大智度論 兩不和合品之下Dazhidulun — Mahāprajñāpāramitā-upadeśa · The Two Discords, Part 2 of 2
兩不和合品之下：說聽兩造諸對偶魔事、外緣勸退、惡魔化現四型、閻浮提珍寶喻與諸佛擁護（經＋論）
這一品的魔，不現猙獰之形。它藏在兩個好人中間。「聽法人欲書、持般若波羅蜜，讀、誦、問義、正憶念；說法人懈墮，不欲為說。當知是為菩薩摩訶薩魔事」——反過來，說的人心不懈墮，聽的人不欲受之，「二心不和，當知是為魔事」。一個要學、一個不教是魔事；一個要教、一個不學也是魔事。過不在哪一邊，過在兩邊合不起來。論主把道理交了底：「一切有為法，因緣和合故生，眾緣離則無。譬如攢燧求火，有鑽、有母，二事因緣得火」——書寫般若也是因緣生法，「師、弟子同心同事故，乃得書成」。缺一邊，火就點不著。
之上的重頭戲是十二頭陀：阿蘭若、常乞食、納衣、一坐食、節量食、中後不飲漿、塚間住、樹下住、露地住、常坐不臥、次第乞食、但三衣。一人受、一人不受，兩不和合，也是魔事。可是論主先劃清一條線：「十二頭陀不名為戒，能行，則戒莊嚴；不能行，不犯戒」——頭陀是行善，不是制戒，不行無罪。無罪之處也能出魔事，這是本品最細的一刀：兩種善法相值而不相下，其失與惡等。接著逐支釋因緣，句句見僧團生活的實感——一食是因為「佛法為行道故，不為益身，如養馬、養猪」；節量食引舍利弗自說「我若食五口、六口，足之以水，則足支身」；不飲漿如馬著了轡勒，「不肯進路」的心才斷；樹下住是隨佛的足跡，「如佛生時、成道時、轉法輪時、般涅槃時，皆在樹下」；露地住則「月光遍照，空中明淨，心易入空三昧」。而總綱只一句：「佛法唯以智慧為本，不以苦為先。」
之下把對偶清單一路鋪開：有信無信、能施悋惜、欲供養不欲受、易悟闇鈍、知不知十二部經次第義、成不成就六波羅蜜、有無方便力、得不得陀羅尼、離不離五蓋，乃至他方危命、飢餓穀貴、豐樂曠野、檀越因緣——每一對都正反兩說，說者聽者輪流在錯的一邊。論主追出病根：「一切眾生所行法，同則和合；一人離五蓋，一人不離，故相輕，相輕故不和合。」相輕二字，收盡二十餘對。師見弟子不行六度便不肯教，不知此人聞般若後當成大事；弟子見師破散六度便疑師不深樂，不知那是斷人著的方便。陀羅尼也有種種：弟子得聞持而不能解義，師能解義而不得聞持——各拿了一半，卻拿自己那一半輕對方。
再往後，魔親自出場，且一次比一次體面：作比丘形像來，說「如我所說經即是般若波羅蜜，此經非般若波羅蜜」，未受記的菩薩便墮疑；作佛身金色丈光，菩薩貪著，「貪著故，耗減薩婆若」；作佛身及比丘僧、化作無數百千萬億菩薩行六波羅蜜，見者心著，同樣耗減。論主的喻毫不留情：「如未離欲人見天女形，深心染著，不能堪受天欲，迷悶而死」；又如人手捉重寶，「有人以少金誑之，捨大價寶而取賤物，是名耗減」。連好法也能作魔：「以著心行六波羅蜜，是名似」；聲聞辟支佛經「雖是好事，破菩薩道，故名魔事」——這一品把判準說到了底：「一切煩惱、取相，皆是魔事。」魔不以惡壞人，以似壞人、以好壞人。
那麼般若何以偏多留難？佛自設一喻：「譬如閻浮提中珍寶：金、銀、琉璃、車𤦲、馬瑙、珊瑚等寶，多難多賊」——賊為珍寶出，不為瓦石生；留難之多，正證般若之貴。魔是欲界主、「世間生死根本」，般若多令眾生入涅槃，故魔作怨賊。但護持也自上而下：能書持正憶念而魔事不起的，「當知佛力故」，十方諸佛與阿鞞跋致菩薩皆擁護祐助——「如賊繞城，大人守護，小兒不覺」。初心人在護中而不自知。品末一句收束全品，也開出藥方：「佛意但欲令行者成般若大事，是故師徒宜應和合，一切惡事，不應計念。」覺魔是防，和合是成；兩不和合品講了幾十種散的方式，只為守住一種合的方式——師徒同心同事，火才點得著，經才寫得成。
The Māra of this chapter does not show a fearsome face. He hides between two good people. ‘The hearer wishes to write out and uphold prajñāpāramitā, to read, recite, ask its meaning, and rightly recollect it; the speaker of the Dharma is slack and does not wish to speak it. Know that this is a deed of Māra for the bodhisattva-mahāsattva’—and the other way round, the speaker's mind is not slack but the hearer does not wish to receive it: ‘the two minds are not in accord; know that this is a deed of Māra.’ One wants to learn and the other will not teach: a deed of Māra. One wants to teach and the other will not learn: also a deed of Māra. The fault lies on neither side; the fault is that the two sides do not come together. The treatise-author lays the principle bare: ‘Every conditioned dharma arises because causes and conditions come together; when the conditions part, it is not. It is like seeking fire with a fire-drill: there is the drill and there is the base, and by the two together the fire is got.’ Writing out prajñā too is a dharma born of conditions: ‘only because teacher and disciple are of one mind and one undertaking can the writing out be completed.’ Take one side away and the fire will not catch.
The weighty matter of the First Part is the twelve dhūta practices: dwelling in the araṇya, always begging for food, wearing robes of cast-off rags, eating at one sitting, eating in measured quantity, not drinking juices after midday, dwelling among the tombs, dwelling under a tree, dwelling in the open, always sitting and never lying down, begging from house to house in order, and keeping only the three robes. One person takes them up and the other does not; the two are not in accord, and this too is a deed of Māra. But the treatise-author first draws a clear line: ‘the twelve dhūta practices are not called precepts; if one can practise them, the precepts are adorned; if one cannot practise them, one does not break the precepts.’ The dhūta practices are the doing of good, not the laying down of precepts; not doing them is no offence. That a deed of Māra can arise even where there is no offence is the finest cut of this chapter: two wholesome dharmas meet and neither yields, and the loss is equal to that of evil. Then the reasons are explained practice by practice, every sentence carrying the felt reality of the life of the Saṅgha: one meal a day is because ‘the Buddha's Dharma is for the sake of practising the path, not for the benefit of the body, as one feeds a horse or feeds a pig’; for eating in measured quantity Śāriputra's own words are cited, ‘if I eat five or six mouthfuls and fill up with water, that is enough to support the body’; not drinking juices is like a horse fitted with the bridle, and only then is the mind that ‘will not go forward on the road’ cut off; dwelling under a tree follows in the Buddha's footsteps, ‘as when the Buddha was born, when he attained the path, when he turned the wheel of the Dharma, and when he entered parinirvāṇa, all under a tree’; dwelling in the open, ‘the moonlight shines everywhere, the sky is bright and clear, and the mind easily enters the emptiness samādhi.’ And the whole is governed by a single sentence: ‘The Buddha's Dharma takes wisdom alone as its root; it does not put suffering first.’
The Last Part spreads out the list of pairs one after another: having faith and having no faith; able to give and begrudging; wishing to make offerings and not wishing to receive them; quick to understand and dull and dark; knowing and not knowing the order and meaning of the twelve divisions of the scriptures; having and not having accomplished the six perfections; having and not having the power of skilful means; obtaining and not obtaining dhāraṇī; parted and not parted from the five hindrances; and on to danger to life in another region, famine and dear grain, a prosperous and pleasant land or a wilderness, the circumstances of a donor—every pair is stated both ways, and speaker and hearer take turns on the wrong side. The treatise-author tracks down the root of the sickness: ‘Among all the dharmas that beings practise, where they are the same there is accord; one person has left the five hindrances and one has not, and so they belittle each other, and because they belittle each other they are not in accord.’ The two Chinese characters rendered here as ‘belittle each other’ gather up more than twenty pairs. A teacher sees that a disciple does not practise the six perfections and so will not teach him, not knowing that this person, having heard prajñā, will accomplish the great matter; a disciple sees the teacher break up and scatter the six perfections and suspects that the teacher does not deeply delight in them, not knowing that this is the skilful means that cuts off a person's attachment. Dhāraṇī too are of many kinds: the disciple has obtained the dhāraṇī of hearing and retaining but cannot explain the meaning; the teacher can explain the meaning but has not obtained the dhāraṇī of hearing and retaining—each holds one half, yet each uses his own half to belittle the other.
Further on, Māra comes forward in person, and each time more presentable than the last: he comes in the form of a bhikṣu and says, ‘the sūtra I speak is prajñāpāramitā; this sūtra is not prajñāpāramitā,’ and the bodhisattva who has not received the prediction falls into doubt; he comes in the body of a Buddha, golden-coloured with a fathom of light, and the bodhisattva craves and clings to it, ‘and because of craving and clinging, sarvajñā is diminished’; he makes the body of a Buddha with a Saṅgha of bhikṣus, and conjures countless hundreds of thousands of myriads of koṭi of bodhisattvas practising the six perfections, and the one who sees them clings in mind, and sarvajñā is diminished in the same way. The treatise-author's simile is merciless: ‘like a person not yet free of desire who sees the form of a heavenly maiden and is deeply stained with attachment, cannot bear to receive the pleasures of heaven, and dies in a swoon’; again, like a person holding a heavy treasure in his hand, ‘whom someone deceives with a little gold, so that he lets go the treasure of great price and takes the cheap thing—this is called diminishment.’ Even good dharmas can act as Māra: ‘to practise the six perfections with a clinging mind is called the semblance’; the sūtras of the śrāvakas and pratyekabuddhas, ‘though they are good things, break the bodhisattva path, and so are called deeds of Māra’—and here the chapter states its criterion to the very bottom: ‘every affliction and every grasping at marks is a deed of Māra.’ Māra does not ruin a person with evil; he ruins him with the semblance, he ruins him with the good.
Why then does prajñā in particular have so many hindrances? The Buddha himself sets a simile: ‘It is like the precious things of Jambudvīpa—gold, silver, beryl, giant clam, agate, coral and such treasures—which have many difficulties and many thieves.’ Thieves come out for treasure, not for tiles and stones; that the hindrances are many is exactly the proof that prajñā is precious. Māra is the lord of the desire realm, ‘the root of birth and death in the world’; prajñā leads many beings into nirvāṇa, and so Māra makes himself an enemy and a thief. But the protection too comes from above: for the one who can write out, uphold, and rightly recollect, and in whom the deeds of Māra do not arise, ‘know that it is by the Buddha's power’; the buddhas of the ten directions and the avaivartika bodhisattvas all guard, protect, and assist him—‘as when thieves surround a city, the grown men keep guard and the small children do not notice.’ The beginner is inside the protection and does not know it. The chapter's last sentence gathers up the whole and also writes out the remedy: ‘The Buddha's intent is only that the practitioner accomplish the great matter of prajñā; therefore teacher and disciple should be in accord, and should not take any evil thing to heart.’ To be aware of Māra is the guarding; to be in accord is the accomplishing. The chapter of the two discords speaks of dozens of ways of coming apart, only in order to hold on to one way of coming together—when teacher and disciple are of one mind and one undertaking, the fire catches, and the sūtra gets written.
卷69 〔T25 0538b18〕
大智度論釋兩不和合品第四十七之餘 聖者龍樹造 後秦龜茲國三藏鳩摩羅什譯 【經】 「復次，須菩提！說法者有信、有善，欲書、受深般若波羅蜜，乃至正憶念；聽法者無信、破戒惡行，不欲書、受深般若波羅蜜乃至正憶念，當知是為魔事。須菩提！聽法者有信、有善，說法者無信、破戒惡行。兩不和合，當知〔T25 0538c〕是為魔事。 「復次，須菩提！說法者能一切施，心不慳惜；聽法者悋惜不捨。當知是為魔事。須菩提！聽法者一切能施，心不慳惜；說法者悋法不施。兩不和合，不得書、持般若波羅蜜乃至正憶念，當知是為魔事。 「復次，須菩提！聽法者欲供養說法人衣服、飲食、臥具、醫藥、資生所須；說法者不欲受之。當知是為魔事。須菩提！說法者欲供給聽法人衣服乃至資生所須；聽法者不欲受之。兩不和合，不得書、持般若波羅蜜乃至正憶念，當知是為魔事。 「復次，須菩提！說法者易悟，聽法人闇鈍。當知是為魔事。須菩提！聽法者易悟，說法人闇鈍。兩不和合，不得書、持般若波羅蜜乃至正憶念，當知是為魔事。 「復次，須菩提！說法者知十二部經次第義，所謂修妬路乃至優波提舍；聽法者不知十二部經次第義。當知是為魔事。聽法者知十二部經次第義，說法人不知十二部經次第義。兩不和合，不得書深般若波羅蜜乃至正憶念，當知是為魔事。 「復次，須菩提！說法者〔T25 0539a〕成就六波羅蜜，聽法人不成就六波羅蜜。兩不和合，不得書深般若波羅蜜乃至正憶念，當知是為魔事。聽法者有六波羅蜜，說法人無六波羅蜜。兩不和合，不得書深般若波羅蜜乃至正憶念，當知是為魔事。 「復次，須菩提！說法者於六波羅蜜有方便力，聽法人於六波羅蜜無方便力。兩不和合，不得書深般若波羅蜜乃至正憶念，當知是為魔事。聽法者於六波羅蜜有方便力，說法人於六波羅蜜無方便力。兩不和合，不得書深般若波羅蜜乃至正憶念，當知是為魔事。 「復次，須菩提！說法者得陀羅尼，聽法者無陀羅尼。兩不和合，不得書深般若波羅蜜乃至正憶念，當知是為魔事。聽法者得陀羅尼，說法者無陀羅尼。兩不和合，不得書深般若波羅蜜乃至正憶念，當知是為魔事。 「復次，須菩提！說法者欲令書、持般若波羅蜜乃至正憶念；聽法人不欲書、持般若波羅蜜，讀、誦乃至正憶念。兩不和合，不得書深般若波羅蜜乃至正憶念，當知是為魔事。聽法者欲書、讀、誦、說般若波羅蜜；說法者不欲令書般若波羅蜜乃至不欲令說。兩不和合，不得書深般若波羅蜜乃至正憶念，當知是為魔事。 「復次，須菩提！說法者離貪欲、瞋恚、睡眠、掉悔、疑，聽法人貪欲、瞋恚、睡眠、掉悔、疑。當知是為魔事。聽法者離貪欲、瞋恚、睡眠、掉悔、疑，說法人貪欲、瞋恚、睡眠、掉悔、疑。兩不和合，不得書深般若波羅蜜乃至正憶念，當知是為魔事。 「復次，須菩提！書是深般若波羅蜜乃至正憶念時，或〔T25 0539b〕有人來，說：『三惡道中苦劇，汝何不於是身盡苦入涅槃？何用是阿耨多羅三藐三菩提為？』兩不和合，不得書深般若波羅蜜乃至正憶念，當知是為魔事。 「復次，須菩提！書是深般若波羅蜜，受持、讀、誦、說、正憶念時，或有人來，讚四天王諸天，讚三十三天、夜摩天、兜率陀天、化樂天、他化自在天、梵天乃至非有想非無想天，讚初禪乃至非有想非無想定，作是言：『善男子！欲界中受五欲快樂，色界中受禪生樂，無色界中受寂滅樂；是事亦無常、苦、空、無我，變相、盡相、散相、離相、滅相。汝何不於是身中取須陀洹果、斯陀含果、阿那含果、阿羅漢果、辟支佛道？何用是世間生死中受種種苦，求阿耨多羅三藐三菩提為？』兩不和合，不得書深般若波羅蜜，乃至正憶念，當知是為魔事。 「復次，須菩提！說法者一身無累，自在無礙；聽法人多將人眾。兩不和合，不得書深般若波羅蜜乃至正憶念，當知是為魔事。聽法者一身無累，自在無礙；說法者多將人眾。兩不和合，不得書深般若波羅蜜乃至正憶念，當知是為魔事。 「復次，須菩提！說法者如是言：『汝能隨我意者，當與汝般若波羅蜜，令書、讀、誦、說、正憶念；若不隨我意者，則不與汝。』兩不和合，不得書深般若波羅蜜，讀、誦、說、正憶念，當知是為魔事。 「復次，須菩提！聽法者欲得追隨如其意；說法者不聽。兩不和合，不得書深般若波羅蜜乃至正憶念，當知是為魔事。 「復次，須菩提！說法者欲得財利故，與般若波羅蜜，令書、持乃至正憶念；聽法〔T25 0539c〕者以是因緣故，不欲從受。兩不和合，不得書深般若波羅蜜乃至正憶念，當知是為魔事。聽法者為財利故，欲書深般若波羅蜜，讀、誦、說；說法者以是因緣故，不欲與。兩不和合，不得書深般若波羅蜜，讀、誦、說，當知是為魔事。 「復次，須菩提！說法者欲至他方危命之處，聽法者不欲隨去。兩不和合，不得書深般若波羅蜜，乃至正憶念，當知是為魔事。聽法者欲至他方危命之處，說法者不欲去。兩不和合，不得書深般若波羅蜜乃至正憶念，當知是為魔事。 「復次，須菩提！說法者欲至他方飢餓、穀貴、無水之處，聽法者不欲隨去。兩不和合，不得書深般若波羅蜜乃至正憶念，當知是為魔事。聽法者欲至他方飢餓、穀貴、無水之處，說法者不欲去。兩不和合，不得書深般若波羅蜜乃至正憶念，當知是為魔事。 「復次，須菩提！說法者欲至他方豐樂之處，聽法者欲隨從去。說法者言：『善男子！汝為利養故追隨我，汝善自思惟，若得、若不得，無令後悔！』以是少因緣故，兩不和合。聽法者聞之心厭，作是念：『是為距逆我，不欲與我相隨。』便止不去。兩不和合，不得書深般若波羅蜜乃至正憶念，當知是為魔事。 「復次，須菩提！說法者欲過曠野，賊怖、旃陀羅怖、獵師怖、惡獸毒蛇怖；聽法者欲隨逐去。說法者言：『善男子！汝何用到彼？彼中多有諸怖——賊怖乃至毒蛇怖。』聽法者聞之，知其不欲與般若波羅蜜書、持乃至正憶念，心厭，不欲追隨。以是少因緣故，兩不和合，當知是〔T25 0540a〕為魔事。 「復次，須菩提！說法者多有檀越數往問訊，以是因緣故，語聽法者：『我有因緣，應往到彼。』聽法人知其意，便止。兩不和合，不得書深般若波羅蜜乃至正憶念，當知是為魔事。」 【論】 問曰： 有人書、持、讀、誦般若波羅蜜，不能行而犯戒，或可有是；若不信，云何從受法？ 答曰： 是人不信般若波羅蜜所謂畢竟空，但欲求名故讀、誦、廣說；如佛弟子不信外道經書，亦為人講說。 復次，不能深心信樂般若故名不信，非都不信。 問曰： 弟子法應供養師，奉諸所有，何以言師不能施？ 答曰： 弟子作是念：「師少物不能捨，何況捨身！雖讚說布施，是為欺誑！」是故不和合。 弟子欲以四事供養師。師少欲知足故不受，或羞愧似如賣法故不受。或師多知多識，無所乏少，能供給弟子。弟子自念：「人當謂我貪師衣食故受法。」或自以德薄，不消所給。此心雖好，不能成般若波羅蜜故，亦是魔事。師鈍根者，是誦經師，非解義師。 十二部經，亦是誦經師。 復次，師有六波羅蜜者，作是念：「弟子罪人、鈍根，不能行六波羅蜜，著世間事，但有弟子名，無有實事。」是師不知弟子聞般若已，後成大事，但以現前無六波羅蜜，不肯教化。弟子亦作是念：「六波羅蜜義，我亦能行；師但能口說，不能修行。」不知師轉身因緣當成大事，又不知師別有讀誦利益因緣，故不和合。 復次，弟子直信著善法。師不著法，以方〔T25 0540b〕便行六波羅蜜；弟子謂為不深樂六波羅蜜。何以知之？師或時讚歎六波羅蜜；或時斷人著故，破散六波羅蜜。弟子有方便，亦如是。 問曰： 若弟子得陀羅尼，師無陀羅尼，何以為師？ 答曰： 陀羅尼有種種。有弟子得聞持陀羅尼，能持、能誦，不能解義；師能為解說。弟子或能得諸法實相陀羅尼義，而不能次第讀誦；或師得聞持陀羅尼，未得大悲故，輕賤弟子，不能教導。 問曰： 弟子欲受持般若波羅蜜，師不與，或可有是；云何師欲與法，弟子不欲受？ 答曰： 如先答：弟子見師有過故，不欲受法。 復次，師欲教化前人為弟子；而是人或邪見諸惡因緣故，不肯受教。 復次，一切眾生所行法，同則和合；一人離五蓋，一人不離，故相輕，相輕故不和合。一切上法皆爾。 復次，書、誦般若波羅蜜乃至正憶念時，一人呵三惡道，一人讚歎諸天，是事如先答。雖不能都破其善行，且壞其大乘，授小乘法。 復次，師少欲知足，不樂眾聚；弟子多有人眾。師作是念：「弟子雖好可度，而將徒眾多。」師深著善法，捨離弟子。弟子一身，亦如是。 復次，說法者意：若弟子隨我意行，若去、若住，隨時問訊，如是等。聽法者但欲從求法利，不能行此眾事。是不和合。或時聽法者隨意進止、問訊等；說法者不聽，作是念：「何用是事？損我功德！」聽法者意謂輕賤，不相好喜。是不和合。 復次，師為利養故欲與法；弟子心則不敬師：「云何欲賣經法？」〔T25 0540c〕弟子亦如是，為財利養讀誦般若，非清淨心故；師知弟子心如是，則薄賤不與。故不和合。 復次，師欲至他方，路經嶮難；弟子惜身命故不能隨，作是念：「我有身，然後求法。」弟子欲去，亦如是。 飢餓、穀貴、無水處，亦如是。 復次，師欲至豐樂處；弟子欲隨師，或羞愧不欲將去；或弟子串樂，不任涉遠；或道里懸遠。或師諳彼國；弟子不悉，謂師稱美彼國，不必實爾；時或慮師，謂貪飲食故去。如是等種種因緣，師語弟子：「如汝所聞彼國土所有，不必盡爾，好自籌量！若自欲去者便去，無以財物豐樂故去，至彼不得隨意，勿以見怨！」師復為說：「汝聞彼國土豐樂故去，非為法故，不須隨我。」師好心止弟子，不知是壞般若波羅蜜因緣。弟子聞是說，敬難師故不能答，便止不去。故不和合。 師復欲至遠國，彼中有種種虎狼、賊盜；語弟子言：「彼間多難，汝不須去！」弟子聞已便止。師但知彼有難事故止弟子，不知是壞般若波羅蜜因緣。 問曰： 若遠國多難，何以自去？ 答曰： 有人言：師彼國生故，服習彼土，能自〔T25 0541a〕防護。 有人言：彼有好師、經書，不惜身命故去。師作是念：「我身自死則可，云何枉他？」如是等因緣故，止弟子不令去。 師多有知識檀越，心生樂著；弟子少欲知足，不著檀越。師常隨時問訊檀越；弟子但欲求法，不喜是事。