listener.

More crucially, the Yogācārabhūmi reveals the dual nature of aspiration³¹:

"The root of both cyclic existence and cessation — this is aspiration. Through wholesome aspiration, one can ultimately attain the complete exhaustion of all outflows; therefore this aspiration is called the root of cessation. If through aspiration one wishes to attain the lower classes of human birth, or birth among the Brahmā assembly and similar… therefore this aspiration is called the root of cyclic existence."

（「流轉、還滅根本故者，謂欲。由善法欲，乃至能得諸漏永盡，是故此欲名還滅根本。」）

The same mental factor (aspiration), depending on its direction, yields radically different results. Wholesome aspiration is the root of cessation; worldly aspiration is the root of cyclic existence. The Diamond Sūtra's merit comparisons operate precisely on this redirectional mechanism: using "much merit" as a lure to redirect ordinary aspiration (cyclic direction) toward wholesome aspiration (cessation direction), and finally pointing toward the emptiness of aspiration itself (the six similes).

Wholesome aspiration requires external conditions for its arising. The Yogācārabhūmi lists four generative forces³²: condition-force, cause-force, wisdom-force, and practice-force. "Condition-force" refers to external conditions such as virtuous teachers and hearing the true dharma. Dharma-offering provides precisely this "condition-force" — speaking the dharma for others creates the external conditions for their wholesome aspiration to arise.

2.8 Śrutavāsanā — The Seed Mechanism of Dharma-Offering's Superiority

Why does dharma-offering surpass material giving? The Cheng weishi lun's seed theory provides a precise mechanistic explanation.

Seeds are of two types³³: innate seeds (běnyǒu zhǒng) — "present since beginningless time in the maturation consciousness, existing by the nature of dharma"; and newly acquired seeds (shǐqǐ zhǒng) — "arising through repeated manifestation and perfuming." The theoretical basis for dharma-hearing planting wholesome roots: hearing dharma → perfuming → newly acquired seeds → strengthening innate seeds.

More critically, the special mechanism of śrutavāsanā (hearing-perfuming)³⁴:

"Uncontaminated seeds also arise through perfuming. They are called hearing-perfuming because they are perfumed into arising through hearing the true dharma that flows equally from the pure dharma-realm, and because they constitute the seed-nature of the supramundane mind."

"When hearing the true dharma, one also perfumes the innate uncontaminated seeds, causing them to gradually increase, until they eventually give rise to the supramundane mind."

（「聞正法時亦熏本有無漏種子，令漸增盛，展轉乃至生出世心。」）

The dual function of śrutavāsanā: contaminated hearing-perfuming — "producing superior maturation results, serving as a dominant condition for supramundane dharma"; uncontaminated hearing-perfuming — "perfuming and increasing innate uncontaminated seeds until they eventually generate the supramundane mind." Dharma-offering plants uncontaminated causal seeds; material giving can only produce contaminated maturation results.

The Cheng weishi lun further distinguishes three types of habitual tendencies³⁵: conceptual-designation tendencies (nāma-vāsanā, the direct-cause seeds of all conditioned dharmas), self-grasping tendencies, and existence-link tendencies (upapatti-vāsanā, karmic seeds determining rebirth). Material giving primarily perfumes existence-link tendencies — producing superior maturation results (better rebirth conditions) but still within the three realms. Dharma-offering, in addition to perfuming existence-link tendencies, simultaneously perfumes conceptual-designation tendencies (seeds at the level of conceptual cognition) and uncontaminated seeds — this is the fundamental difference in seed quality.

Mahāyāna practice requires both types of spiritual lineage³⁶: the innately-present lineage and the habitually-acquired lineage. The latter is "the result of hearing the dharma that flows equally from the dharma-realm — established through the perfuming of what is heard." Dharma-hearing is not mere information transfer — it plants the habitually-acquired lineage in the ālaya-vijñāna, an indispensable condition for awakening to Yogācāra.

D. Supplementary Scriptural Evidence

2.9 The Saṃdhinirmocana Sūtra — Stages of Wholesome Aspiration

The Saṃdhinirmocana Sūtra describes the bodhisattva's starting stage using "resolute faith" (adhimukti)³⁷. The developmental trajectory of wholesome aspiration across the bodhisattva path can be traced: chanda (wholesome aspiration) → adhimukti (resolute faith) → adhyāśaya (superior intention) → praṇidhāna (vow) → mahāpraṇidhāna (great vow).

