大智度論 道樹品Dazhidulun — Mahāprajñāpāramitā-upadeśa · The Tree of the Path

The Tree of the Path: Why the Difficulty of Planting a Tree in Space Is Not an Impossibility but a Great Difficulty; Why the Tree-Planter's Not Recognising Root, Trunk, Branches, and Leaves Is Precisely the Mark of the Bodhisattva's Practice of the Path; Why the Three Benefits of Leaves, Flowers, and Fruit Must Be Spoken of in Three Layers; Why the Bodhisattva's Being as a Buddha Is Not an Exalting of the Bodhisattva; Why the Sequence of Training in Suchness-Prajñā Locks Step upon Step and Cannot Be Skipped; Why the Sixfold Weighing Must Take the Ground of Dry Wisdom and So On up to the Bodhisattva Turned towards the Buddha Path for Comparison; Why, When the One of the First Arousing of the Mind Should Keep in Mind the Omniscience of All Kinds, the Buddha Does Not First Teach the Deep Dharma; Why the Non-existent Dharma as Object and Thought as Dominant Condition Do Not Contradict Each Other; Why Being Called a Non-existent Dharma Because Self-Nature Is Non-existent Is Not Annihilation; Why within Being without Nature One Can Still Practise the Six Perfections and Purify Buddha-Worlds; Why the Animals, Though They Too Have Suchness, Are Not Named as a Buddha; Why the Simile of Obtaining the Pearls by Lightning Is Placed Where the Wisdom Associated with a Single Thought Stands; and Why the Suchness of Worldly Convention Being Precisely the Suchness of the Highest Meaning Is Not Two Tiers of Truth

What Is Being Asked

What this chapter asks is a question that a practitioner most easily asks and that is least easily answered: since the beings to be delivered are unfindable, does the matter of arousing the mind to deliver beings still stand?

Subhūti states this difficulty to the utmost. He does not say that the bodhisattva cannot accomplish the delivering; he says that 「所為甚難」 tr. "what they do is very hard," and he himself puts forth a simile—it is as a person wishing to plant a tree in space. Space has nothing to rest on, and what is planted has nowhere to take root; beings are unfindable, and the mind aroused to deliver them has nowhere to apply its strength. This one simile sets up the whole tension of the chapter at a single stroke: the difficulty is not that beings are too many; it is that even the object to be delivered cannot be taken hold of.

The Buddha's answer does not come back from the side of emptiness, nor does it come back from the side of existence; it takes over Subhūti's simile and changes its angle. The Buddha says: it is as a person plants a tree, not recognising the tree's root, trunk, branches, leaves, flowers, and fruit, and only cherishes and guards it and waters it, and it little by little grows large, and flowers, leaves, and fruit are accomplished. The person who plants the tree need not first recognise the substance and nature of the tree, and the tree grows all the same; the bodhisattva need not first obtain the real dharma of beings, and the six perfections all the same little by little are practised into the Buddha-tree. Subhūti's simile speaks of the place where one plants being empty; the Buddha's simile speaks of the one who plants not recognising—when the two similes are joined, the difficulty is not denied, and yet it is given its place. This is the origin of the chapter's name, 「道樹」 tr. "the tree of the path."

Once the tree is set up, the Buddha at once speaks of its use in three layers: those whom the leaves benefit are freed from the three evil destinies, those whom the flowers benefit obtain birth among humans and gods, and those whom the fruit benefits obtain the four fruits of the śramaṇa and so on up to the Buddha path, and by the three vehicles enter nirvāṇa without remainder. The three layers go from thin to thick, each layer nearer to the ultimate than the last. When the treatise-author explains this simile he further matches out the nature and marks of the three things one by one: the leaves are taken for their shade and coolness, which can keep off the heat; the flowers for their fine colour, pure fragrance, and softness; the fruit for their colour, fragrance, flavour, and strength. Here one matter should be kept in mind—among the three benefits there is not one that is ‘causing beings to become really existent’; what is benefited is in every case the suffering and pleasure of beings, not the self-nature of beings.

The latter half of the chapter turns from the tree simile into suchness. Subhūti praises the bodhisattva as being as a Buddha; the Buddha not only approves it but also pushes the reason to the bottom: by reason of suchness the Tathāgata is spoken of, and by reason of suchness too the worthies and sages are spoken of, form and so on up to consciousness are spoken of, all dharmas and so on up to the conditioned nature and the unconditioned nature are spoken of; the suchnesses are without difference, and therefore the bodhisattva trains in this suchness, obtains the omniscience of all kinds, and obtains the name Tathāgata. From here onward, the sūtra text asks all the way through: whether the omniscience of all kinds is an existent dharma or a non-existent dharma, why the self-nature of dharmas is non-existent, how within being without nature one can still practise the six perfections and purify buddha-worlds, and, since dharmas and the nature of dharmas are separated, how one can still know existence and know non-existence. In between, the treatise-author sets up three rounds of question and answer, and at the end returns to a single sentence: the suchness of worldly truth is precisely the suchness of the truth of the highest meaning. The whole chapter, beginning from 「虛空中種樹」 tr. "planting a tree in space" and concluding at 「世諦、第一義諦無異也」 tr. "Worldly truth and the truth of the highest meaning are without difference," asks about one and the same matter—how practice is to be set up within emptiness.

Passage by Passage

1. Subhūti sets up the difficulty: not finding beings and yet seeking awakening for the sake of beings is like planting a tree in space. At the head of the chapter Subhūti addresses the Buddha. He first praises prajñā as very deep, and at once brings that depth down onto a concrete difficulty: the bodhisattva 「不得眾生，而為眾生求阿耨多羅三藐三菩提」 tr. "does not find beings, and yet for the sake of beings seeks anuttarā samyaksaṃbodhi." In reading this sentence one must see clearly that the two occurrences of 「眾生」 tr. "beings" are one and the same—that for whose sake one acts is it, and that which is unfindable is also it. If it is read as ‘beings exist in the mundane truth and do not exist in the true truth’ and so split into two sections, the difficulty disappears, and the tension of the sūtra text is lost too. Subhūti's putting forth of the simile of planting a tree in space is precisely a refusal to let anyone dissolve the difficulty by the method of splitting it into sections.

2. The Buddha answers with the simile of planting a tree: not recognising the tree's root, trunk, branches, and leaves, and yet cherishing and guarding it and watering it, it little by little grows large. The Buddha's answer is in two sections. The first section first acknowledges the difficulty: 「如是！如是！諸菩薩摩訶薩所為甚難」 tr. "Just so! Just so! What the bodhisattva-mahāsattvas do is very hard"—he does not deny the difficulty Subhūti has set up. Only the second section brings out the simile: it is as a person plants a tree, not recognising the tree's root, trunk, branches, leaves, flowers, and fruit, only cherishing and guarding it and watering it, and it little by little grows large; flowers, leaves, and fruit are accomplished, and all obtain the use of them. The point where this simile puts its strength lies in the two Chinese characters 「不識」 tr. "not recognising": the person who plants the tree need not first have a set of views about the tree, and the growth of the tree does not depend on his views; the bodhisattva need not first obtain the real dharma of beings, and the gradual practice of the six perfections does not depend on this either. Next the Dharma is matched with the simile: for the sake of beings one seeks awakening, little by little practises the six perfections, obtains the omniscience of all kinds, accomplishes the Buddha-tree, and with leaves, flowers, and fruit benefits beings.

3. As for the leaves benefiting beings: because of the bodhisattva, beings obtain freedom from the three evil destinies. The Buddha himself sets up three questions and himself answers them; the first question is about the leaves. The benefit of the leaves is 「因菩薩摩訶薩得離三惡道」 tr. "because of the bodhisattva-mahāsattva, they obtain freedom from the three evil destinies." The three evil destinies are the uttermost place of suffering, and so they are matched with the thinnest layer. Here one should not read 「因菩薩」 tr. "because of the bodhisattva" as the bodhisattva receiving the retribution in place of beings—the sūtra text says only that because of the bodhisattva they obtain freedom; it does not say that the suffering they are freed from is transferred onto the bodhisattva's body.

4. As for the flowers benefiting beings: because of the bodhisattva, beings obtain birth in the great clans of the kṣatriyas and so on up to the abode of the heaven of neither perception nor non-perception. The second question is about the flowers. The benefit of the flowers is obtaining birth in the great clans of the kṣatriyas, the great clans of the brahmins, the great families of the householders, the abode of the Heaven of the Four Heavenly Kings, and so on up to the abode of the heaven of neither perception nor non-perception. This list rises from the nobility of the human world, passes through the heavens of the desire realm, and reaches the summit of the formless realm, going up step by step. What is listed is all the retribution of the good destinies, and so it is matched with the middle layer. The practitioner should know here: the sūtra text does not take birth in heaven as the ultimate; it only places it in the middle of the three layers—it does not discard it, nor does it take it as sufficient.

5. As for the fruit benefiting beings: because the bodhisattva obtains the omniscience of all kinds, he causes beings to obtain the four fruits of the śramaṇa and so on up to the Buddha path, and by the three vehicles to enter nirvāṇa without remainder. The third question is about the fruit. The benefit of the fruit is that, after the bodhisattva obtains the omniscience of all kinds, he causes beings to obtain the fruit of the srota-āpanna, the fruit of the sakṛdāgāmin, the fruit of the anāgāmin, the fruit of the arhat, the pratyekabuddha path, and the Buddha path, and these beings 「漸漸以三乘法於無餘涅槃而般涅槃」 tr. "little by little, by the dharmas of the three vehicles, attain parinirvāṇa within nirvāṇa without remainder." Only here do the three layers reach the ultimate. Note the two Chinese characters 「漸漸」 tr. "little by little"—they echo the 「漸漸長大」 tr. "little by little it grows large" of the tree-planting in the preceding passage and the 「漸漸行」 tr. "little by little practise" of practising the six perfections; the whole section uses 「漸漸」 tr. "little by little" in three places, and this is the rhythm of the gate of practice in this chapter.

6. The bodhisattva does not find the real dharma of beings and yet delivers beings, and has the thought that within all dharmas there are no beings. When the three benefits have been spoken, the Buddha returns to the difficulty at the head of the chapter: this bodhisattva 「不得眾生實法，而度眾生令離我顛倒著」 tr. "does not find the real dharma of beings, and yet delivers beings, causing them to be free from clinging to self and to inversion," and himself has this thought: 「一切諸法中無眾生，我所為眾生求一切種智，是眾生實不可得。」 tr. "Within all dharmas there are no beings; the beings for whose sake I seek the omniscience of all kinds are really unfindable." This is the first point of gathering-in of the whole chapter—delivering and unfindability stand at the same time; it is not first taking a real being and then saying that he is empty, nor is it not delivering because of emptiness. What is left behind is 「我顛倒著」 tr. "clinging to self and to inversion," not beings themselves.

7. Subhūti praises the bodhisattva as being as a Buddha, and himself states that its causes and conditions lie in his being able to cut off the seeds of the evil destinies. Subhūti, hearing this, exclaims: 「當知是菩薩為如佛。」 tr. "It should be known that this bodhisattva is as a Buddha." He states the reason himself: because of this bodhisattva, all the seeds of the hells, the seeds of the animals, and the seeds of the hungry ghosts are cut off; all the difficulties are cut off; all the paths of the poor, the low, and the mean are cut off; all of the desire realm, the form realm, and the formless realm is cut off. The reasons given lie entirely on the side of 「斷」 tr. "cutting off"—cutting off all the way from the seeds of the three evil destinies to the three realms. These words stand in exact contrast with the three benefits of leaves, flowers, and fruit above: the three benefits speak of what is given; here it speaks of what is cut off.

