大智度論 無盡方便品Dazhidulun — Mahāprajñāpāramitā-upadeśa · Inexhaustible Skilful Means
無盡方便品：須菩提念菩提甚深而問般若不可盡，佛以虛空不可盡答，說色受想行識六度乃至一切種智不可盡故般若應生、癡空乃至老死憂悲苦惱空不可盡故般若應生，十二因緣是獨菩薩法能除諸邊顛倒、坐道場時應如是觀，以虛空不可盡法觀十二因緣則不墮二乘、轉還與不轉還皆繫方便力，觀時不見法無因緣生不見法常不滅不見我人乃至不見寂滅非寂滅、於色乃至菩提亦不見，行無所得般若則惡魔愁毒如箭入心如人新喪父母，三千大千世界諸魔皆愁毒不能得便，行般若時具足六波羅蜜——所有布施持戒忍辱精進禪定智慧皆迴向薩婆若；論主釋般若義無量而名字句眾有量、佛說菩提少許分以無能受者、取如相取畢竟空相皆非、虛空無法但有名字、破色生四句與色真相即般若相、離斷常二邊而說十二因緣空假名中道、癡從因緣和合生無自相、觸念不在內外中間而癡實相即智慧、三種十二因緣之凡夫賢聖菩薩、老無定相與髮白車喻、有人言說果報五眾相名老之破、念念生滅則無住無故無老、菩薩不著而生大悲、三觀所屬人、離諸邊顛倒與二種煩惱、第三觀甚深引城譬喻經、過二乘得一切種智與退不退之由、不見一法無因緣生與破邪因緣微塵世性、屬因緣故無我、安住畢竟空而不見般若是名無所得般若、諸魔愁毒與捕魚人喻、能行無所得般若則六度具足、軟根利根二種人皆不能具足檀度、信力慧力等故能迴向薩婆若（經＋論）
本品開卷是一個極短的問。須菩提心裡先起一念：「是諸佛阿耨多羅三藐三菩提甚深，我當問佛。」——他要問的其實只有兩個字。問出口是：「世尊！是般若波羅蜜不可盡？」佛答得更短：「虛空不可盡故，般若波羅蜜不可盡。」為什麼虛空不可盡？論主把它拆到底：「如虛空，無有法，但有名字」——沒有東西，才談不上用完。不可盡不是因為多到用不完，是因為根本沒有可盡之物。
可是這一答立刻逼出一個更難的問題，須菩提隨即問了：「世尊！云何應生般若波羅蜜？」——既然像虛空那樣無所有，那般若又從哪裡生出來？論主把這個難自己攤開：「般若波羅蜜若如虛空無所有故不可盡，云何菩薩能生是般若波羅蜜？」全品論段的展開，就是在答這一句。佛的答法是把「不可盡」一路推到底：色不可盡故般若應生，受想行識、六波羅蜜、乃至一切種智不可盡故般若應生。論主釋其理：「若色有生必有盡，以無生故亦無盡。」——會用完的東西，一定曾經生出來過；沒有生，就無所謂盡。而色之無生不是說色不在，是說所見的那個生滅不實：「二法不可得故，色如幻、如夢，但誑人眼。」於是能生與所觀在實相上合成一件事：「色真相即是般若波羅蜜相」——所謂「應生」，不是從空無中造出一個般若，是色的真相現前時般若自現。
接著佛把同一條路鋪到十二因緣上，一支一支地說：「癡空不可盡故，菩薩摩訶薩般若波羅蜜應生」，行空、識空、名色空、六處、六觸、受、愛、取、有、生，直到「老死憂悲苦惱空不可盡故，菩薩般若波羅蜜應生。」然後給出全品最重的一句判語：「是十二因緣，是獨菩薩法，能除諸邊、顛倒。坐道場時，應如是觀，當得一切種智。」——十二因緣三乘共說，何以獨屬菩薩？論主的答案在兩個坑上：「若人但觀畢竟空，多墮斷滅邊；若觀有，多墮常邊。」空與有兩頭都是懸崖，而十二因緣正是那條中間的路：「若法從因緣和合生，是法無有定性；若法無定性，即是畢竟空寂滅相。」——因緣生，所以不是常；無定性，所以不是斷。「離二邊故，假名為中道。」凡夫順著十二因緣走而不問，二乘知道它是過患而急著滅掉，只有菩薩肯把它窮到根上，所以說獨。連無明本身也不例外：「癡實相即是智慧，取著智慧相即是癡。」——智與癡不是兩樣東西，是同一件事取不取相的分別。
論主隨後把十二因緣分成三層來看：凡夫肉眼所見的，起煩惱造業往來生死；賢聖以法眼分別的，厭老病死而求出離，但「是但滅苦故入於涅槃，不究盡求諸苦相。」；菩薩所觀的，則是「但求究盡十二因緣根本相，不以憂怖自沒。」——前兩層都在苦上動作，一個受苦，一個避苦；第三層是把苦的根本翻開來看，而不被它嚇退。
最見手法的是接下來破「老」的一段。論主不從高處說，從最實在的地方問起：人人都說老，老到底是什麼？先問定義——有人說「老是心不相應行。」論主一句斷之：這相拿不出來，頭白只是色相，不是老相。再問世俗經驗——「世人名老相：髮白、齒離，面皺、身曲，羸瘦、力薄，諸根闇塞」，論主一一破去：有年壯而白的，有老年而黑的，有老而諸根明利、少而闇塞的，甚至「又服還年藥，雖老而壯。」又有人說老是果報五眾的相，論主也不許：「一切有為法念念生滅不住，若不住則無故，無故則無老。」最後收在一個極平近的比喻上：「又如假輪、軸、轅、輻等為車，是假名非實。」——車不在輪軸轅輻之外，也不在其中；老也一樣。而窮到這裡，論主並沒有停在空上：「菩薩觀諸法實相畢竟空、無所有、無所得，亦不著是事故，於眾生中而生大悲」——觀空的下一步不是撒手，是大悲：眾生正在一個拿不出實體的東西上，受著十足真實的苦。
品的後半轉到魔。經文寫得極重：「若菩薩行無所得般若波羅蜜時，惡魔愁毒，如箭入心。譬如人新喪父母」；須菩提問這是一個魔還是所有的魔，佛答：「三千大千世界中諸惡魔皆愁毒，如箭入心，各於其坐不能自安。」魔為什麼愁到這個地步？論主給出理由：「以是菩薩深入十二因緣畢竟空中，不著有、無、非有非無等六十二諸邪見魔網」——魔的本事是張網，而網只鉤得住有所著的心。論主於是自己另出一喻：「譬如捕魚人見一魚深入大水，鉤網所不及，則絕望憂愁。亦如新喪父母。」——不是魚打贏了漁人，是魚去了網到不了的地方。魔之愁，因此不是威脅，是這一觀走通了的外證。
全品收在一個意外平實的秤上。須菩提問行般若時如何具足六度，佛答一切布施皆迴向薩婆若。論主卻指出，同樣迴向而仍不具足者有兩種人：軟根的取相迴向，利根的破了取相卻又戲論空法，「信力轉薄，不用薩婆若，但求諸法實相。」——「一者以信力多、慧力少，二者以慧力多、信力少故。」能具足的只有一種：「信力、慧力等故，能迴向薩婆若。」論主並把兩者各配其實：「念薩婆若者，是信力；如薩婆若迴向者，是智力。」品題四字至此合成一義：無盡是所觀的理，方便是能行的力。而經文裡「方便」二字只出現在一處——轉還的人「皆不得是方便力故」，不轉還的人「皆得是方便力故」。理再無盡，力若不逮，仍舊要退；方便二字，正落在這裡。
This chapter opens on a very short question. Subhūti first has a thought in his mind: ‘The anuttarā samyaksaṃbodhi of the buddhas is very deep; I shall ask the Buddha.’—what he wants to ask is really only two Chinese characters. Spoken aloud it is: ‘World-Honored One! Is this prajñāpāramitā inexhaustible?’ The Buddha's answer is shorter still: ‘Because space is inexhaustible, prajñāpāramitā is inexhaustible.’ Why is space inexhaustible? The treatise-author takes it apart to the bottom: ‘Like space, which has no dharma and has only a name’—where there is no thing, there is no talk of using it up. It is inexhaustible not because there is so much of it that it cannot be used up, but because there is at root no thing that could be exhausted.
But this answer at once forces out a harder question, and Subhūti asks it straightaway: ‘World-Honored One! How should one give rise to prajñāpāramitā?’—since it is, like space, without anything existent, from where then does prajñā arise? The treatise-author lays this difficulty open himself: ‘If prajñāpāramitā is inexhaustible because, like space, it is without anything existent, how can the bodhisattva give rise to this prajñāpāramitā?’ The unfolding of the whole treatise section of the chapter is the answering of this one sentence. The Buddha's way of answering is to push ‘inexhaustible’ all the way to the end: because form is inexhaustible prajñā should arise; because feeling, perception, constructions, and consciousness, the six perfections, and so on up to the omniscience of all kinds are inexhaustible prajñā should arise. The treatise-author explains the principle: ‘If form had arising it would certainly have exhaustion; because it is without arising it is also without exhaustion.’—A thing that can be used up must once have arisen; without arising, there is nothing to be called exhaustion. And the non-arising of form does not say that form is not there; it says that the arising and ceasing that are seen are not real: ‘Because the two dharmas are unfindable, form is like an illusion, like a dream, and only deceives the human eye.’ Thereupon what gives rise and what is contemplated come together, in the real mark, as one matter: ‘The true mark of form is precisely the mark of prajñāpāramitā’—what is called ‘should arise’ is not the making of a prajñā out of empty nothing; it is that when the true mark of form appears, prajñā appears of itself.
Next the Buddha lays the same road over the twelve links of causes and conditions, speaking of them link by link: ‘Because the emptiness of delusion is inexhaustible, the bodhisattva-mahāsattva's prajñāpāramitā should arise’, the emptiness of constructions, the emptiness of consciousness, the emptiness of name-and-form, the six sense-bases, the six contacts, feeling, craving, grasping, existence, birth, straight on to ‘Because the emptiness of old age and death, sorrow, grief, suffering, and vexation is inexhaustible, the bodhisattva's prajñāpāramitā should arise.’ Then he gives the weightiest verdict of the whole chapter: ‘These twelve links of causes and conditions are a dharma of the bodhisattvas alone, able to remove the extremes and the inversions. When sitting at the seat of awakening, one should contemplate thus, and will obtain the omniscience of all kinds.’—The twelve links of causes and conditions are taught in common to the three vehicles; why do they belong to the bodhisattva alone? The treatise-author's answer lies in two pits: ‘If a person contemplates only ultimate emptiness, he mostly falls into the extreme of annihilation; if he contemplates existence, he mostly falls into the extreme of permanence.’ Emptiness and existence are both of them cliffs, and the twelve links of causes and conditions are exactly the road in between: ‘If a dharma arises from the coming together of causes and conditions, this dharma has no fixed nature; if a dharma has no fixed nature, this is precisely the mark of ultimate emptiness and quiescence.’—Arising from causes and conditions, it is therefore not permanent; without fixed nature, it is therefore not annihilated. ‘Because it leaves the two extremes, it is provisionally named the middle way.’ The ordinary person walks along the twelve links of causes and conditions and does not ask; the two vehicles know them to be a fault and hurry to extinguish them; only the bodhisattva is willing to follow them through to the root, and so they are said to be his alone. Even ignorance itself is no exception: ‘The real mark of delusion is precisely wisdom; to grasp and cling to the mark of wisdom is precisely delusion.’—Wisdom and delusion are not two different things; they are the distinction, in one and the same matter, between grasping at marks and not grasping.
The treatise-author then divides the twelve links of causes and conditions into three levels to look at them: what the ordinary person sees with the fleshly eye, giving rise to afflictions, making deeds, and going and coming within birth and death; what the worthies and sages distinguish with the Dharma-eye, wearying of old age, sickness, and death and seeking to go forth, but ‘this is only extinguishing suffering and therefore entering nirvāṇa; it does not seek the marks of suffering through to the end.’; what the bodhisattva contemplates is ‘only seeking to go through to the end of the root-mark of the twelve links of causes and conditions, not sinking himself in sorrow and fear.’—The first two levels both act upon suffering: one undergoes suffering, one avoids suffering; the third level turns the root of suffering open and looks at it, and is not frightened back by it.
Where the hand shows most is the passage that follows, which breaks ‘old age’. The treatise-author does not speak from a height; he begins asking from the most solid place: everyone speaks of old age, but what after all is old age? First he asks after the definition—someone says ‘Old age is a construction not associated with mind.’ With one sentence the treatise-author cuts it off: this mark cannot be produced; white hair is only a mark of form, not the mark of old age. Then he asks after worldly experience—‘The people of the world name the marks of old age: hair white, teeth falling out, face wrinkled, body bent, emaciated, strength thin, the faculties dark and blocked’, and the treatise-author breaks them one by one: there are those who are white in the prime of their years, there are those who are black in old age, there are those who are old and whose faculties are bright and keen, and young and whose faculties are dark and blocked, and even ‘Again, one who takes the medicine that restores the years, though old, is vigorous.’ Again someone says that old age is the mark of the five aggregates of retribution, and this too the treatise-author does not allow: ‘All conditioned dharmas arise and cease thought after thought and do not abide; if they do not abide then there is no oldness, and without oldness there is no old age.’ At the last he gathers it into a very plain and near simile: ‘Again, as wheels, axle, shafts, spokes, and the rest are provisionally taken as a cart, this is a provisional name and not real.’—The cart is not outside the wheels, axle, shafts, and spokes, nor is it within them; old age is the same. And having gone through to this point, the treatise-author does not stop at emptiness: ‘The bodhisattva contemplates the real mark of all dharmas as ultimately empty, without anything existent, with nothing to be attained, and does not cling to this matter either; therefore amid beings he gives rise to great compassion’—the next step after contemplating emptiness is not letting go; it is great compassion: beings are just now, upon a thing of which no real substance can be produced, undergoing suffering that is fully real.
The latter half of the chapter turns to Māra. The sūtra text writes it very heavily: ‘When the bodhisattva practises the prajñāpāramitā with nothing to be attained, the evil Māra is grieved and pained, as though an arrow had entered his heart. It is as when a person has newly lost his father and mother’; Subhūti asks whether this is one Māra or all the Māras, and the Buddha answers: ‘The evil Māras in the three-thousand great-thousand world are all grieved and pained, as though an arrow had entered their hearts, and each upon his own seat cannot be at ease.’ Why does Māra grieve to this degree? The treatise-author gives the reason: ‘Because this bodhisattva enters deeply into the ultimate emptiness of the twelve links of causes and conditions, and does not cling to Māra's net of the sixty-two wrong views of existence, non-existence, neither existence nor non-existence, and the rest’—Māra's skill is the spreading of nets, and a net hooks only the mind that has something it clings to. The treatise-author thereupon puts forth a further simile of his own: ‘It is as when a fisherman sees a fish enter deep into the great water, where hook and net do not reach, and he despairs and grieves. It is also like having newly lost father and mother.’—It is not that the fish has beaten the fisherman; it is that the fish has gone where the net does not reach. Māra's grief, therefore, is not a threat; it is the outward proof that this contemplation has gone through.
The whole chapter closes on a scale that is unexpectedly plain. Subhūti asks how, when practising prajñā, one fulfils the six perfections, and the Buddha answers that all giving is dedicated to sarvajñā. The treatise-author, however, points out that there are two kinds of people who dedicate alike and still do not fulfil them: those of soft faculties dedicate grasping at marks; those of keen faculties have broken the grasping at marks and yet make idle discourse of the dharma of emptiness, ‘the power of faith turns thin; they do not use sarvajñā, and only seek the real mark of all dharmas.’—‘The first is because the power of faith is much and the power of wisdom little; the second is because the power of wisdom is much and the power of faith little.’ Only one kind can fulfil them: ‘Because the power of faith and the power of wisdom are equal, he is able to dedicate to sarvajñā.’ The treatise-author also matches each of the two with what it really is: ‘Keeping sarvajñā in mind is the power of faith; dedicating in the manner of sarvajñā is the power of knowledge.’ At this point the four Chinese characters of the chapter title come together into one meaning: the inexhaustible is the principle that is contemplated; skilful means is the power that is able to practise. And in the sūtra text the two Chinese characters rendered here as ‘skilful means’ appear in only one place—those who turn back ‘all because they do not obtain this power of skilful means’, those who do not turn back ‘all because they obtain this power of skilful means’. However inexhaustible the principle, if the power does not reach it, one still must fall back; the words ‘skilful means’ come down exactly here.
卷80 〔T25 0620c15〕
大智度論釋無盡方便品第六十七 聖者龍樹造 後秦龜茲國三藏鳩摩羅什譯 【經】 爾時，須菩提作是念：「是諸佛阿耨多羅三藐三菩提甚深，我當問佛。」作是念已，白佛言：「世尊！是般若波羅蜜不可盡？」 佛言：「虛空不可盡故，般若波羅蜜不可盡。」 「世尊！云何應生般若波羅蜜？」 佛言：「色不可盡故，般若波羅蜜應生；受、想、行、識不可盡故，般若波羅蜜應生。檀波羅蜜不可盡故，般若波羅蜜應生；尸羅波羅蜜、羼提波羅蜜、毘梨耶波羅蜜、禪波羅蜜、般若波羅蜜不可盡故，般若波羅蜜應生；乃至一切種智不可盡故，般若波羅蜜〔T25 0621a〕應生。 「復次，須菩提！癡空不可盡故，菩薩摩訶薩般若波羅蜜應生；行空不可盡故，菩薩般若波羅蜜應生；識空不可盡故，菩薩般若波羅蜜應生；名色空不可盡故，菩薩般若波羅蜜應生；六處空不可盡故，菩薩般若波羅蜜應生；六觸空不可盡故，菩薩般若波羅蜜應生；受空不可盡故，菩薩般若波羅蜜應生；愛空不可盡故，菩薩般若波羅蜜應生；取空不可盡故，菩薩般若波羅蜜應生；有空不可盡故，菩薩般若波羅蜜應生；生空不可盡故，菩薩般若波羅蜜應生；老死憂悲苦惱空不可盡故，菩薩般若波羅蜜應生。如是，須菩提！菩薩摩訶薩般若波羅蜜應生。須菩提！是十二因緣，是獨菩薩法，能除諸邊、顛倒。坐道場時，應如是觀，當得一切種智。須菩提！若有菩薩摩訶薩以虛空不可盡法，行般若波羅蜜，觀十二因緣，不墮聲聞、辟支佛地，住阿耨多羅三藐三菩提。須菩提！若求菩薩道而轉還者，皆離般若波羅蜜念故；是人不知云何行般若波羅蜜，以虛空不可盡法觀十二因緣。須菩提！若求菩薩道而轉還者，皆不得是方便力故，於阿耨多羅三藐三菩提而轉還。須菩提！若菩薩摩訶薩於阿耨多羅三藐三菩提不轉還者，皆得是方便力故。須菩提！菩薩摩訶薩應以虛空不可盡法觀般若波羅蜜，應以虛空不可盡法生般若波羅蜜。 「如是，須菩提！菩薩摩訶薩觀十二因緣時，不見法無因緣生，不見法常不滅；不見法有我、人、壽者、命者、眾生，知者、見者；不見〔T25 0621b〕法無常，不見法苦，不見法無我，不見法寂滅、非寂滅。如是，須菩提！菩薩摩訶薩行般若波羅蜜，應如是觀十二因緣。須菩提！若菩薩摩訶薩能如是行般若波羅蜜，是時不見色若常、若無常，若苦、若樂，若我、若無我，若寂滅、若非寂滅；受、想、行、識亦如是。須菩提！菩薩摩訶薩是時亦不見般若波羅蜜，亦不見以是法見般若波羅蜜；禪波羅蜜，乃至阿耨多羅三藐三菩提，亦不見阿耨多羅三藐三菩提，亦不見以是法見阿耨多羅三藐三菩提。如是，須菩提！一切法不可得故，是為應般若波羅蜜行。 「若菩薩行無所得般若波羅蜜時，惡魔愁毒，如箭入心。譬如人新喪父母；如是，須菩提！惡魔見菩薩行無所得般若波羅蜜時，便大愁毒，如箭入心。」 須菩提白佛言：「世尊！但一魔愁毒，三千大千世界中魔亦復愁毒？」 佛告須菩提：「三千大千世界中諸惡魔皆愁毒，如箭入心，各於其坐不能自安。須菩提！菩薩摩訶薩能如是行般若波羅蜜，是時一切世間天及人、阿修羅不能得其便令其憂惱。須菩提！以是故，菩薩摩訶薩欲得阿耨多羅三藐三菩提，當行是般若波羅蜜！菩薩摩訶薩行般若波羅蜜時，具足修檀波羅蜜、尸羅波羅蜜、羼提波羅蜜、毘梨耶波羅蜜、禪波羅蜜、般若波羅蜜。須菩提！菩薩摩訶薩行般若波羅蜜時，具足諸波羅蜜。」 須菩提白佛言：「世尊！菩薩摩訶薩行般若波羅蜜時，云何具足檀波羅蜜、尸羅波羅蜜、羼提波羅蜜、毘梨耶波羅蜜、禪波羅蜜、般若波羅蜜？」 佛告須菩提：〔T25 0621c〕「菩薩摩訶薩所有布施皆迴向薩婆若。如是，須菩提！菩薩摩訶薩行般若波羅蜜時，具足檀波羅蜜。須菩提！菩薩摩訶薩所有持戒皆迴向薩婆若，是為具足尸羅波羅蜜。菩薩摩訶薩所有忍辱皆迴向薩婆若，是為具足羼提波羅蜜。菩薩摩訶薩所有精進皆迴向薩婆若，是為具足毘梨耶波羅蜜。菩薩摩訶薩所有禪定皆迴向薩婆若，是為具足禪波羅蜜。菩薩摩訶薩所有智慧皆迴向薩婆若，是為具足般若波羅蜜。如是，須菩提！菩薩摩訶薩行般若波羅蜜，具足六波羅蜜。」 【論】 釋曰： 須菩提從佛聞般若波羅蜜種種相——初聞「畢竟空相」；中聞「囑累」，如似有；後還聞說「空」，所謂般若義無量，名、字、句眾有量。 是時，須菩提作是念：「諸佛阿耨多羅三藐三菩提甚深，我當問佛所以甚深。」 佛說菩提少許分，但為破眾生顛倒故，不具足說。所以者何？無能受者故。若人取如相，佛言：「如亦空，無生住滅故；若法無生住滅，是法即無。」法性、實際亦如是。若有取畢竟空者，亦言非也。何以故？若畢竟空是定相可取，是非畢竟空。是故言甚深，我當更問佛。 須菩提作是念已，如佛自說：「三世諸佛用般若波羅蜜得道，般若故不盡——已不盡、今不盡、當不盡。」是故我今但問「不盡」義。 佛答：「如虛空不盡故，般若亦不盡。」如虛空，無有法，但有名字；般若波羅蜜亦如是。般若波羅蜜若如虛空無所有故不可盡，云何菩薩能生是般若波羅蜜？能生者，菩薩云何心中生能行、〔T25 0622a〕能得？ 佛答：「色無盡故，般若波羅蜜應生。」 如色初、後、中生不可得。色即生色不可得，離色生色不可得。生不可得，生生不可得，如先「破生」中說。生不可得故，色亦不可得；色不可得故，色生不可得。二法不可得故，色如幻、如夢，但誑人眼。若色有生必有盡，以無生故亦無盡。 色真相即是般若波羅蜜相，是故說：「色不可盡，般若波羅蜜亦不可盡。」 受想行識、檀波羅蜜乃至一切種智亦如是。 復次，應生般若者，無明虛空不可盡故。若人但觀畢竟空，多墮斷滅邊；若觀有，多墮常邊。離是二邊故，說十二因緣空。何以故？若法從因緣和合生，是法無有定性；若法無定性，即是畢竟空寂滅相。離二邊故，假名為中道。是故說：「十二因緣如虛空，無法故不盡。」癡亦從因緣和合生，故無自相；無自相故畢竟空，如虛空。 復次，因緣生故無實，如經中說：「因眼緣色生觸念，觸念從癡生。」觸念不在眼中、不在色中，不在內、不在外、亦不在中間，亦不從十方三世來，是法定相不可得。何以故？一切法入如故。若得是無明定相，即是智慧，不名為癡。是故癡相、智慧相無異，癡實相即是智慧，取著智慧相即是癡。是故癡實相畢竟清淨，如虛空，無生無滅。是故說：「得是觀故，迴向阿耨多羅三藐三菩提，即名般若波羅蜜。」 問曰： 若無無明，亦無諸行等，云何說十二因緣？ 答曰： 說十二因緣有三種： 一者、凡夫肉眼所見，顛倒、著我心，起諸煩惱、業，往來生死中。 二者、賢聖以法〔T25 0622b〕眼分別諸法，老、病、死，心厭，欲出世間。求老死因緣，由生故。是生由諸煩惱、業因緣。何以故？無煩惱人則不生。是故知煩惱為生因。煩惱因緣是無明。無明故，應捨而取、應取而捨。何者應捨？老病諸苦因緣煩惱應捨，以少顛倒樂因緣故而取。持戒、禪定、智慧、諸善根本，是涅槃樂因緣，是事應取而捨。是中無有知者、見者、作者。何以故？是法無定相，但從虛誑因緣相續生。行者知是虛誑不實，則不生戲論；是但滅苦故入於涅槃，不究盡求諸苦相。 三者、諸菩薩摩訶薩，大智人利根故，但求究盡十二因緣根本相，不以憂怖自沒。求時不得定相，老法畢竟空，但從虛誑假名有。所以者何？分別諸法相者說：「老是心不相應行。」是相不可得。頭白等是色相，非老相。二事不可得故無老相。 復次，世人名老相：髮白、齒離，面皺、身曲，羸瘦、力薄，諸根闇塞，如是等名老相。但是事不然！所以者何？髮白非唯老者。又年壯而白、老年而黑者。羸瘦、皺曲亦爾。有人老而諸根明利、少而闇塞者；又服還年藥，雖老而壯。如是老無定相。無定相故，諸法和合，假名為老。又如假輪、軸、轅、輻等為車，是假名非實。 復次，有人言說：「果報五眾故相名為老。」是亦不然！所以者何？一切有為法念念生滅不住，若不住則無故，無故則無老。一切有為法若有住則無無常，若無無常即是常，若常則無老，何況非常非無常、畢竟空中而有老！ 復次，諸法畢竟空中生相〔T25 0622c〕不可得，何況有老！ 如是等種種因緣，求老法不可得，不可得故無相，如虛空，不可盡。如老，乃至無明亦如是。破無明，如上說。 菩薩觀諸法實相畢竟空、無所有、無所得，亦不著是事故，於眾生中而生大悲：眾生愚癡故，於不實、顛倒、虛妄法中受諸苦惱。 初十二因緣，但是凡夫人故，於是中不求是非；第二十二因緣，二乘人及未得無生忍法菩薩所觀；第三十二因緣，從得無生忍法乃至坐道場菩薩所觀。 是故說：「無明虛空不可盡，乃至憂悲苦惱虛空不可盡故，菩薩行般若波羅蜜。」 如是深觀因緣法，離諸邊、顛倒者，邊名常邊、斷滅邊，有邊、無邊，實邊、空邊，世間有邊等著諸邊；顛倒者，無常中起常等諸顛倒煩惱。觀是十二因緣法，諸邊、顛倒滅。諸煩惱有二分：一者、外道邪見人名為邊，二者、餘眾生煩惱名為顛倒。觀十二因緣，是二種煩惱皆滅。 是第三十二因緣觀甚深，唯諸菩薩坐道場者能觀；先雖能觀，未能具足。如《城譬喻經》中說：「佛言：『我本未得道時，如是思惟：「眾生可愍，深入嶮道，所謂數數生，數數老，數數死，往來世間，不知出處。」我即時復作是念：「何因緣有老死？」如是求覓時，得實智慧，生因緣是老死等。』」是故知：第三觀，坐道場乃得，如經廣說。 又復觀如是因緣法，過於二乘，得一切種智。若有人於佛道退者，皆不得是甚深觀故；若得是觀則不退。何以故？深入畢竟空中，則不見聲聞、辟支佛地；不見故，則不於是中住。 復次，能如是〔T25 0623a〕觀因緣法者，不見有一法定自在無因緣而生；一切法不自在，皆屬因緣生。有人雖見一切法從因緣生，謂為從邪因緣生。邪因緣者，微塵、世性等。是故說：「不見法無因緣生，亦不見法從常因緣微塵、世性生」。如虛空常，常故則無生，虛空亦不與物作因，以是故，無有法從常因緣生。 復次，菩薩如是觀一切法屬因緣生，不自在；不自在故無我，乃至無知者、見者。 爾時，菩薩安住畢竟空十二因緣中，不見一切色等法若有、若無等，亦不見般若，亦不見用是法行般若；乃至阿耨多羅三藐三菩提亦如是。是名菩薩無所得般若波羅蜜。得是無所得般若，於一切法中便得無所障礙般若。 爾時，諸魔極大愁毒。何以故？以是菩薩深入十二因緣畢竟空中，不著有、無、非有非無等六十二諸邪見魔網，我今無有法可得菩薩便。譬如捕魚人見一魚深入大水，鉤網所不及，則絕望憂愁。亦如新喪父母。 復次，菩薩能如是行無所得般若波羅蜜，則能具足檀波羅蜜等。何以故？行如是法，諸煩惱障般若法皆折薄，諸魔人民不能得便故，諸波羅蜜得具足；先來雖行六波羅蜜，未能得如是具足。 須菩提問：「世尊！菩薩云何能行如是般若波羅蜜，能具足檀波羅蜜等諸波羅蜜？」 佛答：若菩薩所有布施，皆迴向薩婆若者。有二種人：軟根、利根。軟根者，少多布施，皆取相迴向阿耨多羅三藐三菩提。利根者，破是取相，而戲論空法，信力轉薄，不用薩〔T25 0623b〕婆若，但求諸法實相。是二種人皆不能具足檀波羅蜜：一者以信力多、慧力少，二者以慧力多、信力少故。 佛今說：「信力、慧力等故，能迴向薩婆若。」念薩婆若者，是信力；如薩婆若迴向者，是智力。乃至般若波羅蜜亦如是。
《大智度論》卷80 · T25n1509 0620c15–0623b07
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〈無盡方便品〉第六十七，聖者龍樹所造，後秦龜茲國三藏鳩摩羅什所譯，在卷八十。
經①：須菩提念菩提甚深而問般若不可盡，佛以虛空不可盡答；色乃至一切種智不可盡故般若應生，癡空乃至老死憂悲苦惱空不可盡故般若應生；十二因緣是獨菩薩法能除諸邊顛倒、坐道場時應如是觀，以虛空不可盡法觀之則不墮二乘，轉還與不轉還皆繫方便力；觀時不見諸相、於色乃至菩提亦不見，是為應般若波羅蜜行；行無所得般若時惡魔愁毒如箭入心如人新喪父母，三千大千世界諸魔皆然而不能得其便；行般若時具足六波羅蜜，所有布施持戒忍辱精進禪定智慧皆迴向薩婆若
那時，須菩提這樣想：『這諸佛的阿耨多羅三藐三菩提甚深，我應當問佛。』這樣想了以後，向佛稟白：『世尊！這般若波羅蜜是不可盡的嗎？』
佛說：『因為虛空不可盡的緣故，般若波羅蜜不可盡。』
『世尊！應當怎樣生起般若波羅蜜？』
佛說：『因為色不可盡的緣故，般若波羅蜜應生；因為受、想、行、識不可盡的緣故，般若波羅蜜應生。因為檀波羅蜜不可盡的緣故，般若波羅蜜應生；因為尸羅波羅蜜、羼提波羅蜜、毘梨耶波羅蜜、禪波羅蜜、般若波羅蜜不可盡的緣故，般若波羅蜜應生；乃至因為一切種智不可盡的緣故，般若波羅蜜應生。
『再者，須菩提！因為癡空不可盡的緣故，菩薩摩訶薩的般若波羅蜜應生；因為行空不可盡的緣故，菩薩的般若波羅蜜應生；因為識空不可盡的緣故，菩薩的般若波羅蜜應生；因為名色空不可盡的緣故，菩薩的般若波羅蜜應生；因為六處空不可盡的緣故，菩薩的般若波羅蜜應生；因為六觸空不可盡的緣故，菩薩的般若波羅蜜應生；因為受空不可盡的緣故，菩薩的般若波羅蜜應生；因為愛空不可盡的緣故，菩薩的般若波羅蜜應生；因為取空不可盡的緣故，菩薩的般若波羅蜜應生；因為有空不可盡的緣故，菩薩的般若波羅蜜應生；因為生空不可盡的緣故，菩薩的般若波羅蜜應生；因為老死憂悲苦惱空不可盡的緣故，菩薩的般若波羅蜜應生。像這樣，須菩提！菩薩摩訶薩的般若波羅蜜應生。須菩提！這十二因緣，是獨菩薩之法，能夠除去諸邊、顛倒。坐道場的時候，應當這樣觀，就當得一切種智。須菩提！若有菩薩摩訶薩以虛空不可盡之法行般若波羅蜜、觀十二因緣，就不墮聲聞、辟支佛地，安住在阿耨多羅三藐三菩提。須菩提！若求菩薩道而中途轉還的人，都是因為離了般若波羅蜜之念的緣故；這人不知道怎樣行般若波羅蜜，怎樣以虛空不可盡之法觀十二因緣。須菩提！若求菩薩道而轉還的人，都是因為不得這方便力的緣故，於阿耨多羅三藐三菩提而轉還。須菩提！若菩薩摩訶薩於阿耨多羅三藐三菩提不轉還的，都是因為得了這方便力的緣故。須菩提！菩薩摩訶薩應當以虛空不可盡之法觀般若波羅蜜，應當以虛空不可盡之法生般若波羅蜜。
『像這樣，須菩提！菩薩摩訶薩觀十二因緣的時候，不見有法是無因緣而生的，不見有法是常而不滅的；不見有法有我、人、壽者、命者、眾生，知者、見者；不見有法無常，不見有法苦，不見有法無我，不見有法寂滅、非寂滅。像這樣，須菩提！菩薩摩訶薩行般若波羅蜜，應當這樣觀十二因緣。須菩提！若菩薩摩訶薩能夠這樣行般若波羅蜜，這時就不見色是常、是無常，是苦、是樂，是我、是無我，是寂滅、是非寂滅；受、想、行、識也是這樣。須菩提！菩薩摩訶薩這時也不見般若波羅蜜，也不見以這法而見般若波羅蜜；禪波羅蜜，乃至阿耨多羅三藐三菩提，也不見阿耨多羅三藐三菩提，也不見以這法而見阿耨多羅三藐三菩提。像這樣，須菩提！因為一切法不可得的緣故，這就是相應於般若波羅蜜的行。
『若菩薩行無所得的般若波羅蜜時，惡魔愁毒，如同箭射入心中。譬如人新近喪失父母；像這樣，須菩提！惡魔見到菩薩行無所得般若波羅蜜的時候，便大為愁毒，如同箭射入心中。』
須菩提向佛稟白：『世尊！是只有一個魔愁毒呢，還是三千大千世界中的魔也都愁毒？』
佛告訴須菩提：『三千大千世界中的諸惡魔都愁毒，如同箭射入心中，各自在他的座位上不能自安。須菩提！菩薩摩訶薩能夠這樣行般若波羅蜜，這時一切世間的天與人、阿修羅都不能得其方便來使他憂惱。須菩提！因為這個緣故，菩薩摩訶薩想要得阿耨多羅三藐三菩提，應當行這般若波羅蜜！菩薩摩訶薩行般若波羅蜜的時候，具足修檀波羅蜜、尸羅波羅蜜、羼提波羅蜜、毘梨耶波羅蜜、禪波羅蜜、般若波羅蜜。須菩提！菩薩摩訶薩行般若波羅蜜的時候，具足諸波羅蜜。』
須菩提向佛稟白：『世尊！菩薩摩訶薩行般若波羅蜜的時候，怎樣具足檀波羅蜜、尸羅波羅蜜、羼提波羅蜜、毘梨耶波羅蜜、禪波羅蜜、般若波羅蜜？』
佛告訴須菩提：『菩薩摩訶薩所有的布施都迴向薩婆若。像這樣，須菩提！菩薩摩訶薩行般若波羅蜜的時候，具足檀波羅蜜。須菩提！菩薩摩訶薩所有的持戒都迴向薩婆若，這就是具足尸羅波羅蜜。菩薩摩訶薩所有的忍辱都迴向薩婆若，這就是具足羼提波羅蜜。菩薩摩訶薩所有的精進都迴向薩婆若，這就是具足毘梨耶波羅蜜。菩薩摩訶薩所有的禪定都迴向薩婆若，這就是具足禪波羅蜜。菩薩摩訶薩所有的智慧都迴向薩婆若，這就是具足般若波羅蜜。像這樣，須菩提！菩薩摩訶薩行般若波羅蜜，具足六波羅蜜。』
論①：釋般若義無量而名字句眾有量、菩提少許分與取如取空皆非、虛空但有名字、破色生四句與色真相即般若相、離二邊說十二因緣空而假名中道、觸念不可得而癡實相即智慧、三種十二因緣、老無定相與車喻、果報五眾相名老之破、念念不住則無老、不著而生大悲、三觀所屬、離諸邊顛倒與二種煩惱、第三觀甚深引城譬喻經、過二乘與退不退之由、破邪因緣微塵世性、屬因緣故無我、安住畢竟空是名無所得般若、諸魔愁毒與捕魚人喻、六度具足之由、軟根利根二種人、信力慧力等故能迴向薩婆若
論主解釋說：
須菩提從佛聽聞般若波羅蜜的種種相——起初聽聞「畢竟空相」；中間聽聞「囑累」，好像是有；後來又聽聞說「空」。所謂般若之義是無量的，而名、字、句眾是有量的。
這時，須菩提這樣想：『諸佛的阿耨多羅三藐三菩提甚深，我應當問佛所以甚深的緣由。』
佛所說的菩提只是少許一分，只是為了破除眾生的顛倒的緣故，並不具足而說。為什麼呢？因為沒有能承受的人的緣故。若有人取「如」之相，佛說：「如亦空，無生住滅故；若法無生住滅，是法即無。」法性、實際也是這樣。若有人取畢竟空的，也說他不是。為什麼呢？若畢竟空是可取的定相，這就不是畢竟空了。因為這個緣故說甚深，我應當再問佛。
須菩提這樣想了以後，如同佛自己所說的：「三世諸佛用般若波羅蜜得道，般若故不盡——已不盡、今不盡、當不盡。」因為這個緣故，我如今只問「不盡」之義。
佛回答：「如虛空不盡故，般若亦不盡。」如同虛空，並沒有法，只有名字；般若波羅蜜也是這樣。般若波羅蜜若如同虛空一樣以無所有的緣故而不可盡，那麼菩薩怎能生起這般若波羅蜜？所謂能生，是菩薩怎樣在心中生起能行、能得？
佛回答：「色無盡故，般若波羅蜜應生。」
如同色的初生、後生、中生都不可得。色就是生色，不可得；離色生色，也不可得。生不可得，生生也不可得，如同先前「破生」之中所說。因為生不可得的緣故，色也不可得；因為色不可得的緣故，色生不可得。因為這兩法都不可得的緣故，色如幻、如夢，只是誑惑人的眼睛。若色有生，必定有盡；因為無生的緣故，也就無盡。
色的真相就是般若波羅蜜之相，因此說：「色不可盡，般若波羅蜜亦不可盡。」
受想行識、檀波羅蜜乃至一切種智也是這樣。
再者，所以說應生般若，是因為無明虛空不可盡的緣故。若有人只觀畢竟空，多墮在斷滅邊；若觀有，多墮在常邊。為了離這二邊的緣故，所以說十二因緣空。為什麼呢？若法從因緣和合而生，這法就沒有定性；若法沒有定性，就是畢竟空寂滅之相。因為離了二邊的緣故，假名為中道。因此說：「十二因緣如虛空，無法故不盡。」癡也是從因緣和合而生的，所以沒有自相；因為沒有自相的緣故，畢竟空，如同虛空。
再者，因為從因緣生的緣故，所以無實，如經中所說：「因眼緣色生觸念，觸念從癡生。」觸念不在眼中、不在色中，不在內、不在外、也不在中間，也不從十方三世而來，這法的定相不可得。為什麼呢？因為一切法入「如」的緣故。若得到這無明的定相，那就是智慧，不名為癡。因此癡相與智慧相沒有差異，癡的實相就是智慧，取著智慧之相就是癡。因此癡的實相畢竟清淨，如同虛空，無生無滅。因此說：「得是觀故，迴向阿耨多羅三藐三菩提，即名般若波羅蜜。」
論主問道：
若沒有無明，也就沒有諸行等等，那麼為什麼還說十二因緣？
論主答道：
說十二因緣有三種：
一者、凡夫以肉眼所見，顛倒、執著我心，生起諸煩惱、業，往來於生死之中。
二者、賢聖以法眼分別諸法，見老、病、死而心生厭離，想要出離世間。推求老死的因緣，是由生的緣故。這生又是由諸煩惱、業為因緣。為什麼呢？沒有煩惱的人就不生。因此知道煩惱是生的因。煩惱的因緣就是無明。因為無明的緣故，應當捨的反而取、應當取的反而捨。哪些是應當捨的呢？老病諸苦的因緣煩惱應當捨，卻因為少分顛倒之樂的因緣而取著。持戒、禪定、智慧、諸善根本，這些是涅槃樂的因緣，這些事應當取而反捨。這裡面並沒有知者、見者、作者。為什麼呢？因為這法沒有定相，只是從虛誑的因緣相續而生。行者知道這是虛誑不實，就不生戲論；這只是為了滅苦而入於涅槃，並不究竟窮盡地推求諸苦之相。
三者、諸菩薩摩訶薩，因為是大智之人、利根的緣故，只推求究盡十二因緣的根本之相，不因憂怖而自沒。推求的時候不得定相，老法畢竟空，只是從虛誑而假名為有。為什麼呢？分別諸法相的人說：「老是心不相應行。」這相不可得。頭白等等是色相，不是老相。因為這二事都不可得的緣故，所以沒有老相。
再者，世人所稱的老相是：髮白、齒離，面皺、身曲，羸瘦、力薄，諸根闇塞，像這樣等等名為老相。但這事不然！為什麼呢？髮白並不只有老年人才有。又有年壯而髮白的、老年而髮黑的。羸瘦、皺曲也是這樣。有人老了而諸根明利、年少而諸根闇塞；又有服了還年之藥的，雖老而壯。像這樣，老沒有定相。因為沒有定相的緣故，諸法和合，假名為老。又如同假借輪、軸、轅、輻等而名為車，這假名不是實有。
再者，有人這樣說：「果報五眾故相名為老。」這也不然！為什麼呢？一切有為法念念生滅而不住，若不住就沒有故，沒有故就沒有老。一切有為法若有住就沒有無常，若沒有無常就是常，若是常就沒有老，何況在非常非無常、畢竟空之中而有老！
再者，諸法畢竟空之中生相尚且不可得，何況有老！
像這樣等等種種因緣，推求老法而不可得，因為不可得的緣故所以無相，如同虛空，不可盡。如同老，乃至無明也是這樣。破無明，如上文所說。
菩薩觀諸法實相畢竟空、無所有、無所得，也不執著這事的緣故，於眾生之中而生起大悲：眾生因為愚癡的緣故，在不實、顛倒、虛妄之法中領受諸苦惱。
初十二因緣，只是為凡夫人的緣故，在這裡面不推求是非；第二十二因緣，是二乘人以及未得無生忍法的菩薩所觀；第三十二因緣，是從得無生忍法乃至坐道場的菩薩所觀。
因此說：「無明虛空不可盡，乃至憂悲苦惱虛空不可盡故，菩薩行般若波羅蜜。」
這樣深觀因緣法，所謂離諸邊、顛倒的，邊是說常邊、斷滅邊，有邊、無邊，實邊、空邊，世間有邊等等執著諸邊；顛倒是說於無常之中起常等等諸顛倒煩惱。觀這十二因緣法，諸邊、顛倒就滅。諸煩惱有二分：一者、外道邪見之人名為邊，二者、其餘眾生的煩惱名為顛倒。觀十二因緣，這二種煩惱都滅。
這第三十二因緣之觀甚深，唯有諸菩薩坐道場的纔能觀；先前雖然能觀，還未能具足。如《城譬喻經》中所說，佛說：『我本來未得道的時候，這樣思惟：「眾生可愍，深入嶮道，所謂數數生，數數老，數數死，往來世間，不知出處。」我當時又這樣想：「何因緣有老死？」這樣尋求覓察的時候，得到實智慧，老死等等，是以生為因緣。』因此知道：第三觀，要坐道場纔得，如經中廣說。
又再觀這樣的因緣法，超過二乘，而得一切種智。若有人於佛道退轉的，都是因為不得這甚深之觀的緣故；若得了這觀就不退。為什麼呢？深入畢竟空之中，就不見聲聞、辟支佛地；因為不見的緣故，就不在這裡面住。
再者，能夠這樣觀因緣法的人，不見有一法是決定自在、無因緣而生的；一切法都不自在，都屬於因緣而生。有人雖然見到一切法從因緣生，卻認為是從邪因緣生。邪因緣，就是微塵、世性等等。因此說：「不見法無因緣生，亦不見法從常因緣微塵、世性生」。如同虛空是常，因為常的緣故就沒有生，虛空也不與物作因，因為這個緣故，沒有法是從常因緣生的。
再者，菩薩這樣觀一切法屬於因緣而生，不自在；因為不自在的緣故所以無我，乃至沒有知者、見者。
那時，菩薩安住在畢竟空的十二因緣之中，不見一切色等法是有、是無等等，也不見般若，也不見用這法而行般若；乃至阿耨多羅三藐三菩提也是這樣。這就名為菩薩無所得的般若波羅蜜。得了這無所得的般若，於一切法中便得無所障礙的般若。
那時，諸魔極大愁毒。為什麼呢？因為這菩薩深入十二因緣畢竟空之中，不執著有、無、非有非無等六十二諸邪見的魔網，魔心想：我如今沒有法可以得這菩薩的方便。譬如捕魚的人見到一條魚深入大水之中，鉤網所不能及，就絕望憂愁。也如同新近喪失父母。
再者，菩薩能夠這樣行無所得的般若波羅蜜，就能具足檀波羅蜜等等。為什麼呢？因為行這樣的法，諸煩惱障礙般若之法都折損減薄，諸魔的人民不能得其方便的緣故，諸波羅蜜得以具足；先前雖然也行六波羅蜜，還未能得到這樣的具足。
須菩提問道：『世尊！菩薩怎樣能行這樣的般若波羅蜜，能具足檀波羅蜜等諸波羅蜜？』
佛回答：若菩薩所有的布施都迴向薩婆若的。有二種人：軟根、利根。軟根的人，或少或多地布施，都取相而迴向阿耨多羅三藐三菩提。利根的人，破除這取相，而戲論空法，信力轉薄，不用薩婆若，只求諸法實相。這二種人都不能具足檀波羅蜜：一者是以信力多、慧力少，二者是以慧力多、信力少的緣故。
佛如今說：「信力、慧力等故，能迴向薩婆若。」念薩婆若的，是信力；如薩婆若而迴向的，是智力。乃至般若波羅蜜也是這樣。
This chapter is titled the Mahāprajñāpāramitā-upadeśa's commentary on the sixty-seventh chapter, "Inexhaustible Skilful Means", 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 eightieth fascicle.
