大智度論 學空不證品Dazhidulun — Mahāprajñāpāramitā-upadeśa · Training in Emptiness without Realising It
學空不證品：須菩提問云何學空三昧入空三昧乃至學修八聖道分，佛答觀色等空而不令心亂、心不亂則不見是法、不見則不作證，善學自相空故不有餘不有分；復示學時非證時之願與不專攝心繫在緣中，出壯夫護送過險道、有翼之鳥飛空不墮不住、健人善射後箭拄前箭三喻，明以方便力故諸善根未具足不於實際作證；須菩提歎所為甚難，佛以不捨眾生之願與四重復次——觀甚深法生度眾生心、破四顛倒、破著得法、破著諸相——申方便力行三解脫門而不取實際證，末立試問之法辨阿鞞跋致相，明六波羅蜜若聞若不聞能如是答；論主三番問答釋學空入空之別、深入與不專心之辨、未得道而能行深空之驗，逐一還原壯夫鳥箭三喻之所喻，另出執菅草緩急一喻，末以諸法實相惟佛能遍知收束（經＋論）
前品說金華女得記、說不退菩薩之相，人說到了，人所以能不退的那一步還沒有說。本品開卷，須菩提問得極細：「世尊！若菩薩摩訶薩欲行般若波羅蜜，云何學空三昧？云何入空三昧？」三昧之外，四念處乃至八聖道分，一一都問「云何學」與「云何修」。佛的答法出人意料——不說如何取，先說如何不亂：「作是觀時，不令心亂。」不亂之後的話才是全品的門：「是菩薩摩訶薩若心不亂，則不見是法；若不見是法，則不作證。」原來不作證不是忍住不取，是根本看不見一個可取之物。何以看不見？「善學自相空故，不有餘、不有分，證法、證者皆不可見。」色法中連微塵也不留剩，無色法中連一念也不留，證的法與證的人兩頭都空掉了，才談得上「不證」二字。
須菩提聽懂了一半，追問得更逼：「世尊！云何菩薩住空法中而不作證？」——既然住在空裡，怎麼會不證空？佛的答案落在一個時間的分際上：菩薩具足觀空之先，早已作願「我今不應空法作證；我今學時，非是證時。」又「不專攝心繫在緣中」。此下一句接一句地數過去：學檀波羅蜜時非是證時，學尸羅、羼提、毘梨耶、禪時非是證時，修四念處乃至八聖道分時非是證時，修空、無相、無作三昧時非是證時——所修與所證原是同一法，分別只在時候未到。所以「修四念處不證四念處，乃至修八聖道分不證八聖道分。」三十七品是二乘取涅槃的道，菩薩照樣走，只是不在半路停下領受。
要把這件事說明白，經連出三個譬喻。第一是壯夫：「譬如壯夫，勁勇猛健，善於兵法、六十四能，堅持器仗，安立不動」，扶老攜弱走過險道，一路安慰父母妻子：「莫有恐懅！我能過此，必無所苦。」怨賊潛伏劫害，而其人智力具足，能度惡道還歸本處。第二是鳥：「譬如有翼之鳥，飛騰虛空而不墮墜，雖在空中，亦不住空。」不墜與不住並舉，少一頭都不成。第三是射：「譬如健人，學諸射法，善於射術，仰射空中，復以後箭射於前箭，箭箭相拄，不令箭墮，隨意自在」——而這一喻最見機關的是收尾：「若欲令墮，便止後箭爾乃墮地。」前箭之所以不墮，不是有什麼東西托著，是後箭不停。不證不是靜止，是不停的續發。須菩提聽到這裡才歎：「世尊！菩薩摩訶薩所為甚難！」
佛答他難在哪裡不重要，難之所以能行才重要：「是菩薩摩訶薩不捨一切眾生故，作如是願。」願的內容逐字錄在經裡：「我不應捨一切眾生！眾生沒在無所有法中，我應當度！」——發了這個願再入三解脫門，便「不中道取實際證」。此下四個「復次」，每一個都從眾生的病說起：眾生長夜著我相知者見者相，著四顛倒「常想、樂想、我想、淨想」，著得法，著男相女相色相無色相——菩薩為斷這些相而求菩提，於是空、無相、無作皆成行處而不成住處。行處與住處之別，就是本品全部的分寸。
論主接手，先訓兩個字：「初名學空，後是入空；因是學空，果是入空；方便名學空，得名入空。如是等二道。」再標出難題的所在：「三解脫門、三十七品是聲聞、辟支佛涅槃道，佛勅菩薩應行是道。」——走的是同一條路，怎麼會不到同一個終點？須菩提替讀者問了：「此是涅槃道，云何菩薩行是道法而不取涅槃證？」佛答：「菩薩觀色等一切法空。是菩薩以深入禪定，心不可亂，得利智慧力故，不見是空法；以不見故無所證。」二乘斷吾我、捨愛著，直趣涅槃；菩薩則直入畢竟空中，連這個空也不見其可為證。深入之為深入，論主用一個手上的喻說破：「譬如執菅草，捉緩則傷手，若急捉則無傷」——草葉割手，鬆握才傷，緊握反而無事。空也一樣：「深入空故，知空亦空，涅槃亦空，故無所證。」
有人立刻要抓論主的話柄：上文才說深入禪定不令心亂，這裡又說不專心，豈不自相違背？論主自己把這一問提出來，答得極清楚——今言「不專心」者，「是初入時，為不能自出故」；上言「深入」者，「入已深，知空亦空，不令心在餘事，故言不亂。」初入時留一分不專，是為了還出得來——「若專心繫在空緣中，則心柔軟，不能從空自出。」入得深了才說不亂，那時已無餘事可亂。一鬆一緊，各繫一時，不是兩個道理。
三譬到此才由論主逐物還原：「壯夫」是菩薩，「父母親族」是可度眾生，「險道」是三界生死，「惡賊」是魔民及諸煩惱，「器仗」是菩薩五神通等種種方便力，「安立不動」是菩薩住畢竟空。鳥喻之所以要再說一遍，是因為「時會者疑」——「空中無所有，云何可行？」佛才說「如鳥飛虛空，無所依止，而遠逝不墜。」；而鳥之所以不中途落下，是「如鳥未到所至，終不中住。」射喻則配得最密：「弓」是菩薩禪定，「箭」是智慧，「虛空」是三解脫門，「地」是涅槃——以智慧箭射三解脫門的虛空，再以方便力後箭射前箭，「不令墮涅槃地」。弓、箭、方便三者缺一，前箭立刻落地。而使這一切能持續的，論主歸到最根上一句：「是菩薩本願諸一切眾生令得離苦，以是本願、大悲心所持故，雖行空，不作證。」持住不證的不是慧力，是願。
全品收在一個極樸素的驗人法上。經說菩薩學助道法、行助道法時「應當試問」——問他：云何學是法，觀空不證實際？若答「但應念空，一心習行；如聲聞、辟支佛法，不但學知而已。」，那麼「當知是菩薩未為諸佛所授記」，論主點其病根：「不說方便學知故觀空。」若答得不同於此，便知是阿鞞跋致，「已習學入於薄地」——薄不是果位之名：「學習名先學知空。薄地名阿鞞跋致地中諸煩惱薄。」須菩提再問：沒得阿鞞跋致的人能這樣答嗎？佛說能——聽過六波羅蜜的從師而聞，沒聽過的自思惟、正憶念，雖未得無生忍也能求諸法相而如是答。論主順手訓了學與無學：「未得無生法忍名學地，得無生法忍名無學地。」末了佛說這樣的菩薩甚少，何以故，論主的收筆極重：「諸法實相，惟佛能遍知；佛知此人能如法答，故懸與受記。」——驗人的法立在人間，驗人的根據卻在佛智。而這樣的人一旦立住，便「是人善根明了，諸天世人所不能壞。」；何以能不壞，經論同歸一句：「菩薩深入空故，諸根猛利，勝於二乘。」學空而不證，不是學到一半停住，是把空學到連空也空掉，那時腳下才真沒有可墮之地。
The previous chapter told of the Golden Flower woman obtaining the prediction and of the marks of the non-retrogressing bodhisattva; the person has been spoken of, but the step by which the person is able not to retrogress has not yet been spoken of. As this chapter opens, Subhūti asks with the utmost fineness: ‘World-Honored One! If a bodhisattva-mahāsattva wishes to practise prajñāpāramitā, how does he train in the emptiness samādhi? How does he enter the emptiness samādhi?’ Beyond the samādhi, the four foundations of mindfulness and so on up to the eightfold noble path, of each one he asks ‘how does he train in it’ and ‘how does he cultivate it’. The Buddha's way of answering is unexpected—he does not say how to take hold, he first says how not to be disordered: ‘When he makes this contemplation, he does not let the mind be disordered.’ Only the words after not being disordered are the gate of the whole chapter: ‘If this bodhisattva-mahāsattva's mind is not disordered, then he does not see this dharma; if he does not see this dharma, then he does not realise it.’ So not realising is not holding back from taking; it is that there is simply nothing to be seen that could be taken. Why is nothing seen? ‘Because he has trained well in the emptiness of specific marks, there is no remainder and no part; the dharma realised and the one who realises are both not to be seen.’ Among the dharmas of form not even an atom is left over; among the formless dharmas not even a single thought is left; only when the dharma realised and the person realising are emptied out at both ends can the two Chinese characters rendered here as ‘not realising’ be spoken of at all.
Subhūti has understood half of it, and presses more closely: ‘World-Honored One! How does the bodhisattva abide in the dharma of emptiness and yet not realise it?’—Since he abides in emptiness, how can he not realise emptiness? The Buddha's answer falls on a division of time: before the bodhisattva fully contemplates emptiness he has long since made the vow, ‘I should not now realise the dharma of emptiness; now is my time of training, not the time of realising.’ And ‘he does not exclusively gather the mind and bind it to the object.’ From here one sentence follows another in count: when he trains in dānapāramitā it is not the time of realising, when he trains in śīla, kṣānti, vīrya, and dhyāna it is not the time of realising, when he cultivates the four foundations of mindfulness and so on up to the eightfold noble path it is not the time of realising, when he cultivates the emptiness samādhi, the signless samādhi, and the non-action samādhi it is not the time of realising—what is cultivated and what is realised were the same dharma to begin with; the difference lies only in that the time has not yet come. Therefore ‘he cultivates the four foundations of mindfulness and does not realise the four foundations of mindfulness, and so on up to cultivating the eightfold noble path and not realising the eightfold noble path.’ The thirty-seven limbs of the path are the path by which the two vehicles take nirvāṇa; the bodhisattva walks it all the same, only he does not stop halfway to receive it.
To make this matter plain, the sūtra brings out three similes in a row. The first is the stalwart man: ‘As a stalwart man, strong, brave, fierce, and robust, skilled in the arts of war and the sixty-four skills, firmly holding his weapons, standing steady and unmoved’, who leads the old and the weak through a dangerous road, comforting his father, mother, wife, and children all the way: ‘Do not be afraid! I can pass through this; there will surely be no harm.’ Enemies and thieves lie in ambush to rob and kill, yet this man is fully endowed with wisdom and strength, and can cross the evil road and return to his own place. The second is the bird: ‘As a bird with wings, flying up into space and not falling, though it is in space it also does not abide in space.’ Not falling and not abiding are set side by side; drop either end and it does not hold. The third is archery: ‘As a strong man, having trained in the arts of archery and being skilled in the archer's craft, shoots upward into space, and then with a later arrow shoots the earlier arrow, arrow supporting arrow, not letting the arrows fall, at will and unhindered’—and what most reveals the mechanism of this simile is its close: ‘If he wishes them to fall, he simply stops the later arrow, and only then do they fall to the ground.’ The reason the earlier arrow does not fall is not that something holds it up; it is that the later arrow does not stop. Not realising is not stillness; it is unceasing further launching. Only on hearing this does Subhūti sigh: ‘World-Honored One! What the bodhisattva-mahāsattva does is very hard!’
Where the hardness lies, the Buddha answers, does not matter; what matters is how the hard thing can be done: ‘Because this bodhisattva-mahāsattva does not abandon any being, he makes this vow.’ The content of the vow is recorded word for word in the sūtra: ‘I should not abandon any being! Beings are sunk in the dharma of nothing whatsoever; I should deliver them!’—Having made this vow and then entering the three gates of liberation, he ‘does not take the realisation of the limit of reality midway.’ Below this are four ‘furthermores’, each beginning from the illness of beings: beings through the long night cling to the mark of self, the mark of a knower and a seer; cling to the four inversions, ‘the notion of permanence, of happiness, of self, and of purity’; cling to attaining a dharma; cling to the mark of male and the mark of female, the mark of form and the mark of the formless—the bodhisattva seeks awakening in order to sever these marks, and so emptiness, the signless, and non-action all become places of practice and do not become places of abiding. The distinction between a place of practice and a place of abiding is the whole measure of this chapter.
The treatise-author takes over and first glosses two words: ‘At first it is called training in emptiness; afterwards it is entering emptiness; because of training in emptiness as cause, the fruit is entering emptiness; skilful means is called training in emptiness, attainment is called entering emptiness. Such are the two paths.’ Then he marks where the difficulty lies: ‘The three gates of liberation and the thirty-seven limbs are the nirvāṇa path of the śrāvaka and pratyekabuddha; the Buddha commands the bodhisattva to practise this path.’—Walking the same road, how can he not arrive at the same end? Subhūti asks on the reader's behalf: ‘This is the path of nirvāṇa; how does the bodhisattva practise this path-dharma and yet not take the realisation of nirvāṇa?’ The Buddha answers: ‘The bodhisattva contemplates form and all the other dharmas as empty. Because this bodhisattva enters deeply into meditative concentration, his mind cannot be disordered, and by the power of keen wisdom he does not see this dharma of emptiness; because he does not see it, there is nothing realised.’ The two vehicles sever I and mine, abandon love and clinging, and go straight toward nirvāṇa; the bodhisattva enters straight into ultimate emptiness, and does not see even this emptiness as something that could be realised. What entering deeply means as entering deeply, the treatise-author breaks open with a simile from the hand: ‘As when one grasps a blade of coarse grass: hold it loosely and it wounds the hand; grip it tightly and there is no wound’—the grass-blade cuts the hand; a loose hold wounds, a tight grip does no harm. So it is with emptiness: ‘because he enters deeply into emptiness, he knows that emptiness too is empty and nirvāṇa too is empty; therefore there is nothing realised.’
Someone at once wants to catch the treatise-author in his own words: just above it was said that entering deeply into meditative concentration does not let the mind be disordered, and here it is said that he is not exclusively attentive—is that not self-contradictory? The treatise-author raises this question himself and answers with the utmost clarity—the ‘not exclusively attentive’ spoken of here ‘is at the time of first entering, lest he be unable to come out by himself’; the ‘entering deeply’ spoken of above is that ‘having entered deeply, he knows that emptiness too is empty, and does not let the mind rest on any other matter; therefore it is said not to be disordered.’ At the time of first entering, one part is kept not exclusive so that one can still come out—‘if the mind is exclusively bound to the object of emptiness, then the mind becomes soft and cannot come out of emptiness by itself.’ Only when the entering is deep is it said not to be disordered, for at that time there is no other matter left to be disordered by. One loose, one tight, each tied to its own time; not two principles.
Only now are the three similes restored object by object by the treatise-author: the ‘stalwart man’ is the bodhisattva; the ‘father, mother, and kin’ are the beings who can be delivered; the ‘dangerous road’ is birth and death in the three realms; the ‘evil thieves’ are Māra's people and the afflictions; the ‘weapons’ are the bodhisattva's five supernormal powers and all the other kinds of the power of skilful means; ‘standing steady and unmoved’ is the bodhisattva abiding in ultimate emptiness. The reason the bird simile has to be told once more is that ‘those in the assembly doubted’—‘in space there is nothing whatsoever; how can one practise there?’ Only then did the Buddha say, ‘as a bird flying in space, with no support, goes far and does not fall’; and the reason the bird does not drop midway is that ‘as a bird that has not yet reached where it is going never stops midway.’ The archery simile is matched most closely: the ‘bow’ is the bodhisattva's meditative concentration, the ‘arrow’ is wisdom, ‘space’ is the three gates of liberation, ‘the ground’ is nirvāṇa—with the arrow of wisdom he shoots into the space of the three gates of liberation, and then with the later arrow of the power of skilful means he shoots the earlier arrow, ‘not letting it fall to the ground of nirvāṇa.’ Bow, arrow, and skilful means—lacking any one, the earlier arrow drops to the ground at once. And what enables all this to continue the treatise-author traces to a single sentence at the very root: ‘This bodhisattva's original vow is to bring all beings to leave suffering; because he is held by this original vow and by the mind of great compassion, though he practises emptiness he does not realise it.’ What holds not-realising in place is not the power of wisdom; it is the vow.
The whole chapter closes on a most plain method of testing a person. The sūtra says that when a bodhisattva trains in the dharmas that aid the path and practises the dharmas that aid the path, one ‘should test him by asking’—ask him: how do you train in this dharma, contemplating emptiness without realising the limit of reality? If he answers, ‘One should only be mindful of emptiness and practise it single-mindedly, as in the dharma of the śrāvaka and pratyekabuddha; it is not merely a matter of training and knowing’, then ‘know that this bodhisattva has not yet received the prediction from the buddhas’; the treatise-author points to the root of the illness: ‘because he does not speak of contemplating emptiness by training and knowing skilful means.’ If he answers otherwise than this, then one knows he is avaivartika, ‘he has trained and entered the ground of thinning’—‘thinning’ is not the name of a fruit-station: ‘training means first training and knowing emptiness; the ground of thinning means that within the ground of the avaivartika the afflictions are thinned.’ Subhūti asks again: can one who has not obtained avaivartika answer like this? The Buddha says he can—one who has heard the six perfections hears it from a teacher; one who has not heard them thinks it over by himself and rightly recollects; though he has not obtained the acceptance of non-arising, he too can seek the marks of dharmas and answer in this way. The treatise-author glosses in passing the terms training and beyond training: ‘Not yet having obtained the acceptance of the non-arising of dharmas is called the ground of training; having obtained the acceptance of the non-arising of dharmas is called the ground beyond training.’ At the last the Buddha says that such bodhisattvas are very few, and as to why, the treatise-author's closing stroke is very heavy: ‘The real mark of dharmas only the Buddha can know completely; the Buddha, knowing that this person can answer according to the Dharma, gives him the prediction in advance.’—The method of testing a person is set up among human beings, but the ground of the test lies in the Buddha's wisdom. And once such a person stands firm, then ‘this person's roots of goodness are clear and bright, and the gods and the people of the world cannot break them.’; and why they cannot be broken, sūtra and treatise return to a single sentence: ‘because the bodhisattva enters deeply into emptiness, his faculties are fierce and keen, surpassing those of the two vehicles.’ Training in emptiness without realising it is not stopping halfway through the training; it is training in emptiness until even emptiness is emptied out, and only then is there truly no ground underfoot onto which one could fall.
卷76 〔T25 0592a15〕
大智度論釋學空不證品第六十 聖者龍樹造 後秦龜茲國三藏鳩摩羅什譯 【經】 須菩提白佛言：「世尊！若菩薩摩訶薩欲行般若波羅蜜，云何學空三昧？云何入空三昧？云何學無相、無作三昧？云何入無相、無作三昧？云何學四念處？云何修四念處？乃至云何學八聖道分？云何修八聖道分？」 佛告須菩提：「菩薩摩訶薩行般若波羅蜜時，應觀色空、受想行識空，十二入、十八界，乃至應觀欲、色、無色界空。作是觀時，不令心亂。是菩薩摩訶薩若心不亂，則不見是法；若不見是法，則不作證。何以故？是菩薩摩訶薩善學自相〔T25 0592b〕空故，不有餘、不有分，證法、證者皆不可見。」 須菩提白佛言：「世尊！如佛所說，菩薩摩訶薩不應空法作證。世尊！云何菩薩住空法中而不作證？」 佛告須菩提：「若菩薩摩訶薩具足觀空，先作是願：『我今不應空法作證；我今學時，非是證時。』菩薩摩訶薩不專攝心繫在緣中，是故菩薩摩訶薩於阿耨多羅三藐三菩提中不退，亦不取漏盡證。須菩提！菩薩摩訶薩如是大善妙法成就。何以故？住是空中作是念：『我今是學時，非是證時。』須菩提！菩薩摩訶薩應如是念：『我是學檀波羅蜜時，非是證時；學尸羅波羅蜜、羼提波羅蜜、毘梨耶波羅蜜、禪波羅蜜時，修四念處時乃至修八聖道分時，非是證時；修空三昧、無相三昧、無作三昧時，非是證時；修佛十力、四無所畏、四無礙智、十八不共法、大慈大悲時，非是證時。我今學一切種智時，非是得須陀洹果證，乃至阿羅漢、辟支佛道證時。』如是，須菩提！菩薩摩訶薩行般若波羅蜜，學空觀，住空中；學無相、無作觀，住無相、無作中；修四念處不證四念處，乃至修八聖道分不證八聖道分。是菩薩雖學三十七品、雖行三十七品，而不作須陀洹果證乃至辟支佛道。 「須菩提！譬如壯夫，勁勇猛健，善於兵法、六十四能，堅持器仗，安立不動，巧諸伎術，端正淨潔，人所愛敬，少修事業，得報利多。以是因緣故，眾所恭敬、尊重、讚歎；見人敬重，倍復歡喜。少有因緣，當至他處，扶將老弱，過諸險難恐怖之處；安慰父母，曉喻妻子：『莫有恐懅！我能過〔T25 0592c〕此，必無所苦。』嶮難道中，多有怨賊潛伏劫害，其人智力具足故，能度惡道，還歸本處，不遇賊害，歡喜安樂。須菩提！菩薩摩訶薩亦如是，於一切眾生中，慈、悲、喜、捨心遍滿足。爾時，菩薩摩訶薩住四無量心，具足六波羅蜜，不取漏盡證；學一切種智，入空、無相、無作解脫門。是時菩薩不隨一切諸相，亦不證無相三昧；以不證無相三昧故，不墮聲聞辟支佛地。 「須菩提！譬如有翼之鳥，飛騰虛空而不墮墜，雖在空中，亦不住空。須菩提！菩薩摩訶薩亦如是，學空解脫門，學無相、無作解脫門，亦不作證；以不作證故，不墮聲聞、辟支佛地；未具足佛十力、大慈大悲、無量諸佛法、一切種智，亦不證空、無相、無作解脫門。 「須菩提！譬如健人，學諸射法，善於射術，仰射空中，復以後箭射於前箭，箭箭相拄，不令箭墮，隨意自在；若欲令墮，便止後箭爾乃墮地。須菩提！菩薩摩訶薩亦如是，行般若波羅蜜，以方便力故，為阿耨多羅三藐三菩提，諸善根未具足，不於實際作證；若善根成就，是時便於實際作證。以是故，須菩提！菩薩摩訶薩行般若波羅蜜時，應如是觀諸法法相！」 須菩提白佛言：「世尊！菩薩摩訶薩所為甚難！何以故？雖學是諸法相、學實際、學如、學法性、學畢竟〔T25 0593a〕空，乃至學自相空及三解脫門，終不中道墮落。世尊！是甚希有！」 佛告須菩提：「是菩薩摩訶薩不捨一切眾生故，作如是願。須菩提！若菩薩摩訶薩作是念：『我不應捨一切眾生！眾生沒在無所有法中，我應當度！』爾時，即入空解脫門、無相解脫門、無作解脫門。須菩提！當知是菩薩摩訶薩成就方便力，未得一切種智，行是解脫門，亦不中道取實際證。 「復次，須菩提！菩薩摩訶薩欲觀是諸甚深法，所謂內空乃至無法有法空，四念處乃至三解脫門，爾時菩薩摩訶薩應生如是心：『是諸眾生長夜行我相乃至知者、見者相，著於得法；為眾生斷是諸相故，得阿耨多羅三藐三菩提，當說法。』爾時，菩薩行空解脫門，無相、無作解脫門，亦不取實際證；以不證故，不墮須陀洹果，乃至辟支佛道。須菩提！是菩薩摩訶薩以是心欲成就善根故，不中道實際作證，不失四禪、四無量心、四無色定，四念處乃至八聖道分，空、無相、無作，佛十力、四無所畏、四無礙智、大慈大悲、十八不共法。是時，菩薩摩訶薩成就一切助道法，乃至阿耨多羅三藐三菩提，終不耗減。是菩薩有方便力故，常增益善法，諸根通利，勝於阿羅漢、辟支佛根。 「復次，須菩提！若菩薩摩訶薩作是念：『眾生長夜著四顛倒：常想、樂想、我想、淨想；為是眾生故，求薩婆若。我得阿耨多羅三藐三菩提時，為說無常法、苦、不淨、無我法。』是菩薩成就是心，以方便力行般若波羅蜜，不得佛三昧，未具足佛十力、四無所畏、四無礙智、大慈大悲、〔T25 0593b〕十八不共法，亦不實際作證。爾時，菩薩修無作解脫門，雖未得阿耨多羅三藐三菩提，亦不實際作證。 「復次，須菩提！若菩薩摩訶薩作是念：『眾生長夜著得法，所謂我、眾生乃至知者、見者，是色、是受想行識、是入、是界，是四禪、四無量心、四無色定；我如是行，如我得阿耨多羅三藐三菩提時，令眾生無是得法。』菩薩是心成就，以方便力行般若波羅蜜，未具足佛十力、四無所畏、四無礙智、大慈大悲、十八不共法，不於實際作證。爾時，菩薩具足修空三昧。 「復次，須菩提！若菩薩摩訶薩作是念：『眾生長夜行諸相，所謂男相、女相、色相、無色相；我如是行，如我得阿耨多羅三藐三菩提時，令眾生無是諸相過失！』是心成就以方便力行般若波羅蜜，未具足佛十力乃至十八不共法，不於實際作證。爾時，菩薩摩訶薩具足修無相三昧。須菩提！若菩薩摩訶薩學六波羅蜜，學內空乃至無法有法空，學四念處乃至空、無相、無作解脫門，學佛十力、四無所畏、四無礙智、大慈大悲，學十八不共法。如是智慧成就，若著作法、若住三界，無有是處！是菩薩摩訶薩學助道法、行助道法時，應當試問：『諸菩薩摩訶薩欲得阿耨多羅三藐三菩提，云何學是法，觀空不證實際？以不證故，不墮須陀洹果乃至辟支佛道；觀無相、無作、無起、無生、無所有，亦不取證，而修行般若波羅蜜。』應如是問。 「須菩提！若諸菩薩摩訶薩若試問時，是菩薩若如是答：『菩薩摩訶薩但應觀空，但應觀無相、無作、無起、無生、無〔T25 0593c〕所有；是菩薩摩訶薩不應學空、無相、無作、無起、無生、無所有，不應學是助道法。』須菩提！當知是菩薩諸佛未授阿耨多羅三藐三菩提記。何以故？是人不能說阿鞞跋致菩薩所學相，不能示、不能答。若是菩薩摩訶薩能說、能示、能答阿鞞跋致所學相，當知是菩薩摩訶薩已習學菩薩道入薄地，如餘阿鞞跋致菩薩摩訶薩阿鞞跋致相。」 須菩提白佛言：「世尊！頗有未得阿鞞跋致菩薩能如是答不？」 佛言：「有。須菩提！是菩薩摩訶薩，六波羅蜜若聞、若不聞，能如是答如阿鞞跋致菩薩摩訶薩。」 須菩提言：「世尊！多有菩薩求佛道，少有菩薩能如是答如阿鞞跋致菩薩摩訶薩學道、無學道中。」 佛語須菩提：「如是！如是！是菩薩甚少！何以故？菩薩摩訶薩少有如是得授記行阿鞞跋致慧地；若有得授記，是人能如是答。是人善根明了，諸天世人所不能壞。」 【論】 問曰： 學空、入空有何差別？ 答曰： 初名學空，後是入空；因是學空，果是入空；方便名學空，得名入空。如是等二道。 無相、無作、三十七品亦如是。 三解脫門、三十七品是聲聞、辟支佛涅槃道，佛勅菩薩應行是道。 須菩提作是念：「此是涅槃道，云何菩薩行是道法而不取涅槃證？」 佛答：「菩薩觀色等一切法空。是菩薩以深入禪定，心不可亂，得利智慧力故，不見是空法；以不見故無所證。」 聲聞、辟支佛斷吾我，捨愛著，直趣涅槃。是菩薩善學自相空，色法中乃至微〔T25 0594a〕塵，不留遺餘微細之分；無色法中，乃至不留一念；直入畢竟空中，乃至不見是空法可以為證。 佛雖答，須菩提未達佛意，更問：「如佛所說，菩薩不應空法作證；今入空中，云何不作證？」 佛答：以深入故能不作證。具足者即是深入。譬如執菅草，捉緩則傷手，若急捉則無傷；菩薩亦如是，深入空故，知空亦空，涅槃亦空，故無所證。 復次，菩薩未入空時，作是思惟：「我應遍觀諸法空，不應不具足知而取證。」是故不專心攝念入禪、繫在空緣中。所以者何？若專心繫在空緣中，則心柔軟，不能從空自出。 問曰： 上言「深入禪定，不令心亂」，今云何言「不專心」？ 答曰： 今言「不專心」，是初入時，為不能自出故；上言「深入」者，入已深，知空亦空，不令心在餘事，故言不亂。 復次，是菩薩應作是念：「我今未具三十二相、八十種隨形好、十力、四無所畏諸佛法，云何取涅槃證？我今是學時，薄諸煩惱，教化眾生，令入佛道；若我得佛事具足，是時當取證。」是故菩薩雖入三解脫門而不取證。 是中說譬喻：「壯夫」是菩薩，「父母親族」是可度眾生，「險道」是三界生死，「惡賊」是魔民及諸煩惱，「器仗」是菩薩五神通等種種方便力，「還歸本處」是菩薩所行道，「安立不動」是菩薩住畢竟空，以四無量心運致可度眾生著涅槃安樂處。 時會者疑：「空中無所有，云何可行？」是故佛說鳥喻：「如鳥飛虛空，無所依止，而遠逝不墜。」復次，是菩薩未具足道法、未至佛道，於其中間而不作〔T25 0594b〕證；如鳥未到所至，終不中住。學是空法，為自斷煩惱、為度眾生故。 又為明了故，說善射譬喻：如人善於射術。「弓」是菩薩禪定，「箭」是智慧，「虛空」是三解脫門，「地」是涅槃。是菩薩以智慧箭射三解脫門虛空，更以方便力故，以後箭射前箭，不令墮涅槃地；未具足十力等佛事故，終不取證。 須菩提歡喜白佛言：「諸菩薩所為甚難，實為希有！所謂行空而不作證。」 佛答：「是菩薩本願諸一切眾生令得離苦，以是本願、大悲心所持故，雖行空，不作證。」 復次，若菩薩作是念：「一切眾生處在苦中，為顛倒所縛，沒在無所有中。」是時即行空、無相、無作解脫門。當知是菩薩有方便力，行三解脫門，而不捨眾生。 復次，菩薩欲觀甚深法，所謂十八空、三十七品、三解脫門，先應作是念——眾生長夜著我相等。行者若直觀甚深法，或得聲聞道、或墮邪見，以無憐愍心、不能深入自相空故。是以菩薩欲觀是法，先生悲心，所謂眾生長夜著吾我心諸煩惱。長夜名久遠；無量劫來是我必不可得，但空虛誑顛倒故，受諸憂惱。菩薩見是已，作願：「我當為眾生成佛道，斷是眾生著我顛倒。」是時，即是行空等三解脫門而不證實際。是善根成就，菩薩不取實際證，亦不失四禪等諸功德。菩薩深入空故，諸根猛利，勝於二乘。 破四顛倒義，亦如上說。 復次，菩薩作是念：「眾生長夜著得法，所謂我、眾生，乃至若著作法、若住三界，無有是處。」義皆同觀空而不取證。 〔T25 0594c〕 問曰： 云何知是菩薩未得道而能行此深空？ 答曰： 經中自說因緣：「是菩薩應試問：『云何菩薩應學空而不取證？』」 若菩薩答：「但應念空，一心習行；如聲聞、辟支佛法，不但學知而已。」乃至無生、無所有，亦如是。當知是菩薩未為諸佛所授記。所以者何？不說方便學知故觀空。 若是菩薩異於上答者，當知是阿鞞跋致，已習學入於薄地。學習名先學知空。薄地名阿鞞跋致地中諸煩惱薄。 須菩提聞阿鞞跋致相、非阿鞞跋致相已，白佛言：「世尊！頗有菩薩未得阿鞞跋致，能如是答不？」 佛言：「有。菩薩若聞六波羅蜜、若不聞，能如阿鞞跋致答。」若聞者，但從師聞，自未具足菩薩地；若不聞者，自思惟、正憶念，雖未得無生忍，能求諸法相，如阿鞞跋致菩薩答。 須菩提言：「多有人求佛道，少能如是答如阿鞞跋致菩薩學地、無學地中。」未得無生法忍名學地，得無生法忍名無學地。 佛言：「少。何以故？少有菩薩從諸佛受記。已從諸佛受記者，能如是答。」何以故？諸法實相，惟佛能遍知；佛知此人能如法答，故懸與受記。是菩薩雖少，善根明了，能廣利益眾生，無能壞者。
《大智度論》卷76 · T25n1509 0592a15–0594c24
The canonical text stands in Chinese only. This edition renders the essence, the plain reading, the exposition and the apparatus into English — never the sūtra itself. Switch to 漢讀本 or 並行雙語 above to read it.
