大智度論 天主品之上Dazhidulun — Mahāprajñāpāramitā-upadeśa · The Lord of the Gods, Part 1 of 2
天主品之上：帝釋三問，須菩提承佛意說般若（經＋論）
上一品說到無生的忍，這一品場面忽然開闊：三千大千世界的四天王天、忉利天、夜摩、兜率乃至梵天、淨居天，各與無數百千億諸天一時來會。可是這麼多天人的身光——布施持戒禪定所感的業報光明——放到佛的常光旁邊，竟「百分、千分、萬億分不能及一」，像一段燒殘的燈炷比在閻浮檀金邊，照而不現。天光尚且如此，何況智慧之明？帝釋見了這光，心裡想：佛光能蔽諸天光，佛的智慧之明也一定能破我等的愚闇——於是他向須菩提問了最要緊的一件事：菩薩摩訶薩該怎樣安住在般若波羅蜜中？什麼是般若？該怎樣行？須菩提說：我今承順佛意、承佛神力而說。他先勸未發心的天子當發無上心，入了聲聞正位的人雖不堪任，若肯發心也一同隨喜——上人只該更求上法。接著逐層拆開這個「般若」：觀五眾無常、苦、空、無我，如病、如癰疽、如箭入身，痛、惱、衰、壞、憂、畏、不安，一連十五種過患，利根說四事便入苦諦，鈍根要歷八事、七事才生厭離；再觀五眾寂滅、遠離、不生不滅、不垢不淨，都以無所得故。這裡有一句最關鍵的話：般若相者，不離五眾有涅槃，不離涅槃有五眾，五眾實相就是涅槃。帝釋又追問迴向心與菩提心互不相在、互不可得，怎麼還能迴向？須菩提不從如幻如夢的世諦說，只以第一義諦答：這二心都空，是非心相；畢竟空中無是心非心，若真有二法才可迴向，好比乘車西行、南邊有宿處才迴車趣向——無異則無所迴。心相如常住，不生不滅，所以說不可思議，這不可思議也常不可思議，取不到、量不著。一直在座的佛這時開口，只讚了一句：善哉！善哉！須菩提，你為諸菩薩說般若，安慰了他們的心——你是小乘人，卻能善說這樣深的般若。須菩提答以報恩：我行諸法實相得脫老病死，怎能不念這法的大恩？於是為菩薩說六波羅蜜的示、教、利、喜，四事莊嚴說法。下半品，須菩提正說「住」義：色，色空；菩薩，菩薩空；是色空、菩薩空，不二不別——從五眾、六內外處、十二因緣、六度、十八空、四念處乃至十八不共法、三乘一切種智，每一法都是這一句。論主一語點破：這是以十八空觀，眾生空除眾生就無菩薩相，法空除五眾就無五眾相，二空無別，如栴檀火滅與糞草木火滅，滅中本無兩樣。既說了「應如是住」，接著卻通篇說「不應住」：五眾不應住、常無常苦樂淨不淨我無我空不空寂滅不寂滅離不離不應住、四果無為相與福田不應住、初地乃至十地不應住、初發心的種種大願——五眼、三昧門、陀羅尼門、十力、四無畏、大慈大悲、三十二相八十好——都不應住，乃至八人、須陀洹極七世生、家家、中間入涅槃、斯陀含、阿那含八種、阿羅漢九種的果階，一一不應住，都繫一句「以有所得故」。為什麼？若能於五眾中心離不住，那才是真住；不住不是撥無，是斷法愛、離取相。舍利弗心裡起念：都無所住，究竟住哪裡成佛道？須菩提反問他：諸佛住在哪裡？諸佛心於一切法中無所住，於無所住心中也不住，於非不住心中也不住，畢竟清淨——菩薩就這樣隨佛學：我當住不住法。到最後，會中天子起了疑：夜叉的言語字句還聽得懂，須菩提說的般若卻了不可知。須菩提說：你們本來就不該「知」——我無所論說，乃至不說一字，也沒有聽者。他連用四個譬喻：佛化作化人、化人再化四眾說法，夢中見佛說法，深澗兩人各在一面讚佛法而有二嚮相應，工幻師在四衢道化作佛與四眾說法——每一個都問：這裡面有說者、聽者、知者嗎？天子都答：沒有。名字本自皆空，虛誑無實，有名字才有語言，無名字就無語言；般若不異五眾，五眾實相就是般若，這五眾非深非妙，一切種智也非深非妙。佛得菩提時也無說，寂滅相中實無說者、聽者。所以想住須陀洹果乃至佛道的人，都離不開這個忍；菩薩從初發心起，就該這樣安住在般若中——以無說、無聽故。諸觀滅、語言斷，故不可說、不可聽、不可知，於一切法無受無著，就入涅槃。一場諸天雲集、佛光獨耀的盛會，說到底，只是要人放下這一個「住」字：無所住而住，無所說而說，歸於無受無著。
The previous chapter spoke of the acceptance of non-arising; in this chapter the scene suddenly opens wide: the heavens of the Four Heavenly Kings, the Trāyastriṃśa, the Yāma, the Tuṣita, and on to the Brahmā heavens and the Pure Abodes of the three-thousand great-thousand world, each with countless hundreds of thousands of koṭi of gods, come together to the assembly at one time. Yet the bodily light of all these gods, the karmic light won by giving, morality, and meditation, when set beside the Buddha's constant light, ‘does not reach it by a hundredth, a thousandth, a ten-thousand-koṭith part’, like a burnt-out lamp wick set beside jambūnada gold, shining yet not showing. If even the light of the gods is like this, how much more the light of wisdom? Śakra sees this light and thinks: the Buddha's light can eclipse the light of the gods, so the Buddha's light of wisdom must surely be able to break our folly and darkness. And so he asks Subhūti the one most pressing thing: how should a bodhisattva-mahāsattva abide in prajñāpāramitā? what is prajñā? how should it be practised? Subhūti says: I now speak in accord with the Buddha's intent and by the Buddha's spiritual power. He first urges the gods who have not yet aroused the mind to arouse the unsurpassed mind; those who have entered the fixed position of the śrāvaka are not fit for it, but if they are willing to arouse the mind he rejoices with them too, for a superior person should only seek a superior dharma. Then he takes this ‘prajñā’ apart layer by layer: contemplating the five aggregates as impermanent, painful, empty, and not self, as a sickness, as an abscess, as an arrow lodged in the body, as pain, vexation, decay, ruin, sorrow, fear, and unease, fifteen faults in a row; one of sharp faculties enters the truth of suffering when four are spoken, one of dull faculties must pass through eight, and then the remaining seven, before disgust arises; then contemplating the five aggregates as still and extinguished, separate, non-arising and non-ceasing, undefiled and unpurified, all because there is nothing to be attained. Here stands the most crucial sentence of all: the mark of prajñā is that there is no nirvāṇa apart from the five aggregates and no five aggregates apart from nirvāṇa; the real mark of the five aggregates is itself nirvāṇa. Śakra asks further: the mind of dedication and the mind of awakening are not in each other and cannot be found in each other, so how can one still dedicate? Subhūti does not answer from the worldly truth of illusion and dream but only from the truth of the highest meaning: these two minds are both empty, they are the mark of what is not mind; in ultimate emptiness there is neither this mind nor not-mind; only if there really were two dharmas could there be dedication, as a cart travelling west turns toward a lodging to the south, and where there is no difference there is nothing to turn toward. The mark of mind is as if constantly abiding, non-arising and non-ceasing, and so it is called inconceivable, and this inconceivability is constantly inconceivable, not to be grasped, not to be measured. The Buddha, seated there all along, now speaks, and praises with one sentence only: excellent! excellent! Subhūti, you teach prajñā for the bodhisattvas and comfort their minds; you are a person of the Small Vehicle, yet you can teach so deep a prajñā so well. Subhūti answers with gratitude: by practising the real mark of all dharmas I have been freed from old age, sickness, and death; how could I not remember the great kindness of this dharma? And so for the bodhisattvas he teaches the six perfections by showing, teaching, benefiting, and gladdening, expounding the dharma adorned with these four. In the latter half of the chapter Subhūti properly expounds the meaning of ‘abiding’: form, and the emptiness of form; the bodhisattva, and the emptiness of the bodhisattva; and this emptiness of form and emptiness of the bodhisattva are not two and not different. From the five aggregates, the six inner and outer sense-fields, the twelve links of causes and conditions, the six perfections, the eighteen emptinesses, the four foundations of mindfulness up to the eighteen unshared dharmas, the three vehicles and omniscience of all kinds, every single dharma is this one sentence. The treatise-author lays it bare in a word: this is contemplation by the eighteen emptinesses; the emptiness of beings removes beings and there is no mark of the bodhisattva, the emptiness of dharmas removes the five aggregates and there is no mark of the five aggregates, and the two emptinesses are no different, as when a sandalwood fire goes out and a fire of dung and straw goes out, in the going-out there are from the start no two kinds. Having said ‘one should abide thus’, the text then says throughout ‘one should not abide’: one should not abide in the five aggregates; not in permanent or impermanent, painful or pleasant, pure or impure, self or not self, empty or not empty, still or not still, separate or not separate; not in the unconditioned mark of the four fruits nor in the field of merit; not in the first ground up to the tenth ground; not in the many great vows of the first arousing of the mind, the five eyes, the samādhi gates, the dhāraṇī gates, the ten powers, the four fearlessnesses, great kindness and great compassion, the thirty-two marks and eighty minor marks, none of these; and on to the person of the eight, the srota-āpanna of at most seven births, the one who goes from family to family, the one who enters nirvāṇa in the interval, the sakṛdāgāmin, the eight kinds of anāgāmin, the nine kinds of arhat, every stage of fruit one by one, one should not abide, each tied to the one phrase ‘because there would be something attained’. Why? If the mind can be separate and unabiding within the five aggregates, that is true abiding; not abiding is not a sweeping denial, it is cutting off love of dharma and separating from the grasping of marks. Śāriputra thinks: if there is nothing anywhere to abide in, where after all does one abide to accomplish the Buddha path? Subhūti asks him back: where do the buddhas abide? The mind of the buddhas abides nowhere among all dharmas, does not abide in the mind that abides nowhere, does not abide in the mind that is not non-abiding, ultimately pure; the bodhisattva trains after the Buddha just so: I shall abide in the dharma of non-abiding. At the last the gods in the assembly raise a doubt: the words and phrases of the yakṣas can still be understood, but the prajñā Subhūti teaches cannot be known at all. Subhūti says: you were never meant to ‘know’ it; I expound nothing, I do not speak so much as a single letter, and there is no hearer either. He uses four similes in a row: the Buddha conjures a conjured person, and the conjured person conjures a fourfold assembly and teaches them the dharma; one sees the Buddha teaching the dharma in a dream; two people on either side of a deep ravine each praise the Buddha's dharma and the two echoes answer one another; a skilled conjurer at a crossroads conjures a Buddha and a fourfold assembly teaching the dharma. Of each he asks: is there here a speaker, a hearer, a knower? The gods all answer: there is not. Names are empty from the start, false and deceptive and without reality; where there is a name there is speech, where there is no name there is no speech. Prajñā is not different from the five aggregates; the real mark of the five aggregates is prajñā; these five aggregates are neither deep nor subtle, and omniscience of all kinds is neither deep nor subtle. When the Buddha attained awakening there was likewise no speaking; in the mark of stillness and extinction there is truly no speaker and no hearer. So those who wish to abide in the fruit of srota-āpanna and on to the Buddha path can none of them do without this acceptance; the bodhisattva, from the first arousing of the mind, should abide in prajñā just so, because there is no speaking and no hearing. All contemplations cease and speech is cut off, and so it cannot be spoken, cannot be heard, cannot be known; receiving nothing and clinging to nothing among all dharmas, one enters nirvāṇa. A grand assembly of gods gathered like clouds and the Buddha's light shining alone, when all is said, only asks one to set down this single word ‘abide’: abiding without abiding anywhere, speaking without speaking anything, returning to receiving nothing and clinging to nothing.
