大智度論 無作實相品之上Dazhidulun — Mahāprajñāpāramitā-upadeśa · The Uncontrived Real Mark, Part 1 of 2

The Uncontrived Real Mark, First Part: Prajñā Is Without Anything Done; Whoever Would Protect One Who Practises Prajñā Wishes to Protect Space; A Thousand Buddhas of the Ten Directions Appear, and Prajñā Is Pure

What Is Being Asked

The chapter's title is 「無作實相」 tr. "the uncontrived real mark", and the First Part sets it up with the very first sentence of the unit: Subhūti says before the Buddha 「是般若波羅蜜無所作」 tr. "this prajñāpāramitā is without anything done", and the Buddha gives the cause and condition—「作者不可得故」 tr. "because the doer is unfindable"; form is unfindable, and so on up to all dharmas being unfindable. Since nothing is done, how should one practise? The Buddha answers with a whole line of 「不行」 tr. "does not practise": he does not practise form, and so on up to omniscience of all kinds; does not practise permanent or impermanent, suffering or bliss, self or no-self, pure or impure; does not practise incompleteness, does not practise non-obstruction—not practising is precisely practising. From this it is pushed on to speaking and not speaking: this very deep dharma, 「若說亦不增不減，若不說亦不增不減」 tr. "if spoken, neither increases nor decreases; if not spoken, neither increases nor decreases", like praising or reviling space, like praising or reviling an illusory person; and then on to the practitioner: to cultivate prajñā is like cultivating space, to deliver beings is like delivering space, the nature of beings neither decreases nor increases, and yet the bodhisattva arouses the mind for this—therefore it is called the great adornment; and a bhikṣu, hearing the mark of ultimate emptiness, speaks out in astonished joy and in worshipful praise. Next, Śakra's two questions press the meaning of the uncontrived into the place of daily use: in training in prajñā, what dharma does one train in?—「為習空」 tr. "it is emptiness that one trains in"; for one who receives and upholds prajñā, what protection should be given?—Subhūti asks back, 「汝頗見是法可守護者不」 tr. "do you see any dharma here that could be protected?"; whoever would protect one who practises prajñā 「為欲護虛空」 tr. "wishes to protect space", and to practise as it is taught 「即是守護」 tr. "is protection"; he asks further why one who knows and sees as a dream does not think of the dream, and the answer is that because one does not think of form one does not think of the dream. At the end, by the Buddha's supernormal power, a thousand buddhas appear in each of the ten directions, all speaking this chapter, attesting that Maitreya and the bodhisattvas of the Auspicious Kalpa will also expound prajñā in this place, and that what the buddhas of the three times speak is the same; from a single praise of purity comes a series of questions and answers—form is pure, space is pure, undefiled, ungraspable, speakable, unspeakable, unfindable—all returning to 「一切法畢竟清淨故」 tr. "because all dharmas are ultimately pure". Without anything done, nothing to protect, without increase or decrease—and yet the practitioner practises it, the gods make offerings to it, the buddhas of the three times speak it: the uncontrived and the real mark are not two, and this is exactly what the chapter's title establishes.

Passage by Passage

1. Prajñā is without anything done—the doer is unfindable. At the opening Subhūti says to the Buddha: 「是般若波羅蜜無所作。」 tr. "This prajñāpāramitā is without anything done." The Buddha says: 「作者不可得故，色不可得，乃至一切法不可得故。」 tr. "Because the doer is unfindable; because form is unfindable, and so on up to all dharmas being unfindable." To be without anything done does not mean that prajñā is idle and does not rise into function; it means that the very matter of doing cannot stand: wherever doing is spoken of, there must be a doer; search everywhere for the doer and he is utterly unfindable—since the one who can do is absent, how could what is done be established? The Buddha does not speak of the absence of a doer in isolation; he goes on to cite form and so on up to all dharmas as all unfindable—the doer and the dharmas done fall empty together, and only then is the meaning of the uncontrived thorough. The two characters of the title, 「無作」 tr. "uncontrived", establish their tenet from this very sentence.

2. Not practising dharmas, not practising permanent, impermanent, and the rest—this is practising prajñā. Subhūti asks how one should practise, and the Buddha answers: not practising form is practising prajñāpāramitā; not practising feeling, perception, constructions, and consciousness, and so on up to not practising omniscience of all kinds, is practising prajñāpāramitā; with regard to form and so on up to omniscience of all kinds, not practising permanent or impermanent, not practising suffering or bliss, not practising self or non-self, not practising pure or impure—all this is practising prajñāpāramitā. Why is this so?—「是色無所有性」 tr. "this form is of a nature without anything existent"; feeling, perception, constructions, and consciousness, and so on up to omniscience of all kinds, are all of a nature without anything existent; since the nature is without anything existent, from where could the four pairs of permanent and impermanent and the rest be set up? Not practising is not failing to cultivate; it is not setting up fixed marks upon a nature without anything existent; the sūtra text goes through the dharmas sentence by sentence precisely to show that not a single dharma can be an exception.

3. Not practising incompleteness—form that is incomplete is not called form. The Buddha further says: not practising the incompleteness of form is practising prajñāpāramitā, and so on up to omniscience of all kinds likewise. The cause and condition is 「色不具足者，是不名色」 tr. "form that is incomplete is not called form"—since it is not called form, this 「不具足」 tr. "incompleteness" too has nowhere to hang; not practising even this is what practising prajñā is. Once the practitioner has left behind fixed marks such as permanence, he may turn round and reckon that dharmas have a mark of deficiency; the sūtra text blocks off this reckoning too: completeness is unfindable, and incompleteness is likewise unfindable; not practising either end—only this is the practice of the middle path.

4. The mark of obstruction and non-obstruction—not practising non-obstruction. Subhūti praises it as never before: the World-Honored One has well spoken, for good men and good women who seek the bodhisattva path, of 「礙不礙相」 tr. "the mark of obstruction and non-obstruction"; the Buddha confirms it and expounds further: not practising the non-obstruction of form, not practising the non-obstruction of feeling, perception, constructions, and consciousness, not practising the non-obstruction of eye, ear, nose, tongue, body, and mind, not practising the non-obstruction of the six perfections, and so on up to not practising the non-obstruction of omniscience of all kinds—this is practising prajñāpāramitā; when practising thus, one knows that form is non-obstruction, and so on up to knowing that omniscience of all kinds is non-obstruction, and knows that the fruit of srota-āpanna, and so on up to the path of anuttarā samyaksaṃbodhi, is non-obstruction. Non-obstruction is the path, yet even this mark of non-obstruction is not practised—knowing it as non-obstruction yet not taking non-obstruction as a mark: the two barriers of obstruction and non-obstruction are passed at once, and therefore it is called well spoken.

5. The very deep dharma, spoken or not spoken, neither increases nor decreases. The venerable Subhūti says to the Buddha: 「是甚深法，若說亦不增不減，若不說亦不增不減。」 tr. "This very deep dharma, if spoken, neither increases nor decreases; if not spoken, neither increases nor decreases." This sentence pushes the meaning of the uncontrived from the gate of practice on to the gate of speaking: if a dharma increased by being spoken and decreased by silence, it would be a contrived dharma; the very deep dharma is not produced by contrivance, and therefore speaking and not speaking add nothing to it and take nothing from it. The Buddha at once confirms: 「如是！如是！」 tr. "Just so! Just so!"—the two similes that follow are a footnote to precisely this sentence, and the 「不增不減」 tr. "neither increases nor decreases" of the series of questions and answers on purity at the end of the fascicle also takes this sentence, from afar, as its root.