Sūtra ①: Subhūti, Reflecting That Awakening Is Very Deep, Asks Whether Prajñā Is Inexhaustible, and the Buddha Answers That Space Is Inexhaustible; Because Form and So On up to the Omniscience of All Kinds Are Inexhaustible, Prajñā Should Arise, and Because the Emptiness of Delusion and So On up to the Emptiness of Old Age and Death, Sorrow, Grief, Suffering, and Vexation Is Inexhaustible, Prajñā Should Arise; the Twelve Links of Causes and Conditions Are a Dharma of the Bodhisattvas Alone, Able to Remove the Extremes and the Inversions, and When Sitting at the Seat of Awakening One Should Contemplate Thus; Contemplating Them by the Dharma of the Inexhaustibility of Space, One Does Not Fall to the Two Vehicles, and Turning Back and Not Turning Back Both Depend on the Power of Skilful Means; in Contemplating, One Does Not See Any of the Marks, and Does Not See Even Form and So On up to Awakening—This Is the Practice That Corresponds to Prajñāpāramitā; When One Practises the Prajñā with Nothing to Be Attained, the Evil Māra Is Grieved and Pained, as Though an Arrow Had Entered His Heart, as When a Person Has Newly Lost His Father and Mother, and All the Māras of the Three-Thousand Great-Thousand World Are Likewise and Cannot Find Their Opening; When Practising Prajñā One Fulfils the Six Perfections, All Giving, Upholding the Precepts, Patience, Vigour, Meditative Concentration, and Wisdom Being Dedicated to Sarvajñā
At that time Subhūti had this thought: ‘This anuttarā samyaksaṃbodhi of the buddhas is very deep; I should ask the Buddha.’ Having had this thought, he said to the Buddha: ‘World-Honored One! Is this prajñāpāramitā inexhaustible?’
The Buddha said: ‘Because space is inexhaustible, prajñāpāramitā is inexhaustible.’
‘World-Honored One! How should one give rise to prajñāpāramitā?’
The Buddha said: ‘Because form is inexhaustible, prajñāpāramitā should arise; because feeling, perception, constructions, and consciousness are inexhaustible, prajñāpāramitā should arise. Because dānapāramitā is inexhaustible, prajñāpāramitā should arise; because śīlapāramitā, kṣāntipāramitā, vīryapāramitā, dhyānapāramitā, and prajñāpāramitā are inexhaustible, prajñāpāramitā should arise; and so on up to: because the omniscience of all kinds is inexhaustible, prajñāpāramitā should arise.
‘Again, Subhūti! Because the emptiness of delusion is inexhaustible, the bodhisattva-mahāsattva's prajñāpāramitā should arise; because the emptiness of constructions is inexhaustible, the bodhisattva's prajñāpāramitā should arise; because the emptiness of consciousness is inexhaustible, the bodhisattva's prajñāpāramitā should arise; because the emptiness of name-and-form is inexhaustible, the bodhisattva's prajñāpāramitā should arise; because the emptiness of the six sense-bases is inexhaustible, the bodhisattva's prajñāpāramitā should arise; because the emptiness of the six contacts is inexhaustible, the bodhisattva's prajñāpāramitā should arise; because the emptiness of feeling is inexhaustible, the bodhisattva's prajñāpāramitā should arise; because the emptiness of craving is inexhaustible, the bodhisattva's prajñāpāramitā should arise; because the emptiness of grasping is inexhaustible, the bodhisattva's prajñāpāramitā should arise; because the emptiness of existence is inexhaustible, the bodhisattva's prajñāpāramitā should arise; because the emptiness of birth is inexhaustible, the bodhisattva's prajñāpāramitā should arise; because the emptiness of old age and death, sorrow, grief, suffering, and vexation is inexhaustible, the bodhisattva's prajñāpāramitā should arise. Thus, Subhūti, the bodhisattva-mahāsattva's prajñāpāramitā should arise. Subhūti! These twelve links of causes and conditions are a dharma of the bodhisattvas alone, able to remove the extremes and the inversions. When sitting at the seat of awakening, one should contemplate thus, and will then obtain the omniscience of all kinds. Subhūti! If there is a bodhisattva-mahāsattva who practises prajñāpāramitā and contemplates the twelve links of causes and conditions by the dharma of the inexhaustibility of space, he does not fall to the ground of the śrāvaka and pratyekabuddha, and abides securely in anuttarā samyaksaṃbodhi. Subhūti! Those who seek the bodhisattva path and turn back midway all do so because they have departed from the thought of prajñāpāramitā; these people do not know how to practise prajñāpāramitā, nor how to contemplate the twelve links of causes and conditions by the dharma of the inexhaustibility of space. Subhūti! Those who seek the bodhisattva path and turn back all turn back from anuttarā samyaksaṃbodhi because they do not obtain this power of skilful means. Subhūti! Those bodhisattva-mahāsattvas who do not turn back from anuttarā samyaksaṃbodhi are all so because they have obtained this power of skilful means. Subhūti! The bodhisattva-mahāsattva should contemplate prajñāpāramitā by the dharma of the inexhaustibility of space, and should give rise to prajñāpāramitā by the dharma of the inexhaustibility of space.
‘Thus, Subhūti, when the bodhisattva-mahāsattva contemplates the twelve links of causes and conditions, he does not see any dharma that arises without causes and conditions, he does not see any dharma that is permanent and does not cease; he does not see any dharma that has a self, a person, a life, a living one, a being, a knower, a seer; he does not see any dharma as impermanent, he does not see any dharma as suffering, he does not see any dharma as non-self, he does not see any dharma as quiescent or not quiescent. Thus, Subhūti, the bodhisattva-mahāsattva who practises prajñāpāramitā should contemplate the twelve links of causes and conditions in this way. Subhūti! If the bodhisattva-mahāsattva can practise prajñāpāramitā in this way, at that time he does not see form as permanent or impermanent, as suffering or bliss, as self or non-self, as quiescent or not quiescent; feeling, perception, constructions, and consciousness are likewise. Subhūti! At that time the bodhisattva-mahāsattva also does not see prajñāpāramitā, nor does he see that by this dharma prajñāpāramitā is seen; dhyānapāramitā, and so on up to anuttarā samyaksaṃbodhi: he also does not see anuttarā samyaksaṃbodhi, nor does he see that by this dharma anuttarā samyaksaṃbodhi is seen. Thus, Subhūti, because all dharmas are unfindable, this is the practice that corresponds to prajñāpāramitā.
‘When the bodhisattva practises the prajñāpāramitā with nothing to be attained, the evil Māra is grieved and pained, as though an arrow had entered his heart. It is as when a person has newly lost his father and mother; thus, Subhūti, when the evil Māra sees the bodhisattva practising the prajñāpāramitā with nothing to be attained, he is greatly grieved and pained, as though an arrow had entered his heart.’
Subhūti said to the Buddha: ‘World-Honored One! Is it only one Māra who is grieved and pained, or are the Māras in the three-thousand great-thousand world all grieved and pained as well?’
The Buddha told Subhūti: ‘The evil Māras in the three-thousand great-thousand world are all grieved and pained, as though an arrow had entered their hearts, and each upon his own seat cannot be at ease. Subhūti! When the bodhisattva-mahāsattva is able to practise prajñāpāramitā in this way, at that time none in all the world—gods and humans, asuras—can find an opening to cause him sorrow and vexation. Subhūti! For this reason, the bodhisattva-mahāsattva who wishes to obtain anuttarā samyaksaṃbodhi should practise this prajñāpāramitā! When the bodhisattva-mahāsattva practises prajñāpāramitā, he fulfils the cultivation of dānapāramitā, śīlapāramitā, kṣāntipāramitā, vīryapāramitā, dhyānapāramitā, and prajñāpāramitā. Subhūti! When the bodhisattva-mahāsattva practises prajñāpāramitā, he fulfils the perfections.’
Subhūti said to the Buddha: ‘World-Honored One! When the bodhisattva-mahāsattva practises prajñāpāramitā, how does he fulfil dānapāramitā, śīlapāramitā, kṣāntipāramitā, vīryapāramitā, dhyānapāramitā, and prajñāpāramitā?’
The Buddha told Subhūti: ‘All the giving of the bodhisattva-mahāsattva is dedicated to sarvajñā. Thus, Subhūti, when the bodhisattva-mahāsattva practises prajñāpāramitā, he fulfils dānapāramitā. Subhūti! All the upholding of the precepts of the bodhisattva-mahāsattva is dedicated to sarvajñā; this is fulfilling śīlapāramitā. All the patience of the bodhisattva-mahāsattva is dedicated to sarvajñā; this is fulfilling kṣāntipāramitā. All the vigour of the bodhisattva-mahāsattva is dedicated to sarvajñā; this is fulfilling vīryapāramitā. All the meditative concentration of the bodhisattva-mahāsattva is dedicated to sarvajñā; this is fulfilling dhyānapāramitā. All the wisdom of the bodhisattva-mahāsattva is dedicated to sarvajñā; this is fulfilling prajñāpāramitā. Thus, Subhūti, the bodhisattva-mahāsattva who practises prajñāpāramitā fulfils the six perfections.’
Treatise ①: Explaining That the Meaning of Prajñā Is Immeasurable While the Collections of Names, Letters, and Phrases Are Measured; That a Small Portion of Bodhi, and Grasping Suchness or Grasping Emptiness, Are All Wrong; That Space Has Only a Name; Breaking the Four Alternatives of the Arising of Form, and That the True Mark of Form Is the Mark of Prajñā; That, Leaving the Two Extremes, the Emptiness of the Twelve Links of Causes and Conditions Is Taught and Provisionally Named the Middle Way; That Contact-Thought Is Unfindable and the Real Mark of Delusion Is Wisdom; the Three Kinds of the Twelve Links of Causes and Conditions; That Old Age Has No Fixed Mark, and the Simile of the Cart; Breaking the Naming of the Mark of the Five Aggregates of Retribution as Old Age; That, Not Abiding Thought after Thought, There Is No Old Age; Not Clinging and Giving Rise to Great Compassion; To Whom the Three Contemplations Belong; Leaving the Extremes and the Inversions, and the Two Kinds of Afflictions; That the Third Contemplation Is Very Deep, Citing the Sūtra of the Simile of the City; Passing Beyond the Two Vehicles, and the Reason for Retreating and Not Retreating; Breaking Wrong Causes and Conditions—Atoms and the Nature of the World; That Because Dharmas Belong to Causes and Conditions They Are Non-Self; That Abiding Securely in Ultimate Emptiness Is Called the Prajñā with Nothing to Be Attained; the Māras Grieved and Pained, and the Simile of the Fisherman; the Reason the Six Perfections Are Fulfilled; the Two Kinds of People, of Soft Faculties and of Keen Faculties; Because the Power of Faith and the Power of Wisdom Are Equal, One Is Able to Dedicate to Sarvajñā
The treatise-author explains:
Subhūti has heard from the Buddha all kinds of marks of prajñāpāramitā—at first he heard 「畢竟空相」 tr. "the mark of ultimate emptiness"; in the middle he heard 「囑累」 tr. "entrustment", which seems to be something existent; later he again heard 「空」 tr. "emptiness" spoken of. What is called the meaning of prajñā is immeasurable, while the collections of names, letters, and phrases are measured.
At this time Subhūti had this thought: ‘The anuttarā samyaksaṃbodhi of the buddhas is very deep; I should ask the Buddha the reason why it is very deep.’
What the Buddha has spoken of awakening is only a small portion of bodhi, spoken only in order to break the inversions of beings, and not spoken in full. Why? Because there is no one able to receive it. If someone grasps the mark of 「如」 tr. "suchness", the Buddha says: 「如亦空，無生住滅故；若法無生住滅，是法即無。」 tr. "Suchness too is empty, because it is without arising, abiding, and ceasing; if a dharma is without arising, abiding, and ceasing, this dharma is nothing." The nature of dharmas and the limit of reality are likewise. If someone grasps ultimate emptiness, he too is said to be wrong. Why? If ultimate emptiness were a fixed mark that could be grasped, it would not be ultimate emptiness. For this reason it is said to be very deep, and I should ask the Buddha again.
Having had this thought, Subhūti—as the Buddha himself says: 「三世諸佛用般若波羅蜜得道，般若故不盡——已不盡、今不盡、當不盡。」 tr. "The buddhas of the three times attain the path by means of prajñāpāramitā; because of prajñā it is not exhausted—it has not been exhausted, it is not now exhausted, it will not be exhausted." For this reason, I now ask only about the meaning of 「不盡」 tr. "not exhausted".
The Buddha answers: 「如虛空不盡故，般若亦不盡。」 tr. "As space is not exhausted, so prajñā too is not exhausted." Like space, which has no dharma and has only a name, prajñāpāramitā is also thus. If prajñāpāramitā is inexhaustible because, like space, it is without anything existent, then how can the bodhisattva give rise to this prajñāpāramitā? What is called being able to give rise is: how does the bodhisattva give rise in his mind to being able to practise and being able to attain?
The Buddha answers: 「色無盡故，般若波羅蜜應生。」 tr. "Because form is inexhaustible, prajñāpāramitā should arise."
It is as the prior arising, the later arising, and the middle arising of form are all unfindable. Form as itself arisen form is unfindable; apart from form, arisen form is also unfindable. Arising is unfindable, and the arising of arising is also unfindable, as was said earlier in 「破生」 tr. "breaking arising". Because arising is unfindable, form too is unfindable; because form is unfindable, the arising of form is unfindable. Because these two dharmas are both unfindable, form is like an illusion, like a dream, and only deceives the human eye. If form had arising, it would certainly have exhaustion; because it is without arising, it is also without exhaustion.
The true mark of form is precisely the mark of prajñāpāramitā; therefore it is said: 「色不可盡，般若波羅蜜亦不可盡。」 tr. "Form is inexhaustible; prajñāpāramitā too is inexhaustible."
Feeling, perception, constructions, and consciousness, dānapāramitā, and so on up to the omniscience of all kinds are also thus.
Again, the reason it is said that one should give rise to prajñā is that ignorance as space is inexhaustible. If a person contemplates only ultimate emptiness, he mostly falls into the extreme of annihilation; if he contemplates existence, he mostly falls into the extreme of permanence. In order to leave these two extremes, the emptiness of the twelve links of causes and conditions is spoken of. Why? If a dharma arises from the coming together of causes and conditions, this dharma has no fixed nature; if a dharma has no fixed nature, this is precisely the mark of ultimate emptiness and quiescence. Because it leaves the two extremes, it is provisionally named the middle way. Therefore it is said: 「十二因緣如虛空，無法故不盡。」 tr. "The twelve links of causes and conditions are like space: because there is no dharma, they are not exhausted." Delusion too arises from the coming together of causes and conditions, and therefore has no specific mark of its own; because it has no specific mark of its own, it is ultimately empty, like space.
Again, because it arises from causes and conditions, it is without reality, as is said in the sūtra: 「因眼緣色生觸念，觸念從癡生。」 tr. "In dependence on the eye and conditioned by form, contact-thought arises; contact-thought arises from delusion." Contact-thought is not in the eye, not in form, not within, not without, nor in between, nor does it come from the ten directions and the three times; the fixed mark of this dharma is unfindable. Why? Because all dharmas enter 「如」 tr. "suchness". If one obtains the fixed mark of this ignorance, this is precisely wisdom, and it is not called delusion. Therefore the mark of delusion and the mark of wisdom are without difference; the real mark of delusion is precisely wisdom, and to grasp and cling to the mark of wisdom is precisely delusion. Therefore the real mark of delusion is of ultimate purity, like space, without arising and without ceasing. Therefore it is said: 「得是觀故，迴向阿耨多羅三藐三菩提，即名般若波羅蜜。」 tr. "Because one obtains this contemplation, dedicating it to anuttarā samyaksaṃbodhi is called prajñāpāramitā."
The treatise-author asks:
If there is no ignorance, then there are also no constructions and the rest; why then still speak of the twelve links of causes and conditions?
The treatise-author answers:
The twelve links of causes and conditions are spoken of in three kinds:
First, what the ordinary person sees with the fleshly eye: inverted, clinging to the mind of self, he gives rise to the afflictions and deeds, and goes and comes within birth and death.
Second, the worthies and sages distinguish dharmas with the Dharma-eye: seeing old age, sickness, and death, their minds give rise to weariness and turning away, and they wish to leave the world. Seeking out the causes and conditions of old age and death, they find it is because of birth. This birth in turn has the afflictions and deeds as its causes and conditions. Why? One who has no afflictions is not born. Therefore it is known that the afflictions are the cause of birth. The cause and condition of the afflictions is ignorance. Because of ignorance, what should be given up is instead taken, and what should be taken is instead given up. What should be given up? The afflictions that are the causes and conditions of old age, sickness, and the sufferings should be given up, yet because of the causes and conditions of the slight pleasure of inversion one grasps and clings to them. Upholding the precepts, meditative concentration, wisdom, and the root of all goodness—these are the causes and conditions of the bliss of nirvāṇa; these matters should be taken, and instead are given up. Within this there is no knower, no seer, no maker. Why? Because this dharma has no fixed mark and only arises in continuity from false and deceptive causes and conditions. The practitioner knows that this is false, deceptive, and unreal, and does not give rise to idle discourse; this is only extinguishing suffering and thereby entering nirvāṇa; it does not seek the marks of the sufferings through to the end.
Third, the bodhisattva-mahāsattvas: because they are people of great knowledge with keen faculties, they only seek to go through to the end of the root-mark of the twelve links of causes and conditions, and do not sink themselves in sorrow and fear. When they seek, they do not find a fixed mark; the dharma of old age is ultimately empty, and is only provisionally named existent out of what is false and deceptive. Why? Those who distinguish the marks of dharmas say: 「老是心不相應行。」 tr. "Old age is a construction not associated with mind." This mark is unfindable. A white head and the rest are marks of form, not the mark of old age. Because these two matters are both unfindable, there is no mark of old age.
Again, what the people of the world call the marks of old age are: hair white, teeth falling out, face wrinkled, body bent, emaciated, strength thin, the faculties dark and blocked; such things as these are named the marks of old age. But this is not so! Why? White hair is not had only by the old. Again, there are those in the prime of their years whose hair is white, and those in old age whose hair is black. Emaciation, wrinkling, and bending are likewise. There are people who are old and whose faculties are bright and keen, and who are young and whose faculties are dark and blocked; again, there are those who have taken the medicine that restores the years, who, though old, are vigorous. Thus old age has no fixed mark. Because it has no fixed mark, dharmas come together and are provisionally named old age. Again, as wheels, axle, shafts, spokes, and the rest are borrowed and named a cart, this provisional name is not really existent.
Again, someone says thus: 「果報五眾故相名為老。」 tr. "The mark of the oldness of the five aggregates of retribution is named old age." This too is not so! Why? All conditioned dharmas arise and cease thought after thought and do not abide; if they do not abide there is no oldness, and without oldness there is no old age. If all conditioned dharmas had abiding, there would be no impermanence; if there were no impermanence, they would be permanent; if they were permanent, there would be no old age—how much less could there be old age within what is neither permanent nor impermanent, within ultimate emptiness!
Again, within the ultimate emptiness of dharmas even the mark of arising is unfindable, how much less is there old age!
By all kinds of causes and conditions such as these, the dharma of old age is sought and is unfindable; because it is unfindable, it is signless, like space, inexhaustible. As with old age, so on up to ignorance it is likewise. Breaking ignorance is as said above.
Because the bodhisattva contemplates the real mark of all dharmas as ultimately empty, without anything existent, with nothing to be attained, and does not cling to this matter either, amid beings he gives rise to great compassion: beings, because of folly and delusion, undergo sufferings and vexations within dharmas that are unreal, inverted, and false.
The first twelve links of causes and conditions are only for the sake of ordinary people, and within them one does not seek out right and wrong; the second twelve links of causes and conditions are what is contemplated by people of the two vehicles and by bodhisattvas who have not yet obtained the dharma of the acceptance of non-arising; the third twelve links of causes and conditions are what is contemplated by bodhisattvas from the obtaining of the dharma of the acceptance of non-arising and so on up to sitting at the seat of awakening.
Therefore it is said: 「無明虛空不可盡，乃至憂悲苦惱虛空不可盡故，菩薩行般若波羅蜜。」 tr. "Because ignorance as space is inexhaustible, and so on up to sorrow, grief, suffering, and vexation as space being inexhaustible, the bodhisattva practises prajñāpāramitā."
Contemplating the dharma of causes and conditions deeply in this way is what is called leaving the extremes and the inversions. The extremes means the extreme of permanence and the extreme of annihilation, the extreme of existence and the extreme of non-existence, the extreme of reality and the extreme of emptiness, the world's having an end, and the like—clinging to the extremes; the inversions means giving rise, within the impermanent, to permanence and the like—the afflictions of the inversions. When one contemplates this dharma of the twelve links of causes and conditions, the extremes and the inversions cease. The afflictions have two divisions: first, the people of the outside paths with wrong views are called the extremes; second, the afflictions of the remaining beings are called the inversions. When one contemplates the twelve links of causes and conditions, these two kinds of afflictions both cease.
This contemplation of the third twelve links of causes and conditions is very deep; only the bodhisattvas sitting at the seat of awakening can contemplate it; though earlier they could contemplate it, they could not yet fulfil it. As is said in the Sūtra of the Simile of the City, the Buddha says: ‘When I had not yet attained the path, I reflected thus: 「眾生可愍，深入嶮道，所謂數數生，數數老，數數死，往來世間，不知出處。」 tr. "Beings are to be pitied: they have gone deep into a perilous road—that is, being born again and again, growing old again and again, dying again and again, going and coming in the world, not knowing the way out." At that time I further had this thought: 「何因緣有老死？」 tr. "By what causes and conditions is there old age and death?" As I sought and examined in this way, I obtained real wisdom: old age and death and the rest have birth as their cause and condition.’ Therefore it is known: the third contemplation is obtained only on sitting at the seat of awakening, as is spoken of at length in the sūtra.
Again, contemplating such a dharma of causes and conditions further, one passes beyond the two vehicles and obtains the omniscience of all kinds. If there are those who retreat from the Buddha path, it is all because they do not obtain this very deep contemplation; if they obtain this contemplation, they do not retreat. Why? Entering deep into ultimate emptiness, one does not see the ground of the śrāvaka and pratyekabuddha; because one does not see it, one does not abide in it.
Again, one who can contemplate the dharma of causes and conditions in this way does not see a single dharma that is fixed and autonomous, arising without causes and conditions; all dharmas are not autonomous, all belong to causes and conditions and arise. Some people, though they see that all dharmas arise from causes and conditions, hold that they arise from wrong causes and conditions. Wrong causes and conditions are atoms, the nature of the world, and the like. Therefore it is said: 「不見法無因緣生，亦不見法從常因緣微塵、世性生」 tr. "does not see a dharma arising without causes and conditions, nor see a dharma arising from permanent causes and conditions—atoms, the nature of the world". As space is permanent, and because it is permanent it has no arising, and space also does not act as a cause for things, for this reason no dharma arises from permanent causes and conditions.
Again, the bodhisattva thus contemplates all dharmas as belonging to causes and conditions and arising, not autonomous; because they are not autonomous, they are non-self, and so on up to there being no knower and no seer.
At that time the bodhisattva abides securely in the twelve links of causes and conditions of ultimate emptiness; he does not see all dharmas such as form as existent or non-existent and the like, nor does he see prajñā, nor see practising prajñā by means of this dharma; and so on up to anuttarā samyaksaṃbodhi, likewise. This is called the bodhisattva's prajñāpāramitā with nothing to be attained. Having obtained this prajñā with nothing to be attained, he then obtains, in all dharmas, the prajñā without any obstruction.
At that time the Māras are extremely grieved and pained. Why? Because this bodhisattva enters deep into the ultimate emptiness of the twelve links of causes and conditions and does not cling to Māra's net of the sixty-two wrong views of existence, non-existence, neither existence nor non-existence, and the rest, Māra's mind thinks: I now have no dharma by which to find an opening in this bodhisattva. It is as when a fisherman sees a fish go deep into the great water, where hook and net cannot reach, and he despairs and grieves. It is also like having newly lost father and mother.
Again, if the bodhisattva can practise the prajñāpāramitā with nothing to be attained in this way, he can fulfil dānapāramitā and the rest. Why? Because in practising such a dharma, the afflictions and the dharmas that obstruct prajñā are all broken and thinned, and the people of the Māras cannot find an opening, the perfections come to be fulfilled; though earlier he also practised the six perfections, he had not yet been able to obtain such fulfilment.
Subhūti asks: ‘World-Honored One! How can the bodhisattva practise such prajñāpāramitā, and fulfil dānapāramitā and the other perfections?’
The Buddha answers: when all the bodhisattva's giving is dedicated to sarvajñā. There are two kinds of people: those of soft faculties and those of keen faculties. People of soft faculties, whether they give little or much, all grasp at marks and dedicate it to anuttarā samyaksaṃbodhi. People of keen faculties break this grasping at marks, yet make idle discourse of the dharma of emptiness; their power of faith turns thin; they do not use sarvajñā, and only seek the real mark of all dharmas. These two kinds of people both cannot fulfil dānapāramitā: the first because the power of faith is much and the power of wisdom little, the second because the power of wisdom is much and the power of faith little.
The Buddha now says: 「信力、慧力等故，能迴向薩婆若。」 tr. "Because the power of faith and the power of wisdom are equal, one is able to dedicate to sarvajñā." Keeping sarvajñā in mind is the power of faith; dedicating in the manner of sarvajñā is the power of knowledge. And so on up to prajñāpāramitā, likewise.
