大智度論 校量舍利品之下Dazhidulun — Mahāprajñāpāramitā-upadeśa · Weighing the Relics, Part 2 of 2
校量舍利品之下：有為無為二法相、六度以般若為明導、書經施人福勝、內外二緣得大果報（經＋論）
這一品，佛出了一道天秤上的難題。佛問帝釋：把滿閻浮提的佛舍利放作一分，把一卷寫下來的般若波羅蜜放作另一分，這兩分之中，你取哪一分？帝釋答得毫不遲疑：我寧取般若經卷。不是不敬舍利——他明說，供養芥子那麼小一粒舍利，功德都無量無邊；只是他看得更深一層：舍利之所以尊貴，是因為它「從般若波羅蜜中生、般若波羅蜜薰修故」才得人供養。舍利是果，般若是那薰它、成它的本。取般若，就是取舍利之所從生。這一秤、一問、一取，就是全品的骨——「校量舍利」四字，秤的正是舍利與般若孰為本末。
舍利弗卻在旁邊插進一句尖銳的質問：般若不可取啊——它無色、無形、無對，只是一相，所謂無相，你怎麼「取」得？帝釋答得漂亮：正因為「般若波羅蜜不行二法故，不二法相是般若波羅蜜」。他取的不是一件有相之物，取的是那個不落兩邊、無二無分別的般若；為了利益初發心的人，才順著世諦說一個「取」字。佛聽了連聲讚歎，又替他往深裡推一句：法性與般若無二無別，實際、不可思議性與般若也無二無別。般若既是無相無貌、無言無說，受持它的人心一深入，就「不見怖畏相」——沒有一個相可怖畏。帝釋還打了個親切的比方：他常在善法堂上坐，就算他不在座，諸天子也向他的空座作禮而去；同樣，般若經卷所在之處，十方的天龍夜叉都來禮拜供養——因為見般若就與見佛無異，「般若波羅蜜與佛無二無別故」。於是佛把秤越加越重，從滿閻浮提，加到三千大千世界，再加到恒河沙數世界滿中舍利；帝釋三周校量，一味只取般若。
為什麼舍利依般若才尊？論主用一個最實在的比方講透：像一個負債的人，親近了國王、在國王左右供事，債主反過來恭敬供養他——王喻般若，負債人喻舍利。舍利本是宿世業因所成，該還的債本躲不過；正因般若薰修，那些宿命的對報、飢渴寒熱都近不了它，反倒得諸天世人供養。接著論主把般若的功德鋪成全品最華麗的一段——如意寶珠喻。世間那顆無價摩尼寶，無心無識，卻能除四百四病、破黑闇、除熱除冷、解蛇毒、令濁水澄清；般若也如是，能除八萬四千病，根本是貪、瞋、癡、等分四病，以不淨觀、慈悲心、觀因緣一一對治。論主更逐重細辨：珠只能治肉眼，般若能治慧眼；珠治了肉眼，後病還會復發，般若治慧眼，畢竟清淨——珠的功德止於一隅，般若的功德通於究竟。一顆無記色法的寶珠尚且如此，何況般若是無上智慧、諸佛之母、諸法寶中的第一寶。
品的下半，帝釋換了個問法：什麼是有為法相、什麼是無為法相？佛答：內空乃至十八不共法中的智慧，是有為諸法相；無生無滅、無垢無淨、無增無減的「諸法自性」，是無為諸法相——而這兩種法相，都在般若波羅蜜裡攝盡，有為是修行的所行處，無為是所依止處。順著這個「攝一切法」，佛講出般若統攝六度的要義：菩薩行布施、持戒乃至觀諸法時，都以「般若波羅蜜為作明導」，才能各各具足成波羅蜜。就像閻浮提上的樹，葉、華、果、色各各不同，可它們的蔭卻無差別；諸波羅蜜入了般若、到了薩婆若，也一味無差別。論主還補兩個警策的喻：鹽是眾味之主，可愚人聽說便純食鹽，反而失味致患——只行般若而不與五度和合，也一樣墮邪見、不能增進善法，雖說眾行和合、般若為主，卻不可獨行；又像阿那婆達多池的四大河，一入大海就失了本名、合為一味，布施等離開般若則種種差別，入了般若則一相無別。
全品收在一個看似冒犯、實則最深的抉擇上。帝釋問：自己書寫供養般若經卷，與把經卷施給別人令他修學，哪一個福多？佛不直答，反用舍利設問：自己供養舍利，與分一粒芥子大的舍利施人令供養，哪個福多？帝釋答：分與他人令供養的福更多——論主點破：因為「以無吾我、慈悲心與故」。獨自讀誦或許還帶著我心，功德便小；以經卷施人、為人廣解其義，是替人作成佛的因緣，無吾我，功德就大。有人再追一句：福德既在心，佛何必碎身如芥子令人供養？答得極穩：信淨的心從兩個因緣生——內有正憶念，外有良福田；好穀子還要落在良田裡，才收得多；心雖好，也必得因著舍利，然後成大果報。最後佛自證般若為勝：三世聖人都從這裡學成聖道，連佛自己也是以此法得成無上聖、如今還回頭師仰此法。一場舍利與般若的天秤，秤到最後，秤出的是一句話——「般若是菩薩根本因緣，菩薩是諸佛根本因緣，諸佛是一切世間大利益安樂因緣」。舍利可敬，因它是般若所薰；佛可敬，因佛是般若所生。取般若、供養般若，從來不是不敬佛——敬那生佛、教佛的本源，正是最深的敬佛。這就是校量舍利品的心。
In this chapter the Buddha sets a hard problem on the scales. He asks Śakra: put the Buddha's relics filling Jambudvīpa on one side, and one written scroll of prajñāpāramitā on the other; of these two portions, which do you take? Śakra answers without the least hesitation: I would rather take the scroll of prajñā. It is not that he does not revere the relics; he says plainly that making offerings even to a relic the size of a mustard seed brings merit immeasurable and boundless. It is only that he sees one layer deeper: the relics are honoured because they ‘are born from prajñāpāramitā and are perfumed and cultivated by prajñāpāramitā’, and only therefore receive people's offerings. The relics are the fruit; prajñā is the root that perfumes them and brings them to be. To take prajñā is to take that from which the relics are born. This one weighing, one question, and one choice are the backbone of the whole chapter: the four Chinese characters rendered here as ‘weighing the relics’ weigh precisely which of relics and prajñā is root and which is branch.
Yet Śāriputra puts in a pointed challenge from the side: prajñā cannot be taken—it is without form, without shape, without resistance, only one mark, namely the signless; how can you ‘take’ it? Śakra's answer is fine: it is precisely because ‘prajñāpāramitā does not practise dual dharmas; the mark of non-dual dharmas is prajñāpāramitā’. What he takes is not some thing possessed of marks; what he takes is that prajñā which falls on neither side, without duality and without discrimination; it is for the benefit of those who have newly aroused the mind that he speaks, following worldly truth, of a ‘taking’. The Buddha hears this and praises him again and again, and pushes it one step deeper for him: the nature of dharmas and prajñā are without duality and without difference; the limit of reality and the nature of the inconceivable are likewise without duality and without difference from prajñā. Since prajñā is without mark and without appearance, without speech and without utterance, when the mind of one who receives and upholds it enters deeply, he ‘does not see any mark to be feared’—there is no mark there that could be feared. Śakra also offers an intimate comparison: he customarily sits in the Hall of Good Dharma, and even when he is not in his seat the gods pay homage to his empty seat and depart; in the same way, wherever a scroll of prajñā is, the gods, nāgas, and yakṣas of the ten directions come to pay homage and make offerings—because to see prajñā is no different from seeing the Buddha, since ‘prajñāpāramitā and the Buddha are without duality and without difference’. So the Buddha loads the scales heavier and heavier: from filling Jambudvīpa, to the three-thousand great-thousand world, and then to relics filling worlds as many as the sands of the Ganges; through three rounds of weighing Śakra takes prajñā alone, in a single taste.
Why are the relics honoured only in dependence on prajñā? The treatise-author explains it through the most down-to-earth comparison: it is like a debtor who draws near to the king and serves at the king's side, so that his creditors, reversing themselves, pay him reverence and make him offerings—the king is a simile for prajñā, the debtor for the relics. The relics were originally formed by the karmic causes of past lives, and the debts that must be repaid cannot be escaped; it is precisely because prajñā has perfumed and cultivated them that those retributions of past lives, hunger and thirst, cold and heat, cannot come near them, and instead they receive the offerings of gods and humans. Then the treatise-author spreads out the merits of prajñā in the most splendid passage of the whole chapter: the simile of the wish-fulfilling jewel. That priceless maṇi jewel of the world, having neither mind nor consciousness, can yet remove the four hundred and four sicknesses, break the darkness, remove heat and remove cold, dissolve snake-poison, and make muddy water clear; prajñā is likewise: it can remove the eighty-four thousand sicknesses, whose roots are the four sicknesses of greed, hatred, delusion, and their equal mixture, curing them one by one with the contemplation of impurity, the mind of kindness and compassion, and the contemplation of causes and conditions. The treatise-author goes on to distinguish it layer by layer: the jewel can heal only the fleshly eye, while prajñā can heal the wisdom-eye; when the jewel has healed the fleshly eye the sickness will later recur, but when prajñā heals the wisdom-eye it is ultimately pure—the merit of the jewel stops at one corner, while the merit of prajñā reaches through to the ultimate. If a jewel that is an indeterminate form-dharma is already like this, how much more prajñā, which is the unsurpassed wisdom, the mother of the buddhas, the first jewel among all the jewels of the Dharma.
In the lower half of the chapter Śakra changes his manner of asking: what is the mark of conditioned dharmas, and what the mark of unconditioned dharmas? The Buddha answers: the wisdom within inner emptiness and so on up to the eighteen unshared dharmas is the mark of conditioned dharmas; the ‘self-nature of dharmas’, which is without arising and without ceasing, without stain and without purity, without increase and without decrease, is the mark of unconditioned dharmas—and both of these marks of dharmas are wholly gathered within prajñāpāramitā: the conditioned is the place where practice moves, the unconditioned the place on which it relies. Following this ‘gathering of all dharmas’, the Buddha sets out the essential meaning of prajñā governing the six perfections: when a bodhisattva practises giving, upholds morality, and so on up to contemplating all dharmas, it is by having ‘prajñāpāramitā act as the bright guide’ that each can be fully accomplished as a perfection. It is like the trees of Jambudvīpa: their leaves, flowers, fruits, and colours each differ, yet their shade is without difference; when the perfections enter prajñā and reach sarvajñā, they too are of one taste, without difference. The treatise-author adds two cautionary similes: salt is the master of all flavours, yet a fool who hears this and eats salt alone loses the flavour and brings on sickness instead—to practise prajñā alone without joining it with the other five perfections is likewise to fall into wrong view and be unable to advance in wholesome dharmas; although it is said that all practices join together with prajñā as their master, it must not be practised alone. Again, it is like the four great rivers of Lake Anavatapta: once they enter the great sea they lose their own names and merge into one taste; giving and the rest, apart from prajñā, are variously different, but once they enter prajñā they are of one mark without difference.