師知其意，語言：「我有因緣，不得為汝說法。」弟子聞已，不悅：「師貴俗緣，不貴於法。」是不和合。 【經】 「復次，須菩提！惡魔作比丘形像來，方便破壞是般若波羅蜜，不得令書、持、讀、誦、說、正憶念。」 須菩提白佛言：「世尊！何因緣故，惡魔作比丘形像，方便破壞般若波羅蜜，不得令書、持乃至正憶念？」 佛言：「惡魔作比丘形像來，壞善男子、善女人心，令遠離般若波羅蜜，作是言：『如我所說經即是般若波羅蜜，此經非般若波羅蜜。』須菩提！是中破壞諸比丘時，有未受記菩薩便墮疑；墮疑故，不書深般若波羅蜜，不受、不持乃至不作正憶念。不和合，不得書深般若波羅蜜乃至正憶念，當知是為魔事。 「復次，須菩提！惡魔作比丘身到菩薩所，作如是言：『若菩薩行般若波羅蜜於實際作證，得須陀洹果、斯陀含果、阿那含果、阿羅漢果，辟支佛道！』以是兩不和合，不得書深般若波羅蜜乃至正憶念，當知是為魔事。 「復次，須菩提！菩薩說是深般若波羅蜜時，多有魔事起，留難般若波羅蜜，是為魔事。菩薩摩訶薩應當覺知，知已遠離。」 須菩提言：「世尊！何等是魔事留難，菩薩應當覺知，知已遠離？」 佛言：「似般若波羅蜜諸魔〔T25 0541b〕事起，似禪波羅蜜、似毘梨耶波羅蜜、似羼提波羅蜜、似尸羅波羅蜜、似檀波羅蜜魔事起，菩薩應當覺知，知已遠離。 「復次，須菩提！聲聞、辟支佛所應行經，是菩薩摩訶薩應當知是魔事而遠離之。 「復次，須菩提！內空乃至無法有法空，四念處乃至八聖道分，空、無相、無作解脫門；用是法得須陀洹果、斯陀含果、阿那含果、阿羅漢果、辟支佛道。如是等諸經，惡魔作比丘形像，方便與菩薩摩訶薩。是不和合故，不得書深般若波羅蜜乃至正憶念，當知是為魔事。 「復次，須菩提！惡魔作佛身金色丈光，到菩薩所。是菩薩貪著，貪著故，耗減薩婆若。是不和合故，不得書深般若波羅蜜乃至正憶念，當知是為魔事。 「復次，須菩提！惡魔作佛身及比丘僧，到菩薩前；是菩薩起貪著意，作是念：『我於當來世亦當如是從比丘僧為說法。』是菩薩貪著魔身故，耗減薩婆若，不得書成般若波羅蜜多乃至正憶念，當知是為魔事。 「復次，須菩提！惡魔化作無數百千萬億菩薩，行檀波羅蜜、尸羅波羅蜜、羼提波羅蜜、毘梨耶波羅蜜、禪波羅蜜、般若波羅蜜，指示善男子、善女人。善男子、善女人見已貪著，貪著故耗減薩婆若，不得書深般若波羅蜜乃至正憶念，當知是為魔事。何以故？是深般若波羅蜜中，無有色，無有受、想、行、識乃至無有阿耨多羅三藐三菩提。須菩提！是般若波羅蜜若無有色乃至無阿耨多羅三藐三菩提，是中無佛、無聲聞，無辟支佛、無菩薩。何以故？一切諸法自性空〔T25 0541c〕故。 「復次，須菩提！善男子、善女人書是深般若波羅蜜，受、讀、誦、說、正憶念時，多有留難起。須菩提！譬如閻浮提中珍寶：金、銀、琉璃、車𤦲、馬瑙、珊瑚等寶，多難多賊；如是，須菩提！善男子、善女人書是深般若波羅蜜乃至正憶念時，多賊、多留難起。」 須菩提白佛言：「如是！世尊！閻浮提中珍寶：金、銀、琉璃，車𤦲、馬瑙，珊瑚等，多賊、多難。世尊！善男子、善女人亦如是，書是深般若波羅蜜乃至正憶念時，多賊、多留難起，多有魔事。何以故？是愚癡人為魔所使，善男子、善女人書是深般若波羅蜜乃至正憶念時，破壞，令遠離。世尊！是愚癡人少智少慧，是善男子、善女人書深般若波羅蜜乃至正憶念時，破壞，令遠離。是愚癡人心不樂大法，是故不書是深般若波羅蜜，不受、不讀、不誦、不正憶念、不如說修行；亦壞他人，令不得書深般若波羅蜜乃至如說修行。」 佛言：「如是！如是！須菩提！新發大乘意善男子、善女人為魔所使、不種善根、不供養諸佛、不隨善知識故，不書深般若波羅蜜乃至不正憶念，而作留難。是善男子、善女人少智少慧、心不樂大法，是故不能書是深般若波羅蜜乃至正憶念，魔事起故。須菩提！若善男子、善女人能書是深般若波羅蜜乃至正憶念時，魔事不起，能具足禪波羅蜜乃至檀波羅蜜，能具足四念處乃至一切種智。須菩提！當知佛力故，是善男子、善女人能書是深般若波羅蜜乃至正憶念，亦能具足禪波羅蜜乃至檀波羅蜜、內空乃至無法〔T25 0542a〕有法空，具足四念處乃至八聖道分、佛十力乃至一切種智。須菩提！十方現在無量無邊阿僧祇諸佛亦助是善男子、善女人，令得書是深般若波羅蜜乃至正憶念；十方阿鞞跋致諸菩薩摩訶薩亦擁護祐助是善男子、善女人書深般若波羅蜜乃至正憶念。」 【論】 釋曰： 魔作大沙門形，有重威德，令人受其語；多持經卷，與眾弟子俱，語諸比丘：「般若波羅蜜，如我經所說，真實佛語；汝先聞者不實，非佛所說。」呵毀先經，種種自讚所說。鈍根菩薩信受是語，生邪見；若利根未得受記者生疑。何以故？諸佛畢竟空無相，智慧難解，故不和合。 或時魔語菩薩：「般若波羅蜜、三解脫門，廣說但是空；汝常習此空，於中得證。不得證，云何作佛、作佛法？先行布施、持戒等，修三十二相福德；坐道場時，爾乃用空。」菩薩或信或疑，離般若波羅蜜。 問曰： 云何似六波羅蜜名魔事？ 答曰： 如相似般若波羅蜜中說。 復次，以著心行六波羅蜜，是名似。 聲聞、辟支佛經，無有慈悲，不求佛道，但欲自度；雖是好事，破菩薩道，故名魔事。 問曰： 若菩薩見佛身，則信心清淨，云何名魔事？ 答曰： 一切煩惱、取相，皆是魔事。是小菩薩未應見佛身，魔作佛妙形，菩薩心著，為是好身故行道。如未離欲人見天女形，深心染著，不能堪受天欲，迷悶而死。是故魔願得滿。 菩薩雖得少淨心，而失實相智慧；如人手捉重寶，有人以少金誑之，捨大價寶而取賤物，是名耗減。 〔T25 0542b〕 魔作佛身，將諸比丘，示多菩薩行六波羅蜜，亦如上。 此中佛說因緣：「色等一切法自性空。」 復次，眾會生疑：「般若波羅蜜是無上法，多有利益，云何有人憎嫉？」是故佛說譬喻：「如閻浮提金銀等，多怨多賊為是故出，不為瓦石等生。般若波羅蜜是佛法藏中妙寶，微妙、甚深，懈怠鈍根者所不解，是故呰毀。魔以般若波羅蜜多令眾生入涅槃故，魔作怨賊。」 須菩提喜受佛教，述其所說毀呰破壞般若者：「世尊！是狂癡之人為魔所使，不得自在，以少智故，不能通達佛意。是人無有大心，不知清淨法味，但知三相：貪味、婬欲、瞋恚，如畜生法，與般若波羅蜜生留難。」 佛可須菩提所說，語須菩提：「若菩薩摩訶薩書般若乃至正憶念，魔事不起，當知是佛力，亦是十方諸佛及諸菩薩所擁護；而能具足五波羅蜜乃至一切種智，亦是十方現在佛力。」 何以故？魔是欲界主，世間福德、智慧具足，魔是世間生死根本。色界諸天雖有邪見，常入禪定故心柔軟，不能有所破壞。無色界中無形故，又心微細，不能有所作。下諸天無有力勢故，不能如是破壞。是魔先世業因緣力；又住處因緣，他作奪取，是中賊主名為魔。是魔相爾，破壞好事。 初發心菩薩福德、智慧薄故惜身，若十方諸佛菩薩不擁護佐助者，不能成。是故諸佛、菩薩、諸天為破壞魔事，是菩薩或覺、或不覺；如賊繞城，大人守護，小兒不覺。 略說魔事如是，廣說則無量無邊。然〔T25 0542c〕佛意但欲令行者成般若大事，是故師徒宜應和合，一切惡事，不應計念。
《大智度論》卷68–69 · T25n1509 0537a01–0542c03
The canonical text stands in Chinese only. This edition renders the essence, the plain reading, the exposition and the apparatus into English — never the sūtra itself. Switch to 漢讀本 or 並行雙語 above to read it.
本卷題為《大智度論》釋〈兩不和合品〉第四十七之餘——承前卷之續，聖者龍樹所造，後秦龜茲國三藏鳩摩羅什所譯。
經①：信善與破戒、能施與悋惜、受供與不受、易悟與闇鈍
佛承前卷，繼續為須菩提宣說說法者與聽法者兩不和合的魔事：
『再者，須菩提！說法的人有信、有善，想要書寫、受持深般若波羅蜜，乃至正憶念；聽法的人無信、破戒惡行，不想書寫、受持深般若波羅蜜乃至正憶念——應當知道這是魔事。須菩提！聽法的人有信、有善，說法的人無信、破戒惡行。兩不和合，應當知道這是魔事。』
『再者，須菩提！說法的人能夠一切布施，心不慳惜；聽法的人吝惜不捨。應當知道這是魔事。須菩提！聽法的人一切都能布施，心不慳惜；說法的人吝惜於法而不肯施與。兩不和合，不能書寫、受持般若波羅蜜乃至正憶念，應當知道這是魔事。』
『再者，須菩提！聽法的人想要供養說法人衣服、飲食、臥具、醫藥、資生所需之物；說法的人不想接受。應當知道這是魔事。須菩提！說法的人想要供給聽法人衣服乃至資生所需；聽法的人不想接受。兩不和合，不能書寫、受持般若波羅蜜乃至正憶念，應當知道這是魔事。』
『再者，須菩提！說法的人容易領悟，聽法的人闇昧遲鈍。應當知道這是魔事。須菩提！聽法的人容易領悟，說法的人闇昧遲鈍。兩不和合，不能書寫、受持般若波羅蜜乃至正憶念，應當知道這是魔事。』
經①續：十二部經次第義、六波羅蜜、方便力、陀羅尼、書持之欲、五蓋離不離
『再者，須菩提！說法的人知道十二部經的次第之義——也就是從修妬路乃至優波提舍；聽法的人不知道十二部經的次第之義。應當知道這是魔事。聽法的人知道十二部經的次第之義，說法的人不知道十二部經的次第之義。兩不和合，不能書寫深般若波羅蜜乃至正憶念，應當知道這是魔事。』
『再者，須菩提！說法的人成就六波羅蜜，聽法的人不成就六波羅蜜。兩不和合，不能書寫深般若波羅蜜乃至正憶念，應當知道這是魔事。聽法的人有六波羅蜜，說法的人沒有六波羅蜜。兩不和合，不能書寫深般若波羅蜜乃至正憶念，應當知道這是魔事。』
『再者，須菩提！說法的人對於六波羅蜜有方便力，聽法的人對於六波羅蜜沒有方便力。兩不和合，不能書寫深般若波羅蜜乃至正憶念，應當知道這是魔事。聽法的人對於六波羅蜜有方便力，說法的人對於六波羅蜜沒有方便力。兩不和合，不能書寫深般若波羅蜜乃至正憶念，應當知道這是魔事。』
『再者，須菩提！說法的人得了陀羅尼，聽法的人沒有陀羅尼。兩不和合，不能書寫深般若波羅蜜乃至正憶念，應當知道這是魔事。聽法的人得了陀羅尼，說法的人沒有陀羅尼。兩不和合，不能書寫深般若波羅蜜乃至正憶念，應當知道這是魔事。』
『再者，須菩提！說法的人想令人書寫、受持般若波羅蜜乃至正憶念；聽法的人不想書寫、受持般若波羅蜜，讀、誦乃至正憶念。兩不和合，不能書寫深般若波羅蜜乃至正憶念，應當知道這是魔事。聽法的人想要書寫、讀、誦、宣說般若波羅蜜；說法的人不想令他書寫般若波羅蜜，乃至不想令他宣說。兩不和合，不能書寫深般若波羅蜜乃至正憶念，應當知道這是魔事。』
『再者，須菩提！說法的人離了貪欲、瞋恚、睡眠、掉悔、疑，聽法的人有貪欲、瞋恚、睡眠、掉悔、疑。應當知道這是魔事。聽法的人離了貪欲、瞋恚、睡眠、掉悔、疑，說法的人有貪欲、瞋恚、睡眠、掉悔、疑。兩不和合，不能書寫深般若波羅蜜乃至正憶念，應當知道這是魔事。』
經①續：外人來勸——呵三惡道勸速入涅槃、讚諸天勸取小乘之果
佛又說：再者，須菩提！書寫這深般若波羅蜜乃至正憶念之時，或許有人前來，說道：『三惡道之中痛苦劇烈，你何不就在這一身之中滅盡眾苦、進入涅槃？還要這阿耨多羅三藐三菩提做什麼？』兩不和合，不能書寫深般若波羅蜜乃至正憶念，應當知道這是魔事。
佛又說：再者，須菩提！書寫這深般若波羅蜜，受持、讀、誦、宣說、正憶念之時，或許有人前來，讚歎四天王諸天，讚歎三十三天、夜摩天、兜率陀天、化樂天、他化自在天、梵天乃至非有想非無想天，讚歎初禪乃至非有想非無想定，這樣說：『善男子！在欲界之中受五欲的快樂，在色界之中受禪定所生之樂，在無色界之中受寂滅之樂；然而這些事也是無常、苦、空、無我的，是變壞之相、滅盡之相、離散之相、別離之相、寂滅之相。你何不就在這一身之中取須陀洹果、斯陀含果、阿那含果、阿羅漢果、辟支佛道？何必在這世間生死之中受種種苦，去求阿耨多羅三藐三菩提呢？』兩不和合，不能書寫深般若波羅蜜，乃至正憶念，應當知道這是魔事。
經①續：一身與徒眾、隨意與不聽、財利、危命飢餓豐樂曠野之行、檀越因緣
『再者，須菩提！說法的人獨自一身、無所牽累，自在無礙；聽法的人帶領著許多徒眾。兩不和合，不能書寫深般若波羅蜜乃至正憶念，應當知道這是魔事。聽法的人獨自一身、無所牽累，自在無礙；說法的人帶領著許多徒眾。兩不和合，不能書寫深般若波羅蜜乃至正憶念，應當知道這是魔事。』
佛又說：再者，須菩提！說法的人這樣說：『你能隨順我的意思，我就給你般若波羅蜜，令你書寫、讀、誦、宣說、正憶念；若不隨順我的意思，就不給你。』兩不和合，不能書寫深般若波羅蜜，讀、誦、宣說、正憶念，應當知道這是魔事。
『再者，須菩提！聽法的人想要隨侍追隨、一如說法者的意思；說法的人卻不聽許。兩不和合，不能書寫深般若波羅蜜乃至正憶念，應當知道這是魔事。』
『再者，須菩提！說法的人為了想得財利的緣故，才給與般若波羅蜜，令人書寫、受持乃至正憶念；聽法的人因為這個緣故，不願意從他受法。兩不和合，不能書寫深般若波羅蜜乃至正憶念，應當知道這是魔事。聽法的人為了財利的緣故，想要書寫深般若波羅蜜，讀、誦、宣說；說法的人因為這個緣故，不願意給與。兩不和合，不能書寫深般若波羅蜜，讀、誦、宣說，應當知道這是魔事。』
『再者，須菩提！說法的人想到他方有生命危險之處去，聽法的人不想隨去。兩不和合，不能書寫深般若波羅蜜，乃至正憶念，應當知道這是魔事。聽法的人想到他方有生命危險之處去，說法的人不想去。兩不和合，不能書寫深般若波羅蜜乃至正憶念，應當知道這是魔事。』
『再者，須菩提！說法的人想到他方飢餓、穀貴、無水之處去，聽法的人不想隨去。兩不和合，不能書寫深般若波羅蜜乃至正憶念，應當知道這是魔事。聽法的人想到他方飢餓、穀貴、無水之處去，說法的人不想去。兩不和合，不能書寫深般若波羅蜜乃至正憶念，應當知道這是魔事。』
佛又說：再者，須菩提！說法的人想到他方豐樂之處去，聽法的人想要隨從同去。說法的人說：『善男子！你是為了利養的緣故才追隨我，你好好自己思量，將來或者得到、或者得不到，不要事後懊悔！』因為這一點小小因緣，兩不和合。聽法的人聽了心生厭倦，這樣想：『這是拒絕我，不想與我相隨。』便停下不去了。兩不和合，不能書寫深般若波羅蜜乃至正憶念，應當知道這是魔事。
佛又說：再者，須菩提！說法的人要越過曠野，有盜賊之怖、旃陀羅之怖、獵師之怖、惡獸毒蛇之怖；聽法的人想要跟隨著去。說法的人說：『善男子！你何必到那裡去？那裡有許多可怖之事——盜賊之怖乃至毒蛇之怖。』聽法的人聽了，知道他不想把般若波羅蜜給自己書寫、受持乃至正憶念，心生厭倦，不想再追隨。因為這一點小小因緣，兩不和合，應當知道這是魔事。
佛又說：再者，須菩提！說法的人有許多檀越（施主），常常前去問候，因為這個緣故，對聽法的人說：『我有事緣，應當到那裡去。』聽法的人知道他的心意，便停止了。兩不和合，不能書寫深般若波羅蜜乃至正憶念，應當知道這是魔事。
論①：不信云何從受法；師何以不能施——四事供養進退之情
以下是論主的解釋。
有人問：有人書寫、受持、讀、誦般若波羅蜜，卻不能依之而行、以致犯戒——這或許是有的；但若是不信，又怎麼會從人受法呢？
回答說：這種人不信般若波羅蜜——也就是不信畢竟空，只是想求名聲，所以讀、誦、廣為人說；如同佛弟子不信外道的經書，卻也照樣為人講說。
再者，不能深心信樂般若，就名為不信，並不是完全不信。
有人問：依弟子之法，本應供養師父，奉上一切所有，為什麼經中說師不能施？
回答說：弟子這樣想：『師父連少許之物都不能捨，何況捨身！雖然讚歎宣說布施，這是欺誑！』所以不和合。
弟子想以四事供養師父。師父少欲知足，所以不受；或者因羞愧——覺得像是在賣法——所以不受。或者師父見多識廣、交遊眾多，一無所缺，反而能供給弟子。弟子自己想：『人們會說我是貪圖師父的衣食才來受法。』或者自認德薄，消受不起所供給的。這心雖然是好的，但因為不能成就般若波羅蜜的緣故，也是魔事。至於師是鈍根的情形，是說他是誦經之師，不是解義之師。
論①續：誦經師與解義師；六波羅蜜互疑；方便之行；陀羅尼種種
「十二部經」那一段，說的也是誦經師。
再者，師父具有六波羅蜜的，這樣想：『弟子是罪人、鈍根，不能行六波羅蜜，貪著世間之事，只有弟子之名，沒有真實之事。』這師父不知道弟子聽聞般若之後，日後將成大事，只因為眼前沒有六波羅蜜，就不肯教化。弟子也這樣想：『六波羅蜜的義理，我也能行；師父只會口說，自己不能修行。』不知道師父以轉身的因緣將成大事，也不知道師父另有讀誦利益的因緣，所以不和合。
再者，弟子直心而信、執著善法。師父不執著於法，以方便行六波羅蜜；弟子便以為他不深樂六波羅蜜。何以見得？師父有時讚歎六波羅蜜；有時為了斷除人的執著，又破斥六波羅蜜。反過來，弟子有方便而師父直信執著，也是這樣。
有人問：若弟子得了陀羅尼，師父沒有陀羅尼，那憑什麼作師？
回答說：陀羅尼有種種。有的弟子得聞持陀羅尼，能持、能誦，卻不能解義；師父能為他解說。弟子或者能得諸法實相陀羅尼之義，卻不能依次第讀誦；或者師父得聞持陀羅尼，因為還沒有得大悲的緣故，輕賤弟子，不肯教導。
論①續：師不與、弟子不受；五蓋相輕；壞大乘授小乘；眾聚與一身；隨意問訊；財利
有人問：弟子想受持般若波羅蜜而師父不給，這或許是有的；怎麼會師父想給法，弟子反而不想受呢？
回答說：如同前面所答：弟子見師父有過失，所以不想受法。
再者，師父想教化眼前之人作弟子；而這人或因邪見諸惡因緣的緣故，不肯受教。
再者，一切眾生所行之法，相同就和合；一人離了五蓋，一人不離，就互相輕視，互相輕視就不和合。一切上妙之法都是這樣。
再者，書寫、讀誦般若波羅蜜乃至正憶念之時，一人呵斥三惡道，一人讚歎諸天，這事如前面所答。雖然不能完全破壞他的善行，卻已壞了他的大乘，授與他小乘之法。
再者，師父少欲知足，不喜歡人眾聚集；弟子有許多徒眾。師父這樣想：『這弟子雖然好、可以度，但帶領的徒眾太多。』師父深著善法，便捨離弟子。反過來，弟子獨自一身而師父多有徒眾的情形，也是這樣。
再者，說法者的心意是：弟子要隨我的意思行事——或去、或住，隨時問候請安，如此等等。聽法的人只想從他求得法利，不能行這許多事。這就不和合。或者有時聽法的人隨意進退、問候等等；說法的人不接受，這樣想：『要這些事做什麼？損我的功德！』聽法的人心裡覺得被輕賤，彼此不相喜悅。這就不和合。
再者，師父為了利養才想給法；弟子心中就不敬師：『怎麼可以出賣經法？』弟子也是一樣——為了財物利養而讀誦般若，不是清淨心；師父知道弟子心是這樣，就輕賤他、不給他。所以不和合。
論①續：嶮難惜身、飢餓豐樂、遠國多難；檀越俗緣
再者，師父想到他方去，路途經過險難之處；弟子愛惜身命，不能跟隨，這樣想：『我先保得此身，然後再求法。』反過來，弟子想去而師父不去的情形，也是這樣。
飢餓、穀貴、無水之處，也是這樣。
再者，師父想到豐樂之處去；弟子想跟隨師父，師父或者因羞愧而不想帶他去；或者弟子習慣安樂，經不起長途跋涉；或者道路懸遠。或者師父熟悉那個國土；弟子不清楚，以為師父只是稱美那國，未必真是那樣；有時又懷疑師父，以為他是貪圖飲食才去。因為如此等種種因緣，師父對弟子說：『如你所聽說的那國土的種種，未必全是那樣，你好好自己斟酌！若是自己要去就去，不要為了財物豐樂而去，到了那裡不能隨意，可不要怨我！』師父又為他說：『你是聽說那國土豐樂才去，不是為了法，不必跟隨我。』師父好心勸止弟子，卻不知道這正是破壞般若波羅蜜的因緣。弟子聽了這話，因為敬畏師父，不敢回答，便停下不去。所以不和合。
師父又想到遠方之國去，那裡有種種虎狼、賊盜；便對弟子說：『那裡多有災難，你不必去！』弟子聽了便停止。師父只知道那裡有難事而勸止弟子，不知道這是破壞般若波羅蜜的因緣。
有人問：若是遠國多難，師父為什麼自己要去？
回答說：有人說：師父生在那個國土，習慣那裡的水土，能夠自己防護。
有人說：那裡有好的師父、經書，師父不惜身命所以要去。師父這樣想：『我自己身死尚且可以，怎麼能連累他人？』因為如此等因緣，勸止弟子，不讓他去。
師父有許多相識的檀越，心生愛著；弟子少欲知足，不攀著檀越。師父常常隨時問候檀越；弟子只想求法，不喜歡這些事。師父知道他的心意，就對他說：『我有事緣，不能為你說法。』弟子聽了，心中不悅：『師父看重俗緣，不看重法。』這就不和合。
經②：惡魔化作比丘形像——毀謗正經、勸於實際作證
『再者，須菩提！惡魔化作比丘的形像前來，以方便破壞這般若波羅蜜，令人不能書寫、受持、讀、誦、宣說、正憶念。』
須菩提向佛稟白：『世尊！因為什麼緣故，惡魔化作比丘形像，以方便破壞般若波羅蜜，令人不能書寫、受持乃至正憶念？』
佛說：惡魔化作比丘形像前來，敗壞善男子、善女人的心，令他們遠離般若波羅蜜，這樣說：『如我所說的經才是般若波羅蜜，這部經不是般若波羅蜜。』須菩提！當他這樣破壞諸比丘之時，有還未受記的菩薩便墮入疑惑；因為墮疑的緣故，就不書寫深般若波羅蜜，不受、不持乃至不作正憶念。不和合，不能書寫深般若波羅蜜乃至正憶念，應當知道這是魔事。
佛又說：再者，須菩提！惡魔化作比丘之身來到菩薩的處所，這樣說：『若菩薩行般若波羅蜜而在實際上作證，便得須陀洹果、斯陀含果、阿那含果、阿羅漢果，辟支佛道！』因為這樣兩不和合，不能書寫深般若波羅蜜乃至正憶念，應當知道這是魔事。
經②續：似六波羅蜜之魔事；二乘所應行經；三解脫門諸經
『再者，須菩提！菩薩宣說這深般若波羅蜜時，多有魔事生起，留難般若波羅蜜，這就是魔事。菩薩摩訶薩應當覺知，覺知之後遠離它。』
須菩提說：『世尊！什麼是魔事留難，菩薩應當覺知、覺知之後遠離的呢？』
佛說：『相似般若波羅蜜的種種魔事生起，相似禪波羅蜜、相似毘梨耶波羅蜜、相似羼提波羅蜜、相似尸羅波羅蜜、相似檀波羅蜜的魔事生起，菩薩應當覺知，覺知之後遠離。』
『再者，須菩提！聲聞、辟支佛所應行的經典，菩薩摩訶薩應當知道這是魔事而遠離它。』
『再者，須菩提！內空乃至無法有法空，四念處乃至八聖道分，空、無相、無作解脫門——用這些法得須陀洹果、斯陀含果、阿那含果、阿羅漢果、辟支佛道。像這樣的諸經，惡魔化作比丘形像，以方便授與菩薩摩訶薩。因為這樣不和合的緣故，不能書寫深般若波羅蜜乃至正憶念，應當知道這是魔事。』
經②續：魔作佛身、佛身及僧、化無數菩薩——貪著故耗減薩婆若
『再者，須菩提！惡魔化作佛身，金色之身、一丈光明，來到菩薩的處所。這菩薩心生貪著，因為貪著的緣故，耗減薩婆若（一切智）。因為這樣不和合的緣故，不能書寫深般若波羅蜜乃至正憶念，應當知道這是魔事。』
佛又說：再者，須菩提！惡魔化作佛身以及比丘僧眾，來到菩薩面前；這菩薩生起貪著之意，這樣想：『我在未來之世，也要像這樣，有比丘僧相隨，而為之說法。』這菩薩因為貪著魔身的緣故，耗減薩婆若，不能書寫成就般若波羅蜜多乃至正憶念，應當知道這是魔事。
『再者，須菩提！惡魔化作無數百千萬億的菩薩，行檀波羅蜜、尸羅波羅蜜、羼提波羅蜜、毘梨耶波羅蜜、禪波羅蜜、般若波羅蜜，指給善男子、善女人看。善男子、善女人見了心生貪著，因為貪著的緣故耗減薩婆若，不能書寫深般若波羅蜜乃至正憶念，應當知道這是魔事。為什麼呢？這深般若波羅蜜之中，沒有色，沒有受、想、行、識，乃至沒有阿耨多羅三藐三菩提。須菩提！這般若波羅蜜之中既然沒有色乃至沒有阿耨多羅三藐三菩提，其中就沒有佛、沒有聲聞，沒有辟支佛、沒有菩薩。為什麼呢？因為一切諸法自性空的緣故。』
經②續：閻浮提珍寶多賊之喻；須菩提述佛意；佛力與十方諸佛菩薩擁護
『再者，須菩提！善男子、善女人書寫這深般若波羅蜜，受、讀、誦、宣說、正憶念之時，多有留難生起。須菩提！譬如閻浮提中的珍寶：金、銀、琉璃、車𤦲、馬瑙、珊瑚等寶，多有災難、多有盜賊；同樣地，須菩提！善男子、善女人書寫這深般若波羅蜜乃至正憶念之時，多有盜賊、多有留難生起。』
須菩提向佛稟白：『正是如此！世尊！閻浮提中的珍寶：金、銀、琉璃，車𤦲、馬瑙，珊瑚等，多有盜賊、多有災難。世尊！善男子、善女人也是這樣，書寫這深般若波羅蜜乃至正憶念之時，多有盜賊、多有留難生起，多有魔事。為什麼呢？那些愚癡之人被魔所驅使，在善男子、善女人書寫這深般若波羅蜜乃至正憶念之時，加以破壞，令他們遠離。世尊！那些愚癡之人少智少慧，在善男子、善女人書寫深般若波羅蜜乃至正憶念之時，加以破壞，令他們遠離。這些愚癡之人心不愛樂大法，所以自己不書寫這深般若波羅蜜，不受、不讀、不誦、不正憶念、不如所說修行；也破壞他人，令他們不能書寫深般若波羅蜜乃至如所說修行。』
佛說：『正是如此！正是如此！須菩提！新發大乘心的善男子、善女人，因為被魔所驅使、不種善根、不供養諸佛、不隨善知識的緣故，不書寫深般若波羅蜜乃至不正憶念，而作留難。這些善男子、善女人少智少慧、心不愛樂大法，所以不能書寫這深般若波羅蜜乃至正憶念，因為魔事生起的緣故。須菩提！若善男子、善女人能書寫這深般若波羅蜜乃至正憶念之時，魔事不起，能具足禪波羅蜜乃至檀波羅蜜，能具足四念處乃至一切種智。須菩提！應當知道，是佛力的緣故，這善男子、善女人才能書寫這深般若波羅蜜乃至正憶念，也能具足禪波羅蜜乃至檀波羅蜜、內空乃至無法有法空，具足四念處乃至八聖道分、佛十力乃至一切種智。須菩提！十方現在無量無邊阿僧祇諸佛，也幫助這善男子、善女人，令他們得以書寫這深般若波羅蜜乃至正憶念；十方阿鞞跋致的諸菩薩摩訶薩，也擁護祐助這善男子、善女人書寫深般若波羅蜜乃至正憶念。』
論②：魔作大沙門形呵毀先經；魔勸先修福德、坐道場時方用空
以下是論主的解釋。
魔化作大沙門之形，有厚重的威德，令人聽受他的話；又多持經卷，與眾多弟子同行，對諸比丘說：『般若波羅蜜，如我經中所說的，才是真實佛語；你們先前所聽聞的不真實，不是佛所說。』呵斥毀謗先前之經，種種自讚己說。鈍根的菩薩信受這些話，生起邪見；若是利根而還未得受記的，就生疑。為什麼呢？諸佛之法畢竟空、無相，智慧難解，所以不和合。
或者有時魔對菩薩說：『般若波羅蜜、三解脫門，廣說起來只是空；你常修習此空，就會在其中取證。若不取證，又怎麼作佛、成就佛法呢？應當先行布施、持戒等，修三十二相的福德；到坐道場之時，那時才用空。』菩薩或者相信、或者生疑，便離開般若波羅蜜。
論②續：似六波羅蜜；二乘經破菩薩道；見佛身何以名魔事；耗減之義
有人問：為什麼「似六波羅蜜」名為魔事？
回答說：如「相似般若波羅蜜」一段中所說。
再者，以執著之心行六波羅蜜，就名為「相似」。
聲聞、辟支佛的經典，沒有慈悲，不求佛道，只想自己得度；雖然是好事，卻破壞菩薩道，所以名為魔事。
有人問：若菩薩見到佛身，應當是信心清淨，為什麼名為魔事？
回答說：一切煩惱、取相，都是魔事。這是小菩薩，還不到應當見佛身的時候，魔化作佛的妙形，菩薩心生貪著，為了這好身相的緣故而行道。如同未離欲的人見到天女之形，深心染著，卻不能堪受天上之欲，迷悶而死。所以魔的心願得以滿足。
菩薩雖然得到少許清淨心，卻失去了實相智慧；如同人手中捉著貴重之寶，有人用少許金子欺誑他，他便捨棄大價之寶而取了低賤之物——這名為「耗減」。
論②續：魔作佛身將諸比丘；自性空；珍寶喻的因緣；須菩提述、佛可其說
魔化作佛身，帶領諸比丘，向眾多菩薩顯示行六波羅蜜之相——道理也如上面所說。
這裡佛說出因緣：「色等一切法自性空。」
再者，法會大眾生疑：『般若波羅蜜是無上之法，多有利益，為什麼會有人憎恨嫉妒？』所以佛說譬喻：『如同閻浮提的金銀等寶，多怨多賊是為了它而出現，不為瓦石之類而生。般若波羅蜜是佛法藏中的妙寶，微妙、甚深，懈怠鈍根的人所不能解，所以加以毀呰。魔因為般若波羅蜜多令眾生入涅槃的緣故，就作怨賊。』
須菩提歡喜地領受佛的教導，複述佛所說的毀呰破壞般若的人：『世尊！這狂亂愚癡之人被魔所驅使，不得自在，因為智慧少的緣故，不能通達佛意。這種人沒有大心，不知清淨的法味，只知道三種相：貪味、婬欲、瞋恚，如同畜生之法，對般若波羅蜜生起留難。』
佛肯可須菩提所說，告訴須菩提：『若菩薩摩訶薩書寫般若乃至正憶念，魔事不起，應當知道這是佛力，也是十方諸佛及諸菩薩所擁護；而能具足五波羅蜜乃至一切種智，也是十方現在諸佛之力。』
論②續：魔是欲界之主；諸佛菩薩擁護初發心者；師徒宜應和合
為什麼呢？魔是欲界之主，世間的福德、智慧具足，魔是世間生死的根本。色界諸天雖然有邪見，因為常入禪定的緣故心地柔軟，不能有所破壞。無色界之中沒有形體，又心念微細，不能有所作為。下界諸天沒有力勢，不能作這樣的破壞。這魔有先世業因緣之力；又以住處因緣——奪取他人所作的，這其中的賊主就名為魔。魔的相狀就是如此，專門破壞好事。
初發心的菩薩福德、智慧微薄，所以愛惜己身；若沒有十方諸佛菩薩擁護佐助，便不能成就。所以諸佛、菩薩、諸天為他破除魔事，這菩薩或者覺察、或者不覺察；如同盜賊圍城，有大人守護著，小兒並不知覺。
簡略地說，魔事就是這樣；廣說則無量無邊。然而佛意只是想令行者成就般若的大事，所以師徒之間應當和合，一切惡事，都不應計較掛念。（卷終）
This fascicle is titled the Mahāprajñāpāramitā-upadeśa's commentary on the remainder of the forty-seventh chapter, "The Two Discords"—continuing from the previous fascicle—composed by the noble Nāgārjuna and translated by the Tripiṭaka master Kumārajīva of the land of Kucha under the Later Qin.
Sūtra ①: Faith and Goodness against Broken Precepts, Able to Give against Begrudging, Accepting Offerings against Not Accepting, Quick to Understand against Dark and Dull
Continuing from the previous fascicle, the Buddha goes on to proclaim for Subhūti the deeds of Māra in which the speaker of the Dharma and the hearer of the Dharma, the two, are not in accord:
‘Furthermore, Subhūti! The speaker of the Dharma has faith and is good, and wishes to write out and to receive and uphold the deep prajñāpāramitā, and so on up to rightly recollect it; the hearer of the Dharma has no faith, breaks the precepts, and does evil, and does not wish to write out or to receive and uphold the deep prajñāpāramitā, and so on up to rightly recollect it—know that this is a deed of Māra. Subhūti! The hearer of the Dharma has faith and is good; the speaker of the Dharma has no faith, breaks the precepts, and does evil. The two are not in accord; know that this is a deed of Māra.’
‘Furthermore, Subhūti! The speaker of the Dharma can give everything, and his mind does not begrudge; the hearer of the Dharma begrudges and does not let go. Know that this is a deed of Māra. Subhūti! The hearer of the Dharma can give everything, and his mind does not begrudge; the speaker of the Dharma begrudges the Dharma and is unwilling to give it. The two are not in accord; they cannot write out or receive and uphold prajñāpāramitā, and so on up to rightly recollect it; know that this is a deed of Māra.’