Superior intention purifies specifically the first ground (Joyful Ground)³⁸ — the core of the Joyful Ground is intention, the advanced form of wholesome aspiration.

At the deeper level, the bodhisattva's great vow³⁹:

"Able to know well the bliss of nirvāṇa-abiding, capable of swift realization — yet abandoning the bliss of swift realization; without conditions, without expectation, giving rise to the great vow-mind."

（「能善了知涅槃樂住，堪能速證；而復棄捨速證樂住；無緣無待發大願心。」）

The bodhisattva's wholesome aspiration is not an aspiration directed toward self-benefiting nirvāṇa — it is precisely an aspiration to abandon nirvāṇa. The Diamond Sūtra §32's requirement that one "arouse the bodhisattva-mind" corresponds directly.

2.10 The Yogācārabhūmi — Right-Practice Offering Surpasses Material-Reverence Offering

The Yogācārabhūmi Bodhisattva-bhūmi lists ten kinds of offering⁴⁰, with right-practice offering judged supreme:

"Such offering is the foremost, supreme, most excellent, most wonderful, unsurpassed. Such offering surpasses the complete material-reverence offering by a hundredfold, a thousandfold, up to an upaniṣad-fold."⁴¹

（「如是供養為最第一、最上、最勝、最妙、無上。如是供養，過前所說具一切種財敬供養，百倍、千倍，乃至鄔波尼殺曇倍。」）

Right-practice offering consists of practice itself — cultivating the four immeasurables, the three marks, nirvāṇa-contemplation, non-discriminative wisdom. "Even for the briefest moment, as short as the time it takes to milk a cow" — even an extremely brief period of practice in accordance with dharma surpasses all material offering.

The simplest definition of the two kinds of offering⁴²: "Material offering: through one kind of pleasing object. Dharma offering: through all the rest" — all material gifts constitute material offering; all non-material forms of practice-offering constitute dharma offering.

（「財供養者，謂由一種可愛樂法。法供養者，謂由所餘。」）

III. Core Argument

3.1 The Recursive Structure of Merit Comparisons ✅

The six merit comparisons are not six independent comparisons but a recursive structure — the same proposition is restated, but with each repetition the context has shifted, so the same proposition bears different doctrinal weight.

The recursive pattern: giving-scale increases × dharma-offering threshold decreases × conclusion remains constant.

The giving-scale expands from finite (trichiliocosm) to infinite (immeasurable asaṃkhyeya worlds); the dharma-offering threshold descends from behavior (upholding and reciting) to state (unwavering faith) and then rises again to existential realization (knowing non-self) and aspiration (arousing bodhicitta). This descent-then-ascent is not arbitrary: §15's "unwavering faith" is the lowest threshold — the Buddha here demonstrates that even the most minimal faith already surpasses the most spectacular material giving. Then §28 and §32's thresholds rise because the second-half teaching has moved from the behavioral level to the existential and aspirational levels.

3.2 Different Teaching Functions in the First and Second Halves

S5-P07 revealed the Diamond Sūtra's dual-layer structure with §17 as pivot. The merit comparisons confirm this framework through their qualitative shift between the two halves.

The first-half comparisons (§4, §8, §11, §15) use external scales — quantity of jewels, number of bodies, length of time. The teaching purpose is to guide practitioners at the afflictive-obstruction level: what you consider most valuable (jewels) is worth less than what you consider most trivial (speaking a four-line verse). This is the first cut against the conceptual reification "wealth = merit."

The second-half comparisons (§24, §28, §32) undergo a fundamental shift in comparison-object. §28's victor is no longer "upholding a four-line verse" but "knowing all dharmas are non-self, attaining patience" — from doing to being. §32 requires "arousing the bodhisattva-mind" — from action to aspiration. More critically, §28's "the bodhisattva does not receive merit" deconstructs not merely material giving but the very judgment of "surpassing" itself. If the bodhisattva does not receive merit, does "dharma-offering has more merit" still hold? It does — but only at the conventional-truth pedagogical level. At the ultimate-truth level, even "much merit" is itself a conventional designation.