6. The simile of praising and reviling space and the illusory person—as it originally is, not different. The Buddha himself gives two similes: suppose a Buddha, to the end of his life, praised space and reviled space—when praised it neither increases nor decreases, when reviled it neither increases nor decreases; so too an illusory person—praised or reviled, he neither increases nor decreases, 「讚時不喜，毀時不憂」 tr. "not glad when praised, not grieved when reviled". Space is a simile for the substance of the dharma being without gain and without loss; the illusory person is a simile for there being no master at all who receives the praise and the reviling; the mark of dharmas is likewise: if spoken, it is 「如本不異」 tr. "as it originally is, not different"; if not spoken, it is also 「如本不異」 tr. "as it originally is, not different". Praise and reviling are the speech-karma of others and have nothing whatever to do with space or the illusory person—speaking and not speaking, in relation to the real mark, are just the same.

7. To cultivate prajñā is like cultivating space—one should worship those who can take on the great adornment. Subhūti exclaims that what bodhisattvas do is very hard: when cultivating prajñā they are neither grieved nor glad, and they do not turn back from awakening. Why? 「修般若波羅蜜，如修虛空」 tr. "to cultivate prajñāpāramitā is like cultivating space"—in space there is no prajñā, and so on up to no dānapāramitā; no form, feeling, perception, constructions, or consciousness; no inner emptiness, and so on up to no emptiness of non-existent and existent dharmas; no four foundations of mindfulness, and so on up to no eight limbs of the noble path; no ten powers of the Buddha, and so on up to no eighteen unshared dharmas; no four fruits, no path of the pratyekabuddha; no anuttarā samyaksaṃbodhi. The dharma cultivated is wholly without anything existent, and yet the cultivation does not cease—this is why it is hard; and so it is said that one should worship these bodhisattva-mahāsattvas, who are 「能大莊嚴」 tr. "able to take on the great adornment".

8. Arousing the mind in order to deliver beings equal to space—the nature of beings neither decreases nor increases. Subhūti extends its meaning: this person takes on the great adornment for beings as though taking on the great adornment for space; wishing to deliver beings is like wishing to deliver space, like wishing to lift space. Therefore he praises the bodhisattva's great power of vigour, great adornment, and great valour, who arouses the mind of anuttarā samyaksaṃbodhi in order to deliver beings equal to space. The cause and condition is this: suppose the three-thousand great-thousand world were filled with buddhas, as thick as bamboo and reeds, sugar-cane, rice and hemp, and thickets, and each Buddha delivered immeasurable, boundless asaṃkhyeya beings into nirvāṇa—「是眾生性亦不減、亦不增」 tr. "this nature of beings neither decreases nor increases"—「眾生無所有故、眾生離故」 tr. "because beings are without anything existent, because beings are apart". What is delivered is fundamentally empty, and yet the vow to deliver grows ever firmer; the name of the great adornment is established from this.

9. A bhikṣu worships prajñā—no dharma arises or ceases, and yet there are the aggregate of morality and so on up to the turning of the wheel of the Dharma. At that time a bhikṣu said: 「我當禮般若波羅蜜！」 tr. "I shall worship prajñāpāramitā!" Within prajñāpāramitā, though no dharma arises and no dharma ceases, yet there are the aggregate of morality, the aggregate of concentration, the aggregate of wisdom, the aggregate of liberation, and the aggregate of the knowledge and vision of liberation; yet there are srota-āpannas, sakṛdāgāmins, anāgāmins, arhats, and pratyekabuddhas; there are buddhas; there are the Buddha Jewel, the Dharma Jewel, and the Jewel of the Bhikṣu Saṅgha; and yet there is the turning of the wheel of the Dharma. This praise is the close of Sūtra Section One: within ultimate emptiness the five aggregates of the Dharma body, the four fruits, the Three Jewels, and the turning of the wheel of the Dharma are each plainly there—the absence of arising and ceasing and the presence of fruits and results do not obstruct each other; this is precisely the voice of right faith, which hears emptiness without falling into annihilation.

10. The treatise explains being without anything done—even a knower there is not, how much less a doer. The treatise-author explains: Subhūti had heard the Buddha speak of prajñā as having the mark of neither rising nor doing, and so now, before the Buddha, he says 「無所作」 tr. "without anything done". If there is no doer, one cannot cut off the afflictions and cannot cultivate and gather wholesome dharmas—this is the difficulty that the meaning of the uncontrived naturally draws out. Here the Buddha speaks the cause and condition: because from the doer up to all dharmas all are unfindable; 「知者尚無，何況作者」 tr. "even a knower there is not—how much less a doer?" Knowing is the subtlest thing on the side of the agent; if even the knower is unfindable, how much less the doer, which is coarser than knowing. The treatise-author first lays out the difficulty, then settles it with the Buddha's words; the tenet of the uncontrived is established, and the path the doubt will take is already in view—what follows explains precisely by following this doubt.

11. Not practising and not attaining any dharma—prajñā does not accept impermanence, because it can give rise to the attached mind. Subhūti, following up the doubt, asks: if there is no doer, prajñā can do nothing—how does one practise, how does one attain? The Buddha answers: if a bodhisattva does not practise any dharma and does not attain any dharma—namely permanent or impermanent, and so on up to pure or impure—this is called practising prajñāpāramitā. The treatise-author explains: all dharmas, from form up to omniscience of all kinds, are the dharmas the bodhisattva practises; people without wisdom practise dharmas as permanent and the like, the wise practise dharmas as impermanent and the like; prajñā shows the ultimate real mark of dharmas, and therefore does not speak of dharmas as permanent or as impermanent. The crux is this sentence: although impermanence and the like can break inversions such as permanence, within prajñā this dharma is not accepted, 「以能生著心故」 tr. "because it can give rise to the attached mind"—medicine can cure sickness, but clinging to the medicine becomes sickness in turn; reflect and weigh it, and the marks of permanence and impermanence are both unfindable as fixed and real.

12. Impure and suffering as names—what goes as one wishes and is secure is called pure and blissful. Question: Sinful dharmas such as form can be contemplated as impure and as suffering; how can the other, wholesome dharmas be contemplated as impure and as suffering? Answer: These are impure and suffering as names—good dharmas that go as one wishes and are secure are named pure and blissful, dharmas that do not go as one wishes and are not secure are named impure and suffering; among wholesome dharmas, what one loves, delights in, and approves is taken as pure and blissful, what one loathes and dislikes is taken as impure and suffering. This question and answer settles the matter: the names of pure and defiled, of suffering and bliss, are for the most part names set up according to the mind, not a fixed nature in the dharmas; that wholesome dharmas are contemplated as impure and suffering is said in terms of names set up according to the mind, and is not an erasing of the distinction between wholesome and unwholesome.

13. Two readings of completeness—recollection, imagining, and discrimination; and the true contemplation of the bodhisattva bound to buddhahood in one more birth. The treatise-author first sets out Subhūti's concern: if one leaves behind all the contemplations, will one not be incomplete in the bodhisattva path? Therefore the Buddha says that not practising the incompleteness of form and the rest is practising prajñā. On the explanation of 「色具足」 tr. "the completeness of form" there are two schools: one says that the recollection, imagining, and discrimination of permanence, impermanence, and the rest within dharmas such as form is called completeness, and to break permanence with the contemplation of impermanence is called incompleteness, because permanence and the rest are lacking—now even impermanence and the rest are not practised within form, and therefore it is said that one does not practise the incompleteness of form; the other says that completeness means that the bodhisattva bound to buddhahood in one more birth can contemplate form truly, and so on up to omniscience of all kinds, while the rest are incomplete. The two readings stand side by side: one takes discrimination as completeness and blocks it off, the other takes true contemplation as completeness and allows it; the treatise-author records both schools and does not decide between them, which shows precisely that this sentence can be entered through two gates.