無盡方便品：般若不可盡何以要用虛空來答，色不可盡故般若應生何以是生而不是求，十二支空不可盡何以能生般若，十二因緣何以是獨菩薩法，坐道場時應如是觀何以不是初學所行，轉還與不轉還何以只差一個方便力，無所得般若何以令惡魔如箭入心，具足六度何以只在迴向薩婆若一句，取如相與取畢竟空相何以同是非，虛空無所有何以還能生般若，破色生四句何以歸到色真相即般若相，離斷常二邊何以要說十二因緣空而假名中道，觸念不在內外中間何以癡實相即是智慧，說十二因緣何以要分三種，老法何以畢竟空無定相，畢竟空中觀老何以還要生大悲，第三觀何以唯坐道場者能具足，退與不退何以繫於此觀，安住畢竟空何以連般若亦不見，軟根利根二種人何以皆不能具足檀度，信力慧力等何以是迴向之樞
在問什麼
這一品問的是一個極短的問題：般若波羅蜜可不可盡。問的人是須菩提，起因是他先起了一個念——諸佛的阿耨多羅三藐三菩提甚深。深到何處他不說，只把「不可盡」三字提出來請佛決定。佛的答語更短：因為虛空不可盡，所以般若不可盡。一問一答之間，本品的骨架已經立好。
但接著出來的第二問纔是全品的重心：既然不可盡，那麼「云何應生般若波羅蜜」。這一問很要緊。若般若如虛空一般無所有，它便像是個沒有著手處的東西；沒有著手處，行人便無從下手。論主在論段把這個難處明白說出來——般若波羅蜜若如虛空無所有故不可盡，菩薩怎能生起它？怎樣在心中生起能行、能得？本品自此以下所說的一切，都是在回答這一難。
佛的回答分兩路走。第一路是就色、受想行識、六波羅蜜乃至一切種智說：它們不可盡，所以般若應生。第二路是就十二因緣說：癡空、行空、識空、名色空、六處空、六觸空、受空、愛空、取空、有空、生空、老死憂悲苦惱空，一一不可盡，所以般若應生。兩路之中，第二路纔是本品用力最深的地方——經文緊接著說「是十二因緣，是獨菩薩法」，並囑坐道場時應如是觀。論段幾乎全部篇幅，都花在解釋十二因緣何以能作般若的所生之門。
十二因緣本是三乘共觀之法，何以此處說它是獨菩薩法？論主的答案是分三種來說：凡夫肉眼所見的一種、賢聖法眼分別的一種、菩薩大智利根究盡根本相的一種。前二種都在十二因緣之內用功，第三種是把十二因緣推到不可得處——以「老」為樣本，逐層推求老之定相不可得，老既不可得，乃至無明亦不可得，於是十二支一一如虛空而不可盡。不可盡的不是有一個永遠用不完的東西，是根本沒有一個可盡之法。此義一立，「云何應生」之難即解：般若不從有中生，是從一切法不可得處生。
品名所標的「方便」二字，義在後半。以虛空不可盡法觀十二因緣者不墮二乘，求菩薩道而轉還者皆不得是方便力，不轉還者皆得是方便力——退與不退的分水嶺，經文明說只是一個方便力。論段末後又把這方便落到六波羅蜜上：能行無所得般若，煩惱折薄，魔不得便，六度乃得具足；而具足的樞紐只在一句——所有布施持戒忍辱精進禪定智慧皆迴向薩婆若。全品自「不可盡」起，至「迴向薩婆若」結，是從最高處的無盡義，一路落到最平實的行門上。
逐段解明
一、須菩提作念菩提甚深，白佛問般若波羅蜜不可盡。 品首先記須菩提的心行：他先作念「是諸佛阿耨多羅三藐三菩提甚深，我當問佛」，作念已纔白佛。讀者此處當問：為何經文要把未出口的念頭也記下來？因為此念是全品之因——所問的是般若不可盡，所感的卻是菩提甚深。深與不可盡是一事之兩面：深故不可測其底，不可測故不可盡。勿把這一問讀成好奇之問，它是從實見深法而起的請決之問。
二、佛答虛空不可盡故般若波羅蜜不可盡。 佛不解釋般若何以不可盡，只換一個所依：虛空不可盡，所以般若不可盡。此答的力量全在「虛空」二字上。虛空之不可盡，不是量大到用不完，是根本無法可盡——無有一物在其中可以減損。讀者若把虛空讀成廣大無邊之物，這一答便落成誇飾；若讀成無所有，這一答纔是實說。下文論段所釋的「如虛空，無有法，但有名字」，正是為防此誤。
三、須菩提續問云何應生般若波羅蜜。 接得極快：既然如虛空不可盡，那麼應當怎樣生起它？經文此處未再標「白佛言」，只以「世尊」呼格承接，仍是須菩提在問。這一問看似轉了話題，其實是把上答逼到行門上——凡聞一法之高深而不問其入處者，聞與不聞同。讀經至此可自檢：我讀到「不可盡」時，心中生的是讚歎，還是「云何應生」。
四、佛答色乃至一切種智不可盡故般若波羅蜜應生。 佛的第一路答語從最粗近處起：色不可盡故般若應生，受想行識亦然；檀波羅蜜不可盡故般若應生，尸羅、羼提、毘梨耶、禪、般若亦然；乃至一切種智不可盡故般若應生。此處要看清句式——不是『觀色不可盡』而後般若生，是色之不可盡即般若之所以生。所舉三重由粗至細：五眾是所緣之法，六波羅蜜是能行之法，一切種智是所得之果；三重都不可盡，故無一處不是般若生處。
五、佛答十二支空不可盡故般若應生，是獨菩薩法，坐道場應如是觀，觀之則不墮二乘，轉還不轉還皆繫方便力。 第二路答語轉入十二因緣，逐支而說：癡空、行空、識空、名色空、六處空、六觸空、受空、愛空、取空、有空、生空、老死憂悲苦惱空，一一不可盡故般若應生。其下連出四義：是獨菩薩法、能除諸邊顛倒、坐道場時應如是觀當得一切種智、以虛空不可盡法觀之則不墮二乘地而住阿耨多羅三藐三菩提。末後說退轉之由：求菩薩道而轉還者皆離般若波羅蜜念，不知云何以虛空不可盡法觀十二因緣，皆不得是方便力；不轉還者皆得是方便力。此段是全品之骨，論段所釋十之八九都在這裡。讀者當先記住一事：經文說的不是『觀十二因緣之空』，是「以虛空不可盡法觀十二因緣」——所用之法先是無盡，然後纔觀。
六、佛說觀十二因緣時不見諸相，於色乃至菩提亦不見，一切法不可得故是為應般若波羅蜜行。 佛續說此觀之相，全用遮遣：不見法無因緣生，不見法常不滅，不見法有我人壽者命者眾生知者見者，不見法無常、苦、無我、寂滅非寂滅。要緊處在第一句與第二句之對——既不見無因緣生，又不見常不滅：前遮無因，後遮常因，論主下文釋此段正以此二重相對。其下不見我人，不見無常苦無我，亦是兩頭都遮，纔不是以無常破常、以無我破我的對治之觀。其下推至色與受想行識、般若乃至菩提皆不見，末結「一切法不可得故，是為應般若波羅蜜行」。勿把「不見」讀成閉目不觀，它是觀到定相不可得處的自然結果。
七、佛說行無所得般若時惡魔愁毒如箭入心、譬如人新喪父母。 經文忽然從觀法轉到魔事，並自出兩喻：如箭入心、如人新喪父母。此段位置很值得注意——它緊接在「一切法不可得」之後。魔之所以愁毒，正因為菩薩已行到無所得處；有所得處魔尚有下手之地，無所得處則無地可下手。兩喻都取切身之痛而不取威猛之相，是說魔的無可奈何，不是說魔的憤怒。
八、須菩提問但一魔愁毒，抑三千大千世界中魔亦復愁毒。 須菩提的追問看似計較數目，其實是問範圍：一人行般若所動搖的，是一魔之境，還是一大千之境。凡讀經見有問數者，先看他問的是數還是勢。此問問的是勢。
九、佛答三千大千世界諸惡魔皆愁毒各不能自安，天人阿修羅不能得其便，行般若時具足修六波羅蜜。 佛的答語三節。其一、諸惡魔皆愁毒如箭入心，各於其坐不能自安——「各於其坐」四字最見情狀：不是起身來攻，是坐著坐不住。其二、一切世間天及人、阿修羅不能得其便令其憂惱——魔既無下手處，餘者更無。其三、轉出正面利益：行般若波羅蜜時具足修六波羅蜜，具足諸波羅蜜。此第三節是下段之引。
十、須菩提問行般若時云何具足六波羅蜜。 又是一個「云何」。本品兩個大問都由須菩提問出，第一問是「云何應生」，此問是「云何具足」——一問入處，一問果地。兩問合看，可見須菩提之問法：聞高義必求其行，聞行必求其成。
十一、佛答所有布施持戒忍辱精進禪定智慧皆迴向薩婆若，是為具足六波羅蜜。 佛的答案出人意料地平實：所有布施皆迴向薩婆若，即具足檀波羅蜜；持戒、忍辱、精進、禪定、智慧一一亦然，末結「具足六波羅蜜」。要看清「所有」與「皆」二字——不是施得多纔具足，是所施無一不迴向纔具足。具足之義在無漏在外，不在量之滿。此段是全品行門之落腳處，前面一切無盡之義，最後都繫在這一句上。
十二、釋曰：須菩提聞般若種種相，般若義無量而名字句眾有量。 論主起釋，先補出須菩提發問的來歷：他從佛聞般若種種相——初聞「畢竟空相」，中聞「囑累」如似有，後還聞說「空」。三番所聞前後似異，故有此問。論主隨即點出所以異之故：般若義無量，而名、字、句眾有量。此一句是讀一切經論的鑰匙——同一無量之義，用有量之名句說，必然前後看似不齊。讀者遇經中前後語似相違，先取此義，勿急判為矛盾。
十三、須菩提作念問所以甚深。 論主重述須菩提之念：諸佛菩提甚深，我當問佛所以甚深。此處加了「所以」二字，與經段首句相較更進一層——不只問其深，且問其何以深。讀經當學此一問：知其然之後必問其所以然，否則所知者只是一句判語。
十四、論主釋佛說菩提少許分，取如相與取畢竟空相皆非。 論主答何以甚深：佛所說的菩提只是少許一分，但為破眾生顛倒而說，不具足說，以無能受者故。次出兩重簡別：若人取「如」之相，佛言「如亦空，無生住滅故；若法無生住滅，是法即無」，法性、實際亦如是；若有取畢竟空者，亦言非也，以畢竟空若是定相可取，即非畢竟空。此段最要緊——取空與取有同是取，故同是非。行人多知不可取有，少知不可取空；論主把「畢竟空」自己也放進所破之列，這是本論一貫的守法。
十五、須菩提念三世諸佛用般若得道、般若不盡，故但問不盡義。 論主補出須菩提所以只問「不盡」的來歷：如佛自說「三世諸佛用般若波羅蜜得道，般若故不盡——已不盡、今不盡、當不盡」，故今但問不盡之義。三世皆不盡，是從用處證其不盡：若般若可盡，則先佛用盡而後佛無用。讀此段可知須菩提之問不是憑空發，是承佛先語而請其義。
十六、論主釋佛答如虛空不盡故般若亦不盡，並自出難：無所有云何能生。 論主釋佛之譬答：如虛空，無有法，但有名字；般若波羅蜜亦如是。釋畢即自出一難——般若若如虛空無所有故不可盡，云何菩薩能生是般若？所謂能生者，菩薩云何心中生能行、能得？這一難提得極好，它把讀者心中未成形的疑替他問出來了。凡讀論見論主自出難，當知下文所答即是本段之正義；此難以下至品末，皆是答此一難。
十七、論主釋佛答色無盡故般若應生：破色生而歸色真相即般若相。 論主釋第一路答語，先破色之生：色的初生、後生、中生皆不可得；色即生色不可得，離色生色不可得；生不可得，生生不可得，如先「破生」中說。生既不可得，色亦不可得；色不可得故色生不可得。二法俱不可得，故色如幻如夢，但誑人眼。末出正義：若色有生必有盡，以無生故亦無盡；色真相即是般若波羅蜜相，是故說「色不可盡，般若波羅蜜亦不可盡」。受想行識、檀波羅蜜乃至一切種智亦如是。此段的推法要看清方向——不是說色空所以般若空，是說色之真相即般若之相，故色之無盡即般若之無盡。
十八、論主出第二路：無明虛空不可盡故應生般若，離斷常二邊而說十二因緣空，假名中道。 論主轉入十二因緣，先說何以要從此處說：若人但觀畢竟空，多墮斷滅邊；若觀有，多墮常邊。離是二邊故說十二因緣空。何以十二因緣能離二邊？法從因緣和合生則無定性，無定性即是畢竟空寂滅相——因緣生故不斷，無定性故不常。離二邊故假名為中道。末以論主自牒之語「十二因緣如虛空，無法故不盡」收歸，並釋癡亦從因緣和合生故無自相，無自相故畢竟空如虛空。此段是全論段之樞：十二因緣在此不是流轉之相，是離二邊之門。
十九、論主釋因緣生故無實，觸念不可得，癡實相即是智慧。 論主續證因緣生法之無實，引經語「因眼緣色生觸念，觸念從癡生」，隨即推之：觸念不在眼中、不在色中，不在內、不在外、不在中間，亦不從十方三世來，是法定相不可得，以一切法入「如」故。既不可得，則若得是無明定相即是智慧，不名為癡。故癡相智慧相無異，癡實相即是智慧，而取著智慧相即是癡。末歸癡實相畢竟清淨如虛空無生無滅，故迴向菩提即名般若波羅蜜。此段最易讀錯——不是說癡就是智慧可以不斷，是說推癡至其實相處便無癡可得，而取著所得之智慧則又成癡。
二十、問曰：若無無明亦無諸行等，云何說十二因緣。 本品論段唯一的一番問答在此發問。難得極正：既然癡的定相不可得，無明既無，行識乃至老死一併無，那麼經中說十二因緣豈非虛設？凡讀空義而生此疑者甚多，論主不迴避，逕立此問而後答。讀論遇問曰，當先自答一遍再看論主之答，纔知其答之所以然。
廿一、答曰：說十二因緣有三種，一者凡夫肉眼所見。 論主的答法不是直破此難，是分三種而說——一難之所以成難，往往因為把三種混作一種。第一種是凡夫肉眼所見：顛倒、著我心，起諸煩惱、業，往來生死中。此種只是身在其中而不自知，於十二因緣不求是非。讀者可自照：日用之中順著愛取有而行，未嘗一念回看的，即是此種。
廿二、二者賢聖以法眼分別，逆推老死至煩惱無明，但滅苦入涅槃而不究盡求諸苦相。 第二種是賢聖法眼所觀：見老病死而心厭欲出世間，逆推老死由生、生由煩惱業、煩惱因緣是無明。無明之相在此說得極切——應捨而取、應取而捨：老病諸苦因緣之煩惱應捨，卻以少分顛倒之樂而取；持戒禪定智慧諸善根本是涅槃樂因緣，應取而反捨。次明是中無知者見者作者，但從虛誑因緣相續生；行者知虛誑不實則不生戲論，但滅苦故入於涅槃，不究盡求諸苦相。末一句是第二種與第三種的分界——不是不能求，是不究盡求。
廿三、三者菩薩大智利根但求究盡根本相，老法畢竟空、老是心不相應行而相不可得。 第三種是諸菩薩摩訶薩：大智人利根故，但求究盡十二因緣根本相，不以憂怖自沒。此處「不以憂怖自沒」六字對第二種是一個簡別——第二種是因厭苦而求出，厭苦之心一急，便止於滅苦而不再推。菩薩推之，則求時不得定相，老法畢竟空，但從虛誑假名有。論主隨即取一家之說為例：分別諸法相者說「老是心不相應行」，然此相不可得；頭白等是色相，非老相；二事不可得故無老相。以「老」為推求之樣本，是本論的方便——十二支之中老死最切身，最切身者尚且無定相，餘支可知。
廿四、復次：世人所名老相皆非定相，諸法和合假名為老，如假輪軸轅輻等為車。 論主再從世情處破。世人名老相者，髮白、齒離，面皺、身曲，羸瘦、力薄，諸根闇塞。論主一一破之：髮白非唯老者，有年壯而白、老年而黑者；羸瘦皺曲亦爾；有人老而諸根明利、少而闇塞者；又服還年藥雖老而壯。故老無定相，無定相故諸法和合假名為老。末出車喻：如假輪、軸、轅、輻等為車，是假名非實。此喻要看清所比——不是說車不可用，是說車之名下無一物是車。老亦如是：老之事宛然可見，老之相求之不得。
廿五、復次：有人言說果報五眾故相名為老，論主破以念念生滅不住則無故無老。 有人另立一說：果報五眾之故相即名為老。論主判曰是亦不然，其破有二節。其一、一切有為法念念生滅不住，若不住則無故，無故則無老——「故」是對「新」而立的，念念不住則無所謂故舊。其二、一切有為法若有住則無無常，若無無常即是常，若常則無老；何況非常非無常畢竟空中而有老。兩節合看是一個兩難：立住則成常而無老，立不住則無故而無老。讀論遇此等兩難之破，當知論主不是各個擊破，是把對方所有可立之地一併封住。
廿六、復次：畢竟空中生相不可得何況有老，如老乃至無明亦如是。 論主收束老義：諸法畢竟空中生相尚不可得，何況有老。如是種種因緣求老法不可得，不可得故無相，如虛空不可盡。末一句把樣本推廣——如老，乃至無明亦如是，破無明如上說。至此十二支一一如虛空不可盡之義乃成，經文『癡空不可盡故般若應生』一段的所以然也就全出來了。
廿七、菩薩觀諸法實相畢竟空無所有無所得而不著是事故生大悲。 論主在最空處補一句最暖的話：菩薩觀諸法實相畢竟空、無所有、無所得，亦不著是事故，於眾生中而生大悲——眾生愚癡故，於不實、顛倒、虛妄法中受諸苦惱。要看清悲心的出處：不是觀空之後另起一念慈悲，是因為連空亦不著，纔有餘地生悲。若著於所觀之空，則悲心無從發。此段是本品從義理轉入行持的關節。
廿八、三種十二因緣各有其所觀之人。 論主回頭為三種定其人：初十二因緣但是凡夫人故，於是中不求是非；第二十二因緣，是二乘人及未得無生忍法菩薩所觀；第三十二因緣，是從得無生忍法乃至坐道場菩薩所觀。此段極要緊，它把上文的三種從『三種說法』落實為『三等行人』。讀者於此當自知所在——未得無生忍者所觀仍屬第二種，不必以第三種自居；而第三種既是坐道場所觀，經文說「坐道場時，應如是觀」也就不是懸談。
廿九、是故說無明虛空不可盡乃至憂悲苦惱虛空不可盡故菩薩行般若波羅蜜。 論主以「是故說」三字回牒經文，把上來所推的老義、無明義一併結到經句上。凡見論主用「是故說」回牒，即知上文之釋已完，此是驗收之語。讀論可持此為段落之標識：回牒句之前是釋，之後另起新義。
三十、論主訓離諸邊顛倒：邊與顛倒之目，及二種煩惱之分。 論主釋經文「能除諸邊、顛倒」一語，逐字出其目。邊者，常邊、斷滅邊，有邊、無邊，實邊、空邊，世間有邊等著諸邊；顛倒者，於無常中起常等諸顛倒煩惱。觀十二因緣法則諸邊顛倒滅。次分諸煩惱為二分：一者外道邪見人名為邊，二者餘眾生煩惱名為顛倒。此一分別很有用——邊是見上的偏，顛倒是情上的錯；見偏多在立論處，情錯多在日用處。一觀而二皆滅，是因為二者同出於定相之執。
卅一、第三觀甚深唯坐道場者能觀，引《城譬喻經》為證。 論主申明第三種十二因緣觀之甚深：唯諸菩薩坐道場者能觀，先雖能觀未能具足。次引《城譬喻經》為證，經中佛自述本未得道時如是思惟——眾生可愍，深入嶮道，數數生、數數老、數數死，往來世間不知出處；又作念「何因緣有老死」，如是求覓時得實智慧，知生因緣是老死等。論主據此斷曰：第三觀，坐道場乃得。此證用得極有分量——佛自己的成道歷程即是此觀之實例，故非虛說。讀者於此當存一分審慎：能觀與能具足觀不是一事，先能而後具足，非一蹴而至。
卅二、又復觀如是因緣法過於二乘得一切種智，退不退皆繫此觀。 論主接經文之利益：觀如是因緣法過於二乘，得一切種智。次釋退轉之由：若有人於佛道退者，皆不得是甚深觀故；若得是觀則不退。何以故？深入畢竟空中則不見聲聞辟支佛地，不見故不於是中住。此答把『不墮二乘』解得極乾淨——不是見了二乘地而勉力不入，是根本不見有此地可住。凡以意志力守住不退者，其退終有時；以不見故不住者，乃真不退。
卅三、復次：不見一法定自在無因緣而生，破邪因緣微塵世性。 論主續釋經文「不見法無因緣生」一句，並補出其反面。能如是觀者，不見有一法定自在無因緣而生，一切法不自在皆屬因緣生。次破一類人：雖見一切法從因緣生，卻謂為從邪因緣生——邪因緣者，微塵、世性等。是故經說「不見法無因緣生」，論主更推其反面：亦不見法從常因緣（微塵、世性）生。末以虛空為例破常因緣：如虛空常，常故則無生，虛空亦不與物作因，故無有法從常因緣生。此段之要在分兩重——先破無因，次破邪因；破無因易，破邪因難，因為邪因亦是因，形似而實非。
卅四、復次：菩薩觀一切法屬因緣生不自在故無我乃至無知者見者。 承上一轉，把因緣義落到無我上：一切法屬因緣生而不自在，不自在故無我，乃至無知者、見者。此處的推法很直——不自在即是無我之定義，非另有一個我可破。讀者若曾苦於「我」之難破，可從此處入手——不必先尋我在何處，只須看所作所受是否自在。
卅五、爾時菩薩安住畢竟空十二因緣中而不見般若，是名無所得般若波羅蜜。 論主釋經文之觀相：菩薩安住畢竟空十二因緣中，不見一切色等法若有若無等，亦不見般若，亦不見用是法行般若，乃至阿耨多羅三藐三菩提亦如是；是名菩薩無所得般若波羅蜜。末一句最要緊——得是無所得般若，於一切法中便得無所障礙般若。無所得是因，無障礙是果。連能行之般若與所行之法都不見，纔真無所礙；若留一法不見而自以為見，即此一法便是礙處。
卅六、爾時諸魔極大愁毒，捕魚人之喻。 論主釋魔愁之所以然：以是菩薩深入十二因緣畢竟空中，不著有、無、非有非無等六十二諸邪見魔網——此諸邪見之目，本論此段未出，讀者不必代為擬補。魔既無法可得菩薩之便，故極大愁毒。論主自出一喻：譬如捕魚人見一魚深入大水，鉤網所不及，則絕望憂愁；亦如新喪父母。喻中所比是魔之絕望而非魔之能為，讀者勿把此段讀成魔勢可畏。所可畏者反在其對面——魔之所以無法可施，只因菩薩不著一法；一著即成網眼。
卅七、復次：能行無所得般若則六波羅蜜得具足。 論主釋六度具足之所以然：行如是法，諸煩惱障般若之法皆折薄，諸魔人民不能得便，故諸波羅蜜得具足；先來雖行六波羅蜜，未能得如是具足。此段解釋了經段第九條的第三節——何以行般若時六度自具足。答案不在多行，在障薄；障薄則本有之行自然成就。讀者可持此自檢：所行之度不具足，多半不在功夫不勤，在煩惱與魔事未除。
卅八、須菩提問云何能行如是般若而具足諸波羅蜜。 論主以敘述之體重牒經文之問：須菩提問世尊，菩薩云何能行如是般若波羅蜜，能具足檀波羅蜜等諸波羅蜜。此處雖作問答之形，卻是論主複述經段第十條，非另立一番問答。讀論當分清論主自設之問與複述經問二者——前者是論主要破要立，後者只是隨經文而釋。
卅九、佛答二種人：軟根取相迴向、利根戲論空法，皆不能具足檀波羅蜜。 論主釋經文「所有布施皆迴向薩婆若」一句，指出未能具足者有二種人：軟根者，少多布施皆取相而迴向阿耨多羅三藐三菩提；利根者，破是取相而戲論空法，信力轉薄，不用薩婆若，但求諸法實相。二種人皆不能具足檀波羅蜜——一者信力多而慧力少，二者慧力多而信力少。此段是全品最切於今人之處：取相行善與談空廢行，論主一併判為不具足，且判得極平——不說軟根者劣、利根者勝，只說各偏一邊。
四十、佛今說信力慧力等故能迴向薩婆若，念薩婆若是信力、如薩婆若迴向是智力。 末段出正答：信力、慧力等故，能迴向薩婆若。論主隨即訓其名義——念薩婆若者是信力，如薩婆若迴向者是智力；乃至般若波羅蜜亦如是。此二句當合看：信是把心繫在薩婆若上，慧是如薩婆若之實相而迴向，不取其相。二者等而後迴向成，迴向成而後六度具足，六度具足而後無所得般若之行圓。全品自『般若不可盡』問起，答到此處落地——不可盡之般若，行處只在信慧相等的一念迴向之中。
不要讀錯
不要把「不可盡」讀成無限之多。佛的答語是以虛空為喻，而論主明說虛空「無有法，但有名字」。若把不可盡讀成有一個取之不竭的量，則般若便成所得之物，正落在論主所破的『取畢竟空相』之中。不可盡之所以不可盡，是因為本無可盡之法——無生故無滅，無滅故無盡。此義在論主釋色無盡一段說得最明白：若色有生必有盡，以無生故亦無盡。
不要把十二因緣是獨菩薩法讀成二乘不觀十二因緣。經文所標的是「以虛空不可盡法觀十二因緣」這一種觀，不是十二因緣本身。論主分三種而說，第一種是凡夫所見，第二種正是賢聖法眼所分別——二乘不但觀，且逆推老死至於無明，條理分明。所差者只在末一句：但滅苦故入於涅槃，不究盡求諸苦相。獨之所以為獨，在究盡與不究盡，不在觀與不觀。
不要把癡實相即是智慧讀成不必斷癡。論主此語的前提是「若得是無明定相，即是智慧」——是推求無明至於定相不可得處，方說癡相智慧相無異。若略去這個前提而直取結論，便成縱癡之見。況且論主在同一段隨即補上一句：取著智慧相即是癡。可見他所守的分寸極嚴——不但不許執癡為實，連執智慧為實也一併遮了。
不要把破老相讀成否認老。論主所破的是「老」有定相可得，不是老之事不現。他所舉的髮白、齒離、面皺、身曲、羸瘦、力薄、諸根闇塞，件件是人所共見；他的破法也不是說這些不存在，是說這些不能定屬於老——有年壯而白者，有老而諸根明利者。末後以車喻收之：假輪軸轅輻等為車，是假名非實。車仍可乘，老仍會至；所無者只是那個可以指定的老相。
不要把畢竟空之觀讀成與大悲不相干。論主在推破老相、無明之後，緊接的一段不是更空，是生大悲——菩薩觀諸法實相畢竟空無所有無所得，亦不著是事故，於眾生中而生大悲。可見空觀若行得正，其相貌是悲心轉厚而非轉薄。若觀空之後於眾生轉冷，當回看是否著在所觀之空上；著空即是取相，取相即非畢竟空。
不要把軟根利根之判讀成勸人學利根。論主判二種人皆不能具足檀波羅蜜，所判的是偏，不是根。軟根者信多慧少而取相，利根者慧多信少而戲論空法、信力轉薄乃至不用薩婆若——後者之失更近於本論處處所誡的取空。佛所示的正路是「信力、慧力等」，一個等字是全段的判準。讀者若因此段而自輕其信，或自負其慧，兩邊都落在所破之中。
修行作用
第一件受用，是把「云何應生」四字當作讀法來用。須菩提聞般若不可盡而即問云何應生，是不肯讓高義停在讚歎上。日用讀經聞法，凡遇一句高妙之語，可立刻自問一句：此處我應當如何生起、如何下手。答不出來便記著待參，不必先起讚歎。本品全部論段都是對這一問的答覆，可見此問之分量。
第二件受用，是三種十二因緣可作三道自照。今日之中，我於順逆境裡是隨著愛取有而走、未嘗一念回看的嗎——這是第一種。我雖能逆推苦之來處，卻只求離苦便止、不再窮究其根本相嗎——這是第二種。我於老病死之事，是否肯推到『老之定相在何處』而不以憂怖自沒——這是第三種。論主明說第二種是二乘及未得無生忍菩薩所觀，第三種是得無生忍乃至坐道場菩薩所觀，故第三道之照只是識其方向，不必以之自居。
第三件受用，是以老為樣本的推求法可以現前施行。論主不取十二支中最玄遠者，偏取最切身的老來推：先問世人所指的老相是什麼，一一列出；次問這些相是否定屬於老，一一反例；末問去此諸相之外可還有一個老，答曰求之不得。此一套推法可移用於任何一件心上放不下的事——先列其相，次求其定，末看所餘。所餘為空，則執自鬆。
第四件受用，是把『不著是事故生大悲』立為空觀是否走偏的檢驗。行人用功日久，最易生的病是冷。論主給了一個現成的驗方：觀畢竟空而於眾生中生大悲者，是行得正；觀畢竟空而於眾生轉冷、轉輕者，是著在所觀之空上。此驗方不必等到坐道場纔用，日用之中一照即知。
第五件受用，是六度具足的路徑可以立即改換方向。論主說得明白：所以未具足，不是行得少，是諸煩惱障般若之法未折薄、諸魔得便。故欲具足六度者，不必先加倍其行，先看所行是否迴向薩婆若、是否取相、是否戲論空法。而迴向之成，論主又歸到信慧相等——念薩婆若者是信力，如薩婆若迴向者是智力。行人可持此二句自校：我於所作之善，念得到薩婆若嗎；念到之後，是取其相而求報，還是如其實相而迴向。二者俱備，纔是本品所說的具足。
承衍
本品的骨幹，是一段經文與一段論釋。經①自須菩提作念諸佛菩提甚深而白佛問般若波羅蜜不可盡起，佛以虛空不可盡答；次問云何應生，佛以色受想行識、六波羅蜜乃至一切種智不可盡故般若應生答，復以癡空、行空、識空、名色空、六處空、六觸空、受空、愛空、取空、有空、生空、老死憂悲苦惱空一一不可盡故般若應生答，並標十二因緣是獨菩薩法、能除諸邊顛倒、坐道場時應如是觀當得一切種智，以虛空不可盡法觀之則不墮二乘地，轉還者皆離般若波羅蜜念而不得方便力、不轉還者皆得方便力；次說觀十二因緣時不見法無因緣生、不見法常不滅、不見我人壽者命者眾生知者見者、不見無常苦無我寂滅非寂滅，於色受想行識乃至阿耨多羅三藐三菩提亦不見，結以一切法不可得故是為應般若波羅蜜行；次說行無所得般若時惡魔愁毒如箭入心、譬如人新喪父母；須菩提問但一魔抑三千大千世界中魔亦愁毒，佛答諸惡魔皆愁毒各於其坐不能自安、天人阿修羅不能得其便，並說行般若時具足修六波羅蜜；末問云何具足六波羅蜜，佛答所有布施持戒忍辱精進禪定智慧皆迴向薩婆若，結以具足六波羅蜜。論①以釋曰隨文而釋：先補須菩提聞般若種種相之來歷而出般若義無量、名字句眾有量之判；次釋佛說菩提少許分以無能受者，並簡取如相與取畢竟空相皆非；次釋但問不盡義之由；次釋虛空之譬而自出『無所有云何能生』之難，以下皆答此難；次破色之初後中生與生生而歸色真相即般若波羅蜜相；次出無明虛空不可盡一路，明離斷常二邊而說十二因緣空、因緣和合無定性即畢竟空寂滅相、假名中道；次引經語釋觸念不在內外中間而癡實相即是智慧、取著智慧相即是癡；其間立一番問答——問若無無明亦無諸行等云何說十二因緣，答以說十二因緣有三種，一者凡夫肉眼所見，二者賢聖法眼分別而但滅苦入涅槃不究盡求諸苦相，三者菩薩大智利根但求究盡根本相；次以老為樣本逐層推破——老是心不相應行而相不可得、世人所名諸老相皆非定相而諸法和合假名為老如假輪軸轅輻為車、有人言說果報五眾故相名為老而破以念念不住則無故無老、畢竟空中生相不可得何況有老，結以如老乃至無明亦如是；次出菩薩不著是事故於眾生中生大悲；次定三種十二因緣各屬凡夫、二乘及未得無生忍菩薩、得無生忍乃至坐道場菩薩；次回牒經文而訓離諸邊顛倒之目並分諸煩惱為邊與顛倒二分；次明第三觀甚深唯坐道場者能具足而引《城譬喻經》為證；次釋過於二乘得一切種智與退不退皆繫此觀；次破無因與邪因微塵世性，並以虛空常故無生、不與物作因為例；次明屬因緣生不自在故無我乃至無知者見者；次釋安住畢竟空而不見般若是名無所得般若、得是無所得般若則於一切法中得無所障礙般若；次釋諸魔極大愁毒之由而出捕魚人之喻；次釋能行無所得般若則煩惱折薄魔不得便故六波羅蜜得具足；末複述經文之問答，判軟根取相迴向與利根戲論空法二種人皆不能具足檀波羅蜜，結以信力慧力等故能迴向薩婆若、念薩婆若者是信力、如薩婆若迴向者是智力。
本品與前後諸品的義脈，可見者有二線。其一、承前：上品已說三世諸佛用般若得道而般若不盡，本品即承此語而問不可盡之義，故論主釋須菩提之念時逕引「三世諸佛用般若波羅蜜得道，般若故不盡——已不盡、今不盡、當不盡」為其所承，非別起爐灶。其二、垂後：本品末段說行無所得般若則六波羅蜜得具足，而具足之樞在迴向薩婆若與信慧相等；次品即就六度相攝而廣說之，兩品相次，讀者可合觀以見「具足」二字之所指。
古德之釋，本品可誌者二家。吉藏科判此品，以之為般若道與方便道之分界，云：「此下第二明方便道」，並自分其方便道之文云：「初二十三品正明方便因果大用」；其釋品名之由云：「無盡品者，上品已般若無盡，今須菩提更問明此義」，並引論義為據云：「般若若有和有集故有滅有盡，無和無集故無滅無盡」。其釋十二因緣獨菩薩法一句云：「凡夫直順十二不求是非邪正，二乘但知其過盡無我我所，欲滅之入無餘，並不窮因緣之實，菩薩知其本自不生今亦無滅，故非凡夫行非賢聖行，獨菩薩行故名為獨也」——以凡夫、二乘、菩薩三分而釋獨義，與本論所分三種十二因緣同其骨而異其語，並錄不判。其釋離二邊之義云：「就名作空觀即墮斷見中，若作有觀即墮常中，今作因緣觀甚深，便妙悟中道不著斷常，為方便慧體也」；其釋坐道場應如是觀云：「未得無生已來亦作此觀，而未明了具足，得無生觀解明了具足，故云坐道場應如是觀也」——此語與本論「先雖能觀，未能具足」一句相發，兩存之。其釋色無盡云：「色若生故有滅，滅即名盡，以色無生故無滅，所以言無盡也」，與本論破色生一段所歸相近。
慧影釋此品，亦以般若道方便道判之，云：「上來至此明菩薩波若道，自此品已下訖於經末明菩薩方便道」，並引論語為據云：「波若能將菩薩入畢竟空，方便能將菩薩出畢竟空」——此二道之判與吉藏所立同其大勢，而二家各自為語，並錄不判。其釋品名之由云：「上品云：三世諸佛學波若波羅蜜悉皆不盡，已不盡、今不盡、當不盡」，「今此品來為接上文生於下意，明方便道中不可盡義，故名不盡品」——所承與本論釋須菩提之念者同。其釋虛空之譬，別立二種云：「如虗空者有二種：一者世間虗空，二者法性虗空」，是慧影自家之開合，本論未作此分，誌而不判。其釋頭白等非老相云：「此並非老相，乃屬老相家法，非老相也」；其釋捕魚人之喻云：「捕魚人喻魔也，一魚者喻菩薩也」，「深入大水者，喻見菩薩深入諸法實相水也」——皆隨本論之文而配其喻，可與上文逐段解明第三十六段合觀。慧影疏中又自稱本品為「第六十六品者，名為不盡品」，其品次與本帙底本相差一位，而其所用品名又與底本「無盡方便」之全稱、諸異本「無盡」之略稱皆異，成三系並存之局；其品目異稱、諸本分卷與明本所附「經作不可盡品」之夾註，詳考據層，此處不判。
Inexhaustible Skilful Means: Why Space Must Be Used to Answer That Prajñā Is Inexhaustible; Why, When Prajñā Should Arise Because Form Is Inexhaustible, It Is Arising and Not Seeking; Why the Inexhaustibility of the Emptiness of the Twelve Links Can Give Rise to Prajñā; Why the Twelve Links of Causes and Conditions Are a Dharma of the Bodhisattvas Alone; Why Contemplating Thus When Sitting at the Seat of Awakening Is Not What the Beginner Practises; Why Turning Back and Not Turning Back Differ Only by One Power of Skilful Means; Why the Prajñā with Nothing to Be Attained Makes the Evil Māra Feel as Though an Arrow Had Entered His Heart; Why Fulfilling the Six Perfections Lies Only in the One Sentence of Dedicating to Sarvajñā; Why Grasping the Mark of Suchness and Grasping the Mark of Ultimate Emptiness Are Alike Wrong; Why, Space Being without Anything Existent, It Can Still Give Rise to Prajñā; Why Breaking the Four Alternatives of the Arising of Form Comes Back to the True Mark of Form Being the Mark of Prajñā; Why, to Leave the Two Extremes of Annihilation and Permanence, the Emptiness of the Twelve Links of Causes and Conditions Must Be Taught and Provisionally Named the Middle Way; Why, Contact-Thought Being Neither Within nor Without nor in Between, the Real Mark of Delusion Is Precisely Wisdom; Why the Teaching of the Twelve Links of Causes and Conditions Must Be Divided into Three Kinds; Why the Dharma of Old Age Is Ultimately Empty and without a Fixed Mark; Why Contemplating Old Age within Ultimate Emptiness Must Still Give Rise to Great Compassion; Why Only Those Sitting at the Seat of Awakening Can Fulfil the Third Contemplation; Why Retreating and Not Retreating Depend on This Contemplation; Why, Abiding Securely in Ultimate Emptiness, One Does Not See Even Prajñā; Why the Two Kinds of People, of Soft Faculties and of Keen Faculties, Both Cannot Fulfil Dānapāramitā; and Why the Equality of the Power of Faith and the Power of Wisdom Is the Pivot of Dedication
What Is Being Asked
What this chapter asks is an extremely short question: can prajñāpāramitā be exhausted or not? The one who asks is Subhūti, and the occasion is that he first gave rise to a thought—the anuttarā samyaksaṃbodhi of the buddhas is very deep. How deep, to what point, he does not say; he only brings forward the three Chinese characters 「不可盡」 tr. "inexhaustible" and asks the Buddha to decide. The Buddha's answer is shorter still: because space is inexhaustible, prajñā is inexhaustible. Between one question and one answer, the frame of this chapter is already set up.
But the second question that comes out next is the real centre of gravity of the whole chapter: since it is inexhaustible, then 「云何應生般若波羅蜜」 tr. "how should one give rise to prajñāpāramitā?" This question matters very much. If prajñā is, like space, without anything existent, it seems a thing with no place to put one's hand; with no place to put one's hand, the practitioner has no way to begin. In the treatise section the treatise-author states this difficulty plainly—if prajñāpāramitā is inexhaustible because, like space, it is without anything existent, how can the bodhisattva give rise to it? How does he give rise, in his mind, to being able to practise and being able to attain? All that this chapter says from here on is an answer to this one difficulty.
The Buddha's answer goes by two roads. The first road speaks of form, of feeling, perception, constructions, and consciousness, of the six perfections, and so on up to the omniscience of all kinds: they are inexhaustible, and therefore prajñā should arise. The second road speaks of the twelve links of causes and conditions: the emptiness of delusion, the emptiness of constructions, the emptiness of consciousness, the emptiness of name-and-form, the emptiness of the six sense-bases, the emptiness of the six contacts, the emptiness of feeling, the emptiness of craving, the emptiness of grasping, the emptiness of existence, the emptiness of birth, the emptiness of old age and death, sorrow, grief, suffering, and vexation—each one is inexhaustible, and therefore prajñā should arise. Of the two roads, the second is where this chapter puts its deepest effort—the sūtra text follows at once with 「是十二因緣，是獨菩薩法」 tr. "these twelve links of causes and conditions are a dharma of the bodhisattvas alone," and enjoins that when sitting at the seat of awakening one should contemplate thus. Almost the whole length of the treatise section is spent explaining why the twelve links of causes and conditions can serve as the gate from which prajñā arises.
The twelve links of causes and conditions are originally a dharma contemplated in common by the three vehicles; why are they said here to be a dharma of the bodhisattvas alone? The treatise-author's answer is to speak of them in three kinds: the kind seen by the ordinary person's fleshly eye, the kind distinguished by the Dharma-eye of the worthies and sages, and the kind in which the bodhisattva, with great knowledge and keen faculties, goes through to the end of the root-mark. The first two kinds both work within the twelve links of causes and conditions; the third kind pushes the twelve links of causes and conditions to the place where they are unfindable—taking 「老」 tr. "old age" as the sample, it seeks layer by layer and finds the fixed mark of old age unfindable; old age being unfindable, so on up to ignorance too is unfindable, and thereupon each of the twelve links is like space and inexhaustible. What is inexhaustible is not some thing that can never be used up; it is that there is at root no dharma that could be exhausted. Once this meaning stands, the difficulty of 「云何應生」 tr. "how should one give rise to it?" is resolved: prajñā does not arise out of what exists; it arises from the place where all dharmas are unfindable.
The meaning of the two Chinese characters 「方便」 tr. "skilful means" marked in the chapter's name lies in the latter half. One who contemplates the twelve links of causes and conditions by the dharma of the inexhaustibility of space does not fall to the two vehicles; those who seek the bodhisattva path and turn back all do not obtain this power of skilful means, and those who do not turn back all obtain this power of skilful means—the watershed between retreating and not retreating, the sūtra text says plainly, is only one power of skilful means. At the end of the treatise section this skilful means is further brought down onto the six perfections: one who can practise the prajñā with nothing to be attained has his afflictions broken and thinned, Māra finds no opening, and only then are the six perfections fulfilled; and the pivot of that fulfilment lies in just one sentence—all giving, upholding the precepts, patience, vigour, meditative concentration, and wisdom are dedicated to sarvajñā. The whole chapter begins from 「不可盡」 tr. "inexhaustible" and ends at 「迴向薩婆若」 tr. "dedicating to sarvajñā": from the meaning of inexhaustibility at the highest place, it comes down all the way onto the most plain and solid gate of practice.
Passage by Passage
1. Subhūti has the thought that awakening is very deep, and asks the Buddha whether prajñāpāramitā is inexhaustible. The head of the chapter first records the working of Subhūti's mind: he first thinks 「是諸佛阿耨多羅三藐三菩提甚深，我當問佛」 tr. "this anuttarā samyaksaṃbodhi of the buddhas is very deep; I should ask the Buddha," and only after having the thought does he speak to the Buddha. The reader should ask here: why does the sūtra text record even a thought not yet spoken aloud? Because this thought is the cause of the whole chapter—what he asks about is that prajñā is inexhaustible, yet what moves him is that awakening is very deep. Depth and inexhaustibility are two faces of one matter: being deep, its bottom cannot be fathomed; being unfathomable, it cannot be exhausted. Do not read this question as a question of curiosity; it is a question asking for a decision, arising from really seeing a deep dharma.
2. The Buddha answers that because space is inexhaustible, prajñāpāramitā is inexhaustible. The Buddha does not explain why prajñā is inexhaustible; he only changes what it rests on: space is inexhaustible, and therefore prajñā is inexhaustible. The whole force of this answer lies in the two Chinese characters 「虛空」 tr. "space." The inexhaustibility of space is not that its quantity is so great it cannot be used up; it is that there is at root no dharma to be exhausted—there is not a single thing within it that could be diminished. If the reader reads space as something vast and boundless, this answer falls into exaggeration; only if he reads it as without anything existent is this answer a real statement. The words the treatise section explains below, 「如虛空，無有法，但有名字」 tr. "like space, which has no dharma and has only a name," are there precisely to guard against this mistake.
3. Subhūti goes on to ask how one should give rise to prajñāpāramitā. It follows on extremely fast: since it is, like space, inexhaustible, then how should one give rise to it? At this point the sūtra text does not again mark 「白佛言」 tr. "said to the Buddha"; it follows on only with the vocative 「世尊」 tr. "World-Honored One," and it is still Subhūti asking. This question seems to change the subject, but in fact it presses the preceding answer onto the gate of practice—whoever hears of the height and depth of a dharma and does not ask where to enter it has heard and not heard alike. Reading the sūtra up to here, one can examine oneself: when I read 「不可盡」 tr. "inexhaustible," what arose in my mind—was it praise, or was it 「云何應生」 tr. "how should one give rise to it?"
4. The Buddha answers that because form and so on up to the omniscience of all kinds are inexhaustible, prajñāpāramitā should arise. The Buddha's first road of answer begins from the coarsest and nearest place: because form is inexhaustible, prajñā should arise, and feeling, perception, constructions, and consciousness likewise; because dānapāramitā is inexhaustible, prajñā should arise, and morality, patience, vigour, meditation, and prajñā likewise; and so on up to: because the omniscience of all kinds is inexhaustible, prajñā should arise. Here one must see the sentence pattern clearly—it is not that one ‘contemplates form as inexhaustible’ and afterwards prajñā arises; it is that the inexhaustibility of form is itself the reason prajñā arises. The three layers set out go from coarse to fine: the five aggregates are the dharmas taken as object, the six perfections are the dharmas that practise, and the omniscience of all kinds is the fruit attained; all three layers are inexhaustible, and therefore there is not a single place that is not a place where prajñā arises.
5. The Buddha answers that because the emptiness of the twelve links is inexhaustible, prajñā should arise; that this is a dharma of the bodhisattvas alone; that when sitting at the seat of awakening one should contemplate thus; that one who contemplates them does not fall to the two vehicles; and that turning back and not turning back both depend on the power of skilful means. The second road of answer turns into the twelve links of causes and conditions and speaks of them link by link: the emptiness of delusion, the emptiness of constructions, the emptiness of consciousness, the emptiness of name-and-form, the emptiness of the six sense-bases, the emptiness of the six contacts, the emptiness of feeling, the emptiness of craving, the emptiness of grasping, the emptiness of existence, the emptiness of birth, the emptiness of old age and death, sorrow, grief, suffering, and vexation—each one is inexhaustible, and therefore prajñā should arise. Below this four meanings come out in succession: that it is a dharma of the bodhisattvas alone; that it is able to remove the extremes and the inversions; that when sitting at the seat of awakening one should contemplate thus and will obtain the omniscience of all kinds; and that one who contemplates it by the dharma of the inexhaustibility of space does not fall to the ground of the two vehicles and abides in anuttarā samyaksaṃbodhi. At the end it speaks of the reason for turning back: those who seek the bodhisattva path and turn back have all departed from the thought of prajñāpāramitā, do not know how to contemplate the twelve links of causes and conditions by the dharma of the inexhaustibility of space, and all do not obtain this power of skilful means; those who do not turn back all obtain this power of skilful means. This passage is the bone of the whole chapter; eight or nine tenths of what the treatise section explains lies here. The reader should first remember one thing: what the sūtra text says is not ‘contemplating the emptiness of the twelve links of causes and conditions’; it is 「以虛空不可盡法觀十二因緣」 tr. "contemplating the twelve links of causes and conditions by the dharma of the inexhaustibility of space"—the dharma used is first inexhaustibility, and only then does one contemplate.
6. The Buddha says that in contemplating the twelve links of causes and conditions one does not see any of the marks, does not see even form and so on up to awakening, and that because all dharmas are unfindable this is the practice that corresponds to prajñāpāramitā. The Buddha goes on to speak of the marks of this contemplation, entirely by way of negation: he does not see any dharma that arises without causes and conditions, does not see any dharma that is permanent and does not cease, does not see any dharma that has a self, a person, a life, a living one, a being, a knower, a seer, does not see any dharma as impermanent, suffering, non-self, quiescent or not quiescent. The crucial point is the pairing of the first sentence with the second—he neither sees arising without causes and conditions, nor sees what is permanent and does not cease: the former negates the absence of a cause, the latter negates a permanent cause, and the treatise-author, explaining this passage below, does so precisely by setting these two layers against each other. Below this, not seeing a self or a person and not seeing impermanence, suffering, and non-self likewise negate at both ends, and only so is it not the contemplation of antidotes that breaks permanence with impermanence and breaks self with non-self. Below this it is pushed on to not seeing form and feeling, perception, constructions, and consciousness, prajñā, and so on up to awakening, and it closes with 「一切法不可得故，是為應般若波羅蜜行」 tr. "because all dharmas are unfindable, this is the practice that corresponds to prajñāpāramitā." Do not read 「不見」 tr. "does not see" as closing the eyes and not contemplating; it is the natural result of contemplating to the place where the fixed mark is unfindable.
7. The Buddha says that when one practises the prajñā with nothing to be attained, the evil Māra is grieved and pained, as though an arrow had entered his heart, as when a person has newly lost his father and mother. The sūtra text suddenly turns from the dharma of contemplation to the deeds of Māra, and itself brings out two similes: as though an arrow had entered the heart, and as when a person has newly lost his father and mother. The position of this passage is well worth noticing—it comes immediately after 「一切法不可得」 tr. "all dharmas are unfindable." The reason Māra is grieved and pained is precisely that the bodhisattva has already practised to the place where there is nothing to be attained; where there is something to be attained, Māra still has ground on which to put his hand; where there is nothing to be attained, there is no ground on which to put his hand. Both similes take a pain that touches the body closely and do not take an appearance of might and ferocity; they speak of Māra's helplessness, not of Māra's anger.
8. Subhūti asks whether only one Māra is grieved and pained, or whether the Māras in the three-thousand great-thousand world are grieved and pained as well. Subhūti's follow-up question seems to haggle over a number, but in fact it asks about range: what one person's practice of prajñā shakes—is it the realm of one Māra, or the realm of a great-thousand world? Whenever, in reading a sūtra, one sees someone ask about a number, first see whether what he asks about is number or reach. What this question asks about is reach.
9. The Buddha answers that all the evil Māras of the three-thousand great-thousand world are grieved and pained, each unable to be at ease, that gods, humans, and asuras cannot find an opening, and that when practising prajñā one fulfils the cultivation of the six perfections. The Buddha's answer has three parts. First: all the evil Māras are grieved and pained, as though an arrow had entered their hearts, and each upon his own seat cannot be at ease—the four Chinese characters 「各於其坐」 tr. "each upon his own seat" show the state of things most clearly: it is not rising up to attack; it is sitting and being unable to sit still. Second: none in all the world, gods and humans, asuras, can find an opening to cause him sorrow and vexation—since Māra has no place to put his hand, the rest have still less. Third: it turns out the positive benefit: when practising prajñāpāramitā one fulfils the cultivation of the six perfections and fulfils the perfections. This third part is the lead-in to the next passage.
10. Subhūti asks how, when practising prajñā, one fulfils the six perfections. Again a 「云何」 tr. "how." Both of this chapter's great questions are brought out by Subhūti; the first question is 「云何應生」 tr. "how should one give rise to it?", and this question is 「云何具足」 tr. "how does one fulfil them?"—one asks where to enter, one asks about the ground of fruition. Looking at the two questions together, one can see Subhūti's way of asking: hearing a lofty meaning, he must seek its practice; hearing of practice, he must seek its completion.