3.3 "This Merit Is Precisely Non-Merit in Nature" — The Jífēi Structure of Merit ✅

S5-P01 established the jífēi–trisvabhāva mapping framework. Applying this to "merit":

"Merit"                    → Paratantra: merit as karmic fruit, existing dependently
"Precisely non-merit"      → Negating parikalpita: merit is not the fixed entity you think
"Tathāgata says great"    → Pariniṣpanna establishment: knowing merit lacks self-nature, using the name rightly

Kuiji's interpretation is direct: "This merit is separate from the intrinsic nature of merit; therefore it is called great"³ — precisely because merit is free from fixed self-nature can it be described as "great." This echoes P01's Pointing-at-the-Moon mapping: "X" = paratantra (the thing's actual mode of existence), "precisely non-X" = negating parikalpita (the reified entity you imagine does not exist), "is named X" = pariniṣpanna establishment (the name no longer binds).

The jífēi structure of merit has a particularly refined feature: it itself recurses. §4's jífēi ("this merit is precisely non-merit in nature") is epistemological — informing you that merit lacks self-nature. §28's jífēi ("does not receive merit") is praxiological — requiring you to act without attachment. §32's six similes are ontological — all conditioned dharmas (including merit) are like dreams, illusions, bubbles, shadows. Epistemology → praxis → ontology: the jífēi structure completes three levels of progression on the theme of merit.

3.4 The Positive Transformation of Chanda: From Ordinary Desire to Wholesome Aspiration to the Emptiness of Aspiration

The teaching design of the merit comparisons can be decoded through the Yogācāra theory of the chanda mental factor.

Ordinary beings, hearing "much merit," give rise to worldly desire — "I want that much merit too." This itself is not problematic — the Yogācārabhūmi explicitly states that aspiration is "the root of both cyclic existence and cessation"³¹; the key is direction. The Buddha uses "much merit" as a lure to redirect this desire from external objects (jewels) toward internal practice (upholding and reciting). This redirection is the bridge from worldly desire to wholesome aspiration.

The entire pedagogical arc can be summarized as the three-stage transformation of aspiration:

Stage one: from worldly desire to wholesome aspiration. "Much merit" → the reader generates motivation to practice. The Buddha operates on the directional switch of the chanda mental factor — the same mental factor redirected from the root of cyclic existence to the root of cessation.

Stage two: the unfolding of wholesome aspiration along the bodhisattva path. Chanda → adhimukti → adhyāśaya → praṇidhāna → mahāpraṇidhāna. §28's "knowing all dharmas are non-self, attaining patience" and §32's "arousing the bodhisattva-mind" point toward the advanced forms of transformed aspiration.

Stage three: the emptiness of aspiration itself. The six similes close the arc — even wholesome aspiration is conditioned, like dreams and illusions. But this does not negate stages one and two — it is precisely because you have traversed them that you qualify to understand stage three. One cannot skip wholesome aspiration and leap directly to discussing the emptiness of aspiration — that would be "lip-service prajñā" (S5-P02's teaching danger).

3.5 The Yogācāra Mechanism: Seed Quality Difference Between Material and Dharma Giving

Why does dharma-offering surpass material giving? Vasubandhu answers from the fruit perspective: "merit does not advance toward bodhi"¹⁶. Kuiji answers from the cause perspective: "the cause of upholding is superior, hence the fruit attains the dharma-body"²⁴. But neither deploys seed theory for a precise mechanistic explanation.

The Cheng weishi lun's seed theory provides this explanation. The three types of habitual tendencies³⁵ — conceptual-designation, self-grasping, and existence-link — constitute the seed-classification of all conditioned dharmas. Material giving primarily perfumes existence-link tendencies (karmic seeds), producing maturation results within the three realms — better rebirth conditions, more material resources — but still within saṃsāra, still fuel for the cycle. Vasubandhu's judgment that jewel-giving is "a cause of defiled afflictions"¹⁸ is precisely because its maturation results sustain the field in which afflictions operate.

Dharma-offering operates differently. Śrutavāsanā³⁴ acts on two levels simultaneously: contaminated hearing-perfuming produces superior maturation results as a dominant condition; uncontaminated hearing-perfuming "perfumes innate uncontaminated seeds, causing them to gradually increase until they eventually generate the supramundane mind." Dharma-offering plants not merely good conditioned results but uncontaminated liberation-seeds. Material giving can only add points to existence-link tendencies (better saṃsāric conditions); dharma-offering adds points simultaneously to conceptual-designation tendencies and uncontaminated seeds (conceptual transformation + liberation conditions).