8. The Buddha approves and further states the causes and conditions: if the bodhisattva did not arouse the mind, the world would have no buddhas of the three times and no worthies and sages. The Buddha does not only give his approval; he also pushes the reason wider: if the bodhisattva did not arouse the mind to seek awakening, the world would have no buddhas of the past, the future, and the present, and would also have no pratyekabuddhas, arhats, anāgāmins, sakṛdāgāmins, or srota-āpannas, and the three evil destinies and the three realms would have no time of being cut off. In reading this passage one should see its direction—it is not saying that the bodhisattva creates the buddhas and the worthies and sages; it is saying that without this one move of arousing the mind, this whole road that gives birth to the worthies and sages does not stand. Arousing the mind is the starting point of the road, not the maker of the fruit.

9. By reason of suchness the Tathāgata, the worthies and sages, and form and so on up to the conditioned and unconditioned natures are spoken of; because the suchnesses are without difference, it is named suchness. The Buddha pushes the meaning of 「如佛」 tr. "as a Buddha" still further down to its root. He first repeats the words Subhūti has spoken, and then answers why it is so: by reason of suchness the Tathāgata is spoken of; by reason of suchness the pratyekabuddha, the arhat, and all the worthies and sages are spoken of; by reason of suchness form and so on up to consciousness are spoken of; by reason of suchness all dharmas and so on up to the conditioned nature and the unconditioned nature are spoken of; 「是諸如，如實無異，以是故說名為如」 tr. "these suchnesses are, in reality, without difference; for this reason it is named suchness." What matters most here is the breadth of what is listed—not only the positions of the sages; even form and the conditioned and unconditioned natures are among them. Suchness is not some high position possessed by the sages alone; it is the one and the same reality relied on when all dharmas are spoken of. The bodhisattva trains in this suchness and obtains the omniscience of all kinds, and so obtains the name Tathāgata; saying that he is as a Buddha is 「以如相故」 tr. "by reason of the mark of suchness," not a compliment granted out of human sentiment.

10. The sequence of training in suchness-prajñāpāramitā, from training in the suchness of all dharmas up to establishing beings in the three vehicles and causing them to enter nirvāṇa without remainder. The Buddha then gives a sequence in which step locks onto step: training in suchness-prajñāpāramitā, one is then able to train in the suchness of all dharmas; training in the suchness of all dharmas, one then obtains the fulfilment of the suchness of all dharmas; having fulfilled it, one then abides in the suchness of all dharmas and obtains mastery; having obtained mastery, one then knows well the faculties of all beings; having known the faculties, one then knows the completeness of the faculties of beings; having known the completeness of the faculties, one then knows the causes and conditions of the deeds of all beings; having known the causes and conditions of deeds, one then obtains the fulfilment of the knowledge from vows; having fulfilled the knowledge from vows, one then purifies the wisdom of the three times; having purified the wisdom of the three times, one then greatly benefits all beings; having greatly benefited them, one then purifies buddha-lands; having purified buddha-lands, one then obtains the omniscience of all kinds; having obtained the omniscience of all kinds, one then turns the wheel of the Dharma; having turned the wheel of the Dharma, one then establishes beings in the three vehicles and causes them to enter nirvāṇa without remainder. The first two turns follow each other by the character 「則」 tr. "then"; from 「具足已」 tr. "having fulfilled" onward, each sentence locks onto the step before by the character 「已」 tr. "having," and not one step can be skipped. The passage concludes with 「菩薩摩訶薩欲得一切功德，自利利人，應發阿耨多羅三藐三菩提心」 tr. "the bodhisattva-mahāsattva who wishes to obtain all merits, benefiting himself and benefiting others, should arouse the mind of anuttarā samyaksaṃbodhi"—gathering the whole sequence back to the one move of arousing the mind. In reading this passage one should touch on it sentence by sentence, and must not pass over it with a single 「乃至」 tr. "and so on up to"; as for its number of steps, please count them from the sūtra text itself, and do not take a fixed number from outside the treatise.

11. Subhūti says that the gods, humans, and asuras of all the world should pay homage to the bodhisattva who practises the deep prajñā as taught. Subhūti's words arise from the breadth of the merits in the passage above. The one he extols is not ‘the bodhisattva who has attained the path’; it is the bodhisattva who 「能如說行深般若波羅蜜」 tr. "is able to practise the deep prajñāpāramitā as taught"—the weight is on practising as taught, not on whether he has already attained or not yet attained.

12. The Buddha approves his words and says again that all the world should pay homage to him. The Buddha's answer almost says Subhūti's words over again, only adding in the last phrase the one character 「為」 tr. "for him," so that it reads 「應當為作禮」 tr. "should pay homage to him." When the Buddha in the sūtra says a passage over again, it is usually not rhetoric; it is a sealing; what is sealed here is that 「如說行」 tr. "practising as taught" is itself worthy of receiving homage, without waiting for its accomplishment.

13. Subhūti asks how much merit the bodhisattva who has first aroused intent obtains in seeking awakening for the sake of beings. From here the topic turns into weighing. What Subhūti asks about is the bodhisattva of 「初發意」 tr. "the first arousing of intent"—the very first one, who does not yet have any stage to speak of. And what he asks is 「得幾所福德」 tr. "how much merit does he obtain," precisely wanting a measure that can be compared.

14. The Buddha compares it with the merit of the beings of a thousand lands arousing the intent of the two vehicles, which falls short of the bodhisattva who has first aroused intent by a hundred-thousand-myriad-fold. The Buddha first sets up an extremely great measure: the beings within a thousand lands all arouse the intent of the śrāvaka and the pratyekabuddha. Subhūti answers 「甚多無量」 tr. "Very much, and immeasurable." Yet the Buddha says that their merit does not come up to that of the bodhisattva who has first aroused intent, differing to the point of being beyond the reach of calculation and simile, and he brings out the reason: those who arouse the intent of the two vehicles all come forth because of the bodhisattva; the bodhisattva never comes forth because of the two vehicles. This reason is the axle of the whole passage of weighing—what is compared is not the amount of merit; it is the before and after of giving birth.

15. The Buddha continues by comparing the merit of the beings of the three-thousand great-thousand world who abide on the ground of dry wisdom. The Buddha enlarges the measure again: the two-thousand world and the three-thousand great-thousand world are also like this; and, first leaving aside those who abide on the grounds of the śrāvaka and the pratyekabuddha, he asks instead about the beings of the three-thousand great-thousand world all abiding on the ground of dry wisdom. Subhūti still answers 「甚多無量」 tr. "Very much, and immeasurable," and the Buddha still answers that it does not come up to the bodhisattva who has first aroused intent. Here one should see the Buddha's method of setting the question—each round raises the object of comparison one level, while the answer does not change.

16. The Buddha continues by comparing it with the beings who abide on the ground of the stage of nature and so on up to the pratyekabuddha ground. The third round raises the object of comparison all the way through the ground of the stage of nature, the ground of the person of the eight, the ground of seeing, the ground of thinning, the ground of freedom from desire, the ground of what has been done, and the pratyekabuddha ground; this is the whole array of stages of the practice and realisation of the two vehicles. All this merit, compared with the bodhisattva who has first aroused intent, still falls short by a hundredfold, a thousandfold, a vast koṭi of myriads-fold, and so on up to being beyond the reach of calculation and simile. Listing ground by ground without abbreviation is precisely to make the practitioner see: what is compared can be raised no further, and the answer is still thus.

17. The Buddha continues the weighing: the bodhisattva who has first aroused intent does not come up to the bodhisattva who has entered the position of dharmas, the one who has entered the position of dharmas does not come up to the one turned towards the Buddha path, and the one turned towards the Buddha path does not come up to the Buddha. At this point the weighing turns its direction around. The preceding three rounds take the two vehicles to compare with the bodhisattva who has first aroused intent; this round takes the bodhisattva who has first aroused intent to compare with bodhisattvas higher up: the one who has first aroused intent does not come up to the one who has entered the position of dharmas, the one who has entered the position of dharmas does not come up to the one turned towards the Buddha path, the one turned towards the Buddha path does not come up to the merit of the Buddha, and at each level it is by a hundred-thousand-myriad-fold, a vast koṭi of myriads-fold, and so on up to being beyond the reach of calculation and simile. Only here is the sixfold weighing complete—the first three tiers protect the first mind from belittling itself; the latter three tiers protect the first mind from exalting itself. If in reading this passage one takes only the first half, it becomes an exalting of the first arousing of intent; if one takes only the latter half, it becomes a belittling of the first arousing of intent. Only when the two halves are seen together is it the sūtra's meaning.

18. Subhūti asks what dharma the bodhisattva of the first arousing of the mind should keep in mind. The weighing being finished, what Subhūti asks accordingly comes down onto the gate of practice: such a bodhisattva of the first arousing of the mind—in daily use, what should he keep in mind? This question is extremely plain, yet it is the pivot of the whole latter half of the chapter.

19. The Buddha answers that he should keep in mind the omniscience of all kinds. The Buddha's answer is only six Chinese characters: 「應念一切種智。」 tr. "He should keep in mind the omniscience of all kinds." He does not teach him first to contemplate emptiness, nor does he teach him first to learn a sequence; he points straight to the object kept in mind as the Buddha's ultimate fruit. Why this is so, the treatise-author sets up a question later on to explain specially; here the words are first recorded.

20. Subhūti asks about the substance of the omniscience of all kinds and about its object, its dominant condition, its practice, and its mark. Subhūti presses with four matters: what the omniscience of all kinds is, what it has as its object, what as its dominant condition, what as its practice, and what as its mark. These four questions are the skeleton of the latter half of the chapter; the Buddha's answers and the treatise-author's explanations below all follow these four headings.

21. The Buddha answers that the omniscience of all kinds is without anything existent, without perception, without thought, without arising, without showing, and has the non-existent dharma as its object, thought as its dominant condition, quiescence as its practice, and the signless as its mark. The Buddha first speaks of its substance: 「一切種智無所有、無想、無念、無生、無示。」 tr. "The omniscience of all kinds is without anything existent, without perception, without thought, without arising, without showing." Next he repeats Subhūti's four questions and answers them one by one: it has the non-existent dharma as its object, thought as its dominant condition, quiescence as its practice, and the signless as its mark. Here there is a point easily got wrong that must first be settled: having said 「無想、無念」 tr. "without perception, without thought," why does he also say that thought is its dominant condition? The two statements do not contradict each other—‘without thought’ says that its substance cannot be taken by perception and thought; ‘thought as its dominant condition’ speaks of the power on which the practitioner relies within this gate. The treatise-author specially sets up a question and answer later on to explain this; see passages 53 and 54 below.

22. Subhūti asks in return: since the omniscience of all kinds is a non-existent dharma, are form, feeling, perception, constructions, and consciousness, and so on up to the marks of the conditioned and the unconditioned, also non-existent dharmas? Subhūti pushes the Buddha's words onto all dharmas. What he lists is extremely broad: form, feeling, perception, constructions, and consciousness; inner dharmas and outer dharmas; the four dhyānas, the four immeasurable minds, the four formless absorptions; the four foundations of mindfulness and so on up to the eightfold noble path; the three samādhi; the eight liberations; the nine successive absorptions; the Buddha's ten powers, the four fearlessnesses, the four unobstructed knowledges, the eighteen unshared dharmas; great kindness, great compassion, great joy, and great equanimity; the six supernormal powers; the mark of the conditioned and the mark of the unconditioned. The broader the list, the more pressing the intent of the question—he wants to know whether this 「無法」 tr. "non-existent dharma" is said only of the Buddha's fruit, or extends to everything.

