大智度論 趣一切智品Dazhidulun — Mahāprajñāpāramitā-upadeśa · Tending toward Omniscience
趣一切智品：須菩提問解深般若者當趣何所，佛答當趣一切種智——能趣者為一切眾生所歸趣、修般若即修一切法、無所修與不受修與壞修、五眾乃至一切種智壞故為壞修、阿鞞跋致應驗知著不著；論主釋外道從因趣果之常顛倒與無趣不趣、無著心問答、子趣父母喻、行般若菩薩二種；佛廣示驗知之相與隨順一切種智心，論主釋雷霆孔雀喻、順畢竟空則順一切種智、無作無壞無所從來無所去不住無數無量，末以色等即是薩婆若、如無二無別收束（經＋論）
前品說善知識、說一切法趣某某而是趣不過，末了問信解深般若的人「有何等性、何等相、何等貌」——名相說到了，人還沒有驗。本品開卷，須菩提問得極直：「世尊！是諸菩薩摩訶薩解深般若波羅蜜者，當趣何所？」佛答得也極短：「當趣一切種智。」一問一答本無可疑，可是論主一開口就把這一問一答架空了：「般若波羅蜜非趣、非不趣」——既非趣亦非不趣，那須菩提何必問趣，佛又何必答趣？這是全品的入口。論主的解法不在圓融兩頭，而在指出「無趣」一語本是藥不是法：外道說「諸法從因趣果、從先世入今世、從今世趣後世。」，「破是常顛倒故，言『無趣不趣』。」——說無趣，是為破那個把三世串成一條因果線的常見；常見既破，藥亦不留。於是問答自然無礙：「須菩提以無著心問，佛以無著心答。」同樣一句「趣一切種智」，著心說出來是外道的趣，無著心說出來是般若的趣。趣不趣從來不在字面，在說者的心。
趣的第二面隨即轉出：菩薩自趣一切種智的同時，「則為一切眾生所歸趣，修般若波羅蜜故。」自趣與所歸趣不是兩段先後，是一事的兩面。論主配一個極平近的喻：「如子為苦惱所逼，則趣父母。」歸趣不是仰慕的辭令，是苦到極處腳步自己去的地方——喻的重量全在「所逼」二字。有人要問：何以獨菩薩為眾生所歸趣？答在大悲與修：「菩薩於眾生中大悲心故，常修習般若波羅蜜。」能為歸趣的，不是已到的果，是大悲推著走的修。
接著本品把「修」字整個翻了一遍。經說：「無所修是修般若波羅蜜，不受修、壞修是修般若波羅蜜。」三個遮詞連下，佛卻不許它們停在名言上，逕自設問：「何等法壞故，般若波羅蜜為壞修？」須菩提於是把五眾、十二處、十八界、我乃至知者見者、六度、諸空、四念處乃至一切種智逐條數過，條條答以「壞故，般若波羅蜜為壞修」。論主收其訓：無定實法可得，故說無所修；「一切諸觀有過故不受，是名不受修。」；「壞修者，一切法無常散壞，故名壞修。」——壞不是行者去壞它，是所修之法自身本來就在散壞。三詞層層相銜，銜到最後只剩一句：「可破壞法者，所謂色等乃至一切種智。」連所趣的一切種智也在可壞之列，這句話才把「趣」字真正逼到牆角。
前半品議趣，後半品驗人。「佛可須菩提所說。」之後，論主自道其承：「上品末說阿鞞跋致菩薩性、相、貌，今應驗試知。」——前品說相，本品驗實。判準只有一條，在深般若中著與不著：「若著，則非；若不著，則是其相。」何以非驗不可？因為兩種行般若的菩薩外相難分：一種「因般若波羅蜜觀一切法畢竟空，般若亦自空」，一種「不能觀般若亦空」。「是故經中試知著不？」經文隨即逐相列出可驗之處：「不以他人語為堅要，亦不隨他教行。」，不為三毒所牽，不遠離六波羅蜜，聞深般若「心不驚、不沒、不怖、不畏、不悔，歡喜樂聞」。論主釋末一相時設一對比之喻：「如雷霆，小鳥則怖畏悶死；孔雀大鳥歡喜舞戲。」同一聲雷，於小鳥是殺，於孔雀是樂；「邪見凡夫聞則恐怖；阿鞞跋致菩薩聞則歡喜，心無厭足」。般若之深不增不減，聞者之器一驗即見——驚怖與歡喜，正是最省力的驗人之法。
驗過了人，還須說行。須菩提問云何行般若，佛只答七字：「隨順一切種智心」，並開其目為「以空隨順」乃至「以如夢、幻、炎、嚮、化隨順，是行般若波羅蜜。」論主替讀者問出那個最實在的疑：「是菩薩未得一切種智，云何能順？」——未到的境界如何隨順？答得乾淨：「隨順畢竟空心則順一切種智心。」一切種智是寂滅相，畢竟空心亦是寂滅相，相同故順；不必先得，只須同相。此下佛說菩薩之所行處，全是遮詞：「不行色，不行受、想、行、識，乃至不行一切種智。」，「無作法、無壞法、無所從來、亦無所去、無住處」。論主逐詞訓之——不從六波羅蜜來，故無所從來；不入佛法中，故無所去；有為以虛誑故不住，無為以無憶想分別故亦不住；五眾和合故有六道數，壞五眾相續故無數無量；無數無量故語言道斷。遮到語言道斷，正面才出來：「色即是薩婆若，乃至一切種智即是薩婆若。」所趣的薩婆若原不在色之外。「色如相乃至一切種智如相皆是一如，無二無別。」——開卷那句「當趣何所」到此才得究竟的答：無所可趣，而趣不斷。趣非趣之辯，收在一個「如」字上。
The preceding chapter spoke of the good friend, spoke of all dharmas tending toward this or that while the tending does not pass beyond, and at the end asked what nature, what mark, what appearance the person who believes in and understands deep prajñā has—the names and marks had been spoken, but the person had not yet been tested. As this chapter opens, Subhūti asks very directly: ‘World-Honored One! These bodhisattva-mahāsattvas who understand deep prajñāpāramitā—toward what should they tend?’ The Buddha's answer is just as short: ‘They should tend toward the omniscience of all kinds.’ One question, one answer, nothing to doubt; yet the moment the treatise-author opens his mouth he sets this question and answer in the air: ‘prajñāpāramitā neither tends nor does not tend’—if it neither tends nor does not tend, why need Subhūti ask about tending, and why need the Buddha answer with tending? This is the entrance to the whole chapter. The treatise-author's solution is not to harmonise the two ends but to point out that the phrase ‘no tending’ was from the start a medicine, not a dharma: the outside paths say ‘dharmas tend from cause to fruit, enter this life from the former life, tend from this life to the next life’, and ‘to break this inversion of permanence, it is said “no tending, not tending”.’—to say ‘no tending’ is to break that view of permanence which strings the three times into a single line of cause and fruit; once the view of permanence is broken, the medicine too is not kept. And so the question and answer are naturally unobstructed: ‘Subhūti asks with a mind without clinging; the Buddha answers with a mind without clinging.’ One and the same sentence, ‘tend toward the omniscience of all kinds’, spoken from a clinging mind is the tending of the outside paths; spoken from a mind without clinging it is the tending of prajñā. Tending or not tending was never in the wording; it is in the mind of the one who speaks.
The second face of tending turns out at once: while the bodhisattva himself tends toward the omniscience of all kinds, he ‘is that toward which all beings return and tend, because he practises prajñāpāramitā.’ Tending oneself and being that toward which others return are not two stages, one after the other; they are two faces of one matter. The treatise-author fits it with a simile as near to hand as could be: ‘as a child, pressed by pain and distress, tends toward its father and mother.’ Returning is not a phrase of admiration; it is the place one's feet go of themselves when the pain is at its worst—the whole weight of the simile is in the two Chinese characters rendered here as ‘pressed by’. Someone will ask: why is it the bodhisattva alone toward whom beings return and tend? The answer lies in great compassion and in practice: ‘because of his mind of great compassion toward beings, the bodhisattva constantly trains in prajñāpāramitā.’ What can be returned to is not a fruit already reached; it is a practice pushed along by great compassion.
Next the chapter turns the one Chinese character rendered here as ‘practise’ completely over. The sūtra says: ‘practising nothing is practising prajñāpāramitā; the practice of not receiving and the practice of ruin are practising prajñāpāramitā.’ Three negating terms come down in a row, but the Buddha does not let them rest as words; he sets the question himself: ‘By the ruin of which dharmas is prajñāpāramitā the practice of ruin?’ Subhūti then counts through the five aggregates, the twelve sense-fields, the eighteen elements, the self and so on up to the knower and the seer, the six perfections, the emptinesses, the four foundations of mindfulness and so on up to the omniscience of all kinds, item by item, and answers each with ‘by its ruin, prajñāpāramitā is the practice of ruin.’ The treatise-author gathers the gloss: there is no fixed, real dharma to be found, hence practising nothing is spoken of; ‘all contemplations have faults and so are not received; this is called the practice of not receiving’; ‘the practice of ruin: all dharmas are impermanent, scatter, and fall to ruin; hence it is called the practice of ruin.’—ruin is not something the practitioner does to them; the dharmas practised are of themselves already scattering and falling to ruin. The three terms are linked layer to layer, and the linking ends in one sentence only: ‘the dharmas that can be broken and ruined are form and the rest, and so on up to the omniscience of all kinds.’ Even the omniscience of all kinds toward which one tends is among what can be ruined, and only with this sentence is the Chinese character rendered here as ‘tend’ truly driven into the corner.
The first half of the chapter argues tending; the second half tests the person. After ‘the Buddha approved what Subhūti said’, the treatise-author states what he is carrying forward: ‘at the end of the preceding chapter the nature, mark, and appearance of the avaivartika bodhisattva were spoken of; now they should be tested and known.’—the preceding chapter spoke of the marks; this chapter tests them for real. There is only one criterion: within deep prajñā, clinging or not clinging: ‘if he clings, then it is not; if he does not cling, then that is his mark.’ Why must there be a test? Because two kinds of bodhisattva who practise prajñā are hard to tell apart from outside: one ‘by means of prajñāpāramitā contemplates all dharmas as ultimately empty, and prajñā too as empty of itself’, the other ‘cannot contemplate prajñā as empty as well.’ ‘Therefore the sūtra tests whether he clings or not.’ The sūtra then lists mark by mark the points at which he can be tested: ‘he does not take others' words as what is firm and essential, nor does he practise following others' teaching’; he is not dragged by the three poisons, he does not stray far from the six perfections, and hearing deep prajñā ‘his mind is not startled, does not sink, is not terrified, is not afraid, has no regret; he gladly delights in hearing it.’ In explaining the last mark the treatise-author sets a simile of contrast: ‘as with a thunderclap: small birds are terrified and die of fright, while the peacock, a great bird, rejoices and dances.’ The same peal of thunder is death to the small bird and delight to the peacock; ‘ordinary people of wrong view hear it and are terrified; the avaivartika bodhisattva hears it and rejoices, his mind never sated.’ The depth of prajñā neither increases nor decreases; the vessel of the hearer shows at the first test—fright and joy are precisely the least laborious way of testing a person.
The person having been tested, the practice must still be spoken. Subhūti asks how one practises prajñā, and the Buddha answers with only seven Chinese characters, rendered here as ‘in accord with the mind of the omniscience of all kinds’, and opens their headings as ‘accords by emptiness’ and so on up to ‘accords by being like a dream, an illusion, a mirage, an echo, a transformation; this is practising prajñāpāramitā.’ The treatise-author asks the most practical doubt for the reader: ‘this bodhisattva has not yet obtained the omniscience of all kinds; how can he accord with it?’—how does one accord with a realm not yet reached? The answer is clean: ‘the mind that accords with ultimate emptiness accords with the mind of the omniscience of all kinds.’ The omniscience of all kinds is the mark of quiescence; the mind of ultimate emptiness is also the mark of quiescence; the marks are the same, hence they accord; there is no need first to obtain it, only to be of the same mark. Below this the Buddha speaks of the bodhisattva's place of practice, and it is all negating terms: ‘he does not practise form, does not practise feeling, perception, constructions, and consciousness, and so on up to does not practise the omniscience of all kinds’, ‘a dharma without making, a dharma without ruin, coming from nowhere, going nowhere, with no place of abiding.’ The treatise-author glosses them term by term—he does not come from the six perfections, hence coming from nowhere; he does not enter into the Buddha's dharmas, hence going nowhere; the conditioned, being false and deceptive, does not abide, and the unconditioned, being without recollection, imagining, and discrimination, does not abide either; because the five aggregates come together there is the count of the six destinies, and because the continuity of the five aggregates is broken there is neither number nor measure; being without number and without measure, the way of words is cut off. Only when the negating has reached the cutting-off of the way of words does the positive come out: ‘form is sarvajñā, and so on up to the omniscience of all kinds is sarvajñā.’ The sarvajñā toward which one tends was never outside form. ‘The mark of suchness of form and so on up to the mark of suchness of the omniscience of all kinds are all one suchness, without duality and without difference.’—the opening sentence, ‘toward what should they tend’, only here receives its final answer: there is nowhere to tend, and the tending does not cease. The debate of tending and not tending closes on the one Chinese character rendered here as ‘suchness’.
卷71 〔T25 0560c29〕
大智度論釋趣一切智品第五十三 〔T25 0561a〕 【經】 須菩提白佛言：「世尊！是諸菩薩摩訶薩解深般若波羅蜜者，當趣何所？」 佛告須菩提：「是菩薩摩訶薩解深般若波羅蜜者，當趣一切種智。」 須菩提白佛言：「世尊！是菩薩摩訶薩能趣一切種智者，則為一切眾生所歸趣，修般若波羅蜜故。世尊！修般若波羅蜜即是修一切諸法。世尊！無所修是修般若波羅蜜，不受修、壞修是修般若波羅蜜。」 佛告須菩提：「何等法壞故，般若波羅蜜為壞修？」 「世尊！色壞故，般若波羅蜜為壞修；受、想、行、識、十二處、十八界壞故，般若波羅蜜為壞修；我乃至知者、見者壞故，般若波羅蜜為壞修。世尊！檀波羅蜜壞故，般若波羅蜜為壞修；乃至般若波羅蜜壞故，般若波羅蜜為壞修；內空乃至無法有法空、四念處乃至十八不共法、須陀洹果乃至一切種智壞故，般若波羅蜜為壞修。」 佛言：「如是！如是！須菩提！色壞故，般若波羅蜜為壞修；乃至一切種智壞故，般若波羅蜜為壞修。」 爾時，佛告須菩提：「是深般若波羅蜜中，阿鞞跋致菩薩摩訶薩應當驗知！若菩薩摩訶薩是深般若波羅蜜中不著，當知是阿鞞跋致；禪波羅蜜乃至檀波羅蜜中不著，四念處乃至一切種智中不著，當知是阿鞞跋致。」 【論】 問曰： 般若波羅蜜非趣、非不趣，須菩提何以故問「行般若者趣至何處」？又佛何以答「趣薩婆若」？ 答曰： 外道言：「諸法從因趣果、從先世入今世、從今世趣後世。」破是常顛倒故，言「無趣不趣」。 此中，須菩提以無著〔T25 0561b〕心問，佛以無著心答。般若波羅蜜畢竟空，於諸法無障無礙；得無障無礙解脫故無障無礙。因果相似故，故言：「解深般若者，趣一切種智。」 須菩提言：「菩薩知般若波羅蜜者為一切眾生所歸趣。」如子為苦惱所逼，則趣父母。 問曰： 何以故但菩薩解深般若波羅蜜為眾生所歸趣？ 答曰： 菩薩於眾生中大悲心故，常修習般若波羅蜜。以修故，能解一切諸法皆入般若波羅蜜，是故「修般若波羅蜜即修一切法」。 般若無定實法可得，故經中說「無所修是修般若波羅蜜」。般若波羅蜜中，一切諸觀有過故不受，是名不受修。壞修者，一切法無常散壞，故名壞修。可破壞法者，所謂色等乃至一切種智。 佛可須菩提所說。 上品末說阿鞞跋致菩薩性、相、貌，今應驗試知。於深般若波羅蜜中著不？若著，則非；若不著，則是其相。 行般若波羅蜜菩薩有二種：一者、因般若波羅蜜觀一切法畢竟空，般若亦自空；二者、不能觀般若亦空。是故經中試知著不？ 【經】 「若阿鞞跋致菩薩摩訶薩行深般若波羅蜜時，不以他人語為堅要，亦不隨他教行。阿鞞跋致菩薩摩訶薩不為欲心、瞋心、癡心所牽。若阿鞞跋致菩薩摩訶薩不遠離六波羅蜜。若阿鞞跋致菩薩摩訶薩聞說深般若波羅蜜時，心不驚、不沒、不怖、不畏、不悔，歡喜樂聞，受持、讀、誦、正憶念、如說行。須菩提！當知是菩薩先世已問是深般若波羅蜜中事已，受持、讀、誦、說、正憶念。何以故？是菩薩摩訶薩〔T25 0561c〕有大威德故，聞是深般若波羅蜜，心不驚、不怖、不畏、不沒、不悔，歡喜樂聞，受持、讀、誦、正憶念。」 須菩提白佛言：「世尊！若菩薩摩訶薩聞深般若波羅蜜，不驚、不怖乃至正憶念，世尊！是菩薩摩訶薩云何行般若波羅蜜？」 佛言：「隨順一切種智心，是菩薩摩訶薩應如是行般若波羅蜜。」 「世尊！云何名隨順一切種智心，是菩薩摩訶薩應如是行般若波羅蜜？」 佛言：「以空隨順，是為菩薩摩訶薩行深般若波羅蜜；以無相、無作、無所有、不生不滅、不垢不淨隨順，是菩薩摩訶薩應如是行般若波羅蜜；以如夢、幻、炎、嚮、化隨順，是行般若波羅蜜。」 須菩提白佛言：「佛說以空隨順乃至如夢如幻隨順，是行般若波羅蜜。世尊！是菩薩摩訶薩行何法——若色，若受、想、行、識，乃至一切種智？」 佛告須菩提：「菩薩摩訶薩不行色，不行受、想、行、識，乃至不行一切種智。何以故？是菩薩摩訶薩行處，無作法、無壞法、無所從來、亦無所去、無住處，是法不可數、無有量；若無數、無量，是法不可得——不可以色得，乃至不可以一切種智得。何以故？色即是薩婆若，乃至一切種智即是薩婆若。色如相乃至一切種智如相皆是一如，無二無別。」 【論】 釋曰： 阿鞞跋致菩薩所說事，於他語言中不生念：「是中有實、不實。」何以故？他人有二種：在家人，著五欲樂，虛誑不淨；出家外道，著諸邪見不實。此等所說皆無實事，是故不信。自得諸法實相故，乃至佛身來說破諸法實相者亦不信；得無為法故，心則安〔T25 0562a〕重，不復移轉。 是菩薩雖未得佛道，貪欲等諸煩惱折薄故，不為所牽。 心常不離六波羅蜜，知善法果報味故，心常愛樂，不離六波羅蜜。 如是等種種因緣故，聞深般若不怖、不畏，歡喜欲聞，讀、誦、問義、修習。如雷霆，小鳥則怖畏悶死；孔雀大鳥歡喜舞戲。般若波羅蜜亦如是，邪見凡夫聞則恐怖；阿鞞跋致菩薩聞則歡喜，心無厭足，是故說「歡喜樂聞」。 是中佛說因緣：「是菩薩於過去世已聞深般若波羅蜜，多集諸福德、智慧故有大威德，有大威德故不怖畏。」 須菩提問：「是菩薩聞深般若波羅蜜雖不怖畏，是般若無定相，云何應行？」 佛言：「隨順一切種智心。」 問曰： 是菩薩未得一切種智，云何能順？ 答曰： 是故說：「隨順畢竟空心則順一切種智心。」一切種智是寂滅相，佛後品中說：「一切寂滅相是一切種智。」是故言：「順畢竟空則順一切種智。」無相、無作、虛空、無生無滅、無垢無淨、如夢等亦如是。 爾時，須菩提問：「順畢竟空心，觀何等法？」 佛答：「不觀色乃至一切種智。」 何以故？智慧欲求實事，色等有為作法皆虛妄，一切種智是實法。實法故，過有為法；過有為法故，說是法——「無作」，無作者。「無壞法」，無壞者。是法不從六波羅蜜來，故言「無所從來」。不入佛法中，故言「無所去」。有為，虛誑故「不住」；無為法中，無憶想分別故亦「不住」。五眾和合故有六道數，壞五眾相續故則「無數、無量」。無數、無量故則語言道斷，語言道斷故不可以行色等諸法得。 佛此〔T25 0562b〕中自說因緣：「色等諸法即是薩婆若，薩婆若即是色等諸法。何以故？色等諸法如即是薩婆若如，薩婆若如即是色等諸法如，以是故說如，是如無二無別。」 大智度論卷第七十一
《大智度論》卷71 · T25n1509 0560c29–0562b08
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.
本品題為《大智度論》釋〈趣一切智品〉第五十三，聖者龍樹所造，後秦龜茲國三藏鳩摩羅什所譯，在卷七十一。
經①：解深般若者當趣何所——趣一切種智、為眾生所歸趣、無所修不受修壞修、阿鞞跋致應驗知
須菩提向佛稟白：『世尊！這些菩薩摩訶薩能解了甚深般若波羅蜜的，應當趣向何處？』
佛告訴須菩提：『這菩薩摩訶薩解了甚深般若波羅蜜的，應當趣向一切種智。』
須菩提向佛稟白：『世尊！這菩薩摩訶薩能趣向一切種智的，就成為一切眾生的歸趣之處，因為他修般若波羅蜜的緣故。世尊！修般若波羅蜜就是修一切諸法。世尊！無所修才是修般若波羅蜜，不受修、壞修才是修般若波羅蜜。』
佛告訴須菩提：『是什麼法壞了的緣故，般若波羅蜜成為壞修？』
『世尊！色壞了的緣故，般若波羅蜜成為壞修；受、想、行、識、十二處、十八界壞了的緣故，般若波羅蜜成為壞修；我乃至知者、見者壞了的緣故，般若波羅蜜成為壞修。世尊！檀波羅蜜壞了的緣故，般若波羅蜜成為壞修；乃至般若波羅蜜壞了的緣故，般若波羅蜜成為壞修；內空乃至無法有法空、四念處乃至十八不共法、須陀洹果乃至一切種智壞了的緣故，般若波羅蜜成為壞修。』
佛說：『是這樣！是這樣！須菩提！色壞了的緣故，般若波羅蜜成為壞修；乃至一切種智壞了的緣故，般若波羅蜜成為壞修。』
那時，佛告訴須菩提：『在這甚深般若波羅蜜之中，阿鞞跋致菩薩摩訶薩應當加以驗知！若菩薩摩訶薩在這甚深般若波羅蜜之中不生執著，當知這人是阿鞞跋致；在禪波羅蜜乃至檀波羅蜜之中不著，在四念處乃至一切種智之中不著，當知這人是阿鞞跋致。』
論①：非趣非不趣何以問趣答趣——外道從因趣果之破、無著心問答、子趣父母喻、四義之訓、行般若菩薩二種
論主問道：
般若波羅蜜非趣、非不趣，須菩提為什麼要問『行般若的人趣至何處』？又佛為什麼答『趣薩婆若』？
論主答道：
外道說：『諸法從因趣向果、從先世進入今世、從今世趣向後世。』為了破除這種常見顛倒的緣故，才說『無趣不趣』。
此中，須菩提是以無著之心發問，佛是以無著之心作答。般若波羅蜜畢竟空，於諸法無障無礙；由於得了無障無礙的解脫，所以無障無礙。因為因果相似的緣故，所以說：『解了甚深般若的人，趣向一切種智。』
須菩提說：『菩薩知般若波羅蜜的，為一切眾生所歸趣。』這如同孩子被苦惱所逼迫，便趣向父母。
論主問道：
為什麼唯獨菩薩解了甚深般若波羅蜜，纔為眾生所歸趣？
論主答道：
菩薩在眾生之中有大悲心的緣故，常常修習般若波羅蜜。因為修習的緣故，能夠解了一切諸法都入於般若波羅蜜，所以說「修般若波羅蜜即修一切法」。
般若沒有定實之法可得，所以經中說「無所修是修般若波羅蜜」。般若波羅蜜之中，一切諸觀都有過失的緣故而不受，這名為不受修。壞修的意思是，一切法無常散壞，所以名為壞修。可以破壞的法，就是色等乃至一切種智。
佛印可了須菩提所說。
上一品末尾說了阿鞞跋致菩薩的性、相、貌，如今應當加以驗試而知。在甚深般若波羅蜜之中，是著、還是不著？若著，就不是；若不著，就是他的相。
行般若波羅蜜的菩薩有兩種：一者、因般若波羅蜜而觀一切法畢竟空，般若也自空；二者、不能觀般若也空。所以經中要試知著、不著。
經②：阿鞞跋致驗知之相——不以他語為堅要、不為欲心瞋心癡心所牽、不離六度、聞深般若不驚不怖，隨順一切種智心，不行色乃至一切種智，色即是薩婆若
『若阿鞞跋致菩薩摩訶薩行甚深般若波羅蜜時，不把他人的話當作堅固要領，也不隨他人的教導而行。阿鞞跋致菩薩摩訶薩不被欲心、瞋心、癡心所牽引。若阿鞞跋致菩薩摩訶薩不遠離六波羅蜜。若阿鞞跋致菩薩摩訶薩聽人宣說甚深般若波羅蜜時，心不驚、不沒、不怖、不畏、不悔，歡喜而樂於聽聞，受持、讀、誦、正憶念、依所說而行。須菩提！當知這菩薩先世已經問過這甚深般若波羅蜜中的事了，並且受持、讀、誦、演說、正憶念。為什麼呢？因為這菩薩摩訶薩有大威德的緣故，聽聞這甚深般若波羅蜜，心不驚、不怖、不畏、不沒、不悔，歡喜而樂於聽聞，受持、讀、誦、正憶念。』
須菩提向佛稟白：『世尊！若菩薩摩訶薩聽聞甚深般若波羅蜜，不驚、不怖乃至正憶念，世尊！這菩薩摩訶薩是怎樣行般若波羅蜜的？』
佛說：『隨順一切種智之心，這菩薩摩訶薩應當這樣行般若波羅蜜。』
『世尊！什麼叫作隨順一切種智之心，這菩薩摩訶薩應當這樣行般若波羅蜜？』
佛說：『以空隨順，這就是菩薩摩訶薩行甚深般若波羅蜜；以無相、無作、無所有、不生不滅、不垢不淨隨順，這菩薩摩訶薩應當這樣行般若波羅蜜；以如夢、如幻、如炎、如嚮、如化隨順，這就是行般若波羅蜜。』
須菩提向佛稟白：『佛說以空隨順乃至如夢如幻隨順，這是行般若波羅蜜。世尊！這菩薩摩訶薩是行什麼法呢——是色，是受、想、行、識，乃至是一切種智？』
佛告訴須菩提：『菩薩摩訶薩不行色，不行受、想、行、識，乃至不行一切種智。為什麼呢？這菩薩摩訶薩的行處，沒有造作之法、沒有壞滅之法、沒有所從來、也沒有所去、沒有住處，這法不可計數、沒有限量；若是無數、無量，這法就不可得——不可以用色得到，乃至不可以用一切種智得到。為什麼呢？色就是薩婆若，乃至一切種智就是薩婆若。色的如相乃至一切種智的如相，都是同一個如，無二無別。』
論②：釋驗知之相——他人二種故不信、心安重不移轉、煩惱折薄、不離六度、雷霆孔雀喻、順畢竟空則順一切種智、無作無壞無所從來無所去不住無數無量、色等即是薩婆若
論主解釋說：
阿鞞跋致菩薩所說之事，對於他人的言語之中不生起這樣的念頭：『這裡面有實、不實。』為什麼呢？他人有兩種：在家人，貪著五欲之樂，虛誑不淨；出家外道，執著諸邪見而不真實。這些人所說的都沒有實事，所以不信。由於自己已得諸法實相的緣故，乃至佛身前來宣說破壞諸法實相的話也不信；由於得了無為法的緣故，心便安重，不再移轉。
這菩薩雖然還沒有得佛道，但因為貪欲等諸煩惱已經折損稀薄的緣故，不被牽引。
心常常不離六波羅蜜，因為知道善法果報的滋味的緣故，心常愛樂，不離六波羅蜜。
由於如是等種種因緣的緣故，聽聞甚深般若不怖、不畏，歡喜而想聽聞，讀、誦、問義、修習。這如同雷霆之時，小鳥便怖畏悶死；孔雀大鳥卻歡喜舞戲。般若波羅蜜也是這樣，邪見凡夫聽了就恐怖；阿鞞跋致菩薩聽了就歡喜，心無厭足，所以說「歡喜樂聞」。
這裡面佛說了因緣：『這菩薩在過去世已經聽聞甚深般若波羅蜜，多多積集諸福德、智慧的緣故而有大威德，有大威德的緣故不怖畏。』
須菩提問：『這菩薩聽聞甚深般若波羅蜜雖然不怖畏，但這般若沒有定相，應當怎樣行？』
佛說：『隨順一切種智之心。』
論主問道：
這菩薩還沒有得一切種智，怎麼能夠隨順？
論主答道：
所以說：『隨順畢竟空之心，就是隨順一切種智之心。』一切種智是寂滅之相，佛在後面的品中說：『一切寂滅相是一切種智。』所以說：『順畢竟空就是順一切種智。』無相、無作、虛空、無生無滅、無垢無淨、如夢等等也是這樣。
那時，須菩提問：『順畢竟空之心，是觀什麼法？』
佛回答：『不觀色乃至一切種智。』
為什麼呢？智慧是要求取真實之事，而色等有為造作之法都虛妄，一切種智纔是實法。因為是實法的緣故，超過有為法；因為超過有為法的緣故，纔說這個法——「無作」，是沒有作者。「無壞法」，是沒有壞者。這法不從六波羅蜜而來，所以說「無所從來」。不入於佛法之中，所以說「無所去」。有為法，因為虛誑的緣故「不住」；無為法之中，因為沒有憶想分別的緣故也「不住」。因為五眾和合的緣故而有六道之數，壞了五眾的相續便「無數、無量」。因為無數、無量的緣故便語言道斷，因為語言道斷的緣故，不可以用行色等諸法而得。
佛在這裡面自己說了因緣：『色等諸法就是薩婆若，薩婆若就是色等諸法。為什麼呢？色等諸法的如就是薩婆若的如，薩婆若的如就是色等諸法的如，因為這個緣故說如，這個如無二無別。』
This chapter is titled the Mahāprajñāpāramitā-upadeśa's commentary on the fifty-third chapter, "Tending toward Omniscience", composed by the noble Nāgārjuna and translated by the Tripiṭaka master Kumārajīva of the land of Kucha under the Later Qin; it is in the seventy-first fascicle.