卷54 〔T25 0442b07〕
大智度論釋天主品第二十七 聖者龍樹造 後秦龜茲國三藏鳩摩羅什譯 【經】 爾時，三千大千世界諸四天王天等，各與無數百千億諸天，俱來在會中。三千大千世界諸釋提桓因等諸忉利天、須夜魔天王等諸夜魔天、刪兜率陀天王等諸兜率陀天、須涅蜜陀天王等諸妙化天，婆舍跋提天王等諸自在行天，各與無數百千億諸天，俱來在會中。三千大千世界諸梵天王，乃至首陀婆諸天等，各與無數百千億諸天，俱來在會中。是諸四天王天乃至首陀婆諸天業報生身光明，於佛常光，百分、千分、萬億分不能及一，乃至不可以算數譬喻為比。世尊光明最勝、最妙、最上第一，諸天業報光明在佛常光邊不照不現，譬如焦炷比閻浮檀金。 爾時，釋提桓因白大德須菩提：「是三千大千世界諸四天王天乃至首陀婆諸天，一切和合欲聽須菩提說般若波羅蜜義。須菩提！菩薩摩訶薩云何應住般若波羅蜜中？何等是菩薩摩訶薩般若波羅蜜？云何菩薩摩〔T25 0442c〕訶薩應行般若波羅蜜？」 須菩提語釋提桓因言：「憍尸迦！我今當承順佛意、承佛神力，為諸菩薩摩訶薩說般若波羅蜜，如菩薩摩訶薩所應住般若波羅蜜中。諸天子！今未發阿耨多羅三藐三菩提心者，應當發。諸天子！若入聲聞正位，是人不能發阿耨多羅三藐三菩提心。何以故？與生死作障隔故。是人若發阿耨多羅三藐三菩提心者，我亦隨喜。所以者何？上人應更求上法，我終不斷其功德。憍尸迦！何等是般若波羅蜜？菩薩摩訶薩應薩婆若心，念色無常，念色苦，念色空，念色無我，念色如病、如疽癰、瘡，如箭入身，痛、惱、衰、壞，憂、畏、不安，以無所得故；受、想、行、識亦如是。眼、耳、鼻、舌、身、意，地種、水火風空識種，觀無常乃至憂、畏、不安，是亦無所得故。觀色寂滅、離、不生不滅、不垢不淨，受、想、行、識亦如是。觀地種乃至識種寂滅、離、不生不滅、不垢不淨，亦無所得故。 「復次，憍尸迦！菩薩摩訶薩應薩婆若心，觀無明緣諸行乃至老死因緣大苦聚集，亦無所得故；觀無明滅故諸行滅乃至生滅〔T25 0443a〕故老死滅，老死滅故憂悲愁惱大苦聚滅，以無所得故。 「復次，憍尸迦！菩薩摩訶薩應薩婆若心，修四念處，以無所得故；乃至修佛十力、十八不共法，以無所得故。 「復次，憍尸迦！菩薩摩訶薩應薩婆若心，行檀波羅蜜，以無所得故；行尸羅波羅蜜、羼提波羅蜜、毘梨耶波羅蜜、禪波羅蜜，以無所得故。 「復次，憍尸迦！菩薩摩訶薩行般若波羅蜜時，作是觀：『但諸法諸法共相因緣，潤益增長，分別校計，是中無我、無我所。』菩薩迴向心不在阿耨多羅三藐三菩提心中，阿耨多羅三藐三菩提心不在迴向心中；迴向心於阿耨多羅三藐三菩提心中不可得，阿耨多羅三藐三菩提心於迴向心中亦不可得。菩薩雖觀一切法，亦無法可得，是名菩薩摩訶薩般若波羅蜜。」 釋提桓因問大德須菩提：「云何菩薩迴向心不在阿耨多羅三藐三菩提心中？云何阿耨多羅三藐三菩提心不在迴向心中？云何迴向心於阿耨多羅三藐三菩提心中不可得？云何阿耨多羅三藐三菩提心於迴向心中不可得？」 須菩提語釋提桓因言：「憍尸迦！迴向心、阿耨多羅三藐三菩提心，非心；是非心相，非心相中不可迴向。是非心相常非心相，不可思議相常不可思議相，是名菩薩摩訶薩般若波羅蜜。」 爾時，佛讚須菩提言：「善哉！善哉！須菩提！汝為諸菩薩摩訶薩說般若波羅蜜，安慰諸菩薩摩訶薩心。」 須菩提白佛言：「世尊！我應報恩，不應不報恩。過去諸佛及諸弟子為諸菩薩說六波羅蜜，示、教、利、喜；世尊爾時亦在中〔T25 0443b〕學，得阿耨多羅三藐三菩提。我今亦當為諸菩薩說六波羅蜜，示、教、利、喜，令得阿耨多羅三藐三菩提。」 【論】 問曰： 初品中，佛放殊勝光明，諸天大集，此間何以更說？ 答曰： 有人言：「此是後會。」 有人言：「即是前會。」 天以須菩提善能說深般若波羅蜜，諸天歡喜；以是故佛微笑，常光益更發明，諸天光明不復現。如日出時，星、月、燈、燭無復光明；譬如焦炷在閻浮檀金邊。 「四天王天」者，東方名提多羅吒，主乾闥婆及毘舍闍；南方名毘流離，主拘槃茶及薜荔多；西方名毘流波叉，主諸龍王及富多那；北方名鞞沙門，主夜叉及羅剎。「釋提桓因」：「釋迦」，秦言能；「提婆」，秦言天；「因提」，秦言主——合而言之「釋提婆那民」。「須夜磨」，夜摩天王名也，秦言妙善。「刪兜率陀」，兜率陀天王名也，秦言妙足。「須涅蜜陀」，秦言化樂。「婆舍跋提」，秦言他化自在天。 此間一梵天王名尸棄，秦言火。從梵天乃至「首陀婆天」——秦言淨居天。 「業報生身光」者，欲界天以燈燭、明珠等施，及布施、持戒、禪定等清淨故，身常光明，不須日月。色界天行禪離欲，修習火三昧故，身常出妙光，勝於日月及欲界報光明。離欲天，取要言之，是諸天光明皆由心清淨故得。 「佛常光明」者，面各一丈。諸天光明大者，雖無量由旬，於佛光邊蔽而不現。 釋提桓因見佛神力光明，作是念：「佛光明能蔽諸天光，智慧之明亦當能破我等愚闇。」又以佛〔T25 0443c〕命須菩提說般若，是故言：「一切諸天皆大集會，欲聽須菩提說般若義。」 今大福德諸天皆集，欲聞般若義。 「云何是般若波羅蜜」者，是問般若波羅蜜體。 「云何行」者，是問初入方便行。 「云何住」者，問深入究竟住。 須菩提受其語，作是答：若人飢渴，給足飲食，感恩則深；菩薩亦如是，發心求佛道，為是人說般若，則大得利益，感恩亦深，是故說般若。 未發心者當發；已入聖道者則不堪任，以漏盡、無有後生故，如是等因緣，故言「不任」。 問曰： 若是人不任者，何以故言「是人若發心者，我亦隨喜，不障其功德，上人應更求上法」？ 答曰： 須菩提雖是小乘，常習行空故，不著聲聞道；以是故假設言：「若發心，有何咎！」此中須菩提自說二因緣：一者、不障其福德心，二者、上人應更求上法。以是故，上人求阿耨多羅三藐三菩提，無咎；若上人求小法，是可恥。 以中間傍及餘事故更稱問。 「何等是般若波羅蜜」者，所謂應薩婆若心，觀色無常、苦、空、無我，如先說。觀五眾能生諸惱，故言「如病」。有人聞五眾如病，謂為輕微，故言「如癰疽」。有人以癰疽雖難愈，猶或可差，故言「如箭鏑入體，不可得出」。有人以箭鏑在體，雖沈深難拔，良方妙術，猶可令出，故言常「痛」、「惱」。如人著〔T25 0444a〕「衰」，常有不吉；五眾亦如是，若人隨逐，則無安隱。以有「衰」故常懷「憂怖」。是五眾如與師子虎狼共住，常懷「憂畏」。是五眾無常虛誑等過故，常「不安隱」。 問曰： 五眾但有此十五種惡，更有餘事？ 答曰： 略說則十五，廣說則無量無邊；如《雜阿含》中呵五眾有百種罪過。 問曰： 何以常說無常、苦、空、無我，或時說八事——如病、如癰疽等，餘七事少有說處？ 答曰： 人有上、中、下。為利根故說四，即入苦諦。中根者，說四，則不能生厭心；說如病、如癰等八事，則生厭心。鈍根人聞是八事，猶不生厭，更為說痛、惱等七事，然後乃厭。利根易度故，常多說四事；鈍根人時有可度者，故希說餘事。 上八事名為「聖行」，餘七事凡夫、聖人共行。初四入十六聖行故，般若中常說；又說般若，為菩薩利根故，多說聖行。 今問「云何是初行法」故，此中都說。 十二入乃至六種等亦應如是呵。十八界等亦應具說，誦者忘失。所以者何？此十八界等諸法皆是五眾別名故，不應不說。 若行者觀五眾等寂滅、遠離、不生不滅、不垢不淨等，此但為般若波羅蜜故，不合上十五說；十五事，三乘共故。 聲聞人智力薄故，初始不能觀五眾若遠離、若寂滅等，但能觀無常等；入第三諦，乃能觀寂滅。菩薩利根故，初觀五眾，便得寂滅相。 「用無所得」者，常用無所得空慧觀諸法相。 復次，釋提桓因問般若波羅蜜相，不問五眾患厭事，但說般若相。「般若相」者，不離五眾〔T25 0444b〕有涅槃，不離涅槃有五眾；五眾實相即是涅槃。是故初發心鈍根者，先用無常等觀，然後觀五眾寂滅等。 十二因緣亦如是。 復次，修四念處乃至八聖道分，是共法；應薩婆若心，以無所得者，是名般若波羅蜜相。六波羅蜜乃至十八不共法，獨是大乘法。 問曰： 應說般若波羅蜜相行，何以故中間說：「諸法諸法更相因緣潤益增長」？ 答曰： 須菩提上先說「諸法無常等過」，後說「諸法遠離、寂滅、無所得、空」，然後說「諸法雖空，從因緣和合故有」，次說「四念處乃至十八不共法行佛道」。 聽者作是念：「上說遠離、寂滅、空故，知非常；說十二因緣故，知不滅。而無知者、見者，誰修行是諸法得佛？」 是故說菩薩作是念：「諸法空，無我、無眾生；而從因緣故，有四大、六識，是十法各各有力，能生、能起、能有所作——如地能持，水能爛，火能消，風能迴轉，識能分別。是十法各有所作，眾生顛倒故，謂是人作、我作；如皮骨和合故有語聲，或者謂人語。如火燒乾竹林，出大音聲，此中無有作者；又如木人、幻人、化人，雖能動作，無有作者，此十法亦如是。前生法，後生法，因緣——或共生因緣，或相應因緣，或報因緣等，常修常集因緣，令果報增長。如春殖果樹，隨時溉灌，華果繁茂。以智慧分別，知一切諸法無有作者。」 菩薩初發意迴向與佛心作因緣，而初發意迴向時未有佛心，佛心中無初迴向心；雖無，而能作因緣。 問曰： 若初發心迴向時無菩提心者，何所迴向？ 答曰： 〔T25 0444c〕 般若波羅蜜實相中，諸法非常相、非無常相，非有相、非無相，故不應難言：「迴向心已滅無所有，云何與菩提作因？」 若諸法不生不滅、非不生非不滅，云何以不生不滅作難「無菩提心，何所迴向」？ 復次，佛自說菩提相非過去、非未來、非現在，云何難言「未來無菩提故，何所迴向」？ 復次，如〈如品〉中說：「過去世不離未來世，未來世不離過去世，過去世如、未來世如，一如無二。」云何說「菩提心不在迴向心中，迴向心不在菩提心中」？ 但菩薩聞是讚歎佛法，發心愛樂：「我所有功德，皆迴向佛道。」從發心已來，乃至佛道，修是功德，不休不息；用如幻、如夢無所得故，是名「菩薩般若波羅蜜」；能知諸法因緣生果報而無有定相。 釋提桓因難：「何以故迴向心不在菩提心中可得？菩提心不在迴向心中可得？」 須菩提不以世諦如幻、如夢說，但以第一義諦說：「是二心皆空，非心相。」何以故？諸法畢竟空中，無是心非心。如是法，云何可有迴向？若有二法，可有迴向；譬如乘車西行，南有止宿處，故迴車趣向。車與迴向處異故，可有迴向；不得但有車而言迴向，無異故。 「非心相常非心相」者，須菩提意謂：「是心相如常住，不生不滅，不垢不淨。」以非心相故非心，亦無是非心，是故說不可思議；不可思議亦常不可思議，不可籌量思惟取相。 以是因緣故，阿耨多羅三藐三菩提所因心似果，不似則不能生。若初心不淨，後不能發淨心；如鍊鐵不能〔T25 0445a〕成金。 佛以須菩提深入因緣般若波羅蜜中，此是般若波羅蜜名也；以能深得諸法因緣故，即以為名。無有違錯故，於大眾中讚言：「善哉！善哉！汝是小乘人，而能善說深般若波羅蜜！」 「安慰諸菩薩心」者，以般若波羅蜜教諸菩薩，汝莫自以煩惱未盡，未成佛道故而自懈廢！諸法無礙，初心、後心無有異相，但勤精進，則成佛道。 「我應報恩」者，須菩提作是念：「我行此諸法實相，得脫老病死苦，我云何不念是法大恩？」以是故常樂說法。 復次，佛有大悲心，樂說法度眾生；我以佛恩故得道，我亦助佛說法度眾生，是為報恩。 又知今世尊因過去諸佛得成佛道，是故我亦愛敬過去佛；如子愛敬父故，亦愛重於祖。又亦愛敬過去諸菩薩及弟子，能說法教示故，今世尊亦因此得成。須菩提深心信三寶故說：「我知今世尊及法，過去諸佛及弟子恩。」法即是法寶，今佛、過佛即是佛寶，諸菩薩及弟子即是僧寶。 六波羅蜜，如先說。 「示」者，示人好醜、善不善、應行不應行；生死為醜，涅槃安隱為好。分別三乘，分別六波羅蜜，如是等名示。 「教」者，教言汝捨惡行善，是名教。 「利」者，未得善法味故，心則退沒；為說法引導令出：「汝莫於因時求果！汝今雖勤苦，果報出時，大得利益！」令其心利，故名利。 「喜」者，隨其所行而讚歎之，令其心喜；若樂布施者，讚布施則喜，故名喜。 以此四事，莊嚴說法。
The canonical text stands in Chinese only. This edition renders the essence, the plain reading, the exposition and the apparatus into English — never the sūtra itself. Switch to 漢讀本 or 並行雙語 above to read it.