23. The Buddha answers that form too is a non-existent dharma, and so on up to the mark of the conditioned and the mark of the unconditioned too being non-existent dharmas. The Buddha's answer is extremely short; he only points out the two ends of the list Subhūti has made: form too is a non-existent dharma, and so on up to the mark of the conditioned and the mark of the unconditioned too are non-existent dharmas. A short answer that gathers in everything is precisely an answer of ‘it extends to everything’.

24. Subhūti asks for its causes and conditions. Subhūti does not take the short answer as sufficient, and asks further why it is so: by reason of what causes and conditions the omniscience of all kinds is a non-existent dharma, and form and so on up to the marks of the conditioned and the unconditioned are also non-existent dharmas. This one question pushes the whole section into principle.

25. The Buddha answers that because self-nature is non-existent, this is called a non-existent dharma. The Buddha answers: 「一切種智自性無故，若法自性無是名無法。色乃至有為、無為相亦如是。」 tr. "Because the self-nature of the omniscience of all kinds is non-existent. If the self-nature of a dharma is non-existent, this is called a non-existent dharma. Form and so on up to the mark of the conditioned and the mark of the unconditioned are also like this." Here one must see clearly the place where the term 「無法」 tr. "non-existent dharma" is defined—it does not say that this dharma does not exist; it says that its self-nature is non-existent; because its self-nature is non-existent, it is called a non-existent dharma. Once the definition is set up, all the statements of 「無法」 tr. "non-existent dharma" before and after should be read according to it.

26. Subhūti continues by asking why the self-nature of dharmas is non-existent. Subhūti presses down one layer further: by reason of what causes and conditions the self-nature of dharmas is non-existent. One question following on another is driving the meaning of 「無法」 tr. "non-existent dharma" to its final ground.

27. The Buddha answers that because they are born from the coming together of causes and conditions they are without self-nature, and that because all dharmas are empty of self-nature it should be known that all dharmas are without nature. The Buddha gives the final ground: 「諸法和合因緣故生法中無自性，若無自性是名無法。」 tr. "Because dharmas are born from the coming together of causes and conditions, within the dharma that is born there is no self-nature; if there is no self-nature, this is called a non-existent dharma." And he concludes with 「一切法自性空故，以是故當知一切法無性」 tr. "because all dharmas are empty of self-nature; for this reason it should be known that all dharmas are without nature." At this point the three layers run through one another: born from the coming together of causes and conditions, therefore without self-nature; without self-nature, therefore called a non-existent dharma; all dharmas empty of self-nature, therefore all dharmas without nature. The practitioner should here keep one measure—what is refuted is self-nature, not the dharma-marks that arise from the coming together of causes and conditions; if it is read as all dharmas not existing, then the six perfections and the purifying of buddha-worlds below would have nowhere to be set up.

28. Subhūti asks: if all dharmas are without nature, by what power of skilful means is the bodhisattva who has first aroused intent able to practise the six perfections and so on up to the omniscience of all kinds, purify buddha-worlds, and bring beings to accomplishment? This is the second great difficulty of the whole chapter, woven on the same loom as the difficulty at the head of the chapter: the head of the chapter asks how, since the beings to be delivered are unfindable, one is able to deliver them; here it asks how, since the dharmas to be practised are without nature, one is able to practise them. Subhūti lists what is to be practised item by item—dānapāramitā and so on up to prajñāpāramitā, the four dhyānas, the four immeasurables, the four formless absorptions, the emptinesses, the four foundations of mindfulness and so on up to the eightfold noble path, the three samādhi, the eight liberations, the nine successive absorptions, the Buddha's ten powers and so on up to great kindness and great compassion, the omniscience of all kinds—and the more complete the list, the more solid the difficulty.

29. The Buddha answers that training in dharmas' being without nature is precisely the power of skilful means; practising the six perfections he cultivates and trains in the Buddha path; with the wisdom associated with a single thought he obtains the omniscience of all kinds, and the afflictions and their habitual residues are forever exhausted; looking over the three-thousand great-thousand world with the Buddha-eye, even a non-existent dharma is unfindable. The Buddha's answer is the positive face of the gate of practice of the whole chapter. First he sets up the meaning of the power of skilful means: 「菩薩摩訶薩能學諸法無性，亦能淨佛世界、成就眾生，知世界、眾生亦無性，即是方便力。」 tr. "The bodhisattva-mahāsattva is able to train in dharmas' being without nature, and is also able to purify buddha-worlds and bring beings to accomplishment, and knows that worlds and beings are also without nature; this is precisely the power of skilful means."—the power of skilful means is not outside of being without nature; it lies exactly in being able to train in being without nature and still practise. Next he matches it item by item: practising giving and so on up to practising the omniscience of all kinds are all cultivating and training in the Buddha path, and he also knows that the Buddha path is without nature; practising thus until the causes and conditions of the Buddha path are fulfilled, with the wisdom associated with a single thought he obtains the omniscience of all kinds, and all the afflictions and their habitual residues are forever exhausted, because they no longer arise. Next the Buddha-eye is taken as the proof: looking over the three-thousand great-thousand world with the Buddha-eye, 「無法尚不可得，何況有法」 tr. "even a non-existent dharma is unfindable, how much less an existent dharma." Next, taking giving as the example, he blocks everything off position by position: even the non-existent dharma of what is given is unfindable; even the non-existent dharma of the one who receives and of the bodhisattva's mind is not known; and so on up to the one who obtains, the dharma obtained, and the place of obtaining of the omniscience of all kinds, which are likewise so. At the end he brings out its general cause: 「一切法本性爾」 tr. "the original nature of all dharmas is just so"; it is not made by the Buddha, not made by the śrāvakas and pratyekabuddhas, nor made by any other person, because all dharmas have no maker. This passage is the last great section of the sūtra segment; in reading it one must not take only the side of ‘being without anything existent’ and lose the side of ‘and yet still practising’.

30. Subhūti asks whether dharmas and the nature of dharmas are separated. The last question of the sūtra segment rises from here. Subhūti asks: 「諸法、諸法性離耶？」 tr. "Are dharmas separated from the nature of dharmas?" What he asks is whether there is any distance between a dharma and the nature of dharmas—if they are separated, the knower and the known are cut apart.

31. The Buddha answers that they are indeed separated; Subhūti continues the difficulty: how can a separated dharma know of a separated dharma whether it exists or does not exist? The Buddha answers directly: 「如是！如是！諸法、諸法性離。」 tr. "Just so! Just so! Dharmas are separated from the nature of dharmas." Subhūti at once takes up his words and raises the difficulty: if they are separated, how can a separated dharma know of a separated dharma whether it exists or does not exist? And he himself sets out his reasoning: a non-existent dharma cannot know a non-existent dharma, an existent dharma cannot know an existent dharma; a non-existent dharma cannot know an existent dharma, an existent dharma cannot know a non-existent dharma. With the four alternatives blocked off completely, he then forms a single question: since all dharmas are of the mark of being without anything existent, how does the bodhisattva make the distinction that this dharma exists or this dharma does not exist?

32. The Buddha answers that by reason of worldly truth one shows beings that it exists or does not exist, not by the highest meaning; that worldly truth and the truth of the highest meaning are without difference, and it is because beings do not know this suchness that one speaks by worldly dharmas; and furthermore, that because there is clinging within the five aggregates of clinging, one shows that it exists or does not exist, causing them to know the pure being without anything existent. The Buddha's answer is in three sections. The first section: 「菩薩摩訶薩以世諦故示眾生若有、若無，非以第一義。」 tr. "It is by reason of worldly truth that the bodhisattva-mahāsattva shows beings that it exists or does not exist, not by the highest meaning." The second section answers Subhūti's question whether the two truths are different or not: 「世諦、第一義諦無異也。何以故？世諦如即是第一義諦如。」 tr. "Worldly truth and the truth of the highest meaning are without difference. Why? The suchness of worldly truth is precisely the suchness of the truth of the highest meaning." The reason for speaking of existence and speaking of non-existence is that beings do not know and do not see this suchness. The third section, taking up the preceding with 「復次」 tr. "furthermore," speaks of one layer more: because beings have the mark of clinging within the five aggregates of clinging, they do not know what is without anything existent; showing existence and showing non-existence for the sake of these beings is in order to cause them to 「知清淨無所有」 tr. "know the pure being without anything existent." These three sections together form the conclusion of the sūtra segment, and they lock head and tail with the difficulty at the head of the chapter—that not finding beings and yet seeking awakening for the sake of beings is possible lies precisely in this: speaking of existence and speaking of non-existence are both the setting-up of worldly truth, and the suchness of worldly truth is not different from the suchness of the highest meaning.

33. The treatise-author explains: Subhūti, having heard that nothing to be attained is precisely attainment, exclaims that such a thing had never been. The treatise segment begins with 「釋曰」 tr. "explaining, it says." The treatise-author first points out the ground of Subhūti's mind when he puts his question: he had 「從佛聞無所得即是得」 tr. "heard from the Buddha that nothing to be attained is precisely attainment," and therefore exclaimed that such a thing had never been and said to the Buddha, 「世尊！是般若甚深！」 tr. "World-Honored One! This prajñā is very deep!" This one sentence supplies a provenance the sūtra text does not state clearly—the praise at the head of the chapter is not a general exclamation; it arises from what was heard in the preceding chapter. The treatise-author's closing addition, 「如經中廣說」 tr. "as is said at length in the sūtra," is a phrase pointing the way, not a passing-over.

34. The treatise-author explains the tree simile: leaves, flowers, and fruit go from thin to thick; the shade of the leaves removes heat, the flowers are lovely and bring the pleasure of humans and gods, the fruit obtains the fruits of the noble path. The treatise-author glosses the simile thing by thing. First he sets up the general meaning: 「以樹為譬喻，葉、華、果實，從薄轉厚。」 tr. "The tree is taken as the simile; leaves, flowers, and fruit go from thin to thick." Next he matches them one by one: as the shade of the tree's leaves, cool and pleasant in the time of heat, beings by the shade of the bodhisattva's tree of the path obtain freedom from the hot suffering of the three evil destinies, and the reason is 「遮惡故」 tr. "because evil is kept off"; as the flowers, fine in colour, pure in fragrance, and soft, beings, because the bodhisattva teaches and transforms them by giving and upholding the precepts, receive merit and pleasure among humans and gods; as the tree's fruit, with colour, fragrance, flavour, and strength, beings, because of the bodhisattva, obtain the fruits of the noble path, such as that of the srota-āpanna. Three things, three natures, three benefits, matched one to one, with none set up in vain. This passage is the proper explanation of the meaning of the simile in the whole chapter; when reading the three benefits of the sūtra segment, one should read it together with this passage.

