大智度論 歎淨品Dazhidulun — Mahāprajñāpāramitā-upadeśa · Praise of Purity

Praise of Purity: Why Purity Is Very Deep and Receives the One General Answer ‘Because It Is Ultimately Pure’ in Fifteen Rounds; Why the Purity of Wisdom and the Purity of the Object Depend on Each Other while the Real Mark Is of Itself Pure from the Beginning; Why ‘Because I Am Pure, Form Is Pure’ Uses What Is Easily Understood as a Simile for What Is Hard to Understand; Why Being without Anything Existent and the Emptiness of Specific Marks Are Spoken of Separately; How the Two Purities Differ from True Purity; Why Grasping at the Mark of the Mind Is Obstruction and Why Grasping Marks in Recollecting the Buddhas Is Subtle Obstruction; and Why Prajñā Is Hard to Know, Hard to Understand, and Inconceivable

What Is Being Asked

This chapter’s name is 「歎淨品」 tr. "Praise of Purity," taken from Śāriputra’s first cry of praise at the head of the chapter—‘World-Honored One! This purity is very deep!’ The previous chapter set faith and disparagement side by side, making clear the merit of having faith in prajñā and the offence of slandering prajñā; this chapter enters along the road of that faith, and all that the whole chapter praises, asks, and examines is only the one character 「淨」 tr. "purity." The opening is Śāriputra’s unbroken series of fifteen rounds of praise and question: purity is very deep, purity is bright, purity is not continuous, purity is without stain, purity is without attainment and without attachment, purity is without arising, it does not arise in the desire realm, it does not arise in the form realm, it does not arise in the formless realm, purity is without knowing, form’s being without knowing is purity that is pure, feeling, perception, constructions, and consciousness being without knowing is purity that is pure, all dharmas being pure is purity that is pure, prajñā neither benefits nor harms sarvajñā (omniscience), prajñā is pure and receives nothing among dharmas—and in every round the Buddha first answers in general with the same one sentence, 「畢竟淨故」 tr. "because it is ultimately pure," and then adds a particular answer according to what was asked. That the same general answer is repeated fifteen times is precisely the teaching of this chapter: the reason purity has so many faces is that at root it is only one ultimate purity.

The second layer is the question-and-answer of 「我淨故」 tr. "because I am pure," which Subhūti takes over: because I am pure, form is pure; feeling, perception, constructions, and consciousness are pure; the six perfections are pure; the four foundations of mindfulness up to the eighteen unshared dharmas are pure; the fruit of the srota-āpanna up to the path of the Buddha is pure; omniscience is pure; because of the two purities there is no attainment and no attachment; because I am boundless, form and the rest are pure; to be able to know thus is called prajñā—the Buddha still answers in general with ultimate purity, while his particular answers set up, one after another, the meanings of being without anything existent, the emptiness of specific marks, the signless and the thoughtless, without stain and without purity, ultimate emptiness and beginningless emptiness, and knowing the seeds of the path; at the end it returns to this, that one who practises prajñā, by the power of skilful means, has none of the recollection, imagining, and discrimination, and the thirteen emptinesses break all dharmas completely and there is nothing that obstructs. The third layer turns to Śakra’s question: what are the obstructing dharmas of one who seeks the bodhisattva path? Subhūti answers with grasping at the mark of the mind and dedicating; the Buddha goes one level further and himself tells of the subtle marks of obstruction—to grasp marks in recollecting the buddhas is also obstruction; from this are drawn out the five layers of praise and question: prajñā is very deep, it should be worshipped yet there is no one who can attain it, all dharmas are of one nature and without nature, it is hard to know and hard to understand, it is inconceivable. The treatise-author explains these three layers passage by passage, and at the end gathers them in with the simile of the fierce wind that removes the clouds: dharmas can serve as causes and conditions for prajñā, but cannot give birth to prajñā. These three layers are exactly what the sūtra and treatise of this chapter must account for passage by passage.

Passage by Passage

1. Purity is very deep—because it is ultimately pure. At the head of the chapter Śāriputra says to the Buddha: ‘World-Honored One! This purity is very deep!’ The Buddha answers: 「畢竟淨故。」 tr. "Because it is ultimately pure." Śāriputra asks further by the purity of what dharma it is very deep, and the Buddha answers: because form is pure, because feeling, perception, constructions, and consciousness, the four foundations of mindfulness up to the eight limbs of the noble path, the Buddha’s ten powers up to the eighteen unshared dharmas, the bodhisattva, the Buddha, omniscience and omniscience of all kinds are pure, this purity is very deep. The first round at once sets up the pattern of the whole chapter: the purity that is praised is not a virtue possessed by some one dharma alone, but, from the five aggregates all the way to omniscience of all kinds, from the realm of ordinary people all the way to the realm of the Buddha, all are pure together as one body; the reason purity is deep is precisely that not one dharma lies outside this purity.

2. Purity is bright—because prajñā and so on up to dānapāramitā are pure. The second round praises 「淨明」 tr. "purity is bright." The Buddha answers in particular: because prajñāpāramitā is pure, this is purity is bright, and so on up to because dānapāramitā is pure, because the four foundations of mindfulness up to omniscience are pure, this is purity is bright. Brightness is the function of illuminating: the name of the previous chapter, "Illumination," already made clear that prajñā can illuminate all dharmas; here brightness is returned to purity—the brightness of the six perfections and the limbs of the path is in every case the brightness of purity, and it is not that there is some other kind of light apart from purity.

3. Purity is not continuous—because there is no going and no continuity. The third round praises 「淨不相續」 tr. "purity is not continuous." The Buddha answers in particular: because form does not go and is not continuous, and so on up to because omniscience of all kinds does not go and is not continuous. Continuity is the mark of birth and death: the prior dharma ceases, the later dharma arises, shifting and flowing thought after thought. Within purity, form and the other dharmas neither go nor continue—not that their flow is cut off and annihilated, but that the mark of flowing on is seen to be originally unfindable, and so within purity no continuity can be set up.

4. Purity is without stain—because its nature is ever pure. The fourth round praises 「淨無垢」 tr. "purity is without stain." The Buddha answers in particular: because the nature of form is ever pure, and so on up to because the nature of omniscience of all kinds is ever pure. This answer is most worth savouring: being without stain does not mean that the stain departs and then there is purity, but that the nature is originally ever pure—stain has never truly defiled its nature. The treatise’s explanation below, that the hundred and eight afflictions cannot cover and defile it, extends precisely this meaning.

5. Purity is without attainment and without attachment—because there is no attainment and no attachment. The fifth round praises 「淨無得無著」 tr. "purity is without attainment and without attachment." The Buddha answers in particular: because form is without attainment and without attachment, and so on up to because omniscience of all kinds is without attainment and without attachment. Attainment and attachment are two ways the mind clutches at dharmas: to seek and obtain is attainment, to hold on and guard is attachment. Within purity each dharma is in itself without the mark of attainment or attachment, and so the mind that takes it as object also has nothing it attains and nothing it is attached to.

6. Purity is without arising—because there is no arising. The sixth round praises 「淨無生」 tr. "purity is without arising." The Buddha answers in particular: because form is without arising, and so on up to because omniscience of all kinds is without arising. Non-arising is the most thoroughgoing phrase of all the rounds: ‘not continuous’ still denies with reference to the flowing on, while ‘non-arising’ points directly to all dharmas never having arisen from the beginning. The treatise’s explanation below, that because one does not grasp at marks one does not give rise to or make the three kinds of karma, brings non-arising down to karma’s not arising; it is the footnote to this round.

7. It does not arise in the desire realm—because the nature of the desire realm is unfindable. The seventh round praises 「淨不生欲界中」 tr. "purity does not arise in the desire realm." The Buddha answers in particular: because the nature of the desire realm is unfindable. The three realms are the map of birth and death; to say that purity does not arise in the desire realm does not mean that purity avoids the desire realm, but that the self-nature of the desire realm, when sought, is unfindable, and there is not one real realm in which it could arise.

8. It does not arise in the form realm—because the nature of the form realm is unfindable. The eighth round praises the form realm in the same pattern. The realm of the dhyāna absorptions of the form realm surpasses the desire realm, yet its nature is likewise unfindable; purity arises in nothing even in the superior realm, and what this guards against is the subtle attachment of abandoning the desire realm and craving the form realm.