諸天雲集：佛的常光勝過一切業報光明
那時，三千大千世界的諸四天王天等，各與無數百千億諸天，一同來到會中。三千大千世界的諸釋提桓因等諸忉利天、須夜魔天王等諸夜魔天、刪兜率陀天王等諸兜率陀天、須涅蜜陀天王等諸妙化天、婆舍跋提天王等諸自在行天，各與無數百千億諸天，一同來到會中。三千大千世界的諸梵天王，乃至首陀婆諸天等，各與無數百千億諸天，一同來到會中。
這諸四天王天乃至首陀婆諸天業報所生之身的光明，比起佛的常光，百分、千分、萬億分也不及一分，乃至不能用算數譬喻來相比。世尊的光明最勝、最妙、最上第一，諸天業報的光明在佛常光的旁邊，照不出、也顯不現，譬如一截燒焦的燈炷擺在閻浮檀金的旁邊。
帝釋三問：菩薩云何住般若、何等是般若、云何行般若
那時，釋提桓因對大德須菩提說：『這三千大千世界的諸四天王天乃至首陀婆諸天，一切都聚合在此，想聽須菩提說般若波羅蜜的義理。須菩提！菩薩摩訶薩應當如何安住在般若波羅蜜之中？什麼是菩薩摩訶薩的般若波羅蜜？菩薩摩訶薩應當如何修行般若波羅蜜？』
須菩提對釋提桓因說：『憍尸迦！我如今就承順佛的心意、仰仗佛的神力，為諸菩薩摩訶薩宣說般若波羅蜜，也就是菩薩摩訶薩所應安住的般若波羅蜜。諸天子！如今尚未發起阿耨多羅三藐三菩提（無上正等正覺）之心的人，應當發心。諸天子！若已入聲聞的正位，這人便不能再發阿耨多羅三藐三菩提之心。為什麼呢？因為聲聞正位與生死之間已作了障隔的緣故。這人若能發阿耨多羅三藐三菩提之心，我也隨喜。為什麼呢？高上的人應當更求高上之法，我終究不會斷絕他的功德。』
何等是般若：應薩婆若心，觀五眾無常乃至寂滅
『憍尸迦！什麼是般若波羅蜜？菩薩摩訶薩以相應於薩婆若（一切智）的心，念色是無常，念色是苦，念色是空，念色是無我，念色如病、如疽癰、如瘡、如箭射入身，念色是痛、是惱、是衰、是壞、是憂、是畏、是不安穩，這都是以無所得的緣故；受、想、行、識也是如此。眼、耳、鼻、舌、身、意，地種、水火風空識種，觀它們無常乃至憂、畏、不安穩，這也是以無所得的緣故。觀色是寂滅、是離、不生不滅、不垢不淨，受、想、行、識也是如此。觀地種乃至識種是寂滅、是離、不生不滅、不垢不淨，這也是以無所得的緣故。
十二因緣、四念處、六波羅蜜，皆以無所得而修
『再者，憍尸迦！菩薩摩訶薩以相應於薩婆若的心，觀無明為緣而有諸行，乃至以老死為因緣而有大苦聚集，這是以無所得的緣故；觀無明滅則諸行滅，乃至生滅則老死滅，老死滅則憂悲愁惱大苦聚滅，這是以無所得的緣故。
『再者，憍尸迦！菩薩摩訶薩以相應於薩婆若的心，修四念處，以無所得的緣故；乃至修佛的十力、十八不共法，以無所得的緣故。
『再者，憍尸迦！菩薩摩訶薩以相應於薩婆若的心，行檀波羅蜜（布施度），以無所得的緣故；行尸羅波羅蜜（持戒度）、羼提波羅蜜（忍辱度）、毘梨耶波羅蜜（精進度）、禪波羅蜜（禪定度），以無所得的緣故。
諸法但共相因緣：迴向心與菩提心互不相在
『再者，憍尸迦！菩薩摩訶薩修行般若波羅蜜時，作這樣的觀察：只是諸法與諸法共相為因緣，彼此潤益增長，加以分別、比量校計，在這當中並無我、也無我所。菩薩的迴向心不在阿耨多羅三藐三菩提心之中，阿耨多羅三藐三菩提心不在迴向心之中；迴向心在阿耨多羅三藐三菩提心之中不可得，阿耨多羅三藐三菩提心在迴向心之中也不可得。菩薩雖遍觀一切法，卻也沒有一法可得，這就名為菩薩摩訶薩的般若波羅蜜。』
帝釋再問迴向：須菩提答非心相不可迴向
釋提桓因問大德須菩提：『為什麼菩薩的迴向心不在阿耨多羅三藐三菩提心之中？為什麼阿耨多羅三藐三菩提心不在迴向心之中？為什麼迴向心在阿耨多羅三藐三菩提心之中不可得？為什麼阿耨多羅三藐三菩提心在迴向心之中不可得？』
須菩提對釋提桓因說：『憍尸迦！迴向心、阿耨多羅三藐三菩提心，都不是心；這是非心之相，在非心之相中沒有可以迴向的。這非心之相恆常是非心之相，這不可思議之相恆常是不可思議之相——這就名為菩薩摩訶薩的般若波羅蜜。』
佛讚善哉，須菩提白佛我應報恩
那時，佛稱讚須菩提說：『好啊！好啊！須菩提！你為諸菩薩摩訶薩宣說般若波羅蜜，安慰了諸菩薩摩訶薩的心。』
須菩提對佛稟白：『世尊！我應當報恩，不應當不報恩。過去諸佛以及諸弟子，為諸菩薩宣說六波羅蜜，加以示、教、利、喜；世尊當時也在其中修學，得了阿耨多羅三藐三菩提。我如今也應當為諸菩薩宣說六波羅蜜，加以示、教、利、喜，使他們得阿耨多羅三藐三菩提。』
以下是論釋。
為何再集一會：即是前會，佛微笑而常光益發
有人問：初品之中，佛已放出殊勝的光明，諸天已經大集，這裡為什麼又要再說一遍？
論主回答：有人說這是後來的另一會；有人說就是先前那一會——因為須菩提善能宣說甚深的般若波羅蜜，諸天歡喜，佛因此微笑，常光更加發明，諸天的光明便不再顯現。如同太陽出來時，星、月、燈、燭都不再有光；譬如一截燒焦的燈炷擺在閻浮檀金的旁邊。
釋諸天名號：四天王乃至淨居天
所謂「四天王天」：東方的名叫提多羅吒，主管乾闥婆以及毘舍闍；南方的名叫毘流離，主管拘槃茶以及薜荔多；西方的名叫毘流波叉，主管諸龍王以及富多那；北方的名叫鞞沙門，主管夜叉以及羅剎。所謂「釋提桓因」：「釋迦」，用秦地的話說是「能」；「提婆」，用秦地的話說是「天」；「因提」，用秦地的話說是「主」——合起來說就是「釋提婆那民」。「須夜磨」，是夜摩天王的名字，用秦地的話說是「妙善」。「刪兜率陀」，是兜率陀天王的名字，用秦地的話說是「妙足」。「須涅蜜陀」，用秦地的話說是「化樂」。「婆舍跋提」，用秦地的話說是「他化自在天」。這裡有一位梵天王名叫尸棄，用秦地的話說是「火」。從梵天乃至「首陀婆天」——用秦地的話說是「淨居天」。
三種光明：欲界施得、色界禪得、離欲心淨得
所謂「業報生身光」：欲界天以燈燭、明珠等物布施，以及布施、持戒、禪定等清淨的緣故，身上常有光明，不須日月。色界天修禪離欲，修習火三昧的緣故，身上常放妙光，勝過日月以及欲界的業報光明。至於離欲天，扼要地說，這諸天的光明都是由於心清淨才得到的。
所謂「佛常光明」：面向四方各有一丈。諸天光明大的，雖有無量由旬那麼廣，在佛光的旁邊也被遮蔽而不顯現。
帝釋念佛能破愚闇；三問即問體、問行、問住
釋提桓因見到佛神力的光明，作這樣的念頭：『佛的光明能遮蔽諸天的光，佛智慧的明照也應當能破除我等的愚闇。』又因為佛命須菩提說般若，所以帝釋說：『一切諸天都大集會，想聽須菩提宣說般若的義理。』如今大福德的諸天都聚集了，想聽聞般若的義理。
「云何是般若波羅蜜」，這是問般若波羅蜜的體。「云何行」，這是問初入的方便行。「云何住」，這是問深入的究竟住。
報恩之喻：飢渴給食則感恩深
須菩提領受了帝釋的話，作這樣的回答：若有人飢渴，給他飽足的飲食，他感恩就深；菩薩也是這樣，發心求佛道，為這樣的人宣說般若，他就大得利益，感恩也深，所以要說般若。
尚未發心的人應當發心；已入聖道的人則不堪任受了——因為他漏已盡、不再有後世的生，如此等種種因緣，所以說「不任」。
何以言若發亦隨喜：不障福德，上人更求上法
有人問：若這樣的人不堪任受，為什麼又說『這人若發心，我也隨喜，不障礙他的功德，高上的人應當更求高上之法』？
論主回答：須菩提雖是小乘人，卻因常習行空的緣故，不執著於聲聞道；所以他姑且設言：『若發心，又有什麼過咎！』這裡須菩提自己說出兩重因緣：一是不障礙他求福德的心，二是高上的人應當更求高上之法。因此，高上的人求阿耨多羅三藐三菩提，沒有過咎；若高上的人反去求小法，那才是可恥的。
因為中間旁及其餘的事，所以再一次稱述而發問。
五眾十五種觀：從如病到不安穩，隨三根而說
「何等是般若波羅蜜」，所說的就是：以相應於薩婆若的心，觀色是無常、苦、空、無我，如先前所說。觀五眾能生種種煩惱，所以說「如病」。有人聽到五眾如病，以為輕微，所以說「如癰疽」。有人以為癰疽雖難痊癒，卻或許還可以治好，所以說「如箭鏑入體，不可得出」。有人以為箭鏑在身，雖沉陷深難拔，用良方妙術或許還能取出，所以說常「痛」、常「惱」。如人沾上「衰」，常有不吉；五眾也是這樣，人若隨逐它，就沒有安穩。因為有「衰」的緣故，常懷「憂怖」。這五眾如同與師子、虎、狼共住，常懷「憂畏」。這五眾因無常虛誑等過失的緣故，常「不安隱」。
有人問：五眾只有這十五種惡，還是另有其餘的事？論主回答：略說就是十五，廣說則無量無邊；如《雜阿含》中呵責五眾有百種罪過。
有人問：為什麼常說無常、苦、空、無我，有時卻說如病、如癰疽等八事，而其餘七事少有說的地方？論主回答：人有上、中、下三等。為利根的人說四事，就直入苦諦。中根的人，只說四事，便不能生起厭離之心；為他說如病、如癰等八事，就生起厭心。鈍根的人聽了這八事，還不生厭，就再為他說痛、惱等七事，然後才厭。利根的人容易度，所以常多說四事；鈍根的人時而有可度的，所以偶爾才說其餘的事。
上面八事名為「聖行」，其餘七事是凡夫與聖人所共行。最初的四事入於十六聖行，所以般若中常說；又因為說般若是為了利根的菩薩，所以多說聖行。如今問的是「云何是初行法」，所以這裡把它們都說了。
十二入十八界皆五眾別名；聲聞菩薩觀寂滅有深淺
十二入乃至六種等，也應當這樣呵責。十八界等也應當具說，只是誦持的人遺忘失落了。為什麼呢？因為這十八界等諸法都是五眾的別名，所以不應當不說。
若修行的人觀五眾等是寂滅、遠離、不生不滅、不垢不淨等，這只是為了般若波羅蜜的緣故，不合於上面十五種說法；那十五事，是三乘所共的緣故。
聲聞人智慧之力薄弱，起初不能觀五眾如何遠離、如何寂滅等，只能觀無常等；要入第三諦，才能觀寂滅。菩薩利根的緣故，一開始觀五眾，便得寂滅之相。
所謂「用無所得」，是常用無所得的空慧觀察諸法之相。
般若相：五眾實相即涅槃；四念處共法、六度不共法
再者，釋提桓因問的是般若波羅蜜之相，不問五眾的患厭之事，所以只說般若之相。所謂「般若相」：不離開五眾另有涅槃，不離開涅槃另有五眾；五眾的實相就是涅槃。所以初發心的鈍根人，先用無常等觀，然後觀五眾寂滅等。十二因緣也是這樣。
再者，修四念處乃至八聖道分，這是共法；以相應於薩婆若的心、用無所得的緣故，這才名為般若波羅蜜之相。六波羅蜜乃至十八不共法，才是獨屬大乘之法。
諸法但因緣潤益：十法各有力而無作者
有人問：本應宣說般若波羅蜜的相行，為什麼中間卻說「諸法諸法更相因緣潤益增長」？
論主回答：須菩提先前先說「諸法無常等過」，後說「諸法遠離、寂滅、無所得、空」，然後說「諸法雖空，從因緣和合故有」，接著說「四念處乃至十八不共法行佛道」。
聽的人作這樣的念頭：『上面說遠離、寂滅、空，可知諸法非常；說十二因緣，可知諸法不滅。然而既無能知者、能見者，是誰在修行這諸法而得佛？』
所以說菩薩作這樣的念頭：『諸法空，無我、無眾生；然而從因緣的緣故，有四大、六識，這十法各各有力，能生、能起、能有所作——如地能任持，水能浸爛，火能消融，風能迴轉，識能分別。這十法各有所作，眾生顛倒的緣故，說成是某人在作、是我在作；如同皮骨和合的緣故而有語聲，有人便說是人在說話。如同火燒乾竹林，發出巨大的聲響，這當中並沒有作者；又如木頭人、幻化人、變化人，雖能動作，卻沒有作者，這十法也是如此。前生之法、後生之法，彼此為因緣——或是共生因緣，或是相應因緣，或是報因緣等，常修常集這些因緣，使果報增長。如同春天栽種果樹，隨時澆灌，花果就繁茂。以智慧加以分別，便知一切諸法並沒有作者。』
初發意迴向與佛心作因緣：實相中非常非無常
菩薩最初發意的迴向，與佛心互作因緣，然而最初發意迴向時還沒有佛心，佛心之中也沒有最初的迴向心；雖然沒有，卻能互作因緣。
有人問：若最初發心迴向時沒有菩提心，那要迴向到哪裡去？論主回答：在般若波羅蜜的實相之中，諸法非常相、非無常相，非有相、非無相，所以不應當責難說：「迴向心已滅無所有，云何與菩提作因」。若諸法不生不滅、非不生非不滅，怎麼能拿不生不滅來責難「無菩提心，何所迴向」？再者，佛自己說過菩提之相非過去、非未來、非現在，怎麼能責難說「未來無菩提故，何所迴向」？再者，如〈大如品〉中所說：「過去世不離未來世，未來世不離過去世，過去世如、未來世如，一如無二」，怎麼能說「菩提心不在迴向心中，迴向心不在菩提心中」？只是菩薩聽了這讚歎佛法的話，發心愛樂：『我所有的功德，都迴向佛道。』從發心以來，直到佛道，修這功德，不停不息；因為用如幻、如夢無所得的緣故，這就名為「菩薩般若波羅蜜」——能知諸法從因緣生起果報，而沒有一定之相。
帝釋難迴向可得：二心皆空，乘車西行之喻
釋提桓因責難：『為什麼「迴向心不在菩提心中」是可得的？「菩提心不在迴向心中」是可得的？』須菩提不以世諦的如幻、如夢來說，只以第一義諦來說：『這二心都空，都不是心相。』為什麼呢？因為在諸法畢竟空之中，沒有「是心」與「非心」。既是這樣的法，怎麼會有迴向可言？若有兩個法，才可以有迴向；譬如乘車向西行，南邊有止宿之處，所以才迴轉車頭趨向那裡。因為車與所迴向之處是兩處不同，才可以有迴向；不能只有一輛車卻說迴向，因為沒有兩處之異的緣故。
非心相常非心相：不可思議亦常不可思議
所謂「非心相常非心相」：須菩提的意思是說『這心相彷彿常住，不生不滅，不垢不淨』。因為它是非心之相，所以不是心，也沒有那個「非心」，因此說它不可思議；不可思議也恆常不可思議，不可以籌量、思惟、取相。
所因心似果：如鍊鐵成金；佛讚善哉，安慰諸菩薩心
因為這個緣故，阿耨多羅三藐三菩提所依的因心與果相似，不相似就不能生果。若最初的心不淨，後來就不能發起淨心；如同鍊鐵不能鍊成金。
佛因為須菩提深入於因緣般若波羅蜜之中——這正是般若波羅蜜的名稱，因為他能深得諸法的因緣，便以此為名——沒有違失錯謬的緣故，於大眾之中稱讚說：『好啊！好啊！你是小乘人，卻能善說甚深的般若波羅蜜！』
所謂「安慰諸菩薩心」：是用般若波羅蜜教導諸菩薩，你們不要自以為煩惱未盡、尚未成就佛道就自行懈怠廢弛！諸法無所妨礙，初心與後心並無異相，只要勤加精進，就能成就佛道。
我應報恩：四重報恩義，歸於三寶
所謂「我應報恩」：須菩提作這樣的念頭——『我修行這諸法實相，得以解脫老病死苦，我怎能不念這法的大恩？』因此常樂於說法。
再者，佛有大悲心，樂於說法度眾生；我因為佛恩的緣故得道，我也助佛說法度眾生，這就是報恩。
又知道當今的世尊是因為過去諸佛才得以成就佛道，所以我也愛敬過去佛；如同兒子愛敬父親的緣故，也愛重於祖父。又愛敬過去諸菩薩以及弟子，因為他們能說法教示，當今的世尊也是因此才得以成就。須菩提以深心信奉三寶的緣故，說：『我知道當今世尊以及法、過去諸佛以及弟子的恩。』法就是法寶，今佛、過去佛就是佛寶，諸菩薩以及弟子就是僧寶。
示教利喜：四事莊嚴說法
六波羅蜜，如先前所說。
所謂「示」：是為人指示好與醜、善與不善、應行與不應行；生死是醜，涅槃安穩是好。分別三乘，分別六波羅蜜，如此等等名為「示」。
所謂「教」：是教誨說「汝捨惡行善」，這名為「教」。
所謂「利」：因為還未嘗到善法之味，心便退沒；為他說法引導，使他出離——『你不要在因位時就求果！你如今雖然勤苦，果報現前時，會大得利益！』使他的心得利，所以名為「利」。
所謂「喜」：是隨他所行而加以讚歎，使他心生歡喜；若他樂於布施，就讚歎布施，他便歡喜，所以名為「喜」。
以這四事，莊嚴地說法。
The Gods Gather Like Clouds: The Buddha's Constant Light Surpasses All the Light of Karmic Result
At that time, the gods of the Four Heavenly Kings of the three-thousand great-thousand world, each with countless hundreds of thousands of koṭi of gods, came together into the assembly. The Śakra Devānām Indras of the three-thousand great-thousand world and all the Trāyastriṃśa gods, the Suyāma heavenly kings and all the Yāma gods, the Saṃtuṣita heavenly kings and all the Tuṣita gods, the Sunirmita heavenly kings and all the gods of Wondrous Transformation, and the Vaśavartin heavenly kings and all the gods of Sovereign Conduct, each with countless hundreds of thousands of koṭi of gods, came together into the assembly. The Brahmā kings of the three-thousand great-thousand world, and so on up to the Śuddhāvāsa gods, each with countless hundreds of thousands of koṭi of gods, came together into the assembly.