‘Furthermore, Subhūti! The hearer of the Dharma wishes to make offerings to the speaker of the Dharma of clothing, food and drink, bedding, medicine, and the things needed to sustain life; the speaker of the Dharma does not wish to accept them. Know that this is a deed of Māra. Subhūti! The speaker of the Dharma wishes to provide the hearer of the Dharma with clothing and so on up to what is needed to sustain life; the hearer of the Dharma does not wish to accept them. The two are not in accord; they cannot write out or receive and uphold prajñāpāramitā, and so on up to rightly recollect it; know that this is a deed of Māra.’
‘Furthermore, Subhūti! The speaker of the Dharma is quick to understand; the hearer of the Dharma is dark and dull. Know that this is a deed of Māra. Subhūti! The hearer of the Dharma is quick to understand; the speaker of the Dharma is dark and dull. The two are not in accord; they cannot write out or receive and uphold prajñāpāramitā, and so on up to rightly recollect it; know that this is a deed of Māra.’
Sūtra ① (continued): The Order and Meaning of the Twelve Divisions of the Scriptures, the Six Perfections, the Power of Skilful Means, Dhāraṇī, the Wish to Write Out and Uphold, and Being Parted or Not Parted from the Five Hindrances
‘Furthermore, Subhūti! The speaker of the Dharma knows the order and meaning of the twelve divisions of the scriptures—that is, from the sūtra and so on up to the upadeśa; the hearer of the Dharma does not know the order and meaning of the twelve divisions of the scriptures. Know that this is a deed of Māra. The hearer of the Dharma knows the order and meaning of the twelve divisions of the scriptures; the speaker of the Dharma does not know the order and meaning of the twelve divisions of the scriptures. The two are not in accord; they cannot write out the deep prajñāpāramitā, and so on up to rightly recollect it; know that this is a deed of Māra.’
‘Furthermore, Subhūti! The speaker of the Dharma has accomplished the six perfections; the hearer of the Dharma has not accomplished the six perfections. The two are not in accord; they cannot write out the deep prajñāpāramitā, and so on up to rightly recollect it; know that this is a deed of Māra. The hearer of the Dharma has the six perfections; the speaker of the Dharma does not have the six perfections. The two are not in accord; they cannot write out the deep prajñāpāramitā, and so on up to rightly recollect it; know that this is a deed of Māra.’
‘Furthermore, Subhūti! The speaker of the Dharma has the power of skilful means with regard to the six perfections; the hearer of the Dharma does not have the power of skilful means with regard to the six perfections. The two are not in accord; they cannot write out the deep prajñāpāramitā, and so on up to rightly recollect it; know that this is a deed of Māra. The hearer of the Dharma has the power of skilful means with regard to the six perfections; the speaker of the Dharma does not have the power of skilful means with regard to the six perfections. The two are not in accord; they cannot write out the deep prajñāpāramitā, and so on up to rightly recollect it; know that this is a deed of Māra.’
‘Furthermore, Subhūti! The speaker of the Dharma has obtained dhāraṇī; the hearer of the Dharma has no dhāraṇī. The two are not in accord; they cannot write out the deep prajñāpāramitā, and so on up to rightly recollect it; know that this is a deed of Māra. The hearer of the Dharma has obtained dhāraṇī; the speaker of the Dharma has no dhāraṇī. The two are not in accord; they cannot write out the deep prajñāpāramitā, and so on up to rightly recollect it; know that this is a deed of Māra.’
‘Furthermore, Subhūti! The speaker of the Dharma wishes to have others write out and receive and uphold prajñāpāramitā, and so on up to rightly recollect it; the hearer of the Dharma does not wish to write out or receive and uphold prajñāpāramitā, to read and recite it, and so on up to rightly recollect it. The two are not in accord; they cannot write out the deep prajñāpāramitā, and so on up to rightly recollect it; know that this is a deed of Māra. The hearer of the Dharma wishes to write out, read, recite, and expound prajñāpāramitā; the speaker of the Dharma does not wish to let him write out prajñāpāramitā, and so on up to does not wish to let him expound it. The two are not in accord; they cannot write out the deep prajñāpāramitā, and so on up to rightly recollect it; know that this is a deed of Māra.’
‘Furthermore, Subhūti! The speaker of the Dharma is parted from desire, ill will, sloth and torpor, restlessness and remorse, and doubt; the hearer of the Dharma has desire, ill will, sloth and torpor, restlessness and remorse, and doubt. Know that this is a deed of Māra. The hearer of the Dharma is parted from desire, ill will, sloth and torpor, restlessness and remorse, and doubt; the speaker of the Dharma has desire, ill will, sloth and torpor, restlessness and remorse, and doubt. The two are not in accord; they cannot write out the deep prajñāpāramitā, and so on up to rightly recollect it; know that this is a deed of Māra.’
Sūtra ① (continued): Others Come to Urge—Denouncing the Three Evil Destinies to Urge a Swift Entry into Nirvāṇa, Praising the Gods to Urge Taking the Fruits of the Small Vehicle
The Buddha said further: Furthermore, Subhūti! At the time when this deep prajñāpāramitā is being written out, and so on up to rightly recollected, perhaps someone comes and says: ‘Within the three evil destinies the suffering is fierce; why do you not, in this very body, exhaust all suffering and enter nirvāṇa? What do you want this anuttarā samyaksaṃbodhi for?’ The two are not in accord; they cannot write out the deep prajñāpāramitā, and so on up to rightly recollect it; know that this is a deed of Māra.
The Buddha said further: Furthermore, Subhūti! At the time when this deep prajñāpāramitā is being written out, received and upheld, read, recited, expounded, and rightly recollected, perhaps someone comes and praises the gods of the Four Heavenly Kings, praises 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 Brahmā heaven, and so on up to the heaven of neither perception nor non-perception, praises the first dhyāna and so on up to the absorption of neither perception nor non-perception, and speaks thus: ‘Good man! In the desire realm one receives the pleasures of the five desires; in the form realm one receives the pleasure born of dhyāna and concentration; in the formless realm one receives the pleasure of quiescence. Yet these things too are impermanent, suffering, empty, and without self; they are the mark of change and ruin, the mark of extinction, the mark of dispersal, the mark of separation, the mark of quiescence. Why do you not, in this very body, take the fruit of srota-āpanna, the fruit of sakṛdāgāmin, the fruit of anāgāmin, the fruit of arhat, or the path of the pratyekabuddha? Why must you, within this birth and death of the world, receive every kind of suffering in order to seek anuttarā samyaksaṃbodhi?’ The two are not in accord; they cannot write out the deep prajñāpāramitā, and so on up to rightly recollect it; know that this is a deed of Māra.
Sūtra ① (continued): Alone against a Following, Going Along with One's Wishes against Not Permitting, Wealth and Gain, Journeys to Danger to Life, Famine, Prosperity, and the Wilderness, and the Circumstances of Donors
‘Furthermore, Subhūti! The speaker of the Dharma is alone by himself, with nothing tying him down, free and unhindered; the hearer of the Dharma leads a large following. The two are not in accord; they cannot write out the deep prajñāpāramitā, and so on up to rightly recollect it; know that this is a deed of Māra. The hearer of the Dharma is alone by himself, with nothing tying him down, free and unhindered; the speaker of the Dharma leads a large following. The two are not in accord; they cannot write out the deep prajñāpāramitā, and so on up to rightly recollect it; know that this is a deed of Māra.’
The Buddha said further: Furthermore, Subhūti! The speaker of the Dharma speaks thus: ‘If you can go along with my wishes, I will give you prajñāpāramitā and let you write it out, read it, recite it, expound it, and rightly recollect it; if you do not go along with my wishes, I will not give it to you.’ The two are not in accord; they cannot write out, read, recite, expound, or rightly recollect the deep prajñāpāramitā; know that this is a deed of Māra.
‘Furthermore, Subhūti! The hearer of the Dharma wishes to attend on and follow him, wholly according to the wishes of the speaker of the Dharma; yet the speaker of the Dharma does not permit it. The two are not in accord; they cannot write out the deep prajñāpāramitā, and so on up to rightly recollect it; know that this is a deed of Māra.’
‘Furthermore, Subhūti! It is because the speaker of the Dharma wishes to obtain wealth and gain that he gives prajñāpāramitā and lets others write it out, receive and uphold it, and so on up to rightly recollect it; for this reason the hearer of the Dharma is unwilling to receive the Dharma from him. The two are not in accord; they cannot write out the deep prajñāpāramitā, and so on up to rightly recollect it; know that this is a deed of Māra. For the sake of wealth and gain the hearer of the Dharma wishes to write out, read, recite, and expound the deep prajñāpāramitā; for this reason the speaker of the Dharma is unwilling to give it. The two are not in accord; they cannot write out, read, recite, or expound the deep prajñāpāramitā; know that this is a deed of Māra.’
‘Furthermore, Subhūti! The speaker of the Dharma wishes to go to another region where there is danger to life; the hearer of the Dharma does not wish to go along. The two are not in accord; they cannot write out the deep prajñāpāramitā, and so on up to rightly recollect it; know that this is a deed of Māra. The hearer of the Dharma wishes to go to another region where there is danger to life; the speaker of the Dharma does not wish to go. The two are not in accord; they cannot write out the deep prajñāpāramitā, and so on up to rightly recollect it; know that this is a deed of Māra.’
‘Furthermore, Subhūti! The speaker of the Dharma wishes to go to another region where there is famine, dear grain, and no water; the hearer of the Dharma does not wish to go along. The two are not in accord; they cannot write out the deep prajñāpāramitā, and so on up to rightly recollect it; know that this is a deed of Māra. The hearer of the Dharma wishes to go to another region where there is famine, dear grain, and no water; the speaker of the Dharma does not wish to go. The two are not in accord; they cannot write out the deep prajñāpāramitā, and so on up to rightly recollect it; know that this is a deed of Māra.’
The Buddha said further: Furthermore, Subhūti! The speaker of the Dharma wishes to go to another region that is prosperous and pleasant, and the hearer of the Dharma wishes to follow and go with him. The speaker of the Dharma says: ‘Good man! It is for the sake of gain and offerings that you follow me; weigh it well for yourself—later you may get it or you may not; do not regret it afterwards!’ Because of this small cause and condition, the two are not in accord. The hearer of the Dharma, hearing this, grows weary in mind and thinks thus: ‘This is refusing me; he does not wish me to go along with him.’ And so he stops and does not go. The two are not in accord; they cannot write out the deep prajñāpāramitā, and so on up to rightly recollect it; know that this is a deed of Māra.
The Buddha said further: Furthermore, Subhūti! The speaker of the Dharma is about to cross a wilderness where there is the fear of thieves, the fear of caṇḍālas, the fear of hunters, and the fear of fierce beasts and venomous snakes; the hearer of the Dharma wishes to follow along. The speaker of the Dharma says: ‘Good man! Why must you go there? There are many fearful things there—the fear of thieves and so on up to the fear of venomous snakes.’ The hearer of the Dharma, hearing this, knows that he does not wish to give him prajñāpāramitā to write out, receive and uphold, and so on up to rightly recollect; he grows weary in mind and no longer wishes to follow. Because of this small cause and condition, the two are not in accord; know that this is a deed of Māra.
The Buddha said further: Furthermore, Subhūti! The speaker of the Dharma has many donors (patrons), and often goes to pay them his respects; for this reason he says to the hearer of the Dharma: ‘I have an affair to see to; I must go there.’ The hearer of the Dharma knows his intent, and so stops. The two are not in accord; they cannot write out the deep prajñāpāramitā, and so on up to rightly recollect it; know that this is a deed of Māra.
Treatise ①: How One without Faith Could Receive the Dharma; Why the Teacher Cannot Give—the Feelings of Advance and Retreat around the Four Offerings
What follows is the treatise-author's explanation.
Someone asks: That there are people who write out, receive and uphold, read, and recite prajñāpāramitā, yet cannot practise according to it, so that they break the precepts—this may be so; but if they have no faith, how would they receive the Dharma from another?
The answer: Such a person does not have faith in prajñāpāramitā—that is, does not have faith in ultimate emptiness; he only wishes to seek fame, and so reads, recites, and speaks it widely for others; just as a disciple of the Buddha has no faith in the scriptures of the outside paths, yet still explains them for others.
Furthermore, not being able to have faith in and delight in prajñā with a deep mind is called having no faith; it is not that one has no faith at all.
Someone asks: By the rule for disciples, one ought to make offerings to one's teacher and present him with everything one has; why does the sūtra say that the teacher cannot give?
The answer: The disciple thinks thus: ‘The teacher cannot even let go of a small thing, how much less let go of his body! Although he praises and proclaims giving, this is deceit!’ And so they are not in accord.