The whole chapter closes on a choice that looks like an offence yet is the deepest of all. Śakra asks: to write out and make offerings to a scroll of prajñā oneself, or to give the scroll to another so that he may practise and learn—which merit is greater? The Buddha does not answer directly, but sets a question in turn using the relics: to make offerings to the relics oneself, or to divide off a relic the size of a mustard seed and give it to someone so that he may make offerings—which merit is greater? Śakra answers: the merit of dividing it and giving it to another to make offerings is greater—and the treatise-author lays bare the reason: because ‘it is given without any self and with a mind of kindness and compassion’. Reading and reciting alone may still carry the mind of self, and the merit is then small; to give the scroll to others and explain its meaning to them at length is to become for them the cause and condition of becoming a buddha; being without self, the merit is great. Someone presses one question further: since merit lies in the mind, why did the Buddha break his body into pieces the size of mustard seeds for people to make offerings to? The answer is entirely steady: a mind of pure faith is born from two causes and conditions—inwardly there is right recollection, outwardly there is a good field of merit; even good grain must fall into a good field before the harvest is great; though the mind be good, it must still rely on the relics before it brings forth the great result. Finally the Buddha himself bears witness that prajñā is supreme: the sages of the three times all learned the holy path from this, and he himself, having attained by this Dharma the unsurpassed holy state, now still turns back to honour this Dharma as his teacher. A weighing of relics against prajñā, weighed to the very end, weighs out a single sentence—‘prajñā is the root cause and condition of the bodhisattvas; the bodhisattvas are the root cause and condition of the buddhas; the buddhas are the cause and condition of great benefit and ease for all the world’. The relics are venerable because they are what prajñā has perfumed; the Buddha is venerable because he is what prajñā has given birth to. To take prajñā and make offerings to prajñā has never been a failure to revere the Buddha—to revere the source that gives birth to the Buddha and teaches the Buddha is precisely the deepest reverence for the Buddha. This is the heart of the chapter on weighing the relics.
【經】 「復次，世尊！有二種法相：有為諸法相，無為諸法相。云何名有為諸法相？所謂內空中智慧，乃至無法有法空中智慧，四念處中智慧，乃至八聖道分中智慧，佛十力、四無所畏、四無礙智、十八不共法中智慧，善法中不善法中、有漏法中無漏法中、世間法中出世間法中智慧，是名有為諸法法相。云何名無為諸法法相？若法無生無滅、無住無異、無垢無淨、無增無減諸法自性。云何名諸法自性？諸法無所有性，是諸法自性，是名無為諸法相。」 爾時，佛告釋提桓因：「如是！如是！憍尸迦！過去諸佛因是般若波羅蜜得阿耨多羅三藐三菩提，過去諸佛弟子，亦因般若波羅蜜得須陀洹道乃至阿羅漢、辟支佛道；未來、現在世十方無量阿僧祇諸佛因是般若波羅蜜得阿耨多羅三藐三菩提，未來、現在諸佛弟子亦因般若波羅蜜得須陀洹道乃至辟支佛道。何以故？般若波羅蜜中廣說三乘義，以無相法故，無生無滅法故，無垢無淨法故，無作無起、不入不出、不增不損、不取不捨法故。以俗法故，非以第一義。何以故？是〔T25 0479c〕般若波羅蜜，非此非彼、非高非下、非等非不等、非相非無相、非世間非出世間、非有漏非無漏、非有為非無為、非善非不善、非過去非未來非現在。何以故？憍尸迦！般若波羅蜜，不取聲聞、辟支佛法，亦不捨凡夫法。」 釋提桓因白佛言：「世尊！菩薩摩訶薩行般若波羅蜜，知一切眾生心，亦不得眾生，乃至知者、見者亦不得。是菩薩不得色，不得受、想、行、識，不得眼乃至意，不得色乃至法，不得眼觸因緣生受乃至意觸因緣生受，不得四念處乃至十八不共法，不得阿耨多羅三藐三菩提，不得諸佛法，不得佛。何以故？般若波羅蜜，不為得法故出。何以故？般若波羅蜜，性無所有、不可得，所用法不可得，處亦不可得！」 佛告釋提桓因：「如是！如是！憍尸迦！如汝所說！菩薩摩訶薩長夜行般若波羅蜜，阿耨多羅三藐三菩提不可得，何況菩薩及菩薩法！」 爾時，釋提桓因白佛言：「世尊！菩薩摩訶薩但行般若波羅蜜，不行餘波羅蜜耶？」 佛告釋提桓因言：「憍尸迦！菩薩盡行六波羅蜜法，以無所得故。行檀波羅蜜，不得施者，不得受者，不得財物；行尸羅波羅蜜，不得戒，不得持戒人，不得破戒人；乃至行般若波羅蜜，不得智慧，不得智慧人，不得無智慧人。 「憍尸迦！菩薩摩訶薩行布施時，般若波羅蜜為作明導，能具足檀波羅蜜；菩薩摩訶薩行持戒時，般若波羅蜜為作明導，能具足尸羅波羅蜜；菩薩摩訶薩行忍辱時，般若波羅蜜為作明導，能具足羼提波羅蜜；菩薩摩訶薩行精進時，般若波羅蜜為〔T25 0480a〕作明導，能具足毘梨耶波羅蜜；菩薩摩訶薩行禪時，般若波羅蜜為作明導，能具足禪波羅蜜；菩薩摩訶薩觀諸法時，般若波羅蜜為作明導，能具足般若波羅蜜。一切法以無所得故，所謂色乃至一切種智。憍尸迦！譬如閻浮提諸樹，種種葉、種種華、種種果、種種色，其蔭無差別；諸波羅蜜入般若波羅蜜中，至薩婆若，無差別亦如是，以無所得故。」 釋提桓因白佛言：「世尊！般若波羅蜜，大功德成就！世尊！般若波羅蜜，一切功德成就！世尊！般若波羅蜜，無量功德成就！無邊功德成就！無等功德成就！世尊！若有善男子、善女人書是般若波羅蜜經卷，恭敬、供養、尊重、讚歎，華香乃至幡蓋，如般若波羅蜜所說正憶念；復有善男子、善女人書般若波羅蜜經卷與他人，其福何所為多？」 佛告釋提桓因：「憍尸迦！我還問汝，隨汝意報我。若有善男子、善女人供養諸佛舍利，恭敬、尊重、讚歎，華香乃至幡蓋；若復有人分舍利如芥子許與他人，令供養、恭敬、尊重、讚歎，華香乃至幡蓋，其福何所為多？」 釋提桓因白佛言：「世尊！如我從佛聞法中義，若有善男子、善女人自供養舍利，乃至幡蓋；若復有人分舍利如芥子許與他人令供養，其福甚多！世尊！佛見是福，利眾生故，入金剛三昧中，碎金剛身作末舍利。何以故？有人佛滅度後，供養佛舍利，乃至如芥子許，其福報無邊，乃至苦盡故。」 佛告釋提桓因：「如是！如是！憍尸迦！若善男子、善女人書般若波羅蜜經卷，供養、恭敬，華香乃至幡蓋；若復有人〔T25 0480b〕書般若波羅蜜經卷，與他人令學，是善男子、善女人其福甚多！ 「復次，憍尸迦！善男子、善女人如般若波羅蜜中義為他人說，開示、分別，令易解，是善男子、善女人勝於前善男子、善女人功德。所從聞般若波羅蜜，當視其人如佛，亦如高勝梵行人。何以故？當知般若波羅蜜即是佛；般若波羅蜜不異佛，佛不異般若波羅蜜。過去、未來、現在諸佛皆從般若波羅蜜中學，得阿耨多羅三藐三菩提；及高勝梵行人，高勝梵行人者，所謂阿鞞跋致菩薩摩訶薩，亦學是般若波羅蜜，當得阿耨多羅三藐三菩提；聲聞人亦學是般若波羅蜜，得阿羅漢道；求辟支佛道人亦學是般若波羅蜜，得辟支佛道；菩薩亦學是般若波羅蜜，得入菩薩位。以是故，憍尸迦！善男子、善女人欲供養現在諸佛，恭敬、尊重、讚歎，華香乃至幡蓋，當供養般若波羅蜜！ 「我見是利益，初得阿耨多羅三藐三菩提時，作如是念：『誰有可供養、恭敬、尊重、讚歎、依止住者？』憍尸迦！我，一切世間中，若天、若魔、若梵、若沙門、婆羅門中，不見與我等者，何況有勝者！我自思念：『我所得法，自致作佛；我供養是法，恭敬、尊重、讚歎，當依止住，依是法。何等是法？所謂般若波羅蜜。』憍尸迦！我自供養是般若波羅蜜，恭敬、尊重、讚歎已，依止住；何況善男子、善女人欲得阿耨多羅三藐三菩提，而不供養般若波羅蜜，恭敬、尊重、讚歎，華香、瓔珞乃至幡蓋？何以故？般若波羅蜜中生諸菩薩摩訶薩，諸菩薩摩訶薩中生諸佛。以是故，憍〔T25 0480c〕尸迦！善男子、善女人若求佛道、若求辟支佛道、若求聲聞道，皆應供養般若波羅蜜，恭敬、尊重、讚歎，華香乃至幡蓋。」 【論】 問曰： 何因緣故說是有為法、無為法相？ 答曰： 帝釋讚歎般若波羅蜜攝一切法，此中欲說因緣。 有為法相，所謂十八空，三十七品乃至十八不共法；略說善、不善等，乃至世間、出世間，是名有為法相。何以故？是作相，先無今有、已有還無故。 與上相違，即是無為法相。 是二法，皆般若波羅蜜中攝。 有為善法是行處，無為法是依止處；餘無記、不善法，以捨離故不說。此是新發意菩薩所學。 若得般若波羅蜜方便力，應無生忍，則不愛行法、不憎捨法，不離有為法而有無為法，是故不依止涅槃。 是以經中說：「般若波羅蜜中，廣說三乘，用無相法故，無生無滅等。以世諦故作是說，非第一義諦。」 菩薩行是諸法實相，雖能觀一切眾生心，亦不得眾生；雖能行一切法，亦不得一切法。何以故？以得無所得般若波羅蜜故。 佛可其所歎：「菩薩常習是行，乃至阿耨多羅三藐三菩提不可得，何況餘法！」 帝釋意念：「若般若是究竟法者，行人但行般若波羅蜜，何用餘法？」 佛答：「菩薩行六波羅蜜，以般若波羅蜜用無所得法和合故，此即是行般若波羅蜜。」若但行般若，不行五法，則功德不具足，不美不妙。 譬如愚人不識飲食種具，聞鹽是眾味主，便純食鹽，失味致患。行者亦如是，欲除著心故，但行般若，反墮邪〔T25 0481a〕見，不能增進善法；若與五波羅蜜和合，則功德具足，義味調適。雖眾行和合，般若為主。 若布施等諸法離般若波羅蜜，則有種種差別；至般若波羅蜜中，皆一相無有差別。譬如閻浮提阿那婆達多池，四大河流，一大河有五百小川歸之，俱入大海，則失其本名，合為一味，無有別異。又如樹木，枝葉華果，眾色別異，蔭則無別。 問曰： 蔭亦有差別，樹大則蔭大，枝葉華果大小種種異形，云何無差別？ 答曰： 蔽光故影現，無光之處即名為蔭，蔭不以大小異形為義。 問曰： 行般若波羅蜜，受誦乃至正憶念，此事為難；書持般若經卷與他人為易，功德尚不應等，云何言勝？ 答曰： 獨行讀、誦、正憶念雖難，或以我心，故功德小。以經卷與他者，有大悲心，作佛道因緣，無吾我故，功德為大。如佛問帝釋：「若人自供養舍利，復有人以舍利與他令供養，其福何所為多？」答曰：「與他人令供養得福多。」以無吾我、慈悲心與故。 佛雖不用福德，見有如是大利益眾生故，是以入金剛三昧，自碎其身。 問曰： 若福德在心，佛何用碎身如芥子，令人供養？ 答曰： 信淨心從二因緣生：一者、內正憶念，二者、外有良福田。譬如有好穀子，田又良美，所收必多。是故心雖好，必因舍利，然後得大果報。 佛既可其言，復更自說：「有人書寫經卷與人，復有人於大眾中廣解其義，其福勝前。視是人如佛，若次佛。」 如佛、若次佛義，如先說。 佛以二種因緣，證般若波〔T25 0481b〕羅蜜為勝：一者、三世聖人從中學，成聖道；二者、我以此法故得成無上聖，我今還師仰此法。法者，諸法實相，所謂般若波羅蜜。 「憍尸迦！我更無所求，而猶推尊般若供養，何況善男子不以種種供具供養般若波羅蜜！」 此中說因緣：「般若是菩薩根本因緣，菩薩是諸佛根本因緣，諸佛是一切世間大利益安樂因緣。是故聲聞、辟支佛人欲疾安隱入三解脫門者，猶尚供養般若波羅蜜，何況菩薩！」 供養具者，所謂以一心聽受乃至正憶念，及以華香乃至幡蓋。 大智度論卷第五十九
《大智度論》卷59 · T25n1509 0475b02–0481b14
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.