35. The treatise-author repeats Subhūti's words of rejoicing and brings out the causes and conditions he himself states. The treatise-author restates the sūtra text: Subhūti, hearing this, rejoiced and said, 「是菩薩如佛無異」 tr. "This bodhisattva is as a Buddha, without difference," and he points out that 「此中自說因緣」 tr. "here he himself states the causes and conditions"—namely, 「因菩薩故斷地獄等惡道」 tr. "because of the bodhisattva, the evil destinies such as the hells are cut off." Here the treatise-author passes no judgement; he only marks the sūtra text's own structure: the words of praise are followed at once by the reason, and that reason is given by Subhūti himself, without waiting for the Buddha to speak.

36. The treatise-author repeats that the Buddha approved his meaning and further stated the causes and conditions. The treatise-author continues the restatement: the Buddha approved his meaning and further stated the causes and conditions, namely 「須菩提！若菩薩不發心求阿耨多羅三藐三菩提，乃至三界無斷時」 tr. "Subhūti! If the bodhisattva did not arouse the mind to seek anuttarā samyaksaṃbodhi, and so on up to: the three realms would have no time of being cut off." By the two Chinese characters 「更說」 tr. "further stated" he distinguishes the two layers of causes and conditions—what Subhūti states lies in cutting off evil; what the Buddha further states lies in this: without the arousing of the mind, the worthies and sages and the time of cutting off would both be absent.

37. Furthermore: because of obtaining the suchness of dharmas one is called Tathāgata, and so on up to srota-āpanna; suchness is in the Buddha and also in the bodhisattva; apart from suchness there is no further dharma that does not enter suchness. The treatise-author, with 「復次」 tr. "furthermore," brings out one more layer of his own. First he extends the meaning of the sūtra: because of obtaining the suchness of dharmas one is called Tathāgata and so on up to being called srota-āpanna; because of suchness form and so on up to the unconditioned nature are spoken of; 「是諸法如皆一無異」 tr. "these suchnesses of dharmas are all one and without difference." Next he brings out the conclusion: the bodhisattva who trains in this suchness will certainly obtain sarvajñā, and therefore it is said that he is as a Buddha, without difference. Next he sets up a distinction, and this is the most crucial point of this passage—「不以我心貪貴菩薩故說言如佛，以得如故言如佛」 tr. "It is not because my mind covets and prizes the bodhisattva that I say he is as a Buddha; it is because he obtains suchness that he is said to be as a Buddha": saying that the bodhisattva is as a Buddha does not come from a private mind partial to the bodhisattva; it is said with respect to obtaining suchness. At the end he gathers it all up in one sentence: 「是如在佛，亦在菩薩，以一相故」 tr. "This suchness is in the Buddha and is also in the bodhisattva, because it is the same one mark," and 「離如，更無有法不入如者」 tr. "Apart from suchness, there is no further dharma that does not enter suchness."

38. Question and answer one: if it is because of being the same in suchness that one is named as a Buddha, the animals too have suchness; why are they not named as a Buddha? The treatise-author sets up the first round of question and answer. This question is extremely sharp—since suchness pervades all dharmas and is without difference, in the body of an animal too there is this suchness; why is it not said that the animal is as a Buddha? This question drives the 「以一相故」 tr. "because it is the same one mark" of the preceding passage to its extreme; if the answer cannot hold, the words ‘as a Buddha’ become empty words.

39. Answer: though the animals have suchness, the causes and conditions have not yet come forth; they cannot benefit beings and cannot practise suchness up to sarvajñā. The treatise-author's answer is only one sentence, yet it divides into two parts: first, 「因緣未發」 tr. "the causes and conditions have not yet come forth"; second, 「不能利益眾生、不能行如至薩婆若」 tr. "they cannot benefit beings and cannot practise suchness up to sarvajñā." The first part speaks with respect to position; the latter part speaks with respect to function. It can thus be known that the name 「如佛」 tr. "as a Buddha" does not depend on whether one has suchness or not; it depends on whether one can practise this suchness up to sarvajñā, and whether one can benefit beings with this suchness. The practitioner should here look into himself—having suchness is the same; being able to practise it or not is different.

40. The treatise-author explains that training in suchness-prajñā can fulfil the suchness of all dharmas, and so on up to obtaining mastery, knowing well the faculties of beings, and knowing the causes and conditions of deeds. The treatise-author explains following the sequence of the sūtra text. First he explains 「具足」 tr. "fulfilment": 「具足名得諸法實相，能以種種門令眾生得解」 tr. "Fulfilling is called obtaining the real mark of all dharmas, being able by all kinds of gates to bring beings to understanding"—fulfilment is not a great quantity of things collected; it is obtaining the real mark and being able to open many gates. Next he explains that because of fulfilment one obtains mastery in the suchness of all dharmas, because of obtaining mastery one can know well the faculties of beings, and because of knowing the faculties well one can know the completeness of the faculties of beings. Next he explains 「諸根」 tr. "the faculties" as the five wholesome roots, faith and the rest, which persons of the three vehicles each have, and one can distinguish that this person has them and that person does not, this person has obtained their power and that person has not. Next he explains 「具足」 tr. "complete" as the wholesome roots such as faith being complete; such a person is able to leave the world. Next he speaks separately, faculty by faculty, of their power and function: when the faculty of faith obtains its power, one is then certainly able to receive and uphold without doubt; by the power of vigour, though one has not yet seen the Dharma, one seeks the path with a single mind, not sparing body or life, without resting and without ceasing; by the power of mindfulness one constantly recollects one's teacher's teaching—when wholesome dharmas come one lets them in, when evil dharmas come one does not let them in, like a gatekeeper; by the power of concentration one collects the mind in one place and does not move, so as to help wisdom; by the power of wisdom one is able to contemplate the marks of dharmas as they really are. To each of the five faculties he gives one mark and one simile; they must not be spoken of in a jumble.

41. There are two kinds of obtaining the faculties: in the body of a person of the great mind they become bodhisattva faculties; in the body of a person of small mind they become faculties of the Small Vehicle. After the five faculties the treatise-author sets up a separate heading: the same five faculties, faith and the rest, become bodhisattva faculties in the body of a person of the great mind, and become faculties of the Small Vehicle in the body of a person of small mind; obtaining these complete faculties, one can then be delivered. This judgement is very important—the faculties as faculties are the same; the vehicle they accomplish is divided by the greatness or smallness of the mind. The practitioner should know here that what he himself must examine is not whether he has the five faculties or not, but where his mind is turned.

42. Or there is a bodhisattva who sees that a person, though he has obtained the five faculties, cannot be delivered, because the sins of his evil deeds of former lives are heavy. The treatise-author sets up an exception: or there is a bodhisattva who sees that a person, though he has obtained the five faculties such as faith, still cannot be delivered, and this is because the sins of his evil deeds of former lives are heavy; therefore the sūtra text only then says 「知一切眾生業因緣」 tr. "knows the causes and conditions of the deeds of all beings." This passage is the joint between the two parts above and below—going from the completeness of the faculties to the causes and conditions of deeds is not raising a separate topic; it is completing what the preceding part left unfinished.

43. Wishing to know the causes and conditions of deeds through countless kalpas, one must obtain the supernormal power of former lives; having known, one tells beings of their past sinful deeds; one further seeks the knowledge from vows to know the matters of the three times and tells of future sin and merit, causing them to give rise to fear or to joy and so to be easily delivered. The treatise-author brings out step by step why the knowledge from vows is necessary. To know the causes and conditions of deeds through countless kalpas, one must obtain the supernormal power of former lives; having known, one then tells beings of the causes and conditions of their past sinful deeds. But beings take past sins as already gone and do not give rise to fear; therefore one seeks the knowledge from vows in order to know the matters of the three times; having known, one then tells beings of the causes and conditions of the sinful deeds of the future age—that they will fall into the hells; when beings hear it, they become afraid, and being afraid, their minds are tamed and they are easy to deliver; if one wishes to know the causes and conditions of the rewards of merit in the future age, when one tells them, they rejoice and can be delivered. The two roads of fear and joy are used together, both for the sake of easy delivering. What this passage shows is that the sequence of expounding the Dharma rests on the sequence of knowing and seeing, not on seizing chances as they come.

44. Because the knowledge from vows is fulfilled, the wisdom of the three times is pure, penetrating without obstruction, knowing the good and evil of the three times and the keenness and dullness of faculties in the present, and then expounding the Dharma to teach and transform, benefiting much and not in vain; and so on up to purifying buddha-lands, obtaining the omniscience of all kinds, turning the wheel of the Dharma, and establishing beings by the three vehicles and causing them to enter nirvāṇa without remainder. The treatise-author continues from the preceding part and gathers in its fruit. The wisdom of the three times being pure means knowing the good and evil deeds of the past, knowing the good and evil retributions of the future, and knowing the keenness and dullness of the faculties of beings in the present, and then expounding the Dharma to teach and transform them, 「多所利益不虛」 tr. "benefiting much and not in vain." Next, following the list of the sūtra text, he pushes all the way down: because one greatly benefits beings one is able to purify buddha-lands; having purified buddha-lands one obtains the omniscience of all kinds; because one has obtained the omniscience of all kinds one turns the wheel of the Dharma; having turned the wheel of the Dharma one establishes beings by the three vehicles and causes them to enter nirvāṇa without remainder. The sequence set up in passage 10 of the sūtra segment here obtains, in the treatise segment, the full account of its explanation; the two should be read together.

45. Such benefits all come from within training in suchness; therefore the Buddha says that one who wishes to obtain all merits should arouse the mind of awakening. The treatise-author makes a general gathering-in of the long passage above: 「如是利益，皆從學如中來」 tr. "Such benefits as these all come from within training in suchness," and therefore the Buddha says 「菩薩欲得一切功德，自利利人，當發阿耨多羅三藐三菩提心」 tr. "The bodhisattva who wishes to obtain all merits, benefiting himself and benefiting others, should arouse the mind of anuttarā samyaksaṃbodhi." This sentence ties knowing the faculties, knowing deeds, the knowledge from vows, the wisdom of the three times, purifying the lands, the omniscience of all kinds, and the rest all back to the two places of training in suchness and arousing the mind, not letting them scatter into a string of the functions of supernormal powers.

46. The treatise-author repeats that Subhūti, hearing that the merits are very many, says that all the world should pay homage. The treatise-author restates the sūtra text and points out its limit: Subhūti, hearing that this bodhisattva's merits are very many, therefore spoke these words; the treatise-author adds one sentence, 「如經中廣說，分別初發意菩薩功德」 tr. "As is said at length in the sūtra, distinguishing the merits of the bodhisattva who has first aroused intent"—tying up the passage of the sixfold weighing with a phrase pointing the way, and not bringing it out again in the treatise segment.

47. The treatise-author supplies the state of mind in which Subhūti asks: he knows that the very deep prajñā is without recollection and imagining and is not what a beginner obtains. This passage is the treatise-author's own contribution. In the sūtra text one sees only Subhūti asking 「初發心菩薩，應念何等法？」 tr. "What dharma should the bodhisattva of the first arousing of the mind keep in mind?"; the treatise-author supplies why he asks: he knows that this very deep prajñā is without recollection and imagining, not what a beginner can obtain. With this one supplement, why the Buddha below does not teach the deep Dharma but teaches keeping in mind the omniscience of all kinds only then has something to rest on.