14. Even real purity is not practised; obstruction is the non-path, non-obstruction is the path. The treatise-author further brings out the Buddha's intent: beings, brought out of permanence, cling within the without-anything-existent, following the sound of words; therefore it is said, 「如是實清淨亦不行，是為行般若波羅蜜」 tr. "not practising even such real purity—this is practising prajñāpāramitā"—if one who has been rescued from clinging to permanence turns round and embraces the without-anything-existent, that is still giving rise to attachment by following words, and so even real purity is not set up. He also explains that Subhūti's praise, 「希有」 tr. "rare", lies in the good exposition of path and non-path: 「礙者是非道，無礙者是道」 tr. "obstruction is the non-path; non-obstruction is the path"; the Buddha, observing that the minds of the assembly mostly turned toward emptiness, knew that prajñā has the mark of non-obstruction, and therefore said that not practising the non-obstruction of form and the rest is practising prajñā, and that one who can practise thus is without obstruction toward dharmas such as form. Path and non-path are clearly distinguished, yet the mark of non-obstruction too is not taken up—of a piece with the preceding passage, where both ends are sent away.

15. The Buddha approves: spoken or not spoken, without increase or decrease—because it is ever of the mark of non-arising. The treatise-author explains: although Subhūti could not know the principle of ultimate emptiness to the full, he always delighted in speaking of it, this dharma of emptiness being rare and contrary to all worldly dharmas. The Buddha approves his words: spoken or not spoken, it is without increase and without decrease—this is the real mark of all dharmas; 「若以身業毀壞，亦不能令異，何況口說」 tr. "even if one were to destroy it with the karma of the body, it could not be made other—how much less by speech!" For it is so 「常不生相故」 tr. "because it is ever of the mark of non-arising". Reviling by speech is still light; if even destruction by bodily karma cannot make the real mark other, then it is clear that increase and decrease are unfindable; because it does not arise there is nothing to increase, because it does not arise there is also nothing to decrease—the single phrase of the ever non-arising mark gathers up entirely the two similes above.

16. Space is prajñā, the illusory person is the practitioner—all alike become golden. The treatise-author joins the two similes: as with space—space is prajñāpāramitā; the illusory person is the practitioner. Though the practitioner is born from the causes and conditions of sinful karma and is a false and deceptive dharma, because he joins with prajñāpāramitā he is not different from it: 「如種種諸色到須彌山邊，同為金色」 tr. "as the various colours, coming to the side of Mount Sumeru, all alike become golden". Once the false and deceptive body enters prajñā, it is no different at all from the real mark, as mixed colours drawing near the mountain all become gold. This real mark of all dharmas cannot be known and cannot be spoken, and therefore, spoken or not spoken, it is 「如本不異」 tr. "as it originally is, not different"—each simile has its own point, yet together they attest a single sentence; the reader should recognise where they are matched to the dharma.

17. Hard to believe and hard to accept, and therefore to be worshipped. The treatise-author sets out Subhūti's thought: if all dharmas are ultimately empty, without anything existent, like space, down to there being not even a subtle mark, and yet the bodhisattva can cultivate and gather wholesome dharmas and attain the unsurpassed path—「是事難信難受」 tr. "this matter is hard to believe and hard to accept"! Having thought this, he says to the Buddha: what bodhisattvas do is very hard; because they can do what is hard they should be worshipped, namely because they are able to take on the great adornment; and again, with a mind of wonder, he says that these bodhisattvas take on the great adornment for anuttarā samyaksaṃbodhi, and all gods and humans should worship them. The hardness lies not in the depth of emptiness but in being able to practise within emptiness—to cultivate and gather wholesome dharmas where there is ultimately nothing existent: this is the hardness worthy of worship.

18. The simile of striving with vigour for space—proof of the great adornment. Question: How is it known that this is the great adornment? Answer: Subhūti himself gives the simile here—as if someone, for the sake of space, diligently practised vigour and, to benefit it, took on the great adornment, so too the bodhisattva is diligent in vigour to benefit beings; as if someone wished to deliver space, so too the bodhisattva wishes to deliver beings. To strive for space the world regards as futile labour; the bodhisattva, knowing clearly that beings are ultimately empty like space, strives to deliver them, practising precisely with nothing to be attained, and so his adornment is great—the hardness in the simile is the very hardness in the praise.

19. Benefiting and wishing to deliver—why one matter is said twice. Question: Why is one matter said twice? Answer: Benefiting means that, before nirvāṇa is attained, one only causes them to obtain the happiness of this life and later lives, such as wisdom and meditative concentration; wishing to deliver means causing them to exhaust the outflows, accomplish the path of the three vehicles, and enter nirvāṇa without remainder. The two sentences are not a repetition: benefiting is shallow and wishing to deliver is deep; the one gives happiness within birth and death, the other pulls out beyond birth and death. The bodhisattva practises both matters together, and therefore the sūtra text speaks of it twice—the treatise-author distinguishes them by two kinds of causes and conditions, and the doubt about saying it twice is resolved.

20. Like space, without arising or ceasing, suffering or bliss, bondage or release—lifting the beings of the three realms and setting them in nirvāṇa. The treatise-author continues explaining the simile: as space is without arising and without ceasing, without suffering and without bliss, without bondage and without release, because it is without anything existent, so too are beings—therefore it is said that one takes on the great adornment in order to deliver beings equal to space. Again, as space is without colour and without form, and if anyone wished to lift space, that would be hard; the dharma of beings too is likewise ultimately empty, and yet the bodhisattva wishes to lift the beings of the three realms and set them in nirvāṇa, and therefore it is called the great adornment. The two similes of delivering and lifting complete each other: delivering speaks of the universality of the vow, lifting speaks of the arduousness of the power—what is lifted is formless, and yet he is determined to settle it in nirvāṇa: the hardest of the hard, which is why the adornment is great.

21. The causes and conditions of the emptiness of beings—though so many buddhas deliver beings, there is really no decrease. The treatise-author explains Subhūti's further praise of great power of vigour and great valour: because he does not follow a mind of wrong doubt, before attaining the Buddha path and before extinguishing the fetters he can practise the path for beings, and beings too are empty—like wishing to paint space with all kinds of colours. Here the Buddha speaks of the causes and conditions of the emptiness of beings: the buddhas of the ten directions, as many as the sands of the Ganges, expound the Dharma with their supernormal powers for immeasurable kalpas, each Buddha delivering immeasurable asaṃkhyeya beings into nirvāṇa; even supposing this, there is no decrease in beings—if beings really existed and really decreased, 「諸佛應有減眾生罪」 tr. "the buddhas ought to bear the sin of diminishing beings"; beings are really empty; from the coming together of causes and conditions there are beings as a provisional name, 「無有定相」 tr. "without any fixed mark", and therefore, though so many buddhas deliver beings, there is really no decrease, and not delivering them there is also no increase; the buddhas bear no fault of diminishing beings. Emptiness is established by counter-proof: if delivering brought decrease, the Buddha would on the contrary be at fault—so impossible is it.