9. It does not arise in the formless realm—because the nature of the formless realm is unfindable. The ninth round praises the formless realm. The formless realm is the summit of the three existences, the subtlest and deepest realm; its nature too is unfindable, and so purity does not arise in it either. Read the three rounds together, and they see through the three realms one by one from the coarse to the subtle: purity settles itself in no layer of the three realms, because not one layer of the three realms has a real nature in which to settle.

10. Purity is without knowing—because dharmas are dull. The tenth round praises 「淨無知」 tr. "purity is without knowing." The Buddha answers in particular: 「諸法鈍故，是淨無知。」 tr. "Because dharmas are dull, purity is without knowing." Dullness means without knowing and without awareness: dharmas in themselves are dark and without knowing, unable to know themselves and unable to know others. To say that purity is without knowing is to deny the imagining that ‘purity is a kind of brightness that can know’—purity is not a substance that knows, and dharmas are not realities that are known.

11. Form’s being without knowing is purity that is pure—because the self-nature of form is empty. The eleventh round turns one layer deeper: form’s being without knowing is the purity of purity. The Buddha answers in particular: because the self-nature of form is empty. The previous round spoke in general of dharmas being dull; this round comes down to form and adds one character, 「淨」 tr. "pure"—pure and pure again: not only is form without knowing, but its being without knowing comes precisely from the emptiness of its self-nature; because it is empty it is without knowing, and because it is without knowing, purity is added to purity.

12. Feeling, perception, constructions, and consciousness being without knowing is purity that is pure—because their self-nature is empty. The twelfth round extends it in the same pattern with feeling, perception, constructions, and consciousness: the four aggregates’ being without knowing is purity that is pure, because their self-nature is empty. Form and mind are raised together, and the five aggregates are gathered in entirely—being without knowing is not so of form alone; mental dharmas are so as well; the self-nature of the mind that can know is also empty, and so the mind’s being without knowing is also purity that is pure.

13. Because all dharmas are pure, this is purity that is pure—because they are unfindable. The thirteenth round gathers in the whole: because all dharmas are pure, this is purity that is pure; the Buddha answers in particular: because all dharmas are unfindable. The previous two rounds spoke separately with reference to the five aggregates; this round speaks in general with reference to all dharmas; the one word ‘unfindable’ gathers in the meaning of the emptiness of self-nature—dharmas are unfindable, and so purity too has no mark of purity to be found; this is called purity that is pure.

14. Prajñā neither benefits nor harms sarvajñā—because dharmas have the mark of ever abiding. The fourteenth round turns out a startling phrase: prajñāpāramitā neither benefits nor harms sarvajñā. The Buddha answers in particular: because dharmas have the mark of ever abiding. Prajñā is the cause that can lead toward, and sarvajñā is the fruit that is led toward; that the cause should after all neither benefit nor harm the fruit—this is because dharmas have the mark of ever abiding, the substance of the fruit is originally complete, and it is not increased by the cause; what this phrase denies is the idea of treating prajñā as a tool that can fabricate the fruit of buddhahood. The treatise’s explanation extends it with the similes of the dream, the illusion, and space; see the passage below.

15. Prajñā is pure and receives nothing among dharmas—because the nature of dharmas does not move. The fifteenth round brings Sūtra Section One to a close: prajñāpāramitā is pure, and receives nothing among dharmas. The Buddha answers in particular: because the nature of dharmas does not move. Receiving is taking in and clutching at objects; the purity of prajñā does not receive the slightest thing from dharmas, because what it enters is the unmoving nature of dharmas. With this the fifteen rounds are complete: from the depth and brightness of purity, to no continuity, no stain, no attainment or attachment, no arising, to not arising in the three realms, being without knowing, purity that is pure, and at last to neither benefiting nor harming and receiving nothing—layer upon layer of denial and dispelling that reveal only one ultimate purity.

16. The treatise explains the two kinds of purity—the purity of wisdom and the purity of the dharmas taken as object, dependent on each other like firewood and fire. In explaining 「是淨甚深」 tr. "this purity is very deep," the treatise-author first sets up a distinction: purity is of two kinds, first the purity of wisdom, second the purity of the dharmas taken as object. The two depend on each other—apart from the purity of wisdom there is no purity of the object, and apart from the purity of the object there is no purity of wisdom; because all mind and mental-factor dharmas are born from objects, and without an object wisdom does not arise, as when there is no firewood, fire has nothing to burn; and only when there is wisdom does one know the purity of the object, while without wisdom one does not know it. That the purity of wisdom and the purity of the object depend on each other is the ordinary way of the world. This passage first sets up, with reference to worldly truth, the mutual dependence of the knower and the known, laying the ground for the next passage to turn over into the real mark.

17. Apart from wisdom and apart from the object, the real mark is of itself pure from the beginning—the simile of fine food in the same vessel with poison. The treatise-author at once turns up one layer higher: apart from wisdom and apart from the object, the real mark of all dharmas is of itself pure from the beginning. When it is taken as object by mind and mental-factor dharmas, it is defiled and not pure—as when a hundred kinds of fine food are put in the same vessel with poison, they cannot be eaten. The real mark of all dharmas is ever pure; it is not made by the Buddha, and not made by bodhisattvas, pratyekabuddhas, śrāvakas, or ordinary people; whether there is a buddha or no buddha, it ever abides and is not destroyed. Only when it falls among inverted, false, and deceiving dharmas and their results is it defiled and impure. This passage is the foundation of the meaning of the whole chapter: purity is not established by the knower and the known, but lies precisely before the knower and the known; the mind’s taking as object is the defilement, and not taking as object is the original purity—the fine food is originally fine, and the poisoned vessel makes it inedible; the fault is not the food’s.

18. The various names of purity—suchness, the nature of dharmas, the limit of reality, and so on up to ultimate emptiness. The treatise-author lists other names of purity: it is called suchness, the nature of dharmas, the limit of reality; or it is called prajñāpāramitā; or it is called the path; or it is called neither arising nor ceasing, emptiness, the signless, non-action, without knowing and without attainment; or it is called ultimate emptiness and so on—immeasurable and boundless names. One dharma, many names; the names differ and the substance is one. Knowing this, one sees that the various words of praise in the fifteen rounds above all praise the same real mark through different gates, and are not fifteen kinds of purity.

19. Why Śāriputra aroused a mind of rare wonder—slander incurs great offence, faith obtains great fruit. The treatise-author accounts for how the first round came about: Śāriputra contemplated that the mark of prajñā cannot be seen, cannot be heard, cannot be spoken, and cannot be broken or destroyed, and yet one who slanders it incurs immeasurable offence, while one who receives it in faith and practises it rightly obtains the unsurpassed result—at this he aroused a mind of rare wonder and joy and praised purity as very deep. That a dharma which cannot be seen or heard should yet have its offence and merit so plainly present is precisely where the rare wonder lies; this too follows closely on the meaning of faith and disparagement in the previous chapter.

20. The Buddha answers that it surpasses what you see—up to not being attached even to the substance of purity. The Buddha answers Śāriputra: what you see you take to be rare and wondrous, yet in the real mark it surpasses even what you see—among all dharmas it is ultimately pure and attached to nothing, and even to the substance of purity it is not attached; this is called ultimate purity. To be pure and not attached to purity is the right understanding of the word ‘ultimate’: if on top of purity one further set up a mark of purity to guard, it would not be ultimate.

21. The masters of purity, the buddhas, are not attached either—the worthy and noble end their suffering, and still there is no attachment to prajñā. The treatise-author extends it further: the masters of purity are the buddhas of the ten directions and the three times, and the buddhas too are not attached to this purity; pure prajñā can bring the boundless suffering of all the worthy and noble to an end, and has this great benefit, and yet one is not attached to this prajñā either. Even the Buddha is not attached to purity, and not even the merit of rescue is relied upon; by immeasurable causes and conditions it is ultimately pure, and so purity is very deep. To confirm the ultimacy of purity by the Buddha’s non-attachment is the highest guarantee.

22. The root and branch, cause and result of form and the rest are pure. The treatise explains the particular answer: purity is very deep because form and the other dharmas are pure, since the root and branch, cause and result of form and the other dharmas are pure—as was said in the chapter above, it is because the bodhisattva cuts off by contemplative practice within form and the other dharmas that he obtains such purity. The four words root, branch, cause, and result carry purity everywhere: not only is the present moment of thought pure, but its root and its branch, its cause and its result—there is not one link that is not pure; contemplative practice cutting off delusion is the way in, and being originally pure is the reality.