Sūtra ①: Toward What Should Those Who Understand Deep Prajñā Tend—Tending toward the Omniscience of All Kinds, Being That toward Which Beings Return and Tend, Practising Nothing, the Practice of Not Receiving, the Practice of Ruin, and the Avaivartika Who Should Be Tested and Known
Subhūti said to the Buddha: ‘World-Honored One! These bodhisattva-mahāsattvas who can understand very deep prajñāpāramitā—toward what should they tend?’
The Buddha told Subhūti: ‘This bodhisattva-mahāsattva who understands very deep prajñāpāramitā should tend toward the omniscience of all kinds.’
Subhūti said to the Buddha: ‘World-Honored One! This bodhisattva-mahāsattva who can tend toward the omniscience of all kinds becomes that toward which all beings return and tend, because he practises prajñāpāramitā. World-Honored One! To practise prajñāpāramitā is to practise all dharmas. World-Honored One! Practising nothing is practising prajñāpāramitā; the practice of not receiving and the practice of ruin are practising prajñāpāramitā.’
The Buddha told Subhūti: ‘By the ruin of which dharma is prajñāpāramitā the practice of ruin?’
‘World-Honored One! By the ruin of form, prajñāpāramitā is the practice of ruin; by the ruin of feeling, perception, constructions, and consciousness, the twelve sense-fields, and the eighteen elements, prajñāpāramitā is the practice of ruin; by the ruin of the self and so on up to the knower and the seer, prajñāpāramitā is the practice of ruin. World-Honored One! By the ruin of dānapāramitā, prajñāpāramitā is the practice of ruin; and so on up to by the ruin of prajñāpāramitā, prajñāpāramitā is the practice of ruin; by the ruin of inner emptiness and so on up to the emptiness of non-existent and existent dharmas, of the four foundations of mindfulness and so on up to the eighteen unshared dharmas, and of the fruit of srota-āpanna and so on up to the omniscience of all kinds, prajñāpāramitā is the practice of ruin.’
The Buddha said: ‘Just so! Just so! Subhūti! By the ruin of form, prajñāpāramitā is the practice of ruin; and so on up to by the ruin of the omniscience of all kinds, prajñāpāramitā is the practice of ruin.’
At that time the Buddha told Subhūti: ‘Within this very deep prajñāpāramitā, the avaivartika bodhisattva-mahāsattva should be tested and known! If a bodhisattva-mahāsattva gives rise to no clinging within this very deep prajñāpāramitā, know that this person is avaivartika; if he does not cling within dhyānapāramitā and so on up to dānapāramitā, and does not cling within the four foundations of mindfulness and so on up to the omniscience of all kinds, know that this person is avaivartika.’
Treatise ①: If It Neither Tends nor Does Not Tend, Why Ask about Tending and Answer with Tending—the Refutation of the Outside Paths' Tending from Cause to Fruit, Question and Answer with a Mind without Clinging, the Simile of a Child Tending toward Its Father and Mother, the Glosses of the Four Meanings, the Two Kinds of Bodhisattva Who Practise Prajñā
The treatise-author asks:
Prajñāpāramitā neither tends nor does not tend; why then does Subhūti ask ‘toward where does one who practises prajñā tend’? And why does the Buddha answer ‘he tends toward sarvajñā’?
The treatise-author answers:
The outside paths say: ‘Dharmas tend from cause toward fruit, enter this life from the former life, and tend from this life toward the next life.’ It is to break this inversion, the view of permanence, that ‘no tending, not tending’ is spoken.
Here, Subhūti asks with a mind without clinging, and the Buddha answers with a mind without clinging. Prajñāpāramitā is ultimately empty and is without hindrance and without obstruction toward all dharmas; because the liberation without hindrance and without obstruction has been obtained, it is without hindrance and without obstruction. Because cause and fruit resemble each other, it is said: ‘One who understands very deep prajñā tends toward the omniscience of all kinds.’
Subhūti says: ‘The bodhisattva who knows prajñāpāramitā is that toward which all beings return and tend.’ It is like a child who, pressed by pain and distress, then tends toward its father and mother.
The treatise-author asks:
Why is it only when the bodhisattva understands very deep prajñāpāramitā that he is that toward which beings return and tend?
The treatise-author answers:
Because the bodhisattva has the mind of great compassion toward beings, he constantly trains in prajñāpāramitā. Because of this training he can understand that all dharmas enter into prajñāpāramitā, and so it is said 「修般若波羅蜜即修一切法」 tr. "to practise prajñāpāramitā is to practise all dharmas".
Prajñā has no fixed, real dharma that can be found, and so the sūtra says 「無所修是修般若波羅蜜」 tr. "practising nothing is practising prajñāpāramitā". Within prajñāpāramitā, because all contemplations have faults, they are not received; this is called the practice of not receiving. The meaning of the practice of ruin is that all dharmas are impermanent, scatter, and fall to ruin; hence it is called the practice of ruin. The dharmas that can be broken and ruined are form and the rest, and so on up to the omniscience of all kinds.
The Buddha approved what Subhūti said.
At the end of the preceding chapter the nature, mark, and appearance of the avaivartika bodhisattva were spoken of; now they should be tested and known. Within very deep prajñāpāramitā, does he cling, or does he not cling? If he clings, then it is not; if he does not cling, then that is his mark.
The bodhisattvas who practise prajñāpāramitā are of two kinds: first, one who by means of prajñāpāramitā contemplates all dharmas as ultimately empty, and prajñā too as empty of itself; second, one who cannot contemplate prajñā as empty as well. Therefore the sūtra tests and knows whether he clings or does not cling.
Sūtra ②: The Marks by Which the Avaivartika Is Tested and Known—Not Taking Others' Words as What Is Firm and Essential, Not Dragged by a Mind of Desire, Hatred, or Delusion, Not Straying from the Six Perfections, Not Startled or Terrified on Hearing Deep Prajñā; in Accord with the Mind of the Omniscience of All Kinds; Not Practising Form and So On up to the Omniscience of All Kinds; Form Is Sarvajñā
‘If an avaivartika bodhisattva-mahāsattva, when practising very deep prajñāpāramitā, does not take others' words as what is firm and essential, nor practises following others' teaching. The avaivartika bodhisattva-mahāsattva is not dragged by a mind of desire, a mind of hatred, or a mind of delusion. If the avaivartika bodhisattva-mahāsattva does not stray far from the six perfections. If the avaivartika bodhisattva-mahāsattva, when he hears someone expound very deep prajñāpāramitā, has a mind that is not startled, does not sink, is not terrified, is not afraid, has no regret, and he gladly delights in hearing it, receives and upholds it, reads it, recites it, rightly recollects it, and practises as it is taught. Subhūti! Know that in a former life this bodhisattva already asked about the matters within this very deep prajñāpāramitā, and received and upheld, read, recited, expounded, and rightly recollected it. Why? Because this bodhisattva-mahāsattva has great majestic virtue, on hearing this very deep prajñāpāramitā his mind is not startled, is not terrified, is not afraid, does not sink, has no regret; he gladly delights in hearing it, receives and upholds it, reads it, recites it, and rightly recollects it.’
Subhūti said to the Buddha: ‘World-Honored One! If a bodhisattva-mahāsattva hears very deep prajñāpāramitā and is not startled, is not terrified, and so on up to rightly recollects it—World-Honored One! how does this bodhisattva-mahāsattva practise prajñāpāramitā?’
The Buddha said: ‘In accord with the mind of the omniscience of all kinds—this bodhisattva-mahāsattva should practise prajñāpāramitā thus.’
‘World-Honored One! What is called being in accord with the mind of the omniscience of all kinds, such that this bodhisattva-mahāsattva should practise prajñāpāramitā thus?’
The Buddha said: ‘To accord by emptiness—this is the bodhisattva-mahāsattva's practising very deep prajñāpāramitā; to accord by the signless, by non-action, by being without anything existent, by non-arising and non-ceasing, by being neither stained nor pure—this bodhisattva-mahāsattva should practise prajñāpāramitā thus; to accord by being like a dream, like an illusion, like a mirage, like an echo, like a transformation—this is practising prajñāpāramitā.’
Subhūti said to the Buddha: ‘The Buddha says that to accord by emptiness and so on up to to accord by being like a dream, like an illusion, is practising prajñāpāramitā. World-Honored One! What dharma does this bodhisattva-mahāsattva practise—is it form, is it feeling, perception, constructions, and consciousness, and so on up to is it the omniscience of all kinds?’
The Buddha told Subhūti: ‘The bodhisattva-mahāsattva does not practise form, does not practise feeling, perception, constructions, and consciousness, and so on up to does not practise the omniscience of all kinds. Why? In this bodhisattva-mahāsattva's place of practice there is no dharma of making and no dharma of ruin; it comes from nowhere and goes nowhere, and has no place of abiding; this dharma cannot be counted and is without measure; if it is without number and without measure, this dharma is unfindable—it cannot be found by means of form, and so on up to it cannot be found by means of the omniscience of all kinds. Why? Form is sarvajñā, and so on up to the omniscience of all kinds is sarvajñā. The mark of suchness of form and so on up to the mark of suchness of the omniscience of all kinds are all one suchness, without duality and without difference.’
Treatise ②: Explaining the Marks by Which He Is Tested and Known—Others Are of Two Kinds and So He Does Not Believe, a Mind Settled and Weighty That Does Not Shift, the Afflictions Broken Down and Thinned, Not Straying from the Six Perfections, the Simile of the Thunderclap and the Peacock, According with Ultimate Emptiness Is According with the Omniscience of All Kinds, without Making, without Ruin, Coming from Nowhere, Going Nowhere, Not Abiding, without Number and without Measure, Form and the Rest Are Sarvajñā
The treatise-author explains:
In the matters the avaivartika bodhisattva speaks of, he does not give rise, within the words of others, to such a thought as: ‘In this there is the real or the unreal.’ Why? Others are of two kinds: householders, who crave and cling to the pleasures of the five desires and are false, deceptive, and impure; and those of the outside paths who have gone forth, who cling to wrong views and are not true. What these people say has no real matter in it, and so he does not believe it. Because he himself has already obtained the real mark of all dharmas, even if the body of a Buddha came and spoke words that break the real mark of all dharmas, he would not believe it; because he has obtained the unconditioned dharma, his mind is settled and weighty and no longer shifts.
Although this bodhisattva has not yet obtained the Buddha's path, because the afflictions of craving and the rest have already been broken down and thinned, he is not dragged by them.
His mind constantly does not stray from the six perfections; because he knows the flavour of the fruit and retribution of wholesome dharmas, his mind constantly loves and delights in them and does not stray from the six perfections.
Because of such various causes and conditions as these, on hearing very deep prajñā he is not terrified and not afraid, and gladly wishes to hear it, reads it, recites it, asks its meaning, and trains in it. It is as with a thunderclap: small birds are terrified and die of fright, while the peacock, a great bird, rejoices and dances. Prajñāpāramitā is also like this: ordinary people of wrong view hear it and are terrified; the avaivartika bodhisattva hears it and rejoices, his mind never sated; hence it is said 「歡喜樂聞」 tr. "he gladly delights in hearing it".
Here the Buddha states the causes and conditions: ‘In past lives this bodhisattva already heard very deep prajñāpāramitā; because he amassed much merit and wisdom he has great majestic virtue, and because he has great majestic virtue he is not terrified and not afraid.’
Subhūti asks: ‘Although this bodhisattva is not terrified and not afraid on hearing very deep prajñāpāramitā, this prajñā has no fixed mark; how should he practise?’
The Buddha says: ‘In accord with the mind of the omniscience of all kinds.’
The treatise-author asks:
This bodhisattva has not yet obtained the omniscience of all kinds; how can he accord with it?
The treatise-author answers:
Therefore it is said: ‘The mind that accords with ultimate emptiness is the mind that accords with the omniscience of all kinds.’ The omniscience of all kinds is the mark of quiescence; the Buddha says in a later chapter: ‘The mark of all quiescence is the omniscience of all kinds.’ Therefore it is said: ‘To accord with ultimate emptiness is to accord with the omniscience of all kinds.’ The signless, non-action, space, no arising and no ceasing, without stain and without purity, like a dream, and the rest, are also like this.
At that time Subhūti asks: ‘The mind that accords with ultimate emptiness—what dharmas does it contemplate?’
The Buddha answers: ‘It does not contemplate form, and so on up to the omniscience of all kinds.’
Why? Wisdom seeks to take hold of what is real, while form and the rest, conditioned and made dharmas, are all false; the omniscience of all kinds alone is a real dharma. Because it is a real dharma, it passes beyond conditioned dharmas; because it passes beyond conditioned dharmas, this dharma is spoken of thus—「無作」 tr. "without making": there is no maker. 「無壞法」 tr. "a dharma without ruin": there is no ruiner. This dharma does not come from the six perfections, and so it is said 「無所從來」 tr. "coming from nowhere". It does not enter into the dharmas of the Buddha, and so it is said 「無所去」 tr. "going nowhere". Conditioned dharmas, because they are false and deceptive, 「不住」 tr. "do not abide"; within unconditioned dharmas, because there is no recollection, imagining, and discrimination, it also 「不住」 tr. "does not abide". Because the five aggregates come together there is the count of the six destinies; when the continuity of the five aggregates is broken there is 「無數、無量」 tr. "no number, no measure". Because there is no number and no measure, the way of words is cut off; because the way of words is cut off, it cannot be found by practising form and the other dharmas.
Here the Buddha himself states the causes and conditions: ‘Form and the other dharmas are sarvajñā, and sarvajñā is form and the other dharmas. Why? The suchness of form and the other dharmas is the suchness of sarvajñā, and the suchness of sarvajñā is the suchness of form and the other dharmas; for this reason suchness is spoken of, and this suchness is without duality and without difference.’
趣一切智品：般若非趣非不趣何以問趣答趣，趣一切種智何以不是取得一個地方，能趣者何以反成眾生的歸趣，修般若何以即是修一切法，無所修與不受修與壞修何以同是修般若，壞修何以不是毀法，阿鞞跋致何以要在深般若中驗著不著，未得一切種智何以能隨順，順畢竟空何以即順一切種智，不行色乃至不行一切種智何以不是斷絕，色即是薩婆若何以不是混同
在問什麼
這一品只有一個字在動：趣。須菩提起問，問得極短：解了甚深般若波羅蜜的菩薩摩訶薩，應當趣向何處？佛答得也極短：當趣一切種智。問答俱短，難處卻立刻現前——前面諸品一路申明般若畢竟空、諸法無所從來亦無所去，既然如此，還有什麼可趣、有誰在趣、趣到哪裡去？論主開卷第一問，問的正是這個：般若波羅蜜非趣、非不趣，須菩提何以要問趣，佛何以要答趣？
論主的答案不在辯論裡，在一個對照裡。外道說「諸法從因趣果、從先世入今世、從今世趣後世」——趣在他們口中是一條實有的線，線上有實有的東西在移動。為破這種常見的顛倒，般若門中纔說「無趣不趣」。然而「無趣不趣」一旦被握成一個結論，行道便無下手處。所以此品的問答另有分寸：須菩提是以無著之心問，佛是以無著之心答；問趣答趣而心不著趣，趣字便不再是一條線，而是因果相似的自然承接——般若是因，一切種智是果，因中已有果的味道，故說解深般若者趣一切種智。
品的後半把這個「趣」落到人身上。佛囑咐：在這甚深般若波羅蜜之中，阿鞞跋致菩薩應當驗知——驗的不是他能說多少，是他在深般若中著、還是不著。論主接得極準：上一品末尾說了阿鞞跋致的性、相、貌，今應驗試知。於是經文廣列驗知之相：不以他人語為堅要、不為欲瞋癡所牽、不遠離六波羅蜜、聞深般若心不驚不怖而歡喜樂聞。須菩提再追一層：既然般若無定相，這人究竟是怎麼行的？佛答：隨順一切種智心。此答又生一難——人尚未得一切種智，如何能順它？論主的解答是全品的樞紐：順畢竟空之心，就是順一切種智之心。收束處，佛自說因緣：色等諸法即是薩婆若，色如即是薩婆若如，是如無二無別。趣之一字，至此還歸於如。
逐段解明
一、趣何所之問。 須菩提問：解深般若波羅蜜者，當趣何所。此問看似尋常，位置卻要緊：前品廣說善知識、廣說菩薩之相，讀者心中自然生起一個方向感的疑問——這樣行下去，是行到哪裡去？須菩提不問『得什麼』而問「趣何所」，問的是行道的歸向，不是所得之物。讀此一句先要立定：問的是向，不是取。
二、佛答當趣一切種智。 佛答：當趣一切種智。答語與問語同一格式，不添一字解釋。此處最易讀錯的是把「一切種智」想成一個遠方的處所，彷彿般若是路、薩婆若是終點站。論主後文將明白遮掉這個讀法：所以此刻只須記住答語的形式——佛順著須菩提的問法答，是隨順問者的言路，不是為趣立一個實有的所。
三、能趣者反成歸趣——修般若即修一切法、無所修與不受修與壞修。 須菩提聞答即申論，且一連翻出四層。第一層是一個漂亮的翻轉：能趣向一切種智的人，自身便成為一切眾生所歸趣之處——因為他修般若波羅蜜的緣故。趣的人成了被趣的地方，可見趣不是離開此處去到彼處。第二層：修般若波羅蜜即是修一切諸法。第三層：無所修是修般若波羅蜜。第四層：不受修、壞修是修般若波羅蜜。四層一氣而下，後三層都在拆「修」字：修而無所修、修而不受、修而見其壞——若把修解作累積，這三句便全成矛盾語。
四、佛設問何等法壞。 佛不直接印可，先反問：何等法壞故，般若波羅蜜為壞修？這一問是全品教學法的樣本——須菩提說出一個極簡的判語，佛便要他把判語落到具體法上去。凡讀般若經論遇見簡語，可學佛此問：這話說的是哪些法？
五、須菩提歷數所壞之法。 須菩提逐項答：色壞故，受、想、行、識、十二處、十八界壞故，我乃至知者、見者壞故；檀波羅蜜乃至般若波羅蜜壞故；內空乃至無法有法空、四念處乃至十八不共法、須陀洹果乃至一切種智壞故——般若波羅蜜為壞修。此答的次第不可輕看：從五眾、十二處、十八界的世間法，到我與知者見者的人我法，到六波羅蜜的行法，到諸空與四念處乃至十八不共法的觀法，直到須陀洹果乃至一切種智的果法，一路無所遺漏。連般若波羅蜜自身、連一切種智都在所壞之列——所壞既無例外，壞修之義纔真正成立。
六、佛印可。 佛言：如是！如是！並重牒首尾兩端——色壞故乃至一切種智壞故。論主後文以一句斷之：佛可須菩提所說。印可之所以要重牒，是因為此義最易被讀成毀法，故佛親口把首尾再說一遍，令人不得抽換其中任何一項。
七、阿鞞跋致應驗知——著不著為準。 佛於此轉入全品後半：在這深般若波羅蜜中，阿鞞跋致菩薩摩訶薩應當驗知。驗的標準只有一條——不著。深般若中不著，當知是阿鞞跋致；禪波羅蜜乃至檀波羅蜜中不著、四念處乃至一切種智中不著，當知是阿鞞跋致。要緊的是所驗之處：不在世間法上驗，正在最深最勝的法上驗。人於粗法不著易，於深法不著難；故驗知之場，選在深般若。
八、論主設問——非趣非不趣，何以問趣答趣。 論主起首便把讀者心中最尖的一問提出來：般若波羅蜜非趣、非不趣，須菩提何以故問「行般若者趣至何處」？又佛何以答「趣薩婆若」？此問若不先立，後文一切解說都成無的放矢。論主的教學法在此可見：先替讀者把矛盾說到最尖銳，纔開始解。
九、答語之標。 論主以答曰起下文。此標非贅文——本論之體，問與答各自成段，讀者循標即知何者是難、何者是釋，不致把設難之辭誤作正義。
十、外道從因趣果之破——故言無趣不趣。 論主先出所破：外道言「諸法從因趣果、從先世入今世、從今世趣後世」。此中的病不在說因果，在把因果之間看成一個常住之物在移轉——今世的我搬到後世去。破這常顛倒的緣故，般若門中纔說「無趣不趣」。讀此段須看清：無趣不趣是對治語，不是一個新的定論。立此一義，後文纔說得通——佛答「趣一切種智」並不違「無趣不趣」，因為所破的是常顛倒，不是因果相續本身。
十一、無著心問無著心答——畢竟空故無障無礙、因果相似故說趣。 論主給出全品第一個正面解答，分三節。其一、此中須菩提以無著心問，佛以無著心答——同樣的趣字，著心說之則成外道的線，無著心說之則無過。其二、般若波羅蜜畢竟空，於諸法無障無礙；得無障無礙解脫故無障無礙——般若既不與任何法相礙，說趣亦不礙於畢竟空。其三、因果相似故，故言：「解深般若者，趣一切種智。」此第三節是趣字的正解：般若與一切種智因果相似，如種與果同一類，所以說趣；不是有個東西走過去。日用中可作此勘：說『我在趣向菩提』時，心裡若有一段路、一個到達者，便落外道；若只是因中修習、果自相似，趣字無過。
十二、歸趣如子趣父母。 論主牒經句「菩薩知般若波羅蜜者為一切眾生所歸趣」，隨即出喻：如子為苦惱所逼，則趣父母。這是論主自出之第一個譬喻，喻得極平實——孩子受苦時奔向父母，不是父母設了一條路要他走，是苦逼之下自然歸投。眾生歸趣菩薩亦如是：不因號召，因苦而投。此喻同時回應了第三段的翻轉——能趣者何以反成歸趣：因為所趣的從來不是地方，是可依可投之處。
十三、問何以但菩薩為眾生歸趣。 論主再設一問：何以故但菩薩解深般若波羅蜜為眾生所歸趣？此問問得細——解深般若的不只菩薩，二乘亦有其解；何以獨歸菩薩？設此問是為逼出下文的答眼，不是為難。
十四、答語之標。 論主以答曰起下文，格式同第九段，標出以下是釋而非難。
十五、大悲故常修、修故解一切法皆入般若。 答有兩節相扣。其一、菩薩於眾生中大悲心故，常修習般若波羅蜜——歸趣之所以獨在菩薩，根在大悲；二乘有解而無此心，眾生無可投處。其二、以修故，能解一切諸法皆入般若波羅蜜，是故「修般若波羅蜜即修一切法」。此節正解第三段的第二層：修般若即修一切法，不是說般若之外還去修一切法，是說一切法皆入般若，修此即修彼。讀者常誤以為此句在誇大般若的功用，其實它在說範圍——般若不是諸法中的一法，是諸法所入之處。
十六、三句之訓並所壞之量——無所修、不受修、壞修、可破壞法。 論主逐字訓釋須菩提的三句判語。無所修者：般若無定實法可得，故經中說「無所修是修般若波羅蜜」——無所修不是不修，是所修之法無定實可得。不受修者：般若波羅蜜中，一切諸觀有過故不受——連能觀之觀也不取為實。壞修者：一切法無常散壞，故名壞修——壞是法自身的無常相，不是修行人去毀壞它。末出所壞之量：可破壞法者，所謂色等乃至一切種智。此段是全品最易讀錯之處，論主的訓解把三句一齊從『否定修行』的誤讀中救出：三句所否定的是對所修之法的實執，不是修習之事。
十七、佛可須菩提所說。 論主以一句承轉：佛可須菩提所說。此句短，作用大——它告訴讀者，上面四義不是須菩提的私見，是經佛印可之義，可以依之而行。
十八、承上品性相貌、今應驗試。 論主點出經②的來歷：上品末說阿鞞跋致菩薩性、相、貌，今應驗試知。說相是給人認識，驗試是實地勘驗——知相而不驗，相只是知識。驗的方法論主立得斬截：於深般若波羅蜜中著不？若著，則非；若不著，則是其相。
十九、行般若菩薩二種。 論主分出二機：一者、因般若波羅蜜觀一切法畢竟空，般若亦自空；二者、不能觀般若亦空。是故經中試知著不。分際只在一處——般若自身空不空。能觀般若亦自空的，是真不著；只觀諸法空而留般若為所依的，仍是著。這一分科是全品驗知之義的實際刻度，也是第十六段「無所修」之訓的行門落處。
二十、驗知之相廣示——他語、欲心瞋心癡心、六度、聞深般若不驚不怖。 經②佛廣列諸相。其一、行深般若時不以他人語為堅要，亦不隨他教行。其二、不為欲心、瞋心、癡心所牽。其三、不遠離六波羅蜜。其四、聞說深般若時，心不驚、不沒、不怖、不畏、不悔，歡喜樂聞，受持、讀、誦、正憶念、如說行。佛並說其宿因：是菩薩先世已問是深般若波羅蜜中事已，受持、讀、誦、說、正憶念；有大威德故，聞深般若不驚不怖。此段之相，一半是心不被外奪，一半是心於法歡喜——兩半合起來纔是驗知之相，缺一不可。
廿一、須菩提問云何行。 須菩提承相而問：這樣不驚不怖乃至正憶念的菩薩，云何行般若波羅蜜？此問是從相問到行——認得了外顯之相，還要問內在的行法。凡讀諸經見說行者功德之相，皆可學此一問：他是怎麼行的？
廿二、佛答隨順一切種智心。 佛答：隨順一切種智心，是菩薩摩訶薩應如是行般若波羅蜜。此答與第二段的「當趣一切種智」遙相呼應——彼處說趣，此處說順；趣是遠望，順是當下。要緊處在「隨順」二字：不說得、不說證、不說到，只說順。
廿三、重問何名隨順。 須菩提再問：云何名隨順一切種智心。此重問極重要，因為「隨順」若不落到具體，便是一句空話。經中問答之所以層層追下，正為不讓術語停在名相上。
廿四、以空乃至如夢幻隨順。 佛答出隨順的實內容：以空隨順；以無相、無作、無所有、不生不滅、不垢不淨隨順；以如夢、幻、炎、嚮、化隨順。三組並列——第一組是空門，第二組是空門所開之諸義，第三組是五喻。至此「隨順一切種智心」有了確切所指：順的是畢竟空，不是順一個尚未得到的智。
廿五、須菩提問行何法。 須菩提把問題推到最後一步：既以空乃至如夢如幻隨順，那麼這菩薩究竟是行什麼法——是色，是受、想、行、識，乃至一切種智？此問問得老實，也問得險：他把所有可能的所行之法一一舉出來，逼佛作答。
廿六、佛答不行——行處七義、色即是薩婆若、一如無二無別。 佛答：不行色，不行受、想、行、識，乃至不行一切種智。隨即出所以然，是本品義理最密之處，共有七義並一結。七義者：是菩薩行處，無作法、無壞法、無所從來、亦無所去、無住處、不可數、無有量。一結者：若無數、無量，是法不可得——不可以色得，乃至不可以一切種智得。末以因緣收：色即是薩婆若，乃至一切種智即是薩婆若；色如相乃至一切種智如相皆是一如，無二無別。讀「不行」二字勿作斷絕會，下文第四十段論主自有訓解；此處先記住結語的方向——不行，是因為所行與能行本自是一如。
廿七、釋曰之標。 論②以釋曰起。此標與前文之問曰答曰不同：問答是設難而釋，釋曰是隨經文次第逐句解。體例一變，讀法亦當隨之——以下諸段皆是貼著經②的句子走。
廿八、於他語不生實不實之念——他人二種、心安重不移轉。 論主釋第一相。阿鞞跋致於他人語言中不生念：「是中有實、不實。」何以故？他人有二種：在家人，著五欲樂，虛誑不淨；出家外道，著諸邪見不實——此等所說皆無實事，是故不信。論主更推到極處：自得諸法實相故，乃至佛身來說破諸法實相者亦不信；得無為法故，心則安重，不復移轉。此段最見分寸：所謂不信，不是頑固，是已自得實相而不隨言轉；連現佛身而說破實相者也不隨，正因所依是法不是人。讀者於此勿學其形而失其實——未得實相而先學不信他語，是增長我慢，不是阿鞞跋致相。
廿九、煩惱折薄故不為所牽。 論主釋第二相：是菩薩雖未得佛道，貪欲等諸煩惱折薄故，不為所牽。此釋極誠實——不說煩惱已斷，只說折損稀薄。驗知之相從來不是聖位的滿相，是行道途中可驗的實相；煩惱薄到不被牽走，便是此相。
三十、不離六度——知善法果報味故心常愛樂。 論主釋第三相：心常不離六波羅蜜，知善法果報味故，心常愛樂，不離六波羅蜜。所以不離，不是靠持守之力硬繫，是嘗到味道而自然愛樂。行門之要在此一「味」字：知味則不待督責，不知味則守亦易失。
卅一、雷霆孔雀喻。 論主釋第四相，並自出第二個譬喻。如是等種種因緣故，聞深般若不怖、不畏，歡喜欲聞，讀、誦、問義、修習。喻曰：如雷霆，小鳥則怖畏悶死；孔雀大鳥歡喜舞戲。般若波羅蜜亦如是，邪見凡夫聞則恐怖；阿鞞跋致菩薩聞則歡喜，心無厭足，是故說「歡喜樂聞」。此喻的鋒芒在於：雷是同一個雷。法無二法，聞者有二機——同一句畢竟空，在此為悶死之雷，在彼為舞戲之樂。故聞深法而生怖，不必怨法，當自省是何等機。
卅二、佛自說大威德之因緣。 論主引經中佛語：「是菩薩於過去世已聞深般若波羅蜜，多集諸福德、智慧故有大威德，有大威德故不怖畏。」不怖畏之所以可能，不是一時膽氣，是宿世聞法與福慧積集的現行。此義與第廿九段相配：一說煩惱之減，一說福慧之增，驗知之相從這兩面同時長成。
卅三、須菩提問般若無定相云何應行。 論主以第三人稱重述須菩提之問：是菩薩聞深般若波羅蜜雖不怖畏，是般若無定相，云何應行？此問把難處挑明——不怖畏是心境，行是下手；般若既無定相，下手處何在？
卅四、佛言隨順一切種智心。 論主重述佛答：隨順一切種智心。此處與經②第廿二段是同一句，論主重出之，是為引起下文的正難——重述不是重複，是把答語擺上台面好加以推問。
卅五、正難——未得一切種智云何能順。 論主設全品最尖的一問：是菩薩未得一切種智，云何能順？此難極有力：隨順總要有個所順之物；智未得，順誰？若答不了此問，「隨順一切種智心」便只是勸勉之辭。
卅六、答語之標。 論主以答曰起下文，標出以下為正解。
卅七、順畢竟空則順一切種智。 論主的解答分三節。其一、是故說：「隨順畢竟空心則順一切種智心。」——順的下手處是畢竟空，不是那個尚未得到的智。其二、出其理據：一切種智是寂滅相，佛後品中說：「一切寂滅相是一切種智。」——一切種智的體相既是寂滅，則順寂滅即順它，不必先得它。其三、結成並推廣：是故言：「順畢竟空則順一切種智。」無相、無作、虛空、無生無滅、無垢無淨、如夢等亦如是——第廿四段佛所列的三組隨順，於此一齊得解。此段是全品的樞紐：趣一切種智之所以不落外道的線，正因所趣者是寂滅相；而寂滅相當下可順，故趣而無所趣。
卅八、問觀何等法。 論主重述須菩提之問：順畢竟空心，觀何等法？順既已有著落，隨之而來的是所觀。此問與第廿五段經文之問同一脈，論主重述之以承下文的訓解。
卅九、佛答不觀色乃至一切種智。 論主重述佛答：不觀色乃至一切種智。答語仍是一個「不」字。至此讀者必然追問：不觀，那還觀什麼？下段即是論主逐字的訓解。
四十、逐字訓七義——實法過有為、無作無壞無所從來無所去不住無數無量、語言道斷。 論主先出總理：智慧欲求實事，色等有為作法皆虛妄，一切種智是實法；實法故，過有為法。所以不觀色等，不是拒絕觀察，是智慧所求在實事，而有為作法非實。既過有為，便逐字訓經②的七義——論主以「無數、無量」一語總收經側「不可數」「無有量」二目，故標目六條而義仍七。「無作」，是無作者。「無壞法」，是無壞者。是法不從六波羅蜜來，故言「無所從來」——連六度也不是它的來處。不入佛法中，故言「無所去」——連佛法也不是它的去處。「不住」有二釋：有為，虛誑故不住；無為法中，無憶想分別故亦不住——兩邊皆無可住。「無數、無量」者：五眾和合故有六道數，壞五眾相續故則無數、無量——數本從五眾和合而立，五眾相續一壞，數量自無所施。末以語言結：無數、無量故則語言道斷，語言道斷故不可以行色等諸法得。七義逐字訓下來，「不行」「不觀」的真義乃明：不是不作觀行，是所行之處本無可執之相可作所緣。
四一、佛自說因緣——色等即是薩婆若、如無二無別。 全品收於佛自說之因緣：「色等諸法即是薩婆若，薩婆若即是色等諸法。何以故？色等諸法如即是薩婆若如，薩婆若如即是色等諸法如，以是故說如，是如無二無別。」此結有三層。其一、雙向說即：色等即薩婆若，薩婆若即色等——不是色被取消，也不是薩婆若下降為色。其二、即在何處：在如。色之如與薩婆若之如是同一個如，故說即。其三、無二無別：如既無二，則能趣所趣、能順所順、能觀所觀，於如中本自不隔。品首之問「當趣何所」，至此得其究竟答——所趣者即在能趣之處，趣而無所趣，故名趣一切智。
不要讀錯
不要把「無趣不趣」讀成行道無方向。論主立此語時把所破說得分明：外道言「諸法從因趣果、從先世入今世、從今世趣後世」，破是常顛倒故，言「無趣不趣」。所破的是把因果之間看成一個常住之物在移轉，不是因果相續本身。所以佛照樣答「當趣一切種智」，論主照樣說「因果相似故」。若讀成連方向都不許立，則本品的驗知、隨順、行處諸段全無安立處，也違論主自己的解釋。
不要把「壞修」讀成毀壞佛法。經文所列的可壞之法，從色、受想行識、十二處十八界，一路到六波羅蜜、諸空、四念處乃至十八不共法、須陀洹果乃至一切種智——若壞修是行人去破壞，那便是把四念處乃至一切種智都毀了，佛豈會答「如是！如是！」論主的訓解直截：壞修者，一切法無常散壞，故名壞修。壞是法自身的無常相，是行人於此諸法上見其無常散壞而不生實執，故名為修般若。同理，「無所修」是所修之法無定實可得，「不受修」是連能觀之觀亦有過故不取，三句皆在遣執，不在廢行。
不要把『不行色乃至不行一切種智』讀成斷絕觀行。論主逐字訓過：智慧欲求實事，色等有為作法皆虛妄，一切種智是實法——不行不是不作，是不以虛妄有為法為所行之實。七義之訓尤須合看：無作、無壞、無所從來、無所去、不住、無數、無量，句句是遮所緣之實相可執，不是遮修習之事。經文自身正勸人受持、讀、誦、正憶念、如說行——若「不行」是斷絕，經文便自相違。
不要把「色即是薩婆若」讀成凡聖混同、無須修行。佛自說所以然，落在一個如字：色等諸法如即是薩婆若如，以是故說如，是如無二無別。所即者是如，不是相。若讀成色與一切種智全無分際，則本品前半的驗知之教——於深般若中著不著、二種行般若菩薩之分——便無從安立。即而不壞其相，故仍須驗、仍須順、仍須行。
不要把阿鞞跋致「不以他人語為堅要」讀成可以不聽人言。論主的理由說得清楚：他人有二種，在家著五欲樂而虛誑不淨，出家外道著諸邪見而不實，此等所說皆無實事，是故不信；而其所以能不信，是「自得諸法實相故」「得無為法故，心則安重」。所依是已證之法，不是自己的意氣。未得實相而先學不受人語，正是本品所驗的「著」，不是阿鞞跋致之相。
修行作用
第一件受用，是把「趣」字用對。日用中發心、迴向、立志趣菩提，心裡若浮出一段路、一個到達的我，便已落在論主所破的常顛倒裡。本品給的正解極簡：因果相似故說趣。行門上的用法是——只管在因地修習般若，果自相似而至；不必在心中預造一個終點的景象，也不必焦慮自己走到了哪一段。趣者向也，向而不取，纔是般若門中的趣。
第二件受用，是驗知之法可以自用。佛立的驗處在深般若，標準只一條：著不著。論主更把它刻細成二機——能觀般若亦自空的，與只觀諸法空而留般若為所依的。用功人於此可自勘：我所依的「空」，是不是又成了一個不肯放的東西？凡見自己對某一法門、某一見地生起不可動搖之感，便可持此一問回照。此驗不是為評判他人，是為自省——經文明言是「驗知」，不是『論斷』。
第三件受用，是雷霆孔雀喻的自處之道。聞深法而心生怖畏、或生無味、或想避開，本品給的不是責備，是分機：同一雷聲，小鳥悶死，孔雀舞戲。遇此境時可作二事——其一、不怨法，知是自機未熟；其二、依第三十段所示之路，從「知善法果報味」入手，於六波羅蜜中嘗到味道，愛樂自生，機自漸熟。心無厭足是果，不是起點。
