大智度論 大如品之下Dazhidulun — Mahāprajñāpāramitā-upadeśa · The Great Suchness, Part 2 of 2

The Great Suchness, Last Part: Awakening Hard to Obtain and Easy to Obtain, the Four Rounds of Questioning on Retrogressing and Turning Back, No Discrimination of the Three Vehicles within Suchness, How One Who Wishes to Accomplish Awakening Should Practise, and the Equal Mind, the Lowly Intent, the Mind of Safety, and the Two Truths Complete

What Is Being Asked

The First Part carried 「如」 tr. "suchness" all the way to the point beyond which it cannot be pushed: form is sarvajñā and sarvajñā is form; the mark of suchness of form and the mark of suchness of sarvajñā are 「一如，無二無別」 tr. "one suchness, without duality and without difference"; the mark of suchness of the Tathāgata does not come and does not go, abides permanently, is without distinction and without difference, is a place without obstruction, and is not within the three times—and therefore Subhūti is born following the Buddha; and it closed with the three-thousand great-thousand world shaking in six ways. The treatise-author, following the text, distinguished the very deep from the shallow, the all of names from the real all, and why the Buddha, when he first attained the path, was silent and did not expound the Dharma; and with the six thousand bodhisattvas who, lacking the power of skilful means, fell into arhatship, and the simile of the great bird without wings falling to the ground, he showed that though the practice of emptiness is the same, the fruits differ. The Last Part carries on from this, and what it asks about is the two difficulties that spring up at once when this 「如」 tr. "suchness" is put back onto the field of cultivating the path.

The first difficulty is the dispute over hard and easy. Since all dharmas are ultimately empty, and there is no one who obtains and no dharma that can be obtained, is anuttarā samyaksaṃbodhi, then, hard to obtain or easy to obtain? The gods say it is hard to obtain; the Buddha approves that it is hard to obtain and bears witness himself that 「亦無所得」 tr. "yet there is also nothing attained"; Subhūti, for his part, says 「易得」 tr. "easy to obtain"; and Śāriputra brings out the fact before their eyes and asks back: if it is truly easy to obtain, why do bodhisattvas equal to the sands of the Ganges retrogress and turn back? The way this dispute is brought to a close is where this fascicle most shows its hand and eye—Subhūti does not argue hard or easy, but asks four rounds in a row: form, apart from form, the mark of suchness of form, apart from the mark of suchness of form, and so on up to suchness and the nature of dharmas, the abiding of dharmas, the position of dharmas, the limit of reality, and the nature of the inconceivable; of each he asks 「於阿耨多羅三藐三菩提退還不」 tr. "does it retrogress and turn back from anuttarā samyaksaṃbodhi or not", and Śāriputra answers each 「不」 tr. "no". Since for the matter of retrogressing and turning back no subject can be found among the dharmas, the dispute over hard and easy naturally loses what it rests on.

The second difficulty is the one vehicle and the three vehicles. Śāriputra, following this conclusion, turns it round and presses: if no one retrogresses and turns back, will not everyone then become a Buddha—why does the Buddha say there are three vehicles? Subhūti again breaks the discrimination of the three vehicles with the four sentences on the mark of suchness, and the Buddha from the side approves: 「汝所說者，皆是佛力」 tr. "what you have said is all the Buddha's power"; yet Śāriputra in the end must ask the one sentence 「成就何等菩提」 tr. "what awakening does he accomplish", and the Buddha answers 「成就佛阿耨多羅三藐三菩提」 tr. "he accomplishes the Buddha's anuttarā samyaksaṃbodhi". Here the treatise-author lays bare the hinge of the whole passage: 「若入畢竟空門，一切法盡一相；若出畢竟空，三乘則有異」 tr. "if one enters the gate of ultimate emptiness, all dharmas are wholly of one mark; if one comes out of ultimate emptiness, the three vehicles then differ"—whether there are three vehicles or not hangs on going in and out of the gate of ultimate emptiness; these are not two contradictory verdicts.

Having finished breaking views, Sūtra ④ turns to practice. Subhūti asks 「應云何行」 tr. "how should he practise", and what the Buddha answers is not abstruse principle but seven kinds of mind—an equal mind, a mind of great kindness, a lowly intent, a mind of safety, an unobstructed mind, a mind without vexation, a mind of love and respect—and in addition the ten wholesome paths, the four dhyānas, the four immeasurable minds, the sphere of boundless space and so on up to the sphere of neither perception nor non-perception, the six perfections, the emptinesses, the limbs of the path, samādhi, the liberations, the successive absorptions, the ten powers and so on up to great kindness and great compassion, the twelve links of causes and conditions, knowing suffering, severing origination, realising cessation, and cultivating the path, the fruits, the bodhisattva's position, purifying lands and bringing beings to accomplishment, the supernormal powers, the omniscience of all kinds, severing the fetters and their habitual residues, the accomplishment of life-span, the accomplishment of the abiding of the Dharma—each of them set forth with the four matters together, ‘practising it oneself, teaching others, praising, rejoicing.’ The treatise-author explains, item by item, the real state of human feeling in each: why enemies, kin, and those in between must alike be regarded with the thought of affection; why the bodhisattva, being a great person, must arouse a lowly intent; how the mind of safety differs from the love of father and mother; at the end he threads the seven minds together with 「眾生忍，是法忍初門」 tr. "the acceptance of beings is the first gate of the acceptance of dharmas", gathers up the gates of practice with old dharmas and guest dharmas, root and branch complete, and brings the two thousand bodhisattvas' obtaining of the acceptance of the non-arising of dharmas back to 「善說二諦」 tr. "the two truths well expounded". The overall answer of the whole fascicle of the Last Part is only one sentence: suchness, spoken of to its very limit, does not obstruct having practice; having practice, spoken of to its very limit, does not depart from suchness—only when the two are complete, as a cart with both wheels complete, can one get somewhere.

Passage by Passage

1. The gods say awakening is hard to obtain. The gods of the desire and form realms address the Buddha: anuttarā samyaksaṃbodhi is hard to obtain; why? These bodhisattva-mahāsattvas should know all dharmas and then obtain awakening, and 「是法亦不可得」 tr. "this dharma too is unfindable". Where does the hardness lie? It lies not in the road being long, but in both ends being empty—all the dharmas that should be known must be known to the end, and yet the dharma that is obtained is unfindable. What the gods praised in the First Part was the very depth of the Dharma; what they praise in the Last Part is the hardness of obtaining it: very deep speaks of the Dharma; hard to obtain speaks of the real state of a person applying effort upon the Dharma.

2. The Buddha approves that it is hard to obtain, and bears witness in his own person that there is also nothing attained. The Buddha answers 「如是！如是！」 tr. "Just so! Just so!" and bears witness himself: I too obtained all dharmas and the omniscience of all kinds and then obtained awakening, 「亦無所得，無能知、無可知、亦無知者」 tr. "yet there is also nothing attained: there is no knowing, nothing knowable, and no knower either"; why? 「諸法畢竟淨故」 tr. "because all dharmas are ultimately pure". This answer is the pivot of the whole passage: the Buddha does not deny that it is hard to obtain, but he shifts the hardness from ‘not being able to obtain it’ to ‘obtaining with nothing attained’. The three things—knowing, the knowable, and the knower—are all absent; what is hard is not that the road is long, but that neither a person who can obtain nor a dharma that can be obtained can stand. Do not read 「畢竟淨」 tr. "ultimately pure" as the purity of some state—the purity here is precisely non-obtaining; it is that all dharmas from the first have no stain to be removed.

3. Subhūti says awakening is easy to obtain. Subhūti, taking up the meaning of what the Buddha said, reflects in his mind and says 「易得」 tr. "easy to obtain": there is no one who obtains and no dharma that can be obtained; all dharmas and the marks of all dharmas are empty, there is no dharma that can be obtained and no one who can obtain; 「亦無法可增，亦無法可減」 tr. "there is also no dharma that can be increased, and no dharma that can be decreased"; in giving, morality, patience, vigour, meditation, and so on up to the omniscience of all kinds, there is in every case nothing that can be obtained and no one who can obtain; and so on up to 「色，色相空」 tr. "form: the mark of form is empty", 「識相空」 tr. "the mark of consciousness is empty", and the mark of the omniscience of all kinds is empty. Why, with the same ultimate emptiness, does the Buddha say hard and Subhūti say easy? What Subhūti relies on is precisely the 「無所得」 tr. "nothing to be attained" the Buddha had just spoken of—since there is nothing to increase and nothing to decrease, there is not one thing waiting to be added, not one stage waiting to be walked, and so he says easy. The two accounts, hard and easy, do not cancel each other: the Buddha speaks of hard with respect to the real state of persons; Subhūti speaks of easy with respect to the original mark of the Dharma. What matters is that Subhūti himself marks it, 「如我解佛所說義，我心思惟」 tr. "as I understand the meaning of what the Buddha has said, I reflect in my mind", making clear that this is an inference carried on from the Buddha's words, not the setting up of a separate thesis.

4. Śāriputra raises the difficulty of space and of retrogressing and turning back. Śāriputra says to Subhūti: if all dharmas are empty like space, 「虛空不作是念：『我當得阿耨多羅三藐三菩提。』」 tr. "space does not think: ‘I shall obtain anuttarā samyaksaṃbodhi.’" If believing and understanding that all dharmas are empty like space were itself easy obtaining, then the bodhisattvas equal to the sands of the Ganges who now seek awakening—「何以故退還」 tr. "why do they retrogress and turn back"? For this reason one knows that awakening is not easy to obtain. This difficulty has two edges: the front edge says that in emptiness there is no one able to arouse the mind—space does not give rise to the thought of seeking awakening; the back edge brings out, as something directly seen, that the matter of retrogressing and turning back can be verified case by case. It is not that Śāriputra does not understand emptiness; he sets emptiness against the facts of the field of cultivating the path, and forces out a question that must be answered—who, after all, is the one that retrogresses and turns back.

5. The first round of questioning: does form, and so on up to the omniscience of all kinds, retrogress and turn back or not? Subhūti asks back: does form retrogress and turn back from anuttarā samyaksaṃbodhi or not? Śāriputra answers 「不」 tr. "no". Do feeling, perception, constructions, and consciousness retrogress and turn back or not? He answers 「不」 tr. "no". And so on up to: does the omniscience of all kinds retrogress and turn back or not? He answers 「不」 tr. "no". This round first checks, one by one, the five aggregates and the omniscience of all kinds—that is, the dharmas at the two ends, the ordinary and the noble. Subhūti does not argue hard or easy; he only checks the subject: if there is said to be retrogressing and turning back, what retrogresses and turns back must surely be some dharma; so he begins by asking about what is most ready to hand, form, feeling, perception, constructions, and consciousness. Śāriputra's three answers of 「不」 tr. "no" are his own admission: among the five aggregates the one who retrogresses and turns back cannot be found.

6. The second round of questioning: apart from form and the rest, is there a dharma that retrogresses and turns back or not? Apart from form, is there a dharma that retrogresses and turns back from awakening or not? He answers 「不」 tr. "no". Apart from feeling, perception, constructions, and consciousness, is there a dharma that retrogresses and turns back or not? He answers 「不」 tr. "no". And so on up to: apart from the omniscience of all kinds, is there a dharma that retrogresses and turns back or not? He answers 「不」 tr. "no". The first round searched within the dharmas; the second round searches outside the dharmas. People often think that since the subject is not within the five aggregates, there must surely be another one outside the five aggregates; this round seals off exactly that line of retreat. To search inside and outside and find nothing is the preliminary work for the later question, 「若諸法畢竟不可得，何等法於阿耨多羅三藐三菩提退還」 tr. "if all dharmas are ultimately unfindable, what dharma retrogresses and turns back from anuttarā samyaksaṃbodhi".

7. The third round of questioning: does the mark of suchness of form, and so on up to the mark of suchness of the omniscience of all kinds, retrogress and turn back or not? Śāriputra! What do you think? Does the mark of suchness of form retrogress and turn back from awakening or not? He answers 「不」 tr. "no". Does the mark of suchness of feeling, perception, constructions, and consciousness, and so on up to the mark of suchness of the omniscience of all kinds, retrogress and turn back or not? He answers 「不」 tr. "no". The first two rounds asked about the dharmas; this round turns to ask about the mark of suchness of the dharmas. The First Part has already established 「色如相、薩婆若如相，是一如，無二無別」 tr. "the mark of suchness of form and the mark of suchness of sarvajñā are one suchness, without duality and without difference"; since the mark of suchness is one suchness, within the one suchness there is no this and that which could be moved, and so there is no retrogressing and turning back to speak of either. This round lifts the question from the marks of things to the original mark, and this is exactly where the chapter raises its banner of 「如」 tr. "suchness".