有為法相與無為法相：諸法自性即無所有性
『再者，世尊！有兩種法相：一種是有為諸法之相，一種是無為諸法之相。怎樣叫作有為諸法之相呢？就是內空之中的智慧，乃至無法有法空之中的智慧，四念處之中的智慧，乃至八聖道分之中的智慧，佛十力、四無所畏、四無礙智、十八不共法之中的智慧，善法之中、不善法之中的智慧，有漏法之中、無漏法之中的智慧，世間法之中、出世間法之中的智慧——這就叫作有為諸法之相。怎樣叫作無為諸法之相呢？就是那無生無滅、無住無異、無垢無淨、無增無減的諸法自性。又怎樣叫作諸法自性呢？諸法都無所有的那個性，就是諸法的自性，這就叫作無為諸法之相。』
三世諸佛皆因般若得道，而般若非此非彼
這時，佛告訴釋提桓因：『正是如此！正是如此！憍尸迦！過去諸佛因這般若波羅蜜得阿耨多羅三藐三菩提，過去諸佛的弟子，也因般若波羅蜜得須陀洹道，乃至阿羅漢道、辟支佛道；未來、現在世十方無量阿僧祇諸佛，也因這般若波羅蜜得阿耨多羅三藐三菩提，未來、現在諸佛的弟子，也因般若波羅蜜得須陀洹道乃至辟支佛道。為什麼呢？因為般若波羅蜜之中廣說三乘之義，是以無相法的緣故，無生無滅法的緣故，無垢無淨法的緣故，無作無起、不入不出、不增不損、不取不捨法的緣故。這是以世俗法而說，並非以第一義而說。為什麼呢？因為這般若波羅蜜，非此非彼、非高非下、非等非不等、非相非無相、非世間非出世間、非有漏非無漏、非有為非無為、非善非不善、非過去非未來非現在。為什麼呢？憍尸迦！般若波羅蜜，不取聲聞、辟支佛之法，也不捨凡夫之法。』
菩薩行般若不得眾生亦不得一切法
釋提桓因對佛說：『世尊！菩薩摩訶薩行般若波羅蜜，能知一切眾生的心，卻也不得眾生，乃至知者、見者也都不得。這菩薩不得色，不得受、想、行、識，不得眼乃至意，不得色乃至法，不得眼觸因緣所生的受，乃至意觸因緣所生的受，不得四念處乃至十八不共法，不得阿耨多羅三藐三菩提，不得諸佛之法，不得佛。為什麼呢？因為般若波羅蜜，並不是為了得法才出現的。又為什麼呢？因為般若波羅蜜，性無所有、不可得，所用之法也不可得，處所也不可得！』
佛告訴釋提桓因：『正是如此！正是如此！憍尸迦！正如你所說的！菩薩摩訶薩長夜修行般若波羅蜜，阿耨多羅三藐三菩提尚且不可得，何況菩薩以及菩薩之法呢！』
但行般若耶：六波羅蜜皆以般若為明導
這時，釋提桓因對佛說：『世尊！菩薩摩訶薩只行般若波羅蜜，不行其餘波羅蜜嗎？』
佛告訴釋提桓因說：『憍尸迦！菩薩要盡行六波羅蜜之法，以無所得的緣故。行檀波羅蜜時，不得布施者，不得受施者，不得所施的財物；行尸羅波羅蜜時，不得戒，不得持戒之人，不得破戒之人；乃至行般若波羅蜜時，不得智慧，不得有智慧之人，不得無智慧之人。
『憍尸迦！菩薩摩訶薩行布施時，般若波羅蜜為他作明導，能使檀波羅蜜具足；菩薩摩訶薩行持戒時，般若波羅蜜為他作明導，能使尸羅波羅蜜具足；菩薩摩訶薩行忍辱時，般若波羅蜜為他作明導，能使羼提波羅蜜具足；菩薩摩訶薩行精進時，般若波羅蜜為他作明導，能使毘梨耶波羅蜜具足；菩薩摩訶薩行禪時，般若波羅蜜為他作明導，能使禪波羅蜜具足；菩薩摩訶薩觀諸法時，般若波羅蜜為他作明導，能使般若波羅蜜具足。一切法都以無所得的緣故，就是所謂色乃至一切種智。憍尸迦！譬如閻浮提的種種樹，種種葉、種種華、種種果、種種色，它們的樹蔭卻沒有差別；諸波羅蜜入於般若波羅蜜之中，直到薩婆若，沒有差別也正是這樣，以無所得的緣故。』
書經自誦與書經施人，何者福多
釋提桓因對佛說：『世尊！般若波羅蜜，大功德成就！世尊！般若波羅蜜，一切功德成就！世尊！般若波羅蜜，無量功德成就！無邊功德成就！無等功德成就！世尊！假使有善男子、善女人書寫這般若波羅蜜經卷，恭敬、供養、尊重、讚歎，用華香乃至幡蓋，並如般若波羅蜜所說的來正憶念；又有善男子、善女人書寫般若波羅蜜經卷布施給他人——這二者，哪一個福德多呢？』
佛告訴釋提桓因：『憍尸迦！我反過來問你，隨你的意思回答我。假使有善男子、善女人供養諸佛舍利，恭敬、尊重、讚歎，用華香乃至幡蓋；又假使有人把舍利分出如芥子那麼一點給他人，令他人供養、恭敬、尊重、讚歎，用華香乃至幡蓋——這二者，哪一個福德多呢？』
釋提桓因對佛說：『世尊！依我從佛所聞法中的義理，假使有善男子、善女人自己供養舍利，乃至用幡蓋；又假使有人把舍利分出如芥子那麼一點給他人令他供養——那分舍利給人的福德甚多！世尊！佛見到這樣的福德能利益眾生的緣故，便入金剛三昧之中，碎裂金剛之身作成細末舍利。為什麼呢？因為有人在佛滅度之後，供養佛舍利乃至如芥子那麼一點，他的福報無邊，乃至到苦盡為止。』
書經施人令學、為他廣說，福更轉勝
佛告訴釋提桓因：『正是如此！正是如此！憍尸迦！假使善男子、善女人書寫般若波羅蜜經卷，供養、恭敬，用華香乃至幡蓋；又假使有人書寫般若波羅蜜經卷，布施給他人令他修學——那麼這後一位善男子、善女人的福德甚多！
『再者，憍尸迦！善男子、善女人依般若波羅蜜中的義理為他人解說，開示、分別，使人容易理解——這樣的善男子、善女人，勝過前面那位善男子、善女人的功德。至於他從之聽聞般若波羅蜜的那個人，應當看他如佛，也如同高勝的梵行之人。為什麼呢？因為應當知道，般若波羅蜜即是佛；般若波羅蜜不異於佛，佛不異於般若波羅蜜。過去、未來、現在諸佛都從般若波羅蜜中修學，而得阿耨多羅三藐三菩提；至於那高勝梵行之人，所謂高勝梵行之人，就是阿鞞跋致菩薩摩訶薩，他也修學這般若波羅蜜，當得阿耨多羅三藐三菩提；聲聞人也修學這般若波羅蜜，得阿羅漢道；求辟支佛道之人也修學這般若波羅蜜，得辟支佛道；菩薩也修學這般若波羅蜜，得入菩薩位。因為這緣故，憍尸迦！善男子、善女人想供養現在諸佛，恭敬、尊重、讚歎，用華香乃至幡蓋，就應當供養般若波羅蜜！
『我見到這樣的利益，在初得阿耨多羅三藐三菩提時，作了這樣的念：「有誰是可供養、恭敬、尊重、讚歎、依止安住的呢？」憍尸迦！我在一切世間之中，若天、若魔、若梵、若沙門、婆羅門之中，不見有與我平等的，何況有勝過我的呢！我自己思念：「我所得之法，自能致我作佛；我供養這法，恭敬、尊重、讚歎，當依止安住，依這法。什麼是這法呢？就是所謂般若波羅蜜。」憍尸迦！我自己供養這般若波羅蜜，恭敬、尊重、讚歎之後，便依止安住；何況善男子、善女人想得阿耨多羅三藐三菩提，卻不供養般若波羅蜜，不恭敬、尊重、讚歎，不用華香、瓔珞乃至幡蓋呢？為什麼呢？因為般若波羅蜜之中生出諸菩薩摩訶薩，諸菩薩摩訶薩之中生出諸佛。因為這緣故，憍尸迦！善男子、善女人若求佛道、若求辟支佛道、若求聲聞道，都應當供養般若波羅蜜，恭敬、尊重、讚歎，用華香乃至幡蓋。』
論釋何以說有為無為二法相
以下是論主的解釋。
有人問：是什麼因緣，才說這有為法、無為法之相呢？
回答說：帝釋讚歎般若波羅蜜能總攝一切法，這裡便是要說出其中的因緣。
所謂有為法之相，就是十八空、三十七品乃至十八不共法；簡略地說，就是善、不善等，乃至世間、出世間，這都叫作有為法之相。為什麼呢？因為這是造作之相，先前沒有、如今才有，已經有了又還歸於無的緣故。
與上面所說的相反，就是無為法之相。
這兩種法，都攝在般若波羅蜜之中。
有為是行處、無為是依止處，不依止涅槃
有為的善法是所行之處，無為之法是所依止之處；其餘的無記法、不善法，因為要捨離的緣故，所以不說。這是新發意的菩薩所應學的。
若得了般若波羅蜜的方便之力，順應了無生法忍，那就不貪愛所行之法、不憎厭所捨之法，不離開有為法而別有無為法，因此不依止於涅槃。
所以經中說：『般若波羅蜜之中，廣說三乘，是用無相法的緣故，無生無滅等的緣故。這是以世諦而如此說，並非以第一義諦而說。』
菩薩行這諸法實相，雖然能觀一切眾生的心，卻也不得眾生；雖然能行一切法，卻也不得一切法。為什麼呢？因為得了無所得的般若波羅蜜的緣故。
佛認可他所讚歎的：『菩薩常修習這樣的行，乃至阿耨多羅三藐三菩提也不可得，何況其餘之法呢！』
但行般若則功德不具足：鹽味喻
帝釋心中念道：『若般若是究竟之法，那麼行人只行般若波羅蜜就好，何必用其餘之法呢？』
佛回答說：『菩薩行六波羅蜜，是以般若波羅蜜的無所得法與之和合的緣故，這就是行般若波羅蜜。』若只行般若，不行其餘五法，那功德就不具足，不美不妙。
譬如愚人不認識飲食的種種調配，聽說鹽是眾味之主，便單單只吃鹽，反倒失了滋味、招來禍患。修行人也是這樣，為了除去執著之心的緣故，卻只行般若，反而墮入邪見，不能增進善法；若能與五波羅蜜和合，那功德就具足，義味也調適了。雖然是眾行和合，但般若始終是主。
諸法離般若則差別、入般若則一味：大河歸海、樹蔭無別
若布施等諸法離開了般若波羅蜜，就有種種差別；到了般若波羅蜜之中，便都是一相，沒有差別。譬如閻浮提的阿那婆達多池，四條大河之流，每一條大河又有五百條小川匯歸於它，一同流入大海，就都失去了本來的名字，合為一味，沒有別異。又如樹木，枝、葉、華、果，種種顏色各別各異，然而樹蔭卻沒有分別。
有人問：樹蔭也有差別呀，樹大則蔭大，枝、葉、華、果的大小各是種種不同的形狀，怎麼說沒有差別呢？
回答說：因為遮蔽了光才顯現出影，沒有光的地方就叫作蔭，蔭並不以大小、異形來立義。
書經施人何以福勝：無吾我、大悲心故
有人問：修行般若波羅蜜，受持、讀誦乃至正憶念，這件事是難的；書寫般若經卷布施給他人，這是容易的，論功德尚且不應相等，怎麼反說它勝呢？
回答說：獨自讀、誦、正憶念雖然是難的，但或許夾雜著我心，所以功德小。把經卷布施給他人的，有大悲心，是作成佛道的因緣，沒有吾我之見的緣故，所以功德為大。如同佛問帝釋：『若人自己供養舍利，又有人把舍利給他人令其供養，這二者哪一個福德多？』帝釋答說：『給他人令其供養的福德多。』就是因為以無吾我、慈悲之心而給的緣故。
佛雖然自己不需用福德，但見到有如此利益眾生的大事的緣故，所以才入金剛三昧，自碎其身。
內正憶念與外良福田二緣和合：良田好種喻
有人問：若福德是在心上，佛何必碎身如芥子，令人供養呢？
回答說：清淨的信心從兩種因緣而生：一是內在的正憶念，二是外在有良好的福田。譬如有好的穀種，田又肥美，所收成的必然多。因此，心雖然好，也必須藉著舍利，然後才得大果報。
佛既認可他的話，又更自己說：『有人書寫經卷給人，又有人在大眾之中廣解其中的義理，這後者的福德勝過前者。應當看這人如佛，或如次於佛的人。』
至於『如佛、或次於佛』的義理，如同前面所說。
二因緣證般若為勝：三世聖人從中學、佛還師仰此法
佛以兩種因緣，證明般若波羅蜜為勝：一是三世的聖人都從其中修學，而成就聖道；二是我因這法的緣故，得成無上之聖，我如今還反過來師仰這法。所謂法，就是諸法實相，也就是般若波羅蜜。
『憍尸迦！我更無所求，尚且推重尊崇般若、供養般若，何況善男子，怎能不以種種供具供養般若波羅蜜呢！』
這裡說出其中的因緣：『般若是菩薩的根本因緣，菩薩是諸佛的根本因緣，諸佛是一切世間大利益、安樂的因緣。因此聲聞、辟支佛之人想快速安穩地入三解脫門的，尚且供養般若波羅蜜，何況菩薩呢！』
所謂供養之具，就是以一心聽受乃至正憶念，以及華香乃至幡蓋。
《大智度論》卷第五十九。
The Mark of Conditioned Dharmas and the Mark of Unconditioned Dharmas: The Self-Nature of Dharmas Is a Nature Without Anything Existent