23. Explaining ‘purity is bright’—it breaks the ignorance of idle discourse, gives the light of wisdom, gives nirvāṇa with remainder. The treatise explains the second round: this purity can break the ignorance of idle discourse within all dharmas and can give the light of the wisdom of ultimate emptiness, and so it is said that purity is bright; because one practises giving and the other wondrous dharmas of the bodhisattva, one obtains the brightness of purity; because it can give nirvāṇa with remainder, it is said that purity is bright. Brightness has three meanings: breaking the darkness is denial, giving light is illumination, giving nirvāṇa is the fruit—purity as brightness at once breaks, establishes, and realises.

24. Explaining ‘purity is not continuous’—it gives nirvāṇa without remainder; when life ends there is no going and no continuity. The treatise explains the third round: because it gives nirvāṇa without remainder, it is said that purity is not continuous—first, by the three samādhi of emptiness and the rest, one relinquishes all wholesome dharmas; afterwards, life comes naturally to its end, and the five aggregates of form and the rest do not go and are not continuous. The two nirvāṇas, with and without remainder, belong to two rounds: brightness is the illumination of the one with remainder, not being continuous is the stilling of the one without remainder; when life ends and the five aggregates do not continue, it is not that the dharmas are cut off and annihilated, but that the conditions are exhausted and the flow stills of itself.

25. Explaining ‘purity is without stain’—the hundred and eight afflictions cannot cover it. The treatise explains the fourth round: because the hundred and eight afflictions cannot cover and defile purity, it is said that purity is without stain. The afflictions number a hundred and eight, and their power to cover cannot be called light; yet because the nature is ever pure, what can cover can never defile—the covering is the guest, and purity is the host.

26. The two explanations of ‘without attainment and without attachment’—the sixteen minds and the bodhisattva position. The treatise gives two explanations of the fifth round: for one who practises the non-dual path of the real mark of all dharmas, from the acceptance of the dharma of suffering up to the fifteenth mind is called 「得」 tr. "attainment," and the sixteenth mind, attaining the fruit of the śramaṇa, is called 「著」 tr. "attachment"—attachment here means being attached and not falling back, another name for attainment; further, practising the six perfections up to giving rise to compliant acceptance is called 「得」 tr. "attainment," and being able to give rise to the acceptance of the non-arising of dharmas and enter the bodhisattva position is called 「著」 tr. "attachment." Within pure dharmas one uses the mind that has nothing to be attained, and these two things are absent, and so it is called without attainment and without attachment. Of these two explanations one refers to the śrāvaka path and one to the bodhisattva path: even such right attainment and right attachment as realising the fruit and entering the position are not set up within ultimate purity—not to belittle the fruit, but to deny attachment to the fruit.

27. Explaining non-arising—because one does not grasp at marks, karma does not arise; the nature of the three realms is unfindable. The treatise explains the sixth round and gathers in the three rounds of the three realms along with it: practising such a dharma, one knows that all dharmas are ultimately empty; because they are ultimately empty one does not grasp at marks; because one does not grasp at marks one does not give rise to or make the three kinds of karma; because one does not make karma, in the whole world there is no arising—the world is the three realms. For two causes and conditions there is no arising: first, because the three kinds of karma that produce birth do not arise; second, because the self-nature of the three realms is unfindable. Here the meaning of non-arising comes down to its most concrete point: birth and death come from karma, karma comes from grasping at marks, and grasping at marks comes from not knowing emptiness; know emptiness, and every link of the chain comes undone. The Buddha, speaking in general, says that causes and conditions are the emptiness of the self-nature of the three realms, and so says that the self-nature of the three realms, of form and the other dharmas, is unfindable.

28. Because their nature ever does not arise, they are ultimately pure—‘purity is without knowing’ is as said in the chapter above. The treatise explains the tenth round only by saying: this purity is without knowing because dharmas are dull, as was said in the chapter above; and it further concludes in general: the nature of all dharmas ever does not arise; because it does not arise it is unfindable; because it is unfindable it is ultimately pure. The three phrases form a chain—not arising, unfindable, ultimately pure—and gather the particular answers of the preceding rounds into a single line: every particular meaning flows out from the nature’s ever not arising.

29. Explaining ‘neither benefits nor harms’—cutting off the bodhisattvas’ craving and attachment; the similes of dream, illusion, and space. The treatise explains the fourteenth round by first making clear the intent of the question: Śāriputra has attained the śrāvaka’s pāramitā, and the Buddha is the omniscient one; because of the questions and answers between these two, the bodhisattvas in turn come to crave and be attached to prajñā; Śāriputra wishes to cut off their craving and attachment, and so says that although prajñā has such merits, because it is ultimately pure it neither benefits nor harms even sarvajñā. As in a dream or an illusion, though there is gain and loss, there is neither benefit nor harm; as space is ultimately pure and without anything existent, yet because of space things are accomplished and helped—one may not say that space does anything, nor may one say that space brings no benefit; dānapāramitā does something because of prajñā, and so it is said that there is neither benefit nor harm. The one simile of space covers both sides: the myriad things are accomplished because of space, and yet space does nothing; so too with prajñā toward sarvajñā—it is not without its merit, but its merit does not lie in adding anything.

30. Explaining ‘receives nothing’—extinguishing all contemplations and idle discourse, entering the mark of the nature of dharmas. The treatise explains the fifteenth round: prajñā contemplates all dharmas as having faults, as impure, as impermanent, suffering, empty, and without self, as neither arising nor ceasing and as neither not arising nor not ceasing, and so on; by all kinds of causes and conditions it praises the extinguishing of all contemplations and idle discourse and the cutting off of the path of language, and so it is said that prajñā is pure and receives nothing among dharmas; to extinguish contemplation and idle discourse and to cut off the path of language is precisely to enter the mark of the nature of dharmas, and so it is said that it is because the nature of dharmas does not move. Contemplation is the gate of entry, and extinguishing contemplation is arriving home: all contemplations were set up in the first place to break attachment, and when attachment is broken the contemplations too are not received—receiving nothing does not mean not contemplating; it means contemplating to the end and not abiding in contemplation.

31. The first round of Sūtra Section Two—because I am pure, form is pure; because I am without anything existent. In Sūtra Section Two the questioner turns to Subhūti, and the pattern of the sentence changes: it no longer asks about the purity of dharmas, but says 「我淨故色淨」 tr. "because I am pure, form is pure." The Buddha still answers that it is because it is ultimately pure; the particular answer is: because I am without anything existent, form is without anything existent, and is ultimately pure. Starting from the self is the key to all the rounds that follow: the self is the root of the attachment of beings; since the self is without anything existent, form too is without anything existent—the same ultimate purity.

32. Because I am pure, feeling, perception, constructions, and consciousness are pure. The second round extends it in the same pattern with feeling, perception, constructions, and consciousness: because I am pure, the four aggregates are pure; because I am without anything existent, feeling, perception, constructions, and consciousness are without anything existent, and are ultimately pure. Among the five aggregates form is coarse and mind subtle; pressing on each in turn, one sees that the emptiness of the self and the emptiness of the five aggregates are the same being without anything existent, and not one aggregate stands alone outside it.

33. Because I am pure, the six perfections are pure, and the four foundations of mindfulness up to the eighteen unshared dharmas are pure. The third round raises them all in one breath: because I am pure, dāna, śīla, kṣānti, vīrya, and dhyāna pāramitā are pure; because I am pure, prajñāpāramitā is pure; because I am pure, the four foundations of mindfulness up to the eight limbs of the noble path are pure, and the Buddha’s ten powers up to the eighteen unshared dharmas are pure. The Buddha’s particular answer is as before: because I am without anything existent, dānapāramitā is without anything existent and is pure, and so on up to the eighteen unshared dharmas being pure because they are without anything existent. The dharmas of practice and the virtues of the fruit are gathered in together as one body—the six perfections are what practises, the limbs of the path are what is cultivated, the ten powers and the unshared dharmas are the Buddha’s virtues; the purity of the emptiness of the self runs through from beginning to end, and not one stage lies outside ultimate purity.

34. Because I am pure, the fruit of the srota-āpanna up to the path of the Buddha is pure—because of the emptiness of specific marks. The fourth round raises the four fruits, the path of the pratyekabuddha, and the path of the Buddha: because I am pure, the fruits and the paths are pure. The Buddha’s particular answer suddenly changes its wording: 「自相空故。」 tr. "Because of the emptiness of specific marks." He no longer says ‘without anything existent’ but says ‘the emptiness of specific marks’—for this one change of wording the treatise-author below sets up a special question and answer to extend the reason: the fruits and paths are unconditioned dharmas, and differ in the meaning they establish from the conditioned five aggregates and six perfections. Here the text is first recorded; its meaning is detailed in the passage of the treatise’s explanation.