8. The fourth round of questioning: apart from the mark of suchness of form, and so on up to apart from the mark of suchness of the omniscience of all kinds, is there a dharma that retrogresses and turns back or not? Apart from the mark of suchness of form, is there a dharma that retrogresses and turns back from awakening or not? He answers 「不」 tr. "no". Apart from the mark of suchness of feeling, perception, constructions, and consciousness, and so on up to apart from the mark of suchness of the omniscience of all kinds, is there a dharma that retrogresses and turns back or not? He answers 「不」 tr. "no". This round follows the same method as the second but is one layer higher: it is neither within the mark of suchness nor outside the mark of suchness. With this the four rounds form a complete net—within the dharmas, outside the dharmas, within suchness, outside suchness: in all four places there is nothing. The four rounds share one method and advance layer by layer, which shows that they are one whole set and not scattered questioning. As for what the treatise-author later calls 「如相四句」 tr. "the four sentences on the mark of suchness", this refers to the four questions with which Subhūti, after Śāriputra has raised the difficulty of the three vehicles, breaks the three vehicles in turn by the mark of suchness (see below), not to the four rounds on retrogressing and turning back here; do not confuse them in reading.

9. Do suchness and the nature of dharmas and the rest, six names in all, retrogress and turn back or not? Śāriputra! What do you think? Does suchness retrogress and turn back from awakening or not? He answers 「不」 tr. "no". Do the nature of dharmas, the abiding of dharmas, the position of dharmas, the limit of reality, and the nature of the inconceivable retrogress and turn back from awakening or not? He answers 「不」 tr. "no". The single name suchness having already been asked about, five further names—the nature of dharmas, the abiding of dharmas, the position of dharmas, the limit of reality, the nature of the inconceivable—are opened out and asked about together; these five names, together with suchness, are other names for the real mark of all dharmas, and the sūtra asks them side by side precisely to guard against someone's thinking that 「如」 tr. "suchness" does not move while the other headings might perhaps move. The names are six but what they point to is one, and so the answer too is one.

10. Apart from suchness, apart from the nature of dharmas and the rest, is there a dharma that retrogresses and turns back or not? Śāriputra! What do you think? Apart from suchness, is there a dharma that retrogresses and turns back from awakening or not? He answers 「不」 tr. "no". Apart from the nature of dharmas, the abiding of dharmas, the position of dharmas, the limit of reality, and the nature of the inconceivable, is there a dharma that retrogresses and turns back or not? He answers 「不」 tr. "no". This is the close of the four rounds of questioning, applying the word 「離」 tr. "apart from" to suchness and the five names as well. With this, the two roads, inside and outside, the two layers, the marks of things and the original mark, and the two forms, the single name and the names together, have all been asked through—the one who retrogresses and turns back has nowhere to be placed.

11. Subhūti's concluding question: what dharma retrogresses and turns back? Subhūti says to Śāriputra: 「若諸法畢竟不可得，何等法於阿耨多羅三藐三菩提退還？」 tr. "If all dharmas are ultimately unfindable, what dharma retrogresses and turns back from anuttarā samyaksaṃbodhi?" Only here do the four rounds of questioning show their real intent: not to deny that the matter of retrogressing and turning back exists, but to ask who is the subject of retrogressing and turning back. Whenever one speaks of retrogressing and turning back, there must be a dharma that retreats from there toward here; if all dharmas are ultimately unfindable, then the three things—the one able to retrogress, the place retrogressed from, and the station retrogressed from—all lose what they are tied to. This question is the eye of the whole passage and must not be read as forced argument—the dozen and more 「不」 tr. "no" that Śāriputra gave before were answered by himself, step by step.

12. Śāriputra accepts it and presses a further difficulty: are not the three vehicles then without distinction? Śāriputra says to Subhūti: as Subhūti has said, 「是法忍中，無有菩薩於阿耨多羅三藐三菩提退還者」 tr. "within this acceptance of dharmas, there is no bodhisattva who retrogresses and turns back from anuttarā samyaksaṃbodhi"; if they do not retrogress and turn back, then of the three kinds of seekers of the path the Buddha speaks of—the arhat path, the pratyekabuddha path, the Buddha path—「是三種為無分別」 tr. "these three kinds would be without distinction"; as Subhūti says, 「獨有一菩薩求佛道」 tr. "there is only a single bodhisattva seeking the Buddha path". This is where Śāriputra most shows himself as the questioner: he first truthfully accepts what Subhūti has established within the acceptance of dharmas, and at once points out that this position, pushed to the end, will contradict the three vehicles the Buddha himself taught. Accepting and then raising the difficulty is what gives the difficulty its force; this is not going back and forth, but lifting the contradiction into the open.

13. Pūrṇa has Śāriputra put the question. At that time Pūrṇa Maitrāyaṇīputra says to Śāriputra: 「應當問須菩提：『為有一菩薩乘不？』」 tr. "You should ask Subhūti: ‘Is there a single bodhisattva vehicle or not?’" Pūrṇa is the fifth speaker, found only in this chapter; he interjects just this one sentence and then withdraws. His function is not to answer but to give the topic its shape: he rewrites the inference Śāriputra has just made, with its note of refutation, into a clean, straightforward question. The words of one who raises difficulties are often mixed with feeling; once a question is set up, the answerer can more easily answer according to the meaning.

14. Śāriputra asks as he was told. Then Śāriputra asks Subhūti: 「須菩提！為欲說有一菩薩乘？」 tr. "Subhūti! Do you mean to say there is a single bodhisattva vehicle?" Śāriputra receives the words and at once asks, which shows the manner in which the great disciples built up a discussion together: a question need not come from one's own idea, so long as it can press the meaning out. Once this question is put, Subhūti below no longer discusses retrogressing and turning back, but turns to the discernment of whether or not there are three vehicles within suchness.

15. Within suchness, would you have there be people of the three vehicles? Subhūti says to Śāriputra: 「於諸法如中，欲使有三乘人——聲聞乘、辟支佛乘、佛乘耶？」 tr. "Within the suchness of all dharmas, would you have there be people of the three vehicles—the śrāvaka vehicle, the pratyekabuddha vehicle, the Buddha vehicle?" Śāriputra answers 「不也」 tr. "no indeed". Subhūti does not answer head-on, ‘there is one vehicle’ or ‘there is no one vehicle’, but moves the question back into suchness. The headings of the three vehicles are here listed one by one: the śrāvaka vehicle, the pratyekabuddha vehicle, the Buddha vehicle. Since he asks 「於諸法如中」 tr. "within the suchness of all dharmas", the answerer can only answer with respect to suchness; Śāriputra himself answers 「不也」 tr. "no indeed", and the meaning of the one vehicle no longer waits for Subhūti to state it himself.

16. Within the discrimination of the three vehicles, can suchness be found or not? 「舍利弗！三乘分別中，有如可得不？」 tr. "Śāriputra! Within the discrimination of the three vehicles, is there suchness to be found or not?" He answers 「不也」 tr. "no indeed". The former question was whether there are three vehicles within suchness; this question turns it around: whether suchness can be found within the discrimination of the three vehicles. Only by asking in both directions is the relation of suchness and the three vehicles checked out clearly—within suchness there are no three vehicles, and within the three vehicles there is no suchness to be found either. This does not say that the three vehicles are false talk; it says that the discrimination of the three vehicles is not established upon suchness.

17. Does this suchness have one mark, two marks, or three marks? 「舍利弗！是如有若一相、若二相、若三相不？」 tr. "Śāriputra! Does this suchness have either one mark, or two marks, or three marks, or not?" He answers 「不也」 tr. "no indeed". This question guards against a misunderstanding that very easily arises: since it is said that within suchness there are no three vehicles, people will want to say that suchness is 「一相」 tr. "one mark". Subhūti asks away even the one mark along with the rest. One, two, and three are all marks, and whatever sets up a mark is not suchness; so when this chapter speaks of the one vehicle, it is not using one to break three and setting up a separate one.

18. Within suchness, is there even a single bodhisattva? 「舍利弗！汝欲於如中乃至有一菩薩不？」 tr. "Śāriputra! Would you have there be, within suchness, even a single bodhisattva?" He answers 「不也」 tr. "no indeed". The former question broke marks; this one breaks persons. Śāriputra had earlier said 「獨有一菩薩求佛道」 tr. "there is only a single bodhisattva seeking the Buddha path", and here that sentence is dealt with in its turn: within suchness not even a single bodhisattva can be found. Subhūti's position here shows no partiality whatsoever—he does not allow the people of the three vehicles to be found within suchness, nor does he allow his own side's 「一菩薩」 tr. "single bodhisattva" to be found within suchness.

19. Within these four kinds, the people of the three vehicles are unfindable. 「如是四種中，三乘人不可得。舍利弗！云何作是念『是求聲聞乘人，是求辟支佛乘人，是求佛乘人』？」 tr. "Within these four kinds, the people of the three vehicles are unfindable. Śāriputra! How can you think, ‘This is a person seeking the śrāvaka vehicle, this is a person seeking the pratyekabuddha vehicle, this is a person seeking the Buddha vehicle’?" At the end he sets out the positive verdict: when a bodhisattva-mahāsattva hears this mark of suchness of all dharmas and 「心不驚、不沒、不悔、不疑」 tr. "his mind is not startled, does not sink, has no regret, and does not doubt", this is called being able to accomplish anuttarā samyaksaṃbodhi. What are called the four kinds are the four questions before—the three vehicles within suchness, suchness within the three vehicles, the one, two, or three marks of suchness, and a single bodhisattva within suchness. In all four places nothing can be found, and so the discriminations of persons have nowhere to be established. And the conclusion of the sūtra lies not in ‘the three vehicles are false’ but in the mind's not moving on hearing this: being startled is the shock of first hearing; sinking is the mind's collapsing because it cannot take it on; regret is looking back after one has already set out; doubt is wavering between two and not deciding—when these four sicknesses do not arise, that is the mark of being fit to bear it.

20. The Buddha praises Subhūti: all of it is the Buddha's power. Then the Buddha praises Subhūti, saying: 「善哉！善哉！須菩提！汝所說者，皆是佛力。」 tr. "Excellent! Excellent! Subhūti! What you have said is all the Buddha's power." And he himself seals it: if a bodhisattva hears it said that 「是如無有諸法別異」 tr. "in this suchness there is no distinction or difference among dharmas", and 「心不驚、不怖、不畏、不難、不沒、不悔」 tr. "his mind is not startled, not terrified, not afraid, does not find it hard, does not sink, and has no regret", know that this bodhisattva can accomplish anuttarā samyaksaṃbodhi. The Buddha praises and returns it to the Buddha's power, which does not allow the disciple to take what he said as his own possession, and also gives surety for the hearers: these four rounds of questioning just now were not the cleverness of a debater, but the line of reasoning of the Buddha's Dharma itself. The six negations raised here are closer-knit than the four negations Subhūti raised—adding 「怖」 tr. "terrified" and 「畏」 tr. "afraid" speaks of fear in its shallower and deeper degrees; adding 「難」 tr. "finding it hard" speaks of the mind's thinking this Dharma hard to practise and so giving rise to retrogression.

21. Śāriputra asks what awakening is accomplished; the Buddha answers that it is the Buddha's awakening. Śāriputra addresses the Buddha: 「世尊！成就何等菩提？」 tr. "World-Honored One! What awakening does he accomplish?" The Buddha says: 「成就佛阿耨多羅三藐三菩提。」 tr. "He accomplishes the Buddha's anuttarā samyaksaṃbodhi." The whole passage speaks of there being no discrimination of the three vehicles within suchness, and yet at the end a question draws out an answer that has discrimination—this question and answer look like a reversal but are in fact the closing of the whole passage. Śāriputra asks with great precision: since there are no three vehicles, which awakening is it that is accomplished? The Buddha answers with great precision too: it is the Buddha's awakening. The treatise-author explains the causes and conditions of this himself below; here the reader need only remember that the sūtra has not, by speaking of suchness, done away with the fruit that is tended toward.

22. The treatise-author relates the thought of the gods. In explaining this passage, the treatise-author first relates the causes and conditions of the sūtra: at that time the gods had this thought, and addressed the Buddha that awakening is hard to obtain; why? 「一切法畢竟空」 tr. "all dharmas are ultimately empty", while the bodhisattva seeks the Buddha path, contemplates, practises, cultivates and gathers, becomes a Buddha and delivers beings, and 「是法亦不可得」 tr. "this dharma too is unfindable". Here the treatise-author unfolds the sūtra's 「應知一切諸法已」 tr. "should know all dharmas, and then" into 「觀行修集，成佛、度眾生」 tr. "contemplating, practising, cultivating and gathering, becoming a Buddha, and delivering beings"—the hardness is stated more concretely: it is not a hardness of understanding, but the need, within ultimate emptiness, actually to travel this whole great journey to its end, while the dharma travelled is unfindable.

23. The Buddha approves his words, and bears witness in his own person. The Buddha approves his words and bears witness in his own person: 「我坐道場，以一切種得一切法，亦無一定相可得。」 tr. "I sat at the seat of awakening and by all kinds obtained all dharmas, yet no single fixed mark could be found." The treatise-author specially marks the four Chinese characters 「自身為證」 tr. "bearing witness in his own person": the Buddha does not win people over by principle; he brings out the matter of his own attaining of the path as witness. What is called 「以一切種得一切法」 tr. "by all kinds obtained all dharmas" is the meaning of the sūtra's 「得一切法、一切種智已」 tr. "having obtained all dharmas and the omniscience of all kinds"; and 「亦無一定相可得」 tr. "yet no single fixed mark could be found" is the meaning of the sūtra's 「亦無所得」 tr. "yet there is also nothing attained". What gives the witness its force is that the one speaking is exactly the person who has already obtained it.