‘Furthermore, World-Honored One! There are two kinds of marks of dharmas: one is the mark of conditioned dharmas, and one is the mark of unconditioned dharmas. What is called the mark of conditioned dharmas? It is the wisdom within inner emptiness, and so on up to the wisdom within the emptiness of non-existent and existent dharmas; the wisdom within the four foundations of mindfulness, and so on up to the wisdom within the eight limbs of the noble path; the wisdom within the Buddha's ten powers, the four fearlessnesses, the four unobstructed knowledges, and the eighteen unshared dharmas; the wisdom within wholesome dharmas and within unwholesome dharmas; the wisdom within dharmas with outflows and within dharmas without outflows; the wisdom within worldly dharmas and within world-transcending dharmas—this is called the mark of conditioned dharmas. What is called the mark of unconditioned dharmas? It is the self-nature of dharmas, which is without arising and without ceasing, without abiding and without changing, without stain and without purity, without increase and without decrease. And what is called the self-nature of dharmas? That nature in which all dharmas are without anything existent—that is the self-nature of dharmas; this is called the mark of unconditioned dharmas.’
The Buddhas of the Three Times All Attain the Path Through Prajñā, Yet Prajñā Is Neither This nor That
At that time the Buddha told Śakra Devānām Indra: ‘Just so! Just so! Kauśika! The buddhas of the past attained anuttarā samyaksaṃbodhi (unsurpassed, right, and complete awakening) through this prajñāpāramitā; the disciples of the buddhas of the past also attained the path of the srota-āpanna through prajñāpāramitā, and so on up to the path of the arhat and the path of the pratyekabuddha. The immeasurable asaṃkhyeya buddhas of the ten directions of the future and present ages also attain anuttarā samyaksaṃbodhi through this prajñāpāramitā; the disciples of the buddhas of the future and present also attain the path of the srota-āpanna, and so on up to the path of the pratyekabuddha, through prajñāpāramitā. Why? Because within prajñāpāramitā the meaning of the three vehicles is expounded at length—by way of the signless dharma; by way of the dharma without arising and without ceasing; by way of the dharma without stain and without purity; by way of the dharma without making and without originating, neither entering nor exiting, neither increasing nor diminishing, neither grasping nor relinquishing. This is said by way of worldly dharma, not by way of the highest meaning. Why? Because this prajñāpāramitā is neither this nor that, neither high nor low, neither equal nor unequal, neither marked nor signless, neither worldly nor world-transcending, neither with outflows nor without outflows, neither conditioned nor unconditioned, neither wholesome nor unwholesome, neither past nor future nor present. Why? Kauśika! Prajñāpāramitā does not grasp the dharmas of the śrāvakas and pratyekabuddhas, nor does it relinquish the dharmas of ordinary people.’
The Bodhisattva Practising Prajñā Does Not Find Beings, Nor Does He Find Any Dharma
Śakra Devānām Indra said to the Buddha: ‘World-Honored One! The bodhisattva-mahāsattva practising prajñāpāramitā can know the minds of all beings, yet he does not find beings, and so on up to: the knower and the seer are also not found. This bodhisattva does not find form; does not find feeling, perception, constructions, and consciousness; does not find the eye up to the mind; does not find forms up to dharmas; does not find the feeling born from the condition of eye-contact, up to the feeling born from the condition of mind-contact; does not find the four foundations of mindfulness up to the eighteen unshared dharmas; does not find anuttarā samyaksaṃbodhi; does not find the dharmas of the buddhas; does not find the Buddha. Why? Because prajñāpāramitā does not come forth for the sake of attaining any dharma. And why again? Because prajñāpāramitā is in its nature without anything existent and unfindable; the dharma it uses is also unfindable, and its place is also unfindable!’
The Buddha told Śakra Devānām Indra: ‘Just so! Just so! Kauśika! It is just as you say! The bodhisattva-mahāsattva cultivates and practises prajñāpāramitā through the long night, and even anuttarā samyaksaṃbodhi is unfindable—how much less the bodhisattva and the dharmas of the bodhisattva!’
Does He Practise Prajñā Alone? All Six Perfections Take Prajñā as Their Bright Guide
At that time Śakra Devānām Indra said to the Buddha: ‘World-Honored One! Does the bodhisattva-mahāsattva practise only prajñāpāramitā, and not practise the other perfections?’
The Buddha told Śakra Devānām Indra, saying: ‘Kauśika! The bodhisattva must practise the dharmas of the six perfections in full, with nothing to be attained. When he practises dānapāramitā, he does not find a giver, does not find a receiver, does not find the goods given; when he practises śīlapāramitā, he does not find morality, does not find a person who keeps the precepts, does not find a person who breaks the precepts; and so on up to: when he practises prajñāpāramitā, he does not find wisdom, does not find a person possessed of wisdom, does not find a person without wisdom.