22. A bhikṣu's astonished joy makes the conclusion—there is no fixed real mark, and yet there are fruits and results. The treatise-author concludes Sūtra Section One: at that time a bhikṣu, hearing the mark of ultimate emptiness, said in astonished joy, 「我當禮般若波羅蜜」 tr. "I shall worship prajñāpāramitā"—within prajñā no dharma has a fixed real mark, and yet there are the aggregate of morality and the rest, and the various fruits and results. Read against the sūtra text of Passage 9, what the treatise-author picks out is precisely the words 「驚喜」 tr. "astonished joy": hearing ultimate emptiness he is not startled or terrified but on the contrary gives rise to joy, and what he rejoices in is precisely this meaning, that emptiness does not destroy fruits and results—this bhikṣu is an eyewitness on the spot of one who hears this chapter and gains right faith, and therefore the treatise-author cites him twice.

23. Śakra asks what dharma one trains—it is emptiness that one trains in. Sūtra Section Two opens with Śakra Devānām Indra asking Subhūti: when a bodhisattva-mahāsattva trains in prajñāpāramitā, what dharma does he train in? Subhūti answers: 「憍尸迦！是菩薩摩訶薩習般若波羅蜜，為習空。」 tr. "Kauśika! When this bodhisattva-mahāsattva trains in prajñāpāramitā, it is emptiness that he trains in." Above, the uncontrived and not practising were spoken of broadly; Śakra gathers it into a question of cultivation and training—what is it that one trains; the answer is direct: to train in prajñā is to train in emptiness. In one question and one answer the doctrine of Sūtra Section One is set down at the point of entry of the gate of practice, and the discussion of protection below unfolds from here.

24. What protection should be given to one who receives and upholds—do you see any dharma here that could be protected? Śakra says to the Buddha: good men and good women receive and uphold prajñā, draw near to it, read it, recite it, expound it, rightly recollect it—what protection should I give them? Subhūti answers in the Buddha's stead, asking back: 「汝頗見是法可守護者不？」 tr. "Do you see any dharma here that could be protected?" Śakra says: No, I see no dharma here that could be protected. The premise of protection is that there is something to protect; seek throughout prajñā for a single dharma that could be protected and it is utterly unfindable, and so the word protection has nowhere to be placed. The counter-question is not a refusal of his goodwill; it turns the question up one level—since what is to be protected is empty, what could the protector apply?

25. To practise as it is taught is protection—whoever would protect one who practises prajñā wishes to protect space. Subhūti answers directly: if one practises as it is taught within prajñāpāramitā, 「即是守護」 tr. "that is protection", namely never departing from the practice of prajñāpāramitā as it is taught; such good men and good women—neither humans nor non-humans find an opening in them. Conversely, 「若人欲護行般若波羅蜜菩薩，為欲護虛空」 tr. "if anyone wishes to protect a bodhisattva who practises prajñāpāramitā, he wishes to protect space". Protection does not come from outside; it lies right in not departing from the practice as it is taught; where the practice is, there the protection is, and apart from the practice there is nothing to protect—this is the first meaning of the gate of practice in this unit, which the treatise-author below explains broadly.

26. One cannot protect dream, mirage, illusion, or transformation, what the Buddha has conjured, the nature of dharmas or the limit of reality—a threefold turning. Subhūti poses his question three times: can you protect a dream, a mirage, a shadow, an echo, an illusion, a transformation? Can you protect what the Buddha has conjured? Can you protect the nature of dharmas, the limit of reality, suchness, the nature of the inconceivable? Śakra answers three times 「不能護」 tr. "I cannot protect it", and Subhūti concludes three times, 「若人欲護行般若波羅蜜諸菩薩摩訶薩亦如是」 tr. "if anyone wishes to protect the bodhisattva-mahāsattvas who practise prajñāpāramitā, it is likewise". The three layers go from shallow to deep: dream, illusion, and the rest are false and deceptive, without reality, and so there is nothing to protect; what the Buddha has conjured, though it seems to exist, is not real, and so there is nothing to protect; the nature of dharmas and the limit of reality are unconditioned and ever-abiding, and so do not wait on protection—those who practise prajñā are of one substance with these three, and so to protect them is futile labour.

27. Knowing and seeing as a dream, yet not thinking of the dream—Śakra follows up with a question. Śakra asks further: how does a bodhisattva, practising prajñāpāramitā, know and see dharmas as like a dream, like a mirage, like a shadow, like an echo, like an illusion, like a transformation, and yet, because of knowing and seeing as he does, not think of the dream, not think that it is a dream, not think of using the dream, not think that I dream? Mirage, shadow, echo, illusion, and transformation likewise. The intent of the question is deep and fine: since the dream and the rest are used as similes for the knowing, why is not even a thought raised toward the objects of these similes? The simile is set up in the first place to break attachment; if one again gives rise to thought toward the simile, attachment has only shifted one layer—this four-phrase question presses out exactly this layer.

28. Because he does not think of form he can not think of the dream—and so on up to omniscience. Subhūti answers: if a bodhisattva practising prajñāpāramitā does not think of form, does not think that it is form, does not think of using form, does not think of my form, then this bodhisattva can also not think of the dream, not think that it is a dream, not think of using the dream, not think that I dream, and so on up to transformation, which likewise he does not think of; feeling, perception, constructions, and consciousness likewise, and so on up to omniscience: he does not think of omniscience, does not think that it is omniscience, does not think of using omniscience, does not think of my omniscience. The intent of the answer points straight at the root: attachment to the dream simile does not arise from the dream; it arises from attachment to the five aggregates; not thinking of dharmas such as form in the four phrases, one naturally does not think of the similes such as the dream—to treat attachment one must treat its root, and not do separate work on the simile.

29. The treatise explains training in emptiness—all dharmas in the long run return to nirvāṇa. The treatise-author explains: at that moment Śakra asks about this very deep prajñā he has heard from the Buddha and from Subhūti—what dharma does one train in? Subhūti says: because all dharmas in the long run all return to nirvāṇa, one should train in the emptiness of dharmas; therefore it is said that one who wishes to train in prajñā should train in emptiness. The answer adds a cause and condition: that dharmas in the end return to nirvāṇa is the sign that their original nature is empty and still; training in emptiness is not forcing a contemplation of emptiness onto dharmas but training in it in accord with where dharmas tend—practising emptiness is precisely according with the real mark of all dharmas.

30. Why Śakra wished to protect—evil ghosts and Māra's people constantly trouble the practitioner. The treatise-author sets out the cause and condition of Śakra's question: Śakra is a king among humans and gods, sovereign in the world, able to give what is needed, and so he wishes to act as protector; hearing prajñā he rejoices and says to the Buddha, what shall I do to protect them—whatever they need I shall give them all. Subhūti and the bhikṣu, by the dharma of those who have left home, only pay reverence; but evil ghosts constantly trouble such people, and Māra or Māra's people constantly trouble the practitioner, and therefore he asks the Buddha by what means he should protect them—whether protecting them himself, or sending his sons and followers, or sending his officials and attendants to guard them, as the Buddha instructs. Śakra's question comes from real circumstance and real kindness and is not idle discourse; precisely because it is sincere, what follows takes away his protecting without harming his reverence.