35. Because I am pure, omniscience is pure—because it is signless and without thought. The fifth round raises omniscience: because I am pure, omniscience is pure. The Buddha answers in particular: because it is signless and without thought. Omniscience is the ultimate knowledge, and the particular answer too is the subtlest: being signless is not grasping at marks; being thoughtless is not thinking even of the signless—its meaning is detailed in the passage of the treatise’s explanation.

36. Because of the two purities there is no attainment and no attachment—because it is without stain and without purity. Subhūti continues: because of the two purities there is no attainment and no attachment. The Buddha answers with ultimate purity; the particular answer: because it is without stain and without purity. The two purities are the purity of the self and the purity of dharmas; this question joins into one sentence the purities spoken of separately one by one in the preceding rounds, and the Buddha’s answer directly denies the pairing of stain and purity—only being without stain and without purity is the reality of the two purities.

37. Because I am boundless, form and the rest are pure—because of ultimate emptiness and beginningless emptiness. Subhūti further says: because I am boundless, form is pure, and feeling, perception, constructions, and consciousness are pure. The Buddha answers in particular: because of ultimate emptiness and beginningless emptiness. Not only is the self without anything existent, but it has no boundary to be sought; because it is boundless, the Buddha answers with two emptinesses together—its meaning is detailed in the passage of the treatise’s explanation on the emptiness of beings and beginningless emptiness.

38. To be able to know thus is called prajñā—because he knows the seeds of the path. Subhūti sums up: if a bodhisattva can know thus, this is called the prajñāpāramitā of the bodhisattva-mahāsattva. The Buddha answers that it is because it is ultimately pure; the particular answer: 「知道種故。」 tr. "Because he knows the seeds of the path." To be able to know thus—to know the purity of the self and the purity of dharmas, being without anything existent, the emptiness of specific marks, being without stain and without purity—is precisely prajñā; yet the Buddha does not seal it with ultimate emptiness, but seals it with knowing the seeds of the path; the deep meaning in this the treatise-author below brings out especially.

39. The thought that form does not know form—he forms this thought by the power of skilful means. Subhūti goes on to say: if a bodhisattva practises prajñā by the power of skilful means, he forms this thought: form does not know form, feeling, perception, constructions, and consciousness do not know consciousness, past dharmas do not know past dharmas, future dharmas do not know future dharmas, present dharmas do not know present dharmas. That dharma does not know dharma brings the meaning of being without anything existent down to the relation between dharma and dharma: not only is the self unfindable, but between dharma and dharma there is also no real relation of one that knows and one that is known.

40. The Buddha answers that by the power of skilful means he does not form this thought—because of the thirteen emptinesses there is none of the recollection, imagining, and discrimination. The Buddha’s answer speaks from the side of not forming: a bodhisattva who practises prajñā by the power of skilful means does not form this thought—I give to that person, I keep the precepts, I cultivate patience, I am vigorous, I enter meditation, I cultivate wisdom, I obtain merit, I shall enter the bodhisattva’s Dharma-position, I shall purify buddha-worlds, bring beings to maturity, and attain omniscience of all kinds. There is none of the recollection, imagining, and discrimination, because of inner emptiness, outer emptiness, inner-and-outer emptiness, the emptiness of emptiness, great emptiness, the emptiness of the highest meaning, the emptiness of the conditioned, the emptiness of the unconditioned, beginningless emptiness, the emptiness of dispersal, the emptiness of nature, the emptiness of all dharmas, and the emptiness of specific marks. This is called the bodhisattva’s practising prajñā; by the power of skilful means there is nothing that obstructs. From the giving at the first arousing of the mind all the way to the omniscience of all kinds at becoming a buddha, every thought of ‘how I …’ along the way is dispelled; the thirteen emptinesses are the tools of dispelling, and there being nothing that obstructs is the effect of dispelling completely.

41. Treatise Section Two explains the Buddha’s bearing witness—what is easily understood as a simile for what is hard to understand. The treatise-author first makes clear the pattern: the Buddha at first commanded Subhūti to speak prajñā, and for what he says one should not seek its causes and conditions; only for what others say should causes and conditions be sought. When Śāriputra asked about the mark of purity, the Buddha bore witness; now when Subhūti speaks of the mark of purity, the Buddha likewise bears witness for him. Explaining 「我淨故五眾淨」 tr. "because I am pure, the five aggregates are pure": just as the self is ultimately without anything existent and unfindable, so too are the five aggregates; ultimate emptiness is precisely the purity of the self and the purity of the five aggregates. To understand the emptiness of the self is easy, to understand the emptiness of the five aggregates is hard, and so what is easily understood is used as a simile for what is hard to understand. This passage points out the intent behind the sentence pattern of Sūtra Section Two: people still easily believe in the emptiness of the self—that searching for the self one finds it wholly unfindable is a realm commonly granted; toward the five aggregates, however, they hold them to be really existent. Starting from the purity of the self is borrowing the place of easy faith to lead into the place of hard faith. The six perfections up to the eighteen unshared dharmas, and the fruits and paths, are also thus: because I am pure, these dharmas too are pure.

42. Distinguishing being without anything existent from the emptiness of specific marks—spoken of separately for the conditioned and the unconditioned. The treatise-author raises a question: above it was said that because I am without anything existent, form up to the eighteen unshared dharmas are also without anything existent; why now say that the fruit of the srota-āpanna up to the path of the Buddha is the emptiness of specific marks? The answer: the self is born as a provisional name from the coming together of causes and conditions, and in what is without self there is the inversion of a self, and so it is said that the self is false and without anything existent; the five aggregates are without anything existent because they are the causes and conditions of places of attachment; dāna and the other dharmas, though wholesome, are conditioned, made dharmas and are what bodhisattvas are attached to, and so it is said that they are without anything existent. The fruit of the srota-āpanna and the rest are unconditioned dharmas, and unconditioned dharmas are the emptiness of specific marks—because they have no arising and no ceasing, no abiding and no change—and so it is not said that they are without anything existent, but only said that they are the emptiness of specific marks. The distinction between the two words stands at the boundary of the conditioned and the unconditioned: conditioned dharmas are the realm held by inversion, and so, with reference to their falseness, it is said they are without anything existent; unconditioned dharmas originally have no arising, ceasing, abiding, or change, and so, with reference to their original mark, it is said they are the emptiness of specific marks. The words differ and the emptiness is the same; each fits its dharma.

43. Because wrong practice is much, without anything existent; because there is no wrong practice, the emptiness of specific marks. The treatise-author extends it again with a second meaning: because within conditioned dharmas wrong practice is much, it is said they are without anything existent; because within unconditioned dharmas there is no arising and no ceasing and no wrong practice, it is said they are the emptiness of specific marks. Wrong practice means what is practised by inverted clutching at objects: upon the conditioned realm wrong practice is rife, and so ‘without anything existent’ must be used to snatch away what it holds; upon unconditioned dharmas there is no wrong practice to snatch away, and simply showing the emptiness of specific marks is enough.

44. Explaining ‘signless and without thought’—not thinking even of the signless samādhi. The treatise explains the round of omniscience: because I am pure, omniscience of all kinds is pure; it is because bodhisattvas are deeply attached that ‘signless and without thought’ is said. Signless is the signless samādhi; thoughtless means not thinking even of the signless samādhi. Bodhisattvas are most easily deeply attached to the ultimate knowledge, and so it is denied most subtly: entering the signless samādhi is still having something to rely on; only not thinking even of this samādhi is the reality of the purity of knowledge.

45. Purity by way of dual dharmas and purity by way of non-dual dharmas—purity in name and true purity. The treatise explains the round of the two purities: Subhūti knew that prajñā is truly pure, and so said to the Buddha that because of the two purities there is no attainment and no attachment. Purity is of two kinds: first, purity by way of dual dharmas; second, purity by way of non-dual dharmas. Purity by way of dual dharmas is purity in name; purity by way of non-dual dharmas is true purity. The Buddha speaks of the mark of all dharmas as ultimately empty; here he speaks of the causes and conditions, namely that all dharmas are without stain and without purity—only within the two purities is there discrimination of this as stain and that as purity. This passage sets up the most essential judgement of this chapter: any purity established in dependence on stain is purity in name; only when stain and purity in their pairing are both dispelled is there true purity. If the purity of the fifteen rounds above is understood as a paired opposite, it falls into purity in name.