The disciple wishes to make the four offerings to the teacher. The teacher has few desires and knows contentment, and so does not accept them; or out of shame—feeling that it is like selling the Dharma—he does not accept them. Or the teacher has seen much and knows much and has many acquaintances, lacks nothing, and can instead provide for the disciple. The disciple thinks to himself: ‘People will say that I came to receive the Dharma coveting the teacher's clothing and food.’ Or he regards himself as thin in virtue and unworthy to consume what is provided. Although this mind is good, because it cannot bring prajñāpāramitā to accomplishment, it too is a deed of Māra. As for the case where the teacher is of dull faculties, this means that he is a teacher who recites the sūtras, not a teacher who explains the meaning.
Treatise ① (continued): The Teacher Who Recites the Sūtras and the Teacher Who Explains the Meaning; Mutual Suspicion over the Six Perfections; the Practice of Skilful Means; the Many Kinds of Dhāraṇī
The passage on 「十二部經」 tr. "the twelve divisions of the scriptures" is also speaking of a teacher who recites the sūtras.
Furthermore, a teacher who has the six perfections thinks thus: ‘The disciple is a sinner, of dull faculties, cannot practise the six perfections, craves and clings to the affairs of the world, and has only the name of a disciple without the reality.’ This teacher does not know that the disciple, having heard prajñā, will later accomplish a great matter; only because at present he does not have the six perfections, the teacher is unwilling to teach and transform him. The disciple too thinks thus: ‘The meaning of the six perfections—I too can practise it; the teacher can only speak it with his mouth and cannot cultivate it himself.’ He does not know that the teacher, through the causes and conditions of his next body, will accomplish a great matter, nor does he know that the teacher has other causes and conditions of benefit from reading and reciting; and so they are not in accord.
Furthermore, the disciple has faith with a straight mind and clings to wholesome dharmas. The teacher does not cling to dharmas and practises the six perfections by skilful means; the disciple then takes it that he does not deeply delight in the six perfections. How can this be seen? At times the teacher praises the six perfections; at times, in order to cut off people's clinging, he refutes the six perfections. Conversely, when the disciple has skilful means and the teacher has straight faith and clings, it is likewise.
Someone asks: If the disciple has obtained dhāraṇī and the teacher has no dhāraṇī, on what ground does he act as teacher?
The answer: There are many kinds of dhāraṇī. Some disciples obtain the dhāraṇī of hearing and retaining; they can retain and can recite, yet cannot explain the meaning; the teacher can explain it for them. Or the disciple can obtain the meaning of the dhāraṇī of the real mark of all dharmas, yet cannot read and recite in order; or the teacher has obtained the dhāraṇī of hearing and retaining, but because he has not yet obtained great compassion, he looks down on the disciple and is unwilling to teach and guide him.
Treatise ① (continued): The Teacher Does Not Give, the Disciple Does Not Receive; Belittling Each Other over the Five Hindrances; Ruining the Great Vehicle and Handing on the Small Vehicle; a Following against One Alone; Going Along with Wishes and Paying Respects; Wealth and Gain
Someone asks: That the disciple wishes to receive and uphold prajñāpāramitā and the teacher does not give it—this may be so; how could it be that the teacher wishes to give the Dharma and the disciple instead does not wish to receive it?
The answer: It is as answered before: the disciple sees faults in the teacher, and so does not wish to receive the Dharma.
Furthermore, the teacher wishes to teach and transform the person before him and make him a disciple; but this person, because of the causes and conditions of wrong views and every evil, is unwilling to receive the teaching.
Furthermore, among the dharmas that all beings practise, where they are the same there is accord; one person has left the five hindrances and one has not, and so they belittle each other, and because they belittle each other they are not in accord. All the supreme and wondrous dharmas are like this.
Furthermore, at the time of writing out, reading, and reciting prajñāpāramitā, and so on up to rightly recollecting it, one person denounces the three evil destinies and one person praises the gods; this matter is as answered before. Although they cannot wholly ruin his good conduct, they have already ruined his Great Vehicle and handed him the dharma of the Small Vehicle.
Furthermore, the teacher has few desires and knows contentment and does not like crowds of people gathering; the disciple has a large following. The teacher thinks thus: ‘Although this disciple is good and can be brought across, the following he leads is too large.’ The teacher clings deeply to wholesome dharmas, and so leaves the disciple. Conversely, when the disciple is alone by himself and the teacher has a large following, it is likewise.
Furthermore, the intent of the speaker of the Dharma is this: the disciple should act according to my wishes—going or staying, paying his respects and asking after my well-being at all times, and so forth. The hearer of the Dharma only wishes to seek the benefit of the Dharma from him and cannot do all these many things. This is not being in accord. Or at times the hearer of the Dharma goes and comes as he pleases, pays his respects, and so forth; the speaker of the Dharma does not accept this, and thinks thus: ‘What do I want these things for? They diminish my merit!’ The hearer of the Dharma feels in his mind that he has been looked down on, and neither takes pleasure in the other. This is not being in accord.
Furthermore, the teacher wishes to give the Dharma only for the sake of gain and offerings; in his mind the disciple then does not respect the teacher: ‘How can one sell the scriptures of the Dharma?’ The disciple is the same—he reads and recites prajñā for the sake of goods and gain and offerings, not with a pure mind; the teacher knows that the disciple's mind is like this, and so looks down on him and does not give to him. And so they are not in accord.
Treatise ① (continued): Sparing the Body in Dangerous Places; Famine and Prosperity; Distant Lands with Many Difficulties; the Worldly Ties of Donors
Furthermore, the teacher wishes to go to another region, and the road passes through dangerous places; the disciple spares his body and life and cannot follow, thinking thus: ‘I will first keep this body safe, and afterwards seek the Dharma.’ Conversely, when the disciple wishes to go and the teacher does not go, it is likewise.
Places of famine, dear grain, and no water are likewise.
Furthermore, the teacher wishes to go to a place that is prosperous and pleasant; the disciple wishes to follow the teacher, and the teacher, perhaps out of shame, does not wish to take him; or the disciple is used to ease and comfort and cannot bear the long journey; or the road is very far. Or the teacher knows that land well; the disciple does not know it clearly and takes it that the teacher is only praising that land and that it may not really be so; at times too he suspects the teacher, taking it that he goes out of craving for food and drink. Because of all these kinds of causes and conditions, the teacher says to the disciple: ‘All that you have heard about that land may not all be so; weigh it well for yourself! If you yourself wish to go, then go; do not go for the sake of goods and prosperity and pleasure—if, once there, things do not go as you wish, do not blame me!’ The teacher further says to him: ‘You are going because you have heard that land is prosperous and pleasant, not for the sake of the Dharma; there is no need to follow me.’ The teacher kindly urges the disciple to stop, yet does not know that this is precisely a cause and condition that ruins prajñāpāramitā. The disciple, hearing these words, because he reveres and fears the teacher, dares not answer, and so stops and does not go. And so they are not in accord.
The teacher further wishes to go to a distant land where there are all kinds of tigers and wolves, thieves and robbers; and so he says to the disciple: ‘There are many calamities there; there is no need for you to go!’ The disciple, hearing this, stops. The teacher knows only that there are difficulties there and urges the disciple to stop; he does not know that this is a cause and condition that ruins prajñāpāramitā.
Someone asks: If the distant land has many difficulties, why does the teacher go himself?
The answer: Someone says: The teacher was born in that land and is used to its water and soil, and can protect himself.
Someone says: There are good teachers and scriptures there, and because the teacher does not spare his body and life he goes. The teacher thinks thus: ‘For my own body to die would still be acceptable; how could I drag others into it?’ Because of such causes and conditions, he urges the disciple to stop and does not let him go.
The teacher has many donors whom he knows, and his mind gives rise to fondness and attachment; the disciple has few desires and knows contentment and does not cling to donors. The teacher often pays his respects to the donors at all times; the disciple only wishes to seek the Dharma and does not like these things. The teacher knows his intent, and so says to him: ‘I have an affair to see to; I cannot speak the Dharma for you.’ The disciple, hearing this, is displeased in his mind: ‘The teacher values worldly ties and does not value the Dharma.’ This is not being in accord.
Sūtra ②: The Evil Māra Conjures Up the Form of a Bhikṣu—Slandering the True Sūtra, Urging Realisation at the Limit of Reality
‘Furthermore, Subhūti! The evil Māra conjures up the form of a bhikṣu and comes, and by skilful means ruins this prajñāpāramitā, causing people to be unable to write it out, receive and uphold it, read it, recite it, expound it, or rightly recollect it.’
Subhūti said to the Buddha: ‘World-Honored One! For what reason does the evil Māra conjure up the form of a bhikṣu and by skilful means ruin prajñāpāramitā, causing people to be unable to write it out, receive and uphold it, and so on up to rightly recollect it?’
The Buddha said: The evil Māra conjures up the form of a bhikṣu and comes, ruins the minds of good men and good women, and causes them to be far removed from prajñāpāramitā, speaking thus: ‘The sūtra that I speak is alone prajñāpāramitā; this sūtra is not prajñāpāramitā.’ Subhūti! When he is ruining the bhikṣus in this way, there are bodhisattvas who have not received the prediction who then fall into doubt; because they fall into doubt, they do not write out the deep prajñāpāramitā, do not receive it, do not uphold it, and so on up to do not rightly recollect it. They are not in accord; they cannot write out the deep prajñāpāramitā, and so on up to rightly recollect it; know that this is a deed of Māra.
The Buddha said further: Furthermore, Subhūti! The evil Māra conjures up the body of a bhikṣu, comes to where the bodhisattva is, and speaks thus: ‘If a bodhisattva practises prajñāpāramitā and takes realisation at the limit of reality, he then obtains the fruit of srota-āpanna, the fruit of sakṛdāgāmin, the fruit of anāgāmin, the fruit of arhat, the path of the pratyekabuddha!’ Because the two are thus not in accord, they cannot write out the deep prajñāpāramitā, and so on up to rightly recollect it; know that this is a deed of Māra.
Sūtra ② (continued): The Deeds of Māra That Are the Semblance of the Six Perfections; the Sūtras That the Two Vehicles Should Practise; the Sūtras of the Three Gates of Liberation
‘Furthermore, Subhūti! When a bodhisattva expounds this deep prajñāpāramitā, many deeds of Māra arise and make hindrances for prajñāpāramitā; this is a deed of Māra. The bodhisattva-mahāsattva should be aware of them, and having become aware of them, be far removed from them.’
Subhūti said: ‘World-Honored One! What are the deeds of Māra that make hindrances, of which the bodhisattva should be aware, and having become aware, be far removed from?’
The Buddha said: ‘Every kind of deed of Māra arises that is the semblance of prajñāpāramitā; deeds of Māra arise that are the semblance of dhyānapāramitā, the semblance of vīryapāramitā, the semblance of kṣāntipāramitā, the semblance of śīlapāramitā, the semblance of dānapāramitā; the bodhisattva should be aware of them, and having become aware of them, be far removed from them.’
‘Furthermore, Subhūti! The sūtras that the śrāvakas and pratyekabuddhas should practise—the bodhisattva-mahāsattva should know that they are a deed of Māra and be far removed from them.’
‘Furthermore, Subhūti! Inner emptiness and so on up to the emptiness of non-existent and existent dharmas, the four foundations of mindfulness and so on up to the eightfold noble path, and the gates of liberation of emptiness, the signless, and non-action—by these dharmas one obtains the fruit of srota-āpanna, the fruit of sakṛdāgāmin, the fruit of anāgāmin, the fruit of arhat, the path of the pratyekabuddha. Such sūtras as these the evil Māra, conjuring up the form of a bhikṣu, hands by skilful means to the bodhisattva-mahāsattva. Because they are thus not in accord, they cannot write out the deep prajñāpāramitā, and so on up to rightly recollect it; know that this is a deed of Māra.’
Sūtra ② (continued): Māra Makes the Body of a Buddha, the Body of a Buddha with a Saṅgha, and Conjures Countless Bodhisattvas—Because of Craving and Clinging, Sarvajñā Is Diminished
‘Furthermore, Subhūti! The evil Māra conjures up the body of a Buddha—a golden-coloured body with a fathom of light—and comes to where the bodhisattva is. This bodhisattva's mind gives rise to craving and clinging, and because of craving and clinging, sarvajñā (omniscience) is diminished. Because they are thus not in accord, they cannot write out the deep prajñāpāramitā, and so on up to rightly recollect it; know that this is a deed of Māra.’
The Buddha said further: Furthermore, Subhūti! The evil Māra conjures up the body of a Buddha together with a Saṅgha of bhikṣus and comes before the bodhisattva; this bodhisattva gives rise to a thought of craving and clinging, and thinks thus: ‘In a future age I too shall be like this, with a Saṅgha of bhikṣus following me, and speak the Dharma for them.’ Because this bodhisattva craves and clings to the body of Māra, sarvajñā is diminished; he cannot write out and accomplish prajñāpāramitā, and so on up to rightly recollect it; know that this is a deed of Māra.
‘Furthermore, Subhūti! The evil Māra conjures up countless hundreds of thousands of myriads of koṭi of bodhisattvas practising dānapāramitā, śīlapāramitā, kṣāntipāramitā, vīryapāramitā, dhyānapāramitā, and prajñāpāramitā, and points them out for good men and good women to see. Good men and good women, seeing them, give rise in their minds to craving and clinging, and because of craving and clinging sarvajñā is diminished; they cannot write out the deep prajñāpāramitā, and so on up to rightly recollect it; know that this is a deed of Māra. Why? Within this deep prajñāpāramitā there is no form, there is no feeling, perception, constructions, or consciousness, and so on up to there is no anuttarā samyaksaṃbodhi. Subhūti! Since within this prajñāpāramitā there is no form and so on up to there is no anuttarā samyaksaṃbodhi, within it there is no Buddha, there is no śrāvaka, there is no pratyekabuddha, there is no bodhisattva. Why? Because all dharmas are empty of self-nature.’
Sūtra ② (continued): The Simile of the Treasures of Jambudvīpa and Their Many Thieves; Subhūti Restates the Buddha's Intent; the Buddha's Power and the Protection of the Buddhas and Bodhisattvas of the Ten Directions
‘Furthermore, Subhūti! At the time when good men and good women write out this deep prajñāpāramitā, receive, read, recite, expound, and rightly recollect it, many hindrances arise. Subhūti! It is like the precious things of Jambudvīpa—gold, silver, beryl, giant clam, agate, coral and such treasures—which have many difficulties and many thieves; in the same way, Subhūti! at the time when good men and good women write out this deep prajñāpāramitā, and so on up to rightly recollect it, many thieves and many hindrances arise.’
Subhūti said to the Buddha: ‘Just so, World-Honored One! The precious things of Jambudvīpa—gold, silver, beryl, giant clam, agate, coral and such—have many thieves and many difficulties. World-Honored One! Good men and good women are also like this: at the time when they write out this deep prajñāpāramitā, and so on up to rightly recollect it, many thieves and many hindrances arise, and many deeds of Māra. Why? Those foolish people, driven by Māra, ruin good men and good women at the time when they write out this deep prajñāpāramitā, and so on up to rightly recollect it, and cause them to be far removed from it. World-Honored One! Those foolish people, of little knowledge and little wisdom, ruin good men and good women at the time when they write out the deep prajñāpāramitā, and so on up to rightly recollect it, and cause them to be far removed from it. These foolish people do not love and delight in the great Dharma in their minds, and so they themselves do not write out this deep prajñāpāramitā, do not receive it, do not read it, do not recite it, do not rightly recollect it, do not practise as it is taught; and they also ruin others, causing them to be unable to write out the deep prajñāpāramitā, and so on up to practise as it is taught.’
The Buddha said: ‘Just so! Just so! Subhūti! Good men and good women who have newly aroused the mind of the Great Vehicle—because they are driven by Māra, do not plant roots of goodness, do not make offerings to the buddhas, and do not follow good friends—do not write out the deep prajñāpāramitā, and so on up to do not rightly recollect it, and make hindrances. These good men and good women are of little knowledge and little wisdom and do not love and delight in the great Dharma in their minds, and so they cannot write out this deep prajñāpāramitā, and so on up to rightly recollect it, because deeds of Māra arise. Subhūti! If good men and good women can, at the time when they write out this deep prajñāpāramitā, and so on up to rightly recollect it, have no deeds of Māra arise, they can fulfil dhyānapāramitā and so on up to dānapāramitā, and can fulfil the four foundations of mindfulness and so on up to omniscience of all kinds. Subhūti! Know that it is by the Buddha's power that these good men and good women can write out this deep prajñāpāramitā, and so on up to rightly recollect it, and can also fulfil dhyānapāramitā and so on up to dānapāramitā, inner emptiness and so on up to the emptiness of non-existent and existent dharmas, and fulfil the four foundations of mindfulness and so on up to the eightfold noble path, the Buddha's ten powers and so on up to omniscience of all kinds. Subhūti! The immeasurable, boundless, asaṃkhyeya buddhas now present in the ten directions also help these good men and good women, enabling them to write out this deep prajñāpāramitā, and so on up to rightly recollect it; the avaivartika bodhisattva-mahāsattvas of the ten directions also guard, protect, and assist these good men and good women in writing out the deep prajñāpāramitā, and so on up to rightly recollecting it.’
Treatise ②: Māra Takes the Form of a Great Śramaṇa and Denounces the Earlier Sūtra; Māra Urges First Cultivating Merit, and Using Emptiness Only When One Sits at the Seat of Awakening
What follows is the treatise-author's explanation.
Māra conjures up the form of a great śramaṇa, with weighty majesty and virtue, causing people to listen to and accept his words; he also carries many sūtra scrolls and travels with many disciples, and says to the bhikṣus: ‘Prajñāpāramitā as spoken in my sūtra is alone the real word of the Buddha; what you heard before is not real, and was not spoken by the Buddha.’ He denounces and slanders the earlier sūtra and praises his own teaching in every way. Bodhisattvas of dull faculties believe and accept these words and give rise to wrong views; those of keen faculties who have not yet received the prediction give rise to doubt. Why? The Dharma of the buddhas is ultimately empty and signless, and its wisdom is hard to understand; and so they are not in accord.
Or at times Māra says to the bodhisattva: ‘Prajñāpāramitā and the three gates of liberation, spoken at length, are only emptiness; if you always cultivate this emptiness, you will take realisation in it. If you do not take realisation, how then will you become a Buddha and accomplish the dharmas of the Buddha? You should first practise giving, keeping the precepts, and the rest, and cultivate the merit of the thirty-two marks; when you sit at the seat of awakening, only then use emptiness.’ The bodhisattva perhaps believes it, perhaps gives rise to doubt, and so leaves prajñāpāramitā.
Treatise ② (continued): The Semblance of the Six Perfections; the Sūtras of the Two Vehicles Break the Bodhisattva Path; Why Seeing the Body of a Buddha Is Called a Deed of Māra; the Meaning of Diminishment
Someone asks: Why is 「似六波羅蜜」 tr. "the semblance of the six perfections" called a deed of Māra?
The answer: It is as said in the passage on 「相似般若波羅蜜」 tr. "the semblance of prajñāpāramitā".
Furthermore, to practise the six perfections with a clinging mind is called 「相似」 tr. "the semblance".
The sūtras of the śrāvakas and pratyekabuddhas have no kindness and compassion and do not seek the Buddha-path; they wish only to be brought across themselves; though they are good things, they break the bodhisattva path, and so are called deeds of Māra.
Someone asks: If the bodhisattva sees the body of a Buddha, his mind of faith ought to be pure; why is it called a deed of Māra?
The answer: Every affliction and every grasping at marks is a deed of Māra. This is a small bodhisattva, whose time for seeing the body of a Buddha has not yet come; Māra conjures up the wondrous form of a Buddha, the bodhisattva's mind gives rise to craving and clinging, and he practises the path for the sake of this fine bodily form. It is like a person not yet free of desire who sees the form of a heavenly maiden and is deeply stained with attachment, yet cannot bear to receive the pleasures of heaven, and dies in a swoon. And so Māra's wish is fulfilled.
Although the bodhisattva obtains a little pure mind, he loses the wisdom of the real mark; it is like a person holding a precious treasure in his hand, whom someone deceives with a little gold, so that he lets go the treasure of great price and takes the cheap thing—this is called 「耗減」 tr. "diminishment".
Treatise ② (continued): Māra Makes the Body of a Buddha Leading the Bhikṣus; Emptiness of Self-Nature; the Causes and Conditions of the Simile of the Treasures; Subhūti Restates It and the Buddha Approves His Words
Māra conjures up the body of a Buddha leading the bhikṣus, and shows the many bodhisattvas the marks of practising the six perfections—the principle too is as said above.
Here the Buddha states the cause and condition: 「色等一切法自性空。」 tr. "Form and all other dharmas are empty of self-nature."
Furthermore, the great assembly of the Dharma-gathering gives rise to doubt: ‘Prajñāpāramitā is the unsurpassed Dharma, of much benefit; why would there be people who hate and envy it?’ And so the Buddha speaks a simile: ‘It is like the gold, silver, and other treasures of Jambudvīpa: many enemies and many thieves appear for their sake; they do not arise for tiles and stones and the like. Prajñāpāramitā is the wondrous treasure in the treasury of the Buddha's Dharma, subtle and very deep; slack people of dull faculties cannot understand it, and so they disparage it. Because prajñāpāramitā leads many beings into nirvāṇa, Māra makes himself an enemy and a thief.’
Subhūti gladly receives the Buddha's teaching and restates what the Buddha said of the people who disparage and ruin prajñā: ‘World-Honored One! These deranged and foolish people are driven by Māra and are not free; because their wisdom is little, they cannot penetrate the Buddha's intent. Such people have no great mind and do not know the pure taste of the Dharma; they know only three marks—craving for flavours, sexual desire, and anger—like the way of animals, and they make hindrances for prajñāpāramitā.’
The Buddha approves what Subhūti has said and tells Subhūti: ‘If the bodhisattva-mahāsattva writes out prajñā, and so on up to rightly recollects it, and deeds of Māra do not arise, know that this is the Buddha's power, and also the protection of the buddhas and bodhisattvas of the ten directions; and that he can fulfil the five perfections and so on up to omniscience of all kinds is also the power of the buddhas now present in the ten directions.’
Treatise ② (continued): Māra Is the Lord of the Desire Realm; the Buddhas and Bodhisattvas Protect Those at the First Arousing of the Mind; Teacher and Disciple Should Be in Accord
Why? Māra is the lord of the desire realm, full in worldly merit and wisdom; Māra is the root of birth and death in the world. Although the gods of the form realm have wrong views, because they constantly enter dhyāna and concentration their minds are soft, and they cannot ruin anything. In the formless realm there is no bodily form, and moreover the thoughts of the mind are subtle, so they cannot do anything. The gods of the lower realms have no strength or power and cannot do such ruining. This Māra has the power of the causes and conditions of karma from former lives; and further, by the causes and conditions of his dwelling-place—seizing what others have made—the chief of thieves within it is called Māra. Such is the character of Māra: he makes it his business to ruin good things.
The merit and wisdom of the bodhisattva at the first arousing of the mind are thin and slight, and so he cherishes his own body; without the protection and aid of the buddhas and bodhisattvas of the ten directions, he cannot achieve accomplishment. And so the buddhas, the bodhisattvas, and the gods break up the deeds of Māra for him, and this bodhisattva is perhaps aware of it, perhaps not aware of it; as when thieves surround a city, the grown men keep guard and the small children do not notice.
Briefly speaking, the deeds of Māra are like this; spoken at length, they are immeasurable and boundless. Yet the Buddha's intent is only that the practitioner accomplish the great matter of prajñā; therefore teacher and disciple should be in accord, and should not take any evil thing to heart. (End of the fascicle.)