24. Why Subhūti says it is easy to obtain. Subhūti says: 「世尊！如我意：『阿耨多羅三藐三菩提易得。』」 tr. "World-Honored One! In my view: ‘Anuttarā samyaksaṃbodhi is easy to obtain.’" Why? 「一切法畢竟常空故」 tr. "because all dharmas are ultimately and always empty"; within this there is no one who obtains and no dharma that can be obtained, 「無障無礙、無所修、無所斷故」 tr. "because there is no hindrance and no obstruction, nothing to be cultivated, and nothing to be severed". The treatise-author fills in three pairs of reasons for Subhūti: no one who obtains and no dharma that can be obtained—this is said with respect to the one who obtains and what is obtained; no hindrance and no obstruction—this is said with respect to the road; nothing to cultivate and nothing to sever—this is said with respect to the effort. Cultivating and severing are the two great matters on the path; if neither has anything to act upon, where would hardness come from? The one Chinese character 「易」 tr. "easy" here is said with respect to the directness of the line of reasoning, not with respect to a person's slackness—Śāriputra's difficulty below is meant precisely to guard against this mistake.

25. Śāriputra's difficulty: one or two become buddhas, and the rest all retrogress and turn back. Then Śāriputra says: 「若佛道易得者，何以故恒河沙等無量菩薩求佛道，若一、若二作佛，餘者皆退還？」 tr. "If the Buddha path is easy to obtain, why is it that of the countless bodhisattvas equal to the sands of the Ganges who seek the Buddha path, one or two become buddhas and the rest all retrogress and turn back?" The treatise-author states the sūtra's 「何以故退還」 tr. "why do they retrogress and turn back" more piercingly: those who arouse the mind are like the sands of the Ganges; those who accomplish it are only one or two. This difficulty lies not in principle but in fact; whoever speaks of ease by principle must pass this barrier. The learner reading this should ask himself: can the principle I believe in give a place to the facts I see before my eyes?

26. Subhūti asks back, and the treatise-author explains the reason for 「不也」 tr. "no indeed" . Subhūti answers Śāriputra: 「色於阿耨多羅三藐三菩提退還不？受、想、行、識乃至一切種智退還不？」 tr. "Does form retrogress and turn back from anuttarā samyaksaṃbodhi or not? Do feeling, perception, constructions, and consciousness, and so on up to the omniscience of all kinds, retrogress and turn back or not?" The answer is 「不也」 tr. "no indeed". The treatise-author himself explains why: 「色等法畢竟空，無有退還。」 tr. "Form and the other dharmas are ultimately empty; there is no retrogressing and turning back." The sūtra records only a question and an answer; the treatise-author supplies the principle in the answerer's mind—Śāriputra's answer 「不也」 tr. "no indeed" is not because he has been stumped by the question, but because he himself also knows that form and the other dharmas are ultimately empty. With this one supplement, the dozen and more 「不」 tr. "no" before are not perfunctory.

27. The suchness of form and the other dharmas has no two marks, and so there is no retrogressing and turning back. The treatise-author continues his explanation: 「色等法如無二相，亦無分別，故無退還。」 tr. "The suchness of form and the other dharmas has no two marks and no discrimination either; therefore there is no retrogressing and turning back." This sentence explains the sūtra's third round—asking about retrogressing and turning back with respect to the mark of suchness. No two marks: the suchness of form and the suchness of awakening are not two; no discrimination: between them there is no boundary on the basis of which advance and retreat could be spoken of. Retrogressing and turning back must depend on there being two: only when there is this shore and the other shore can retreat be spoken of. Since suchness has no two, the name retrogressing and turning back has nothing on which to be set up.

28. Apart from form and the rest there is no further dharma. 「離色等法，更有法退還不？」 tr. "Apart from form and the other dharmas, is there a further dharma that retrogresses and turns back or not?" The treatise-author explains the answer: 「離色等更無有法，是故言『不也』。」 tr. "Apart from form and the rest there is no further dharma; therefore he says ‘no indeed’." This explains the second round. People think there is a dharma outside the dharmas, taking the word 「離」 tr. "apart from" as if it could really separate out something; the treatise-author says straight out that outside form and the rest there is not a single dharma. Since there is no such dharma, to ask whether it retrogresses and turns back becomes an empty supposition.

29. Suchness too is itself empty; therefore he says no. 「離色等法如，更有法退還不？」 tr. "Apart from the suchness of form and the other dharmas, is there a further dharma that retrogresses and turns back or not?" The treatise-author explains: 「如破色等法已，如亦自空，是故言『不』。」 tr. "When suchness has broken form and the other dharmas, suchness too is itself empty; therefore he says ‘no’." This explains the fourth round, and is where the whole passage most needs one's attention. What breaks form and the other dharmas is suchness; once they are broken, will that 「如」 tr. "suchness" itself remain behind as something attained? The treatise-author answers: suchness too is itself empty. If suchness were not itself empty, all the dharmas broken before would grow back again out of suchness. This sentence is the way prajñā always closes—of the knife used to break, in the end not even the knife is kept.

30. The nature of dharmas, the position of dharmas, and so on up to the nature of the inconceivable are likewise. The treatise-author passes over it in a word: 「法性、法位乃至不可思議性亦如是。」 tr. "The nature of dharmas, the position of dharmas, and so on up to the nature of the inconceivable are likewise." The sūtra asks about six names side by side; since the treatise-author has already explained that suchness is itself empty, the remaining names follow the same principle and he does not explain them again. The 「亦如是」 tr. "are likewise" here is not an omission; it says that the six names are of one substance: the verdict made about suchness is the verdict made about the nature of dharmas, the position of dharmas, the limit of reality, and the nature of the inconceivable.

31. Subhūti asks again why retrogressing and turning back is spoken of. Subhūti says to Śāriputra: 「若法無退還，何以故言『如恒河沙等菩薩退還』？」 tr. "If dharmas do not retrogress and turn back, why do you say, ‘bodhisattvas equal to the sands of the Ganges retrogress and turn back’?" The four rounds being finished, Subhūti hands Śāriputra's original words back to him intact. The questioner had earlier raised facts against principle; now that the principle stands, how are the facts to be placed—this question is not pressing an advantage, but handing the difficulty back to the one who raised it, so that he himself says how the two can stand together.

32. Śāriputra answers with the acceptance of dharmas; the treatise-author glosses 「法忍」 tr. "acceptance of dharmas" as the gate of the Dharma, the practice of the Dharma, the conduct of the Dharma. Śāriputra answers: 「如須菩提所說，法忍中則無退還。」 tr. "As Subhūti has said, within the acceptance of dharmas there is no retrogressing and turning back." The treatise-author immediately glosses: 「『法忍』者，是法門、法修、法行。入須菩提所說法門中，則無退還；出是法門，則有退還。」 tr. "‘Acceptance of dharmas’ is the gate of the Dharma, the practice of the Dharma, the conduct of the Dharma. Having entered the gate of the Dharma that Subhūti speaks of, there is no retrogressing and turning back; having come out of this gate of the Dharma, there is retrogressing and turning back." This passage unties the first difficulty of the whole fascicle. Whether there is retrogressing and turning back is not an absolute verdict; it hangs on whether or not one is within this gate: within the gate, ultimate emptiness is the measure, and there is not a single dharma that can retrogress; outside the gate, persons and dharmas are the measure, and cases of retrogressing and turning back can be counted one by one. The acceptance of dharmas is not a kind of forbearance; it is a gate that can be entered and left—the three Chinese characters for gate, practice, and conduct say precisely that it is both the place entered and the thing practised.

33. Śāriputra himself cites the Buddha's Dharma to raise a difficulty. The treatise-author records the real state of things: 「舍利弗雖現受須菩提語，亦自引佛法作難：『若無退者，盡當作佛，何以說有三乘？』」 tr. "Although Śāriputra visibly accepts Subhūti's words, he also himself cites the Buddha's Dharma to raise a difficulty: ‘If there is no one who retrogresses, all should become buddhas; why is it said that there are three vehicles?’" To accept openly and yet raise a difficulty again is the virtue of a questioner. The treatise-author uses the four Chinese characters 「自引佛法」 tr. "himself cites the Buddha's Dharma" to point out the weight of this difficulty—it is not that Śāriputra personally is unconvinced; it is that the three vehicles which the Buddha himself taught run up against this conclusion; whenever a difficulty takes the holy words as its ground, the answerer cannot suppress it by force.

34. Subhūti in turn breaks the three vehicles with the four sentences on the mark of suchness. 「須菩提還以如相四句破三乘。」 tr. "Subhūti in turn breaks the three vehicles with the four sentences on the mark of suchness." The treatise-author wraps up in one sentence that whole long stretch of four questions in the sūtra. What are called the four sentences on the mark of suchness are: the three vehicles within suchness, suchness within the three vehicles, the one, two, or three marks of suchness, and a single bodhisattva within suchness. It is called 「還」 tr. "in turn" because what Subhūti uses is still the very same knife-work with which he had just broken retrogressing and turning back: he does not contend with others over existence and non-existence, but only asks where within suchness the thing contended over can be found.

35. The Buddha praises Subhūti. 「佛歎須菩提：『善哉！若菩薩聞如中無三乘分別，不恐怖，是菩薩即能成無上道。』」 tr. "The Buddha praises Subhūti: ‘Excellent! If a bodhisattva hears that within suchness there is no discrimination of the three vehicles and is not afraid and terrified, this bodhisattva can then accomplish the unsurpassed path.’" The treatise-author gathers the sūtra's six 「不」 tr. "not" into the three Chinese characters 「不恐怖」 tr. "is not afraid and terrified", and moves the weight onto 「即能成無上道」 tr. "can then accomplish the unsurpassed path". Why is not being afraid and terrified on hearing the Dharma the mark of being able to accomplish it? Because the discrimination of the three vehicles is exactly where practitioners settle body and life; once one hears that this discrimination cannot be found within suchness and the mind does not move, one already does not take the position one has set up as one's home—only one who does not take a position as home can walk all the way to the unsurpassed.

36. Question: why does Śāriputra further ask what awakening is accomplished? The treatise-author poses a question: 「若佛說『菩薩成阿耨多羅三藐三菩提』，舍利弗何以故問『成就何等菩提』？」 tr. "If the Buddha has said, ‘the bodhisattva accomplishes anuttarā samyaksaṃbodhi’, why does Śāriputra ask, ‘what awakening does he accomplish’?" The Buddha's words have already made it clear—why ask again? This question is raised on the reader's behalf—the question and answer in the sūtra look superfluous, but the treatise-author does not let them pass, which shows precisely the fineness of his reading of the sūtra.

37. Answer: each has its own unsurpassed; the Great Vehicle is unsurpassed. The treatise-author answers: 「各各有無上，舍利弗疑故，問：『何等道無上？』答：『大乘無上。』」 tr. "Each has its own unsurpassed; because Śāriputra doubted, he asked: ‘Which path is unsurpassed?’ The answer: ‘The Great Vehicle is unsurpassed.’" This answer is of the utmost importance. What is meant by each having its own unsurpassed is that the śrāvaka path is ultimate for the śrāvaka, and the pratyekabuddha path is ultimate for the pratyekabuddha, and each can call itself unsurpassed; so merely saying ‘unsurpassed awakening’ is not yet enough to fix what is meant, and Śāriputra's doubt lies exactly here. The Buddha's answer, 「成就佛阿耨多羅三藐三菩提」 tr. "he accomplishes the Buddha's anuttarā samyaksaṃbodhi", designates one among the three ‘each its own unsurpassed’. Do not read this answer as the Buddha contradicting what he said before—what he said before was that within suchness there is no discrimination; this answer is that within speech a name must be fixed.

38. Furthermore: the Buddha says "Excellent!" because the mind that clings to the three vehicles is broken. The treatise-author gives a further explanation: 「復次，須菩提以畢竟空智慧，破著三乘心，佛讚：『善哉！』」 tr. "Furthermore, Subhūti with the wisdom of ultimate emptiness broke the mind that clings to the three vehicles, and the Buddha praised him: ‘Excellent!’" The previous explanation speaks from Śāriputra's doubt; this explanation speaks from the Buddha's praise. What the Buddha praises is not that Subhūti spoke cleverly, but that what he used was the wisdom of ultimate emptiness, and what he broke was 「著」 tr. "clinging"—not breaking the three vehicles, but breaking the mind that clings to the three vehicles. The three vehicles are the teaching the Buddha himself set up—how could there be any principle for breaking them? What is broken is only the human mind's holding them as real.

39. Subhūti says that if the mind does not sink and is not terrified, one can accomplish it. The treatise-author restates Subhūti's words: 「菩薩聞是，心不沒、不怖，則能成就阿耨多羅三藐三菩提。」 tr. "When the bodhisattva hears this and his mind does not sink and is not terrified, he can accomplish anuttarā samyaksaṃbodhi." This is the treatise-author restating the sūtra in the third person, not another dialogue. The purpose of the restatement is to carry what came before on to what follows: having spoken of breaking the mind that clings to the three vehicles, he at once says that one who hears without moving can accomplish it, precisely as a lead-in to Śāriputra's question below.