第四件受用，是「隨順」給了未證者一個當下可行的下手處。人常被「未得一切種智，云何能順」這類疑難攔住，遂以為高深法門與己無關。論主的答是全品最切用之語：順畢竟空心則順一切種智心。一切種智是寂滅相，寂滅相當下可順——於日用中不取諸相為實、不於所修法上生定執，便已是順。不必等得果纔學順，順本身就是因地之行。
第五件受用，是七義可作觀行的口訣。行處無作、無壞、無所從來、無所去、無住處、不可數、無有量——這七句不是玄談，是七個回照的角度。作意時可逐句自問：我所緣的這一法，有沒有被我看成有人在作、有物可壞、從某處來、往某處去、可住可據、可計可量？七句一一過去，所緣之實執便鬆。末句尤須記得：語言道斷故不可以行色等諸法得——觀到說不出處，不要急著替它安一個名字。
承衍
本品的骨幹，是兩段經文與兩段論釋。經①自須菩提問「解深般若波羅蜜者，當趣何所」起，佛答「當趣一切種智」；須菩提申論能趣者為一切眾生所歸趣，並出修般若即修一切法、無所修、不受修、壞修四義；佛設問「何等法壞」，須菩提歷數色、受想行識、十二處十八界、我乃至知者見者、六波羅蜜、內空乃至無法有法空、四念處乃至十八不共法、須陀洹果乃至一切種智；佛印可，末囑阿鞞跋致應於深般若中驗知著不著。論①先設『非趣非不趣何以問趣答趣』之難，出外道從因趣果之破而立「無趣不趣」，次明無著心問答、畢竟空無障無礙、因果相似故說趣，出子趣父母喻釋歸趣，再設『何以但菩薩為眾生歸趣』之問而答以大悲常修、諸法皆入般若，逐字訓無所修、不受修、壞修與可破壞法，末承上品性相貌而立驗試之義，分行般若菩薩二種。經②廣示阿鞞跋致驗知之相——不以他人語為堅要、不為欲心瞋心癡心所牽、不遠離六波羅蜜、聞深般若不驚不怖而歡喜樂聞、宿世已問而有大威德；須菩提問云何行，佛答隨順一切種智心，重問而出以空、無相無作無所有不生不滅不垢不淨、如夢幻炎嚮化三組隨順；末問行何法，佛答不行色乃至不行一切種智，出行處七義與「色即是薩婆若」「一如，無二無別」之結。論②以釋曰隨文釋驗知諸相：他人二種故不信、自得實相故心安重不移轉、煩惱折薄故不為所牽、知善法果報味故不離六度、雷霆孔雀喻釋歡喜樂聞、佛自說大威德因緣；次設「未得一切種智，云何能順」之難，答以順畢竟空則順一切種智並引後品「一切寂滅相是一切種智」為據；末重述問答而逐字訓無作、無壞法、無所從來、無所去、不住、無數無量與語言道斷，終以佛自說「色等諸法如即是薩婆若如」之如無二無別收束全品，接卷七十一之卷尾。
本品與前後諸品的義脈，可見者有三線。其一、承前：論主明言「上品末說阿鞞跋致菩薩性、相、貌，今應驗試知」——前品說相，本品驗相，說與驗是一事之兩節；本品後半經文之所以全在阿鞞跋致身上，根由在此。其二、承前而轉：般若非趣非不趣之義，前此諸品已反覆申明，本品不重立此義，而是問它與「趣一切種智」如何並行——故本品之新意不在破趣，在還趣字以無過之用法。其三、垂後：論主引佛後品中說「一切寂滅相是一切種智」為據，明白指向本品之後將詳說之義；讀者可合後諸品觀之，以見『順畢竟空即順一切種智』一語的全幅。
古德之釋，本品可誌者一家。吉藏科判此品，其起段云：「此第三明中下根人者，標大果。文三：第一明由般若故趣薩婆若果，二識驗信般若人相，三明能如所驗釋法不著秤順薩婆若也」——以趣果、驗人相、釋法不著三分本品，與本論經①論①明趣、經②論②明驗知與隨順之次第相應。其釋問趣答趣之意又云：「已上明非趣不趣，今所以問趣答趣著，以明非趣不趣乃是趣道耳，故見趣不趣皆名不趣」——此是吉藏自家之判釋，與論主『因果相似故說趣』一路各有所重，並錄不判，讀者兩存之。其品目異稱、諸本分卷與後世徵引之考，詳考據層。
Tending toward Omniscience: Why, Prajñā Neither Tending nor Not Tending, the Question Is about Tending and the Answer Is about Tending; Why Tending toward the Omniscience of All Kinds Is Not Taking Possession of a Place; Why the One Who Tends Turns Instead into That toward Which Beings Return and Tend; Why Practising Prajñā Is Precisely Practising All Dharmas; Why Practising Nothing, the Practice of Not Receiving, and the Practice of Ruin Are Alike Practising Prajñā; Why the Practice of Ruin Is Not Destroying Dharmas; Why the Avaivartika Must Be Tested within Deep Prajñā for Clinging or Not Clinging; Why One Who Has Not Yet Obtained the Omniscience of All Kinds Can Accord with It; Why According with Ultimate Emptiness Is Precisely According with the Omniscience of All Kinds; Why Not Practising Form and So On up to Not Practising the Omniscience of All Kinds Is Not Cutting Off; and Why ‘Form Is Sarvajñā’ Is Not Confounding the Two
What Is Being Asked
In this chapter only one Chinese character is in motion: the one rendered here as ‘tending’. Subhūti raises the question, and asks it very briefly: the bodhisattva-mahāsattvas who have understood the very deep prajñāpāramitā—toward what place should they tend? The Buddha answers just as briefly: they should tend toward the omniscience of all kinds. Question and answer are both short, yet the difficulty at once appears before us—the chapters before this have made clear all along that prajñā is ultimately empty and that dharmas come from nowhere and also go nowhere; this being so, what is there still to tend toward, who is it that tends, and where does the tending go? The treatise-author's first question at the opening of the fascicle asks exactly this: prajñāpāramitā neither tends nor does not tend; why must Subhūti ask about tending, and why must the Buddha answer with tending?
The treatise-author's answer does not lie in argument; it lies in a contrast. The outside paths say 「諸法從因趣果、從先世入今世、從今世趣後世」 tr. "dharmas tend from cause to fruit, enter this life from the former life, and tend from this life to the next life"—tending, in their mouths, is a really existent line, and along the line something really existent is moving. It is to break this inversion of the view of permanence that within the gate of prajñā 「無趣不趣」 tr. "no tending, not tending" is spoken. Yet once 「無趣不趣」 tr. "no tending, not tending" is gripped as a conclusion, the practice of the path has nowhere to set its hand. Therefore the question and answer of this chapter have a further measure: Subhūti asks with a mind without clinging, and the Buddha answers with a mind without clinging; the question is about tending and the answer is about tending, yet the mind does not cling to tending, and so the word tending is no longer a line but the natural succession in which cause and fruit resemble each other—prajñā is the cause, the omniscience of all kinds is the fruit, and within the cause there is already the flavour of the fruit; therefore it is said that one who understands deep prajñā tends toward the omniscience of all kinds.
The second half of the chapter sets this 「趣」 tr. "tending" down upon persons. The Buddha instructs: within this very deep prajñāpāramitā, one should test and know the avaivartika bodhisattva—what is tested is not how much he can say, but whether, within deep prajñā, he clings or does not cling. The treatise-author takes it up with great precision: at the end of the preceding chapter the nature, mark, and appearance of the avaivartika were spoken of; now they should be tested and known. And so the sūtra text lists at length the marks by which he is tested and known: he does not take others' words as what is firm and essential; he is not dragged by desire, hatred, and delusion; he does not stray far from the six perfections; hearing deep prajñā, his mind is not startled and not terrified, and he gladly delights in hearing it. Subhūti presses one layer further: since prajñā has no fixed mark, how, in the end, does this person practise? The Buddha answers: in accord with the mind of the omniscience of all kinds. This answer in turn gives rise to a difficulty—a person who has not yet obtained the omniscience of all kinds, how can he accord with it? The treatise-author's solution is the pivot of the whole chapter: the mind that accords with ultimate emptiness is precisely the mind that accords with the omniscience of all kinds. At the close, the Buddha himself speaks the cause and condition: form and the other dharmas are sarvajñā (omniscience); the suchness of form is the suchness of sarvajñā; this suchness is without duality and without difference. The one Chinese character rendered here as ‘tending’ here returns at last to suchness.
Passage by Passage
1. The question, toward what place to tend. Subhūti asks: the one who understands deep prajñāpāramitā, toward what place should he tend? This question looks ordinary, but its position is important: the preceding chapter spoke at length of the good friend and at length of the marks of the bodhisattva, and in the reader's mind a question about direction naturally arises—going on practising like this, where does one go? Subhūti does not ask ‘what is obtained’ but asks 「趣何所」 tr. "toward what place to tend"; what he asks about is where the practice of the path is directed, not a thing to be obtained. In reading this one sentence one must first stand firm: what is asked is a direction, not a taking.
2. The Buddha answers that one should tend toward the omniscience of all kinds. The Buddha answers: one should tend toward the omniscience of all kinds. The answer has the same pattern as the question and adds not one word of explanation. What is most easily misread here is to imagine 「一切種智」 tr. "the omniscience of all kinds" as a distant place, as though prajñā were the road and sarvajñā the terminal station. Further on, the treatise-author will plainly screen off this reading; so at this moment one need only remember the form of the answer—the Buddha answers following Subhūti's way of asking; he follows the questioner's path of words, and is not setting up a really existent place for tending.
3. The one who tends turns instead into that toward which others return and tend—practising prajñā is practising all dharmas; practising nothing, the practice of not receiving, and the practice of ruin. Hearing the answer, Subhūti at once expands on it, and turns out four layers in a row. The first layer is a fine reversal: the person who can tend toward the omniscience of all kinds himself becomes the place toward which all beings return and tend—because he practises prajñāpāramitā. The one who tends has become the place tended toward; hence one can see that tending is not leaving here to go over there. The second layer: practising prajñāpāramitā is practising all dharmas. The third layer: practising nothing is practising prajñāpāramitā. The fourth layer: the practice of not receiving and the practice of ruin are practising prajñāpāramitā. The four layers come down in one breath, and the last three are all taking apart the Chinese character 「修」 tr. "practise": practising and yet practising nothing, practising and yet not receiving, practising and yet seeing its ruin—if practice is understood as accumulating, these three sentences all become contradictions.
4. The Buddha sets the question: by the ruin of which dharmas? The Buddha does not approve directly; first he asks back: by the ruin of which dharmas is prajñāpāramitā the practice of ruin? This question is a model of the teaching method of the whole chapter—Subhūti speaks an extremely brief judgement, and the Buddha then requires him to set the judgement down upon concrete dharmas. Whenever, in reading the prajñā sūtras and treatises, one meets brief words, one may learn from this question of the Buddha's: which dharmas are these words speaking of?
5. Subhūti counts through the dharmas that are ruined. Subhūti answers item by item: because form is ruined, because feeling, perception, constructions, consciousness, the twelve sense-fields, and the eighteen elements are ruined, because the self and so on up to the knower and the seer are ruined; because dānapāramitā and so on up to prajñāpāramitā are ruined; because 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 eighteen unshared dharmas, and the fruit of the srota-āpanna and so on up to the omniscience of all kinds are ruined—prajñāpāramitā is the practice of ruin. The order of this answer must not be taken lightly: from the worldly dharmas of the five aggregates, the twelve sense-fields, and the eighteen elements, to the dharmas of person and self, the self and the knower and seer, to the dharmas of practice, the six perfections, to the dharmas of contemplation, the emptinesses and the four foundations of mindfulness and so on up to the eighteen unshared dharmas, all the way to the dharmas of fruit, the fruit of the srota-āpanna and so on up to the omniscience of all kinds—nothing whatever is left out along the way. Even prajñāpāramitā itself, even the omniscience of all kinds, are among what is ruined—since what is ruined has no exception, only then is the meaning of the practice of ruin truly established.
6. The Buddha approves. The Buddha says: Just so! Just so! and restates both ends, the first and the last—because form is ruined, and so on up to because the omniscience of all kinds is ruined. Further on, the treatise-author settles it in one sentence: the Buddha approved what Subhūti said. The approval needs the restatement because this meaning is most easily read as destroying dharmas; therefore the Buddha with his own mouth says the first and the last once more, so that no one may swap out any single item among them.
7. One should test and know the avaivartika—clinging or not clinging is the standard. Here the Buddha turns into the second half of the whole chapter: within this deep prajñāpāramitā, one should test and know the avaivartika bodhisattva-mahāsattva. The standard of the test is only one—not clinging. If within deep prajñā he does not cling, know that he is avaivartika; if within dhyānapāramitā and so on up to dānapāramitā he does not cling, and within the four foundations of mindfulness and so on up to the omniscience of all kinds he does not cling, know that he is avaivartika. What matters is the place of testing: he is not tested on worldly dharmas; he is tested precisely on the deepest and most excellent dharma. For a person, not clinging to coarse dharmas is easy, and not clinging to deep dharmas is hard; therefore the field of testing and knowing is chosen in deep prajñā.
8. The treatise-author sets a question—neither tending nor not tending; why is the question about tending and the answer about tending? Right at the start the treatise-author brings out the sharpest question in the reader's mind: prajñāpāramitā neither tends nor does not tend; for what reason does Subhūti ask 「行般若者趣至何處」 tr. "the one who practises prajñā tends to what place"? And why does the Buddha answer 「趣薩婆若」 tr. "he tends toward sarvajñā"? If this question were not first set up, all the explanation that follows would be shooting arrows with no target. The treatise-author's teaching method can be seen here: he first states the contradiction at its sharpest on the reader's behalf, and only then begins to resolve it.
9. The mark of the answer. The treatise-author opens what follows with the mark Answer:. This mark is not superfluous—in the form of this treatise, question and answer each make a paragraph of their own; following the marks, the reader knows which is the difficulty and which the explanation, and does not mistake the words that set a difficulty for the proper meaning.
10. The refutation of the outside paths' tending from cause to fruit—therefore it is said, no tending, not tending. The treatise-author first brings out what is refuted: the outside paths say 「諸法從因趣果、從先世入今世、從今世趣後世」 tr. "dharmas tend from cause to fruit, enter this life from the former life, and tend from this life to the next life." The illness here is not in speaking of cause and fruit; it is in seeing, between cause and fruit, a permanently abiding thing being moved across—the self of this life carried over into the next life. It is for the sake of breaking this inversion of permanence that within the gate of prajñā 「無趣不趣」 tr. "no tending, not tending" is spoken. In reading this passage one must see clearly: no tending, not tending is a word of remedy, not a new fixed conclusion. Only when this one meaning is established does what follows make sense—the Buddha's answer 「趣一切種智」 tr. "tend toward the omniscience of all kinds" does not go against 「無趣不趣」 tr. "no tending, not tending," because what is broken is the inversion of permanence, not the continuity of cause and fruit itself.
11. Asking with a mind without clinging, answering with a mind without clinging—because of ultimate emptiness, no obstruction and no hindrance; because cause and fruit resemble each other, tending is spoken of. The treatise-author gives the first positive resolution of the whole chapter, in three sections. First: here Subhūti asks with a mind without clinging, and the Buddha answers with a mind without clinging—the same word tending, spoken with a clinging mind, becomes the line of the outside paths; spoken with a mind without clinging, it is without fault. Second: prajñāpāramitā is ultimately empty and is without hindrance and without obstruction toward all dharmas; because one obtains the liberation without hindrance and without obstruction, one is without hindrance and without obstruction—since prajñā does not obstruct any dharma, speaking of tending also does not obstruct ultimate emptiness. Third: because cause and fruit resemble each other, therefore it is said: 「解深般若者，趣一切種智。」 tr. "One who understands deep prajñā tends toward the omniscience of all kinds." This third section is the proper explanation of the word tending: prajñā and the omniscience of all kinds resemble each other as cause and fruit, as seed and fruit are of one kind, and therefore tending is spoken of; it is not that some thing walks over there. In daily use this check can be made: when saying ‘I am tending toward awakening’, if in the mind there is a stretch of road and one who arrives, one has fallen into the outside paths; if there is only practice and training in the causal stage, while the fruit of itself resembles it, the word tending is without fault.
12. Returning and tending, as a child tends toward its father and mother. The treatise-author cites the sūtra sentence 「菩薩知般若波羅蜜者為一切眾生所歸趣」 tr. "the bodhisattva who knows prajñāpāramitā is that toward which all beings return and tend," and at once brings out a simile: as a child, pressed by pain and distress, tends toward its father and mother. This is the first simile the treatise-author brings out himself, and it is a very plain one—a child running to its father and mother when it suffers is not the father and mother laying down a road for it to walk; it is turning to them naturally under the pressure of suffering. Beings returning and tending toward the bodhisattva are likewise: not because of a summons, but because of suffering they turn to him. This simile at the same time answers the reversal of Passage 3—why the one who tends turns instead into that toward which others return and tend: because what is tended toward was never a place; it is somewhere one can rely on and turn to.
13. The question why the bodhisattva alone is that toward which beings return and tend. The treatise-author sets one more question: for what reason is it only the bodhisattva who understands deep prajñāpāramitā that is that toward which beings return and tend? This question is finely asked—it is not only bodhisattvas who understand deep prajñā; the two vehicles also have their understanding; why do beings return to the bodhisattva alone? The question is set to press out the eye of the answer below, not to make a difficulty.
14. The mark of the answer. The treatise-author opens what follows with the mark Answer:, in the same format as Passage 9, marking that what follows is explanation and not difficulty.
15. Constantly practising because of great compassion; because of practice, understanding that all dharmas enter prajñā. The answer has two sections that lock together. First: because of the bodhisattva's mind of great compassion toward beings, he constantly practises and trains in prajñāpāramitā—that returning and tending lies with the bodhisattva alone has its root in great compassion; the two vehicles have understanding but not this mind, and in them beings have nowhere to turn. Second: because he practises, he can understand that all dharmas enter prajñāpāramitā; therefore 「修般若波羅蜜即修一切法」 tr. "practising prajñāpāramitā is practising all dharmas." This section properly explains the second layer of Passage 3: that practising prajñā is practising all dharmas does not mean that besides prajñā one goes on to practise all dharmas; it means that all dharmas enter prajñā, and practising this is practising that. Readers often mistakenly think this sentence exaggerates the function of prajñā; in fact it is speaking of scope—prajñā is not one dharma among dharmas; it is the place into which dharmas enter.
16. The glosses on the three sentences, together with the extent of what is ruined—practising nothing, the practice of not receiving, the practice of ruin, the dharmas that can be broken and ruined. The treatise-author glosses Subhūti's three judgements word by word. Practising nothing: in prajñā no fixed, real dharma can be found, and therefore the sūtra says 「無所修是修般若波羅蜜」 tr. "practising nothing is practising prajñāpāramitā"—practising nothing is not not practising; it is that no fixed reality can be found in the dharmas practised. The practice of not receiving: within prajñāpāramitā, all contemplations have faults and so are not received—even the contemplation that contemplates is not taken as real. The practice of ruin: all dharmas are impermanent, scatter, and fall to ruin; therefore it is called the practice of ruin—ruin is the mark of impermanence of the dharmas themselves, not the practitioner going to destroy them. At the end he brings out the extent of what is ruined: the dharmas that can be broken and ruined are form and the rest, and so on up to the omniscience of all kinds. This passage is the place in the whole chapter most easily misread; the treatise-author's glosses rescue all three sentences at once from the misreading ‘negating practice’: what the three sentences negate is the grasping at reality in the dharmas practised, not the work of practising and training.
17. The Buddha approved what Subhūti said. The treatise-author turns with one sentence: the Buddha approved what Subhūti said. The sentence is short and its work is great—it tells the reader that the four meanings above are not Subhūti's private view but a meaning approved by the Buddha, on which one may rely in practice.
18. Carrying on the nature, mark, and appearance of the preceding chapter; now they should be tested. The treatise-author points out where Sūtra ② comes from: at the end of the preceding chapter the nature, mark, and appearance of the avaivartika bodhisattva were spoken of; now they should be tested and known. Speaking the marks is to let people recognise him; testing is examining him on the ground—to know the marks without testing them is to have the marks only as knowledge. The method of testing the treatise-author sets down decisively: within deep prajñāpāramitā, does he cling or not? If he clings, then it is not; if he does not cling, then that is his mark.
19. Two kinds of bodhisattva who practise prajñā. The treatise-author distinguishes two capacities: the first, by means of prajñāpāramitā, contemplates all dharmas as ultimately empty, and prajñā too as empty of itself; the second cannot contemplate prajñā as empty as well. Therefore the sūtra tests whether he clings or not. The dividing line lies in one place only—whether prajñā itself is empty or not. The one who can contemplate prajñā too as empty of itself truly does not cling; the one who contemplates only dharmas as empty and keeps prajñā as what he relies on still clings. This division is the actual measuring mark of the meaning of testing and knowing in the whole chapter, and is also where the gloss on 「無所修」 tr. "practising nothing" in Passage 16 comes to land in the gate of practice.
20. The marks of testing and knowing shown at length—others' words; the mind of desire, the mind of hatred, and the mind of delusion; the six perfections; not startled and not terrified on hearing deep prajñā. In Sūtra ② the Buddha lists the marks at length. First: when practising deep prajñā he does not take others' words as what is firm and essential, nor does he practise following others' teaching. Second: he is not dragged by the mind of desire, the mind of hatred, or the mind of delusion. Third: he does not stray far from the six perfections. Fourth: hearing deep prajñā spoken, his mind is not startled, does not sink, is not terrified, is not afraid, has no regret; he gladly delights in hearing it, receives and upholds it, reads, recites, rightly recollects, and practises as it is spoken. The Buddha also speaks of its cause in former lives: this bodhisattva in a former life already asked about the matters within this deep prajñāpāramitā, and received and upheld, read, recited, expounded, and rightly recollected; because he has great majestic virtue, hearing deep prajñā he is not startled and not terrified. Of the marks in this passage, half is the mind not being seized from outside, and half is the mind rejoicing in the Dharma—only the two halves together make the marks of testing and knowing; neither can be missing.