The light of the bodies born of karmic result of these gods, from the gods of the Four Heavenly Kings up to the Śuddhāvāsa gods, compared with the Buddha's constant light, does not reach one part in a hundred, one part in a thousand, or one part in ten thousand koṭi, and so on up to: it cannot be compared by calculation or by simile. The light of the World-Honored One is the most excellent, the most wondrous, the highest and foremost; the light of the gods' karmic result, beside the Buddha's constant light, neither shines nor shows, just as a charred lamp-wick placed beside jambūnada gold.
Śakra's Three Questions: How the Bodhisattva Abides in Prajñā, What Prajñā Is, and How He Practises Prajñā
At that time Śakra Devānām Indra said to the venerable Subhūti: ‘The gods of the Four Heavenly Kings of this three-thousand great-thousand world, up to the Śuddhāvāsa gods, have all gathered here, wishing to hear Subhūti speak the meaning of prajñāpāramitā. Subhūti! How should the bodhisattva-mahāsattva abide in prajñāpāramitā? What is the bodhisattva-mahāsattva's prajñāpāramitā? How should the bodhisattva-mahāsattva practise prajñāpāramitā?’
Subhūti said to Śakra Devānām Indra: ‘Kauśika! I shall now, in accord with the Buddha's intent and relying on the Buddha's spiritual power, expound prajñāpāramitā for the bodhisattva-mahāsattvas, that is, the prajñāpāramitā in which the bodhisattva-mahāsattva should abide. Gods! Those who have not yet aroused the mind of anuttarā samyaksaṃbodhi (unsurpassed, right, and complete awakening) should now arouse the mind. Gods! If one has already entered the right position of the śrāvaka, this person can no longer arouse the mind of anuttarā samyaksaṃbodhi. Why? Because between the right position of the śrāvaka and birth-and-death a barrier has already been made. If this person can arouse the mind of anuttarā samyaksaṃbodhi, I too rejoice. Why? The superior person ought to seek a still more superior dharma; I will never cut off his merit.’
What Prajñā Is: With a Mind Accordant with Sarvajñā, Contemplating the Five Aggregates as Impermanent, up to Quiescent
‘Kauśika! What is prajñāpāramitā? The bodhisattva-mahāsattva, with a mind accordant with sarvajñā (omniscience), is mindful that form is impermanent, mindful that form is suffering, mindful that form is empty, mindful that form is non-self; mindful that form is like a sickness, like a boil and abscess, like a sore, like an arrow shot into the body; mindful that form is pain, is vexation, is decline, is decay, is sorrow, is fear, is not secure—all this because of there being nothing to be attained; feeling, perception, constructions, and consciousness are likewise. The eye, ear, nose, tongue, body, and mind, the earth element, and the water, fire, wind, space, and consciousness elements—he contemplates them as impermanent, up to sorrow, fear, and not secure, and this too because of there being nothing to be attained. He contemplates form as quiescent, as apart, as neither arising nor ceasing, as neither stained nor pure; feeling, perception, constructions, and consciousness are likewise. He contemplates the earth element up to the consciousness element as quiescent, as apart, as neither arising nor ceasing, as neither stained nor pure, and this too because of there being nothing to be attained.
The Twelve Links of Causes and Conditions, the Four Foundations of Mindfulness, and the Six Perfections Are All Cultivated Because of There Being Nothing to Be Attained
‘Furthermore, Kauśika! The bodhisattva-mahāsattva, with a mind accordant with sarvajñā, contemplates that with ignorance as condition there are constructions, up to: with old age and death as cause and condition there is the gathering of the great mass of suffering—this because of there being nothing to be attained; he contemplates that when ignorance ceases, constructions cease, up to: when birth ceases, old age and death cease, and when old age and death cease, sorrow, grief, distress, vexation, and the great mass of suffering cease—this because of there being nothing to be attained.
‘Furthermore, Kauśika! The bodhisattva-mahāsattva, with a mind accordant with sarvajñā, cultivates the four foundations of mindfulness, because of there being nothing to be attained; up to cultivating the Buddha's ten powers and the eighteen unshared dharmas, because of there being nothing to be attained.
‘Furthermore, Kauśika! The bodhisattva-mahāsattva, with a mind accordant with sarvajñā, practises dānapāramitā (the perfection of giving), because of there being nothing to be attained; practises śīlapāramitā (the perfection of morality), kṣāntipāramitā (the perfection of patience), vīryapāramitā (the perfection of vigour), and dhyānapāramitā (the perfection of meditation), because of there being nothing to be attained.
Dharmas Are Only Causes and Conditions for One Another: The Mind of Dedication and the Mind of Awakening Are Not in Each Other
‘Furthermore, Kauśika! When the bodhisattva-mahāsattva practises prajñāpāramitā, he makes this contemplation: it is only that dharmas and dharmas serve together as causes and conditions for one another, moistening and increasing one another, being discriminated, compared, and reckoned; and within this there is no self and no what-belongs-to-self. The bodhisattva's mind of dedication is not within the mind of anuttarā samyaksaṃbodhi, and the mind of anuttarā samyaksaṃbodhi is not within the mind of dedication; the mind of dedication, within the mind of anuttarā samyaksaṃbodhi, is unfindable, and the mind of anuttarā samyaksaṃbodhi, within the mind of dedication, is also unfindable. Although the bodhisattva contemplates all dharmas throughout, there is also not a single dharma to be found—this is called the bodhisattva-mahāsattva's prajñāpāramitā.’
Śakra Asks Again About Dedication: Subhūti Answers That in the Mark of Non-Mind There Is Nothing to Be Dedicated
Śakra Devānām Indra asked the venerable Subhūti: ‘Why is the bodhisattva's mind of dedication not within the mind of anuttarā samyaksaṃbodhi? Why is the mind of anuttarā samyaksaṃbodhi not within the mind of dedication? Why is the mind of dedication, within the mind of anuttarā samyaksaṃbodhi, unfindable? Why is the mind of anuttarā samyaksaṃbodhi, within the mind of dedication, unfindable?’
Subhūti said to Śakra Devānām Indra: ‘Kauśika! The mind of dedication and the mind of anuttarā samyaksaṃbodhi are both not mind; this is the mark of non-mind, and within the mark of non-mind there is nothing that can be dedicated. This mark of non-mind is constantly the mark of non-mind; this inconceivable mark is constantly the inconceivable mark—this is called the bodhisattva-mahāsattva's prajñāpāramitā.’
The Buddha Praises Him, ‘Excellent’, and Subhūti Tells the Buddha, ‘I Should Repay the Kindness’
At that time the Buddha praised Subhūti, saying: ‘Excellent! Excellent! Subhūti! You have expounded prajñāpāramitā for the bodhisattva-mahāsattvas and have comforted the minds of the bodhisattva-mahāsattvas.’
Subhūti addressed the Buddha: ‘World-Honored One! I should repay the kindness; I should not fail to repay the kindness. The Buddhas of the past and their disciples expounded the six perfections for the bodhisattvas, showing, teaching, benefiting, and gladdening them; the World-Honored One at that time also trained among them and attained anuttarā samyaksaṃbodhi. I too should now expound the six perfections for the bodhisattvas, showing, teaching, benefiting, and gladdening them, so that they attain anuttarā samyaksaṃbodhi.’
What follows is the treatise-author's explanation.
Why the Assembly Gathers Again: It Is the Earlier Assembly; the Buddha Smiles and His Constant Light Shines Forth All the More
Someone asks: In the first chapter the Buddha has already emitted a surpassing light, and the gods have already gathered in a great assembly; why is it said here once again?
The treatise-author answers: Some say this is a later, separate assembly; some say it is that very earlier assembly—because Subhūti is skilled at expounding the very profound prajñāpāramitā, the gods rejoice, and the Buddha therefore smiles; his constant light shines forth all the more, and the light of the gods no longer appears. It is like when the sun comes out, and the stars, the moon, lamps, and candles no longer have any light; it is like a charred lamp-wick placed beside jambūnada gold.
Explaining the Names of the Gods: From the Four Heavenly Kings up to the Pure Abodes
As to what is called ‘the gods of the Four Heavenly Kings’: the one in the east is named Dhṛtarāṣṭra, who governs the gandharvas and the piśācas; the one in the south is named Virūḍhaka, who governs the kumbhāṇḍas and the pretas; the one in the west is named Virūpākṣa, who governs the nāga kings and the pūtanas; the one in the north is named Vaiśravaṇa, who governs the yakṣas and the rākṣasas. As to what is called ‘Śakra Devānām Indra’: ‘Śakra’ is rendered in the language of Qin as “able”; ‘deva’ is rendered in the language of Qin as “god”; ‘indra’ is rendered in the language of Qin as “lord”—put together, it is called ‘Śakra devānām’. ‘Suyāma’ is the name of the king of the Yāma gods, rendered in the language of Qin as “Wondrous Goodness”. ‘Saṃtuṣita’ is the name of the king of the Tuṣita gods, rendered in the language of Qin as “Wondrous Contentment”. ‘Sunirmita’ is rendered in the language of Qin as “Delight in Transformation”. ‘Vaśavartin’ is rendered in the language of Qin as “the gods Sovereign over Others' Transformations”. Here there is a Brahmā king named Śikhin, rendered in the language of Qin as “fire”. From the Brahmā heaven up to ‘the Śuddhāvāsa gods’—rendered in the language of Qin as “the Pure Abodes”.
Three Kinds of Light: In the Desire Realm Gained by Giving, in the Form Realm Gained by Meditation, and for Those Free of Desire Gained by Purity of Mind
As to what is called ‘the light of the body born of karmic result’: the gods of the desire realm, because they gave lamps, candles, bright pearls, and such things, and because of the purity of giving, keeping the precepts, meditation, and so on, constantly have light on their bodies and do not need the sun and moon. The gods of the form realm cultivate meditation and are free of desire; because they cultivate the fire samādhi, their bodies constantly emit a wondrous light that surpasses the sun and moon and the light of karmic result of the desire realm. As for the gods free of desire, to put it briefly, the light of these gods is all gained because the mind is pure.
As to what is called ‘the Buddha's constant light’: toward each of the four directions it extends ten feet. Among the lights of the gods, the great ones, though as broad as immeasurable yojanas, beside the Buddha's light are also eclipsed and do not appear.