本品題為《大智度論》釋〈學空不證品〉第六十，聖者龍樹所造，後秦龜茲國三藏鳩摩羅什所譯，在卷七十六。
經①：學空入空之問——觀空不令心亂故不作證、學時非證時、壯夫過險道喻、有翼之鳥喻、健人善射喻
須菩提向佛稟白：『世尊！若菩薩摩訶薩想要行般若波羅蜜，應當怎樣學空三昧？怎樣入空三昧？怎樣學無相三昧、無作三昧？怎樣入無相三昧、無作三昧？怎樣學四念處？怎樣修四念處？乃至怎樣學八聖道分？怎樣修八聖道分？』
佛告訴須菩提：『菩薩摩訶薩行般若波羅蜜時，應當觀色是空、受想行識是空，十二入、十八界也是空，乃至應當觀欲界、色界、無色界都是空。作這樣觀察的時候，不使心散亂。這菩薩摩訶薩若心不散亂，就不見是法；若不見是法，就不作證。為什麼呢？因為這菩薩摩訶薩善學自相空的緣故，不有餘、不有分，所證之法與能證之人都不可見。』
須菩提向佛稟白：『世尊！如佛所說，菩薩摩訶薩不應當於空法作證。世尊！菩薩是怎樣住在空法之中而不作證的呢？』
佛告訴須菩提：『若菩薩摩訶薩具足觀空，先發這樣的願：『我如今不應當於空法作證；我如今是學的時候，不是證的時候。』菩薩摩訶薩不專一攝持其心繫縛在所緣之中，因為這個緣故，菩薩摩訶薩於阿耨多羅三藐三菩提之中不退轉，也不取漏盡之證。須菩提！菩薩摩訶薩這樣便成就了大善妙法。為什麼呢？因為住在這空之中而這樣想念：『我如今是學的時候，不是證的時候。』須菩提！菩薩摩訶薩應當這樣想念：『我是學檀波羅蜜的時候，不是證的時候；學尸羅波羅蜜、羼提波羅蜜、毘梨耶波羅蜜、禪波羅蜜的時候，修四念處的時候乃至修八聖道分的時候，都不是證的時候；修空三昧、無相三昧、無作三昧的時候，不是證的時候；修佛十力、四無所畏、四無礙智、十八不共法、大慈大悲的時候，不是證的時候。我如今學一切種智的時候，不是得須陀洹果之證的時候，乃至不是得阿羅漢之證、辟支佛道之證的時候。』像這樣，須菩提！菩薩摩訶薩行般若波羅蜜，學空觀而住在空中；學無相觀、無作觀而住在無相、無作之中；修四念處而不證四念處，乃至修八聖道分而不證八聖道分。這菩薩雖然學三十七品、雖然行三十七品，卻不作須陀洹果之證乃至辟支佛道之證。
『須菩提！譬如壯夫，勁健勇猛，善於兵法與六十四種技能，堅執器仗，安立不動，巧於種種伎術，端正潔淨，為人所愛敬，少少修習事業而所得果報豐多。因為這個因緣的緣故，被眾人所恭敬、尊重、讚歎；他見人敬重自己，就加倍歡喜。因有少許因緣，當要前往別處，扶持著老弱之人，經過種種險難恐怖的地方；他安慰父母，曉諭妻子說：『不要恐懼惶懅！我能通過這裡，必定不會有苦。』險難的道路之中，多有怨賊潛伏著劫奪殺害；這人智慧與力量具足的緣故，能夠度過惡道，回到本處，不遭遇賊害，歡喜安樂。須菩提！菩薩摩訶薩也是這樣，於一切眾生之中，慈心、悲心、喜心、捨心遍滿具足。那時，菩薩摩訶薩住在四無量心之中，具足六波羅蜜，不取漏盡之證；學一切種智，入空解脫門、無相解脫門、無作解脫門。這時菩薩不隨逐一切諸相，也不證無相三昧；因為不證無相三昧的緣故，不墮落聲聞地、辟支佛地。
『須菩提！譬如有翅翼的鳥，飛騰在虛空之中而不墜墮，雖然身在空中，也不住著於空。須菩提！菩薩摩訶薩也是這樣，學空解脫門，學無相解脫門、無作解脫門，也不作證；因為不作證的緣故，不墮落聲聞地、辟支佛地；在未具足佛十力、大慈大悲、無量諸佛法、一切種智之前，也不證空解脫門、無相解脫門、無作解脫門。
『須菩提！譬如健壯的人，學種種射法，善於射術，仰身射向空中，又以後一枝箭射前一枝箭，箭箭相互支拄，不使箭墮落，隨意自在；若想要令它墮落，便停下後箭，於是纔墮到地上。須菩提！菩薩摩訶薩也是這樣，行般若波羅蜜，以方便力的緣故，為了阿耨多羅三藐三菩提，在諸善根未具足之前，不於實際作證；若善根成就了，這時纔於實際作證。因為這個緣故，須菩提！菩薩摩訶薩行般若波羅蜜時，應當這樣觀察諸法的法相！』
經②：所為甚難——不捨眾生之願、觀甚深法生度眾生心、破四顛倒、破著得法、破著諸相、試問之法辨阿鞞跋致相
須菩提向佛稟白：『世尊！菩薩摩訶薩的所作所為甚為艱難！為什麼呢？雖然學這諸法之相、學實際、學如、學法性、學畢竟空，乃至學自相空以及三解脫門，終究不在中道墮落。世尊！這是甚為希有的！』
佛告訴須菩提：『這菩薩摩訶薩因為不捨一切眾生的緣故，發這樣的願。須菩提！若菩薩摩訶薩這樣想念：『我不應當捨棄一切眾生！眾生沉沒在無所有法之中，我應當救度他們！』那時，他就入空解脫門、無相解脫門、無作解脫門。須菩提！當知這菩薩摩訶薩成就了方便力，在未得一切種智之前，行這解脫門，也不在中道取實際之證。
『再者，須菩提！菩薩摩訶薩想要觀這些甚深之法，就是內空乃至無法有法空，四念處乃至三解脫門，那時菩薩摩訶薩應當生起這樣的心：『這些眾生長夜行於我相乃至知者相、見者相，執著於所得之法；為了替眾生斷除這些相的緣故，我要得阿耨多羅三藐三菩提，當為他們說法。』那時，菩薩行空解脫門，行無相解脫門、無作解脫門，也不取實際之證；因為不證的緣故，不墮須陀洹果，乃至不墮辟支佛道。須菩提！這菩薩摩訶薩以這樣的心想要成就善根的緣故，不在中道於實際作證，也不失四禪、四無量心、四無色定，四念處乃至八聖道分，空、無相、無作，佛十力、四無所畏、四無礙智、大慈大悲、十八不共法。這時，菩薩摩訶薩成就一切助道之法，乃至到阿耨多羅三藐三菩提，終不耗損減少。這菩薩因為有方便力的緣故，常常增益善法，諸根通達銳利，勝過阿羅漢、辟支佛的根。
『再者，須菩提！若菩薩摩訶薩這樣想念：『眾生長夜執著四種顛倒——常想、樂想、我想、淨想；為了這些眾生的緣故，我求薩婆若。我得阿耨多羅三藐三菩提的時候，要為他們宣說無常之法、苦、不淨、無我之法。』這菩薩成就了這樣的心，以方便力行般若波羅蜜，在未得佛三昧、未具足佛十力、四無所畏、四無礙智、大慈大悲、十八不共法之前，也不於實際作證。那時，菩薩修無作解脫門，雖然還沒有得阿耨多羅三藐三菩提，也不於實際作證。
『再者，須菩提！若菩薩摩訶薩這樣想念：『眾生長夜執著所得之法，就是我、眾生乃至知者、見者，是色、是受想行識、是入、是界，是四禪、四無量心、四無色定；我這樣修行，等我得阿耨多羅三藐三菩提的時候，要令眾生沒有這些所得之法。』菩薩這樣的心成就了，以方便力行般若波羅蜜，在未具足佛十力、四無所畏、四無礙智、大慈大悲、十八不共法之前，不於實際作證。那時，菩薩具足修空三昧。
『再者，須菩提！若菩薩摩訶薩這樣想念：『眾生長夜行於諸相，就是男相、女相、色相、無色相；我這樣修行，等我得阿耨多羅三藐三菩提的時候，要令眾生沒有這些諸相的過失！』這樣的心成就了，以方便力行般若波羅蜜，在未具足佛十力乃至十八不共法之前，不於實際作證。那時，菩薩摩訶薩具足修無相三昧。須菩提！若菩薩摩訶薩學六波羅蜜，學內空乃至無法有法空，學四念處乃至空解脫門、無相解脫門、無作解脫門，學佛十力、四無所畏、四無礙智、大慈大悲，學十八不共法。這樣的智慧成就了，若還執著造作之法、若還住在三界之中，是沒有這種道理的！這菩薩摩訶薩學助道之法、行助道之法的時候，應當試著問他：『諸菩薩摩訶薩想要得阿耨多羅三藐三菩提，是怎樣學這法，觀空而不證實際？因為不證的緣故，不墮須陀洹果乃至辟支佛道；觀無相、無作、無起、無生、無所有，也不取證，而修行般若波羅蜜。』應當這樣問他。
『須菩提！若諸菩薩摩訶薩這樣試著問的時候，這被問的菩薩若這樣回答：『菩薩摩訶薩只應當觀空，只應當觀無相、無作、無起、無生、無所有；這菩薩摩訶薩不應當學空、無相、無作、無起、無生、無所有，不應當學這助道之法。』須菩提！當知這菩薩，諸佛未曾授予他阿耨多羅三藐三菩提之記。為什麼呢？因為這人不能宣說阿鞞跋致菩薩所學之相，不能開示、不能作答。若這菩薩摩訶薩能說、能示、能答阿鞞跋致所學之相，當知這菩薩摩訶薩已經習學菩薩之道而入於薄地，如同其餘阿鞞跋致菩薩摩訶薩的阿鞞跋致之相。』
須菩提向佛稟白：『世尊！可有未得阿鞞跋致的菩薩，能這樣回答的嗎？』
佛說：『有。須菩提！這菩薩摩訶薩，於六波羅蜜若曾聽聞、若不曾聽聞，都能這樣回答，如同阿鞞跋致菩薩摩訶薩一樣。』
須菩提說：『世尊！多有菩薩求佛道，少有菩薩能在學道、無學道之中這樣回答，如同阿鞞跋致菩薩摩訶薩一樣。』
佛告語須菩提：『是這樣！是這樣！這樣的菩薩甚少！為什麼呢？因為菩薩摩訶薩少有像這樣得授記而行於阿鞞跋致慧地的；若有得授記的，這人便能這樣回答。這人善根明了，諸天世人所不能破壞。』
論：學空入空之別、深入禪定何以又說不專心、三喻之所喻、本願大悲所持故行空不證、試問之法何以能驗、諸法實相惟佛能遍知
論主問道：
學空與入空有什麼差別？
論主答道：
起初名為學空，後來纔是入空；因是學空，果是入空；方便名為學空，得，名為入空。像這樣等等，是二種道。
無相、無作以及三十七品也是這樣。
三解脫門、三十七品是聲聞、辟支佛的涅槃之道，佛卻敕命菩薩應當行這條道。
須菩提這樣想念：『這是涅槃之道，菩薩怎麼能行這道法而不取涅槃之證呢？』
佛回答說：『菩薩觀色等一切法是空。這菩薩因為深入禪定，心不可散亂，得了銳利的智慧力的緣故，不見是空法；因為不見的緣故，所以無所證。』
聲聞、辟支佛斷除吾我，捨棄愛著，一直趣向涅槃。這菩薩善學自相空，於色法之中乃至微塵，不留下殘餘微細的一分；於無色法之中，乃至不留下一念；一直入於畢竟空中，乃至不見這空法可以用來作證。
佛雖然這樣答了，須菩提還未通達佛的意思，便再追問：『如佛所說，菩薩不應當於空法作證；如今既已入空之中，怎麼能不作證呢？』
佛回答：因為深入的緣故所以能不作證。所謂具足，就是深入。譬如手執菅草，捉得鬆緩就傷手，若捉得緊急就不傷；菩薩也是這樣，因為深入空的緣故，知道空也是空、涅槃也是空，所以無所證。
再者，菩薩未入空的時候，作這樣的思惟：『我應當周遍觀察諸法是空，不應當還沒有具足知曉就取證。』因此不專一其心攝持念頭而入禪、繫縛在空的所緣之中。為什麼呢？若專一其心繫縛在空的所緣之中，心就柔軟，不能從空之中自己出來。
論主問道：
上文說「深入禪定，不令心亂」，如今為什麼又說「不專心」？
論主答道：
如今說的「不專心」，是指初入的時候，因為不能自己出來的緣故；上文說的「深入」，是指入得已深，知道空也是空，不使心留在其餘的事上，所以說不亂。
再者，這菩薩應當作這樣的想念：『我如今還沒有具足三十二相、八十種隨形好、十力、四無所畏等諸佛之法，怎麼可以取涅槃之證？我如今是學的時候，要淡薄諸煩惱，教化眾生，令他們入於佛道；若我所得的佛事具足了，那時當取證。』因此菩薩雖然入三解脫門而不取證。
這裡面解說前面的譬喻：「壯夫」是菩薩，「父母親族」是可度的眾生，「險道」是三界的生死，「惡賊」是魔民以及諸煩惱，「器仗」是菩薩五神通等種種方便力，「還歸本處」是菩薩所行之道，「安立不動」是菩薩住於畢竟空，以四無量心運載可度的眾生安置於涅槃安樂之處。
當時法會之中的人起疑：『空中無所有，怎麼可以行走呢？』因此佛說鳥的譬喻：『如鳥飛在虛空，沒有依止之處，卻能遠遠飛去而不墜落。』再者，這菩薩在未具足道法、未至佛道之前，於這中間而不作證；如同鳥未到所要到的地方，終不中途停住。學這空法，是為了自斷煩惱、為了度眾生的緣故。
又為了使義理明了的緣故，解說善射的譬喻：如人善於射術。「弓」是菩薩的禪定，「箭」是智慧，「虛空」是三解脫門，「地」是涅槃。這菩薩以智慧之箭射三解脫門的虛空，更以方便力的緣故，以後箭射前箭，不使它墮到涅槃之地；因為未具足十力等佛事的緣故，終不取證。
須菩提歡喜地向佛稟白：『諸菩薩的所作所為甚為艱難，實在希有！所謂行空而不作證。』
佛回答說：『這菩薩本來發願要使一切眾生得離眾苦，因為被這本願、大悲之心所任持的緣故，雖然行空，卻不作證。』
再者，若菩薩這樣想念：『一切眾生處在苦中，被顛倒所繫縛，沉沒在無所有之中。』這時就行空解脫門、無相解脫門、無作解脫門。當知這菩薩有方便力，行三解脫門，而不捨棄眾生。
再者，菩薩想要觀甚深之法，就是十八空、三十七品、三解脫門，先應當作這樣的想念——眾生長夜執著我相等等。修行的人若直接觀甚深之法，或者得聲聞道、或者墮入邪見，因為沒有憐愍之心、不能深入自相空的緣故。因此菩薩想要觀這法，先生起悲心，就是想到眾生長夜執著吾我之心的諸煩惱。長夜，名為久遠；無量劫以來這個我必定不可得，只是空虛誑惑顛倒的緣故，受種種憂惱。菩薩見到這情形以後，發願說：『我當為眾生成就佛道，斷除這些眾生執著我的顛倒。』這時，就是行空等三解脫門而不證實際。這樣善根成就，菩薩不取實際之證，也不失四禪等諸功德。菩薩因為深入空的緣故，諸根猛利，勝過二乘。
破四顛倒的義理，也如上面所說。
再者，菩薩這樣想念：『眾生長夜執著所得之法，就是我、眾生，乃至若執著造作之法、若住在三界，是沒有這種道理的。』其義都同於觀空而不取證。
論主問道：
怎麼知道這菩薩還沒有得道而能行這深空呢？
論主答道：
經中自己說了因緣——這菩薩應當被試著問：『菩薩應當怎樣學空而不取證？』
若菩薩這樣回答：『只應當念空，一心習行；如同聲聞、辟支佛之法，不只是學著知道而已。』乃至無生、無所有，也是這樣。當知這菩薩還沒有被諸佛所授記。為什麼呢？因為他不說以方便學知的緣故而觀空。
若這菩薩的回答不同於上面那樣，當知他是阿鞞跋致，已經習學而入於薄地。學習，是說先學著知道空。薄地，是說阿鞞跋致地之中諸煩惱淡薄。
須菩提聽了阿鞞跋致之相、非阿鞞跋致之相以後，向佛稟白：『世尊！可有菩薩未得阿鞞跋致，能這樣回答的嗎？』
佛說：『有。菩薩若曾聽聞六波羅蜜、若不曾聽聞，都能如阿鞞跋致那樣回答。』若是曾聽聞的，只是從師長聽來，自己還沒有具足菩薩之地；若是不曾聽聞的，自己思惟、正憶念，雖然還沒有得無生忍，卻能推求諸法之相，如同阿鞞跋致菩薩那樣回答。
須菩提說：『多有人求佛道，少有人能在學地、無學地之中這樣回答，如同阿鞞跋致菩薩一樣。』未得無生法忍名為學地，得無生法忍名為無學地。
佛說：『少。為什麼呢？因為少有菩薩從諸佛受記。已經從諸佛受記的人，纔能這樣回答。』為什麼呢？諸法的實相，唯有佛能遍知；佛知道這人能如法而答，所以預先給他授記。這菩薩雖然稀少，但善根明了，能廣大利益眾生，沒有誰能破壞他。
This chapter is titled the Mahāprajñāpāramitā-upadeśa's commentary on the sixtieth chapter, "Training in Emptiness without Realising It", composed by the noble Nāgārjuna and translated by the Tripiṭaka master Kumārajīva of the land of Kucha under the Later Qin; it is in the seventy-sixth fascicle.
Sūtra ①: The Question of Training in Emptiness and Entering Emptiness—Contemplating Emptiness without Letting the Mind Be Disordered, and so Not Realising It; the Time of Training Is Not the Time of Realising; the Simile of the Stalwart Man Crossing the Dangerous Road, the Simile of the Bird with Wings, and the Simile of the Strong Man Skilled in Archery
Subhūti said to the Buddha: ‘World-Honored One! If a bodhisattva-mahāsattva wishes to practise prajñāpāramitā, how should he train in the emptiness samādhi? How should he enter the emptiness samādhi? How should he train in the signless samādhi and the non-action samādhi? How should he enter the signless samādhi and the non-action samādhi? How should he train in the four foundations of mindfulness? How should he cultivate the four foundations of mindfulness? And so on up to: how should he train in the eightfold noble path? How should he cultivate the eightfold noble path?’
The Buddha told Subhūti: ‘When the bodhisattva-mahāsattva practises prajñāpāramitā, he should contemplate form as empty, feeling, perception, constructions, and consciousness as empty, the twelve sense-fields and the eighteen elements as also empty, and so on up to: he should contemplate the desire realm, the form realm, and the formless realm as all empty. When he makes this contemplation, he does not let the mind be scattered and disordered. If this bodhisattva-mahāsattva's mind is not scattered and disordered, then he does not see this dharma; if he does not see this dharma, then he does not realise it. Why? Because this bodhisattva-mahāsattva has trained well in the emptiness of specific marks, there is no remainder and no part; the dharma that is realised and the person who realises are both not to be seen.’
Subhūti said to the Buddha: ‘World-Honored One! As the Buddha has said, the bodhisattva-mahāsattva should not realise the dharma of emptiness. World-Honored One! How does the bodhisattva abide within the dharma of emptiness and yet not realise it?’
The Buddha told Subhūti: ‘If the bodhisattva-mahāsattva fully contemplates emptiness, he first makes this vow: ‘I should not now realise the dharma of emptiness; now is my time of training, not the time of realising.’ The bodhisattva-mahāsattva does not exclusively gather his mind and bind it to the object; for this reason the bodhisattva-mahāsattva does not retrogress from anuttarā samyaksaṃbodhi, nor does he take the realisation of the exhaustion of the outflows. Subhūti! In this way the bodhisattva-mahāsattva accomplishes a great, good, and wondrous dharma. Why? Because, abiding within this emptiness, he has this thought: ‘Now is my time of training, not the time of realising.’ Subhūti! The bodhisattva-mahāsattva should have this thought: ‘It is my time of training in dānapāramitā, not the time of realising; the time of training in śīlapāramitā, kṣāntipāramitā, vīryapāramitā, and dhyānapāramitā, the time of cultivating the four foundations of mindfulness, and so on up to the time of cultivating the eightfold noble path—none of these is the time of realising; the time of cultivating the emptiness samādhi, the signless samādhi, and the non-action samādhi is not the time of realising; the time of cultivating the Buddha's ten powers, the four fearlessnesses, the four unobstructed knowledges, the eighteen unshared dharmas, and great kindness and great compassion is not the time of realising. Now is my time of training in the omniscience of all kinds, not the time of the realisation of obtaining the fruit of the srota-āpanna, and so on up to not the time of the realisation of obtaining arhatship or the realisation of the pratyekabuddha path.’ Thus, Subhūti, the bodhisattva-mahāsattva practising prajñāpāramitā trains in the contemplation of emptiness and abides within emptiness; trains in the signless contemplation and the non-action contemplation and abides within the signless and non-action; cultivates the four foundations of mindfulness and does not realise the four foundations of mindfulness, and so on up to: cultivates the eightfold noble path and does not realise the eightfold noble path. Though this bodhisattva trains in the thirty-seven limbs of the path, and though he practises the thirty-seven limbs of the path, he does not make the realisation of the fruit of the srota-āpanna, and so on up to the realisation of the pratyekabuddha path.
‘Subhūti! It is like a stalwart man, strong, robust, brave, and fierce, skilled in the arts of war and in the sixty-four skills, firmly holding his weapons, standing steady and unmoved, adept in all kinds of crafts, upright and clean, loved and respected by people, who by a little practice at his undertakings obtains an abundant fruit. Because of this cause and condition he is respected, honoured, and praised by the multitude; seeing people respect and honour him, he rejoices all the more. Because of some small cause and condition he must go elsewhere, and, supporting the old and the weak, he passes through all kinds of dangerous, difficult, and fearful places; he comforts his father and mother and instructs his wife and children, saying: ‘Do not be afraid or alarmed! I can pass through here; there will surely be no suffering.’ On the dangerous and difficult road there are many enemies and thieves lying in ambush to rob and kill; because this man is fully endowed with wisdom and strength, he is able to cross the evil road and return to his own place, meeting no harm from the thieves, joyful and at ease. Subhūti! The bodhisattva-mahāsattva is also like this: toward all beings, the mind of kindness, the mind of compassion, the mind of joy, and the mind of equanimity pervade everywhere and are complete. At that time the bodhisattva-mahāsattva abides in the four immeasurable minds, fulfils the six perfections, and does not take the realisation of the exhaustion of the outflows; he trains in the omniscience of all kinds, and enters the emptiness gate of liberation, the signless gate of liberation, and the non-action gate of liberation. At this time the bodhisattva does not follow after any of the marks, nor does he realise the signless samādhi; because he does not realise the signless samādhi, he does not fall to the śrāvaka ground or the pratyekabuddha ground.
‘Subhūti! It is like a bird with wings, flying up into space and not falling; though its body is in space, it also does not abide in or cling to space. Subhūti! The bodhisattva-mahāsattva is also like this: he trains in the emptiness gate of liberation, trains in the signless gate of liberation and the non-action gate of liberation, and also does not realise them; because he does not realise them, he does not fall to the śrāvaka ground or the pratyekabuddha ground; before he has fulfilled the Buddha's ten powers, great kindness and great compassion, the immeasurable dharmas of the buddhas, and the omniscience of all kinds, he also does not realise the emptiness gate of liberation, the signless gate of liberation, or the non-action gate of liberation.
‘Subhūti! It is like a strong man who trains in all the arts of archery and is skilled in the archer's craft; leaning back, he shoots upward into space, and then with a later arrow shoots the earlier arrow, arrow supporting arrow, not letting the arrows fall, at will and unhindered; if he wishes them to fall, he simply stops the later arrow, and only then do they fall to the ground. Subhūti! The bodhisattva-mahāsattva is also like this: practising prajñāpāramitā, by the power of skilful means, for the sake of anuttarā samyaksaṃbodhi, before his roots of goodness are fulfilled he does not realise the limit of reality; if his roots of goodness are accomplished, only then does he realise the limit of reality. For this reason, Subhūti, when the bodhisattva-mahāsattva practises prajñāpāramitā, he should contemplate the mark of dharmas of all dharmas in this way!’
Sūtra ②: What He Does Is Very Hard—the Vow Not to Abandon Beings, Contemplating the Very Deep Dharmas and Giving Rise to the Mind of Delivering Beings, Breaking the Four Inversions, Breaking Clinging to Attaining a Dharma, Breaking Clinging to Marks, and the Method of Testing by Asking to Discern the Marks of the Avaivartika
Subhūti said to the Buddha: ‘World-Honored One! What the bodhisattva-mahāsattva does is very hard! Why? Though he trains in these marks of dharmas, trains in the limit of reality, trains in suchness, trains in the nature of dharmas, trains in ultimate emptiness, and so on up to trains in the emptiness of specific marks and the three gates of liberation, in the end he does not fall midway. World-Honored One! This is very rare!’
The Buddha told Subhūti: ‘It is because this bodhisattva-mahāsattva does not abandon any being that he makes this vow. Subhūti! If the bodhisattva-mahāsattva has this thought: ‘I should not abandon any being! Beings are sunk in the dharma of nothing whatsoever; I should deliver them!’—at that time he enters the emptiness gate of liberation, the signless gate of liberation, and the non-action gate of liberation. Subhūti! Know that this bodhisattva-mahāsattva has accomplished the power of skilful means: before he obtains the omniscience of all kinds, he practises these gates of liberation, and also does not take the realisation of the limit of reality midway.
‘Furthermore, Subhūti! When the bodhisattva-mahāsattva wishes to contemplate these very deep dharmas—namely inner emptiness and so on up to the emptiness of non-existent and existent dharmas, the four foundations of mindfulness and so on up to the three gates of liberation—at that time the bodhisattva-mahāsattva should give rise to this mind: ‘These beings through the long night practise within the mark of self, and so on up to the mark of a knower and the mark of a seer, and cling to attaining a dharma; in order to sever these marks for beings, I shall obtain anuttarā samyaksaṃbodhi and shall expound the Dharma for them.’ At that time the bodhisattva practises the emptiness gate of liberation, practises the signless gate of liberation and the non-action gate of liberation, and also does not take the realisation of the limit of reality; because he does not realise it, he does not fall into the fruit of the srota-āpanna, and so on up to does not fall into the pratyekabuddha path. Subhūti! Because this bodhisattva-mahāsattva, with such a mind, wishes to accomplish roots of goodness, he does not realise the limit of reality midway, and also does not lose the four dhyānas, the four immeasurable minds, the four formless absorptions, the four foundations of mindfulness and so on up to the eightfold noble path, emptiness, the signless, non-action, the Buddha's ten powers, the four fearlessnesses, the four unobstructed knowledges, great kindness and great compassion, and the eighteen unshared dharmas. At this time the bodhisattva-mahāsattva accomplishes all the dharmas that aid the path, and all the way to anuttarā samyaksaṃbodhi they never wear away or diminish. Because this bodhisattva has the power of skilful means, he constantly increases wholesome dharmas, and his faculties are penetrating and keen, surpassing the faculties of the arhat and the pratyekabuddha.
‘Furthermore, Subhūti! If the bodhisattva-mahāsattva has this thought: ‘Beings through the long night cling to the four kinds of inversion—the notion of permanence, the notion of happiness, the notion of self, the notion of purity; for the sake of these beings I seek sarvajñā. When I obtain anuttarā samyaksaṃbodhi, I shall proclaim for them the dharma of impermanence, suffering, impurity, and the dharma of non-self.’ This bodhisattva, having accomplished such a mind, practises prajñāpāramitā by the power of skilful means, and before he has obtained the Buddha's samādhi, and before he has fulfilled the Buddha's ten powers, the four fearlessnesses, the four unobstructed knowledges, great kindness and great compassion, and the eighteen unshared dharmas, he also does not realise the limit of reality. At that time the bodhisattva cultivates the non-action gate of liberation; though he has not yet obtained anuttarā samyaksaṃbodhi, he also does not realise the limit of reality.
‘Furthermore, Subhūti! If the bodhisattva-mahāsattva has this thought: ‘Beings through the long night cling to attaining dharmas—namely self, beings, and so on up to a knower and a seer; this is form, this is feeling, perception, constructions, and consciousness, this is a sense-field, this is an element; this is the four dhyānas, the four immeasurable minds, the four formless absorptions; I practise thus, so that when I obtain anuttarā samyaksaṃbodhi, I shall bring beings to be without these attained dharmas.’ When such a mind of the bodhisattva has been accomplished, he practises prajñāpāramitā by the power of skilful means, and before he has fulfilled the Buddha's ten powers, the four fearlessnesses, the four unobstructed knowledges, great kindness and great compassion, and the eighteen unshared dharmas, he does not realise the limit of reality. At that time the bodhisattva fully cultivates the emptiness samādhi.
‘Furthermore, Subhūti! If the bodhisattva-mahāsattva has this thought: ‘Beings through the long night practise within marks—namely the mark of male, the mark of female, the mark of form, the mark of the formless; I practise thus, so that when I obtain anuttarā samyaksaṃbodhi, I shall bring beings to be free of the faults of these marks!’ Such a mind having been accomplished, he practises prajñāpāramitā by the power of skilful means, and before he has fulfilled the Buddha's ten powers and so on up to the eighteen unshared dharmas, he does not realise the limit of reality. At that time the bodhisattva-mahāsattva fully cultivates the signless samādhi. Subhūti! Suppose the bodhisattva-mahāsattva trains in the six perfections, trains in inner emptiness and so on up to the emptiness of non-existent and existent dharmas, trains in the four foundations of mindfulness and so on up to the emptiness gate of liberation, the signless gate of liberation, and the non-action gate of liberation, trains in the Buddha's ten powers, the four fearlessnesses, the four unobstructed knowledges, and great kindness and great compassion, and trains in the eighteen unshared dharmas. When such wisdom has been accomplished, that he should still cling to made dharmas, or still abide within the three realms—there is no such principle! When this bodhisattva-mahāsattva trains in the dharmas that aid the path and practises the dharmas that aid the path, one should test him by asking: ‘When the bodhisattva-mahāsattvas wish to obtain anuttarā samyaksaṃbodhi, how do they train in this dharma, contemplating emptiness and not realising the limit of reality? Because they do not realise it, they do not fall into the fruit of the srota-āpanna and so on up to the pratyekabuddha path; they contemplate the signless, non-action, non-origination, non-arising, and nothing whatsoever, and also do not take realisation, and yet they cultivate prajñāpāramitā.’ One should ask him in this way.
‘Subhūti! When the bodhisattva-mahāsattvas test him by asking in this way, if the bodhisattva who is asked answers thus: ‘The bodhisattva-mahāsattva should only contemplate emptiness, should only contemplate the signless, non-action, non-origination, non-arising, and nothing whatsoever; this bodhisattva-mahāsattva should not train in emptiness, the signless, non-action, non-origination, non-arising, and nothing whatsoever, and should not train in these dharmas that aid the path’—Subhūti! Know that the buddhas have never yet given this bodhisattva the prediction of anuttarā samyaksaṃbodhi. Why? Because this person cannot proclaim the marks of what the avaivartika bodhisattva trains in; he cannot reveal them and cannot answer. If this bodhisattva-mahāsattva can speak of, can show, and can answer the marks of what the avaivartika trains in, know that this bodhisattva-mahāsattva has already trained in the bodhisattva path and entered the ground of thinning, like the marks of the avaivartika of the other avaivartika bodhisattva-mahāsattvas.’
Subhūti said to the Buddha: ‘World-Honored One! Is there a bodhisattva who has not yet obtained avaivartika who can answer like this?’
The Buddha said: ‘There is. Subhūti! This bodhisattva-mahāsattva, whether he has heard of the six perfections or has not heard of them, can answer like this, just as an avaivartika bodhisattva-mahāsattva does.’
Subhūti said: ‘World-Honored One! Many bodhisattvas seek the Buddha path; few bodhisattvas can answer like this within the path of training and the path beyond training, as an avaivartika bodhisattva-mahāsattva does.’
The Buddha told Subhūti: ‘Just so! Just so! Such bodhisattvas are very few! Why? Because few bodhisattva-mahāsattvas have thus received the prediction and practise in the avaivartika ground of wisdom; if there are those who have received the prediction, these people can then answer like this. This person's roots of goodness are clear and bright, and the gods and the people of the world cannot break them.’
Treatise: The Difference between Training in Emptiness and Entering Emptiness, Why, after Entering Deeply into Meditative Concentration, It Is Also Said ‘Not Exclusively Attentive’, What the Three Similes Stand For, Not Realising though Practising Emptiness because Held by the Original Vow and Great Compassion, How the Method of Testing by Asking Can Verify, and the Real Mark of Dharmas That Only the Buddha Can Know Completely
The treatise-author asks:
What difference is there between training in emptiness and entering emptiness?
The treatise-author answers:
At first it is called training in emptiness; afterwards it is entering emptiness. As cause it is training in emptiness, as fruit it is entering emptiness; skilful means is called training in emptiness, attainment is called entering emptiness. Such as these are the two kinds of path.
The signless, non-action, and the thirty-seven limbs of the path are also like this.
The three gates of liberation and the thirty-seven limbs of the path are the path of nirvāṇa of the śrāvaka and the pratyekabuddha, yet the Buddha commands the bodhisattva to practise this path.
Subhūti had this thought: ‘This is the path of nirvāṇa; how can the bodhisattva practise this path-dharma and not take the realisation of nirvāṇa?’
The Buddha answered: ‘The bodhisattva contemplates form and all other dharmas as empty. Because this bodhisattva enters deeply into meditative concentration, his mind cannot be disordered, and because he has obtained the power of keen wisdom, he does not see this dharma of emptiness; because he does not see it, there is nothing realised.’
The śrāvaka and the pratyekabuddha sever I and mine, abandon love and clinging, and go straight toward nirvāṇa. This bodhisattva trains well in the emptiness of specific marks: within the dharmas of form, down even to an atom, he leaves behind not the least remaining subtle part; within the formless dharmas, he leaves behind not even a single thought; he enters straight into ultimate emptiness, and does not even see this dharma of emptiness as something that can be used for realising.
Though the Buddha had answered thus, Subhūti had not yet penetrated the Buddha's meaning, and so pressed further: ‘As the Buddha has said, the bodhisattva should not realise the dharma of emptiness; now that he has already entered emptiness, how can he not realise it?’
The Buddha answered: because he enters deeply, he is able not to realise it. What is called fully is precisely entering deeply. It is like grasping a blade of coarse grass in the hand: hold it loosely and it wounds the hand; grip it tightly and there is no wound. The bodhisattva is also like this: because he enters deeply into emptiness, he knows that emptiness too is empty and nirvāṇa too is empty; therefore there is nothing realised.
Furthermore, when the bodhisattva has not yet entered emptiness, he reflects thus: ‘I should contemplate all dharmas thoroughly as empty; I should not take realisation before I have fully known.’ For this reason he does not exclusively gather his mind and hold his thought so as to enter dhyāna and bind it to the object of emptiness. Why? If he exclusively binds his mind to the object of emptiness, then the mind becomes soft and cannot come out of emptiness by itself.
The treatise-author asks:
Above it was said 「深入禪定，不令心亂」 tr. "entering deeply into meditative concentration, he does not let the mind be disordered"; why is it now said 「不專心」 tr. "not exclusively attentive"?
The treatise-author answers:
The 「不專心」 tr. "not exclusively attentive" spoken of now refers to the time of first entering, lest he be unable to come out by himself; the 「深入」 tr. "entering deeply" spoken of above refers to having entered deeply, knowing that emptiness too is empty, and not letting the mind rest on any other matter; therefore it is said not to be disordered.
Furthermore, this bodhisattva should have this thought: ‘I have not yet fulfilled the thirty-two marks, the eighty minor marks, the ten powers, the four fearlessnesses, and the other dharmas of the buddhas; how could I take the realisation of nirvāṇa? Now is my time of training: I am to thin the afflictions, teach and transform beings, and bring them into the Buddha path; if the Buddha-work I obtain becomes complete, then I shall take realisation.’ For this reason, though the bodhisattva enters the three gates of liberation, he does not take realisation.
Here the earlier similes are explained: 「壯夫」 tr. "the stalwart man" is the bodhisattva; 「父母親族」 tr. "father, mother, and kin" are the beings who can be delivered; 「險道」 tr. "the dangerous road" is birth and death in the three realms; 「惡賊」 tr. "the evil thieves" are Māra's people and the afflictions; 「器仗」 tr. "the weapons" are the bodhisattva's five supernormal powers and all the other kinds of the power of skilful means; 「還歸本處」 tr. "returning to his own place" is the path the bodhisattva practises; 「安立不動」 tr. "standing steady and unmoved" is the bodhisattva abiding in ultimate emptiness, carrying with the four immeasurable minds the beings who can be delivered and setting them in the peace and happiness of nirvāṇa.
At that time those in the assembly doubted: ‘In space there is nothing whatsoever; how can one travel there?’ Therefore the Buddha spoke the simile of the bird: ‘As a bird flies in space with no support, and yet can go far and does not fall.’ Furthermore, this bodhisattva, before he has fulfilled the path-dharma and before he has reached the Buddha path, does not realise it in the interval; just as a bird that has not yet reached where it is going never stops midway. He trains in this dharma of emptiness in order to sever his own afflictions and for the sake of delivering beings.
Again, to make the meaning clear, the simile of skilled archery is explained: it is like a man skilled in the archer's craft. The 「弓」 tr. "bow" is the bodhisattva's meditative concentration; the 「箭」 tr. "arrow" is wisdom; 「虛空」 tr. "space" is the three gates of liberation; the 「地」 tr. "ground" is nirvāṇa. This bodhisattva, with the arrow of wisdom, shoots into the space of the three gates of liberation, and further, by the power of skilful means, shoots the earlier arrow with the later arrow, not letting it fall to the ground of nirvāṇa; because the ten powers and the other Buddha-works are not yet fulfilled, he never takes realisation.
Subhūti joyfully said to the Buddha: ‘What the bodhisattvas do is very hard, truly rare!—namely practising emptiness and not realising it.’
The Buddha answered: ‘This bodhisattva originally vowed to bring all beings to leave the multitude of sufferings; because he is held by this original vow and by the mind of great compassion, though he practises emptiness he does not realise it.’
Furthermore, if the bodhisattva has this thought: ‘All beings are in suffering, bound by inversions, sunk in nothing whatsoever’, at this time he practises the emptiness gate of liberation, the signless gate of liberation, and the non-action gate of liberation. Know that this bodhisattva has the power of skilful means: he practises the three gates of liberation and does not abandon beings.
Furthermore, when the bodhisattva wishes to contemplate very deep dharmas—namely the eighteen emptinesses, the thirty-seven limbs of the path, the three gates of liberation—he should first have this thought: beings through the long night cling to the mark of self and the rest. If a practitioner contemplates very deep dharmas directly, he either attains the śrāvaka path or falls into wrong views, because he has no mind of pity and cannot enter deeply into the emptiness of specific marks. Therefore, when the bodhisattva wishes to contemplate this dharma, he first gives rise to the mind of compassion—namely he thinks of the afflictions of beings who through the long night have clung to the mind of I and mine. The long night is called far and distant: from immeasurable kalpas onward this self has certainly been unfindable; only because of emptiness, falseness, deception, and inversion do they undergo all kinds of sorrow and vexation. Having seen this, the bodhisattva makes a vow, saying: ‘I shall accomplish the Buddha path for beings, and sever these beings' inversion of clinging to self.’ At this time he practises the three gates of liberation, emptiness and the rest, and does not realise the limit of reality. Roots of goodness being accomplished in this way, the bodhisattva does not take the realisation of the limit of reality, and also does not lose the four dhyānas and the other merits. Because the bodhisattva enters deeply into emptiness, his faculties are fierce and keen, surpassing the two vehicles.
The meaning of breaking the four inversions is also as said above.
Furthermore, the bodhisattva has this thought: ‘Beings through the long night cling to attaining dharmas—namely self, beings, and so on up to: that one should cling to made dharmas or abide in the three realms—there is no such principle.’ Its meaning is in every case the same as contemplating emptiness and not taking realisation.
The treatise-author asks:
How is it known that this bodhisattva, not yet having attained the path, can practise this deep emptiness?
The treatise-author answers:
The sūtra itself states the causes and conditions: this bodhisattva should be tested by asking: ‘How should the bodhisattva train in emptiness and not take realisation?’