兩不和合品之下：說聽兩造諸對偶魔事、外緣勸退、惡魔化現四型、閻浮提珍寶喻與諸佛擁護
在問什麼
之上開品，立起「兩不和合」的基本格局：聽法人欲書持而說法人懈墮，說法人欲與而聽法人不欲受，二心不和即是魔事；欲至他方、貴重布施與少欲知足、受不受十二頭陀，四重對偶正反雙舉。論主以攢燧求火為喻——有鑽有母，二事因緣得火；書寫般若亦如是，師弟同心同事，乃得書成——為全品定下總綱；繼而逐支釋十二頭陀之因緣：阿蘭若遠離憒閙、常乞食斷諸漏緣、納衣離好衣之患、一食節量、中後不飲漿、塚間樹下露地、常坐、次第乞食、但三衣，末以「佛法唯以智慧為本，不以苦為先」收住頭陀之意。之下承此而來，把對偶列舉推向全帳：信善與破戒、能施與悋惜、受供與不受、易悟與闇鈍、十二部經知與不知、六波羅蜜成與不成、方便力有無、陀羅尼有無、書持之欲有無、五蓋離與不離，乃至外人來勸、徒眾多寡、隨意財利、他方安危飢豐、曠野諸怖、檀越因緣——一一皆兩向立文。列舉窮盡之後，經文轉入更險的一層：惡魔不再借師徒之隙，而親自化現——作比丘形毀謗正經、勸證實際，作佛身、作佛身及僧、化無數菩薩，令人貪著而耗減薩婆若；末以閻浮提珍寶多賊為喻總結留難之所以多，而歸於佛力與十方諸佛菩薩之擁護。之下要問的是兩問：師徒之間，何以連好心也能成魔事？魔所化現，何以連佛身也不可貪著？答案一內一外：內以『壞般若因緣』為魔事的唯一判準，不問存心善惡；外以「一切諸法自性空」為簡別魔現的唯一據依，不隨相轉。而全卷之終，佛意所歸只是一句——師徒宜應和合。
逐段解明
一、信善與無信破戒。 說法者有信、有善，欲書寫、受持深般若乃至正憶念；聽法者無信、破戒惡行，不欲書受——當知是魔事。反之，聽法者有信有善，說法者無信、破戒惡行，兩不和合，當知是魔事。之下的第一對即從「信」立：般若之授受以信為底，一方有信一方無信，法即無從過手——信之有無，正反兩向皆能成礙。
二、能施與悋惜。 說法者能一切施、心不慳惜，聽法者悋惜不捨，是魔事；聽法者一切能施、心不慳惜，說法者悋法不施，兩不和合，不得書持般若乃至正憶念，是魔事。此對財法雙關：徒悋財、師悋法，所悋不同而同斷授受之路。
三、供養與不受。 聽法者欲供養說法人衣服、飲食、臥具、醫藥、資生所須，說法者不欲受之，是魔事；說法者欲供給聽法人衣服乃至資生所須，聽法者不欲受之，兩不和合，是魔事。此對最堪驚醒：欲供與欲給皆是善心，不受亦或出於少欲——而般若因緣即於此斷，魔事之判不待惡心。
四、易悟與闇鈍。 說法者易悟、聽法人闇鈍，是魔事；聽法者易悟、說法人闇鈍，兩不和合，是魔事。根性利鈍本非罪過，然利者不耐鈍者之遲、鈍者不及利者之疾，兩速不齊，法輪即滯。
五、十二部經次第義知與不知。 說法者知十二部經次第義——所謂修妬路乃至優波提舍，聽法者不知，是魔事；聽法者知而說法人不知，兩不和合，是魔事。教相之學亦成對偶之一目：一方通次第、一方不通，講授即失其階。
六、六波羅蜜成與不成。 說法者成就六波羅蜜、聽法人不成就，兩不和合，不得書深般若乃至正憶念，是魔事；聽法者有六波羅蜜、說法人無，兩不和合，亦是魔事。行證之有無亦兩向立文——此對之情實，論主下文（段廿九）將細剖。
七、方便力有無。 說法者於六波羅蜜有方便力、聽法人無方便力，兩不和合，是魔事；聽法者有方便力、說法人無，亦是魔事。六度之上更立「方便」一目：有行而無方便、有方便而彼不識，皆成隔閡。
八、陀羅尼有無。 說法者得陀羅尼、聽法者無陀羅尼，兩不和合，是魔事；聽法者得陀羅尼、說法者無，亦是魔事。持法之力不均，亦是不和之緣——何以弟子得而師無仍可為師，論主下文（段卅二）自有分疏。
九、書持之欲有無。 說法者欲令書持般若乃至正憶念，聽法人不欲書持讀誦乃至正憶念，兩不和合，是魔事；聽法者欲書讀誦說般若，說法者不欲令書乃至不欲令說，兩不和合，是魔事。此對回到最直接的一層：一頭熱、一頭冷，事即不成。
十、離五蓋與不離。 說法者離貪欲、瞋恚、睡眠、掉悔、疑，聽法人不離，是魔事；聽法者離五蓋、說法人不離，兩不和合，是魔事。五蓋為覆心之法，一方覆一方不覆，心地明暗不齊，同事之緣即薄——論主下文（段卅六）點出「相輕」二字為其病根。
十一、外人呵三惡道、勸速入涅槃。 書深般若乃至正憶念時，或有人來說：三惡道中苦劇，何不就此身盡苦入涅槃，還要阿耨多羅三藐三菩提做什麼？兩不和合，是魔事。此勸以怖苦為餌：借三惡道之可畏，勸人捨長遠佛道而取速了之涅槃——語似慈悲，實斷大乘之根。
十二、外人讚諸天、勸取小乘之果。 或有人來，讚四天王諸天乃至非有想非無想天，讚初禪乃至非有想非無想定，而說：欲界受五欲樂、色界受禪生樂、無色界受寂滅樂，是事亦無常、苦、空、無我，變相、盡相、散相、離相、滅相——何不即此身取須陀洹果乃至辟支佛道，何用於生死中受苦求菩提？兩不和合，是魔事。此勸更巧：先讚天樂，繼以無常之觀奪之，末勸取小果——前半是實話，後半是歧路；以正觀為餌而導入二乘，似法之毒深於非法。
十三、一身無累與多將人眾。 說法者一身無累、自在無礙，聽法人多將人眾，兩不和合，是魔事；聽法者一身無累，說法者多將人眾，亦是魔事。獨行與領眾各是一種行儀，本無高下；兩儀不合，同止同行皆難，法緣遂散。
十四、隨我意者當與汝。 說法者言：汝能隨我意者，當與汝般若，令書讀誦說正憶念；不隨我意則不與汝。兩不和合，是魔事。以法為挾持之具，授受成了交易——師位之權用在「隨我意」上，法已先被輕賤了。
十五、欲追隨如其意而不聽。 聽法者欲得追隨如其意，說法者不聽，兩不和合，是魔事。上段是師挾法制徒，此段是徒能隨師意進止問訊而師反不受——兩向合觀，方見經文不偏責一方。
十六、財利故與、財利故受。 說法者欲得財利故與般若令書持乃至正憶念，聽法者以是因緣故不欲從受，兩不和合，是魔事；聽法者為財利故欲書深般若讀誦說，說法者以是因緣故不欲與，兩不和合，是魔事。財利之心在師則徒不受，在徒則師不與——不淨之緣，兩頭皆斷法。
十七、他方危命之處。 說法者欲至他方危命之處，聽法者不欲隨去，兩不和合，是魔事；聽法者欲至危命之處，說法者不欲去，亦是魔事。危地之行，去者有去者之志，不去者有不去者之慮——經文不判是非，只記兩不和合處法之所失。
十八、飢餓穀貴無水之處。 說法者欲至他方飢餓、穀貴、無水之處，聽法者不欲隨去，是魔事；聽法者欲至而說法者不欲去，兩不和合，是魔事。危命之外又立飢乏一目：資生之艱，同是離散之緣。
十九、豐樂之處——距逆之念。 說法者欲至他方豐樂之處，聽法者欲隨從去；說法者言：善男子！汝為利養故追隨我，汝善自思惟，若得若不得，無令後悔！以是少因緣故兩不和合。聽法者聞之心厭，作是念：是為距逆我，不欲與我相隨——便止不去。是魔事。師一句試探之語，徒一念被拒之感，「以是少因緣故」——經文特標一「少」字：破壞般若因緣的，往往不是大惡，是這一點點。
二十、曠野諸怖。 說法者欲過曠野——賊怖、旃陀羅怖、獵師怖、惡獸毒蛇怖，聽法者欲隨逐去；說法者言：善男子！汝何用到彼？彼中多有諸怖。聽法者聞之，知其不欲與般若書持乃至正憶念，心厭不欲追隨。以是少因緣故，兩不和合，是魔事。師實言諸怖，徒卻讀出拒意——語出於此、解成於彼，「少因緣」之病再現。
廿一、檀越問訊。 說法者多有檀越，數往問訊，以是因緣語聽法者：我有因緣，應往到彼。聽法人知其意，便止。兩不和合，是魔事。經段列舉至此收束：外護之緣反成內授之礙——檀越本是護法之人，數數往還卻奪了說法之時。
廿二、問起：不信云何從受法。 論主設問：有人書持讀誦般若而不能行、以致犯戒，或可有是；若不信，云何從受法？此問直取經文第一對的痛處：既已從師受法，怎能說他無信？問得越實，下答越見分寸。
廿三、求名故讀誦廣說。 答曰：是人不信般若波羅蜜所謂畢竟空，但欲求名故讀誦廣說；如佛弟子不信外道經書，亦為人講說。不信的所指被論主釘準了：不是不信文句，是不信畢竟空——口在講般若而心不許空，正如佛弟子講外道書，講得再熟，信不在焉。
廿四、非都不信。 復次，「不能深心信樂般若故名不信，非都不信」。一句補足，免人讀死：經言無信是就深心信樂之闕而言，非謂全無信心——信有淺深，深心不至，於般若之授受即同無信。
廿五、問起：師何以不能施。 論主再問：弟子法應供養師、奉諸所有，何以言師不能施？經文說法者能一切施而聽法者悋惜不捨、又反之，問者專就師之悋一邊索解——師以法施人，何至於悋？
廿六、弟子疑師欺誑。 答曰：弟子作是念：師少物不能捨，何況捨身！雖讚說布施，是為欺誑！是故不和合。師之悋財所傷者不在財，在徒心中信之崩壞——講施而不能施，一「欺誑」之念起，師之一切言教皆搖。
廿七、四事供養之進退——誦經師非解義師。 弟子欲以四事供養師：師或少欲知足故不受，或羞愧似如賣法故不受；或師多知多識、無所乏少，反能供給弟子，弟子自念「人當謂我貪師衣食故受法」，或自以德薄不消所給。論主斷曰：此心雖好，不能成般若波羅蜜故，亦是魔事。又釋經文師鈍之義：「師鈍根者，是誦經師，非解義師。」前半是全品眼目所在：不受不消，各各是好心——而好心不能成般若，即是魔事；魔事之判在因緣之壞，不在存心之惡。
廿八、十二部經亦誦經師。 「十二部經，亦是誦經師。」經文「說法者知十二部經次第義」一對，論主一句收之：所謂知次第義而不解深義者，仍是誦經之師——通教相而不通實義，與鈍根一例。
廿九、師弟互不知因緣。 師有六波羅蜜者作是念：弟子罪人鈍根、不能行六波羅蜜、著世間事，但有弟子名，無有實事——是師不知弟子聞般若已後成大事，但以現前無六波羅蜜，不肯教化。弟子亦作是念：六波羅蜜義我亦能行，師但能口說不能修行——不知師轉身因緣當成大事，又不知師別有讀誦利益因緣，故不和合。兩個「不知」是此段之骨：師不知徒之後成，徒不知師之轉身——眼光只及現前，彼此皆以現量斷人，法緣遂絕於兩重短視。
三十、直信著法與方便行。 弟子直信著善法；師不著法，以方便行六波羅蜜——或時讚歎六波羅蜜，或時斷人著故破散六波羅蜜；弟子謂為不深樂六波羅蜜。弟子有方便，亦如是。讚與破皆是一師之方便，直信者只見其破而疑其心——方便力有無之對（段七）的情實在此：無方便者不但自己行不得，連有方便者的行相也讀不懂。
卅一、問起：弟子得陀羅尼，何以為師。 問曰：若弟子得陀羅尼、師無陀羅尼，何以為師？此問重演經文第八對之反向：法力在徒不在師，師位何以立？
卅二、陀羅尼有種種。 答曰：陀羅尼有種種——有弟子得聞持陀羅尼，能持能誦不能解義，師能為解說；弟子或能得諸法實相陀羅尼義，而不能次第讀誦；或師得聞持陀羅尼，「未得大悲故，輕賤弟子，不能教導」。一名之下有聞持、有實相，各有所長短——師徒互有所得所闕，正宜相補；而得聞持者無大悲，反以所得輕人，長處成了不和之根。
卅三、問起：云何師欲與法，弟子不欲受。 問曰：弟子欲受持般若、師不與，或可有是；云何師欲與法、弟子不欲受？順情之疑：求法不得可解，與法不受難解。
卅四、見師有過故不欲受。 答曰：如先答——弟子見師有過故，不欲受法。前文欺誑之念（段廿六）於此重提：徒之拒法，多半先拒了這個人。
卅五、邪見諸惡因緣不肯受教。 復次，師欲教化前人為弟子，而是人或邪見諸惡因緣故，不肯受教。拒法之由更深一層：非關師過，是受者自身邪見惡緣為障——兩不和合之因，有在師者、有在徒者、有在徒之宿習者。
卅六、同則和合；五蓋相輕。 復次，一切眾生所行法，同則和合；一人離五蓋、一人不離，故相輕，「相輕故不和合。一切上法皆爾」。此是論主為全品諸對偶提出的通則：行法同則合、不同則離；而不同之所以成礙，樞紐在「相輕」一念——高者輕下、下者忌高，五蓋如是，一切上法如是。
卅七、壞其大乘，授小乘法。 復次，書誦般若乃至正憶念時，一人呵三惡道、一人讚歎諸天，是事如先答；雖不能都破其善行，且壞其大乘，授小乘法。經文兩段外人來勸（段十一、十二），論主一語判其害之所在：不是壞其善，是壞其大——奪大與小，正是此類魔事的定式。
卅八、不樂眾聚，捨離弟子。 復次，師少欲知足、不樂眾聚，弟子多有人眾；師作是念：弟子雖好可度，而將徒眾多——師深著善法，捨離弟子。弟子一身，亦如是。「深著善法」四字下得極重：少欲知足本是善法，著之過深，反成捨離可度之人的因緣——善法之著亦能斷法緣，此品魔事之細，於此見底。
卅九、隨意進止問訊之違。 復次，說法者意：弟子隨我意行，若去若住、隨時問訊如是等；聽法者但欲從求法利，不能行此眾事——是不和合。或時聽法者隨意進止問訊等，說法者不聽，作是念：何用是事？損我功德！聽法者意謂輕賤，不相好喜——是不和合。同一問訊之儀，一師望之而徒不行，一師拒之而徒自傷——儀節本無定是非，兩心不相知，行與不行皆成隙。
四十、賣經法之疑。 復次，師為利養故欲與法，弟子心則不敬師：云何欲賣經法？弟子亦如是，為財利養讀誦般若、非清淨心故，師知弟子心如是，則薄賤不與。故不和合。經文財利一對（段十六）之釋：財利之心一起，敬意先亡——師徒之間，法以敬傳，敬盡則法路斷。
四一、嶮難惜身。 復次，師欲至他方、路經嶮難，弟子惜身命故不能隨，作是念：我有身，然後求法。弟子欲去，亦如是。「我有身，然後求法」——惜身之念自有其理，論主如實錄之不加貶斥；然身與法孰先，正是危地一對（段十七）留給行者自答的問題。
四二、飢餓穀貴無水亦如是。 「飢餓、穀貴、無水處，亦如是。」一句例推：資生之艱與身命之危同科，惜身之念所及，皆成兩不和合之緣。
四三、豐樂處——好心止弟子。 復次，師欲至豐樂處，弟子欲隨；或師羞愧不欲將去，或弟子串樂不任涉遠，或道里懸遠，或師諳彼國而弟子不悉、謂師稱美不必實爾，時或慮師貪飲食故去。師語弟子：如汝所聞彼國土所有，不必盡爾，好自籌量！若自欲去者便去，無以財物豐樂故去，至彼不得隨意，勿以見怨！復說：汝聞彼國土豐樂故去，非為法故，不須隨我。「師好心止弟子，不知是壞般若波羅蜜因緣。」弟子敬難師故不能答，便止不去。故不和合。此段是全卷最深的一針：師之言句句是好心——教徒自量、防徒後悔、辨其為法為利——而論主判語只有一句：好心，而「壞般若波羅蜜因緣」。魔事不揀好心。
四四、遠國多難止弟子。 師復欲至遠國，彼中有種種虎狼賊盜，語弟子言：彼間多難，汝不須去！弟子聞已便止。師但知彼有難事故止弟子，不知是壞般若波羅蜜因緣。與上段同一病型再舉一例：所知者實（彼地實多難），所壞者亦實（般若因緣實斷）——實話與魔事，竟可同在一語。
四五、問起：遠國多難，何以自去。 問曰：若遠國多難，何以自去？就上段追問：師既知彼多難而止弟子，自己何以偏行？
四六、服習彼土，能自防護。 答曰：有人言：師彼國生故，服習彼土，能自防護。第一解：師自往非輕身，是彼土所生、力能自護——止弟子者，護其所不能護。
四七、不惜身命故去——云何枉他。 有人言：彼有好師、經書，不惜身命故去。師作是念：我身自死則可，云何枉他？如是等因緣故，止弟子不令去。第二解更進：師為法忘身，而不肯以己之決死累人——「我身自死則可，云何枉他」，止弟子正出於慈；慈心與壞法因緣同在一念，此品之弔詭至此而極。
四八、檀越俗緣。 師多有知識檀越，心生樂著；弟子少欲知足，不著檀越。師常隨時問訊檀越，弟子但欲求法，不喜是事。師知其意，語言：我有因緣，不得為汝說法。弟子聞已不悅：師貴俗緣，不貴於法。是不和合。論段收於檀越一對（段廿一之釋）：師著外護、徒專求法，一語「不得為汝說法」，徒心中師之位已易——「貴俗緣，不貴於法」七字，是弟子眼中師徒之道斷處。
四九、惡魔作比丘形像——總標。 經文轉入第二段：惡魔作比丘形像來，方便破壞是般若波羅蜜，不得令書持讀誦說正憶念。前段諸魔事皆借師徒自身之隙；自此以下，魔親自出場化現——外相是比丘，所行是破般若，兩不和合進入『人與法』不得和合的一層。
五十、須菩提問其因緣。 須菩提白佛：世尊！何因緣故，惡魔作比丘形像，方便破壞般若，不得令書持乃至正憶念？問處在「何因緣」：魔何以偏用比丘之形？下答自明——形之可信，正是破壞之方便。
五一、毀先經自讚己說——未受記者墮疑。 佛言：惡魔作比丘形像來，壞善男子善女人心，令遠離般若，作是言：如我所說經即是般若波羅蜜，此經非般若波羅蜜。是中破壞諸比丘時，「有未受記菩薩便墮疑」；墮疑故不書深般若、不受不持乃至不作正憶念。不和合，是魔事。魔語之毒在真偽對調：不毀般若之名，只移般若之實——謂我經是而此經非；未受記者道根未固，一疑即退。
五二、勸於實際作證。 復次，惡魔作比丘身到菩薩所，作如是言：若菩薩行般若波羅蜜於實際作證，得須陀洹果乃至阿羅漢果、辟支佛道！以是兩不和合，是魔事。此化現之勸與外人讚天（段十二）同轍而更精：不勸捨般若，反勸依般若作證——於實際作證而取小果，行門是正的，落點是偏的；以正行導入歧終，此魔事之最難辨者。
五三、多有魔事，應覺知遠離。 復次，菩薩說是深般若時，多有魔事起，留難般若波羅蜜，是為魔事；菩薩摩訶薩應當覺知，知已遠離。經文於列舉之間立一總則：對治只有四字——覺知、遠離；不覺則墮，覺而不離亦墮。
五四、何等是魔事留難。 須菩提言：世尊！何等是魔事留難，菩薩應當覺知、知已遠離？承上總則索其相：欲遠離者先須識相，故有此問，引出似法一段。
五五、似六波羅蜜魔事。 佛言：似般若波羅蜜諸魔事起，似禪波羅蜜、似毘梨耶波羅蜜、似羼提波羅蜜、似尸羅波羅蜜、似檀波羅蜜魔事起，菩薩應當覺知，知已遠離。六度各有其「似」——魔事之相不現於反面而現於相似面；愈似愈險，故特標為應覺知之首。
五六、二乘所應行經。 復次，聲聞、辟支佛所應行經，是菩薩摩訶薩應當知是魔事而遠離之。此句須善會：非謂二乘經本身是魔——是就菩薩之機而言，應行大乘而被授以二乘，即成留難；其分寸論主下文（段六九）明判。
五七、三解脫門諸經方便與菩薩。 復次，內空乃至無法有法空、四念處乃至八聖道分、空無相無作解脫門，用是法得須陀洹果乃至辟支佛道——如是等諸經，惡魔作比丘形像，方便與菩薩摩訶薩。是不和合故，是魔事。所授之法竟是空與道品——法皆佛法，用之偏了：以此等法專取小果之經授與菩薩，佛法成了引離佛道之具；「方便與」三字，寫盡魔用正法之巧。
五八、魔作佛身金色丈光。 復次，惡魔作佛身金色丈光，到菩薩所；是菩薩貪著，貪著故耗減薩婆若。是不和合故，是魔事。化現升級至佛身：金色丈光，相好逼真——經文所責不在見，在貪著；一著之間，「耗減薩婆若」，所損者是一切智之分。
五九、魔作佛身及比丘僧。 復次，惡魔作佛身及比丘僧，到菩薩前；菩薩起貪著意，作是念：我於當來世亦當如是從比丘僧為說法。貪著魔身故耗減薩婆若，是魔事。此著更細：非著色相，是著『我當如是』的當來之想——見他莊嚴而起自身影像之貪，魔正以行者自己的願為鉤。
六十、化無數菩薩行六度；自性空之簡別。 復次，惡魔化作無數百千萬億菩薩，行檀波羅蜜乃至般若波羅蜜，指示善男子善女人；見已貪著，貪著故耗減薩婆若，是魔事。何以故？是深般若波羅蜜中，無有色，無有受想行識，乃至無有阿耨多羅三藐三菩提；是中無佛、無聲聞、無辟支佛、無菩薩。何以故？「一切諸法自性空」故。第四型化現之後，經文自說簡別之據：深般若中色乃至菩提皆不可得，佛與三乘之人亦不可得——自性空是照破一切化現的鏡子；於空中無相可著，魔現何相皆失其鉤。
六一、閻浮提珍寶多賊之喻。 復次，善男子善女人書是深般若、受讀誦說正憶念時，多有留難起。譬如閻浮提中珍寶——金銀琉璃車𤦲馬瑙珊瑚等寶，多難多賊；如是，書是深般若乃至正憶念時，多賊多留難起。全段化現列舉收於一喻：寶之所在即賊之所聚——留難之多，不是法有咎，正是法貴之證。
六二、須菩提述愚癡人之相。 須菩提白佛述成其喻：如是！世尊！閻浮提珍寶多賊多難；善男子善女人書是深般若乃至正憶念時亦如是，多賊多留難、多有魔事。是愚癡人為魔所使，破壞令遠離；是愚癡人少智少慧、心不樂大法，是故自不書不受不讀不誦不正憶念不如說修行，亦壞他人令不得書乃至如說修行。作留難者之相被說盡：為魔所使、少智少慧、不樂大法——自不行而復壞他，自他兩損。
六三、佛可其說——佛力與諸佛菩薩擁護。 佛言：如是！如是！新發大乘意者為魔所使、不種善根、不供養諸佛、不隨善知識故，不書深般若乃至不正憶念而作留難。若善男子善女人能書是深般若乃至正憶念時，魔事不起，能具足禪波羅蜜乃至檀波羅蜜、四念處乃至一切種智——當知佛力故；十方現在無量無邊阿僧祇諸佛亦助是人，十方阿鞞跋致諸菩薩摩訶薩亦擁護祐助。經段之收兩面並舉：作留難者其因有四（魔使、無根、不供佛、不隨善知識）；能書持而魔事不起者，內具足眾行、外承佛力與諸佛菩薩之護——留難雖多，護持更大。
六四、魔作大沙門形。 論主釋曰：魔作大沙門形，有重威德，令人受其語；多持經卷、與眾弟子俱，語諸比丘：般若波羅蜜如我經所說，真實佛語；汝先聞者不實，非佛所說——呵毀先經、種種自讚所說。鈍根菩薩信受是語生邪見，若利根未得受記者生疑。何以故？「諸佛畢竟空無相，智慧難解，故不和合。」論主為魔化比丘補足其行頭：重威德、多經卷、眾弟子——可信之相樣樣俱全；而受害有差：鈍者成邪見、利而未受記者成疑。畢竟空難解，正是疑之得入處。
六五、魔勸先福後空。 或時魔語菩薩：般若波羅蜜、三解脫門，廣說但是空；汝常習此空，於中得證。不得證，云何作佛、作佛法？先行布施持戒等、修三十二相福德，坐道場時爾乃用空。菩薩或信或疑，離般若波羅蜜。魔語立一兩難：習空則證實際而墮小，不證則無以作佛——兩頭堵死，逼出『先福後空』的次第來；言之成理，而其效只有一個：現在就放下般若。凡勸人『此時未須般若』者，皆此語之裔。
六六、問起：云何似六波羅蜜名魔事。 問曰：云何似六波羅蜜名魔事？經文似法一段（段五五）之「似」字須有定義，故論主自問。
六七、如相似般若波羅蜜中說。 答曰：如相似般若波羅蜜中說。論主指還前釋：似法之相，本論釋相似般若處已廣說——此處存目不重敷。
六八、著心行六度名似。 復次，「以著心行六波羅蜜，是名似」。復補一義為此段之眼：似與真之界不在行相在心地——同一布施持戒，著心行之即是似；似法非別有一法，是真法被著心行壞了的樣子。
六九、二乘經破菩薩道。 聲聞、辟支佛經，無有慈悲，不求佛道，但欲自度；「雖是好事，破菩薩道，故名魔事」。論主為經文二乘經之判（段五六）補足分寸：自度是好事，經是好經——名魔事者，唯就其破菩薩道一義；奪大與小則為魔用，法本身無罪。
七十、問起：見佛身云何名魔事。 問曰：若菩薩見佛身，則信心清淨，云何名魔事？此問把經文最刺處挑明：見佛生信是常途功德，何以經中判為魔事？
七一、取相皆魔事——天女喻。 答曰：「一切煩惱、取相，皆是魔事。」是小菩薩未應見佛身，魔作佛妙形，菩薩心著，為是好身故行道；如未離欲人見天女形，深心染著，不能堪受天欲，迷悶而死——是故魔願得滿。答意兩層：判準是取相非見佛——見而不著無咎，著即入魔事之科；喻意是分位——未離欲者堪不起天女，小菩薩堪不起佛身，非境有毒，是力不勝境。
七二、耗減之義——少金誑重寶。 菩薩雖得少淨心，而失實相智慧；如人手捉重寶，有人以少金誑之，捨大價寶而取賤物，「是名耗減」。經文屢言耗減薩婆若，論主於此下其定義：所得是少淨心（非全無得），所失是實相智慧——以小換大、得不償失，故名耗減；魔不必令人全墮，令人賤售即足。
七三、魔作佛身將諸比丘，亦如上。 魔作佛身、將諸比丘，示多菩薩行六波羅蜜，亦如上。論主將經文第三、第四型化現（段五九、六十）例歸前釋：其病同是貪著取相，其失同是耗減，不復別釋。
七四、佛說因緣——色等一切法自性空。 此中佛說因緣：「色等一切法自性空。」論主特標經文自性空一句（段六十）為簡別之本：化現四型所以皆可勘破，只憑此一句——空中無色無菩提無佛無僧，貪著失其所緣。
七五、眾疑與珍寶喻之因緣。 復次，眾會生疑：般若波羅蜜是無上法、多有利益，云何有人憎嫉？是故佛說譬喻：如閻浮提金銀等，多怨多賊為是故出，不為瓦石等生；般若波羅蜜是佛法藏中妙寶，微妙甚深，懈怠鈍根者所不解，是故呰毀。「魔以般若波羅蜜多令眾生入涅槃故，魔作怨賊。」論主揭出珍寶喻（段六一）之所答：喻正為釋『無上之法何以招憎』一疑——賊為金出、不為瓦石出；而魔之為賊別有一因：般若多令眾生入涅槃，奪魔之民，故魔必為怨。
七六、須菩提述三相如畜生法。 須菩提喜受佛教，述其所說毀呰破壞般若者：是狂癡之人為魔所使、不得自在，以少智故不能通達佛意；是人無有大心，不知清淨法味，但知三相——貪味、婬欲、瞋恚，如畜生法，與般若波羅蜜生留難。述成之語為留難者畫像：非其力大，是其知短——所知只有三相，於清淨法味全無所曉；如畜生法一喻，哀矜多於呵斥。
七七、佛可其說——佛力擁護。 佛可須菩提所說，語須菩提：若菩薩摩訶薩書般若乃至正憶念，魔事不起，當知是佛力，亦是十方諸佛及諸菩薩所擁護；而能具足五波羅蜜乃至一切種智，亦是十方現在佛力。與經文段六三相印：魔事不起不是行者獨力之功——書持之能成、眾行之能具，皆有佛力諸佛菩薩之護在後。
七八、魔是欲界主。 何以故？「魔是欲界主」，世間福德智慧具足，「魔是世間生死根本」。色界諸天雖有邪見，常入禪定故心柔軟，不能有所破壞；無色界中無形故、又心微細，不能有所作；下諸天無有力勢故，不能如是破壞。是魔先世業因緣力，又住處因緣、他作奪取，是中賊主名為魔。是魔相爾，破壞好事。論主釋何以作難者獨魔：遍檢三界，色界柔軟、無色界無形心細、下天無力——能破壞而肯破壞者唯欲界之主；其位由先世業力與住處因緣得，其相即是破壞好事。知敵之所自，怖畏可轉為明辨。
七九、初發心者諸佛擁護——賊繞城喻。 初發心菩薩福德智慧薄故惜身，若十方諸佛菩薩不擁護佐助者，不能成。是故諸佛菩薩諸天為破壞魔事，是菩薩或覺或不覺；「如賊繞城，大人守護，小兒不覺」。喻意極溫：初心如小兒，賊實繞城而小兒安然嬉戲——不是無賊，是有大人在；行者平日不覺魔事者，未必是無魔，多半是被護著。
八十、略說魔事——師徒宜應和合。 略說魔事如是，廣說則無量無邊。然佛意但欲令行者成般若大事，是故「師徒宜應和合，一切惡事，不應計念」。全卷之結穴：魔事說之不盡，佛意卻只有一句——列舉兩不和合至於無量，不是教人處處見魔，是教人一處用心：和合。一切惡事不應計念，正是和合的下手處。
不要讀錯
不要把「兩不和合」讀成單方的罪案。經文每一對皆正反雙舉——說法者如是、聽法者亦如是；師有師之失，徒有徒之失，乃至雙方皆是好心而事仍不成。責一方而恕一方，即失此品立文之法。
不要把魔事讀成必出惡心。此卷最深處正在好心之為礙：不受供養是少欲、止弟子涉險是慈悲、「我身自死則可，云何枉他」是捨己——而論主一律判曰「師好心止弟子，不知是壞般若波羅蜜因緣」。魔事之判準是般若因緣之壞與不壞，不是存心之善惡。
不要把「聲聞、辟支佛所應行經」判屬魔事讀成貶抑二乘經典。論主明言「雖是好事，破菩薩道，故名魔事」——經是好經、自度是好事；名魔事者，唯就菩薩應行大乘而被授以小乘、奪大與小之一義而言。
不要把魔作佛身之判為魔事讀成見佛皆當疑懼。論主判準只在取相：「一切煩惱、取相，皆是魔事」——病不在所見之相，在能見之貪著；小菩薩未應見而著之，如未離欲人之於天女，是力不勝境，非境為咎。
不要把「是中無佛、無聲聞，無辟支佛、無菩薩」讀成撥無三寶。此是「一切諸法自性空」之正說，經文正用它來簡別魔所化現——於空中無相可著，故金色丈光不足貪；是破著之刃，非壞法之言。
不要把魔勸『先行布施持戒、坐道場時方用空』讀成有理之次第。此語以『習空墮證、不證難成佛』兩頭逼人，其效只是令人現在放下般若；六度與般若本相導而行，凡勸人『此時未須般若』者，即此魔語之流。
修行作用
拿經文的對偶清單逐對自檢。師位徒位各過一遍：我悋過法否？拒過供養否？以隨我意挾持過人否？以現前之短斷過人之後成否？此品是師徒關係的照膽鏡，每一對都照得出自己在哪一頭。
拿「以是少因緣故」警醒細處。破壞般若因緣的常常不是大惡，是一句試探的話、一念被拒的感受、一次「我有因緣，應往到彼」。同修師友之間生隙，先問：這是不是那個「少因緣」？
拿『好心而壞般若因緣』勘自家的善意。勸人莫涉險、替人作籌量、少欲而拒人供養——善意發動之時，加問一句：此舉令彼人近般若，還是遠般若？以法為秤，不以心意自恕。
拿「著心行六波羅蜜，是名似」檢點行門。同一布施持戒，著心行之即成相似之法。行善之後覺得自己了不起處，即是「似」之萌芽——覺知、遠離，四字用在自家心行上，先於用在外境上。
拿「一切煩惱、取相，皆是魔事」對治勝境之貪。用功中見光見相、乃至見佛，記取金色丈光之誡：不必怖，亦不可著——以「一切諸法自性空」一句照過去，相自失其鉤。並記天女喻自量其分：力未勝境時，遠離勝於玩味。
拿「如賊繞城，大人守護，小兒不覺」生報恩心與精進心。修行路上未遭大難，未必是自己道力，多半是諸佛菩薩護念之功——由此不自恃；賊實繞城，由此不放逸。
拿「師徒宜應和合，一切惡事，不應計念」作日用結行。與同修師友有可計較之事，記取全卷之終只此一句：佛意但欲令行者成般若大事——事有大小，較念之際，先問哪個是大事。
承衍
之下承之上而來的，是把「兩不和合」從行儀之對推到存亡之際、再從師徒之隙推到魔之親現的一條線。之上立其綱：欲書而懈墮、欲與而不受、欲住而欲行、重供養與少欲知足、受頭陀與不受頭陀——四重對偶正反雙舉；攢燧求火之喻定下總則：書寫般若如鑽木取火，有鑽有母、二事因緣，師弟同心同事乃得書成；十二頭陀逐支釋其因緣，而以佛法以智慧為本、不以苦為先收之。之下先窮其目：信善、能施、受供、易悟、十二部經、六波羅蜜、方便力、陀羅尼、書持之欲、五蓋，一一兩向立文；繼以外人呵惡道、讚諸天而奪大與小，徒眾、隨意、財利、危命、飢餓、豐樂、曠野、檀越，凡人情所至之處皆是隙。論主釋之，處處點出此品之細：不信是不信畢竟空而非都不信；不受供養此心雖好而不能成般若故亦是魔事；師徒互不知轉身後成之因緣；相輕故不和合、一切上法皆爾；師好心止弟子而不知是壞般若因緣。至惡魔親現，化比丘而毀先經、勸證實際，化佛身、佛僧、無數菩薩而以貪著耗減薩婆若——經文以一切諸法自性空一句為簡別之刃，論主以取相皆是魔事一句為判準之綱，以少金誑重寶釋耗減，以魔是欲界主、生死根本釋作難之所自。末後珍寶多賊之喻答盡無上之法何以招憎之疑——賊為金出、不為瓦石；而佛力與十方諸佛菩薩之擁護如大人守城，小兒不覺。一品首尾，「兩不和合」四字至此稱足：之上言和合之緣如鑽燧不可缺一，之下言不和之隙無微不入而魔復乘之——然佛意所歸不在數魔，在勸和：師徒宜應和合，一切惡事不應計念；兩不和合說到窮處，只為成就一個和合。
The Two Discords, Last Part: The Paired Deeds of Māra between Speaker and Hearer, Outside Conditions Urging Retreat, the Four Types of the Evil Māra's Apparitions, the Simile of the Precious Things of Jambudvīpa, and the Protection of the Buddhas
What Is Being Asked