‘Kauśika! When the bodhisattva-mahāsattva practises giving, prajñāpāramitā acts as his bright guide and can bring dānapāramitā to fulfilment; when the bodhisattva-mahāsattva practises keeping the precepts, prajñāpāramitā acts as his bright guide and can bring śīlapāramitā to fulfilment; when the bodhisattva-mahāsattva practises patience, prajñāpāramitā acts as his bright guide and can bring kṣāntipāramitā to fulfilment; when the bodhisattva-mahāsattva practises vigour, prajñāpāramitā acts as his bright guide and can bring vīryapāramitā to fulfilment; when the bodhisattva-mahāsattva practises meditation, prajñāpāramitā acts as his bright guide and can bring dhyānapāramitā to fulfilment; when the bodhisattva-mahāsattva contemplates all dharmas, prajñāpāramitā acts as his bright guide and can bring prajñāpāramitā to fulfilment. This is because all dharmas are with nothing to be attained—that is to say, form, up to omniscience of all kinds. Kauśika! It is like the various trees of Jambudvīpa, with various leaves, various flowers, various fruits, and various colours, yet their shade is without difference; the perfections, entering into prajñāpāramitā and reaching sarvajñā (omniscience), are without difference in just this way, with nothing to be attained.’
Writing Out the Sūtra and Reciting It Oneself, or Writing It Out and Giving It to Others: Which Has More Merit
Śakra Devānām Indra said to the Buddha: ‘World-Honored One! Prajñāpāramitā is accomplished in great merit! World-Honored One! Prajñāpāramitā is accomplished in all merit! World-Honored One! Prajñāpāramitā is accomplished in immeasurable merit! Accomplished in boundless merit! Accomplished in unequalled merit! World-Honored One! Suppose there are good men and good women who write out the scroll of this prajñāpāramitā sūtra, revere it, make offerings to it, honour it, and praise it, with flowers and incense up to banners and canopies, and rightly recollect it as prajñāpāramitā teaches; and again there are good men and good women who write out the scroll of the prajñāpāramitā sūtra and give it to others—of these two, which has more merit?’
The Buddha told Śakra Devānām Indra: ‘Kauśika! I shall ask you in return; answer me as you see fit. Suppose there are good men and good women who make offerings to the relics of the buddhas, revere, honour, and praise them, with flowers and incense up to banners and canopies; and again suppose someone divides off from the relics a portion the size of a mustard seed and gives it to others, causing them to make offerings, revere, honour, and praise, with flowers and incense up to banners and canopies—of these two, which has more merit?’
Śakra Devānām Indra said to the Buddha: ‘World-Honored One! According to the meaning within the Dharma that I have heard from the Buddha, suppose there are good men and good women who themselves make offerings to the relics, up to with banners and canopies; and again suppose someone divides off from the relics a portion the size of a mustard seed and gives it to others, causing them to make offerings—the merit of the one who divides the relics and gives them to others is very great! World-Honored One! Because the Buddha saw that such merit could benefit beings, he entered the vajra samādhi and broke his vajra body into relics of fine powder. Why? Because if someone, after the Buddha's passing into extinction, makes offerings to the Buddha's relics even as little as the size of a mustard seed, his reward of merit is boundless, and so on up to: until suffering is exhausted.’
Writing Out the Sūtra and Giving It to Others to Learn, and Expounding It Widely for Others: The Merit Grows Ever Greater
The Buddha told Śakra Devānām Indra: ‘Just so! Just so! Kauśika! Suppose good men and good women write out the scroll of the prajñāpāramitā sūtra, make offerings to it and revere it, with flowers and incense up to banners and canopies; and again suppose someone writes out the scroll of the prajñāpāramitā sūtra and gives it to others, causing them to cultivate and learn it—then the merit of this latter good man or good woman is very great!
‘Furthermore, Kauśika! Good men and good women who, according to the meaning within prajñāpāramitā, explain it for others, reveal and show it, and analyse it, making it easy for people to understand—such good men and good women surpass the merit of the good men and good women before. As for the person from whom one hears prajñāpāramitā, one should regard him as a Buddha, and also as one of lofty and excellent pure conduct. Why? Because it should be known that prajñāpāramitā is the Buddha; prajñāpāramitā is not different from the Buddha, and the Buddha is not different from prajñāpāramitā. The buddhas of the past, future, and present all cultivate and learn within prajñāpāramitā and attain anuttarā samyaksaṃbodhi. As for one of lofty and excellent pure conduct—what is called one of lofty and excellent pure conduct is the avaivartika bodhisattva-mahāsattva; he too cultivates and learns this prajñāpāramitā and will attain anuttarā samyaksaṃbodhi. The śrāvakas too cultivate and learn this prajñāpāramitā and attain the path of the arhat; those who seek the path of the pratyekabuddha too cultivate and learn this prajñāpāramitā and attain the path of the pratyekabuddha; bodhisattvas too cultivate and learn this prajñāpāramitā and gain entry into the bodhisattva position. For this reason, Kauśika! Good men and good women who wish to make offerings to the present buddhas, to revere, honour, and praise them, with flowers and incense up to banners and canopies, should make offerings to prajñāpāramitā!
‘Seeing such benefit, when I first attained anuttarā samyaksaṃbodhi I had this thought: 「有誰是可供養、恭敬、尊重、讚歎、依止安住的呢？」 tr. "Who is there to whom I may make offerings, whom I may revere, honour, and praise, on whom I may rely and in whom I may abide?" Kauśika! Among all the world, whether among gods, Māra, or Brahmā, or among śramaṇas and brahmins, I did not see anyone equal to me—how much less anyone surpassing me! I reflected to myself: 「我所得之法，自能致我作佛；我供養這法，恭敬、尊重、讚歎，當依止安住，依這法。什麼是這法呢？就是所謂般若波羅蜜。」 tr. "The Dharma that I have attained is itself able to bring me to become a Buddha; I make offerings to this Dharma, revere, honour, and praise it, and shall rely on it and abide in it—relying on this Dharma. What is this Dharma? It is what is called prajñāpāramitā." Kauśika! I myself, having made offerings to this prajñāpāramitā and revered, honoured, and praised it, then relied on it and abided in it; how much less should good men and good women who wish to attain anuttarā samyaksaṃbodhi fail to make offerings to prajñāpāramitā, fail to revere, honour, and praise it, fail to use flowers and incense, necklaces, up to banners and canopies! Why? Because from within prajñāpāramitā the bodhisattva-mahāsattvas are born, and from within the bodhisattva-mahāsattvas the buddhas are born. For this reason, Kauśika! Good men and good women, whether they seek the Buddha-path, or seek the path of the pratyekabuddha, or seek the path of the śrāvaka, should all make offerings to prajñāpāramitā, revere, honour, and praise it, with flowers and incense up to banners and canopies.’
The Treatise Explains Why the Two Marks of Dharmas, Conditioned and Unconditioned, Are Spoken Of
What follows is the treatise-author's explanation.
Someone asks: What is the cause and condition for speaking of this mark of conditioned dharmas and of unconditioned dharmas?
The answer: Śakra praised prajñāpāramitā as able to gather all dharmas together; here the cause and condition of this is to be spoken of.
What is called the mark of conditioned dharmas is the eighteen emptinesses, the thirty-seven limbs of the path, up to the eighteen unshared dharmas; to put it briefly, it is the wholesome, the unwholesome, and so on, up to the worldly and the world-transcending—all these are called the mark of conditioned dharmas. Why? Because this is the mark of being made: formerly it was not, now only does it exist, and having existed it returns again to non-existence.
The reverse of what was said above is the mark of unconditioned dharmas.
These two kinds of dharmas are both gathered within prajñāpāramitā.
The Conditioned Is the Place Where Practice Moves, the Unconditioned the Place on Which It Relies; He Does Not Rely on Nirvāṇa
Conditioned wholesome dharmas are the place where practice moves; unconditioned dharmas are the place on which it relies. The remaining indeterminate dharmas and unwholesome dharmas are not spoken of, because they are to be relinquished. This is what a bodhisattva who has newly aroused the mind should learn.
If he has gained the power of skilful means of prajñāpāramitā and accords with the acceptance of the non-arising of dharmas, then he does not crave the dharmas that are practised and does not loathe the dharmas that are relinquished; he does not, apart from conditioned dharmas, have unconditioned dharmas elsewhere; therefore he does not rely on nirvāṇa.
So the sūtra says: ‘Within prajñāpāramitā the three vehicles are expounded at length, by way of the signless dharma, by way of being without arising and without ceasing, and so on. This is said thus by way of worldly truth, not by way of the truth of the highest meaning.’
The bodhisattva practising this real mark of all dharmas, although able to contemplate the minds of all beings, yet does not find beings; although able to practise all dharmas, yet does not find any dharma. Why? Because he has gained the prajñāpāramitā in which there is nothing to be attained.
The Buddha affirms what he has praised: ‘The bodhisattva constantly cultivates such practice, and even anuttarā samyaksaṃbodhi is unfindable—how much less the other dharmas!’
If One Practises Prajñā Alone, the Merit Is Not Complete: The Simile of the Flavour of Salt
Śakra thought in his mind: ‘If prajñā is the ultimate dharma, then the practitioner need only practise prajñāpāramitā; what use are the other dharmas?’
The Buddha answers: ‘The bodhisattva practises the six perfections because the dharma of nothing to be attained of prajñāpāramitā comes together with them; this is practising prajñāpāramitā.’ If one practises only prajñā and does not practise the other five dharmas, then the merit is not complete, neither fine nor wondrous.
It is like a foolish person who does not know the various ways of seasoning food and drink; hearing that salt is the master of all flavours, he eats salt alone, and instead loses the flavour and brings on harm. The practitioner is also like this: for the sake of removing the attached mind, he practises only prajñā, and instead falls into wrong view and cannot advance in wholesome dharmas; if he can join it with the five perfections, then the merit is complete, and the flavour of its meaning is also balanced. Although it is the coming together of the many practices, prajñā is always the master.
Apart from Prajñā, Dharmas Are Different; Entering Prajñā, They Are of One Taste: The Great Rivers Returning to the Sea, and the Shade of Trees Without Difference
If giving and the other dharmas are apart from prajñāpāramitā, they have all kinds of differences; once they reach prajñāpāramitā, they are all of one mark, without difference. It is like Lake Anavatapta in Jambudvīpa and the flow of the four great rivers: into each great river five hundred small streams also return, and together they flow into the great sea; then they all lose their original names and merge into one taste, without distinction. Again, it is like trees: branches, leaves, flowers, and fruits, with all kinds of colours, each distinct and each different, yet the shade is without distinction.