If the bodhisattva answers thus: ‘One should only be mindful of emptiness and practise it single-mindedly; as in the dharma of the śrāvaka and the pratyekabuddha, it is not merely a matter of training and knowing’—and so on up to non-arising and nothing whatsoever, likewise—know that this bodhisattva has not yet received the prediction from the buddhas. Why? Because he does not speak of contemplating emptiness by way of training and knowing skilful means.
If this bodhisattva's answer differs from the above, know that he is avaivartika, having already trained and entered the ground of thinning. Training means first training and knowing emptiness. The ground of thinning means that within the ground of the avaivartika the afflictions are thinned.
Subhūti, having heard the marks of the avaivartika and the marks of the non-avaivartika, said to the Buddha: ‘World-Honored One! Is there a bodhisattva who has not obtained avaivartika who can answer like this?’
The Buddha said: ‘There is. Whether the bodhisattva has heard the six perfections or has not heard them, he can answer as the avaivartika does.’ If he has heard them, he has only heard them from a teacher, and has not yet himself fulfilled the bodhisattva ground; if he has not heard them, he thinks it over by himself and rightly recollects, and though he has not yet obtained the acceptance of non-arising, he can seek the marks of dharmas and answer as the avaivartika bodhisattva does.
Subhūti said: ‘Many people seek the Buddha path; few can answer like this within the ground of training and the ground beyond training, as the avaivartika bodhisattva does.’ Not yet having obtained the acceptance of the non-arising of dharmas is called the ground of training; having obtained the acceptance of the non-arising of dharmas is called the ground beyond training.
The Buddha said: ‘Few. Why? Because few bodhisattvas receive the prediction from the buddhas. Only those who have already received the prediction from the buddhas can answer like this.’ Why? The real mark of dharmas only the Buddha can know completely; the Buddha, knowing that this person can answer according to the Dharma, gives him the prediction in advance. Though such a bodhisattva is rare, his roots of goodness are clear and bright, he can greatly and widely benefit beings, and no one can break him.
學空不證品：學空與入空何以要分成二道，心不亂何以反成不作證之因，不有餘不有分說的是什麼，學時非證時何以不是拖延，不專攝心繫在緣中何以不是散心，壯夫過險道喻何以不是勸人不斷煩惱，有翼之鳥何以既不墮也不住，後箭射前箭何以是方便力的樣子，四重復次何以都從眾生說起，試問之法何以能驗阿鞞跋致，深入禪定不令心亂與不專心何以不相違，執菅草緩急之喻何以說的是深入，若聞若不聞能如是答何以都算，諸法實相惟佛能遍知何以是全品之結
在問什麼
這一品的難處，全在一個「不」字上：不作證。前此諸品一路教人學空、入空、行三解脫門，本品忽然加上一個限制——學它、入它，卻不可以證它。難處立刻現前：空是所學，證是學成，既學而不許證，豈不是學而不成？又，三解脫門與三十七品本是聲聞、辟支佛趣涅槃的道路，佛卻敕命菩薩去行；行人家的路而不許到人家的終點，這條路要怎麼走？須菩提開口第一問，問的正是這個：菩薩想行般若波羅蜜，究竟怎樣學空三昧、怎樣入空三昧，乃至怎樣學修八聖道分。
佛的答語出人意料地不從「空」上說，而從「心」上說：應觀色乃至三界皆空，作是觀時不令心亂；心若不亂，則不見是法；不見是法，則不作證。三句一路遞下，不作證不是外加的禁令，是觀行深到極處的自然結果——不是行者硬忍著不證，是深觀之中根本尋不到一個可證之法、一個能證之人。所以佛接著說出理由：善學自相空故，不有餘、不有分，證法、證者皆不可見。全品的樞紐在此一句。須菩提隨即再問一層：既然住在空法之中，怎麼會不作證？佛乃出『學時非證時』之願、「不專攝心繫在緣中」之行，並連出三喻——壯夫勁健而能扶老弱過險道、有翼之鳥飛空而不墮不住、健人善射以後箭拄前箭——喻中所共明的，只有一事：以方便力故，諸善根未具足時不於實際作證。
品的後半把「不證」落到發心上。須菩提歎其甚難，佛答得極簡：不捨一切眾生故，作如是願。以下四重「復次」，一重一重從眾生說起——為眾生斷諸相、為眾生破四顛倒、為眾生破著得法、為眾生破著諸相——每一重都以同一句收尾：未具足佛法之前不於實際作證。可見「不證」的力量不在壓抑，在悲願。末後佛又立一個可操作之法：試問。問他菩薩云何學是法、觀空而不證實際；聽他怎麼答，便知他是不是阿鞞跋致。論主承此逐層申釋，先辨學空入空之別，再辨「深入禪定，不令心亂」與「不專心」何以不相違，逐一還原三喻之所喻，末以「諸法實相，惟佛能遍知」收束全品。
逐段解明
一、學空入空之問。 須菩提問：菩薩摩訶薩欲行般若波羅蜜，云何學空三昧、云何入空三昧，無相無作亦爾，乃至云何學四念處、云何修四念處，云何學八聖道分、云何修八聖道分。此問有一個常被讀過去的形式：每一法都問兩遍——一問「學」，一問「入」或「修」。讀者若只看見所問之法而看不見這一雙，本品全部的分際便無處可立。先記住：問的不是空是什麼，是學它與入它有何不同。
二、佛答觀空不令心亂——不見是法故不作證、善學自相空故不有餘不有分。 佛答不直接說學與入，先給觀法：行般若時應觀色空、受想行識空，十二入、十八界乃至欲界色界無色界皆空。隨後一句纔是全答之骨：作是觀時，不令心亂。心不亂則不見是法，不見是法則不作證。此處最易讀錯的是把「不令心亂」當作定力的附帶條件；實則它是不作證的正因——心愈不亂，觀愈周遍，可證之相愈無處可得。末句佛自出所以然：善學自相空故，不有餘、不有分，證法、證者皆不可見。「不有餘」者，觀不留剩下的角落；「不有分」者，觀不留可切分的一小塊。餘與分既盡，能所俱不可見，證於何處安立。
三、住空中而不作證之問。 須菩提聞答即追一層：如佛所說，菩薩不應空法作證；世尊，云何菩薩住空法中而不作證。此問問得極準——他不再問理由，問的是「住」與「不證」如何同時。凡讀般若，遇見兩個看似相排的詞被放在一句裡，可學須菩提此問：不是要求取消其一，是要問二者並存的分寸在哪裡。
四、先作是願學時非證時——不專攝心繫在緣中、遍歷諸度諸品皆非證時。 佛答分三節。其一、先作是願：我今不應空法作證；我今學時，非是證時。其二、不專攝心繫在緣中——不把心死死繫在一個所緣上。其三、遍歷諸法而一一結以「非是證時」：檀波羅蜜乃至禪波羅蜜、四念處乃至八聖道分、空無相無作三昧、佛十力四無所畏四無礙智十八不共法大慈大悲、乃至學一切種智之時，都不是得須陀洹果乃至辟支佛道之證的時候。此段不要讀成拖延——「非是證時」不是把證推到以後纔要，是說此時的用功本身不以取證為事。佛更明說果效：以是故於阿耨多羅三藐三菩提中不退，亦不取漏盡證；末句總收：雖學三十七品、雖行三十七品，而不作須陀洹果證乃至辟支佛道。學而不證，至此成立為一種正行，不是一種欠缺。
五、壯夫扶老弱過險道喻。 佛出第一喻。壯夫勁勇猛健，善於兵法與六十四能，堅持器仗，安立不動，巧諸伎術，端正淨潔，人所愛敬，少修事業而得報利多；因少有因緣當至他處，扶將老弱，過諸險難恐怖之處，安慰父母、曉喻妻子莫有恐懅；險道之中多有怨賊潛伏劫害，其人智力具足故能度惡道，還歸本處，不遇賊害，歡喜安樂。喻畢即合：菩薩於一切眾生中慈悲喜捨遍滿具足，住四無量心，具足六波羅蜜，不取漏盡證；學一切種智，入空、無相、無作解脫門，不隨一切諸相，亦不證無相三昧；以不證故，不墮聲聞辟支佛地。此喻之要在「扶將」二字——壯夫之所以不獨自輕身而過，正因手上有人。
六、有翼之鳥飛空不墮不住喻。 第二喻極短：有翼之鳥飛騰虛空而不墮墜，雖在空中亦不住空。合法亦短：菩薩學空、無相、無作解脫門而不作證；以不作證故不墮二乘地；未具足佛十力、大慈大悲、無量諸佛法、一切種智，亦不證三解脫門。此喻雙遮：不墮，遮的是退落；不住，遮的是停駐。讀者若只取一邊，便成兩種偏差——只記不墮，便以為空可久留；只記不住，便以為空不可入。鳥之在空，正是既不落地也不停步。
七、健人善射後箭拄前箭喻。 第三喻最工：健人學諸射法，善於射術，仰射空中，復以後箭射於前箭，箭箭相拄，不令箭墮，隨意自在；若欲令墮，便止後箭，爾乃墮地。合法：菩薩行般若，以方便力故，為阿耨多羅三藐三菩提，諸善根未具足，不於實際作證；若善根成就，是時便於實際作證。此喻與前二喻不同處，在它把『何時可證』也說了——箭之墮不墮，全在後箭續不續；證之取不取，全在善根具不具。所以不證不是永不證，是時節未至。經①末佛結云：行般若波羅蜜時，應如是觀諸法法相。
八、須菩提歎所為甚難。 經②起於須菩提之歎：菩薩摩訶薩所為甚難——雖學諸法相、學實際、學如、學法性、學畢竟空，乃至學自相空及三解脫門，終不中道墮落，是甚希有。此歎不是讚辭而已，是把難處點名：所學之法門門通向寂滅，而行者偏偏一門也不入住。歎中已含問，故佛下文即答其所以。
九、不捨一切眾生故作如是願。 佛答只一句而根柢全出：是菩薩摩訶薩不捨一切眾生故，作如是願。續言其相：若作是念——我不應捨一切眾生，眾生沒在無所有法中，我應當度——爾時即入三解脫門。當知是菩薩成就方便力，未得一切種智，行是解脫門，亦不中道取實際證。要看清此段的次第：先有不捨眾生之念，後纔入解脫門；入時所持者是此念，故雖入而不取證。方便力之所以名為力，正在此處。
十、第一重復次——欲觀甚深法而先生斷眾生諸相之心。 菩薩欲觀內空乃至無法有法空、四念處乃至三解脫門諸甚深法，爾時應生如是心：是諸眾生長夜行我相乃至知者見者相，著於得法；為眾生斷是諸相故得阿耨多羅三藐三菩提，當說法。爾時行三解脫門而不取實際證；以不證故，不墮須陀洹果乃至辟支佛道。佛更說其利：以是心欲成就善根故，不中道實際作證，不失四禪、四無量心、四無色定、四念處乃至八聖道分、空無相無作、佛十力乃至十八不共法；成就一切助道法乃至菩提終不耗減；有方便力故常增益善法，諸根通利，勝於阿羅漢辟支佛根。此處須留意：不證的果報不是停滯，是諸功德一項不失而諸根轉利。
十一、第二重復次——為破四顛倒。 菩薩作是念：眾生長夜著四顛倒——常想、樂想、我想、淨想；為是眾生故求薩婆若，我得菩提時當為說無常法、苦、不淨、無我法。四顛倒之目在此段由經文自身列出，不假他處。成就是心，以方便力行般若，未得佛三昧、未具足佛十力乃至十八不共法，亦不實際作證；爾時修無作解脫門，雖未得菩提亦不實際作證。四重復次之中，第一重三門並出（「行空解脫門，無相、無作解脫門，亦不取實際證」），後三重乃各配一門；此一重配的是無作。
十二、第三重復次——為破著得法。 菩薩作是念：眾生長夜著得法，所謂我、眾生乃至知者見者，是色、是受想行識、是入、是界，是四禪、四無量心、四無色定；我如是行，如我得菩提時令眾生無是得法。是心成就，以方便力行般若，未具足佛十力乃至十八不共法，不於實際作證；爾時具足修空三昧。此一重配空三昧——所破是『有所得』，故對之以空。
十三、第四重復次——為破著諸相，並立試問之辭。 菩薩作是念：眾生長夜行諸相，所謂男相、女相、色相、無色相；我如是行，如我得菩提時令眾生無是諸相過失。是心成就，以方便力行般若，未具足佛十力乃至十八不共法，不於實際作證；爾時具足修無相三昧——此一重配無相，所破是相。四重既畢，佛續言智慧成就之相：學六波羅蜜、學內空乃至無法有法空、學四念處乃至三解脫門、學佛十力乃至十八不共法，如是智慧成就，若著作法、若住三界，無有是處。末乃立法：是菩薩學助道法、行助道法時，應當試問——諸菩薩欲得菩提，云何學是法、觀空不證實際，以不證故不墮須陀洹果乃至辟支佛道，觀無相無作無起無生無所有亦不取證而修行般若。應如是問。此問之所以能驗，在它把本品全部分際壓成一句，答者稍有偏側即現。
十四、答語二途——未授記之答與阿鞞跋致之答。 佛出失答之相：若答云菩薩摩訶薩但應觀空、但應觀無相無作無起無生無所有，不應學是諸法、不應學是助道法——當知是菩薩諸佛未授阿耨多羅三藐三菩提記。何以故？是人不能說阿鞞跋致菩薩所學相，不能示、不能答。反之，能說、能示、能答者，當知已習學菩薩道入薄地，如餘阿鞞跋致菩薩之阿鞞跋致相。失處要看準：失不在他說空，在他把「觀」與「學」對立起來——只許觀而不許學，正是本品所遮的偏。
十五、頗有未得阿鞞跋致能如是答不。 須菩提問：頗有未得阿鞞跋致菩薩能如是答不。此問的分量在「未得」二字——若答語只有已得者說得出，試問之法便只能事後追認，不能及時識人。
十六、佛答有——六波羅蜜若聞若不聞。 佛答：有。是菩薩摩訶薩，六波羅蜜若聞、若不聞，能如是答如阿鞞跋致菩薩摩訶薩。答中「若聞、若不聞」一雙不可略過：不以聽聞之有無為限，故所驗者是見地不是學歷。
十七、多有求佛道少能如是答。 須菩提申言：多有菩薩求佛道，少有菩薩能如是答如阿鞞跋致菩薩於學道、無學道中。多與少一對照，試問之法的意義乃明——它不是普查，是揀別。
十八、佛印可而說其故——得授記者能如是答。 佛言如是如是，是菩薩甚少；何以故？菩薩摩訶薩少有如是得授記行阿鞞跋致慧地；若有得授記，是人能如是答；是人善根明了，諸天世人所不能壞。經②收於此。須注意佛給的因由是「得授記」與「善根明了」，不是聰辯——能答之所以難，難在根，不在口。
十九、論主開論第一問——學空入空有何差別。 論主起論即問：學空、入空有何差別。答出四句：初名學空，後是入空；因是學空，果是入空；方便名學空，得名入空——如是等二道。四句實是一義之四面：時之先後、因之與果、方便之與所得。二道之名由此立。經①開口處一問兩遍的形式，至此得其解。
二十、無相無作與三十七品亦如是。 論主一句推廣：無相、無作、三十七品亦如是。經文所問者不止空一門，故此二道之分通於諸門，不可只作空門之特例讀。
廿一、二乘涅槃道而佛敕菩薩行之。 論主點出全品之難所從生：三解脫門、三十七品是聲聞、辟支佛涅槃道，佛敕菩薩應行是道。所行之道與所不取之果同在一處，難處由此而立——此一句是下文一切問答的根。
廿二、須菩提之疑——此是涅槃道云何不取涅槃證。 論主重述經意：須菩提作是念——此是涅槃道，云何菩薩行是道法而不取涅槃證。此處是論主複述經中問答以申因緣，不是另有一人發言，讀時當作論主引經。
廿三、佛答深入禪定故不見是空法。 論主重述佛答：菩薩觀色等一切法空；是菩薩以深入禪定，心不可亂，得利智慧力故，不見是空法；以不見故無所證。答語把「不證」歸到「不見」，把「不見」歸到「深入」與「利智」——三環相扣，一環也不是靠抑制。
廿四、二乘與菩薩之別——直趣涅槃與善學自相空。 論主出對照：聲聞、辟支佛斷吾我、捨愛著，直趣涅槃；是菩薩善學自相空，色法中乃至微塵不留遺餘微細之分，無色法中乃至不留一念，直入畢竟空中，乃至不見是空法可以為證。經①「不有餘、不有分」一語，至此得其訓解——不留微塵之分是不有分，不留一念是不有餘。對照之要不在勤惰，在觀之周遍與否。
廿五、須菩提未達佛意而更問。 論主續述：佛雖答，須菩提未達佛意，更問——如佛所說菩薩不應空法作證，今入空中云何不作證。同一問而問第二遍，論主明說其故是「未達佛意」；可見前答之「不見」尚須再落一層，纔算說透。
廿六、佛答以深入故——具足即是深入、執菅草緩急喻。 論主重述佛答：以深入故能不作證；具足者即是深入。隨出一喻：譬如執菅草，捉緩則傷手，若急捉則無傷；菩薩亦如是，深入空故，知空亦空、涅槃亦空，故無所證。此喻是論主一邊獨出之喻，經側三喻之外別成一枝。喻意極切：菅草鋒利，半提半放纔割手，握到底反而無傷——空亦如此，淺嘗則被空所傷而取證，深入則知空亦空而無可證。
廿七、未入空時之思惟——故不專心攝念繫在空緣。 論主釋經①「不專攝心繫在緣中」：菩薩未入空時作是思惟——我應遍觀諸法空，不應不具足知而取證；是故不專心攝念入禪、繫在空緣中。所以者何？若專心繫在空緣中，則心柔軟，不能從空自出。「心柔軟」是此段的關鍵語：非謂心不堪任，謂其久繫一緣而順熟於彼，出離便難。
廿八、深入禪定不令心亂與不專心之辨。 論主自設第二問：上言「深入禪定，不令心亂」，今云何言「不專心」。答曰：今言「不專心」，是初入時，為不能自出故；上言「深入」者，入已深，知空亦空，不令心在餘事，故言不亂。一語破之——二說不同時。初入之際說不專，是防其陷；入已深後說不亂，是言其定。凡見論中前後語似相違，可學此法：先問二語各屬何位。
廿九、未具相好十力云何取證。 論主更出一重：是菩薩應作是念——我今未具三十二相、八十種隨形好、十力、四無所畏諸佛法，云何取涅槃證？我今是學時，薄諸煩惱，教化眾生令入佛道；若我得佛事具足，是時當取證。是故菩薩雖入三解脫門而不取證。此段把「學時」的內容說實了：學時不是空等，是薄煩惱、是教化眾生——兩件事都在做，只是不取證。
三十、壯夫喻之所喻。 論主逐字還原第一喻：「壯夫」是菩薩，「父母親族」是可度眾生，「險道」是三界生死，「惡賊」是魔民及諸煩惱，「器仗」是菩薩五神通等種種方便力，「還歸本處」是菩薩所行道，「安立不動」是菩薩住畢竟空；以四無量心運致可度眾生著涅槃安樂處。七目一一對配，喻中無一閒筆。尤要看「安立不動」配「住畢竟空」——壯夫之不動不是不行，是立處不搖。
卅一、鳥喻之所喻——時會者之疑。 論主先出設疑之機：時會者疑——空中無所有，云何可行。是故佛說鳥喻：如鳥飛虛空，無所依止而遠逝不墜。續合第二義：是菩薩未具足道法、未至佛道，於其中間而不作證；如鳥未到所至，終不中住。末出所為：學是空法，為自斷煩惱、為度眾生故。鳥喻在論中得兩義——不墜對治『空中不可行』之疑，不中住對治『中道取證』之失。
卅二、善射喻之所喻。 論主釋第三喻：又為明了故說善射譬喻，如人善於射術；「弓」是菩薩禪定，「箭」是智慧，「虛空」是三解脫門，「地」是涅槃。是菩薩以智慧箭射三解脫門虛空，更以方便力故以後箭射前箭，不令墮涅槃地；未具足十力等佛事故，終不取證。四目對配之外，另有一層：後箭之為方便力，正說明不證是一種持續的用功，不是一次的決定。
卅三、須菩提歡喜歎與佛答本願大悲所持。 論主重述經②之起：須菩提歡喜白佛言——諸菩薩所為甚難，實為希有，所謂行空而不作證。佛答：是菩薩本願諸一切眾生令得離苦，以是本願、大悲心所持故，雖行空，不作證。「所持」二字是全品最重之語——不證之力不出於行者一己之忍，出於本願與大悲的任持。
卅四、方便力故行三解脫門而不捨眾生。 論主釋第一重復次：若菩薩作是念——一切眾生處在苦中，為顛倒所縛，沒在無所有中——是時即行空、無相、無作解脫門。當知是菩薩有方便力，行三解脫門而不捨眾生。行與不捨同時，方便力之名乃實。
卅五、欲觀甚深法先生悲心——長夜之訓、作願、諸根猛利。 論主續釋：菩薩欲觀甚深法，所謂十八空、三十七品、三解脫門，先應作是念——眾生長夜著我相等。此處論主說出所以先者：行者若直觀甚深法，或得聲聞道、或墮邪見，以無憐愍心、不能深入自相空故。故欲觀是法先生悲心，所謂眾生長夜著吾我心諸煩惱。隨出一訓：長夜名久遠——無量劫來是我必不可得，但空虛誑顛倒故受諸憂惱。菩薩見是已作願：我當為眾生成佛道，斷是眾生著我顛倒。是時即是行空等三解脫門而不證實際。末出果效：是善根成就，菩薩不取實際證，亦不失四禪等諸功德；深入空故諸根猛利，勝於二乘。此段要合前讀：直觀而無悲，正是墮處；有悲而後觀，纔是本品之行。
卅六、破四顛倒與著得法二重亦如上說。 論主於第二、第三重復次不重立文，逕云：破四顛倒義，亦如上說。又云：菩薩作是念——眾生長夜著得法，所謂我、眾生乃至若著作法、若住三界無有是處——義皆同觀空而不取證。此非略過，是論主自明其義同；讀者當回取卅五段之文以充之。
卅七、云何知未得道而能行深空——經中自說因緣。 論主自設第三問：云何知是菩薩未得道而能行此深空。答曰：經中自說因緣——是菩薩應試問：云何菩薩應學空而不取證。論主明說驗法不是自立，是經中已有；此即經②末「應當試問」之文。
卅八、失答之相——但應念空一心習行。 論主釋失答：若菩薩答云但應念空、一心習行，如聲聞辟支佛法，不但學知而已——乃至無生、無所有亦如是——當知是菩薩未為諸佛所授記。所以者何？不說方便學知故觀空。失處論主點得極準：他不說『以方便學知故觀空』，故其空成了與二乘同一路的空。
卅九、得答之相——阿鞞跋致、學習與薄地之訓。 論主釋得答：若是菩薩異於上答者，當知是阿鞞跋致，已習學入於薄地。隨出二訓：學習名先學知空；薄地名阿鞞跋致地中諸煩惱薄。二訓皆論主自出，不假外求；「薄」之為地，說的是煩惱之量，不是位次之名。
四十、未得阿鞞跋致而能如是答——若聞若不聞之別。 論主重述經文問答：須菩提聞阿鞞跋致相、非阿鞞跋致相已，白佛言——頗有菩薩未得阿鞞跋致能如是答不。佛言有——菩薩若聞六波羅蜜、若不聞，能如阿鞞跋致答。論主續訓二途：若聞者，但從師聞，自未具足菩薩地；若不聞者，自思惟、正憶念，雖未得無生忍，能求諸法相，如阿鞞跋致菩薩答。二途各有其路，一從師教入，一從自思入，所至同而所由異。
四一、多有求佛道少能如是答——學地無學地之訓。 論主重述：須菩提言，多有人求佛道，少能如是答如阿鞞跋致菩薩學地、無學地中。隨出一訓：未得無生法忍名學地，得無生法忍名無學地。此訓要記牢——此處之學地、無學地是就無生法忍而分，與二乘所立之學無學名同而所指異。
四二、佛答少——諸法實相惟佛能遍知。 全品收於論主釋佛之末答：佛言少；何以故？少有菩薩從諸佛受記；已從諸佛受記者，能如是答。論主更出其故：諸法實相，惟佛能遍知；佛知此人能如法答，故懸與受記。末結其德：是菩薩雖少，善根明了，能廣利益眾生，無能壞者。「懸與受記」四字是全品之眼——受記在能答之前，非因能答而得記，是因佛遍知其能如法答而先與之記。品首『學而不證』之難，至此歸於佛智：不證之所以可能，根在實相本無可證；實相之遍知，唯佛而已。
不要讀錯
不要把「不作證」讀成壓抑或推遲。經文給的次第是觀→心不亂→不見是法→不作證，論主更把「不見」歸於「深入禪定」與「得利智慧力」。可見不證是觀行深處的自然結果，不是行者咬牙不取。若讀成壓抑，則『學時非證時』便成一種苦等，而經文明說此時要薄諸煩惱、教化眾生令入佛道——正是最用力處，不是最消極處。執菅草之喻尤可為證：捉緩傷手，急捉無傷——傷在半吊，不在用力。
不要把「不專攝心繫在緣中」讀成散心修行。論主的理由說得分明：若專心繫在空緣中，則心柔軟，不能從空自出；而所以不專，是「我應遍觀諸法空，不應不具足知而取證」。所遮的是把心久繫一緣而順熟於彼，不是遮定。更有第二問的明文為據：今言不專心，是初入時；上言深入，是入已深——二語各屬一位，並不相違。若讀成不必修定，則佛答本身「以深入禪定，心不可亂」一句先自相違。
不要把壯夫喻讀成不須斷煩惱。論主配喻時把「惡賊」配魔民及諸煩惱，把「器仗」配五神通等方便力——壯夫是帶著器仗度惡道，不是與賊相安。經文亦明說菩薩住四無量心、具足六波羅蜜而「不取漏盡證」：不取的是那個證，不是不斷煩惱；論主另處更說學是空法「為自斷煩惱、為度眾生故」，二事並舉。若讀成留惑不斷，則喻中「不遇賊害，歡喜安樂」一句無處安放。
不要把鳥喻的「不住空」讀成不許入空。喻文自身是雙的：飛騰虛空而不墮墜，雖在空中亦不住空——先說在空，後說不住。論主配此喻亦雙——不墜答「空中無所有，云何可行？」之疑，不中住答中道取證之失。經文更明說菩薩「學空解脫門」「具足修空三昧」「具足修無相三昧」——入是要入的，不住而已。若讀成不可入空，則後三重復次一一配無作、空、無相三門之文便全成空話。
不要把「若善根成就，是時便於實際作證」讀成本品自相矛盾。善射喻已把分際說明：箭之墮不墮全在後箭續不續，若欲令墮，便止後箭爾乃墮地。所遮者是『諸善根未具足而於實際作證』，不是永不作證。論主釋之亦同：未具足十力等佛事故終不取證；菩薩自念若得佛事具足，是時當取證。可見不證是時節之語，不是絕對之禁。
不要把試問之法只讀成考問他人，也不要只讀成自驗。經文本有問他、辨答之結構——「是菩薩若如是答」，據其答而辨相；然此法亦可回用於學助道法、行助道法的菩薩自身之驗處；論主也明說「經中自說因緣」，所驗者是一句答語所透出的見地——是把觀與學打成兩橛，還是以方便學知故觀空。若拿去衡量他人，本品所說「多有菩薩求佛道，少有菩薩能如是答」一語便成論斷之資，而佛給的因由明明是「得授記」「善根明了」，不是辯才高下。
不要把「若聞、若不聞」讀成聽聞無用。論主訓此二途時，於「若聞者」明說「但從師聞，自未具足菩薩地」，於「若不聞者」明說「自思惟、正憶念」——兩路都要下功夫，不是憑空能答。所破的只是以聽聞之有無為唯一判準，不是廢聞。經文既自說六波羅蜜可聞可不聞而皆能如是答，正是要人回到答語所依之見地。
修行作用
第一件受用，是把「學時」與「證時」分清楚。日用中一坐下來，心裡往往暗暗期待一個結果——今日要相應、要得力、要見一個境界。本品給的對治極簡：作是願，我今學時，非是證時。此願不是取消進步，是取消『這一座要收成』的心。經文更把它遍歷到每一法上——行檀時、持戒時、修念處時、修三昧時，都是學時。願一立定，用功便從追討變成耕耘。
第二件受用，是「不有餘、不有分」可作觀行的準繩。論主的訓解具體可用：色法中乃至微塵，不留遺餘微細之分；無色法中，乃至不留一念。觀時可自勘兩處——所觀的境上，有沒有一小塊被我默許為實而繞開了？能觀的心上，有沒有一念被我當作立足處而未觀？餘與分若還留著，所謂空只是局部之空，正是取證之根。
第三件受用，是執菅草之喻可解『用功用不到位反而受傷』之惑。許多人初學空觀，觀了一段反覺心無著落、生畏或生慢——這正是捉緩之相。喻中之方是急捉，論主之方是深入：知空亦空、涅槃亦空。遇此境時不要退，要再入一層——空若還是一個可依可怕的東西，便還沒深入。
第四件受用，是悲心先行之法可以照搬。論主說得極明白：行者若直觀甚深法，或得聲聞道、或墮邪見，以無憐愍心、不能深入自相空故；是以欲觀是法，先生悲心。行門上的用法是——每次要作深觀之前，先起一念：眾生長夜著吾我心諸煩惱，無量劫來是我必不可得，但空虛誑顛倒故受諸憂惱。一念既起，觀便有所持，不至觀而生冷。
第五件受用，是三喻可作三種自處。心怯而不敢深入者，取壯夫喻——手上有人，故能過險道。心疑空中無可用功者，取鳥喻——無所依止而遠逝不墜，不落也不停。心急欲見效者，取善射喻——後箭續前箭，一枝一枝地續，不必問何時落地。三喻各治一病，遇何病取何喻。
第六件受用，是試問之法可以自問。不必等人來考，自己拿那一句問自己：我如今學是法、觀空，是不是把「觀」與「學」打成了兩橛，只肯觀而不肯學諸助道法？或反過來，只肯學而所學一一皆成所得？論主指出的失處是「不說方便學知故觀空」——自問時便問這一句：我的觀，是以方便學知而觀，還是為了了結而觀。
承衍
本品的骨幹，是兩段經文與一段論釋。經①自須菩提問「云何學空三昧？云何入空三昧？」乃至「云何學八聖道分？云何修八聖道分？」起，佛答以觀色等乃至三界皆空而不令心亂、心不亂則不見是法、不見是法則不作證，出「善學自相空故，不有餘、不有分」之理；須菩提再問住空中云何不作證，佛出「我今學時，非是證時」之願與「不專攝心繫在緣中」之行，遍歷六度、四念處乃至八聖道分、三三昧、十力乃至大慈大悲而一一結以非是證時，續出壯夫扶老弱過險道、有翼之鳥飛空不墮不住、健人善射後箭拄前箭三喻，明以方便力故諸善根未具足不於實際作證。經②自須菩提歎「所為甚難」起，佛答以不捨一切眾生故作如是願，續以四重「復次」——欲觀甚深法而生為眾生斷諸相之心、破四顛倒、破著得法、破著諸相——各配無作、空、無相諸門而皆結以不於實際作證，末立試問之辭，出失答與得答二相，並以「六波羅蜜若聞、若不聞」明未得阿鞞跋致者亦能如是答，終以「少有如是得授記行阿鞞跋致慧地」收經。論段以「學空、入空有何差別」開論，出初後、因果、方便與得四句而立二道，推及無相無作與三十七品；指出三解脫門與三十七品本是二乘涅槃道而佛敕菩薩行之，乃生全品之難；次以三番問曰答曰逐層申釋——學空入空之別、「深入禪定，不令心亂」與「不專心」之辨、『云何知未得道而能行此深空』之驗——其間別出執菅草緩急一喻以明深入，並逐一還原經側三喻之所喻；末釋試問之失答得答二相，訓「學習」「薄地」「學地」「無學地」諸名，以「諸法實相，惟佛能遍知」與「懸與受記」收束全品。
本品與前後諸品的義脈，可見者有二線。其一、承前：本品開卷不另立緣起，逕就前品所說阿鞞跋致之事續說驗知之法——經②末與論末兩處皆以「能如是答」為阿鞞跋致之徵，可見本品後半與前此說阿鞞跋致諸品是一事之相續。其二、垂後：本品所立『學而不證』之義，於次品更就夢中一境重加勘驗；本品言覺時之不證，次品言夢中之不證，二品合看，纔見此義之徹。讀者可合觀之。
古德之釋，本品可誌者二家。吉藏科判本品，其釋學空入空之分云：「初明學空，終名入空也。」又以二乘為對照設難云：「既學空入空，云何不證耶？二乘在空觀時亦能不取空相，云何獨證耶？」其釋「具足」一語云：「具足是深入空，不見空故不見涅槃。」三語與本論「初名學空，後是入空」「具足者即是深入」之訓相契。吉藏又於所釋經前品〈深奧品〉科文中預言本品之位云：「然自行化他二行成者，要由學空不證故，不墮二乘地亦不墮凡夫地」——以學空不證為自行化他二行得成之所由。其釋試問一段云：「上來明學空不證，已明其內行空，今欲驗之，當觀其所說相秤以不，故試問也。」以「內行」與「驗之」分本品前後兩節，與本論「經中自說因緣」之釋各有所重，並錄不判。
慧影疏本品，以品次相承發問云：「何故次河天品後明於此品？」其科本品為三分，前二分云：「第一、以法、喻兩周，明菩薩善入三脫而不住空；第二、明三三昧別有所益，各有所治」——以法喻兩周分經①、以三三昧各有所治分經②之四重復次，與本論首重三門並出、後三重逐重配無作、空、無相之文相應。其釋「不有餘、不有分」云：「菩薩不化城中止取小涅槃，故云不有餘；不住實際，故云不有分也。」此與本論「色法中乃至微塵，不留遺餘微細之分；無色法中，乃至不留一念」之訓不同——論主就觀之周遍訓之，慧影就所不住之處訓之，並錄不判。其釋深入與不專之辨云：「上云不令心亂者，據明菩薩善解學空入三三昧；今言不專攝心繫在緣中者，據菩薩不專住空實際中證也。」亦與本論「初入時」「入已深」之分位訓法各成一說，兩存之。又慧影標本品云：「第五十九品者，名為學空不證品。」其自訂科判編號較底本所題品次少一，係其疏自身之編號體例，如實誌錄不判。其品目異稱、諸本分卷、卷題與卷末之考，詳考據層。
Training in Emptiness without Realising It: Why Training in Emptiness and Entering Emptiness Must Be Divided into Two Paths; Why the Mind Not Being Disordered Becomes Instead the Cause of Not Realising; What No Remainder and No Part Speaks Of; Why the Time of Training Not Being the Time of Realising Is Not Procrastination; Why Not Exclusively Gathering the Mind and Binding It to the Object Is Not a Scattered Mind; Why the Simile of the Stalwart Man Crossing the Dangerous Road Is Not an Exhortation Not to Sever the Afflictions; Why the Bird with Wings Neither Falls nor Abides; Why the Later Arrow Shooting the Earlier Arrow Is the Very Shape of the Power of Skilful Means; Why the Four Rounds of Furthermore All Begin from Beings; Why the Method of Testing by Asking Can Verify the Avaivartika; Why Entering Deeply into Meditative Concentration without Letting the Mind Be Disordered Does Not Contradict Not Being Exclusively Attentive; Why the Simile of Grasping Coarse Grass Loosely or Tightly Speaks of Entering Deeply; Why Being Able to Answer Thus, Whether One Has Heard or Has Not Heard, Counts Either Way; and Why the Real Mark of All Dharmas, Which Only the Buddha Can Know Completely, Is the Conclusion of the Whole Chapter
What Is Being Asked
The difficulty of this chapter lies entirely in a single word, 「不」 tr. "not": not realising. The chapters before this one have all along taught people to train in emptiness, to enter emptiness, and to practise the three gates of liberation; this chapter suddenly adds a restriction—one trains in it and enters it, yet may not realise it. The difficulty appears at once: emptiness is what is trained in, and realisation is the training's completion; if one trains and yet is not permitted to realise, is that not training without completion? Again, the three gates of liberation and the thirty-seven limbs of the path are properly the road by which the śrāvaka and the pratyekabuddha tend toward nirvāṇa, yet the Buddha commands the bodhisattva to walk it; to walk another's road and not be permitted to reach that other's destination—how is this road to be walked? Subhūti's first question, as he opens his mouth, asks exactly this: if the bodhisattva wishes to practise prajñāpāramitā, how, in the end, does he train in the emptiness samādhi, how does he enter the emptiness samādhi, and so on up to how does he train in and cultivate the eightfold noble path.