46. ‘I am boundless’ is the emptiness of beings—because people fear emptiness, it is called purity. The treatise explains the round of ‘I am boundless’: as the self is empty, and because it is empty it is boundless, so too are the five aggregates. It further raises a question: it is always said to be ultimately pure; why now say ultimate emptiness and beginningless emptiness? The answer: ultimate emptiness is precisely ultimate purity; because people fear emptiness, it is called purity. Here it speaks of the self as boundless; the self is beings, and this is the emptiness of beings; why? Because of beginningless emptiness. This passage lays bare the card held under the wording of the whole chapter: purity and emptiness are one meaning with two names—speak of emptiness and people fear it, speak of purity and people draw near to it; the fifteen rounds of praising purity are in reality fifteen rounds of praising ultimate emptiness.

47. The emptiness of beings, the emptiness of dharmas, ultimate emptiness—this is called prajñā. The treatise explains the round of ‘being able to know thus’: to be able, by the emptiness of beings and the emptiness of dharmas, by the ultimate emptiness of all dharmas—this is called prajñāpāramitā; prajñā is precisely ultimate purity. Prajñā is not a wisdom outside emptiness: when the two emptinesses are thoroughly penetrated and ultimate emptiness is present, the very place where it is present is called prajñā—the knower and the known are not made into two pieces within ultimate emptiness.

48. Because he knows the seeds of the path—ultimate emptiness is spoken to break the attached mind; it is not a real emptiness. The treatise-author raises a question: the Buddha always answers with ultimate emptiness; why does he say that a bodhisattva’s being able to know thus is called the bodhisattva’s prajñā? The Buddha says it is because he knows the seeds of the path. Though the bodhisattva knows all dharmas to be ultimately empty, he wishes beings to attain this ultimate emptiness and to leave far behind the attached mind; ultimate emptiness is spoken only in order to break the attached mind; it is not a real emptiness. This is one of the eyes of the whole chapter: ultimate emptiness itself is not a real dharma either—it is a medicine, not a realm; the bodhisattva’s knowing does not stop at realising emptiness for himself, but further knows by what path and what gate to lead beings away from attachment, and so it is sealed with knowing the seeds of the path.

49. Prajñā has no fixed mark; it is spoken of with discrimination by the knowledge of the kinds of paths. The treatise explains the question of form not knowing form: the Buddha’s intent is that prajñā has no fixed mark, but because of the knowledge of the kinds of paths it is spoken of with discrimination, so that the bodhisattva practising prajñā has skilful means; though dharmas are ultimately empty, he likewise knows thus that form does not know the dharma of form, and so on. Contemplating all dharmas as ultimately empty, there remains only the wisdom that contemplates, and one should not make that too ultimately empty, in order to guide beings’ attached minds and let them enter ultimate emptiness. This passage continues from the one above: emptiness does not hinder speaking with discrimination, and speaking with discrimination does not destroy emptiness; the wisdom that contemplates is kept for a time and not dispelled, not in order to rely on oneself, but in order to guide others.

50. Outer contemplation and inner contemplation—not forming the thought ‘I give, he receives’. The treatise explains the Buddha’s answer: if a bodhisattva practising prajñā has skilful means, he can contemplate outer dharmas as ultimately empty, form as not knowing form, and so on; contemplating his own inner mind within, it is likewise; by the power of skilful means, when practising giving he does not form this thought: I give to him, he is the one who receives the gift. Outer dharmas and the inner mind are one and the same method of contemplation: contemplating outwardly, dharma does not know dharma; contemplating inwardly, the marks of giver and receiver do not arise—contemplation is not merely for understanding, but comes down directly on the mark of the mind at the time of practising giving.

51. Because they do not know each other there is nothing done—breaking the two things of the receiver and the thing given. The treatise explains form not knowing form and the rest: because all dharmas are empty they do not know each other; because they do not know each other there is nothing done; this breaks two things—namely the receiver and the thing given; now the breaking of the giver, and so on up to ‘I cultivate omniscience of all kinds’, is likewise. The one matter of giving has three wheels: the giver, the receiver, and the thing given; when dharma does not know dharma, the three wheels are broken all at once, and pushing on to the thought ‘I cultivate omniscience of all kinds’, that too is broken.

52. The thirteen emptinesses break all dharmas completely—this is called nothing that obstructs. The treatise concludes Sūtra Section Two: here it speaks of the causes and conditions—the bodhisattva practising prajñā, because of skilful means, has no such discrimination; because of inner emptiness and so on up to the emptiness of specific marks, these thirteen emptinesses break all dharmas completely, and the last five kinds of emptiness speak of the general mark; this is called the bodhisattva’s having nothing that obstructs. Having nothing that obstructs means that these emptinesses are not obstructed by anything among all dharmas. Each of the thirteen emptinesses has what it breaks, and when the breaking is complete not one dharma is an obstruction; obstruction is originally set up by attachment, and when attachment is exhausted dharma after dharma is unobstructed. Fascicle sixty-three ends here; fascicle sixty-four sets out the chapter title again, and Sūtra Section Three begins.

53. Śakra asks about obstructing dharmas—grasping at the mark of the mind and dedicating is obstruction. In Sūtra Section Three Śakra asks Subhūti: what are the obstructing dharmas of a good man who seeks the bodhisattva path? Subhūti answers: there are good men and good women seeking the bodhisattva path who grasp at the mark of the mind—grasp at the mark of the six perfections, the mark of inner emptiness up to the emptiness of non-existent and existent dharmas, the mark of the four foundations of mindfulness up to the eight limbs of the noble path, the mark of the Buddha’s ten powers up to the eighteen unshared dharmas, the mark of the buddhas, the mark of planting roots of goodness with the buddhas—and, joining all this merit together, grasp its mark and dedicate it to anuttarā samyaksaṃbodhi; this is called obstructing dharmas; because of these dharmas one cannot practise prajñā without obstruction. Why? The mark of form cannot be dedicated, the marks of feeling, perception, constructions, and consciousness cannot be dedicated, and so on up to the mark of omniscience cannot be dedicated. Not one of the things grasped is an evil dharma—the six perfections, the gates of emptiness, the limbs of the path, the virtues of the Buddha, the roots of goodness are all wondrous and good; the obstruction lies not in the dharmas grasped, but in the mind that grasps at marks. That marks cannot be dedicated is the reason: if dedication is set up on the strength of marks, what is dedicated falls into marks that have an end.

54. Showing, teaching, benefiting, and gladdening by the real mark—oneself without error, as the Buddha permits. Subhūti goes on to speak of the road without obstruction: if a bodhisattva shows, teaches, benefits, and gladdens others with anuttarā samyaksaṃbodhi, he should show, teach, benefit, and gladden them with the real mark of all dharmas—when practising giving he should not discriminate ‘I give’, ‘I keep the precepts’, ‘I am patient’, ‘I am vigorous’, ‘I enter meditation’, ‘I cultivate wisdom’, ‘I practise inner emptiness’, and so on up to ‘I practise anuttarā samyaksaṃbodhi’. Showing, teaching, benefiting, and gladdening thus, he himself is without error, and he also shows, teaches, benefits, and gladdens by the dharma the Buddha permits, letting good men and good women leave far behind all obstructing dharmas. The way of teaching others is precisely the way of one’s own practice: teaching by the real mark, the teacher does not fall into the error of the mark of self, the receiver does not plant the cause of grasping at marks, and both benefits are accomplished together.

55. The Buddha himself tells of the subtle marks of obstruction—grasping marks in recollecting the buddhas is in every case a mark of obstruction. The Buddha praises Subhūti, ‘Excellent, excellent,’ and bids him listen further to the subtle marks of obstruction: there are good men and good women who arouse the mind of anuttarā samyaksaṃbodhi and grasp marks in recollecting the buddhas—whatever marks there may be, all are marks of obstruction; with regard to the buddhas, from the first arousing of intent up to the abiding of the Dharma, to grasp marks and recollect and dedicate all the roots of goodness in between—all are marks of obstruction; to grasp marks and dedicate the roots of goodness of the buddhas and their disciples and the roots of goodness of the remaining beings—all are marks of obstruction. Why? One should not grasp marks in recollecting the buddhas, nor should one grasp marks in thinking of the roots of goodness of the buddhas. This is the steepest passage of this chapter: recollecting the Buddha, thinking of the Buddha’s roots of goodness, dedicating roots of goodness to awakening, are the most correct gates of practice; yet once grasping at marks is involved, they are judged alike as obstruction. The better what is denied, the subtler its mark—grasping at marks within right practice could not be seen through unless the Buddha himself spoke of it.