40. Śāriputra asks what awakening is accomplished. The treatise-author relates Śāriputra's question: 「三乘菩提無定相，今言成就菩提，成何等菩提？」 tr. "The awakening of the three vehicles has no fixed mark; now, when it is said that awakening is accomplished, what awakening is accomplished?" Here the treatise-author fills out Śāriputra's intent in asking more clearly: what he relies on is 「三乘菩提無定相」 tr. "the awakening of the three vehicles has no fixed mark". Since there is no fixed mark, the phrase 「成就菩提」 tr. "awakening is accomplished" falls into emptiness; asking 「成何等」 tr. "what is accomplished" is exactly asking for a fixed name. Because the question is put so clearly, the answer below shows its measure.

41. The Buddha says: he accomplishes the Buddha's anuttarā samyaksaṃbodhi. The treatise-author relates the Buddha's answer: 「成就佛阿耨多羅三藐三菩提。」 tr. "He accomplishes the Buddha's anuttarā samyaksaṃbodhi." It does not shift a single character from the sūtra. The treatise-author records it directly without adding explanation, letting the answer stand on its own; the explanation is kept for the general verdict of the next passage.

42. Entering the gate of ultimate emptiness there is one mark; coming out, the three vehicles differ. The treatise-author's general verdict: 「若入畢竟空門，一切法盡一相；若出畢竟空，三乘則有異。今佛分別諸法故說有上、中、下乘，不為畢竟空故說。」 tr. "If one enters the gate of ultimate emptiness, all dharmas are wholly of one mark; if one comes out of ultimate emptiness, the three vehicles then differ. Now the Buddha, because he discriminates dharmas, says there are the higher, middle, and lower vehicles; he does not say it for the sake of ultimate emptiness." This is the culmination of Treatise ③, and also the resolution of the second difficulty of the whole fascicle. One mark and difference are not two contradictory claims, but two ways of speaking of the same Dharma inside the gate and outside the gate: entering, all dharmas are wholly of one mark, and so within suchness there are no three vehicles; coming out, dharmas must be discriminated, and so the higher, middle, and lower vehicles are spoken of. The Buddha's speaking of three vehicles is a speaking at the time of 「分別諸法」 tr. "discriminating dharmas", not a speaking at the time of 「為畢竟空」 tr. "for the sake of ultimate emptiness"—once these two places of speaking are distinguished, the three vehicles and the one suchness do not obstruct each other. If the learner clings to one mark and slanders the three vehicles, or clings to the three vehicles and fears one mark, in both cases he is lumping together the words spoken inside the gate and outside it.

43. Subhūti asks how one who wishes to accomplish awakening should practise. Sūtra ④ begins: Subhūti addresses the Buddha: 「世尊！若菩薩摩訶薩欲成就阿耨多羅三藐三菩提，應云何行？」 tr. "World-Honored One! If a bodhisattva-mahāsattva wishes to accomplish anuttarā samyaksaṃbodhi, how should he practise?" View being settled, practice must now be asked about. This question follows directly on the Buddha's answer 「成就佛阿耨多羅三藐三菩提」 tr. "he accomplishes the Buddha's anuttarā samyaksaṃbodhi": since the fruit to be accomplished is settled as the Buddha's awakening, one naturally asks for its road. The whole great passage below that sets out the gates of practice at large all flows from this one question.

44. The Buddha answers with the seven minds and the four matters of the ten wholesome paths. The Buddha answers: he should arouse an equal mind, 「於一切眾生亦以等心與語，無有偏黨」 tr. "and speak to all beings too with an equal mind, without partiality"; among all beings he should arouse a mind of great kindness, and speak to them too with a mind of great kindness; 「於一切眾生中下意」 tr. "among all beings, a lowly intent", and speak to them too with a lowly intent; he should give rise to a mind of safety, an unobstructed mind, and a mind without vexation, and speak to them too, each with that mind; he should give rise to a mind of love and respect, 「如父、如母、如兄、如弟、如姊、如妹、如兒子、如親族、知識」 tr. "as to a father, as to a mother, as to an elder brother, as to a younger brother, as to an elder sister, as to a younger sister, as to a son, as to kin and friends", and speak to them too with a mind of love and respect. Next he shows the way of practising the ten wholesome paths: 「亦應自不殺生，亦教人不殺生，讚不殺生法，歡喜讚歎諸不殺生者」 tr. "he should also himself not kill living beings, also teach others not to kill living beings, praise the dharma of not killing living beings, and joyfully praise all who do not kill living beings"; and so on up to himself practising no wrong view, teaching others not to practise wrong view, praising the dharma of no wrong view, and joyfully praising those without wrong view. This passage sets the pattern for the whole of Sūtra ④, and two things must first be seen clearly. First, the seven minds side by side—an equal mind, a mind of great kindness, a lowly intent, a mind of safety, an unobstructed mind, a mind without vexation, a mind of love and respect: seven in all; and each mind carries a sentence, ‘speak to them too with such-and-such a mind’—beyond the mind, it demands the words as well, not allowing mind and mouth to be in different places. Second, the four matters together—practising it oneself, teaching others, praising its dharma, and joyfully praising the people who practise its dharma; these four matters will run through all the gates of practice below. As for the ten items of the ten wholesome paths, the sūtra here gives only the two ends, beginning with 「不殺生」 tr. "not killing living beings" and ending with 「不邪見」 tr. "no wrong view", abbreviating the middle with 「乃至」 tr. "and so on up to", and does not name them one by one; the treatise-author below calls them the ten wholesome paths without giving their items either, and the reader need not fill them in here on their behalf.

45. The four dhyānas. Furthermore, one who wishes to accomplish awakening 「應自行初禪，亦教他人行初禪，讚歎行初禪法，歡喜讚歎行初禪者」 tr. "should himself practise the first dhyāna, also teach others to practise the first dhyāna, praise the dharma of practising the first dhyāna, and joyfully praise those who practise the first dhyāna"; the second dhyāna, the third dhyāna, and the fourth dhyāna are likewise. The items of the four dhyānas the sūtra lists itself: the first dhyāna, the second dhyāna, the third dhyāna, the fourth dhyāna. This passage is the first re-performance of the four-matter pattern—first the full text for one member, then the remaining members covered by 「亦如是」 tr. "are likewise". In reading the sūtra one must restore 「亦如是」 tr. "are likewise" into one round of the four matters for each member, and not take it as passing over.

46. The four immeasurable minds; the sphere of boundless space and so on up to the sphere of neither perception nor non-perception; the six perfections. Furthermore, practising a mind of kindness oneself, teaching others to practise a mind of kindness, praising its dharma, and joyfully praising those who practise it—「悲、喜、捨心亦如是」 tr. "the minds of compassion, joy, and equanimity are likewise"; the items of the four immeasurable minds appear here: kindness, compassion, joy, equanimity. Practising the sphere of boundless space oneself, and so on up to joyfully praising those who practise it—「識處、無所有處、非有想非無想處亦如是」 tr. "the sphere of boundless consciousness, the sphere of nothing whatsoever, and the sphere of neither perception nor non-perception are likewise"; their items appear here: the sphere of boundless space, the sphere of boundless consciousness, the sphere of nothing whatsoever, the sphere of neither perception nor non-perception. Oneself fully practising dānapāramitā, and so on up to joyfully praising—「尸羅、羼提、毘梨耶、禪、般若波羅蜜亦如是」 tr. "śīla, kṣānti, vīrya, dhyāna, and prajñāpāramitā are likewise"; the items of the six perfections appear here: giving, morality, patience, vigour, meditation, prajñā. Three groups of practice-gates stand side by side in one passage, and each group has all four matters. What is most worth noting in this passage is that the six perfections stand in the same line with the four dhyānas, the four immeasurables, and the four formless absorptions, and are not set up as a separate, higher stage: under the frame of ‘practising it oneself, teaching others, praising the dharma, rejoicing’, all the gates of practice are laid out flat alike.

47. The emptinesses, the limbs of the path, samādhi, the liberations, the successive absorptions, the ten powers and so on up to great kindness and great compassion, and the twelve links of causes and conditions. Furthermore, practising inner emptiness oneself, and so on up to joyfully praising, 「乃至無法有法空亦如是」 tr. "and so on up to the emptiness of non-existent and existent dharmas, likewise"; practising the four foundations of mindfulness oneself, and so on up to joyfully praising, 「乃至八聖道分亦如是」 tr. "and so on up to the eightfold noble path, likewise"; himself cultivating 「空三昧、無相、無作三昧」 tr. "the emptiness samādhi, the signless, and the non-action samādhi", also teaching others to cultivate them, praising, and joyfully praising; practising the eight liberations oneself, practising the nine successive absorptions oneself, each also with the four matters; oneself fully possessing the Buddha's ten powers, also teaching others to possess them fully, praising, and joyfully praising; 「自行四無所畏、四無礙智、十八不共法、大慈大悲」 tr. "himself practising the four fearlessnesses, the four unobstructed knowledges, the eighteen unshared dharmas, and great kindness and great compassion", likewise; 「自逆順觀十二因緣」 tr. "himself contemplating the twelve links of causes and conditions in reverse and forward order", likewise. It closes: the bodhisattva-mahāsattva who wishes to accomplish awakening 「應如是行」 tr. "should practise thus". What is listed in this passage the sūtra mostly covers with its two ends plus 「乃至」 tr. "and so on up to": from inner emptiness to the emptiness of non-existent and existent dharmas, the sūtra does not give the names one by one; from the four foundations of mindfulness to the eightfold noble path, it does not give the names one by one either; of the eight liberations, the nine successive absorptions, the Buddha's ten powers, the four fearlessnesses, the four unobstructed knowledges, and the eighteen unshared dharmas, the sūtra gives only the general names and does not list their members. The only one that can be counted out item by item is this samādhi—emptiness, the signless, non-action. The gates of practice are many, but the format does not change: the four matters and nothing else.

48. Knowing suffering, severing origination, realising cessation, and cultivating the path; the fruit of srota-āpanna and so on up to the fruit of arhat; the path of the pratyekabuddha; the bodhisattva's position; purifying lands and bringing beings to accomplishment; the supernormal powers; the omniscience of all kinds; severing the fetters and their habitual residues. Furthermore, 「自應知苦、斷集、滅證、修道」 tr. "he himself should know suffering, sever origination, realise cessation, and cultivate the path", also teaching others, praising, and joyfully praising—their aspects of practice appear here: knowing suffering, severing origination, realising cessation, cultivating the path. 「自生須陀洹果證智而不證實際」 tr. "himself giving rise to the knowledge of realisation of the fruit of srota-āpanna, yet not realising the limit of reality", also teaching others to settle in the fruit of srota-āpanna, praising its dharma, and joyfully praising those who obtain the fruit; 「斯陀含果、阿那含果、阿羅漢果亦如是」 tr. "the fruit of sakṛdāgāmin, the fruit of anāgāmin, and the fruit of arhat are likewise"—the items srota-āpanna, sakṛdāgāmin, anāgāmin, and arhat appear here. 「自生辟支佛道證知而不證辟支佛道」 tr. "himself giving rise to the realising knowledge of the path of the pratyekabuddha, yet not realising the path of the pratyekabuddha", also teaching others to settle in the path of the pratyekabuddha, and so on up to joyfully praising. Next it comes to himself entering the bodhisattva's position, himself purifying buddha-worlds and bringing beings to accomplishment, himself arousing the bodhisattva's supernormal powers, himself giving rise to the omniscience of all kinds, himself severing all the fetters and their habitual residues—each with the four matters. It closes: 「應如是行」 tr. "should practise thus". In this passage there is a stroke most worth noting: for the four fruits and the path of the pratyekabuddha, the sūtra in each case adds a turning phrase, 「證智而不證實際」 tr. "the knowledge of realisation, yet not realising the limit of reality" and 「證知而不證辟支佛道」 tr. "realising knowledge, yet not realising the path of the pratyekabuddha". That the bodhisattva gives rise to the knowledge of realisation of the fruits of the two vehicles and yet does not take their realisation is the eye of this passage—it is not that he does not know the two vehicles; he knows them and does not abide in them; and toward others he still teaches them, praises them, and rejoices in them. Do not read 「教人著須陀洹果中」 tr. "teaching others to settle in the fruit of srota-āpanna" as urging people to take the small; the sūtra, precisely with the word 「著」 tr. "settle in", truthfully records the capacity of those whom it teaches.