11. The Buddha answers that all giving, upholding the precepts, patience, vigour, meditative concentration, and wisdom are dedicated to sarvajñā, and this is fulfilling the six perfections. The Buddha's answer is unexpectedly plain and solid: all giving is dedicated to sarvajñā, and this is fulfilling dānapāramitā; upholding the precepts, patience, vigour, meditative concentration, and wisdom are each likewise, and it closes with 「具足六波羅蜜」 tr. "fulfils the six perfections." One must see clearly the two Chinese characters 「所有」 tr. "all" and 「皆」 tr. "every one"—it is not that one fulfils only by giving much; it is that one fulfils only when there is nothing given that is not dedicated. The meaning of fulfilment lies in there being no leakage outside, not in the fullness of quantity. This passage is where the practice of the whole chapter lands; all the meanings of inexhaustibility before it are in the end tied to this one sentence.
12. The treatise explains: Subhūti has heard all kinds of marks of prajñā; the meaning of prajñā is immeasurable, while the collections of names, letters, and phrases are measured. The treatise-author begins his explanation by first supplying the background of Subhūti's question: he has heard all kinds of marks of prajñā from the Buddha—at first he heard 「畢竟空相」 tr. "the mark of ultimate emptiness," in the middle he heard 「囑累」 tr. "entrustment," which seems to be something existent, and later he again heard 「空」 tr. "emptiness" spoken of. What he heard on the three occasions seems to differ from first to last, and therefore there is this question. The treatise-author at once points out the reason for the difference: the meaning of prajñā is immeasurable, while the collections of names, letters, and phrases are measured. This one sentence is the key to reading all sūtras and treatises—one and the same immeasurable meaning, spoken in measured names and phrases, must seem uneven from first to last. When the reader meets words in a sūtra that seem to contradict each other from first to last, let him first take up this meaning and not hastily judge it a contradiction.
13. Subhūti has the thought to ask the reason why it is very deep. The treatise-author restates Subhūti's thought: the awakening of the buddhas is very deep; I should ask the Buddha the reason why it is very deep. Here the two Chinese characters 「所以」 tr. "the reason why" are added, going one layer further than the first sentence of the sūtra section—not only asking about its depth, but asking why it is deep. In reading the sūtras one should learn this question: after knowing that a thing is so, one must ask why it is so; otherwise what one knows is only a sentence of verdict.
14. The treatise-author explains that what the Buddha speaks is a small portion of bodhi, and that grasping the mark of suchness and grasping the mark of ultimate emptiness are both wrong. The treatise-author answers why it is very deep: the awakening the Buddha has spoken of is only a small portion of bodhi, spoken only to break the inversions of beings, not spoken in full, because there is no one able to receive it. Next he brings out two layers of distinction: if someone grasps the mark of 「如」 tr. "suchness," the Buddha says 「如亦空，無生住滅故；若法無生住滅，是法即無」 tr. "suchness too is empty, because it is without arising, abiding, and ceasing; if a dharma is without arising, abiding, and ceasing, this dharma is nothing," and the nature of dharmas and the limit of reality are likewise; if there is someone who grasps ultimate emptiness, he too is said to be wrong, because if ultimate emptiness were a fixed mark that could be grasped, it would not be ultimate emptiness. This passage matters most—grasping emptiness and grasping existence are alike grasping, and are therefore alike wrong. Practitioners mostly know that existence must not be grasped, and few know that emptiness must not be grasped; the treatise-author places 「畢竟空」 tr. "ultimate emptiness" itself among what is broken, and this is the guarding of the Dharma that runs through this treatise throughout.
15. Subhūti keeps in mind that the buddhas of the three times attain the path by prajñā and that prajñā is not exhausted, and therefore asks only about the meaning of not being exhausted. The treatise-author supplies the background of why Subhūti asks only about 「不盡」 tr. "not exhausted": as the Buddha himself says, 「三世諸佛用般若波羅蜜得道，般若故不盡——已不盡、今不盡、當不盡」 tr. "the buddhas of the three times attain the path by means of prajñāpāramitā; because of prajñā it is not exhausted—it has not been exhausted, it is not now exhausted, it will not be exhausted," and therefore he now asks only about the meaning of not being exhausted. That it is not exhausted in any of the three times proves its inexhaustibility from its use: if prajñā could be exhausted, the earlier buddhas would have used it up and the later buddhas would have none to use. Reading this passage, one can know that Subhūti's question does not come out of nowhere; it takes up the Buddha's earlier words and asks for their meaning.
16. The treatise-author explains the Buddha's answer, that as space is not exhausted so prajñā too is not exhausted, and himself raises a difficulty: being without anything existent, how can it give rise? The treatise-author explains the Buddha's answer by simile: like space, which has no dharma and has only a name; prajñāpāramitā is also thus. Having explained this, he at once raises a difficulty himself—if prajñā is inexhaustible because, like space, it is without anything existent, how can the bodhisattva give rise to this prajñā? What is called being able to give rise: how does the bodhisattva give rise, in his mind, to being able to practise and being able to attain? This difficulty is raised extremely well; it asks, on the reader's behalf, the doubt not yet formed in the reader's mind. Whenever, in reading a treatise, one sees the treatise-author raise a difficulty himself, one should know that what is answered below is the proper meaning of this passage; from this difficulty down to the end of the chapter, all is the answer to this one difficulty.
17. The treatise-author explains the Buddha's answer, that because form is inexhaustible prajñā should arise: breaking the arising of form, he comes back to the true mark of form being precisely the mark of prajñā. The treatise-author explains the first road of answer, first breaking the arising of form: the prior arising, the later arising, and the middle arising of form are all unfindable; form as itself arisen form is unfindable, and apart from form, arisen form is unfindable; arising is unfindable, and the arising of arising is unfindable, as was said earlier in 「破生」 tr. "breaking arising." Arising being unfindable, form too is unfindable; because form is unfindable, the arising of form is unfindable. The two dharmas are both unfindable, and therefore form is like an illusion, like a dream, and only deceives the human eye. At the end he brings out the proper meaning: if form had arising, it would certainly have exhaustion; because it is without arising, it is also without exhaustion; the true mark of form is precisely the mark of prajñāpāramitā, and therefore it is said, 「色不可盡，般若波羅蜜亦不可盡」 tr. "form is inexhaustible; prajñāpāramitā too is inexhaustible." Feeling, perception, constructions, and consciousness, dānapāramitā, and so on up to the omniscience of all kinds are also thus. One must see clearly the direction of the reasoning in this passage—it is not saying that form is empty and therefore prajñā is empty; it is saying that the true mark of form is precisely the mark of prajñā, and therefore the inexhaustibility of form is precisely the inexhaustibility of prajñā.
18. The treatise-author brings out the second road: because ignorance as space is inexhaustible one should give rise to prajñā; leaving the two extremes of annihilation and permanence, the emptiness of the twelve links of causes and conditions is taught, and it is provisionally named the middle way. The treatise-author turns into the twelve links of causes and conditions, and first says why one must speak from this place: if a person contemplates only ultimate emptiness, he mostly falls into the extreme of annihilation; if he contemplates existence, he mostly falls into the extreme of permanence. In order to leave these two extremes, the emptiness of the twelve links of causes and conditions is spoken of. Why can the twelve links of causes and conditions leave the two extremes? If a dharma arises from the coming together of causes and conditions, it has no fixed nature, and having no fixed nature is precisely the mark of ultimate emptiness and quiescence—because it arises from causes and conditions it is not annihilated; because it has no fixed nature it is not permanent. Because it leaves the two extremes, it is provisionally named the middle way. At the end it is gathered back by the treatise-author's own citing words, 「十二因緣如虛空，無法故不盡」 tr. "the twelve links of causes and conditions are like space: because there is no dharma, they are not exhausted," and he explains that delusion too arises from the coming together of causes and conditions and therefore has no specific mark of its own, and because it has no specific mark of its own it is ultimately empty, like space. This passage is the pivot of the whole treatise section: here the twelve links of causes and conditions are not the marks of flowing on in birth and death; they are the gate of leaving the two extremes.
19. The treatise-author explains that because it arises from causes and conditions it is without reality, that contact-thought is unfindable, and that the real mark of delusion is precisely wisdom. The treatise-author continues to prove that dharmas arisen from causes and conditions are without reality, citing the words of the sūtra, 「因眼緣色生觸念，觸念從癡生」 tr. "in dependence on the eye and conditioned by form, contact-thought arises; contact-thought arises from delusion," and at once pushes it further: contact-thought is not in the eye, not in form, not within, not without, nor in between, nor does it come from the ten directions and the three times; the fixed mark of this dharma is unfindable, because all dharmas enter 「如」 tr. "suchness." Since it is unfindable, then if one obtains the fixed mark of this ignorance, this is precisely wisdom, and it is not called delusion. Therefore the mark of delusion and the mark of wisdom are without difference; the real mark of delusion is precisely wisdom, and to grasp and cling to the mark of wisdom is precisely delusion. At the end it returns to this: the real mark of delusion is of ultimate purity, like space, without arising and without ceasing, and therefore dedicating to awakening is called prajñāpāramitā. This passage is the easiest to misread—it is not saying that delusion simply is wisdom and so need not be cut off; it is saying that when delusion is pushed to its real mark, there is no delusion to be found, while grasping and clinging to the wisdom attained becomes delusion again.
20. Question: If there is no ignorance, and also no constructions and the rest, how can the twelve links of causes and conditions be spoken of? The only exchange of question and answer in this chapter's treatise section is raised here. The difficulty is posed quite rightly: since the fixed mark of delusion is unfindable, and ignorance is not there, then constructions, consciousness, and so on up to old age and death are all not there together—so are not the twelve links of causes and conditions in the sūtras set up in vain? Many who read the meaning of emptiness give rise to this doubt; the treatise-author does not avoid it, but sets up this question directly and then answers. When, in reading a treatise, one meets a ‘Question:’, one should first answer it oneself once and then look at the treatise-author's answer; only then does one know why his answer is so.
21. Answer: The twelve links of causes and conditions are spoken of in three kinds; the first is what the ordinary person sees with the fleshly eye. The treatise-author's way of answering is not to break this difficulty directly but to speak of three kinds—the reason a difficulty becomes a difficulty is often that three kinds have been mixed into one. The first kind is what the ordinary person sees with the fleshly eye: inverted, clinging to the mind of self, he gives rise to the afflictions and deeds, and goes and comes within birth and death. This kind is only being within it bodily without knowing it oneself, and it does not seek out right and wrong in the twelve links of causes and conditions. The reader can shine this on himself: one who, in daily life, goes along with craving, grasping, and existence and has never for a single thought turned back to look—that is this kind.
22. The second: the worthies and sages distinguish with the Dharma-eye, tracing old age and death back to the afflictions and ignorance; they only extinguish suffering and enter nirvāṇa, and do not seek the marks of the sufferings through to the end. The second kind is what the worthies and sages contemplate with the Dharma-eye: seeing old age, sickness, and death, their minds weary of them and they wish to leave the world; they trace back that old age and death come from birth, birth from the afflictions and deeds, and the cause and condition of the afflictions is ignorance. The mark of ignorance is stated here very pointedly—what should be given up is taken, and what should be taken is given up: the afflictions that are the causes and conditions of old age, sickness, and the sufferings should be given up, yet one takes them for the sake of a slight pleasure of inversion; upholding the precepts, meditative concentration, wisdom, and the roots of goodness are originally the causes and conditions of the bliss of nirvāṇa, and should be taken, yet one instead gives them up. Next it makes clear that within this there is no knower, no seer, no maker, but only arising in continuity from false and deceptive causes and conditions; the practitioner, knowing that it is false, deceptive, and unreal, does not give rise to idle discourse, but only extinguishes suffering and so enters nirvāṇa, and does not seek the marks of the sufferings through to the end. The last sentence is the boundary between the second kind and the third—it is not that they cannot seek; it is that they do not seek through to the end.
23. The third: the bodhisattvas, with great knowledge and keen faculties, only seek to go through to the end of the root-mark; the dharma of old age is ultimately empty, and old age as a construction not associated with mind has a mark that is unfindable. The third kind is the bodhisattva-mahāsattvas: because they are people of great knowledge with keen faculties, they only seek to go through to the end of the root-mark of the twelve links of causes and conditions, and 「不以憂怖自沒」 tr. "do not sink themselves in sorrow and fear." Here these six Chinese characters are a distinction set against the second kind—the second kind seeks to leave because it wearies of suffering, and once the mind that wearies of suffering becomes urgent, it stops at extinguishing suffering and pushes no further. The bodhisattva pushes it on, and when he seeks he does not find a fixed mark: the dharma of old age is ultimately empty, and is only provisionally named existent out of what is false and deceptive. The treatise-author at once takes the teaching of one school as an example: those who distinguish the marks of dharmas say 「老是心不相應行」 tr. "old age is a construction not associated with mind," yet this mark is unfindable; a white head and the rest are marks of form, not the mark of old age; the two matters are unfindable, and therefore there is no mark of old age. Taking 「老」 tr. "old age" as the sample for seeking is this treatise's skilful means—among the twelve links, old age and death touch the body most closely; if even what touches the body most closely has no fixed mark, the other links can be known.
24. Again: the marks that the people of the world call old age are none of them fixed marks; dharmas come together and are provisionally named old age, as wheels, axle, shafts, spokes, and the rest are borrowed and named a cart. The treatise-author breaks it again, from the place of worldly feeling. What the people of the world call the marks of old age are hair white, teeth falling out, face wrinkled, body bent, emaciated, strength thin, the faculties dark and blocked. The treatise-author breaks them one by one: white hair is not had only by the old; there are those in the prime of their years whose hair is white and those in old age whose hair is black; emaciation, wrinkling, and bending are likewise; there are people who are old and whose faculties are bright and keen, and who are young and whose faculties are dark and blocked; and again, one who takes the medicine that restores the years, though old, is vigorous. Therefore old age has no fixed mark, and because it has no fixed mark, dharmas come together and are provisionally named old age. At the end comes the simile of the cart: as wheels, axle, shafts, spokes, and the rest are borrowed and named a cart, this is a provisional name and not real. One must see clearly what this simile compares—it is not saying that the cart cannot be used; it is saying that under the name ‘cart’ there is not a single thing that is the cart. Old age is also thus: the matter of old age can be plainly seen, but the mark of old age, when sought, is not found.
25. Again: someone says that the mark of the oldness of the five aggregates of retribution is named old age; the treatise-author breaks this: arising and ceasing thought after thought and not abiding, there is no oldness, and without oldness there is no old age. Someone sets up another teaching: the mark of oldness of the five aggregates of retribution is named old age. The treatise-author judges that this too is not so, and his breaking has two parts. First: all conditioned dharmas arise and cease thought after thought and do not abide; if they do not abide there is no oldness, and without oldness there is no old age—「故」 tr. "oldness" is set up over against 「新」 tr. "new," and if thought after thought nothing abides, there is nothing to be called old. Second: if all conditioned dharmas had abiding, there would be no impermanence; if there were no impermanence, they would be permanent; if they were permanent, there would be no old age—how much less could there be old age within what is neither permanent nor impermanent, within ultimate emptiness! Looked at together, the two parts are one dilemma: set up abiding, and it becomes permanent and there is no old age; set up not-abiding, and there is no oldness and no old age. When reading a treatise one meets such a breaking by dilemma, one should know that the treatise-author is not striking down each point separately; he is sealing off at once every ground on which the other side could stand.
26. Again: within ultimate emptiness even the mark of arising is unfindable, how much less is there old age; as with old age, so on up to ignorance it is likewise. The treatise-author gathers up the meaning of old age: within the ultimate emptiness of dharmas even the mark of arising is unfindable, how much less is there old age. By all kinds of causes and conditions such as these, the dharma of old age is sought and is unfindable; because it is unfindable it is signless, like space, inexhaustible. The last sentence extends the sample—as with old age, so on up to ignorance it is likewise, and breaking ignorance is as said above. At this point the meaning that each of the twelve links is like space and inexhaustible is completed, and the reason behind the sūtra's passage ‘because the emptiness of delusion is inexhaustible, prajñā should arise’ comes out in full.
27. The bodhisattva contemplates the real mark of all dharmas as ultimately empty, without anything existent, with nothing to be attained, and because he does not cling to this matter either, he gives rise to great compassion. At the emptiest place the treatise-author adds one sentence that is the warmest: the bodhisattva contemplates the real mark of all dharmas as ultimately empty, without anything existent, with nothing to be attained, and because he does not cling to this matter either, amid beings he gives rise to great compassion—because beings, through folly and delusion, undergo sufferings and vexations within dharmas that are unreal, inverted, and false. One must see clearly where the compassionate mind comes from: it is not that after contemplating emptiness one separately raises a thought of kindness and compassion; it is because one does not cling even to emptiness that there is room for compassion to arise. If one clings to the emptiness contemplated, the compassionate mind has no way to come forth. This passage is the joint at which this chapter turns from principle into practice.
28. The three kinds of the twelve links of causes and conditions each have the people who contemplate them. The treatise-author turns back to fix the people for the three kinds: the first twelve links of causes and conditions are only for the sake of ordinary people, and within them one does not seek out right and wrong; the second twelve links of causes and conditions are what is contemplated by people of the two vehicles and by bodhisattvas who have not yet obtained the dharma of the acceptance of non-arising; the third twelve links of causes and conditions are what is contemplated by bodhisattvas from the obtaining of the dharma of the acceptance of non-arising and so on up to sitting at the seat of awakening. This passage matters very much: it makes the three kinds above concrete, from ‘three ways of speaking’ into ‘three grades of practitioners’. Here the reader should know for himself where he stands—what is contemplated by one who has not yet obtained the acceptance of non-arising still belongs to the second kind, and he need not take the third kind for his own place; and since the third kind is what is contemplated at the seat of awakening, the sūtra's words 「坐道場時，應如是觀」 tr. "when sitting at the seat of awakening, one should contemplate thus" are not empty talk either.
29. Therefore it is said: because ignorance as space is inexhaustible, and so on up to sorrow, grief, suffering, and vexation as space being inexhaustible, the bodhisattva practises prajñāpāramitā. With the three Chinese characters 「是故說」 tr. "therefore it is said," the treatise-author cites the sūtra text back, tying the meaning of old age and the meaning of ignorance traced out above together to the sūtra's sentence. Whenever one sees the treatise-author cite back with 「是故說」 tr. "therefore it is said," one knows that the explanation above is complete and this is the word of inspection and acceptance. In reading a treatise one can hold this as a marker of paragraphs: before the citing-back sentence is explanation; after it a new meaning begins.
30. The treatise-author glosses leaving the extremes and the inversions: the items of the extremes and the inversions, and the division of the afflictions into two. The treatise-author explains the sūtra's words 「能除諸邊、顛倒」 tr. "able to remove the extremes and the inversions," bringing out their items word by word. The extremes: the extreme of permanence and the extreme of annihilation, the extreme of existence and the extreme of non-existence, the extreme of reality and the extreme of emptiness, the world's having an end, and the like—clinging to the extremes; the inversions: giving rise, within the impermanent, to permanence and the like—the afflictions of the inversions. When one contemplates the dharma of the twelve links of causes and conditions, the extremes and the inversions cease. Next he divides the afflictions into two divisions: first, the people of the outside paths with wrong views are called the extremes; second, the afflictions of the remaining beings are called the inversions. This one distinction is very useful—the extremes are a lopsidedness in views, the inversions are an error in feeling; lopsided views are mostly in the place where one sets up a thesis, errors of feeling are mostly in the place of daily life. That one contemplation extinguishes both is because both alike come from the clinging to fixed marks.
31. The third contemplation is very deep and only those sitting at the seat of awakening can contemplate it; the Sūtra of the Simile of the City is cited as proof. The treatise-author makes plain the great depth of the third contemplation of the twelve links of causes and conditions: only the bodhisattvas sitting at the seat of awakening can contemplate it; though earlier they could contemplate it, they could not yet fulfil it. Next he cites the Sūtra of the Simile of the City as proof; in that sūtra the Buddha relates himself that when he had not yet attained the path he reflected thus—beings are to be pitied, having gone deep into a perilous road, being born again and again, growing old again and again, dying again and again, going and coming in the world without knowing the way out; and further he thought 「何因緣有老死」 tr. "by what causes and conditions is there old age and death?"; as he sought and examined in this way he obtained real wisdom, and knew that birth is the cause and condition of old age and death and the rest. On this basis the treatise-author concludes: the third contemplation is obtained only on sitting at the seat of awakening. This proof is used with great weight—the Buddha's own course of attaining the path is itself a real instance of this contemplation, and so it is not empty talk. Here the reader should keep a measure of caution: being able to contemplate and being able to fulfil the contemplation are not one matter; first one is able and afterwards one fulfils, and it is not reached in a single step.
32. Again, contemplating such a dharma of causes and conditions, one passes beyond the two vehicles and obtains the omniscience of all kinds; retreating and not retreating both depend on this contemplation. The treatise-author takes up the sūtra's benefit: contemplating such a dharma of causes and conditions, one passes beyond the two vehicles and obtains the omniscience of all kinds. Next he explains the reason for retreating: if there are those who retreat from the Buddha path, it is all because they do not obtain this very deep contemplation; if they obtain this contemplation, they do not retreat. Why? Entering deep into ultimate emptiness, one does not see the ground of the śrāvaka and pratyekabuddha, and because one does not see it, one does not abide in it. This answer explains ‘not falling to the two vehicles’ very cleanly—it is not that one sees the ground of the two vehicles and by effort refrains from entering it; it is that one does not see at root that there is such a ground to abide in. Whoever holds to not retreating by the power of will will in the end have a time of retreating; one who does not abide because he does not see—that is truly not retreating.
33. Again: not seeing a single dharma that is fixed and autonomous and arises without causes and conditions; breaking wrong causes and conditions—atoms and the nature of the world. The treatise-author goes on to explain the sūtra's sentence 「不見法無因緣生」 tr. "does not see any dharma that arises without causes and conditions," and supplies its reverse side. One who can contemplate in this way does not see that there is a single dharma, fixed and autonomous, that arises without causes and conditions; all dharmas are not autonomous and all belong to arising from causes and conditions. Next he breaks a class of people: though they see that all dharmas arise from causes and conditions, they hold that they arise from wrong causes and conditions—wrong causes and conditions being atoms, the nature of the world, and the like. Therefore the sūtra says 「不見法無因緣生」 tr. "does not see any dharma that arises without causes and conditions," and the treatise-author further pushes on to its reverse side: nor does one see a dharma arising from permanent causes and conditions (atoms, the nature of the world). At the end he takes space as an example to break permanent causes and conditions: as space is permanent, and because it is permanent it has no arising, and space also does not act as a cause for things, therefore no dharma arises from permanent causes and conditions. The key point of this passage is in dividing two layers—first breaking the absence of a cause, next breaking a wrong cause; breaking the absence of a cause is easy, breaking a wrong cause is hard, because a wrong cause is also a cause, alike in form but not in reality.
34. Again: the bodhisattva contemplates all dharmas as belonging to arising from causes and conditions and not autonomous, and therefore there is no self, and so on up to no knower and no seer. Taking up what precedes with one turn, he brings the meaning of causes and conditions down onto non-self: all dharmas belong to arising from causes and conditions and are not autonomous; because they are not autonomous there is no self, and so on up to no knower and no seer. The reasoning here is very direct—not being autonomous is precisely the definition of non-self; there is not some other self to be broken. If the reader has ever suffered over how hard 「我」 tr. "self" is to break, he can enter from this place—he need not first look for where the self is; he need only see whether what is done and what is undergone are autonomous.
35. At that time the bodhisattva abides securely in the twelve links of causes and conditions of ultimate emptiness and does not see prajñā; this is called the prajñāpāramitā with nothing to be attained. The treatise-author explains the marks of contemplation in the sūtra text: the bodhisattva abides securely in the twelve links of causes and conditions of ultimate emptiness; he does not see all dharmas such as form as existent or non-existent and the like, nor does he see prajñā, nor see practising prajñā by means of this dharma, and so on up to anuttarā samyaksaṃbodhi, likewise; this is called the bodhisattva's prajñāpāramitā with nothing to be attained. The last sentence matters most—having obtained this prajñā with nothing to be attained, he then obtains, in all dharmas, the prajñā without any obstruction. Having nothing to be attained is the cause; being without obstruction is the fruit. Only when neither the prajñā that practises nor the dharma practised is seen is there truly nothing obstructing; if one leaves one dharma not seen through and yet takes oneself to have seen, that one dharma is the place of obstruction.
36. At that time the Māras are extremely grieved and pained: the simile of the fisherman. The treatise-author explains why Māra grieves: because this bodhisattva enters deep into the ultimate emptiness of the twelve links of causes and conditions and does not cling to Māra's net of the sixty-two wrong views of existence, non-existence, neither existence nor non-existence, and the rest—the items of these wrong views are not set out in this passage of this treatise, and the reader need not draw them up and supply them on its behalf. Since Māra has no dharma by which to find an opening in the bodhisattva, he is extremely grieved and pained. The treatise-author himself brings out a simile: it is as when a fisherman sees a fish go deep into the great water, where hook and net cannot reach, and he despairs and grieves; it is also like having newly lost father and mother. What the simile compares is Māra's despair and not what Māra is able to do; the reader should not read this passage as Māra's power being fearful. What is fearful lies rather on its opposite side—the only reason Māra has nothing he can do is that the bodhisattva does not cling to a single dharma; the moment he clings, it becomes a mesh of the net.
37. Again: one who can practise the prajñā with nothing to be attained fulfils the six perfections. The treatise-author explains why the six perfections are fulfilled: in practising such a dharma, the afflictions and the dharmas that obstruct prajñā are all broken and thinned, and the people of the Māras cannot find an opening, and therefore the perfections come to be fulfilled; though earlier he practised the six perfections, he had not yet been able to obtain such fulfilment. This passage explains the third part of passage 9 of the sūtra section—why, when practising prajñā, the six perfections are fulfilled of themselves. The answer lies not in practising more, but in the obstructions being thin; when the obstructions are thin, the practice one already has is accomplished naturally. The reader can hold this to examine himself: when the perfections one practises are not fulfilled, most often it is not that one's effort is not diligent, but that the afflictions and the deeds of Māra have not yet been removed.
38. Subhūti asks how one can practise such prajñā and fulfil the perfections. The treatise-author, in the form of narration, cites back the sūtra's question: Subhūti asks the World-Honored One how the bodhisattva can practise such prajñāpāramitā and can fulfil dānapāramitā and the other perfections. Although this takes the form of question and answer, it is the treatise-author restating passage 10 of the sūtra section, not setting up a separate exchange of question and answer. In reading a treatise one should keep apart two things, the question the treatise-author sets up himself and the restated question of the sūtra—in the former the treatise-author means to break and to establish; in the latter he only explains following the sūtra text.
39. The Buddha answers of two kinds of people: those of soft faculties who grasp at marks in dedicating, and those of keen faculties who make idle discourse of the dharma of emptiness, both cannot fulfil dānapāramitā. The treatise-author explains the sūtra's sentence 「所有布施皆迴向薩婆若」 tr. "all giving is dedicated to sarvajñā," and points out that there are two kinds of people who cannot yet fulfil it: those of soft faculties, whether they give little or much, all grasp at marks and dedicate it to anuttarā samyaksaṃbodhi; those of keen faculties break this grasping at marks yet make idle discourse of the dharma of emptiness, their power of faith turns thin, they do not use sarvajñā, and only seek the real mark of all dharmas. These two kinds of people both cannot fulfil dānapāramitā—the first because the power of faith is much and the power of wisdom little, the second because the power of wisdom is much and the power of faith little. This passage is the place in the whole chapter that bears most closely on people today: doing good while grasping at marks, and talking of emptiness while abandoning practice—the treatise-author judges both alike as not fulfilling, and judges very evenly—he does not say that those of soft faculties are inferior and those of keen faculties superior; he only says that each leans to one side.
40. The Buddha now says that because the power of faith and the power of wisdom and the rest are equal one can dedicate to sarvajñā: keeping sarvajñā in mind is the power of faith; dedicating in the manner of sarvajñā is the power of knowledge. The last passage brings out the proper answer: because the power of faith and the power of wisdom and the rest are equal, one is able to dedicate to sarvajñā. The treatise-author at once glosses their names and meanings—keeping sarvajñā in mind is the power of faith; dedicating in the manner of sarvajñā is the power of knowledge; and so on up to prajñāpāramitā, likewise. These two sentences should be looked at together: faith is tying the mind to sarvajñā; wisdom is dedicating in accordance with the real mark of sarvajñā, not grasping at its mark. Only when the two are equal is dedication accomplished; only when dedication is accomplished are the six perfections fulfilled; only when the six perfections are fulfilled is the practice of the prajñā with nothing to be attained complete. The whole chapter begins its questioning from ‘prajñā is inexhaustible’, and in its answer lands at this point—the inexhaustible prajñā is practised only within a single thought of dedication in which faith and wisdom are equal.
Do Not Misread
Do not read 「不可盡」 tr. "inexhaustible" as infinitely many. The Buddha's answer uses space as its simile, and the treatise-author says plainly that space 「無有法，但有名字」 tr. "has no dharma and has only a name." If one reads inexhaustible as there being a quantity that can never be drawn dry, then prajñā becomes a thing attained, and falls exactly into ‘grasping the mark of ultimate emptiness’, which the treatise-author breaks. The reason the inexhaustible is inexhaustible is that there is originally no dharma to be exhausted—without arising, therefore without ceasing; without ceasing, therefore without exhaustion. This meaning is said most clearly in the treatise-author's passage explaining the inexhaustibility of form: if form had arising, it would certainly have exhaustion; because it is without arising, it is also without exhaustion.
Do not read ‘the twelve links of causes and conditions are a dharma of the bodhisattvas alone’ as meaning that the two vehicles do not contemplate the twelve links of causes and conditions. What the sūtra text marks out is the one contemplation 「以虛空不可盡法觀十二因緣」 tr. "contemplating the twelve links of causes and conditions by the dharma of the inexhaustibility of space," not the twelve links of causes and conditions themselves. The treatise-author speaks of three kinds; the first kind is what the ordinary person sees, and the second kind is precisely what the worthies and sages distinguish with the Dharma-eye—the two vehicles not only contemplate it but trace old age and death back to ignorance, in clear order. What they lack lies only in the last sentence: they only extinguish suffering and so enter nirvāṇa, and do not seek the marks of the sufferings through to the end. What makes ‘alone’ alone lies in going through to the end or not going through to the end, not in contemplating or not contemplating.
Do not read ‘the real mark of delusion is precisely wisdom’ as meaning that delusion need not be cut off. The premise of the treatise-author's words is 「若得是無明定相，即是智慧」 tr. "if one obtains the fixed mark of this ignorance, this is precisely wisdom"—only when ignorance has been sought to the place where its fixed mark is unfindable does he say that the mark of delusion and the mark of wisdom are without difference. If one leaves out this premise and takes the conclusion directly, it becomes a view that indulges delusion. Moreover, in the same passage the treatise-author at once adds a sentence: to grasp and cling to the mark of wisdom is precisely delusion. One can see that the measure he keeps is very strict—not only does he not allow clinging to delusion as real; he also negates clinging to wisdom as real.
Do not read the breaking of the marks of old age as denying old age. What the treatise-author breaks is that 「老」 tr. "old age" has a fixed mark that can be found, not that the matter of old age does not appear. The hair white, teeth falling out, face wrinkled, body bent, emaciated, strength thin, the faculties dark and blocked that he lists are each things everyone sees; nor is his way of breaking them to say that these do not exist; it is to say that these cannot be fixedly assigned to old age—there are those in the prime of their years who are white, there are those who are old and whose faculties are bright and keen. At the end he gathers it with the simile of the cart: wheels, axle, shafts, spokes, and the rest are borrowed and named a cart; this is a provisional name and not real. The cart can still be ridden, and old age will still come; what is not there is only that mark of old age that could be pointed to and fixed.
Do not read the contemplation of ultimate emptiness as having nothing to do with great compassion. After the treatise-author has broken the mark of old age and ignorance, the passage that follows immediately is not something emptier; it is giving rise to great compassion—the bodhisattva contemplates the real mark of all dharmas as ultimately empty, without anything existent, with nothing to be attained, and because he does not cling to this matter either, amid beings he gives rise to great compassion. One can see that if the contemplation of emptiness is practised rightly, its appearance is that the compassionate mind grows thicker, not thinner. If after contemplating emptiness one grows cold toward beings, one should look back and see whether one is clinging to the emptiness contemplated; clinging to emptiness is precisely grasping at marks, and grasping at marks is not ultimate emptiness.
Do not read the judgement on soft faculties and keen faculties as urging people to learn to be of keen faculties. The treatise-author judges that both kinds of people cannot fulfil dānapāramitā; what he judges is the leaning, not the faculties. Those of soft faculties have much faith and little wisdom, and grasp at marks; those of keen faculties have much wisdom and little faith, make idle discourse of the dharma of emptiness, and their power of faith turns thin, to the point of not using sarvajñā—the fault of the latter is nearer to the grasping at emptiness that this treatise warns against everywhere. The right road the Buddha shows is 「信力、慧力等」 tr. "the power of faith and the power of wisdom are equal," and the one word ‘equal’ is the standard of judgement for the whole passage. If, because of this passage, the reader belittles his own faith or prides himself on his own wisdom, either way he falls within what is broken.
Bearing on Practice
The first use is to take the four Chinese characters 「云何應生」 tr. "how should one give rise to it?" as a way of reading. Subhūti, hearing that prajñā is inexhaustible, at once asks how one should give rise to it; he is unwilling to let a lofty meaning stop at praise. In daily life, reading the sūtras and hearing the Dharma, whenever one meets a lofty and wondrous sentence, one can at once ask oneself: here, how should I give rise to it, and where should I begin? If one cannot answer, keep it in mind to be investigated, and do not first give rise to praise. The whole treatise section of this chapter is the reply to this one question, and from this one can see the weight of this question.
The second use is that the three kinds of the twelve links of causes and conditions can serve as three ways of shining on oneself. Today, in favourable and adverse circumstances, did I go along with craving, grasping, and existence and never for a single thought turn back to look—this is the first kind. Though I can trace back where suffering comes from, do I seek only to leave suffering and then stop, no longer searching to the end for its root-mark—this is the second kind. In the matter of old age, sickness, and death, am I willing to push on to ‘where is the fixed mark of old age’ and not sink myself in sorrow and fear—this is the third kind. The treatise-author says plainly that the second kind is what is contemplated by the two vehicles and by bodhisattvas who have not yet obtained the acceptance of non-arising, and the third kind is what is contemplated by bodhisattvas from obtaining the acceptance of non-arising and so on up to sitting at the seat of awakening; so the third way of shining is only for recognising its direction, and one need not take it as one's own place.
The third use is that the method of seeking with old age as the sample can be put into practice here and now. The treatise-author does not take the most remote and abstruse of the twelve links, but deliberately takes old age, which touches the body most closely, to push through: first he asks what the marks of old age pointed to by the people of the world are, and lists them one by one; next he asks whether these marks are fixedly assigned to old age, and gives counter-examples one by one; last he asks whether, apart from these marks, there is still an old age, and answers that when sought it is not found. This whole method of pushing through can be transferred to any matter the mind cannot let go of—first list its marks, next seek whether they are fixed, last look at what remains. If what remains is empty, the clinging loosens of itself.
The fourth use is to set up ‘because he does not cling to this matter, he gives rise to great compassion’ as the test of whether the contemplation of emptiness has gone astray. When a practitioner has applied effort for a long time, the sickness most easily arising is coldness. The treatise-author has given a ready-made test: one who contemplates ultimate emptiness and amid beings gives rise to great compassion is practising rightly; one who contemplates ultimate emptiness and grows colder and lighter toward beings is clinging to the emptiness contemplated. This test need not wait until one sits at the seat of awakening to be used; in daily life one shines it and at once knows.
The fifth use is that the path to fulfilling the six perfections can change direction at once. The treatise-author says it plainly: the reason they are not yet fulfilled is not that one has practised too little; it is that the afflictions and the dharmas that obstruct prajñā have not yet been broken and thinned, and the Māras find an opening. Therefore one who wishes to fulfil the six perfections need not first double his practice; let him first see whether what he practises is dedicated to sarvajñā, whether it grasps at marks, whether it makes idle discourse of the dharma of emptiness. And the accomplishment of dedication the treatise-author further returns to the equality of faith and wisdom—keeping sarvajñā in mind is the power of faith; dedicating in the manner of sarvajñā is the power of knowledge. The practitioner can take these two sentences to check himself: in the good I do, does my mind reach to sarvajñā? And having reached it, do I grasp at its mark and seek a reward, or do I dedicate in accordance with its real mark? Only when both are present is it the fulfilment of which this chapter speaks.
Further Resonances
The backbone of this chapter is one section of sūtra text and one section of treatise explanation. Sūtra ① begins from Subhūti having the thought that the awakening of the buddhas is very deep and asking the Buddha whether prajñāpāramitā is inexhaustible, and the Buddha answers with space being inexhaustible; next he asks how one should give rise to it, and the Buddha answers that because form, feeling, perception, constructions, and consciousness, the six perfections, and so on up to the omniscience of all kinds are inexhaustible, prajñā should arise, and further answers that because the emptiness of delusion, the emptiness of constructions, the emptiness of consciousness, the emptiness of name-and-form, the emptiness of the six sense-bases, the emptiness of the six contacts, the emptiness of feeling, the emptiness of craving, the emptiness of grasping, the emptiness of existence, the emptiness of birth, and the emptiness of old age and death, sorrow, grief, suffering, and vexation are each inexhaustible, prajñā should arise, and marks out that the twelve links of causes and conditions are a dharma of the bodhisattvas alone, able to remove the extremes and the inversions, that when sitting at the seat of awakening one should contemplate thus and will obtain the omniscience of all kinds, that one who contemplates them by the dharma of the inexhaustibility of space does not fall to the ground of the two vehicles, and that those who turn back have all departed from the thought of prajñāpāramitā and do not obtain the power of skilful means, while those who do not turn back all obtain the power of skilful means; next it says that in contemplating the twelve links of causes and conditions one does not see any dharma arising without causes and conditions, does not see any dharma permanent and not ceasing, does not see a self, a person, a life, a living one, a being, a knower, a seer, does not see impermanence, suffering, non-self, quiescence or non-quiescence, and does not see form, feeling, perception, constructions, and consciousness, and so on up to anuttarā samyaksaṃbodhi either, closing with: because all dharmas are unfindable, this is the practice that corresponds to prajñāpāramitā; next it says that when one practises the prajñā with nothing to be attained the evil Māra is grieved and pained, as though an arrow had entered his heart, as when a person has newly lost his father and mother; Subhūti asks whether only one Māra, or also the Māras in the three-thousand great-thousand world, are grieved and pained, and the Buddha answers that all the evil Māras are grieved and pained, each upon his own seat unable to be at ease, that gods, humans, and asuras cannot find an opening, and says that when practising prajñā one fulfils the cultivation of the six perfections; at the end he asks how one fulfils the six perfections, and the Buddha answers that all giving, upholding the precepts, patience, vigour, meditative concentration, and wisdom are dedicated to sarvajñā, closing with fulfilling the six perfections. Treatise ① explains following the text with ‘The treatise explains’: first it supplies the background of Subhūti's having heard all kinds of marks of prajñā, and brings out the judgement that the meaning of prajñā is immeasurable while the collections of names, letters, and phrases are measured; next it explains that the Buddha speaks a small portion of bodhi because there is no one able to receive it, and distinguishes that grasping the mark of suchness and grasping the mark of ultimate emptiness are both wrong; next it explains why only the meaning of not being exhausted is asked; next it explains the simile of space and itself raises the difficulty ‘being without anything existent, how can it give rise?’, all that follows answering this difficulty; next it breaks the prior, later, and middle arising of form and the arising of arising, and comes back to the true mark of form being precisely the mark of prajñāpāramitā; next it brings out the road of ignorance as space being inexhaustible, making clear that to leave the two extremes of annihilation and permanence the emptiness of the twelve links of causes and conditions is taught, that the coming together of causes and conditions, having no fixed nature, is precisely the mark of ultimate emptiness and quiescence, and that it is provisionally named the middle way; next it cites the words of the sūtra to explain that contact-thought is not within, without, or in between and that the real mark of delusion is precisely wisdom, while grasping and clinging to the mark of wisdom is precisely delusion; in between it sets up one exchange of question and answer—the question, if there is no ignorance and also no constructions and the rest, how can the twelve links of causes and conditions be spoken of; the answer, that the twelve links of causes and conditions are spoken of in three kinds: first, what the ordinary person sees with the fleshly eye; second, what the worthies and sages distinguish with the Dharma-eye, who only extinguish suffering and enter nirvāṇa and do not seek the marks of the sufferings through to the end; third, the bodhisattvas with great knowledge and keen faculties, who only seek to go through to the end of the root-mark; next, with old age as the sample, it breaks layer by layer—that old age is a construction not associated with mind and yet its mark is unfindable; that the marks of old age named by the people of the world are none of them fixed marks, and that dharmas come together and are provisionally named old age, as wheels, axle, shafts, spokes are borrowed and named a cart; that someone says the mark of the oldness of the five aggregates of retribution is named old age, broken by: not abiding thought after thought, there is no oldness and no old age; that within ultimate emptiness even the mark of arising is unfindable, how much less is there old age—closing with: as with old age, so on up to ignorance it is likewise; next it brings out that the bodhisattva, because he does not cling to this matter, gives rise to great compassion amid beings; next it fixes the three kinds of the twelve links of causes and conditions as belonging respectively to ordinary people; to the two vehicles and bodhisattvas who have not yet obtained the acceptance of non-arising; and to bodhisattvas from obtaining the acceptance of non-arising and so on up to sitting at the seat of awakening; next it cites the sūtra text back and glosses the items of leaving the extremes and the inversions, dividing the afflictions into the two divisions of the extremes and the inversions; next it makes clear that the third contemplation is very deep and only those sitting at the seat of awakening can fulfil it, citing the Sūtra of the Simile of the City as proof; next it explains passing beyond the two vehicles and obtaining the omniscience of all kinds, and that retreating and not retreating both depend on this contemplation; next it breaks the absence of a cause and the wrong causes of atoms and the nature of the world, taking as an example that space, because permanent, has no arising and does not act as a cause for things; next it makes clear that because they belong to arising from causes and conditions and are not autonomous, there is no self, and so on up to no knower and no seer; next it explains that abiding securely in ultimate emptiness and not seeing prajñā is called the prajñā with nothing to be attained, and that having obtained this prajñā with nothing to be attained one obtains, in all dharmas, the prajñā without any obstruction; next it explains the reason the Māras are extremely grieved and pained, and brings out the simile of the fisherman; next it explains that one who can practise the prajñā with nothing to be attained has his afflictions broken and thinned, Māra finds no opening, and therefore the six perfections come to be fulfilled; at the end it restates the sūtra's question and answer, judges that the two kinds of people—those of soft faculties who grasp at marks in dedicating and those of keen faculties who make idle discourse of the dharma of emptiness—both cannot fulfil dānapāramitā, and closes with: because the power of faith and the power of wisdom and the rest are equal one is able to dedicate to sarvajñā; keeping sarvajñā in mind is the power of faith; dedicating in the manner of sarvajñā is the power of knowledge.