21. Subhūti asks how he practises. Subhūti takes up the marks and asks: this bodhisattva, who is not startled and not terrified and so on up to rightly recollecting—how does he practise prajñāpāramitā? This question goes from marks to practice—having recognised the marks that show outwardly, one must still ask about the inner way of practice. Whenever one reads in the sūtras of the marks of a practitioner's merit, one may learn this one question: how did he practise?
22. The Buddha answers: in accord with the mind of the omniscience of all kinds. The Buddha answers: in accord with the mind of the omniscience of all kinds—so should this bodhisattva-mahāsattva practise prajñāpāramitā. This answer echoes from afar the 「當趣一切種智」 tr. "one should tend toward the omniscience of all kinds" of Passage 2—there it speaks of tending, here of according; tending is looking into the distance, according is the present moment. What matters lies in the two Chinese characters 「隨順」 tr. "in accord with": it does not speak of obtaining, does not speak of realising, does not speak of arriving; it speaks only of according.
23. The repeated question: what is called according? Subhūti asks again: what is called in accord with the mind of the omniscience of all kinds? This repeated question is extremely important, because if 「隨順」 tr. "according" is not set down upon something concrete, it is an empty phrase. The questions and answers in the sūtra press down layer by layer precisely so as not to let the technical terms stop at names and marks.
24. According by emptiness, and so on up to according by being like a dream and an illusion. The Buddha answers with the real content of according: he accords by emptiness; he accords by the signless, non-action, being without anything existent, non-arising and non-ceasing, neither stained nor pure; he accords by being like a dream, an illusion, a mirage, an echo, a transformation. Three groups are set side by side—the first group is the gate of emptiness, the second the meanings that the gate of emptiness opens, the third the five similes. Here 「隨順一切種智心」 tr. "in accord with the mind of the omniscience of all kinds" has its exact referent: what is accorded with is ultimate emptiness, not some knowledge not yet obtained.
25. Subhūti asks what dharma he practises. Subhūti pushes the question to its last step: since he accords by emptiness and so on up to being like a dream and an illusion, what dharma, in the end, does this bodhisattva practise—form, or feeling, perception, constructions, and consciousness, and so on up to the omniscience of all kinds? The question is honestly asked, and also perilously asked: he holds up one by one every possible dharma that could be practised, pressing the Buddha to answer.
26. The Buddha answers that he does not practise—the seven meanings of the place of practice; form is sarvajñā; one suchness, without duality and without difference. The Buddha answers: he does not practise form, does not practise feeling, perception, constructions, and consciousness, and so on up to does not practise the omniscience of all kinds. Then at once he brings out the reason why, which is the densest place of meaning in this chapter, with seven meanings and one conclusion in all. The seven meanings: this bodhisattva's place of practice is a dharma without making, a dharma without ruin, coming from nowhere, and also going nowhere, with no place of abiding, it cannot be counted, and it is without measure. The one conclusion: if it is without number and without measure, this dharma is unfindable—it cannot be found by way of form, and so on up to it cannot be found by way of the omniscience of all kinds. At the end he gathers it with the cause and condition: form is sarvajñā, and so on up to the omniscience of all kinds is sarvajñā; the mark of suchness of form and so on up to the mark of suchness of the omniscience of all kinds are all one suchness, without duality and without difference. In reading the two Chinese characters 「不行」 tr. "does not practise," do not understand them as cutting off; below, in Passage 40, the treatise-author has his own gloss; here first remember the direction of the concluding words—he does not practise because what is practised and the one who practises are originally one suchness.
27. The mark of the explanation. Treatise ② opens with the mark Explanation:. This mark differs from the Question: and Answer: above: question and answer set a difficulty and explain it; the explanation follows the order of the sūtra text and explains it sentence by sentence. When the form changes, the way of reading should change with it—the passages below all walk close beside the sentences of Sūtra ②.
28. Not giving rise to the thought of real and unreal in others' words—the two kinds of others; the mind settled and weighty, not shifting. The treatise-author explains the first mark. The avaivartika, in the words of others, does not give rise to the thought: 「是中有實、不實。」 tr. "In this there is what is real and what is not real." Why? There are two kinds of others: householders, who cling to the pleasures of the five desires and are false, deceptive, and impure; and those of the outside paths who have gone forth, who cling to wrong views and are not real—what such people say is all without any real matter, and therefore he does not believe it. The treatise-author pushes it further to the extreme: because he himself has obtained the real mark of all dharmas, even if one came in the body of a Buddha to speak in breaking the real mark of all dharmas, he would not believe; because he has obtained the unconditioned dharma, his mind is settled and weighty and no longer shifts. This passage shows its measure most of all: what is called not believing is not stubbornness; it is having himself obtained the real mark and not turning with words; he does not follow even one who manifests the body of a Buddha and speaks in breaking the real mark, precisely because what he relies on is the Dharma, not the person. Readers here should not learn its form and lose its reality—to learn not to believe others' words before having obtained the real mark is to increase the conceit of self, and is not the mark of the avaivartika.
29. Because the afflictions are broken and thinned, he is not dragged by them. The treatise-author explains the second mark: though this bodhisattva has not yet obtained the Buddha path, because craving and the other afflictions are broken and thinned, he is not dragged by them. This explanation is most honest—it does not say the afflictions are already severed; it says only that they are broken and thinned. The marks of testing and knowing were never the full marks of the station of a sage; they are real marks that can be tested midway along the path; when the afflictions are thin enough not to drag him away, that is this mark.
30. Not straying from the six perfections—because he knows the flavour of the fruit and reward of wholesome dharmas, his mind always loves and delights in them. The treatise-author explains the third mark: his mind never strays from the six perfections; because he knows the flavour of the fruit and reward of wholesome dharmas, his mind always loves and delights in them, and he does not stray from the six perfections. That he does not stray is not a matter of being forcibly bound by the strength of holding fast; it is having tasted the flavour and naturally loving and delighting in them. The crux of the gate of practice lies in this one Chinese character 「味」 tr. "flavour": knowing the flavour, one needs no supervising or urging; not knowing the flavour, even what is held fast is easily lost.
31. The simile of the thunderclap and the peacock. The treatise-author explains the fourth mark, and brings out his second simile himself. Because of such various causes and conditions, hearing deep prajñā he is not terrified and not afraid, gladly wishes to hear it, reads, recites, asks about its meaning, practises and trains in it. The simile says: as with a thunderclap, small birds are terrified and die of fright, while the peacock, a great bird, rejoices and dances. Prajñāpāramitā is also like this: ordinary people of wrong view hear it and are terrified; the avaivartika bodhisattva hears it and rejoices, his mind never sated; therefore it is said 「歡喜樂聞」 tr. "he gladly delights in hearing it." The edge of this simile is this: the thunder is the same thunder. The Dharma is not two dharmas; the hearers have two capacities—the same ultimate emptiness is here the thunder that kills with fright, and there the joy of dancing. Therefore, when one hears the deep Dharma and fear arises, one need not blame the Dharma; one should examine oneself as to what kind of capacity one is.
32. The Buddha himself speaks the cause and condition of great majestic virtue. The treatise-author cites the Buddha's words in the sūtra: 「是菩薩於過去世已聞深般若波羅蜜，多集諸福德、智慧故有大威德，有大威德故不怖畏。」 tr. "This bodhisattva in past lives has already heard deep prajñāpāramitā; because he has gathered much merit and wisdom he has great majestic virtue; because he has great majestic virtue he is not terrified or afraid." That fearlessness is possible is not the nerve of a single moment; it is the present working of hearing the Dharma in former lives and of the gathering of merit and wisdom. This meaning matches Passage 29: the one speaks of the lessening of the afflictions, the other of the increase of merit and wisdom; the marks of testing and knowing grow from these two sides at once.
33. Subhūti asks: prajñā has no fixed mark; how should one practise? The treatise-author restates Subhūti's question in the third person: though this bodhisattva, hearing deep prajñāpāramitā, is not terrified or afraid, this prajñā has no fixed mark; how should he practise? This question lays the difficulty bare—not being terrified or afraid is a state of mind; practice is setting one's hand to the work; since prajñā has no fixed mark, where is the place to set one's hand?
34. The Buddha says: in accord with the mind of the omniscience of all kinds. The treatise-author restates the Buddha's answer: in accord with the mind of the omniscience of all kinds. This is the same sentence as Passage 22 in Sūtra ②; the treatise-author brings it out again in order to draw out the proper difficulty below—the restatement is not repetition; it is setting the answer out on the table so that it can be pressed with questions.
35. The proper difficulty—not having obtained the omniscience of all kinds, how can he accord with it? The treatise-author sets the sharpest question in the whole chapter: this bodhisattva has not yet obtained the omniscience of all kinds; how can he accord with it? This difficulty is very forceful: according always needs something that is accorded with; the knowledge not yet obtained, whom does he accord with? If this question cannot be answered, 「隨順一切種智心」 tr. "in accord with the mind of the omniscience of all kinds" is merely words of encouragement.
36. The mark of the answer. The treatise-author opens what follows with the mark Answer:, marking that what follows is the proper resolution.
37. According with ultimate emptiness is according with the omniscience of all kinds. The treatise-author's resolution is in three sections. First: therefore it is said: 「隨順畢竟空心則順一切種智心。」 tr. "The mind in accord with ultimate emptiness accords with the mind of the omniscience of all kinds."—the place to set one's hand in according is ultimate emptiness, not that knowledge not yet obtained. Second: he brings out the ground of reason: the omniscience of all kinds is the mark of quiescence, and the Buddha says in a later chapter: 「一切寂滅相是一切種智。」 tr. "The mark of all quiescence is the omniscience of all kinds."—since the substance and mark of the omniscience of all kinds is quiescence, to accord with quiescence is to accord with it, with no need first to obtain it. Third: he concludes and extends it: therefore it is said: 「順畢竟空則順一切種智。」 tr. "According with ultimate emptiness is according with the omniscience of all kinds." The signless, non-action, space, non-arising and non-ceasing, without stain and without purity, being like a dream, and so on, are also like this—the three groups of according that the Buddha listed in Passage 24 are here resolved all together. This passage is the pivot of the whole chapter: tending toward the omniscience of all kinds does not fall into the line of the outside paths precisely because what is tended toward is the mark of quiescence; and the mark of quiescence can be accorded with right now, and therefore one tends and yet there is nothing tended toward.
38. The question: what dharmas does he contemplate? The treatise-author restates Subhūti's question: with the mind in accord with ultimate emptiness, what dharmas does he contemplate? According now having its footing, what follows it is what is contemplated. This question is of one vein with the sūtra's question in Passage 25; the treatise-author restates it to lead into the glosses that follow.
39. The Buddha answers: he does not contemplate form, and so on up to the omniscience of all kinds. The treatise-author restates the Buddha's answer: he does not contemplate form and so on up to the omniscience of all kinds. The answer is still one Chinese character, 「不」 tr. "not." At this point the reader will inevitably press: not contemplating, then what does he contemplate? The next passage is the treatise-author's word-by-word gloss.
40. Glossing the seven meanings word by word—the real dharma passes beyond the conditioned; without making, without ruin, coming from nowhere, going nowhere, not abiding, without number, without measure; the way of words is cut off. The treatise-author first brings out the general principle: wisdom wishes to seek the real matter; form and the other conditioned, made dharmas are all false, and the omniscience of all kinds is a real dharma; being a real dharma, it passes beyond conditioned dharmas. So not contemplating form and the rest is not refusing to observe; it is that what wisdom seeks lies in the real matter, and conditioned, made dharmas are not real. Having passed beyond the conditioned, he then glosses word by word the seven meanings of Sūtra ②—the treatise-author, with the single phrase 「無數、無量」 tr. "without number, without measure," gathers together the two headings on the sūtra side, 「不可數」 tr. "cannot be counted" and 「無有量」 tr. "is without measure," and so the headings are six and yet the meanings are still seven. 「無作」 tr. "Without making" means there is no maker. 「無壞法」 tr. "A dharma without ruin" means there is no one who ruins. This dharma does not come from the six perfections, and therefore it is said 「無所從來」 tr. "coming from nowhere"—not even the six perfections are its place of coming. It does not enter into the Buddha's dharmas, and therefore it is said 「無所去」 tr. "going nowhere"—not even the Buddha's dharmas are its place of going. 「不住」 tr. "Not abiding" has two explanations: the conditioned, being false and deceptive, does not abide; within the unconditioned dharma, because there is no recollection, imagining, and discrimination, it also does not abide—on both sides there is nothing to abide in. 「無數、無量」 tr. "Without number, without measure": because the five aggregates come together there is the count of the six destinies; because the continuity of the five aggregates is broken, there is then no number and no measure—number is originally set up from the coming together of the five aggregates; once the continuity of the five aggregates is broken, number and measure of themselves have nowhere to be applied. At the end he concludes with words: because there is no number and no measure, the way of words is cut off; because the way of words is cut off, it cannot be found by practising form and the other dharmas. When the seven meanings have been glossed word by word, the true meaning of 「不行」 tr. "not practising" and 「不觀」 tr. "not contemplating" becomes clear: it is not that he does no practice of contemplation; it is that in the place of practice there is originally no graspable mark to serve as an object.
41. The Buddha himself speaks the cause and condition—form and the rest are sarvajñā; suchness is without duality and without difference. The whole chapter is gathered in the cause and condition the Buddha himself speaks: 「色等諸法即是薩婆若，薩婆若即是色等諸法。何以故？色等諸法如即是薩婆若如，薩婆若如即是色等諸法如，以是故說如，是如無二無別。」 tr. "Form and the other dharmas are sarvajñā; sarvajñā is form and the other dharmas. Why? The suchness of form and the other dharmas is the suchness of sarvajñā; the suchness of sarvajñā is the suchness of form and the other dharmas; for this reason suchness is spoken of; this suchness is without duality and without difference." This conclusion has three layers. First, identity spoken in both directions: form and the rest are sarvajñā, sarvajñā is form and the rest—it is not that form is cancelled, nor that sarvajñā descends to become form. Second, where the identity lies: in suchness. The suchness of form and the suchness of sarvajñā are one and the same suchness; therefore identity is spoken of. Third, without duality and without difference: since suchness is not two, the one who tends and what is tended toward, the one who accords and what is accorded with, the one who contemplates and what is contemplated, are within suchness originally not separated. The question at the head of the chapter, 「當趣何所」 tr. "toward what place should one tend," here receives its ultimate answer—what is tended toward is right in the place of the one who tends; one tends and yet there is nothing tended toward, and therefore it is called Tending toward Omniscience.
Do Not Misread
Do not read 「無趣不趣」 tr. "no tending, not tending" as the practice of the path having no direction. When the treatise-author set up these words he stated clearly what is refuted: the outside paths say 「諸法從因趣果、從先世入今世、從今世趣後世」 tr. "dharmas tend from cause to fruit, enter this life from the former life, and tend from this life to the next life," and to break this inversion of permanence it is said 「無趣不趣」 tr. "no tending, not tending." What is refuted is seeing, between cause and fruit, a permanently abiding thing being moved across, not the continuity of cause and fruit itself. So the Buddha answers all the same 「當趣一切種智」 tr. "one should tend toward the omniscience of all kinds," and the treatise-author says all the same 「因果相似故」 tr. "because cause and fruit resemble each other." If it is read as not permitting even a direction to be set up, then the passages of this chapter on testing and knowing, on according, and on the place of practice have nowhere at all to stand, and it also goes against the treatise-author's own explanation.
Do not read 「壞修」 tr. "the practice of ruin" as destroying the Buddha's Dharma. The dharmas that can be ruined listed in the sūtra text run from form, feeling, perception, constructions, and consciousness, the twelve sense-fields and the eighteen elements, all the way to the six perfections, the emptinesses, the four foundations of mindfulness and so on up to the eighteen unshared dharmas, and the fruit of the srota-āpanna and so on up to the omniscience of all kinds—if the practice of ruin were the practitioner going to break them, that would be destroying the four foundations of mindfulness and so on up to the omniscience of all kinds; how could the Buddha answer 「如是！如是！」 tr. "Just so! Just so!"? The treatise-author's gloss is direct: the practice of ruin means that all dharmas are impermanent, scatter, and fall to ruin; therefore it is called the practice of ruin. Ruin is the mark of impermanence of the dharmas themselves; it is the practitioner seeing, in these dharmas, their impermanence, scattering, and ruin, and not giving rise to grasping at reality, that is called practising prajñā. By the same principle, 「無所修」 tr. "practising nothing" means that no fixed reality can be found in the dharmas practised, and 「不受修」 tr. "the practice of not receiving" means that even the contemplation that contemplates has faults and so is not taken; all three sentences are dispelling grasping, not abolishing practice.
Do not read ‘not practising form and so on up to not practising the omniscience of all kinds’ as cutting off the practice of contemplation. The treatise-author has glossed it word by word: wisdom wishes to seek the real matter; form and the other conditioned, made dharmas are all false, and the omniscience of all kinds is a real dharma—not practising is not not doing; it is not taking false, conditioned dharmas as the reality of what is practised. The glosses on the seven meanings must especially be read together: without making, without ruin, coming from nowhere, going nowhere, not abiding, without number, without measure—every phrase screens off the object's having a real mark that can be grasped, not the work of practice and training. The sūtra text itself urges people precisely to receive and uphold, read, recite, rightly recollect, and practise as it is spoken—if 「不行」 tr. "not practising" were cutting off, the sūtra text would contradict itself.
Do not read 「色即是薩婆若」 tr. "form is sarvajñā" as confounding the ordinary and the sage, with no need to practise. The Buddha himself speaks the reason, and it falls on the one Chinese character rendered here as ‘suchness’: the suchness of form and the other dharmas is the suchness of sarvajñā; for this reason suchness is spoken of; this suchness is without duality and without difference. What the identity lies in is suchness, not marks. If it is read as form and the omniscience of all kinds having no distinction whatever, then the teaching of testing and knowing in the first half of this chapter—clinging or not clinging within deep prajñā, the distinction between the two kinds of bodhisattva who practise prajñā—has no way to stand. Identity without ruining their marks: therefore one must still test, must still accord, must still practise.
Do not read the avaivartika's 「不以他人語為堅要」 tr. "not taking others' words as what is firm and essential" as being free not to listen to what people say. The treatise-author states his reason clearly: there are two kinds of others—householders cling to the pleasures of the five desires and are false, deceptive, and impure; those of the outside paths who have gone forth cling to wrong views and are not real; what such people say is all without any real matter, and therefore he does not believe it; and that he can refrain from believing is 「自得諸法實相故」 tr. "because he himself has obtained the real mark of all dharmas," and 「得無為法故，心則安重」 tr. "because he has obtained the unconditioned dharma, his mind is settled and weighty." What he relies on is the Dharma already realised, not his own temper. To learn not to accept what people say before obtaining the real mark is precisely the 「著」 tr. "clinging" that this chapter tests, not the mark of the avaivartika.
Bearing on Practice
The first benefit is to use the word 「趣」 tr. "tending" rightly. In daily use, in arousing the mind, in dedicating, in resolving to tend toward awakening, if there floats up in the mind a stretch of road and a self who arrives, one has already fallen into the inversion of permanence that the treatise-author refutes. The proper explanation this chapter gives is extremely simple: because cause and fruit resemble each other, tending is spoken of. Its use in the gate of practice is this—simply practise and train in prajñā in the causal stage, and the fruit, resembling it, arrives of itself; there is no need to construct beforehand in the mind a picture of a terminal point, nor to be anxious about which stretch one has reached. To tend is to face toward; facing toward and not taking—only this is tending in the gate of prajñā.
The second benefit is that the method of testing and knowing can be used on oneself. The place of testing the Buddha sets is deep prajñā, and the standard is only one: clinging or not clinging. The treatise-author carves it further into two capacities—the one who can contemplate prajñā too as empty of itself, and the one who contemplates only dharmas as empty and keeps prajñā as what he relies on. One who applies effort can check himself here: has the 「空」 tr. "emptiness" I rely on become once again something I will not let go of? Whenever one sees arising in oneself a feeling of unshakeable certainty toward some gate of the Dharma or some view, one can hold up this one question to shine back on it. This test is not for judging others but for examining oneself—the sūtra text says plainly 「驗知」 tr. "test and know," not ‘pass verdict’.
The third benefit is the way of placing oneself given by the simile of the thunderclap and the peacock. When, hearing the deep Dharma, fear arises in the mind, or it seems flavourless, or one wants to avoid it, what this chapter gives is not reproach but a distinction of capacities: the same sound of thunder—the small bird dies of fright, the peacock dances. On meeting this state two things can be done—first, do not blame the Dharma; know that one's own capacity is not yet ripe; second, following the road shown in Passage 30, enter by way of 「知善法果報味」 tr. "knowing the flavour of the fruit and reward of wholesome dharmas": taste the flavour within the six perfections, and love and delight arise of themselves, and the capacity of itself gradually ripens. A mind never sated is the fruit, not the starting point.
The fourth benefit is that 「隨順」 tr. "according" gives one not yet realised a place to set one's hand that can be practised right now. People are often stopped by such difficulties as 「未得一切種智，云何能順」 tr. "not having obtained the omniscience of all kinds, how can he accord with it," and so think that the lofty gates of the Dharma have nothing to do with them. The treatise-author's answer is the most practically useful sentence in the whole chapter: the mind that accords with ultimate emptiness accords with the mind of the omniscience of all kinds. The omniscience of all kinds is the mark of quiescence, and the mark of quiescence can be accorded with right now—in daily use, not taking marks as real and not giving rise to fixed grasping on the dharmas one practises is already according. There is no need to wait until the fruit is obtained to learn according; according is itself the practice of the causal stage.
The fifth benefit is that the seven meanings can serve as a mnemonic for the practice of contemplation. The place of practice is without making, without ruin, coming from nowhere, going nowhere, with no place of abiding, cannot be counted, is without measure—these seven phrases are not abstruse talk; they are seven angles for shining back. When bringing the mind to bear, one may ask oneself phrase by phrase: this dharma that I take as object—have I seen it as having someone who makes it, a thing that can be ruined, coming from somewhere, going somewhere, able to be abided in and relied on, able to be counted and measured? When the seven phrases have been gone through one by one, the grasping at the reality of the object loosens. The last phrase especially must be remembered: because the way of words is cut off, it cannot be found by practising form and the other dharmas—when contemplation reaches the place that cannot be spoken, do not hurry to fit a name onto it.
Further Resonances
The skeleton of this chapter is two sūtra passages and two treatise explanations. Sūtra ① begins with Subhūti asking 「解深般若波羅蜜者，當趣何所」 tr. "the one who understands deep prajñāpāramitā, toward what place should he tend," and the Buddha answering 「當趣一切種智」 tr. "he should tend toward the omniscience of all kinds"; Subhūti expands that the one who tends is that toward which all beings return and tend, and brings out four meanings: practising prajñā is practising all dharmas, practising nothing, the practice of not receiving, and the practice of ruin; the Buddha sets the question 「何等法壞」 tr. "which dharmas are ruined," and Subhūti counts through form, feeling, perception, constructions, and consciousness, the twelve sense-fields and the eighteen elements, the self and so on up to the knower and the seer, the six perfections, 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 eighteen unshared dharmas, and the fruit of the srota-āpanna and so on up to the omniscience of all kinds; the Buddha approves, and at the end instructs that the avaivartika be tested and known within deep prajñā for clinging or not clinging. Treatise ① first sets the difficulty ‘neither tending nor not tending; why is the question about tending and the answer about tending?’, brings out the refutation of the outside paths' tending from cause to fruit and establishes 「無趣不趣」 tr. "no tending, not tending," next makes clear the question and answer with a mind without clinging, ultimate emptiness without hindrance and without obstruction, and tending spoken of because cause and fruit resemble each other, brings out the simile of the child tending toward its father and mother to explain returning and tending, then sets the question ‘why is the bodhisattva alone that toward which beings return and tend?’ and answers it with constant practice out of great compassion and all dharmas entering prajñā, glosses word by word practising nothing, the practice of not receiving, the practice of ruin, and the dharmas that can be broken and ruined, and at the end, carrying on the nature, mark, and appearance of the preceding chapter, establishes the meaning of testing, and distinguishes two kinds of bodhisattva who practise prajñā. Sūtra ② shows at length the marks by which the avaivartika is tested and known—not taking others' words as what is firm and essential, not being dragged by the mind of desire, the mind of hatred, or the mind of delusion, not straying far from the six perfections, not startled and not terrified on hearing deep prajñā but gladly delighting in hearing it, having asked in former lives and having great majestic virtue; Subhūti asks how he practises, and the Buddha answers: in accord with the mind of the omniscience of all kinds; asked again, he brings out three groups of according—by emptiness; by the signless, non-action, being without anything existent, non-arising and non-ceasing, neither stained nor pure; by being like a dream, an illusion, a mirage, an echo, a transformation; at the end, asked what dharma he practises, the Buddha answers that he does not practise form and so on up to does not practise the omniscience of all kinds, and brings out the seven meanings of the place of practice and the conclusion of 「色即是薩婆若」 tr. "form is sarvajñā" and 「一如，無二無別」 tr. "one suchness, without duality and without difference." Treatise ②, with the mark of explanation, explains the marks of testing and knowing following the text: not believing because of the two kinds of others, the mind settled and weighty and not shifting because he himself has obtained the real mark, not dragged because the afflictions are broken and thinned, not straying from the six perfections because he knows the flavour of the fruit and reward of wholesome dharmas, the simile of the thunderclap and the peacock explaining the glad delight in hearing, and the Buddha himself speaking the cause and condition of great majestic virtue; next it sets the difficulty 「未得一切種智，云何能順」 tr. "not having obtained the omniscience of all kinds, how can he accord with it," answers that according with ultimate emptiness is according with the omniscience of all kinds, and cites the later chapter's 「一切寂滅相是一切種智」 tr. "the mark of all quiescence is the omniscience of all kinds" as its ground; at the end it restates the question and answer and glosses word by word without making, a dharma without ruin, coming from nowhere, going nowhere, not abiding, without number and without measure, and the way of words cut off, and finally closes the whole chapter with the suchness without duality and without difference of the cause and condition the Buddha himself speaks, 「色等諸法如即是薩婆若如」 tr. "the suchness of form and the other dharmas is the suchness of sarvajñā," and so reaches the end of fascicle seventy-one.
In the vein of meaning linking this chapter with the chapters before and after it, three lines can be seen. First, carrying on from before: the treatise-author says plainly 「上品末說阿鞞跋致菩薩性、相、貌，今應驗試知」 tr. "at the end of the preceding chapter the nature, mark, and appearance of the avaivartika bodhisattva were spoken of; now they should be tested and known"—the preceding chapter speaks of the marks, this chapter tests the marks; speaking and testing are two sections of one matter; the root of why the sūtra text in the second half of this chapter is wholly about the avaivartika lies here. Second, carrying on and turning: the meaning that prajñā neither tends nor does not tend has been set forth again and again in the chapters before this; this chapter does not establish this meaning anew, but asks how it goes together with 「趣一切種智」 tr. "tending toward the omniscience of all kinds"—so the new meaning of this chapter lies not in refuting tending but in giving the word tending back its faultless use. Third, handing on to what follows: the treatise-author cites what the Buddha says in a later chapter, 「一切寂滅相是一切種智」 tr. "the mark of all quiescence is the omniscience of all kinds," as his ground, plainly pointing toward a meaning to be explained in detail after this chapter; the reader may view the following chapters together, to see the full breadth of the sentence ‘according with ultimate emptiness is according with the omniscience of all kinds’.
Among the ancient masters' explanations, one school can be recorded for this chapter. Jizang, dividing this chapter into sections, says at its opening section: 「此第三明中下根人者，標大果。文三：第一明由般若故趣薩婆若果，二識驗信般若人相，三明能如所驗釋法不著秤順薩婆若也」 tr. "This third makes clear the persons of middling and lower faculties, and sets forth the great fruit. The text is threefold: first, it makes clear that because of prajñā one tends toward the fruit of sarvajñā; second, it recognises and tests the marks of the person who believes in prajñā; third, it makes clear that one who is able to be as tested explains that dharmas are not clung to and accords with sarvajñā"—dividing this chapter into three parts, tending toward the fruit, testing the marks of the person, and explaining that dharmas are not clung to, which corresponds to the order in this treatise, where Sūtra ① and Treatise ① make clear tending, and Sūtra ② and Treatise ② make clear testing and knowing and according. On the meaning of asking about tending and answering with tending he also says: 「已上明非趣不趣，今所以問趣答趣著，以明非趣不趣乃是趣道耳，故見趣不趣皆名不趣」 tr. "Above, it made clear neither tending nor not tending; the reason it now asks about tending and answers with tending is to make clear that neither tending nor not tending is precisely the path of tending; therefore seeing tending and seeing not tending are both called not tending"—this is Jizang's own judgement and explanation, and it and the treatise-author's road of ‘because cause and fruit resemble each other, tending is spoken of’ each have their own emphasis; they are recorded side by side without judgement, and the reader keeps both. The study of the variant chapter titles, of the division of fascicles in the witnesses, and of later citations is detailed in the Apparatus.