31. Prajñā is precious and need not receive favours—if it could be seen, it would not be called ultimate emptiness. The treatise-author explains the intent of Subhūti's counter-question: Subhūti knew that prajñā has immeasurable power, and also knew the Buddha's intent to make prajñāpāramitā precious and not needing to receive favours, and so he said to Śakra: within prajñāpāramitā all is empty, like an illusion, like a dream; do you see any fixed dharma that could be protected? Śakra said: No. If it could be seen, it would not be called the ultimate emptiness of prajñāpāramitā; if it cannot be seen, how can he say what he will do to protect it? The two sentences lock it in place: if it can be protected, it is not ultimate emptiness; if it is ultimate emptiness, there is nothing to protect—of Śakra's wish and the substance of prajñā, only one can stand.

32. Abiding as it is taught is protection—this person needs no protection. The treatise-author broadly explains the direct answer: if a bodhisattva, as it is taught in prajñā, with a single mind believes and accepts, reflects, rightly recollects, enters meditative concentration, contemplates the real mark of all dharmas, attains the wisdom of ultimate emptiness, accords with the acceptance of the non-arising of dharmas, and enters the bodhisattva position—such a person does not begrudge even body and life, how much less outer things; this person needs no protection. Protection means warding off sufferings and vexations and causing one to gain happiness; this person has left all worldly dharmas, has no worry, sorrow, suffering, or vexation, does not rejoice at gaining worldly things and does not grieve at losing worldly things—this is what is meant by never departing from the practice of prajñāpāramitā as it is taught. If a person practises in accord for a short time and later loses it again, he ought to be protected; if he never departs from practice as it is taught, he needs no protection—the judgement of needing or not needing lies only in whether the practice is long or brief, held to or let go.

33. The simile of the yakṣa Kāla—the breath of prajñā is the absorption of cessation. The treatise-author cites an event as proof: as when the yakṣa Kāla struck Śāriputra on the head with his fist, Śāriputra was at that time in the absorption of cessation and did not feel the pain of the blow. 「般若波羅蜜氣分即是滅盡定」 tr. "the very breath of prajñāpāramitā is the absorption of cessation", and therefore neither humans nor non-humans can find an opening. In the absorption of cessation feeling and perception do not operate, and the pain of the fist has nowhere to land; one who practises prajñā is always in the wisdom of ultimate emptiness, and the troubles from humans and non-humans likewise find no gap to exploit. The word breath is apt: one need not be wholly the same as the absorption of cessation—merely to have the breath of prajñā is already enough to leave those who would trouble and harm with nothing to act upon.

34. Two causes and conditions for needing no protection—like cutting grass and trees, giving rise to no sorrow. The treatise-author briefly gives two causes and conditions for needing no protection and for humans and non-humans finding no opening: first, from the body up to all dharmas he is weary of and detached from them all, and because there is no self and nothing belonging to self he is attached to nothing, 「如斬草木，不生憂愁」 tr. "like cutting grass and trees, giving rise to no sorrow"; second, because he has attained the supreme and wondrous Dharma, he is protected by the buddhas and bodhisattvas of the ten directions and by the gods. Of the two causes and conditions one is inner and one outer: within, attached to nothing, there is nothing that can be plundered, and harming him is like cutting grass and trees—the practitioner does not take it as sorrow; without, there is superior protection, so Śakra need not trouble himself, and protection is complete of itself. Taken together, needing no protection is not being without protection; it is that the protection does not come by request.

35. The simile of protecting space—wearying oneself in vain, of no benefit to space. The treatise-author further makes it clear with a simile: suppose a person wished to protect space—space, rain cannot spoil, wind and sun cannot dry, knives and staves cannot wound; if anyone wished to protect space, he would be 「徒自疲苦，於空無益」 tr. "wearying himself in vain, of no benefit to space". If anyone wishes to protect a bodhisattva who practises prajñā, it is likewise. To make this matter clear he asks whether one can protect space and the persons seen in a dream, shadows, echoes, and conjured persons, and the answer is no—these dharmas only deceive the mind and the eye, appearing briefly and then ceasing; how could they be protected? The bodhisattva who practises prajñā contemplates the five aggregates as false and deceptive, like a dream and the rest, and protecting him is likewise: of no benefit to the one protected, futile labour for the protector.

36. As no one can protect unconditioned dharmas—not glad at gain, not grieved at ruin. The treatise-author explains the third layer: as with unconditioned dharmas—suchness, the nature of dharmas, the limit of reality, the nature of the inconceivable—there is no one who can protect them, nor are they benefited by anything. The bodhisattva who practises prajñā knows his body as suchness, the nature of dharmas, the limit of reality, and does not discriminate; when he gains the benefit of offerings he is not glad, when he meets ruin and loss he is not grieved. What need has such a person of protection? The preceding simile made clear the futility of outer protection; this passage makes clear that the practitioner, in his own substance, does not wait upon protection: his body the same as the unconditioned, unmoved by gain and decline, the one word protection has nowhere at all to be put to use on him.

37. Dream and the rest as similes for the five aggregates—because one again gives rise to attachment toward the dream, he asks. The treatise-author explains why Śakra followed up: Śakra greatly prizes this wisdom that is like a dream and the rest—a bodhisattva who gains the power of this wisdom needs no outer protection—and so he asks how the bodhisattva knows these empty dharmas that are like a dream and the rest. As for 「如所知見不念夢等」 tr. "as he knows and sees, he does not think of the dream and the rest": dream and the rest are similes for the five aggregates; the five aggregates are what people cling to, dream and the rest are what people do not cling to; wishing to make them leave the thing clung to, he takes the thing not clung to as the simile, wishing to make them contemplate the five aggregates as a dream. Yet toward the dream too one again gives rise to attachment, and therefore Śakra asks: like a dream, and also not clinging to this dream. As for a simile: used rightly it breaks attachment; clung to, it turns into a new attachment—what Śakra asks about is precisely attachment upon the simile.

38. Four kinds of thinking of the dream—the marks of ordinary people's attachment to the dream. The treatise-author opens up the four marks of ordinary people's attachment to the dream: ordinary people use the dream as a simile for the five aggregates and then cling to the dream, saying that there definitely is a dream-dharma that arises in sleep—this is called 「念夢」 tr. "thinking of the dream"; this dream is bad, this dream is good—discriminating thus is called 「念是夢」 tr. "thinking that it is a dream", and when the dream brings good things the mind is elated, when it brings bad things the mind is grieved; again, using this dream as a simile to gain this dream-like real wisdom is called 「念用夢」 tr. "thinking of using the dream"; hearing this simile and thinking, through this dream I have come to know that all dharmas are like a dream—this is called 「念我夢」 tr. "thinking that I dream". The four marks go from coarse to fine: clinging to the dream as a real dharma, raising likes and dislikes toward the dream, relying on the dream-simile as the tool for gaining wisdom, taking the dream-simile as ground for pride in one's own ability to know—even to exalt oneself by the simile is still attachment. The other similes are likewise.

39. The four phrases of not thinking of form—entering the gate of no-self, going straight into the real mark of all dharmas. The treatise-author explains Subhūti's answer: if the practitioner does not think of form—this form, the form of humans and the form of non-humans, the form of trees and the form of mountains, the four great elements or the form made from the four great elements, and so on; does not think that this form is permanent or impermanent and so on; does not, because of form, give rise to pride in the mind; does not think of form as belonging to self or as not belonging to self, 「入無我門，直至諸法實相中」 tr. "he enters the gate of no-self and goes straight into the real mark of all dharmas". Each of the four phrases blocks something: not thinking of form blocks clinging to it as real, not thinking that it is form blocks discriminating reckoning, not thinking of using form blocks relying on it to give rise to pride, not thinking of my form blocks the reckoning of what belongs to self—when the reckoning of what belongs to self is broken, the gate of no-self opens, and one goes straight to the real mark without any detour.