49. The accomplishment of life-span and the accomplishment of the abiding of the Dharma; training in the power of skilful means and obtaining non-obstruction; from the very first not receiving. Furthermore, himself taking up the accomplishment of life-span, himself accomplishing the abiding of the Dharma, also teaching others, praising, and joyfully praising. Then comes the general conclusion: one who wishes to accomplish awakening 「應如是行，亦應如是學般若波羅蜜方便力」 tr. "should practise thus, and should also thus train in the power of skilful means of prajñāpāramitā"; when he trains thus and practises thus, 「當得無礙色，得無礙受、想、行、識，乃至得無礙法住」 tr. "he will obtain unobstructed form, obtain unobstructed feeling, perception, constructions, and consciousness, and so on up to obtaining the unobstructed abiding of the Dharma". Why? 「是菩薩摩訶薩從本已來，不受色，不受受、想、行、識，乃至不受一切種智」 tr. "this bodhisattva-mahāsattva, from the very first, does not receive form, does not receive feeling, perception, constructions, and consciousness, and so on up to does not receive the omniscience of all kinds"; why? 「色不受者為非色，乃至一切種智不受者為非一切種智」 tr. "form not received is not form, and so on up to the omniscience of all kinds not received is not the omniscience of all kinds". The gates of practice close here, and the place where they close is exactly this chapter's 「如」 tr. "suchness". That one can practise all these things widely and yet be unobstructed lies not in adding strength to the things, but in the two Chinese characters 「不受」 tr. "not receiving": from the very first not receiving form, and so on up to not receiving the omniscience of all kinds. And why not receiving can stand, the sūtra itself gives the principle—form not received is not form; the omniscience of all kinds not received is not the omniscience of all kinds. The passage before spoke of practice; here it speaks of what practice relies on; with this section, the vast gates of practice of Sūtra ④ do not fall into a heap of the marks of things.

50. Two thousand bodhisattvas obtain the acceptance of the non-arising of dharmas. 「說是菩薩行品時，二千菩薩得無生法忍。」 tr. "When this chapter on the bodhisattva's practice was expounded, two thousand bodhisattvas obtained the acceptance of the non-arising of dharmas." Sūtra ④ closes with this narrative sentence. It should be noticed that the sūtra here calls itself 「菩薩行品」 tr. "the chapter on the bodhisattva's practice", which differs from what the chapter's title calls it—the sūtra itself labels the passage it expounds as the bodhisattva's practice, which fits exactly the fact that this passage speaks only of the gates of practice. The assembly that benefits is two thousand bodhisattvas; the mark of the benefit is the acceptance of the non-arising of dharmas; at the very end of the fascicle the treatise-author will explain, with regard to this sentence alone, why it is so.

51. The treatise-author relates Subhūti's question. Treatise ④ begins; the treatise-author explains, first relating the question: 「菩薩欲成無上道者，云何應行？」 tr. "The bodhisattva who wishes to accomplish the unsurpassed path—how should he practise?" It has the same meaning as the sūtra's 「應云何行」 tr. "how should he practise" but changes the word order. In explaining this great passage, the treatise-author's pattern is first to cite one sentence of the sūtra and then at once to explain it by human feeling and the principles of things; the reader can read on following the rhythm of ‘first cite, then explain’.

52. The Buddha answers: arouse an equal mind, without partiality. The treatise-author cites the Buddha's answer: 「應起等心，於一切眾生無有偏黨。」 tr. "He should arouse an equal mind, without partiality toward all beings." Among the seven minds he cites the equal mind alone first, because the equal mind is the root of the six minds that follow: only once partiality is broken do the mind of kindness, the lowly intent, and so on up to the mind of love and respect have ground on which to stand. The treatise-author below gives three successive explanations of the equal mind, which shows precisely its weight.

53. The equal mind, first: all three divisions—enemies, kin, and those in between—are regarded with the thought of affection. The treatise-author first explains 「眾生」 tr. "beings": 「五眾和合，假名眾生，如車、如林。」 tr. "The five aggregates come together and are provisionally named beings, like a cart, like a forest." Next he explains 「一切」 tr. "all": 「一切眾生者，盡舉十方六道，無有遺餘。」 tr. "‘All beings’ takes up entirely the ten directions and the six destinies, with nothing left out." Next he brings out what is to be remedied: 「一切眾生法，各行三分：怨、親、中人。」 tr. "The way of all beings is each to act in three divisions: enemies, kin, and those in between." Therefore the Buddha teaches the bodhisattva the equal mind: toward all beings 「皆有親愛想，莫生怨心，莫生中人心」 tr. "to have the thought of affection for all, not to give rise to the mind toward an enemy, not to give rise to the mind toward someone in between". These three steps are very orderly: first he takes apart the person who is the object—the five aggregates come together and are provisionally named beings, like a cart, like a forest, cart and forest both being provisional names gathered from many parts; then he stretches out the extent of the object—the ten directions and the six destinies, with nothing left out; last he points out the three compartments into which the human mind naturally divides people. The equal mind is not levelling the three compartments into indifference; it is raising all three alike into affection. The phrase ‘not to give rise to the mind toward someone in between’ is especially fine: not to feel enmity toward an enemy is already hard, but not even the unrelated person is allowed to be set aside as ‘unrelated’—only this is equal.

54. The equal mind, second: leaving the two minds of hatred and love and practising the mind of kind affection. The treatise-author explains further: 「復次，眾生有二種：愛及憎。」 tr. "Furthermore, beings have two kinds: love and hatred." The Buddha says that toward all beings one should leave these two minds: 「莫生憎、愛」 tr. "do not give rise to hatred or love". He also draws a distinction himself: 「愛者，貪欲，煩惱心，不應行；當行慈愛心。」 tr. "Love is greed and desire, a mind of affliction, and should not be practised; one should practise the mind of kind affection." Next he brings up the ways of the world: 「世間法，愛念妻子、牛馬等，憎惡怨賊等。菩薩轉此世間法，但行慈愛心於一切眾生。」 tr. "The way of the world is to love and cherish wife and children, oxen and horses, and the like, and to hate and loathe enemies and thieves and the like. The bodhisattva turns this way of the world and practises only the mind of kind affection toward all beings." The previous explanation spoke in three divisions; this one speaks in two, and is more direct. And the most important thing in it is a distinction: having said 「莫生憎、愛」 tr. "do not give rise to hatred or love", he also says 「當行慈愛心」 tr. "one should practise the mind of kind affection"—is this not self-contradictory? The treatise-author separates them clearly—the love to be left is the love of greed, desire, and affliction; the love to be practised is kind affection. The two share a name but differ in substance: greedy love is tied to one's own desire; kind affection is tied to the other's obtaining happiness. The five Chinese characters 「轉此世間法」 tr. "turns this way of the world" are the place to set one's hand: it is not making some other kind of mind; it is turning the love and cherishing people already have, away from wife and children, oxen and horses, to bestow it on all.

55. The equal mind, third: people of six grades, three evil and three good; the bodhisattva practises the sixth mind. The treatise-author's third explanation: 「復次，『等心』者，菩薩生法喜，於一切眾生，欲令皆至佛道」 tr. "Furthermore, ‘the equal mind’ is that the bodhisattva gives rise to the joy of the Dharma and, toward all beings, wishes to bring them all to the Buddha path"; the bodhisattva 「自捨憎愛心，亦捨眾生憎愛心加己」 tr. "himself gives up the mind of hatred and love, and also gives up the hatred and love that beings direct at him". Next he lists the grades of people in the world: evil, great evil, evil within evil; good, great good, good within good. The evil: 「如人以惡事加己，還報之以惡事」 tr. "as when someone does an evil thing to him, and he repays it with an evil thing"; yet the Dharma of the buddhas holds an equal mind toward all beings: 「不應起惡念，何況起身行、口行」 tr. "one should not give rise to an evil thought, how much less to acts of body and acts of speech"; the great evil: 「如無人侵己，而以惡加人」 tr. "as when no one has encroached on him, and yet he does evil to others"; evil within evil: 「如人以好心供給慈念，而反以惡心毀害」 tr. "as when someone with a good mind provides for him and thinks of him with kindness, and he in return harms him with an evil mind". The good: 「如人以好事於己，還以善報」 tr. "as when someone does a good thing for him, and he repays it with good"; the great good: 「如人於己無善，而以善事利益」 tr. "as when someone has done him no good, and yet he benefits him with good things"; good within good: 「如人以惡事害於己，而以善事乃至身命供養」 tr. "as when someone harms him with an evil thing, and yet he makes offerings to him with good things, even with his body and life". At the end he decides: 「菩薩捨是三惡，過是二種善，行第六心於一切眾生。」 tr. "The bodhisattva gives up these three evils, passes beyond these two kinds of good, and practises the sixth mind toward all beings." The order of this passage is the treatise-author's own listing; the six names in order are evil, great evil, evil within evil, good, great good, good within good; what is called the sixth mind is the last of these six names, good within good. Giving up the first three, passing beyond the first two of the latter three, and practising the sixth—the treatise-author's numbers correspond one by one with his list, with no need to seek outside. And the criterion of the six grades is consistent: all are set up in terms of ‘how others act on me, and how I repay them.’ Evil within evil repays a good mind with evil; good within good repays an evil deed with body and life—the two ends stand facing each other, which shows that what is called the equal mind is extended alike even to the hardest place. Besides this, the sentence 「自捨憎愛心，亦捨眾生憎愛心加己」 tr. "himself gives up the mind of hatred and love, and also gives up the hatred and love that beings direct at him" must be looked at closely: not only does one not give rise to hatred and love oneself, one also lets go of the hatred and love that others direct at one; otherwise, the moment someone directs hatred at one, the equal mind is broken.

56. Question: not yet having obtained the Dharma body, how can he practise this mind? The treatise-author poses a question: 「是菩薩未得法身，云何能行是心？」 tr. "This bodhisattva has not yet obtained the Dharma body; how can he practise this mind?" This question is asked with great realism. Making offerings to enemies and thieves with one's body and life is the business of a bodhisattva of the Dharma body; while the ordinary fleshly body is still there, how can one bear it? Whoever, reading a lofty teaching, thinks ‘this is not something I can practise’—this question is raised on his behalf. The five rounds of answer below mean precisely to put this matter back where it can be practised.

57. Answer, first: seeking the unsurpassed path, one should practise the unsurpassed Dharma—the simile of the merchant on a dangerous road. The treatise-author answers: 「是菩薩求無上道，應行無上法，受如是難為苦行，乃成無上道。」 tr. "This bodhisattva seeks the unsurpassed path; he should practise the unsurpassed Dharma and take on such ascetic practices hard to do, and then he accomplishes the unsurpassed path." And he gives a simile: 「譬如估客，於險道中備受諸苦，乃得大利。」 tr. "It is like a merchant who, on a dangerous road, undergoes every kind of suffering, and then obtains great profit." The first answer speaks from the matching of cause and effect: since what is sought is unsurpassed, what is practised cannot but be unsurpassed; to wish to take an unsurpassed fruit with ordinary practice does not make sense. The simile of the merchant takes his willing acceptance: it is not that the merchant does not know the suffering of the dangerous road, only that, because the profit he aims at is great, the suffering can be borne. This simile does not allow one to see ascetic practice as a penalty imposed from outside—it is the price one is willing to pay after doing one's own reckoning.

58. Answer, second: because he deeply believes in ultimate emptiness, he can make offerings to enemies and thieves. 「復次，是菩薩聞佛法正體——所謂畢竟空，無我、無我所，無一定實法，所見、所聞、所知皆是虛誑，如幻、如夢；深信是法故，能以身命供養怨賊。」 tr. "Furthermore, this bodhisattva hears the proper substance of the Buddha's Dharma—namely ultimate emptiness: no self, nothing belonging to a self, no single fixed real dharma; what is seen, what is heard, and what is known are all false and deceptive, like an illusion, like a dream; because he deeply believes this Dharma, he can make offerings to enemies and thieves with his body and life." The second answer turns to view. The previous answer spoke of the power of vow; this answer speaks of the power of view: since he deeply believes in no self and nothing belonging to a self, the body he gives up was never his own, and the harm done by enemies and thieves is also like a thing in an illusion or a dream. This answer runs in one vein with this chapter's 「如」 tr. "suchness"—the First Part spoke of the non-duality of suchness, and the Last Part redeems it here as the power to give up.

59. Answer, third: this body is the root of sin and defilement; exchanging a worn-out body for great profit. 「復次，菩薩知此身從罪業煩惱顛倒因緣生，所見、所聞皆是虛誑罪垢之本；若有人來欲加害於我，我宜歡喜受之，以此弊身而得無上道利，何為不與！」 tr. "Furthermore, the bodhisattva knows that this body is born from the causes and conditions of sinful deeds, afflictions, and inversion, and that what is seen and what is heard are all false and deceptive, the root of sin and defilement; if someone comes wishing to harm me, I should gladly accept it; with this worn-out body I obtain the profit of the unsurpassed path—why should I not give it!" The third answer speaks of the body itself. The previous answer broke its reality with illusion and dream; this answer makes plain its inferiority by sin and defilement: since it is born of the causes and conditions of sinful deeds, afflictions, and inversion, keeping it has nothing to prize. The four Chinese characters 「何為不與」 tr. "why should I not give it" portray the bodhisattva's frankness—not enduring pain, but having done the sum and found that it adds up.