The First Part opened the chapter and set up the basic pattern of 「兩不和合」 tr. "the two discords": the hearer of the Dharma wishes to write out and uphold, but the speaker of the Dharma is slack; the speaker of the Dharma wishes to give, but the hearer of the Dharma does not wish to receive; when the two minds are not in accord, that is a deed of Māra. Wishing to go to another region, valuing giving and having few desires and being content, taking up or not taking up the twelve dhūta practices—four sets of pairs are stated both ways, forward and reverse. The treatise-author took seeking fire with a fire-drill as the simile—there is the drill and there is the base, and by the causes and conditions of the two things fire is got; writing out prajñā is also like this: only when teacher and disciple are of one mind and one undertaking is the writing out completed—and set the general principle of the whole chapter; then he explained, practice by practice, the causes and conditions of the twelve dhūta practices: dwelling in the araṇya to be far from clamour and bustle, always begging for food to cut off the conditions of the outflows, wearing robes of cast-off rags to be free of the troubles of fine robes, eating at one sitting and eating in measured quantity, not drinking juices after midday, dwelling among the tombs, under a tree, and in the open, always sitting, begging from house to house in order, keeping only the three robes; and at the end he closed the meaning of the dhūta practices with 「佛法唯以智慧為本，不以苦為先」 tr. "the Buddha's Dharma takes wisdom alone as its root; it does not put suffering first". The Last Part carries on from this and pushes the listing of pairs through the whole register: faith and goodness against broken precepts, able to give against begrudging, receiving offerings against not receiving, quick to understand against dull and dark, knowing and not knowing the twelve divisions of the scriptures, having and not having accomplished the six perfections, having and not having the power of skilful means, having and not having dhāraṇī, having and not having the wish to write out and uphold, parted and not parted from the five hindrances, and on to those of the outside paths coming to urge, few or many followers, following one's own wishes, wealth and gain, safety and danger, famine and plenty in another region, the terrors of the wilderness, the circumstances of a donor—every one of them stated both ways. When the listing has been exhausted, the sūtra turns to a more dangerous layer: the evil Māra no longer borrows the gap between teacher and disciple but conjures himself in person—he takes the form of a bhikṣu to slander the true sūtra and to urge realisation of the limit of reality, he makes the body of a Buddha, the body of a Buddha together with a Saṅgha, and conjures countless bodhisattvas, so that people crave and cling and sarvajñā, omniscience, is diminished; at the end, the simile of the precious things of Jambudvīpa, with their many thieves, sums up why the hindrances are many, and it all comes back to the Buddha's power and the protection of the buddhas and bodhisattvas of the ten directions. What the Last Part asks is two questions: between teacher and disciple, how can even a good mind become a deed of Māra? And in what Māra conjures, how can even the body of a Buddha not be craved and clung to? The answer is one inward and one outward: inwardly, ‘ruining the causes and conditions of prajñā’ is the one criterion of a deed of Māra, without asking whether the intention was good or evil; outwardly, 「一切諸法自性空」 tr. "all dharmas are empty of self-nature" is the one ground for sifting out Māra's apparitions, not being turned by marks. And at the very end of the whole fascicle, what the Buddha's intent comes back to is only one sentence—teacher and disciple should be in accord.
Passage by Passage
1. Faith and goodness against no faith and broken precepts. The speaker of the Dharma has faith and has goodness, and wishes to write out, receive, and uphold the deep prajñā, and so on up to rightly recollecting it; the hearer of the Dharma has no faith, breaks the precepts, and acts evilly, and does not wish to write out or receive it—know that this is a deed of Māra. The other way round: the hearer of the Dharma has faith and goodness, the speaker of the Dharma has no faith, breaks the precepts, and acts evilly; the two are in discord—know that this is a deed of Māra. The first pair of the Last Part is set up from 「信」 tr. "faith": the giving and receiving of prajñā has faith as its base; when one side has faith and the other has none, the Dharma has no way to pass from hand to hand—the having or not having of faith can be an obstruction in both directions, forward and reverse.
2. Able to give against begrudging. The speaker of the Dharma can give everything and his mind is not stingy, while the hearer of the Dharma begrudges and will not let go—this is a deed of Māra; the hearer of the Dharma can give everything and his mind is not stingy, while the speaker of the Dharma begrudges the Dharma and does not give it; the two are in discord, and they cannot write out and uphold prajñā, and so on up to rightly recollecting it—this is a deed of Māra. This pair bears on both wealth and Dharma: the disciple begrudges wealth, the teacher begrudges the Dharma; what is begrudged differs, but alike it cuts off the road of giving and receiving.
3. Offering against not receiving. The hearer of the Dharma wishes to make offerings to the speaker of the Dharma of robes, food and drink, bedding, medicine, and whatever is needed to support life, and the speaker of the Dharma does not wish to receive them—this is a deed of Māra; the speaker of the Dharma wishes to supply the hearer of the Dharma with robes and so on up to whatever is needed to support life, and the hearer of the Dharma does not wish to receive them; the two are in discord—this is a deed of Māra. This pair is the one most able to startle one awake: the wish to offer and the wish to supply are both good minds, and not receiving may also come from having few desires—yet the causes and conditions of prajñā are cut off right here; the judgement of a deed of Māra does not wait for an evil mind.
4. Quick to understand against dull and dark. The speaker of the Dharma is quick to understand and the hearer of the Dharma is dull and dark—this is a deed of Māra; the hearer of the Dharma is quick to understand and the speaker of the Dharma is dull and dark; the two are in discord—this is a deed of Māra. Keenness and dullness of faculties are no fault in themselves; yet the keen cannot bear the slowness of the dull, and the dull cannot keep up with the speed of the keen; when the two speeds are not matched, the wheel of the Dharma stalls.
5. Knowing and not knowing the order and meaning of the twelve divisions of the scriptures. The speaker of the Dharma knows the order and meaning of the twelve divisions of the scriptures—that is, sūtra and so on up to upadeśa—and the hearer of the Dharma does not know them—this is a deed of Māra; the hearer of the Dharma knows them and the speaker of the Dharma does not; the two are in discord—this is a deed of Māra. The learning of the forms of the teaching also becomes one item among the pairs: when one side is versed in the order and the other is not, the teaching loses its steps.
6. Having and not having accomplished the six perfections. The speaker of the Dharma has accomplished the six perfections and the hearer of the Dharma has not; the two are in discord, and they cannot write out the deep prajñā, and so on up to rightly recollecting it—this is a deed of Māra; the hearer of the Dharma has the six perfections and the speaker of the Dharma has not; the two are in discord—this too is a deed of Māra. The having or not having of practice and realisation is also stated both ways—the real situation of this pair the treatise-author will dissect in detail below (passage 29).
7. Having and not having the power of skilful means. The speaker of the Dharma has the power of skilful means in the six perfections and the hearer of the Dharma has no power of skilful means; the two are in discord—this is a deed of Māra; the hearer of the Dharma has the power of skilful means and the speaker of the Dharma has not—this too is a deed of Māra. Above the six perfections one more item is set up, 「方便」 tr. "skilful means": to have the practice but no skilful means, or to have skilful means that the other does not recognise—both become a barrier.
8. Having and not having dhāraṇī. The speaker of the Dharma has obtained dhāraṇī and the hearer of the Dharma has no dhāraṇī; the two are in discord—this is a deed of Māra; the hearer of the Dharma has obtained dhāraṇī and the speaker of the Dharma has not—this too is a deed of Māra. The power of upholding the Dharma is unequal, and this too is a condition of discord—how, when the disciple has obtained it and the teacher has not, the teacher can still be a teacher, the treatise-author has his own analysis below (passage 32).
9. Having and not having the wish to write out and uphold. The speaker of the Dharma wishes to have prajñā written out and upheld, and so on up to rightly recollected, and the hearer of the Dharma does not wish to write out, uphold, read, recite, and so on up to rightly recollect it; the two are in discord—this is a deed of Māra; the hearer of the Dharma wishes to write out, read, recite, and expound prajñā, and the speaker of the Dharma does not wish to have it written out, and so on up to not wishing to have it expounded; the two are in discord—this is a deed of Māra. This pair comes back to the most direct layer: one end hot, one end cold, and the matter is not accomplished.
10. Parted and not parted from the five hindrances. The speaker of the Dharma is parted from desire, ill will, sloth and torpor, restlessness and remorse, and doubt, and the hearer of the Dharma is not parted from them—this is a deed of Māra; the hearer of the Dharma is parted from the five hindrances and the speaker of the Dharma is not; the two are in discord—this is a deed of Māra. The five hindrances are dharmas that cover the mind; when one side is covered and the other is not, the light and dark of the mind's ground are not matched, and the condition of a shared undertaking grows thin—the treatise-author points out below (passage 36) the two Chinese characters 「相輕」 tr. "belittle each other" as the root of the sickness.
11. One of the outside paths rebukes with the three evil destinies and urges a quick entry into nirvāṇa. When one is writing out the deep prajñā, and so on up to rightly recollecting it, someone may come and say: the suffering in the three evil destinies is severe; why not, in this very body, exhaust suffering and enter nirvāṇa—what do you still want anuttarā samyaksaṃbodhi for? The two are in discord—this is a deed of Māra. This urging uses dread of suffering as bait: borrowing the fearfulness of the three evil destinies, it urges a person to give up the long, far Buddha path and take the nirvāṇa that is quickly finished—the words seem compassionate, but in truth they cut the root of the Great Vehicle.
12. One of the outside paths praises the gods and urges taking the fruit of the Small Vehicle. Or someone comes and praises the gods of the Four Heavenly Kings and so on up to the gods of neither perception nor non-perception, praises the first dhyāna and so on up to the concentration of neither perception nor non-perception, and says: in the desire realm one receives the pleasures of the five desires, in the form realm one receives the pleasure born of dhyāna, in the formless realm one receives the pleasure of quiescent extinction; these things too are impermanent, suffering, empty, and without self, marks of change, marks of exhaustion, marks of scattering, marks of separation, marks of cessation—why not, in this very body, take the fruit of srota-āpanna and so on up to the path of the pratyekabuddha; what use is it to receive suffering in birth and death seeking awakening? The two are in discord—this is a deed of Māra. This urging is cleverer still: first it praises the pleasures of heaven, then it takes them away with the contemplation of impermanence, and at the end it urges taking the small fruit—the first half is true speech, the second half is a forking road; using right contemplation as bait to lead into the two vehicles, the poison of what resembles the Dharma is deeper than that of what is not the Dharma.
13. Alone and unencumbered against leading a large following. The speaker of the Dharma is alone and unencumbered, free and unobstructed, and the hearer of the Dharma leads a large following; the two are in discord—this is a deed of Māra; the hearer of the Dharma is alone and unencumbered, and the speaker of the Dharma leads a large following—this too is a deed of Māra. Going alone and leading a following are each a way of conduct, with no higher or lower between them; when the two ways do not fit, staying together and going together are both hard, and the Dharma-connection then scatters.
14. ‘If you follow my wishes, I will give it to you.’ The speaker of the Dharma says: if you can follow my wishes, I will give you prajñā and let you write out, read, recite, expound, and rightly recollect it; if you do not follow my wishes, I will not give it to you. The two are in discord—this is a deed of Māra. The Dharma is made a means of coercion, and giving and receiving has become a trade—the authority of the teacher's position is used on 「隨我意」 tr. "follow my wishes", and the Dharma has already been cheapened beforehand.
15. Wishing to attend on him according to his wishes, and not being allowed. The hearer of the Dharma wishes to attend on him according to his wishes, and the speaker of the Dharma does not allow it; the two are in discord—this is a deed of Māra. The passage above is the teacher using the Dharma to control the disciple; this passage is the disciple able to follow the teacher's wishes in going and staying and in paying respects, and the teacher on the contrary not accepting it—only when the two directions are seen together does one see that the sūtra does not put the blame on one side alone.
16. Giving for the sake of wealth and gain, receiving for the sake of wealth and gain. The speaker of the Dharma, for the sake of obtaining wealth and gain, gives prajñā to be written out and upheld, and so on up to rightly recollected, and the hearer of the Dharma, because of this, does not wish to receive it from him; the two are in discord—this is a deed of Māra; the hearer of the Dharma, for the sake of wealth and gain, wishes to write out, read, recite, and expound the deep prajñā, and the speaker of the Dharma, because of this, does not wish to give it; the two are in discord—this is a deed of Māra. When the mind of wealth and gain is in the teacher, the disciple does not receive; when it is in the disciple, the teacher does not give—an impure condition cuts off the Dharma at both ends.
17. A place of danger to life in another region. The speaker of the Dharma wishes to go to a place of danger to life in another region, and the hearer of the Dharma does not wish to go along; the two are in discord—this is a deed of Māra; the hearer of the Dharma wishes to go to a place of danger to life, and the speaker of the Dharma does not wish to go—this too is a deed of Māra. On a journey to a dangerous land, the one who goes has the resolve of one who goes, and the one who does not go has the misgivings of one who does not go—the sūtra does not judge right and wrong; it only records what the Dharma loses where the two are in discord.
18. A place of famine, dear grain, and no water. The speaker of the Dharma wishes to go to a place of famine, dear grain, and no water in another region, and the hearer of the Dharma does not wish to go along—this is a deed of Māra; the hearer of the Dharma wishes to go and the speaker of the Dharma does not wish to go; the two are in discord—this is a deed of Māra. Beyond danger to life, one more item of hunger and want is set up: hardship in the means of life is likewise a condition of parting.