The lines of meaning between this chapter and the chapters before and after it can be seen in two threads. First, continuing what precedes: the preceding chapter has already said that the buddhas of the three times attain the path by prajñā and that prajñā is not exhausted; this chapter takes up these words and asks about the meaning of being inexhaustible, and so the treatise-author, explaining Subhūti's thought, directly cites 「三世諸佛用般若波羅蜜得道，般若故不盡——已不盡、今不盡、當不盡」 tr. "the buddhas of the three times attain the path by means of prajñāpāramitā; because of prajñā it is not exhausted—it has not been exhausted, it is not now exhausted, it will not be exhausted" as what it continues from, not setting up a separate stove. Second, reaching to what follows: the last section of this chapter says that one who practises the prajñā with nothing to be attained fulfils the six perfections, and that the pivot of fulfilment lies in dedicating to sarvajñā and in the equality of faith and wisdom; the next chapter speaks broadly of this in terms of the six perfections containing one another; the two chapters stand in sequence, and the reader can view them together to see what the two Chinese characters 「具足」 tr. "fulfil" point to.
Of the explanations of the ancient masters, two can be recorded for this chapter. Jizang, in his division of this chapter, takes it as the boundary between the path of prajñā and the path of skilful means, saying: 「此下第二明方便道」 tr. "From here on, the second makes clear the path of skilful means," and himself divides the text of his path of skilful means, saying: 「初二十三品正明方便因果大用」 tr. "The first twenty-three chapters properly make clear the great function of cause and fruit of skilful means"; explaining the reason for the chapter's name he says: 「無盡品者，上品已般若無盡，今須菩提更問明此義」 tr. "As for the chapter ‘The Inexhaustible’: the preceding chapter has already said that prajñā is inexhaustible, and now Subhūti asks further to make this meaning clear," and cites the meaning of the treatise as grounds, saying: 「般若若有和有集故有滅有盡，無和無集故無滅無盡」 tr. "If prajñā had combining and had gathering, it would therefore have ceasing and have exhaustion; being without combining and without gathering, it is without ceasing and without exhaustion." Explaining the sentence ‘the twelve links of causes and conditions are a dharma of the bodhisattvas alone’, he says: 「凡夫直順十二不求是非邪正，二乘但知其過盡無我我所，欲滅之入無餘，並不窮因緣之實，菩薩知其本自不生今亦無滅，故非凡夫行非賢聖行，獨菩薩行故名為獨也」 tr. "Ordinary people simply go along with the twelve and do not seek out right and wrong, false and correct; the two vehicles only know their faults, exhaust self and what belongs to self, wish to extinguish them and enter the remainderless, and do not search out the reality of causes and conditions; the bodhisattva knows that they originally do not arise and now also do not cease; therefore it is not the practice of ordinary people, not the practice of the worthies and sages; being the practice of the bodhisattva alone, it is called ‘alone’."—explaining the meaning of ‘alone’ by the threefold division of ordinary people, the two vehicles, and bodhisattvas, it shares its bone with the three kinds of the twelve links of causes and conditions divided in this treatise but differs in wording; they are recorded side by side without judgement. Explaining the meaning of leaving the two extremes, he says: 「就名作空觀即墮斷見中，若作有觀即墮常中，今作因緣觀甚深，便妙悟中道不著斷常，為方便慧體也」 tr. "If, going by the name, one makes the contemplation of emptiness, one falls into the view of annihilation; if one makes the contemplation of existence, one falls into permanence; now one makes the contemplation of causes and conditions, which is very deep, and then wondrously awakens to the middle way, not clinging to annihilation or permanence; this is the substance of the wisdom of skilful means." Explaining ‘when sitting at the seat of awakening one should contemplate thus’, he says: 「未得無生已來亦作此觀，而未明了具足，得無生觀解明了具足，故云坐道場應如是觀也」 tr. "From before obtaining non-arising one also makes this contemplation, but not yet clearly and fully; on obtaining non-arising, the understanding of the contemplation is clear and full; therefore it says that when sitting at the seat of awakening one should contemplate thus."—these words and this treatise's sentence 「先雖能觀，未能具足」 tr. "though earlier they could contemplate it, they could not yet fulfil it" bring each other out; both are kept. Explaining the inexhaustibility of form, he says: 「色若生故有滅，滅即名盡，以色無生故無滅，所以言無盡也」 tr. "If form arises, it therefore has ceasing, and ceasing is called exhaustion; because form is without arising it is without ceasing, and that is why it is said to be inexhaustible," which is close to where this treatise's passage breaking the arising of form comes back to.
Huiying, explaining this chapter, also judges it by the path of prajñā and the path of skilful means, saying: 「上來至此明菩薩波若道，自此品已下訖於經末明菩薩方便道」 tr. "From the beginning up to here makes clear the bodhisattva's path of prajñā; from this chapter down to the end of the sūtra makes clear the bodhisattva's path of skilful means," and cites the words of the treatise as grounds, saying: 「波若能將菩薩入畢竟空，方便能將菩薩出畢竟空」 tr. "Prajñā can lead the bodhisattva into ultimate emptiness; skilful means can lead the bodhisattva out of ultimate emptiness"—this judgement of the two paths shares its broad direction with what Jizang sets up, while the two masters each speak in their own words; they are recorded side by side without judgement. Explaining the reason for the chapter's name, he says: 「上品云：三世諸佛學波若波羅蜜悉皆不盡，已不盡、今不盡、當不盡」 tr. "The preceding chapter says: the buddhas of the three times train in prajñāpāramitā, and all of it is not exhausted—it has not been exhausted, it is not now exhausted, it will not be exhausted," and 「今此品來為接上文生於下意，明方便道中不可盡義，故名不盡品」 tr. "Now this chapter comes in order to join the text above and give rise to the meaning below, making clear the meaning of inexhaustibility within the path of skilful means; therefore it is named the chapter ‘Not Exhausted’"—what it continues from is the same as what this treatise continues from in explaining Subhūti's thought. Explaining the simile of space, he sets up two kinds of his own, saying: 「如虗空者有二種：一者世間虗空，二者法性虗空」 tr. "As for ‘like space’, there are two kinds: first, worldly space; second, the space of the nature of dharmas"; this is Huiying's own opening and closing, and this treatise does not make this division; it is recorded and not judged. Explaining that a white head and the rest are not the mark of old age, he says: 「此並非老相，乃屬老相家法，非老相也」 tr. "These are none of them the mark of old age; they belong to the dharmas of the house of the mark of old age, and are not the mark of old age"; explaining the simile of the fisherman, he says: 「捕魚人喻魔也，一魚者喻菩薩也」 tr. "The fisherman stands for Māra; the one fish stands for the bodhisattva," and 「深入大水者，喻見菩薩深入諸法實相水也」 tr. "‘Going deep into the great water’ stands for seeing the bodhisattva go deep into the water of the real mark of all dharmas"—in all of these he follows the text of this treatise and matches the similes to it, and they can be looked at together with passage 36 of the Passage by Passage above. In his commentary Huiying also himself calls this chapter 「第六十六品者，名為不盡品」 tr. "the sixty-sixth chapter, named the chapter ‘Not Exhausted’"; his chapter sequence differs by one place from the base text of this edition, and the chapter name he uses differs again both from the base text's full name 「無盡方便」 tr. "Inexhaustible Skilful Means" and from the variant texts' short name 「無盡」 tr. "The Inexhaustible," forming a situation in which three lines stand side by side; the variant names of the chapter heading, the division of fascicles among the texts, and the interlinear note appended in the Ming edition, 「經作不可盡品」 tr. "the sūtra has the chapter ‘Cannot Be Exhausted’," are examined in detail in the Apparatus, and are not judged here.
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，居卷八十之開卷首品，單一單元。卷七十九之卷末題「大智度論卷第七十九」〔T25 0620c12〕（卷七十九之收卷標記）與卷八十之開卷標記〔T25 0620c15〕相銜，本品品題即卷八十之卷首題：「大智度論釋無盡方便品第六十七」〔T25 0620c15〕，其後綴夾註「卷八十」〔T25 0620c16〕（繫於卷首題之內）。品首有卷題、有造署、有譯署——「聖者龍樹造」〔T25 0620c18〕、「後秦龜茲國三藏鳩摩羅什譯」〔T25 0620c19〕——此與品六十二〈同學品〉之「品首無卷題、無造署譯署」正相反，與品四十八〈佛母品〉之跨卷型亦異。
品身訖於「乃至般若波羅蜜亦如是。」〔T25 0623b05〕一句迄〔T25 0623b06〕，次品品題「大智度論釋六度相攝品第六十八」〔T25 0623b07〕緊接其後；本品範圍內無卷末題——卷八十之收卷標記在「大智度論卷第八十」〔T25 0625b22〕，其間尚容次品〈六度相攝品〉之前半（次品訖於次次品〈大方便品第六十九〉品題〔T25 0632b19〕前，故次品自身跨卷八十、八十一兩卷）。故本品為居卷首·卷內未竟即續次品之型。
全品純漢字三千六百一十八（另以漢字流獨立重算得同數三千六百一十八），為近數品中之輕品。品內結構一【經】一【論】、單一單元：【經】〔T25 0620c20〕、【論】〔T25 0621c12〕。兩結構標記皆有校記，宋、宮二本俱無此二標記；【經】標記之注另記石本「不分卷」（見第八目），且此注被次品〈六度相攝品〉之【經】標記〔T25 0623b08〕以 star 機制跨品沿用——本品為 star 之目標端、次品為出現端，方向與品內四枚 star 相反（見第八目 star 專列）。
問答之數與說者結構：經①以須菩提作是念發端〔T25 0620c20〕，作是念已白佛問般若不可盡〔T25 0620c22〕，佛答「虛空不可盡故」〔T25 0620c22〕；其下須菩提續問「世尊！云何應生般若波羅蜜？」〔T25 0620c23〕——此處無「白佛言」重起標記，唯以呼格「世尊！」承接，依文法可辨，如實分記。佛自〔T25 0620c24〕起連續開示至〔T25 0621b14〕，本品經段「復次，須菩提！」一見〔T25 0621a01〕、「如是，須菩提！」八見（〔T25 0621a12〕〔T25 0621a27〕〔T25 0621b02〕〔T25 0621b06〕〔T25 0621b10〕〔T25 0621b13〕〔T25 0621c01〕〔T25 0621c10〕），皆佛之連續開示承接語，未見換說標記，屬本經常態文體。其下換說二回皆有明文：〔T25 0621b15〕「須菩提白佛言」／〔T25 0621b17〕「佛告須菩提」、〔T25 0621b26〕「世尊！菩薩摩訶薩行般若波羅蜜時，云何具足」／〔T25 0621b29〕「佛告須菩提」——「須菩提白佛言」二見、「佛告須菩提」二見，以漢字流逐一定位所得。
論①以「釋曰：」〔T25 0621c12〕起論（起論標記，不計入問答對數），正式問答一組：〔T25 0622a26〕問／〔T25 0622a27〕答——逐字點之，「問曰：」一、「答曰：」一，與漢字流定位之一組 loc 相合。「有人言」一見〔T25 0622b24〕（「復次，有人言說：『果報五眾故相名為老。』」，論主隨即駁之「是亦不然」）。「復次」全品九見〔T25 0621a01〕〔T25 0622a09〕〔T25 0622a17〕〔T25 0622b17〕〔T25 0622b24〕〔T25 0622b29〕〔T25 0622c29〕〔T25 0623a07〕〔T25 0623a19〕——其首見在經段（「復次，須菩提！」），餘八見在論段，漢字流重掃所得。論段末〔T25 0623a24〕以下另有「須菩提問……佛答……佛今說」三段，為論主以敘述體重牒經文之複述申論，非另立問答對，如實分記不列入問答對數。
二、術語考
無盡·不可盡·不盡。 本品之總名與其三種語形。品題作「無盡方便」，而經文通篇用「不可盡」——「不可盡」於本品範圍三十一見，自「虛空不可盡故，般若波羅蜜不可盡。」〔T25 0620c22〕起，歷色、受想行識、六波羅蜜、一切種智，至十二因緣諸支「老死憂悲苦惱空不可盡故，菩薩般若波羅蜜應生。」〔T25 0621a11〕。論段則轉用二字之「不盡」——「不盡」於本品八見，集中於〔T25 0621c24〕以下一段：論主先牒「三世諸佛用般若波羅蜜得道，般若故不盡——已不盡、今不盡、當不盡。」〔T25 0621c23〕，繼以「是故我今但問『不盡』義。」收之〔T25 0621c25〕，佛答亦作「如虛空不盡故，般若亦不盡。」〔T25 0621c25〕。經文之「不可盡」與論文之「不盡」同指而語形三分，品題之「無盡」則為第三形（本品範圍內「無盡」四見，二見在品題與結構目次列，二見在論段〔T25 0622a01〕「色無盡故」、〔T25 0622a06〕「以無生故亦無盡」）。品名三系之異（無盡方便／無盡／不盡）即坐此語形之三分，見第四目。
方便。 品題所獨有、而經文正文所無之二字。「方便」於本品範圍四見：二見在品題與結構目次列，正文唯二見，且皆作「方便力」——「若求菩薩道而轉還者，皆不得是方便力故」〔T25 0621a21〕、「若菩薩摩訶薩於阿耨多羅三藐三菩提不轉還者，皆得是方便力故。」〔T25 0621a23〕。轉還與不轉還之判，全繫於方便力之有無，此即品題「方便」二字在正文中唯一之落點。古德二家於此皆以本品為般若道與方便道之分界首品（見第六目），其說與此二見相值。
獨菩薩法。 本品之判教語。經文：「是十二因緣，是獨菩薩法，能除諸邊、顛倒。」〔T25 0621a13〕——「獨菩薩法」四字於 T25n1509 全論三見（〔T25 0430a23〕〔T25 0466b11〕〔T25 0621a14〕），本品一見；於所釋經 T08n0223 全經一見，即本品同位〔T08 0364b23〕，兩藏逐串重掃所得。此語之對位唯一，是本品與所釋經最堅之錨。其所以獨者，本論以凡夫、二乘、菩薩三種觀法申釋（見第二目），吉藏則直拈「獨」字訓明（見第六目）。
虛空不可盡法。 觀十二因緣之所依。經以此立能觀之法：「若有菩薩摩訶薩以虛空不可盡法，行般若波羅蜜，觀十二因緣，不墮聲聞、辟支佛地」〔T25 0621a16〕，並以能觀所觀兩面重言：「菩薩摩訶薩應以虛空不可盡法觀般若波羅蜜」〔T25 0621a25〕、「應以虛空不可盡法生般若波羅蜜。」〔T25 0621a26〕——觀與生兩事同依一法。「虛空」於本品範圍十七見，遍貫經論二段，是全品之總喻（喻之析見第三目）。
中道。 論主於本品唯一之明文。論釋離二邊之所以：「若法從因緣和合生，是法無有定性；若法無定性，即是畢竟空寂滅相。離二邊故，假名為中道。」〔T25 0622a12〕，其下即收以「十二因緣如虛空，無法故不盡。」〔T25 0622a15〕——「中道」二字於本品範圍唯一見〔T25 0622a14〕，漢字流重掃所得。其所離之二邊，論自出之：「若人但觀畢竟空，多墮斷滅邊；若觀有，多墮常邊。」〔T25 0622a10〕。
三種十二因緣。 本品論段之骨。論設問而後分之：「說十二因緣有三種」〔T25 0622a27〕——其一「凡夫肉眼所見，顛倒、著我心，起諸煩惱、業，往來生死中。」〔T25 0622a28〕；其二「賢聖以法眼分別諸法」〔T25 0622a29〕，其行止於「是但滅苦故入於涅槃，不究盡求諸苦相。」〔T25 0622b10〕；其三「諸菩薩摩訶薩，大智人利根故，但求究盡十二因緣根本相」〔T25 0622b11〕。論後自出其配屬：「初十二因緣，但是凡夫人故，於是中不求是非」〔T25 0622c06〕、「第二十二因緣，二乘人及未得無生忍法菩薩所觀」〔T25 0622c08〕、「第三十二因緣，從得無生忍法乃至坐道場菩薩所觀。」〔T25 0622c09〕——三觀之別不在所觀之法，在能觀之人與其所求之盡不盡。
老相·心不相應行。 論破老法之訓詁樞紐。論先引分別諸法相者之說：「老是心不相應行。」〔T25 0622b15〕，隨即斷之「是相不可得。頭白等是色相，非老相。」〔T25 0622b15〕——「老相」於本品範圍四見（〔T25 0622b16〕二見、〔T25 0622b17〕〔T25 0622b18〕），皆在此一段。其破法凡三重：一破世俗之相（見第三目「還年藥」喻），二破有人言之「果報五眾故相名為老。」〔T25 0622b24〕，三以畢竟空總收「諸法畢竟空中生相不可得，何況有老！」〔T25 0622b29〕。
無所得般若·無所障礙般若。 本品果位之二名。經以「若菩薩行無所得般若波羅蜜時」〔T25 0621b12〕立名，論則於末段自出其階：「是名菩薩無所得般若波羅蜜。」〔T25 0623a12〕，「得是無所得般若，於一切法中便得無所障礙般若。」〔T25 0623a13〕——無所得是因、無所障礙是果，「無所障礙」四字於本品範圍唯一見〔T25 0623a14〕。「無所得」則六見（〔T25 0621b12〕〔T25 0621b14〕〔T25 0622c04〕〔T25 0623a13〕二見〔T25 0623a20〕）。
信力·慧力。 全品收尾之判。論釋二種人皆不具足檀波羅蜜之由：「有二種人：軟根、利根。」〔T25 0623a27〕，其失各在一偏——「一者以信力多、慧力少，二者以慧力多、信力少故。」〔T25 0623b02〕；其所以能具足者則在等：「信力、慧力等故，能迴向薩婆若。」〔T25 0623b03〕，論並配其實「念薩婆若者，是信力；如薩婆若迴向者，是智力。」〔T25 0623b04〕。「信力」於本品範圍五見、「慧力」三見，皆在此收尾一段。末句作「是智力」而非「是慧力」，兩名並用一義，如實分記。
三、譬喻與故事
本品要喻五，引事一，皆繫於所釋之義，無泛設。
虛空（總喻）。 全品之骨喻，經論兩用。經以之答不可盡：「虛空不可盡故，般若波羅蜜不可盡。」〔T25 0620c22〕；論則先拆其所以為喻者：「如虛空，無有法，但有名字」〔T25 0621c26〕——虛空之不可盡，不在其大，在其無法可盡。論並自設難：「般若波羅蜜若如虛空無所有故不可盡，云何菩薩能生是般若波羅蜜？」〔T25 0621c27〕，全品論段之開展即由此一難逼出。末於老法亦以之收：「求老法不可得，不可得故無相，如虛空，不可盡。」〔T25 0622c01〕——虛空一喻，前後貫全品之首尾。
如幻、如夢（色生不可得之喻）。 論破色生：「生不可得，生生不可得，如先『破生』中說。」〔T25 0622a03〕，其結為「二法不可得故，色如幻、如夢，但誑人眼。」〔T25 0622a05〕——幻夢之為喻，落點在「誑人眼」三字：不是色不存在，是所見之生滅不實。其下即接「若色有生必有盡，以無生故亦無盡。」〔T25 0622a06〕，喻與義相銜無隙。
假輪、軸、轅、輻等為車（老無定相之喻）。 論破老相，先數世人所名之老相：「世人名老相：髮白、齒離，面皺、身曲，羸瘦、力薄，諸根闇塞」〔T25 0622b17〕，一一破之，其中最快者一事：「又服還年藥，雖老而壯。」〔T25 0622b21〕——同一身而老相可去，則老不在相。其結取世間最平近之物為比：「又如假輪、軸、轅、輻等為車，是假名非實。」〔T25 0622b23〕——車不在輪軸轅輻之外，亦不在其中；老不在髮白齒離之外，亦不在其中。此喻與品六十二〈同學品〉之「白衣兄弟」同屬取平近事之例，而所破不同：彼破諍心，此破定相。
如箭入心（魔愁之喻）。 經寫魔之不堪：「惡魔愁毒，如箭入心。」〔T25 0621b13〕——「如箭入心」於本品範圍三見（〔T25 0621b13〕〔T25 0621b15〕〔T25 0621b18〕），於 T25n1509 全論六見（〔T25 0231b08〕〔T25 0501a24〕〔T25 0603a15〕〔T25 0621b13〕〔T25 0621b15〕〔T25 0621b18〕），本品獨佔其半，漢字流重掃所得。其一見在品六十二〈同學品〉〔T25 0603a15〕——兩品共用一喻而所繫之因異：彼繫於「不離般若」，此繫於「行無所得般若」。經更以三千大千世界廣之：「三千大千世界中諸惡魔皆愁毒，如箭入心，各於其坐不能自安。」〔T25 0621b17〕。
新喪父母（魔愁之副喻）。 與前喻連用：「譬如人新喪父母」〔T25 0621b13〕——「新喪父母」於本品二見（經段〔T25 0621b13〕、論段〔T25 0623a19〕），於 T25n1509 全論亦唯此二見，全論重掃所得。此喻為本品所專有，他品無。喻之力在「新」字：不是久已之哀，是方才失去的那一下。
捕魚人見一魚深入大水（論主自出之喻）。 論釋魔何以愁而無可奈何，出一經文所無之新喻：「譬如捕魚人見一魚深入大水，鉤網所不及，則絕望憂愁。亦如新喪父母。」〔T25 0623a18〕——論主既自出新喻，復以經之舊喻「新喪父母」收之，兩喻疊用。其所以絕望者，論先已言之：「以是菩薩深入十二因緣畢竟空中，不著有、無、非有非無等六十二諸邪見魔網」〔T25 0623a15〕——魔之網與魚之網相對成文：魔張六十二見之網，菩薩入畢竟空之水；水深則網不及。「捕魚人」三字於本品唯一見〔T25 0623a18〕。慧影疏於此喻逐物配之（見第六目）。
《城譬喻經》事（引事一）。 論釋第三種十二因緣觀「唯諸菩薩坐道場者能觀」〔T25 0622c18〕，引一經事為證：「如《城譬喻經》中說」〔T25 0622c19〕，其所引為佛自述本因：「眾生可愍，深入嶮道，所謂數數生，數數老，數數死，往來世間，不知出處。」〔T25 0622c21〕，「何因緣有老死？」〔T25 0622c23〕——佛自陳「我本未得道時」之思惟，正證「第三觀，坐道場乃得」〔T25 0622c24〕。「城譬喻經」四字於 T25n1509 全論唯一見，即此處〔T25 0622c20〕；另於所釋經 T08n0223 全經、及 T01／T02 兩冊全文回搜「城譬喻經」「城喻經」，皆零命中〔查無〕——此經之藏內對應未能定位，如實誌闕，不以推定之異名充數（禁偽判準）。
四、所釋經文
品名三系網：無盡方便／無盡／不盡（並錄不判）。 本品品名三系，逐一據底本誌之。其一，無盡方便品——本論底本品題〔T25 0620c15〕「大智度論釋無盡方便品第六十七」，四字全稱，為底本所獨；慧影疏之總目〔X46n0791 0794b24〕與 body 品題〔X46n0791 0912c03〕亦皆作「釋無盡方便品第六十七」，與底本同系。其二，無盡品——宋、元、明、宮四本與石本皆省作二字略稱（宮本另衍一「品」字，見第八目第一條底本原樣）；所釋經 T223 側之品題〔T08 0364a28〕「摩訶般若波羅蜜經無盡品第六十七」與其結構目次列、吉藏疏之總目〔X24n0451 0195c06〕與 body 品題〔X24n0451 0319a10〕亦皆作「無盡品第六十七」，略稱一系橫跨經、疏、諸異本。其三，不盡品——慧影疏 body 自身之敘述用語：「第六十六品者，名為不盡品。」〔X46n0791 0912c04〕、「所以次此名不盡品者，故是乘上生下之義。」〔X46n0791 0913a03〕——慧影總目與品題用全稱、而行文用第三形略稱，一人兩用，如實分記。三系各取本品一義：底本兼取「無盡」與「方便」，通行諸本唯取「無盡」，慧影行文取「不盡」；並錄不判。
明本夾註「經作不可盡品」之所指（本目之眼·兩處定位）。 本論品題注之明本一造，底本內嵌一 place="inline" 夾註：「（大智度論卷第八十釋無盡品第六十七經作不可盡品）二十二字【明】」〔T25 0620c15〕——明本編者自陳「經」另稱本品為「不可盡品」。此語所指，於兩處定位得之：
- 其一，所釋經 T223 側之品題校記。 T223 本品品題注〔T08 0364a28〕曰「無盡品第六十七【大】，〔－〕【聖】，不可盡品第六十七【宋】【元】【明】【宮】」——T223 之宋、元、明、宮四本正作「不可盡品第六十七」。明本編者所謂「經作不可盡品」，其所據即此。〔誌：另以漢字流於 T08n0223 全經正文與結構目次列回搜「不可盡品」，零命中——該名唯存於校記層，不入經之正文與目錄；故以正文與目次為搜域之負命題不足以否證其存在，此即「禁偽判準」之一實例。〕
- 其二，本論自身卷五〈序品〉之前指。 論主於卷五釋十二因緣觀之「巧」時，逕以此名指本品：「《般若波羅蜜．不可盡品》中，佛告須菩提」〔T25 0100c06〕，其下所牒之經文為「癡如虛空不可盡，行如虛空不可盡，乃至眾苦和合集如虛空不可盡。」〔T25 0100c06〕、「作是觀十二因緣起者，則為坐道場，得薩婆若。」〔T25 0100c09〕——場景結構與本品經段全合（皆佛告須菩提·皆以虛空不可盡貫十二因緣諸支·皆以坐道場得一切種智收），而逐字不同（本品作「癡空不可盡故，菩薩摩訶薩般若波羅蜜應生」〔T25 0621a01〕、「坐道場時，應如是觀，當得一切種智。」〔T25 0621a14〕）。論主前指本品時所用之名，正是「不可盡品」而非「無盡品」，亦非「無盡方便品」，如實誌錄；其牒文與本品經文之逐字差異，屬論主牒經之常態，並錄不判。
品次 -1 階（石本·慧影兩端·來源有別）。 石本品題作「摩訶般若波羅蜜品第六十六無盡品【石】」〔T25 0620c15〕，品序 -1，與品四十四以下逐品順推、同向同幅——-1 階鏈於本品續存。本品範圍內 -1 階另見一端：品末「是」字注，石本作「是【大】，（是釋第六十六品竟，大智度論經卷第八十）【石】」〔T25 0623b06〕（下帳第三十七條）——品末「釋某品竟」型括注與品題兩層互證，皆作「六十六」，非孤證。慧影疏之自編號亦作「第六十六品」〔X46n0791 0912c04〕，惟彼屬疏家內部編號，非底本異文，性質有別，如實區分。
石本卷次（品末收束記·與底本卷界相逆）。 上引石本品末括注內另帶卷端記『大智度論經卷第八十』（下帳第三十七條）——石本以本品之末為其卷八十之終；底本則以本品之首為其卷八十之始（〔T25 0620c15〕開卷，至〔T25 0625b22〕方竟）。兩造之卷八十於本品處恰成首尾相逆：底本卷八十起於本品品題，石本卷八十止於本品品末，且石本題作「大智度論經」（多一「經」字）。底本／石本卷品雙軌不疊合，如實誌錄不強解。 又本品品題注內未見石本卷端記（不同於品六十二品題注首記「卷第七十八首【石】」之型），與品末之卷終記恰相配，如實分記。
所釋經品題之兩造與 mulu 屬性重出。 所釋經 T223 側本品品題〔T08 0364a28〕作「摩訶般若波羅蜜經無盡品第六十七」，其注三造已引於上；另有一注在同位〔T08 0364a28〕曰「經【大】，經三十【聖】」——聖本於經題下繫其自身卷次「三十」，如實誌錄。T223 結構目次列序號之重出：本品之結構目次列標六十八而顯文標「67 無盡品」〔T08 0364a28〕——+1 偏移自品四十一以來屢見，本品續存（承品四十八〈佛母品〉既誌之常設體例，不重判）；而次品〈攝五品〉之結構目次列亦標六十八〔T08 0365a26〕，未依序遞增至六十九——逐條重取品六十三至六十九之序列確認：「63 等學品」標六十四〔T08 0357a08〕、「64 淨願品」標六十五〔T08 0358b16〕、「65 度空品」標六十六〔T08 0360b09〕、「66 累教品」標六十七〔T08 0362a10〕、「67 無盡品」標六十八〔T08 0364a28〕、「68 攝五品」標六十八〔T08 0365a26〕、「69 方便品」標七十〔T08 0368c07〕——重出一處、其後即回復 +1 偏移。此與品四十六、四十七所誌之「兩過品／佛母品 n=48 重出」同型，本品為此類之又一例，如實誌錄不強解。又次品品名 T223 側亦有兩造：「攝五【大】，六度相攝【宋】【元】【明】【宮】【聖】」〔T08 0365a26〕——T223 諸異本之「六度相攝」正是本論次品之名，如實誌錄。
全量牒經對讀（兩側對勘·異文六處·逐處誌其校記之有無）。 本論經①與所釋經〈無盡品〉逐字幾近同文，其異六處：
- 檀波羅蜜／檀那波羅蜜·禪波羅蜜／禪那波羅蜜——本論作「檀波羅蜜不可盡故，般若波羅蜜應生」〔T25 0620c26〕，T223 作「檀那波羅蜜不可盡故，般若波羅蜜應生」〔T08 0364b06〕；禪度同款。T223 側「那」字有 star 注「那【大】＊，〔－〕【聖】＊」（其定義錨在前品範圍〔T08 0364a11〕，本品範圍內以 star
beg_481〔T08 0364b06〕、beg_482〔T08 0364b08〕、beg_484〔T08 0365a07〕、beg_485〔T08 0365a11〕、beg_487〔T08 0365a12〕、beg_488〔T08 0365a16〕、beg_48a〔T08 0365a22〕共七枚掛回，另「羅」字注以beg_486〔T08 0365a11〕、beg_489〔T08 0365a18〕二枚掛回）——T223 之聖本無「那」字，所成之讀正是本論底本之譯名；本論側此處無校記。 - 是十二因緣／如是十二因緣——本論作「是十二因緣，是獨菩薩法」〔T25 0621a13〕，T223 同位作「是十二因緣是獨菩薩法」〔T08 0364b23〕。兩造於同一「是」字皆有校記而方向相逆：本論側注「是【大】，〔－〕【宋】【元】【明】【宮】」（下帳第四條）——宋元明宮四本刪此「是」；T223 側注「是【大】，如是【宋】【元】【明】【宮】」〔T08 0364b23〕——同四本增一「如」字。如實並錄，不以一造之讀判另一造。
- 是獨／獨是——本論側另有一注在其下之「是獨」二字：「是獨【大】，獨是【宋】【宮】」（下帳第五條）；T223 側此處無校記（T223 底本亦作「是獨」）。
- 應以虛空不可盡法觀十二因緣——本論作「是人不知云何行般若波羅蜜，以虛空不可盡法觀十二因緣。」〔T25 0621a19〕，T223 作「是人不知云何行般若波羅蜜。應以虛空不可盡法觀十二因緣。」〔T08 0364b29〕，多一「應」字。T223 側此處有注「應【大】，〔－〕【宋】【元】【明】【宮】【聖】」〔T08 0364c01〕——T223 之五本俱無「應」字，所成之讀正與本論底本合；本論側此處無校記。此為六處異文中鏡像最全者。
- 眾生，知者／眾生乃至知者——本論作「不見法有我、人、壽者、命者、眾生，知者、見者」〔T25 0621a28〕，T223 作「不見法有我、人、壽者、命者、眾生乃至知者、見者」〔T08 0364c10〕，多「乃至」二字。本論側此處有注「生【大】，生乃至【元】【明】」（下帳第八條）——元、明二本作「眾生乃至知者」，正是 T223 底本之讀；T223 側此處無校記。
- 惡魔／是惡魔——本論作「惡魔見菩薩行無所得般若波羅蜜時，便大愁毒，如箭入心。」〔T25 0621b14〕，T223 同位〔T08 0364c25〕全同。兩造於同一「惡」字皆有校記且同向：本論側「惡【大】，是惡【元】【明】」（下帳第十條）、T223 側「惡【大】，是惡【宋】【元】【明】【宮】【聖】」〔T08 0364c25〕——同一異讀而諸本之數不同（本論二本、T223 五本），如實分記。
對照組（八串·兩藏各自見數誠實記·對位唯一）。 「是十二因緣，是獨菩薩法」〔T25 0621a13〕／〔T08 0364b23〕；「坐道場時，應如是觀，當得一切種智」〔T25 0621a14〕／〔T08 0364b24〕；「應以虛空不可盡法生般若波羅蜜」〔T25 0621a26〕／〔T08 0364c07〕；「一切法不可得故，是為應般若波羅蜜行」〔T25 0621b11〕／〔T08 0364c22〕；「各於其坐不能自安」〔T25 0621b18〕／〔T08 0364c29〕；「不能得其便令其憂惱」〔T25 0621b20〕／〔T08 0365a03〕；「老死憂悲苦惱空不可盡故」〔T25 0621a11〕／〔T08 0364b20〕；「但一魔愁毒」〔T25 0621b16〕／〔T08 0364c27〕。以上八串之漢字流，於 T25n1509 全論與 T08n0223 全經各唯一見（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。另誌兩串之見數不為一者，以免以估值充數：「所有布施皆迴向薩婆若」於 T25n1509 全論二見（〔T25 0621c01〕經段、〔T25 0623a26〕論段牒經），於 T08n0223 全經一見〔T08 0365a14〕；「便大愁毒，如箭入心」於 T25n1509 全論一見〔T25 0621b15〕、於 T08n0223 全經二見（〔T08 0305a16〕〔T08 0364c26〕，首見在本品之外）。判為「同品同名異略」（品身逐字幾近同文，品名之全稱／略稱兩系見上）。本論【論】層為論體之結構性擴增，所釋經無此層，非異文。
五、般若義眼
本品之眼，在一「盡」字上翻身——不是把般若說得多長多大，是指出它根本沒有可盡之處，因而也沒有生處。其義可約為五重。
其一，不可盡之所以，在無法可盡。須菩提之問極直：「是般若波羅蜜不可盡？」〔T25 0620c22〕，佛之答更直：「虛空不可盡故，般若波羅蜜不可盡。」〔T25 0620c22〕。虛空何以不可盡？論拆得乾淨：「如虛空，無有法，但有名字」〔T25 0621c26〕——沒有東西，才談不上用完。而這一答立刻逼出更難的一問：既然如虛空無所有，那般若又從哪裡生？論主把這個難自己提出來：「般若波羅蜜若如虛空無所有故不可盡，云何菩薩能生是般若波羅蜜？」〔T25 0621c27〕——全品論段的開展，就是在答這一問。
其二，生之答，答在「無生故無盡」。佛答「色無盡故，般若波羅蜜應生。」〔T25 0622a01〕，論釋其理：「若色有生必有盡，以無生故亦無盡。」〔T25 0622a06〕——會盡的東西一定曾經生，沒生過的就無所謂盡。而色之無生，不是說色不在，是說所見之生滅不實：「二法不可得故，色如幻、如夢，但誑人眼。」〔T25 0622a05〕。於是能生之般若與所觀之色，在實相上合為一事：「色真相即是般若波羅蜜相」〔T25 0622a07〕——所謂「應生」，不是從無處造出一個般若，是色之真相現前時般若自現。
其三，十二因緣之觀，是離二邊的唯一走法。論說得極清楚：「若人但觀畢竟空，多墮斷滅邊；若觀有，多墮常邊。」〔T25 0622a10〕——空與有兩頭都有坑。走法只有一條：「若法從因緣和合生，是法無有定性；若法無定性，即是畢竟空寂滅相。」〔T25 0622a12〕，於是「離二邊故，假名為中道。」〔T25 0622a14〕。這也是為什麼十二因緣在本品被稱作「獨菩薩法」〔T25 0621a14〕——凡夫順它而不問，二乘知其過而急滅之，只有菩薩肯把它窮到底。連無明本身也不例外：「癡實相即是智慧，取著智慧相即是癡。」〔T25 0622a23〕——智與癡不是兩個東西，是同一個東西取不取相的差別。
其四，老之不可得，是這一觀最硬的試金石。論不從高處說，從最實在的地方問起：人人都說老，老到底是什麼？先問定義——「老是心不相應行。」〔T25 0622b15〕，論斷之：這相拿不出來，頭白只是色相，不是老相。再問世俗經驗——「世人名老相：髮白、齒離，面皺、身曲，羸瘦、力薄，諸根闇塞」〔T25 0622b17〕，論一一破之：有年壯而白的，有老年而黑的，有老而諸根明利的，甚至「又服還年藥，雖老而壯。」〔T25 0622b21〕。最後給出結論的方式最見手法：「又如假輪、軸、轅、輻等為車，是假名非實。」〔T25 0622b23〕——車不在零件之外，也不在零件之中；老也一樣。而窮到這裡，論並不停在空上：「菩薩觀諸法實相畢竟空、無所有、無所得，亦不著是事故，於眾生中而生大悲」〔T25 0622c03〕——觀空的下一步不是放手，是大悲。
其五，魔之愁，是這一觀走通的外證。經寫魔：「惡魔愁毒，如箭入心。譬如人新喪父母」〔T25 0621b13〕；論釋魔何以如此：「以是菩薩深入十二因緣畢竟空中，不著有、無、非有非無等六十二諸邪見魔網」〔T25 0623a15〕——魔的本事是張網，而網只能捉住有所著的心。論於是自出一喻：「譬如捕魚人見一魚深入大水，鉤網所不及，則絕望憂愁。」〔T25 0623a18〕——不是魚打贏了漁人，是魚去了網到不了的地方。全品最後收在一個極平實的秤上：布施迴向薩婆若而仍不具足檀波羅蜜者有二種人，一種信多慧少，一種慧多信少，「信力、慧力等故，能迴向薩婆若。」〔T25 0623b03〕——無盡之般若，落到行上就是信與慧的持平。 品題「無盡方便」四字，至此二義合一：無盡是所觀之理，方便是能行之力；經文中「方便」二字唯二見，皆繫於轉還與不轉還〔T25 0621a21〕〔T25 0621a23〕——理若無盡而力不逮，仍要退轉；方便二字正落在這裡。
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。本品古德覆讀兩家：釋所釋經之吉藏疏存完整專章，釋本論之慧影疏亦存完整專章（與品四十四以下數品「X46 零覆蓋」之情形不同，本品與品六十二同為反例）；天台系唯智顗《法華玄義》兩處引所釋經之本品經文，湛然《止觀輔行傳弘決》與《法華玄義釋籤》之「大論八十」諸引逐條核皆非本品；均正書零命中。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〈無盡品〉之逐文疏，起「無盡品第六十七」〔X24n0451 0319a10〕，迄〔X24n0451 0319c12〕，次品「攝五品第六十八」〔X24n0451 0319c13〕起前，覆本品經全篇；另於卷首總目列「無盡品第六十七」〔X24n0451 0195c06〕。其可誌者五。
其一，大科之轉與本品之位——「此下第二明方便道。前是般若道，生起如前。」〔X24n0451 0319a11〕：吉藏以本品為般若道與方便道之分界首品。其科之細目自出：「就文為二：初二十三品正明方便因果大用，第二常啼、法尚兩品結勸修行。」〔X24n0451 0319a18〕，「初段為三：第一從初竟方便品明方便體用秤歎令行，第二有三慧畢竟品明發心起行，第三從四諦已去明方便得果。」〔X24n0451 0319a21〕——本品即其「初段」之首。本論本品內無此科判之明文，此屬吉藏自立之科，如實分記。
其二，二慧之四解與品名之訓——吉藏先列前人解實慧方便慧之四家，其下自釋品名之由：「無盡品者，上品已般若無盡，今須菩提更問明此義。」〔X24n0451 0319b02〕，並引論為證：「論云：般若若有和有集故有滅有盡，無和無集故無滅無盡，故三世佛悞之而成佛也。」〔X24n0451 0319b03〕——「論云」二字所繫者為吉藏約引之語，非本論原文（本論本品同位作「三世諸佛用般若波羅蜜得道，般若故不盡——已不盡、今不盡、當不盡。」〔T25 0621c23〕），繫屬顯白，如實分記。
其三，「獨」字之訓（本目最可誌者）——「十二因緣獨菩薩法者，就名作空觀即墮斷見中，若作有觀即墮常中，今作因緣觀甚深，便妙悟中道不著斷常，為方便慧體也。」〔X24n0451 0319b14〕，其下更以三人對顯：「凡夫直順十二不求是非邪正，二乘但知其過盡無我我所，欲滅之入無餘，並不窮因緣之實，菩薩知其本自不生今亦無滅，故非凡夫行非賢聖行，獨菩薩行故名為獨也。」〔X24n0451 0319b16〕——本論不直訓「獨」字，而以三種觀法辨其所以獨；吉藏則直拈「獨」字為訓，兩家申釋之路不同；其「不著斷常」「為方便慧體」之語，與本論「離二邊故，假名為中道。」〔T25 0622a14〕同指而說法各異，如實分記。
其四，惡無不除之五科——「能除諸邊顛倒下，第二、明方便妙用。」〔X24n0451 0319b22〕，其下分五：除諸邊顛倒、離二乘地、離我見、離無因邪因見、離法見；及至魔事一段，別立為第六：「惡魔便大愁毒如箭入心。此即生下，第二、離惡緣也。」〔X24n0451 0319c06〕。吉藏以「緣觀俱絕」釋魔何以愁——「菩薩爾時緣觀俱絕」〔X24n0451 0319c06〕，本論則以「不著有、無、非有非無等六十二諸邪見魔網」〔T25 0623a16〕釋之，二家立義小異，並錄不判。
其五，具足六度之兩重——「具足檀下，第二、明生道，為二：初、明方便力故令六度名得滿足；第二、明一一度中具足六度。」〔X24n0451 0319c08〕——此為吉藏跨品之總科：第一科在本品，第二科「一一度中具足六度」於次品〈攝五品第六十八〉起句「此下第二」承接，不屬本品之釋。本論本品末段則釋軟根利根二種人之信慧偏至（見第二目），如實分記。
慧影《大智度論疏》（X46n0791）。 為釋本論之唯一古疏，僅殘卷存世；本品有完整專章，起「釋無盡方便品第六十七」〔X46n0791 0912c03〕，其下繫 body 標題「釋第八十卷論」〔X46n0791 0912c03〕，迄次品「釋六度相攝品第六十八」〔X46n0791 0914b21〕起前；另於卷首總目列「釋無盡方便品第六十七」〔X46n0791 0794b24〕。其可誌者五。
其一，自編號 -1 與第三種品名——「第六十六品者，名為不盡品。」〔X46n0791 0912c04〕：慧影自稱本品為「第六十六品」，較底本少一，與石本之 -1 階同向而來源有別（見第四目）；其所用之名「不盡品」為三系中之第三形，且與其自身總目與品題之全稱「釋無盡方便品第六十七」不一致，一人兩用，如實分記。其名之由，慧影自釋：「所以次此名不盡品者，故是乘上生下之義。」〔X46n0791 0913a03〕，「今此品來為接上文生於下意，明方便道中不可盡義，故名不盡品。」〔X46n0791 0913a05〕——並引前品經文為其所承：「上品云：三世諸佛學波若波羅蜜悉皆不盡，已不盡、今不盡、當不盡。」〔X46n0791 0913a04〕。又自陳論主之舉品：「論將欲釋，故舉之云第六十六品釋論也。」〔X46n0791 0913a06〕。
其二，般若道／方便道之分界（與吉藏全同之判）——「上來至此明菩薩波若道，自此品已下訖於經末明菩薩方便道。」〔X46n0791 0912c04〕，其所據亦引論：「故論云：波若能將菩薩入畢竟空，方便能將菩薩出畢竟空。」〔X46n0791 0912c09〕——「論云」所繫者為慧影約引之語，非本論本品之原文（本品無此二句），繫屬顯白。此判與吉藏「此下第二明方便道。前是般若道」〔X24n0451 0319a11〕完全一致——兩家皆以本品為分界首品，而各自表述、無互抄之跡，如實誌錄以供比對。
其三，方便道之分科與科家之史——「就方便道中，論主自科有於二分：從此品去至曇無竭品，通明方便道義；囑累一品，明其付囑。」〔X46n0791 0912c11〕；其下慧影別述前代科家源流，終取苻姚時諸法師之三分：「且依此苻姚時諸法師科有於三分」〔X46n0791 0912c20〕——與吉藏之「初二十三品／常啼法尚兩品」二分科異（吉藏二分、慧影三分），二家科判各立，並錄不判。
其四，虛空二種之分——「如虗空者有二種：一者世間虗空，二者法性虗空。」〔X46n0791 0913a15〕，「今只以此虗空不可盡故，能生無盡波若，波若從無盡之法生故無盡。」〔X46n0791 0913a17〕——本論但以「如虛空，無有法，但有名字」〔T25 0621c26〕總說，未分二種，此分為慧影所獨出，如實誌錄。
其五，捕魚喻之逐物配與邪因緣之出處——釋本論末段魔愁之喻：「捕魚人喻魔也，一魚者喻菩薩也。深入大水者，喻見菩薩深入諸法實相水也。」〔X46n0791 0914b17〕——本論出喻而未配其目，慧影逐物配之，與其疏體相應。又釋本論「邪因緣者，微塵、世性等。」〔T25 0623a04〕一語之所自：「微塵已下，僧佉經中明此義云：微塵世性等是常故，法從此生也。」〔X46n0791 0914b13〕——指出本論所破之邪因緣說出於僧佉一系，本論但舉其目未標其宗，此為慧影所補，如實誌錄。慧影全章多以「當說」「當一一說」為節收語，屬其疏體，非缺釋。
智顗《法華玄義》（T33n1716）·兩處引所釋經。 其一，釋境之麁妙時引：「十二緣，獨菩薩法。」〔T33n1716 0700b11〕——所引為所釋經本品之句〔T08 0364b23〕，屬約引（經原文作「是十二因緣是獨菩薩法」）。其二，同段下文：「《大品》說十二因緣，是為坐道場。」〔T33n1716 0700b15〕——與所釋經本品「坐道場時應如是觀」〔T08 0364b24〕相值，亦屬約引。兩引皆標《大品》而不標《大論》，所引為經文非論文，繫屬顯白；「」內為智顗原文，非本論亦非所釋經之原文。另於 T46n1911《摩訶止觀》全檔回搜「無盡方便」「不盡品」「新喪父母」「如箭入心」「城譬喻經」「捕魚人」六串，皆零命中，如實誌錄負結果。
湛然《止觀輔行傳弘決》（T46n1912）·《法華玄義釋籤》（T33n1717）·「大論八十」諸引逐條排除。 以漢字流獨立重掃：「大論八十」於 T46n1912 五見（〔T46n1912 0155b05〕〔T46n1912 0200b11〕〔T46n1912 0267b09〕〔T46n1912 0406b11〕〔T46n1912 0409c03〕）、於 T33n1717 四見（〔T33n1717 0842c16〕〔T33n1717 0867c26〕〔T33n1717 0882b02〕〔T33n1717 0912a11〕）——逐條取其引文之場景結構核對，無一繫本品：或論「始行菩薩云何修行」之三種差別、或論「微細魔事」、或引「佛告阿難．菩薩摩訶薩共住相視」（即品六十二〈同學品〉，已於該品誌錄）、或引「阿難問佛．魔為都嬈一切菩薩」（同品六十二）、或引「須菩提白佛．菩薩云何行般若波羅蜜」而下接「色是寂滅故」一段——逐串回搜本論：「始行菩薩云何修行」「有微細魔事」「色是寂滅故」於 T25n1509 全論皆零命中，其餘二引之場景已繫品六十二。故本品在 T46 掃描範圍內確認零直引，如實記，不強解（此非「grep=0」之素樸負命題，乃逐條場景核後之誠實排除）。