40. Using the dream simile to break attachment to the five aggregates—even in the dream one does not err. The treatise-author concludes Sūtra Section Two: this person can not think of the dream, not think that it is a dream, and so on; using these similes of the dream and the rest he breaks attachment to the five aggregates, and because attachment is broken, 「於夢中亦不錯」 tr. "even in the dream he does not err". If one cannot break attachment to form, this person errs about form and errs about the dream as well. Feeling, perception, constructions, and consciousness, and so on up to omniscience of all kinds, are likewise; illusion, mirage, echo, shadow, transformation, and the rest are likewise; the bodhisattvas know all dharmas as a dream, and toward the dream too they do not think. The judgement of erring and not erring lies in attachment, not in the simile: when attachment is broken, neither the object of the simile nor the object of the dharma is erred about; while attachment remains, both places are erred about—let the simile go back to being a simile; the whole of the work lies in breaking attachment.

41. The gods scatter sandalwood and bow to the Buddha—a thousand buddhas appear in each of the ten directions. Sūtra Section Three opens: by the Buddha's supernormal power, in the three-thousand great-thousand world, all the gods—of the Heaven of the Four Heavenly Kings, the Heaven of the Thirty-three, the Yāma heaven, the Tuṣita heaven, the Heaven of Delight in Transformation, the heaven of the gods Sovereign over Others' Transformations, the Heaven of Brahmā's Body, the Heaven of Brahmā's Ministers, the Heaven of Brahmā's Assembly, the Great Brahmā Heaven, the Heaven of Lesser Light, and so on up to the Pure Abodes—scattered heavenly sandalwood from afar over the Buddha, came to where the Buddha was, and bowed their heads to the Buddha's feet. Again by the Buddha's supernormal power, they saw a thousand buddhas in the east expounding the Dharma, with such marks and such names, expounding this chapter of prajñāpāramitā; the bhikṣus were all named Subhūti, and the questioners were all named Śakra Devānām Indra; in the south, the west, and the north, in the four intermediate directions, above and below, a thousand buddhas likewise appeared in each. The speaking of one assembly appears throughout the ten directions, the speaker and the questioner bearing the same names—what this chapter speaks is a dharma spoken in common by the ten directions, not a teaching of one place and one time.

42. Maitreya will expound prajñā in this place—so too the bodhisattvas of the Auspicious Kalpa. The Buddha tells Subhūti: when the bodhisattva-mahāsattva Maitreya attains anuttarā samyaksaṃbodhi, he too will expound prajñāpāramitā in this place; just as when the bodhisattva-mahāsattvas of the Auspicious Kalpa attain anuttarā samyaksaṃbodhi, they too will expound prajñāpāramitā in this place. The thousand buddhas in each of the ten directions, above, extend across space; Maitreya and the Auspicious Kalpa, here, reach through time: at present the ten directions speak it together, and the buddhas of the future too will speak it together in this place—the speaking of prajñā runs through the three times, and this sets up in advance the very proof for the sentence at the end of the fascicle, 「過去、未來、現在佛所說」 tr. "spoken by the buddhas of the past, the future, and the present".

43. With what mark, what cause, and what meaning Maitreya will expound—because it is ultimately pure, the Dharma should be expounded thus. Subhūti asks: when Maitreya attains awakening, with what mark, what cause, and what meaning will he expound the meaning of this prajñāpāramitā? The Buddha answers: form is neither permanent nor impermanent—thus the Dharma should be expounded; form is neither suffering nor bliss, neither self nor no-self, neither pure nor impure, neither bound nor released—thus the Dharma should be expounded; form is neither past, nor future, nor present—thus the Dharma should be expounded; feeling, perception, constructions, and consciousness likewise; form is ultimately pure—thus the Dharma should be expounded; feeling, perception, constructions, and consciousness, and so on up to omniscience, are ultimately pure—thus the Dharma should be expounded. The earlier five pairs are negations, the one sentence of ultimate purity is an affirmation: the double negations send away all marks, and what is revealed is ultimate purity—the gate of the Dharma that Maitreya will expound is no different from the present Buddha's; because the Dharma is the same, the speaking is the same.

44. The series of questions and answers on the purity of prajñā—all returning to ultimate purity. Subhūti praises, 「是般若波羅蜜清淨」 tr. "this prajñāpāramitā is pure", and the Buddha goes back and forth with him in series: because form is pure, prajñā is pure—form neither arises nor ceases, is neither stained nor pure: this is called the purity of form; because space is pure, prajñā is pure—「虛空不生不滅故清淨」 tr. "space is pure because it neither arises nor ceases"; because form is undefiled, prajñā is pure—as space cannot be defiled; because space cannot be grasped, space is pure; because space can be spoken of, prajñā is pure—「因虛空中二聲出」 tr. "because two sounds come forth within space"; because space cannot be spoken of, prajñā is pure; because space is unfindable, prajñā is pure—space is without the mark of anything to be attained; because all dharmas neither arise nor cease and are neither stained nor pure, prajñā is pure—「一切法畢竟清淨故」 tr. "because all dharmas are ultimately pure". Layer upon layer, with space as the turning simile, at the end it all returns to the one sentence of ultimate purity: purity is not gained by counteracting; it is the original mark of dharmas.

45. Because the real mark is spoken clearly, the gods make offerings—two accounts, of the former gods and of new gods. Treatise Section Three explains: although this prajñāpāramitā is all very deep, because this chapter speaks the real mark of all dharmas clearly and distinctly, the gods of the three-thousand great-thousand world bring offerings to offer to the Buddha. Question: These are the very gods mentioned above—do they now come again? Answer: Someone says, 「事久故去，竟更來」 tr. "because the affair was long, they left, and in the end came again"; someone says that there are other, new gods who come. To make people believe in prajñā, a thousand buddhas appear in each of the ten directions; these people, by the causes and conditions of their merit, were fit to see the thousand buddhas, and by the Buddha's supernormal power the whole assembly saw the buddhas of the ten directions—what humans and gods can see is limited; without the Buddha's majestic power there would be no way to see those buddhas. The height of the offerings and the appearing of the thousand buddhas both hang on one sentence: this chapter speaks the real mark clearly.

46. The matter of Maitreya and Kāśyapa—spoken by the buddhas of the three times, it should be believed and received. The treatise-author explains the thousand bhikṣus and the thousand Śakras: those who expound the Dharma before the buddhas are all named Subhūti, those who raise questions are all named Śakra Devānām Indra, 「取其同字者有千人」 tr. "taking those of the same name, there are a thousand persons"; Subhūti and Śakra rejoice, saying 「非獨我等能說、能問」 tr. "it is not we alone who can speak and can ask". The Buddha, wishing to attest that Maitreya will expound the Dharma in this place, cites the matter at length: Maitreya will lead the great assembly to Mount Gṛdhrakūṭa and 「以足指開山頂」 tr. "open the summit of the mountain with his toe", and Mahākāśyapa's skeleton, wearing the saṃghāṭī, holding staff and bowl, will come forth; Maitreya will tell the great assembly: in the past, in the time of Śākyamuni Buddha, when human life was a hundred years, this person was foremost among the disciples in having few desires and being content and in practising dhūta; he possessed the six supernormal powers and attained the three clarities, and by the power of his supernormal powers has kept this skeleton until now—if through this small body such benefit is obtained, how is it that you, with great bodies, born in a good age, cannot benefit yourselves? Through this matter Maitreya will expound the Dharma broadly and cause immeasurable beings to reach the end of suffering. By this matter it is known that Maitreya will expound the Dharma on Mount Gṛdhrakūṭa; this prajñāpāramitā is spoken by the buddhas of the past, the future, and the present, and should be believed and received.