The Buddha's answer, unexpectedly, does not speak from 「空」 tr. "emptiness" but from 「心」 tr. "the mind": one should contemplate form and so on up to the three realms as all empty, and when making this contemplation not let the mind be disordered; if the mind is not disordered, then he does not see this dharma; if he does not see this dharma, then he does not realise it. The three clauses pass down in one line; not realising is not a prohibition imposed from outside but the natural result of contemplative practice reaching its very depth—it is not that the practitioner forcibly holds back from realising; it is that within deep contemplation there is simply no dharma to be realised and no person who realises to be found. So the Buddha goes on to state the reason: because he has trained well in the emptiness of specific marks, there is no remainder and no part; the dharma realised and the one who realises are both not to be seen. The pivot of the whole chapter lies in this one sentence. Subhūti at once asks a further layer: since he abides in the dharma of emptiness, how can he not realise it? The Buddha then brings out the vow ‘the time of training is not the time of realising’ and the practice 「不專攝心繫在緣中」 tr. "does not exclusively gather the mind and bind it to the object," and sets out three similes in a row—the stalwart man, strong and robust, able to help the old and the weak across a dangerous road; the bird with wings flying in space, neither falling nor abiding; the strong man skilled at archery, propping the earlier arrow with the later arrow—and what the similes together make clear is only one thing: by the power of skilful means, while the roots of goodness are not yet fulfilled, he does not realise the limit of reality.
The latter half of the chapter brings 「不證」 tr. "not realising" down onto the arousing of the mind. Subhūti sighs at how very hard it is, and the Buddha answers with the utmost brevity: because he does not abandon any being, he makes this vow. Below this, the four rounds of 「復次」 tr. "furthermore" each begin, one round after another, from beings—for the sake of beings severing the marks, for the sake of beings breaking the four inversions, for the sake of beings breaking the clinging to attaining a dharma, for the sake of beings breaking the clinging to the marks—and every round closes with the same sentence: before the dharmas of a Buddha are fulfilled, he does not realise the limit of reality. From this it can be seen that the strength of 「不證」 tr. "not realising" lies not in suppression but in the vow of compassion. At the end the Buddha sets up a further, workable method: testing by asking. Ask him how the bodhisattva trains in this dharma, contemplating emptiness and not realising the limit of reality; listen to how he answers, and one knows whether or not he is an avaivartika. The treatise-author, taking this up, explains it layer by layer: first he distinguishes training in emptiness from entering emptiness, then distinguishes why 「深入禪定，不令心亂」 tr. "entering deeply into meditative concentration, he does not let the mind be disordered" and 「不專心」 tr. "not exclusively attentive" do not contradict each other, restores one by one what the three similes stand for, and at the end draws the whole chapter together with 「諸法實相，惟佛能遍知」 tr. "the real mark of dharmas only the Buddha can know completely."
Passage by Passage
1. The question of training in emptiness and entering emptiness. Subhūti asks: if the bodhisattva-mahāsattva wishes to practise prajñāpāramitā, how does he train in the emptiness samādhi, how does he enter the emptiness samādhi—the signless and non-action likewise—and so on up to how does he train in the four foundations of mindfulness, how does he cultivate the four foundations of mindfulness, how does he train in the eightfold noble path, how does he cultivate the eightfold noble path. This question has a form that is often read straight past: of every dharma it asks twice—once asking about 「學」 tr. "training," once about 「入」 tr. "entering" or 「修」 tr. "cultivating." If the reader sees only the dharma asked about and does not see this pair, the whole measure of this chapter has nowhere to stand. Remember this first: what is asked is not what emptiness is, but how training in it differs from entering it.
2. The Buddha answers that in contemplating emptiness he does not let the mind be disordered—because he does not see this dharma he does not realise it, and because he has trained well in the emptiness of specific marks there is no remainder and no part. The Buddha's answer does not speak directly of training and entering; he first gives the method of contemplation: when practising prajñā, one should contemplate form as empty, feeling, perception, constructions, and consciousness as empty, the twelve sense-fields, the eighteen elements, and so on up to the desire realm, the form realm, and the formless realm as all empty. Only the sentence that follows is the bone of the whole answer: when making this contemplation, he does not let the mind be disordered. If the mind is not disordered, then he does not see this dharma; if he does not see this dharma, then he does not realise it. What is most easily misread here is to take 「不令心亂」 tr. "does not let the mind be disordered" as an attendant condition of the power of concentration; in fact it is the proper cause of not realising—the less disordered the mind, the more all-pervading the contemplation, and the less anywhere a mark to be realised can be found. In the last sentence the Buddha himself gives the reason why: because he has trained well in the emptiness of specific marks, there is no remainder and no part; the dharma realised and the one who realises are both not to be seen. 「不有餘」 tr. "No remainder" means the contemplation leaves no corner left over; 「不有分」 tr. "no part" means the contemplation leaves no small piece that could be cut off. Once remainder and part are exhausted, and neither the realiser nor the realised can be seen, where could realisation be set up?
3. The question of abiding in emptiness and yet not realising it. On hearing the answer Subhūti at once presses a further layer: as the Buddha says, the bodhisattva should not realise the dharma of emptiness; World-Honored One, how does the bodhisattva abide in the dharma of emptiness and yet not realise it? This question is asked with the utmost precision—he no longer asks the reason; what he asks is how 「住」 tr. "abiding" and 「不證」 tr. "not realising" can hold at the same time. Whenever, in reading the prajñā texts, one meets two words that seem to exclude each other placed within one sentence, one may learn from Subhūti's question here: the point is not to demand that one of them be cancelled, but to ask where the measure lies by which the two stand together.
4. First he makes the vow that the time of training is not the time of realising—not exclusively gathering the mind and binding it to the object, and going through all the perfections and all the limbs, none of which is the time of realising. The Buddha's answer falls into three parts. First, he first makes the vow: I should not now realise the dharma of emptiness; now is my time of training, not the time of realising. Second, he does not exclusively gather the mind and bind it to the object—he does not bind the mind rigidly to a single object. Third, he goes through all the dharmas and closes each one with 「非是證時」 tr. "it is not the time of realising": dānapāramitā and so on up to dhyānapāramitā, the four foundations of mindfulness and so on up to the eightfold noble path, the emptiness samādhi, the signless samādhi, and the non-action samādhi, the ten powers of a Buddha, the four fearlessnesses, the four unobstructed knowledges, the eighteen unshared dharmas, great kindness and great compassion, and so on up to the time of training in the omniscience of all kinds—none of these is the time for the realisation of obtaining the fruit of the srota-āpanna and so on up to the pratyekabuddha path. Do not read this passage as procrastination—「非是證時」 tr. "it is not the time of realising" is not pushing realisation off to be wanted only later; it says that the effort of this time is not itself about taking realisation. The Buddha further states the effect plainly: for this reason he does not retrogress from anuttarā samyaksaṃbodhi, and also does not take the realisation of the exhaustion of outflows; the last sentence gathers it all: though he trains in the thirty-seven limbs of the path, though he practises the thirty-seven limbs of the path, he does not make the realisation of the fruit of the srota-āpanna and so on up to the pratyekabuddha path. Training without realising is established here as a kind of right practice, not as a kind of lack.
5. The simile of the stalwart man helping the old and the weak across the dangerous road. The Buddha brings out the first simile. A stalwart man, strong, brave, fierce, and robust, skilled in the arts of war and the sixty-four skills, firmly holding his weapons, standing steady and unmoved, adept in all the crafts, upright and clean, loved and respected by people, doing little work and gaining much reward; because of some small cause and condition he must go to another place, and helping along the old and the weak, he passes through places of danger, difficulty, and terror, comforting his father and mother and telling his wife and children not to be afraid; on the dangerous road many enemies and thieves lie in ambush to rob and kill, but because this man is fully endowed with wisdom and strength he can cross the evil road and return to his own place, meeting no harm from the thieves, glad and at ease. The simile finished, it is at once matched: the bodhisattva, among all beings, is completely and fully endowed with kindness, compassion, joy, and equanimity, abides in the four immeasurable minds, fulfils the six perfections, and does not take the realisation of the exhaustion of outflows; he trains in the omniscience of all kinds, enters the gates of liberation of emptiness, the signless, and non-action, does not follow any of the marks, and also does not realise the signless samādhi; because he does not realise it, he does not fall to the śrāvaka or pratyekabuddha ground. The key to this simile lies in the two Chinese characters rendered here as 「扶將」 tr. "helping along"—the reason the stalwart man does not cross lightly on his own is precisely that he has people in his hands.
6. The simile of the bird with wings flying in space, neither falling nor abiding. The second simile is extremely short: a bird with wings flies up into space and does not fall; though it is in space it also does not abide in space. The matching to the Dharma is short as well: the bodhisattva trains in the gates of liberation of emptiness, the signless, and non-action and does not realise them; because he does not realise them he does not fall to the ground of the two vehicles; while he has not yet fulfilled the ten powers of a Buddha, great kindness and great compassion, the immeasurable dharmas of the buddhas, and the omniscience of all kinds, he also does not realise the three gates of liberation. This simile negates on both sides: not falling negates dropping back; not abiding negates stopping to stay. If the reader takes only one side, two deviations result—remembering only not falling, one supposes that emptiness can be lingered in for long; remembering only not abiding, one supposes that emptiness cannot be entered. The bird's being in space is exactly this: it neither drops to the ground nor stops its course.
7. The simile of the strong man skilled at archery, the later arrow propping the earlier arrow. The third simile is the most finely made: a strong man, having trained in the arts of archery and being skilled in the archer's craft, shoots upward into space, and then with a later arrow shoots the earlier arrow, arrow propping arrow, not letting the arrows fall, at will and unhindered; if he wishes them to fall, he simply stops the later arrow, and only then do they fall to the ground. The matching to the Dharma: the bodhisattva practises prajñā, and by the power of skilful means, for the sake of anuttarā samyaksaṃbodhi, while the roots of goodness are not yet fulfilled, does not realise the limit of reality; if the roots of goodness are accomplished, then at that time he realises the limit of reality. Where this simile differs from the two before it is that it also tells ‘when realising may take place’—whether the arrows fall or not rests wholly on whether the later arrows continue or not; whether realisation is taken or not rests wholly on whether the roots of goodness are complete or not. So not realising is not never realising; it is that the season has not yet come. At the close of Sūtra ① the Buddha concludes: when practising prajñāpāramitā, one should contemplate the dharma-marks of dharmas in this way.
8. Subhūti sighs that what is done is very hard. Sūtra ② begins from Subhūti's sigh: what the bodhisattva-mahāsattva does is very hard—though he trains in the marks of dharmas, trains in the limit of reality, trains in suchness, trains in the nature of dharmas, trains in ultimate emptiness, and so on up to training in the emptiness of specific marks and the three gates of liberation, he never falls midway—this is most rare. This sigh is not merely words of praise; it calls the difficulty by name: every one of the dharma-gates trained in leads toward quiescence, and yet the practitioner enters and abides in not a single one of them. The question is already contained in the sigh, so the Buddha, below, answers why.
9. Because he does not abandon any being, he makes this vow. The Buddha's answer is only one sentence, yet the whole root comes out: because this bodhisattva-mahāsattva does not abandon any being, he makes this vow. He goes on to state its marks: if he makes this thought—I should not abandon any being; beings are sunk in the dharma of nothing whatsoever; I should deliver them—then at that time he enters the three gates of liberation. Know that this bodhisattva has accomplished the power of skilful means; not yet having obtained the omniscience of all kinds, he practises these gates of liberation and also does not take the realisation of the limit of reality midway. The order of this passage must be seen clearly: first there is the thought of not abandoning beings, and only afterwards does he enter the gates of liberation; what he holds to as he enters is this thought, so though he enters he does not take realisation. The reason the power of skilful means is called a power lies exactly here.
10. The first round of furthermore—wishing to contemplate the very deep dharmas, he first gives rise to the mind of severing the marks of beings. When the bodhisattva wishes to contemplate the very deep dharmas—inner emptiness and so on up to the emptiness of non-existent and existent dharmas, the four foundations of mindfulness and so on up to the three gates of liberation—at that time he should give rise to this mind: these beings, through the long night, practise the mark of self and so on up to the mark of a knower and a seer, and cling to attaining a dharma; for the sake of beings, to sever these marks, I will obtain anuttarā samyaksaṃbodhi and will teach the Dharma. At that time he practises the three gates of liberation and does not take the realisation of the limit of reality; because he does not realise it, he does not fall to the fruit of the srota-āpanna and so on up to the pratyekabuddha path. The Buddha further speaks of its benefit: because with this mind he wishes to accomplish the roots of goodness, he does not realise the limit of reality midway, and does not lose the four dhyānas, the four immeasurable minds, the four formless absorptions, the four foundations of mindfulness and so on up to the eightfold noble path, emptiness, the signless, and non-action, the ten powers of a Buddha and so on up to the eighteen unshared dharmas; he accomplishes all the dharmas that aid the path, and so on up to awakening, without ever diminishing; because he has the power of skilful means he constantly increases wholesome dharmas, and his faculties are penetrating and keen, surpassing the faculties of the arhat and the pratyekabuddha. Here one must take note: the fruit of not realising is not stagnation; it is that not one of the merits is lost, while the faculties grow ever keener.
11. The second round of furthermore—to break the four inversions. The bodhisattva makes this thought: beings through the long night cling to the four inversions—the notion of permanence, the notion of happiness, the notion of self, the notion of purity; for the sake of these beings I seek sarvajñā, and when I obtain awakening I will teach them the dharma of impermanence, suffering, impurity, and the dharma of no-self. The items of the four inversions are listed in this passage by the sūtra text itself, not borrowed from elsewhere. Having accomplished this mind, he practises prajñā by the power of skilful means; not yet having obtained the samādhi of a Buddha, not yet having fulfilled the ten powers of a Buddha and so on up to the eighteen unshared dharmas, he also does not realise the limit of reality; at that time he cultivates the gate of liberation of non-action, and though he has not yet obtained awakening, he also does not realise the limit of reality. Among the four rounds of furthermore, in the first round the three gates come out together (「行空解脫門，無相、無作解脫門，亦不取實際證」 tr. "he practises the gate of liberation of emptiness, the gates of liberation of the signless and of non-action, and also does not take the realisation of the limit of reality"), while each of the latter three rounds is paired with one gate; this round is paired with non-action.
12. The third round of furthermore—to break the clinging to attaining a dharma. The bodhisattva makes this thought: beings through the long night cling to attaining a dharma—namely self, beings, and so on up to a knower and a seer; this is form, this is feeling, perception, constructions, and consciousness, this is a sense-field, this is an element; this is the four dhyānas, the four immeasurable minds, the four formless absorptions; I practise thus, so that when I obtain awakening I may bring beings to be without this attaining of dharmas. This mind accomplished, he practises prajñā by the power of skilful means; not yet having fulfilled the ten powers of a Buddha and so on up to the eighteen unshared dharmas, he does not realise the limit of reality; at that time he fully cultivates the emptiness samādhi. This round is paired with the emptiness samādhi—what is broken is ‘having something attained’, and so emptiness is set against it.
13. The fourth round of furthermore—to break the clinging to the marks, together with the setting up of the words of testing by asking. The bodhisattva makes this thought: beings through the long night practise the marks—namely the mark of male, the mark of female, the mark of form, the mark of the formless; I practise thus, so that when I obtain awakening I may bring beings to be without the faults of these marks. This mind accomplished, he practises prajñā by the power of skilful means; not yet having fulfilled the ten powers of a Buddha and so on up to the eighteen unshared dharmas, he does not realise the limit of reality; at that time he fully cultivates the signless samādhi—this round is paired with the signless; what is broken is marks. The four rounds finished, the Buddha goes on to speak of the marks of the accomplishment of wisdom: training in the six perfections, training in inner emptiness and so on up to the emptiness of non-existent and existent dharmas, training in the four foundations of mindfulness and so on up to the three gates of liberation, training in the ten powers of a Buddha and so on up to the eighteen unshared dharmas—when wisdom is accomplished in this way, that he should cling to a made dharma or abide in the three realms—there is no such case. At the end he sets up the method: when this bodhisattva trains in the dharmas that aid the path and practises the dharmas that aid the path, one should test him by asking—when bodhisattvas wish to obtain awakening, how do they train in this dharma, contemplating emptiness without realising the limit of reality, and because of not realising it not falling to the fruit of the srota-āpanna and so on up to the pratyekabuddha path, contemplating the signless, non-action, non-origination, non-arising, and being without anything existent, also not taking realisation, and so practising prajñā? One should ask in this way. The reason this question can verify is that it presses the whole measure of this chapter into a single sentence; if the one answering leans even slightly to one side, it shows at once.
14. The two courses of the answer—the answer of one not yet given the prediction, and the answer of the avaivartika. The Buddha brings out the marks of a failed answer: if he answers that the bodhisattva-mahāsattva should only contemplate emptiness, should only contemplate the signless, non-action, non-origination, non-arising, and being without anything existent, should not train in these dharmas, should not train in these dharmas that aid the path—know that this bodhisattva has not been given by the buddhas the prediction of anuttarā samyaksaṃbodhi. Why? This person cannot speak of the marks of what the avaivartika bodhisattva trains in; he cannot show them, cannot answer. Conversely, one who can speak, can show, can answer—know that he has already trained in the bodhisattva path and entered the ground of thinning, like the marks of the avaivartika of the other avaivartika bodhisattvas. The place of failure must be seen accurately: the failure lies not in his speaking of emptiness, but in his setting 「觀」 tr. "contemplating" and 「學」 tr. "training" against each other—permitting only contemplation and not permitting training is exactly the one-sidedness that this chapter negates.
15. Is there one who has not yet obtained avaivartika and yet can answer thus, or not? Subhūti asks: is there a bodhisattva who has not yet obtained avaivartika and yet can answer thus, or not? The weight of this question lies in the two Chinese characters rendered here as 「未得」 tr. "not yet obtained"—if the answer could be spoken only by one who has already obtained it, the method of testing by asking could only confirm after the fact and could not recognise a person in good time.
16. The Buddha answers that there is—whether or not he has heard the six perfections. The Buddha answers: there is. This bodhisattva-mahāsattva, whether he has heard the six perfections or has not heard them, can answer thus, as the avaivartika bodhisattva-mahāsattva does. In the answer the pair 「若聞、若不聞」 tr. "whether he has heard or has not heard" must not be passed over: it is not limited by whether or not one has heard, so what is verified is one's view, not one's schooling.
17. Many seek the Buddha path; few can answer thus. Subhūti states: many bodhisattvas seek the Buddha path; few bodhisattvas can answer thus, as the avaivartika bodhisattva does, within the path of training and the path beyond training. With many and few set against each other, the meaning of the method of testing by asking becomes clear—it is not a general survey; it is a sifting out.
18. The Buddha affirms it and speaks of the reason—one who has obtained the prediction can answer thus. The Buddha says: just so, just so; such bodhisattvas are very few. Why? Few bodhisattva-mahāsattvas have thus obtained the prediction and practise the avaivartika ground of wisdom; if there is one who has obtained the prediction, this person can answer thus; this person's roots of goodness are clear and bright, and the gods and the people of the world cannot break them. Sūtra ② closes here. Note that the reasons the Buddha gives are 「得授記」 tr. "having obtained the prediction" and 「善根明了」 tr. "roots of goodness clear and bright," not quickness of argument—the reason being able to answer is hard is that the difficulty lies in the root, not in the mouth.
19. The treatise-author opens the treatise with the first question—what difference is there between training in emptiness and entering emptiness. The treatise-author, beginning his treatise, at once asks: what difference is there between training in emptiness and entering emptiness? He answers with four phrases: at first it is called training in emptiness; afterwards it is entering emptiness; the cause is training in emptiness, the fruit is entering emptiness; skilful means is called training in emptiness, attainment is called entering emptiness—such are the two paths. The four phrases are in fact four faces of one meaning: before and after in time, cause and fruit, skilful means and what is attained. The name of the two paths is established from this. The form at the opening of Sūtra ①, where each question is asked twice, here finds its explanation.
20. The signless, non-action, and the thirty-seven limbs of the path are likewise. The treatise-author extends it in one sentence: the signless, non-action, and the thirty-seven limbs of the path are likewise. What the sūtra text asks about is not only the one gate of emptiness, so this division into two paths runs through all the gates and must not be read as a special case of the gate of emptiness alone.
21. The path of nirvāṇa of the two vehicles, which the Buddha commands the bodhisattva to practise. The treatise-author points out where the difficulty of the whole chapter arises from: the three gates of liberation and the thirty-seven limbs of the path are the nirvāṇa path of the śrāvaka and pratyekabuddha; the Buddha commands the bodhisattva to practise this path. The path that is practised and the fruit that is not taken are in one and the same place; the difficulty is established from this—this one sentence is the root of all the questions and answers below.
22. Subhūti's doubt—this is the path of nirvāṇa; how does one not take the realisation of nirvāṇa? The treatise-author restates the sūtra's meaning: Subhūti makes this thought—this is the path of nirvāṇa; how does the bodhisattva practise this path-dharma and yet not take the realisation of nirvāṇa? Here the treatise-author is retelling the question and answer in the sūtra in order to lay out the causes and conditions; it is not that some other person speaks; in reading, take it as the treatise-author citing the sūtra.
23. The Buddha answers that because he enters deeply into meditative concentration he does not see this dharma of emptiness. The treatise-author restates the Buddha's answer: the bodhisattva contemplates form and all the other dharmas as empty; because this bodhisattva enters deeply into meditative concentration, his mind cannot be disordered, and by the power of keen wisdom he does not see this dharma of emptiness; because he does not see it, there is nothing realised. The answer returns 「不證」 tr. "not realising" to 「不見」 tr. "not seeing," and returns 「不見」 tr. "not seeing" to 「深入」 tr. "entering deeply" and 「利智」 tr. "keen wisdom"—three links locking into one another, not one link of which relies on restraint.
24. The difference between the two vehicles and the bodhisattva—going straight toward nirvāṇa, and training well in the emptiness of specific marks. The treatise-author sets out a contrast: the śrāvaka and the pratyekabuddha sever I and mine, abandon love and clinging, and go straight toward nirvāṇa; this bodhisattva trains well in the emptiness of specific marks: among the dharmas of form, even down to an atom, he leaves no subtle part remaining; among the formless dharmas, he leaves not even a single thought; he enters straight into ultimate emptiness, and does not even see this dharma of emptiness as something that could be taken as realisation. The phrase of Sūtra ①, 「不有餘、不有分」 tr. "no remainder and no part," here receives its gloss—leaving no part even of an atom is no part; leaving not even a single thought is no remainder. The key to the contrast lies not in diligence or laxity but in whether or not the contemplation is all-pervading.
25. Subhūti, not having reached the Buddha's meaning, asks again. The treatise-author continues the account: though the Buddha had answered, Subhūti had not reached the Buddha's meaning and asked again—as the Buddha says, the bodhisattva should not realise the dharma of emptiness; now, entering emptiness, how does he not realise it? The same question asked a second time—the treatise-author states plainly that the reason is 「未達佛意」 tr. "he had not reached the Buddha's meaning"; from this it can be seen that the 「不見」 tr. "not seeing" of the earlier answer still had to be brought down one layer further before it counted as fully spoken.
26. The Buddha answers that it is because he enters deeply—fulfilment is entering deeply; the simile of grasping coarse grass loosely or tightly. The treatise-author restates the Buddha's answer: because he enters deeply he is able not to realise; fulfilment is entering deeply. Then he brings out a simile: as when one grasps a blade of coarse grass: hold it loosely and it wounds the hand; grip it tightly and there is no wound; the bodhisattva is also like this: because he enters deeply into emptiness, he knows that emptiness too is empty and nirvāṇa too is empty; therefore there is nothing realised. This simile is one the treatise-author brings out on his own side alone, forming a separate branch outside the three similes on the sūtra side. The sense of the simile is most apt: the coarse grass is sharp; only when held half up and half let go does it cut the hand, and gripped all the way it does no harm—emptiness is also like this: tasted shallowly, one is wounded by emptiness and takes realisation; entered deeply, one knows that emptiness too is empty and there is nothing to be realised.
27. His thinking before entering emptiness—therefore he does not exclusively attend and gather his thought, binding it to the object of emptiness. The treatise-author explains 「不專攝心繫在緣中」 tr. "does not exclusively gather the mind and bind it to the object" of Sūtra ①: before the bodhisattva enters emptiness he thinks thus—I should contemplate all dharmas everywhere as empty, and should not take realisation without complete knowing; therefore he does not exclusively attend and gather his thought to enter dhyāna, binding it to the object of emptiness. Why is this? If the mind is exclusively bound to the object of emptiness, then the mind becomes soft and cannot come out of emptiness by itself. 「心柔軟」 tr. "the mind becomes soft" is the key phrase of this passage: it does not mean the mind is incapable; it means that, bound long to one object, it grows accustomed and familiar with it, and leaving it becomes hard.
28. The distinction between entering deeply into meditative concentration without letting the mind be disordered, and not being exclusively attentive. The treatise-author himself sets up the second question: above it was said 「深入禪定，不令心亂」 tr. "entering deeply into meditative concentration, he does not let the mind be disordered"; now, why is it said 「不專心」 tr. "not exclusively attentive"? He answers: the 「不專心」 tr. "not exclusively attentive" spoken of now is at the time of first entering, lest he be unable to come out by himself; the 「深入」 tr. "entering deeply" spoken of above is that, having entered deeply, he knows that emptiness too is empty and does not let the mind rest on any other matter; therefore it is said not to be disordered. One phrase breaks the difficulty—the two statements are not of the same time. At the moment of first entering, not exclusive is said, to guard against his sinking in; after having entered deeply, not disordered is said, to speak of his concentration. Whenever one sees earlier and later words in the treatise that seem to contradict each other, one can learn this method: first ask to which position each of the two statements belongs.
29. Not yet endowed with the marks and minor signs and the ten powers, how could he take realisation? The treatise-author brings out one more layer: this bodhisattva should think thus—I am not yet endowed with the thirty-two marks, the eighty minor marks, the ten powers, the four fearlessnesses, and all the dharmas of the buddhas; how could I take the realisation of nirvāṇa? Now is my time of training; I thin the afflictions and teach and transform beings so that they enter the Buddha path; if I obtain the complete matters of a Buddha, then at that time I shall take realisation. Therefore, though the bodhisattva enters the three gates of liberation, he does not take realisation. This passage makes the content of 「學時」 tr. "the time of training" concrete: the time of training is not a time of waiting in vain; it is thinning the afflictions, it is teaching and transforming beings—both things are being done; it is only that realisation is not taken.
30. What the simile of the stalwart man stands for. The treatise-author restores the first simile word by word: the 「壯夫」 tr. "stalwart man" is the bodhisattva; the 「父母親族」 tr. "father, mother, and kin" are the beings who can be delivered; the 「險道」 tr. "dangerous road" is birth and death in the three realms; the 「惡賊」 tr. "evil thieves" are Māra's people and the afflictions; the 「器仗」 tr. "weapons" are the bodhisattva's five supernormal powers and the other kinds of the power of skilful means; 「還歸本處」 tr. "returning to his own place" is the path the bodhisattva practises; 「安立不動」 tr. "standing steady and unmoved" is the bodhisattva abiding in ultimate emptiness; with the four immeasurable minds he conveys the beings who can be delivered and sets them in the place of the peace and bliss of nirvāṇa. Seven items matched one by one; in the simile there is not one idle stroke. Look especially at 「安立不動」 tr. "standing steady and unmoved" being matched with 「住畢竟空」 tr. "abiding in ultimate emptiness"—the stalwart man's being unmoved is not his not moving on; it is that the place where he stands does not shake.
31. What the bird simile stands for—the doubt of those in the assembly. The treatise-author first brings out the occasion on which the doubt was raised: those in the assembly doubted—in space there is nothing whatsoever; how can one practise there? Therefore the Buddha spoke the bird simile: as a bird flying in space, with no support, goes far and does not fall. He goes on to match a second meaning: this bodhisattva, not yet having fulfilled the path-dharma and not yet having reached the Buddha path, does not realise it in the interval; as a bird that has not yet reached where it is going never stops midway. At the end he brings out its purpose: he trains in this dharma of emptiness in order to sever his own afflictions and in order to deliver beings. The bird simile receives two meanings in the treatise—not falling counters the doubt that ‘one cannot practise in space’, and not stopping midway counters the fault of ‘taking realisation midway’.
32. What the archery simile stands for. The treatise-author explains the third simile: further, for the sake of clarity, he speaks the archery simile, as of a man skilled in the archer's craft; the 「弓」 tr. "bow" is the bodhisattva's meditative concentration, the 「箭」 tr. "arrow" is wisdom, 「虛空」 tr. "space" is the three gates of liberation, and the 「地」 tr. "ground" is nirvāṇa. This bodhisattva, with the arrow of wisdom, shoots into the space of the three gates of liberation, and further, by the power of skilful means, with the later arrow shoots the earlier arrow, not letting it fall to the ground of nirvāṇa; because he has not yet fulfilled the ten powers and the other matters of a Buddha, he never takes realisation. Beyond the matching of the four items there is a further layer: that the later arrow is the power of skilful means shows precisely that not realising is a continuous effort, not a single decision.
33. Subhūti's joyful sigh, and the Buddha's answer that he is held by the original vow and great compassion. The treatise-author restates the opening of Sūtra ②: Subhūti joyfully said to the Buddha—what the bodhisattvas do is very hard and truly rare, namely practising emptiness and not realising it. The Buddha answers: this bodhisattva's original vow is to bring all beings to leave suffering; because he is held by this original vow and by the mind of great compassion, though he practises emptiness he does not realise it. The two Chinese characters rendered here as 「所持」 tr. "held by" are the weightiest words of the whole chapter—the strength of not realising does not come from the practitioner's own endurance; it comes from the upholding of the original vow and great compassion.
34. By the power of skilful means he practises the three gates of liberation and does not abandon beings. The treatise-author explains the first round of furthermore: if the bodhisattva makes this thought—all beings are placed in suffering, bound by the inversions, sunk in nothing whatsoever—at that time he practises the gates of liberation of emptiness, the signless, and non-action. Know that this bodhisattva has the power of skilful means: he practises the three gates of liberation and does not abandon beings. Practising and not abandoning being at the same time, the name power of skilful means becomes real.
35. Wishing to contemplate the very deep dharmas, he first gives rise to the mind of compassion—the gloss on the long night, the making of the vow, and the faculties fierce and keen. The treatise-author continues his explanation: when the bodhisattva wishes to contemplate the very deep dharmas—namely the eighteen emptinesses, the thirty-seven limbs of the path, and the three gates of liberation—he should first make this thought: beings through the long night cling to the mark of self and so on. Here the treatise-author states why this comes first: if the practitioner contemplates the very deep dharmas directly, he either obtains the śrāvaka path or falls into wrong views, because he has no mind of pity and cannot enter deeply into the emptiness of specific marks. Therefore, wishing to contemplate these dharmas, he first gives rise to the mind of compassion, namely: beings through the long night cling to the mind of I and mine and to all the afflictions. Then comes a gloss: the long night means a long, distant time—for immeasurable kalpas this self has certainly been unfindable, yet only because of what is empty, false, deceptive, and inverted have they undergone all their sorrows and vexations. Having seen this, the bodhisattva makes the vow: I shall accomplish the Buddha path for the sake of beings and sever these beings' inversion of clinging to self. At that time he is practising the three gates of liberation, emptiness and the rest, without realising the limit of reality. At the end comes the effect: these roots of goodness being accomplished, the bodhisattva does not take the realisation of the limit of reality, and also does not lose the four dhyānas and all the other merits; because he enters deeply into emptiness, his faculties are fierce and keen, surpassing those of the two vehicles. This passage must be read together with what came before: contemplating directly without compassion is exactly the place of falling; contemplating after compassion is present—only this is the practice of this chapter.
36. The two rounds of breaking the four inversions and of the clinging to attaining a dharma are also as spoken above. For the second and third rounds of furthermore the treatise-author does not set up a text again, but says directly: the meaning of breaking the four inversions is also as spoken above. He also says: the bodhisattva makes this thought—beings through the long night cling to attaining a dharma, namely self, beings, and so on up to: that he should cling to a made dharma or abide in the three realms, there is no such case—the meaning in each is the same: contemplating emptiness and not taking realisation. This is not skipping over it; it is the treatise-author himself making clear that the meaning is the same; the reader should go back and take the text of section 35 to fill it out.
37. How is it known that one who has not yet obtained the path can practise the deep emptiness—the sūtra itself tells the causes and conditions. The treatise-author himself sets up the third question: how is it known that this bodhisattva, not yet having obtained the path, can practise this deep emptiness? He answers: the sūtra itself tells the causes and conditions—this bodhisattva should be tested by asking: how should the bodhisattva train in emptiness and not take realisation? The treatise-author states plainly that the method of verification is not set up by himself but is already in the sūtra; this is the text 「應當試問」 tr. "one should test him by asking" at the end of Sūtra ②.
38. The marks of a failed answer—one should only be mindful of emptiness and practise it single-mindedly. The treatise-author explains the failed answer: if the bodhisattva answers that one should only be mindful of emptiness and practise it single-mindedly, as in the dharma of the śrāvaka and pratyekabuddha, it is not merely a matter of training and knowing—and so on up to non-arising and nothing whatsoever likewise—know that this bodhisattva has not yet received the prediction from the buddhas. Why is this? Because he does not speak of contemplating emptiness by training and knowing skilful means. The treatise-author pinpoints the place of failure most accurately: he does not say ‘contemplating emptiness because of training and knowing skilful means’, so his emptiness becomes an emptiness on one and the same road as that of the two vehicles.
39. The marks of a successful answer—the avaivartika, and the glosses on training and the ground of thinning. The treatise-author explains the successful answer: if this bodhisattva's answer differs from the answer above, know that he is an avaivartika, who has trained and entered the ground of thinning. Then come two glosses: training means first training and knowing emptiness; the ground of thinning means that within the ground of the avaivartika the afflictions are thinned. Both glosses the treatise-author brings out himself, without seeking them outside; that 「薄」 tr. "thinning" is a ground speaks of the measure of the afflictions, not of the name of a rank.
40. One who has not yet obtained avaivartika and can yet answer thus—the difference between having heard and not having heard. The treatise-author restates the question and answer of the sūtra text: Subhūti, having heard the marks of the avaivartika and the marks of the non-avaivartika, said to the Buddha—is there a bodhisattva who has not yet obtained avaivartika and yet can answer thus, or not? The Buddha says there is—whether the bodhisattva has heard the six perfections or has not heard them, he can answer as an avaivartika does. The treatise-author goes on to gloss the two courses: one who has heard only hears it from a teacher, and has not himself fulfilled the bodhisattva ground; one who has not heard thinks it over by himself and rightly recollects, and though he has not yet obtained the acceptance of non-arising, he can seek the marks of dharmas and answer as the avaivartika bodhisattva does. Each of the two courses has its own road—one enters from a teacher's teaching, one from his own thinking; where they arrive is the same, but where they come from differs.
41. Many seek the Buddha path; few can answer thus—the gloss on the ground of training and the ground beyond training. The treatise-author restates: Subhūti says, many people seek the Buddha path; few can answer thus, as the avaivartika bodhisattva does, within the ground of training and the ground beyond training. Then comes a gloss: not yet having obtained the acceptance of the non-arising of dharmas is called the ground of training; having obtained the acceptance of the non-arising of dharmas is called the ground beyond training. This gloss must be held firmly—the ground of training and the ground beyond training here are divided with respect to the acceptance of the non-arising of dharmas; the name is the same as the training and beyond training set up by the two vehicles, but what it points to is different.
42. The Buddha answers that they are few—the real mark of dharmas only the Buddha can know completely. The whole chapter closes on the treatise-author's explanation of the Buddha's last answer: the Buddha says they are few; why? Few bodhisattvas have received the prediction from the buddhas; those who have already received the prediction from the buddhas can answer thus. The treatise-author further brings out the reason: the real mark of dharmas only the Buddha can know completely; the Buddha, knowing that this person can answer according to the Dharma, gives him the prediction in advance. At the end he concludes with its virtue: though such bodhisattvas are few, their roots of goodness are clear and bright, they can benefit beings widely, and none can break them. The four Chinese characters rendered here as 「懸與受記」 tr. "gives him the prediction in advance" are the eye of the whole chapter—the prediction comes before the being able to answer; it is not that the prediction is obtained because one can answer, but that, because the Buddha knows completely that he can answer according to the Dharma, he gives it to him beforehand. The difficulty at the head of the chapter, ‘training without realising’, here returns to the Buddha's wisdom: the reason not realising is possible has its root in the real mark having originally nothing to be realised; and the complete knowing of the real mark belongs to the Buddha alone.
Do Not Misread
Do not read 「不作證」 tr. "does not realise it" as suppression or postponement. The order the sūtra text gives is contemplation → the mind not disordered → not seeing this dharma → not realising it, and the treatise-author further returns 「不見」 tr. "not seeing" to 「深入禪定」 tr. "entering deeply into meditative concentration" and 「得利智慧力」 tr. "by the power of keen wisdom." From this it can be seen that not realising is the natural result at the depth of contemplative practice, not the practitioner clenching his teeth and not taking it. If it is read as suppression, then ‘the time of training is not the time of realising’ becomes a kind of bitter waiting, yet the sūtra text says plainly that at this time one must thin the afflictions and teach and transform beings so that they enter the Buddha path—this is exactly the place of greatest effort, not the most passive place. The simile of grasping the coarse grass can serve especially as proof: held loosely it wounds the hand, gripped tightly there is no wound—the wound lies in the half-hold, not in the effort.