考據Apparatus
一、科判
本品在《大智度論》釋《大品般若》之次第中屬〈釋餘品〉一段，全在卷七十一，單一單元。卷七十一之卷首題為「大智度論釋大事起品第五十」〔T25 0552c18〕——其時尚在品五十〈大事起品〉；卷七十一內順次收品五十、品五十一〈譬喻品〉、品五十二〈善知識品〉，而以本品收卷。品題「大智度論釋趣一切智品第五十三」〔T25 0560c29〕逕接前品〈善知識品第五十二〉之末而起，品首無卷題、無造署譯署。品身訖於「色等諸法如即是薩婆若如，薩婆若如即是色等諸法如」〔T25 0562b02〕以下「是如無二無別」句迄〔T25 0562b04〕；卷末題「大智度論卷第七十一」〔T25 0562b05〕在本品範圍之內——本品恰收於卷七十一之末，品尾繫卷尾。次卷卷首題即次品品題「大智度論釋大如品第五十四」〔T25 0562b08〕，並重出造署「聖者龍樹造」〔T25 0562b10〕、譯署「後秦龜茲國三藏鳩摩羅什譯」〔T25 0562b11〕。此型與品四十六〈魔事品〉之『卷首起題·卷內未竟即續次品』異，與品四十八〈佛母品〉之跨卷型異，亦與品五十二〈善知識品〉之『居卷中·不涉卷界』異——本品為居卷末·品尾繫卷尾之型，釋餘品諸型中又別為一型。
全品純漢字一千九百六十三（機械重計值·與底稿所載相合），為近數品中最輕之一品。品內結構二【經】二【論】交替、單一單元：【經】〔T25 0561a01〕、【論】〔T25 0561a25〕、【經】〔T25 0561b21〕、【論】〔T25 0561c24〕。二枚【論】標記各有校記，宋、宮、聖三本無此二枚結構標記；二枚【經】標記無校記——標記存否屬底本傳承層，結構計數仍依底本標籤為準（全帳見第八目）。
問答之數與說者結構：經①以須菩提問「世尊！是諸菩薩摩訶薩解深般若波羅蜜者，當趣何所？」〔T25 0561a01〕發端，佛答「是菩薩摩訶薩解深般若波羅蜜者，當趣一切種智。」〔T25 0561a03〕，其下須菩提申論〔T25 0561a04 白佛言〕、佛設問「何等法壞故，般若波羅蜜為壞修？」〔T25 0561a09〕、須菩提逐條答〔T25 0561a10〕、佛印可〔T25 0561a17 佛言〕，末以「爾時，佛告須菩提」〔T25 0561a19〕囑阿鞞跋致之驗知收束。其中〔T25 0561a10〕一段承前段佛之設問直接續答，底本未重出「須菩提言」之換說標記，依問答對應關係逕判為須菩提所答，非不確定項，如實分記。論①正式問答二組（「般若波羅蜜非趣、非不趣」〔T25 0561a25〕一組、「何以故但菩薩解深般若波羅蜜為眾生所歸趣？」〔T25 0561b06〕一組），其間「須菩提言」〔T25 0561b04〕一句為論主重牒經①之文以續申論，非另一說者現場發言；末段「佛可須菩提所說。」〔T25 0561b15〕以下為論主敘事過渡，轉入經②之驗試母題，不計入問答對數。經②承論①末之過渡逕以「若阿鞞跋致菩薩摩訶薩行深般若波羅蜜時」〔T25 0561b21〕續開示，底本未出換說標記，依常態認定為佛對須菩提之開示；其下轉折四處皆有明文（〔T25 0561c03〕「白佛言」、〔T25 0561c05〕「佛言」、〔T25 0561c08〕「佛言」、〔T25 0561c16〕「佛告」），另〔T25 0561c07〕一問承前段佛之答語直接追問，未重出標記，依問答對應關係逕判。論②以「釋曰」〔T25 0561c24〕起論（起論標記，不計入問答對數），正式問答唯一組（「是菩薩未得一切種智，云何能順？」〔T25 0562a14〕／答〔T25 0562a15〕）；另有第三人稱敘事體重述經文問答四處（〔T25 0562a09〕「是中佛說因緣」、〔T25 0562a11〕「須菩提問」、〔T25 0562a13〕「佛言」、〔T25 0562a19〕「爾時，須菩提問」／〔T25 0562a20〕「佛答」）——此非「問曰」「答曰」之正式格式，亦非另一說者介入，如實分記，不計入問答對數。全品無「有人言」（與品五十二同型，與品四十八之十五見成對比），論釋純為論主自問自答與隨文訓釋，未引異說並陳，如實誌錄。
義理兩軸循經論之分：經①明解深般若者所趣在一切種智，並以「壞修」一義翻「修」字；經②明阿鞞跋致之驗知相與「隨順一切種智心」之行法。論①釋「趣」何以可問可答於畢竟空中，並訓『無所修·不受修·壞修』三名；論②逐相釋驗知五事，末訓『無作·無壞法·無所從來·無所去·不住·無數無量』諸遮詞，以「色等諸法即是薩婆若」之如相無二收束全品。
二、術語考
趣一切種智·薩婆若。 全品之總名。經①發端之問答即立其目：「世尊！是諸菩薩摩訶薩解深般若波羅蜜者，當趣何所？」〔T25 0561a01〕、「是菩薩摩訶薩解深般若波羅蜜者，當趣一切種智。」〔T25 0561a03〕——品名「趣一切智」之「一切智」，經文本作「一切種智」，論釋則多用梵音「薩婆若」。論①牒問即以兩名並用：「須菩提何以故問『行般若者趣至何處』？又佛何以答『趣薩婆若』？」〔T25 0561a25〕。品末以二名相即收束：「色即是薩婆若，乃至一切種智即是薩婆若。」〔T25 0561c21〕。
趣、非趣（非趣非不趣）。 本品之樞紐，亦本品接續前品之筍卯。論①開卷即設難：「般若波羅蜜非趣、非不趣」〔T25 0561a25〕——既云非趣非不趣，則問答「趣何所」本不可立；論自釋其所破：「諸法從因趣果、從先世入今世、從今世趣後世。」〔T25 0561a27〕，「破是常顛倒故，言『無趣不趣』。」〔T25 0561a28〕——「無趣不趣」是對治外道常見之語，非於般若中別立一無趣之法。既破已，則問答自無障：「此中，須菩提以無著心問，佛以無著心答。」〔T25 0561a29〕，「因果相似故，故言：『解深般若者，趣一切種智。』」〔T25 0561b03〕——趣之可說，在無著；不在有一可趣之處。
歸趣。 經①第二轉：「則為一切眾生所歸趣，修般若波羅蜜故。」〔T25 0561a05〕——菩薩自趣一切種智，同時為眾生之所歸趣。論以喻訓其義：「如子為苦惱所逼，則趣父母。」〔T25 0561b05〕；復設問何以獨菩薩為所歸趣，答以大悲與修：「菩薩於眾生中大悲心故，常修習般若波羅蜜。」〔T25 0561b07〕。
修般若即修一切法。 經①之標語「修般若波羅蜜即是修一切諸法。」〔T25 0561a06〕，論隨文釋之：「以修故，能解一切諸法皆入般若波羅蜜，是故『修般若波羅蜜即修一切法』。」〔T25 0561b08〕——一切法之入般若，是所以一修攝一切修。
無所修·不受修·壞修。 本品訓詁之要目，三名皆遮詞。經①：「無所修是修般若波羅蜜，不受修、壞修是修般若波羅蜜。」〔T25 0561a07〕。論逐名訓之：「般若無定實法可得，故經中說『無所修是修般若波羅蜜』。」〔T25 0561b10〕——無所修者，無定實法可修；「一切諸觀有過故不受，是名不受修。」〔T25 0561b12〕——不受修者，諸觀有過故不領受；「壞修者，一切法無常散壞，故名壞修。」〔T25 0561b13〕——壞修者，所修之法自身無常散壞。經文於此設一問答以明「壞」之所指：「何等法壞故，般若波羅蜜為壞修？」〔T25 0561a09〕，須菩提逐條答以五眾、十二處、十八界、我乃至知者見者、六度、內外諸空、四念處乃至十八不共法、四果乃至一切種智皆壞——「我乃至知者、見者壞故，般若波羅蜜為壞修。」〔T25 0561a12〕；論收其目：「可破壞法者，所謂色等乃至一切種智。」〔T25 0561b14〕。
阿鞞跋致·驗知。 經①末轉入驗知一軸：「是深般若波羅蜜中，阿鞞跋致菩薩摩訶薩應當驗知！」〔T25 0561a20〕，其判準在著不著：「若菩薩摩訶薩是深般若波羅蜜中不著，當知是阿鞞跋致」〔T25 0561a21〕。論釋其所以須驗：「上品末說阿鞞跋致菩薩性、相、貌，今應驗試知。」〔T25 0561b15〕；又出可驗之實據：「行般若波羅蜜菩薩有二種」〔T25 0561b17〕——一者觀般若亦自空，二者不能觀般若亦空，「是故經中試知著不？」〔T25 0561b20〕。所釋經側此名作「阿惟越致」（見第四目）。
驗知五相。 經②逐相列之：其一「不以他人語為堅要，亦不隨他教行。」〔T25 0561b22〕；其二「不為欲心、瞋心、癡心所牽」〔T25 0561b23〕；其三不遠離六波羅蜜；其四「心不驚、不沒、不怖、不畏、不悔，歡喜樂聞」〔T25 0561b26〕；其五「是菩薩先世已問是深般若波羅蜜中事已」〔T25 0561b28〕，其故在「是菩薩摩訶薩有大威德故」〔T25 0561b29〕。論②逐相隨釋（見第五目）。
隨順一切種智心。 經②之行法。佛答須菩提「云何行般若」之問曰：「隨順一切種智心，是菩薩摩訶薩應如是行般若波羅蜜。」〔T25 0561c05〕；更問其名，佛以諸空諸如列其隨順之目：「以空隨順，是為菩薩摩訶薩行深般若波羅蜜」〔T25 0561c09〕，乃至「以如夢、幻、炎、嚮、化隨順，是行般若波羅蜜。」〔T25 0561c12〕。論設難：「是菩薩未得一切種智，云何能順？」〔T25 0562a14〕；答以畢竟空為順之實體：「隨順畢竟空心則順一切種智心。」〔T25 0562a15〕，其據在「一切種智是寂滅相，佛後品中說：『一切寂滅相是一切種智。』」〔T25 0562a16〕。
無作法·無壞法·無所從來·無所去·不住·無數無量。 經②末所出菩薩行處之六遮：「無作法、無壞法、無所從來、亦無所去、無住處」〔T25 0561c18〕，「是法不可數、無有量」〔T25 0561c19〕。論②逐詞訓之：「是法不從六波羅蜜來，故言『無所從來』。」〔T25 0562a24〕；「有為，虛誑故『不住』；無為法中，無憶想分別故亦『不住』。」〔T25 0562a25〕——不住一詞兩面皆立，有為以虛誑故不住，無為以無憶想分別故亦不住；「五眾和合故有六道數，壞五眾相續故則『無數、無量』。」〔T25 0562a27〕，「無數、無量故則語言道斷」〔T25 0562a28〕。
如相·一如無二無別。 全品收束之目。經②：「色如相乃至一切種智如相皆是一如，無二無別。」〔T25 0561c22〕；論②自出其因緣：「色等諸法即是薩婆若，薩婆若即是色等諸法。」〔T25 0562b01〕，「色等諸法如即是薩婆若如，薩婆若如即是色等諸法如」〔T25 0562b02〕——所趣與能趣於如相中無二，故「趣」之一字至此自銷。
三、譬喻與故事
本品篇幅最輕，要喻亦少——經文全無設喻，論中自出二喻，引事零。
子趣父母喻（承「一切眾生所歸趣」義）。 論①釋菩薩何以為眾生所歸趣，出一極平近之喻：「如子為苦惱所逼，則趣父母。」〔T25 0561b05〕——歸趣不是仰慕之辭，是苦惱所逼時腳步自然所向之處。喻在「所逼」二字：不逼則不趣，趣之真偽於苦時可驗。
雷霆·小鳥·孔雀喻（承「聞深般若不怖」義）。 論②釋驗知第四相，出一對比之喻：「如雷霆，小鳥則怖畏悶死；孔雀大鳥歡喜舞戲。」〔T25 0562a05〕——同一雷聲，於小鳥為殺，於孔雀為樂；論即配其法：「邪見凡夫聞則恐怖；阿鞞跋致菩薩聞則歡喜，心無厭足」〔T25 0562a07〕。般若之深不變，聞者之器異，故驚怖與歡喜適足以驗人——喻與所驗之義嚴密相扣，非泛設。
四、所釋經文
品名三造網：趣一切智／驗知／趣智（並錄不判）。 本品品名三造，逐一據底本誌之。其一，趣一切智品——本論底本品題〔T25 0560c29〕「大智度論釋趣一切智品第五十三」。其二，驗知品——聖本作「摩訶般若波羅蜜驗知品第五十二」（經題式·-1 階·「驗知」異名）、石本作「摩訶般若波羅蜜經品第五十二驗知品趣一切智」（經題式·-1 階·「驗知」「趣一切智」二名疊出，詞序亦異）。「驗知」一名之所本，當在經①末「阿鞞跋致菩薩摩訶薩應當驗知」〔T25 0561a20〕一句與經②之驗知諸相——底本以品首之「趣一切智」名品，聖石二本以品身後半之「驗知」名品，兩造各取一義，並錄不判。其三，趣智品——所釋經 T223 側品題〔T08 0334a02〕「摩訶般若波羅蜜經趣智品第五十三」（無「一切」二字）；吉藏疏目次與正文科判皆作「趣智品第五十三」〔X24n0451 0195b22〕、〔X24n0451 0302b17〕。又本論明本於品題內刪「一切」二字（見下），其正文品名亦成「趣智品」——與 T223 側之簡稱字面相合，惟成因各異（明本＝底本內部之異本刪節；T223＝異譯本自身之題），不可逕謂同源，如實並錄。
明本刪節與夾註兩層之分歧。 品題〔T25 0560c29〕明本刪「大智度論」四字（第八目下帳第二條）、宋元明宮四本刪「一切」二字（下帳第四條）；而明本於「第五十三」之「三」字下出夾註「經作趣一切智品」（下帳第五條）——即明本正文品名雖簡作「趣智品」，其夾註仍標所釋經原題作「趣一切智品」。正文與夾註兩層於明本自身互異，如實誌錄此分歧，不強解孰為明本之定讀。宮本此處別作「三品」。
品次 -1 階（聖石續存·唯品題一層）。 本論聖本「第五十二」、石本「品第五十二」，皆較底本品序「第五十三」少一，與品四十四以下逐品順推、同向同幅——-1 階鏈於本品續存無斷。本品範圍內 -1 階另見一端：品末「別」字注，聖本作「別（釋第五十二品竟）」、石本作「別（釋五十二品竟）」（下帳第四十二條）——品末「釋某品竟」型夾註於此與品題兩層互證，二本皆作「五十二」，-1 階於品題、品末兩端同幅，非孤證。
T223 mulu n 屬性 +1 偏移（續存）。 所釋經 T223 側本品之 mulu 標 n="54" 而顯文標「53 趣智品」〔T08 0334a02〕——n 屬性 +1 偏移自品四十一以來屢見，本品續存（承品四十八既誌之常設體例，不重判）。次品〈大如品〉mulu 標 n="55" 而顯文「54 大如品」〔T08 0334c16〕，同款 +1。又本品品題 head 內另見 star 錨一枚，corresp 目標為 note(0328003)〔T08 0328a05〕——該注在 T223 品五十〈成辦品〉（本論品五十〈大事起品〉所釋）題名內，屬 T223 自身題名用字之重出組，與本論側 star 無涉，如實誌錄。
T223 側品界繫卷界。 所釋經本品訖〔T08 0334c04〕，即以「摩訶般若波羅蜜經卷第十五」〔T08 0334c05〕收卷，次品〈大如品〉起於卷第十六。本論側本品亦恰收於卷七十一之末（見第一目）——兩傳承於此品之品界、卷界罕見地同時合一，如實誌錄；惟兩側卷數不同（本論卷七十一／所釋經卷第十五），非同一分卷體系，不引為一事。
全量牒經對讀（兩側對勘·兩造校記互印·對照組）。 本論經①②與所釋經〈趣智品〉逐字幾近同文，其異皆小：本論「何等法壞故」〔T25 0561a09〕，T223 作「何法壞故，般若波羅蜜為壞修？」〔T08 0334a11〕；本論「不以他人語為堅要，亦不隨他教行。」〔T25 0561b22〕，T223 作「不以他語為堅要，亦不隨他教行。」〔T08 0334a28〕（少一「人」字）；本論「以如夢、幻、炎、嚮、化隨順，是行般若波羅蜜。」〔T25 0561c12〕，T223 作「以如夢、幻、焰、響、化隨順，是行般若波羅蜜。」〔T08 0334b19〕（炎／焰·嚮／響）；本論作「阿鞞跋致」，T223 作「阿惟越致菩薩摩訶薩應當驗知。」〔T08 0334a22〕。四處之異，兩造校記皆互印：①處／入——本論〔T25 0561a11〕「處」字之異讀作「入」，出聖本（下帳第十二條，star 共用品五十二之注），T223 側同位〔T08 0334a13〕注作「處【大】，入【宋】【元】【明】【宮】」；②行／觀——本論〔T25 0561c15〕「行」字異讀作「觀」出聖本（下帳第二十五條），T223 側〔T08 0334b22〕注作「行【大】，觀【中】」；③問／聞——本論〔T25 0561b28〕「問」字異讀作「聞」出宋元明宮聖（下帳第二十三條），T223 側〔T08 0334b05〕注作「問【大】，聞【元】【明】」；④嚮／響——本論〔T25 0561c12〕作「嚮」而元明作「響」（下帳第二十四條），T223 側〔T08 0334b19〕反之，底本作「響」而聖中二本作「嚮」，兩造互為底本與異讀。四處皆兩藏各自校記所並載，非以甲本之詞搜乙本之弱判。
品題「一切」二字之兩造互印（本目之眼）。 本論品題〔T25 0560c29〕注作「一切【大】，〔－〕【宋】【元】【明】【宮】」——底本有「一切」，宋元明宮四本無；所釋經 T223 品題〔T08 0334a02〕注則作「智【大】，一切智【宋】【元】【明】【宮】【聖】」——底本作「趣智品」，宋元明宮聖五本反作「趣一切智品」。兩造校記恰成鏡像：本論之底本讀法（有「一切」）正是 T223 諸異本之讀法，T223 之底本讀法（無「一切」）正是本論諸異本之讀法。品名「趣智／趣一切智」之兩讀，非一藏之內部游移，而是兩藏傳承各自並存之兩讀，如實誌錄，不判孰正。
「薩婆若即是色」一句之有無（兩造互印其二）。 本論經②「色即是薩婆若，乃至一切種智即是薩婆若。」〔T25 0561c21〕，其「若」字兩注（下帳第二十九、三十條）誌元明二本於此增「薩婆若即是色」「薩婆若即是一切種智」二語；T223 側同位〔T08 0334b29〕作「色即是薩婆若，薩婆若即是色。」，其注則誌聖本、中本無「薩婆若即是色」一語〔T08 0334b29〕、無「薩婆若即是一切種智」一語〔T08 0334c01〕。本論之元明增文，正即所釋經底本之文；所釋經之聖中刪文，正即本論底本之文——同一互文對句之有無，於兩藏各見一半，合之乃全，如實誌錄。
對照組（七串·兩藏各唯一見·對位唯一）。 「世尊！是諸菩薩摩訶薩解深般若波羅蜜者，當趣何所？」〔T25 0561a01〕／〔T08 0334a03〕；「則為一切眾生所歸趣」〔T25 0561a05〕／〔T08 0334a07〕；「不受修、壞修是修般若波羅蜜。」〔T25 0561a08〕／〔T08 0334a10〕；「四念處乃至一切種智中不著」〔T25 0561a23〕／〔T08 0334a25〕；「心不驚、不沒、不怖、不畏、不悔，歡喜樂聞」〔T25 0561b26〕／T223 作「心不驚不沒不怖不畏不悔，歡喜樂聞」〔T08 0334b03〕；「是法不可數、無有量」〔T25 0561c19〕／〔T08 0334b26〕；「色如相乃至一切種智如相皆是一如，無二無別。」〔T25 0561c22〕／T223 作「色如相乃至一切種智如相，皆是一如，無二無別。」〔T08 0334c02〕。以上七串之漢字流，於 T25n1509 全論與 T08n0223 全經各唯一見（本帳逐串於兩藏底本原檔以容錯法獨立重掃，非轉抄），對位唯一、無他品可淆。判為「同品異名」（品身逐字幾近同文，品名三造之異見上）。本論二【論】層為論體之結構性擴增，所釋經無此層，非異文。所釋經 T223 側本品對讀範圍〔T08 0334a02–0334c05〕內之校勘 witness，本帳已逐條掃得二十二條編號注、七枚 star 重引（其中六枚共用「惟越」一注），其與本論互印之四處與二組互文已如上誌錄，餘條未逐條展開，據實誌其未展開，不以估值充數。
五、般若義眼
本品之眼，在一「趣」字被般若翻透——趣非有一處可到，而是行者於畢竟空中無著之向；向既無著，則所趣與能趣於如相中無二。其義可約為五重。
其一，無趣不趣是破常，不是立無趣。論①開卷即自設難：「般若波羅蜜非趣、非不趣」〔T25 0561a25〕，而所以言無趣者，為破外道「諸法從因趣果、從先世入今世、從今世趣後世。」〔T25 0561a27〕之常顛倒；「破是常顛倒故，言『無趣不趣』。」〔T25 0561a28〕——遮詞之用在對治，非別立一法。故問答仍立而不礙：「此中，須菩提以無著心問，佛以無著心答。」〔T25 0561a29〕。無著心是本品全部問答之底色：同一句「趣一切種智」，著心說則成外道之趣，無著心說則成般若之趣。
其二，自趣與所歸趣是一事之兩面。經①才答「當趣一切種智」〔T25 0561a03〕，須菩提即轉為「則為一切眾生所歸趣，修般若波羅蜜故。」〔T25 0561a05〕——菩薩趣一切種智之同時即為眾生所歸趣，不是先自趣而後度他。論以大悲繫之：「菩薩於眾生中大悲心故，常修習般若波羅蜜。」〔T25 0561b07〕——所以能為歸趣者，在大悲所推之修，不在已到之果。
其三，修之為修，正在其可壞。經①以三遮詞翻「修」字：「無所修是修般若波羅蜜，不受修、壞修是修般若波羅蜜。」〔T25 0561a07〕；而佛不令此三詞停在名言上，逕設問「何等法壞故，般若波羅蜜為壞修？」〔T25 0561a09〕，逼出五眾以至一切種智之全帳。壞修之壞不是行者去壞，是「一切法無常散壞，故名壞修。」〔T25 0561b13〕——所修之法自身無常，修乃得名為般若之修。三遮詞層層相銜：無定實法可得故無所修，諸觀有過故不受修，所修自壞故壞修。
其四，驗人之法在著不著，不在所現之相。經①末以驗知收前半品：「若菩薩摩訶薩是深般若波羅蜜中不著，當知是阿鞞跋致」〔T25 0561a21〕。論出其可驗之實據：「行般若波羅蜜菩薩有二種」〔T25 0561b17〕——觀般若亦自空者，與不能觀般若亦空者。驗之所以必要，正因二者外相難分；而所驗之處不在深法之外，即在深法之中：於般若不著，即是阿鞞跋致之相。經②所列五相——不以他語為堅要、不為三毒所牽、不離六度、聞深法不怖、宿世已問——皆此一判準之逐面展開。
其五，趣之銷處在如相無二。經②末問「是菩薩摩訶薩行何法」〔T25 0561c14〕，佛答「菩薩摩訶薩不行色，不行受、想、行、識，乃至不行一切種智。」〔T25 0561c16〕，並出六遮：「無作法、無壞法、無所從來、亦無所去、無住處」〔T25 0561c18〕。六遮非為空無所有，是為顯「色即是薩婆若，乃至一切種智即是薩婆若。」〔T25 0561c21〕——所趣之薩婆若不在色外，則趣無所趣而後趣乃成。「色如相乃至一切種智如相皆是一如，無二無別。」〔T25 0561c22〕——開卷之「當趣何所」至此得其究竟答：無所可趣，而趣不斷。
六、諸家異釋
《大智度論》本無逐文全疏之傳統，古德引釋率屬據實偏倚。本品古德覆讀唯一家：釋所釋經之吉藏疏存完整專章；釋論之慧影疏於本品零覆蓋；均正書、天台系諸書於本品零命中。此目誌錄其所疏所引與本品之對應，不判各家詮釋高下。
吉藏《大品經義疏》（X24n0451）。 於所釋經〈趣智品〉之逐文疏，起「趣智品第五十三」〔X24n0451 0302b17〕（緊接前品疏訖處），迄〔X24n0451 0303a10〕，次品「大如品第五十四」〔X24n0451 0303a11〕起前，覆本品經全篇。其可誌者五。
其一，品位與大科——「此第三明中下根人者，標大果。」〔X24n0451 0302b18〕，「第一明由般若故趣薩婆若果，二識驗信般若人相，三明能如所驗釋法不著秤順薩婆若也。」〔X24n0451 0302b18〕：吉藏以本品屬中下根人一段之第三，並以『趣果·驗人·隨順』三分全品，與本論經①趣一切種智、經①末至經②驗知相、經②隨順一切種智心之次第相值。
其二，非趣不趣乃是趣道——「已上明非趣不趣，今所以問趣答趣著，以明非趣不趣乃是趣道耳」〔X24n0451 0302b21〕：吉藏以前文既明非趣不趣，今復問趣答趣，正所以顯非趣不趣即是趣道。其所破亦標外道：「又上破諸外道，言有未來法趣現在，現在法趣過去，故云無此趣不趣耳。」〔X24n0451 0302b23〕——與本論「破是常顛倒故」之釋同指外道三世相趣之執，二家所舉之外道義同而詞異（本論作「從因趣果、從先世入今世、從今世趣後世」，吉藏作「未來法趣現在，現在法趣過去」），如實分記。其立義則進一步：「今菩薩無所得因，不趣三有及二乘」〔X24n0451 0302c01〕。
其三，初段三意之科——「初三意：一、明趣因行果；二、明趣化他果；三、釋二趣意。」〔X24n0451 0302c03〕：以自趣、為眾生所歸趣、雙釋二趣三意科經①前分，與本論論①「趣一切種智」「為一切眾生所歸趣」『修般若即修一切法』之三段次第相值。其釋修義：「修般若是修一切法也，一切行由般若乃成也。」〔X24n0451 0302c08〕；釋壞修則以內外雙破立義：「外行及內心皆可破壞，故言壞修」〔X24n0451 0302c10〕——此與本論之訓不同：本論訓壞修在「一切法無常散壞」〔T25 0561b13〕，吉藏訓在外行內心皆可破壞，二家立義小異，並錄不判。
其四，驗人段之科與五相——「第二、驗得外人相。上品壞說其人相，今更令驗之。」〔X24n0451 0302c13〕：與本論「上品末說阿鞞跋致菩薩性、相、貌，今應驗試知。」〔T25 0561b15〕同以前品之說人相為本品驗知之所承，二家於此承前一節所見全同。其列五相之二、三、四相：「在家人著五欲，出家外道著邪見」〔X24n0451 0302c17〕，「三者、雖未得道不隨三毒所引。四者、知善法味故常不離六度。」〔X24n0451 0302c19〕——與本論論②逐相所釋（他人二種、貪欲折薄、知善法果報味）逐條相值。
其五，末段之訓——「第三、明能如所驗於法不著，便能隨順一切種智也」〔X24n0451 0302c23〕；釋六遮之首二詞：「無作法、無壞法者，明一切種智是無為法」〔X24n0451 0303a02〕；釋無數無量：「五陰和合有六道數，破五眾相續故無六道數」〔X24n0451 0303a06〕——末一句與本論「五眾和合故有六道數，壞五眾相續故則『無數、無量』。」〔T25 0562a27〕幾近逐字同文（五陰／五眾之譯名異、破／壞一字異），二家於此顯有同源之訓，如實誌錄，不判孰先。
慧影《大智度論疏》（X46n0791）·零覆蓋（如實誌）。 為釋本論之唯一古疏，僅殘卷存世。本帳於 X46n0791 全檔獨立回搜「趣一切智」「趣智品」「驗知品」三串，皆零命中；復搜「阿鞞跋致」「善知識品」「譬喻品」「大如品」亦皆零命中（唯「善知識品」於 X46n0791〔0904a11〕1 見，係品六十一疏旁指，非本品範圍）——本論卷七十一及其前後諸品全不在該疏殘卷覆蓋範圍，零覆蓋屬殘卷實況，非搜尋失誤，如實誌錄負結果。
均正《大乘四論玄義》（X46n0784）·零命中（如實誌）。 本品品名三造於 X46n0784 全檔回搜零命中，均正於本品無具名引，如實誌錄。
天台系（T46n1911《摩訶止觀》·T46n1912《止觀輔行傳弘決》·T33n1716《法華玄義》·T33n1717《法華玄義釋籤》）·零命中（如實誌）。 本帳於四檔全檔獨立回搜「趣一切智」「趣智品」「驗知品」三串，皆零命中——本品品題於天台系四書無明稱之引，候補不登，如實誌錄負結果。
七、互讀與承衍
本品之義脈，前後相承者有四，皆此目所誌，不代定讀。
其一，『性相貌—驗知』之品次承衍（論主自證·硬鏈本論自身）。 前品〈善知識品〉末，須菩提問信解深般若者「有何等性、何等相、何等貌？」〔T25 0560c01〕，佛答以「欲、瞋」等斷離為其性相貌；本品論①即自述其承：「上品末說阿鞞跋致菩薩性、相、貌，今應驗試知。」〔T25 0561b15〕——前品說其人之相，本品驗其人之實，品次相生。此承衍另有一機械之證：本品〔T25 0561b16〕「貌」字之校記，非本品原生之注，而以 star 共用前品〔T25 0560c02〕之注（聖本作「𦴭」，下帳第二十一條）——論主所承之句與所承之注，於底本傳承層亦相繫，如實誌錄。所釋經側同一句作「欲瞋癡斷離是性相貌」〔T08 0333c29〕，「性相貌」三字之漢字流於本論全書二見（〔T25 0560c02〕、〔T25 0561b16〕）、於所釋經全經一見（〔T08 0333c29〕），對位唯一，本帳逐串重掃所得。
其二，『趣、非趣』通式之承（承品五十二經③）。 前品經③廣示『一切法趣某某·是趣不過』之通式（見該品考據第一目），其中即含「趣非趣不可得故」一語；本品論①開卷之「般若波羅蜜非趣、非不趣」〔T25 0561a25〕承此通式而設難，佛之答與論之釋皆不離該式。本品之「趣」義不自本品起，是前品通式落到一切種智一事上的收束——誌其承，不代前品定讀。
其三，『佛後品中說』之前指（逐字查無·如實誌）。 論②引一佛語為據：「一切種智是寂滅相，佛後品中說：『一切寂滅相是一切種智。』」〔T25 0562a16〕——所引既標「後品」，當在本論本品以下。本帳以「一切寂滅相是一切種智」十字漢字流於 T25n1509 全論獨立重掃，全書一見，即本句自身〔T25 0562a16〕，本品以下零命中；於 T08n0223 全經亦零命中。本論後文義近者，最近一處為「是諸法如即是寂滅相，是無上道相。」〔T25 0584b25〕——誌其關聯，不判為論主所指之後品文；逐字之前指據實標闕，不以義近之文充之。
其四，寶庫掛鏈（穩定徵引·軟引）。 本品「無趣不趣」破常之訓、「無所修·不受修·壞修」三名之訓、「隨順畢竟空心則順一切種智心」〔T25 0562a15〕之行法、與「色即是薩婆若」之如相無二，為後世論般若行趣之所本，落穩定徵引〔T25n1509 趣一切智品·卷七十一〕；諸帙引本論處尚未定稿，故軟引，俟其逐字核存。此屬般若義下貫諸經之承衍，誌錄不判。
八、校本與版本說明
本品底本為《大智度論》卷七十一〔T25 0560c29–0562b08〕（品身正文自品題〔T25 0560c29〕起，終於「是如無二無別」句迄〔T25 0562b04〕；卷末題「大智度論卷第七十一」〔T25 0562b05〕在本品範圍之內，次卷卷首題兼次品品題〔T25 0562b08〕前）；所釋經校本為《摩訶般若波羅蜜經》〈趣智品〉〔T08 0334a02–0334c05〕（品訖即卷第十五訖）；古德疏校本為吉藏《大品經義疏》（X24n0451，覆本品〔X24n0451 0302b17–0303a10〕）；慧影《大智度論疏》（X46n0791）本品零覆蓋、均正《大乘四論玄義》（X46n0784）本品零命中、天台系四書零命中（見第六目）。異讀校記依大正校勘，涉大正底本與宋、元、明、宮、聖、石（石山寺本）諸本及 CBETA 校之異——本品未見聖乙本入帳。
品題校記（品名三造與 -1 階之底據·專列）。 品題〔T25 0560c29〕一注三造——「大智度論釋趣一切智品第五十三【大】｜摩訶般若波羅蜜驗知品第五十二【聖】｜摩訶般若波羅蜜經品第五十二驗知品趣一切智【石】」——此即品名三造與品次 -1 階之底據，如實並錄，不強加調解（析論見第四目）。同處另有三注一星：明本刪「大智度論」四字、star 共用前品之「度」字注、宋元明宮刪「一切」二字、明宮二本於「三」字下之異（下帳第一至第五條）。
校記附註（傍註）二條·原樣保留（專列）。 本品校記之內另含底本夾註二處，底本原檔之夾註型子注，本帳原樣保留不刪：其一，〔T25 0560c29〕「三【大】｜三（經作趣一切智品）【明】｜三品【宮】」（下帳第五條）——括注內即明本所標之經題；其二，〔T25 0562b04〕「別【大】｜別（釋第五十二品竟）【聖】｜別（釋五十二品竟）【石】」（下帳第四十二條）——括注內即聖石二本之品末收束記，並為 -1 階之第二端證（見第四目）。
CBETA 校訂層二條（非傳統諸本並陳型·專列）。 其一，〔T25 0561b15〕「末【CB】｜未【大】」（下帳第二十條）——底本之 note 型為 type="add"，即 CBETA 校訂底本【大】之「未」為「末」（「上品末說」），無宋元明宮聖石等傳統 witness 標記，屬 CBETA 現代校勘層，本版讀者面從 CBETA 現行文本讀法。其二，卷末題〔T25 0562b05〕之注，底本之 lem 作「（大智…一）九字」之略記（CBETA 略記體例，指「大智度論卷第七十一」九字），本帳依既有體例（承品四十八卷七十續題之處理）逕錄其所指之九字全文，並於此標明底本之略記形，俾兩層可互溯。
star 八枚·全數跨品（專列）。 本品範圍內 star anchor 八枚（beg_7d7–beg_7de），本帳逐枚解其 corresp 目標並定位所屬品，得八枚全數跨品、零品內——目標分佈：品五十〈大事起品〉三見（note(0554005)〔T25 0554a24〕一見·note(0554008)〔T25 0554b23〕二見）、品五十一〈譬喻品〉二見（note(0556006)〔T25 0556b05〕二見）、品五十二〈善知識品〉三見（note(0557009)〔T25 0557b13〕一見·note(0559001)〔T25 0559a04〕一見·note(0560007)〔T25 0560c02〕一見）。此為既有 witness 組（同一異讀組於文中多處同形字重出共用一注）之跨品連結標記，非本品獨有之義理歧異；其中 note(0560007) 一枚所繫之句即論主承前品之「性、相、貌」（見第七目），note(0554008) 二枚即二枚【論】結構標記之共用注。star 目標之注文於底本帶「＊」記，本帳依底本原樣保留。
校勘總帳（四十三條全量對帳·底本原樣）。 下依底本出現序全量列之，內含 star 重引八條，隨條標明其 corresp 目標與所屬品。異本讀法並列保存，正文仍從現行底本讀法：
app 條（四十三·底本出現序·star-corresp 隨條標明）
- 〔T25 0560c29〕大智度論釋趣一切智品第五十三【大】｜摩訶般若波羅蜜驗知品第五十二【聖】｜摩訶般若波羅蜜經品第五十二驗知品趣一切智【石】（品題一注三造·趣一切智／驗知兩名系＋聖石-1階·見第四目）
- 〔T25 0560c29〕大智度論【大】｜〔－〕【明】（品題內·明本刪「大智度論」四字）
- 〔T25 0560c29〕度【大】＊｜〔－〕【宋】【宮】＊（star·corresp→note(0557009)＝品五十二〈善知識品〉題〔T25 0557b13〕注·跨品共用）
- 〔T25 0560c29〕一切【大】｜〔－〕【宋】【元】【明】【宮】（品題內·四本無「一切」＝作「趣智品」·與所釋經底本題字面相合·見第四目）
- 〔T25 0560c29〕三【大】｜三（經作趣一切智品）【明】｜三品【宮】（校記附註〔傍註〕原樣保留·明本正文與夾註兩層互異·見第四目）
- 〔T25 0561a02〕解【大】｜能解【元】【明】
- 〔T25 0561a03〕者【大】｜〔－〕【元】【明】【宮】
- 〔T25 0561a05〕則【大】｜是【宋】【元】【明】｜〔－〕【宮】
- 〔T25 0561a07〕是【大】＊｜〔－〕【石】＊（star·corresp→note(0554005)＝品五十〈大事起品〉〔T25 0554a24〕注·跨品共用）
- 〔T25 0561a07〕諸【大】｜〔－〕【聖】
- 〔T25 0561a09〕般若【大】｜修般若【宋】【元】【明】【宮】
- 〔T25 0561a11〕處【大】＊｜入【聖】＊（star·corresp→note(0559001)＝品五十二〔T25 0559a04〕注·跨品共用·所釋經側同位注作「處【大】，入【宋】【元】【明】【宮】」·兩造互印·見第四目）
- 〔T25 0561a21〕應【大】｜〔－〕【聖】
- 〔T25 0561a22〕致【大】｜致相【聖】【石】
- 〔T25 0561a25〕【論】【大】＊｜〔－〕【宋】【宮】【聖】＊（結構標記存否注·star·corresp→note(0554008)＝品五十〔T25 0554b23〕注·跨品共用·見第一目）
- 〔T25 0561b03〕故【大】｜〔－〕【宋】【元】【明】
- 〔T25 0561b03〕般若【大】｜般若波羅蜜【聖】【石】
- 〔T25 0561b06〕深【大】｜〔－〕【宋】【宮】
- 〔T25 0561b13〕名【大】｜必【聖】
- 〔T25 0561b15〕末【CB】｜未【大】（CBETA 校訂層·底本 note 型 type="add"·無傳統 witness·見上專列）
- 〔T25 0561b16〕貌【大】＊｜𦴭【聖】＊（star·corresp→note(0560007)＝品五十二〔T25 0560c02〕注·跨品共用·所繫句即論主承前品「性、相、貌」處·見第七目）
- 〔T25 0561b21〕若【大】｜若有【宋】【元】【明】【聖】【石】
- 〔T25 0561b28〕問【大】｜聞【宋】【元】【明】【宮】【聖】（所釋經側同位注作「問【大】，聞【元】【明】」·兩造互印·見第四目）
- 〔T25 0561c12〕嚮【大】｜響【元】【明】（所釋經側同位注反之作「響【大】，嚮【聖】【中】」·兩造互為底本與異讀·見第四目）
- 〔T25 0561c15〕行【大】｜觀【聖】（所釋經側同位注作「行【大】，觀【中】」·兩造互印·見第四目）
- 〔T25 0561c18〕摩訶薩【大】｜〔－〕【宋】【元】【明】【宮】
- 〔T25 0561c18〕行【大】｜無行【宋】【聖】【石】
- 〔T25 0561c19〕法【大】｜法相【聖】【石】
- 〔T25 0561c22〕若【大】｜若薩婆若即是色【元】【明】（元明增文即所釋經底本之文·見第四目）
- 〔T25 0561c22〕若【大】｜若薩婆若即是一切種智【元】【明】（元明增文即所釋經底本之文·見第四目）
- 〔T25 0561c24〕【論】【大】＊｜〔－〕【宋】【宮】【聖】＊（結構標記存否注·star·corresp→note(0554008)＝品五十〔T25 0554b23〕注·跨品共用·與上第十五條重出同一 witness 組）
- 〔T25 0561c24〕說【大】｜試【宋】【元】【明】｜誡【聖】【石】
- 〔T25 0561c27〕邪【大】＊｜耶【聖】＊（star·corresp→note(0556006)＝品五十一〈譬喻品〉〔T25 0556b05〕注·跨品共用）
- 〔T25 0562a05〕霆【大】｜電【聖】【石】
- 〔T25 0562a07〕邪【大】＊｜耶【聖】＊（star·corresp→note(0556006)＝品五十一〈譬喻品〉〔T25 0556b05〕注·跨品共用·與上第三十三條重出同一 witness 組）
- 〔T25 0562a10〕福德智慧【大】｜智慧福德【聖】【石】（底本原注之本讀無頓號·工作底本清單作「福德、智慧」·如實誌錄，並列不判）
- 〔T25 0562a15〕隨【大】｜〔－〕【宋】【元】【明】【宮】
- 〔T25 0562a16〕心【大】｜〔－〕【聖】【石】
- 〔T25 0562a19〕是【大】｜如【石】
- 〔T25 0562a22〕法【大】｜〔－〕【聖】
- 〔T25 0562b04〕如【大】｜〔－〕【宋】【元】【明】【聖】【石】
- 〔T25 0562b04〕別【大】｜別（釋第五十二品竟）【聖】｜別（釋五十二品竟）【石】（校記附註〔傍註〕原樣保留·聖石品末收束記·-1階第二端證·見第四目）
- 〔T25 0562b04〕不分卷【石】（point-anchor 型校記·
<anchor type="circle"/>無 beg/end 對·抽取器未收·回核底本原檔補列＝第四十四條·誌不入分母之機械數） - 〔T25 0562b05〕大智度論卷第七十一【大】｜大智度論經卷第七十一【聖】（卷末題注·底本 lem 作「（大智…一）九字」之略記·本帳錄其所指九字全文·見上專列）
以上四十三條與工作底本錨點校記之數機械相合，另補 point-anchor 型一條（0562b04「不分卷【石】」）合四十四條，star 之目標已隨條標明。品題一注三造、校記附註二條、CBETA 校訂層二條已於上文專列；本品範圍內另有點錨注一條〔T25 0562b04〕「不分卷【石】」不入此四十三條之帳，如實誌錄，並列不判。
所釋經 witness 對讀（已展開四處二組·餘未展開·誌闕待補）。 所釋經 T223 側本品對讀範圍〔T08 0334a02–0334c05〕內，本帳逐條掃得編號注二十二條、star 重引七枚；其與本論校記互印之四處（處／入·行／觀·問／聞·嚮／響）與二組互文（「薩婆若即是色」「薩婆若即是一切種智」之有無）、及品題「一切」二字之鏡像兩讀，已逐條誌於第四目。餘條之逐條並錄本帳未展開，據實誌其未展開，不以估值充數。