47. The gate of the Dharma Maitreya expounds is the same as the Buddha's—the foremost purity, because cause and result resemble each other. The treatise-author explains Subhūti's question of with what mark, what cause, and what gate of the Dharma Maitreya will expound: the Buddha says, 「如我說」 tr. "as I speak"—dharmas such as form are neither permanent nor impermanent, neither bound nor released, and so on, as said before, and form is not spoken of as past, future, or present; as nirvāṇa goes beyond the three times, so too are dharmas such as form; as it was said before that all dharmas are like the mark of nirvāṇa, what Maitreya speaks is likewise. He also explains the praise of the foremost purity: the Buddha says that dharmas such as form are pure 「因果相似故」 tr. "because cause and result resemble each other"—because dharmas such as form do not lose the causes and conditions of karma, and because the mark of arising of dharmas is not found to be fixed and real, they neither arise nor cease; because the mark of dharmas is never defiled, they are neither stained nor pure. Because the cause is pure, the result is pure; the purity of prajñā is the purity of dharmas.

48. The simile of dust and water not clinging and the simile of being undefilable—having neither colour nor form, it cannot be grasped. The treatise-author explains the similes: similes are spoken here to make the matter clear. As dust and water do not cling to space, because its nature is pure, so too prajñāpāramitā, because it neither arises nor ceases, is ever pure. As space cannot be defiled, so too prajñā: although there are wrong views and idle discourse, they cannot defile it, and knives, staves, and evil things cannot destroy it—having neither colour nor form, it cannot be grasped, and because it cannot be grasped, it cannot be defiled. The two similes advance step by step: dust and water not clinging speaks of its nature being originally pure; being undefilable speaks of its purity being indestructible; the reason it cannot be destroyed is traced to its being ungraspable, and the reason it is ungraspable is traced to its having neither colour nor form—that its purity cannot be taken away is rooted in its being without marks.

49. Speakable like space; the simile of the echo—the dharmas of ordinary people and the dharmas of the noble are all false and deceptive. The treatise-author explains speakability: the bodhisattvas, abiding in eloquence and in the unobstructed knowledge of delight in speaking, expound for beings the twelve divisions of the scriptures and the eighty-four thousand heaps of Dharma—all of it the one matter of prajñāpāramitā, spoken in distinctions; therefore it is said that prajñā can be spoken and is pure like space. He further explains the simile of the echo: from space and the mountain valley, a person's voice comes out of the space of the mouth, and because a sound comes forth from this it is called an echo; as the echo is empty, so too is the voice of the mouth—both sounds are false and deceptive and not real, yet people take the voice as real and the echo as false. Prajñā too is like this: all dharmas are ultimately empty, like an illusion, like a dream; the dharmas of ordinary people and the dharmas of the noble are all false and deceptive; lesser bodhisattvas take the dharmas of ordinary people as false and deceptive and the noble dharmas as real. Voice and echo are equally false, yet people cling one-sidedly to one of them—this precisely illuminates that the division between ordinary and noble lies in feeling, not in the dharma.

50. Why noble dharmas are taken as real—they are accomplished by cultivating and gathering merit. Question: Both are false and deceptive; why do lesser bodhisattvas take the dharmas of ordinary people as false and the noble dharmas as real? Answer: Noble dharmas are accomplished by cultivating and gathering merit through keeping the precepts, meditative concentration, and wisdom, and therefore they are taken as real; the dharmas of ordinary people exist naturally, as the echo comes out naturally, not deliberately made, and so they are taken as false. Beings, from beginningless ages, have clung to this body, and since the voice comes from the body they take it as real; lesser bodhisattvas deeply delight in wholesome dharmas, and therefore take them as real. The treatise-author gives each side its reason: the clinging of ordinary people to the voice comes from the beginningless view of the body; the clinging of lesser bodhisattvas to noble dharmas comes from deep delight in wholesome dharmas—their clinging is understandable, yet as clinging it is one and the same, and only within ultimate emptiness can the two be seen as equal.

51. Space has no mark of sound, voice, or words—because the path of all language is cut off. The treatise-author explains unspeakability: as in space there is no mark of sound, voice, or words, and so nothing is spoken; words, sounds, and voices are all contrived dharmas, and space is an uncontrived dharma. Prajñāpāramitā too is like this: the foremost deep meaning, ultimate emptiness, without any spoken word, 「一切語言道斷故」 tr. "because the path of all language is cut off". Speakability is said from the gate of eloquence, unspeakability from the gate of the deep meaning: language is a contrived dharma, prajñā is an uncontrived dharma; to express the uncontrived by the contrived, what the expression reaches is in the end not its substance—here the two Chinese characters of the title rendered here as ‘uncontrived’ meet us once more.

52. Space is without the mark of anything to be attained—pure because the marks of existence and non-existence are unfindable. The treatise-author explains unfindability: as space is without the mark of anything to be attained, one does not find it existent and does not find it non-existent—if it existed, it would be 「無相」 tr. "without marks", as the mark of space was refuted earlier; if it did not exist, yet through this space immeasurable things are made! Prajñāpāramitā too is like this: 「有無相不可得故清淨」 tr. "it is pure because the marks of existence and non-existence are unfindable". Of space, if one says it exists, one seeks its mark and does not find it; if one says it does not exist, the myriad things are accomplished through it; prajñā is so as well—it cannot be set on either pillar, existence or non-existence. Unfindability does not mean utterly nothing existent; it means that the reckonings of existence and non-existence are here both exhausted.

53. Prajñā arises from right recollection—ultimately empty and pure. The treatise-author concludes the fascicle: prajñāpāramitā arises because of the right recollection of all dharmas; 「正憶念者，畢竟空清淨」 tr. "right recollection is ultimately empty and pure", and therefore all dharmas neither arise nor cease and are neither stained nor pure. The series of questions and answers on purity is gathered into this sentence: prajñā is not obtained from outside; it arises from the right recollection of dharmas, and the substance of right recollection is ultimate emptiness and purity—because the recollection that gives rise is pure, the wisdom that arises is pure; because the dharmas illuminated are originally pure, the purity that illuminates has somewhere to return. Fascicle sixty-four ends here, and the Last Part goes on to speak of the merit of receiving and upholding.

Do Not Misread

Do not read 「無所作」 tr. "without anything done" as a denial of practice. The sūtra text itself first blocks this road: the bhikṣu's praise in worship of prajñā says it plainly—within prajñā, though no dharma arises and no dharma ceases, yet there are the aggregate of morality, the aggregate of concentration, the aggregate of wisdom, the aggregate of liberation, and the aggregate of the knowledge and vision of liberation; there are the four fruits, the pratyekabuddhas, the buddhas, and the Three Jewels, 「而有轉法輪」 tr. "and yet there is the turning of the wheel of the Dharma". Being without anything done means that the doer is unfindable; it does not mean the annihilation of cause and effect; the treatise-author too first raises this doubt—if there is no doer, one cannot cut off the afflictions or cultivate wholesome dharmas—and then explains it with the Buddha's words. To hear of the uncontrived and abandon cultivation is precisely to swallow the medicine and turn it into sickness.