56. Prajñā is very deep—because all dharmas are ever apart. Hearing this, Subhūti praises: prajñāpāramitā is very deep! The Buddha answers: 「一切法常離故。」 tr. "Because all dharmas are ever apart." Depth lies not in distance but in being apart: all dharmas are ever of themselves far apart—apart from marks, apart from names, apart from the place of attachment and grasping—and prajñā, in accord with the nature, illuminates this ever being apart, and so it is deep beyond fathoming.

57. I shall worship prajñā—because it is without origination and without action, there is no one who can attain it. Subhūti says: I shall worship prajñāpāramitā! The Buddha tells him: because prajñā is without origination and without action, there is no one who can attain it. The moment the mind of worship and reverence arises, the Buddha at once denies its knower and known: prajñā is without origination and without action, and is not an object before which one can make worship and from which one can obtain something; this denial does not refuse his reverence, but guards against grasping at marks within reverence—exactly of a piece with the teaching on the subtle marks of obstruction.

58. All dharmas are of one nature, not of two natures—absence of nature is precisely the nature. Subhūti says: all dharmas too are unfindable. The Buddha says: all dharmas are of one nature, not of two natures; this one nature of dharmas is also without nature; this absence of nature is precisely the nature, and this nature does not originate and does not act. If a bodhisattva knows that all dharmas are of one nature—namely without nature—without origination and without action, he leaves far behind all marks of obstruction. This passage is the summit of the meaning of Sūtra Section Three: the one nature is not some separate substance behind the myriad dharmas; the one nature is precisely absence of nature; and absence of nature is not annihilated non-existence either; absence of nature is precisely the nature. Knowing it at the place where there is no origination and no action, the marks of obstruction are of themselves far away.

59. Hard to know and hard to understand—no seer, no hearer, no knower, no cognizer, no attainer. Subhūti says to the Buddha: prajñā is hard to know and hard to understand! The Buddha says: it is as you say—prajñā has no seer, no hearer, no knower, no cognizer, no attainer. The fivefold ‘no’ closes at once every gate by which one might take prajñā as an object: seeing, hearing, knowing, cognising, and attaining are the whole of the passages by which mind and consciousness grasp dharmas; prajñā has no one who does any of these, and so its difficulty lies not in the difficulty of its meaning but in there being no road through.

60. Inconceivable—not born from the mind, and so on up to not born from the eighteen unshared dharmas. Subhūti further says: prajñā is inconceivable! The Buddha says: it is as you say—prajñā is not born from the mind, not born from form, feeling, perception, constructions, and consciousness, and so on up to not born from the eighteen unshared dharmas. Conceiving is the activity of the mind; since prajñā is not born from the mind, nor born from the five aggregates up to the Buddha’s virtues, the tools of conceiving have nothing to be applied to in it—inconceivable is not the utmost word of praise, but a statement of the real mark.

61. Treatise Section Three explains why Śakra asks further—obstructing dharmas are subtle, and those of dull faculties do not perceive them. The treatise-author raises a question: if what runs contrary to non-obstruction is called obstruction, why does Śakra ask further about obstruction? The answer: the bodhisattva’s obstructing dharmas are subtle and enter into combination with wholesome dharmas; those of sharp faculties perceive them, those of dull faculties do not; because they are hard to understand, he asks further before the Buddha. If obstruction appeared within evil dharmas, everyone could recognise it; precisely because it is mixed in among wholesome dharmas and combined with good practice so as to be hard to tell apart, it must be specially picked out—Śakra’s question asks about what the many do not see.

62. The explanation of grasping at the mark of the mind—though food is fragrant and fine, eaten to excess it makes one sick. The treatise explains grasping at the mark of the mind: the bodhisattva discriminates the mind of stinginess from the mind of giving, abandons the mind of stinginess and grasps the mind of giving—this is called grasping at the mark of the mind; he knows the thing given as precious or cheap, and knows that by cultivating and accumulating giving he can give away everything—these, dānapāramitā up to the merit of rejoicing, wholesome dharmas grasped by their marks, though they are wondrous, are attached inwardly to the self and outwardly to dharmas, and fall among obstructing dharmas; as food, though fragrant and fine, makes one sick when eaten to excess. Abandoning stinginess and grasping giving is in itself right practice; the sickness lies in the mind, at the moment of grasping and abandoning, holding a knower and a known: inwardly there is a self that can give, outwardly there is a dharma that is given. The simile of eating and sickness: the food is not poison, but eaten to excess it becomes sickness; wholesome dharmas are not obstruction, but practised with grasping at marks they become obstruction.

63. Because they are ultimately empty, they cannot be dedicated. The treatise cites Subhūti’s own statement of the cause and condition: 「色等諸法相畢竟空故，不可得迴向無上道。」 tr. "Because the marks of form and the other dharmas are ultimately empty, they cannot be dedicated to the unsurpassed path." The reason dedication cannot rely on marks is precisely that marks are ultimately empty: to dedicate by empty marks is like catching a shadow and throwing it far away—in the end it arrives nowhere; only dedication that does not grasp at marks accords with the signless substance of the unsurpassed path.

64. The mark of non-obstruction—the real dharma is the extinguishing of all recollection, imagining, and discrimination, and obtains two kinds of benefit. The treatise explains the mark of non-obstruction: if a bodhisattva wishes to teach others the unsurpassed path, he should show, teach, benefit, and gladden them with the real dharma; the real dharma is namely the extinguishing of all recollection, imagining, and discrimination, and so it says that when practising giving one does not discriminate ‘I give’ and the like. If one can teach and transform in this way, one obtains two kinds of benefit: first, one is oneself without error; second, one also transforms others by the dharma as the Buddha obtained it. Such things run contrary to the immeasurable marks of obstruction; this is called the mark of non-obstruction. The real dharma is not some other set of dharmas; it is precisely the place within all practices where recollection, imagining, and discrimination are extinguished; teaching people by this, teacher and receiver alike leave the net of obstruction.

65. Why the Buddha himself tells of the subtle marks of obstruction—they are beyond the reach of Subhūti’s power. The treatise-author raises a question: the Buddha has already praised Subhūti for speaking of the mark of non-obstruction; why does he now further tell of the subtle marks of obstruction himself? The answer: the Buddha praises Subhūti within the measure of his power—you are one who has abandoned beings, and yet you can speak of the bodhisattva’s marks of obstruction; the subtle marks of obstruction are beyond the reach of Subhūti’s power, and therefore the Buddha tells of them himself. Praising and telling of it himself do not hinder each other: within what his power reaches, the Buddha praises him as thoroughly good; for what his power does not reach, the Buddha himself supplies the subtlety—and this also shows the subtlety of the subtle marks of obstruction, which nothing but the Buddha’s knowledge can illuminate completely.

66. The explanation of the subtle marks of obstruction—the mark of the signless is prajñā; results mixed with poison do not attain the unsurpassed path. The treatise explains subtle obstruction: because the marks of obstruction are subtle, listen well with one mind—for a bodhisattva to recollect the buddhas and the rest with a mind that grasps at marks is in every case obstruction; the mark of the signless is prajñāpāramitā, and the Buddha comes forth from prajñā and is likewise the mark of the signless; roots of goodness dedicated with an attached mind that grasps at marks are a worldly result, and because they are exhaustible and mixed with poison they cannot attain the unsurpassed path. To recollect the Buddha while grasping at marks is already not the reality of the Buddha recollected—the Buddha is the mark of the signless, and grasping at marks loses what is recollected; roots of goodness dedicated with attachment to marks have their results fall within the world, exhaustible and mixed with poison. Poison means the attachment of grasping at marks seeping into the good: though the result is good it is not pure, and so it cannot of its own course reach the inexhaustible unsurpassed path.

67. Distinguishing coarse obstruction from subtle obstruction—the obstruction within the samādhi of recollecting the Buddha. The treatise-author raises a question: above, in speaking of coarse obstruction, grasping at marks was mentioned; now within subtle obstruction grasping at marks is also mentioned—what is the difference? The answer: above it spoke of ‘I am the giver, he is the receiver’, and the like; now it speaks only of grasping at marks. Further, now it speaks of the subtle mark because of the bodhisattvas’ samādhi of recollecting the Buddha—it is obstruction within a person of subtle mind, and therefore it is called subtle obstruction. Coarse obstruction carries the marks of self and other, and its attachment is plain; subtle obstruction is only a single thought of grasping at marks, and appears besides within such subtle activity of mind as the samādhi of recollecting the Buddha—the subtler the mind, the more hidden the obstruction, and so the name ‘subtle’ is set up separately.