Śakra Reflects That the Buddha Can Break Through Foolish Darkness; the Three Questions Ask About the Substance, the Practice, and the Abiding
Śakra Devānām Indra, seeing the light of the Buddha's spiritual power, had this thought: ‘The Buddha's light can eclipse the light of the gods; the illuminating brightness of the Buddha's wisdom should likewise be able to break through the foolish darkness of us and our kind.’ Also, because the Buddha had bidden Subhūti to speak of prajñā, Śakra said: ‘All the gods have gathered in a great assembly, wishing to hear Subhūti expound the meaning of prajñā.’ Now the gods of great merit and virtue have all gathered, wishing to hear the meaning of prajñā.
‘What is prajñāpāramitā’—this asks about the substance of prajñāpāramitā. ‘How does he practise’—this asks about the practice of skilful means on first entering. ‘How does he abide’—this asks about the ultimate abiding of deep entry.
The Simile of Repaying Kindness: When the Hungry and Thirsty Are Given Food, Their Gratitude Is Deep
Subhūti received Śakra's words and answered thus: If someone is hungry and thirsty and is given food and drink to satisfy him, his gratitude is deep; the bodhisattva is likewise—he arouses the mind and seeks the Buddha path, and when prajñā is expounded for such a person, he gains great benefit and his gratitude too is deep; therefore prajñā is to be expounded.
Those who have not yet aroused the mind should arouse the mind; those who have already entered the noble path are no longer fit to receive it—because their outflows are already exhausted and there is no further birth in a later life; for these and all kinds of causes and conditions, it is said ‘not fit’.
Why It Is Said ‘If He Arouses It, I Too Rejoice’: He Does Not Obstruct Merit and Virtue, and the Superior Person Seeks a Still More Superior Dharma
Someone asks: If such a person is not fit to receive it, why is it also said, ‘If this person arouses the mind, I too rejoice; I do not obstruct his merit; the superior person ought to seek a still more superior dharma’?
The treatise-author answers: Although Subhūti is a person of the Small Vehicle, because he constantly practises emptiness he does not cling to the śrāvaka path; therefore he speaks by way of supposition for the moment: ‘If he arouses the mind, what fault is there!’ Here Subhūti himself states two causes and conditions: first, he does not obstruct that person's mind that seeks merit and virtue; second, the superior person ought to seek a still more superior dharma. Therefore, for a superior person to seek anuttarā samyaksaṃbodhi is without fault; if a superior person instead seeks a small dharma, that indeed is shameful.
Because in between other matters were touched upon, it is stated once again and the question asked.
Fifteen Contemplations of the Five Aggregates: From ‘Like a Sickness’ to ‘Not Secure’, Spoken According to the Three Kinds of Faculties
‘What is prajñāpāramitā’—what is said is: with a mind accordant with sarvajñā, contemplating form as impermanent, suffering, empty, and non-self, as was said before. Contemplating that the five aggregates can give rise to all kinds of afflictions, it says ‘like a sickness’. Some people, hearing that the five aggregates are like a sickness, take it as slight, and so it says ‘like an abscess and boil’. Some people think that although an abscess and boil is hard to heal, it may perhaps still be cured, and so it says ‘like an arrowhead entering the body, which cannot be drawn out’. Some people think that although an arrowhead in the body is sunk deep and hard to pull out, with a good prescription and a skilled technique it may perhaps still be removed, and so it says constant ‘pain’ and constant ‘vexation’. Just as a person who meets with ‘decline’ constantly has ill fortune, the five aggregates are likewise: if a person follows after them, there is no security. Because there is ‘decline’, one constantly harbours ‘sorrow and dread’. These five aggregates are like living together with lions, tigers, and wolves; one constantly harbours ‘sorrow and fear’. Because of faults such as impermanence and false deception, these five aggregates are constantly ‘not secure’.
Someone asks: Do the five aggregates have only these fifteen kinds of evil, or are there other matters besides? The treatise-author answers: Stated briefly there are fifteen; stated at length they are immeasurable and boundless—as in the Miscellaneous Āgama, where the five aggregates are rebuked for a hundred kinds of fault.
Someone asks: Why are impermanence, suffering, emptiness, and non-self constantly spoken of, while sometimes the eight matters such as ‘like a sickness’ and ‘like an abscess and boil’ are spoken of, and the remaining seven matters are seldom spoken of anywhere? The treatise-author answers: People are of three grades—superior, middling, and inferior. For people of sharp faculties the four matters are spoken, and they enter directly into the truth of suffering. For people of middling faculties, if only the four matters are spoken, they cannot give rise to a mind of revulsion and departure; when the eight matters such as ‘like a sickness’ and ‘like an abscess’ are spoken for them, they give rise to revulsion. People of dull faculties, having heard these eight matters, still do not give rise to revulsion; then the seven matters such as ‘pain’ and ‘vexation’ are further spoken for them, and only then do they feel revulsion. People of sharp faculties are easy to deliver, and so the four matters are constantly and often spoken; among people of dull faculties there are at times some who can be delivered, and so only occasionally are the remaining matters spoken.
The eight matters above are named ‘noble practices’; the remaining seven matters are practised in common by ordinary people and noble ones. The first four matters enter into the sixteen noble practices, and so they are constantly spoken in prajñā; also, because prajñā is spoken for bodhisattvas of sharp faculties, the noble practices are much spoken. Now what is asked is ‘what is the dharma of first practice’, and so here they are all spoken.
The Twelve Sense-Fields and the Eighteen Elements Are All Other Names for the Five Aggregates; Śrāvakas and Bodhisattvas Contemplate Quiescence with Differing Depth
The twelve sense-fields, up to the six elements and so on, should likewise be rebuked in this way. The eighteen elements and so on should also be spoken in full; it is only that those who recited and kept the text forgot and lost them. Why? Because these dharmas such as the eighteen elements are all other names for the five aggregates, and therefore they should not go unspoken.
If the practitioner contemplates the five aggregates and so on as quiescent, far removed, neither arising nor ceasing, neither stained nor pure, and so on, this is only for the sake of prajñāpāramitā, and does not fit with the fifteen kinds of statement above; those fifteen matters are shared by the three vehicles.
The śrāvaka's power of wisdom is weak; at first he cannot contemplate how the five aggregates are far removed, how they are quiescent, and so on, but can only contemplate impermanence and so on; only on entering the third truth can he contemplate quiescence. Because the bodhisattva is of sharp faculties, as soon as he contemplates the five aggregates he gains the mark of quiescence.
As to what is called ‘using nothing to be attained’: it is constantly using the wisdom of emptiness in which there is nothing to be attained to contemplate the marks of dharmas.
The Mark of Prajñā: The Real Mark of the Five Aggregates Is Nirvāṇa; the Four Foundations of Mindfulness Are Shared Dharmas, the Six Perfections Unshared Dharmas
Furthermore, what Śakra Devānām Indra asks about is the mark of prajñāpāramitā, not the matter of the five aggregates as affliction to be wearied of, and so only the mark of prajñā is spoken. As to what is called ‘the mark of prajñā’: there is no nirvāṇa apart from the five aggregates, and there are no five aggregates apart from nirvāṇa; the real mark of the five aggregates is precisely nirvāṇa. Therefore people of dull faculties who have first aroused the mind first use contemplations such as impermanence, and afterwards contemplate the five aggregates as quiescent and so on. The twelve links of causes and conditions are likewise.
Furthermore, cultivating the four foundations of mindfulness up to the limbs of the eightfold noble path—these are shared dharmas; it is because of a mind accordant with sarvajñā and using nothing to be attained that these are then named the mark of prajñāpāramitā. The six perfections up to the eighteen unshared dharmas are the dharmas that belong solely to the Great Vehicle.
Dharmas Are Only Moistened and Benefited by Causes and Conditions: The Ten Dharmas Each Have Power, Yet There Is No Maker
Someone asks: The marks and practice of prajñāpāramitā ought to be expounded; why is it said in between, ‘dharmas and dharmas are in turn causes and conditions for one another, moistening, benefiting, and increasing’?
The treatise-author answers: Subhūti first spoke of ‘the faults of dharmas such as impermanence’, afterwards spoke of ‘dharmas as far removed, quiescent, nothing to be attained, empty’, then spoke of ‘although dharmas are empty, they exist because causes and conditions come together’, and next spoke of ‘practising the Buddha path through the four foundations of mindfulness up to the eighteen unshared dharmas’.
The hearers had this thought: ‘Above, far removal, quiescence, and emptiness are spoken of, from which one can know that dharmas are not permanent; the twelve links of causes and conditions are spoken of, from which one can know that dharmas do not cease. Yet since there is no knower and no seer, who is it that practises these dharmas and attains buddhahood?’
Therefore it says that the bodhisattva has this thought: ‘Dharmas are empty, without self and without beings; yet because of causes and conditions there are the four great elements and the six consciousnesses, and these ten dharmas each have power, able to produce, able to give rise, able to do something—as earth is able to bear and hold, water is able to soak and rot, fire is able to melt, wind is able to turn round, and consciousness is able to discriminate. These ten dharmas each have what they do; because beings are inverted, it is said that such-and-such a person is doing it, that I am doing it—just as, because skin and bone come together, there is the sound of speech, and people say that a person is speaking. It is like fire burning a dry bamboo grove, giving off a great noise, and within this there is no maker; again, like a wooden puppet, a conjured person, or a transformed person, although they can move and act, there is no maker—these ten dharmas are likewise. Dharmas born earlier and dharmas born later are causes and conditions for one another—whether as the co-arising cause-and-condition, the associated cause-and-condition, the retribution cause-and-condition, and so on; constantly cultivating and constantly accumulating these causes and conditions makes the fruit of retribution increase. It is like planting fruit trees in spring and watering them at the proper times, so that the flowers and fruit flourish. Discriminating with wisdom, one knows that all dharmas have no maker.’
The Dedication of the First Arousing of Intent and the Buddha-Mind Act as Causes and Conditions: Within the Real Mark There Is Neither Permanence nor Impermanence
The dedication of the bodhisattva's first arousing of intent and the Buddha-mind act as causes and conditions for each other; yet at the time of the dedication of the first arousing of intent there is not yet the Buddha-mind, and within the Buddha-mind there is also no mind of the first dedication; although neither is there, they can still act as causes and conditions for each other.
Someone asks: If, at the time of dedication when the mind is first aroused, there is no mind of awakening, where is it to be dedicated? The treatise-author answers: Within the real mark of prajñāpāramitā, dharmas have neither the mark of permanence nor the mark of impermanence, neither the mark of existence nor the mark of non-existence; therefore one should not raise the objection: ‘The mind of dedication has already ceased and is without anything existent; how can it act as a cause for awakening?’ If dharmas neither arise nor cease, and are neither not-arising nor not-ceasing, how can one take non-arising and non-ceasing to raise the objection, ‘There is no mind of awakening; to what is it dedicated’? Furthermore, the Buddha himself said that the mark of awakening is not past, not future, and not present; how can one object, ‘Because awakening does not exist in the future, to what is it dedicated’? Furthermore, as is said in the chapter "The Great Suchness": ‘The past world is not apart from the future world, and the future world is not apart from the past world; the suchness of the past world and the suchness of the future world are one suchness without duality’—how can one say, ‘The mind of awakening is not in the mind of dedication, and the mind of dedication is not in the mind of awakening’? It is only that the bodhisattva, hearing these words praising the Buddha-Dharma, arouses the mind and delights in it: ‘All the merit I have, I dedicate to the Buddha path.’ From arousing the mind up to the Buddha path, he cultivates this merit without stopping and without resting; because he uses nothing to be attained, like an illusion, like a dream, this is called ‘the bodhisattva's prajñāpāramitā’—being able to know that dharmas give rise to the fruit of retribution from causes and conditions, and yet have no fixed mark.
Śakra Challenges How Dedication Can Be Findable: Both Minds Are Empty; the Simile of Riding a Cart Westward
Śakra Devānām Indra raised the challenge: ‘Why is it findable that “the mind of dedication is not in the mind of awakening”? Why is it findable that “the mind of awakening is not in the mind of dedication”?’ Subhūti does not speak by way of worldly truth, as like an illusion, like a dream, but speaks only by way of the truth of the highest meaning: ‘These two minds are both empty; neither is the mark of mind.’ Why? Because within the ultimate emptiness of all dharmas there is no ‘this is mind’ and no ‘not mind’. Since the dharma is thus, how could there be any dedication to speak of? Only if there are two dharmas can there be dedication; for example, riding a cart heading west, there is a place to stop and lodge to the south, and so one turns the cart's head round and heads toward it. Because the cart and the place turned toward are two different places, there can be dedication; one cannot speak of dedication with only a single cart, because there is no difference of two places.
The Mark of Non-Mind Is Constantly the Mark of Non-Mind: The Inconceivable Is Also Constantly Inconceivable
As to what is called ‘the mark of non-mind is constantly the mark of non-mind’: Subhūti's meaning is ‘this mark of mind is as if constantly abiding, neither arising nor ceasing, neither stained nor pure’. Because it is the mark of non-mind, it is not mind, and there is also no such ‘non-mind’; therefore it is said to be inconceivable; the inconceivable is also constantly inconceivable, and cannot be measured, thought about, or have its marks grasped.
The Causal Mind Resembles the Fruit: As in Smelting Iron into Gold; the Buddha Praises Him, ‘Excellent’, Comforting the Minds of the Bodhisattvas
For this reason, the causal mind on which anuttarā samyaksaṃbodhi depends resembles the fruit; if it did not resemble it, it could not produce the fruit. If the first mind is not pure, later a pure mind cannot be aroused; just as smelting iron cannot smelt it into gold.
Because Subhūti had entered deeply into the prajñāpāramitā of causes and conditions—this is precisely a name of prajñāpāramitā, because he could deeply attain the causes and conditions of dharmas, it takes this as its name—without deviation or error, the Buddha praised him in the midst of the great assembly, saying: ‘Excellent! Excellent! You are a person of the Small Vehicle, and yet you are able to expound skilfully the very profound prajñāpāramitā!’
As to what is called ‘comforting the minds of the bodhisattvas’: it is teaching the bodhisattvas by means of prajñāpāramitā: do not, thinking that your afflictions are not yet exhausted and that you have not yet accomplished the Buddha path, grow lax and give up of your own accord! Dharmas have nothing that obstructs them; the first mind and the later mind have no different mark; only exert yourselves diligently with vigour, and you will be able to accomplish the Buddha path.