60. Answer, fourth: teaching by the body so that beings believe and accept. 「復次，菩薩發心，深愛眾生，欲利益故，自以己身供養怨賊，欲令眾生効己所行；以有眾生說法教者不必肯受故，以身教令其信受。」 tr. "Furthermore, the bodhisattva, having aroused the mind, deeply loves beings, and because he wishes to benefit them, himself makes offerings to enemies and thieves with his own body, wishing to have beings imitate what he does; because there are beings who, taught by the expounding of the Dharma, will not necessarily accept it, he teaches them with his body so that they believe and accept." The fourth answer turns from benefiting oneself to benefiting others. The first three answers all say why the bodhisattva himself can give up; this answer says that giving up is teaching: there is a kind of being who, taught by words, does not accept, and believes only on seeing the person's bodily conduct. Here a very weighty verdict is set down—the reason teaching by the body cannot be abandoned is not that it is higher than teaching by words, but that there is a kind of capacity that can be delivered only by it.

61. Answer, fifth: for those who speak of seeking the path while their bodily conduct does not match, he teaches with his body. 「復次，多有人發言求無上道而身行不稱；亦以是故，菩薩以身教之，令堅心行此難事。欲求無上道，當行善中善法，為此難事，爾乃可得。」 tr. "Furthermore, there are many who declare in words that they seek the unsurpassed path, while their bodily conduct does not match; for this reason too the bodhisattva teaches them with his body, so that they make their minds firm and do this hard thing. Wishing to seek the unsurpassed path, one should practise the dharma of good within good; doing this hard thing, only then can one obtain it." This answer follows the previous one and advances further: what it remedies is the sickness of speech and bodily conduct being apart. And the sentence 「當行善中善法」 tr. "one should practise the dharma of good within good" links straight back to the sixth mind set up in passage 55—when someone harms one with an evil thing and one makes offerings to him with body and life, that is good within good; so the hard thing here is the sixth mind of that passage. The treatise-author ties before and after together; he is not giving examples offhand.

62. By countless causes and conditions such as these. 「如是等無量因緣，自以身命供養怨賊。」 tr. "By countless causes and conditions such as these, he himself makes offerings to enemies and thieves with his body and life." With this sentence the treatise-author gathers up the five answers. Marking it 「無量」 tr. "countless" says that the five answers given are not an exhaustive number, only those that can be spoken of. This closing sentence also reminds the reader: what was asked before was 「未得法身，云何能行」 tr. "not yet having obtained the Dharma body, how can he practise", and the answers never lay in the realm of supernormal powers at all, but wholly in the weighing of vow, view, and the body, and in the capacity for teaching—whether it can be practised or not is decided in these few places.

63. Question: what difference is there between the equal mind and the mind of kindness? The treatise-author poses a question: 「等心、慈心有何等異？」 tr. "What difference is there between the equal mind and the mind of kindness?" The first two of the seven minds are the equal mind and the mind of great kindness; both are aroused toward all beings, and their boundary is easily blurred. This question is not a quibble over words—if the two minds were not different, why would the Buddha set them side by side; if they are different, where does the difference lie? Below, three accounts are set side by side in answer.

64. Answer, first: the equal mind is the four immeasurable minds; the mind of kindness is one immeasurable. The treatise-author answers: 「等心者是四無量心，慈心者是一無量。」 tr. "The equal mind is the four immeasurable minds; the mind of kindness is one immeasurable." The first account explains by inclusion: the equal mind is the general, containing the four immeasurables; the mind of kindness is the particular, one of the four. The items of the four immeasurables Sūtra ④ has already given itself above—kindness, compassion, joy, equanimity. By this account, the two minds are not two side by side but a difference of general and particular.

65. Someone says: first giving up enemy and kin is the equal mind; afterwards adding pity is the mind of kindness. 「有人言：初捨怨親是等心，後加愍念是慈心。」 tr. "Someone says: first giving up enemy and kin is the equal mind; afterwards adding pity is the mind of kindness." The second account explains by sequence: first level the discrimination, then arouse the pity; the equal mind comes first as the ground, the mind of kindness comes after as the function. The treatise-author marks it 「有人言」 tr. "someone says" and records it, noting that it is another's account, not his own verdict. Setting the three accounts side by side without forcing them into one is precisely this treatise's constant way of preserving difference.

66. Furthermore, someone says: the equal mind contemplates suchness, the limit of reality, and the nature of dharmas; the mind of kindness loves and cherishes beings. 「復次，有人言：等心者，觀眾生如如、實際、法性，是法皆無為、無量故等；愛念眾生，是名慈心。」 tr. "Furthermore, someone says: the equal mind contemplates beings as like suchness, the limit of reality, and the nature of dharmas; these dharmas are all unconditioned and immeasurable, and therefore it is equal; loving and cherishing beings is called the mind of kindness." The third account explains by the object: the 「等」 tr. "equal" of the equal mind comes from the dharmas contemplated being unconditioned and immeasurable—since suchness, the limit of reality, and the nature of dharmas have no bounds, the mind contemplating them is of itself without partiality; the kindness of the mind of kindness falls upon loving and cherishing beings. This account runs most closely with this chapter's 「如」 tr. "suchness": the First Part spoke of suchness as without duality and without difference, and here it is taken as that from which the equal mind comes. Yet the mind of kindness is still spoken of with respect to beings, which shows that the treatise-author does not dissolve the mind of kindness too into the contemplation of emptiness.

67. Why the mind of compassion is not spoken of. 「所以不說悲心者，悲心或憂念眾生，積集此心，心則退沒。」 tr. "The reason the mind of compassion is not spoken of is that the mind of compassion sometimes grieves over beings, and when this mind accumulates, the mind retreats and sinks." Also: 「或有眾生不愛菩薩悲念，言：『汝何以不自憂其身而念他人？』慈心無如是事，易攝眾生故，但說慈心。」 tr. "Or there are beings who do not love the bodhisattva's compassionate concern and say: ‘Why do you not worry about yourself instead of thinking of others?’ The mind of kindness has no such matter, and because it easily gathers in beings, only the mind of kindness is spoken of." This passage answers a question the sūtra itself never asked: since the four immeasurables are the substance of the equal mind, why among the seven minds does the Buddha mark out the mind of great kindness alone and not the mind of compassion? The treatise-author brings out two causes and conditions: one concerns oneself—the grieving of the mind of compassion, accumulated over time, makes the mind retreat and sink; the other concerns others—beings do not necessarily welcome another's pity, and on the contrary take receiving it as being slighted. Kindness and compassion originally go together; the choice here is made with respect to this one point, ‘meeting with people’—the sūtra says precisely 「亦以大慈心與語」 tr. "and speak to them too with a mind of great kindness", and what is being discussed is the moment of speaking or keeping silent and responding to people.

68. Question: the bodhisattva is a great person; how does he arouse a lowly intent among beings? The treatise-author poses a question: 「若眾生有三種：上、中、下，菩薩福德智慧積集故，應是大人，云何言『於一切眾生中起下意』？」 tr. "If beings are of three kinds, high, middle, and low, and the bodhisattva, because he has accumulated merit and wisdom, should be a great person, how can it be said, ‘among all beings arouse a lowly intent’?" The third of the seven minds is the lowly intent. What the questioner holds to is a ready-made principle: positions are high and low, and courtesy has its degrees; since the bodhisattva is a great person, would not placing himself low misrepresent the fact? This question is asked squarely and properly, and so the six answers below each answer from principle, not muddling through with a word about the virtue of humility.

69. Answer, first: all dharmas are impermanent; great and small are set up by worldly ways. The treatise-author answers: the bodhisattva thinks thus: 「一切法無常，一切眾生上、中、下皆歸磨滅，是中何者是大？何者是小？人以世法故有大小。」 tr. "All dharmas are impermanent; all beings, high, middle, and low, return alike to being ground away; among these, which is great? Which is small? It is by worldly ways that people have great and small." The first answer speaks from impermanence. Since the three grades, high, middle, and low, return alike to being ground away, what one relies on to divide great and small does not abide long; and what is called great and small is a name established 「人以世法故」 tr. "by people through worldly ways", not a mark really existing in dharmas. This answer first dismantles the questioner's premise—it is not that the bodhisattva is being modest, but that the matter of great and small has no place to stand in the first place.

70. Answer, second: great and small are not fixed; they change with place and time. 「復次，大小不定，此國以為大，餘國以為小；於此為大，於彼為小；如今世卑賤，後世為天王。如是業因緣，在世間輪轉，貴賤大小無定。如水火貴賤隨時，用捨無定。」 tr. "Furthermore, great and small are not fixed: this country takes something as great, another country takes it as small; here it is great, there it is small; as one lowly and mean in this life becomes a heavenly king in the next. By the causes and conditions of deeds such as these, turning round in the world, noble and mean, great and small are not fixed. As water and fire are dear or cheap according to the time, and whether they are used or set aside is not fixed." The second answer speaks from non-fixity. The previous answer broke its permanence by impermanence; this answer breaks its fixity by relativity: the same person, the same thing, when place and time change, is judged wholly differently. The simile of water and fire is very plain—in drought water is dear, in cold fire is dear; dearness and cheapness do not lie in water and fire themselves. That being so, to rely on one's present position and take oneself as great is to take a judgement of the moment as the reality.

71. Answer, third: knowing that merit is ultimately empty, he does not have great and small. 「復次，菩薩雖有功德，知是功德畢竟空、如幻、如夢，不著此功德，不有是大小。」 tr. "Furthermore, though the bodhisattva has merit, he knows that this merit is ultimately empty, like an illusion, like a dream; he does not cling to this merit and does not have this great and small." The third answer speaks of merit itself. The first two answers broke the worldly ways relied upon; this answer breaks the merit leaned upon. The questioner said that the bodhisattva, 「福德智慧積集故，應是大人」 tr. "because he has accumulated merit and wisdom, should be a great person", taking merit precisely as the basis; the treatise-author sets his hand directly on this basis—merit is not absent, but it is ultimately empty, like an illusion, like a dream, and cannot be clung to so as to exalt oneself. This answer follows the same line of reasoning as passage 58: this chapter's suchness is redeemed here as not relying on oneself.

72. Answer, fourth: only the Buddha can know who has the causes and conditions of the Buddha path; belittling them is belittling a future buddha. 「復次，一切眾生中有佛道因緣者，唯佛能知。」 tr. "Furthermore, among all beings, who has the causes and conditions of the Buddha path only the Buddha can know." The bodhisattva thinks thus: 「若我以眾生形貌、才能——以此事輕者，則為輕未來佛；若輕佛則為永了。」 tr. "If I belittle beings for their appearance and abilities—belittling them for such things—then I belittle a future buddha; and if I belittle a buddha, then I am finished for ever." The fourth answer speaks of the one belittled. The first three answers said that oneself is not to be relied on; this answer says that the other cannot be measured: among beings, who has the causes and conditions of the Buddha path none but the Buddha can know; judging people by appearance and ability, the one belittled may be a future buddha. This answer gives the lowly intent its hardest reason—it is not a posture; it is not daring to gamble.

73. Answer, fifth: having vowed to deliver beings, if they have attained nothing he fails them—the simile of the host inviting guests. 「復次，菩薩作是念：『我誓度一切眾生；若眾生無所得，我則孤負眾生。』譬如主人請客，則應敬客而自卑；若無所供設，是則負愧於客。」 tr. "Furthermore, the bodhisattva thinks thus: ‘I have vowed to deliver all beings; if beings have attained nothing, then I have failed beings.’ It is like a host who invites guests: he should honour the guests and humble himself; if he has nothing to set before them, he is ashamed before his guests." The fifth answer speaks from the original vow. Since the bodhisattva has himself vowed to deliver beings, beings are like guests who have received an invitation; a host should of course honour his guests and humble himself, how much more when what he is to set out is not yet prepared. This simile moves the lowly intent from virtuous conduct to one's due role: it is not that the bodhisattva is of a modest temperament, but that he has already placed himself in the host's seat while the guests have not yet received what is to be provided—he is too taken up with his shame to have leisure for anything else; how could he be self-important?

74. Answer, sixth: self-importance gives rise to hatred; with a lowly mind there is no resentment—the simile of the master beating the slave. 「復次，以自大心故，則喜生瞋恚；憍慢是瞋之本，瞋是一切重罪之根。」 tr. "Furthermore, because of a self-important mind, hatred readily arises; pride is the root of hatred, and hatred is the root of all grave sins." If the bodhisattva arouses a lowly mind toward beings, 「眾生若罵、若打，則無恚恨；譬如大家打奴，奴不敢瞋恨」 tr. "if beings scold him or beat him, he has no resentment; as when a master beats a slave, the slave dares not hate"; if the bodhisattva exalts himself and in his thoughts looks down on beings, 「眾生侵害，忿然生怒；如奴打大家，則起瞋怒」 tr. "when beings encroach on and harm him, he flares up in anger; as when a slave beats the master, hatred and anger arise". It closes: 「下意有如是等種種利益故，菩薩應當行。」 tr. "Because the lowly intent has benefits of all kinds such as these, the bodhisattva should practise it." The sixth answer speaks of faults and benefits, and is the most practically useful of the six. Its line of reasoning is a chain: pride gives rise to hatred, and hatred is the root of grave sins; and the reason a person's being insulted turns into anger is mostly that he has first placed himself high in his mind. The simile takes the two directions of master and slave in contrast, taking only the one meaning ‘when the position one occupies differs, the reaction to insult differs’. The learner here should recognise how to use it: putting the mind low is not an ornament of self-cultivation; it is taking the firewood out from under the pot of hatred.