Do not read 「不專攝心繫在緣中」 tr. "does not exclusively gather the mind and bind it to the object" as practising with a scattered mind. The treatise-author's reason is stated clearly: if the mind is exclusively bound to the object of emptiness, then the mind becomes soft and cannot come out of emptiness by itself; and the reason for not being exclusive is 「我應遍觀諸法空，不應不具足知而取證」 tr. "I should contemplate all dharmas everywhere as empty, and should not take realisation without complete knowing." What is negated is binding the mind long to one object and growing accustomed and familiar with it, not concentration. There is further the explicit text of the second question as ground: the not exclusively attentive spoken of now is at the time of first entering; the entering deeply spoken of above is having entered deeply—the two statements each belong to one position and do not contradict each other. If it is read as no need to cultivate concentration, then the Buddha's own answer, the sentence 「以深入禪定，心不可亂」 tr. "because he enters deeply into meditative concentration, his mind cannot be disordered," would contradict itself first.
Do not read the simile of the stalwart man as having no need to sever the afflictions. When the treatise-author matches the simile, he matches the 「惡賊」 tr. "evil thieves" with Māra's people and the afflictions, and the 「器仗」 tr. "weapons" with the five supernormal powers and the other kinds of the power of skilful means—the stalwart man crosses the evil road carrying weapons, not living at peace with the thieves. The sūtra text also says plainly that the bodhisattva abides in the four immeasurable minds, fulfils the six perfections, and 「不取漏盡證」 tr. "does not take the realisation of the exhaustion of outflows": what is not taken is that realisation, not that the afflictions are not severed; and elsewhere the treatise-author says further that he trains in this dharma of emptiness 「為自斷煩惱、為度眾生故」 tr. "in order to sever his own afflictions and in order to deliver beings," setting the two matters side by side. If it is read as leaving delusion unsevered, then the sentence in the simile, 「不遇賊害，歡喜安樂」 tr. "meeting no harm from the thieves, glad and at ease," would have nowhere to be placed.
Do not read the bird simile's 「不住空」 tr. "does not abide in space" as not being permitted to enter emptiness. The simile's own text is twofold: flying up into space and not falling, though it is in space it also does not abide in space—first it speaks of being in space, and after that of not abiding. The treatise-author's matching of this simile is also twofold—not falling answers the doubt 「空中無所有，云何可行？」 tr. "In space there is nothing whatsoever; how can one practise there?", not stopping midway answers the fault of taking realisation midway. The sūtra text further says plainly that the bodhisattva 「學空解脫門」 tr. "trains in the gate of liberation of emptiness," 「具足修空三昧」 tr. "fully cultivates the emptiness samādhi," 「具足修無相三昧」 tr. "fully cultivates the signless samādhi"—entering is what must be done; it is only that he does not abide. If it is read as not being permitted to enter emptiness, then the text in which the latter three rounds of furthermore are paired one by one with the three gates of non-action, emptiness, and the signless would become entirely empty words.
Do not read 「若善根成就，是時便於實際作證」 tr. "if the roots of goodness are accomplished, then at that time he realises the limit of reality" as this chapter contradicting itself. The archery simile has already made the measure clear: whether the arrows fall or not rests wholly on whether the later arrows continue or not; if he wishes them to fall, he simply stops the later arrow, and only then do they fall to the ground. What is negated is ‘realising the limit of reality while the roots of goodness are not yet fulfilled’, not never realising. The treatise-author explains it in the same way: because he has not yet fulfilled the ten powers and the other matters of a Buddha, he never takes realisation; the bodhisattva thinks to himself that if he obtains the complete matters of a Buddha, then at that time he shall take realisation. From this it can be seen that not realising is a word about timing, not an absolute prohibition.
Do not read the method of testing by asking only as examining others, nor only as verifying oneself. The sūtra text itself has the structure of asking another and discerning the answer—「是菩薩若如是答」 tr. "if this bodhisattva answers thus"—discerning the marks according to his answer; yet this method can also be turned back as the place of self-verification for the bodhisattva who trains in and practises the dharmas that aid the path; the treatise-author also says plainly 「經中自說因緣」 tr. "the sūtra itself tells the causes and conditions"; what is verified is the view that shows through a single answer—whether contemplating and training are split into two separate pieces, or whether one contemplates emptiness because of training and knowing skilful means. If it is taken up to measure others, then the words of this chapter, 「多有菩薩求佛道，少有菩薩能如是答」 tr. "many bodhisattvas seek the Buddha path; few bodhisattvas can answer thus," become material for passing judgement, whereas the reasons the Buddha gives are plainly 「得授記」 tr. "having obtained the prediction" and 「善根明了」 tr. "roots of goodness clear and bright," not higher or lower eloquence.
Do not read 「若聞、若不聞」 tr. "whether he has heard or has not heard" as meaning that hearing is useless. When the treatise-author glosses these two courses, of 「若聞者」 tr. "one who has heard" he says plainly 「但從師聞，自未具足菩薩地」 tr. "he only hears it from a teacher, and has not himself fulfilled the bodhisattva ground," and of 「若不聞者」 tr. "one who has not heard" he says plainly 「自思惟、正憶念」 tr. "he thinks it over by himself and rightly recollects"—both roads require effort; it is not that one can answer out of nothing. What is broken is only taking the presence or absence of hearing as the sole criterion; it is not abolishing hearing. Since the sūtra text itself says that the six perfections may be heard or not heard and in either case one can answer thus, this is exactly to bring people back to the view on which the answer rests.
Bearing on Practice
The first use is to separate clearly 「學時」 tr. "the time of training" and 「證時」 tr. "the time of realising." In daily use, as soon as one sits down, the mind often secretly expects a result—today there must be accord, there must be traction, some state must be seen. The remedy this chapter gives is extremely simple: make this vow—now is my time of training, not the time of realising. This vow does not cancel progress; it cancels the mind of ‘this sitting must bring in a harvest’. The sūtra text further carries it through every dharma—when practising giving, when keeping the precepts, when cultivating the foundations of mindfulness, when cultivating the samādhis, all are the time of training. Once the vow is set firm, the effort turns from demanding payment into tilling the field.
The second use is that 「不有餘、不有分」 tr. "no remainder and no part" can serve as the plumb-line of contemplative practice. The treatise-author's gloss is concrete and usable: among the dharmas of form, even down to an atom, leave no subtle part remaining; among the formless dharmas, leave not even a single thought. In contemplating, one can examine oneself at two places—on the object contemplated, is there a small piece I have tacitly allowed to be real and have gone around? On the contemplating mind, is there a thought I have taken as a place to stand and have not contemplated? If remainder and part are still left, the so-called emptiness is only a partial emptiness, which is exactly the root of taking realisation.
The third use is that the simile of grasping the coarse grass can resolve the perplexity of ‘effort that does not go all the way ends up wounding’. Many people, first learning the contemplation of emptiness, after contemplating for a while feel instead that the mind has nowhere to land, and give rise to fear or to pride—this is exactly the mark of holding loosely. The prescription in the simile is to grip tightly; the treatise-author's prescription is to enter deeply: to know that emptiness too is empty and nirvāṇa too is empty. When meeting this state, do not retreat; enter one layer further—if emptiness is still something that can be leaned on or feared, one has not yet entered deeply.
The fourth use is that the method of letting compassion go first can be taken over just as it is. The treatise-author says it most plainly: if the practitioner contemplates the very deep dharmas directly, he either obtains the śrāvaka path or falls into wrong views, because he has no mind of pity and cannot enter deeply into the emptiness of specific marks; therefore, wishing to contemplate these dharmas, he first gives rise to the mind of compassion. Its use in the gate of practice is this—each time before making a deep contemplation, first raise one thought: beings through the long night cling to the mind of I and mine and to all the afflictions; for immeasurable kalpas this self has certainly been unfindable, yet only because of what is empty, false, deceptive, and inverted have they undergone all their sorrows and vexations. Once this thought has arisen, the contemplation has something that holds it, and does not turn cold as it contemplates.
The fifth use is that the three similes can serve as three ways of placing oneself. One whose mind is timid and dares not enter deeply takes the simile of the stalwart man—he has people in his hands, and so he can cross the dangerous road. One whose mind doubts that there is anything to work on in space takes the bird simile—with no support it goes far and does not fall, neither dropping nor stopping. One whose mind is anxious to see results takes the archery simile—the later arrow continues the earlier arrow, continuing them one arrow after another, with no need to ask when they will fall to the ground. Each of the three similes cures one illness; whichever illness is met, take the corresponding simile.
The sixth use is that the method of testing by asking can be used to ask oneself. There is no need to wait for someone to come and examine; take that one sentence and ask it of oneself: as I now train in this dharma and contemplate emptiness, have I split 「觀」 tr. "contemplating" and 「學」 tr. "training" into two separate pieces, willing only to contemplate and not willing to train in all the dharmas that aid the path? Or, the other way round, willing only to train, with everything trained in becoming, one by one, something attained? The place of failure that the treatise-author points out is 「不說方便學知故觀空」 tr. "he does not speak of contemplating emptiness by training and knowing skilful means"—in asking oneself, ask exactly this sentence: is my contemplation a contemplating by training and knowing skilful means, or a contemplating in order to be done with it?
Further Resonances
The backbone of this chapter is two passages of sūtra text and one passage of treatise explanation. Sūtra ① begins from Subhūti's asking 「云何學空三昧？云何入空三昧？」 tr. "How does he train in the emptiness samādhi? How does he enter the emptiness samādhi?" and so on up to 「云何學八聖道分？云何修八聖道分？」 tr. "How does he train in the eightfold noble path? How does he cultivate the eightfold noble path?"; the Buddha answers that one contemplates form and so on up to the three realms as all empty and does not let the mind be disordered, that if the mind is not disordered he does not see this dharma, and that if he does not see this dharma he does not realise it, and brings out the principle 「善學自相空故，不有餘、不有分」 tr. "because he has trained well in the emptiness of specific marks, there is no remainder and no part"; Subhūti asks again how, abiding in emptiness, he does not realise it, and the Buddha brings out the vow 「我今學時，非是證時」 tr. "now is my time of training, not the time of realising" and the practice 「不專攝心繫在緣中」 tr. "does not exclusively gather the mind and bind it to the object," goes through the six perfections, the four foundations of mindfulness and so on up to the eightfold noble path, the three samādhi, the ten powers and so on up to great kindness and great compassion, closing each one with its not being the time of realising, and goes on to bring out the three similes of the stalwart man helping the old and the weak across the dangerous road, the bird with wings flying in space neither falling nor abiding, and the strong man skilled at archery with the later arrow propping the earlier arrow, making clear that by the power of skilful means, while the roots of goodness are not yet fulfilled, he does not realise the limit of reality. Sūtra ② begins from Subhūti's sigh 「所為甚難」 tr. "what he does is very hard"; the Buddha answers that because he does not abandon any being he makes this vow, and continues with the four rounds of 「復次」 tr. "furthermore"—wishing to contemplate the very deep dharmas and giving rise to the mind of severing the marks for the sake of beings, breaking the four inversions, breaking the clinging to attaining a dharma, breaking the clinging to the marks—each paired with the gates of non-action, emptiness, and the signless, and all closing with not realising the limit of reality; at the end he sets up the words of testing by asking, brings out the two marks of the failed answer and the successful answer, and with 「六波羅蜜若聞、若不聞」 tr. "whether he has heard the six perfections or has not heard them" makes clear that one who has not yet obtained avaivartika can also answer thus, finally closing the sūtra with 「少有如是得授記行阿鞞跋致慧地」 tr. "few have thus obtained the prediction and practise the avaivartika ground of wisdom." The treatise section opens the treatise with 「學空、入空有何差別」 tr. "what difference is there between training in emptiness and entering emptiness," brings out the four phrases of first and after, cause and fruit, and skilful means and attainment, to establish the two paths, and extends them to the signless, non-action, and the thirty-seven limbs of the path; it points out that the three gates of liberation and the thirty-seven limbs of the path are properly the nirvāṇa path of the two vehicles and that the Buddha commands the bodhisattva to practise it, whence arises the difficulty of the whole chapter; next, with three rounds of question and answer, it explains layer by layer—the difference between training in emptiness and entering emptiness, the distinction between 「深入禪定，不令心亂」 tr. "entering deeply into meditative concentration, he does not let the mind be disordered" and 「不專心」 tr. "not exclusively attentive," and the verification of ‘how is it known that one who has not yet obtained the path can practise this deep emptiness’—bringing out in between the separate simile of grasping coarse grass loosely or tightly to make clear entering deeply, and restoring one by one what the three similes on the sūtra side stand for; at the end it explains the two marks of the failed answer and the successful answer of testing by asking, glosses the names 「學習」 tr. "training," 「薄地」 tr. "the ground of thinning," 「學地」 tr. "the ground of training," and 「無學地」 tr. "the ground beyond training," and draws the whole chapter together with 「諸法實相，惟佛能遍知」 tr. "the real mark of dharmas only the Buddha can know completely" and 「懸與受記」 tr. "gives him the prediction in advance."
The doctrinal veins between this chapter and the chapters before and after it can be seen along two lines. First, looking back: this chapter at its opening sets up no separate occasion, but goes straight on from the matter of the avaivartika spoken of in the preceding chapters to speak of the method of verifying and knowing it—at the end of Sūtra ② and at the end of the treatise alike, 「能如是答」 tr. "can answer thus" is taken as the sign of the avaivartika, so it can be seen that the latter half of this chapter and the earlier chapters that speak of the avaivartika are the continuation of one matter. Second, looking ahead: the meaning this chapter establishes, ‘training without realising’, is examined again in the next chapter against the single setting of the dream; this chapter speaks of not realising while awake, the next chapter speaks of not realising in a dream, and only when the two chapters are viewed together is the thoroughness of this meaning seen. The reader may view them together.
Of the ancient masters' explanations, two schools can be recorded for this chapter. Jizang, in his sectional division of this chapter, explains the distinction between training in emptiness and entering emptiness, saying: 「初明學空，終名入空也。」 tr. "At first it makes clear training in emptiness; at the end it is called entering emptiness." He also sets up a difficulty with the two vehicles as contrast, saying: 「既學空入空，云何不證耶？二乘在空觀時亦能不取空相，云何獨證耶？」 tr. "Since he trains in emptiness and enters emptiness, how does he not realise it? The two vehicles, while in the contemplation of emptiness, can also not take up the mark of emptiness; how is it that they alone realise?" His explanation of the word 「具足」 tr. "fulfilment" says: 「具足是深入空，不見空故不見涅槃。」 tr. "Fulfilment is entering deeply into emptiness; because he does not see emptiness, he does not see nirvāṇa." These three sayings accord with this treatise's glosses 「初名學空，後是入空」 tr. "at first it is called training in emptiness; afterwards it is entering emptiness" and 「具足者即是深入」 tr. "fulfilment is entering deeply." Jizang also, in his sectional text on the preceding chapter of the sūtra he explains, "The Profound," foretells the position of this chapter, saying: 「然自行化他二行成者，要由學空不證故，不墮二乘地亦不墮凡夫地」 tr. "Yet the accomplishment of the two practices of practising oneself and transforming others depends on training in emptiness without realising it; therefore he does not fall to the ground of the two vehicles and also does not fall to the ground of ordinary people"—taking training in emptiness without realising it as that by which the two practices of practising oneself and transforming others come to be accomplished. His explanation of the passage on testing by asking says: 「上來明學空不證，已明其內行空，今欲驗之，當觀其所說相秤以不，故試問也。」 tr. "What has come above made clear training in emptiness without realising it, and has made clear his inner practice of emptiness; now, wishing to verify it, one should observe whether the marks he speaks of weigh true or not; therefore he is tested by asking." With 「內行」 tr. "inner practice" and 「驗之」 tr. "verifying it" he divides this chapter into its former and latter parts; this and this treatise's explanation 「經中自說因緣」 tr. "the sūtra itself tells the causes and conditions" each have their own emphasis, and are recorded side by side without judgement.
Huiying, in his Commentary on this chapter, raises a question from the sequence of the chapters, saying: 「何故次河天品後明於此品？」 tr. "Why is this chapter set forth next after the River Goddess chapter?" He divides this chapter into three parts, of which the first two say: 「第一、以法、喻兩周，明菩薩善入三脫而不住空；第二、明三三昧別有所益，各有所治」 tr. "First, with the two rounds of Dharma and simile, it makes clear that the bodhisattva enters the three liberations well and does not abide in emptiness; second, it makes clear that the three samādhi each have their separate benefit and each have what they cure"—dividing Sūtra ① by the two rounds of Dharma and simile, and dividing the four rounds of furthermore of Sūtra ② by the three samādhi each having what they cure, which corresponds to this treatise's text in which, in the first round, the three gates come out together, and the latter three rounds are paired round by round with non-action, emptiness, and the signless. His explanation of 「不有餘、不有分」 tr. "no remainder and no part" says: 「菩薩不化城中止取小涅槃，故云不有餘；不住實際，故云不有分也。」 tr. "The bodhisattva does not stop in the conjured city and take only the small nirvāṇa; therefore it says no remainder. He does not abide in the limit of reality; therefore it says no part." This differs from this treatise's gloss 「色法中乃至微塵，不留遺餘微細之分；無色法中，乃至不留一念」 tr. "among the dharmas of form, even down to an atom, he leaves no subtle part remaining; among the formless dharmas, he leaves not even a single thought"—the treatise-author glosses it with respect to the all-pervadingness of the contemplation, Huiying glosses it with respect to the places where one does not abide; they are recorded side by side without judgement. His explanation of the distinction between entering deeply and not being exclusive says: 「上云不令心亂者，據明菩薩善解學空入三三昧；今言不專攝心繫在緣中者，據菩薩不專住空實際中證也。」 tr. "Where it said above that he does not let the mind be disordered, this is in terms of making clear that the bodhisattva well understands training in emptiness and enters the three samādhi; where it now says he does not exclusively gather the mind and bind it to the object, this is in terms of the bodhisattva not exclusively abiding in emptiness and realising within the limit of reality." This, too, with this treatise's positional glosses 「初入時」 tr. "at the time of first entering" and 「入已深」 tr. "having entered deeply," forms a separate account; both are kept. Huiying further marks this chapter, saying: 「第五十九品者，名為學空不證品。」 tr. "The fifty-ninth chapter is named the chapter Training in Emptiness without Realising It." His own sectional numbering is one less than the chapter sequence given in the base text; this is the numbering convention of his commentary itself, recorded as it is without judgement. The study of the variant names of the chapter title, the division of fascicles among the texts, and the fascicle titles and fascicle ends is detailed in the Apparatus.
考據Apparatus
一、科判
本品在《大智度論》釋《大品般若》之次第中屬〈釋餘品〉一段，全在卷七十六，單一單元。品題「大智度論釋學空不證品第六十」〔T25 0592a15〕即卷七十六之卷首題——前一卷之卷末題「大智度論卷第七十五」緊接其前，本品逕以品題起卷，其下造署「聖者龍樹造」〔T25 0592a18〕、譯署「後秦龜茲國三藏鳩摩羅什譯」〔T25 0592a19〕全出。品身訖於「是菩薩雖少，善根明了，能廣利益眾生，無能壞者。」〔T25 0594c22〕；次品品題「大智度論釋夢中不證品第六十一」〔T25 0594c24〕逕接其後，中間無卷末題——卷七十六於本品收訖時尚未竟，其卷末題「大智度論卷第七十六」〔T25 0598c16〕遠在品六十一之末，已在本品範圍之外。此型與品四十六〈魔事品〉之『卷首起題·卷內未竟即續次品』同型，與品五十三〈趣一切智品〉之『居卷末·品尾繫卷尾』異，亦與品四十八〈佛母品〉之跨卷型異。
底本品題之內另帶夾註「卷七十六」一處（夾註型，本帳作〔卷七十六〕，第八目下帳第一條）——即底本以夾註形式標卷次，而不以卷題形式另立一行；宋、元、宮三本則反之，逕作「大智度論卷第七十六釋……」之卷題形，並於其下另出夾註〔訖六十一品上〕。此一『夾註標卷／卷題標卷』之兩形，正是本品品題一注六造之樞紐（析論見第四目）。
全品純漢字三千八百零九（機械重計值·與底稿所載相合）。品內結構一【經】一【論】：【經】〔T25 0592a20〕、【論】〔T25 0593c19〕，二枚結構標記各有校記（【經】宋、宮、聖三本無；【論】宋、宮、石三本無）。說者層則分三段——經①〔T25 0592a20〕、經②〔T25 0592c22〕、論〔T25 0593c19〕；其中經②並無另一枚【經】標記，乃說者表依開示之轉折所分之段，非底本結構標記，如實分記，勿與結構計數相混。
問答之數與說者結構：經①以須菩提問「云何學空三昧？云何入空三昧？云何學無相、無作三昧？云何入無相、無作三昧？」〔T25 0592a21〕發端，佛以「應觀色空」以下總答，其下須菩提再問〔T25 0592b02 白佛言〕、佛再答〔T25 0592b04 佛告〕，末出壯夫、有翼之鳥、善射三譬而收。經②承經①末須菩提歎「所為甚難」之語，佛以「不捨一切眾生」之願續開示，四重「復次」而下，轉折四處皆有明文（〔T25 0593c08〕「白佛言」、〔T25 0593c10〕「佛言」、〔T25 0593c12〕「須菩提言」、〔T25 0593c14〕「佛語須菩提」）。論以「問曰」〔T25 0593c19〕起，正式問答三組（〔T25 0593c19〕／〔T25 0593c19〕、〔T25 0594a12〕／〔T25 0594a13〕、〔T25 0594c01〕／〔T25 0594c02〕；本帳於漢字流逐行獨立重數，問曰三、答曰三，兩數相符）。另有第三人稱敘事體重述經文問答四處（〔T25 0593c24〕「須菩提作是念」／〔T25 0593c25〕「佛答」、〔T25 0594a03〕「佛雖答，須菩提未達佛意，更問」／〔T25 0594a05〕「佛答」、〔T25 0594b07〕「須菩提歡喜白佛言」／〔T25 0594b09〕「佛答」、〔T25 0594c09〕「須菩提聞……白佛言」／〔T25 0594c12〕「佛言」）——此非「問曰」「答曰」之正式格式，亦非另一說者現場介入，乃論主複述經文以申因緣，如實分記，不計入問答對數。全品無「有人言」（與品五十二、品五十三同型），論釋純為論主自問自答與隨文訓釋。
義理兩軸循經論之分：經①明學空、入空之問與『心不亂故不見是法·不見是法故不作證』之總答，並以三譬申方便力故不中道取證；經②明不捨眾生之本願與四重「復次」之對治，末以「試問」「若如是答」辨阿鞞跋致相。論則逐層釋之：先訓學空、入空之二道，次釋「深入」與「不專心」之表裡，再逐一還原三譬之所合，末釋試問之得失與受記之所以。
二、術語考
學空·入空（二道）。 本品第一義目，亦品名之首二字。經①發端之問即以二名並舉：「云何學空三昧？云何入空三昧？云何學無相、無作三昧？云何入無相、無作三昧？」〔T25 0592a21〕；論開卷即以問答訓之：「初名學空，後是入空；因是學空，果是入空；方便名學空，得名入空。如是等二道。」〔T25 0593c19〕——三對六名，皆一事之始終、因果、方便與所得。訓已即推及餘目：「無相、無作、三十七品亦如是。」〔T25 0593c21〕——學入之分不限於空門，三解脫門與道品皆有此二道。
不證（不作證·不取證·不於實際作證）。 品名之後二字，全品之樞紐。經①總答即立其式：「是菩薩摩訶薩善學自相空故，不有餘、不有分，證法、證者皆不可見。」〔T25 0592a29〕——不作證之所以，在證法與證者兩頭俱不可見，非有一可證之法而強不取之。論釋其機：「深入空故，知空亦空，涅槃亦空，故無所證。」〔T25 0594a07〕——空亦空則無可住，涅槃亦空則無可取，「以不見故無所證」〔T25 0593c27〕。經文於三解脫門、四念處乃至八聖道分逐項施此式：「修四念處不證四念處」，所修與所證於同一法上分開。
涅槃道（三解脫門·三十七品）。 本品之難端所繫。論標其名：「三解脫門、三十七品是聲聞、辟支佛涅槃道，佛勅菩薩應行是道。」〔T25 0593c22〕——所行之道即二乘趣涅槃之道，故「行是道法而不取涅槃證」始成問題；本品之全部申論，皆為此一問而設。
深入·不專心（表裡一對）。 訓詁之要目，二語形似相違而實為一事之兩時。經①既云「不令心亂」，又云菩薩「不專攝心繫在緣中」〔T25 0592b06〕；論主自設問以辨之——上言「深入禪定，不令心亂」〔T25 0594a13〕，今何以言「不專心」？其答曰：今言「不專心」者，「是初入時，為不能自出故」〔T25 0594a14〕；上言「深入」者，「入已深，知空亦空，不令心在餘事，故言不亂。」〔T25 0594a15〕——初入之時不專心者，恐繫心空緣而不能自出；入已深者不亂，乃知空亦空而心無餘事。二語各繫一時，非相違。
方便力。 不證之所以能成而不落斷滅者。經①善射一譬即歸於此：菩薩「以方便力故」，諸善根未具足則不於實際作證，善根成就乃於實際作證。論於三譬之合皆以方便力為眼，而以本願大悲繫其根：「是菩薩本願諸一切眾生令得離苦，以是本願、大悲心所持故，雖行空，不作證。」〔T25 0594b09〕——持之者願與悲，用之者方便。
阿鞞跋致·試問·薄地。 經②末一軸。經文立驗人之法：「是菩薩摩訶薩學助道法、行助道法時，應當試問」〔T25 0593b22〕；答之失者，「當知是菩薩諸佛未授阿耨多羅三藐三菩提記」〔T25 0593c02〕；答之得者，「已習學菩薩道入薄地」〔T25 0593c07〕。論逐名訓之：「學習名先學知空。薄地名阿鞞跋致地中諸煩惱薄。」〔T25 0594c08〕——薄非果位之名，乃煩惱薄之謂。