I. Structural Placement
Within the sequence in which the Mahāprajñāpāramitā-upadeśa comments on the Larger Sūtra, this chapter belongs to the section of the Commentary on the Remaining Chapters; it falls wholly in Fascicle 71, as a single unit. The fascicle-head title of Fascicle 71 is 「大智度論釋大事起品第五十」 tr. "Mahāprajñāpāramitā-upadeśa, Commentary on the Chapter on the Great Matter Arising, the Fiftieth"〔T25 0552c18〕—at that point it is still Chapter 50, "The Great Matter Arises"; within Fascicle 71 are contained, in order, Chapter 50, Chapter 51, "Parables", and Chapter 52, "The Good Friend", and the fascicle closes with this chapter. The chapter title 「大智度論釋趣一切智品第五十三」 tr. "Mahāprajñāpāramitā-upadeśa, Commentary on the Chapter on Tending toward Omniscience, the Fifty-third"〔T25 0560c29〕 rises directly on the end of the preceding chapter, "The Good Friend", the Fifty-second; at the head of the chapter there is no fascicle title and no signature of author or translator. The chapter body ends at 「色等諸法如即是薩婆若如，薩婆若如即是色等諸法如」 tr. "the suchness of form and the other dharmas is the suchness of sarvajñā; the suchness of sarvajñā is the suchness of form and the other dharmas"〔T25 0562b02〕 and the sentence below it, 「是如無二無別」 tr. "this suchness is without duality and without difference", up to〔T25 0562b04〕; the fascicle-end title 「大智度論卷第七十一」 tr. "Mahāprajñāpāramitā-upadeśa, Fascicle Seventy-one"〔T25 0562b05〕 falls within the range of this chapter—this chapter closes exactly at the end of Fascicle 71: the end of the chapter is tied to the end of the fascicle. The fascicle-head title of the next fascicle is precisely the chapter title of the next chapter, 「大智度論釋大如品第五十四」 tr. "Mahāprajñāpāramitā-upadeśa, Commentary on the Chapter on the Great Suchness, the Fifty-fourth"〔T25 0562b08〕, and the author's signature 「聖者龍樹造」 tr. "Composed by the noble Nāgārjuna"〔T25 0562b10〕 and the translator's signature 「後秦龜茲國三藏鳩摩羅什譯」 tr. "Translated by Kumārajīva, Tripiṭaka master of Kucha, in the Later Qin"〔T25 0562b11〕 appear again. This type differs from that of Chapter 46, "The Deeds of Māra", ‘the title rising at the head of a fascicle, and the next chapter continuing within the fascicle before it is finished’; it differs from the fascicle-crossing type of Chapter 48, "The Mother of the Buddhas"; and it differs too from that of Chapter 52, "The Good Friend", ‘lying in the middle of a fascicle, not touching a fascicle boundary’—this chapter is of the type lying at the end of a fascicle, the end of the chapter tied to the end of the fascicle, yet another distinct type among the types of the Commentary on the Remaining Chapters.
The whole chapter has one thousand nine hundred and sixty-three pure Chinese characters (a mechanically recounted value · agreeing with the figure recorded in the preparatory materials), the lightest of the chapters in recent sequence. Within the chapter the structure is two Sūtra 【經】 and two Treatise 【論】 sections alternating, a single unit: 【經】〔T25 0561a01〕, 【論】〔T25 0561a25〕, 【經】〔T25 0561b21〕, 【論】〔T25 0561c24〕. Each of the two 【論】 markers has a collation note, and the three texts Song, Palace, and Shōgozō lack these two structural markers; the two 【經】 markers have no collation note—whether the markers are present belongs to the layer of the base text's transmission, and the structural count still follows the tags of the base text (see the full ledger in Section VIII).
The number of questions and answers and the structure of speakers: Sūtra ① opens with Subhūti asking 「世尊！是諸菩薩摩訶薩解深般若波羅蜜者，當趣何所？」 tr. "World-Honored One! These bodhisattva-mahāsattvas who understand deep prajñāpāramitā—toward what should they tend?"〔T25 0561a01〕; the Buddha answers 「是菩薩摩訶薩解深般若波羅蜜者，當趣一切種智。」 tr. "These bodhisattva-mahāsattvas who understand deep prajñāpāramitā should tend toward the omniscience of all kinds."〔T25 0561a03〕; below this Subhūti sets out his argument〔T25 0561a04 白佛言〕, the Buddha sets a question, 「何等法壞故，般若波羅蜜為壞修？」 tr. "By the ruin of which dharmas is prajñāpāramitā the practice of ruin?"〔T25 0561a09〕, Subhūti answers item by item〔T25 0561a10〕, the Buddha approves〔T25 0561a17 佛言〕, and at the end, with 「爾時，佛告須菩提」 tr. "At that time the Buddha told Subhūti"〔T25 0561a19〕, the charge that the avaivartika be tested and known closes it. Of these, the passage at〔T25 0561a10〕 continues its answer directly from the Buddha's question in the preceding passage, and the base text does not repeat the marker of a change of speaker, 「須菩提言」 tr. "Subhūti said"; by the correspondence of question and answer it is judged directly to be Subhūti's answer; it is not an uncertain item, and it is recorded separately as it is. Treatise ① has two formal pairs of Question and Answer (one pair at 「般若波羅蜜非趣、非不趣」 tr. "prajñāpāramitā neither tends nor does not tend"〔T25 0561a25〕, one pair at 「何以故但菩薩解深般若波羅蜜為眾生所歸趣？」 tr. "Why is it only the bodhisattva who understands deep prajñāpāramitā who is that toward which beings return and tend?"〔T25 0561b06〕); the sentence 「須菩提言」 tr. "Subhūti said"〔T25 0561b04〕 between them is the treatise-author re-citing the text of Sūtra ① to continue his argument, not another speaker speaking on the scene; the final passage from 「佛可須菩提所說。」 tr. "The Buddha approved what Subhūti said."〔T25 0561b15〕 onward is the treatise-author's narrative transition, turning to the motif of testing in Sūtra ②, and is not counted in the number of question-and-answer pairs. Sūtra ②, carrying on from the transition at the end of Treatise ①, continues the exposition directly with 「若阿鞞跋致菩薩摩訶薩行深般若波羅蜜時」 tr. "If the avaivartika bodhisattva-mahāsattva, when practising deep prajñāpāramitā,"〔T25 0561b21〕; the base text gives no marker of a change of speaker, and by the ordinary pattern it is taken as the Buddha's exposition to Subhūti; the four turns below it all have explicit markers (〔T25 0561c03〕 「白佛言」 tr. "said to the Buddha", 〔T25 0561c05〕 「佛言」 tr. "the Buddha said", 〔T25 0561c08〕 「佛言」 tr. "the Buddha said", 〔T25 0561c16〕 「佛告」 tr. "the Buddha told"); in addition, the question at〔T25 0561c07〕 follows directly on the Buddha's answer in the preceding passage without repeating a marker, and is judged directly by the correspondence of question and answer. Treatise ② begins its discussion with 「釋曰」 tr. "The explanation says"〔T25 0561c24〕 (a marker opening the discussion, not counted in the number of question-and-answer pairs), and has only one formal pair of Question and Answer (「是菩薩未得一切種智，云何能順？」 tr. "This bodhisattva has not yet obtained the omniscience of all kinds; how can he accord with it?"〔T25 0562a14〕 / the answer〔T25 0562a15〕); in addition there are four places where the sūtra's questions and answers are restated in third-person narrative (〔T25 0562a09〕 「是中佛說因緣」 tr. "here the Buddha states the causes and conditions", 〔T25 0562a11〕 「須菩提問」 tr. "Subhūti asks", 〔T25 0562a13〕 「佛言」 tr. "the Buddha says", 〔T25 0562a19〕 「爾時，須菩提問」 tr. "At that time Subhūti asks" / 〔T25 0562a20〕 「佛答」 tr. "the Buddha answers")—this is not the formal pattern of 「問曰」 tr. "Question" and 「答曰」 tr. "Answer", nor is it another speaker stepping in; it is recorded separately as it is and not counted in the number of question-and-answer pairs. In the whole chapter there is no 「有人言」 tr. "someone says" (the same type as Chapter 52, in contrast with the fifteen occurrences in Chapter 48); the treatise's explanation is purely the treatise-author's own question and own answer and glossing along the text, with no divergent views cited side by side; recorded as it is.
The two axes of meaning follow the division of sūtra and treatise: Sūtra ① makes clear that where one who understands deep prajñā tends is the omniscience of all kinds, and with the one meaning of 「壞修」 tr. "the practice of ruin" turns over the Chinese character 「修」 tr. "practise"; Sūtra ② makes clear the marks by which the avaivartika is tested and known, and the method of practice of 「隨順一切種智心」 tr. "in accord with the mind of the omniscience of all kinds". Treatise ① explains why 「趣」 tr. "tending" can be asked about and answered within ultimate emptiness, and glosses the three names ‘practising nothing · the practice of not receiving · the practice of ruin’; Treatise ② explains mark by mark the five matters of testing and knowing, and at the end glosses the negating terms ‘without making · a dharma without ruin · coming from nowhere · going nowhere · not abiding · without number and without measure’, closing the whole chapter with the non-duality in the mark of suchness of 「色等諸法即是薩婆若」 tr. "form and the other dharmas are sarvajñā".
II. Terms Examined
Tending toward the omniscience of all kinds · sarvajñā. The general name of the whole chapter. The question and answer at the opening of Sūtra ① set up its heading: 「世尊！是諸菩薩摩訶薩解深般若波羅蜜者，當趣何所？」 tr. "World-Honored One! These bodhisattva-mahāsattvas who understand deep prajñāpāramitā—toward what should they tend?"〔T25 0561a01〕, 「是菩薩摩訶薩解深般若波羅蜜者，當趣一切種智。」 tr. "These bodhisattva-mahāsattvas who understand deep prajñāpāramitā should tend toward the omniscience of all kinds."〔T25 0561a03〕—in the chapter name 「趣一切智」 tr. "Tending toward Omniscience", its 「一切智」 tr. "omniscience" reads in the sūtra text 「一切種智」 tr. "the omniscience of all kinds", and the treatise's explanation mostly uses the Sanskrit sound-form 「薩婆若」 tr. "sarvajñā". Treatise ①, re-citing the question, uses the two names together at once: 「須菩提何以故問『行般若者趣至何處』？又佛何以答『趣薩婆若』？」 tr. "Why does Subhūti ask, ‘Where does one who practises prajñā tend to?’ And why does the Buddha answer, ‘He tends toward sarvajñā’?"〔T25 0561a25〕. The end of the chapter closes with the two names identical with each other: 「色即是薩婆若，乃至一切種智即是薩婆若。」 tr. "Form is sarvajñā, and so on up to the omniscience of all kinds is sarvajñā."〔T25 0561c21〕.
Tending, not tending (neither tending nor not tending). The pivot of this chapter, and also the mortise and tenon joining it to the preceding chapter. At the very opening of Treatise ① the treatise sets up an objection: 「般若波羅蜜非趣、非不趣」 tr. "prajñāpāramitā neither tends nor does not tend"〔T25 0561a25〕—since it neither tends nor does not tend, the question and answer 「趣何所」 tr. "toward what to tend" cannot in the first place be set up; the treatise explains for itself what it breaks: 「諸法從因趣果、從先世入今世、從今世趣後世。」 tr. "Dharmas tend from cause to fruit, enter this life from the former life, and tend from this life to the next life."〔T25 0561a27〕, 「破是常顛倒故，言『無趣不趣』。」 tr. "To break this inversion of permanence, it is said ‘no tending, not tending’."〔T25 0561a28〕—「無趣不趣」 tr. "no tending, not tending" is a word that treats the outside paths' view of permanence; it does not set up, within prajñā, a separate dharma of no tending. Once this has been broken, the question and answer are naturally without obstruction: 「此中，須菩提以無著心問，佛以無著心答。」 tr. "Here Subhūti asks with a mind without clinging, and the Buddha answers with a mind without clinging."〔T25 0561a29〕, 「因果相似故，故言：『解深般若者，趣一切種智。』」 tr. "Because cause and fruit resemble each other, it is said: ‘One who understands deep prajñā tends toward the omniscience of all kinds.’"〔T25 0561b03〕—that tending can be spoken of lies in not clinging; it does not lie in there being a place to which one can tend.
Returning and tending. The second turn of Sūtra ①: 「則為一切眾生所歸趣，修般若波羅蜜故。」 tr. "then he is that toward which all beings return and tend, because he practises prajñāpāramitā."〔T25 0561a05〕—the bodhisattva himself tends toward the omniscience of all kinds, and at the same time is that toward which beings return and tend. The treatise glosses its meaning with a simile: 「如子為苦惱所逼，則趣父母。」 tr. "As a child, pressed by pain and distress, tends toward its father and mother."〔T25 0561b05〕; it further asks why it is the bodhisattva alone toward whom they return and tend, and answers with great compassion and practice: 「菩薩於眾生中大悲心故，常修習般若波羅蜜。」 tr. "Because of his mind of great compassion toward beings, the bodhisattva constantly trains in prajñāpāramitā."〔T25 0561b07〕.
Practising prajñā is practising all dharmas. The motto of Sūtra ①, 「修般若波羅蜜即是修一切諸法。」 tr. "To practise prajñāpāramitā is to practise all dharmas."〔T25 0561a06〕; the treatise explains it along the text: 「以修故，能解一切諸法皆入般若波羅蜜，是故『修般若波羅蜜即修一切法』。」 tr. "Because of practice, one can understand that all dharmas enter prajñāpāramitā; therefore ‘to practise prajñāpāramitā is to practise all dharmas’."〔T25 0561b08〕—that all dharmas enter prajñā is why one practice gathers in all practices.
Practising nothing · the practice of not receiving · the practice of ruin. The chief heading of the glosses of this chapter; all three names are negating terms. Sūtra ①: 「無所修是修般若波羅蜜，不受修、壞修是修般若波羅蜜。」 tr. "Practising nothing is practising prajñāpāramitā; the practice of not receiving and the practice of ruin are practising prajñāpāramitā."〔T25 0561a07〕. The treatise glosses them name by name: 「般若無定實法可得，故經中說『無所修是修般若波羅蜜』。」 tr. "In prajñā no fixed, real dharma can be found; therefore the sūtra says ‘practising nothing is practising prajñāpāramitā’."〔T25 0561b10〕—practising nothing means there is no fixed, real dharma to be practised; 「一切諸觀有過故不受，是名不受修。」 tr. "All contemplations have faults and so are not received; this is called the practice of not receiving."〔T25 0561b12〕—the practice of not receiving means that because the contemplations have faults, they are not taken in; 「壞修者，一切法無常散壞，故名壞修。」 tr. "The practice of ruin: all dharmas are impermanent, scatter, and fall to ruin; hence it is called the practice of ruin."〔T25 0561b13〕—the practice of ruin means that the dharmas practised are themselves impermanent and scatter and fall to ruin. At this point the sūtra text sets up a question and answer to make clear what 「壞」 tr. "ruin" refers to: 「何等法壞故，般若波羅蜜為壞修？」 tr. "By the ruin of which dharmas is prajñāpāramitā the practice of ruin?"〔T25 0561a09〕, and Subhūti answers item by item that the five aggregates, the twelve sense-fields, the eighteen elements, the self and so on up to the knower and the seer, the six perfections, the inner and outer emptinesses, the four foundations of mindfulness and so on up to the eighteen unshared dharmas, and the four fruits and so on up to the omniscience of all kinds are all ruined—「我乃至知者、見者壞故，般若波羅蜜為壞修。」 tr. "Because the self and so on up to the knower and the seer are ruined, prajñāpāramitā is the practice of ruin."〔T25 0561a12〕; the treatise gathers up its headings: 「可破壞法者，所謂色等乃至一切種智。」 tr. "The dharmas that can be broken and ruined are form and the rest, and so on up to the omniscience of all kinds."〔T25 0561b14〕.
Avaivartika · testing and knowing. At the end of Sūtra ① it turns to the axis of testing and knowing: 「是深般若波羅蜜中，阿鞞跋致菩薩摩訶薩應當驗知！」 tr. "Within this deep prajñāpāramitā, the avaivartika bodhisattva-mahāsattva should be tested and known!"〔T25 0561a20〕, its criterion lying in clinging or not clinging: 「若菩薩摩訶薩是深般若波羅蜜中不著，當知是阿鞞跋致」 tr. "if a bodhisattva-mahāsattva does not cling within this deep prajñāpāramitā, know that he is avaivartika"〔T25 0561a21〕. The treatise explains why he must be tested: 「上品末說阿鞞跋致菩薩性、相、貌，今應驗試知。」 tr. "At the end of the preceding chapter the nature, mark, and appearance of the avaivartika bodhisattva were spoken of; now they should be tested and known."〔T25 0561b15〕; it further gives the real grounds on which he can be tested: 「行般若波羅蜜菩薩有二種」 tr. "bodhisattvas who practise prajñāpāramitā are of two kinds"〔T25 0561b17〕—the first contemplates prajñā too as empty of itself, the second cannot contemplate prajñā as empty as well—「是故經中試知著不？」 tr. "therefore the sūtra tests whether he clings or not."〔T25 0561b20〕. On the side of the sūtra explained this name is written 「阿惟越致」 tr. "avaivartika (a variant transliteration)" (see Section IV).
The five marks of testing and knowing. Sūtra ② lists them mark by mark: the first, 「不以他人語為堅要，亦不隨他教行。」 tr. "he does not take others' words as what is firm and essential, nor does he practise following others' teaching."〔T25 0561b22〕; the second, 「不為欲心、瞋心、癡心所牽」 tr. "he is not dragged by a mind of desire, a mind of hatred, or a mind of delusion"〔T25 0561b23〕; the third, he does not stray far from the six perfections; the fourth, 「心不驚、不沒、不怖、不畏、不悔，歡喜樂聞」 tr. "his mind is not startled, does not sink, is not terrified, is not afraid, has no regret; he gladly delights in hearing it"〔T25 0561b26〕; the fifth, 「是菩薩先世已問是深般若波羅蜜中事已」 tr. "in a former life this bodhisattva had already asked about the matters within this deep prajñāpāramitā"〔T25 0561b28〕, the reason lying in 「是菩薩摩訶薩有大威德故」 tr. "because this bodhisattva-mahāsattva has great majestic virtue"〔T25 0561b29〕. Treatise ② explains them mark by mark in order (see Section V).