75. The mind of safety: giving the happiness of this life, of the next life, and of the ultimate. The treatise-author explains the fourth of the seven minds: 「『安隱心』者，與今世、後世、究竟樂，非如父母、知識與現世樂。」 tr. "‘A mind of safety’ gives the happiness of this life, of the next life, and of the ultimate—not as father and mother and friends give the happiness of the present life." The method of explanation is to mark it off by the happiness given: what father, mother, and friends give stops at the present life; what the mind of safety gives extends through this life, the next life, and on to the ultimate. This distinction is very important—if safety were only making people comfortable for the moment, it would not differ from worldly kind love; only with the addition of the two further layers, the next life and the ultimate, does it show itself as the mind of a bodhisattva.

76. The unobstructed mind: penetrating without obstruction toward those who do not know kindness and those sent by Māra. The treatise-author explains the fifth of the seven minds. When the bodhisattva benefits beings with an equal mind, a mind of kindness, and a lowly mind, 「若有不知恩人來惱菩薩，不信所行，謂為欺誑，為求名故，無有實事」 tr. "if there are people who do not know kindness who come and vex the bodhisattva, not believing what he does, calling it deceit, done to seek fame, with nothing real in it"; and there are those who, 「為魔所使，來惱菩薩」 tr. "sent by Māra, come and vex the bodhisattva"—these are 「惡中之惡，不識恩分」 tr. "the evil within evil, who do not recognise a kindness done"; and 「菩薩等心，於此通達無礙」 tr. "the bodhisattva's equal mind penetrates this without obstruction". The unobstructed mind is not a loose way of saying the mind is broad; it is named with respect to a specific obstruction: to bestow kindness and on the contrary be suspected of deceit and of seeking fame is one of the obstructions most easily met by one who walks the bodhisattva path. The treatise-author here calls such people 「惡中之惡」 tr. "the evil within evil", linking back exactly to the name set up in passage 55—those who, when someone with a good mind provides for them and thinks of them with kindness, in return harm him with an evil mind. The name set up before is used here, which shows that the verdict of the six grades is not idle text.

77. The mind without vexation: though beings have great sins and faults, he wishes only to benefit them. 「得是無礙心已，眾生雖有大罪大過，但欲利益，不生惱心。慈心、安隱，無礙、不惱心。」 tr. "Having obtained this unobstructed mind, though beings have great sins and great faults, he wishes only to benefit them and does not give rise to a mind of vexation. The mind of kindness, safety, non-obstruction, the mind without vexation." The treatise-author explains the sixth of the seven minds, and with one sentence threads four minds together: the mind of kindness, the mind of safety, the unobstructed mind, and the mind without vexation arise in order one from another—having kindness, one can then give ultimate happiness; able to give happiness, one is then unobstructed toward slander and vexation; unobstructed toward slander and vexation, one then does not give rise to a mind that vexes and harms, even on seeing a person's great sins and faults. Not giving rise to a mind of vexation is not failing to see their faults; it is seeing the faults while what one wishes is still only to benefit them.

78. The mind of love and respect: like a filial son's love and respect for his parents, yet extended to all. 「譬如孝子愛敬父母，如兄、如弟、如姊妹、如兒女，無婬欲心而生愛敬慈念。世人但能愛敬所親，菩薩普及一切。」 tr. "It is like a filial son who loves and respects his father and mother, and, as to an elder brother, as to a younger brother, as to sisters, as to sons and daughters, gives rise without a mind of lust to love, respect, and kind thought. Worldly people can love and respect only those close to them; the bodhisattva extends it universally to all." The treatise-author explains the last of the seven minds. The sūtra originally gave as father, as mother, as elder brother, as younger brother, as elder sister, as younger sister, as son, as kin and friends; the treatise-author takes the filial son's love and respect as the simile and specially adds a distinction: 「無婬欲心」 tr. "without a mind of lust". The love of relatives is the most intimate, and so it is taken as the simile; and the love of relatives is also the most easily mixed with the taint of feeling, and so this distinction is set down at once. The last sentence points out the difference between the simile and what it illustrates: the love and respect of worldly people stop at those close to them, while the bodhisattva extends the same intimacy universally to all—the simile is taken for its quality, not for its extent.

79. The acceptance of beings is the first gate of the acceptance of dharmas. 「得是柔軟清淨好心，名眾生忍，是法忍初門。」 tr. "Obtaining this soft, pure, good mind is called the acceptance of beings; it is the first gate of the acceptance of dharmas." With this sentence the treatise-author sums up the seven minds. The seven minds are not seven scattered virtues; taken together they are one soft and pure mind; this mind, accomplished upon beings, is called the acceptance of beings. And the acceptance of beings is again not the end point but 「法忍初門」 tr. "the first gate of the acceptance of dharmas"—Treatise ③ above has already glossed 「法忍」 tr. "acceptance of dharmas" as the gate of the Dharma, the practice of the Dharma, the conduct of the Dharma, and here it fits exactly into place: only one who can hold firm in acceptance upon beings can step into that gate where there is no retrogressing and turning back. The two great sections of the whole fascicle secretly interlock here: on the side of view it is said that within the acceptance of dharmas there is no retrogressing and turning back; on the side of practice it is said that the acceptance of beings is the first gate of the acceptance of dharmas.

80. The ten wholesome paths are old dharmas, practised by forty kinds of practice. 「次行十善道。十善道，有佛、無佛，世間常有，是善法教。菩薩先以四十種行，行是十善道。何以故？是菩薩深念善法，心慈眾生故。」 tr. "Next he practises the ten wholesome paths. The ten wholesome paths, whether there is a Buddha or no Buddha, are always in the world; this is the teaching of wholesome dharmas. The bodhisattva first practises these ten wholesome paths by forty kinds of practice. Why? Because this bodhisattva is deeply mindful of wholesome dharmas and his mind is kind toward beings." Here the treatise-author judges the character of the ten wholesome paths: whether there is a Buddha or no Buddha they are always in the world, and so they are old dharmas—not waiting for a Buddha's appearance to exist. What are called the forty kinds of practice can be counted from the pattern of the sūtra: each item of the ten wholesome paths has the four matters—practising it oneself, teaching others, praising its dharma, and joyfully praising those who practise it—and ten times four is exactly forty. The treatise-author here does not give the items of the ten wholesome paths again, and the sūtra too gives only the two ends, not killing living beings and no wrong view, so their ten items do not appear in this fascicle. And what is answered after 「何以故」 tr. "Why?" is why the bodhisattva practises the goodness always present in the world with so close-knit a method: because he is deeply mindful of wholesome dharmas and his mind is kind toward beings, he will not treat even old dharmas carelessly.

81. The twelve matters of the dharmas of the ordinary person separated from desire: forty-eight kinds of practice. 「離欲凡夫法有十二事，亦以四十八種行。」 tr. "The dharmas of the ordinary person separated from desire have twelve matters, also practised by forty-eight kinds of practice." The treatise-author passes over it in one sentence, and the numbers are clear: each of the twelve matters has the four matters, and so there are forty-eight. What are called the twelve matters the treatise-author does not name; going by the order of listing in Sūtra ④, what the Buddha shows in order after the ten wholesome paths is the four dhyānas, four; the four immeasurable minds, four; the sphere of boundless space and so on up to the sphere of neither perception nor non-perception, four—exactly the number twelve; and all three of these classes are common to the ordinary person separated from desire and not exclusive to the Buddha's Dharma, which fits the name 「離欲凡夫法」 tr. "the dharmas of the ordinary person separated from desire". What is relied on here is only the sūtra's own order and numbers; since the treatise-author does not list the names, the reader need not seek elsewhere to match them.

82. The six perfections and so on up to the abiding of the Dharma are guest dharmas. 「六波羅蜜乃至法住，是客法，有佛說則有菩薩行。」 tr. "The six perfections and so on up to the abiding of the Dharma are guest dharmas: when there is a Buddha who expounds them, there is the bodhisattva's practice." This forms a pair with the verdict of passage 80: old dharmas are always in the world; guest dharmas exist only after a Buddha expounds them. What is called 「乃至法住」 tr. "and so on up to the abiding of the Dharma" is the long list in Sūtra ④ from the six perfections down to the accomplishment of life-span and the accomplishment of the abiding of the Dharma. The meaning of ‘guest’ is that these gates of practice are not originally in the world but are brought by a Buddha's appearing in the world; for the practitioner they are not old things of the household but must be received from a Buddha. With the two verdicts standing side by side, the gates of practice acquire a clear layering.

83. Old dharmas and guest dharmas, root and branch complete. 「上來舊法、客法，本末具足，今世得善法，智慧無礙；捨身，得法身無礙，隨意至十方教化眾生，於十方佛前修集善法。」 tr. "The old dharmas and guest dharmas above, root and branch complete: in this life one obtains wholesome dharmas, and wisdom is unobstructed; on giving up the body, one obtains an unobstructed Dharma body, goes at will to the ten directions to teach and transform beings, and cultivates and gathers wholesome dharmas before the buddhas of the ten directions." Here the treatise-author concludes the whole of the gates of practice of Sūtra ④. Root and branch: old dharmas are the root, guest dharmas the branch—root does not mean higher and lower; it is an order of before and after: the goodness always present in the world is the ground, and the Dharma the Buddha expounds is built upon it. When the two are complete, the effect in this life is wholesome dharmas and unobstructed wisdom, and the effect after giving up the body is the unobstructed Dharma body, travelling the ten directions to teach and transform, and continuing to cultivate before the buddhas of the ten directions. Only when a passage on the gates of practice has been spoken this far does its destination appear: it does not stop at non-obstruction in this life.

84. Two thousand bodhisattvas obtain the acceptance of the non-arising of dharmas—the two dharmas, existence and non-existence, complete, and the simile of the two wheels. The treatise-author cites the last sentence of the sūtra and explains it: 「『聞是法時，二千菩薩得無生法忍』者，是品說如微妙深法，亦說有行，善門、智門，二行具足。」 tr. "‘When this Dharma was heard, two thousand bodhisattvas obtained the acceptance of the non-arising of dharmas’: this chapter speaks of suchness, the subtle and deep Dharma, and also speaks of having practice—the gate of goodness and the gate of wisdom, both practices complete." Why must completeness be awaited? 「但說如法，所利少；若說有法，所利亦少。今說有、無二法，具足故，得無生法忍；譬如二輪具足故，能有所至。」 tr. "If only the dharma of suchness is spoken of, the benefit is small; if the dharma of existence is spoken of, the benefit is also small. Now the two dharmas, existence and non-existence, are spoken of, and because both are complete, one obtains the acceptance of the non-arising of dharmas; as a cart with both wheels complete can get somewhere." This passage is the culmination of the whole fascicle, and also the reason the chapter's two great sections form one chapter. The subtle and deep Dharma of suchness spoken of in the First Part and in Sūtra ③ is the gate of non-existence, the gate of wisdom; the vast gates of practice spoken of in Sūtra ④—practising oneself, teaching others, praising, rejoicing—are the gate of existence, the gate of goodness. Speaking of only one of them, the benefit is small either way; only when both are complete is there the obtaining of the acceptance of the non-arising of dharmas. The simile of the two wheels takes the point that neither can go alone: a single wheel, however round, cannot get anywhere. The learner who has read the chapter to this point should know that the emptiness of the first half and the practice of the second half are not two separate pieces of writing, but exactly the two wheels of this one cart.

85. Because the two truths are well expounded, the acceptance of the non-arising of dharmas is obtained. 「此中善說二諦故，二千菩薩得無生法忍。」 tr. "Because here the two truths were well expounded, two thousand bodhisattvas obtained the acceptance of the non-arising of dharmas." At the very end the treatise-author changes the words 「有無二法」 tr. "the two dharmas, existence and non-existence" into 「二諦」 tr. "the two truths", bringing the simile of the passage before back to the Dharma: speaking of suchness and of there being no one who obtains is the truth of the highest meaning; speaking of practice, of practising oneself, teaching others, praising, and rejoicing, is worldly truth. The reason it could bring two thousand bodhisattvas to obtain the acceptance of the non-arising of dharmas lies not in speaking deeply but in 「善說」 tr. "well expounded"—the two truths spoken together without robbing each other, so that hearers do not fall into annihilation in emptiness and do not fall into existence in practice. The conclusion of the whole chapter is just this one sentence, and the pattern of the one chapter and the dividing and joining of its two units are all within it.

Do Not Misread

Do not read 「難得」 tr. "hard to obtain" and 「易得」 tr. "easy to obtain" as the Buddha and Subhūti contradicting each other. The Buddha says hard to obtain and bears witness himself that 「亦無所得」 tr. "yet there is also nothing attained"; Subhūti says easy to obtain and marks himself 「如我解佛所說義」 tr. "as I understand the meaning of what the Buddha has said"—the two accounts come from one source. Hard is said with respect to the real state of a person contemplating, practising, cultivating and gathering, becoming a Buddha and delivering beings within ultimate emptiness; easy is said with respect to the Dharma's being originally without increase and without decrease, with nothing to cultivate and nothing to sever. In explaining the dispute over hard and easy, the treatise-author at the end does not judge which is right, but gathers it up with going in and out of the gate of the Dharma: 「入須菩提所說法門中，則無退還；出是法門，則有退還。」 tr. "Having entered the gate of the Dharma that Subhūti speaks of, there is no retrogressing and turning back; having come out of this gate of the Dharma, there is retrogressing and turning back." Hard and easy should be read in the same way.