48. The Buddha answers that one should keep in mind the omniscience of all kinds; the omniscience of all kinds is one with awakening, sarvajñā, the Buddha-dharma, and the Buddha path, these being other names for it. The treatise-author explains the Buddha's answer, and sets up for 「一切種智」 tr. "the omniscience of all kinds" a heading of its other names: it is anuttarā samyaksaṃbodhi, sarvajñā, the Buddha-dharma, the Buddha path, and 「皆是一切種智異名」 tr. "these are all other names for the omniscience of all kinds." This heading is very useful—in the running text of this treatise the four names are used interchangeably, and a reader who does not know them to be other names easily takes them wrongly as four matters.

49. Question and answer two: why does the Buddha answer, saying to keep in mind the omniscience of all kinds? The treatise-author sets up the second round of question and answer. What is asked is exactly the doubt left over by the passage above: since prajñā is very deep and not what a beginner obtains, why does the Buddha straightaway teach him to keep in mind the omniscience of all kinds—is not the object kept in mind higher still?

50. Answer: the bodhisattva who has first aroused intent has not yet obtained deep wisdom and has already given up the pleasures of the five desires; the Buddha teaches him to bind his mind and keep sarvajñā in mind, and by the benefits of the fourfold contrast causes him constantly to keep it in mind. The treatise-author's answer first settles his position: the bodhisattva who has first aroused intent has not yet obtained deep wisdom, and yet has already given up the pleasures of the five desires of the world—above, he does not cling to the pleasure of the Dharma; below, he has already given up the pleasure of desire; he stands exactly in the middle, in a place with nothing to rely on, and so the Buddha teaches him to bind his mind and keep sarvajñā in mind. Next he brings out the content of what is kept in mind, as a fourfold contrast: 「雖捨小雜樂，當得清淨大樂；捨顛倒虛誑樂，得實樂；捨繫縛樂，得解脫樂；捨獨善樂，得共一切眾生善樂。」 tr. "Though you give up small and mixed pleasures, you will obtain pure and great pleasure; giving up inverted, false, and deceptive pleasure, you obtain real pleasure; giving up the pleasure of bondage, you obtain the pleasure of liberation; giving up the pleasure of being good alone, you obtain the pleasure of being good in common with all beings." All four are one giving-up and one obtaining, and the finer what is given up, the broader what is obtained; the last one moreover reaches from oneself to all beings. Because of obtaining such benefits as these, the Buddha teaches the one who has first aroused intent constantly to keep sarvajñā in mind. This passage is the gate of practice in this chapter most pressing for the first mind; the four should be touched on one by one.

51. The treatise-author repeats Subhūti's question whether the omniscience of all kinds is an existent dharma or a non-existent dharma, and what are its object, dominant condition, practice, and mark. The treatise-author repeats the sūtra's question, and supplies a part that the sūtra text does not have but that its meaning necessarily has—「為是有法？為是無法？」 tr. "Is it an existent dharma? Is it a non-existent dharma?" This question is marked clearly in the treatise segment, and the Buddha's answer below, 「無所有名非法」 tr. "what is without anything existent is called not a dharma," corresponds exactly to this question.

52. The treatise-author repeats the Buddha's answer: the omniscience of all kinds is without anything existent; what is without anything existent is called not a dharma, without arising and without ceasing; its object, the suchness and reality of dharmas, is also without anything existent; thought is its dominant condition, quiescence its practice, the signless its mark. The treatise-author repeats the Buddha's answer and adds within it a gloss: 「無所有名非法」 tr. "what is without anything existent is called not a dharma"—defining once more at this place the sūtra's term 「無法」 tr. "non-existent dharma," and linking it with 「無生無滅」 tr. "without arising and without ceasing." Next he answers the four headings one by one. This passage should be read against passage 21 of the sūtra segment: the sūtra says the non-existent dharma is its object, the treatise says 「諸法如實緣亦無所有」 tr. "its object, the suchness and reality of dharmas, is also without anything existent"; the two statements return to the same place while their wording differs, and one must not reread either by means of the other.

53. Question and answer three: since all is ultimate emptiness, why is thought alone said to be dominant? The treatise-author sets up the third round of question and answer, and what it asks is precisely the difficulty left over by passage 21: since all is ultimate emptiness, why, among the four headings, is it only of 「念」 tr. "thought" that it is said to be dominant? If this question is not resolved, then 「無想、無念」 tr. "without perception, without thought" and 「念為增上」 tr. "thought as its dominant condition" must obstruct each other.

54. Answer: dharmas each have their own power; the Buddha, having obtained the omniscience of all kinds, no longer ponders, and whatever he keeps in mind he obtains; therefore thought is said to be dominant. The treatise-author's answer is in two parts. The first part sets up the general rule: 「諸法各各有力」 tr. "dharmas each have their own power"—ultimate emptiness does not obstruct each dharma's having its own power and function; and he cites the Buddha's wisdom as ultimate emptiness, and suchness, the nature of dharmas, the limit of reality, and the signless as precisely the mark of quiescence. The latter part speaks with respect to the Buddha's fruit: after the Buddha obtains the omniscience of all kinds, he 「不復思惟，無復難易遠近，所念皆得」 tr. "no longer ponders, and no longer has any difference of hard and easy, far and near; whatever he keeps in mind he obtains," and therefore it is said that thought is dominant. It can thus be known that 「增上」 tr. "dominant" speaks of what is kept in mind being obtained at once without gap; it does not say that thought has a real substance. Ultimate emptiness and each having its own power go side by side in this passage without contradiction.

55. The treatise-author repeats Subhūti's question: is it only the omniscience of all kinds that is a non-existent dharma, or are dharmas such as form also non-existent dharmas? The treatise-author repeats in brief words the long question of passage 22 of the sūtra segment. The sūtra text lists dharmas extremely broadly; the treatise segment gathers them only with the three Chinese characters 「色等法」 tr. "dharmas such as form"—this is the treatise-author's usual way of writing, not a passing-over; the reader should go back to the sūtra segment and count off its full list.

56. The treatise-author repeats the Buddha's answer that all dharmas such as form are also non-existent dharmas, and that he himself states the causes and conditions: what is born from the coming together of causes and conditions is without self-nature, and what is without self-nature is empty, a non-existent dharma. The treatise-author repeats the Buddha's answer, and marks that the Buddha 「自說因緣」 tr. "himself states the causes and conditions": 「若法從因緣和合生，即無自性；若法無自性，即是空無法。以是因緣故，當知一切法無所有性。」 tr. "If a dharma is born from the coming together of causes and conditions, it is without self-nature; if a dharma is without self-nature, it is empty, a non-existent dharma. By reason of these causes and conditions, it should be known that all dharmas are of a nature without anything existent." It is the same line of reasoning as what is said in passage 27 of the sūtra segment, while here the three Chinese characters 「空無法」 tr. "empty, a non-existent dharma" are said together, binding 「空」 tr. "emptiness" and 「無法」 tr. "non-existent dharma" into one matter.

57. The treatise-author repeats Subhūti's question: by what skilful means does the bodhisattva of the first arousing of the mind practise the six perfections and so on up to the omniscience of all kinds? The treatise-author repeats the difficulty of passage 28 of the sūtra segment. The sūtra text lists things at great length; the treatise segment gathers them into the one sentence 「行檀波羅蜜乃至一切種智，淨佛世界、教化眾生」 tr. "practise dānapāramitā and so on up to the omniscience of all kinds, purify buddha-worlds, and teach and transform beings"—as before, it is a gathering, not an abridgement.

58. The treatise-author explains the Buddha's answer: training within the nature of dharmas that is without anything existent, entering contemplation, one is also able to gather merits, teach and transform beings, and purify buddha-worlds; the two dharmas of existence and non-existence are practised at one time; when practising the six perfections one also cultivates and orders the Buddha path; sitting at the seat of awakening, using the wisdom associated with a single thought, one obtains the omniscience of all kinds, as a person who at night loses a string of pearls, and the lightning flashes for a moment, at once obtains it back. This passage is the proper explanation of the gate of practice in the treatise segment, and there are several layers within it. First, where the power of skilful means lies: 「無所有法性中學，入觀亦能集諸功德、教化眾生、淨佛世界，即是方便力」 tr. "training within the nature of dharmas that is without anything existent, entering contemplation, he is also able to gather all merits, teach and transform beings, and purify buddha-worlds; this is the power of skilful means"—it is not doing merit separately after leaving contemplation; it is being able to gather it while within contemplation. Second, the treatise-author himself brings out a sentence to make clear why it is so: 「所謂有、無二法，能一時行故，所謂畢竟空，集諸福德」 tr. "Namely, because the two dharmas of existence and non-existence can be practised at one time—namely, ultimate emptiness, and the gathering of all merit"—existence and non-existence are not two times, before and after; they go side by side at one time, and this is precisely where the skill lies. Third, when practising the six perfections, 「亦修治佛道」 tr. "he also cultivates and orders the Buddha path," and he practises 「如佛心，以畢竟空、無所有法」 tr. "like the Buddha's mind, by the dharma of ultimate emptiness and of being without anything existent," and so is able to fulfil the Buddha's ten powers and so on up to great kindness and great compassion. Fourth, sitting at the seat of awakening, using the wisdom associated with a single thought, he obtains the omniscience of all kinds, and here the treatise-author brings out a simile: 「如人夜失貫珠，電光暫現，即時還得故」 tr. "it is as a person who at night loses a string of pearls: the lightning flashes for a moment, and at once he obtains it back"—the one who lost the pearls from the first has his pearls; the lightning does not make the pearls; it only shines once, and at once they are obtained. This simile is placed most fittingly at the wisdom associated with a single thought: the omniscience of all kinds is not made by a single thought; what a single thought obtains is what was from the first there and not yet seen. At the end he concludes that the afflictions and the habitual residues are forever exhausted and no longer arise.

59. Having obtained Buddhahood, looking over the worlds of the ten directions with the Buddha-eye, among all things he does not even see a non-existent dharma, how much less an existent dharma; that the dharma of ultimate emptiness can break inversion and cause the bodhisattva to become a Buddha—even this matter is unfindable. The treatise-author continues by explaining what is seen after the fruit is obtained. Looking within all the worlds of the ten directions with the Buddha-eye, 「一切物尚不見無法，何況有法」 tr. "among all things he does not even see a non-existent dharma, how much less an existent dharma." Next he pushes one layer further: the dharma of ultimate emptiness can break inversion and cause the bodhisattva to become a Buddha, and yet 「是事尚不可得，何況凡夫顛倒有法」 tr. "even this matter is unfindable, how much less the inverted existent dharmas of ordinary people"—even the matter of ultimate emptiness, which can break inversion, is unfindable. This push is extremely crucial; it guards against people, after breaking their clinging, clinging again to that by which it was broken.

60. It should be known that all dharmas are of the mark of being without anything existent; this is called the bodhisattva's skilful means; even emptiness is unfindable, how much less existence; the bodhisattva should practise the prajñāpāramitā that is without anything existent. The treatise-author makes the conclusion of the two passages above: 「當知一切法無所有相」 tr. "it should be known that all dharmas are of the mark of being without anything existent," and marks its heading as 「菩薩方便」 tr. "the bodhisattva's skilful means"; again, with the sentence 「空尚不可得，何況有」 tr. "Even emptiness is unfindable, how much less existence," he blocks it off once more, and at the end he exhorts the bodhisattva to practise the prajñāpāramitā that is without anything existent. Here the four Chinese characters 「菩薩方便」 tr. "the bodhisattva's skilful means" are a heading the treatise-author marks himself, running through with the meaning set up in passage 58.