‘I Should Repay the Kindness’: Four Layers of Meaning in Repaying Kindness, Returning to the Three Jewels
As to what is called ‘I should repay the kindness’: Subhūti had this thought—‘I practise the real mark of these dharmas and have been able to be liberated from the suffering of old age, sickness, and death; how could I not remember the great kindness of this Dharma?’ Therefore he always delights in expounding the Dharma.
Furthermore, the Buddha has the mind of great compassion and delights in expounding the Dharma to deliver beings; I have attained the path because of the Buddha's kindness, and I too help the Buddha expound the Dharma to deliver beings—this is repaying the kindness.
Again, he knows that the present World-Honored One was able to accomplish the Buddha path because of the past Buddhas, and so I too love and revere the past Buddhas; just as a son, because he loves and reveres his father, also loves and esteems his grandfather. He also loves and reveres the past bodhisattvas and disciples, because they were able to expound the Dharma and instruct, and it was also through this that the present World-Honored One was able to accomplish it. Because Subhūti with a deep mind believed in and revered the Three Jewels, he said: ‘I know the kindness of the present World-Honored One and of the Dharma, of the past Buddhas and of their disciples.’ The Dharma is the Dharma Jewel; the present Buddha and the past Buddhas are the Buddha Jewel; the bodhisattvas and disciples are the Saṅgha Jewel.
Showing, Teaching, Benefiting, and Gladdening: Four Matters That Adorn the Expounding of the Dharma
The six perfections are as was said before.
As to what is called ‘showing’: it is pointing out to people the fair and the ugly, the wholesome and the unwholesome, what should be practised and what should not be practised; birth-and-death is ugly, and the security of nirvāṇa is fair. Distinguishing the three vehicles, distinguishing the six perfections—such things as these are called ‘showing’.
As to what is called ‘teaching’: it is instructing, saying, “Abandon evil and practise good”; this is called ‘teaching’.
As to what is called ‘benefiting’: because one has not yet tasted the flavour of wholesome dharmas, the mind retreats and sinks; one expounds the Dharma for him and guides him, so that he may get out—‘Do not seek the fruit while still at the stage of the cause! Although you now toil diligently, when the fruit of retribution appears you will gain great benefit!’ Because it makes his mind gain benefit, it is called ‘benefiting’.
As to what is called ‘gladdening’: it is praising him according to what he practises, making his mind give rise to joy; if he delights in giving, one praises giving, and he then rejoices; therefore it is called ‘gladdening’.
With these four matters, one expounds the Dharma with adornment.
天主品之上：帝釋三問，應薩婆若心以無所得住般若
在問什麼
這一單元由釋提桓因（天主憍尸迦）出面發問。他在諸天雲集、佛常光獨勝一切業報光明的場面裡，向須菩提提出三問：「菩薩摩訶薩云何應住般若波羅蜜中？何等是菩薩摩訶薩般若波羅蜜？云何菩薩摩訶薩應行般若波羅蜜？」——一句問「住」，一句問「體」，一句問「行」。這三問看似平列，其實一路逼向同一件事：般若既然是空、是無所得，那麼修般若的人要把心「安」在哪裡？若無處可安，還談什麼住、什麼行？之上要回答的正是這個「住」的難處。須菩提承佛意、仗佛力作答，答案的骨幹只有一句反覆出現的話——「以無所得故」：念色無常是以無所得故，修四念處乃至十八不共法是以無所得故，行六波羅蜜也是以無所得故。住般若不是把心停在某一法上，而是遍觀諸法而「無法可得」。單元後半，帝釋又追問一個更細的關口：菩薩的迴向心與阿耨多羅三藐三菩提心『不二不一、互不相在』，這要怎麼講？須菩提答以『非心相』——連能迴向的心與所趣的果心都不是心相，一路把「無所得」貫徹到發心迴向的根上。末後佛出面讚歎，須菩提說「我應報恩」，以示教利喜四事莊嚴說法作收——說法本身，也是報恩，也是般若的落實。
逐段解明
先看場面與三問。諸天業報所生的光明再大，「於佛常光，百分、千分、萬億分不能及一」，譬如一截焦炷擺在閻浮檀金旁邊——這不是點綴，而是替全單元定調：帝釋見佛光能蔽諸天光，便起一念「智慧之明亦當能破我等愚闇」，於是請須菩提說般若。三問一出，論主立刻把它拆開定位：「云何是般若波羅蜜」是問般若的體，「云何行」是問初入的方便行，「云何住」是問深入的究竟住。體、行、住三事一線貫下，正是之上的間架。
論主釋此段，先料理幾樁名相與敘事的考據。其一，初品已放光大集，此處何以更說一會？論主錄兩家之言——「此是後會」，謂是後來另開之會；「即是前會」，謂即前會，因須菩提善說深般若、諸天歡喜、佛微笑而常光益發，諸天業報之光遂不復現。其二，列四天王之方位所主：東方提多羅吒主乾闥婆及毘舍闍，南方毘流離主拘槃茶及薜荔多，西方毘流波叉主諸龍王及富多那，北方鞞沙門主夜叉及羅剎。其三，逐一以秦言訓諸天之名：「釋迦」訓能、「提婆」訓天、「因提」訓主，合稱釋提婆那民；須夜磨為妙善，刪兜率陀為妙足，須涅蜜陀為化樂，婆舍跋提為他化自在天，尸棄為火，首陀婆天為淨居天。其四，辨業報光明之緣由：欲界天由施、戒、禪等清淨故身常光明不須日月，色界天修火三昧故身出妙光勝於日月，總歸一句「是諸天光明皆由心清淨故得」。其五，佛之常光「面各一丈」，而諸天之光雖廣至無量由旬，於佛光邊亦蔽而不現——這一段考據並非閒筆，正替帝釋『佛光既能蔽諸天光，佛智亦當能破我愚闇』的一念鋪好了底。
再看須菩提怎麼答「住」。他先安頓聽眾：未發心者當發，已入聲聞正位者則『不堪任受』——因為漏盡無後生，與生死作了障隔。但他隨即補一句「是人若發心者，我亦隨喜」，論主替這句話點出兩重因緣：「一者、不障其福德心，二者、上人應更求上法。」須菩提是小乘人而常習行空、不著聲聞道，所以敢為發大心者作隨喜。接著正答「何等是般若」：以相應於薩婆若的心，念色無常、苦、空、無我，再展開為如病、如癰疽、如箭入身，乃至痛、惱、衰、壞、憂、畏、不安穩十五事。論主辨明這十五事隨三根而說——利根說四即入苦諦，中根說八事乃生厭，鈍根更說七事然後厭；而且上面八事名為「聖行」，其餘七事凡夫聖人共行。要緊的是那句收束：觀五眾『寂滅、遠離、不生不滅、不垢不淨』，這才「但為般若波羅蜜故」，超出三乘共說的十五事。聲聞智力薄，初不能觀寂滅，只能觀無常；「菩薩利根故，初觀五眾，便得寂滅相」——同觀五眾，深淺卻不同，這就是般若之所以為般若。
這裡還有幾處論釋，須一併補明。其一，須菩提何以肯應帝釋而說？論主設一飢渴施食之喻——「若人飢渴，給足飲食，感恩則深」；發心求佛道者聞般若則大得利益、感恩亦深，故值得為說。其二，「如病、如癰疽」等十五事，是否五眾之惡盡於此？論主答「略說則十五，廣說則無量無邊」，如《雜阿含》中呵五眾有百種罪過——十五事不過舉其要。其三，經文只列五眾，何以不及十二入、十八界？論主釋：十二入乃至十八界等亦應如是呵責具說，只緣「此十八界等諸法皆是五眾別名故」，誦者偶有忘失，義理上原不待別出。
般若之無所得觀，不止施於五眾。經文同以應薩婆若之心觀十二因緣——順則「觀無明緣諸行乃至老死因緣大苦聚集」，逆則無明滅故諸行滅、乃至老死滅，流轉與還滅兩門皆以無所得而觀；論主於此只綴「十二因緣亦如是」一句，正見十二因緣與五眾、四念處、六度並列，同是那一味無所得觀的所緣，無一法在無所得之外別立。
論主又把「般若相」正面點破：「不離五眾有涅槃，不離涅槃有五眾；五眾實相即是涅槃。」這一句是之上的義眼——般若不是離開五眾去別求一個空，是就五眾當體見其實相即涅槃。所以帝釋問的是般若之相，須菩提便只說般若相，不再糾纏五眾的患厭。四念處乃至八聖道分是「共法」，六波羅蜜乃至十八不共法才「獨是大乘法」，分際也在此劃清。
單元中段插入「諸法諸法更相因緣潤益增長」一節，論主自設問答解釋它為何出現：聽者會起疑——既說諸法遠離、寂滅、空，又說十二因緣，那麼「無知者、見者，誰修行是諸法得佛」？於是須菩提以『十法各有力而無作者』作答：四大六識各有其能，地持、水爛、火消、風迴轉、識分別，「此中無有作者」；如皮骨和合而有語聲、如火燒乾竹林而出大音聲、如木人幻人化人雖動作而無作者。空與因緣兩不相礙——無作者而因緣宛然，果報照樣增長，如春殖果樹隨時溉灌而華果繁茂。這一節是替「無所得」擋掉斷滅的誤讀：無我無作，不等於無因無果。
迴向的難處，論主先以四重論答擋在前頭。有人問：若初發心迴向時尚無菩提心，那要迴向到哪裡去？論主不從正面另立一個迴向之處，反把發問所倚的四個預設一一拆掉。其一，般若實相中「諸法非常相、非無常相，非有相、非無相」，既非常非斷、非有非無，便不應以「迴向心已滅無所有，云何與菩提作因」相難——難者先把迴向心坐實成一個生已即滅之物，實相中本無此定相。其二，諸法既「不生不滅、非不生非不滅」，又何得執定不生不滅來難「無菩提心，何所迴向」？其三，佛自說「菩提相非過去、非未來、非現在」，則不應以「未來無菩提故，何所迴向」為難——菩提不落三世，非等在未來的一個物。其四，引〈大如品〉「過去世不離未來世，未來世不離過去世，過去世如、未來世如，一如無二」，前後既一如無二，便不得說「菩提心不在迴向心中，迴向心不在菩提心中」而以二心相隔為難。四難既遣，方見『無菩提心何所迴向』之疑，根子在把迴向心與菩提心都當作可指實、可隔斷的定相；定相一拆，菩薩「從發心已來，乃至佛道，修是功德，不休不息」宛然不廢，只是用如幻如夢無所得而已。這四重論答，正是下文帝釋再難、須菩提以第一義諦答『二心皆空』的前一階——先於實相中遣去諸定相，才好在第一義中說二心非心。
後半的迴向之辯把「無所得」推到發心的根上。菩薩初發意的迴向與佛心互作因緣，「而初發意迴向時未有佛心，佛心中無初迴向心；雖無，而能作因緣」。帝釋不解：既互不相在、又互不可得，如何迴向？須菩提「不以世諦如幻、如夢說，但以第一義諦說」——「是二心皆空，非心相」，因為「諸法畢竟空中，無是心非心」。他用乘車西行之喻收緊：要有車與所趣兩處之異，才說得上迴向；「不得但有車而言迴向，無異故」。而所謂「非心相常非心相」，是說這心相彷彿常住、不生不滅不垢不淨，「以非心相故非心，亦無是非心，是故說不可思議」。再以鍊鐵成金作結：所因之心與果相似，「不似則不能生」，「若初心不淨，後不能發淨心」——初心與果心雖同是空、同不可得，卻不礙因果相似而能生。
末段佛出面。論主先點出佛讚的緣由與『般若』得名之由：佛正因須菩提「深入因緣般若波羅蜜中」、「能深得諸法因緣故，即以為名」——般若之名，原取其能深達諸法因緣；須菩提所說無有違錯，佛乃於大眾中稱歎。佛讚「善哉！善哉！」，論主特別記下讚辭裡「汝是小乘人，而能善說深般若波羅蜜」一句——讚的正是小乘人能說大乘深法。「安慰諸菩薩心」的意思，是教菩薩莫因煩惱未盡、佛道未成而自懈廢，「初心、後心無有異相，但勤精進，則成佛道」。須菩提答以「我應報恩」，論主開為四重：得脫老病死苦，是念法之大恩；佛大悲樂說法度眾生，我助佛說法，是報佛恩；今世尊因過去諸佛得成，故愛敬過去佛，如子愛敬父而及祖；愛敬過去諸菩薩及弟子，因其能說法教示——收歸三寶：法即法寶，今佛過佛即佛寶，諸菩薩及弟子即僧寶。報恩的方式就是說法，說法即以示教利喜四事莊嚴：示人好醜善惡，教人捨惡行善，於退沒處引導令其心利，隨其所行讚歎令其心喜。全單元由『聽般若』起、由『說般若』結，說法本身就是所說之般若的當場示現。
不要讀錯
不要把「以無所得故」讀成什麼都不修。整段答「住」的話，句句是「修四念處，以無所得故」、「行檀波羅蜜，以無所得故」——無所得是修法時的心相，不是取消所修之法。所拆的是得心，不是行門。
不要把「五眾實相即是涅槃」讀成五眾之外另有涅槃可趣。論主話說得明白：「不離五眾有涅槃，不離涅槃有五眾」。若心裡還存著一個『別處的涅槃』，恰是把五眾與涅槃打成兩橛，正落在般若所破的二見裡。
不要把「諸法無有作者」讀成無因無果。論主緊接著就用四大六識各有其力、如春殖果樹華果繁茂來擋——無作者而因緣潤益、果報增長。無我是無「作者」的我，不是無因緣的斷滅。
不要把迴向心與菩提心「不可得」讀成迴向落空、修福白費。須菩提是「以第一義諦說」二心皆空；在世諦名字上，「從發心已來，乃至佛道，修是功德，不休不息」宛然不廢。畢竟空中無心非心，不礙如幻如夢中發心迴向。
不要把「非心相常非心相」讀成另立一個常住真心。論主隨即補一句「亦無是非心」——連那個「非心」也不許握住，才說「不可思議」。若把它坐實成一個可思可取之相，就不是不可思議了。
修行作用
三問可以隨身自檢：我這一座、這一行，是把心安住般若，還是安在某一個所得上？住般若的驗處只有一條——遍觀諸法而「無法可得」；一旦覺得『我得了個什麼』，就已經不是住般若。
觀五眾時記得深淺之別。無常、苦、空、無我是入門，但不要停在無常上；學那句「初觀五眾，便得寂滅相」——就五眾當體看它寂滅、不生不滅，才是般若的觀，不是三乘共的厭離觀。
修一切善法時，把「以無所得故」貼在每一行的後面。念佛、持戒、布施、修觀，行是照行，心裡守住不取得果之相；如此則善法照修而不生高心，這正是之上答「住」的用法。
發心迴向時，守住「二心皆空」而照樣迴向。日常把功德迴向佛道、迴向眾生，儘管迴向；只在心裡明白能迴向的心與所趣的果都不可得——迴向用得，得心用不得。
把說法、待人也看成報恩與般若的落實。示人好醜、教人捨惡、於退心處引導、隨其所行讚歎——這示教利喜四事，既是報恩，也是把自己所解的般若當場兌現。所解若真是無所得的般若，說法時自然不居功、不著相。
承衍
之上的骨架是一條從「聽」到「說」的完整弧線：帝釋三問立目——住、體、行；須菩提以『應薩婆若心、以無所得』貫穿答「住」，以「五眾實相即是涅槃」點出般若相，以『十法各有力而無作者』擋住斷滅之疑，以迴向二心皆空把無所得推到發心的根上；佛讚而須菩提報恩、以示教利喜作結。全單元的引擎是兩句話：「以無所得故」與「五眾實相即是涅槃」。前一句管住修行的心相——無論念色、修念處、行六度、發心迴向，一律不取所得；後一句管住般若的落點——不向五眾之外別求空，就當體見實相。帝釋一層層的追問，看似要把「住」逼到無處可住，讀到末後才見：正因為無所得，才無處不可住；正因為五眾實相即涅槃，才不必離開眼前諸法去別安一個心。之上留給下一單元的，正是這個『云何住、云何不住』的接口——住的正義既已立在「無所得」上，之下便順勢展開『應如是住、所不應住』的全幅。
The Lord of the Gods, First Part: Śakra’s Three Questions; with the Mind in Accord with Sarvajñā, Abiding in Prajñā by Means of Nothing to Be Attained
What Is Being Asked
In this unit it is Śakra Devānām Indra (the lord of the gods, Kauśika) who comes forward to ask. Amid a scene in which the gods have gathered like clouds and the Buddha’s constant light alone surpasses all the light born of karmic result, he puts three questions to Subhūti: 「菩薩摩訶薩云何應住般若波羅蜜中？何等是菩薩摩訶薩般若波羅蜜？云何菩薩摩訶薩應行般若波羅蜜？」 tr. "How should the bodhisattva-mahāsattva abide in prajñāpāramitā? What is the prajñāpāramitā of the bodhisattva-mahāsattva? How should the bodhisattva-mahāsattva practise prajñāpāramitā?"—one question asks about 「住」 tr. "abiding", one about the 「體」 tr. "substance", one about 「行」 tr. "practice". These three questions look parallel, but in fact they press all the way toward one and the same matter: since prajñā is empty and is nothing to be attained, where is the one who cultivates prajñā to 「安」 tr. "settle" the mind? If there is nowhere to settle it, what talk can there be of abiding, or of practice? What the First Part has to answer is precisely this difficulty of 「住」 tr. "abiding". Subhūti answers in accordance with the Buddha’s intent and relying on the Buddha’s power, and the backbone of his answer is only one sentence that recurs again and again—「以無所得故」 tr. "because of nothing to be attained": to be mindful of form as impermanent is because of nothing to be attained; to cultivate the four foundations of mindfulness, and so on up to the eighteen unshared dharmas, is because of nothing to be attained; to practise the six perfections is also because of nothing to be attained. Abiding in prajñā is not stopping the mind on some one dharma, but contemplating all dharmas throughout and finding that 「無法可得」 tr. "there is no dharma that can be attained". In the second half of the unit Śakra presses on to a finer juncture: the bodhisattva’s mind of dedication and the mind of anuttarā samyaksaṃbodhi, unsurpassed, right, and complete awakening, are ‘neither two nor one, and neither is present in the other’—how is this to be explained? Subhūti answers with ‘not the mark of mind’—even the mind that dedicates and the fruit-mind toward which it tends are not the mark of mind—carrying 「無所得」 tr. "nothing to be attained" all the way through to the root of arousing the mind and dedicating. At the end the Buddha comes forward to praise him, and Subhūti says 「我應報恩」 tr. "I ought to repay the kindness", closing with teaching the Dharma adorned by the four things of showing, teaching, benefiting, and gladdening—teaching the Dharma is itself the repaying of kindness, and is also prajñā made real.
Passage by Passage