均正《大乘四論玄義》（X46n0784）·零命中（如實誌）。 於全檔獨立回搜「無盡方便」「無盡品」「不盡品」「新喪父母」「如箭入心」「城譬喻經」六串，皆零命中——均正於本品無具名引，如實誌錄負結果。
七、互讀與承衍
本品之義脈，前後相承者有四，皆此目所誌，不代定讀。
其一，『不可盡品』之自引前指（論主自證·硬鏈本論自身）。 論主於卷五〈序品〉釋十二因緣觀之「巧」時，逕以「《般若波羅蜜．不可盡品》中，佛告須菩提」〔T25 0100c06〕前指本品，並牒其文「癡如虛空不可盡，行如虛空不可盡，乃至眾苦和合集如虛空不可盡。」〔T25 0100c06〕與「作是觀十二因緣起者，則為坐道場，得薩婆若。」〔T25 0100c09〕。全論之首卷已知有此一品、且已知其名、已知其義——卷五所預告之「觀十二因緣而得薩婆若」，至卷八十本品方廣釋之。「不可盡品」四字於 T25n1509 全論 body 唯此一見（以排除 note 層之漢字流於全論重掃所得）；本品品題注內之明本夾註「經作不可盡品」其錨在〔T25 0620c15〕，屬校記層，不入 body 之帳——二事分屬兩層，如實分記。論主自用之品名與底本品題不同，正是第四目品名三系之最早一端，誌其承。
其二，『魔愁·如箭入心』之品次承衍（同喻兩品·所繫之因異）。 「如箭入心」之喻於本論二處成段：品六十二〈同學品〉「魔大愁毒，如箭入心。」〔T25 0603a15〕與本品「惡魔愁毒，如箭入心。」〔T25 0621b13〕。彼品繫於「不離般若波羅蜜」，本品繫於「行無所得般若波羅蜜」；彼品所出之魔事為九，落在同道之間的口舌上，本品則但出魔何以無可奈何之理，並自出捕魚人一喻。前品說魔之事，本品說魔之窮，品次相生，誌其承。吉藏於本品以「緣觀俱絕」〔X24n0451 0319c06〕釋之，可誌關聯。
其三，『般若道／方便道』之分界（兩家同判·誌錄不判）。 吉藏「此下第二明方便道。前是般若道」〔X24n0451 0319a11〕與慧影「上來至此明菩薩波若道，自此品已下訖於經末明菩薩方便道。」〔X46n0791 0912c04〕，兩家各自表述而所判之界同落本品。本論本品內無此分界之明文（於本品範圍逐字查「方便道」「般若道」皆零命中），故此判屬二疏之科，非論主自陳；唯經文「方便力」二見〔T25 0621a21〕〔T25 0621a23〕確為品題「方便」二字在正文中之唯一落點（見第二目），二疏之判與此相值。誌其關聯，不代定讀。
其四，寶庫掛鏈（穩定徵引·軟引）。 本品「虛空不可盡故，般若波羅蜜不可盡」之總答、「十二因緣是獨菩薩法」而「離二邊故假名為中道」之觀法、三種十二因緣之階次、破老相之次第（心不相應行·世俗老相·果報五眾三破）、與「信力、慧力等故能迴向薩婆若」之收尾，為後世論中道觀、論緣起與空之不二、論信慧相資之所本，落穩定徵引〔T25n1509 無盡方便品·卷八十〕；諸帙引本論處尚未定稿，故軟引，俟其逐字核存。此屬般若義下貫觀門之承衍，誌錄不判。
八、校本與版本說明
本品底本為《大智度論》卷八十〔T25 0620c15–0623b07〕（品身正文自卷首題〔T25 0620c15〕起，終於「乃至般若波羅蜜亦如是」句迄〔T25 0623b06〕；次品品題〔T25 0623b07〕前；本品範圍內無卷末題）；所釋經校本為《摩訶般若波羅蜜經》〈無盡品〉〔T08 0364a28–0365a26〕；古德疏校本為吉藏《大品經義疏》（X24n0451，覆所釋經〔X24n0451 0319a10–0319c12〕）與慧影《大智度論疏》（X46n0791，覆本論〔X46n0791 0912c03–0914b20〕）；均正《大乘四論玄義》（X46n0784）本品零命中、智顗《摩訶止觀》零命中、智顗《法華玄義》兩處引所釋經、湛然二書之「大論八十」諸引逐條排除（見第六目）。異讀校記依大正校勘，涉大正底本與宋、元、明、宮、石（石山寺本）諸本及 CBETA 校之異——本品三十七條之帳內未見聖本與聖乙本入帳（聖本於本品之校勘全缺，唯所釋經 T223 側有聖本異文，見第四目），如實分記。
品題注入帳（與品六十二異）。 本品品題之注 n="0620016"（type=mod）之錨為 beg0620016／end0620016 之起訖對（非品六十二之 <anchor type="circle"/> 點錨型），故入工作底本三十七條之帳，列為下帳第一條，不另設專列——此與品六十二「品題注不入四十條之帳」之處置相異，其因在兩品底本錨型不同，如實分記。其底本全文原樣即下帳第一條，品名三系、石本 -1 階、明本夾註三事之底據皆在此一條（析論見第四目）。
star 五枚·品內四枚·跨品一枚（本品為目標端·專列）。 本品範圍內 star anchor 四枚，另有一枚在次品而以本品之注為目標，合為五枚。逐枚解其校勘條之對應目標並定位所屬品：
beg_86b〔T25 0622a08〕「可」字——corresp→note(0622001)，即本品〔T25 0622a07〕之注（下帳第十七條），品內自共用；二見相隔僅一句（「色不可盡，般若波羅蜜亦不可盡。」），注只定義一次，第二見以 star 掛回。beg_86c〔T25 0622a18〕「觸」字——corresp→note(0622002)，即本品〔T25 0622a18〕之注（下帳第十九條），品內自共用。beg_86d〔T25 0622a18〕「觸」字——corresp→note(0622002)，與前枚同 loc 同目標：本句「因眼緣色生觸念，觸念從癡生」〔T25 0622a17〕內「觸」字三見，一為注之定義本體、另二為 star，此即下帳第十九至二十一條三列同 loc 同 lemma 之機械成因。beg_86e〔T25 0622b26〕「故」字——corresp→note(0622010)，即本品〔T25 0622b26〕之注（下帳第三十條），品內自共用：句「若不住則無故，無故則無老」〔T25 0622b26〕內「故」字二見，一為定義、一為 star，此即下帳第三十與第三十二條同 loc 之機械成因。beg_86f〔T25 0623b08〕，屬次品〈六度相攝品第六十八〉起首之【經】標記——corresp→note(0620018)，即本品〔T25 0620c20〕【經】標記之注（下帳第三條）。核得該 corresp id 於全檔僅二處引用（本品定義端beg0620018與次品沿用端beg_86f），即此 star 為「【經】體例標記於宋宮二本俱缺、石本更不分卷」之通則性說明，透過 star 機制掛回單一定義處，非本品特有之義理歧異；其方向與品六十二之例相逆——彼品為 star 之出現端、本品為目標端。
五枚之 corresp 目標既定，star 之分佈為品內四枚、跨品一枚（出現端在次品）。star 目標之注文於底本帶「＊」記，本帳依底本原樣保留（下帳第三、十一、十七、十八、十九、二十、二十一、三十、三十二條）。
CBETA 校訂層一條（非傳統諸本並陳型·專列）。 〔T25 0622b06〕「因【CB】，困【大】」（下帳第二十四條）——底本之 note 型為 type="add"，其錨 id 作 beg0622b0601（與其餘三十六條之 beg0622NNN 編號式不同，屬 CBETA 自設之校訂錨），無宋元明宮石等傳統 witness 標記；即 CBETA 校訂底本【大】之「困」為「因」（「以少顛倒樂因緣故而取」），屬 CBETA 現代校勘層，本版讀者面從 CBETA 現行文本讀法。本條底本之首項作「因【CB】」而非「【大】」，與其餘各條之首項恆為底本讀法者體例相逆，如實分記。〔誌：本條 body 之 lemma 實作「因」（CBETA 已採校訂讀法入正文），非底本 note 次項所載之底本讀法「困」。〕
CBETA 本文從宮石讀法一條（body 與底本讀法相違·專列）。 〔T25 0621c13〕「知【大】，如【宮】【石】」（下帳第十二條）——核：本條之 lemma 在 body 實作「如」（「中聞『囑累』，如似有」），即 CBETA 現行文本於此處採宮、石二本之讀法入正文，與其自身校記所標之底本【大】讀法「知」相違。逐條比對三十七條之 lemma 與其注首項，唯此一條有此現象（品題注與署名行注之首項作「（大智…十）十七字」型省略式，非字面讀法，不屬此類）。如實誌錄，本版讀者面從 CBETA 現行文本讀法，兩讀並錄不判。
校記附註（傍註）三處·原樣保留（專列）。 本品校記之內含底本夾註三處，底本之 place="inline" 子語或括注，本帳原樣保留不刪：其一其二皆在品題注〔T25 0620c15〕（下帳第一條）——宋、元二本之「訖第六十八品上」（自陳本卷所訖之品），與明本之「經作不可盡品」（自陳所牒之經另有品名，其所指已於第四目兩處定位）；其三，〔T25 0623b06〕「是【大】，（是釋第六十六品竟，大智度論經卷第八十）【石】」（下帳第三十七條）——括注內即石本之品末收束記，並為 -1 階之第二端證與石本卷次之唯一端證（見第四目）。下帳第一條之兩處內嵌夾註依底本字面順序原樣錄於其位，不另加分隔符；底本之字數計語（「二十四字」「二十二字」「二十三字」）亦原樣保留，該數即含夾註之字。
校勘總帳（三十七條全量對帳·底本原樣）。 下依底本出現序全量列之，內含 star 四條（品內），跨品之第五枚在次品範圍不入本帳。異本讀法並列保存，正文仍從 CBETA 現行文本讀法：
app 條（三十七·底本出現序·star-corresp 隨條標明）
- 〔T25 0620c15〕（大智…十）十七字【大】｜（大智度論釋卷第八十釋無盡品第六十七訖第六十八品上）二十四字【宋】｜大智度論釋卷第八十釋無盡品第六十七品【宮】｜（大智度論卷第八十釋無盡品第六十七經作不可盡品）二十二字【明】｜（大智度論卷第八十釋無盡品第六十七訖第六十八品上）二十三字【元】｜摩訶般若波羅蜜品第六十六無盡品【石】（品題注·入帳·內嵌
place="inline"夾註二處「訖第六十八品上」「經作不可盡品」原樣在位·品名三系與石本 -1 階之底據·見第四目） - 〔T25 0620c18〕（聖者…譯）十七字【大】｜〔－〕【石】（署名行·石本整行不錄）
- 〔T25 0620c20〕【經】【大】＊｜〔－〕【宋】【宮】＊｜不分卷【石】（結構標記存否注·star 定義端·corresp 之出現端在次品〈六度相攝品〉【經】標記〔T25 0623b08〕·跨品共用·見上專列）
- 〔T25 0621a13〕是【大】｜〔－〕【宋】【元】【明】【宮】（「是十二因緣」之「是」·與所釋經同位之增「如」互逆·見第四目）
- 〔T25 0621a14〕是獨【大】｜獨是【宋】【宮】
- 〔T25 0621a14〕倒【大】｜倒獨不共法【石】（石本於「能除諸邊、顛倒」下增「獨不共法」四字·義理負載之增文）
- 〔T25 0621a19〕皆【大】｜〔－〕【宋】【宮】
- 〔T25 0621a29〕生【大】｜生乃至【元】【明】（元明作「眾生乃至知者」·正是所釋經底本之讀·見第四目）
- 〔T25 0621b11〕法【大】｜法以【石】
- 〔T25 0621b14〕惡【大】｜是惡【元】【明】（與所釋經同位同向之異讀·彼作五本·見第四目）
- 〔T25 0621c12〕【論】【大】＊｜〔－〕【宋】【宮】＊（結構標記存否注·底本帶＊記·核全檔無他處以此注為 corresp 目標）
- 〔T25 0621c13〕知【大】｜如【宮】【石】（body 之 lemma 實作「如」·CBETA 現行文本從宮石讀法·與注所標底本讀法相違·見上專列）
- 〔T25 0621c17〕分【大】｜分別【石】
- 〔T25 0621c24〕盡【大】｜盡壞【石】
- 〔T25 0621c25〕我今【大】｜今我【石】
- 〔T25 0621c27〕若【大】｜〔－〕【宋】【元】【明】【宮】
- 〔T25 0622a07〕可【大】＊｜〔－〕【石】＊（star 定義處·note(0622001)·所共用者見下一條）
- 〔T25 0622a08〕可【大】＊｜〔－〕【石】＊（star·corresp→note(0622001)＝本品〔T25 0622a07〕注·品內共用）
- 〔T25 0622a18〕觸【大】＊｜濁【宋】【元】【明】【宮】【石】＊（star 定義處·note(0622002)·所共用者見下二條）
- 〔T25 0622a18〕觸【大】＊｜濁【宋】【元】【明】【宮】【石】＊（star·corresp→note(0622002)·品內共用）
- 〔T25 0622a18〕觸【大】＊｜濁【宋】【元】【明】【宮】【石】＊（star·corresp→note(0622002)·品內共用·同 loc 三列之成因見上 star 專列）
- 〔T25 0622b01〕老【大】｜老病【元】【明】【石】
- 〔T25 0622b04〕煩惱【大】｜緣生【石】
- 〔T25 0622b06〕因【CB】｜困【大】（CBETA 校訂層·底本 note 型 type="add"·錨 id 作
beg0622b0601·無傳統 witness·首項為 CB 讀法·見上專列） - 〔T25 0622b10〕入【大】｜又【元】【明】
- 〔T25 0622b13〕求【大】｜於【元】【明】
- 〔T25 0622b20〕瘦皺【大】｜瘦面皺身【石】（note 層不帶標點·body 之 lemma 作「瘦、皺」·體例差非異文）
- 〔T25 0622b21〕又【大】｜又復【石】
- 〔T25 0622b23〕輻【大】｜𨍮【元】【明】【石】（異體字依 CBETA 組字式原樣錄·不取正規化字形）
- 〔T25 0622b26〕故【大】＊｜相【元】【明】＊【石】（star 定義處·note(0622010)·＊記位置照底本誌·所共用者見下第二條）
- 〔T25 0622b26〕無【大】｜無相【石】
- 〔T25 0622b26〕故【大】＊｜相【元】【明】＊【石】（star·corresp→note(0622010)＝本品〔T25 0622b26〕注·品內共用·同 loc 兩列之成因見上 star 專列）
- 〔T25 0622c14〕著【大】｜〔－〕【宋】【宮】
- 〔T25 0622c27〕若【大】｜若有【石】
- 〔T25 0623a13〕是無【大】｜無是【宋】【元】【明】【宮】
- 〔T25 0623b03〕以【大】｜以智【石】
- 〔T25 0623b06〕是【大】｜（是釋第六十六品竟，大智度論經卷第八十）【石】（校記附註〔傍註〕原樣保留·石本品末收束記·-1 階第二端證·石本卷次唯一端證·見第四目）
以上三十七條與工作底本錨點校記之數機械相合（工作底本·校勘條三十七·另以錨點與星記錨逐一枚舉得同數三十七），star 之目標已隨條標明。品題注入帳、star 五枚、CBETA 校訂層一條、CBETA 本文從宮石讀法一條、校記附註三處已於上文專列。
所釋經 witness 對讀（已展開六處·餘未展開·誌闕待補）。 所釋經 T223 側本品對讀範圍〔T08 0364a28–0365a26〕內，逐條掃得編號注十二條與 star 錨十枚（皆掛回「那」「羅」二字之注，其定義錨在前品範圍〔T08 0364a11〕），合為對讀之全帳。其與本論互印之六處異文（檀那／禪那·是十二因緣／如是·是獨／獨是·應以虛空不可盡法觀·眾生乃至知者·惡魔／是惡魔）與品題之三造校記，已逐條誌於第四目。餘條之逐條並錄未展開，據實誌其未展開，不以估值充數。
I. Structural Placement
Within the sequence in which the Mahāprajñāpāramitā-upadeśa comments on the Larger Sūtra, this chapter belongs to the section of the Commentary on the Remaining Chapters; it is the first chapter at the opening of Fascicle 80, a single unit. The fascicle-end title of Fascicle 79, 「大智度論卷第七十九」 tr. "Mahāprajñāpāramitā-upadeśa, Fascicle Seventy-nine"〔T25 0620c12〕 (the closing mark of Fascicle 79), adjoins the opening mark of Fascicle 80〔T25 0620c15〕, and the title of this chapter is precisely the fascicle-head title of Fascicle 80: 「大智度論釋無盡方便品第六十七」 tr. "Mahāprajñāpāramitā-upadeśa, Commentary on the Chapter on Inexhaustible Skilful Means, the Sixty-seventh"〔T25 0620c15〕, followed by the interlinear note 「卷八十」 tr. "Fascicle Eighty"〔T25 0620c16〕 (tied within the fascicle-head title). At the head of the chapter there is a fascicle title, an author's signature, and a translator's signature—「聖者龍樹造」 tr. "Composed by the noble Nāgārjuna"〔T25 0620c18〕, 「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 0620c19〕—which is exactly the opposite of the 「品首無卷題、無造署譯署」 tr. "no fascicle title at the head of the chapter, no author's or translator's signature" of Chapter 62, "Training Alike", and differs also from the fascicle-crossing type of Chapter 48, "The Mother of the Buddhas".
The body of the chapter ends with the one sentence 「乃至般若波羅蜜亦如是。」 tr. "And so on up to prajñāpāramitā: it is likewise."〔T25 0623b05〕, running on to〔T25 0623b06〕, and the title of the next chapter, 「大智度論釋六度相攝品第六十八」 tr. "Mahāprajñāpāramitā-upadeśa, Commentary on the Chapter on the Six Perfections Containing One Another, the Sixty-eighth"〔T25 0623b07〕, follows immediately after it; within the range of this chapter there is no fascicle-end title—the closing mark of Fascicle 80 is at 「大智度論卷第八十」 tr. "Mahāprajñāpāramitā-upadeśa, Fascicle Eighty"〔T25 0625b22〕, and between the two there is still room for the first half of the next chapter, "The Six Perfections Contain One Another" (the next chapter ends before the title of the chapter after it, "The Great Skilful Means", the Sixty-ninth〔T25 0632b19〕, so that the next chapter itself spans the two fascicles 80 and 81). Hence this chapter is of the type placed at the head of a fascicle · continuing into the next chapter before the fascicle has ended.
The whole chapter has three thousand six hundred and eighteen pure Chinese characters (a separate, independent recount in the stream of Chinese characters gives the same number, three thousand six hundred and eighteen), a light chapter among the several chapters nearby. The structure within the chapter is one 【經】 and one 【論】, a single unit: 【經】〔T25 0620c20〕 and 【論】〔T25 0621c12〕. Both structural markers have collation notes: the Song and Palace editions both lack these two markers; the note on the 【經】 marker records in addition the Ishiyama text's 「不分卷」 tr. "not divided into fascicles" (see Section VIII), and this note is taken over across chapters, by the star mechanism, by the 【經】 marker of the next chapter, "The Six Perfections Contain One Another"〔T25 0623b08〕—this chapter is the target end of the star, and the next chapter is the end where it appears, the direction being the reverse of the four stars within the chapter (see the separate listing of stars in Section VIII).
The number of questions and answers, and the speaker structure: Sūtra ① opens with Subhūti having this thought〔T25 0620c20〕; having had this thought, he speaks to the Buddha and asks whether prajñā is inexhaustible〔T25 0620c22〕, and the Buddha answers 「虛空不可盡故」 tr. "because space is inexhaustible"〔T25 0620c22〕; below that Subhūti asks further, 「世尊！云何應生般若波羅蜜？」 tr. "World-Honored One! How should one give rise to prajñāpāramitā?"〔T25 0620c23〕—here there is no restarting marker 「白佛言」 tr. "said to the Buddha"; the question is carried on only by the vocative 「世尊！」 tr. "World-Honored One!", which the grammar makes distinguishable, and it is recorded separately, as it is. From〔T25 0620c24〕 the Buddha teaches continuously up to〔T25 0621b14〕; within the sūtra segment of this chapter, 「復次，須菩提！」 tr. "Again, Subhūti!" is seen once〔T25 0621a01〕, and 「如是，須菩提！」 tr. "Thus, Subhūti!" is seen eight times (〔T25 0621a12〕〔T25 0621a27〕〔T25 0621b02〕〔T25 0621b06〕〔T25 0621b10〕〔T25 0621b13〕〔T25 0621c01〕〔T25 0621c10〕), all of them connecting words in the Buddha's continuous teaching, with no marker of a change of speaker seen—the ordinary style of this sūtra. Below that, the two changes of speaker both have explicit wording: 〔T25 0621b15〕「須菩提白佛言」 tr. "Subhūti said to the Buddha" / 〔T25 0621b17〕「佛告須菩提」 tr. "the Buddha told Subhūti", and 〔T25 0621b26〕「世尊！菩薩摩訶薩行般若波羅蜜時，云何具足」 tr. "World-Honored One! When the bodhisattva-mahāsattva practises prajñāpāramitā, how does he fulfil" / 〔T25 0621b29〕「佛告須菩提」 tr. "the Buddha told Subhūti"—「須菩提白佛言」 tr. "Subhūti said to the Buddha" is seen twice and 「佛告須菩提」 tr. "the Buddha told Subhūti" twice, as located one by one in the stream of Chinese characters.
Treatise ① opens the treatise with 「釋曰：」 tr. "The explanation says:"〔T25 0621c12〕 (a marker that opens the treatise, not counted in the number of question-and-answer pairs); the formal questions and answers are one pair: 〔T25 0622a26〕 question / 〔T25 0622a27〕 answer—counting them character by character, 「問曰：」 tr. "Question:" occurs once and 「答曰：」 tr. "Answer:" once, agreeing with the loci of the one pair located in the stream of Chinese characters. 「有人言」 tr. "someone says" is seen once〔T25 0622b24〕 (「復次，有人言說：『果報五眾故相名為老。』」 tr. "Again, someone says: ‘The mark of the oldness of the five aggregates of retribution is named old age.’", which the treatise-author at once refutes: 「是亦不然」 tr. "this too is not so"). 「復次」 tr. "again" is seen nine times in the whole chapter〔T25 0621a01〕〔T25 0622a09〕〔T25 0622a17〕〔T25 0622b17〕〔T25 0622b24〕〔T25 0622b29〕〔T25 0622c29〕〔T25 0623a07〕〔T25 0623a19〕—its first occurrence is in the sūtra section (「復次，須菩提！」 tr. "Again, Subhūti!"), and the remaining eight are in the treatise section, as found by rescanning the stream of Chinese characters. Below〔T25 0623a24〕 at the end of the treatise section there are in addition the three passages 「須菩提問……佛答……佛今說」 tr. "Subhūti asks … the Buddha answers … the Buddha now says", a restatement and further exposition in which the treatise-author re-cites the sūtra text in narrative style, not a separately established question-and-answer pair; they are recorded separately, as they are, and not counted among the question-and-answer pairs.
II. Terms Examined
Inexhaustible · cannot be exhausted · not exhausted. The general name of this chapter and its three verbal forms. The chapter title reads 「無盡方便」 tr. "Inexhaustible Skilful Means", while the sūtra text uses 「不可盡」 tr. "cannot be exhausted" throughout—「不可盡」 tr. "cannot be exhausted" is seen thirty-one times within the range of this chapter, beginning from 「虛空不可盡故，般若波羅蜜不可盡。」 tr. "Because space is inexhaustible, prajñāpāramitā is inexhaustible."〔T25 0620c22〕, passing through form, feeling, perception, constructions, and consciousness, the six perfections, and the omniscience of all kinds, down to the members of the twelve links of causes and conditions, 「老死憂悲苦惱空不可盡故，菩薩般若波羅蜜應生。」 tr. "Because the emptiness of old age and death, sorrow, grief, suffering, and vexation is inexhaustible, the bodhisattva's prajñāpāramitā should arise."〔T25 0621a11〕. The treatise section turns instead to the two-character 「不盡」 tr. "not exhausted"—「不盡」 tr. "not exhausted" is seen eight times in this chapter, concentrated in the one passage from〔T25 0621c24〕 on: the treatise-author first re-cites 「三世諸佛用般若波羅蜜得道，般若故不盡——已不盡、今不盡、當不盡。」 tr. "The buddhas of the three times attain the path by means of prajñāpāramitā; because of prajñā it is not exhausted—it has not been exhausted, it is not now exhausted, it will not be exhausted."〔T25 0621c23〕, and then gathers it with 「是故我今但問『不盡』義。」 tr. "For this reason, I now ask only about the meaning of ‘not exhausted’."〔T25 0621c25〕, and the Buddha's answer too reads 「如虛空不盡故，般若亦不盡。」 tr. "As space is not exhausted, so prajñā too is not exhausted."〔T25 0621c25〕. The 「不可盡」 tr. "cannot be exhausted" of the sūtra text and the 「不盡」 tr. "not exhausted" of the treatise text point to the same thing, while the verbal forms are split three ways, the 「無盡」 tr. "inexhaustible" of the chapter title being the third form (within the range of this chapter 「無盡」 tr. "inexhaustible" is seen four times, twice in the chapter title and the structural table-of-contents line, and twice in the treatise section, at〔T25 0622a01〕 in 「色無盡故」 tr. "because form is inexhaustible" and at〔T25 0622a06〕 in 「以無生故亦無盡」 tr. "because it is without arising it is also without exhaustion"). The difference among the three lines of chapter names (Inexhaustible Skilful Means / The Inexhaustible / Not Exhausted) rests on precisely this threefold split of verbal form; see Section IV.
Skilful means. Two characters found only in the chapter title, and absent from the main text of the sūtra. 「方便」 tr. "skilful means" is seen four times within the range of this chapter: twice in the chapter title and the structural table-of-contents line, and only twice in the main text, both times as 「方便力」 tr. "the power of skilful means"—「若求菩薩道而轉還者，皆不得是方便力故」 tr. "those who seek the bodhisattva path and turn back all do so because they do not obtain this power of skilful means"〔T25 0621a21〕, 「若菩薩摩訶薩於阿耨多羅三藐三菩提不轉還者，皆得是方便力故。」 tr. "Those bodhisattva-mahāsattvas who do not turn back from anuttarā samyaksaṃbodhi are all so because they obtain this power of skilful means."〔T25 0621a23〕. The judgement between turning back and not turning back rests wholly on the presence or absence of the power of skilful means, and this is the only place where the two characters 「方便」 tr. "skilful means" of the chapter title land in the main text. The two ancient masters both take this chapter as the first chapter at the boundary between the path of prajñā and the path of skilful means (see Section VI), and their account matches these two occurrences.
A dharma of the bodhisattvas alone. The doctrinal-classification phrase of this chapter. The sūtra text: 「是十二因緣，是獨菩薩法，能除諸邊、顛倒。」 tr. "These twelve links of causes and conditions are a dharma of the bodhisattvas alone, able to remove the extremes and the inversions."〔T25 0621a13〕—the four characters 「獨菩薩法」 tr. "a dharma of the bodhisattvas alone" are seen three times in the whole of T25n1509 (〔T25 0430a23〕〔T25 0466b11〕〔T25 0621a14〕), once in this chapter; in the whole of the sūtra explained, T08n0223, they are seen once, precisely at the same position as this chapter〔T08 0364b23〕, as found by rescanning string by string in the two canons. The correspondence of this phrase is unique; it is the firmest anchor between this chapter and the sūtra explained. As for why it is ‘alone’, this treatise explains it by the three kinds of contemplation of the ordinary person, the two vehicles, and the bodhisattva (see Section II), while Jizang glosses the character 「獨」 tr. "alone" directly (see Section VI).
The dharma of the inexhaustibility of space. That on which the contemplation of the twelve links of causes and conditions relies. By this the sūtra establishes the dharma that contemplates: 「若有菩薩摩訶薩以虛空不可盡法，行般若波羅蜜，觀十二因緣，不墮聲聞、辟支佛地」 tr. "If there is a bodhisattva-mahāsattva who, by the dharma of the inexhaustibility of space, practises prajñāpāramitā and contemplates the twelve links of causes and conditions, he does not fall to the ground of the śrāvaka and pratyekabuddha"〔T25 0621a16〕, and it repeats this from the two sides of what contemplates and what is contemplated: 「菩薩摩訶薩應以虛空不可盡法觀般若波羅蜜」 tr. "the bodhisattva-mahāsattva should contemplate prajñāpāramitā by the dharma of the inexhaustibility of space"〔T25 0621a25〕, 「應以虛空不可盡法生般若波羅蜜。」 tr. "and should give rise to prajñāpāramitā by the dharma of the inexhaustibility of space."〔T25 0621a26〕—contemplating and giving rise, the two matters, rely alike on the one dharma. 「虛空」 tr. "space" is seen seventeen times within the range of this chapter, running through both the sūtra and treatise sections; it is the general simile of the whole chapter (for the analysis of the simile see Section III).
The middle way. The treatise-author's only explicit wording on it in this chapter. The treatise explains why the two extremes are left: 「若法從因緣和合生，是法無有定性；若法無定性，即是畢竟空寂滅相。離二邊故，假名為中道。」 tr. "If a dharma arises from the coming together of causes and conditions, this dharma has no fixed nature; if a dharma has no fixed nature, this is precisely the mark of ultimate emptiness and quiescence. Because it leaves the two extremes, it is provisionally named the middle way."〔T25 0622a12〕, and directly below it gathers this with 「十二因緣如虛空，無法故不盡。」 tr. "The twelve links of causes and conditions are like space: because there is no dharma, they are not exhausted."〔T25 0622a15〕—the two characters 「中道」 tr. "the middle way" are seen only once within the range of this chapter〔T25 0622a14〕, as found by rescanning the stream of Chinese characters. The two extremes that it leaves the treatise itself sets out: 「若人但觀畢竟空，多墮斷滅邊；若觀有，多墮常邊。」 tr. "If a person contemplates only ultimate emptiness, he mostly falls into the extreme of annihilation; if he contemplates existence, he mostly falls into the extreme of permanence."〔T25 0622a10〕.
The three kinds of the twelve links of causes and conditions. The backbone of the treatise section of this chapter. The treatise sets up a question and then divides them: 「說十二因緣有三種」 tr. "the twelve links of causes and conditions are spoken of as of three kinds"〔T25 0622a27〕—the first, 「凡夫肉眼所見，顛倒、著我心，起諸煩惱、業，往來生死中。」 tr. "what the ordinary person sees with the fleshly eye: inverted, with a mind clinging to self, giving rise to afflictions and deeds, going and coming within birth and death."〔T25 0622a28〕; the second, 「賢聖以法眼分別諸法」 tr. "the worthies and sages distinguish dharmas with the Dharma-eye"〔T25 0622a29〕, whose course stops at 「是但滅苦故入於涅槃，不究盡求諸苦相。」 tr. "this is only extinguishing suffering and therefore entering nirvāṇa; it does not seek the marks of suffering through to the end."〔T25 0622b10〕; the third, 「諸菩薩摩訶薩，大智人利根故，但求究盡十二因緣根本相」 tr. "the bodhisattva-mahāsattvas, being persons of great wisdom with keen faculties, only seek to go through to the end of the root-mark of the twelve links of causes and conditions"〔T25 0622b11〕. Afterwards the treatise itself sets out to whom they belong: 「初十二因緣，但是凡夫人故，於是中不求是非」 tr. "the first twelve links of causes and conditions, being only of ordinary persons, do not seek right and wrong in them"〔T25 0622c06〕, 「第二十二因緣，二乘人及未得無生忍法菩薩所觀」 tr. "the second twelve links of causes and conditions are what is contemplated by persons of the two vehicles and by bodhisattvas who have not yet obtained the dharma of the acceptance of non-arising"〔T25 0622c08〕, 「第三十二因緣，從得無生忍法乃至坐道場菩薩所觀。」 tr. "The third twelve links of causes and conditions are what is contemplated by bodhisattvas from the obtaining of the dharma of the acceptance of non-arising up to sitting at the seat of awakening."〔T25 0622c09〕—the difference of the three contemplations lies not in the dharma contemplated but in the person who contemplates and in whether or not what he seeks goes through to the end.
The mark of old age · a construction not associated with mind. The hinge of the gloss by which the treatise breaks the dharma of old age. The treatise first cites the account of those who distinguish the marks of dharmas: 「老是心不相應行。」 tr. "Old age is a construction not associated with mind."〔T25 0622b15〕, and at once cuts it off: 「是相不可得。頭白等是色相，非老相。」 tr. "This mark is unfindable. White hair and the like are marks of form, not the mark of old age."〔T25 0622b15〕—「老相」 tr. "the mark of old age" is seen four times within the range of this chapter (twice at〔T25 0622b16〕, and at〔T25 0622b17〕〔T25 0622b18〕), all in this one passage. Its breaking of the dharma is threefold in all: first it breaks the worldly marks (see Section III, the simile of the 「還年藥」 tr. "medicine that restores the years"); second it breaks the 「果報五眾故相名為老。」 tr. "The mark of the oldness of the five aggregates of retribution is named old age."〔T25 0622b24〕 of the one who says it; third it gathers all with ultimate emptiness: 「諸法畢竟空中生相不可得，何況有老！」 tr. "Within the ultimate emptiness of all dharmas the mark of arising is unfindable—how much less is there old age!"〔T25 0622b29〕.
The prajñā with nothing to be attained · the prajñā without any obstruction. The two names of the fruit-position in this chapter. The sūtra sets up the name with 「若菩薩行無所得般若波羅蜜時」 tr. "when the bodhisattva practises the prajñāpāramitā with nothing to be attained"〔T25 0621b12〕, and in its last passage the treatise itself sets out its steps: 「是名菩薩無所得般若波羅蜜。」 tr. "This is called the bodhisattva's prajñāpāramitā with nothing to be attained."〔T25 0623a12〕, 「得是無所得般若，於一切法中便得無所障礙般若。」 tr. "Obtaining this prajñā with nothing to be attained, he then obtains, in all dharmas, the prajñā without any obstruction."〔T25 0623a13〕—nothing to be attained is the cause, being without any obstruction is the fruit; the four characters 「無所障礙」 tr. "without any obstruction" are seen only once within the range of this chapter〔T25 0623a14〕. 「無所得」 tr. "nothing to be attained" is seen six times (〔T25 0621b12〕〔T25 0621b14〕〔T25 0622c04〕, twice at〔T25 0623a13〕, and〔T25 0623a20〕).