Someone asks: The shade of trees also has differences! If the tree is large, the shade is large; the branches, leaves, flowers, and fruits, large and small, each have various different shapes—how can you say there is no difference?
The answer: It is because light is blocked that a shadow appears; the place without light is called shade, and shade is not given its meaning by size or by differing shape.
Why Writing Out the Sūtra and Giving It to Others Has Surpassing Merit: Because It Is Without Self and With the Mind of Great Compassion
Someone asks: To cultivate and practise prajñāpāramitā, to receive and uphold it, read and recite it, up to rightly recollecting it—this is difficult; to write out a scroll of the prajñā sūtra and give it to others is easy. In terms of merit they should not even be equal; how is it said, on the contrary, that it surpasses?
The answer: Although reading, reciting, and rightly recollecting alone are difficult, they may be mixed with the mind of self, and so the merit is small. The one who gives the scroll to others has the mind of great compassion; it is a cause and condition for making the Buddha-path, and because there is no view of self, the merit is great. It is as when the Buddha asked Śakra: ‘If a person himself makes offerings to the relics, and again someone gives relics to others to make offerings, which of these two has more merit?’ Śakra answered: ‘Giving to others to make offerings has more merit.’ This is precisely because it is given without self and with a mind of kindness and compassion.
Although the Buddha himself has no need of merit, because he saw so great a matter of benefiting beings, he therefore entered the vajra samādhi and broke his own body into pieces.
The Two Conditions of Inner Right Recollection and an Outer Good Field of Merit Coming Together: The Simile of a Good Field and Good Seed
Someone asks: If merit lies in the mind, why did the Buddha need to break his body into pieces like mustard seeds and have people make offerings to it?
The answer: The mind of pure faith is born from two causes and conditions: first, inner right recollection; second, an outer good field of merit. It is like having good seed-grain and a fertile field as well: the harvest is sure to be great. Therefore, although the mind is good, it must still rely on the relics, and only then does it gain the great result.
The Buddha, having affirmed his words, further speaks himself: ‘Someone writes out a scroll and gives it to people, and again someone within the great assembly explains its meaning at length; the merit of the latter surpasses the former. One should regard this person as a Buddha, or as one next to a Buddha.’
As for the meaning of ‘as a Buddha, or next to a Buddha’, it is as was said before.
Two Causes and Conditions Prove Prajñā Supreme: The Sages of the Three Times Learn from It, and the Buddha Still Honours This Dharma as His Teacher
The Buddha proves by two causes and conditions that prajñāpāramitā is supreme: first, the sages of the three times all cultivate and learn within it and accomplish the holy path; second, because of this Dharma I attained the unsurpassed holy state, and I now still turn back and honour this Dharma as my teacher. What is called the Dharma is the real mark of all dharmas, which is also prajñāpāramitā.
‘Kauśika! I, who seek nothing further, still esteem and revere prajñā and make offerings to prajñā; how much less can good men fail to make offerings to prajñāpāramitā with all kinds of necessities for offerings!’
Here the cause and condition of this is spoken: ‘Prajñā is the root cause and condition of the bodhisattvas; the bodhisattvas are the root cause and condition of the buddhas; the buddhas are the cause and condition of great benefit and ease for all the world. Therefore even the people of the śrāvakas and pratyekabuddhas who wish to enter the three gates of liberation quickly and securely make offerings to prajñāpāramitā—how much more the bodhisattvas!’
What are called the necessities for offerings are hearing and receiving with a single mind, up to rightly recollecting, together with flowers and incense up to banners and canopies.
Mahāprajñāpāramitā-upadeśa, fascicle fifty-nine.
校量舍利品之下：有為無為二法相、般若為六度明導、書經施人福勝、內外二緣成大果報
在問什麼
之上一路校量舍利與般若二分，帝釋屢屢取般若，論主以如意寶珠一喻十九重詳配作結，末了一句『讚般若波羅蜜，是義先已說』把校量之義收住。之下便換了問法：不再問『二分之中取何所』，而轉入般若「攝一切法」到底攝的是什麼、怎麼攝。帝釋開口就提出有為、無為兩種法相，佛一一印可，並申明三世諸佛及弟子皆因般若得道，卻又緊接一串「非此非彼、非高非下」的遮遣——般若能生萬法、攝萬法，自己卻無一相可取。由此逼出之下真正的問題：一個「性無所有、不可得」的般若，怎麼還能作六度的明導？怎麼還堪受供養、還分得出書經自誦與書經施人的福德高下、還要佛碎身如芥子令人供養？帝釋連問三事——但行般若可不可以、書經自誦與施人孰福多、福德既在心又何用碎身——佛與論主逐一作答。答案始終扣住一個樞紐：正因般若無所得，它才不與五度爭一相，而能作五度之導、能一味融諸法之別、能以無吾我之施成大福。之下所校量的，已不是舍利與經卷的孰重孰輕，而是『有所得』與「無所得」的孰真孰妄。
逐段解明
先看有為、無為二法相。帝釋自陳兩相：有為諸法相是「內空中智慧」乃至「十八不共法中智慧」、善不善、有漏無漏、世出世間種種智慧；無為諸法相是「無生無滅、無住無異、無垢無淨、無增無減」的諸法自性。要緊的是末後對「自性」的收煞——「諸法無所有性，是諸法自性」。無為並不是有為之外另立一個實體，而是就這一切有為法「無所有」的那個性上安名。論主釋得直截：有為法相所以是有為，因它「先無今有、已有還無」，是造作之相；「與上相違，即是無為法相」。二相既立，隨即歸一——「是二法，皆般若波羅蜜中攝」。這正接上之上『般若為首、為明導』的舊義：般若之所以能攝有為無為，不是它比二法更大，而是它見得二法同歸無所有。
次看佛的印可與遮遣。佛答帝釋「如是如是」，先立般若的生成之德——三世諸佛、三世弟子，得無上菩提也好、得須陀洹乃至辟支佛道也好，『皆因般若波羅蜜』。可是這德才立，佛立刻遮住不許人取相：般若「非此非彼、非高非下、非等非不等、非相非無相」，乃至非有為非無為、非善非不善。佛自點明這是「以俗法故，非以第一義」——說般若能生能攝，是隨順世諦的方便說；就第一義而言，般若連『能生』之相也不立。帝釋隨即順此意深入：菩薩行般若「知一切眾生心，亦不得眾生」，乃至不得五陰、不得四念處十八不共法、不得菩提、不得佛。何以能知而不得？因為「般若波羅蜜，性無所有、不可得，所用法不可得，處亦不可得」——能觀之般若、所觀之法、觀照之處，三者俱不可得，這才是『知而不得』的底據。佛再印可：長夜行般若，菩提尚不可得，何況菩薩及菩薩法。
三看般若為六度作明導。帝釋起一疑：既然般若這樣殊勝，菩薩『但行般若，不行餘波羅蜜』可不可以？佛答得斬截：菩薩要「盡行六波羅蜜」，只是以無所得而行——行檀不得施者、受者、財物，行尸羅不得戒、持戒人、破戒人，乃至行般若不得智慧、智慧人、無智慧人。接著才點出六度與般若的關係不是取代而是引領：菩薩行布施、持戒、忍辱、精進、禪、觀諸法時，「般若波羅蜜為作明導」，方能使一一波羅蜜具足。經文自設閻浮提諸樹一喻——種種葉、華、果、色，其蔭卻無差別；諸波羅蜜入般若中至薩婆若，無差別也正如此。論主到論③處把這一義推足，另設鹽味一喻：愚人聞鹽是眾味之主，便單食鹽而失味致患；行者若只行般若不與五度和合，「反墮邪見，不能增進善法」。兩喻合看，帝釋「但行般若」之疑就破了——般若是味中之主而非唯一之味，是眾樹之蔭而非離樹之蔭；「雖眾行和合，般若為主」，主而不孤，導而不代。
四看書經自誦與書經施人的校量。帝釋三歎般若大功德、一切功德、無量無邊無等功德之後，提出一個很實的問題：書經卷自己供養正憶念，與書經卷施人，孰福多？佛不直答，反以舍利為例回問帝釋——自供養舍利，與分舍利如芥子與人令供養，孰福多？帝釋答『分舍利與他人』的福甚多，並自己補出佛入金剛三昧碎金剛身作末舍利、正為令後人供養得無邊福報。佛乃順此印可：書經施人令學，福甚於自書供養；更進一層，能「為他人說，開示、分別，令易解」的，又勝於但施經卷——且教人視所從聞般若之人「如佛」、如高勝梵行人，因為「般若波羅蜜即是佛」，三世諸佛皆從中學。論主釋這福德高下之由，不落在事相的多寡，而落在心地的有我無我：獨行讀誦「或以我心，故功德小」；以經施人「有大悲心，作佛道因緣，無吾我故，功德為大」。校量的秤，終究秤的是我執之有無。
五看內外二緣與收束。帝釋末一疑最切：福德既在心，佛「何用碎身如芥子，令人供養」？論主答以二因緣和合方成大果——「信淨心從二因緣生：一者、內正憶念，二者、外有良福田」；更設良田好種一喻：穀種雖好，必得良田，所收乃多；心雖好，必因舍利，然後得大果報。內心與外境不是二選一，而是相須而成。末後論主以二因緣證般若為勝：三世聖人從中學成聖道；佛自身以此法得成無上聖，「還師仰此法」——法者，即諸法實相、般若波羅蜜。全單元收於一句遞進的根本因緣：「般若是菩薩根本因緣，菩薩是諸佛根本因緣，諸佛是一切世間大利益安樂因緣」；而所謂供養之具，不過「一心聽受乃至正憶念」及華香幡蓋。以最深的實相義開頭，以最平的一心聽受作結，正是之下的收法。
不要讀錯
不要把『有為無為二法相』讀成兩個實體並立。經文末句已自破——「諸法無所有性，是諸法自性」；無為不在有為之外，是就有為「無所有」處安名，論主釋為「與上相違，即是無為法相」，相違而非別有。
不要把『般若非此非彼、非高非下』讀成般若什麼都不是的頑空。這一串遮遣的前一句正是『三世諸佛皆因般若得道』；能生萬德而不取一相，才是遮遣的用意。佛自揀明這是「以俗法故，非以第一義」——遮的是取相，不是撥無般若之用。
不要把「但行般若」讀成般若可以獨行。佛明答「菩薩盡行六波羅蜜」，鹽味喻更說但食鹽則「失味致患」、但行般若則「墮邪見」。般若是明導、是味主，導而不代五度，主而不廢眾味；讀成廢餘五度，恰是論所破的愚人。
不要把『書經施人勝於自誦』讀成事相上施人這件事本身有更大功德。論主把高下繫於心——自誦「或以我心故功德小」，施人「無吾我故功德為大」。勝的是無我的悲心，不是「施」這個動作；若施而懷我，一樣是小。
不要把「佛何用碎身如芥子」讀成福德只在外境舍利。論主答的是「二因緣」——內正憶念與外良福田缺一不可，良田好種喻正為顯相須。既不可撥無舍利只論心，也不可離心只論舍利；偏執一頭，都不是二緣和合之義。
修行作用
拿『般若為六度作明導』校自己的用功。布施、持戒、忍辱時，若一味求福、求相、記著能所，便是有所得而行，五度各成一堆差別；於一一行上照見施者受者財物皆不可得，那無所得處便是般若在導。導在行中，不在行外別提一個空。
拿鹽味喻對治偏空之病。用功稍嘗空味，最易生一念『只此便夠，餘皆不必』，於是廢施廢戒、厭一切行。記得『純食鹽則失味致患』——空是味主而非唯一之味，須與五度和合，功德乃「義味調適」。
拿「無吾我故功德為大」練施捨與說法。書經、施人、為他解說，一起我心便小，一泯吾我便大。日用中凡有所與、有所教，先鬆開那『這是我作的、我教的』一念，悲心才不被我執減損。
拿「二因緣」定內外雙修的分寸。只管內心正憶念而輕外緣福田，或只管外供事相而不返內心，都缺一緣。良田好種要並用：內以正憶念培心地，外以恭敬供養結勝緣，二緣和合，果報乃大。
拿「還師仰此法」自校慢心。修行稍有所得，最易起『法由我證』之慢。佛自身得成無上聖，尚且「還師仰此法」——所師者即諸法實相。以佛之尊尚師仰實相，學人更當於所得處放下能得之我。
承衍
之下自承之上而衍出一段完整的轉進。之上校量的是舍利與般若二分之孰重，結在『般若為首、為明導，如王必有將從』；之下承此「明導」二字，把它從校量之喻推成六度之實——般若為布施乃至禪定「作明導」，王與將從的舊喻，落成了主味與眾味、眾樹與一蔭的新喻。之上以如意寶珠顯般若之能，之下以「性無所有、不可得」顯般若之體；能而不失其空，空而不礙其能，一體一用，相承而下。中間插入的有為無為二法相，是這一衍的樞紐：唯其見二法同歸無所有，般若才攝得一切、導得五度、融得諸別為一味。末後書經施人、碎身供養、內外二緣諸問，看似落到事相校量，其實步步扣回無吾我、無所得的實相——與之上『舍利從般若薰修生』是同一條理路：舍利之可貴在般若，施人之福大在無我，二緣之果大在心境相須。之下交到後手的，就是這一線——先於六度上認得般若是導而非代，再於施福上認得無我方大，終於在內外二緣上認得心不孤成、境不獨立。之上取的是般若之分，之下顯的是般若之用；取與用兩問，答的都是同一個無所得而萬德宛然的般若。
Weighing the Relics, Last Part: The Two Marks of Conditioned and Unconditioned Dharmas; Prajñā as the Bright Guide of the Six Perfections; the Greater Merit of Writing Out the Sūtra and Giving It to Others; the Two Conditions, Inner and Outer, Yielding a Great Result
What Is Being Asked