First, look at the scene and the three questions. However great the light born of the gods’ karmic result, 「於佛常光，百分、千分、萬億分不能及一」 tr. "beside the Buddha’s constant light, it cannot reach one part in a hundred, one in a thousand, one in ten thousand koṭi", like a charred wick set beside jambūnada gold—this is no ornament, but sets the key for the whole unit: Śakra, seeing that the Buddha’s light can eclipse the light of the gods, gives rise to one thought, 「智慧之明亦當能破我等愚闇」 tr. "the brightness of his wisdom must also be able to break our darkness of folly", and so asks Subhūti to speak on prajñā. As soon as the three questions are out, the treatise-author takes them apart and places each: 「云何是般若波羅蜜」 tr. "what is prajñāpāramitā" asks about the substance of prajñā; 「云何行」 tr. "how to practise" asks about the practice of skilful means at first entry; 「云何住」 tr. "how to abide" asks about the ultimate abiding of deep entry. Substance, practice, and abiding, running down in one line, are exactly the framework of the First Part.
In explaining this passage the treatise-author first settles several points of research into names and narrative. First, the great assembly with its emitted light was already told in the first chapter; why is another gathering spoken of here? The treatise-author records the words of two views—「此是後會」 tr. "this is a later gathering", meaning a separate gathering opened afterwards; and 「即是前會」 tr. "it is the former gathering itself", meaning that it is the former gathering, and that because Subhūti spoke the deep prajñā well, the gods rejoiced and the Buddha smiled, his constant light grew still greater, and so the light of the gods’ karmic result no longer appeared. Second, the directions and charges of the Four Heavenly Kings are listed: Dhṛtarāṣṭra of the east governs the gandharvas and the piśācas; Virūḍhaka of the south governs the kumbhāṇḍas and the pretas; Virūpākṣa of the west governs the nāga kings and the pūtanas; Vaiśravaṇa of the north governs the yakṣas and the rākṣasas. Third, the names of the gods are glossed one by one in the language of Qin: 「釋迦」 tr. "Śakra" is glossed as able, 「提婆」 tr. "deva" as god, 「因提」 tr. "indra" as lord, together called Śakra Devānām Indra; Suyāma is Wondrous Good, Saṃtuṣita is Wondrous Foot, Sunirmita is Delight in Transformation, Vaśavartin is the gods Sovereign over Others’ Transformations, Śikhin is fire, and the Śuddhāvāsa gods are the Pure Abodes. Fourth, the reasons for the light born of karmic result are distinguished: the gods of the desire realm, because of the purity of giving, morality, meditation, and the like, have bodies always luminous and need neither sun nor moon; the gods of the form realm cultivate the fire samādhi, and so their bodies emit a wondrous light surpassing sun and moon; all of it comes back to one sentence, 「是諸天光明皆由心清淨故得」 tr. "the light of all these gods is attained entirely because of purity of mind". Fifth, the Buddha’s constant light extends 「面各一丈」 tr. "one zhang on every side", and though the light of the gods reaches as far as immeasurable yojanas, beside the Buddha’s light it too is eclipsed and does not appear—this piece of research is not an idle stroke of the brush; it lays the ground for Śakra’s one thought, ‘since the Buddha’s light can eclipse the light of the gods, the Buddha’s wisdom must also be able to break my darkness of folly.’
Next, see how Subhūti answers the question of 「住」 tr. "abiding". He first settles his hearers: those who have not yet aroused the mind should arouse it, while those who have already entered the fixed position of the śrāvaka are ‘not fit to receive it’—because their outflows are exhausted and they have no further birth, they are cut off from birth and death by a barrier. But he at once adds a sentence, 「是人若發心者，我亦隨喜」 tr. "if such a person arouses the mind, I too rejoice", and the treatise-author points out two causes for this sentence: 「一者、不障其福德心，二者、上人應更求上法。」 tr. "First, so as not to obstruct their mind of merit; second, a superior person ought to seek a still higher dharma." Subhūti is a man of the Small Vehicle, yet he constantly practises emptiness and does not cling to the śrāvaka path, and so he dares to rejoice for those who arouse the great mind. Then he answers directly 「何等是般若」 tr. "what prajñā is": with a mind in accord with sarvajñā, omniscience, one is mindful of form as impermanent, suffering, empty, and without self, and this unfolds further into like a sickness, like a boil, like an arrow entering the body, and so on to pain, vexation, decline, decay, sorrow, fear, and unease—fifteen things. The treatise-author makes clear that these fifteen things are spoken according to three kinds of faculties—for those of sharp faculties four are spoken and they at once enter the truth of suffering; for those of middling faculties eight things are spoken and only then does weariness arise; for those of dull faculties seven more things are spoken before they grow weary; moreover the first eight things are called 「聖行」 tr. "noble practices", while the remaining seven are practised in common by ordinary people and noble ones. What matters is the closing sentence: contemplating the five aggregates as ‘quiescent, apart, neither arising nor ceasing, neither stained nor pure’—only this is 「但為般若波羅蜜故」 tr. "solely for the sake of prajñāpāramitā", going beyond the fifteen things spoken in common to the three vehicles. The śrāvaka’s power of knowledge is thin; at first he cannot contemplate quiescent cessation and can only contemplate impermanence; 「菩薩利根故，初觀五眾，便得寂滅相」 tr. "because the bodhisattva has sharp faculties, when he first contemplates the five aggregates he at once attains the mark of quiescent cessation"—contemplating the same five aggregates, the depth nevertheless differs, and this is why prajñā is prajñā.
There are a few further explanations of the treatise here that should be made clear together. First, why is Subhūti willing to respond to Śakra and speak? The treatise-author sets up a simile of giving food to the hungry and thirsty—「若人飢渴，給足飲食，感恩則深」 tr. "if a person is hungry and thirsty and is given enough to eat and drink, his gratitude is deep"; those who have aroused the mind to seek the Buddha path gain great benefit on hearing prajñā and their gratitude too is deep, and so they are worth speaking to. Second, are the faults of the five aggregates exhausted by the fifteen things such as 「如病、如癰疽」 tr. "like a sickness, like a boil"? The treatise-author answers, 「略說則十五，廣說則無量無邊」 tr. "spoken in brief they are fifteen; spoken at length they are measureless and boundless", just as in the Miscellaneous Āgama the five aggregates are rebuked for a hundred kinds of fault—the fifteen things merely raise the essentials. Third, the sūtra text lists only the five aggregates; why does it not reach the twelve sense-fields and the eighteen elements? The treatise-author explains: the twelve sense-fields, on to the eighteen elements and the rest, should likewise be rebuked and spoken of in full; it is only 「此十八界等諸法皆是五眾別名故」 tr. "because these dharmas, the eighteen elements and the rest, are all other names for the five aggregates" that the reciters occasionally let them slip, and in meaning they never needed to be set out separately.
Prajñā’s contemplation of nothing to be attained is not applied only to the five aggregates. The sūtra text, with the same mind in accord with sarvajñā, contemplates the twelve causes and conditions—in forward order, 「觀無明緣諸行乃至老死因緣大苦聚集」 tr. "one contemplates that ignorance conditions constructions, and so on up to old age and death: through causes and conditions the great mass of suffering gathers"; in reverse order, because ignorance ceases constructions cease, and so on to the ceasing of old age and death; both gates, the flowing-on and its turning back to cessation, are contemplated by way of nothing to be attained. Here the treatise-author adds only one sentence, 「十二因緣亦如是」 tr. "the twelve causes and conditions are likewise", which shows plainly that the twelve causes and conditions stand alongside the five aggregates, the four foundations of mindfulness, and the six perfections as objects of the same single flavour of the contemplation of nothing to be attained: not one dharma is set up apart, outside nothing to be attained.
The treatise-author further lays bare the 「般若相」 tr. "mark of prajñā" head-on: 「不離五眾有涅槃，不離涅槃有五眾；五眾實相即是涅槃。」 tr. "Nirvāṇa is not apart from the five aggregates, and the five aggregates are not apart from nirvāṇa; the real mark of the five aggregates is precisely nirvāṇa." This sentence is the eye of the meaning of the First Part—prajñā is not leaving the five aggregates to seek an emptiness elsewhere, but seeing, in the five aggregates just as they are, that their real mark is precisely nirvāṇa. So, since what Śakra asked about was the mark of prajñā, Subhūti speaks only of the mark of prajñā and no longer entangles himself in the ills of the five aggregates and weariness with them. The four foundations of mindfulness up to the limbs of the eightfold noble path are 「共法」 tr. "shared dharmas", while the six perfections up to the eighteen unshared dharmas are 「獨是大乘法」 tr. "alone the dharmas of the Great Vehicle"; the boundary is drawn clearly here as well.
In the middle of the unit a passage is inserted, 「諸法諸法更相因緣潤益增長」 tr. "dharmas and dharmas are in turn causes and conditions for one another, moistening, benefiting, and making them grow", and the treatise-author sets up his own question and answer to explain why it appears: the hearers will raise a doubt—since it has been said that all dharmas are apart, quiescent, and empty, and yet the twelve causes and conditions are also spoken of, then 「無知者、見者，誰修行是諸法得佛」 tr. "if there is no knower and no seer, who cultivates these dharmas and attains buddhahood"? So Subhūti answers with ‘the ten dharmas each have their own power, yet there is no maker’: the four great elements and the six consciousnesses each have their own capacity—earth holds, water softens, fire digests, wind turns and moves, consciousness discriminates—and 「此中無有作者」 tr. "within this there is no maker"; as when skin and bone come together there is the sound of speech, as when fire burns a dry bamboo grove a great sound comes forth, as a wooden man, an illusory person, or a conjured person moves and acts and yet there is no maker. Emptiness and causes and conditions do not obstruct each other—there is no maker, and yet causes and conditions are plainly present, and karmic results grow just the same, as fruit trees planted in spring and watered in due season flourish in flower and fruit. This passage fends off, on behalf of 「無所得」 tr. "nothing to be attained", the misreading of annihilation: no self and no maker is not the same as no cause and no effect.