The power of faith · the power of wisdom. The judgement that closes the whole chapter. The treatise explains why two kinds of people both fail to fulfil dānapāramitā: 「有二種人：軟根、利根。」 tr. "There are two kinds of people: those of soft faculties and those of keen faculties."〔T25 0623a27〕; the failing of each lies in one-sidedness—「一者以信力多、慧力少，二者以慧力多、信力少故。」 tr. "The first is because the power of faith is much and the power of wisdom little; the second is because the power of wisdom is much and the power of faith little."〔T25 0623b02〕; what enables fulfilment lies in their being equal: 「信力、慧力等故，能迴向薩婆若。」 tr. "Because the power of faith and the power of wisdom are equal, one is able to dedicate to sarvajñā."〔T25 0623b03〕, and the treatise also matches each with what it really is: 「念薩婆若者，是信力；如薩婆若迴向者，是智力。」 tr. "Keeping sarvajñā in mind is the power of faith; dedicating in the manner of sarvajñā is the power of knowledge."〔T25 0623b04〕. 「信力」 tr. "the power of faith" is seen five times within the range of this chapter and 「慧力」 tr. "the power of wisdom" three times, all in this closing passage. The last sentence reads 「是智力」 tr. "is the power of knowledge" and not 「是慧力」 tr. "is the power of wisdom": the two names are used together for one meaning, recorded separately, as it is.
III. Similes and Stories
This chapter has five key similes and one cited story, all of them tied to the meaning being explained; none is set out idly.
Space (the general simile). The backbone simile of the whole chapter, used by both the sūtra and the treatise. The sūtra uses it to answer that prajñā is inexhaustible: 「虛空不可盡故，般若波羅蜜不可盡。」 tr. "Because space is inexhaustible, prajñāpāramitā is inexhaustible."〔T25 0620c22〕; the treatise first takes apart why it serves as a simile: 「如虛空，無有法，但有名字」 tr. "like space, which has no dharma and has only a name"〔T25 0621c26〕—the inexhaustibility of space lies not in its greatness but in there being no dharma in it that could be exhausted. The treatise also raises a difficulty against itself: 「般若波羅蜜若如虛空無所有故不可盡，云何菩薩能生是般若波羅蜜？」 tr. "If prajñāpāramitā is inexhaustible because, like space, it is without anything existent, how can the bodhisattva give rise to this prajñāpāramitā?"〔T25 0621c27〕, and the unfolding of the whole treatise section of the chapter is forced out by this one difficulty. At the end it gathers the dharma of old age with it too: 「求老法不可得，不可得故無相，如虛空，不可盡。」 tr. "Seeking the dharma of old age, it is unfindable; because it is unfindable it is signless, like space, inexhaustible."〔T25 0622c01〕—the one simile of space runs through the whole chapter from its head to its tail.
Like an illusion, like a dream (the simile of the unfindability of the arising of form). The treatise breaks the arising of form: 「生不可得，生生不可得，如先『破生』中說。」 tr. "Arising is unfindable, the arising of arising is unfindable, as told earlier in ‘Breaking Arising’."〔T25 0622a03〕, its conclusion being 「二法不可得故，色如幻、如夢，但誑人眼。」 tr. "Because the two dharmas are unfindable, form is like an illusion, like a dream, and only deceives the human eye."〔T25 0622a05〕—the point on which illusion and dream serve as a simile falls on the three characters 「誑人眼」 tr. "deceives the human eye": it is not that form does not exist, but that the arising and ceasing that are seen are not real. Directly below it follows 「若色有生必有盡，以無生故亦無盡。」 tr. "If form has arising, it must have exhaustion; because it is without arising, it is also without exhaustion."〔T25 0622a06〕; simile and meaning join without a gap.
Provisionally taking wheels, axle, shafts, spokes, and the rest as a cart (the simile that old age has no fixed mark). Breaking the mark of old age, the treatise first lists the marks of old age as the people of the world name them: 「世人名老相：髮白、齒離，面皺、身曲，羸瘦、力薄，諸根闇塞」 tr. "The people of the world name the marks of old age: hair white, teeth falling out, face wrinkled, body bent, emaciated, strength thin, the faculties dark and blocked"〔T25 0622b17〕, and breaks them one by one; among them the most telling is one matter: 「又服還年藥，雖老而壯。」 tr. "Again, one who takes the medicine that restores the years, though old, is vigorous."〔T25 0622b21〕—if in one and the same body the mark of old age can be removed, then old age is not in the mark. Its conclusion takes the plainest and nearest thing in the world for a comparison: 「又如假輪、軸、轅、輻等為車，是假名非實。」 tr. "Again, as wheels, axle, shafts, spokes, and the rest are provisionally taken as a cart, this is a provisional name and not real."〔T25 0622b23〕—the cart is not outside the wheels, axle, shafts, and spokes, nor is it within them; old age is not outside white hair and falling teeth, nor is it within them. This simile belongs, together with the 「白衣兄弟」 tr. "white-robed brothers" of Chapter 62, "Training Alike", to the cases that take a plain and near matter, but what they break differs: that breaks the contentious mind, this breaks the fixed mark.
As though an arrow had entered his heart (the simile of Māra's grief). The sūtra describes how Māra cannot bear it: 「惡魔愁毒，如箭入心。」 tr. "The evil Māra is grieved and pained, as though an arrow had entered his heart."〔T25 0621b13〕—「如箭入心」 tr. "as though an arrow had entered his heart" is seen three times within the range of this chapter (〔T25 0621b13〕〔T25 0621b15〕〔T25 0621b18〕), and six times in the whole of T25n1509 (〔T25 0231b08〕〔T25 0501a24〕〔T25 0603a15〕〔T25 0621b13〕〔T25 0621b15〕〔T25 0621b18〕), this chapter alone holding half of them, as found by rescanning the stream of Chinese characters. One of them is in Chapter 62, "Training Alike"〔T25 0603a15〕—the two chapters share one simile, but the cause to which it is tied differs: there it is tied to 「不離般若」 tr. "not departing from prajñā", here to 「行無所得般若」 tr. "practising the prajñā with nothing to be attained". The sūtra further widens it to the three-thousand great-thousand world: 「三千大千世界中諸惡魔皆愁毒，如箭入心，各於其坐不能自安。」 tr. "The evil Māras in the three-thousand great-thousand world are all grieved and pained, as though an arrow had entered their hearts, and each upon his own seat cannot be at ease."〔T25 0621b17〕.
Newly lost father and mother (the subsidiary simile of Māra's grief). Used together with the preceding simile: 「譬如人新喪父母」 tr. "It is as when a person has newly lost his father and mother"〔T25 0621b13〕—「新喪父母」 tr. "newly lost father and mother" is seen twice in this chapter (in the sūtra section〔T25 0621b13〕 and in the treatise section〔T25 0623a19〕), and in the whole of T25n1509 also only these two times, as found by rescanning the whole treatise. This simile belongs to this chapter alone; no other chapter has it. The force of the simile lies in the character 「新」 tr. "new": not a grief long past, but that one moment of having just lost them.
A fisherman sees a fish enter deep into the great water (the simile the treatise-author puts forth himself). Explaining why Māra grieves and yet can do nothing, the treatise puts forth a new simile that the sūtra text does not have: 「譬如捕魚人見一魚深入大水，鉤網所不及，則絕望憂愁。亦如新喪父母。」 tr. "It is as when a fisherman sees a fish enter deep into the great water, where hook and net do not reach, and he despairs and grieves. It is also like having newly lost father and mother."〔T25 0623a18〕—the treatise-author, having put forth a new simile himself, gathers it again with the sūtra's old simile, 「新喪父母」 tr. "newly lost father and mother", the two similes laid one upon the other. Why he despairs the treatise has already said: 「以是菩薩深入十二因緣畢竟空中，不著有、無、非有非無等六十二諸邪見魔網」 tr. "because this bodhisattva enters deeply into the ultimate emptiness of the twelve links of causes and conditions, and does not cling to Māra's net of the sixty-two wrong views of existence, non-existence, neither existence nor non-existence, and the rest"〔T25 0623a15〕—Māra's net and the net for the fish stand facing each other in the text: Māra spreads the net of the sixty-two views, and the bodhisattva enters the water of ultimate emptiness; where the water is deep, the net does not reach. The three characters 「捕魚人」 tr. "fisherman" are seen only once in this chapter〔T25 0623a18〕. Huiying's Commentary matches this simile to things item by item (see Section VI).
The story of the Sūtra of the Simile of the City (the one cited story). Explaining that the third kind of contemplation of the twelve links of causes and conditions is such that 「唯諸菩薩坐道場者能觀」 tr. "only the bodhisattvas who sit at the seat of awakening can contemplate it"〔T25 0622c18〕, the treatise cites a sūtra story as proof: 「如《城譬喻經》中說」 tr. "as told in the Sūtra of the Simile of the City"〔T25 0622c19〕; what it cites is the Buddha's own account of his original cause: 「眾生可愍，深入嶮道，所謂數數生，數數老，數數死，往來世間，不知出處。」 tr. "Beings are to be pitied: they have gone deep into a perilous road—that is, being born again and again, growing old again and again, dying again and again, going and coming in the world, not knowing the way out."〔T25 0622c21〕, 「何因緣有老死？」 tr. "By what causes and conditions is there old age and death?"〔T25 0622c23〕—the Buddha's own statement of his reflection 「我本未得道時」 tr. "when I had not yet attained the path" proves exactly that 「第三觀，坐道場乃得」 tr. "the third contemplation is obtained only at the seat of awakening"〔T25 0622c24〕. The four characters 「城譬喻經」 tr. "Sūtra of the Simile of the City" are seen only once in the whole of T25n1509, precisely here〔T25 0622c20〕; further, searching back for 「城譬喻經」 tr. "Sūtra of the Simile of the City" and 「城喻經」 tr. "Sūtra of the City Simile" in the whole of the sūtra explained, T08n0223, and in the full texts of the two volumes T01 / T02 gave zero hits in every case〔not found〕—the counterpart of this sūtra within the canon could not be located; the gap is recorded as it is, and no conjectured other name is put in to fill up the count (the rule against false criteria).
IV. The Sūtra Passage Explained
The web of three lines of chapter names: Inexhaustible Skilful Means / The Inexhaustible / Not Exhausted (recorded side by side without judgement). The chapter names of this chapter fall into three lines, each recorded here on the basis of the base text. First, Inexhaustible Skilful Means—the chapter title of this treatise's base text〔T25 0620c15〕, 「大智度論釋無盡方便品第六十七」 tr. "Mahāprajñāpāramitā-upadeśa, Commentary on the Chapter on Inexhaustible Skilful Means, the Sixty-seventh", the full name of four characters, peculiar to the base text; the general table of contents of Huiying's Commentary〔X46n0791 0794b24〕 and its body chapter title〔X46n0791 0912c03〕 also both read 「釋無盡方便品第六十七」 tr. "Commentary on the Chapter on Inexhaustible Skilful Means, the Sixty-seventh", of the same line as the base text. Second, The Inexhaustible—the four editions of Song, Yuan, Ming, and Palace and the Ishiyama text all abbreviate it to the two-character short name (the Palace edition in addition has a superfluous character 「品」 tr. "chapter"; see the base text as it stands in entry one of Section VIII); the chapter title on the side of the sūtra explained, T223〔T08 0364a28〕, 「摩訶般若波羅蜜經無盡品第六十七」 tr. "Mahāprajñāpāramitā Sūtra, Chapter on the Inexhaustible, the Sixty-seventh", together with its structural table-of-contents line, and the general table of contents of Jizang's commentary〔X24n0451 0195c06〕 and its body chapter title〔X24n0451 0319a10〕 also all read 「無盡品第六十七」 tr. "Chapter on the Inexhaustible, the Sixty-seventh", the one line of the short name spanning the sūtra, the commentary, and the variant texts. Third, Not Exhausted—the narrative wording of the body of Huiying's Commentary itself: 「第六十六品者，名為不盡品。」 tr. "The sixty-sixth chapter is named the chapter ‘Not Exhausted’."〔X46n0791 0912c04〕, 「所以次此名不盡品者，故是乘上生下之義。」 tr. "The reason why this, coming next, is named the chapter ‘Not Exhausted’ is the meaning of riding on what is above and giving rise to what is below."〔X46n0791 0913a03〕—Huiying's general table of contents and chapter title use the full name, while his running text uses a third, short form: one person using two, recorded separately, as it is. Each of the three lines takes one meaning of this chapter: the base text takes both 「無盡」 tr. "inexhaustible" and 「方便」 tr. "skilful means", the current editions take only 「無盡」 tr. "inexhaustible", and Huiying's running text takes 「不盡」 tr. "not exhausted"; recorded side by side without judgement.
What the Ming edition's interlinear note, 「經作不可盡品」 tr. "the sūtra has the chapter ‘Cannot Be Exhausted’", refers to (the eye of this section · located in two places). In the Ming-edition reading of the note on this treatise's chapter title, the base text embeds a place="inline" interlinear note: 「（大智度論卷第八十釋無盡品第六十七經作不可盡品）二十二字【明】」 tr. "(Mahāprajñāpāramitā-upadeśa, Fascicle Eighty, Commentary on the Chapter on the Inexhaustible, the Sixty-seventh; the sūtra has the chapter ‘Cannot Be Exhausted’) twenty-two characters (Ming)"〔T25 0620c15〕—the Ming editor states himself that the 「經」 tr. "sūtra" calls this chapter by another name, 「不可盡品」 tr. "the chapter ‘Cannot Be Exhausted’". What this phrase refers to is found by locating it in two places:
- First, the collation note on the chapter title on the side of the sūtra explained, T223. The note on this chapter's title in T223〔T08 0364a28〕 says 「無盡品第六十七【大】，〔－〕【聖】，不可盡品第六十七【宋】【元】【明】【宮】」 tr. "Chapter on the Inexhaustible, the Sixty-seventh (Taishō); omitted (Shōgozō); the chapter ‘Cannot Be Exhausted’, the Sixty-seventh (Song, Yuan, Ming, Palace)"—the four editions of Song, Yuan, Ming, and Palace of T223 read precisely 「不可盡品第六十七」 tr. "the chapter ‘Cannot Be Exhausted’, the Sixty-seventh". What the Ming editor calls 「經作不可盡品」 tr. "the sūtra has the chapter ‘Cannot Be Exhausted’" rests on precisely this. 〔Note: searching back further in the stream of Chinese characters for 「不可盡品」 tr. "the chapter ‘Cannot Be Exhausted’" in the main text and the structural table-of-contents lines of the whole of T08n0223 gives zero hits—the name survives only in the collation-note layer and does not enter the main text or the table of contents of the sūtra; hence a negative claim that takes the main text and the table of contents as its search domain is not enough to disprove its existence, and this is one actual instance of 「禁偽判準」 tr. "the rule against false criteria".〕
- Second, this treatise's own forward pointer in the "Introduction" chapter of Fascicle 5. In Fascicle 5, explaining the 「巧」 tr. "skill" of the contemplation of the twelve links of causes and conditions, the treatise-author points to this chapter directly by this name: 「《般若波羅蜜．不可盡品》中，佛告須菩提」 tr. "in the chapter ‘Cannot Be Exhausted’ of the Prajñāpāramitā, the Buddha told Subhūti"〔T25 0100c06〕, and the sūtra text re-cited below it is 「癡如虛空不可盡，行如虛空不可盡，乃至眾苦和合集如虛空不可盡。」 tr. "Delusion is like space, inexhaustible; constructions are like space, inexhaustible; and so on up to the coming together and gathering of the mass of suffering, which is like space, inexhaustible."〔T25 0100c06〕 and 「作是觀十二因緣起者，則為坐道場，得薩婆若。」 tr. "One who contemplates the arising of the twelve links of causes and conditions in this way thereby sits at the seat of awakening and obtains sarvajñā."〔T25 0100c09〕—its scene-structure agrees wholly with the sūtra section of this chapter (in both the Buddha tells Subhūti · in both the inexhaustibility of space runs through the links of the twelve links of causes and conditions · in both it is gathered with sitting at the seat of awakening and obtaining the omniscience of all kinds), while the wording differs character by character (this chapter reads 「癡空不可盡故，菩薩摩訶薩般若波羅蜜應生」 tr. "because the emptiness of delusion is inexhaustible, the bodhisattva-mahāsattva's prajñāpāramitā should arise"〔T25 0621a01〕 and 「坐道場時，應如是觀，當得一切種智。」 tr. "When sitting at the seat of awakening, one should contemplate thus, and will obtain the omniscience of all kinds."〔T25 0621a14〕). The name the treatise-author uses when pointing ahead to this chapter is precisely 「不可盡品」 tr. "the chapter ‘Cannot Be Exhausted’", not 「無盡品」 tr. "the chapter ‘The Inexhaustible’", nor 「無盡方便品」 tr. "the chapter ‘Inexhaustible Skilful Means’"; this is recorded as it is; the character-by-character difference between his re-citation and the sūtra text of this chapter belongs to the treatise-author's ordinary manner of re-citing the sūtra, and is recorded side by side without judgement.
The -1 step in chapter numbering (two ends, the Ishiyama text and Huiying · of different sources). The Ishiyama text's chapter title reads 「摩訶般若波羅蜜品第六十六無盡品【石】」 tr. "Mahāprajñāpāramitā, Chapter the Sixty-sixth, The Inexhaustible (Ishiyama)"〔T25 0620c15〕, the chapter number being -1, in the same direction and by the same amount as reckoned chapter by chapter from Chapter 44 on—the chain of the -1 step continues in this chapter. Within the range of this chapter the -1 step is seen at one further end: in the note on the character 「是」 tr. "this" at the end of the chapter, the Ishiyama text reads 「是【大】，（是釋第六十六品竟，大智度論經卷第八十）【石】」 tr. "this (Taishō); (this. The commentary on the sixty-sixth chapter is finished. Mahāprajñāpāramitā-upadeśa Sūtra, Fascicle Eighty) (Ishiyama)"〔T25 0623b06〕 (entry thirty-seven of the ledger below)—the bracketed note of the 「釋某品竟」 tr. "end of the commentary on such-and-such chapter" type at the end of the chapter and the chapter title confirm each other across two layers, both reading 「六十六」 tr. "sixty-six"; it is not a lone witness. Huiying's own numbering also reads 「第六十六品」 tr. "the sixty-sixth chapter"〔X46n0791 0912c04〕, but that belongs to the commentator's internal numbering, not to a variant reading of the base text; the two differ in nature and are distinguished as they are.
The Ishiyama text's fascicle numbering (the closing record at the end of the chapter · the reverse of the base text's fascicle boundary). The Ishiyama text's bracketed note at the end of the chapter cited above carries in addition a fascicle-edge record, ‘Mahāprajñāpāramitā-upadeśa Sūtra, Fascicle Eighty’ (entry thirty-seven of the ledger below)—the Ishiyama text takes the end of this chapter as the close of its Fascicle 80, whereas the base text takes the head of this chapter as the start of its Fascicle 80 (opening the fascicle at〔T25 0620c15〕 and ending it only at〔T25 0625b22〕). At this chapter the two Fascicles 80 stand exactly head to tail in reverse: the base text's Fascicle 80 begins at this chapter's title, the Ishiyama text's Fascicle 80 stops at this chapter's end, and the Ishiyama text entitles it 「大智度論經」 tr. "Mahāprajñāpāramitā-upadeśa Sūtra" (with one more character, 「經」 tr. "sūtra"). The double tracks of fascicle and chapter in the base text and the Ishiyama text do not coincide; this is recorded as it is, without forcing a reconciliation. Further, no Ishiyama fascicle-edge record is seen within the note on this chapter's title (unlike the type of Chapter 62, whose title-note records at its head 「卷第七十八首【石】」 tr. "head of Fascicle Seventy-eight (Ishiyama)"), which matches exactly the fascicle-close record at the end of the chapter; recorded separately, as it is.
The two readings of the chapter title of the sūtra explained, and the duplication of the mulu attribute. The chapter title of this chapter on the side of the sūtra explained, T223〔T08 0364a28〕, reads 「摩訶般若波羅蜜經無盡品第六十七」 tr. "Mahāprajñāpāramitā Sūtra, Chapter on the Inexhaustible, the Sixty-seventh", and its note in three readings has been cited above; there is another note at the same position〔T08 0364a28〕, saying 「經【大】，經三十【聖】」 tr. "sūtra (Taishō); sūtra, thirty (Shōgozō)"—the Shōgozō attaches its own fascicle number, 「三十」 tr. "thirty", below the sūtra title, recorded as it is. The duplication of the number in T223's structural table-of-contents line: the structural table-of-contents line of this chapter is marked sixty-eight while the displayed text marks 「67 無盡品」 tr. "67 Chapter on the Inexhaustible"〔T08 0364a28〕—the +1 offset has been seen repeatedly since Chapter 41 and continues in this chapter (following the standing convention already recorded at Chapter 48, "The Mother of the Buddhas", not judged again); but the structural table-of-contents line of the next chapter, "Containing the Five", is also marked sixty-eight〔T08 0365a26〕, not rising in order to sixty-nine—taking up again, item by item, the sequence of Chapters 63 to 69 confirms it: 「63 等學品」 tr. "63 Chapter on Equal Training" is marked sixty-four〔T08 0357a08〕, 「64 淨願品」 tr. "64 Chapter on the Pure Vow" sixty-five〔T08 0358b16〕, 「65 度空品」 tr. "65 Chapter on Delivering Space" sixty-six〔T08 0360b09〕, 「66 累教品」 tr. "66 Chapter on Entrusting the Teaching" sixty-seven〔T08 0362a10〕, 「67 無盡品」 tr. "67 Chapter on the Inexhaustible" sixty-eight〔T08 0364a28〕, 「68 攝五品」 tr. "68 Chapter on Containing the Five" sixty-eight〔T08 0365a26〕, 「69 方便品」 tr. "69 Chapter on Skilful Means" seventy〔T08 0368c07〕—one duplication, after which the +1 offset at once resumes. This is of the same type as the 「兩過品／佛母品 n=48 重出」 tr. "‘The Two Faults’ / ‘The Mother of the Buddhas’: n=48 duplicated" recorded at Chapters 46 and 47; this chapter is a further instance of the kind, recorded as it is, without forcing a reconciliation. Further, the name of the next chapter also has two readings on the T223 side: 「攝五【大】，六度相攝【宋】【元】【明】【宮】【聖】」 tr. "Containing the Five (Taishō); the Six Perfections Containing One Another (Song, Yuan, Ming, Palace, Shōgozō)"〔T08 0365a26〕—the 「六度相攝」 tr. "the Six Perfections Containing One Another" of the variant texts of T223 is precisely the name of this treatise's next chapter, recorded as it is.
Full collation of the re-cited sūtra (the two sides collated · six places of variant reading · recording for each whether it has a collation note). This treatise's Sūtra ① and the sūtra explained, "The Inexhaustible", are nearly identical character for character; they differ in six places:
- Dānapāramitā without na / with na · dhyānapāramitā without na / with na—this treatise reads 「檀波羅蜜不可盡故，般若波羅蜜應生」 tr. "because dānapāramitā is inexhaustible, prajñāpāramitā should arise"〔T25 0620c26〕, and T223 reads 「檀那波羅蜜不可盡故，般若波羅蜜應生」 tr. "because dānapāramitā (written with na) is inexhaustible, prajñāpāramitā should arise"〔T08 0364b06〕; the perfection of meditation is of the same pattern. On the T223 side the character 「那」 tr. "na" has a star note, 「那【大】＊，〔－〕【聖】＊」 tr. "na (Taishō, starred); omitted (Shōgozō, starred)" (its anchor of definition is in the range of the preceding chapter〔T08 0364a11〕, and within the range of this chapter it is hung back to by the stars
beg_481〔T08 0364b06〕,beg_482〔T08 0364b08〕,beg_484〔T08 0365a07〕,beg_485〔T08 0365a11〕,beg_487〔T08 0365a12〕,beg_488〔T08 0365a16〕, andbeg_48a〔T08 0365a22〕, seven in all, while the note on the character 「羅」 tr. "ra" is hung back to by two,beg_486〔T08 0365a11〕 andbeg_489〔T08 0365a18〕)—the Shōgozō of T223 lacks the character 「那」 tr. "na", and the reading it yields is precisely the rendering of the name in this treatise's base text; on this treatise's side there is no collation note here. - ‘These twelve links’ / ‘thus these twelve links’—this treatise reads 「是十二因緣，是獨菩薩法」 tr. "these twelve links of causes and conditions are a dharma of the bodhisattvas alone"〔T25 0621a13〕, and T223 at the same position reads 「是十二因緣是獨菩薩法」 tr. "these twelve links of causes and conditions are a dharma of the bodhisattvas alone"〔T08 0364b23〕. Both readings have a collation note on the same character 「是」 tr. "these", but in opposite directions: the note on this treatise's side, 「是【大】，〔－〕【宋】【元】【明】【宮】」 tr. "these (Taishō); omitted (Song, Yuan, Ming, Palace)" (entry four of the ledger below)—the four editions of Song, Yuan, Ming, and Palace delete this 「是」 tr. "these"; the note on the T223 side, 「是【大】，如是【宋】【元】【明】【宮】」 tr. "these (Taishō); thus these (Song, Yuan, Ming, Palace)"〔T08 0364b23〕—the same four editions add a character 「如」 tr. "thus". Recorded side by side, as it is; the reading of one side is not used to judge the other.
- ‘Are … alone’ / ‘alone are’—on this treatise's side there is another note, on the two characters 「是獨」 tr. "are … alone" below it: 「是獨【大】，獨是【宋】【宮】」 tr. "are … alone (Taishō); alone are (Song, Palace)" (entry five of the ledger below); on the T223 side there is no collation note here (the T223 base text also reads 「是獨」 tr. "are … alone").
- ‘Should contemplate the twelve links of causes and conditions by the dharma of the inexhaustibility of space’—this treatise reads 「是人不知云何行般若波羅蜜，以虛空不可盡法觀十二因緣。」 tr. "These people do not know how to practise prajñāpāramitā, how to contemplate the twelve links of causes and conditions by the dharma of the inexhaustibility of space."〔T25 0621a19〕, while T223 reads 「是人不知云何行般若波羅蜜。應以虛空不可盡法觀十二因緣。」 tr. "These people do not know how to practise prajñāpāramitā. One should contemplate the twelve links of causes and conditions by the dharma of the inexhaustibility of space."〔T08 0364b29〕, with one more character, 「應」 tr. "should". On the T223 side there is a note here, 「應【大】，〔－〕【宋】【元】【明】【宮】【聖】」 tr. "should (Taishō); omitted (Song, Yuan, Ming, Palace, Shōgozō)"〔T08 0364c01〕—all five texts of T223 lack the character 「應」 tr. "should", and the reading they yield agrees exactly with this treatise's base text; on this treatise's side there is no collation note here. Of the six places of variant reading, this is the one whose mirror-image is most complete.
- ‘A being, a knower’ / ‘a being, and so on up to a knower’—this treatise reads 「不見法有我、人、壽者、命者、眾生，知者、見者」 tr. "does not see any dharma that has a self, a person, a life, a living one, a being, a knower, a seer"〔T25 0621a28〕, while T223 reads 「不見法有我、人、壽者、命者、眾生乃至知者、見者」 tr. "does not see any dharma that has a self, a person, a life, a living one, a being, and so on up to a knower, a seer"〔T08 0364c10〕, with the two further characters 「乃至」 tr. "and so on up to". On this treatise's side there is a note here, 「生【大】，生乃至【元】【明】」 tr. "being (Taishō); being, and so on up to (Yuan, Ming)" (entry eight of the ledger below)—the Yuan and Ming editions read 「眾生乃至知者」 tr. "a being, and so on up to a knower", which is precisely the reading of the T223 base text; on the T223 side there is no collation note here.
- ‘The evil Māra’ / ‘this evil Māra’—this treatise reads 「惡魔見菩薩行無所得般若波羅蜜時，便大愁毒，如箭入心。」 tr. "When the evil Māra sees the bodhisattva practising the prajñāpāramitā with nothing to be attained, he is greatly grieved and pained, as though an arrow had entered his heart."〔T25 0621b14〕, and T223 at the same position〔T08 0364c25〕 is wholly the same. Both readings have a collation note on the same character 「惡」 tr. "evil", in the same direction: on this treatise's side, 「惡【大】，是惡【元】【明】」 tr. "evil (Taishō); this evil (Yuan, Ming)" (entry ten of the ledger below), and on the T223 side, 「惡【大】，是惡【宋】【元】【明】【宮】【聖】」 tr. "evil (Taishō); this evil (Song, Yuan, Ming, Palace, Shōgozō)"〔T08 0364c25〕—the same variant reading, but with a different number of texts (two in this treatise, five in T223), recorded separately, as it is.
The control group (eight strings · the counts in each of the two canons recorded honestly · unique correspondence). 「是十二因緣，是獨菩薩法」 tr. "these twelve links of causes and conditions are a dharma of the bodhisattvas alone"〔T25 0621a13〕 / 〔T08 0364b23〕; 「坐道場時，應如是觀，當得一切種智」 tr. "when sitting at the seat of awakening, one should contemplate thus, and will obtain the omniscience of all kinds"〔T25 0621a14〕 / 〔T08 0364b24〕; 「應以虛空不可盡法生般若波羅蜜」 tr. "should give rise to prajñāpāramitā by the dharma of the inexhaustibility of space"〔T25 0621a26〕 / 〔T08 0364c07〕; 「一切法不可得故，是為應般若波羅蜜行」 tr. "because all dharmas are unfindable, this is the practice that corresponds to prajñāpāramitā"〔T25 0621b11〕 / 〔T08 0364c22〕; 「各於其坐不能自安」 tr. "each upon his own seat cannot be at ease"〔T25 0621b18〕 / 〔T08 0364c29〕; 「不能得其便令其憂惱」 tr. "cannot find an opening to cause him sorrow and vexation"〔T25 0621b20〕 / 〔T08 0365a03〕; 「老死憂悲苦惱空不可盡故」 tr. "because the emptiness of old age and death, sorrow, grief, suffering, and vexation is inexhaustible"〔T25 0621a11〕 / 〔T08 0364b20〕; 「但一魔愁毒」 tr. "is it only one Māra who is grieved and pained"〔T25 0621b16〕 / 〔T08 0364c27〕. The streams of Chinese characters of these eight strings are each seen only once in the whole of T25n1509 and in the whole of T08n0223 (each string rescanned independently in the base texts of the two canons by the full-text method, not copied over), the correspondence being unique, with no other chapter to confuse it with. The counts of two strings that are not one are also recorded, so as not to fill up the count with an estimate: 「所有布施皆迴向薩婆若」 tr. "all giving is dedicated to sarvajñā" is seen twice in the whole of T25n1509 (〔T25 0621c01〕 in the sūtra section, 〔T25 0623a26〕 in the treatise section re-citing the sūtra), and once in the whole of T08n0223〔T08 0365a14〕; 「便大愁毒，如箭入心」 tr. "he is greatly grieved and pained, as though an arrow had entered his heart" is seen once in the whole of T25n1509〔T25 0621b15〕 and twice in the whole of T08n0223 (〔T08 0305a16〕〔T08 0364c26〕, the first occurrence being outside this chapter). The judgement is 「同品同名異略」 tr. "the same chapter under the same name, differing as full and short" (the body of the chapter being nearly identical character for character, and the two lines of the full and short chapter names being as above). The 【論】 layer of this treatise is a structural expansion in the form of a treatise, which the sūtra explained does not have; it is not a variant reading.
V. The Prajñā Eye
The eye of this chapter turns over upon the one character 「盡」 tr. "exhaust"—it is not making prajñā out to be very long or very great; it is pointing out that prajñā has at root no place where it could be exhausted, and therefore no place where it arises either. Its meaning can be summarised in five layers.
First, the reason it is inexhaustible lies in there being no dharma to exhaust. Subhūti's question is utterly direct: 「是般若波羅蜜不可盡？」 tr. "Is this prajñāpāramitā inexhaustible?"〔T25 0620c22〕, and the Buddha's answer more direct still: 「虛空不可盡故，般若波羅蜜不可盡。」 tr. "Because space is inexhaustible, prajñāpāramitā is inexhaustible."〔T25 0620c22〕. Why is space inexhaustible? The treatise takes it apart cleanly: 「如虛空，無有法，但有名字」 tr. "like space, which has no dharma and has only a name"〔T25 0621c26〕—only where there is no thing is there no talk of using it up. And this answer at once forces out a harder question: since it is, like space, without anything existent, from where then does prajñā arise? The treatise-author raises this difficulty himself: 「般若波羅蜜若如虛空無所有故不可盡，云何菩薩能生是般若波羅蜜？」 tr. "If prajñāpāramitā is inexhaustible because, like space, it is without anything existent, how can the bodhisattva give rise to this prajñāpāramitā?"〔T25 0621c27〕—the unfolding of the whole treatise section of the chapter is the answering of this one question.
Second, the answer about arising is answered by 「無生故無盡」 tr. "because it is without arising, it is inexhaustible". The Buddha answers 「色無盡故，般若波羅蜜應生。」 tr. "Because form is inexhaustible, prajñāpāramitā should arise."〔T25 0622a01〕, and the treatise explains the principle: 「若色有生必有盡，以無生故亦無盡。」 tr. "If form has arising, it must have exhaustion; because it is without arising, it is also without exhaustion."〔T25 0622a06〕—what will be exhausted must once have arisen; what has never arisen cannot be spoken of as exhausted. And the non-arising of form does not say that form is not there; it says that the arising and ceasing that are seen are not real: 「二法不可得故，色如幻、如夢，但誑人眼。」 tr. "Because the two dharmas are unfindable, form is like an illusion, like a dream, and only deceives the human eye."〔T25 0622a05〕. Thereupon the prajñā that gives rise and the form that is contemplated join, in the real mark, into one matter: 「色真相即是般若波羅蜜相」 tr. "the true mark of form is precisely the mark of prajñāpāramitā"〔T25 0622a07〕—what is called 「應生」 tr. "should arise" is not the making of a prajñā out of nowhere; it is that when the true mark of form appears, prajñā appears of itself.
Third, the contemplation of the twelve links of causes and conditions is the only way of walking that leaves the two extremes. The treatise says it with the utmost clarity: 「若人但觀畢竟空，多墮斷滅邊；若觀有，多墮常邊。」 tr. "If a person contemplates only ultimate emptiness, he mostly falls into the extreme of annihilation; if he contemplates existence, he mostly falls into the extreme of permanence."〔T25 0622a10〕—at both ends, emptiness and existence alike, there are pits. There is only one way to walk: 「若法從因緣和合生，是法無有定性；若法無定性，即是畢竟空寂滅相。」 tr. "If a dharma arises from the coming together of causes and conditions, this dharma has no fixed nature; if a dharma has no fixed nature, this is precisely the mark of ultimate emptiness and quiescence."〔T25 0622a12〕, and so 「離二邊故，假名為中道。」 tr. "Because it leaves the two extremes, it is provisionally named the middle way."〔T25 0622a14〕. This is also why in this chapter the twelve links of causes and conditions are called 「獨菩薩法」 tr. "a dharma of the bodhisattvas alone"〔T25 0621a14〕—the ordinary person follows them without asking, the two vehicles know their fault and hurry to extinguish them, and only the bodhisattva is willing to go through them to the end. Even ignorance itself is no exception: 「癡實相即是智慧，取著智慧相即是癡。」 tr. "The real mark of delusion is precisely wisdom; to grasp and cling to the mark of wisdom is precisely delusion."〔T25 0622a23〕—wisdom and delusion are not two things; they are the difference, in one and the same thing, between grasping at marks and not grasping.
Fourth, the unfindability of old age is the hardest touchstone of this contemplation. The treatise does not speak from a height; it begins asking from the most solid place: everyone speaks of old age—what after all is old age? First it asks after the definition—「老是心不相應行。」 tr. "Old age is a construction not associated with mind."〔T25 0622b15〕, and the treatise cuts it off: this mark cannot be produced; white hair is only a mark of form, not the mark of old age. Then it asks after worldly experience—「世人名老相：髮白、齒離，面皺、身曲，羸瘦、力薄，諸根闇塞」 tr. "The people of the world name the marks of old age: hair white, teeth falling out, face wrinkled, body bent, emaciated, strength thin, the faculties dark and blocked"〔T25 0622b17〕, and the treatise breaks them one by one: there are those who are white in the prime of their years, there are those who are black in old age, there are those who are old and whose faculties are bright and keen, and even 「又服還年藥，雖老而壯。」 tr. "Again, one who takes the medicine that restores the years, though old, is vigorous."〔T25 0622b21〕. The way it finally gives its conclusion shows its hand most: 「又如假輪、軸、轅、輻等為車，是假名非實。」 tr. "Again, as wheels, axle, shafts, spokes, and the rest are provisionally taken as a cart, this is a provisional name and not real."〔T25 0622b23〕—the cart is not outside its parts, nor is it within its parts; old age is the same. And having gone through to this point, the treatise does not stop at emptiness: 「菩薩觀諸法實相畢竟空、無所有、無所得，亦不著是事故，於眾生中而生大悲」 tr. "the bodhisattva contemplates the real mark of all dharmas as ultimately empty, without anything existent, with nothing to be attained, and does not cling to this matter either; therefore amid beings he gives rise to great compassion"〔T25 0622c03〕—the next step after contemplating emptiness is not letting go; it is great compassion.
Fifth, Māra's grief is the outward proof that this contemplation has gone through. The sūtra writes of Māra: 「惡魔愁毒，如箭入心。譬如人新喪父母」 tr. "The evil Māra is grieved and pained, as though an arrow had entered his heart. It is as when a person has newly lost his father and mother"〔T25 0621b13〕; the treatise explains why Māra is so: 「以是菩薩深入十二因緣畢竟空中，不著有、無、非有非無等六十二諸邪見魔網」 tr. "because this bodhisattva enters deeply into the ultimate emptiness of the twelve links of causes and conditions, and does not cling to Māra's net of the sixty-two wrong views of existence, non-existence, neither existence nor non-existence, and the rest"〔T25 0623a15〕—Māra's skill is to spread nets, and a net can catch only the mind that has something it clings to. The treatise thereupon puts forth a simile of its own: 「譬如捕魚人見一魚深入大水，鉤網所不及，則絕望憂愁。」 tr. "It is as when a fisherman sees a fish enter deep into the great water, where hook and net do not reach, and he despairs and grieves."〔T25 0623a18〕—it is not that the fish has beaten the fisherman; it is that the fish has gone where the net cannot reach. The whole chapter closes at last on a very plain scale: among those who dedicate their giving to sarvajñā and still do not fulfil dānapāramitā there are two kinds of people, one with much faith and little wisdom, the other with much wisdom and little faith; 「信力、慧力等故，能迴向薩婆若。」 tr. "Because the power of faith and the power of wisdom are equal, one is able to dedicate to sarvajñā."〔T25 0623b03〕—the inexhaustible prajñā, come down into practice, is simply the balance of faith and wisdom. The four characters of the chapter title, 「無盡方便」 tr. "Inexhaustible Skilful Means", here join their two meanings into one: the inexhaustible is the principle that is contemplated, skilful means is the power that is able to practise; in the sūtra text the two characters 「方便」 tr. "skilful means" are seen only twice, both tied to turning back and not turning back〔T25 0621a21〕〔T25 0621a23〕—if the principle is inexhaustible but the power does not reach it, one still falls back; the two characters for skilful means fall exactly here.
VI. Divergent Readings of the Masters
The Mahāprajñāpāramitā-upadeśa has no tradition of a complete line-by-line commentary; the ancient masters' citations and explanations are, as a rule, partial, according to what is actually there. Two ancient masters' readings cover this chapter: Jizang's commentary on the sūtra explained preserves a complete dedicated chapter, and Huiying's Commentary on this treatise also preserves a complete dedicated chapter (unlike the situation of 「X46 零覆蓋」 tr. "zero coverage in X46" in the several chapters from Chapter 44 on, this chapter, like Chapter 62, is a counter-example); in the Tiantai line, only Zhiyi's Profound Meaning of the Lotus cites the sūtra text of this chapter of the sūtra explained, in two places, while the citations 「大論八十」 tr. "Great Treatise, eighty" in Zhanran's Supporting Practice and Broad Resolution of Calming and Contemplation and Annotations on the Profound Meaning of the Lotus, checked entry by entry, are none of them this chapter; Junzheng's book has zero hits. This section records how what they comment on and cite corresponds to this chapter, and does not judge the relative merit of the masters' interpretations.
Jizang's Commentary on the Larger Sūtra (X24n0451). His line-by-line commentary on "The Inexhaustible" of the sūtra explained begins at 「無盡品第六十七」 tr. "Chapter on the Inexhaustible, the Sixty-seventh"〔X24n0451 0319a10〕 and ends at〔X24n0451 0319c12〕, before the start of the next chapter, 「攝五品第六十八」 tr. "Chapter on Containing the Five, the Sixty-eighth"〔X24n0451 0319c13〕, covering the whole sūtra text of this chapter; in addition, the general table of contents at the head of the fascicle lists 「無盡品第六十七」 tr. "Chapter on the Inexhaustible, the Sixty-seventh"〔X24n0451 0195c06〕. Five things in it are worth recording.
First, the turn of the major division and the position of this chapter—「此下第二明方便道。前是般若道，生起如前。」 tr. "From here on, the second makes clear the path of skilful means. What preceded was the path of prajñā; how it arises is as before."〔X24n0451 0319a11〕: Jizang takes this chapter as the first chapter at the boundary between the path of prajñā and the path of skilful means. He sets out the detailed items of his division himself: 「就文為二：初二十三品正明方便因果大用，第二常啼、法尚兩品結勸修行。」 tr. "Taking the text, it is in two: first, twenty-three chapters properly make clear the great function of cause and fruit of skilful means; second, the two chapters of Sadāprarudita and Dharmodgata conclude by exhorting to practice."〔X24n0451 0319a18〕, 「初段為三：第一從初竟方便品明方便體用秤歎令行，第二有三慧畢竟品明發心起行，第三從四諦已去明方便得果。」 tr. "The first section is in three: the first, from the beginning to the end of the chapter on skilful means, makes clear the substance and function of skilful means, praising it and causing it to be practised; the second, containing the chapter on the three wisdoms and the chapter on the ultimate, makes clear arousing the mind and setting practice going; the third, from the four truths on, makes clear skilful means obtaining the fruit."〔X24n0451 0319a21〕—this chapter is the head of his 「初段」 tr. "first section". Within this chapter of this treatise there is no explicit wording of this division; it is a division Jizang establishes himself, recorded separately, as it is.