The First Part weighed the two portions, the relics and prajñā, all the way through; Śakra took prajñā time and again, and the treatise-author concluded with the single simile of the wish-fulfilling jewel matched in detail in nineteen layers, and at the very end one sentence, ‘in praising prajñāpāramitā, this meaning has already been spoken of before’, drew the meaning of the weighing to a close. The Last Part then changes its manner of asking: it no longer asks ‘of the two portions, which is to be taken’, but turns instead to what, after all, it is that prajñā, which 「攝一切法」 tr. "gathers in all dharmas", gathers in, and how it gathers it in. Śakra opens by setting forth two kinds of marks of dharmas, conditioned and unconditioned; the Buddha confirms each one, and declares that the buddhas of the three times and their disciples all attained the path because of prajñā, yet he follows it at once with a string of negations, 「非此非彼、非高非下」 tr. "neither this nor that, neither high nor low"—prajñā can give rise to the myriad dharmas and gather in the myriad dharmas, yet in itself has not a single mark that can be grasped. From this the real question of the Last Part is pressed out: how can a prajñā whose 「性無所有、不可得」 tr. "nature is without anything existent and unfindable" still act as the bright guide of the six perfections? How can it still be worthy of receiving offerings, still distinguish degrees of merit between writing out the sūtra to recite oneself and writing it out to give to others, and still call for the Buddha to break his body into pieces like mustard seeds so that people might make offerings? Śakra asks three things in succession—whether it will do to practise prajñā alone; whether writing out the sūtra to recite oneself or giving it to others brings more merit; and, since merit lies in the mind, why the body should be broken into pieces—and the Buddha and the treatise-author answer each in turn. The answer is always fastened to one pivot: precisely because prajñā is nothing to be attained, it does not contend with the five perfections over any one mark, and so it can act as the guide of the five perfections, can fuse the differences among dharmas into one taste, and can accomplish great merit through a giving that is without self. What the Last Part weighs is no longer which of the relics and the scroll is heavier and which lighter, but which of ‘something to be attained’ and 「無所得」 tr. "nothing to be attained" is true and which false.
Passage by Passage
First, look at the two marks of dharmas, conditioned and unconditioned. Śakra himself sets out the two marks: the mark of conditioned dharmas is the 「內空中智慧」 tr. "wisdom within inner emptiness" and so on up to the 「十八不共法中智慧」 tr. "wisdom within the eighteen unshared dharmas", and every kind of wisdom within the wholesome and the unwholesome, with outflows and without outflows, the worldly and the world-transcending; the mark of unconditioned dharmas is the self-nature of dharmas that is 「無生無滅、無住無異、無垢無淨、無增無減」 tr. "without arising and without ceasing, without abiding and without changing, without stain and without purity, without increase and without decrease". What matters is the closing stroke on 「自性」 tr. "self-nature" at the end—「諸法無所有性，是諸法自性」 tr. "the nature of dharmas that is without anything existent is the self-nature of dharmas". The unconditioned is not another entity set up outside the conditioned; it is a name placed on precisely that nature of all these conditioned dharmas which is 「無所有」 tr. "without anything existent". The treatise-author explains it directly: the mark of conditioned dharmas is conditioned because it is 「先無今有、已有還無」 tr. "formerly absent and now present, already present and again absent"—it is the mark of being made; 「與上相違，即是無為法相」 tr. "what is opposite to the above is the mark of unconditioned dharmas". Once the two marks are established, they are at once returned to one—「是二法，皆般若波羅蜜中攝」 tr. "these two dharmas are both gathered within prajñāpāramitā". This connects precisely with the old meaning of the First Part, ‘prajñā is the head, is the bright guide’: the reason prajñā can gather in the conditioned and the unconditioned is not that it is greater than the two dharmas, but that it sees the two dharmas return alike to being without anything existent.
Next, look at the Buddha's confirmation and his negations. The Buddha answers Śakra, 「如是如是」 tr. "Just so, just so", and first establishes prajñā's virtue of giving rise—the buddhas of the three times and the disciples of the three times, whether attaining unsurpassed awakening or attaining the path of the srota-āpanna and so on up to the path of the pratyekabuddha, ‘all do so because of prajñāpāramitā’. Yet no sooner is this virtue established than the Buddha at once blocks it off and does not allow anyone to grasp at marks: prajñā is 「非此非彼、非高非下、非等非不等、非相非無相」 tr. "neither this nor that, neither high nor low, neither equal nor unequal, neither marked nor signless", and so on up to neither conditioned nor unconditioned, neither wholesome nor unwholesome. The Buddha himself makes clear that this is 「以俗法故，非以第一義」 tr. "by way of worldly dharma, not by way of the highest meaning"—to say that prajñā can give rise and can gather in is a skilful-means way of speaking that accords with worldly truth; in terms of the highest meaning, prajñā does not set up even the mark of ‘being able to give rise’. Śakra then goes deeper, following this intent: a bodhisattva who practises prajñā 「知一切眾生心，亦不得眾生」 tr. "knows the minds of all beings, yet does not find beings", and so on up to not finding the five aggregates, not finding the four foundations of mindfulness or the eighteen unshared dharmas, not finding awakening, not finding the Buddha. How can one know and yet not find? Because 「般若波羅蜜，性無所有、不可得，所用法不可得，處亦不可得」 tr. "prajñāpāramitā is by nature without anything existent and unfindable; the dharmas it uses are unfindable, and its place too is unfindable"—the prajñā that contemplates, the dharmas contemplated, and the place of contemplating and illuminating: all three are unfindable, and only this is the ground of ‘knowing and yet not finding’. The Buddha confirms it again: practising prajñā through the long night, even awakening is unfindable, how much more the bodhisattva and the dharmas of a bodhisattva.
Third, look at prajñā acting as the bright guide for the six perfections. Śakra raises a doubt: since prajñā is so surpassing, would it do for the bodhisattva ‘to practise prajñā alone and not practise the other perfections’? The Buddha's answer is decisive: the bodhisattva must 「盡行六波羅蜜」 tr. "practise all six perfections", only practising them with nothing to be attained—practising giving without finding a giver, a receiver, or the thing given; practising morality without finding precepts, a person who keeps the precepts, or a person who breaks them; and so on up to practising prajñā without finding wisdom, a wise person, or a person without wisdom. Only then does he point out that the relation of the six perfections to prajñā is not replacement but leading: when the bodhisattva practises giving, keeping the precepts, patience, vigour, meditation, and the contemplation of all dharmas, 「般若波羅蜜為作明導」 tr. "prajñāpāramitā acts as the bright guide", and only thus can each perfection be fully accomplished. The sūtra text itself sets up a simile of the trees of Jambudvīpa—various leaves, various flowers, various fruits, various colours, yet their shade is without difference; the perfections, entering prajñā and reaching sarvajñā, are likewise without difference. At the third treatise section the treatise-author pushes this meaning to its full, setting up a further simile of the taste of salt: a fool hears that salt is the master of all flavours and so eats salt alone, losing the flavour and bringing on sickness; if a practitioner practises prajñā alone and does not join it with the five perfections, he 「反墮邪見，不能增進善法」 tr. "instead falls into wrong view and cannot advance in wholesome dharmas". Taking the two similes together, Śakra's doubt about 「但行般若」 tr. "practising prajñā alone" is broken—prajñā is the master among the flavours, not the only flavour; it is the shade of all the trees, not a shade apart from the trees; 「雖眾行和合，般若為主」 tr. "although all practices join together, prajñā is their master"—master yet not alone, guide yet not substitute.