61. When practising the prajñā that is without anything existent, in giving, the thing given is empty, and the one who receives and the bodhisattva's mind are also without anything existent, and so on up to the one who obtains, the dharma obtained, and the place of obtaining being all without anything existent; the original nature of all dharmas is just so, not made by ordinary people nor made by the sages, because all dharmas are unmade and have no maker. The treatise-author, taking giving as the example, blocks everything off position by position: in giving he knows at once that the thing given is empty and without anything existent, and that the one who receives and the bodhisattva's mind are also without anything existent; and so on up to the one who obtains, the dharma obtained, and the place of obtaining of the omniscience of all kinds, of which even a non-existent dharma is not known, how much less an existent dharma. Next he sets down definitions for the three names—「得者，菩薩；得法，是阿耨多羅三藐三菩提；用得法是菩薩道」 tr. "The one who obtains is the bodhisattva; the dharma obtained is anuttarā samyaksaṃbodhi; that by which the dharma is obtained is the bodhisattva path"; each of the three names has what it points to, and they do not overlap. At the end he brings out the general cause: 「一切法本性爾，不以智慧故異」 tr. "The original nature of all dharmas is just so; it does not become different because of wisdom," and says that it is not made by ordinary people nor made by the sages, because all dharmas are unmade and have no maker. The two sides of makers named in this passage differ in wording from those named in passage 29 of the sūtra segment: the sūtra segment has ‘not made by the Buddha, not made by the śrāvakas and pratyekabuddhas, nor made by any other person’; the treatise segment has ‘not made by ordinary people, nor made by the sages’—one blocks off starting from the side of the sages, the other starting from the side of ordinary people; both texts are kept, and neither may stand in for the other.

62. Subhūti's intent: if dharmas are all of the mark of being without anything existent, who knows that they are without anything existent? Therefore he asks: dharmas and the nature of dharmas being separated, how can a separated dharma know a separated dharma? The treatise-author supplies the thought in which Subhūti raises this question: 「若諸法都是無所有相，誰知是無所有？」 tr. "If all dharmas are of the mark of being without anything existent, who knows that they are without anything existent?" With this one supplement, the string of four-alternative blocking words of difficulty in passage 31 of the sūtra segment only then shows where it comes from—what is at issue is not existence and non-existence; it is where the knower is. The treatise-author then repeats the question of the sūtra text in full.

63. The Buddha answers that by reason of worldly convention the bodhisattva tells beings that it exists or does not exist, not by the highest meaning; if existence were really existent, non-existence too should have its reality; if existence is not real, how should non-existence be real? The treatise-author repeats the Buddha's answer and himself adds a piece of inference: 「若有是實有，無亦應有實。若有不實，無云何應實？」 tr. "If existence were really existent, then non-existence too should have its reality. If existence is not real, how should non-existence be real?" This inference is supporting evidence the treatise-author supplies for the sūtra text—if existence were real, then the non-existence set up in dependence on it should also be real; since existence is not real, how could non-existence alone be real? Existence and non-existence stand in dependence on each other, and so one may not cling one-sidedly to either as real. These words are very sharp; they are the one sentence of this passage most worth taking away.

64. Subhūti asks whether worldly convention and the highest meaning are different; the treatise-author explains that if they were different, this would break the nature of dharmas. The treatise-author repeats this question, and himself brings out a sentence of reason: 「若異，破壞法性故」 tr. "because, if they were different, this would break the nature of dharmas"—if the two truths were really different, the nature of dharmas would become two, and so they may not be different. This sentence is the treatise-author's paving of the road for the Buddha's answer in the next passage.

65. The Buddha answers that they are not different; the suchness of worldly convention is precisely the suchness of the highest meaning; because beings do not know this suchness, one tells them by worldly convention that it exists or does not exist. The treatise-author repeats the Buddha's answer: 「不異。世俗如即是第一義如。」 tr. "They are not different. The suchness of worldly convention is precisely the suchness of the highest meaning." And he follows it with: because beings do not know this suchness, one tells them by worldly convention that it exists or does not exist. At this point the 「誰知是無所有」 tr. "who knows that they are without anything existent" asked in passage 62 obtains its answer—what is known is not some separate thing outside the two truths; speaking of existence and speaking of non-existence is a setting-up made with respect to beings' not knowing.

66. Furthermore: beings have something they cling to within the five aggregates of clinging; in order that they may leave what they have and obtain being without anything existent, the bodhisattva says ‘without anything existent’; by reason of worldly dharmas he distinguishes dharmas; at the end he exhorts that one should train in the prajñāpāramitā that is without anything existent. The treatise-author, with 「復次」 tr. "furthermore," brings out the last passage himself, which is also the conclusion of the whole chapter. Beings have something they cling to within the five aggregates of clinging; in order to make these beings 「離所有、得無所有」 tr. "leave what they have and obtain being without anything existent," the bodhisattva says 「無所有」 tr. "without anything existent"; by reason of worldly dharmas he distinguishes dharmas, wishing to cause beings to know that this is without anything existent. At the end he gathers up the whole chapter in one sentence: 「如是，須菩提！菩薩應學無所有般若波羅蜜。」 tr. "Like this, Subhūti, the bodhisattva should train in the prajñāpāramitā that is without anything existent." This conclusion locks with the difficulty at the head of the chapter from afar—that a tree planted in space can be planted is precisely because the existence and non-existence spoken of are all set up in order to cause beings to know being without anything existent, not by taking beings as real. It should also be noted that at this point the sūtra segment has 「五受眾」 tr. "the five aggregates of clinging (written wu shou zhong)" and the treatise segment has 「五受陰」 tr. "the five aggregates of clinging (written wu shou yin)"; the wording of the two places differs, each follows its own text, and they are not to be drawn together.

Do Not Misread

Do not read planting a tree in space as an impossible matter. The words Subhūti sets up are 「甚難」 tr. "very hard," not 「不能」 tr. "cannot"; and the Buddha's answer too takes up only its hardness and not its impossibility—right after 「諸菩薩摩訶薩所為甚難」 tr. "what the bodhisattva-mahāsattvas do is very hard" come the simile of planting a tree and the little-by-little practice of the six perfections. If it is read as impossible, then the later passages—accomplishing the Buddha-tree, benefiting beings, the sixfold weighing, the power of skilful means—all have nothing to attach to. Hard and impossible are separated only by one word, and yet the gates of practice are entirely different.

Do not read 「不識樹根、莖、枝、葉、華、果」 tr. "not recognising the tree's root, trunk, branches, leaves, flowers, and fruit" as ignorance. What is not recognised in the simile is the substance and nature of the tree; what is done is cherishing, guarding, and watering; what the bodhisattva does not find is the real dharma of beings; what he does is the little-by-little six perfections. The leaf-shade, flower-colour, and fruit that the treatise-author matches when explaining this simile each have their mark and function, and from this it can be seen that the intent of the simile is not to praise ignorance but to show that practice does not wait on taking hold of the real. If it is read as the practitioner being able to do without knowing dharmas, it runs exactly counter to the passages below—「學一切法如」 tr. "train in the suchness of all dharmas," 「善知眾生根」 tr. "know well the faculties of beings," 「知一切眾生業因緣」 tr. "know the causes and conditions of the deeds of all beings."

Do not read the three benefits of leaves, flowers, and fruit as three kinds of reward. What the three benefits speak of is freedom from the three evil destinies, birth in the good destinies of humans and gods, and obtaining the path-fruits of the three vehicles—all said with respect to the suffering and pleasure and the path-fruits of beings; they do not say that beings thereby become really existent; and what follows directly after the three benefits is exactly 「不得眾生實法，而度眾生令離我顛倒著」 tr. "does not find the real dharma of beings, and yet delivers beings, causing them to be free from clinging to self and to inversion." If the three benefits are read as there being a real being who receives three portions of real benefit, then the difficulty at the head of the chapter is not only unresolved but made heavier.

Do not read 「菩薩如佛」 tr. "the bodhisattva is as a Buddha" as the bodhisattva being identical with the Buddha. The sūtra text itself states the reason for it as 「以如相故」 tr. "by reason of the mark of suchness," and the treatise-author further sets up a distinction: 「不以我心貪貴菩薩故說言如佛，以得如故言如佛。」 tr. "It is not because my mind covets and prizes the bodhisattva that I say he is as a Buddha; it is because he obtains suchness that he is said to be as a Buddha." Moreover, the sixfold weighing in the latter half of this chapter states plainly that the bodhisattva who has first aroused intent does not come up to the one who has entered the position of dharmas, the one who has entered the position of dharmas does not come up to the one turned towards the Buddha path, and the one turned towards the Buddha path does not come up to the merit of the Buddha. Speaking with respect to suchness there is no difference; speaking with respect to position there is a gap; each of the two places has what it refers to. If they are mixed into one, the earlier passage becomes an exalting, and the later passage becomes self-contradiction.

Do not read the question whether the animals too have suchness as suchness having differences. The treatise-author's answer never says that the suchness in the body of an animal is inferior; it says only 「因緣未發故，不能利益眾生、不能行如至薩婆若故」 tr. "because the causes and conditions have not yet come forth, and because they cannot benefit beings and cannot practise suchness up to sarvajñā." The difference lies in being able to practise or not, not in whether suchness is present or its height. If it is read as suchness having grades, the sentence above, 「是諸如，如實無異」 tr. "these suchnesses are, in reality, without difference," has nowhere to be placed.

Do not read 「無法」 tr. "non-existent dharma" as there being nothing at all. The Buddha has already given this word its definition—「若法自性無是名無法」 tr. "if the self-nature of a dharma is non-existent, this is called a non-existent dharma"—and the treatise-author further adds a sentence, 「無所有名非法」 tr. "what is without anything existent is called not a dharma"; what is non-existent is self-nature, not the dharma-marks. Precisely because of this, the passages below can practise the six perfections, purify buddha-worlds, and bring beings to accomplishment within being without nature. If it is read as annihilation, then the passage on the power of skilful means cannot be established, and the treatise-author's 「有、無二法，能一時行」 tr. "the two dharmas of existence and non-existence can be practised at one time" also becomes idle discourse.

Do not read 「無想、無念」 tr. "without perception, without thought" and 「念為增上」 tr. "thought as its dominant condition" as contradicting each other. The treatise-author specially sets up a question and answer for this, and the answer is in two parts: 「諸法各各有力」 tr. "dharmas each have their own power" is the general rule, and after the Buddha obtains the omniscience of all kinds, 「不復思惟，無復難易遠近，所念皆得」 tr. "he no longer ponders, and no longer has any difference of hard and easy, far and near; whatever he keeps in mind he obtains" is said specifically of the Buddha's fruit. ‘Without thought’ says that its substance cannot be taken by perception and thought; ‘thought as its dominant condition’ speaks of the power relied on within this gate. The two statements each have what they refer to; it is neither necessary nor permissible to take one and discard the other.

Do not read the simile of obtaining the pearls by lightning as a sudden obtaining that needs no prior practice. The person in the simile from the first has his pearls and loses them in the night; the lightning flashes once and at once he obtains them back—the pearls are not made by the lightning. The treatise-author places this simile at 「坐道場，用一念相應慧，得一切種智」 tr. "sitting at the seat of awakening, using the wisdom associated with a single thought, he obtains the omniscience of all kinds," and before this sentence there have already passed the passages 「行六波羅蜜時，亦修治佛道」 tr. "when practising the six perfections, he also cultivates and orders the Buddha path" and 「行菩薩道時，具足是法」 tr. "when practising the bodhisattva path, he fulfils these dharmas." So what this simile shows is the suddenness of the last illumination, not a discarding of the gradualness of the prior practice.