Second, the four explanations of the two wisdoms and the gloss on the chapter name—Jizang first lists the explanations of four earlier masters concerning the wisdom of reality and the wisdom of skilful means, and below that explains himself the reason for the chapter name: 「無盡品者，上品已般若無盡，今須菩提更問明此義。」 tr. "As for the chapter ‘The Inexhaustible’: the preceding chapter has already said that prajñā is inexhaustible, and now Subhūti asks further to make this meaning clear."〔X24n0451 0319b02〕, and he cites the treatise as proof: 「論云：般若若有和有集故有滅有盡，無和無集故無滅無盡，故三世佛悞之而成佛也。」 tr. "The treatise says: If prajñā had combining and had gathering, it would therefore have ceasing and have exhaustion; being without combining and without gathering, it is without ceasing and without exhaustion; therefore the buddhas of the three times err in it and become buddhas."〔X24n0451 0319b03〕—what the two characters 「論云」 tr. "the treatise says" are attached to is Jizang's own abridged citation, not the original text of this treatise (at the same position in this chapter this treatise reads 「三世諸佛用般若波羅蜜得道，般若故不盡——已不盡、今不盡、當不盡。」 tr. "The buddhas of the three times attain the path by means of prajñāpāramitā; because of prajñā it is not exhausted—it has not been exhausted, it is not now exhausted, it will not be exhausted."〔T25 0621c23〕); the attribution is plain, recorded separately, as it is.
Third, the gloss on the character 「獨」 tr. "alone" (the thing most worth recording in this section)—「十二因緣獨菩薩法者，就名作空觀即墮斷見中，若作有觀即墮常中，今作因緣觀甚深，便妙悟中道不著斷常，為方便慧體也。」 tr. "As for ‘the twelve links of causes and conditions are a dharma of the bodhisattvas alone’: if, going by the name, one makes the contemplation of emptiness, one falls into the view of annihilation; if one makes the contemplation of existence, one falls into permanence; now one makes the contemplation of causes and conditions, which is very deep, and then wondrously awakens to the middle way, not clinging to annihilation or permanence; this is the substance of the wisdom of skilful means."〔X24n0451 0319b14〕, and below that he sets three kinds of person against one another to show it: 「凡夫直順十二不求是非邪正，二乘但知其過盡無我我所，欲滅之入無餘，並不窮因緣之實，菩薩知其本自不生今亦無滅，故非凡夫行非賢聖行，獨菩薩行故名為獨也。」 tr. "Ordinary people simply go along with the twelve and do not seek out right and wrong, false and correct; the two vehicles only know their faults, exhaust self and what belongs to self, wish to extinguish them and enter the remainderless, and do not search out the reality of causes and conditions; the bodhisattva knows that they originally do not arise and now also do not cease; therefore it is not the practice of ordinary people, not the practice of the worthies and sages; being the practice of the bodhisattva alone, it is called ‘alone’."〔X24n0451 0319b16〕—this treatise does not gloss the character 「獨」 tr. "alone" directly, but distinguishes why it is ‘alone’ by the three kinds of contemplation; Jizang takes up the character 「獨」 tr. "alone" directly as the thing to gloss: the two masters' ways of explaining differ; his words 「不著斷常」 tr. "not clinging to annihilation or permanence" and 「為方便慧體」 tr. "this is the substance of the wisdom of skilful means" point to the same thing as this treatise's 「離二邊故，假名為中道。」 tr. "Because it leaves the two extremes, it is provisionally named the middle way."〔T25 0622a14〕, but the ways of saying it differ; recorded separately, as it is.
Fourth, the five divisions of ‘no evil left unremoved’—「能除諸邊顛倒下，第二、明方便妙用。」 tr. "From ‘able to remove the extremes and the inversions’ on, second, it makes clear the wondrous function of skilful means."〔X24n0451 0319b22〕, below which he divides it into five: removing the extremes and the inversions, leaving the ground of the two vehicles, leaving the view of self, leaving the views of no cause and of wrong causes, and leaving the view of dharmas; and when he comes to the passage on the deeds of Māra, he sets it up separately as a sixth: 「惡魔便大愁毒如箭入心。此即生下，第二、離惡緣也。」 tr. "‘The evil Māra is then greatly grieved and pained, as though an arrow had entered his heart.’ This gives rise to what follows: second, leaving evil conditions."〔X24n0451 0319c06〕. Jizang explains why Māra grieves by 「緣觀俱絕」 tr. "object and contemplation both cut off"—「菩薩爾時緣觀俱絕」 tr. "at that time, for the bodhisattva, object and contemplation are both cut off"〔X24n0451 0319c06〕—while this treatise explains it by 「不著有、無、非有非無等六十二諸邪見魔網」 tr. "does not cling to Māra's net of the sixty-two wrong views of existence, non-existence, neither existence nor non-existence, and the rest"〔T25 0623a16〕; the positions of the two masters differ slightly, recorded side by side without judgement.
Fifth, the two layers of fulfilling the six perfections—「具足檀下，第二、明生道，為二：初、明方便力故令六度名得滿足；第二、明一一度中具足六度。」 tr. "From ‘fulfils dāna’ on, second, it makes clear the arising of the path, in two: first, it makes clear that by the power of skilful means the six perfections are caused to be named fulfilled; second, it makes clear that within each single perfection the six perfections are fulfilled."〔X24n0451 0319c08〕—this is Jizang's overall division spanning chapters: the first division is in this chapter, while the second, 「一一度中具足六度」 tr. "within each single perfection the six perfections are fulfilled", is taken up by the opening words 「此下第二」 tr. "from here on, the second" of the next chapter, "Containing the Five", the Sixty-eighth, and does not belong to the explanation of this chapter. The last passage of this chapter of this treatise, for its part, explains the one-sidedness in faith and wisdom of the two kinds of people, of soft faculties and of keen faculties (see Section II); recorded separately, as it is.
Huiying's Commentary (X46n0791). It is the only ancient commentary explaining this treatise, surviving only in fragmentary fascicles; for this chapter it has a complete dedicated chapter, beginning at 「釋無盡方便品第六十七」 tr. "Commentary on the Chapter on Inexhaustible Skilful Means, the Sixty-seventh"〔X46n0791 0912c03〕, with the body heading 「釋第八十卷論」 tr. "Commentary on the treatise of Fascicle Eighty"〔X46n0791 0912c03〕 attached below it, and ending before the start of the next chapter, 「釋六度相攝品第六十八」 tr. "Commentary on the Chapter on the Six Perfections Containing One Another, the Sixty-eighth"〔X46n0791 0914b21〕; in addition, the general table of contents at the head of the fascicle lists 「釋無盡方便品第六十七」 tr. "Commentary on the Chapter on Inexhaustible Skilful Means, the Sixty-seventh"〔X46n0791 0794b24〕. Five things in it are worth recording.
First, his own numbering at -1 and the third chapter name—「第六十六品者，名為不盡品。」 tr. "The sixty-sixth chapter is named the chapter ‘Not Exhausted’."〔X46n0791 0912c04〕: Huiying calls this chapter 「第六十六品」 tr. "the sixty-sixth chapter", one less than the base text, in the same direction as the Ishiyama text's -1 step but from a different source (see Section IV); the name he uses, 「不盡品」 tr. "the chapter ‘Not Exhausted’", is the third form among the three lines, and is inconsistent with the full name of his own general table of contents and chapter title, 「釋無盡方便品第六十七」 tr. "Commentary on the Chapter on Inexhaustible Skilful Means, the Sixty-seventh"—one person using two, recorded separately, as it is. The reason for the name Huiying explains himself: 「所以次此名不盡品者，故是乘上生下之義。」 tr. "The reason why this, coming next, is named the chapter ‘Not Exhausted’ is the meaning of riding on what is above and giving rise to what is below."〔X46n0791 0913a03〕, 「今此品來為接上文生於下意，明方便道中不可盡義，故名不盡品。」 tr. "Now this chapter comes in order to join the text above and give rise to the meaning below, making clear the meaning of inexhaustibility within the path of skilful means; therefore it is named the chapter ‘Not Exhausted’."〔X46n0791 0913a05〕—and he cites the sūtra text of the preceding chapter as what it carries on: 「上品云：三世諸佛學波若波羅蜜悉皆不盡，已不盡、今不盡、當不盡。」 tr. "The preceding chapter says: the buddhas of the three times train in prajñāpāramitā, and all of it is not exhausted—it has not been exhausted, it is not now exhausted, it will not be exhausted."〔X46n0791 0913a04〕. He also states how the treatise-author raises the chapter: 「論將欲釋，故舉之云第六十六品釋論也。」 tr. "The treatise being about to explain it, it therefore raises it, saying: the treatise explaining the sixty-sixth chapter."〔X46n0791 0913a06〕.
Second, the boundary between the path of prajñā and the path of skilful means (a judgement wholly the same as Jizang's)—「上來至此明菩薩波若道，自此品已下訖於經末明菩薩方便道。」 tr. "From the beginning up to here makes clear the bodhisattva's path of prajñā; from this chapter down to the end of the sūtra makes clear the bodhisattva's path of skilful means."〔X46n0791 0912c04〕, and for its ground he too cites the treatise: 「故論云：波若能將菩薩入畢竟空，方便能將菩薩出畢竟空。」 tr. "Therefore the treatise says: prajñā can lead the bodhisattva into ultimate emptiness; skilful means can lead the bodhisattva out of ultimate emptiness."〔X46n0791 0912c09〕—what 「論云」 tr. "the treatise says" is attached to is Huiying's own abridged citation, not the original text of this chapter of this treatise (this chapter does not have these two sentences); the attribution is plain. This judgement agrees completely with Jizang's 「此下第二明方便道。前是般若道」 tr. "From here on, the second makes clear the path of skilful means. What preceded was the path of prajñā"〔X24n0451 0319a11〕—both masters take this chapter as the first chapter at the boundary, yet each expresses it in his own way, with no trace of copying from each other; recorded as it is, for comparison.
Third, the division of the path of skilful means and the history of the dividers—「就方便道中，論主自科有於二分：從此品去至曇無竭品，通明方便道義；囑累一品，明其付囑。」 tr. "Within the path of skilful means, the treatise-author's own division is in two parts: from this chapter on to the Dharmodgata chapter, making clear throughout the meaning of the path of skilful means; the one chapter on Entrustment, making clear its entrusting."〔X46n0791 0912c11〕; below that Huiying separately relates the sources and currents of earlier dividers, and finally adopts the threefold division of the Dharma masters of the Fu and Yao times: 「且依此苻姚時諸法師科有於三分」 tr. "for now, following the division of the Dharma masters of the Fu and Yao times, it is in three parts"〔X46n0791 0912c20〕—it differs from Jizang's twofold division of 「初二十三品／常啼法尚兩品」 tr. "the first twenty-three chapters / the two chapters of Sadāprarudita and Dharmodgata" (Jizang in two, Huiying in three); the two masters' divisions each stand on their own, recorded side by side without judgement.
Fourth, the division of space into two kinds—「如虗空者有二種：一者世間虗空，二者法性虗空。」 tr. "As for ‘like space’, there are two kinds: first, worldly space; second, the space of the nature of dharmas."〔X46n0791 0913a15〕, 「今只以此虗空不可盡故，能生無盡波若，波若從無盡之法生故無盡。」 tr. "Now, only because this space is inexhaustible, it can give rise to inexhaustible prajñā; prajñā arises from the inexhaustible dharma and is therefore inexhaustible."〔X46n0791 0913a17〕—this treatise only speaks of it generally with 「如虛空，無有法，但有名字」 tr. "like space, which has no dharma and has only a name"〔T25 0621c26〕, without dividing it into two kinds; the division is Huiying's alone, recorded as it is.
Fifth, the item-by-item matching of the fishing simile and the source of the wrong causes and conditions—explaining the simile of Māra's grief in this treatise's last passage: 「捕魚人喻魔也，一魚者喻菩薩也。深入大水者，喻見菩薩深入諸法實相水也。」 tr. "The fisherman stands for Māra; the one fish stands for the bodhisattva. ‘Going deep into the great water’ stands for seeing the bodhisattva go deep into the water of the real mark of all dharmas."〔X46n0791 0914b17〕—this treatise puts forth the simile without matching its items, and Huiying matches them thing by thing, in keeping with the form of his commentary. He also explains where this treatise's words 「邪因緣者，微塵、世性等。」 tr. "Wrong causes and conditions are atoms, the nature of the world, and the like."〔T25 0623a04〕 come from: 「微塵已下，僧佉經中明此義云：微塵世性等是常故，法從此生也。」 tr. "From ‘atoms’ on: the Sāṃkhya Sūtra makes this meaning clear, saying that because atoms, the nature of the world, and the like are permanent, dharmas arise from them."〔X46n0791 0914b13〕—he points out that the doctrine of wrong causes and conditions that this treatise breaks comes from the Sāṃkhya line; this treatise only raises its items without marking its school, and this is Huiying's supplement, recorded as it is. Throughout the chapter Huiying often closes a section with 「當說」 tr. "it will be told" or 「當一一說」 tr. "each will be told one by one", which belongs to the form of his commentary and is not a missing explanation.
Zhiyi's Profound Meaning of the Lotus (T33n1716) · two citations of the sūtra explained. First, in explaining the coarse and the subtle of objects he cites: 「十二緣，獨菩薩法。」 tr. "The twelve links are a dharma of the bodhisattvas alone."〔T33n1716 0700b11〕—what is cited is a sentence of this chapter of the sūtra explained〔T08 0364b23〕, an abridged citation (the original sūtra text reads 「是十二因緣是獨菩薩法」 tr. "these twelve links of causes and conditions are a dharma of the bodhisattvas alone"). Second, lower in the same passage: 「《大品》說十二因緣，是為坐道場。」 tr. "The Larger Sūtra says that the twelve links of causes and conditions are sitting at the seat of awakening."〔T33n1716 0700b15〕—matching this chapter of the sūtra explained, 「坐道場時應如是觀」 tr. "when sitting at the seat of awakening one should contemplate thus"〔T08 0364b24〕, and also an abridged citation. Both citations are marked as the Larger Sūtra and not as the Great Treatise; what is cited is sūtra text and not treatise text, and the attribution is plain; what is within the 「」 tr. "the quotation brackets" is Zhiyi's own wording, neither the original text of this treatise nor that of the sūtra explained. Further, searching back through the whole file of T46n1911, the Great Calming and Contemplation, for the six strings 「無盡方便」 tr. "Inexhaustible Skilful Means", 「不盡品」 tr. "the chapter ‘Not Exhausted’", 「新喪父母」 tr. "newly lost father and mother", 「如箭入心」 tr. "as though an arrow had entered his heart", 「城譬喻經」 tr. "Sūtra of the Simile of the City", and 「捕魚人」 tr. "fisherman" gave zero hits in every case; the negative result is recorded as it is.
Zhanran's Supporting Practice and Broad Resolution of Calming and Contemplation (T46n1912) · Annotations on the Profound Meaning of the Lotus (T33n1717) · the citations 「大論八十」 tr. "Great Treatise, eighty" excluded entry by entry. Rescanned independently in the stream of Chinese characters, 「大論八十」 tr. "Great Treatise, eighty" is seen five times in T46n1912 (〔T46n1912 0155b05〕〔T46n1912 0200b11〕〔T46n1912 0267b09〕〔T46n1912 0406b11〕〔T46n1912 0409c03〕) and four times in T33n1717 (〔T33n1717 0842c16〕〔T33n1717 0867c26〕〔T33n1717 0882b02〕〔T33n1717 0912a11〕)—checking the scene-structure of each citation entry by entry, not one is tied to this chapter: some discuss the three kinds of difference of 「始行菩薩云何修行」 tr. "how the bodhisattva who has just begun to practise cultivates", some discuss 「微細魔事」 tr. "subtle deeds of Māra", some cite 「佛告阿難．菩薩摩訶薩共住相視」 tr. "the Buddha told Ānanda: bodhisattva-mahāsattvas dwelling together and looking upon one another" (that is, Chapter 62, "Training Alike", already recorded at that chapter), some cite 「阿難問佛．魔為都嬈一切菩薩」 tr. "Ānanda asked the Buddha: does Māra harass all bodhisattvas" (likewise Chapter 62), and some cite 「須菩提白佛．菩薩云何行般若波羅蜜」 tr. "Subhūti said to the Buddha: how does the bodhisattva practise prajñāpāramitā" followed below by a passage with 「色是寂滅故」 tr. "because form is quiescence"—searching this treatise back string by string, 「始行菩薩云何修行」 tr. "how the bodhisattva who has just begun to practise cultivates", 「有微細魔事」 tr. "there are subtle deeds of Māra", and 「色是寂滅故」 tr. "because form is quiescence" give zero hits in every case in the whole of T25n1509, and the scenes of the other two citations are already tied to Chapter 62. Hence it is confirmed that within the range of the T46 scan this chapter has zero direct citations; recorded as it is, without forcing an explanation (this is not a naive negative claim of 「grep=0」 tr. "grep = 0", but an honest exclusion after checking the scene of each entry).
Junzheng's Profound Meaning of the Four Mahāyāna Treatises (X46n0784) · zero hits (recorded as it is). Searching back independently through the whole file for the six strings 「無盡方便」 tr. "Inexhaustible Skilful Means", 「無盡品」 tr. "the chapter ‘The Inexhaustible’", 「不盡品」 tr. "the chapter ‘Not Exhausted’", 「新喪父母」 tr. "newly lost father and mother", 「如箭入心」 tr. "as though an arrow had entered his heart", and 「城譬喻經」 tr. "Sūtra of the Simile of the City" gave zero hits in every case—Junzheng has no named citation of this chapter; the negative result is recorded as it is.
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 treatise's own forward pointer, ‘the chapter "Inexhaustible"’ (the treatise-author's own testimony · a hard link within this treatise itself). In the "Introduction" chapter of Fascicle 5, explaining the 「巧」 tr. "skill" of the contemplation of the twelve links of causes and conditions, the treatise-author points ahead to this chapter directly with 「《般若波羅蜜．不可盡品》中，佛告須菩提」 tr. "in the chapter ‘Cannot Be Exhausted’ of the Prajñāpāramitā, the Buddha told Subhūti"〔T25 0100c06〕, and re-cites its text: 「癡如虛空不可盡，行如虛空不可盡，乃至眾苦和合集如虛空不可盡。」 tr. "Delusion is like space, inexhaustible; constructions are like space, inexhaustible; and so on up to the coming together and gathering of the mass of suffering, which is like space, inexhaustible."〔T25 0100c06〕 and 「作是觀十二因緣起者，則為坐道場，得薩婆若。」 tr. "One who contemplates the arising of the twelve links of causes and conditions in this way thereby sits at the seat of awakening and obtains sarvajñā."〔T25 0100c09〕. The opening fascicles of the whole treatise already know that there is this chapter, already know its name, and already know its meaning—the 「觀十二因緣而得薩婆若」 tr. "contemplating the twelve links of causes and conditions and obtaining sarvajñā" announced in Fascicle 5 is explained at length only in this chapter, in Fascicle 80. The four characters 「不可盡品」 tr. "the chapter ‘Cannot Be Exhausted’" are seen only this once in the body of the whole of T25n1509 (found by rescanning the whole treatise in the stream of Chinese characters with the note layer excluded); the anchor of the Ming edition's interlinear note within the note on this chapter's title, 「經作不可盡品」 tr. "the sūtra has the chapter ‘Cannot Be Exhausted’", is at〔T25 0620c15〕, belonging to the collation-note layer and not entering the ledger of the body—the two matters belong to two layers, recorded separately, as they are. That the chapter name the treatise-author himself uses differs from the chapter title of the base text is precisely the earliest end of the three lines of chapter names of Section IV; the succession is recorded.
Second, the succession across chapters of ‘Māra's grief · as though an arrow had entered his heart’ (one simile in two chapters · tied to different causes). The simile 「如箭入心」 tr. "as though an arrow had entered his heart" forms a passage in two places in this treatise: in Chapter 62, "Training Alike", 「魔大愁毒，如箭入心。」 tr. "Māra is greatly grieved and pained, as though an arrow had entered his heart."〔T25 0603a15〕, and in this chapter, 「惡魔愁毒，如箭入心。」 tr. "The evil Māra is grieved and pained, as though an arrow had entered his heart."〔T25 0621b13〕. That chapter ties it to 「不離般若波羅蜜」 tr. "not departing from prajñāpāramitā", this chapter to 「行無所得般若波羅蜜」 tr. "practising the prajñāpāramitā with nothing to be attained"; the deeds of Māra that that chapter sets out are nine, falling on the talk between those of the same path, while this chapter sets out only the principle of why Māra can do nothing, and itself puts forth the one simile of the fisherman. The preceding chapter tells of Māra's deeds, this chapter of Māra's being at his wits' end; the chapters give rise to one another in order, and the succession is recorded. Jizang explains it in this chapter by 「緣觀俱絕」 tr. "object and contemplation both cut off"〔X24n0451 0319c06〕, and the connection may be recorded.
Third, the boundary of ‘the path of prajñā / the path of skilful means’ (the same judgement by two masters · recorded without judgement). Jizang's 「此下第二明方便道。前是般若道」 tr. "From here on, the second makes clear the path of skilful means. What preceded was the path of prajñā"〔X24n0451 0319a11〕 and Huiying's 「上來至此明菩薩波若道，自此品已下訖於經末明菩薩方便道。」 tr. "From the beginning up to here makes clear the bodhisattva's path of prajñā; from this chapter down to the end of the sūtra makes clear the bodhisattva's path of skilful means."〔X46n0791 0912c04〕: the two masters each express it in their own way, while the boundary they judge falls alike on this chapter. Within this chapter of this treatise there is no explicit wording of this boundary (checking character by character within the range of this chapter, 「方便道」 tr. "the path of skilful means" and 「般若道」 tr. "the path of prajñā" both give zero hits), so this judgement belongs to the divisions of the two commentaries and is not the treatise-author's own statement; only the two occurrences of 「方便力」 tr. "the power of skilful means" in the sūtra text〔T25 0621a21〕〔T25 0621a23〕 are truly the only place where the two characters 「方便」 tr. "skilful means" of the chapter title land in the main text (see Section II), and the judgement of the two commentaries matches this. The connection is recorded, without settling the reading on anyone's behalf.
Fourth, linking to the treasury (stable citation · soft citation). This chapter's general answer, 「虛空不可盡故，般若波羅蜜不可盡」 tr. "because space is inexhaustible, prajñāpāramitā is inexhaustible"; its method of contemplation, by which 「十二因緣是獨菩薩法」 tr. "the twelve links of causes and conditions are a dharma of the bodhisattvas alone" and 「離二邊故假名為中道」 tr. "because it leaves the two extremes, it is provisionally named the middle way"; the graded order of the three kinds of the twelve links of causes and conditions; the order of breaking the mark of old age (a construction not associated with mind · the worldly marks of old age · the five aggregates of retribution: three breakings); and its close, 「信力、慧力等故能迴向薩婆若」 tr. "because the power of faith and the power of wisdom are equal, one is able to dedicate to sarvajñā"—these are the basis on which later ages discussed the contemplation of the middle way, the non-duality of dependent arising and emptiness, and the mutual support of faith and wisdom; they rest on a stable citation〔T25n1509 無盡方便品·卷八十〕; since the places in the various volumes that cite this treatise are not yet in final form, the citation is soft, awaiting the preservation of their character-by-character check. This belongs to the further resonance by which the meaning of prajñā runs down through the gates of contemplation; recorded without judgement.
VIII. Witnesses and Editions
The base text of this chapter is Fascicle 80 of the Mahāprajñāpāramitā-upadeśa〔T25 0620c15–0623b07〕 (the main text of the chapter body begins from the fascicle-head title〔T25 0620c15〕 and ends with the sentence 「乃至般若波羅蜜亦如是」 tr. "and so on up to prajñāpāramitā: it is likewise", running on to〔T25 0623b06〕; it lies before the title of the next chapter〔T25 0623b07〕; within the range of this chapter there is no fascicle-end title); the collation text for the sūtra explained is "The Inexhaustible" in the Mahāprajñāpāramitā Sūtra〔T08 0364a28–0365a26〕; the ancient-master commentary texts for collation are Jizang's Commentary on the Larger Sūtra (X24n0451, covering the sūtra explained at〔X24n0451 0319a10–0319c12〕) and Huiying's Commentary (X46n0791, covering this treatise at〔X46n0791 0912c03–0914b20〕); Junzheng's Profound Meaning of the Four Mahāyāna Treatises (X46n0784) has zero hits for this chapter, Zhiyi's Great Calming and Contemplation has zero hits, Zhiyi's Profound Meaning of the Lotus cites the sūtra explained in two places, and the citations 「大論八十」 tr. "Great Treatise, eighty" in Zhanran's two books are excluded entry by entry (see Section VI). The variant collation notes follow the Taishō collation, covering differences between the Taishō base text and the Song, Yuan, Ming, Palace, and Ishiyama (the Ishiyama-dera manuscript) texts, and the CBETA collation—within this chapter's ledger of thirty-seven entries no entry of the Shōgozō manuscript or of the Shōgozō B is seen (the Shōgozō is wholly absent from the collation of this chapter; only on the side of the sūtra explained, T223, are there Shōgozō variant readings; see Section IV), recorded separately, as it is.
The note on the chapter title enters the ledger (unlike Chapter 62). The note on this chapter's title, n="0620016" (type=mod), has as its anchor the beginning-and-end pair beg0620016 / end0620016 (not the point-anchor type <anchor type="circle"/> of Chapter 62), and so it enters the ledger of thirty-seven entries of the working base text, listed as entry one of the ledger below, without setting up a separate listing—this differs from the handling in Chapter 62, where 「品題注不入四十條之帳」 tr. "the note on the chapter title does not enter the ledger of forty entries"; the reason lies in the different anchor types of the base texts of the two chapters, recorded separately, as it is. Its full text in the base text as it stands is entry one of the ledger below, and the grounds of the three matters—the three lines of chapter names, the Ishiyama -1 step, and the Ming interlinear note—all lie in this one entry (analysed in Section IV).
Five stars · four within the chapter · one across chapters (this chapter as the target end · listed separately). Within the range of this chapter there are four star anchors, and there is one more in the next chapter that takes a note of this chapter as its target, five in all. The collation entry to which each corresponds is resolved star by star, and the chapter to which it belongs is located:
beg_86b〔T25 0622a08〕 the character 「可」 tr. "can"—corresp→note(0622001), that is, the note at〔T25 0622a07〕 in this chapter (entry seventeen of the ledger below), shared within the chapter itself; the two occurrences are only one sentence apart (「色不可盡，般若波羅蜜亦不可盡。」 tr. "Form is inexhaustible; prajñāpāramitā too is inexhaustible."), the note is defined only once, and the second occurrence is hung back to it by a star.beg_86c〔T25 0622a18〕 the character 「觸」 tr. "contact"—corresp→note(0622002), that is, the note at〔T25 0622a18〕 in this chapter (entry nineteen of the ledger below), shared within the chapter itself.beg_86d〔T25 0622a18〕 the character 「觸」 tr. "contact"—corresp→note(0622002), the same locus and the same target as the preceding star: in this sentence, 「因眼緣色生觸念，觸念從癡生」 tr. "in dependence on the eye and conditioned by form, contact-thought arises; contact-thought arises from delusion"〔T25 0622a17〕, the character 「觸」 tr. "contact" appears three times, one being the body of the note's definition and the other two stars—this is the mechanical cause of the three rows, entries nineteen to twenty-one of the ledger below, at the same locus with the same lemma.beg_86e〔T25 0622b26〕 the character 「故」 tr. "oldness"—corresp→note(0622010), that is, the note at〔T25 0622b26〕 in this chapter (entry thirty of the ledger below), shared within the chapter itself: in the sentence 「若不住則無故，無故則無老」 tr. "if they do not abide then there is no oldness, and without oldness there is no old age"〔T25 0622b26〕 the character 「故」 tr. "oldness" appears twice, one being the definition and the other a star—this is the mechanical cause of entries thirty and thirty-two of the ledger below being at the same locus.beg_86f〔T25 0623b08〕, belonging to the 【經】 marker at the opening of the next chapter, "The Six Perfections Contain One Another", the Sixty-eighth—corresp→note(0620018), that is, the note on the 【經】 marker at〔T25 0620c20〕 in this chapter (entry three of the ledger below). Checking shows that this corresp id is referred to at only two places in the whole file (the defining end in this chapter,beg0620018, and the end taking it over in the next chapter,beg_86f); that is, this star is a general explanation that 「【經】體例標記於宋宮二本俱缺、石本更不分卷」 tr. "the sūtra style-marker is lacking in both the Song and Palace editions, and the Ishiyama text moreover does not divide the fascicle", hung back through the star mechanism to the single place of definition, not a divergence of meaning peculiar to this chapter; its direction is the reverse of the case of Chapter 62—that chapter is the end where the star appears, this chapter the target end.
With the corresp targets of the five settled, the distribution of the stars is four within the chapter and one across chapters (the end where it appears being in the next chapter). The note texts of the star targets carry the mark 「＊」 tr. "asterisk" in the base text, and this ledger keeps them as they stand in the base text (entries three, eleven, seventeen, eighteen, nineteen, twenty, twenty-one, thirty, and thirty-two of the ledger below).
One entry of the CBETA emendation layer (not of the type setting the traditional texts side by side · listed separately). 〔T25 0622b06〕「因【CB】，困【大】」 tr. "cause (CBETA); distress (Taishō)" (entry twenty-four of the ledger below)—the base-text note type is type="add", and its anchor id reads beg0622b0601 (unlike the numbering form beg0622NNN of the other thirty-six entries; it is an emendation anchor set up by CBETA itself), with no traditional witness mark of Song, Yuan, Ming, Palace, Ishiyama, and the like; that is, CBETA emends the 「困」 tr. "distress" of the Taishō base text 【大】 to 「因」 tr. "cause" (「以少顛倒樂因緣故而取」 tr. "and grasps because of the causes and conditions of a little inverted pleasure"), which belongs to CBETA's modern collation layer; the reader-facing text of this edition follows the reading of the current CBETA text. The first item of this entry's base-text note reads 「因【CB】」 tr. "cause (CBETA)" and not 「【大】」 tr. "(Taishō)", the reverse of the convention of all the other entries, whose first item is always the base-text reading; recorded separately, as it is. 〔Note: the lemma of this entry in the body actually reads 「因」 tr. "cause" (CBETA having taken the emended reading into the main text), not the base-text reading 「困」 tr. "distress" carried in the second item of the base-text note.〕
One entry where the CBETA main text follows the reading of the Palace and Ishiyama texts (the body contrary to the base-text reading · listed separately). 〔T25 0621c13〕「知【大】，如【宮】【石】」 tr. "know (Taishō); seem (Palace, Ishiyama)" (entry twelve of the ledger below)—checked against the file: the lemma of this entry in the body actually reads 「如」 tr. "seem" (「中聞『囑累』，如似有」 tr. "in the middle he heard ‘entrustment’, which seems to be something existent"); that is, at this point the current CBETA text takes the reading of the two texts, Palace and Ishiyama, into the main text, contrary to the Taishō 【大】 base-text reading 「知」 tr. "know" marked in its own collation note. Comparing entry by entry the lemmas of the thirty-seven entries with the first items of their notes, this is the only entry with this phenomenon (the first items of the notes on the chapter title and on the signature line are abbreviated forms of the 「（大智…十）十七字」 tr. "(from the opening ‘great wisdom’ … to the closing ‘ten’) seventeen characters" type, not literal readings, and do not belong to this kind). Recorded as it is; the reader-facing text of this edition follows the reading of the current CBETA text, the two readings recorded side by side without judgement.
Three collation annotations (side-notes) · kept as they stand (listed separately). Within the collation notes of this chapter there are three interlinear notes of the base text—place="inline" sub-phrases or bracketed notes of the base text—which this ledger keeps as they stand, without deleting them: the first and second are both in the note on the chapter title〔T25 0620c15〕 (entry one of the ledger below)—the Song and Yuan editions' 「訖第六十八品上」 tr. "ending with the first part of the sixty-eighth chapter" (stating itself the chapter at which this fascicle ends), and the Ming edition's 「經作不可盡品」 tr. "the sūtra has the chapter ‘Cannot Be Exhausted’" (stating itself that the sūtra it re-cites has another chapter name; what it refers to has been located in two places in Section IV); the third, 〔T25 0623b06〕「是【大】，（是釋第六十六品竟，大智度論經卷第八十）【石】」 tr. "this (Taishō); (this. The commentary on the sixty-sixth chapter is finished. Mahāprajñāpāramitā-upadeśa Sūtra, Fascicle Eighty) (Ishiyama)" (entry thirty-seven of the ledger below)—the bracketed note is the Ishiyama text's closing record at the end of the chapter, and is at once the second end of evidence for the -1 step and the only end of evidence for the Ishiyama fascicle numbering (see Section IV). The two embedded interlinear notes of entry one of the ledger below are recorded as they stand in their places, following the literal order of the base text, without adding any separator; the base text's statements of character counts (「二十四字」 tr. "twenty-four characters", 「二十二字」 tr. "twenty-two characters", 「二十三字」 tr. "twenty-three characters") are also kept as they stand, the number including the characters of the interlinear notes.
Complete ledger of collation notes (all thirty-seven entries reconciled · the base text as it stands). Below, all are listed in the order of their appearance in the base text, including four star entries (within the chapter); the fifth, across chapters, lies in the range of the next chapter and does not enter this ledger. The readings of the variant texts are preserved side by side, while the main text still follows the reading of the current CBETA text:
App entries (thirty-seven · in order of appearance in the base text · star-corresp marked with each entry)
- 〔T25 0620c15〕（大智…十）十七字【大】｜（大智度論釋卷第八十釋無盡品第六十七訖第六十八品上）二十四字【宋】｜大智度論釋卷第八十釋無盡品第六十七品【宮】｜（大智度論卷第八十釋無盡品第六十七經作不可盡品）二十二字【明】｜（大智度論卷第八十釋無盡品第六十七訖第六十八品上）二十三字【元】｜摩訶般若波羅蜜品第六十六無盡品【石】(note on the chapter title · enters the ledger · the two embedded
place="inline"interlinear notes 「訖第六十八品上」 tr. "ending with the first part of the sixty-eighth chapter" and 「經作不可盡品」 tr. "the sūtra has the chapter ‘Cannot Be Exhausted’" in their places as they stand · the basis of the three lines of chapter names and of the Ishiyama -1 step · see Section IV) - 〔T25 0620c18〕（聖者…譯）十七字【大】｜〔－〕【石】(signature line · the Ishiyama text omits the whole line)
- 〔T25 0620c20〕【經】【大】＊｜〔－〕【宋】【宮】＊｜不分卷【石】(note on the presence or absence of a structural marker · defining end of a star · the corresp end where it appears is at the 【經】 marker of the next chapter, "The Six Perfections Contain One Another"〔T25 0623b08〕 · shared across chapters · see the separate listing above)
- 〔T25 0621a13〕是【大】｜〔－〕【宋】【元】【明】【宮】(of 「是十二因緣」 tr. "these twelve links of causes and conditions", its 「是」 tr. "these" · the reverse of the added 「如」 tr. "thus" at the same position in the sūtra explained · see Section IV)
- 〔T25 0621a14〕是獨【大】｜獨是【宋】【宮】
- 〔T25 0621a14〕倒【大】｜倒獨不共法【石】(the Ishiyama text adds, below 「能除諸邊、顛倒」 tr. "able to remove the extremes and the inversions", the four characters 「獨不共法」 tr. "the unshared dharma alone" · an addition carrying doctrinal weight)
- 〔T25 0621a19〕皆【大】｜〔－〕【宋】【宮】
- 〔T25 0621a29〕生【大】｜生乃至【元】【明】(the Yuan and Ming editions read 「眾生乃至知者」 tr. "a being, and so on up to a knower" · precisely the reading of the base text of the sūtra explained · see Section IV)
- 〔T25 0621b11〕法【大】｜法以【石】
- 〔T25 0621b14〕惡【大】｜是惡【元】【明】(a variant reading at the same position and in the same direction as in the sūtra explained · there it is in five texts · see Section IV)
- 〔T25 0621c12〕【論】【大】＊｜〔－〕【宋】【宮】＊(note on the presence or absence of a structural marker · carries the ＊ mark in the base text · checking shows that no other place in the whole file takes this note as its corresp target)
- 〔T25 0621c13〕知【大】｜如【宮】【石】(the lemma in the body actually reads 「如」 tr. "seem" · the current CBETA text follows the Palace and Ishiyama reading · contrary to the base-text reading marked in the note · see the separate listing above)
- 〔T25 0621c17〕分【大】｜分別【石】
- 〔T25 0621c24〕盡【大】｜盡壞【石】
- 〔T25 0621c25〕我今【大】｜今我【石】
- 〔T25 0621c27〕若【大】｜〔－〕【宋】【元】【明】【宮】
- 〔T25 0622a07〕可【大】＊｜〔－〕【石】＊(place of definition of a star · note(0622001) · for the one that shares it, see the next entry)
- 〔T25 0622a08〕可【大】＊｜〔－〕【石】＊(star · corresp→note(0622001) = the note at〔T25 0622a07〕 in this chapter · shared within the chapter)
- 〔T25 0622a18〕觸【大】＊｜濁【宋】【元】【明】【宮】【石】＊(place of definition of a star · note(0622002) · for the two that share it, see the next two entries)
- 〔T25 0622a18〕觸【大】＊｜濁【宋】【元】【明】【宮】【石】＊(star · corresp→note(0622002) · shared within the chapter)
- 〔T25 0622a18〕觸【大】＊｜濁【宋】【元】【明】【宮】【石】＊(star · corresp→note(0622002) · shared within the chapter · for the cause of the three rows at the same locus, see the separate listing of stars above)
- 〔T25 0622b01〕老【大】｜老病【元】【明】【石】
- 〔T25 0622b04〕煩惱【大】｜緣生【石】
- 〔T25 0622b06〕因【CB】｜困【大】(CBETA emendation layer · base-text note type type="add" · anchor id
beg0622b0601· no traditional witness · the first item is the CB reading · see the separate listing above) - 〔T25 0622b10〕入【大】｜又【元】【明】
- 〔T25 0622b13〕求【大】｜於【元】【明】
- 〔T25 0622b20〕瘦皺【大】｜瘦面皺身【石】(the note layer carries no punctuation · the lemma in the body reads 「瘦、皺」 tr. "emaciated, wrinkled" · a difference of convention, not a variant reading)
- 〔T25 0622b21〕又【大】｜又復【石】
- 〔T25 0622b23〕輻【大】｜𨍮【元】【明】【石】(the variant character is recorded as it stands in the CBETA composed form · the normalised character form is not adopted)
- 〔T25 0622b26〕故【大】＊｜相【元】【明】＊【石】(place of definition of a star · note(0622010) · the position of the ＊ mark recorded as in the base text · for the one that shares it, see the second entry below)
- 〔T25 0622b26〕無【大】｜無相【石】
- 〔T25 0622b26〕故【大】＊｜相【元】【明】＊【石】(star · corresp→note(0622010) = the note at〔T25 0622b26〕 in this chapter · shared within the chapter · for the cause of the two rows at the same locus, see the separate listing of stars above)
- 〔T25 0622c14〕著【大】｜〔－〕【宋】【宮】
- 〔T25 0622c27〕若【大】｜若有【石】
- 〔T25 0623a13〕是無【大】｜無是【宋】【元】【明】【宮】
- 〔T25 0623b03〕以【大】｜以智【石】
- 〔T25 0623b06〕是【大】｜（是釋第六十六品竟，大智度論經卷第八十）【石】(collation annotation (side-note) kept as it stands · the Ishiyama text's closing record at the end of the chapter · the second end of evidence for the -1 step · the only end of evidence for the Ishiyama fascicle numbering · see Section IV)
The above thirty-seven entries agree mechanically with the number of collation notes at anchor points in the working base text (the working base text · thirty-seven collation entries · a separate enumeration, anchor by anchor and star-anchor by star-anchor, gives the same number, thirty-seven), and the targets of the stars have been marked with each entry. The note on the chapter title entering the ledger, the five stars, the one entry of the CBETA emendation layer, the one entry where the CBETA main text follows the Palace and Ishiyama reading, and the three collation annotations have been listed separately above.
Witness collation of the sūtra explained (six places expanded · the rest not expanded · the gap recorded, to be supplied). Within the range of collation for this chapter on the side of the sūtra explained, T223〔T08 0364a28–0365a26〕, twelve numbered notes and ten star anchors (all hung back to the notes on the two characters 「那」 tr. "na" and 「羅」 tr. "ra", whose anchors of definition are in the range of the preceding chapter〔T08 0364a11〕) were found by scanning entry by entry, together forming the full ledger of the collation. The six places of variant reading in which it and this treatise confirm each other (dāna / dhyāna without and with na · ‘these’ / ‘thus these’ twelve links · ‘are … alone’ / ‘alone are’ · ‘should contemplate by the dharma of the inexhaustibility of space’ · ‘a being, and so on up to a knower’ · ‘the evil Māra’ / ‘this evil Māra’) and the collation notes in three readings on the chapter title have been recorded entry by entry in Section IV. The listing side by side of the remaining entries one by one has not been expanded; that it has not been expanded is recorded as it stands, and the count is not filled up with an estimate.