學地·無學地。 經②末須菩提語中之一對，論以無生法忍判之：「未得無生法忍名學地，得無生法忍名無學地。」〔T25 0594c17〕——與聲聞法中依四果判學無學者，所依之界線不同，如實誌錄。
諸根通利·諸根猛利（勝二乘）。 經論各出一語而義同。經②：「是菩薩有方便力故，常增益善法，諸根通利，勝於阿羅漢、辟支佛根。」〔T25 0593a22〕；論：「菩薩深入空故，諸根猛利，勝於二乘。」〔T25 0594b26〕——經歸之於方便力，論歸之於深入空，二語相須，非二事。
三、譬喻與故事
本品為《大智度論》釋餘品中譬喻最密之一品：經①一氣連出三譬，論後段又逐一還原其所合，另於論中自出一譬。引事零。
壯夫護送喻（經出·論合）。 經①第一譬：「譬如壯夫，勁勇猛健，善於兵法、六十四能，堅持器仗，安立不動，巧諸伎術，端正淨潔」〔T25 0592b23〕——其人扶將老弱，過險難恐怖之處，安慰父母，曉喻妻子，雖有怨賊潛伏劫害，以智力具足故能度惡道，還歸本處。論逐物配其法：「是中說譬喻」〔T25 0594a21〕以下，「壯夫」是菩薩，「父母親族」是可度眾生，「險道」是三界生死，「惡賊」是魔民及諸煩惱，「器仗」是菩薩五神通等種種方便力，「還歸本處」是菩薩所行道，「安立不動」是菩薩住畢竟空。喻之眼在「安立不動」四字：不動非不行，是於畢竟空中不動。
有翼之鳥喻（經出·論合·並出設問之由）。 經①第二譬：「譬如有翼之鳥，飛騰虛空而不墮墜，雖在空中，亦不住空。」〔T25 0592c09〕——不墮與不住兩遮並立。論釋此譬之所以更出，先出其問：「時會者疑」〔T25 0594a26〕空中無所有云何可行，故佛說鳥喻；復以「未到所至，終不中住」申菩薩於未具足道法之中間而不作證。三譬之中，唯此譬論主明出設問之緣起，如實誌錄。
善射後箭拄前箭喻（經出·論合·全品之眼）。 經①第三譬：「譬如健人，學諸射法，善於射術，仰射空中，復以後箭射於前箭，箭箭相拄，不令箭墮，隨意自在」〔T25 0592c14〕——若欲令墮，止後箭乃墮地。論「又為明了故，說善射譬喻」〔T25 0594b02〕以下逐物配之：「弓」是菩薩禪定，「箭」是智慧，「虛空」是三解脫門，「地」是涅槃；「是菩薩以智慧箭射三解脫門虛空，更以方便力故，以後箭射前箭，不令墮涅槃地」〔T25 0594b05〕。前箭不墮，非有物承之，乃後箭續發不絕——不證之為行，正是此相續之力，非一住不動之靜。此譬本論於品三〈習相應品〉已預告（見第七目）。
執菅草喻（論自出·訓「深入」）。 論釋「具足者即是深入」時自出一喻：「譬如執菅草，捉緩則傷手，若急捉則無傷」〔T25 0594a06〕——菅草之葉緣利，緩執則割手，急執反不傷。以喻深入空者不為空所傷，淺入者反為空所證。喻在『緩／急』之反常：常情以急執為險，此喻以緩執為險，正翻學人於空中欲淺嘗輒止之心。
四、所釋經文
品名三系網：學空不證／不證／空中不證（並錄不判）。 本品品名，兩藏合觀凡成三系，逐一據底本誌之。
其一，學空不證系——本論底本品題〔T25 0592a15〕「大智度論釋學空不證品第六十」，明本、宋本、元本同作「學空不證品第六十」而冠以卷題「大智度論卷第七十六」（第八目下帳第一條）；所釋經側則於底本正文品名之外另出夾註，逕作「丹學空不證品」（T223 註 0350004，該夾註宋、元、明、宮、聖五本皆無），其字與本論底本品名全字相同（唯少一「釋」字，因所釋經品題例不冠「釋」字）。所釋經之明本亦於品名內增「學空」二字（T223 註 0350003 作「不【大】，學空不【明】，行空中不【聖】」）。
其二，不證系——所釋經底本品題逕作「不證品第六十」〔T08 0350a05〕（無「學空」二字）；本論宮本品題亦刪「學空」二字而作「釋不證品第六十品」（並於「六十」下增一「品」字，見第八目下帳第一條之底本 orig 注語）；吉藏疏之目次與正文科判亦皆作「不證品第六十」〔X24n0451 0195c03〕、〔X24n0451 0311c14〕。兩藏之「不證」單稱，於底本與異本各據一造：所釋經以之為底本讀法，本論以之為宮本讀法，恰成鏡像。
其三，空中不證系——本論聖本作「摩訶般若波羅蜜空中不證品第五十九」、石本作「摩訶般若波羅蜜品第五十九空中不證」（經題式·-1 階·詞序亦異）；所釋經聖本則作「行空中不證品」（T223 註 0350003）。「空中不證」一名於兩藏之聖本同時出現，而兩藏底本皆不用此名——此系之witness 基礎在聖石一系之傳承，非一藏之內部游移，如實並錄，不強加調解。
品次 -1 階（聖石續存·首尾兩端）。 本論聖本「第五十九」、石本「品第五十九」，皆較底本品序「第六十」少一，與品四十四以下逐品順推、同向同幅——-1 階鏈於本品續存無斷。本品範圍內另見一端：品末「者」字注，石本作「者釋第五十九品竟，大智度經卷第七十六」（下帳第六十四條）——品末『釋某品竟』型校記與品題兩層互證，石本兩處皆作「五十九」，-1 階於品題、品末兩端同幅，非孤證。又，該條之後另有一 point-anchor 注「卷第七十六終【石】」〔T25 0594c23〕（無 beg／end 對，未入六十四條之帳，見第八目專列）——石本於本品之末即收卷七十六，與底本卷七十六續入品六十一者不同，石本之分卷與底本不同一系；此亦與下帳第二條底本 mod note 所載石本「不分卷」一讀相值，如實誌錄。
T223 mulu n 屬性 +1 偏移（續存）。 所釋經 T223 側本品之 mulu 標 n="61" 而顯文標「60 不證品」〔T08 0350a05〕——n 屬性 +1 偏移自品四十一以來屢見，本品續存（承既誌之常設體例，不重判）。前品〈河天品〉mulu 標 n="60" 而顯文「59」、次品〈夢誓品〉mulu 標 n="62" 而顯文「61」，序列銜接無重出、無跳號（本帳 逐條重掃）。
T223 側品界不繫卷界。 所釋經本品起〔T08 0350a05〕、訖於次品〈夢誓品〉品題〔T08 0351c07〕前，其間無卷界標記。本論側則不然：本品即卷七十六之首品，卷首起題（見第一目），而卷七十六未竟即續入品六十一——兩傳承於本品之型兩異：所釋經側為『品在卷中』，本論側為『品起卷首而卷內續入次品』，兩側分記，如實誌錄；惟兩側卷數本不同系，亦不併為一事。
全量牒經對讀（兩側對勘·兩造校記互印·對照組）。 本論經①②與所釋經〈不證品〉逐字幾近同文，其異皆小，且四處皆有兩藏校記互印：
其一，箭／前——本論作「箭箭相拄，不令箭墮」〔T25 0592c16〕，所釋經作「箭箭相拄不令前墮」〔T08 0350c04〕；本論同處三注（下帳第十六至十八條：「箭【大】｜前【聖】」、「箭【大】｜〔－〕【石】」、「拄【大】｜注【聖】」），所釋經同位注則作「前墮【大】，墮地【宋】【元】【明】【宮】」〔T08 0350c05〕、「拄【大】，注【聖】」〔T08 0350c04〕。「拄／注【聖】」一條，兩藏校記逐字全同——同一聖本於兩藏同一喻之同一字，作同一異讀，對位極密。
其二，伎／技——本論「伎【大】｜技【元】【明】」（下帳第十條）、所釋經「伎【大】，技【元】【明】」〔T08 0350b13〕，兩藏校記逐字全同。
其三，慧／乾慧——本論「慧【大】｜乾慧【宋】【元】【明】【宮】」（下帳第三十七條）、所釋經「慧【大】，乾慧【宋】【元】【明】，〔－〕【聖】」〔T08 0351c04〕；兩造大體相合而所釋經側少一宮本、多一聖本缺文，如實分記其不盡合處。
其四，眾生／一切眾生——本論作「眾生沒在無所有法中」〔T25 0593a05〕，所釋經作「一切眾生沒在無所有法中」〔T08 0350c18〕；而本論同處之注（下帳第二十一條）正作「生【大】｜生一切【宋】【元】【明】【宮】【聖】【石】」——本論六異本之增文，恰即所釋經底本之文，合之乃全，如實誌錄。
四顛倒一段之字序與想／相（兩造互印之眼）。 本論作「常想、樂想、我想、淨想」〔T25 0593a25〕，所釋經作「常相、樂相、淨相、我相」〔T08 0351a11〕——想／相之別、我淨二字之序皆異。而本論此一處密出四注（下帳第二十五至二十八條，含二枚 star）：其一組作「想【大】｜相【宋】【宮】【聖】」，其一條作「我想、淨【大】｜淨相我【宋】【宮】｜淨想我【元】【明】【聖】」。所釋經底本之讀法「常相、樂相、淨相、我相」，正是本論宋宮二本之讀法「淨相我」——想作相、淨在我前，兩事皆合。同一四顛倒句之兩讀，於兩藏各據一造，如實誌錄。
對照組（四串·兩藏各唯一見·對位唯一）。 「云何學空三昧？云何入空三昧？云何學無相、無作三昧？云何入無相、無作三昧？」〔T25 0592a21〕／〔T08 0350a07〕；「不有餘、不有分，證法、證者皆不可見」〔T25 0592b01〕／〔T08 0350a16〕；「譬如有翼之鳥，飛騰虛空而不墮墜，雖在空中，亦不住空。」〔T25 0592c09〕／〔T08 0350b26〕；「終不中道墮落」〔T25 0593a01〕／〔T08 0350c15〕。以上四串之漢字流，於 T25n1509 全論與 T08n0223 全經各唯一見（本帳 逐串於兩藏底本以 markup 容錯法獨立重掃，非轉抄），對位唯一、無他品可淆。判為「同品異名」（品身逐字幾近同文，品名三系之異見上）。本論【經】【論】二層為論體之結構性擴增，所釋經無此層，非異文。所釋經側本品對讀範圍〔T08 0350a05–0351c07〕內之校勘 witness，本帳 已逐條掃得二十六條編號注、六枚 star 錨；其與本論互印之四處與二組互文已如上誌錄，餘條未逐條展開，據實誌其未展開，不以估值充數。
五、般若義眼
本品之眼，在一「證」字被般若翻透——所行之道即二乘取證之道，而菩薩行之終不取；不取非自外強抑，乃深入之極自然無可取。其義可約為五重。
其一，不證之根在不見，不在不取。經①之總答不從『勿取』說起，而從「不見」說起：「是菩薩摩訶薩若心不亂，則不見是法；若不見是法，則不作證。」〔T25 0592a27〕，其所以不見，在「善學自相空故，不有餘、不有分」〔T25 0592a29〕——色法乃至微塵不留遺餘，無色法乃至不留一念，則證法與證者兩頭俱不可得。論承之而下一轉語：「深入空故，知空亦空，涅槃亦空，故無所證。」〔T25 0594a07〕——空亦空則無所住，涅槃亦空則無所取。故不證不是一種克制，是無物可證。
其二，學與證之分在時，不在法。經①反覆申一語式：我今是學時，非是證時——檀波羅蜜乃至一切種智，皆施此式。所修與所證非二法，唯時分先後：「修四念處不證四念處」〔T25 0592b20〕。此所以三十七品雖是二乘涅槃道而菩薩得行——「三解脫門、三十七品是聲聞、辟支佛涅槃道，佛勅菩薩應行是道。」〔T25 0593c22〕，道無二道，取捨在時。
其三，深入與不專心是一事之兩時，非兩法。論主自撞其前語而後釋之：「深入禪定，不令心亂」〔T25 0594a13〕與「不專心」似相違，而今言「不專心」者，「是初入時，為不能自出故」〔T25 0594a14〕；上言「深入」者，「入已深，知空亦空，不令心在餘事，故言不亂。」〔T25 0594a15〕——初入時之不專心，正為保住出空之路；入已深之不亂，乃無餘事可亂。執菅草之喻即為此設：緩執者傷，急執者不傷。
其四，不證之力在願，不在慧獨。三譬之合皆歸方便力，而方便力之所持者是本願大悲：「是菩薩本願諸一切眾生令得離苦，以是本願、大悲心所持故，雖行空，不作證。」〔T25 0594b09〕——若唯以慧入空，則空成所住；願與悲在，則空成所行。故經②四重「復次」皆自眾生之顛倒說起，觀甚深法之先必先生悲心。善射之喻於此得其全解：弓是禪定，箭是智慧，而使後箭續發不絕者是方便——三者缺一，前箭即墮。
其五，驗人之法在能答與否，不在所現之相。經②末不以神通、不以年臘驗人，唯以一問：「是菩薩摩訶薩學助道法、行助道法時，應當試問」〔T25 0593b22〕；答但應觀空而不應學空者為失，「當知是菩薩諸佛未授阿耨多羅三藐三菩提記」〔T25 0593c02〕；反是者為得，「已習學菩薩道入薄地」〔T25 0593c07〕。論更申其所以能答：聞與不聞皆可，要在自思惟正憶念而能求諸法相。末以受記之根收束全品：「諸法實相，惟佛能遍知」〔T25 0594c20〕——人之能答與否，佛知之而懸與受記；驗人之法立於人間，而其根據在佛智。
六、諸家異釋
《大智度論》本無逐文全疏之傳統，古德引釋率屬據實偏倚。本品古德覆讀二家俱存且皆為完整專章——釋所釋經之吉藏疏、釋本論之慧影疏，此為近數品中罕有之『兩疏俱全』型（品五十三慧影零覆蓋、品四十六亦零覆蓋）。均正書、天台系諸書於本品零命中。此目誌錄其所疏所引與本品之對應，不判各家詮釋高下。
吉藏《大品經義疏》（X24n0451）。 於所釋經〈不證品〉之逐文疏，起「不證品第六十」〔X24n0451 0311c14〕，迄〔X24n0451 0312c20〕，次品「夢誓品第六十一」〔X24n0451 0312c21〕起前，覆本品經全篇。其可誌者七。
其一，品位與大科——「四品明上根行相為三：初明自行成，二明化他行成，三雙釋成。」〔X24n0451 0311c15〕：吉藏以本品與其下三品合為一段，而以『自行成·化他行成·雙釋成』三分之。
其二，不證之二重——「自行不證有二種：一不證有，二不證空。」〔X24n0451 0311c17〕，並以二乘之病相形：小行之徒以有為有、以空為空，二邊俱滯，捨有而住心求空，正觀現前則息心不進；「菩薩在有非有、處空非空，故文中明此二種翻彼二心。」〔X24n0451 0311c20〕——此與本論之訓取徑不同：本論訓不證在「不見是法」之無可證，吉藏訓在『不證有·不證空』之雙翻二乘，二家立義小異，並錄不判。
其三，品內三分——「品三：初、明學不證；二、明不證故二行成；三、明二行成。」〔X24n0451 0312a01〕，與本論經①之問答、經①後半之三譬、經②之歎希有三段次第相值。
其四，學空入空之釋——「先問云何學空、云何入空，此問始行之人云何學空入空。初明學空，終名入空也。」〔X24n0451 0312a02〕：與本論「初名學空，後是入空」之訓幾近同義，而吉藏更繫之於「始行之人」。其釋不證之機亦與本論相值：「心不亂故能深入空亦不見空，若見空則證空，以不見空故不證空。」〔X24n0451 0312a08〕。
其五，二乘同不取空相之難——「既學空入空，云何不證耶？二乘在空觀時亦能不取空相，云何獨證耶？」〔X24n0451 0312a13〕，其答以具足與不具足判之：「具足是深入空，不見空故不見涅槃。何以證耶？二乘見有涅槃是不具足，故證空也。」〔X24n0451 0312a14〕；復以願判之：「菩薩先有願故不證也，二乘無願故證也。」〔X24n0451 0312a16〕——願為不證之因，與本論「本願、大悲心所持故」之訓同指，二家於此所見相合。其釋深入與不專心之兩時亦與本論同構：「上據深入定知空，不令餘事得入，故言攝心。今據初入時，恐於空不能自拔，故不專心在空也。」〔X24n0451 0312a20〕。
其六，三譬之配——「壯夫是能化菩薩，出母等是所化眾生，器杖是五通二慧，伎術等是萬行，嶮道是生死」〔X24n0451 0312b06〕、「安立不動是菩薩畢竟空慧，內外魔不能動也。」〔X24n0451 0312b10〕，與本論之配逐物相值而所配之名小異（本論「器仗」配五神通等方便力，吉藏配五通二慧；本論「安立不動」配住畢竟空，吉藏配畢竟空慧）。鳥喻則出其設問之緣：「時會疑云：既畢竟空，菩薩何所行耶？翼喻二慧，鳥喻菩薩也。」〔X24n0451 0312b12〕，並以不飛不住雙遮申之：「如鳥不行空分不得飛，若住空則墮地；菩薩若心不遊空則不得捨有見，若住空則墮二乘地也。」〔X24n0451 0312b13〕——與本論「時會者疑」之設問同構，二家所承者當是同一問。末釋試問之由：「上來明學空不證，已明其內行空，今欲驗之，當觀其所說相秤以不，故試問也。」〔X24n0451 0312c06〕。
其七，薄地之異釋——吉藏於「薄地」一名下並陳古今南北諸解（「薄地者，論云：得阿」〔X24n0451 0312c15〕以下，出「初地名薄地」『六位住名薄地』二說，並載北人二釋），而本論之訓則逕作「薄地名阿鞞跋致地中諸煩惱薄」——本論以煩惱薄訓之，吉藏諸家以地位訓之，取徑不同，並錄不判。
慧影《大智度論疏》（X46n0791）。 為釋本論之唯一古疏，於本品非零覆蓋：卷首總目三見連列（「釋學空不證品第六十」〔X46n0791 0794b18〕，其上為〈釋恒伽提婆品第五十九〉、其下為〈釋夢中不證品第六十一〉），正文專章起〔X46n0791 0900c22〕，迄〔X46n0791 0902c22〕，次品〈釋夢中不證品第六十一〉〔X46n0791 0902c23〕起前。其可誌者六。
其一，科判自數 -1（誌不判）——起段逕云：「第五十九品者，名為學空不證品。何故次河天品後明於此品？」〔X46n0791 0900c23〕——慧影以本品為「第五十九品」，較本論底本「第六十」少一，而其所書品名「學空不證品」與底本全同，卷首總目亦作「釋學空不證品第六十」而不作五十九。此一自數與聖石本之 -1 階同幅而異源（聖石為寫本傳承之品序差，慧影此處為其疏自身之科判編號），如實並錄不強解。又其承前品之名作「河天品」，與本論品五十九之品題相值。
其二，品之三分——「須菩提白佛言已下，就此品中大有三分：第一、以法、喻兩周，明菩薩善入三脫而不住空」〔X46n0791 0901a04〕，二明三三昧別有所益各有所治，三明驗知阿鞞跋致菩薩——與本論經①（法喻兩周）、經②四重復次（別有所益）、經②末試問（驗知）三段次第逐段相值。
其三，不有餘不有分之釋——「菩薩不化城中止取小涅槃，故云不有餘；不住實際，故云不有分也。」〔X46n0791 0901a08〕——與本論之訓不同：本論以『色法中乃至微塵不留遺餘·無色法中乃至不留一念』訓餘與分（即所觀之法無遺留），慧影以化城與實際訓之（即所取之果無停住），二家立義小異，並錄不判。
其四，深入與不專心之兩時——「上云不令心亂者，據明菩薩善解學空入三三昧；今言不專攝心繫在緣中者，據菩薩不專住空實際中證也。」〔X46n0791 0901a12〕；又以二空判不證之所以：「菩薩得法空故，解空亦空，故云不證。二乘不得法空故，有空可證也。」〔X46n0791 0902b18〕、「二乘但得生空，不能深入法空，故於空作證。菩薩既得二空，深入法空，知自相空，解空無空，故云深入故不證也。」〔X46n0791 0902b22〕——以生空、法空二空判菩薩與二乘之別，此判於本論文中無明文，屬慧影自立之釋，如實分記。
其五，三譬之次第相生與參天射——「就此譬說之中凡有三譬，次第展轉相生：第一、作壯夫喻；第二、作鳥飛空喻；第三、作善射喻。」〔X46n0791 0901a20〕；鳥喻之配：「鳥者是菩薩，有翼者譬二智，飛騰下喻學入三空，而不墮者不墮二地也。」〔X46n0791 0902a06〕，其設問之由亦與本論同：「上雖言菩薩具多種事而不住空，而時眾疑言空無所有，云何可行而言不住？」〔X46n0791 0902a04〕。善射喻則出一射法之名，為兩藏經論所無：「如世間善射人放箭欲令相注時，若急後箭前箭則破，若緩後箭則不運前箭，須善得中令不墮落射法中，此名為參天射也。」〔X46n0791 0902a15〕，其合則云：「今菩薩亦爾，以禪定弓放智慧箭，以方便前復注智慧箭，不令住空墮於二地也。」〔X46n0791 0902a18〕——「參天射」之名與『急則破、緩則不運』之兩失，本論唯言「箭箭相拄」而未及，慧影所補為射術之實相，誌錄不判。
其六，學入與學無學之訓——「以初攢求為學，學已深達為入也。」〔X46n0791 0902b14〕（與本論「初名學空，後是入空」相值）；「功用道是菩薩學道，無功用道是菩薩無學道也。」〔X46n0791 0902b11〕——與本論之訓不同：本論以無生法忍判學地無學地，慧影以功用、無功用判之，二家並錄不判。又慧影於「六十四能」一目廣徵：「六十四能解者甚少，大莊嚴論極廣釋，今且略說。」〔X46n0791 0901b07〕，其下以俗法六十四能與佛法六十四能兩釋之，佛法一釋引《實性論》以十力、四無所畏、十八不共法、三十二相為六十四——此為慧影自引他論，本論未及，如實誌錄，不代定讀。
均正《大乘四論玄義》（X46n0784）·零命中（如實誌）。 本帳 於 X46n0784 全檔獨立回搜「學空不證」「不證品」「空中不證」「夢中不證」四串，皆零命中；均正書屬泛論體例，非逐品科判，於本品無具名引，如實誌錄負結果。
天台系（T46n1911《摩訶止觀》·T46n1912《止觀輔行傳弘決》·T33n1716《法華玄義》·T33n1717《法華玄義釋籤》）·本品零命中（如實誌·另出一對照組確認）。 本帳 於四檔全檔獨立回搜上列四串：T46n1911、T33n1716、T33n1717 三檔全零；T46n1912 於「不證品」一串得一命中〔T46n1912 0289b21〕，其文作「故大品觀空不證品云」——品名作「觀空不證品」，為三系之外之第四種稱法。惟其下所引之經文（「我證跋致餘人永無」以下至「當知是菩薩旃陀羅」），本帳 逐串於所釋經底本獨立定位，實在 T223〈夢誓品第六十一〉之內〔T08 0353a18〕、〔T08 0353b26〕——即湛然所引之文不在本品範圍。故此一命中屬對照組確認（品名字面近而所引文不在本品），非本品之古德引，如實誌錄，不以近似品名充命中。
七、互讀與承衍
本品之義脈，前後相承者有四，皆此目所誌，不代定讀。
其一，善射喻之前指與後應（論主自證·硬鏈本論自身）。 本論品三〈習相應品〉（卷三十六）釋方便力入三解脫門而不取涅槃時，已預告本品之喻：「如後品中說。譬如仰射虛空，箭箭相拄，不令墮地」〔T25 0323a03〕，其下逕以「以智慧箭仰射三解脫虛空，以方便後箭射前箭，不令墮涅槃之地」配之——與本品論之配（弓是禪定·箭是智慧·虛空是三解脫門·地是涅槃）逐物相同，而彼處先出、此處為其所指之「後品」。同卷另一處亦前指本品：「不取證。如後品中說」〔T25 0328b26〕，其下所引作「入空、無相、無作三昧，菩薩住是三解脫門，作是念言」而繼以「今是觀時，非是證時」——與本品經①之「我今是學時，非是證時」語式同構而字小異（觀／學一字之差），如實分記，不逕謂同文。本論之前指與本品之實說首尾相繫，為論主自證之硬鏈。
其二，『不退—不證』之品次承衍。 前品〈河天品第五十九〉說金華女之受記與不退，本品承之而明不退之所以在學空不證——品次相承之直接科判見於慧影；吉藏於所釋經〈深奧品第五十七〉（即本論〈燈炷品〉所釋之經品）科文中所云「然自行化他二行成者，要由學空不證故，不墮二乘地」〔X24n0451 0307b09〕只可作學空不證之旁證，非品次之證。慧影起段云本品「何故次河天品後明於此品」〔X46n0791 0900c23〕而以不退菩薩之行願答之。次品〈夢中不證品第六十一〉則更進一層——覺時不證已明，夢中亦不證。三品相生，本品居中，如實誌其承，不代前後品定讀。
其三，『學時·證時』語式之貫串（誌其式·不作統計）。 「我今是學時，非是證時」一語式，於本品經①內以檀波羅蜜乃至一切種智逐項重施，為全品最密之語式；其異形「今是觀時，非是證時」見於本論品三〔T25 0328b27〕。此式之用在時分而不在法分——所學即所證之法，唯時未至。誌其式之貫串，不作跨品全量統計（跨品統計須另立範圍逐條重掃，非本目所任）。
其四，寶庫掛鏈（穩定徵引·軟引）。 本品「學空、入空」之二道訓、「深入空故，知空亦空，涅槃亦空」之不證機、善射後箭拄前箭之方便喻、與「應當試問」之驗人法，為後世論菩薩行空不證之所本，落穩定徵引〔T25n1509 學空不證品·卷七十六〕；諸帙引本論處尚未定稿，故軟引，俟其逐字核存。此屬般若義下貫諸經之承衍，誌錄不判。
八、校本與版本說明
本品底本為《大智度論》卷七十六〔T25 0592a15–0594c24〕（品身正文自品題〔T25 0592a15〕起，終於「是菩薩雖少，善根明了，能廣利益眾生，無能壞者。」〔T25 0594c22〕句迄；次品品題〔T25 0594c24〕前，其間無卷末題）；所釋經校本為《摩訶般若波羅蜜經》〈不證品〉〔T08 0350a05–0351c07〕；古德疏校本為吉藏《大品經義疏》（X24n0451，覆本品〔X24n0451 0311c14–0312c20〕）與慧影《大智度論疏》（X46n0791，覆本品〔X46n0791 0900c22–0902c22〕）；均正《大乘四論玄義》（X46n0784）本品零命中、天台系四書本品零命中（另一對照組確認見第六目）。異讀校記依大正校勘，涉大正底本與宋、元、明、宮、聖、石（石山寺本）諸本、南藏及 CBETA 校之異——本品未見聖乙本入帳。
品題校記（品名三系與 -1 階之底據·專列）。 品題〔T25 0592a15〕一注六造（下帳第一條），即品名三系與品次 -1 階之底據，如實並錄，不強加調解（析論見第四目）。此條之內另含底本夾註一處「卷七十六」與宋元宮三本夾註「訖六十一品上」，其夾註子注，本帳作〔卷七十六〕〔訖六十一品上〕原樣保留不刪。底本本讀內之「（卷七十六）」係品題夾註「卷七十六」之渲染，非誤植，本帳依凡例作夾註記，並於此標明其注型，俾兩層可互溯。該條另有原注一段（注號 0592010·原注型）以字數略記體例出之，內含「上註宮本無學空二字而六十下有品字」「此註下宋本元本宮本俱有訖六十一品上六字夾註」二語，即宮本刪「學空」增「品」字與三本夾註之所本，本帳依既有印可體例逕錄其所指之全文於下帳，並於此標明其略記形。
校記附註（傍註）二條·原樣保留（專列）。 其一，〔T25 0593b29〕「但應觀」條（下帳第三十一條），底本除 mod／orig 二注外另出 type="rest" 之注一段：「但聖本石本俱有但應觀或本五字傍註」——即聖石二本雖無此三字於正文，而其傍註猶存「但應觀或本」五字，本帳原樣保留此附註。其二，〔T25 0593c23〕「勅」條（下帳第四十條），底本 mod note 作「勅【大】，勸【宋】【元】，明註曰勅南藏作勸」——第三造之「勸」出明本註語所引南藏（底本之 rdg resp=#resp5 wit=#wit12），本帳依底本分列三造。
CBETA 校訂層一條（非傳統諸本並陳型·專列）。 〔T25 0594b05〕「脫【CB】｜解【大】」（下帳第五十四條）——底本之 note 型為 type="add"，lem 之 wit 作 #wit.cbeta，即 CBETA 校訂底本【大】之「解」為「脫」（「三解脫門」），無宋元明宮聖石等傳統 witness 標記，屬 CBETA 現代校勘層，本版讀者面從 CBETA 現行文本讀法。
star 四枚·全數品內（專列）。 本品範圍內 star anchor 四枚（beg_842–beg_845），本帳 逐枚解其 corresp 目標並定位所屬品，得四枚全數品內、零跨品——目標分佈：note(0593006)〔T25 0593a25〕二見（下帳第二十六、二十八條，即同段內「樂想」「淨想」二字重用「常想」一字之 witness 組）、note(0593011)〔T25 0593c03〕二見（下帳第三十五、三十八條，即同段內二處「授」字重用同一組）。此型與品五十三〈趣一切智品〉之八枚全數跨品恰成反例，如實誌錄。
另有兩注帶 ＊ 而其 star 錨在本品之外（跨品回指·專列）。 本帳 另逐枚回查本品各注之被引情形，得二條：其一，〔T25 0592a20〕【經】結構標記之注（下帳第二條，底本 mod note 帶 ＊），其對應 star 錨在品六十一〈夢中不證品〉〔T25 0594c25〕；其二，〔T25 0594c21〕「惟」字之注（下帳第六十條，底本 mod note 帶 ＊），其對應 star 錨在品六十一之餘〔T25 0597c13〕。二者皆為後品之字回指本品之注，方向與前一專列所誌之四枚相反，如實誌錄此一雙向型態。star 目標之注文於底本帶「＊」記，本帳依底本原樣保留。
point-anchor 一條·未入六十四條之帳（顯式標出）。 本品範圍之末另有底本 note n="0594021"〔T25 0594c23〕「卷第七十六終【石】」一條，其錨為 anchor type="circle" 之點錨（無 beg／end 對），故未入工作底本六十四條之帳；本帳仍以六十四條為帳數，此點錨注不入六十四條之帳，另列於此。其義理值不小——石本於本品末即收卷七十六（見第四目）。另本品起處〔T25 0592a20〕亦有 anchor type="circle" 一枚，其緊接【經】標記之 beg 錨而無獨立注文，非另一條校記，如實誌錄。
校勘總帳（六十四條全量對帳·底本原樣）。 下依底本出現序全量列之，內含 star 重引四條，隨條標明其 corresp 目標與所屬品。異本讀法並列保存，正文仍從現行底本讀法：
app 條（六十四·底本出現序·star-corresp 隨條標明）
- 〔T25 0592a15〕大智度論釋學空不證品第六十〔卷七十六〕【大】｜大智度論卷第七十六釋學空不證品第六十【明】｜大智度論卷第七十六釋不證品第六十品〔訖六十一品上〕【宮】｜大智度論卷第七十六釋學空不證品第六十〔訖六十一品上〕【宋】【元】｜摩訶般若波羅蜜空中不證品第五十九【聖】｜摩訶般若波羅蜜品第五十九空中不證【石】（品題一注六造·底本夾註〔卷七十六〕原樣保留·宋元宮三本卷題形＋夾註〔訖六十一品上〕·聖石二本經題式 -1 階·見第四目）
- 〔T25 0592a20〕【經】【大】＊｜〔－〕【宋】【宮】【聖】＊（結構標記存否注·star·＊記見底本 mod note·其 corresp 來自品六十一〔T25 0594c25〕之 star 錨·跨品回指本品·另底本 mod note 尚載「不分卷【石】」一讀而 app 元素無之·顯式標出·見第八目）
- 〔T25 0592a26〕界【大】｜界空【元】【明】
- 〔T25 0592b06〕繫【大】｜係【聖】
- 〔T25 0592b07〕是故【大】｜如是【聖】【石】
- 〔T25 0592b18〕漢【大】｜漢果【宋】【元】【明】【宮】【聖】【石】
- 〔T25 0592b19〕觀，住空中【大】｜觀空住空中【聖】【石】（lemma 內含頓逗（「觀，住空中」）·point-anchor 型·底本原樣保留）
- 〔T25 0592b24〕壯【大】｜庄【石】
- 〔T25 0592b25〕立【大】｜立不【石】
- 〔T25 0592b25〕伎【大】｜技【元】【明】
- 〔T25 0592b25〕正【大】｜政【宮】【聖】【石】
- 〔T25 0592b29〕懅【大】｜懼【聖】【石】
- 〔T25 0592c03〕亦【大】｜亦復【聖】【石】
- 〔T25 0592c12〕作【大】｜〔－〕【宋】【元】【明】【宮】
- 〔T25 0592c15〕空中【大】｜虛空【聖】
- 〔T25 0592c16〕箭【大】｜前【聖】
- 〔T25 0592c16〕箭【大】｜〔－〕【石】
- 〔T25 0592c16〕拄【大】｜注【聖】
- 〔T25 0592c22〕法【大】｜〔－〕【宋】【元】【明】【宮】
- 〔T25 0593a03〕若【大】｜若是【宋】【元】【明】【宮】
- 〔T25 0593a04〕生【大】｜生一切【宋】【元】【明】【宮】【聖】【石】
- 〔T25 0593a13〕提【大】｜提時【元】【明】
- 〔T25 0593a16〕道【大】｜地【聖】
- 〔T25 0593a22〕減【大】｜咸【聖】
- 〔T25 0593a25〕想【大】＊｜相【宋】【宮】【聖】＊（想／相 witness 組之首·star·＊記見底本 mod note·底本 mod note 作「想【大】＊，相【宋】【宮】＊，【聖】」而 app 元素之 rdg witness 作【宋】【宮】【聖】·兩層小異·顯式標出）
- 〔T25 0593a25〕想【大】＊｜相【宋】【宮】＊（star·corresp→note(0593006)＝本品內〔T25 0593a25〕注·品內共用（非跨品））
- 〔T25 0593a25〕我想、淨【大】｜淨相我【宋】【宮】｜淨想我【元】【明】【聖】（lemma 內含頓號（「我想、淨」）·point-anchor 型·宋宮作「淨相我」＝所釋經底本之字序·見第四目）
- 〔T25 0593a25〕想【大】＊｜相【宋】【宮】＊（star·corresp→note(0593006)＝本品內〔T25 0593a25〕注·品內共用）
- 〔T25 0593b23〕問：『諸【大】｜問【宋】【元】【明】【宮】｜問若【聖】（lemma 內含冒號與內層引號（「問：『諸」）·point-anchor 型·底本原樣保留）
- 〔T25 0593b26〕而【大】｜實際而【元】【明】
- 〔T25 0593b29〕但應觀【大】｜〔－〕【聖】【石】（校記附註〔傍註〕·底本另出 type="rest" 之注：「但聖本石本俱有但應觀或本五字傍註」·原樣保留不刪）
- 〔T25 0593c03〕授【大】＊｜受【聖】＊（授／受 witness 組之首·star·＊記見底本 mod note）
- 〔T25 0593c08〕相【大】｜地【宮】【聖】【石】
- 〔T25 0593c15〕薩【大】｜薩摩訶薩【聖】【石】
- 〔T25 0593c16〕授【大】＊｜受【聖】＊（star·corresp→note(0593011)＝本品內〔T25 0593c03〕注·品內共用）
- 〔T25 0593c16〕行【大】｜〔－〕【宋】【宮】
- 〔T25 0593c16〕慧【大】｜乾慧【宋】【元】【明】【宮】
- 〔T25 0593c16〕授【大】＊｜受【聖】＊（star·corresp→note(0593011)＝本品內〔T25 0593c03〕注·品內共用）
- 〔T25 0593c19〕【論】【大】｜〔－〕【宋】【宮】【石】（結構標記存否注·【論】一枚·宋宮石三本無）
- 〔T25 0593c23〕勅【大】｜勸【宋】【元】｜勸【南藏】（校記附註·底本 mod note 作「勅【大】，勸【宋】【元】，明註曰勅南藏作勸」·第三造出明本註語所引南藏·原樣保留）
- 〔T25 0593c25〕道【大】｜〔－〕【宋】【元】【明】【宮】【聖】【石】
- 〔T25 0593c26〕可【大】｜〔－〕【宋】【元】【明】【宮】
- 〔T25 0594a05〕作【大】｜〔－〕【宋】【元】【明】【宮】【聖】
- 〔T25 0594a06〕緩【大】｜瑗【石】
- 〔T25 0594a07〕急捉【大】｜捉急【宋】【元】【明】【宮】
- 〔T25 0594a10〕念【大】｜心【聖】【石】
- 〔T25 0594a12〕中【大】｜〔－〕【宋】【元】【明】【宮】
- 〔T25 0594a12〕柔【大】｜濡【宮】【聖】【石】
- 〔T25 0594a21〕喻【大】｜如【聖】【石】（與次條同出底本 orig 注一條（「喻壯夫＝如莊夫【聖】【石】」）·CBETA 於 mod 層拆為 a／b 兩注·顯式標出）
- 〔T25 0594a21〕壯【大】｜莊【聖】【石】（見上條·底本注 id 作 0594007b）
- 〔T25 0594a27〕虛空【大】｜空虛【宋】【元】【明】【宮】
- 〔T25 0594b02〕斷【大】｜折【宋】【宮】
- 〔T25 0594b02〕度【大】｜〔－〕【宋】【元】【明】【宮】
- 〔T25 0594b05〕脫【CB】｜解【大】（CBETA 校訂層·底本 note 型 type="add"·lem wit=#wit.cbeta·無傳統寫本 witness·本版讀者面從 CBETA 現行讀法）
- 〔T25 0594b07〕故【大】｜〔－〕【宋】【元】【明】【宮】
- 〔T25 0594c05〕是【大】｜〔－〕【聖】【石】
- 〔T25 0594c12〕言【大】｜言有【宋】【元】【明】【宮】【聖】【石】
- 〔T25 0594c13〕若【大】｜〔－〕【宮】【聖】【石】
- 〔T25 0594c19〕受【大】｜授【聖】【石】
- 〔T25 0594c21〕惟【大】＊｜唯【宋】【元】【明】【宮】【聖】【石】＊（star·＊記見底本 mod note·其 corresp 來自品六十一之餘〔T25 0597c13〕之 star 錨·跨品回指本品）
- 〔T25 0594c21〕佛知【大】｜〔－〕【聖】【石】
- 〔T25 0594c22〕懸【大】｜縣【聖】
- 〔T25 0594c22〕受【大】｜授【元】【明】
- 〔T25 0594c23〕者【大】｜者釋第五十九品竟，大智度經卷第七十六【石】（石本卷末題·「釋第五十九品竟」與品題之聖石 -1 階首尾互證·見第四目）
I. Structural Placement
Within the sequence in which the Mahāprajñāpāramitā-upadeśa comments on the Larger Sūtra, this chapter belongs to the section of the Commentary on the Remaining Chapters; it lies wholly within Fascicle 76, as a single unit. The chapter title 「大智度論釋學空不證品第六十」 tr. "Mahāprajñāpāramitā-upadeśa, Commentary on the Chapter on Training in Emptiness without Realising It, the Sixtieth"〔T25 0592a15〕 is the fascicle-head title of Fascicle 76—the fascicle-end title of the preceding fascicle, 「大智度論卷第七十五」 tr. "Mahāprajñāpāramitā-upadeśa, Fascicle Seventy-five", comes immediately before it; this chapter opens the fascicle directly with its chapter title, and below it the author's signature 「聖者龍樹造」 tr. "Composed by the noble Nāgārjuna"〔T25 0592a18〕 and the translator's signature 「後秦龜茲國三藏鳩摩羅什譯」 tr. "Translated by Kumārajīva, Tripiṭaka master of Kucha, in the Later Qin"〔T25 0592a19〕 appear in full. The body of the chapter ends at 「是菩薩雖少，善根明了，能廣利益眾生，無能壞者。」 tr. "Though these bodhisattvas are few, their roots of goodness are clear and bright; they can benefit beings widely, and there is none who can break them."〔T25 0594c22〕; the title of the next chapter, 「大智度論釋夢中不證品第六十一」 tr. "Mahāprajñāpāramitā-upadeśa, Commentary on the Chapter on Not Realising It in a Dream, the Sixty-first"〔T25 0594c24〕, follows directly after it, with no fascicle-end title in between—Fascicle 76 is not yet finished when this chapter closes; its fascicle-end title 「大智度論卷第七十六」 tr. "Mahāprajñāpāramitā-upadeśa, Fascicle Seventy-six"〔T25 0598c16〕 lies far off at the end of Chapter 61, already outside the range of this chapter. This type is of the same type as the ‘title at the head of the fascicle · the fascicle not yet finished, continuing straight into the next chapter’ of Chapter 46, "The Deeds of Māra", and differs from the ‘placed at the end of the fascicle · the chapter's end tied to the fascicle's end’ of Chapter 53, "Tending toward Omniscience", and also from the fascicle-crossing type of Chapter 48, "The Mother of the Buddhas".
Within the chapter title of the base text there is in addition one interlinear note, 「卷七十六」 tr. "Fascicle Seventy-six" (of the interlinear-note type; this apparatus writes it as 〔卷七十六〕, the first entry of the ledger under Section VIII)—that is, the base text marks the fascicle number in the form of an interlinear note, and does not set up a separate line in the form of a fascicle title; the Song, Yuan, and Palace editions do the reverse, writing outright the fascicle-title form 「大智度論卷第七十六釋……」 tr. "Mahāprajñāpāramitā-upadeśa, Fascicle Seventy-six, Commentary on …", and giving below it a further interlinear note, 〔訖六十一品上〕 (‘ending at the first part of Chapter Sixty-one’). These two forms, ‘marking the fascicle by interlinear note / marking the fascicle by fascicle title’, are precisely the pivot of the one note in six forms on this chapter's title (analysed in Section IV).
The whole chapter has three thousand eight hundred and nine pure Chinese characters (the mechanically recounted value · agreeing with the figure recorded in the working base text). The structure within the chapter is one 【經】 and one 【論】: 【經】〔T25 0592a20〕 and 【論】〔T25 0593c19〕; each of the two structural markers has a collation note (for 【經】, the Song and Palace editions and the Shōgozō manuscript lack it; for 【論】, the Song and Palace editions and the Ishiyama-dera manuscript lack it). The speaker layer, however, is divided into three segments—Sūtra ①〔T25 0592a20〕, Sūtra ②〔T25 0592c22〕, and the Treatise〔T25 0593c19〕; of these, Sūtra ② has no separate 【經】 marker of its own: it is a segment divided by the speaker table according to a turning point in the teaching, not a structural marker of the base text; the two are recorded separately, as they are, and are not to be confused with the structural count.
The number of questions and answers, and the speaker structure: Sūtra ① opens with Subhūti asking 「云何學空三昧？云何入空三昧？云何學無相、無作三昧？云何入無相、無作三昧？」 tr. "How does he train in the emptiness samādhi? How does he enter the emptiness samādhi? How does he train in the signless and non-action samādhi? How does he enter the signless and non-action samādhi?"〔T25 0592a21〕, and the Buddha answers in general with what follows from 「應觀色空」 tr. "he should contemplate form as empty"; below that Subhūti asks again〔T25 0592b02 白佛言〕 and the Buddha answers again〔T25 0592b04 佛告〕, and at the end three similes are brought out—the stalwart man, the bird with wings, and the skilled archer—and it closes. Sūtra ② takes up Subhūti's words of wonder at the end of Sūtra ①, 「所為甚難」 tr. "what he does is very hard", and the Buddha continues the teaching with the vow 「不捨一切眾生」 tr. "does not abandon any being"; from there down through four rounds of 「復次」 tr. "furthermore", the four turning points all have explicit markers (〔T25 0593c08〕「白佛言」 tr. "said to the Buddha", 〔T25 0593c10〕「佛言」 tr. "the Buddha said", 〔T25 0593c12〕「須菩提言」 tr. "Subhūti said", 〔T25 0593c14〕「佛語須菩提」 tr. "the Buddha told Subhūti"). The Treatise begins with 「問曰」 tr. "Question"〔T25 0593c19〕, with three formal groups of questions and answers (〔T25 0593c19〕 / 〔T25 0593c19〕, 〔T25 0594a12〕 / 〔T25 0594a13〕, 〔T25 0594c01〕 / 〔T25 0594c02〕; this apparatus recounted them independently, line by line, in the stream of Chinese characters: three of "Question" and three of "Answer", the two numbers agreeing). There are in addition four places where the questions and answers of the sūtra are restated in third-person narrative (〔T25 0593c24〕「須菩提作是念」 tr. "Subhūti had this thought" / 〔T25 0593c25〕「佛答」 tr. "the Buddha answers", 〔T25 0594a03〕「佛雖答，須菩提未達佛意，更問」 tr. "Though the Buddha answered, Subhūti had not yet reached the Buddha's meaning, and asked again" / 〔T25 0594a05〕「佛答」 tr. "the Buddha answers", 〔T25 0594b07〕「須菩提歡喜白佛言」 tr. "Subhūti, rejoicing, said to the Buddha" / 〔T25 0594b09〕「佛答」 tr. "the Buddha answers", 〔T25 0594c09〕「須菩提聞……白佛言」 tr. "Subhūti, hearing … said to the Buddha" / 〔T25 0594c12〕「佛言」 tr. "the Buddha said")—these are not in the formal format of 「問曰」 tr. "Question" and 「答曰」 tr. "Answer", nor the on-the-spot intervention of another speaker; they are the treatise-author's retelling of the sūtra text to set out its causes and conditions; they are recorded separately, as they are, and not counted in the number of question-and-answer pairs. The whole chapter has no 「有人言」 tr. "someone says" (of the same type as Chapters 52 and 53); the treatise's explanation is purely the treatise-author's own questions and answers and glosses following the text.
The two axes of meaning follow the division of sūtra and treatise: Sūtra ① makes clear the question of training in emptiness and entering emptiness, and the general answer ‘because the mind is not disordered he does not see this dharma · because he does not see this dharma he does not realise it’, and with three similes sets out that, by the power of skilful means, he does not take the realisation midway; Sūtra ② makes clear the original vow not to abandon beings and the remedies of the four rounds of 「復次」 tr. "furthermore", and at the end, with 「試問」 tr. "test him by asking" and 「若如是答」 tr. "if he answers thus", distinguishes the marks of the avaivartika. The Treatise explains it layer by layer: first it glosses the two paths of training in emptiness and entering emptiness; next it explains the outside and inside of 「深入」 tr. "entering deeply" and 「不專心」 tr. "not exclusively attentive"; then it restores one by one what the three similes are matched to; and at the end it explains the gain and loss of the testing question and the reason for the prediction.
II. Terms Examined
Training in emptiness · entering emptiness (the two paths). The first item of meaning in this chapter, and also the first two Chinese characters of the chapter title, rendered here as ‘training in emptiness’. The question with which Sūtra ① opens already sets the two names side by side: 「云何學空三昧？云何入空三昧？云何學無相、無作三昧？云何入無相、無作三昧？」 tr. "How does he train in the emptiness samādhi? How does he enter the emptiness samādhi? How does he train in the signless and non-action samādhi? How does he enter the signless and non-action samādhi?"〔T25 0592a21〕; the Treatise, at its opening, glosses them by question and answer: 「初名學空，後是入空；因是學空，果是入空；方便名學空，得名入空。如是等二道。」 tr. "At first it is called training in emptiness; afterwards it is entering emptiness; because of training in emptiness as cause, the fruit is entering emptiness; skilful means is called training in emptiness, attainment is called entering emptiness. Such are the two paths."〔T25 0593c19〕—three pairs, six names, all of them the beginning and end, the cause and fruit, the means and the attainment of one matter. Having glossed them, it at once extends this to the other items: 「無相、無作、三十七品亦如是。」 tr. "The signless, non-action, and the thirty-seven limbs are likewise."〔T25 0593c21〕—the distinction of training and entering is not limited to the gate of emptiness; the three gates of liberation and the limbs of the path all have these two paths.