19. A prosperous and pleasant place—the thought of being rebuffed. The speaker of the Dharma wishes to go to a prosperous and pleasant place in another region, and the hearer of the Dharma wishes to follow him there; the speaker of the Dharma says: Good man! You are following me for the sake of gain and offerings; consider well for yourself whether you will get it or not get it, and let there be no regret afterwards! Because of this small condition the two are in discord. The hearer of the Dharma hears it and his mind is wearied, and he thinks: this is rebuffing me; he does not wish me to go along with him—and so he stops and does not go. This is a deed of Māra. One testing word from the teacher, one felt rebuff in the disciple—「以是少因緣故」 tr. "because of this small condition"; the sūtra specially marks the one word 「少」 tr. "small": what ruins the causes and conditions of prajñā is often not a great evil; it is this little bit.
20. The terrors of the wilderness. The speaker of the Dharma wishes to cross a wilderness—the terror of thieves, the terror of caṇḍālas, the terror of hunters, the terror of evil beasts and poisonous snakes—and the hearer of the Dharma wishes to follow him; the speaker of the Dharma says: Good man! What use is it for you to go there? There are many terrors there. The hearer of the Dharma hears it and understands that he does not wish to give prajñā to be written out and upheld, and so on up to rightly recollected, and his mind is wearied and he does not wish to follow him. Because of this small condition the two are in discord—this is a deed of Māra. The teacher truly speaks of the terrors, yet the disciple reads a rebuff into it—the words come out meaning this and are understood as that; the sickness of the 「少因緣」 tr. "small condition" appears again.
21. Paying respects to donors. The speaker of the Dharma has many donors and often goes to pay his respects; because of this he says to the hearer of the Dharma: I have matters to attend to; I must go there. The hearer of the Dharma understands his meaning and stops. The two are in discord—this is a deed of Māra. The listing of the sūtra passage is gathered up here: the condition of outer support turns into an obstruction to the inner transmission—donors are by nature people who protect the Dharma, yet the frequent comings and goings take away the time for speaking the Dharma.
22. A question arises: if one has no faith, how does one receive the Dharma from him? The treatise-author sets up a question: that a person writes out, upholds, reads, and recites prajñā but cannot practise it, so that he even breaks the precepts—that may be so; but if he has no faith, how does he receive the Dharma from him? This question goes straight to the sore point of the sūtra's first pair: since he has already received the Dharma from a teacher, how can it be said that he has no faith? The more concretely the question is asked, the more the answer below shows its measure.
23. Reading, reciting, and expounding widely for the sake of fame. Answer: This person does not have faith in prajñāpāramitā, that is, in ultimate emptiness; he reads, recites, and expounds widely only because he wishes to seek fame; just as the Buddha's disciples do not have faith in the scriptures of the outside paths, and yet also expound them for others. What "no faith" refers to is pinned down exactly by the treatise-author: it is not a lack of faith in the words and sentences; it is a lack of faith in ultimate emptiness—the mouth is expounding prajñā while the mind does not allow emptiness, just as the Buddha's disciples expound the books of the outside paths: however well they expound them, faith is not there.
24. Not wholly without faith. Again, 「不能深心信樂般若故名不信，非都不信」 tr. "because he cannot have faith in and delight in prajñā with a deep mind, he is called without faith; it is not that he has no faith at all". One sentence fills it out, so that people do not read it rigidly: when the sūtra speaks of having no faith, it speaks of a lack of faith and delight with a deep mind; it does not mean being wholly without a mind of faith—faith has shallow and deep; where the deep mind does not reach, in the giving and receiving of prajñā it is the same as having no faith.
25. A question arises: why can the teacher not give? The treatise-author asks again: by rule the disciple should make offerings to the teacher and present all that he has; why is it said that the teacher cannot give? The sūtra says that the speaker of the Dharma can give everything while the hearer of the Dharma begrudges and will not let go, and the reverse; the questioner seeks an explanation only of the one side of the teacher's begrudging—the teacher gives the Dharma to people; how could he come to begrudge?
26. The disciple suspects the teacher of deceit. Answer: The disciple thinks: the teacher cannot let go of a small thing, how much less let go of his body! Though he praises and expounds giving, this is deceit! Therefore they are not in accord. What the teacher's begrudging of wealth wounds is not wealth; it is the collapse of faith in the disciple's mind—to speak of giving and not be able to give: once the one thought 「欺誑」 tr. "deceit" arises, all the teacher's words and teachings are shaken.
27. The advance and retreat of the four kinds of offerings—a teacher who recites the sūtras, not a teacher who understands the meaning. The disciple wishes to make the four kinds of offerings to the teacher: the teacher may not receive them because he has few desires and is content, or may not receive them out of shame, as if he were selling the Dharma; or the teacher knows much and knows many people and lacks nothing, and on the contrary can supply the disciple, and the disciple thinks to himself 「人當謂我貪師衣食故受法」 tr. "people will say that I receive the Dharma because I crave the teacher's robes and food", or considers that his own virtue is too thin to consume what is given. The treatise-author rules: though this mind is good, because it cannot accomplish prajñāpāramitā, it too is a deed of Māra. He also explains the sūtra's meaning of a dull teacher: 「師鈍根者，是誦經師，非解義師。」 tr. "A teacher of dull faculties is a teacher who recites the sūtras, not a teacher who understands the meaning." The first half is where the eye of the whole chapter lies: not receiving, not consuming—each of these is a good mind—and yet a good mind that cannot accomplish prajñā is a deed of Māra; the judgement of a deed of Māra lies in the ruin of causes and conditions, not in the evil of the intention.
28. The twelve divisions of the scriptures, too, are a teacher who recites the sūtras. 「十二部經，亦是誦經師。」 tr. "The twelve divisions of the scriptures, too, are a teacher who recites the sūtras." The sūtra's pair 「說法者知十二部經次第義」 tr. "the speaker of the Dharma knows the order and meaning of the twelve divisions of the scriptures" the treatise-author gathers up in one sentence: one who knows the order and meaning but does not understand the deep meaning is still a teacher who recites the sūtras—versed in the forms of the teaching but not in the real meaning, he is of one kind with the dull of faculties.
29. Teacher and disciple each do not know the other's causes and conditions. The teacher who has the six perfections thinks: the disciple is a sinful person of dull faculties who cannot practise the six perfections and is attached to worldly affairs; he has only the name of disciple and nothing real—this teacher does not know that the disciple, after hearing prajñā, will later accomplish the great matter, and only because at present he has no six perfections, he will not teach and transform him. The disciple too thinks: the meaning of the six perfections I too can practise; the teacher can only speak it with his mouth and cannot cultivate and practise it—not knowing that the causes and conditions of the teacher's turned body will accomplish the great matter, and again not knowing that the teacher has separate causes and conditions of benefit through reading and reciting; therefore they are not in accord. The two 「不知」 tr. "not knowing" are the bones of this passage: the teacher does not know the disciple's later accomplishment, the disciple does not know the teacher's turned body—their sight reaches only what is present, each judges the other by present perception alone, and the Dharma-connection is then cut off by a double short-sightedness.
30. Straightforward faith clinging to dharmas, and practice with skilful means. The disciple with straightforward faith clings to wholesome dharmas; the teacher does not cling to dharmas and practises the six perfections with skilful means—at times praising the six perfections, at times, in order to cut off people's clinging, breaking up and scattering the six perfections; the disciple takes it that he does not deeply delight in the six perfections. When the disciple has skilful means, it is likewise. Praising and breaking up are both the skilful means of one teacher, but one with straightforward faith sees only the breaking up and suspects his mind—the real situation of the pair of having and not having the power of skilful means (passage 7) is here: one without skilful means not only cannot practise himself, he cannot even read the conduct of one who has skilful means.
31. A question arises: if the disciple has obtained dhāraṇī, how is the other a teacher? Question: If the disciple has obtained dhāraṇī and the teacher has no dhāraṇī, how is he a teacher? This question replays the reverse direction of the sūtra's eighth pair: when the power of the Dharma is in the disciple and not in the teacher, on what does the teacher's position stand?
32. Dhāraṇī are of many kinds. Answer: Dhāraṇī are of many kinds—there is the disciple who has obtained the dhāraṇī of hearing and retaining, who can retain and recite but cannot understand the meaning, and the teacher can explain it for him; the disciple may be able to obtain the meaning of the dhāraṇī of the real mark of all dharmas, yet be unable to read and recite in order; or the teacher has obtained the dhāraṇī of hearing and retaining, but 「未得大悲故，輕賤弟子，不能教導」 tr. "because he has not yet obtained great compassion, he belittles and despises the disciple and cannot teach and guide him". Under the one name there is hearing and retaining and there is the real mark, each with its strengths and shortcomings—teacher and disciple each have something gained and something lacking, and should rightly complement each other; but the one who has obtained hearing and retaining without great compassion on the contrary uses what he has gained to belittle others, and his strength becomes the root of discord.
33. A question arises: how is it that the teacher wishes to give the Dharma and the disciple does not wish to receive it? Question: That the disciple wishes to receive and uphold prajñā and the teacher does not give it—that may be so; how is it that the teacher wishes to give the Dharma and the disciple does not wish to receive it? A doubt that follows ordinary feeling: seeking the Dharma and not getting it is understandable; being given the Dharma and not receiving it is hard to understand.
34. Seeing the teacher's faults, he does not wish to receive. Answer: As answered before—because the disciple sees the teacher's faults, he does not wish to receive the Dharma. The thought of deceit in the earlier text (passage 26) is taken up again here: the disciple's refusal of the Dharma is mostly a refusal of this person first.
35. Because of wrong views and evil conditions he will not accept teaching. Again, the teacher wishes to teach and transform the person before him as a disciple, but this person, perhaps because of wrong views and evil causes and conditions, will not accept teaching. The reason for refusing the Dharma goes one layer deeper: it has nothing to do with the teacher's faults; it is the receiver's own wrong views and evil conditions that are the obstruction—of the causes of the two discords, some lie in the teacher, some lie in the disciple, and some lie in the disciple's former habits.
36. Where they are the same there is accord; the five hindrances and belittling each other. Again, among the dharmas that all beings practise, where they are the same there is accord; one person has left the five hindrances and one has not, and so they belittle each other: 「相輕故不和合。一切上法皆爾」 tr. "because they belittle each other they are not in accord. All higher dharmas are like this". This is the general principle the treatise-author puts forward for all the pairs of the chapter: where the dharma practised is the same there is accord, where it is not the same there is parting; and the pivot by which not being the same becomes an obstruction lies in the one thought of 「相輕」 tr. "belittling each other"—the higher belittles the lower, the lower resents the higher; so it is with the five hindrances, so it is with all higher dharmas.
37. Ruining his Great Vehicle and handing him the dharma of the Small Vehicle. Again, when one is writing out and reciting prajñā, and so on up to rightly recollecting it, one person rebukes with the three evil destinies, one person praises the gods; these matters are as answered before; though they cannot wholly break his good conduct, they ruin his Great Vehicle and hand him the dharma of the Small Vehicle. On the sūtra's two passages of those of the outside paths coming to urge (passages 11 and 12), the treatise-author judges in one phrase where the harm lies: it is not that they ruin his good; it is that they ruin his great—taking away the great and handing over the small is precisely the fixed form of this kind of deed of Māra.
38. Not delighting in crowds, he leaves the disciple. Again, the teacher has few desires and is content and does not delight in crowds, while the disciple has a large following; the teacher thinks: though the disciple is good and can be delivered, he brings many followers—the teacher clings deeply to wholesome dharmas and leaves the disciple. When the disciple is alone, it is likewise. The four Chinese characters 「深著善法」 tr. "clings deeply to wholesome dharmas" are set down with great weight: having few desires and being content is by nature a wholesome dharma, but clinging to it too deeply on the contrary becomes the cause and condition for leaving a person who could be delivered—clinging to wholesome dharmas can also cut off the Dharma-connection; the fineness of the deeds of Māra in this chapter here reaches the bottom.
39. Discord over following his wishes in going, staying, and paying respects. Again, the intent of the speaker of the Dharma is: the disciple should act according to my wishes, going or staying, paying respects at the proper times, and such things; the hearer of the Dharma only wishes to seek the benefit of the Dharma from him and cannot carry out these many matters—this is discord. Or at times the hearer of the Dharma follows his wishes in going, staying, and paying respects, and the speaker of the Dharma does not allow it, thinking: what use are these things? They diminish my merit! The hearer of the Dharma takes it to mean that he is belittled and despised, and they do not take pleasure in each other—this is discord. The same courtesy of paying respects: one teacher expects it and the disciple does not do it, another teacher refuses it and the disciple is hurt—courtesies have no fixed right and wrong in themselves; when two minds do not know each other, doing and not doing both become a rift.
40. The suspicion of selling the sūtras and the Dharma. Again, when the teacher wishes to give the Dharma for the sake of gain and offerings, the disciple's mind does not respect the teacher: how can he wish to sell the sūtras and the Dharma? The disciple too is like this: when he reads and recites prajñā for the sake of wealth, gain, and offerings, not with a pure mind, the teacher knows the disciple's mind is thus, and slights him and does not give it. Therefore they are not in accord. This is the explanation of the sūtra's pair of wealth and gain (passage 16): once the mind of wealth and gain arises, respect dies first—between teacher and disciple the Dharma is passed on by respect, and when respect is exhausted the road of the Dharma is cut off.
41. Sparing oneself on a perilous and difficult road. Again, the teacher wishes to go to another region, the road passing through peril and difficulty, and the disciple, because he spares his own life, cannot follow, thinking: 「我有身，然後求法」 tr. "I have a body, and only then do I seek the Dharma". When the disciple wishes to go, it is likewise. "I have a body, and only then do I seek the Dharma"—the thought of sparing oneself has its own reason, and the treatise-author records it as it is without adding reproach; yet which comes first, the body or the Dharma, is exactly the question the pair of the dangerous land (passage 17) leaves for the practitioner to answer for himself.
42. Famine, dear grain, and no water are likewise. 「飢餓、穀貴、無水處，亦如是。」 tr. "Places of famine, dear grain, and no water are likewise." One sentence carries the case over: hardship in the means of life is of the same class as danger to life; wherever the thought of sparing oneself reaches, all become conditions of the two discords.
43. A prosperous and pleasant place—a good mind stops the disciple. Again, the teacher wishes to go to a prosperous and pleasant place, and the disciple wishes to follow; either the teacher is ashamed and does not wish to take him along, or the disciple is used to pleasure and not fit to travel far, or the road is very long, or the teacher is familiar with that country while the disciple is not, and thinks the teacher's praise of it is not necessarily so, and at times suspects that the teacher is going because he craves food and drink. The teacher says to the disciple: what you have heard of what that land has is not necessarily all so; reckon it well for yourself! If you yourself wish to go, then go; do not go because of the wealth and prosperity, and when you get there and do not find things as you wished, do not blame me! He says again: you are going because you have heard that land is prosperous and pleasant, not for the sake of the Dharma; you need not follow me. 「師好心止弟子，不知是壞般若波羅蜜因緣。」 tr. "The teacher with a good mind stops the disciple, not knowing that this ruins the causes and conditions of prajñāpāramitā." Because the disciple respects and stands in awe of the teacher he cannot answer, and so he stops and does not go. Therefore they are not in accord. This passage is the deepest needle of the whole fascicle: every sentence the teacher speaks is a good mind—teaching the disciple to reckon for himself, guarding against the disciple's later regret, discerning whether he goes for the Dharma or for gain—and the treatise-author's verdict is only one sentence: a good mind, and yet it 「壞般若波羅蜜因緣」 tr. "ruins the causes and conditions of prajñāpāramitā". A deed of Māra does not pick out a good mind for exception.
44. A distant country with many difficulties stops the disciple. The teacher again wishes to go to a distant country where there are tigers, wolves, thieves, and robbers of every kind, and says to the disciple: there are many difficulties there; you need not go! The disciple hears it and stops. The teacher only knows that there are difficult things there and so stops the disciple, not knowing that this ruins the causes and conditions of prajñāpāramitā. One more example of the same type of sickness as the passage above: what is known is real (that land really has many difficulties), and what is ruined is also real (the causes and conditions of prajñā are really cut off)—true speech and a deed of Māra can after all lie in one utterance.
45. A question arises: if the distant country has many difficulties, why does he go himself? Question: If the distant country has many difficulties, why does he go himself? This presses on from the passage above: since the teacher knows that place has many difficulties and stops the disciple, why does he himself insist on going?
46. Accustomed to that land, he can protect himself. Answer: Someone says: because the teacher was born in that country, he is accustomed to that land and can protect himself. The first explanation: the teacher's going himself is not making light of his body; he was born in that land and has the strength to protect himself—in stopping the disciple, he protects what the disciple cannot protect.
47. He goes without sparing his life—how could he wrong another? Someone says: there are good teachers and scriptures there, and he goes without sparing his life. The teacher thinks: if I myself die, that is acceptable; how could I wrong another? Because of such causes and conditions he stops the disciple and does not let him go. The second explanation goes further: the teacher forgets his body for the Dharma, yet will not burden another with his own resolve to die—「我身自死則可，云何枉他」 tr. "if I myself die, that is acceptable; how could I wrong another", and stopping the disciple comes precisely from kindness; the mind of kindness and the cause and condition of ruining the Dharma lie in one and the same thought, and the paradox of this chapter here reaches its extreme.
48. Worldly ties with donors. The teacher has many acquaintances and donors, and his mind takes pleasure in and clings to them; the disciple has few desires and is content and does not cling to donors. The teacher always pays respects to the donors at the proper times; the disciple only wishes to seek the Dharma and does not like this. The teacher knows his mind and says: I have matters to attend to; I cannot speak the Dharma for you. The disciple hears it and is displeased: the teacher values worldly ties and does not value the Dharma. This is discord. The treatise section closes on the pair of donors (the explanation of passage 21): the teacher clings to outer support, the disciple seeks only the Dharma; with the one phrase 「不得為汝說法」 tr. "I cannot speak the Dharma for you", the teacher's place in the disciple's mind has already shifted—the seven Chinese characters 「貴俗緣，不貴於法」 tr. "values worldly ties and does not value the Dharma" are where, in the disciple's eyes, the way of teacher and disciple is cut off.
49. The evil Māra takes the form of a bhikṣu—the general heading. The sūtra turns to its second section: the evil Māra comes in the form and appearance of a bhikṣu and by skilful means ruins this prajñāpāramitā, so that it cannot be written out, upheld, read, recited, expounded, or rightly recollected. The deeds of Māra of the preceding section all borrowed the gap within teacher and disciple themselves; from here on, Māra comes onto the stage in person and conjures—the outer form is a bhikṣu, what he does is break prajñā, and the two discords enter the layer of ‘person and Dharma’ not coming into accord.
50. Subhūti asks its cause and condition. Subhūti said to the Buddha: World-Honored One! For what cause and condition does the evil Māra take the form and appearance of a bhikṣu and by skilful means ruin prajñā, so that it cannot be written out, upheld, and so on up to rightly recollected? The point of the question lies in 「何因緣」 tr. "for what cause and condition": why does Māra choose the form of a bhikṣu in particular? The answer below makes it plain of itself—that the form is credible is exactly the skilful means of ruin.
51. Disparaging the former sūtra and praising his own words—a bodhisattva who has not received the prediction falls into doubt. The Buddha said: the evil Māra comes in the form and appearance of a bhikṣu, ruins the minds of good men and good women, and makes them far from prajñā, saying: the sūtra I speak is prajñāpāramitā; this sūtra is not prajñāpāramitā. When he ruins the bhikṣus in this way, 「有未受記菩薩便墮疑」 tr. "a bodhisattva who has not received the prediction falls into doubt"; because he falls into doubt he does not write out the deep prajñā, does not receive it, does not uphold it, and so on up to not rightly recollecting it. They are in discord—this is a deed of Māra. The poison of Māra's words lies in swapping the true and the false: he does not disparage the name of prajñā, he only shifts the reality of prajñā—saying my sūtra is it and this sūtra is not; the one who has not received the prediction has a root of the path not yet firm, and at one doubt he retreats.
52. Urging realisation of the limit of reality. Again, the evil Māra, in the body of a bhikṣu, comes to where the bodhisattva is and speaks thus: if the bodhisattva practises prajñāpāramitā and realises the limit of reality, he attains the fruit of srota-āpanna and so on up to the fruit of arhat and the path of the pratyekabuddha! Because of this the two are in discord—this is a deed of Māra. This urging by an apparition runs in the same track as the praise of the gods by the one of the outside paths (passage 12) but is more refined: he does not urge giving up prajñā; on the contrary he urges realisation by means of prajñā—realising the limit of reality and taking the small fruit: the gate of practice is right, the landing is off; leading by right practice into a forked ending, this is the deed of Māra hardest of all to discern.
53. There are many deeds of Māra; one should be aware of them and keep far from them. Again, when the bodhisattva speaks this deep prajñā, many deeds of Māra arise, hindering prajñāpāramitā; these are deeds of Māra; the bodhisattva-mahāsattva should be aware of them, and having known them, keep far from them. Amid the listing the sūtra sets down a general rule: the remedy is only four Chinese characters—be aware, keep far; not to be aware is to fall, and to be aware and not keep far is also to fall.
54. What are the deeds of Māra and the hindrances? Subhūti said: World-Honored One! What are the deeds of Māra and the hindrances that the bodhisattva should be aware of, and having known them, keep far from? Following on from the general rule above he asks for their marks: one who wishes to keep far must first recognise the marks, hence this question, which draws out the section on what resembles the Dharma.
55. The deeds of Māra that are the semblance of the six perfections. The Buddha said: the deeds of Māra that are the semblance of prajñāpāramitā arise; the deeds of Māra that are the semblance of dhyānapāramitā, the semblance of vīryapāramitā, the semblance of kṣāntipāramitā, the semblance of śīlapāramitā, the semblance of dānapāramitā arise; the bodhisattva should be aware of them, and having known them, keep far from them. Each of the six perfections has its 「似」 tr. "semblance"—the marks of the deeds of Māra appear not on the opposite face but on the resembling face; the closer the resemblance, the greater the danger, and so they are specially marked as the first of what one should be aware of.
56. The sūtras that śrāvakas and pratyekabuddhas should practise. Again, the sūtras that śrāvakas and pratyekabuddhas should practise—of these the bodhisattva-mahāsattva should know that they are deeds of Māra and keep far from them. This sentence must be understood well: it does not mean that the sūtras of the two vehicles are Māra in themselves—it is said with regard to the bodhisattva's capacity: one who should practise the Great Vehicle being handed the two vehicles becomes a hindrance; its measure the treatise-author judges clearly below (passage 69).
57. Sūtras of the three gates of liberation given by skilful means to the bodhisattva. Again, inner emptiness and so on up to the emptiness of non-existent and existent dharmas, the four foundations of mindfulness and so on up to the limbs of the eightfold noble path, the gates of liberation of emptiness, the signless, and non-action—using these dharmas one attains the fruit of srota-āpanna and so on up to the path of the pratyekabuddha—such sūtras as these the evil Māra, in the form and appearance of a bhikṣu, gives by skilful means to the bodhisattva-mahāsattva. Because this is discord, this is a deed of Māra. What is handed over is, of all things, emptiness and the limbs of the path—the dharmas are all the Buddha's Dharma, but used off-centre: when sūtras that use these dharmas solely to take the small fruit are handed to a bodhisattva, the Buddha's Dharma becomes a tool for leading away from the Buddha path; the three Chinese characters 「方便與」 tr. "gives by skilful means" portray to the full the skill with which Māra uses the true Dharma.
58. Māra makes the body of a Buddha, golden-coloured with a fathom of light. Again, the evil Māra makes the body of a Buddha, golden-coloured with a fathom of light, and comes to where the bodhisattva is; this bodhisattva craves and clings, and because of craving and clinging, sarvajñā is diminished. Because this is discord, this is a deed of Māra. The apparition rises to the level of the body of a Buddha: golden-coloured with a fathom of light, the marks and excellent features true to life—what the sūtra reproves lies not in the seeing but in the craving and clinging; in the moment of one clinging, 「耗減薩婆若」 tr. "sarvajñā is diminished", and what is damaged is one's share of omniscience.
59. Māra makes the body of a Buddha together with a Saṅgha of bhikṣus. Again, the evil Māra makes the body of a Buddha together with a Saṅgha of bhikṣus and comes before the bodhisattva; the bodhisattva gives rise to a mind of craving and clinging and thinks: in the world to come I too shall, like this, speak the Dharma for a Saṅgha of bhikṣus following me. Because he craves and clings to Māra's body, sarvajñā is diminished—this is a deed of Māra. This clinging is finer: it is not clinging to form and marks; it is clinging to the future thought ‘I shall be like this’—seeing another's adornment, he gives rise to a craving for an image of himself, and Māra uses the practitioner's very own vow as the hook.