Do not read the whole line of 「不行」 tr. "does not practise" as cultivating nothing at all. Not practising form, not practising permanent and impermanent—the sūtra text says plainly, 「是行般若波羅蜜」 tr. "this is practising prajñāpāramitā"—not practising is precisely practising; what is not practised is the setting up of fixed marks upon dharmas, not the works of the six perfections and the myriad practices. The treatise-author explains it more finely still: although the contemplation of impermanence can break the inversion of permanence, within prajñā this dharma is not accepted, 「以能生著心故」 tr. "because it can give rise to the attached mind"—not clinging even to the medicine that can cure: only this is the root meaning of not practising; to read it as abandoning contemplation and abandoning practice is exactly the opposite of the sūtra's meaning.

Do not read the words about needing no protection as saying that the practitioner may go unguarded, or that Śakra's goodwill is rejected. Subhūti's direct answer is: to practise as it is taught 「即是守護」 tr. "is protection"—protection is not cancelled; it is gathered back into practice; and the treatise-author states plainly the second cause and condition: because he has attained the supreme and wondrous Dharma, he is 「為十方諸佛菩薩、諸天守護」 tr. "protected by the buddhas and bodhisattvas of the ten directions and by the gods"—the person who needs no protection is precisely the one most richly protected; it is only that the protection does not come by request. Śakra's wish comes from real circumstance; Subhūti takes away what he would protect without diminishing his reverence; let the reader not conceive here the idea that ‘prajñā refuses the protection of the gods’.

Do not read 「凡夫法、聖法皆是虛誑」 tr. "the dharmas of ordinary people and the dharmas of the noble are all false and deceptive" as saying that wholesome and unwholesome are level and that cultivation is of no use. The treatise-author immediately raises this question himself and answers it: noble dharmas are accomplished by cultivating and gathering merit through keeping the precepts, meditative concentration, and wisdom, and so lesser bodhisattvas take them as real; the dharmas of ordinary people exist naturally, as the echo comes out naturally. Seeing them as equal within ultimate emptiness is said in terms of the real mark; the plain difference between what is accomplished by merit and what exists naturally is said in terms of causes and conditions. Each of the two statements has its place; to cling to the first and abandon cultivation, or to cling to the second and be blind to emptiness, is equally a misreading.

Bearing on Practice

Set up no fixed marks upon the dharmas one cultivates. The summary phrase of the gate of practice in this unit is 「不行」 tr. "does not practise": giving, keeping the precepts, meditation, and recitation are carried out in their outward form as before, but upon what is done, permanent and impermanent, pure and impure, complete and incomplete, obstruction and non-obstruction—none of these is set up as a fixed mark to bind oneself. The place to examine oneself in daily use is very simple: whenever one notices arising toward some gate of the Dharma the thought ‘it must be thus’ or ‘only this is real’, that is practising permanence and the rest—remember the words that prajñā does not accept impermanence, and do not hold on even to the view that can break.

In the moment of praise and reviling, test for increase and decrease. If spoken, neither increasing nor decreasing; if not spoken, neither increasing nor decreasing—brought down to daily use, this is the checkpoint of the eight winds: when praised, ask oneself what has increased; when reviled, ask oneself what has decreased—like praising or reviling space, like praising or reviling an illusory person, 「讚時不喜，毀時不憂」 tr. "not glad when praised, not grieved when reviled". Since the real mark is not moved by speech or silence, the practitioner's mind too should not be shaken by approval or censure; this one simile can serve as a ready watchword when one meets the situation.

Rather than seek outer protection, abide in what is taught. Having heard this passage of the sūtra, when one meets fear, trouble, or harm, the first reaction is not to go out in all directions seeking protection but to turn back and examine oneself: am I still within practising as it is taught? With a single mind believing and accepting, reflecting, rightly recollecting, entering meditative concentration and contemplating the real mark—to abide in this is protection, and neither humans nor non-humans find an opening; apart from this, even Śakra in person could not protect space. Keep the two causes and conditions together in mind: within, attached to nothing among dharmas, like cutting grass and trees, giving rise to no sorrow; without, the supreme and wondrous Dharma itself calls forth the protection of the buddhas and the gods.

Use the simile and do not cling to the simile. The similes of dream, illusion, and the rest are tools for breaking attachment to the five aggregates; the four kinds of thinking of the dream in ordinary people—clinging to the dream as real, discriminating likes and dislikes in the dream, relying on the simile as an attainment, exalting oneself by the simile—turn the tool into an object of clinging once again. In daily use, when one hears a good simile or gains a gate of the Dharma, just as the experience is bright and keen one must guard against the two barriers of 「念用夢」 tr. "thinking of using the dream" and 「念我夢」 tr. "thinking that I dream": to take pride in having gained a simile is attachment; the whole work of breaking attachment is done on the four phrases of not thinking of form, and there is no work to be done on the simile.

Further Resonances

The First Part, three sūtra sections and three treatise sections, is the passage in which the chapter on the uncontrived real mark establishes its tenet. Sūtra Section One establishes the tenet of 「無所作」 tr. "without anything done"—because the doer is unfindable, a whole line of not practising is precisely practising, and spoken or not spoken it neither increases nor decreases, like space, like an illusory person; within ultimate emptiness the bodhisattva arouses the mind in order to deliver beings equal to space, the nature of beings neither decreases nor increases, and therefore it is called the great adornment; the bhikṣu's praise first leaves clear proof that emptiness does not destroy fruits and results. Sūtra Section Two presses the uncontrived into the gate of practice—to train in prajñā is to train in emptiness; the question of protection turns over three times, to practise as it is taught is protection, and whoever would protect one who practises prajñā wishes to protect space; the breaking of the four kinds of thinking of the dream searches out even the subtle delusion of clinging to the simile—because one does not think of form one does not think of the dream, entering the gate of no-self and going straight into the real mark of all dharmas. Sūtra Section Three attests the Dharma by events—a thousand buddhas in each of the ten directions speak this chapter together, Maitreya and the bodhisattvas of the Auspicious Kalpa will expound prajñā in this place, the events of the toe opening the mountain and Kāśyapa's skeleton bear witness to it, and what the buddhas of the three times speak is the same; at the end the series of questions and answers on purity, with space turned seven times as the simile—form is pure, undefiled, ungraspable, speakable, unspeakable, unfindable—all returns to the ultimate purity of all dharmas, and is gathered into prajñā arising from right recollection, right recollection being ultimately empty and pure. Nothing to do, nothing to protect, nothing to increase or decrease, and yet the speaker speaks it, the practitioner practises it, the gods make offerings to it—the uncontrived and the real mark are not two, and the First Part has spoken of their substance. What merits one who receives and upholds prajñā gains in this life; how the promise never to suffer sickness of the eye, ear, nose, tongue, or body is reconciled with karmic retribution; what the name of the precious-treasure pāramitā takes as its meaning; how the sentence that, whether there are buddhas or no buddhas, the mark of dharmas ever abides is established; and on to the gods' praise of the second turning of the wheel of the Dharma, and the Buddha's saying that it is neither turning nor returning—the Last Part of this chapter unfolds these in continuation; they are not anticipated here.