As to the difficulty of dedication, the treatise-author first sets a fourfold reply in the way. Someone asks: if at the time of dedication, when the mind is first aroused, there is as yet no mind of awakening, then where is it to be dedicated? The treatise-author does not set up, head-on, some other place to which one dedicates; instead he takes apart, one by one, the four presuppositions on which the question leans. First, in the real mark of prajñā, 「諸法非常相、非無常相，非有相、非無相」 tr. "all dharmas have neither the mark of permanence nor the mark of impermanence, neither the mark of existence nor the mark of non-existence"; since they are neither permanent nor annihilated, neither existent nor non-existent, one should not object with 「迴向心已滅無所有，云何與菩提作因」 tr. "the mind of dedication has already ceased and is without anything existent; how can it act as a cause for awakening?"—the objector has first fixed the mind of dedication as a thing that ceases as soon as it arises, whereas in the real mark there is fundamentally no such fixed mark. Second, since all dharmas are 「不生不滅、非不生非不滅」 tr. "neither arising nor ceasing, and neither not arising nor not ceasing", how can one cling to a fixed non-arising and non-ceasing and object, 「無菩提心，何所迴向」 tr. "there is no mind of awakening; to what does one dedicate?" Third, the Buddha himself says that 「菩提相非過去、非未來、非現在」 tr. "the mark of awakening is neither past, nor future, nor present", so one should not object with 「未來無菩提故，何所迴向」 tr. "because in the future there is no awakening, to what does one dedicate?"—awakening does not fall into the three times; it is not a thing waiting in the future. Fourth, the chapter "The Great Suchness" is cited: 「過去世不離未來世，未來世不離過去世，過去世如、未來世如，一如無二」 tr. "the past is not apart from the future, the future is not apart from the past; the suchness of the past and the suchness of the future are one suchness without duality"; since before and after are one suchness without duality, one may not say 「菩提心不在迴向心中，迴向心不在菩提心中」 tr. "the mind of awakening is not in the mind of dedication, and the mind of dedication is not in the mind of awakening" and so object that the two minds are cut off from each other. Only when the four objections have been dispelled does one see that the doubt ‘there is no mind of awakening; to what does one dedicate?’ is rooted in treating both the mind of dedication and the mind of awakening as fixed marks that can be pointed to as real and cut off from each other; once the fixed marks are taken apart, the bodhisattva who 「從發心已來，乃至佛道，修是功德，不休不息」 tr. "from the arousing of the mind onward, all the way to the Buddha path, cultivates these merits without resting and without ceasing" is plainly present and not set aside—it is only that he uses them as an illusion, as a dream, with nothing to be attained. This fourfold reply is precisely the step before what follows, where Śakra objects again and Subhūti answers by the truth of the highest meaning that ‘both minds are empty’—first the fixed marks are dispelled within the real mark, and only then can it well be said, in the highest meaning, that the two minds are not mind.
The debate on dedication in the second half pushes 「無所得」 tr. "nothing to be attained" to the root of arousing the mind. The dedication of the bodhisattva’s first arousing of intent and the Buddha-mind act as causes and conditions for each other, 「而初發意迴向時未有佛心，佛心中無初迴向心；雖無，而能作因緣」 tr. "and yet at the time of dedication with the first arousing of intent there is as yet no Buddha-mind, and in the Buddha-mind there is no mind of the first dedication; though they are absent, they are able to act as causes and conditions". Śakra does not understand: since neither is present in the other, and neither can be attained by the other, how can there be dedication? Subhūti 「不以世諦如幻、如夢說，但以第一義諦說」 tr. "does not speak by worldly truth, as an illusion, as a dream, but speaks only by the truth of the highest meaning"—「是二心皆空，非心相」 tr. "these two minds are both empty and are not the mark of mind", because 「諸法畢竟空中，無是心非心」 tr. "within the ultimate emptiness of all dharmas there is neither this mind nor not-mind". He draws it tight with the simile of riding a carriage westward: only when there is the difference of two places, the carriage and where it is heading, can one speak of turning toward; 「不得但有車而言迴向，無異故」 tr. "one cannot speak of turning toward when there is only the carriage, because there is no difference". And what is called 「非心相常非心相」 tr. "the mark of not-mind is constantly the mark of not-mind" means that this mark of mind seems to abide constantly, neither arising nor ceasing, neither stained nor pure—「以非心相故非心，亦無是非心，是故說不可思議」 tr. "because it is the mark of not-mind it is not mind, and there is also no ‘this is not-mind’; therefore it is called inconceivable". It is concluded further with refining iron into gold: the mind that is the cause resembles the fruit—「不似則不能生」 tr. "if it did not resemble it, it could not produce it"; 「若初心不淨，後不能發淨心」 tr. "if the first mind is not pure, later one cannot arouse a pure mind"—though the first mind and the fruit-mind are alike empty and alike unfindable, this does not obstruct cause and effect from resembling each other so that the one can produce the other.
In the last section the Buddha comes forward. The treatise-author first points out the reason for the Buddha’s praise and how ‘prajñā’ gets its name: it is precisely because Subhūti has 「深入因緣般若波羅蜜中」 tr. "deeply entered the prajñāpāramitā of causes and conditions", 「能深得諸法因緣故，即以為名」 tr. "because he is able to attain deeply the causes and conditions of all dharmas, it is taken as the name"—the name prajñā was originally taken from its ability to penetrate deeply the causes and conditions of all dharmas; what Subhūti said had no deviation or error, and so the Buddha extolled him before the great assembly. The Buddha praises, 「善哉！善哉！」 tr. "Excellent! Excellent!", and the treatise-author specially records the sentence in the words of praise, 「汝是小乘人，而能善說深般若波羅蜜」 tr. "you are a man of the Small Vehicle, and yet you are able to speak the deep prajñāpāramitā well"—what is praised is exactly that a man of the Small Vehicle can speak the deep dharma of the Great Vehicle. The meaning of 「安慰諸菩薩心」 tr. "consoling the minds of the bodhisattvas" is to teach bodhisattvas not to grow slack and give up because their afflictions are not yet exhausted and the Buddha path is not yet accomplished: 「初心、後心無有異相，但勤精進，則成佛道」 tr. "the first mind and the later mind have no different marks; only be diligent and vigorous, and the Buddha path will be accomplished". Subhūti answers, 「我應報恩」 tr. "I ought to repay the kindness", and the treatise-author opens this into four layers: to have attained liberation from the suffering of old age, sickness, and death is the great kindness of the Dharma, to be remembered; the Buddha, out of great compassion, delights in teaching the Dharma to liberate beings, and my helping the Buddha teach the Dharma is repaying the Buddha’s kindness; the present World-Honored One attained through the buddhas of the past, and so one loves and reveres the buddhas of the past, as a son who loves and reveres his father extends it to his grandfather; one loves and reveres the bodhisattvas and disciples of the past, because they were able to teach the Dharma and instruct—gathered back into the Three Jewels: the Dharma is the Dharma Jewel, the present Buddha and the past buddhas are the Buddha Jewel, and the bodhisattvas and disciples are the Saṅgha Jewel. The way of repaying kindness is teaching the Dharma, and teaching the Dharma is adorned by the four things of showing, teaching, benefiting, and gladdening: showing people good and ugly, wholesome and evil; teaching people to abandon evil and practise good; at the place where they fall back, guiding them so that their minds are sharpened; praising them according to what they practise so that their minds are gladdened. The whole unit begins from ‘hearing prajñā’ and ends with ‘speaking prajñā’; the teaching of the Dharma itself is the on-the-spot manifestation of the very prajñā that is taught.
Do Not Misread
Do not read 「以無所得故」 tr. "because of nothing to be attained" as cultivating nothing at all. In the whole passage that answers 「住」 tr. "abiding", sentence after sentence says 「修四念處，以無所得故」 tr. "cultivating the four foundations of mindfulness, because of nothing to be attained", 「行檀波羅蜜，以無所得故」 tr. "practising dānapāramitā, because of nothing to be attained"—nothing to be attained is the mark of the mind while cultivating dharmas, not the cancelling of the dharmas cultivated. What is taken apart is the mind of attaining, not the gates of practice.
Do not read 「五眾實相即是涅槃」 tr. "the real mark of the five aggregates is precisely nirvāṇa" as though there were a nirvāṇa outside the five aggregates to head toward. The treatise-author says it plainly: 「不離五眾有涅槃，不離涅槃有五眾」 tr. "nirvāṇa is not apart from the five aggregates, and the five aggregates are not apart from nirvāṇa". If the mind still keeps ‘a nirvāṇa somewhere else’, that is exactly splitting the five aggregates and nirvāṇa into two pieces, and falling right into the two views that prajñā breaks.
Do not read 「諸法無有作者」 tr. "all dharmas have no maker" as no cause and no effect. The treatise-author immediately fends this off with the four great elements and six consciousnesses each having their own power, and with fruit trees planted in spring flourishing in flower and fruit—there is no maker, and yet causes and conditions moisten and benefit and karmic results grow. No self is the absence of a self that is a 「作者」 tr. "maker", not an annihilation without causes and conditions.
Do not read the 「不可得」 tr. "unfindability" of the mind of dedication and the mind of awakening as dedication coming to nothing and the cultivation of merit being wasted. Subhūti speaks of the two minds as both empty 「以第一義諦說」 tr. "speaking by the truth of the highest meaning"; at the level of the names of worldly truth, 「從發心已來，乃至佛道，修是功德，不休不息」 tr. "from the arousing of the mind onward, all the way to the Buddha path, one cultivates these merits without resting and without ceasing" remains plainly present and is not set aside. That within ultimate emptiness there is neither mind nor not-mind does not obstruct arousing the mind and dedicating within what is like an illusion, like a dream.
Do not read 「非心相常非心相」 tr. "the mark of not-mind is constantly the mark of not-mind" as setting up another true mind that abides constantly. The treatise-author at once adds the sentence 「亦無是非心」 tr. "there is also no ‘this is not-mind’"—not even that 「非心」 tr. "not-mind" may be grasped, and only then is it said to be 「不可思議」 tr. "inconceivable". If it is fixed as a mark that can be thought and grasped, it is no longer inconceivable.
Bearing on Practice
The three questions can be carried about as a self-check: in this sitting, in this practice, is my mind settled in abiding in prajñā, or settled on some one thing attained? There is only one test of abiding in prajñā—contemplating all dharmas throughout and finding that 「無法可得」 tr. "there is no dharma that can be attained"; the moment one feels ‘I have attained something’, one is already not abiding in prajñā.
When contemplating the five aggregates, remember the difference between shallow and deep. Impermanence, suffering, emptiness, and non-self are the entrance, but do not stop at impermanence; learn that sentence, 「初觀五眾，便得寂滅相」 tr. "when he first contemplates the five aggregates he at once attains the mark of quiescent cessation"—seeing the five aggregates, just as they are, as quiescent, neither arising nor ceasing: only this is the contemplation of prajñā, not the contemplation of weary renunciation shared by the three vehicles.
When cultivating all wholesome dharmas, attach 「以無所得故」 tr. "because of nothing to be attained" to the end of every practice. Recollecting the Buddha, keeping the precepts, giving, cultivating contemplation—the practice is practised all the same, while in the mind one keeps from taking the mark of attaining a fruit; in this way wholesome dharmas are cultivated all the same and no haughty mind arises, and this is exactly how the First Part’s answer to 「住」 tr. "abiding" is put to use.
When arousing the mind and dedicating, keep to 「二心皆空」 tr. "the two minds are both empty" and dedicate all the same. In daily life, dedicate merit to the Buddha path and to beings, by all means dedicate; only understand in the mind that neither the mind that dedicates nor the fruit toward which it tends can be attained—dedication can be used; the mind of attaining cannot.
Regard teaching the Dharma and dealing with people, too, as repaying kindness and as prajñā made real. Showing people good and ugly, teaching people to abandon evil, guiding them where their minds fall back, praising them according to what they practise—these four things of showing, teaching, benefiting, and gladdening are at once the repaying of kindness and the making good, on the spot, of the prajñā one has understood. If what one has understood is truly the prajñā of nothing to be attained, then in teaching the Dharma one naturally claims no merit and does not cling to marks.
Further Resonances
The skeleton of the First Part is one complete arc from 「聽」 tr. "hearing" to 「說」 tr. "speaking": Śakra’s three questions establish the headings—abiding, substance, practice; Subhūti, with ‘a mind in accord with sarvajñā, by means of nothing to be attained’, runs through his answer on 「住」 tr. "abiding", points out the mark of prajñā with 「五眾實相即是涅槃」 tr. "the real mark of the five aggregates is precisely nirvāṇa", blocks the doubt of annihilation with ‘the ten dharmas each have their own power, yet there is no maker’, and pushes nothing to be attained to the root of arousing the mind with the two minds of dedication being both empty; the Buddha praises, and Subhūti repays the kindness, concluding with showing, teaching, benefiting, and gladdening. The engine of the whole unit is two sentences: 「以無所得故」 tr. "because of nothing to be attained" and 「五眾實相即是涅槃」 tr. "the real mark of the five aggregates is precisely nirvāṇa". The first sentence governs the mark of the mind in practice—whether being mindful of form, cultivating the foundations of mindfulness, practising the six perfections, or arousing the mind and dedicating, one never takes anything attained; the second governs where prajñā lands—not seeking emptiness outside the five aggregates, but seeing the real mark in them just as they are. Śakra’s questions, pressing layer after layer, seem meant to drive 「住」 tr. "abiding" to where there is nowhere to abide, but only on reading to the end does one see: precisely because there is 「無所得」 tr. "nothing to be attained", there is nowhere one cannot abide; precisely because the real mark of the five aggregates is precisely nirvāṇa, there is no need to leave the dharmas before one’s eyes to settle a mind somewhere else. What the First Part leaves to the next unit is exactly this juncture of ‘how to abide, and how not to abide’—the right meaning of abiding having been established on nothing to be attained, the Last Part goes on to unfold, in full, ‘how one should abide, and where one should not abide’.