68. The praise of very deep and the Buddha’s answer—because prajñā is far from all dharmas, subtle marks cannot enter it. The treatise explains Subhūti’s praise: knowing that what the Buddha spoke is deep and wondrous and not within his own reach, he praises it as very deep. The Buddha answers that it is because all dharmas have the mark of being ever far apart—the Buddha is saying that this prajñā is far from all dharmas; because it is far from all dharmas, subtle marks cannot enter into prajñā. This answer follows directly from the subtle obstruction: however subtle a mark of obstruction may be, it is still a mark; prajñā is far from all dharmas, and even a subtle mark has no crack by which to enter—the real meaning of depth is having no crack.

69. The thought of making worship and the Buddha’s answer—the buddhas as many as the sands of the ten directions, none can attain it. The treatise explains the passage on making worship: Subhūti rejoices and says, I shall make worship to prajñā, meaning: because I have understood this very deep mark of prajñā, I arouse the mind, and I ought to make worship. The Buddha says: because prajñā is without origination and without action, the buddhas of the ten directions, as many as the sands of the Ganges, none of them can attain it—how can you, a śrāvaka, speak of attaining it? Even the buddhas as many as the sands of the ten directions cannot attain prajñā—attaining requires the mark of origination and action, and prajñā is without origination and without action, so no one who attains can be set up; denying Subhūti’s attainment is not to put down the śrāvaka, but to make clear that in the substance of prajñā there is originally no meaning of attainment.

70. All dharmas are of one nature without duality—one should not be attached to ultimate emptiness nor grasp at its mark. Subhūti says that all dharmas are without knowing and without attainment; the Buddha says that all dharmas are of one nature without duality. The treatise explains: the one nature is namely ultimate emptiness; without duality means there is no ultimate and not-ultimate; the one nature of dharmas is precisely without nature. One should not be attached to ultimate emptiness, nor grasp at its mark—why? Because it is born from the coming together of causes and conditions. This explanation fills out the sūtra text’s meaning of one nature and absence of nature: ultimate emptiness too may not be held as ultimate—to hold to the ultimate is to make a pair with the not-ultimate; the understanding of emptiness is born from causes and conditions, and a born dharma has nothing to be attached to, so one is not attached even to ultimate emptiness.

71. Subhūti’s two thoughts—he took it that he had attained, and the Buddha says he has not. The treatise recounts Subhūti’s understanding: he thought, if absence of nature is precisely the nature, then, because there is no origination and no action, the suffering of later lives does not continue; if one can know prajñā thus, all obstructions are left far behind; if one leaves obstructions far behind, then one freely attains the unsurpassed path. Having heard the Buddha speak, he further thought: I took it that I had attained, and the Buddha says I have not attained; this prajñā is hard to understand and hard to know. The first thought is right understanding—absence of nature is the nature, suffering does not continue, leaving obstruction one is free; the second thought is what is seen through—where he took himself to have attained, the Buddha says there is no attainment. Between the two thoughts lies exactly the difficulty of being hard to understand: the place of understanding is precisely where the idea of attainment arises, and the place where the idea of attainment arises is precisely what is denied.

72. It is not hard for you alone—prajñā goes beyond the six kinds of knowing. The treatise explains the Buddha’s answer: it is not hard for you alone; for all beings there is no seer, no hearer, no knower, no cognizer, no attainer—it is not known by ear, nose, tongue, or body, and not cognised or attained by mind; this prajñā goes beyond the six kinds of knowing, and so it is said to be hard to understand. The six kinds of knowing are the whole of the faculties by which beings know dharmas; prajñā is not their realm, and so everyone alike finds it hard here—the difficulty is not because of dull faculties, but because prajñā goes beyond the whole framework of knowing as knowing.

73. His power of wisdom exhausted, he says it is inconceivable. The treatise explains the praise ‘inconceivable’: Subhūti entered into the deep prajñā, and his power of wisdom was exhausted, and so he said it is inconceivable. This praise is not general praise: it is a true report from one who has gone to the end of the power of wisdom—only when the power of conceiving is used to the point where it has no further use does one know that there is something conceiving cannot reach.

74. Because it has no mark of arising—not born from the mind, not born from the five aggregates. The treatise explains the Buddha’s answer: this prajñā is not born from the mind, not born from the five aggregates, and so on up to not born from the eighteen unshared dharmas, because it has no mark of arising. If prajñā were born from the mind, it would be what comes out of the mind, a dharma that has arising; what has arising has ceasing—how would it be fit to be the substance of ultimate purity? Because it has no mark of arising, none of the positions that can give birth—from the mind to the Buddha’s virtues—is its father or mother.

75. Distinguishing the brief statement from the extended statement—the simile of the fierce wind that removes the clouds. At the end the treatise raises a question: if it is said that it is not born from the mind, why is it further said of the five aggregates? Within the five aggregates, the aggregate of consciousness is precisely the mind. The answer: first speaking of the mind is the brief statement; afterwards speaking of the five aggregates and the rest is the extended statement. The five aggregates up to the eighteen unshared dharmas can serve as causes and conditions for prajñā, but cannot give birth to prajñā; as a fierce wind, removing the clouds, can let the sun and moon appear, yet cannot make the sun and moon. This simile gathers in the whole chapter: all the dharmas of practice—the body of the five aggregates, the practice of the limbs of the path, the adornment of the Buddha’s virtues—are all like the fierce wind, able to remove the clouds that cover and let the sun and moon of prajñā appear before one; yet the sun and moon are in the sky of themselves, not made by the wind. Prajñā is ultimately pure and originally already complete; the practices remove the obstructions for it and do not make its substance—the purity of this whole chapter of praising purity here returns to what is originally present.

Do Not Misread

Do not read the 「畢竟淨故」 tr. "because it is ultimately pure" of the fifteen rounds as a perfunctory formula. That the Buddha answers the fifteen questions alike with this sentence is not because he has no particular answer to give, but to show plainly that very deep, bright, not continuous, without stain, without attainment and attachment, without arising, not arising in the three realms, without knowing, purity that is pure, neither benefiting nor harming, receiving nothing—these many faces come out of the same source, and the source is ultimate purity; the particular answers open a gate according to the question, and the general answer is every gate returning to the same place. The treatise-author’s explanation, that ultimate emptiness is precisely ultimate purity and that because people fear emptiness it is called purity, is exactly this meaning: in reading the fifteen rounds, one should see what is not repeated in what is repeated—each round is a particular gate of ultimate emptiness, and not fifteen kinds of purity each going its own way.

Do not read 「般若波羅蜜於薩婆若無益無損」 tr. "prajñāpāramitā neither benefits nor harms sarvajñā" as meaning that prajñā is useless and practice is in vain. The treatise-author says clearly that these words were spoken because Śāriputra wished to cut off the bodhisattvas’ craving and attachment to prajñā; its meaning is like space—one may not say that space does anything, nor may one say that space brings no benefit; the myriad things are accomplished because of space, and space adds nothing; dānapāramitā does something because of prajñā, which shows precisely its merit. Neither benefiting nor harming denies treating prajñā as a tool of fabrication that can add something to the substance of the fruit; it does not brush aside its function of guiding to completion. In the same way, the simile of the fierce wind removing the clouds at the end—that the practices cannot give birth to prajñā—does not mean the practices may be discarded: without the wind the clouds are not removed, and the sun and moon never appear.

Do not read the self in 「我淨故色淨」 tr. "because I am pure, form is pure" as a really existent pure self. The treatise-author’s explanation is very clear: the self is born as a provisional name from the coming together of causes and conditions, and in what is without self there is the inversion of a self, and so it is said that the self is false and without anything existent; the purity of the self is precisely the self’s being ultimately without anything existent and unfindable, and so too are the five aggregates. Starting from the self is only because understanding the emptiness of the self is easy and understanding the emptiness of dharmas is hard, using what is easily understood as a simile for what is hard to understand—borrowing the non-self that people easily believe to lead into the emptiness of dharmas that they find hard to believe; if a pure self were set up here, it would be exactly contrary to what is taught. Again, do not confuse the two words 「無所有」 tr. "without anything existent" and 「自相空」 tr. "the emptiness of specific marks": conditioned dharmas are said to be without anything existent with reference to false attachment, and unconditioned dharmas are said to be the emptiness of specific marks with reference to their having no arising, ceasing, abiding, or change; each word fits its dharma, while the meaning of emptiness is not two.