This is the "incommensurability" of prajñā and merit — the two do not occupy the same order of magnitude. No matter how much jewel-giving accumulates, it remains within the dimension of contaminated maturation; a single dharma-offering, once it triggers growth in uncontaminated seeds, leaps into another dimension entirely. The sum of all finite numbers is still less than the first infinity — a structural analogy ⚠️ from mathematics, not an equivalence.

3.6 "Upholding, Reciting, and Explaining to Others" = The Bodhisattva-Path Mechanism of Śrutavāsanā

The Diamond Sūtra's standard expression for dharma-offering is "upholding even a four-line verse and explaining it to others." This expression contains two aspects: self-benefit (upholding and reciting) and benefiting others (explaining to others).

The Yogācāra mechanism of self-benefit: upholding and reciting = repeated hearing-perfuming. Each recitation perfumes seeds — "arising through repeated manifestation and perfuming."³³ The Cheng weishi lun states clearly that awakening to Yogācāra requires both the innately-present lineage and the habitually-acquired lineage³⁶ — the latter is accomplished precisely through hearing-perfuming.

The Yogācāra mechanism of benefiting others: explaining to others = providing the condition-force for others' hearing-perfuming. The Yogācārabhūmi lists condition-force as the first of four generative forces for wholesome aspiration³². When you teach dharma for others, you provide the external conditions for their wholesome aspiration to arise. This is not information transfer — it plants the habitually-acquired lineage in their ālaya-vijñāna.

The Avataṃsaka Sūtra lists "observing that sentient beings lack wholesome aspiration" as one of the ten causes for the bodhisattva's great compassion⁴³. The merit comparisons' insistent repetition of "explaining to others" carries pedagogical intent: you must not merely practice yourself; you must provide the condition-force for others' wholesome aspiration — this is the core of the bodhisattva path.

3.7 §28 "The Bodhisattva Does Not Receive Merit" — Climax of the Reward Paradox

§28 is the most tension-laden passage in the entire merit-comparison sequence. It manufactures a paradox: the one with the greatest merit (the bodhisattva who knows all dharmas are non-self) is precisely the one who does not receive merit.

The Reward Paradox works as follows: The Buddha repeatedly says "much merit," guiding practitioners to generate wholesome aspiration. This is the first layer of teaching — using reward to guide behavior. But at §28, the Buddha reveals the second layer: the one who genuinely attains the greatest "merit" is precisely the one who does not care about merit. Vasubandhu's "receiving without grasping"¹⁷ precisely disassembles this paradox: "receiving" = acknowledging merit's existence (conventional truth); "grasping" = acting with attachment (parikalpita). The bodhisattva receives without grasping — rightly using the reward mechanism within conventional truth (paratantra) while not attaching to the reward at the ultimate level (pariniṣpanna).

The Reward Paradox functions as self-calibration. If upon reading §28 you think, "Good, I too shall achieve non-receiving of merit" — this very "wanting to not-receive" is itself parikalpita. P02's kōan-mirror operates here again: your reaction upon reading "does not receive merit" is the self-portrait you hand to the mirror. You want to "imitate" non-receiving — the mirror reveals you remain at the parikalpita level. Whether you receive or not is not something you can decide — it is a cognitive transformation that occurs naturally when practice matures.

3.8 §32 Six Similes = Self-Dismantling Device

§32 closes the sūtra with six similes: "All conditioned phenomena are like dreams, illusions, bubbles, shadows, like dew and like lightning."

The six similes are not merely the sūtra's conclusion — they are the merit-comparison sequence's self-dismantling device. "All conditioned phenomena" includes: jewel-giving, upholding and reciting, the merit comparisons themselves, the wholesome aspiration that arises when you read them, and even "much merit" as a pedagogical declaration. All like dreams and illusions.