In accord with the mind of the omniscience of all kinds. The method of practice of Sūtra ②. To Subhūti's question 「云何行般若」 tr. "how does one practise prajñā?", the Buddha answers: 「隨順一切種智心，是菩薩摩訶薩應如是行般若波羅蜜。」 tr. "In accord with the mind of the omniscience of all kinds—thus should the bodhisattva-mahāsattva practise prajñāpāramitā."〔T25 0561c05〕; asked further about its name, the Buddha lists, by the emptinesses and by the likenesses, the headings of according: 「以空隨順，是為菩薩摩訶薩行深般若波羅蜜」 tr. "to accord by emptiness—this is the bodhisattva-mahāsattva practising deep prajñāpāramitā"〔T25 0561c09〕, and so on up to 「以如夢、幻、炎、嚮、化隨順，是行般若波羅蜜。」 tr. "to accord by being like a dream, an illusion, a mirage, an echo, a transformation—this is practising prajñāpāramitā."〔T25 0561c12〕. The treatise raises an objection: 「是菩薩未得一切種智，云何能順？」 tr. "This bodhisattva has not yet obtained the omniscience of all kinds; how can he accord with it?"〔T25 0562a14〕; it answers with ultimate emptiness as the real substance of according: 「隨順畢竟空心則順一切種智心。」 tr. "The mind that accords with ultimate emptiness accords with the mind of the omniscience of all kinds."〔T25 0562a15〕, its ground lying in 「一切種智是寂滅相，佛後品中說：『一切寂滅相是一切種智。』」 tr. "the omniscience of all kinds is the mark of quiescence; the Buddha says in a later chapter: ‘The mark of quiescence of all things is the omniscience of all kinds.’"〔T25 0562a16〕.
A dharma without making · a dharma without ruin · coming from nowhere · going nowhere · not abiding · without number and without measure. The six negations of the bodhisattva's place of practice given at the end of Sūtra ②: 「無作法、無壞法、無所從來、亦無所去、無住處」 tr. "a dharma without making, a dharma without ruin, coming from nowhere, and going nowhere either, with no place of abiding"〔T25 0561c18〕, 「是法不可數、無有量」 tr. "this dharma cannot be counted and is without measure"〔T25 0561c19〕. Treatise ② glosses them term by term: 「是法不從六波羅蜜來，故言『無所從來』。」 tr. "This dharma does not come from the six perfections; hence it is said ‘coming from nowhere’."〔T25 0562a24〕; 「有為，虛誑故『不住』；無為法中，無憶想分別故亦『不住』。」 tr. "The conditioned, because it is false and deceptive, ‘does not abide’; in the unconditioned dharma, because there is no recollection, imagining, and discrimination, it also ‘does not abide’."〔T25 0562a25〕—the one term not abiding is established on both sides: the conditioned does not abide because it is false and deceptive, and the unconditioned also does not abide because it is without recollection, imagining, and discrimination; 「五眾和合故有六道數，壞五眾相續故則『無數、無量』。」 tr. "Because the five aggregates come together there is the count of the six destinies; because the continuity of the five aggregates is broken there is ‘no number and no measure’."〔T25 0562a27〕, 「無數、無量故則語言道斷」 tr. "because there is no number and no measure, the way of words is cut off"〔T25 0562a28〕.
The mark of suchness · one suchness, without duality and without difference. The heading that closes the whole chapter. Sūtra ②: 「色如相乃至一切種智如相皆是一如，無二無別。」 tr. "The mark of suchness of form and so on up to the mark of suchness of the omniscience of all kinds are all one suchness, without duality and without difference."〔T25 0561c22〕; Treatise ② gives for itself its causes and conditions: 「色等諸法即是薩婆若，薩婆若即是色等諸法。」 tr. "Form and the other dharmas are sarvajñā; sarvajñā is form and the other dharmas."〔T25 0562b01〕, 「色等諸法如即是薩婆若如，薩婆若如即是色等諸法如」 tr. "the suchness of form and the other dharmas is the suchness of sarvajñā; the suchness of sarvajñā is the suchness of form and the other dharmas"〔T25 0562b02〕—that toward which one tends and that which tends are without duality in the mark of suchness, and so the one Chinese character 「趣」 tr. "tend" here dissolves of itself.
III. Similes and Stories
This chapter is the lightest in length, and its principal similes are also few—the sūtra text sets up no simile at all; the treatise puts forward two similes of its own, and cites no stories.
The simile of the child tending toward its father and mother (continuing the meaning of 「一切眾生所歸趣」 tr. "that toward which all beings return and tend"). In Treatise ①, explaining why the bodhisattva is that toward which beings return and tend, the treatise puts forward a simile as plain and near as could be: 「如子為苦惱所逼，則趣父母。」 tr. "As a child, pressed by pain and distress, tends toward its father and mother."〔T25 0561b05〕—returning and tending is not a phrase of admiration; it is the place toward which one's feet go of themselves when pressed by pain and distress. The simile lies in the two Chinese characters 「所逼」 tr. "pressed by": without pressure there is no tending, and whether the tending is true or false can be tested in the time of suffering.
The simile of the thunderclap, the small birds, and the peacock (continuing the meaning of 「聞深般若不怖」 tr. "not being terrified on hearing deep prajñā"). In Treatise ②, explaining the fourth mark of testing and knowing, the treatise puts forward a simile of contrast: 「如雷霆，小鳥則怖畏悶死；孔雀大鳥歡喜舞戲。」 tr. "As with a thunderclap: small birds are terrified and die of fright, while the peacock, a great bird, rejoices and dances."〔T25 0562a05〕—the same peal of thunder is death to the small bird and delight to the peacock; the treatise at once matches it to the Dharma: 「邪見凡夫聞則恐怖；阿鞞跋致菩薩聞則歡喜，心無厭足」 tr. "ordinary people of wrong view hear it and are terrified; the avaivartika bodhisattva hears it and rejoices, his mind never sated"〔T25 0562a07〕. The depth of prajñā does not change; the vessels of the hearers differ, and so fright and joy are just enough to test a person—the simile and the meaning tested are tightly interlocked; it is not set up at random.
IV. The Sūtra Passage Explained
The network of the three formations of the chapter name: Tending toward Omniscience / Testing and Knowing / Tending toward Knowledge (recorded side by side without judgement). The chapter name of this chapter has three formations, each recorded in turn according to the base text. First, Tending toward Omniscience—the chapter title in the base text of this treatise〔T25 0560c29〕, 「大智度論釋趣一切智品第五十三」 tr. "Mahāprajñāpāramitā-upadeśa, Commentary on the Chapter on Tending toward Omniscience, the Fifty-third". Second, Testing and Knowing—the Shōgozō text reads 「摩訶般若波羅蜜驗知品第五十二」 tr. "Chapter on Mahāprajñāpāramitā, Testing and Knowing, the Fifty-second" (sūtra-title type · the -1 step · the variant name 「驗知」 tr. "Testing and Knowing"), and the Ishiyama text reads 「摩訶般若波羅蜜經品第五十二驗知品趣一切智」 tr. "Mahāprajñāpāramitā Sūtra, Chapter the Fifty-second, Chapter on Testing and Knowing, Tending toward Omniscience" (sūtra-title type · the -1 step · the two names 「驗知」 tr. "Testing and Knowing" and 「趣一切智」 tr. "Tending toward Omniscience" piled together, and in a different word order as well). The source of the name 「驗知」 tr. "testing and knowing" should lie in the sentence at the end of Sūtra ①, 「阿鞞跋致菩薩摩訶薩應當驗知」 tr. "the avaivartika bodhisattva-mahāsattva should be tested and known"〔T25 0561a20〕, and in the marks of testing and knowing in Sūtra ②—the base text names the chapter by 「趣一切智」 tr. "Tending toward Omniscience" from the head of the chapter, while the Shōgozō and Ishiyama texts name it by 「驗知」 tr. "Testing and Knowing" from the latter half of the chapter body; the two formations each take one meaning, recorded side by side without judgement. Third, Tending toward Knowledge—the chapter title on the side of the sūtra explained, T223〔T08 0334a02〕, 「摩訶般若波羅蜜經趣智品第五十三」 tr. "Mahāprajñāpāramitā Sūtra, Chapter on Tending toward Knowledge, the Fifty-third" (without the two Chinese characters 「一切」 tr. "all"); the table of contents of Jizang's commentary and his division of the text in the body both read 「趣智品第五十三」 tr. "Chapter on Tending toward Knowledge, the Fifty-third"〔X24n0451 0195b22〕, 〔X24n0451 0302b17〕. Further, the Ming edition of this treatise deletes the two characters 「一切」 tr. "all" within the chapter title (see below), so that its chapter name in the main text also becomes 「趣智品」 tr. "Chapter on Tending toward Knowledge"—agreeing in wording with the short name on the T223 side, but the causes are different (the Ming edition = an abridgement by a variant edition within the base text's own line; T223 = the title of the variant translation itself), and they cannot be said outright to share a source; both are recorded side by side as they are.
The divergence between the two layers of the Ming abridgement and its interlinear note. In the chapter title〔T25 0560c29〕 the Ming edition deletes the four Chinese characters 「大智度論」 tr. "Mahāprajñāpāramitā-upadeśa" (the second entry of the ledger in Section VIII), and the four editions Song, Yuan, Ming, and Palace delete the two characters 「一切」 tr. "all" (the fourth entry of the ledger below); while the Ming edition, in 「第五十三」 tr. "the fifty-third", beneath the character 「三」 tr. "three", gives the interlinear note 「經作趣一切智品」 tr. "the sūtra has Chapter on Tending toward Omniscience" (the fifth entry of the ledger below)—that is, though the chapter name in the Ming main text is shortened to 「趣智品」 tr. "Chapter on Tending toward Knowledge", its interlinear note still marks the original title of the sūtra explained as 「趣一切智品」 tr. "Chapter on Tending toward Omniscience". The two layers, main text and interlinear note, differ from each other within the Ming edition itself; this divergence is recorded as it is, without forcing a decision as to which is the Ming edition's settled reading. At this place the Palace edition instead reads 「三品」 tr. "three, chapter".
The -1 step in the chapter number (continuing in the Shōgozō and Ishiyama · only at the one layer of the chapter title). In this treatise the Shōgozō text has 「第五十二」 tr. "the fifty-second" and the Ishiyama text 「品第五十二」 tr. "chapter the fifty-second", both one less than the chapter order of the base text, 「第五十三」 tr. "the fifty-third", advancing chapter by chapter from Chapter 44 onward in the same direction and by the same amount—the chain of the -1 step continues unbroken in this chapter. Within the range of this chapter the -1 step is also seen at one other end: in the note on the character 「別」 tr. "difference" at the end of the chapter, the Shōgozō text reads 「別（釋第五十二品竟）」 tr. "difference (end of the commentary on the fifty-second chapter)" and the Ishiyama text 「別（釋五十二品竟）」 tr. "difference (end of the commentary on chapter fifty-two)" (the forty-second entry of the ledger below)—here the interlinear note of the type 「釋某品竟」 tr. "end of the commentary on such-and-such a chapter" at the end of the chapter and the chapter title attest each other at two layers, and both texts read 「五十二」 tr. "fifty-two"; the -1 step is of the same amount at both ends, chapter title and chapter end, and it is not a lone witness.
The +1 offset of the n attribute in the T223 mulu (continuing). On the side of the sūtra explained, T223, the mulu of this chapter is marked n="54" while the displayed text reads 「53 趣智品」 tr. "53 Chapter on Tending toward Knowledge"〔T08 0334a02〕—the +1 offset of the n attribute has been seen repeatedly since Chapter 41, and it continues in this chapter (following the standing practice already recorded at Chapter 48; not judged again). The mulu of the next chapter, "The Great Suchness", is marked n="55" while the displayed text reads 「54 大如品」 tr. "54 Chapter on the Great Suchness"〔T08 0334c16〕, the same +1. Further, within the head of this chapter's title there is also one star anchor, whose corresp target is note(0328003)〔T08 0328a05〕—that note lies within the title of T223's Chapter 50, "Accomplishing" (which is what Chapter 50 of this treatise, "The Great Matter Arises", explains), and belongs to the group of repeated uses of wording in T223's own titles; it has nothing to do with the stars on the side of this treatise; recorded as it is.
On the T223 side the chapter boundary is tied to the fascicle boundary. The sūtra explained ends this chapter at〔T08 0334c04〕 and closes the fascicle there with 「摩訶般若波羅蜜經卷第十五」 tr. "Mahāprajñāpāramitā Sūtra, Fascicle Fifteen"〔T08 0334c05〕; the next chapter, "The Great Suchness", begins in Fascicle Sixteen. On the side of this treatise this chapter also closes exactly at the end of Fascicle 71 (see Section I)—in this chapter the chapter boundaries and fascicle boundaries of the two transmissions coincide at once, a rare occurrence; recorded as it is; but the fascicle numbers on the two sides differ (this treatise Fascicle 71 / the sūtra explained Fascicle Fifteen); they are not one system of fascicle division, and they are not taken as one matter.
Full comparative reading of the cited sūtra (collation of the two sides · the collation notes of the two formations attesting each other · control group). Sūtras ① and ② of this treatise and "Tending toward Knowledge" in the sūtra explained are nearly identical word for word, and their differences are all small: this treatise's 「何等法壞故」 tr. "by the ruin of which dharmas"〔T25 0561a09〕, where T223 reads 「何法壞故，般若波羅蜜為壞修？」 tr. "By the ruin of what dharma is prajñāpāramitā the practice of ruin?"〔T08 0334a11〕; this treatise's 「不以他人語為堅要，亦不隨他教行。」 tr. "he does not take others' words as what is firm and essential, nor does he practise following others' teaching."〔T25 0561b22〕, where T223 reads 「不以他語為堅要，亦不隨他教行。」 tr. "he does not take the words of others as what is firm and essential, nor does he practise following others' teaching."〔T08 0334a28〕 (lacking the one character 「人」 tr. "person"); this treatise's 「以如夢、幻、炎、嚮、化隨順，是行般若波羅蜜。」 tr. "to accord by being like a dream, an illusion, a mirage, an echo, a transformation—this is practising prajñāpāramitā."〔T25 0561c12〕, where T223 reads 「以如夢、幻、焰、響、化隨順，是行般若波羅蜜。」 tr. "to accord by being like a dream, an illusion, a mirage, an echo, a transformation—this is practising prajñāpāramitā (with other characters for mirage and echo)."〔T08 0334b19〕 (the two characters for mirage differ, and the two characters for echo differ); this treatise reads 「阿鞞跋致」 tr. "avaivartika", while T223 reads 「阿惟越致菩薩摩訶薩應當驗知。」 tr. "the avaivartika (a variant transliteration) bodhisattva-mahāsattva should be tested and known."〔T08 0334a22〕. In four places the differences are attested by the collation notes of both formations: ① place / enter—in this treatise, at〔T25 0561a11〕, the variant reading of the character 「處」 tr. "place" is 「入」 tr. "enter", from the Shōgozō text (the twelfth entry of the ledger below, a star sharing the note of Chapter 52), and the note at the same position on the T223 side〔T08 0334a13〕 reads 「處【大】，入【宋】【元】【明】【宮】」 tr. "‘place’ in the Taishō; ‘enter’ in the Song, Yuan, Ming, and Palace"; ② practise / contemplate—in this treatise, at〔T25 0561c15〕, the variant reading of the character 「行」 tr. "practise" is 「觀」 tr. "contemplate", from the Shōgozō (the twenty-fifth entry of the ledger below), and the note on the T223 side〔T08 0334b22〕 reads 「行【大】，觀【中】」 tr. "‘practise’ in the Taishō; ‘contemplate’ in the Zhong"; ③ ask / hear—in this treatise, at〔T25 0561b28〕, the variant reading of the character 「問」 tr. "ask" is 「聞」 tr. "hear", from the Song, Yuan, Ming, Palace, and Shōgozō (the twenty-third entry of the ledger below), and the note on the T223 side〔T08 0334b05〕 reads 「問【大】，聞【元】【明】」 tr. "‘ask’ in the Taishō; ‘hear’ in the Yuan and Ming"; ④ the two characters for echo—this treatise〔T25 0561c12〕 has 「嚮」 tr. "echo (the first form)" while the Yuan and Ming have 「響」 tr. "echo (the second form)" (the twenty-fourth entry of the ledger below), and on the T223 side〔T08 0334b19〕 it is the reverse: the base text has 「響」 tr. "echo (the second form)" while the Shōgozō and Zhong texts have 「嚮」 tr. "echo (the first form)"; the two formations are each other's base text and variant reading. All four places are carried side by side by the collation notes of each of the two collections; it is not the weak judgement of searching one text with another text's words.
The mutual attestation of the two formations on the two characters 「一切」 tr. "all" in the chapter title (the eye of this section). The note on this treatise's chapter title〔T25 0560c29〕 reads 「一切【大】，〔－〕【宋】【元】【明】【宮】」 tr. "‘all’ in the Taishō; absent in the Song, Yuan, Ming, and Palace"—the base text has 「一切」 tr. "all", and the four texts Song, Yuan, Ming, and Palace lack it; while the note on the chapter title of the sūtra explained, T223〔T08 0334a02〕, reads 「智【大】，一切智【宋】【元】【明】【宮】【聖】」 tr. "‘knowledge’ in the Taishō; ‘omniscience’ in the Song, Yuan, Ming, Palace, and Shōgozō"—the base text reads 「趣智品」 tr. "Chapter on Tending toward Knowledge", while the five texts Song, Yuan, Ming, Palace, and Shōgozō on the contrary read 「趣一切智品」 tr. "Chapter on Tending toward Omniscience". The collation notes of the two formations are exact mirror images: the reading of this treatise's base text (with 「一切」 tr. "all") is precisely the reading of the variant texts of T223, and the reading of T223's base text (without 「一切」 tr. "all") is precisely the reading of this treatise's variant texts. The two readings of the chapter name, 「趣智／趣一切智」 tr. "Tending toward Knowledge / Tending toward Omniscience", are not a wavering within one collection, but two readings existing side by side in the transmissions of the two collections; recorded as it is, without judging which is correct.
Whether the sentence 「薩婆若即是色」 tr. "sarvajñā is form" is present (the second mutual attestation of the two formations). This treatise's Sūtra ② reads 「色即是薩婆若，乃至一切種智即是薩婆若。」 tr. "Form is sarvajñā, and so on up to the omniscience of all kinds is sarvajñā."〔T25 0561c21〕, and the two notes on its character 「若」 tr. "ruo (the final syllable of sarvajñā)" (the twenty-ninth and thirtieth entries of the ledger below) record that the two editions Yuan and Ming here add the two phrases 「薩婆若即是色」 tr. "sarvajñā is form" and 「薩婆若即是一切種智」 tr. "sarvajñā is the omniscience of all kinds"; at the same position on the T223 side〔T08 0334b29〕 it reads 「色即是薩婆若，薩婆若即是色。」 tr. "Form is sarvajñā; sarvajñā is form.", and its notes record that the Shōgozō and Zhong texts lack the phrase 「薩婆若即是色」 tr. "sarvajñā is form"〔T08 0334b29〕 and lack the phrase 「薩婆若即是一切種智」 tr. "sarvajñā is the omniscience of all kinds"〔T08 0334c01〕. This treatise's Yuan-Ming added text is precisely the text of the base text of the sūtra explained; the Shōgozō-Zhong omitted text of the sūtra explained is precisely the text of this treatise's base text—whether the same paired intertextual sentence is present is seen half in each of the two collections, and put together they are whole; recorded as it is.
Control group (seven strings · each seen only once in each of the two collections · a unique alignment). 「世尊！是諸菩薩摩訶薩解深般若波羅蜜者，當趣何所？」 tr. "World-Honored One! These bodhisattva-mahāsattvas who understand deep prajñāpāramitā—toward what should they tend?"〔T25 0561a01〕/〔T08 0334a03〕; 「則為一切眾生所歸趣」 tr. "then he is that toward which all beings return and tend"〔T25 0561a05〕/〔T08 0334a07〕; 「不受修、壞修是修般若波羅蜜。」 tr. "the practice of not receiving and the practice of ruin are practising prajñāpāramitā."〔T25 0561a08〕/〔T08 0334a10〕; 「四念處乃至一切種智中不著」 tr. "does not cling within the four foundations of mindfulness and so on up to the omniscience of all kinds"〔T25 0561a23〕/〔T08 0334a25〕; 「心不驚、不沒、不怖、不畏、不悔，歡喜樂聞」 tr. "his mind is not startled, does not sink, is not terrified, is not afraid, has no regret; he gladly delights in hearing it"〔T25 0561b26〕/ T223 reads 「心不驚不沒不怖不畏不悔，歡喜樂聞」 tr. "his mind is not startled, does not sink, is not terrified, is not afraid, has no regret; he gladly delights in hearing it (without the enumeration commas)"〔T08 0334b03〕; 「是法不可數、無有量」 tr. "this dharma cannot be counted and is without measure"〔T25 0561c19〕/〔T08 0334b26〕; 「色如相乃至一切種智如相皆是一如，無二無別。」 tr. "The mark of suchness of form and so on up to the mark of suchness of the omniscience of all kinds are all one suchness, without duality and without difference."〔T25 0561c22〕/ T223 reads 「色如相乃至一切種智如相，皆是一如，無二無別。」 tr. "The mark of suchness of form and so on up to the mark of suchness of the omniscience of all kinds—all are one suchness, without duality and without difference."〔T08 0334c02〕. The Chinese character streams of these seven strings are each seen only once in the whole of T25n1509 and in the whole of T08n0223 (this ledger rescanned each string independently, with the tolerant method, in the original files of the base texts of both collections; not transcribed from elsewhere); the alignment is unique, with no other chapter to confuse it. It is judged to be 「同品異名」 tr. "same chapter, different name" (the chapter body nearly identical word for word; for the differences among the three formations of the chapter name see above). The two 【論】 layers of this treatise are a structural expansion belonging to the treatise form; the sūtra explained has no such layer, and it is not a variant reading. Of the collation witnesses within the range of the comparative reading for this chapter on the side of the sūtra explained, T223〔T08 0334a02–0334c05〕, this ledger has scanned entry by entry twenty-two numbered notes and seven star repeated citations (six of which share the one note on 「惟越」 tr. "weiyue (part of the variant transliteration of avaivartika)"); the four places and the two groups of intertextual sentences where they attest this treatise have been recorded as above; the remaining entries have not been unfolded entry by entry, the fact that they were not unfolded is recorded as it is, and no estimate is used to fill the number.
V. The Prajñā Eye
The eye of this chapter lies in the one Chinese character 「趣」 tr. "tend" being turned completely over by prajñā—tending is not a place that can be reached; it is the practitioner's direction without clinging within ultimate emptiness; since the direction is without clinging, that toward which one tends and that which tends are without duality in the mark of suchness. Its meaning can be summed up in five layers.
First, no tending, not tending breaks permanence; it does not set up no tending. At the very opening of Treatise ① the treatise itself sets up the objection 「般若波羅蜜非趣、非不趣」 tr. "prajñāpāramitā neither tends nor does not tend"〔T25 0561a25〕, and the reason it speaks of no tending is to break the outside paths' 「諸法從因趣果、從先世入今世、從今世趣後世。」 tr. "Dharmas tend from cause to fruit, enter this life from the former life, and tend from this life to the next life."〔T25 0561a27〕, an inversion of permanence; 「破是常顛倒故，言『無趣不趣』。」 tr. "To break this inversion of permanence, it is said ‘no tending, not tending’."〔T25 0561a28〕—the use of the negating term lies in treatment, not in setting up a separate dharma. Therefore the question and answer still stand without obstruction: 「此中，須菩提以無著心問，佛以無著心答。」 tr. "Here Subhūti asks with a mind without clinging, and the Buddha answers with a mind without clinging."〔T25 0561a29〕. The mind without clinging is the ground colour of all the questions and answers of this chapter: the same sentence 「趣一切種智」 tr. "tend toward the omniscience of all kinds", spoken with a clinging mind, becomes the tending of the outside paths; spoken with a mind without clinging, it becomes the tending of prajñā.
Second, tending oneself and being that toward which others return and tend are two faces of one matter. No sooner has Sūtra ① answered 「當趣一切種智」 tr. "should tend toward the omniscience of all kinds"〔T25 0561a03〕 than Subhūti turns it into 「則為一切眾生所歸趣，修般若波羅蜜故。」 tr. "then he is that toward which all beings return and tend, because he practises prajñāpāramitā."〔T25 0561a05〕—at the same time as the bodhisattva tends toward the omniscience of all kinds he is that toward which beings return and tend; it is not that he first tends himself and afterwards delivers others. The treatise ties it to great compassion: 「菩薩於眾生中大悲心故，常修習般若波羅蜜。」 tr. "Because of his mind of great compassion toward beings, the bodhisattva constantly trains in prajñāpāramitā."〔T25 0561b07〕—what makes him able to be that toward which they return and tend lies in the practice pushed along by great compassion, not in a fruit already reached.
Third, what makes practice practice lies precisely in its being able to be ruined. Sūtra ① turns over the Chinese character 「修」 tr. "practise" with three negating terms: 「無所修是修般若波羅蜜，不受修、壞修是修般若波羅蜜。」 tr. "Practising nothing is practising prajñāpāramitā; the practice of not receiving and the practice of ruin are practising prajñāpāramitā."〔T25 0561a07〕; yet the Buddha does not let these three terms rest on names and words, but directly sets the question 「何等法壞故，般若波羅蜜為壞修？」 tr. "By the ruin of which dharmas is prajñāpāramitā the practice of ruin?"〔T25 0561a09〕, forcing out the full ledger from the five aggregates up to the omniscience of all kinds. The ruin of the practice of ruin is not the practitioner going to ruin things; it is 「一切法無常散壞，故名壞修。」 tr. "all dharmas are impermanent, scatter, and fall to ruin; hence it is called the practice of ruin."〔T25 0561b13〕—only because the dharmas practised are themselves impermanent can the practice be named the practice of prajñā. The three negating terms are linked layer to layer: because no fixed, real dharma can be found, practising nothing; because the contemplations have faults, the practice of not receiving; because what is practised falls to ruin of itself, the practice of ruin.
Fourth, the method of testing a person lies in clinging or not clinging, not in the marks displayed. At the end of Sūtra ① testing and knowing closes the first half of the chapter: 「若菩薩摩訶薩是深般若波羅蜜中不著，當知是阿鞞跋致」 tr. "if a bodhisattva-mahāsattva does not cling within this deep prajñāpāramitā, know that he is avaivartika"〔T25 0561a21〕. The treatise gives the real grounds on which he can be tested: 「行般若波羅蜜菩薩有二種」 tr. "bodhisattvas who practise prajñāpāramitā are of two kinds"〔T25 0561b17〕—the one who contemplates prajñā too as empty of itself, and the one who cannot contemplate prajñā as empty as well. The test is necessary precisely because the two are hard to tell apart by outward marks; and the place of testing is not outside the deep Dharma but right within it: not clinging to prajñā is the mark of the avaivartika. The five marks listed in Sūtra ②—not taking others' words as what is firm and essential, not being dragged by the three poisons, not straying from the six perfections, not being terrified on hearing the deep Dharma, having asked in former lives—are all the unfolding, face by face, of this one criterion.
Fifth, the place where tending dissolves lies in the non-duality of the mark of suchness. At the end of Sūtra ② it is asked 「是菩薩摩訶薩行何法」 tr. "what dharma does this bodhisattva-mahāsattva practise"〔T25 0561c14〕, and the Buddha answers 「菩薩摩訶薩不行色，不行受、想、行、識，乃至不行一切種智。」 tr. "The bodhisattva-mahāsattva does not practise form, does not practise feeling, perception, constructions, and consciousness, and so on up to does not practise the omniscience of all kinds."〔T25 0561c16〕, and gives the six negations: 「無作法、無壞法、無所從來、亦無所去、無住處」 tr. "a dharma without making, a dharma without ruin, coming from nowhere, and going nowhere either, with no place of abiding"〔T25 0561c18〕. The six negations are not for the sake of an emptiness without anything existent; they are to reveal 「色即是薩婆若，乃至一切種智即是薩婆若。」 tr. "Form is sarvajñā, and so on up to the omniscience of all kinds is sarvajñā."〔T25 0561c21〕—since the sarvajñā toward which one tends is not outside form, tending tends toward nothing, and only then is tending accomplished. 「色如相乃至一切種智如相皆是一如，無二無別。」 tr. "The mark of suchness of form and so on up to the mark of suchness of the omniscience of all kinds are all one suchness, without duality and without difference."〔T25 0561c22〕—the 「當趣何所」 tr. "toward what should they tend" of the opening of the chapter only here receives its ultimate answer: there is nothing toward which to tend, and the tending does not cease.
VI. Divergent Readings of the Masters
The Mahāprajñāpāramitā-upadeśa has no tradition of a complete line-by-line commentary, and the ancient masters' citations and explanations are, as a matter of fact, partial and uneven. For this chapter there is only one ancient master's reading: Jizang's commentary on the sūtra explained preserves a complete chapter devoted to it; Huiying's commentary on the treatise has zero coverage of this chapter; Junzheng's book and the books of the Tiantai line have zero hits for this chapter. This section records the correspondence between what they comment on and cite and this chapter, without judging the relative merit of the masters' interpretations.
Jizang's Commentary on the Larger Sūtra (X24n0451). Its line-by-line commentary on "Tending toward Knowledge" in the sūtra explained begins at 「趣智品第五十三」 tr. "Chapter on Tending toward Knowledge, the Fifty-third"〔X24n0451 0302b17〕 (immediately following the point where the commentary on the preceding chapter ends) and runs to〔X24n0451 0303a10〕, before the start of the next chapter, 「大如品第五十四」 tr. "Chapter on the Great Suchness, the Fifty-fourth"〔X24n0451 0303a11〕, covering the whole of the sūtra of this chapter. Five things in it may be recorded.