Not realising (not realising it · not taking realisation · not realising within the limit of reality). The last two Chinese characters of the chapter title (rendered here as ‘without realising it’), the pivot of the whole chapter. The general answer of Sūtra ① at once sets up its formula: 「是菩薩摩訶薩善學自相空故，不有餘、不有分，證法、證者皆不可見。」 tr. "Because this bodhisattva-mahāsattva has trained well in the emptiness of specific marks, there is no remainder and no part; the dharma realised and the one who realises are both not to be seen."〔T25 0592a29〕—the reason he does not realise lies in the dharma realised and the one who realises being both not to be seen at either end; it is not that there is a dharma that could be realised and he forcibly refrains from taking it. The Treatise explains its mechanism: 「深入空故，知空亦空，涅槃亦空，故無所證。」 tr. "Because he enters deeply into emptiness, he knows that emptiness too is empty and nirvāṇa too is empty; therefore there is nothing realised."〔T25 0594a07〕—if emptiness too is empty, there is nothing to abide in; if nirvāṇa too is empty, there is nothing to take; 「以不見故無所證」 tr. "because he does not see it, there is nothing realised"〔T25 0593c27〕. The sūtra text applies this formula item by item to the three gates of liberation, the four foundations of mindfulness, and so on up to the eightfold noble path: 「修四念處不證四念處」 tr. "he cultivates the four foundations of mindfulness and does not realise the four foundations of mindfulness"—what is cultivated and what is realised are divided upon one and the same dharma.
The path of nirvāṇa (the three gates of liberation · the thirty-seven limbs of the path). Where the difficulty of this chapter is tied. The Treatise names it: 「三解脫門、三十七品是聲聞、辟支佛涅槃道，佛勅菩薩應行是道。」 tr. "The three gates of liberation and the thirty-seven limbs are the nirvāṇa path of the śrāvaka and pratyekabuddha; the Buddha commands the bodhisattva to practise this path."〔T25 0593c22〕—the path that is practised is the very path by which the two vehicles tend toward nirvāṇa, and so 「行是道法而不取涅槃證」 tr. "practising this path-dharma and yet not taking the realisation of nirvāṇa" only then becomes a question; the whole of this chapter's argument is set up for this one question.
Entering deeply · not exclusively attentive (a pair of outside and inside). A key item of glossing: the two words look opposed in form but are in fact two times of one matter. Sūtra ① says both 「不令心亂」 tr. "does not let the mind be disordered" and that the bodhisattva 「不專攝心繫在緣中」 tr. "does not exclusively gather the mind and bind it to the object"〔T25 0592b06〕; the treatise-author raises the question himself to distinguish them—above it said 「深入禪定，不令心亂」 tr. "enters deeply into meditative concentration and does not let the mind be disordered"〔T25 0594a13〕; why does it now say 「不專心」 tr. "not exclusively attentive"? His answer: what is now called 「不專心」 tr. "not exclusively attentive" 「是初入時，為不能自出故」 tr. "is at the time of first entering, lest he be unable to come out by himself"〔T25 0594a14〕; what was called 「深入」 tr. "entering deeply" above is 「入已深，知空亦空，不令心在餘事，故言不亂。」 tr. "Having entered deeply, he knows that emptiness too is empty, and does not let the mind rest on any other matter; therefore it is said not to be disordered."〔T25 0594a15〕—one who is not exclusively attentive at the time of first entering fears that, binding the mind to the object of emptiness, he will be unable to come out by himself; one who has entered deeply is not disordered, because he knows that emptiness too is empty and the mind has no other matter. The two words are each tied to one time; they are not opposed.
The power of skilful means. That by which not realising can be accomplished without falling into annihilation. The simile of skilled archery in Sūtra ① returns entirely to this: the bodhisattva 「以方便力故」 tr. "by the power of skilful means", while his roots of goodness are not yet complete, does not realise within the limit of reality; when his roots of goodness are accomplished, he then realises within the limit of reality. In the matching of all three similes the Treatise takes the power of skilful means as the eye, and ties its root to the original vow and great compassion: 「是菩薩本願諸一切眾生令得離苦，以是本願、大悲心所持故，雖行空，不作證。」 tr. "This bodhisattva's original vow is to bring all beings to leave suffering; because he is held by this original vow and by the mind of great compassion, though he practises emptiness he does not realise it."〔T25 0594b09〕—what holds it is vow and compassion; what uses it is skilful means.
Avaivartika · testing by asking · the ground of thinning. An axis at the end of Sūtra ②. The sūtra text sets up a method of testing a person: 「是菩薩摩訶薩學助道法、行助道法時，應當試問」 tr. "When this bodhisattva-mahāsattva trains in the dharmas that aid the path and practises the dharmas that aid the path, one should test him by asking"〔T25 0593b22〕; of one who answers wrongly, 「當知是菩薩諸佛未授阿耨多羅三藐三菩提記」 tr. "know that the buddhas have not yet given this bodhisattva the prediction of anuttarā samyaksaṃbodhi"〔T25 0593c02〕; of one who answers rightly, 「已習學菩薩道入薄地」 tr. "he has trained in the bodhisattva path and entered the ground of thinning"〔T25 0593c07〕. The Treatise glosses name by name: 「學習名先學知空。薄地名阿鞞跋致地中諸煩惱薄。」 tr. "Training means first training and knowing emptiness. The ground of thinning means that within the ground of the avaivartika the afflictions are thinned."〔T25 0594c08〕—thinning is not the name of a fruit-station; it means that the afflictions are thinned.
The ground of training · the ground beyond training. A pair in Subhūti's words at the end of Sūtra ②, which the Treatise judges by the acceptance of the non-arising of dharmas: 「未得無生法忍名學地，得無生法忍名無學地。」 tr. "Not yet having obtained the acceptance of the non-arising of dharmas is called the ground of training; having obtained the acceptance of the non-arising of dharmas is called the ground beyond training."〔T25 0594c17〕—the dividing line relied on differs from that of the śrāvaka teaching, which divides training and beyond training by the four fruits; recorded as it is.
Faculties penetrating and keen · faculties fierce and keen (surpassing the two vehicles). Sūtra and treatise each give a phrase, and the meaning is the same. Sūtra ②: 「是菩薩有方便力故，常增益善法，諸根通利，勝於阿羅漢、辟支佛根。」 tr. "Because this bodhisattva has the power of skilful means, he constantly increases wholesome dharmas, and his faculties are penetrating and keen, surpassing the faculties of arhats and pratyekabuddhas."〔T25 0593a22〕; the Treatise: 「菩薩深入空故，諸根猛利，勝於二乘。」 tr. "Because the bodhisattva enters deeply into emptiness, his faculties are fierce and keen, surpassing those of the two vehicles."〔T25 0594b26〕—the sūtra returns it to the power of skilful means, the treatise returns it to entering deeply into emptiness; the two phrases need each other, and are not two matters.
III. Similes and Stories
This chapter is one of the chapters densest in similes within the Commentary on the Remaining Chapters of the Mahāprajñāpāramitā-upadeśa: Sūtra ① brings out three similes in one breath, the later part of the Treatise restores one by one what they are matched to, and in addition the Treatise brings out one simile of its own. Stories cited: none.
The simile of the stalwart man as escort (given by the sūtra · matched by the treatise). The first simile of Sūtra ①: 「譬如壯夫，勁勇猛健，善於兵法、六十四能，堅持器仗，安立不動，巧諸伎術，端正淨潔」 tr. "As a stalwart man, strong, brave, fierce, and robust, skilled in the arts of war and the sixty-four skills, firmly holding his weapons, standing steady and unmoved, clever in all the crafts, upright, clean, and comely"〔T25 0592b23〕—this man supports the old and the weak through places of danger, hardship, and fear, comforting his father and mother and reassuring his wife and children; though enemies and thieves lie in ambush to rob and kill, because he is fully endowed with wisdom and strength he can cross the evil road and return to his own place. The Treatise matches each thing to its dharma: from 「是中說譬喻」 tr. "here a simile is told"〔T25 0594a21〕 onward, 「壯夫」 tr. "the stalwart man" is the bodhisattva, 「父母親族」 tr. "father, mother, and kin" are the beings who can be delivered, 「險道」 tr. "the dangerous road" is birth and death in the three realms, 「惡賊」 tr. "the evil thieves" are Māra's people and the afflictions, 「器仗」 tr. "the weapons" are the bodhisattva's five supernormal powers and all the other kinds of the power of skilful means, 「還歸本處」 tr. "returning to his own place" is the path the bodhisattva practises, and 「安立不動」 tr. "standing steady and unmoved" is the bodhisattva abiding in ultimate emptiness. The eye of the simile lies in the four Chinese characters 「安立不動」 tr. "standing steady and unmoved": unmoved is not not-going; it is being unmoved within ultimate emptiness.
The simile of the bird with wings (given by the sūtra · matched by the treatise · with the occasion of the question given as well). The second simile of Sūtra ①: 「譬如有翼之鳥，飛騰虛空而不墮墜，雖在空中，亦不住空。」 tr. "As a bird with wings, flying up into space and not falling, though it is in space it also does not abide in space."〔T25 0592c09〕—not falling and not abiding, two negations set side by side. In explaining why this simile is brought out further, the Treatise first gives its question: 「時會者疑」 tr. "those in the assembly doubted"〔T25 0594a26〕 how, since in space there is nothing whatsoever, one can practise there, and therefore the Buddha told the bird simile; further, with 「未到所至，終不中住」 tr. "has not yet reached where it is going, never stops midway" it sets out that the bodhisattva, in the middle, while the dharmas of the path are not yet complete, does not realise. Among the three similes, only for this one does the treatise-author explicitly give the occasion of the question; recorded as it is.
The simile of the skilled archer, whose later arrow supports the earlier arrow (given by the sūtra · matched by the treatise · the eye of the whole chapter). The third simile of Sūtra ①: 「譬如健人，學諸射法，善於射術，仰射空中，復以後箭射於前箭，箭箭相拄，不令箭墮，隨意自在」 tr. "As a strong man, having trained in the arts of archery and being skilled in the archer's craft, shoots upward into space, and then with a later arrow shoots the earlier arrow, arrow supporting arrow, not letting the arrows fall, at will and unhindered"〔T25 0592c14〕—if he wishes them to fall, he stops the later arrow, and then they fall to the ground. From the Treatise's 「又為明了故，說善射譬喻」 tr. "Further, to make it clear, the simile of skilled archery is told"〔T25 0594b02〕 onward, each thing is matched: 「弓」 tr. "the bow" is the bodhisattva's meditative concentration, 「箭」 tr. "the arrow" is wisdom, 「虛空」 tr. "space" is the three gates of liberation, 「地」 tr. "the ground" is nirvāṇa; 「是菩薩以智慧箭射三解脫門虛空，更以方便力故，以後箭射前箭，不令墮涅槃地」 tr. "this bodhisattva, with the arrow of wisdom, shoots into the space of the three gates of liberation, and further, by the power of skilful means, with a later arrow shoots the earlier arrow, not letting it fall to the ground of nirvāṇa"〔T25 0594b05〕. The earlier arrow does not fall, not because something holds it up, but because the later arrows keep being loosed without break—not realising, as a practice, is precisely this power of continuity, not the stillness of abiding once and not moving. This simile was already announced in advance by this treatise in Chapter 3, "Practising in Accord" (see Section VII).
The simile of grasping coarse grass (given by the treatise itself · glossing 「深入」 tr. "entering deeply"). When the Treatise explains 「具足者即是深入」 tr. "being complete is precisely entering deeply", it gives a simile of its own: 「譬如執菅草，捉緩則傷手，若急捉則無傷」 tr. "As when one grasps a blade of coarse grass: hold it loosely and it wounds the hand; grip it tightly and there is no wound"〔T25 0594a06〕—the edges of the coarse grass-blade are sharp; a loose hold cuts the hand, while a tight grip, on the contrary, does no harm. This stands for how one who enters deeply into emptiness is not harmed by emptiness, while one who enters shallowly is, on the contrary, brought to realisation by emptiness. The simile lies in the reversal of the ordinary in ‘loose / tight’: common feeling takes a tight grip as the danger, this simile takes a loose hold as the danger, precisely overturning the learner's wish to take only a shallow taste of emptiness and then stop.
IV. The Sūtra Passage Explained
The network of three lines of chapter names: "Training in Emptiness without Realising It" / "Not Realising" / "Not Realising within Emptiness" (recorded side by side without judgement). Taking the two canons together, the names of this chapter form three lines in all; each is recorded according to the base texts.
First, the line of "Training in Emptiness without Realising It"—the chapter title of the base text of this treatise〔T25 0592a15〕 is 「大智度論釋學空不證品第六十」 tr. "Mahāprajñāpāramitā-upadeśa, Commentary on the Chapter on Training in Emptiness without Realising It, the Sixtieth"; the Ming, Song, and Yuan editions likewise read 「學空不證品第六十」 tr. "Chapter on Training in Emptiness without Realising It, the Sixtieth", but crown it with the fascicle title 「大智度論卷第七十六」 tr. "Mahāprajñāpāramitā-upadeśa, Fascicle Seventy-six" (the first entry of the ledger under Section VIII); on the side of the sūtra explained, beyond the chapter name in the main text of the base text, an interlinear note is given, reading outright 「丹學空不證品」 tr. "the Khitan edition: Chapter on Training in Emptiness without Realising It" (T223 note 0350004; this interlinear note is absent in all five of the Song, Yuan, Ming, Palace, and Shōgozō texts), and its characters are identical, character for character, with the chapter name of the base text of this treatise (lacking only the one character 「釋」 tr. "commentary", since by rule the chapter titles of the sūtra explained do not carry 「釋」 tr. "commentary"). The Ming edition of the sūtra explained likewise adds the two characters 「學空」 tr. "training in emptiness" within the chapter name (T223 note 0350003 reads 「不【大】，學空不【明】，行空中不【聖】」 tr. "not (Taishō); training in emptiness, not (Ming); practising within emptiness, not (Shōgozō)").
Second, the line of "Not Realising"—the chapter title of the base text of the sūtra explained reads outright 「不證品第六十」 tr. "Chapter on Not Realising, the Sixtieth"〔T08 0350a05〕 (without the two characters 「學空」 tr. "training in emptiness"); the Palace edition of this treatise likewise drops the two characters 「學空」 tr. "training in emptiness" from its chapter title and reads 「釋不證品第六十品」 tr. "Commentary on the Chapter on Not Realising, the Sixtieth chapter" (and, below 「六十」 tr. "sixty", adds one character 「品」 tr. "chapter"; see the wording of the base text's orig note in the first entry of the ledger under Section VIII); the table of contents and the main-text structural division of Jizang's commentary also both read 「不證品第六十」 tr. "Chapter on Not Realising, the Sixtieth"〔X24n0451 0195c03〕, 〔X24n0451 0311c14〕. The single name 「不證」 tr. "not realising" of the two canons takes one side each, in a base text and in a variant text: the sūtra explained has it as the reading of its base text, this treatise has it as the reading of its Palace edition—exactly a mirror image.
Third, the line of "Not Realising within Emptiness"—the Shōgozō text of this treatise reads 「摩訶般若波羅蜜空中不證品第五十九」 tr. "Mahāprajñāpāramitā, Chapter on Not Realising within Emptiness, the Fifty-ninth", and the Ishiyama text reads 「摩訶般若波羅蜜品第五十九空中不證」 tr. "Mahāprajñāpāramitā, Chapter the Fifty-ninth, Not Realising within Emptiness" (the sūtra-title form · the -1 step · the word order also differs); the Shōgozō text of the sūtra explained reads 「行空中不證品」 tr. "Chapter on Practising within Emptiness without Realising" (T223 note 0350003). The name 「空中不證」 tr. "not realising within emptiness" appears at once in the Shōgozō texts of both canons, while the base texts of both canons do not use this name—the witness basis of this line lies in the transmission of the Shōgozō–Ishiyama line, not in a wavering inside one canon; recorded side by side as it is, without forcing a reconciliation.
The -1 step of chapter order (continuing in the Shōgozō and Ishiyama · at both the head and the tail). The Shōgozō text of this treatise reads 「第五十九」 tr. "the Fifty-ninth" and the Ishiyama text 「品第五十九」 tr. "Chapter the Fifty-ninth", both one less than the base text's chapter order 「第六十」 tr. "the Sixtieth", advancing chapter by chapter from Chapter 44 onward, in the same direction and by the same amount—the chain of the -1 step continues in this chapter without break. Within the range of this chapter one more end is seen: in the note on the character 「者」 tr. "the particle zhe" at the end of the chapter, the Ishiyama text reads 「者釋第五十九品竟，大智度經卷第七十六」 tr. "zhe. The commentary on the fifty-ninth chapter is finished. the Great Wisdom-Crossing Sūtra, Fascicle Seventy-six" (entry sixty-four of the ledger below)—the collation note of the type ‘the commentary on such-and-such chapter is finished’ at the chapter's end and the chapter title confirm each other on two levels; in both places the Ishiyama text reads 「五十九」 tr. "fifty-nine"; the -1 step is of the same amount at both ends, chapter title and chapter end, and is not a lone witness. Further, after that entry there is also a point-anchor note, 「卷第七十六終【石】」 tr. "end of Fascicle Seventy-six (Ishiyama)"〔T25 0594c23〕 (without a beg/end pair, not entered in the ledger of sixty-four entries; see the separate listing in Section VIII)—the Ishiyama text closes Fascicle 76 at the end of this chapter, unlike the base text, whose Fascicle 76 continues into Chapter 61; the fascicle division of the Ishiyama text is not of the same line as that of the base text; this also accords with the Ishiyama reading 「不分卷」 tr. "no division of the fascicle" recorded in the base text's mod note of the second entry of the ledger below; recorded as it is.
The +1 offset of the n attribute of the T223 mulu (continuing). On the T223 side of the sūtra explained, the mulu of this chapter is marked n="61" while the displayed text is marked 「60 不證品」 tr. "60 Chapter on Not Realising"〔T08 0350a05〕—the +1 offset of the n attribute has been seen repeatedly since Chapter 41, and continues in this chapter (following the standing pattern already recorded, not judged again). The mulu of the preceding chapter, "River Goddess", is marked n="60" with the displayed text 「59」 tr. "the number 59", and the mulu of the next chapter, "The Dream Oath", is marked n="62" with the displayed text 「61」 tr. "the number 61"; the sequence joins without duplication and without skipped numbers (this apparatus rescanned entry by entry).
On the T223 side the chapter boundary is not tied to a fascicle boundary. In the sūtra explained this chapter begins at〔T08 0350a05〕 and ends before the chapter title of the next chapter, "The Dream Oath"〔T08 0351c07〕, with no fascicle-boundary marker in between. On the side of this treatise it is otherwise: this chapter is the first chapter of Fascicle 76, its title opening the fascicle (see Section I), and Fascicle 76, not yet finished, continues into Chapter 61—the two transmissions differ in type for this chapter: on the side of the sūtra explained it is ‘the chapter within a fascicle’; on the side of this treatise it is ‘the chapter opening the fascicle, and the fascicle continuing within itself into the next chapter’; the two sides are recorded separately, as they are; only, the fascicle numbers of the two sides are of different systems to begin with, and are not merged into one matter.
A full comparative reading of the cited sūtra (the two sides collated · the collation notes of the two sides confirming each other · control group). Sūtra ① and ② of this treatise and "Not Realising" of the sūtra explained are nearly identical word for word; their differences are all small, and at four places the collation notes of the two canons confirm each other:
First, arrow / earlier—this treatise reads 「箭箭相拄，不令箭墮」 tr. "arrow supporting arrow, not letting the arrows fall"〔T25 0592c16〕, the sūtra explained reads 「箭箭相拄不令前墮」 tr. "arrow supporting arrow, not letting the earlier fall"〔T08 0350c04〕; at the same place this treatise has three notes (entries sixteen to eighteen of the ledger below: 「箭【大】｜前【聖】」 tr. "arrow (Taishō) | earlier (Shōgozō)", 「箭【大】｜〔－〕【石】」 tr. "arrow (Taishō) | [omitted] (Ishiyama)", 「拄【大】｜注【聖】」 tr. "support (Taishō) | zhu, a variant form (Shōgozō)"), while the notes at the same position in the sūtra explained read 「前墮【大】，墮地【宋】【元】【明】【宮】」 tr. "the earlier fall (Taishō); fall to the ground (Song, Yuan, Ming, Palace)"〔T08 0350c05〕 and 「拄【大】，注【聖】」 tr. "support (Taishō); zhu, a variant form (Shōgozō)"〔T08 0350c04〕. For the one entry 「拄／注【聖】」 tr. "support / zhu (Shōgozō)", the collation notes of the two canons are identical word for word—the same Shōgozō text, at the same character of the same simile in both canons, has the same variant reading; the correspondence of position is very close.
Second, craft / skill—this treatise has 「伎【大】｜技【元】【明】」 tr. "craft (Taishō) | skill (Yuan, Ming)" (entry ten of the ledger below), the sūtra explained has 「伎【大】，技【元】【明】」 tr. "craft (Taishō); skill (Yuan, Ming)"〔T08 0350b13〕: the collation notes of the two canons are identical word for word.
Third, wisdom / dry wisdom—this treatise has 「慧【大】｜乾慧【宋】【元】【明】【宮】」 tr. "wisdom (Taishō) | dry wisdom (Song, Yuan, Ming, Palace)" (entry thirty-seven of the ledger below), the sūtra explained has 「慧【大】，乾慧【宋】【元】【明】，〔－〕【聖】」 tr. "wisdom (Taishō); dry wisdom (Song, Yuan, Ming); [omitted] (Shōgozō)"〔T08 0351c04〕; the two sides broadly agree, but the side of the sūtra explained lacks the Palace edition and has in addition an omission in the Shōgozō text; the points where they do not fully agree are recorded separately, as they are.
Fourth, beings / all beings—this treatise reads 「眾生沒在無所有法中」 tr. "beings are sunk in the dharma of nothing whatsoever"〔T25 0593a05〕, the sūtra explained reads 「一切眾生沒在無所有法中」 tr. "all beings are sunk in the dharma of nothing whatsoever"〔T08 0350c18〕; and the note at the same place in this treatise (entry twenty-one of the ledger below) reads precisely 「生【大】｜生一切【宋】【元】【明】【宮】【聖】【石】」 tr. "sheng (Taishō) | sheng, all (Song, Yuan, Ming, Palace, Shōgozō, Ishiyama)"—the added words of six variant texts of this treatise are exactly the text of the base text of the sūtra explained; put together, they make it whole; recorded as it is.
The character order and notion / mark in the passage on the four inversions (the eye where the two sides confirm each other). This treatise reads 「常想、樂想、我想、淨想」 tr. "the notion of permanence, the notion of happiness, the notion of self, the notion of purity"〔T25 0593a25〕, the sūtra explained reads 「常相、樂相、淨相、我相」 tr. "the mark of permanence, the mark of happiness, the mark of purity, the mark of self"〔T08 0351a11〕—both the distinction of notion and mark and the order of the two words for self and purity differ. And at this one place this treatise has four notes packed together (entries twenty-five to twenty-eight of the ledger below, including two stars): one group reads 「想【大】｜相【宋】【宮】【聖】」 tr. "notion (Taishō) | mark (Song, Palace, Shōgozō)", and one entry reads 「我想、淨【大】｜淨相我【宋】【宮】｜淨想我【元】【明】【聖】」 tr. "self-notion, purity (Taishō) | purity-mark, self (Song, Palace) | purity-notion, self (Yuan, Ming, Shōgozō)". The reading of the base text of the sūtra explained, 「常相、樂相、淨相、我相」 tr. "the mark of permanence, the mark of happiness, the mark of purity, the mark of self", is precisely the reading 「淨相我」 tr. "purity-mark, self" of the Song and Palace editions of this treatise—notion written as mark, purity before self: both matters agree. The two readings of the one sentence on the four inversions take one side each in the two canons; recorded as it is.
Control group (four strings · each seen only once in each of the two canons · correspondence of position unique). 「云何學空三昧？云何入空三昧？云何學無相、無作三昧？云何入無相、無作三昧？」 tr. "How does he train in the emptiness samādhi? How does he enter the emptiness samādhi? How does he train in the signless and non-action samādhi? How does he enter the signless and non-action samādhi?"〔T25 0592a21〕 / 〔T08 0350a07〕; 「不有餘、不有分，證法、證者皆不可見」 tr. "there is no remainder and no part; the dharma realised and the one who realises are both not to be seen"〔T25 0592b01〕 / 〔T08 0350a16〕; 「譬如有翼之鳥，飛騰虛空而不墮墜，雖在空中，亦不住空。」 tr. "As a bird with wings, flying up into space and not falling, though it is in space it also does not abide in space."〔T25 0592c09〕 / 〔T08 0350b26〕; 「終不中道墮落」 tr. "never falls midway"〔T25 0593a01〕 / 〔T08 0350c15〕. The streams of Chinese characters of the above four strings are each seen only once in the whole treatise T25n1509 and in the whole sūtra T08n0223 (this apparatus independently rescanned them string by string in the base texts of both canons by the full-text method, not transcribed), with unique correspondence of position and no other chapter to confuse them with. Judged to be 「同品異名」 tr. "same chapter, different name" (the chapter body nearly identical word for word; for the difference of the three lines of chapter names, see above). The two layers 【經】【論】 of this treatise are a structural expansion belonging to the treatise form; the sūtra explained has no such layer; they are not variant readings. As for the collation witnesses within the range of the comparative reading of this chapter on the side of the sūtra explained〔T08 0350a05–0351c07〕, this apparatus has scanned entry by entry and found twenty-six numbered notes and six star anchors; the four places and the two groups of corresponding text where they confirm this treatise have been recorded as above; the remaining entries were not unfolded entry by entry, the fact that they were not unfolded is recorded as it is, and no estimate is used to fill the number.
V. The Prajñā Eye
The eye of this chapter lies in the one character 「證」 tr. "realise" being turned through and through by prajñā—the path that is practised is the very path by which the two vehicles take realisation, and yet the bodhisattva practises it and in the end does not take it; not taking is not a forcing down from outside; it is that, at the utmost of entering deeply, there is naturally nothing to take. Its meaning can be summed up in five layers.
First: the root of not realising lies in not seeing, not in not taking. The general answer of Sūtra ① does not begin from ‘do not take’; it begins from 「不見」 tr. "does not see": 「是菩薩摩訶薩若心不亂，則不見是法；若不見是法，則不作證。」 tr. "If this bodhisattva-mahāsattva's mind is not disordered, then he does not see this dharma; if he does not see this dharma, then he does not realise it."〔T25 0592a27〕, and the reason he does not see lies in 「善學自相空故，不有餘、不有分」 tr. "because he has trained well in the emptiness of specific marks, there is no remainder and no part"〔T25 0592a29〕—among the dharmas of form not even an atom is left over, among the formless dharmas not even a single thought is left, and so the dharma realised and the one who realises are unfindable at both ends. The Treatise takes this up and adds a turning word: 「深入空故，知空亦空，涅槃亦空，故無所證。」 tr. "Because he enters deeply into emptiness, he knows that emptiness too is empty and nirvāṇa too is empty; therefore there is nothing realised."〔T25 0594a07〕—if emptiness too is empty, there is nothing to abide in; if nirvāṇa too is empty, there is nothing to take. So not realising is not a kind of restraint; it is that there is nothing to realise.
Second: the distinction between training and realising lies in time, not in dharma. Sūtra ① sets out one formula again and again: now is my time of training, not the time of realising—from dānapāramitā up to the omniscience of all kinds, this formula is applied to each. What is cultivated and what is realised are not two dharmas; only time divides them into before and after: 「修四念處不證四念處」 tr. "he cultivates the four foundations of mindfulness and does not realise the four foundations of mindfulness"〔T25 0592b20〕. This is why, though the thirty-seven limbs are the nirvāṇa path of the two vehicles, the bodhisattva can practise them—「三解脫門、三十七品是聲聞、辟支佛涅槃道，佛勅菩薩應行是道。」 tr. "The three gates of liberation and the thirty-seven limbs are the nirvāṇa path of the śrāvaka and pratyekabuddha; the Buddha commands the bodhisattva to practise this path."〔T25 0593c22〕; the path is not two paths; taking and leaving lie in time.
Third: entering deeply and being not exclusively attentive are two times of one matter, not two dharmas. The treatise-author collides with his own earlier words and then explains them: 「深入禪定，不令心亂」 tr. "enters deeply into meditative concentration and does not let the mind be disordered"〔T25 0594a13〕 and 「不專心」 tr. "not exclusively attentive" seem opposed, but what is now called 「不專心」 tr. "not exclusively attentive" 「是初入時，為不能自出故」 tr. "is at the time of first entering, lest he be unable to come out by himself"〔T25 0594a14〕; what was called 「深入」 tr. "entering deeply" above is 「入已深，知空亦空，不令心在餘事，故言不亂。」 tr. "Having entered deeply, he knows that emptiness too is empty, and does not let the mind rest on any other matter; therefore it is said not to be disordered."〔T25 0594a15〕—not being exclusively attentive at the time of first entering is precisely to keep open the road out of emptiness; not being disordered once one has entered deeply is that there is no other matter by which to be disordered. The simile of grasping coarse grass is set up precisely for this: one who holds loosely is wounded, one who grips tightly is not wounded.
Fourth: the power of not realising lies in the vow, not in wisdom alone. The matching of all three similes returns to the power of skilful means, and what holds the power of skilful means is the original vow and great compassion: 「是菩薩本願諸一切眾生令得離苦，以是本願、大悲心所持故，雖行空，不作證。」 tr. "This bodhisattva's original vow is to bring all beings to leave suffering; because he is held by this original vow and by the mind of great compassion, though he practises emptiness he does not realise it."〔T25 0594b09〕—if one entered emptiness by wisdom alone, emptiness would become a place of abiding; where vow and compassion are present, emptiness becomes a place of practice. Therefore the four rounds of 「復次」 tr. "furthermore" of Sūtra ② all begin from the inversions of beings: before contemplating the very deep Dharma, one must first give rise to a mind of compassion. The simile of skilled archery here receives its full explanation: the bow is meditative concentration, the arrow is wisdom, and what keeps the later arrows being loosed without break is skilful means—lacking any one of the three, the earlier arrow falls at once.
Fifth: the method of testing a person lies in whether he can answer, not in the marks he displays. At the end of Sūtra ② a person is tested not by supernormal powers and not by years in the robe, but only by one question: 「是菩薩摩訶薩學助道法、行助道法時，應當試問」 tr. "When this bodhisattva-mahāsattva trains in the dharmas that aid the path and practises the dharmas that aid the path, one should test him by asking"〔T25 0593b22〕; one who answers that one should only contemplate emptiness and should not train in emptiness has failed—「當知是菩薩諸佛未授阿耨多羅三藐三菩提記」 tr. "know that the buddhas have not yet given this bodhisattva the prediction of anuttarā samyaksaṃbodhi"〔T25 0593c02〕; one who answers the opposite has succeeded—「已習學菩薩道入薄地」 tr. "he has trained in the bodhisattva path and entered the ground of thinning"〔T25 0593c07〕. The Treatise further sets out why he can answer: whether he has heard or has not heard, either will do; what matters is that he thinks it over by himself and rightly recollects, and can seek the marks of dharmas. At the last it gathers up the whole chapter with the root of the prediction: 「諸法實相，惟佛能遍知」 tr. "The real mark of dharmas only the Buddha can know completely"〔T25 0594c20〕—whether a person can answer or not, the Buddha knows it and gives the prediction in advance; the method of testing a person is set up among human beings, but its ground lies in the Buddha's wisdom.
VI. Divergent Readings of the Masters
The Mahāprajñāpāramitā-upadeśa has, from the first, no tradition of a full line-by-line commentary; the citations and explanations of the ancient masters are, as a rule, partial, as the facts stand. For this chapter the re-readings of two ancient masters both survive, and both are complete dedicated chapters—Jizang's commentary, which explains the sūtra explained, and Huiying's commentary, which explains this treatise; this is the type ‘both commentaries complete’, rare among the recent chapters (Huiying has zero coverage of Chapter 53, and zero coverage of Chapter 46 as well). Junzheng's book and the books of the Tiantai line have zero hits for this chapter. This section records the correspondence of what they comment on and cite with this chapter, and does not judge the relative merits of the masters' interpretations.
Jizang's Commentary on the Larger Sūtra (X24n0451). His line-by-line commentary on "Not Realising" of the sūtra explained begins at 「不證品第六十」 tr. "Chapter on Not Realising, the Sixtieth"〔X24n0451 0311c14〕 and ends at〔X24n0451 0312c20〕, before the beginning of the next chapter, 「夢誓品第六十一」 tr. "Chapter on the Dream Oath, the Sixty-first"〔X24n0451 0312c21〕, covering the whole sūtra text of this chapter. There are seven points worth recording.
First, the chapter's place and the major divisions—「四品明上根行相為三：初明自行成，二明化他行成，三雙釋成。」 tr. "These four chapters make clear the marks of practice of those of superior faculties, in three parts: first, making clear the accomplishment of one's own practice; second, making clear the accomplishment of the practice of transforming others; third, explaining both as accomplished."〔X24n0451 0311c15〕: Jizang joins this chapter with the three chapters below it into one section, and divides it in three as ‘the accomplishment of one's own practice · the accomplishment of the practice of transforming others · both explained as accomplished’.
Second, the twofold not realising—「自行不證有二種：一不證有，二不證空。」 tr. "Not realising in one's own practice is of two kinds: first, not realising existence; second, not realising emptiness."〔X24n0451 0311c17〕, and he contrasts it with the illness of the two vehicles: the followers of the small practice take existence as existence and emptiness as emptiness, stuck at both extremes; they abandon existence and fix the mind on seeking emptiness, and when right contemplation appears before them, they let the mind rest and advance no further; 「菩薩在有非有、處空非空，故文中明此二種翻彼二心。」 tr. "The bodhisattva, being in existence, is not in existence; dwelling in emptiness, is not in emptiness; therefore the text makes clear these two kinds, to overturn those two minds."〔X24n0451 0311c20〕—this takes a different route from the gloss of this treatise: this treatise glosses not realising as there being nothing to realise, in the sense of 「不見是法」 tr. "he does not see this dharma"; Jizang glosses it as ‘not realising existence · not realising emptiness’, the double overturning of the two vehicles; the two masters establish their meaning slightly differently; recorded side by side without judgement.
Third, the three parts of the chapter—「品三：初、明學不證；二、明不證故二行成；三、明二行成。」 tr. "The chapter is in three: first, making clear training without realising; second, making clear that because of not realising the two practices are accomplished; third, making clear that the two practices are accomplished."〔X24n0451 0312a01〕, corresponding in sequence to the three segments of this treatise: the question and answer of Sūtra ①, the three similes of the latter half of Sūtra ①, and the wonder at the rare in Sūtra ②.
Fourth, the explanation of training in emptiness and entering emptiness—「先問云何學空、云何入空，此問始行之人云何學空入空。初明學空，終名入空也。」 tr. "First he asks how one trains in emptiness and how one enters emptiness; this asks how a person beginning the practice trains in emptiness and enters emptiness. At first it is made clear as training in emptiness; at the end it is called entering emptiness."〔X24n0451 0312a02〕: nearly the same in meaning as this treatise's gloss 「初名學空，後是入空」 tr. "at first it is called training in emptiness; afterwards it is entering emptiness", while Jizang further ties it to 「始行之人」 tr. "a person beginning the practice". His explanation of the mechanism of not realising also corresponds to this treatise: 「心不亂故能深入空亦不見空，若見空則證空，以不見空故不證空。」 tr. "Because the mind is not disordered, he can enter deeply into emptiness and also not see emptiness; if he saw emptiness, he would realise emptiness; because he does not see emptiness, he does not realise emptiness."〔X24n0451 0312a08〕.
Fifth, the difficulty that the two vehicles likewise do not grasp the mark of emptiness—「既學空入空，云何不證耶？二乘在空觀時亦能不取空相，云何獨證耶？」 tr. "Since he trains in emptiness and enters emptiness, how is it that he does not realise it? The two vehicles, at the time of contemplating emptiness, can also not grasp the mark of emptiness; how is it that they alone realise it?"〔X24n0451 0312a13〕; his answer judges it by complete and not complete: 「具足是深入空，不見空故不見涅槃。何以證耶？二乘見有涅槃是不具足，故證空也。」 tr. "Being complete is entering deeply into emptiness; because he does not see emptiness, he does not see nirvāṇa. How then would he realise? The two vehicles see that there is nirvāṇa, which is not being complete; therefore they realise emptiness."〔X24n0451 0312a14〕; and he further judges it by the vow: 「菩薩先有願故不證也，二乘無願故證也。」 tr. "The bodhisattva does not realise because he has a vow beforehand; the two vehicles realise because they have no vow."〔X24n0451 0312a16〕—the vow as the cause of not realising points to the same thing as this treatise's gloss 「本願、大悲心所持故」 tr. "because he is held by the original vow and by the mind of great compassion"; on this the two masters see alike. His explanation of the two times of entering deeply and being not exclusively attentive is also of the same structure as this treatise: 「上據深入定知空，不令餘事得入，故言攝心。今據初入時，恐於空不能自拔，故不專心在空也。」 tr. "Above, it is according to entering deeply into concentration and knowing emptiness, not letting any other matter get in, that it speaks of gathering the mind. Now, it is according to the time of first entering, fearing that he will be unable to pull himself out of emptiness, that he does not keep his mind exclusively on emptiness."〔X24n0451 0312a20〕.