But self-dismantling is not negation. P04 argued: the raft analogy does not negate the raft. The six similes' dismantling of the merit comparisons likewise does not negate the preceding six comparisons' pedagogical value — it is dimensional elevation. The six comparisons established "dharma-offering prevails" as a belief and transformed the direction of the chanda mental factor — these teachings were genuinely effective (paratantra). The six similes prevent these effective teachings from themselves becoming new attachments (parikalpita) — reminding you: even "dharma-offering surpasses material giving" is itself a raft. Use it to cross; upon reaching the shore, set it down.

Bodhiruci's translation (T0236a) contains nine similes rather than six — star, eye-floater, lamp, illusion, dew, bubble, dream, lightning, cloud⁴⁴ — each illuminating the conditioned and impermanent nature of all compounded phenomena from a different angle.

3.9 Vernacular Analogy: The Points System in Gamified Learning

Imagine you are using a language-learning app. After each lesson, the screen pops up: "Congratulations! 50 XP earned!" To accumulate more experience points, you open the app every day — the points system is the driving force.

But one day you discover that you can already converse fluently in the new language. Looking back at this point, do those experience points still matter? They helped you build a study habit (right use of paratantra), but what you actually learned — that ability to produce correct sentences without thinking — has nothing to do with the number on the screen.

If at this point someone is still obsessively screenshotting their XP ranking each day, you realize: what they care about is no longer learning but the score itself. The points system has transformed from tool into purpose — carrying the raft on land.

The Diamond Sūtra's merit comparisons are this points system. The Buddha uses "much merit" to drive you to begin practice (downloading the app), uses "upholding a four-line verse and explaining to others" to tell you what to do (completing lessons), then at §32 tells you: experience points are like dreams and illusions — the real learning happens when you forget about the points.

IV. Interdisciplinary Dialogue

4.1 ⚠️ Intrinsic vs. Extrinsic Motivation (Behavioral Psychology)

The distinction between intrinsic motivation and extrinsic motivation in psychology bears structural resemblance to the pedagogical arc of the merit comparisons.

Extrinsic motivation is driven by rewards — doing things to get something. Intrinsic motivation is driven by the activity itself — doing things because the activity has inherent value. Psychological research has identified a paradoxical phenomenon: excessive external rewards can undermine intrinsic motivation — a child who originally drew because they enjoyed it, after receiving prizes, stops drawing when the prizes are withdrawn. This is known as the "overjustification effect."

The Diamond Sūtra's pedagogical arc exhibits a structurally similar process: first using extrinsic motivation ("much merit" = reward promise) to drive behavior, then progressively shifting motivation from extrinsic to intrinsic (§28 "knowing all dharmas are non-self" = no longer needing external reward), and finally dismantling the reward structure itself (§32 six similes = releasing even the framework of reward).

But this analogy has boundaries ⚠️. Psychological motivation theory presupposes a stable "self" as the bearer of motivation. The Diamond Sūtra's merit comparisons ultimately point toward the emptiness of "self" itself — not "transitioning from extrinsic to intrinsic motivation" but "transitioning from self-referential motivation to non-self practice." The psychological framework has explanatory power for stage one (extrinsic → intrinsic) but exceeds its theoretical range at stage three (the emptiness of motivation itself). Noted and not extended.

4.2 ⚠️ Self-Dismantling Mechanisms in Gamification Design

Gamification is a common strategy in modern learning design — using points, badges, and leaderboards to drive non-game behavior. The most sophisticated gamification designs include a self-dismantling mechanism: the best systems gradually fade the points system after the user has established autonomous learning habits, shifting from "learning for points" to "learning for learning's sake."

The Diamond Sūtra's pedagogical arc is structurally similar to a gamification system with a built-in self-dismantling mechanism: six comparisons = six point notifications ("Much merit!"); §32 six similes = system self-destruct ("All conditioned phenomena are like dreams and illusions" = even the points system is part of the game).

Boundaries of this analogy ⚠️: gamification design aims to build "autonomous behavior," presupposing the agent's "autonomy" as the ultimate goal. The Diamond Sūtra's teaching goal is not to build an "autonomous practitioner" — what it ultimately deconstructs is precisely the self-identity "I am a practitioner" (P07, Vasubandhu: "harboring 'I am a bodhisattva' — this itself obstructs the mind"). Gamification stops at "good player"; the Diamond Sūtra's goal is "releasing even the player-identity."