First, the chapter's position and main division—「此第三明中下根人者，標大果。」 tr. "This third part, making clear the persons of middle and low faculties, marks out the great fruit."〔X24n0451 0302b18〕, 「第一明由般若故趣薩婆若果，二識驗信般若人相，三明能如所驗釋法不著秤順薩婆若也。」 tr. "The first makes clear that because of prajñā one tends toward the fruit of sarvajñā; the second recognises and tests the marks of the person who believes in prajñā; the third makes clear that one who can be as he has been tested explains that dharmas are not clung to, and so tallies with and accords with sarvajñā."〔X24n0451 0302b18〕: Jizang takes this chapter as the third within the section on persons of middle and low faculties, and divides the whole chapter into three parts, ‘tending toward the fruit · testing the person · according’, which match the order in this treatise of tending toward the omniscience of all kinds in Sūtra ①, the marks of testing and knowing from the end of Sūtra ① through Sūtra ②, and the mind in accord with the omniscience of all kinds in Sūtra ②.
Second, neither tending nor not tending is itself the path of tending—「已上明非趣不趣，今所以問趣答趣著，以明非趣不趣乃是趣道耳」 tr. "Above, neither tending nor not tending was made clear; the reason why tending is now asked about, and tending, with clinging, answered, is to make clear that neither tending nor not tending is itself the path of tending"〔X24n0451 0302b21〕: Jizang holds that since the preceding text has made clear neither tending nor not tending, the present renewed asking about tending and answering with tending is precisely to show that neither tending nor not tending is the path of tending. What he breaks is also marked as the outside paths: 「又上破諸外道，言有未來法趣現在，現在法趣過去，故云無此趣不趣耳。」 tr. "Further, above it breaks the outside paths, which say that there are future dharmas tending into the present and present dharmas tending into the past; therefore it says there is no such tending or not tending."〔X24n0451 0302b23〕—this points, together with this treatise's explanation 「破是常顛倒故」 tr. "to break this inversion of permanence", to the same outside paths' clinging to the three times tending into one another; the doctrine of the outside paths the two masters take up is the same in meaning though different in wording (this treatise says 「從因趣果、從先世入今世、從今世趣後世」 tr. "tend from cause to fruit, enter this life from the former life, and tend from this life to the next life", Jizang says 「未來法趣現在，現在法趣過去」 tr. "future dharmas tend into the present, present dharmas tend into the past"); recorded separately as it is. His establishing of the meaning goes a step further: 「今菩薩無所得因，不趣三有及二乘」 tr. "now the bodhisattva, with the cause of nothing to be attained, does not tend toward the three existences or the two vehicles"〔X24n0451 0302c01〕.
Third, the division of the three meanings of the first section—「初三意：一、明趣因行果；二、明趣化他果；三、釋二趣意。」 tr. "The first has three meanings: first, making clear the tending toward the fruit of the causal practice; second, making clear the tending toward the fruit of transforming others; third, explaining the meaning of the two tendings."〔X24n0451 0302c03〕: with the three meanings of tending oneself, being that toward which beings return and tend, and explaining both tendings together, he divides the first part of Sūtra ①, which matches the order of the three sections in this treatise's Treatise ①, 「趣一切種智」 tr. "tending toward the omniscience of all kinds", 「為一切眾生所歸趣」 tr. "being that toward which all beings return and tend", and ‘practising prajñā is practising all dharmas’. His explanation of the meaning of practice: 「修般若是修一切法也，一切行由般若乃成也。」 tr. "To practise prajñā is to practise all dharmas; all practices are accomplished only through prajñā."〔X24n0451 0302c08〕; he explains the practice of ruin by establishing a meaning that breaks both outer and inner: 「外行及內心皆可破壞，故言壞修」 tr. "outer practices and the inner mind can both be broken and ruined; therefore it says the practice of ruin"〔X24n0451 0302c10〕—this differs from this treatise's gloss: this treatise glosses the practice of ruin as 「一切法無常散壞」 tr. "all dharmas are impermanent, scatter, and fall to ruin"〔T25 0561b13〕, while Jizang glosses it as outer practices and the inner mind both being breakable; the meanings the two masters establish differ slightly; recorded side by side without judgement.
Fourth, the division of the section on testing the person, and the five marks—「第二、驗得外人相。上品壞說其人相，今更令驗之。」 tr. "Second, testing and obtaining the outward marks of the person. The chapter above, in its breaking, spoke of this person's marks; now it further has them tested."〔X24n0451 0302c13〕: together with this treatise's 「上品末說阿鞞跋致菩薩性、相、貌，今應驗試知。」 tr. "At the end of the preceding chapter the nature, mark, and appearance of the avaivartika bodhisattva were spoken of; now they should be tested and known."〔T25 0561b15〕 it takes the talk of the person's marks in the preceding chapter as what this chapter's testing and knowing carries forward; what the two masters see in this carrying forward from the preceding chapter is wholly the same. Of the five marks he lists the second, third, and fourth: 「在家人著五欲，出家外道著邪見」 tr. "householders cling to the five desires; those of the outside paths who have gone forth cling to wrong views"〔X24n0451 0302c17〕, 「三者、雖未得道不隨三毒所引。四者、知善法味故常不離六度。」 tr. "Third, though he has not yet obtained the path, he does not follow where the three poisons lead. Fourth, because he knows the flavour of wholesome dharmas, he never leaves the six perfections."〔X24n0451 0302c19〕—these match item by item what this treatise's Treatise ② explains mark by mark (the two kinds of others, desire and the other afflictions broken and thinned, knowing the flavour of the retribution of wholesome dharmas).
Fifth, the gloss of the final section—「第三、明能如所驗於法不著，便能隨順一切種智也」 tr. "Third, making clear that one who can be as he has been tested does not cling to dharmas, and then can accord with the omniscience of all kinds"〔X24n0451 0302c23〕; explaining the first two terms of the six negations: 「無作法、無壞法者，明一切種智是無為法」 tr. "‘a dharma without making, a dharma without ruin’ makes clear that the omniscience of all kinds is an unconditioned dharma"〔X24n0451 0303a02〕; explaining without number and without measure: 「五陰和合有六道數，破五眾相續故無六道數」 tr. "because the five aggregates come together there is the count of the six destinies; because the continuity of the five aggregates is broken there is no count of the six destinies"〔X24n0451 0303a06〕—this last sentence and this treatise's 「五眾和合故有六道數，壞五眾相續故則『無數、無量』。」 tr. "Because the five aggregates come together there is the count of the six destinies; because the continuity of the five aggregates is broken there is ‘no number and no measure’."〔T25 0562a27〕 are nearly word for word the same (the translated names for the aggregates differ, and the one character for breaking differs); the two masters here clearly share a gloss from a common source; recorded as it is, without judging which came first.
Huiying's Commentary (X46n0791) · zero coverage (recorded as it is). The only ancient commentary explaining this treatise, surviving only in fragmentary fascicles. This ledger independently searched back through the whole file of X46n0791 for the three strings 「趣一切智」 tr. "tending toward omniscience", 「趣智品」 tr. "Chapter on Tending toward Knowledge", and 「驗知品」 tr. "Chapter on Testing and Knowing", all with zero hits; it further searched for 「阿鞞跋致」 tr. "avaivartika", 「善知識品」 tr. "Chapter on the Good Friend", 「譬喻品」 tr. "Chapter on Parables", and 「大如品」 tr. "Chapter on the Great Suchness", also all with zero hits (only 「善知識品」 tr. "Chapter on the Good Friend" is seen once in X46n0791〔0904a11〕, a side reference in the commentary on Chapter 61, not within the range of this chapter)—Fascicle 71 of this treatise and the chapters before and after it are wholly outside the coverage of the fragmentary fascicles of that commentary; the zero coverage belongs to the actual state of the fragments and is not a failure of the search; the negative result is recorded as it is.
Junzheng's Profound Meaning of the Four Mahāyāna Treatises (X46n0784) · zero hits (recorded as it is). The three formations of this chapter's name, searched back through the whole file of X46n0784, give zero hits; Junzheng has no citation by name of this chapter; recorded as it is.
The Tiantai line (T46n1911 Great Calming and Contemplation · T46n1912 Supporting Practice and Broad Resolution of Calming and Contemplation · T33n1716 Profound Meaning of the Lotus · T33n1717 Annotations on the Profound Meaning of the Lotus) · zero hits (recorded as it is). This ledger independently searched back through the whole of the four files for the three strings 「趣一切智」 tr. "tending toward omniscience", 「趣智品」 tr. "Chapter on Tending toward Knowledge", and 「驗知品」 tr. "Chapter on Testing and Knowing", all with zero hits—the chapter title of this chapter has no explicit citation in the four books of the Tiantai line; no candidate is registered, and the negative result is recorded as it is.
VII. Cross-reading and Further Resonances
The line of meaning of this chapter has four connections running before and after it, all of which this section records, without fixing a reading on anyone's behalf.
First, the further resonance in the chapter order of ‘nature, mark, and appearance—testing and knowing’ (the treatise-author's own attestation · a hard link within this treatise itself). At the end of the preceding chapter, "The Good Friend", Subhūti asks of one who believes in and understands deep prajñā: 「有何等性、何等相、何等貌？」 tr. "What nature, what mark, what appearance does he have?"〔T25 0560c01〕, and the Buddha answers with the severance and separation from 「欲、瞋」 tr. "desire, hatred" and the rest as his nature, mark, and appearance; Treatise ① of this chapter states for itself what it carries forward: 「上品末說阿鞞跋致菩薩性、相、貌，今應驗試知。」 tr. "At the end of the preceding chapter the nature, mark, and appearance of the avaivartika bodhisattva were spoken of; now they should be tested and known."〔T25 0561b15〕—the preceding chapter speaks of the marks of that person, this chapter tests the reality of that person; the chapter order gives rise from one to the next. This further resonance has also a mechanical proof: the collation note on the character at〔T25 0561b16〕 of this chapter, 「貌」 tr. "appearance", is not a note native to this chapter, but shares by star the note of the preceding chapter at〔T25 0560c02〕 (the Shōgozō text has 「𦴭」 tr. "appearance (a variant form of the character)", the twenty-first entry of the ledger below)—the sentence the treatise-author carries forward and the note carried forward are also linked at the layer of the base text's transmission; recorded as it is. On the side of the sūtra explained the same sentence reads 「欲瞋癡斷離是性相貌」 tr. "the severance and separation from desire, hatred, and delusion is the nature, mark, and appearance"〔T08 0333c29〕; the Chinese character stream of the three characters 「性相貌」 tr. "nature, mark, and appearance" is seen twice in the whole of this treatise (〔T25 0560c02〕, 〔T25 0561b16〕) and once in the whole of the sūtra explained (〔T08 0333c29〕); the alignment is unique, obtained by this ledger's rescanning of each string.
Second, the carrying forward of the general formula ‘tending, not tending’ (continuing from Sūtra ③ of Chapter 52). Sūtra ③ of the preceding chapter shows at length the general formula ‘all dharmas tend toward such-and-such · this tending does not pass beyond’ (see Section I of that chapter's apparatus), which contains the phrase 「趣非趣不可得故」 tr. "because tending and not tending are unfindable"; this chapter's 「般若波羅蜜非趣、非不趣」 tr. "prajñāpāramitā neither tends nor does not tend"〔T25 0561a25〕 at the opening of Treatise ① sets up its objection on this formula, and the Buddha's answer and the treatise's explanation both stay within that formula. The meaning of 「趣」 tr. "tending" in this chapter does not begin with this chapter; it is the gathering-in of the general formula of the preceding chapter as it lands on the one matter of the omniscience of all kinds—its carrying forward is recorded, without fixing a reading of the preceding chapter on anyone's behalf.
Third, the forward reference ‘the Buddha says in a later chapter’ (not found word for word · recorded as it is). Treatise ② cites a word of the Buddha as ground: 「一切種智是寂滅相，佛後品中說：『一切寂滅相是一切種智。』」 tr. "the omniscience of all kinds is the mark of quiescence; the Buddha says in a later chapter: ‘The mark of quiescence of all things is the omniscience of all kinds.’"〔T25 0562a16〕—since what is cited is marked 「後品」 tr. "a later chapter", it should lie below this chapter in this treatise. This ledger rescanned independently the character stream of the ten characters 「一切寂滅相是一切種智」 tr. "the mark of quiescence of all things is the omniscience of all kinds" through the whole of T25n1509: it is seen once in the whole book, namely this sentence itself〔T25 0562a16〕, with zero hits below this chapter; in the whole of T08n0223 there are also zero hits. The nearest place in the later text of this treatise close in meaning is 「是諸法如即是寂滅相，是無上道相。」 tr. "This suchness of dharmas is the mark of quiescence; it is the mark of the unsurpassed path."〔T25 0584b25〕—its connection is recorded, and it is not judged to be the later-chapter text the treatise-author refers to; the word-for-word forward reference is marked as missing according to the facts, and no text close in meaning is used to fill it.
Fourth, the link to the treasury (a stable citation · a soft citation). This chapter's gloss of 「無趣不趣」 tr. "no tending, not tending" as breaking permanence, its gloss of the three names 「無所修·不受修·壞修」 tr. "practising nothing · the practice of not receiving · the practice of ruin", the method of practice 「隨順畢竟空心則順一切種智心」 tr. "the mind that accords with ultimate emptiness accords with the mind of the omniscience of all kinds"〔T25 0562a15〕, and the non-duality in the mark of suchness of 「色即是薩婆若」 tr. "form is sarvajñā" are the basis for later generations' discussion of the direction of practice of prajñā; a stable citation is set down〔T25n1509 趣一切智品·卷七十一〕; the places in the various collections that cite this treatise are not yet settled, so the citation is soft, awaiting word-for-word checking and preservation. This belongs to the further resonance of the meaning of prajñā running down into the various sūtras; recorded without judgement.
VIII. Witnesses and Editions
The base text of this chapter is Fascicle 71 of the Mahāprajñāpāramitā-upadeśa〔T25 0560c29–0562b08〕 (the main text of the chapter body begins from the chapter title〔T25 0560c29〕 and ends with the sentence 「是如無二無別」 tr. "this suchness is without duality and without difference" at〔T25 0562b04〕; the fascicle-end title 「大智度論卷第七十一」 tr. "Mahāprajñāpāramitā-upadeśa, Fascicle Seventy-one"〔T25 0562b05〕 falls within the range of this chapter, before the fascicle-head title of the next fascicle, which is also the chapter title of the next chapter〔T25 0562b08〕); the collation text for the sūtra explained is "Tending toward Knowledge" in the Mahāprajñāpāramitā Sūtra〔T08 0334a02–0334c05〕 (where the chapter ends, Fascicle Fifteen ends); the ancient-master commentary text for collation is Jizang's Commentary on the Larger Sūtra (X24n0451, covering this chapter at〔X24n0451 0302b17–0303a10〕); Huiying's Commentary (X46n0791) has zero coverage of this chapter, Junzheng's Profound Meaning of the Four Mahāyāna Treatises (X46n0784) has zero hits for this chapter, and the four books of the Tiantai line have zero hits (see Section VI). The variant collation notes follow the Taishō collation, covering differences between the Taishō base text and the Song, Yuan, Ming, Palace, and Shōgozō editions and the Ishiyama text (the Ishiyama-dera manuscript), and the CBETA collation—in this chapter no Shōgozō B text is seen entered in the ledger.
Collation notes on the chapter title (the evidential basis of the three formations of the chapter name and of the -1 step · listed separately). At the chapter title〔T25 0560c29〕 there is one note in three formations—「大智度論釋趣一切智品第五十三【大】｜摩訶般若波羅蜜驗知品第五十二【聖】｜摩訶般若波羅蜜經品第五十二驗知品趣一切智【石】」 tr. "‘Mahāprajñāpāramitā-upadeśa, Commentary on the Chapter on Tending toward Omniscience, the Fifty-third’ in the Taishō; ‘Chapter on Mahāprajñāpāramitā, Testing and Knowing, the Fifty-second’ in the Shōgozō; ‘Mahāprajñāpāramitā Sūtra, Chapter the Fifty-second, Chapter on Testing and Knowing, Tending toward Omniscience’ in the Ishiyama"—this is the evidential basis of the three formations of the chapter name and of the -1 step in the chapter number; recorded side by side as it is, with no reconciliation forced upon it (for the analysis see Section IV). At the same place there are three further notes and one star: the Ming edition deleting the four characters 「大智度論」 tr. "Mahāprajñāpāramitā-upadeśa", the star sharing the note of the preceding chapter on the character 「度」 tr. "perfection (the character in the title)", the Song, Yuan, Ming, and Palace deleting the two characters 「一切」 tr. "all", and the difference of the two editions Ming and Palace beneath the character 「三」 tr. "three" (the first to fifth entries of the ledger below).
The two annotations attached to collation notes (interlinear notes) · kept in their original form (listed separately). Within the collation notes of this chapter there are also two interlinear notes of the base text, sub-notes of the interlinear type in the original file of the base text, which this ledger keeps in their original form without deleting them: the first,〔T25 0560c29〕 「三【大】｜三（經作趣一切智品）【明】｜三品【宮】」 tr. "‘three’ in the Taishō; ‘three (the sūtra has Chapter on Tending toward Omniscience)’ in the Ming; ‘three, chapter’ in the Palace" (the fifth entry of the ledger below)—within the parentheses is precisely the sūtra title marked by the Ming edition; the second,〔T25 0562b04〕 「別【大】｜別（釋第五十二品竟）【聖】｜別（釋五十二品竟）【石】」 tr. "‘difference’ in the Taishō; ‘difference (end of the commentary on the fifty-second chapter)’ in the Shōgozō; ‘difference (end of the commentary on chapter fifty-two)’ in the Ishiyama" (the forty-second entry of the ledger below)—within the parentheses is precisely the chapter-end closing record of the Shōgozō and Ishiyama texts, and the second end of the evidence for the -1 step (see Section IV).
Two entries of the CBETA revision layer (not of the type setting the traditional editions side by side · listed separately). The first,〔T25 0561b15〕 「末【CB】｜未【大】」 tr. "‘end’ in CBETA; ‘not yet’ in the Taishō" (the twentieth entry of the ledger below)—the note type in the base text is type="add", that is, CBETA revises the 「未」 tr. "not yet" of the base text 【大】 to 「末」 tr. "end" (「上品末說」 tr. "at the end of the preceding chapter it was spoken"), with no marks of traditional witnesses such as the Song, Yuan, Ming, Palace, Shōgozō, or Ishiyama; it belongs to the modern CBETA collation layer, and the reader-facing text of this edition follows the reading of the current CBETA text. The second, the note on the fascicle-end title〔T25 0562b05〕: the lem in the base text is the abbreviated form 「（大智…一）九字」 tr. "(the nine characters ‘Great Wisdom … one’)" (a CBETA abbreviation convention, referring to the nine characters 「大智度論卷第七十一」 tr. "Mahāprajñāpāramitā-upadeśa, Fascicle Seventy-one"); following the already established practice (continuing the handling of the continued title of Fascicle 70 in Chapter 48), this ledger records directly the full text of the nine characters referred to, and marks here the abbreviated form of the base text, so that the two layers can be traced to each other.
Eight stars · all crossing chapters (listed separately). Within the range of this chapter there are eight star anchors (beg_7d7–beg_7de); this ledger resolved the corresp target of each and located the chapter to which it belongs, finding that all eight cross chapters, and none is within the chapter—the distribution of targets: Chapter 50, "The Great Matter Arises", three (note(0554005)〔T25 0554a24〕 once · note(0554008)〔T25 0554b23〕 twice); Chapter 51, "Parables", two (note(0556006)〔T25 0556b05〕 twice); Chapter 52, "The Good Friend", three (note(0557009)〔T25 0557b13〕 once · note(0559001)〔T25 0559a04〕 once · note(0560007)〔T25 0560c02〕 once). These are cross-chapter link markers of existing witness groups (the same group of variant readings recurring at several places in the text with the same character and sharing one note), not doctrinal divergences peculiar to this chapter; of them, the sentence to which note(0560007) is tied is precisely the treatise-author's carrying forward of the preceding chapter's 「性、相、貌」 tr. "nature, mark, and appearance" (see Section VII), and the two of note(0554008) are precisely the shared note of the two 【論】 structural markers. The note texts of the star targets carry the mark 「＊」 tr. "asterisk" in the base text, which this ledger keeps as in the base text.
Complete ledger of collation notes (all forty-three entries reconciled · base text as it stands). Below, listed in full in the order of their appearance in the base text, including eight star repeated citations, each entry marked with its corresp target and the chapter to which it belongs. The readings of the variant texts are preserved side by side, while the main text still follows the reading of the current base text:
App entries (forty-three · in order of appearance in the base text · star-corresp marked with each entry)
- 〔T25 0560c29〕大智度論釋趣一切智品第五十三【大】｜摩訶般若波羅蜜驗知品第五十二【聖】｜摩訶般若波羅蜜經品第五十二驗知品趣一切智【石】(one note on the chapter title made in three forms · the two name-systems Tending toward Omniscience / Testing and Knowing + the Shōgozō and Ishiyama -1 step · see Section IV)
- 〔T25 0560c29〕大智度論【大】｜〔－〕【明】(within the chapter title · the Ming edition deletes the four characters 「大智度論」 tr. "Mahāprajñāpāramitā-upadeśa")
- 〔T25 0560c29〕度【大】＊｜〔－〕【宋】【宮】＊(star · corresp → note(0557009) = the note on the title of Chapter 52, "The Good Friend"〔T25 0557b13〕 · shared across chapters)
- 〔T25 0560c29〕一切【大】｜〔－〕【宋】【元】【明】【宮】(within the chapter title · four editions lack 「一切」 tr. "all" = reading 「趣智品」 tr. "Chapter on Tending toward Knowledge" · agreeing in wording with the title in the base text of the sūtra explained · see Section IV)
- 〔T25 0560c29〕三【大】｜三（經作趣一切智品）【明】｜三品【宮】(annotation attached to a collation note [interlinear note] kept in its original form · the Ming main text and interlinear note differ at two layers · see Section IV)
- 〔T25 0561a02〕解【大】｜能解【元】【明】
- 〔T25 0561a03〕者【大】｜〔－〕【元】【明】【宮】
- 〔T25 0561a05〕則【大】｜是【宋】【元】【明】｜〔－〕【宮】
- 〔T25 0561a07〕是【大】＊｜〔－〕【石】＊(star · corresp → note(0554005) = the note of Chapter 50, "The Great Matter Arises"〔T25 0554a24〕 · shared across chapters)
- 〔T25 0561a07〕諸【大】｜〔－〕【聖】
- 〔T25 0561a09〕般若【大】｜修般若【宋】【元】【明】【宮】
- 〔T25 0561a11〕處【大】＊｜入【聖】＊(star · corresp → note(0559001) = the note of Chapter 52〔T25 0559a04〕 · shared across chapters · the note at the same position on the side of the sūtra explained reads 「處【大】，入【宋】【元】【明】【宮】」 tr. "‘place’ in the Taishō; ‘enter’ in the Song, Yuan, Ming, and Palace" · the two formations attest each other · see Section IV)
- 〔T25 0561a21〕應【大】｜〔－〕【聖】
- 〔T25 0561a22〕致【大】｜致相【聖】【石】
- 〔T25 0561a25〕【論】【大】＊｜〔－〕【宋】【宮】【聖】＊(note on the presence of the structural marker · star · corresp → note(0554008) = the note of Chapter 50〔T25 0554b23〕 · shared across chapters · see Section I)
- 〔T25 0561b03〕故【大】｜〔－〕【宋】【元】【明】
- 〔T25 0561b03〕般若【大】｜般若波羅蜜【聖】【石】
- 〔T25 0561b06〕深【大】｜〔－〕【宋】【宮】
- 〔T25 0561b13〕名【大】｜必【聖】
- 〔T25 0561b15〕末【CB】｜未【大】(CBETA revision layer · the note type in the base text is type="add" · no traditional witness · see the separate listing above)
- 〔T25 0561b16〕貌【大】＊｜𦴭【聖】＊(star · corresp → note(0560007) = the note of Chapter 52〔T25 0560c02〕 · shared across chapters · the sentence it is tied to is where the treatise-author carries forward the preceding chapter's 「性、相、貌」 tr. "nature, mark, and appearance" · see Section VII)
- 〔T25 0561b21〕若【大】｜若有【宋】【元】【明】【聖】【石】
- 〔T25 0561b28〕問【大】｜聞【宋】【元】【明】【宮】【聖】(the note at the same position on the side of the sūtra explained reads 「問【大】，聞【元】【明】」 tr. "‘ask’ in the Taishō; ‘hear’ in the Yuan and Ming" · the two formations attest each other · see Section IV)
- 〔T25 0561c12〕嚮【大】｜響【元】【明】(the note at the same position on the side of the sūtra explained reads the reverse, 「響【大】，嚮【聖】【中】」 tr. "‘echo’ (the second form) in the Taishō; ‘echo’ (the first form) in the Shōgozō and Zhong" · the two formations are each other's base text and variant reading · see Section IV)
- 〔T25 0561c15〕行【大】｜觀【聖】(the note at the same position on the side of the sūtra explained reads 「行【大】，觀【中】」 tr. "‘practise’ in the Taishō; ‘contemplate’ in the Zhong" · the two formations attest each other · see Section IV)
- 〔T25 0561c18〕摩訶薩【大】｜〔－〕【宋】【元】【明】【宮】
- 〔T25 0561c18〕行【大】｜無行【宋】【聖】【石】
- 〔T25 0561c19〕法【大】｜法相【聖】【石】
- 〔T25 0561c22〕若【大】｜若薩婆若即是色【元】【明】(the Yuan-Ming added text is precisely the text of the base text of the sūtra explained · see Section IV)
- 〔T25 0561c22〕若【大】｜若薩婆若即是一切種智【元】【明】(the Yuan-Ming added text is precisely the text of the base text of the sūtra explained · see Section IV)
- 〔T25 0561c24〕【論】【大】＊｜〔－〕【宋】【宮】【聖】＊(note on the presence of the structural marker · star · corresp → note(0554008) = the note of Chapter 50〔T25 0554b23〕 · shared across chapters · the same witness group recurring as the fifteenth entry above)
- 〔T25 0561c24〕說【大】｜試【宋】【元】【明】｜誡【聖】【石】
- 〔T25 0561c27〕邪【大】＊｜耶【聖】＊(star · corresp → note(0556006) = the note of Chapter 51, "Parables"〔T25 0556b05〕 · shared across chapters)
- 〔T25 0562a05〕霆【大】｜電【聖】【石】
- 〔T25 0562a07〕邪【大】＊｜耶【聖】＊(star · corresp → note(0556006) = the note of Chapter 51, "Parables"〔T25 0556b05〕 · shared across chapters · the same witness group recurring as the thirty-third entry above)
- 〔T25 0562a10〕福德智慧【大】｜智慧福德【聖】【石】(the reading of the original note in the base text has no enumeration comma · the working base-text list reads 「福德、智慧」 tr. "merit and wisdom" · recorded as it is, side by side without judgement)
- 〔T25 0562a15〕隨【大】｜〔－〕【宋】【元】【明】【宮】
- 〔T25 0562a16〕心【大】｜〔－〕【聖】【石】
- 〔T25 0562a19〕是【大】｜如【石】
- 〔T25 0562a22〕法【大】｜〔－〕【聖】
- 〔T25 0562b04〕如【大】｜〔－〕【宋】【元】【明】【聖】【石】
- 〔T25 0562b04〕別【大】｜別（釋第五十二品竟）【聖】｜別（釋五十二品竟）【石】(annotation attached to a collation note [interlinear note] kept in its original form · the chapter-end closing record of the Shōgozō and Ishiyama · the second end of the evidence for the -1 step · see Section IV)
- 〔T25 0562b04〕不分卷【石】(collation note of the point-anchor type ·
<anchor type="circle"/>with no beg/end pair · not captured in the collection · supplied by checking back against the original file of the base text = the forty-fourth entry · recorded as a mechanical number not counted in the total) - 〔T25 0562b05〕大智度論卷第七十一【大】｜大智度論經卷第七十一【聖】(note on the fascicle-end title · the lem in the base text is the abbreviated form 「（大智…一）九字」 tr. "(the nine characters ‘Great Wisdom … one’)" · this ledger records the full text of the nine characters it refers to · see the separate listing above)
The above forty-three entries agree mechanically with the number of anchored collation notes in the working base text; adding the one entry of the point-anchor type (0562b04 「不分卷【石】」 tr. "‘not divided into fascicles’ in the Ishiyama") makes forty-four entries, and the targets of the star entries have been marked with each entry. The one note on the chapter title in three formations, the two annotations attached to collation notes, and the two entries of the CBETA revision layer have been listed separately above; within the range of this chapter there is in addition one point-anchor note〔T25 0562b04〕 「不分卷【石】」 tr. "‘not divided into fascicles’ in the Ishiyama" not entered in the ledger of these forty-three entries; recorded as it is, side by side without judgement.
Witness reading on the side of the sūtra explained (four places and two groups unfolded · the rest not unfolded · the gap recorded for later supplementing). Within the range of the comparative reading for this chapter on the side of the sūtra explained, T223〔T08 0334a02–0334c05〕, this ledger has scanned entry by entry twenty-two numbered notes and seven star repeated citations; the four places where they attest this treatise's collation notes (place / enter · practise / contemplate · ask / hear · the two forms of echo) and the two groups of intertextual sentences (whether 「薩婆若即是色」 tr. "sarvajñā is form" and 「薩婆若即是一切種智」 tr. "sarvajñā is the omniscience of all kinds" are present), as well as the mirror-image two readings of the two characters 「一切」 tr. "all" in the chapter title, have been recorded entry by entry in Section IV. The entry-by-entry listing of the remaining entries has not been unfolded in this ledger; the fact that it has not been unfolded is recorded as it is, and no estimate is used to fill the number.