Do not read the two truths being without difference as the two truths being without distinction. What the Buddha says is 「世諦如即是第一義諦如」 tr. "the suchness of worldly truth is precisely the suchness of the truth of the highest meaning"—what is the same lies in suchness, while speaking of existence and speaking of non-existence is still the setting-up of worldly truth, not the highest meaning. The treatise-author too himself brings out the sentence 「若異，破壞法性故」 tr. "because, if they were different, this would break the nature of dharmas," only to block off difference; he never says that the two truths can stand in for each other. If it is read as without distinction, then the sentence 「以世諦故示眾生若有、若無，非以第一義」 tr. "by reason of worldly truth one shows beings that it exists or does not exist, not by the highest meaning" becomes an empty setting-up.

Bearing on Practice

The first use is to take the difficulty at the head of the chapter as a self-examination in daily use. What the bodhisattva does is very hard, and the hardness lies in the one to be delivered being unfindable and yet being delivered. At the place of arousing the mind, the practitioner can make this one reflection: the mind I arouse today—is its object a really existent person who can be delivered, or is it not taking hold of his reality and yet not abandoning his suffering? If the former, then however diligent the practice, it is separated from the sūtra's meaning; if the latter, even if not yet pure, it is already on the path. This reflection need not wait until one has deep wisdom to be of use; the difficulty at the head of the chapter was from the first spoken to the person of the first mind.

The second use is that the simile of planting a tree can serve as the rhythm of the gate of practice. In the simile, what is done is only the two matters of cherishing and watering, and what is waited for is 「漸漸長大」 tr. "little by little it grows large." The sūtra segment uses 「漸漸」 tr. "little by little" in three places—little by little growing large, little by little practising the six perfections, little by little entering nirvāṇa without remainder by the dharmas of the three vehicles. Here the practitioner can spare himself a great deal of anxious haste: not recognising the substance of the tree, the tree grows of itself; not taking hold of the real dharma of beings, the six perfections are accomplished of themselves. What must be kept is not breaking off the watering.

The third use is that the sixfold weighing can serve as a medicine for two sides. The first three tiers compare those in a thousand lands who arouse the intent of the two vehicles, those in the three-thousand great-thousand world who abide on the ground of dry wisdom, and those who abide on the ground of the stage of nature and so on up to the pratyekabuddha ground, with the bodhisattva who has first aroused intent, and all fall short—this side cures self-belittling: one who has first aroused the mind and has not yet attained anything should not think that his practice has no weight. The latter three tiers have the one who has first aroused intent not coming up to the one who has entered the position of dharmas, the one who has entered the position of dharmas not coming up to the one turned towards the Buddha path, and the one turned towards the Buddha path not coming up to the Buddha—this side cures self-exalting: one who knows that his practice has weight should not think it already sufficient. One medicine taken two ways, chosen according to the sickness; if one takes only one of them, it becomes lopsided and withered.

The fourth use is that the power and function of the five faculties can serve as a self-examination faculty by faculty. The treatise-author gives each of the five faculties—faith, vigour, mindfulness, concentration, and wisdom—one mark: when the faculty of faith obtains its power, one is certainly able to receive and uphold without doubt; by the power of vigour, though one has not yet seen the Dharma, one seeks the path with a single mind, not sparing body or life, without resting and without ceasing; by the power of mindfulness one constantly recollects one's teacher's teaching—when wholesome dharmas come one lets them in, when evil dharmas come one does not let them in, like a gatekeeper; by the power of concentration one collects the mind in one place and does not move, so as to help wisdom; by the power of wisdom one is able to contemplate the marks of dharmas as they really are. The five can serve as five questions, usable anywhere in the course of a day. One should also read it together with passage 41—the same five faculties become bodhisattva faculties in the body of a person of the great mind and become faculties of the Small Vehicle in the body of a person of small mind; so after examining the five faculties one must still ask one more question: where are these five faculties of mine turned?

The fifth use is that the fourfold pleasure can serve as what the person of the first mind keeps in mind. The four sentences the treatise-author brings out for the bodhisattva who has first aroused intent are exactly the thought to be held when the Buddha teaches him to bind his mind and keep sarvajñā in mind: though you give up small and mixed pleasures, you will obtain pure and great pleasure; giving up inverted, false, and deceptive pleasure, you obtain real pleasure; giving up the pleasure of bondage, you obtain the pleasure of liberation; giving up the pleasure of being good alone, you obtain the pleasure of being good in common with all beings. These four sentences are best memorised—at the time when one has first given up the pleasure of desire and not yet obtained the pleasure of the Dharma, a person most easily retreats, and what these four sentences give is exactly the support for that stretch of the middle road. The last one, reaching from self to others, above all must not be omitted.

The sixth use is that the power of skilful means can serve as the standard for contemplative practice and merit being not two. The treatise-author states plainly 「無所有法性中學，入觀亦能集諸功德、教化眾生、淨佛世界」 tr. "training within the nature of dharmas that is without anything existent, entering contemplation, he is also able to gather all merits, teach and transform beings, and purify buddha-worlds," and himself brings out the sentence 「有、無二法，能一時行」 tr. "the two dharmas of existence and non-existence can be practised at one time." Practitioners often suffer from two sicknesses: one, losing the contemplation of emptiness while doing merit; two, abandoning merit while cultivating the contemplation of emptiness. The medicine this passage gives is going side by side at one time—at the time of giving, knowing at once that the thing is empty, the receiver is empty, and one's own mind is empty, and yet the giving does not stop; this is precisely the power of skilful means spoken of in the sūtra. One can begin from the single gate of giving; since the treatise-author blocks everything off position by position with giving, the other practices too should each be inferred according to this.

The seventh use is that the sentence 「若有不實，無云何應實」 tr. "if existence is not real, how should non-existence be real" can serve as a knife for breaking clinging. After breaking existence, people most easily cling to non-existence, taking non-existence as real. These words of the treatise-author are only two sentences, yet they pull up the roots entirely: if existence were real, the non-existence set up in dependence on it should also be real; since existence is not real, how could non-existence alone be real? In daily use, whenever the thought ‘this truly does not exist’ arises, one can question oneself with this sentence; when these words are read together with passage 59, 「是事尚不可得，何況凡夫顛倒有法」 tr. "even this matter is unfindable, how much less the inverted existent dharmas of ordinary people," their thoroughness is seen still more.

Further Resonances

The backbone of this chapter is one section of sūtra text and one section of treatise explanation. Sūtra ① begins from Subhūti addressing the Buddha, exclaiming that prajñā is very deep, and setting up the difficulty that not finding beings and yet seeking awakening for the sake of beings is like planting a tree in space; the Buddha takes up the difficulty and, with the simile of planting a tree without recognising its root, trunk, branches, and leaves, makes clear that little by little practising the six perfections one obtains the omniscience of all kinds and accomplishes the Buddha-tree, and with leaves, flowers, and fruit benefits beings; he sets up three questions in turn to make clear that the leaves free beings from the three evil destinies, the flowers give birth among humans and gods and so on up to the abode of neither perception nor non-perception, and the fruit obtains the four fruits of the śramaṇa and so on up to the Buddha path and by the three vehicles enters nirvāṇa without remainder, and concludes with not finding the real dharma of beings and yet delivering beings, causing them to be free from clinging to self and to inversion. Next Subhūti praises the bodhisattva as being as a Buddha and himself states the causes and conditions of cutting off the seeds of the evil destinies; the Buddha approves it and further states that if the mind were not aroused, the buddhas of the three times, the worthies and sages, and the time of cutting off the three realms would all be absent, and says that by reason of suchness the Tathāgata and so on up to form and the conditioned and unconditioned natures are spoken of, and that because the suchnesses are without difference it is named suchness, exhorting training in suchness-prajñā. Next comes the sequence of training in suchness: from training in the suchness of all dharmas, fulfilment, obtaining mastery, knowing the faculties of beings, knowing the completeness of the faculties, knowing the causes and conditions of deeds, the fulfilment of the knowledge from vows, purifying the wisdom of the three times, greatly benefiting beings, purifying buddha-lands, obtaining the omniscience of all kinds, and turning the wheel of the Dharma, up to establishing beings in the three vehicles and causing them to enter nirvāṇa without remainder, concluding that one who wishes to obtain all merits should arouse the mind of awakening. Next Subhūti says that all the world should pay homage to one who practises as taught, and the Buddha approves it. Next he asks about the merit of the bodhisattva who has first aroused intent, and the Buddha compares it in three tiers with those in a thousand lands who arouse the intent of the two vehicles, those in the three-thousand great-thousand world who abide on the ground of dry wisdom, and those who abide on the ground of the stage of nature and so on up to the pratyekabuddha ground, and again compares in three tiers the one who has first aroused intent not coming up to the one who has entered the position of dharmas, the one who has entered the position of dharmas not coming up to the one turned towards the Buddha path, and the one turned towards the Buddha path not coming up to the merit of the Buddha. Next he asks what dharma the one of the first arousing of the mind should keep in mind; the Buddha answers that he should keep in mind the omniscience of all kinds, and answers that its object, dominant condition, practice, and mark are: the non-existent dharma as object, thought as dominant condition, quiescence as practice, the signless as mark. Next he asks whether, since the omniscience of all kinds is a non-existent dharma, form and so on up to the marks of the conditioned and the unconditioned are also non-existent dharmas; the Buddha answers that all are non-existent dharmas, giving as their causes and conditions that because self-nature is non-existent this is called a non-existent dharma, and that because they are born from the coming together of causes and conditions they are without self-nature. Next he asks how within being without nature one is able to practise the six perfections and so on up to the omniscience of all kinds, purify buddha-worlds, and bring beings to accomplishment; the Buddha answers that training in dharmas' being without nature is precisely the power of skilful means, and that practising the six perfections one cultivates and trains in the Buddha path and so on up to obtaining the omniscience of all kinds by the wisdom associated with a single thought, with the afflictions and their habitual residues forever exhausted, and concludes with this: looking over the three-thousand great-thousand world with the Buddha-eye, even a non-existent dharma is unfindable; in giving and so on up to the omniscience of all kinds, the one who obtains, the dharma obtained, and the place of obtaining are all unfindable; the original nature of all dharmas is just so, and there is no maker. Last he asks how, since dharmas and the nature of dharmas are separated, a separated dharma can know of a separated dharma whether it exists or does not exist; the Buddha answers that by reason of worldly truth one shows that it exists or does not exist, not by the highest meaning; that the two truths are without difference, because the suchness of worldly truth is precisely the suchness of the truth of the highest meaning; and furthermore that for the sake of those who cling within the five aggregates of clinging one shows existence and shows non-existence, causing them to know the pure being without anything existent; concluding that one should practise prajñāpāramitā thus. Treatise ① explains following the text, beginning with 「釋曰」 tr. "explaining, it says": first it supplies the provenance of Subhūti's exclaiming that such a thing had never been, having heard that nothing to be attained is precisely attainment, and next glosses thing by thing the three natures and three benefits of the leaves, flowers, and fruit of the tree simile; next it repeats Subhūti's words of rejoicing and the causes and conditions the Buddha further states, and next, with ‘furthermore’, extends that because of obtaining the suchness of dharmas one is called Tathāgata and so on up to srota-āpanna, and sets up the distinction 「不以我心貪貴菩薩故說言如佛」 tr. "It is not because my mind covets and prizes the bodhisattva that I say he is as a Buddha"; next it sets up three rounds of question and answer—why the animals, though they too have suchness, are not named as a Buddha; why the Buddha answers, saying to keep in mind the omniscience of all kinds; and why, since all is ultimate emptiness, thought alone is said to be the dominant condition. In between it explains fulfilment as obtaining the real mark of all dharmas and being able by all kinds of gates to bring beings to understanding; explains the faculties as the five wholesome roots, faith and the rest, and speaks separately, faculty by faculty, of their power and function; sets up the judgement of the two kinds of obtaining the faculties; brings out the example of those whose sins of former lives are heavy and who, though they have obtained the five faculties, cannot be delivered; infers why the supernormal power of former lives and the knowledge from vows are necessary; gathers in the benefits of the purity of the wisdom of the three times and pushes all the way to establishing beings by the three vehicles and causing them to enter nirvāṇa without remainder; and gathers all this up as 「如是利益，皆從學如中來」 tr. "Such benefits as these all come from within training in suchness." Next it sets up a heading of other names for the omniscience of all kinds; brings out the pleasures of the fourfold giving-up and obtaining as what the one who has first aroused intent keeps in mind; explains thought as dominant with 「諸法各各有力」 tr. "dharmas each have their own power" as the general rule; explains training within the nature of dharmas that is without anything existent, with 「有、無二法，能一時行」 tr. "the two dharmas of existence and non-existence can be practised at one time," as skilful means; brings out the simile 「如人夜失貫珠，電光暫現，即時還得故」 tr. "it is as a person who at night loses a string of pearls: the lightning flashes for a moment, and at once he obtains it back" to match the wisdom associated with a single thought; blocks off that even the matter of ultimate emptiness being able to break inversion is unfindable; sets down definitions for the three names, the one who obtains, the dharma obtained, and the place of obtaining; and supplies the two pieces of inference 「若有不實，無云何應實」 tr. "if existence is not real, how should non-existence be real" and 「若異，破壞法性故」 tr. "because, if they were different, this would break the nature of dharmas." Last, with ‘furthermore’, it explains that for those who have something they cling to within the five aggregates of clinging one speaks of being without anything existent, and concludes that one should train in the prajñāpāramitā that is without anything existent.