V. Middle Way Corrections

5.1 ❌ The Merit Comparisons Are Not a Ranking of "Dharma-Offering Beats Material Giving"

The most common misreading reduces the merit comparisons to a ranking chart: "Dharma-offering > material giving, so I should do more dharma-offering and less material giving."

This is precisely the conceptual reification the merit comparisons are designed to dismantle. Their pedagogical purpose is not to establish a new ranking but to guide you from attachment to external objects (jewels) toward trust in prajñā. If you read the teaching as "dharma-offering scores higher" and then strategically increase dharma-offering to acquire more merit — you are already carrying the raft on land (P04).

5.2 ❌ "The Bodhisattva Does Not Receive Merit" ≠ "No Need to Do Good"

§28 can easily be read as "good deeds are unnecessary" or "merit is meaningless."

The full context: "The merit a bodhisattva creates should not be clung to; therefore it is said they do not receive merit"¹⁰ — "creates" is the premise: the bodhisattva is still performing good deeds. "Does not receive" means not that they do not act but that they act without attachment. Asaṅga's interpretation is more precise: "receiving through expedience without grasping"²¹.

5.3 ❌ The Merit Comparisons Are Not a Scoreboard (KPI Mentality)

Modern readers are especially prone to reading the merit comparisons through a performance-management lens: "Upholding and reciting = X merit points, explaining to others = Y merit points, accumulate to Z and liberation achieved."

Vasubandhu already negated this reading. Jewel-giving possesses "accumulative meaning" but lacks "progressive meaning"¹⁶ — you can endlessly accumulate merit (like saving money), but accumulation itself does not advance you toward bodhi. Practice is not performance review — you are not accumulating points but transforming your cognitive mode.

5.4 ❌ The Six-Simile Closure Does Not Negate All Preceding Merit Comparisons — It Is Dimensional Elevation

§32's six similes can easily be read as "everything about merit just discussed turns out to be dreams and illusions, so there's no need to care" — leaping from ranking mentality directly to nihilistic mentality.

The six similes are not negation. P04 argued: the raft analogy does not negate the raft. The six similes tell you that even "dharma-offering surpasses material giving" is a raft — paratantra (conventionally established, genuinely useful) but not pariniṣpanna (not an intrinsically fixed truth).

If you are still in the water (still attached to jewels as the ultimate value), the raft (the merit comparisons' teaching) is still the tool you need. The six similes are written for those who have already reached the shore — for those still in the water, they do not yet apply.

VI. Conclusion

6.1 Core Findings

This paper's argument can be summarized in five points.

First, the six merit comparisons throughout the Diamond Sūtra constitute a recursive structure — giving-scale increases, dharma-offering threshold decreases, conclusion remains constant — each repetition cutting a different layer of attachment in a different context. Vasubandhu's "similar in phrasing but different in meaning" is the most precise description of this structure.

Second, the merit comparisons serve different teaching functions in P07's dual-layer structure: the first half uses external scales (quantity of jewels) to guide at the afflictive-obstruction level — cutting the conceptual reification "wealth = merit"; the second half uses internal scales (non-self patience, bodhicitta) to guide at the cognitive-obstruction level — cutting the conceptual reification "dharma-offering scores higher." The merit comparisons are the dashboard measuring the entire sūtra's pedagogical progress.

Third, the merit comparisons operate on the positive transformation of the chanda mental factor — from worldly desire (root of cyclic existence) to wholesome aspiration (root of cessation), and finally toward the emptiness of aspiration itself (six similes). Wholesome aspiration is both the starting point of practice (entry condition for the accumulation stage) and the driving force of the bodhisattva path (the foundation of great vows).

Fourth, the Yogācāra mechanism of dharma-offering's superiority lies in seed quality: material giving primarily perfumes existence-link tendencies (contaminated maturation results); dharma-offering simultaneously perfumes conceptual-designation tendencies and uncontaminated seeds (śrutavāsanā). "When hearing the true dharma, one also perfumes innate uncontaminated seeds, causing them to gradually increase until they eventually generate the supramundane mind" — this is the fundamental reason for prajñā's incommensurability with merit.

Fifth, §28's "the bodhisattva does not receive merit" constitutes the climax of the Reward Paradox; §32's six similes constitute the self-dismantling device. The entire merit-comparison sequence is a raft: use it to cross the river (wholesome aspiration guiding practice); upon reaching the shore, set it down (even the reward structure itself is empty).