60. Conjuring countless bodhisattvas practising the six perfections; the sifting by emptiness of self-nature. Again, the evil Māra conjures countless hundreds of thousands of myriads of koṭi of bodhisattvas practising dānapāramitā and so on up to prajñāpāramitā, and shows them to good men and good women; having seen them, they crave and cling, and because of craving and clinging sarvajñā is diminished—this is a deed of Māra. Why? In this deep prajñāpāramitā there is no form, there is no feeling, perception, constructions, or consciousness, and so on up to there is no anuttarā samyaksaṃbodhi; in it there is no Buddha, no śrāvaka, no pratyekabuddha, no bodhisattva. Why? Because 「一切諸法自性空」 tr. "all dharmas are empty of self-nature". After the fourth type of apparition, the sūtra itself states the ground of sifting: in deep prajñā, form and so on up to awakening are all unfindable, and the Buddha and the persons of the three vehicles are also unfindable—emptiness of self-nature is the mirror that illumines and breaks through every apparition; in emptiness there is no mark to cling to, and whatever mark Māra displays loses its hook.
61. The simile of the precious things of Jambudvīpa and their many thieves. Again, when good men and good women write out this deep prajñā, receive, read, recite, expound, and rightly recollect it, many hindrances arise. It is like the precious things of Jambudvīpa—gold, silver, beryl, giant clam, agate, coral and such treasures—which have many difficulties and many thieves; just so, when one writes out this deep prajñā, and so on up to rightly recollecting it, many thieves and many hindrances arise. The whole listing of apparitions is gathered up in one simile: where the treasure is, there the thieves gather—that the hindrances are many is not a fault in the Dharma; it is precisely the proof that the Dharma is precious.
62. Subhūti describes the marks of the foolish person. Subhūti said to the Buddha, declaring and confirming his simile: Just so, World-Honored One! The precious things of Jambudvīpa have many thieves and many difficulties; when good men and good women write out this deep prajñā, and so on up to rightly recollecting it, it is also like this: many thieves, many hindrances, many deeds of Māra. These foolish people are sent by Māra and ruin it, making others far from it; these foolish people have little knowledge and little wisdom, and their minds do not delight in the great Dharma; therefore they themselves do not write out, do not receive, do not read, do not recite, do not rightly recollect, and do not cultivate and practise as it is spoken, and they also ruin others, so that they cannot write it out and so on up to cultivating and practising as it is spoken. The marks of those who make hindrances are fully described: sent by Māra, of little knowledge and little wisdom, not delighting in the great Dharma—not practising themselves and ruining others as well, harming both self and others.
63. The Buddha approves his words—the Buddha's power and the protection of the buddhas and bodhisattvas. The Buddha said: Just so! Just so! Those who have newly set their minds on the Great Vehicle, because they are sent by Māra, do not plant roots of goodness, do not make offerings to the buddhas, and do not follow good friends, do not write out the deep prajñā, and so on up to not rightly recollecting it, and make hindrances. If good men and good women can write out this deep prajñā, and so on up to rightly recollecting it, and the deeds of Māra do not arise, and they can fulfil dhyānapāramitā and so on up to dānapāramitā, the four foundations of mindfulness and so on up to omniscience of all kinds—know that it is by the Buddha's power; the immeasurable, boundless, asaṃkhyeya buddhas now present in the ten directions also help these people, and the avaivartika bodhisattva-mahāsattvas of the ten directions also guard, protect, and assist them. The close of the sūtra section sets both sides together: those who make hindrances have four causes (sent by Māra, without roots, not making offerings to the buddhas, not following good friends); those who can write out and uphold and in whom the deeds of Māra do not arise are, within, fulfilled in the many practices and, from outside, borne up by the Buddha's power and the protection of the buddhas and bodhisattvas—though the hindrances are many, the protection and upholding is greater.
64. Māra takes the form of a great śramaṇa. The treatise-author explains: Māra takes the form of a great śramaṇa, of weighty majesty and virtue, so that people accept his words; he holds many sūtra scrolls and is accompanied by a crowd of disciples, and says to the bhikṣus: prajñāpāramitā is as my sūtra says, the true and real word of the Buddha; what you heard before is not real, not spoken by the Buddha—rebuking and disparaging the former sūtra and in every way praising what he himself says. Bodhisattvas of dull faculties believe and accept these words and give rise to wrong view; those of keen faculties who have not yet received the prediction give rise to doubt. Why? 「諸佛畢竟空無相，智慧難解，故不和合。」 tr. "The ultimate emptiness and signlessness of the buddhas is hard to understand by wisdom, and so there is discord." The treatise-author fills out the costume of Māra's conjured bhikṣu: weighty majesty and virtue, many sūtra scrolls, a crowd of disciples—every credible mark complete; and those harmed differ: the dull come to wrong view, the keen who have not received the prediction come to doubt. That ultimate emptiness is hard to understand is exactly where doubt gets in.
65. Māra urges merit first and emptiness afterwards. Or at times Māra says to the bodhisattva: prajñāpāramitā and the three gates of liberation, spoken at length, are only emptiness; if you constantly train in this emptiness, you will realise it within it. And if you do not realise it, how will you become a Buddha and make the Buddha's Dharma? First practise giving, keeping the precepts, and the rest, and cultivate the merit of the thirty-two marks; when you sit at the seat of awakening, only then use emptiness. The bodhisattva either believes or doubts, and leaves prajñāpāramitā. Māra's words set up a dilemma: training in emptiness, one realises the limit of reality and falls into the small; not realising it, one has no way to become a Buddha—both ends blocked, forcing out the sequence ‘merit first and emptiness afterwards’; the words make sense, but their effect is only one: to put down prajñā right now. All who urge people that ‘at this time prajñā is not yet needed’ are descendants of these words.
66. A question arises: how is the semblance of the six perfections called a deed of Māra? Question: How is the semblance of the six perfections called a deed of Māra? The word 「似」 tr. "semblance" in the sūtra's section on what resembles the Dharma (passage 55) must have a definition, and so the treatise-author asks himself.
67. As said in the section on the semblance of prajñāpāramitā. Answer: As said in the section on the semblance of prajñāpāramitā. The treatise-author points back to his earlier explanation: the marks of the semblance dharmas have already been explained at length where this treatise explained the semblance of prajñā—here the heading is kept and not spread out again.
68. Practising the six perfections with a clinging mind is called the semblance. Again, 「以著心行六波羅蜜，是名似」 tr. "to practise the six perfections with a clinging mind is called the semblance". He adds one more meaning as the eye of this passage: the boundary between the semblance and the true lies not in the conduct but in the ground of the mind—the same giving and keeping of precepts, practised with a clinging mind, is the semblance; the semblance dharma is not some other dharma; it is what the true dharma looks like once it has been ruined by being practised with a clinging mind.
69. The sūtras of the two vehicles break the bodhisattva path. The sūtras of the śrāvakas and pratyekabuddhas have no kindness and compassion, do not seek the Buddha path, and only wish to deliver oneself; 「雖是好事，破菩薩道，故名魔事」 tr. "though they are good things, they break the bodhisattva path, and so are called deeds of Māra". The treatise-author fills out the measure of the sūtra's judgement on the sūtras of the two vehicles (passage 56): delivering oneself is a good thing, and the sūtras are good sūtras—they are called deeds of Māra solely in the one sense that they break the bodhisattva path; taking away the great and handing over the small is Māra's use, and the Dharma itself is without fault.
70. A question arises: seeing the body of a Buddha, how is that called a deed of Māra? Question: If a bodhisattva sees the body of a Buddha, his mind of faith is pure; how is that called a deed of Māra? This question brings into the open the sharpest point of the sūtra: seeing a Buddha and giving rise to faith is merit of the ordinary course; why is it judged in the sūtra to be a deed of Māra?
71. Grasping at marks is all a deed of Māra—the simile of the heavenly maiden. Answer: 「一切煩惱、取相，皆是魔事。」 tr. "Every affliction and every grasping at marks is a deed of Māra." This small bodhisattva is not yet fit to see the body of a Buddha; Māra makes the wondrous form of a Buddha, the bodhisattva's mind clings, and he practises the path for the sake of this fine body; like a person not yet free of desire who sees the form of a heavenly maiden, is deeply stained with attachment, cannot bear to receive the pleasures of heaven, and dies in a swoon—therefore Māra's wish is fulfilled. The answer has two layers: the criterion is grasping at marks, not seeing a Buddha—to see and not cling is no fault, to cling is to enter the class of deeds of Māra; the meaning of the simile is one of station—one not yet free of desire cannot bear a heavenly maiden, a small bodhisattva cannot bear the body of a Buddha; it is not that the object has poison, it is that one's strength does not match the object.
72. The meaning of diminishment—deceived with a little gold out of a heavy treasure. Though the bodhisattva obtains a little pure mind, he loses the wisdom of the real mark; like a person holding a heavy treasure in his hand, whom someone deceives with a little gold, so that he lets go the treasure of great price and takes the cheap thing—「是名耗減」 tr. "this is called diminishment". The sūtra speaks again and again of sarvajñā being diminished, and here the treatise-author gives its definition: what is gained is a little pure mind (it is not that nothing at all is gained), what is lost is the wisdom of the real mark—exchanging the great for the small, the gain not making up for the loss, and so it is called diminishment; Māra need not make a person fall wholly; making him sell cheap is enough.
73. Māra makes the body of a Buddha leading bhikṣus—likewise as above. Māra makes the body of a Buddha leading bhikṣus, and shows many bodhisattvas practising the six perfections—likewise as above. The treatise-author refers the sūtra's third and fourth types of apparition (passages 59 and 60) back to the preceding explanation: their sickness is alike craving, clinging, and grasping at marks, their loss is alike diminishment, and they are not explained separately again.
74. The Buddha states the cause and condition—form and all dharmas are empty of self-nature. Here the Buddha states the cause and condition: 「色等一切法自性空。」 tr. "Form and all dharmas are empty of self-nature." The treatise-author specially marks the sūtra's sentence on emptiness of self-nature (passage 60) as the root of the sifting: that all four types of apparition can be seen through rests on this one sentence alone—in emptiness there is no form, no awakening, no Buddha, no Saṅgha, and craving and clinging lose their object.
75. The doubt of the assembly and the cause and condition of the simile of the precious things. Again, the assembly gave rise to a doubt: prajñāpāramitā is the unsurpassed Dharma and of much benefit; how is it that people hate and envy it? Therefore the Buddha spoke a simile: like the gold, silver, and such of Jambudvīpa, for the sake of which many enemies and many thieves come out, and not for tiles, stones, and such; prajñāpāramitā is the wondrous treasure in the storehouse of the Buddha's Dharma, subtle, wondrous, and very deep, which the slack and dull of faculties do not understand, and therefore they disparage it. 「魔以般若波羅蜜多令眾生入涅槃故，魔作怨賊。」 tr. "Because prajñāpāramitā leads many beings into nirvāṇa, Māra makes himself an enemy and a thief." The treatise-author brings to light what the simile of the precious things (passage 61) answers: the simile is precisely to resolve the one doubt ‘why the unsurpassed Dharma invites hatred’—thieves come out for gold, not for tiles and stones; and that Māra is the thief has one further cause of its own: prajñā leads many beings into nirvāṇa and takes away Māra's people, and so Māra is bound to be an enemy.
76. Subhūti describes the three marks, like the way of animals. Subhūti joyfully received the Buddha's teaching and described those he had spoken of who disparage and ruin prajñā: these are mad and foolish people, sent by Māra and not free, who because of little knowledge cannot penetrate the Buddha's intent; these people have no great mind and do not know the taste of the pure Dharma; they know only three marks—craving for tastes, lust, and ill will—like the way of animals, and they make hindrances to prajñāpāramitā. The words of declaring and confirming paint a portrait of those who make hindrances: it is not that their strength is great, it is that their knowledge is short—what they know is only three marks, and of the taste of the pure Dharma they understand nothing at all; the one simile ‘like the way of animals’ holds more pity than rebuke.
77. The Buddha approves his words—the protection of the Buddha's power. The Buddha approved what Subhūti had said and said to Subhūti: if the bodhisattva-mahāsattva writes out prajñā, and so on up to rightly recollecting it, and the deeds of Māra do not arise, know that it is the Buddha's power, and also the protection of the buddhas and bodhisattvas of the ten directions; and that he can fulfil the five perfections and so on up to omniscience of all kinds is also the power of the buddhas now present in the ten directions. It seals the sūtra's passage 63: that the deeds of Māra do not arise is not the work of the practitioner's strength alone—that the writing out and upholding can be accomplished, that the many practices can be fulfilled, all have behind them the protection of the Buddha's power and of the buddhas and bodhisattvas.
78. Māra is the lord of the desire realm. Why? 「魔是欲界主」 tr. "Māra is the lord of the desire realm", complete in worldly merit and wisdom; 「魔是世間生死根本」 tr. "Māra is the root of birth and death in the world". The gods of the form realm, though they have wrong views, constantly enter dhyāna and concentration, and so their minds are soft and they cannot ruin anything; in the formless realm, because there is no form, and because the mind is subtle and fine, they cannot do anything; the lower gods, because they have no strength or power, cannot ruin in this way. This Māra, by the power of the causes and conditions of karma in former lives, and also by the causes and conditions of his dwelling-place and of seizing what others have made, is the master of the thieves in it, and is named Māra. Such is the mark of this Māra: he ruins good things. The treatise-author explains why the one who makes difficulties is Māra alone: searching through the three realms—the form realm is soft, the formless realm has no form and a subtle mind, the lower gods have no strength—the one who can ruin and is willing to ruin is only the lord of the desire realm; his position is obtained through the power of karma in former lives and the causes and conditions of his dwelling-place, and his mark is precisely to ruin good things. Knowing where the enemy comes from, dread can be turned into clear discernment.
79. The buddhas protect those who have first aroused the mind—the simile of thieves surrounding a city. Because the bodhisattva who has first aroused the mind is thin in merit and wisdom, he spares his body; if the buddhas and bodhisattvas of the ten directions do not protect and assist him, he cannot succeed. Therefore the buddhas, the bodhisattvas, and the gods break up the deeds of Māra, and this bodhisattva is either aware of it or not aware; 「如賊繞城，大人守護，小兒不覺」 tr. "as when thieves surround a city, the grown men keep guard and the small children do not notice". The meaning of the simile is very warm: the beginner's mind is like a small child; the thieves really surround the city, and the small child plays at ease—not because there are no thieves, but because there are grown men; the practitioner who in ordinary days does not notice the deeds of Māra is not necessarily without Māra; most likely he is being protected.
80. The deeds of Māra briefly told—teacher and disciple should be in accord. The deeds of Māra, briefly told, are like this; told at length, they are immeasurable and boundless. Yet the Buddha's intent is only that the practitioner accomplish the great matter of prajñā, and therefore 「師徒宜應和合，一切惡事，不應計念」 tr. "teacher and disciple should be in accord, and should not take any evil thing to heart". The culmination of the whole fascicle: the deeds of Māra cannot be told to the end, yet the Buddha's intent is only one sentence—listing the two discords to the point of the immeasurable is not to teach people to see Māra everywhere; it is to teach people to set their minds on one place: accord. Not taking any evil thing to heart is exactly where accord takes hold.
Do Not Misread
Do not read 「兩不和合」 tr. "the two discords" as a case against one side. Every pair in the sūtra is stated both ways, forward and reverse—the speaker of the Dharma thus, the hearer of the Dharma thus too; the teacher has the teacher's failings, the disciple has the disciple's failings, and even when both sides have good minds the matter is still not accomplished. To blame one side and excuse the other is to lose the method by which this chapter sets out its text.
Do not read a deed of Māra as necessarily coming from an evil mind. The deepest point of this fascicle lies precisely in the good mind becoming an obstruction: not receiving offerings is having few desires, stopping the disciple from facing danger is compassion, 「我身自死則可，云何枉他」 tr. "if I myself die, that is acceptable; how could I wrong another" is giving up oneself—and the treatise-author judges them all alike: 「師好心止弟子，不知是壞般若波羅蜜因緣」 tr. "the teacher with a good mind stops the disciple, not knowing that this ruins the causes and conditions of prajñāpāramitā". The criterion of a deed of Māra is whether the causes and conditions of prajñā are ruined or not ruined, not whether the intention is good or evil.
Do not read the judgement that 「聲聞、辟支佛所應行經」 tr. "the sūtras that śrāvakas and pratyekabuddhas should practise" are deeds of Māra as a depreciation of the scriptures of the two vehicles. The treatise-author says plainly 「雖是好事，破菩薩道，故名魔事」 tr. "though they are good things, they break the bodhisattva path, and so are called deeds of Māra"—the sūtras are good sūtras, delivering oneself is a good thing; they are called deeds of Māra only in the one sense of a bodhisattva who should practise the Great Vehicle being handed the Small Vehicle, the great taken away and the small handed over.
Do not read the judgement that Māra's making the body of a Buddha is a deed of Māra to mean that every seeing of a Buddha should be met with suspicion and fear. The treatise-author's criterion lies only in grasping at marks: 「一切煩惱、取相，皆是魔事」 tr. "every affliction and every grasping at marks is a deed of Māra"—the sickness is not in the mark seen but in the craving and clinging of the one who sees; the small bodhisattva is not yet fit to see and clings to it, like a person not yet free of desire before a heavenly maiden: his strength does not match the object; the object is not to blame.
Do not read 「是中無佛、無聲聞，無辟支佛、無菩薩」 tr. "in it there is no Buddha, no śrāvaka, no pratyekabuddha, no bodhisattva" as denying the Three Jewels. This is the right teaching of 「一切諸法自性空」 tr. "all dharmas are empty of self-nature", and the sūtra uses it precisely to sift out what Māra conjures—in emptiness there is no mark to cling to, and so golden colour and a fathom of light are not worth craving; it is a blade for breaking clinging, not words that ruin the Dharma.
Do not read Māra's urging ‘first practise giving and keeping the precepts, and only use emptiness when sitting at the seat of awakening’ as a reasonable sequence. These words press a person from both ends with ‘training in emptiness one falls into realisation; not realising, it is hard to become a Buddha’, and their effect is only to make a person put down prajñā right now; the six perfections and prajñā by nature go together, each guiding the other; all who urge people that ‘at this time prajñā is not yet needed’ belong to the stream of these words of Māra.
Bearing on Practice
Take the sūtra's list of pairs and examine yourself pair by pair. Go through it once in the teacher's position and once in the disciple's: have I begrudged the Dharma? Have I refused offerings? Have I coerced anyone with ‘follow my wishes’? Have I judged someone's later accomplishment by his present shortcomings? This chapter is a mirror that shows the heart of the relation between teacher and disciple; every pair can show which end one stands on oneself.
Take 「以是少因緣故」 tr. "because of this small condition" as a warning about small things. What ruins the causes and conditions of prajñā is often not a great evil; it is one testing word, one felt rebuff, one 「我有因緣，應往到彼」 tr. "I have matters to attend to; I must go there". When a rift arises between fellow practitioners, teachers, and friends, first ask: is this that 「少因緣」 tr. "small condition"?
Take ‘a good mind ruining the causes and conditions of prajñā’ to examine your own good intentions. Urging someone not to face danger, reckoning on someone's behalf, having few desires and refusing someone's offerings—at the moment good intention stirs, add one question: does this bring that person closer to prajñā, or further from prajñā? Use the Dharma as the scale; do not excuse yourself by your intentions.
Take 「著心行六波羅蜜，是名似」 tr. "to practise the six perfections with a clinging mind is called the semblance" to check the gates of practice. The same giving and keeping of precepts, practised with a clinging mind, becomes a semblance dharma. The place where, after doing good, one feels oneself to be remarkable is the sprout of the 「似」 tr. "semblance"—be aware, keep far: use these four Chinese characters on your own mind and conduct before using them on outer objects.
Take 「一切煩惱、取相，皆是魔事」 tr. "every affliction and every grasping at marks is a deed of Māra" to cure craving for exalted states. When in practice one sees light, sees forms, even sees a Buddha, remember the warning of golden colour and a fathom of light: there is no need for dread, and no room for clinging—illumine it with the one sentence 「一切諸法自性空」 tr. "all dharmas are empty of self-nature", and the mark of itself loses its hook. And remember the simile of the heavenly maiden to measure your own station: while your strength does not yet match the object, keeping far is better than savouring it.
Take 「如賊繞城，大人守護，小兒不覺」 tr. "as when thieves surround a city, the grown men keep guard and the small children do not notice" to give rise to a mind of repaying kindness and a mind of vigour. If on the road of practice one has not met great difficulty, it is not necessarily one's own power on the path; most likely it is the work of the buddhas' and bodhisattvas' protecting mindfulness—from this, do not rely on yourself; the thieves really surround the city—from this, do not be heedless.
Take 「師徒宜應和合，一切惡事，不應計念」 tr. "teacher and disciple should be in accord, and should not take any evil thing to heart" as the conduct that concludes each day. When there is something to reckon against fellow practitioners, teachers, and friends, remember that the whole fascicle ends with only this one sentence: the Buddha's intent is only that the practitioner accomplish the great matter of prajñā—matters are large and small; at the moment of reckoning, first ask which one is the great matter.
Further Resonances
What the Last Part carries on from the First Part is a single line that pushes 「兩不和合」 tr. "the two discords" from pairs of conduct to the edge of life and death, and then from the gap between teacher and disciple to Māra's appearing in person. The First Part set up its outline: wishing to write out against slackness, wishing to give against not receiving, wishing to stay against wishing to go, valuing offerings against having few desires and being content, taking up the dhūta practices against not taking them up—four sets of pairs stated both ways, forward and reverse; the simile of seeking fire with a fire-drill fixed the general principle: writing out prajñā is like drilling wood for fire—there is the drill and there is the base, the causes and conditions of two things, and only when teacher and disciple are of one mind and one undertaking is the writing out completed; the twelve dhūta practices were explained practice by practice in their causes and conditions, and closed with the Buddha's Dharma taking wisdom as its root and not putting suffering first. The Last Part first exhausts the items: faith and goodness, being able to give, receiving offerings, quickness of understanding, the twelve divisions of the scriptures, the six perfections, the power of skilful means, dhāraṇī, the wish to write out and uphold, the five hindrances—every one stated both ways; then those of the outside paths rebuke with the evil destinies and praise the gods, taking away the great and handing over the small; followers, following one's wishes, wealth and gain, danger to life, famine, prosperity and pleasure, the wilderness, donors—wherever human feeling reaches, there is a gap. The treatise-author explains them, and at every point shows the fineness of this chapter: no faith is no faith in ultimate emptiness and not wholly without faith; not receiving offerings—though this mind is good, because it cannot accomplish prajñā it too is a deed of Māra; teacher and disciple each do not know the causes and conditions of the other's turned body and later accomplishment; because they belittle each other they are not in accord, and all higher dharmas are like this; the teacher with a good mind stops the disciple, not knowing that this ruins the causes and conditions of prajñā. When the evil Māra appears in person, conjuring a bhikṣu to disparage the former sūtra and urge realisation of the limit of reality, conjuring the body of a Buddha, a Buddha with a Saṅgha, and countless bodhisattvas, so that by craving and clinging sarvajñā is diminished—the sūtra takes the one sentence ‘all dharmas are empty of self-nature’ as the blade of sifting, and the treatise-author takes the one sentence ‘grasping at marks is all a deed of Māra’ as the cord of the criterion, explains diminishment by being deceived with a little gold out of a heavy treasure, and explains where the one who makes difficulties comes from by Māra's being the lord of the desire realm and the root of birth and death. Last of all, the simile of the precious things with their many thieves fully answers the doubt of why the unsurpassed Dharma invites hatred—thieves come out for gold, not for tiles and stones; and the protection of the Buddha's power and of the buddhas and bodhisattvas of the ten directions is like grown men guarding a city, while the small children do not notice. From the head of the chapter to its end, the four Chinese characters 「兩不和合」 tr. "the two discords" here reach their full weight: the First Part says that the conditions of accord are like the drill and the base, neither of which can be lacking; the Last Part says that the gaps of discord enter everywhere, however fine, and Māra rides on them in turn—yet where the Buddha's intent comes back to is not in counting Māra but in urging accord: teacher and disciple should be in accord, and should not take any evil thing to heart; the two discords, spoken of to their very end, are only for the sake of accomplishing one accord.