Of the veins of meaning between this chapter and the chapters before and after, three lines can be seen. First, continuing from what precedes: the preceding chapter, "The Three Wisdoms", the Seventieth, spoke broadly of the differences of the three wisdoms and the three knowledges; this chapter continues its momentum and turns into practice—having known the wisdom to be trained in, it then asks how, since the beings to be delivered are unfindable, one is able to practise; so the difficulty at the head of the chapter is not a stove set up anew, but a question put from where the preceding chapter came down. Second, within the chapter it makes two turns of its own: the first half, by the tree simile, sets up ‘practice does not wait on taking hold of the real’; the latter half, by suchness and the two truths, sets up ‘speaking does not obstruct being without anything existent’; the two halves have as their pivot the section 「菩薩如佛」 tr. "the bodhisattva is as a Buddha"—since suchness pervades all dharmas, speaking of existence and speaking of non-existence are both within suchness, and so the questions of the latter half can all be settled. Third, handing on to what follows: this chapter concludes with 「應學無所有般若波羅蜜」 tr. "should train in the prajñāpāramitā that is without anything existent," and the next chapter, "The Bodhisattva's Practice", the Seventy-second, continues speaking precisely of the bodhisattva's practice; the two chapters stand in sequence; among the texts there is another that writes the next chapter's title as "Practice of the Path"; the differences of its wording and the fascicle divisions of the texts are detailed in the Apparatus layer.

Among the explanations of the ancient masters, one house can be recorded for this chapter. Jizang, in his Commentary on the Larger Sūtra, explaining this chapter, first sets up a major division, saying: 「此下第二明發心修行。此中有三：第一從此品竟六喻品，明自行；第二從四攝品以下，明化他行；第三從畢定品，明自他二行無不信皆不退。」 tr. "From here below, the second makes clear the arousing of the mind and the cultivating of practice. Within this there are three: the first, from this chapter to the end of the chapter on the Six Similes, makes clear one's own practice; the second, from the chapter on the Four Means of Gathering onward, makes clear the practice of transforming others; the third, from the chapter on Certainty, makes clear that in the two practices of self and others there is none without faith and all are non-retrogressing."—taking this chapter as the head of one great section that 「明發心修行」 tr. "makes clear the arousing of the mind and the cultivating of practice." Next he divides this chapter into seven, saying: 「初品中為七：第一明方便起心無所依著希有可歎；第二如佛歎；第三以體如同佛故勸學如，學如必須發心」 tr. "Within the first chapter there are seven: the first makes clear that arousing the mind by skilful means, with nothing relied on and nothing clung to, is rare and to be exclaimed at; the second is the praise of being as a Buddha; the third, because in substance suchness is the same as the Buddha, exhorts training in suchness, and training in suchness must require arousing the mind"—the division into seven broadly corresponds with the sequence of the sūtra segment of this treatise, while the names set up are Jizang's own sectional divisions, not the text of this treatise; they are recorded side by side without judgement. In explaining the chapter's name he sets up two questions. One asks about cause and fruit, saying: 「問：此云道樹，樹為是因樹因道？為果佛樹佛道？答：此語通也。言道是無上菩提道，樹亦是無上菩提樹也。」 tr. "Question: this is called the tree of the path—is the tree the tree of the cause, the path of the cause? Or is it the fruit, the Buddha-tree, the Buddha path? Answer: this phrase covers both. The path spoken of is the path of unsurpassed awakening, and the tree too is the tree of unsurpassed awakening." One asks about one's own practice and transforming others, saying: 「問：此道樹是自行，為是化他？答：具足二也。菩薩求佛道樹是行，以此華果答眾生，以此樹華菓是化他。」 tr. "Question: is this tree of the path one's own practice, or is it transforming others? Answer: it is complete in both. The bodhisattva's seeking the Buddha's tree of the path is practice; answering beings with these flowers and fruit—these flowers and fruit of the tree—is transforming others."—taking the one name, tree of the path, as covering both cause and fruit and both self and others; this and this treatise's speaking of transforming others by the three benefits of leaves, flowers, and fruit and of one's own practice by the little-by-little practice of the six perfections take a meaning that is close, while the words relied on differ; both are kept. He explains the difficulty of planting a tree in space, saying: 「有所得人見眾生是有，不知是空，空中度眾生，於其是難。」 tr. "The person with something to be attained sees beings as existent and does not know that they are empty; delivering beings within emptiness is, for him, hard."—taking the mind with something to be attained as that from which the difficulty arises, whereas this treatise only states the difficulty and does not mark the mind with something to be attained; this is Jizang's own explanation. He explains the Buddha's answer as complete in two matters, saying: 「須菩提但明眾生不可得，為眾生種樹，不明樹體有無。佛答則具二事：不識樹者，此明菩薩體樹不可得也。」 tr. "Subhūti only makes clear that beings are unfindable and that the tree is planted for the sake of beings; he does not make clear whether the substance of the tree exists or not. The Buddha's answer is complete in two matters: as for not recognising the tree, this makes clear that for the bodhisattva the substance of the tree is unfindable."—dividing what each side of the question and answer makes clear into one matter and two matters; this differs in what it refers to from this treatise's explaining of the simile solely with respect to the three benefits of leaves, flowers, and fruit; recorded side by side. He explains the benefit of the leaves, saying: 「葉陰涼，除三惡道熱」 tr. "the leaves' shade is cool, removing the heat of the three evil destinies," which accords with this treatise's two phrases 「如樹葉蔭，熱時涼樂」 tr. "as the shade of the tree's leaves, cool and pleasant in the time of heat" and 「得離三惡道熱苦」 tr. "obtain freedom from the hot suffering of the three evil destinies." He explains what is kept in mind at the first arousing, saying: 「當念何等法，第五、明始行所念也。」 tr. "What dharma should one keep in mind: the fifth, making clear what the beginner in practice keeps in mind." And again he says: 「般若深妙一無定相，故令始行標心佛心果也。」 tr. "Prajñā is deep and wondrous and wholly without fixed mark; therefore he has the beginner in practice set his mind on the Buddha-mind and its fruit."—taking prajñā's being without fixed mark as the reason why the Buddha has the beginner set his mind on the Buddha's fruit; this and the fourfold pleasure of giving-up and obtaining that this treatise brings out differ in their line of reasoning; both are kept. He explains thought as dominant, saying: 「種智雖畢竟淨而能知一切法，故云念為增上也。」 tr. "Though the omniscience of all kinds is ultimately pure, it is able to know all dharmas; therefore it is said that thought is dominant."—returning to the same place as this treatise's answer 「諸法各各有力」 tr. "dharmas each have their own power," while the simile and ground taken differ. He explains the passage on skilful means, saying: 「上云種智及一切法自性空，令問云：何等空中方便修行耶？」 tr. "Above it was said that the omniscience of all kinds and all dharmas are empty of self-nature; hence the question says: within what emptiness does one cultivate practice by skilful means?" And again he says: 「此文中略就檀一行中成熟眾生淨佛國土，餘行皆應爾也。」 tr. "In this text, briefly, it is within the single practice of giving that beings are brought to maturity and buddha-lands purified; all the other practices should be likewise."—taking the single practice of giving as the example to exemplify the other practices, which is the same method as this treatise's blocking everything off position by position with giving. He explains the name of the dharma obtained, saying: 「得法者得佛道，用得法是菩薩道也。」 tr. "The dharma obtained is the obtaining of the Buddha path; that by which the dharma is obtained is the bodhisattva path."—pointing to the same thing as this treatise's sentence 「得法，是阿耨多羅三藐三菩提；用得法是菩薩道」 tr. "the dharma obtained is anuttarā samyaksaṃbodhi; that by which the dharma is obtained is the bodhisattva path," with slightly different wording. He explains the last passage, saying: 「佛答：明第一義中未曾有不有，今隨俗故，云佛知無所有而為眾生說有不有也。」 tr. "The Buddha's answer: it makes clear that within the highest meaning there has never been existence or non-existence; now, because of following convention, it says that the Buddha knows what is without anything existent and for the sake of beings speaks of existence and non-existence."—explaining the two truths' not being different by there never having been existence or non-existence within the highest meaning, which returns to the same place as this treatise's 「世俗如即是第一義如」 tr. "the suchness of worldly convention is precisely the suchness of the highest meaning."

For the two houses of Huiying's Commentary and Junzheng's Profound Meaning of the Four Mahāyāna Treatises, this chapter is 〔not found〕: in both books ‘Tree of the Path chapter’ and ‘Tree-Planting chapter’ both have zero hits, and the one single occurrence of the term ‘tree of the path’ in Huiying's book is words about the Buddha-land, unrelated to this chapter's title; the gap is recorded as it is, and it is not filled with text from elsewhere. Among the commentaries of the Tiantai house the term ‘tree of the path’ appears repeatedly, but always as the general usage of sitting under the tree of the path and attaining the path, not as a named citation of this chapter; this too is 〔not found〕. The variant names of the chapter title among the texts and the differences of chapter order, and the variant names of the corresponding chapter in the sūtra explained, are detailed in the Apparatus layer.