6.2 Series Outlook

This paper has extracted from the merit comparisons' pedagogical arc two threads — "wholesome aspiration transformation" and "the Reward Paradox" — leaving open questions for subsequent papers.

S5-P06 will analyze "abiding nowhere, yet giving rise to the mind" (§10) — "giving without abiding in marks" is precisely the heart-practice foundation of the merit comparisons, and "non-abiding" is the daily-life operation of "not receiving merit." §10 appears in the merit-comparison context (§10's "adorning the buddha-land" section immediately follows §8's merit comparison), and their relationship warrants further investigation.

S5-P09 will analyze the §32 six similes — this paper has touched on the similes' function as a self-dismantling device; P09 will unfold the similes' own doctrinal structure. The six similes are not merely the merit comparisons' closure but the entire sūtra's closure — their full significance as the sūtra's self-dismantling device extends beyond the scope of merit comparisons alone.

References

I. Primary Buddhist Sources

• Vajracchedikā Prajñāpāramitā Sūtra (金剛般若波羅蜜經), trans. Kumārajīva, T08, No. 235《金剛般若波羅蜜經》Vajracchedikā-prajñāpāramitāT8, No. 235View on CBETA online reader ↗.
• Vajracchedikā Prajñāpāramitā Sūtra (金剛般若波羅蜜經), trans. Bodhiruci, T08, No. 236《金剛般若波羅蜜經》(菩提流支譯)Vajracchedikā-prajñāpāramitā-sūtra (Bodhiruci tr.)T8, No. 236View on CBETA online reader ↗a.
• Saṃdhinirmocana Sūtra (解深密經), trans. Xuanzang, T16, No. 676《解深密經》Saṃdhinirmocana-sūtraT16, No. 676View on CBETA online reader ↗.
• Avataṃsaka Sūtra (大方廣佛華嚴經), trans. Śikṣānanda, T10, No. 279《大方廣佛華嚴經》(八十華嚴)Avataṃsaka-sūtra (80-fascicle)T10, No. 279View on CBETA online reader ↗.
• Vajracchedikā-prajñāpāramitopadeśa (金剛般若波羅蜜經論), by Vasubandhu, trans. Bodhiruci, T25, No. 1511《金剛般若波羅蜜經論》(世親)Vajracchedikā-prajñāpāramitā-śāstra (Vasubandhu)T25, No. 1511View on CBETA online reader ↗.
• Vajracchedikā-prajñāpāramitā-śāstra (能斷金剛般若波羅蜜多經論), by Asaṅga, trans. Yijing, T25, No. 1510《金剛般若波羅蜜經論》(無著)Vajracchedikā-prajñāpāramitā-śāstra (Asaṅga)T25, No. 1510View on CBETA online reader ↗b.
• Yogācārabhūmi-śāstra (瑜伽師地論), by Maitreya, trans. Xuanzang, T30, No. 1579《瑜伽師地論》Yogācārabhūmi-śāstraT30, No. 1579View on CBETA online reader ↗.
• Vijñaptimātratāsiddhi-śāstra (成唯識論), by Dharmapāla et al., trans. Xuanzang, T31, No. 1585《成唯識論》Vijñaptimātratā-siddhi-śāstraT31, No. 1585View on CBETA online reader ↗.
• Kuiji, Vajracchedikā-prajñāpāramitā-sūtra-praśastā (金剛般若波羅蜜經讚述), T33, No. 1700《金剛般若經贊述》T33, No. 1700View on CBETA online reader ↗.
• Kuiji, Vajracchedikā-prajñāpāramitā-sūtra-praśastā (金剛般若經贊述), T33, No. 1700《金剛般若經贊述》T33, No. 1700View on CBETA online reader ↗.

II. Sūtra & Śāstra Index

Cross-Reference Index

Footnotes

Pointing at the Moon · S5-P05 · The Pedagogical Arc of Merit Comparisons · Version 1.0 · 2026 The true nature of all dharmas has always been thus.

All scriptural citations in this study have been verified against the CBETA Chinese Electronic Tripiṭaka Collection critical editions.

This research paper is released under CC BY-NC-SA 4.0.

Source repository: https://github.com/pointing-at-the-moon/dharma-research