Do not read 「無有菩薩於阿耨多羅三藐三菩提退還者」 tr. "there is no bodhisattva who retrogresses and turns back from anuttarā samyaksaṃbodhi" as denying that retrogression happens. What the four rounds of questioning in the sūtra break is the subject of retrogressing and turning back, not the phenomenon of retrogressing and turning back; what Śāriputra raised—「恒河沙等無量菩薩求佛道，若一、若二作佛，餘者皆退還」 tr. "of the countless bodhisattvas equal to the sands of the Ganges who seek the Buddha path, one or two become buddhas and the rest all retrogress and turn back"—the treatise-author does not refute by a single word. The matter of retrogressing and turning back can be counted case by case outside the gate of the Dharma; the one who retrogresses and turns back is utterly unfindable within ultimate emptiness—each of the two sentences has its own place of speaking; mix them and both are lost.

Do not read the absence of discrimination of the three vehicles within suchness as meaning that the three vehicles the Buddha taught are false. The treatise-author's verdict is very clear: 「若入畢竟空門，一切法盡一相；若出畢竟空，三乘則有異。今佛分別諸法故說有上、中、下乘，不為畢竟空故說。」 tr. "If one enters the gate of ultimate emptiness, all dharmas are wholly of one mark; if one comes out of ultimate emptiness, the three vehicles then differ. Now the Buddha, because he discriminates dharmas, says there are the higher, middle, and lower vehicles; he does not say it for the sake of ultimate emptiness." The three vehicles are the right teaching at the time of discriminating dharmas; the one suchness is the right teaching at the time of entering the gate of ultimate emptiness. Clinging to the one suchness and slandering the three vehicles, and clinging to the three vehicles and fearing the one suchness, are equally not knowing the place of speaking.

Do not read 「獨有一菩薩求佛道」 tr. "there is only a single bodhisattva seeking the Buddha path" as the thesis this chapter sets up. It is a difficulty Śāriputra inferred along the line of Subhūti's words; Subhūti at once breaks it with the four sentences, and at the end asks 「汝欲於如中乃至有一菩薩不」 tr. "would you have there be, within suchness, even a single bodhisattva", and Śāriputra answers 「不也」 tr. "no indeed"—even this 「一菩薩」 tr. "single bodhisattva" is broken along with the rest. When this chapter speaks of the one vehicle, it is not replacing three with one; three and one are alike unfindable.

Do not read 「莫生憎、愛」 tr. "do not give rise to hatred or love" and 「當行慈愛心」 tr. "one should practise the mind of kind affection" as self-contradictory. The treatise-author makes the distinction himself: 「愛者，貪欲，煩惱心，不應行；當行慈愛心。」 tr. "Love is greed and desire, a mind of affliction, and should not be practised; one should practise the mind of kind affection." What is left is the greedy love tied to one's own desire; what is practised is the kind affection tied to the other's happiness—the same name, a different substance. If this distinction is not made, the whole passage on the equal mind cannot be understood.

Do not read 「下意」 tr. "the lowly intent" as self-abasement or putting on an act. Not one of the treatise-author's six answers says that the bodhisattva is of a modest temperament: one breaks the permanence of great and small by impermanence; one breaks the fixity of great and small by relativity; one breaks self-reliance by the ultimate emptiness of merit; one breaks the belittling of others by the immeasurability of future buddhas; one makes plain his shame by the distinction of host and guest in the original vow; one makes plain its harm by pride's being the root of hatred. The lowly intent is set up on principle, not on posture.

Do not read 「教人著須陀洹果中」 tr. "teaching others to settle in the fruit of srota-āpanna" as urging people to take the fruit of the Small Vehicle. The same passage of the sūtra says plainly of the bodhisattva himself, 「自生須陀洹果證智而不證實際」 tr. "himself giving rise to the knowledge of realisation of the fruit of srota-āpanna, yet not realising the limit of reality", and 「自生辟支佛道證知而不證辟支佛道」 tr. "himself giving rise to the realising knowledge of the path of the pratyekabuddha, yet not realising the path of the pratyekabuddha"—not himself taking the realisation while teaching others to obtain the fruit is precisely giving according to capacity, not taking the small as sufficient. Nor does this contradict 「著三乘心」 tr. "the mind that clings to the three vehicles", rejected in Treatise ③: what is broken is clinging on one's own part; what is practised is responding to capacity.

Do not read 「四十種行」 tr. "forty kinds of practice" and 「四十八種行」 tr. "forty-eight kinds of practice" as other named items still awaiting investigation. Forty: each of the ten items of the ten wholesome paths has the four matters—practising it oneself, teaching others, praising the dharma, rejoicing; forty-eight: each of the twelve matters has these four matters. The ten items of the ten wholesome paths are not named here in sūtra or treatise; the twelve matters of the dharmas of the ordinary person separated from desire Sūtra ④ lists itself—the four dhyānas, the four immeasurables of kindness, compassion, joy, and equanimity, and the four formless absorptions from the sphere of boundless space to the sphere of neither perception nor non-perception—and Treatise ④ totals them as twelve matters. Beyond this, nothing may be filled in on their behalf.

Bearing on Practice

Use the four rounds of questioning to examine one's own mind of retrogressing. When a thought of retrogressing arises, ask oneself once through, in the order of the sūtra: is it form that retrogresses, is it feeling, perception, constructions, and consciousness; is there, apart from form, some self that retrogresses; is it the mark of suchness of form that retrogresses; is there, apart from the mark of suchness of form, some other thing that retrogresses. Having asked in the four places, that feeling of ‘I am going to retrogress’ finds no place to stand. This is not a word of self-consolation; it is the same road by which Subhūti that day pressed Śāriputra to answer a dozen and more 「不」 tr. "no" in a row.

Use ‘having entered this gate of the Dharma there is no retrogressing and turning back; having come out of this gate of the Dharma there is retrogressing and turning back’ to check whether one is inside the gate or outside it. There is no need to ask whether one is retrogressing; first ask which ruler one is using at this moment: if ultimate emptiness is the measure, retrogressing and turning back has no place to be established; if the gains and losses of persons and dharmas are the measure, retrogressing and turning back can be counted step by step. To notice that one has gone out of the gate is the very moment of returning to it.

Use ‘practising it oneself, teaching others, praising its dharma, joyfully praising those who practise its dharma’ as the frame of one's daily practice. Whatever dharma one cultivates, do not stop at cultivating it oneself; ask further: have I taught others? Have I praised this dharma? When I see others practising it, does my mind rejoice along with them, or not? If one of the four matters is lacking, the gate of practice leans toward oneself. Sūtra ④ threads all the gates of practice with these four matters precisely so that the practitioner turns a matter of solitary cultivation into a matter accomplished in common.

Use the seven minds, one by one, to look over how one treats people today. Before speaking with someone, check through them once: is this moment an equal mind, is there a mind of great kindness, am I willing to have a lowly intent, is what I give safety, am I unobstructed toward his faults, do I not give rise to vexation toward his vexing, do I regard him as kin and friend. In the sūtra each mind is tied to ‘speak to them too with such-and-such a mind’, which says precisely that these seven are to be tested at the point of opening the mouth, not at the point of sitting quietly.

Use 「莫生中人心」 tr. "not to give rise to the mind toward someone in between" to treat the least related people. Not to feel enmity toward an enemy is already a hard thing, yet what one fails to hold far more often is that great crowd of people who have nothing to do with me—the sūtra does not allow them to be set aside as ‘nothing to do with me’. The passers-by, colleagues, and complete strangers one meets today—try treating them once with the thought of affection, and whether the equal mind is true or false is seen at once.

Use the sixth mind to measure one's own hard places. When someone harms me with an evil thing and I make offerings to him with good things, even with my body and life, the treatise-author calls it good within good, which is also what is called the sixth mind. There is no need to leap in one step to body and life; start from the smallest place: someone treats me badly—can I today still do him one good thing of real benefit? To practise one part of it is to practise one part of the sixth mind.

Use 「憍慢是瞋之本，瞋是一切重罪之根」 tr. "pride is the root of hatred, and hatred is the root of all grave sins" to cut off the road by which anger comes. Next time anger stirs, do not deal with the anger first; turn back and find the mind that has placed itself high: being insulted and becoming angry is mostly because in the mind there was first ‘I should not have to suffer this’. The treatise-author makes the simile of master and slave in two directions to say only one thing—once the position one occupies changes, the same event is no longer an insult.

Use ‘not receiving form, and so on up to not receiving the omniscience of all kinds’ to gather in all the gates of practice. That one practises all these things widely and yet does not fall onto the marks of things lies only in the two Chinese characters 「不受」 tr. "not receiving"; and why not receiving can stand, the sūtra says itself: form not received is not form. Where practice gains strength, a mind of possession easily arises; at that moment shine this sentence on it: if what is obtained could be received, it would not be what is obtained.

Use the simile of the two wheels to examine one's own lopsidedness. Those lopsided toward emptiness love, in listening to the Dharma, to hear the highest meaning, and as soon as it comes to practising oneself, teaching others, praising, and rejoicing, they find it trivial; those lopsided toward existence are diligent in the marks of things and give rise to fear of ultimate emptiness. The treatise-author says it plainly: speak only of the dharma of suchness and the benefit is small; speak only of the dharma of existence and the benefit is also small. Take what is lacking and supply it, and the cart can then move.

Further Resonances

What the Last Part carries on from the First Part is to put a 「如」 tr. "suchness" already spoken of to its very limit back onto the field of cultivating the path, and to see whether it can withstand a threefold pressing. The First Part set up its substance with form being sarvajñā and the mark of suchness of form and the mark of suchness of sarvajñā being one suchness, without duality and without difference; it spoke of Subhūti's being born following the Buddha by the mark of suchness of the Tathāgata's not coming and not going, abiding permanently, being without distinction and without difference, and not being within the three times; and it closed with the great earth shaking in six ways; there the treatise-author had already planted a question in advance—since the practice of emptiness is the same, why did six thousand bodhisattvas, lacking the power of skilful means, fall into arhatship, like a great bird without wings that throws itself down from on high and falls? The first pressing of the Last Part is hard and easy: the gods say it is hard to obtain, the Buddha approves and bears witness himself that there is nothing attained, Subhūti insists that it is easy to obtain, and Śāriputra raises the difficulty with the fact of bodhisattvas like the sands of the Ganges retrogressing and turning back. The second pressing is the one vehicle and the three vehicles: if there is no retrogressing and turning back, will not all become buddhas—why does the Buddha speak of three vehicles? The third pressing appears not in the form of a question but in the form of practice—Subhūti asks 「應云何行」 tr. "how should he practise", and the Buddha answers at large with the seven minds and the gates of practice, which is precisely asking whether this suchness can grow practice.

The answers to the three pressings each have their key. The key to hard and easy is the acceptance of dharmas: the acceptance of dharmas is the gate of the Dharma, the practice of the Dharma, the conduct of the Dharma; inside the gate there is no retrogressing, outside the gate there is retrogressing, and so the two accounts, hard and easy, each have their place of speaking. The key to one and three is going in and out of the gate of ultimate emptiness: entering, all dharmas are wholly of one mark; coming out, the three vehicles differ; the Buddha's speaking of three vehicles is a speaking at the time of discriminating dharmas. The key to practice is the four matters and not receiving: the four matters of practising oneself, teaching others, praising, and rejoicing thread through all the gates of practice, and they are gathered up with 「從本已來，不受色」 tr. "from the very first, does not receive form", so that practice, though wide, does not fall onto the marks of things. And the three answers thread through one another—Treatise ③ takes the acceptance of dharmas as the gate of no retrogressing; Treatise ④ takes the acceptance of beings as the first gate of the acceptance of dharmas; the gate on the side of view and the gate on the side of practice are originally one road.

And why one chapter is divided into two units and yet is still one chapter, the last passage itself says clearly: 「是品說如微妙深法，亦說有行，善門、智門，二行具足。」 tr. "This chapter speaks of suchness, the subtle and deep Dharma, and also speaks of having practice—the gate of goodness and the gate of wisdom, both practices complete." The First Part and Sūtra ③ are the one wheel of suchness; Sūtra ④ is the one wheel of practice; speaking of only one of them, the benefit is small either way; only with both wheels complete can one get somewhere. At the very end the treatise-author changes this into the two truths: 「此中善說二諦故，二千菩薩得無生法忍。」 tr. "Because here the two truths were well expounded, two thousand bodhisattvas obtained the acceptance of the non-arising of dharmas." This chapter bears the banner 「大如」 tr. "the Great Suchness", yet the fruit obtained is not obtained alone where suchness is spoken of, but at the juncture where the two truths are spoken together—this is the sentence the Last Part hands back to the whole chapter. As for the chapter title's variant names, the variant readings of the editions, and the positions assigned by the sectional divisions of the ancient masters, none of these are the business of this layer; each belongs to the apparatus and to the chapter-level texts.