Sixth, the matching of the three similes—「壯夫是能化菩薩，出母等是所化眾生，器杖是五通二慧，伎術等是萬行，嶮道是生死」 tr. "The stalwart man is the bodhisattva who transforms; bringing out his mother and the rest are the beings who are transformed; the weapons are the five supernormal powers and the two wisdoms; the crafts and the rest are the myriad practices; the perilous road is birth and death"〔X24n0451 0312b06〕, 「安立不動是菩薩畢竟空慧，內外魔不能動也。」 tr. "Standing steady and unmoved is the bodhisattva's wisdom of ultimate emptiness, which the inner and outer Māras cannot move."〔X24n0451 0312b10〕; with the matching of this treatise it corresponds thing for thing, while the names matched differ slightly (this treatise matches 「器仗」 tr. "the weapons" to the five supernormal powers and the other kinds of the power of skilful means, Jizang to the five supernormal powers and the two wisdoms; this treatise matches 「安立不動」 tr. "standing steady and unmoved" to abiding in ultimate emptiness, Jizang to the wisdom of ultimate emptiness). For the bird simile he gives the occasion of its question: 「時會疑云：既畢竟空，菩薩何所行耶？翼喻二慧，鳥喻菩薩也。」 tr. "Those in the assembly at the time doubted, saying: since it is ultimately empty, what does the bodhisattva practise? The wings stand for the two wisdoms; the bird stands for the bodhisattva."〔X24n0451 0312b12〕, and sets it out by the double negation of not flying and not abiding: 「如鳥不行空分不得飛，若住空則墮地；菩薩若心不遊空則不得捨有見，若住空則墮二乘地也。」 tr. "As a bird that does not move in its share of space cannot fly, and if it abides in space it falls to the ground; so the bodhisattva, if his mind does not roam in emptiness, cannot give up the view of existence, and if he abides in emptiness he falls to the ground of the two vehicles."〔X24n0451 0312b13〕—of the same structure as this treatise's setting of the question, 「時會者疑」 tr. "those in the assembly doubted"; what the two masters inherit must be the same question. At the end he explains the occasion of the testing question: 「上來明學空不證，已明其內行空，今欲驗之，當觀其所說相秤以不，故試問也。」 tr. "Up to here it has made clear training in emptiness without realising it, and has made clear his inward practice of emptiness; now, wishing to test it, one should observe whether what he says weighs up with the marks or not; therefore he is tested by asking."〔X24n0451 0312c06〕.
Seventh, the divergent explanation of the ground of thinning—under the name 「薄地」 tr. "the ground of thinning" Jizang sets out side by side the various explanations of past and present, south and north (from 「薄地者，論云：得阿」 tr. "As for the ground of thinning, the treatise says: obtaining the a-"〔X24n0451 0312c15〕 onward, he gives the two views 「初地名薄地」 tr. "the first ground is called the ground of thinning" and ‘the stations of the six abodes are called the ground of thinning’, and also records two explanations of the northern masters), whereas this treatise's gloss reads outright 「薄地名阿鞞跋致地中諸煩惱薄」 tr. "the ground of thinning means that within the ground of the avaivartika the afflictions are thinned"—this treatise glosses it by the thinning of afflictions, Jizang and the various masters gloss it by station; they take different routes; recorded side by side without judgement.
Huiying's Commentary (X46n0791). The only ancient commentary explaining this treatise, and not of zero coverage for this chapter: in the general table of contents at the head of the fascicle it appears as one of three listed in a row (「釋學空不證品第六十」 tr. "Commentary on the Chapter on Training in Emptiness without Realising It, the Sixtieth"〔X46n0791 0794b18〕, above it "Commentary on the Chapter on Gaṅgadevī, the Fifty-ninth", below it "Commentary on the Chapter on Not Realising It in a Dream, the Sixty-first"); the dedicated chapter of the main text begins at〔X46n0791 0900c22〕 and ends at〔X46n0791 0902c22〕, before the beginning of the next chapter, "Commentary on the Chapter on Not Realising It in a Dream, the Sixty-first"〔X46n0791 0902c23〕. There are six points worth recording.
First, his own numbering of the structural division is -1 (recorded, not judged)—the opening passage says outright: 「第五十九品者，名為學空不證品。何故次河天品後明於此品？」 tr. "As for the fifty-ninth chapter, it is named the Chapter on Training in Emptiness without Realising It. Why is this chapter made clear next, after the River Goddess chapter?"〔X46n0791 0900c23〕—Huiying takes this chapter as 「第五十九品」 tr. "the fifty-ninth chapter", one less than the base text's 「第六十」 tr. "the Sixtieth", while the chapter name he writes, 「學空不證品」 tr. "Chapter on Training in Emptiness without Realising It", is wholly the same as the base text's, and his general table of contents at the head of the fascicle also reads 「釋學空不證品第六十」 tr. "Commentary on the Chapter on Training in Emptiness without Realising It, the Sixtieth", not fifty-nine. This numbering of his own is of the same amount as, but of a different source from, the -1 step of the Shōgozō and Ishiyama texts (for the Shōgozō and Ishiyama it is a difference of chapter order in the transmission of the manuscripts; here in Huiying it is the numbering of his commentary's own structural division); recorded side by side, without forcing an explanation. Further, the name by which he takes up the preceding chapter reads 「河天品」 tr. "the River Goddess chapter", corresponding to the chapter title of Chapter 59 of this treatise.
Second, the three parts of the chapter—「須菩提白佛言已下，就此品中大有三分：第一、以法、喻兩周，明菩薩善入三脫而不住空」 tr. "From ‘Subhūti said to the Buddha’ onward, within this chapter there are broadly three parts: first, by the two rounds of dharma and simile, it makes clear that the bodhisattva enters well into the three liberations and yet does not abide in emptiness"〔X46n0791 0901a04〕; second, it makes clear that the three samādhi each have their particular benefit and each have what they remedy; third, it makes clear testing and knowing the avaivartika bodhisattva—corresponding segment by segment in sequence to the three segments of this treatise: Sūtra ① (the two rounds of dharma and simile), the four rounds of furthermore of Sūtra ② (the particular benefits), and the testing question at the end of Sūtra ② (testing and knowing).
Third, the explanation of no remainder and no part—「菩薩不化城中止取小涅槃，故云不有餘；不住實際，故云不有分也。」 tr. "The bodhisattva does not stop in the conjured city and take the small nirvāṇa; therefore it says ‘no remainder’. He does not abide in the limit of reality; therefore it says ‘no part’."〔X46n0791 0901a08〕—different from the gloss of this treatise: this treatise glosses remainder and part by ‘among the dharmas of form not even an atom is left over · among the formless dharmas not even a single thought is left’ (that is, nothing of the dharma contemplated is left behind); Huiying glosses them by the conjured city and the limit of reality (that is, there is no stopping at the fruit taken); the two masters establish their meaning slightly differently; recorded side by side without judgement.
Fourth, the two times of entering deeply and being not exclusively attentive—「上云不令心亂者，據明菩薩善解學空入三三昧；今言不專攝心繫在緣中者，據菩薩不專住空實際中證也。」 tr. "Where it says above ‘does not let the mind be disordered’, it is according to making clear that the bodhisattva understands well training in emptiness and entering the three samādhi; where it now says ‘does not exclusively gather the mind and bind it to the object’, it is according to the bodhisattva's not abiding exclusively in emptiness and realising within the limit of reality."〔X46n0791 0901a12〕; further, he judges the reason for not realising by the two emptinesses: 「菩薩得法空故，解空亦空，故云不證。二乘不得法空故，有空可證也。」 tr. "Because the bodhisattva obtains the emptiness of dharmas, he understands that emptiness too is empty; therefore it says he does not realise. Because the two vehicles do not obtain the emptiness of dharmas, there is emptiness for them to realise."〔X46n0791 0902b18〕, 「二乘但得生空，不能深入法空，故於空作證。菩薩既得二空，深入法空，知自相空，解空無空，故云深入故不證也。」 tr. "The two vehicles obtain only the emptiness of beings and cannot enter deeply into the emptiness of dharmas; therefore they realise within emptiness. The bodhisattva, having obtained both emptinesses, enters deeply into the emptiness of dharmas, knows the emptiness of specific marks, and understands that emptiness is without emptiness; therefore it says that because he enters deeply he does not realise."〔X46n0791 0902b22〕—judging the difference between the bodhisattva and the two vehicles by the two emptinesses, the emptiness of beings and the emptiness of dharmas: this judgement has no explicit text in this treatise and belongs to Huiying's own explanation; recorded separately, as it is.
Fifth, the three similes arising from one another in sequence, and ‘shooting to join the sky’—「就此譬說之中凡有三譬，次第展轉相生：第一、作壯夫喻；第二、作鳥飛空喻；第三、作善射喻。」 tr. "Within this simile-teaching there are three similes in all, arising from one another in sequence: first, the simile of the stalwart man; second, the simile of the bird flying in space; third, the simile of skilled archery."〔X46n0791 0901a20〕; the matching of the bird simile: 「鳥者是菩薩，有翼者譬二智，飛騰下喻學入三空，而不墮者不墮二地也。」 tr. "The bird is the bodhisattva; having wings stands for the two knowledges; ‘flying up’ and what follows stand for training in and entering the three emptinesses; and ‘not falling’ is not falling into the two grounds."〔X46n0791 0902a06〕, and the occasion of its question is also the same as in this treatise: 「上雖言菩薩具多種事而不住空，而時眾疑言空無所有，云何可行而言不住？」 tr. "Though above it says that the bodhisattva is endowed with many kinds of things and does not abide in emptiness, the assembly at the time doubted, saying: in emptiness there is nothing whatsoever; how can one practise there, and yet it says he does not abide?"〔X46n0791 0902a04〕. For the simile of skilled archery he gives the name of a method of archery, which neither the treatise nor the sūtra of the two canons has: 「如世間善射人放箭欲令相注時，若急後箭前箭則破，若緩後箭則不運前箭，須善得中令不墮落射法中，此名為參天射也。」 tr. "As when a skilled archer of the world lets fly arrows and wishes them to strike one another: if the later arrow is too swift, the earlier arrow is broken; if the later arrow is too slack, it does not carry the earlier arrow; he must hit the mean well so that they do not fall—in the art of archery this is called ‘shooting to join the sky’."〔X46n0791 0902a15〕, and its matching says: 「今菩薩亦爾，以禪定弓放智慧箭，以方便前復注智慧箭，不令住空墮於二地也。」 tr. "Now the bodhisattva is also like this: with the bow of meditative concentration he lets fly the arrow of wisdom, and with skilful means he again directs the arrow of wisdom at the earlier one, not letting it abide in emptiness and fall into the two grounds."〔X46n0791 0902a18〕—the name 「參天射」 tr. "shooting to join the sky" and the two faults ‘too swift, it breaks; too slack, it does not carry’: this treatise only says 「箭箭相拄」 tr. "arrow supporting arrow" and does not reach them; what Huiying supplies is the actual mark of the archer's craft; recorded, not judged.
Sixth, the glosses of training and entering and of training and beyond training—「以初攢求為學，學已深達為入也。」 tr. "The first drilling and seeking is taken as training; deep penetration once trained is entering."〔X46n0791 0902b14〕 (corresponding to this treatise's 「初名學空，後是入空」 tr. "at first it is called training in emptiness; afterwards it is entering emptiness"); 「功用道是菩薩學道，無功用道是菩薩無學道也。」 tr. "The path with effort is the bodhisattva's path of training; the path without effort is the bodhisattva's path beyond training."〔X46n0791 0902b11〕—different from the gloss of this treatise: this treatise judges the ground of training and the ground beyond training by the acceptance of the non-arising of dharmas, Huiying judges them by with effort and without effort; the two masters are recorded side by side without judgement. Further, under the item 「六十四能」 tr. "the sixty-four skills" Huiying cites widely: 「六十四能解者甚少，大莊嚴論極廣釋，今且略說。」 tr. "Those who understand the sixty-four skills are very few; the Great Adornment Treatise explains them very broadly; here we speak of them briefly for now."〔X46n0791 0901b07〕, and below this he explains them in two ways, as the sixty-four skills of worldly dharmas and the sixty-four skills of the Buddha-dharma; the Buddha-dharma explanation cites the Treatise on the Jewel Nature, taking the ten powers, the four fearlessnesses, the eighteen unshared dharmas, and the thirty-two marks as the sixty-four—this is Huiying citing another treatise on his own; this treatise does not reach it; recorded as it is, without settling the reading on his behalf.
Junzheng's Profound Meaning of the Four Mahāyāna Treatises (X46n0784) · zero hits (recorded as it is). This apparatus independently searched back through the whole file of X46n0784 for the four strings 「學空不證」 tr. "training in emptiness without realising it", 「不證品」 tr. "Chapter on Not Realising", 「空中不證」 tr. "not realising within emptiness", and 「夢中不證」 tr. "not realising it in a dream", with zero hits for all; Junzheng's book is of the general-discussion kind, not a chapter-by-chapter structural division, and has no named citation of this chapter; the negative result is recorded as it is.
The Tiantai line (T46n1911, the Great Calming and Contemplation · T46n1912, the Supporting Practice and Broad Resolution of Calming and Contemplation · T33n1716, the Profound Meaning of the Lotus · T33n1717, the Annotations on the Profound Meaning of the Lotus) · zero hits for this chapter (recorded as it is · with one control-group confirmation given in addition). This apparatus independently searched back through the whole of the four files for the four strings listed above: the three files T46n1911, T33n1716, and T33n1717 are wholly zero; T46n1912 has one hit for the string 「不證品」 tr. "Chapter on Not Realising"〔T46n1912 0289b21〕, whose text reads 「故大品觀空不證品云」 tr. "Therefore the Chapter on Contemplating Emptiness without Realising It of the Larger Sūtra says"—the chapter name reads 「觀空不證品」 tr. "Chapter on Contemplating Emptiness without Realising It", a fourth designation outside the three lines. But the sūtra text cited below it (from 「我證跋致餘人永無」 tr. "I have realised non-retrogression; other people forever lack it" to 「當知是菩薩旃陀羅」 tr. "know that this is a bodhisattva caṇḍāla"), which this apparatus independently located string by string in the base text of the sūtra explained, is in fact within "The Dream Oath, the Sixty-first" of T223〔T08 0353a18〕, 〔T08 0353b26〕—that is, the text Zhanran cites is not within the range of this chapter. So this hit belongs to a control-group confirmation (the chapter name is close in wording, but the text cited is not in this chapter), and is not an ancient master's citation of this chapter; recorded as it is, and a similar chapter name is not used to fill in a hit.
VII. Cross-reading and Further Resonances
The lines of meaning of this chapter that carry on before and after are four; all are recorded in this section, without settling the reading on anyone's behalf.
First, the forward pointing and the later answering of the simile of skilled archery (the treatise-author's own testimony · a hard link within this treatise itself). In Chapter 3 of this treatise, "Practising in Accord" (Fascicle 36), when it explains entering the three gates of liberation by the power of skilful means without taking nirvāṇa, it already announces the simile of this chapter: 「如後品中說。譬如仰射虛空，箭箭相拄，不令墮地」 tr. "As will be told in a later chapter. It is like shooting upward into space, arrow supporting arrow, not letting them fall to the ground"〔T25 0323a03〕, and below it matches it outright with 「以智慧箭仰射三解脫虛空，以方便後箭射前箭，不令墮涅槃之地」 tr. "with the arrow of wisdom shooting upward into the space of the three liberations, and with the later arrow of skilful means shooting the earlier arrow, not letting it fall to the ground of nirvāṇa"—identical thing for thing with the matching in this chapter's treatise (the bow is meditative concentration · the arrow is wisdom · space is the three gates of liberation · the ground is nirvāṇa); there it is given first, and here is the 「後品」 tr. "later chapter" to which it points. Another place in the same fascicle also points forward to this chapter: 「不取證。如後品中說」 tr. "does not take realisation. As will be told in a later chapter"〔T25 0328b26〕; what is cited below it reads 「入空、無相、無作三昧，菩薩住是三解脫門，作是念言」 tr. "enters the emptiness, signless, and non-action samādhi; the bodhisattva, abiding in these three gates of liberation, has this thought and says", continuing with 「今是觀時，非是證時」 tr. "now is the time of contemplating, not the time of realising"—of the same structure, but slightly different in wording, as the formula of Sūtra ① of this chapter, 「我今是學時，非是證時」 tr. "now is my time of training, not the time of realising" (a difference of one character: contemplating / training); recorded separately, as it is, and not said outright to be the same text. The forward pointing of this treatise and the actual telling in this chapter are tied together head and tail; this is a hard link of the treatise-author's own testimony.
Second, the succession of chapter order ‘not retrogressing — not realising’. The preceding chapter, "River Goddess, the Fifty-ninth", tells of the Golden Flower woman's receiving the prediction and not retrogressing; this chapter takes it up and makes clear that the reason for not retrogressing lies in training in emptiness without realising it—the direct structural division of the succession of chapter order is seen in Huiying; what Jizang says in his structural text on "The Profound, the Fifty-seventh" of the sūtra explained (that is, the sūtra chapter explained by "The Lamp-wick" of this treatise), 「然自行化他二行成者，要由學空不證故，不墮二乘地」 tr. "Yet the accomplishment of the two practices, one's own practice and the transforming of others, depends on training in emptiness without realising it, and therefore he does not fall into the ground of the two vehicles"〔X24n0451 0307b09〕, can serve only as side evidence for training in emptiness without realising it, not as evidence of the chapter order. Huiying's opening passage says of this chapter, 「何故次河天品後明於此品」 tr. "why is this chapter made clear next, after the River Goddess chapter"〔X46n0791 0900c23〕, and answers it with the practice and vow of the non-retrogressing bodhisattva. The next chapter, "Not Realising It in a Dream, the Sixty-first", goes one layer further—not realising while awake has been made clear; even in a dream he does not realise. The three chapters give rise to one another, with this chapter in the middle; their succession is recorded as it is, without settling the reading of the chapters before and after on their behalf.
Third, the thread of the formula ‘time of training · time of realising’ (recording its form · no statistics made). The formula 「我今是學時，非是證時」 tr. "now is my time of training, not the time of realising" is applied again and again within Sūtra ① of this chapter, item by item from dānapāramitā up to the omniscience of all kinds, and is the densest formula of the whole chapter; its variant form 「今是觀時，非是證時」 tr. "now is the time of contemplating, not the time of realising" is seen in Chapter 3 of this treatise〔T25 0328b27〕. The use of this formula lies in the division of time, not in a division of dharmas—what is trained in is the very dharma that is realised; only the time has not yet come. The thread of the formula is recorded; no cross-chapter full statistics are made (cross-chapter statistics would require setting up a separate range and rescanning entry by entry, which is not the task of this section).
Fourth, linking to the treasury (stable citation · soft citation). This chapter's gloss of the two paths, 「學空、入空」 tr. "training in emptiness, entering emptiness"; its mechanism of not realising, 「深入空故，知空亦空，涅槃亦空」 tr. "because he enters deeply into emptiness, he knows that emptiness too is empty and nirvāṇa too is empty"; its simile of skilful means, the skilled archer whose later arrow supports the earlier arrow; and its method of testing a person, 「應當試問」 tr. "one should test him by asking"—these are the basis on which later ages discussed the bodhisattva's practising emptiness without realising it; they rest on a stable citation〔T25n1509 學空不證品·卷七十六〕; the places where the other collections cite this treatise are not yet in settled form, so the citation is soft, awaiting their word-by-word verification. This belongs to the further resonances by which the meaning of prajñā runs down through the sūtras; recorded, not judged.
VIII. Witnesses and Editions
The base text of this chapter is Fascicle 76 of the Mahāprajñāpāramitā-upadeśa〔T25 0592a15–0594c24〕 (the main text of the chapter body begins from the chapter title〔T25 0592a15〕 and ends with the sentence 「是菩薩雖少，善根明了，能廣利益眾生，無能壞者。」 tr. "Though these bodhisattvas are few, their roots of goodness are clear and bright; they can benefit beings widely, and there is none who can break them."〔T25 0594c22〕; before the title of the next chapter〔T25 0594c24〕, with no fascicle-end title in between); the collation text for the sūtra explained is "Not Realising" in the Mahāprajñāpāramitā Sūtra〔T08 0350a05–0351c07〕; the ancient-master commentary texts for collation are Jizang's Commentary on the Larger Sūtra (X24n0451, covering this chapter at〔X24n0451 0311c14–0312c20〕) and Huiying's Commentary (X46n0791, covering this chapter at〔X46n0791 0900c22–0902c22〕); Junzheng's Profound Meaning of the Four Mahāyāna Treatises (X46n0784) has zero hits for this chapter, and the four books of the Tiantai line have zero hits for this chapter (for the one control-group confirmation, see Section VI). The variant collation notes follow the Taishō collation, covering differences between the Taishō base text and the Song, Yuan, Ming, Palace, Shōgozō, and Ishiyama (the Ishiyama-dera manuscript) texts, the Southern Canon, and the CBETA collation—in this chapter no entry of the Shōgozō B is seen.
Collation note on the chapter title (the basis of the three lines of chapter names and of the -1 step · listed separately). The chapter title〔T25 0592a15〕 is one note in six forms (the first entry of the ledger below), which is the basis of the three lines of chapter names and of the -1 step of chapter order; recorded side by side as it is, without forcing a reconciliation (analysed in Section IV). Within this entry are also one interlinear note of the base text, 「卷七十六」 tr. "Fascicle Seventy-six", and the interlinear note of the three editions Song, Yuan, and Palace, 「訖六十一品上」 tr. "ending at the first part of Chapter Sixty-one"; this apparatus writes these interlinear sub-notes as 〔卷七十六〕 and 〔訖六十一品上〕, kept as they stand, not deleted. The 「（卷七十六）」 tr. "(Fascicle Seventy-six)" within the reading of the base text is a rendering of the interlinear note 「卷七十六」 tr. "Fascicle Seventy-six" of the chapter title, not a misprint; this apparatus, following the conventions, records it as an interlinear note, and marks its note-type here, so that the two layers can be traced to each other. The entry also has a passage of original note (note number 0592010 · original-note type) given in the abbreviated form of counting characters, which contains the two remarks 「上註宮本無學空二字而六十下有品字」 tr. "In the note above, the Palace edition lacks the two characters for ‘training in emptiness’, and has the character for ‘chapter’ below ‘sixty’" and 「此註下宋本元本宮本俱有訖六十一品上六字夾註」 tr. "Below this note, the Song, Yuan, and Palace editions all have the six-character interlinear note ‘ending at the first part of Chapter Sixty-one’"—that is, the basis for the Palace edition's dropping 「學空」 tr. "training in emptiness" and adding the character 「品」 tr. "chapter", and for the interlinear note of the three editions; this apparatus, following the convention already approved, records outright the full text to which it refers in the ledger below, and marks its abbreviated form here.
Two collation annotations (side-notes) · kept as they stand (listed separately). First, the entry 「但應觀」 tr. "but should contemplate" at〔T25 0593b29〕 (entry thirty-one of the ledger below): besides the two notes mod / orig, the base text gives in addition a passage of note of type="rest": 「但聖本石本俱有但應觀或本五字傍註」 tr. "but both the Shōgozō and Ishiyama texts have the five characters ‘but should contemplate, some text’ as a side-note"—that is, though the Shōgozō and Ishiyama texts do not have these three characters in the main text, their side-note still keeps the five characters 「但應觀或本」 tr. "but should contemplate, some text"; this apparatus keeps this annotation as it stands. Second, the entry 「勅」 tr. "commands" at〔T25 0593c23〕 (entry forty of the ledger below): the base text's mod note reads 「勅【大】，勸【宋】【元】，明註曰勅南藏作勸」 tr. "commands (Taishō); exhorts (Song, Yuan); the Ming note says: for ‘commands’ the Southern Canon has ‘exhorts’"—the third reading, 「勸」 tr. "exhorts", comes from the Southern Canon cited in the Ming edition's note (the base text's rdg resp=#resp5 wit=#wit12); this apparatus, following the base text, lists the three readings separately.
One entry of the CBETA emendation layer (not of the type that sets the traditional texts side by side · listed separately). 〔T25 0594b05〕「脫【CB】｜解【大】」 tr. "liberation (CBETA) | release (Taishō)" (entry fifty-four of the ledger below)—the base text's note type is type="add", and the wit of the lem is #wit.cbeta; that is, CBETA emends the 「解」 tr. "release" of the base text 【大】 to 「脫」 tr. "liberation" (「三解脫門」 tr. "the three gates of liberation"), with no traditional witness marker such as Song, Yuan, Ming, Palace, Shōgozō, or Ishiyama; it belongs to the present-day collation layer of CBETA, and the reader-facing text of this edition follows the current reading of the CBETA text.
Four stars · all within the chapter (listed separately). Within the range of this chapter there are four star anchors (beg_842–beg_845); this apparatus resolved their corresp targets one by one and located the chapter to which each belongs, finding all four within the chapter, zero across chapters—the distribution of targets: note(0593006)〔T25 0593a25〕 seen twice (entries twenty-six and twenty-eight of the ledger below, that is, the witness group within the same passage in which the two words 「樂想」 tr. "the notion of happiness" and 「淨想」 tr. "the notion of purity" reuse that of the one word 「常想」 tr. "the notion of permanence"), and note(0593011)〔T25 0593c03〕 seen twice (entries thirty-five and thirty-eight of the ledger below, that is, two places within the same passage where the character 「授」 tr. "give" reuses the same group). This type is exactly the counter-example of the eight stars, all across chapters, of Chapter 53, "Tending toward Omniscience"; recorded as it is.
Two further notes carry ＊ while their star anchors lie outside this chapter (pointing back across chapters · listed separately). This apparatus further checked back one by one how the notes of this chapter are cited, and found two entries: first, the note on the structural marker 【經】 at〔T25 0592a20〕 (entry two of the ledger below; the base text's mod note carries ＊), whose corresponding star anchor lies in Chapter 61, "Not Realising It in a Dream"〔T25 0594c25〕; second, the note on the character 「惟」 tr. "only" at〔T25 0594c21〕 (entry sixty of the ledger below; the base text's mod note carries ＊), whose corresponding star anchor lies in the remainder of Chapter 61〔T25 0597c13〕. Both are characters of a later chapter pointing back to notes of this chapter, in the direction opposite to the four recorded in the preceding separate listing; this two-way pattern is recorded as it is. The note texts of the star targets carry the mark 「＊」 tr. "asterisk" in the base text, and this apparatus keeps them as they stand in the base text.
One point-anchor entry · not entered in the ledger of sixty-four entries (marked explicitly). At the end of the range of this chapter there is in addition the base text's note n="0594021"〔T25 0594c23〕, 「卷第七十六終【石】」 tr. "end of Fascicle Seventy-six (Ishiyama)"; its anchor is a point anchor of anchor type="circle" (without a beg/end pair), and so it is not entered in the ledger of sixty-four entries of the working base text; this apparatus still takes sixty-four entries as the ledger count, and this point-anchor note is not entered in the ledger of sixty-four entries, but listed separately here. Its value for meaning is not small—the Ishiyama text closes Fascicle 76 at the end of this chapter (see Section IV). Further, at the place where this chapter begins〔T25 0592a20〕 there is also one anchor type="circle", which immediately follows the beg anchor of the 【經】 marker and has no note text of its own; it is not another collation note; recorded as it is.
Complete ledger of collation notes (all sixty-four entries reconciled · base text as it stands). Below, all are listed in the order of their appearance in the base text, including four star repeated citations, with their corresp targets and the chapters to which they belong marked with each entry. The readings of the variant texts are preserved side by side, while the main text still follows the reading of the current base text:
App entries (sixty-four · in order of appearance in the base text · star-corresp marked with each entry)
- 〔T25 0592a15〕大智度論釋學空不證品第六十〔卷七十六〕【大】｜大智度論卷第七十六釋學空不證品第六十【明】｜大智度論卷第七十六釋不證品第六十品〔訖六十一品上〕【宮】｜大智度論卷第七十六釋學空不證品第六十〔訖六十一品上〕【宋】【元】｜摩訶般若波羅蜜空中不證品第五十九【聖】｜摩訶般若波羅蜜品第五十九空中不證【石】(one note in six forms on the chapter title · the base text's interlinear note 〔卷七十六〕 kept as it stands · the Song, Yuan, and Palace editions in the fascicle-title form plus the interlinear note 〔訖六十一品上〕 · the Shōgozō and Ishiyama in the sūtra-title form with the -1 step · see Section IV)
- 〔T25 0592a20〕【經】【大】＊｜〔－〕【宋】【宮】【聖】＊(note on the presence or absence of a structural marker · star · the ＊ mark is found in the base text's mod note · its corresp comes from the star anchor in Chapter 61〔T25 0594c25〕 · pointing back across chapters to this chapter · in addition the base text's mod note also carries the reading 「不分卷【石】」 tr. "no division of the fascicle (Ishiyama)", which the app element lacks · marked explicitly · see Section VIII)
- 〔T25 0592a26〕界【大】｜界空【元】【明】
- 〔T25 0592b06〕繫【大】｜係【聖】
- 〔T25 0592b07〕是故【大】｜如是【聖】【石】
- 〔T25 0592b18〕漢【大】｜漢果【宋】【元】【明】【宮】【聖】【石】
- 〔T25 0592b19〕觀，住空中【大】｜觀空住空中【聖】【石】(the lemma contains a pause comma (「觀，住空中」 tr. "contemplates, abides in emptiness") · point-anchor type · kept as it stands in the base text)
- 〔T25 0592b24〕壯【大】｜庄【石】
- 〔T25 0592b25〕立【大】｜立不【石】
- 〔T25 0592b25〕伎【大】｜技【元】【明】
- 〔T25 0592b25〕正【大】｜政【宮】【聖】【石】
- 〔T25 0592b29〕懅【大】｜懼【聖】【石】
- 〔T25 0592c03〕亦【大】｜亦復【聖】【石】
- 〔T25 0592c12〕作【大】｜〔－〕【宋】【元】【明】【宮】
- 〔T25 0592c15〕空中【大】｜虛空【聖】
- 〔T25 0592c16〕箭【大】｜前【聖】
- 〔T25 0592c16〕箭【大】｜〔－〕【石】
- 〔T25 0592c16〕拄【大】｜注【聖】
- 〔T25 0592c22〕法【大】｜〔－〕【宋】【元】【明】【宮】
- 〔T25 0593a03〕若【大】｜若是【宋】【元】【明】【宮】
- 〔T25 0593a04〕生【大】｜生一切【宋】【元】【明】【宮】【聖】【石】
- 〔T25 0593a13〕提【大】｜提時【元】【明】
- 〔T25 0593a16〕道【大】｜地【聖】
- 〔T25 0593a22〕減【大】｜咸【聖】
- 〔T25 0593a25〕想【大】＊｜相【宋】【宮】【聖】＊(head of the witness group notion / mark · star · the ＊ mark is found in the base text's mod note · the base text's mod note reads 「想【大】＊，相【宋】【宮】＊，【聖】」 tr. "notion (Taishō); mark (Song, Palace); (Shōgozō)" while the rdg witnesses of the app element are 【宋】【宮】【聖】 · the two layers differ slightly · marked explicitly)
- 〔T25 0593a25〕想【大】＊｜相【宋】【宮】＊(star · corresp → note(0593006) = the note at〔T25 0593a25〕 within this chapter · shared within the chapter (not across chapters))
- 〔T25 0593a25〕我想、淨【大】｜淨相我【宋】【宮】｜淨想我【元】【明】【聖】(the lemma contains an enumeration comma (「我想、淨」 tr. "self-notion, purity") · point-anchor type · the Song and Palace read 「淨相我」 tr. "purity-mark, self" = the character order of the base text of the sūtra explained · see Section IV)
- 〔T25 0593a25〕想【大】＊｜相【宋】【宮】＊(star · corresp → note(0593006) = the note at〔T25 0593a25〕 within this chapter · shared within the chapter)
- 〔T25 0593b23〕問：『諸【大】｜問【宋】【元】【明】【宮】｜問若【聖】(the lemma contains a colon and an inner quotation mark (「問：『諸」 tr. "asks: ‘all") · point-anchor type · kept as it stands in the base text)
- 〔T25 0593b26〕而【大】｜實際而【元】【明】
- 〔T25 0593b29〕但應觀【大】｜〔－〕【聖】【石】(collation annotation (side-note) · the base text gives in addition a note of type="rest": 「但聖本石本俱有但應觀或本五字傍註」 tr. "but both the Shōgozō and Ishiyama texts have the five characters ‘but should contemplate, some text’ as a side-note" · kept as it stands, not deleted)
- 〔T25 0593c03〕授【大】＊｜受【聖】＊(head of the witness group give / receive · star · the ＊ mark is found in the base text's mod note)
- 〔T25 0593c08〕相【大】｜地【宮】【聖】【石】
- 〔T25 0593c15〕薩【大】｜薩摩訶薩【聖】【石】
- 〔T25 0593c16〕授【大】＊｜受【聖】＊(star · corresp → note(0593011) = the note at〔T25 0593c03〕 within this chapter · shared within the chapter)
- 〔T25 0593c16〕行【大】｜〔－〕【宋】【宮】
- 〔T25 0593c16〕慧【大】｜乾慧【宋】【元】【明】【宮】
- 〔T25 0593c16〕授【大】＊｜受【聖】＊(star · corresp → note(0593011) = the note at〔T25 0593c03〕 within this chapter · shared within the chapter)
- 〔T25 0593c19〕【論】【大】｜〔－〕【宋】【宮】【石】(note on the presence or absence of a structural marker · the one 【論】 · absent in the Song, Palace, and Ishiyama)
- 〔T25 0593c23〕勅【大】｜勸【宋】【元】｜勸【南藏】(collation annotation · the base text's mod note reads 「勅【大】，勸【宋】【元】，明註曰勅南藏作勸」 tr. "commands (Taishō); exhorts (Song, Yuan); the Ming note says: for ‘commands’ the Southern Canon has ‘exhorts’" · the third reading comes from the Southern Canon cited in the Ming edition's note · kept as it stands)
- 〔T25 0593c25〕道【大】｜〔－〕【宋】【元】【明】【宮】【聖】【石】
- 〔T25 0593c26〕可【大】｜〔－〕【宋】【元】【明】【宮】
- 〔T25 0594a05〕作【大】｜〔－〕【宋】【元】【明】【宮】【聖】
- 〔T25 0594a06〕緩【大】｜瑗【石】
- 〔T25 0594a07〕急捉【大】｜捉急【宋】【元】【明】【宮】
- 〔T25 0594a10〕念【大】｜心【聖】【石】
- 〔T25 0594a12〕中【大】｜〔－〕【宋】【元】【明】【宮】
- 〔T25 0594a12〕柔【大】｜濡【宮】【聖】【石】
- 〔T25 0594a21〕喻【大】｜如【聖】【石】(issues from the same single orig note of the base text as the next entry (「喻壯夫＝如莊夫【聖】【石】」 tr. "simile, stalwart man = like, zhuang man (Shōgozō, Ishiyama)") · CBETA splits it into two notes, a / b, in the mod layer · marked explicitly)
- 〔T25 0594a21〕壯【大】｜莊【聖】【石】(see the entry above · the base text's note id reads 0594007b)
- 〔T25 0594a27〕虛空【大】｜空虛【宋】【元】【明】【宮】
- 〔T25 0594b02〕斷【大】｜折【宋】【宮】
- 〔T25 0594b02〕度【大】｜〔－〕【宋】【元】【明】【宮】
- 〔T25 0594b05〕脫【CB】｜解【大】(CBETA emendation layer · the base text's note type type="add" · lem wit=#wit.cbeta · no traditional manuscript witness · the reader-facing text of this edition follows the current CBETA reading)
- 〔T25 0594b07〕故【大】｜〔－〕【宋】【元】【明】【宮】
- 〔T25 0594c05〕是【大】｜〔－〕【聖】【石】
- 〔T25 0594c12〕言【大】｜言有【宋】【元】【明】【宮】【聖】【石】
- 〔T25 0594c13〕若【大】｜〔－〕【宮】【聖】【石】
- 〔T25 0594c19〕受【大】｜授【聖】【石】
- 〔T25 0594c21〕惟【大】＊｜唯【宋】【元】【明】【宮】【聖】【石】＊(star · the ＊ mark is found in the base text's mod note · its corresp comes from the star anchor in the remainder of Chapter 61〔T25 0597c13〕 · pointing back across chapters to this chapter)
- 〔T25 0594c21〕佛知【大】｜〔－〕【聖】【石】
- 〔T25 0594c22〕懸【大】｜縣【聖】
- 〔T25 0594c22〕受【大】｜授【元】【明】
- 〔T25 0594c23〕者【大】｜者釋第五十九品竟，大智度經卷第七十六【石】(the Ishiyama text's fascicle-end title · 「釋第五十九品竟」 tr. "the commentary on the fifty-ninth chapter is finished" and the -1 step of the Shōgozō and Ishiyama in the chapter title confirm each other head and tail · see Section IV)