Do not read the teaching on the subtle marks of obstruction as meaning that one may not recollect the Buddha, or may not dedicate roots of goodness. The two Chinese characters the Buddha denies are plain—「取相」 tr. "grasping at marks": it is grasping marks in recollecting the buddhas that is obstruction, not the recollecting of the buddhas; it is dedicating with an attached mind that grasps at marks that falls into a worldly result, not dedication itself that is at fault. The Buddha himself comes forth from prajñā and is the mark of the signless; only when one recollects apart from marks is what is recollected the reality of the Buddha. The steeper this teaching, the more one sees how earnestly it protects the gates of practice: even when right practice reaches the subtlety of the samādhi of recollecting the Buddha, there is still a single thought of grasping at marks to be examined—not wishing people to abandon practice, but wishing them to practise without attachment. That the Buddha sees through, at a touch, even Subhūti’s reverence in ‘I shall worship prajñā’ and his understanding in ‘I took it that I had attained’ is precisely the layer-upon-layer demonstration of this meaning.

Bearing on Practice

The first benefit this chapter gives to one who applies himself is the settling of the mind in the word 「畢竟淨」 tr. "ultimately pure." In what the fifteen rounds praise, from the five aggregates to omniscience of all kinds not one dharma is impure, and its purity does not come from fabrication—the real mark is ever pure, not made by the Buddha, and whether there is a buddha or no buddha it ever abides and is not destroyed; the hundred and eight afflictions cannot cover and defile it. One who applies himself often feels his own stains to be heavy and the realm of purity far away; this chapter teaches people first to have enough faith in this: purity is not a new thing produced by cultivation, but the original purity covered over by the mind’s taking of objects. The simile of the fine food in the same vessel with poison can serve as a method of contemplation in daily use—the object is not to blame; the defilement of the mind’s taking of objects is to blame; applying oneself does not lie in making some other purity, but in resting the taking of objects that can defile.

The second benefit lies in the order of the gate of contemplation in 「我淨故色淨」 tr. "because I am pure, form is pure." The treatise-author points out that this uses what is easily understood as a simile for what is hard to understand: first search in one’s own self—where is the self? It is born as a provisional name from the coming together of causes and conditions, and when sought it is wholly unfindable—this step anyone can take in hand; when one has enough faith in the emptiness of the self, contemplate form, feeling, perception, constructions, and consciousness with the same eye, contemplate the six perfections and the limbs of the path up to the path of the Buddha, and see that they are the same being without anything existent, the same emptiness of specific marks. Entering the emptiness of dharmas by way of the emptiness of the self is the ready-made ladder this chapter gives; in daily use, wherever self-attachment arises is exactly where this contemplation is put to work.

The third benefit is a mirror in the gate of practice for examining 「取相」 tr. "grasping at marks." Sūtra Section Three speaks of obstructing dharmas to their subtlest: to discriminate, when giving, ‘I give, he receives’ is obstruction; to practise wholesome dharmas grasping the mark of wholesome dharmas is obstruction; and so on up to recollecting the Buddha grasping at marks and dedicating roots of goodness grasping at marks—all are obstruction. One who applies himself should reflect on himself by this: what obstructs has never been evil dharmas, but the attached mind within good practice—at the moment of abandoning stinginess and grasping giving, at the time of reciting sūtras and recollecting the Buddha, in the instant of dedicating and making vows, is there or is there not a self that practises, a dharma that is practised, a mark that can be grasped lurking within? The simile ‘though food is fragrant and fine, eaten to excess it makes one sick’ should be kept always in mind: the sickness of the gate of practice lies mostly not in not practising, but in practising and holding on.

The fourth benefit is honesty in the place of difficulty. The Buddha says that prajñā has no seer, no hearer, no knower, no cognizer, no attainer, and goes beyond the six kinds of knowing; he further says it is not hard for you alone—for all beings it is hard. When one who applies himself feels he has some insight into the meaning of prajñā, it is just the time to remember Subhūti’s example—I took it that I had attained, and the Buddha says I have not attained. Where there is understanding, be careful not to settle at once: the time one takes oneself to have attained is exactly the time the subtle grasping at marks is active. Yet neither need one retreat because of the difficulty: the practices are like the fierce wind removing the clouds, and the sun and moon are there from the beginning—only exhaust the work of removing obstructions, and do not count on the effect of giving birth to the moon; when the work is deep and the obstructions thin, the original purity appears of itself.

Further Resonances

The backbone of this chapter is a threefold question-and-answer strung together by the one character 「淨」 tr. "purity": first comes Śāriputra’s fifteen rounds of praising purity—very deep, bright, not continuous, without stain, without attainment and without attachment, without arising, not arising in the three realms, without knowing, purity that is pure, neither benefiting nor harming, receiving nothing—to all of which the Buddha answers in general with ‘because it is ultimately pure’ and in particular according to the question; the treatise-author lays its foundation with the mutual dependence of the purity of wisdom and the purity of the object, and the real mark’s being of itself pure from the beginning apart from wisdom and apart from the object; extends its meaning of ultimacy with the other names of purity, with not being attached even to the substance of purity, and with the buddhas too not being attached; and gathers in the doubt about neither benefiting nor harming with the similes of dream, illusion, and space. Next comes the question-and-answer of Subhūti’s ‘because I am pure, form is pure’ up to ‘the eighteen unshared dharmas are pure’—being without anything existent and the emptiness of specific marks fitting the conditioned and the unconditioned respectively, the signless and the thoughtless denying attachment to the ultimate, purity by way of dual dharmas and purity by way of non-dual dharmas judging purity in name and true purity, ‘I am boundless’ returning to the emptiness of beings and beginningless emptiness, ultimate emptiness being precisely ultimate purity yet called purity because people fear emptiness, and being able to know thus being called prajñā and sealed with knowing the seeds of the path—returning to having none of the recollection, imagining, and discrimination by the power of skilful means, and the thirteen emptinesses breaking all dharmas completely with nothing that obstructs. Last comes Śakra’s question about obstructing dharmas—grasping at the mark of the mind and dedicating is obstruction, showing, teaching, benefiting, and gladdening by the real mark is non-obstruction; the Buddha himself tells of the subtle marks of obstruction—grasping marks in recollecting the buddhas is in every case a mark of obstruction; and with all dharmas being ever apart, one nature and absence of nature, there being no seer, hearer, knower, cognizer, or attainer, and not being born from the mind, he answers the praises that prajñā is very deep, hard to know and hard to understand, and inconceivable; the treatise-author, with the two similes of fine food eaten to excess and the fierce wind removing the clouds, speaks to the utmost of the cause of obstruction and the root of purity.

Of the veins of meaning linking this chapter with the chapters before and after, three lines are most visible. First, the previous chapter set faith and disparagement side by side, and those who have faith in prajñā obtain the result as spoken; this chapter at its opening is the utmost of the one who has faith—Śāriputra arouses a mind of rare wonder and joy and praises purity, and Śakra and Subhūti take it up layer upon layer, turning from the gate of faith into the gate of purity. Second, the chapter "Illumination" before it established the brightness of prajñā in that, because it is ultimately pure, it can illuminate all dharmas; this chapter’s second round, purity is bright, and the treatise’s explanation of breaking the ignorance of idle discourse and giving the light of wisdom, are precisely a deepening of the same vein of meaning—that praised prajñā from the side of the function of illumination, this praises purity from the side of the substance of purity. Third, this chapter’s closing teaching that grasping at marks is obstruction and the mark of the signless is prajñā pushes the meaning of nothing to be attained, spoken of repeatedly in the chapters before, into the subtlest place of the gate of practice—not even recollecting the Buddha and dedicating may grasp at marks—and the answers that all dharmas are of one nature and without nature and that prajñā is not born from any dharma set aside ground in advance for the meaning of the uncontrived real mark that the following chapter goes on to speak of. The reader may view the preceding and following chapters together, to see the single continuous vein of prajñā passing from the praise of its virtues and examination and discernment into the substance of purity and the discerning of the marks of obstruction (the carrying-on of the chapters and the examination of the chapter names in the transmitted texts are detailed in the Apparatus).