Fourth, look at the weighing of writing out the sūtra to recite oneself against writing it out to give to others. After Śakra has three times extolled prajñā as accomplished in great merit, in all merit, and in merit immeasurable, boundless, and without equal, he raises a very concrete question: between writing out the scroll of the sūtra, making offerings to it oneself and rightly recollecting it, and writing out the scroll and giving it to others, which brings more merit? The Buddha does not answer directly, but turns the question back on Śakra, taking the relics as an example—making offerings to relics oneself, and dividing off relics the size of a mustard seed and giving them to people so that they may make offerings: which brings more merit? Śakra answers that the merit of ‘dividing the relics and giving them to others’ is very great, and himself adds that the Buddha entered the vajra samādhi and broke his vajra body into powdered relics precisely so that later people might make offerings and obtain boundless merit and reward. The Buddha then confirms it, following this: writing out the sūtra and giving it to others so that they learn brings more merit than writing it out and making offerings oneself; and going one layer further, one who can 「為他人說，開示、分別，令易解」 tr. "speak it for others, opening and showing it, analysing it, so that it is easy to understand" surpasses one who merely gives the scroll—and people are taught to regard the person from whom they heard prajñā 「如佛」 tr. "as a Buddha", and as a person of lofty and superior pure conduct, because 「般若波羅蜜即是佛」 tr. "prajñāpāramitā is the Buddha", and the buddhas of the three times all trained within it. The treatise-author explains the reason for these degrees of merit not by the quantity of outward acts but by whether the mind-ground has a self or is without self: reading and reciting alone, 「或以我心，故功德小」 tr. "one may do it with a mind of self, and so the merit is small"; giving the sūtra to others, one 「有大悲心，作佛道因緣，無吾我故，功德為大」 tr. "has a mind of great compassion and makes a cause and condition for the Buddha path; because there is no self, the merit is great". The scale of the weighing, in the end, weighs whether self-grasping is present or absent.
Fifth, look at the two conditions, inner and outer, and the closing. Śakra's last doubt is the most pressing: since merit lies in the mind, why did the Buddha 「何用碎身如芥子，令人供養」 tr. "need to break his body into pieces like mustard seeds so that people might make offerings"? The treatise-author answers that a great fruit is accomplished only by the coming together of two causes and conditions—「信淨心從二因緣生：一者、內正憶念，二者、外有良福田」 tr. "a mind of pure faith is born from two causes and conditions: first, inward right recollection; second, an outward good field of merit"; and he further sets up a simile of a good field and good seed: though the grain seed is good, it must get a good field before the harvest is great; though the mind is good, it must rely on the relics before it obtains the great result. The inner mind and the outer object are not a choice of one out of two; each needs the other to be accomplished. At the end the treatise-author proves by two causes and conditions that prajñā is supreme: the sages of the three times learned within it and accomplished the holy path; the Buddha himself attained the unsurpassed holy state by this Dharma and yet 「還師仰此法」 tr. "still turns back to honour this Dharma as his teacher"—the Dharma being the real mark of all dharmas, prajñāpāramitā. The whole unit closes on one sentence of ascending root causes and conditions: 「般若是菩薩根本因緣，菩薩是諸佛根本因緣，諸佛是一切世間大利益安樂因緣」 tr. "prajñā is the root cause and condition of the bodhisattvas; the bodhisattvas are the root cause and condition of the buddhas; the buddhas are the cause and condition of great benefit and ease for all the world"; and what are called the necessities for offerings are nothing more than 「一心聽受乃至正憶念」 tr. "listening and receiving with one mind, and so on up to right recollection", together with flowers, incense, and so on up to banners and canopies. To open with the deepest meaning of the real mark and close with the plainest listening and receiving with one mind—this is exactly how the Last Part gathers itself up.
Do Not Misread
Do not read ‘the two marks of dharmas, conditioned and unconditioned’ as two entities standing side by side. The final sentence of the sūtra text already refutes this itself—「諸法無所有性，是諸法自性」 tr. "the nature of dharmas that is without anything existent is the self-nature of dharmas"; the unconditioned is not outside the conditioned, but is a name placed where the conditioned is 「無所有」 tr. "without anything existent", and the treatise-author explains it as 「與上相違，即是無為法相」 tr. "what is opposite to the above is the mark of unconditioned dharmas"—opposite, not something existing separately.
Do not read ‘prajñā is neither this nor that, neither high nor low’ as an inert emptiness in which prajñā is nothing at all. The sentence just before this string of negations is precisely ‘the buddhas of the three times all attained the path because of prajñā’; to be able to give rise to myriad virtues without grasping a single mark—that is the intent of the negations. The Buddha himself makes the distinction clear: this is 「以俗法故，非以第一義」 tr. "by way of worldly dharma, not by way of the highest meaning"—what is negated is the grasping at marks, not a sweeping away of the function of prajñā.
Do not read 「但行般若」 tr. "practising prajñā alone" as meaning that prajñā can be practised by itself. The Buddha answers plainly, 「菩薩盡行六波羅蜜」 tr. "the bodhisattva practises all six perfections", and the simile of the taste of salt says further that one who eats salt alone 「失味致患」 tr. "loses the flavour and brings on sickness", and one who practises prajñā alone 「墮邪見」 tr. "falls into wrong view". Prajñā is the bright guide, the master of all flavours: it guides without replacing the five perfections, and is master without discarding the many flavours; to read it as discarding the other five perfections is to be exactly the fool whom the treatise refutes.
Do not read ‘writing out the sūtra and giving it to others surpasses reciting it oneself’ as meaning that the outward act of giving to others itself has the greater merit. The treatise-author ties the degrees to the mind—reciting oneself, 「或以我心故功德小」 tr. "one may do it with a mind of self, and so the merit is small"; giving to others, 「無吾我故功德為大」 tr. "because there is no self, the merit is great". What surpasses is the compassionate mind without self, not the act of 「施」 tr. "giving"; if one gives while harbouring a self, it is small just the same.
Do not read 「佛何用碎身如芥子」 tr. "why did the Buddha need to break his body into pieces like mustard seeds" as meaning that merit lies only in the outer object, the relics. What the treatise-author answers with is 「二因緣」 tr. "two causes and conditions"—inward right recollection and an outward good field of merit, neither of which can be lacking; the simile of the good field and good seed is there exactly to show that each needs the other. One may neither sweep away the relics and speak only of the mind, nor leave the mind and speak only of the relics; clinging one-sidedly to either end is not the meaning of the two conditions coming together.
Bearing on Practice
Take ‘prajñā acts as the bright guide for the six perfections’ and check your own practice by it. When giving, keeping the precepts, or being patient, if one seeks only merit, seeks marks, and keeps hold of agent and object, that is practising with something to be attained, and the five perfections each become a heap of differences; when in each practice one sees that the giver, the receiver, and the thing given are all unfindable, that place of nothing to be attained is prajñā guiding. The guide is within the practice; it is not a separate emptiness brought up outside the practice.
Take the simile of the taste of salt and use it against the sickness of one-sided emptiness. When in one's practice one gets a slight taste of emptiness, it is easiest to give rise to the thought ‘this alone is enough; the rest is all unnecessary’, and so one discards giving, discards the precepts, and grows weary of all practices. Remember ‘eating salt alone, one loses the flavour and brings on sickness’—emptiness is the master of all flavours, not the only flavour; it must be joined with the five perfections, and only then is merit 「義味調適」 tr. "harmonious in meaning and flavour".
Take 「無吾我故功德為大」 tr. "because there is no self, the merit is great" and train giving and teaching the Dharma by it. Writing out the sūtra, giving it to others, explaining it for others—the moment the mind of self arises, it becomes small; the moment the self is effaced, it becomes great. In daily life, whenever one gives something or teaches something, first loosen that thought ‘this is what I did, what I taught’, and only then is the compassionate mind not diminished by self-grasping.
Take 「二因緣」 tr. "the two causes and conditions" and set by them the measure of cultivating inner and outer together. Attending only to right recollection in the inner mind while slighting the outer condition, the field of merit, or attending only to outward acts of offering without turning back to the inner mind—both lack one condition. Good field and good seed must be used together: inwardly, cultivate the mind-ground with right recollection; outwardly, form excellent conditions with reverent offerings; when the two conditions come together, the result is great.
Take 「還師仰此法」 tr. "still turns back to honour this Dharma as his teacher" and check your own proud mind by it. When there is a little attainment in practice, it is easiest to give rise to the pride of ‘the Dharma is realised by me’. The Buddha himself, having attained the unsurpassed holy state, still 「還師仰此法」 tr. "turns back to honour this Dharma as his teacher"—what he takes as his teacher is the real mark of all dharmas. If even the Buddha, in all his honour, still honours the real mark as his teacher, the learner all the more should, at the place of attainment, set down the self that attains.
Further Resonances
The Last Part takes over from the First Part and unfolds from it a complete forward turn. What the First Part weighed was which of the two portions, relics and prajñā, is heavier, and it concluded with ‘prajñā is the head, is the bright guide, as a king must have a retinue following’; the Last Part takes up these words, 「明導」 tr. "bright guide", and pushes them from a simile of weighing to the reality of the six perfections—prajñā 「作明導」 tr. "acts as the bright guide" for giving and so on up to meditation, and the old simile of the king with his retinue following settles into new similes: the master flavour among the many flavours, the one shade of the many trees. The First Part shows the capacity of prajñā with the wish-fulfilling jewel; the Last Part shows the substance of prajñā with 「性無所有、不可得」 tr. "by nature without anything existent and unfindable"; capacity without losing its emptiness, emptiness without obstructing its capacity—one substance and one function, handed down in succession. The two marks of dharmas, conditioned and unconditioned, inserted in the middle are the pivot of this unfolding: only because it sees the two dharmas return alike to being without anything existent can prajñā gather in all things, guide the five perfections, and fuse all differences into one taste. The final questions—writing out the sūtra and giving it to others, breaking the body into pieces for offerings, the two conditions inner and outer—seem to descend into a weighing of outward acts, but in fact step by step they are fastened back to the real mark of no self and nothing to be attained—the same line of reasoning as the First Part's ‘the relics are born from being perfumed and cultivated by prajñā’: what makes the relics precious lies in prajñā; what makes the merit of giving to others great lies in no self; what makes the fruit of the two conditions great lies in mind and object needing each other. What the Last Part hands on to what follows is just this thread—first recognising, in the six perfections, that prajñā guides and does not replace; then recognising, in the merit of giving, that only without self is it great; and finally recognising, in the two conditions inner and outer, that the mind is not accomplished alone and the object does not stand by itself. What the First Part takes is the portion of prajñā; what the Last Part shows is the function of prajñā; the two questions, of taking and of function, are both answered by one and the same prajñā—nothing to be attained, and yet myriad virtues plainly present.