大智度論 種善根品Dazhidulun — Mahāprajñāpāramitā-upadeśa · Planting Roots of Goodness
種善根品：須菩提問不供養諸佛、不具足善根、不得真知識當得薩婆若不，佛答供養諸佛種善根得真知識尚難得何況不；再問既供養種植而得知識何以猶難得，佛答遠離方便力、不從諸佛聞方便力、所種善根不具足、不常隨善知識教；三問何等是方便力，佛以六波羅蜜逐一答之——檀以應薩婆若念布施而不生施想受者想、尸羅持戒不墮婬怒癡諸慢與二乘心、羼提行見諦思惟道而不取四果是名無生法忍、毘梨耶入四禪四無量四無色而不受果報、禪入八背捨九次第定而不證四果、般若學十力四無所畏四無礙智十八不共法大慈大悲乃至未得一切種智於其中間應如是行，皆以觀諸法自相空無生無定相無所轉為方便力，增益善根、淨佛國土、成就眾生而不受世間果報。論主釋須菩提何以作是麁問而出二說，牒佛答與畢竟空中無福非福之難、世諦中有福故得之答，出乞食道人杖打餓狗喻，釋離方便之三相——見色身不見法身、少種善根不具足、得善知識不親近諮受，釋有心無心行檀之二門與不生三想之由，結以無如是方便尚不得何況不供養、餘五波羅蜜亦如是（經＋論）
本品開卷是一個看似不必問的問。須菩提白佛：「世尊！菩薩摩訶薩若不供養諸佛、不具足善根、不得真知識，當得薩婆若不？」——不供養、不種善根、不遇善知識，能成佛嗎？答案像是現成的。佛卻不順著現成處答，而是把秤往上一挪：「菩薩摩訶薩供養諸佛、種善根、得真知識，一切種智尚難得，何況不供養諸佛、不種善根、不得真知識！」——三事都做足了尚且難得，不做的就更不必說。全品的門，就從這一句「尚難得」開進去：難的地方既然不在三事之不足，那它在哪裡？
須菩提立刻追上這個縫：「世尊！菩薩摩訶薩供養諸佛、種善根、得真知識，何以故難得一切種智？」佛的答只一句：「是菩薩摩訶薩遠離方便力，不從諸佛聞方便力，所種善根不具足，不常隨善知識教。」——難不在三事，在方便。於是第三問順勢而出：「世尊！何等是方便力，菩薩摩訶薩行是方便力，得一切種智？」——全品的正文，就是這一問的答。
佛以六度次第答之，六段同出一格。布施時「是時不生布施想、受者想。」；持戒則「持戒不受世間果報」；忍則「方便力成就故，行見諦道、思惟道，亦不取須陀洹果、斯陀含、阿那含、阿羅漢果。」，其結名即「是名菩薩無生法忍。」——行其道而不取其果，這就叫忍。精進則入四禪、四無量心、四無色定而「雖出入諸禪，而不受果報。」；禪則「入八背捨、九次第定，亦不證須陀洹果，乃至不證阿羅漢果。」；般若則「乃至未得一切種智，未淨佛國土，未成就眾生，於其中間應如是行。」——六段所不取的一層比一層高：先不取施想，再不取世間果報，再不取四沙門果，最後連中間任何一得都不取。而所以能不取，六段回到的是同一件事，措辭卻有三種：施、戒兩段作「觀一切法自相空，無生，無定相，無所轉，入諸法實相，所謂一切法無作無起相。」，忍、禪、般若三段作「知諸法自相空，無生，無定相，無所轉」，精進一段則就其所行別作「知諸禪定自相空，無生，無定相，無所轉」。方便之為方便，不是多添了一法，是在每一法上少取一物。
論主接手，第一件事是問這個問為什麼要問：「須菩提何以故作是麁問」。他代出兩重疑：一是空義滑了腳——「若一切諸法無所有性畢竟空，畢竟空中，種善根、不種善根等無異。」；二是另有捷徑之想——「得薩婆若更有種種門，可不須種善根等。」麁問之所以非問不可，正因所本的是細義：畢竟空一旦落到行門上，最先鬆脫的就是『種與不種等無異』這一句。
隨即是全品最短的一輪——這一問一答出於論段，經中所無。須菩提逼問：「以畢竟空中無有福以非福，何以但以福德故得？」佛答只八字：「以世諦中有福故得。」論主點出這一問一答的機關：「須菩提為眾生著無所有故問，佛以不著有法答」——問是替著空的人問的，答是用不著有的法答的。若在畢竟空裡答，正落他所著；若拿實有之福答，又落另一邊。所以佛的話是：「精進修福尚不可得，何況不修福！」
論主為這一句配了一件市井小事。一位乞食的出家人走遍一個聚落，從一家到一家，「乞食不得」；出來看見一隻餓狗飢臥在地，拿杖打牠說：「汝畜生無智，我種種因緣，家家求食尚不能得，何況汝臥而望得！」——喻的力量全在一個「臥」字。道人之所以說得出這話，不是因為他討到了飯，正是因為他沒討到；沒討到卻還家家去求的人，和飢臥著等的狗，差別從來不在所得，在所行。這句『我尚不能得，何況汝臥而望得』的句法，正是佛開卷那句「尚難得，何況不」的翻版；到品末又出現第三次——「無如是方便，菩薩雖供養諸佛、種善根、得真知識，尚不得，何況不供養！」三處相扣，成了全品的骨。
那麼方便究竟是什麼？論主給了全品最要緊的一個定義：「方便者，所謂般若波羅蜜。」——方便不是般若之外另備的一套善巧，就是般若落在事上的那一面。所以離了方便，三事便一一落空，論主三句指得極準：「雖見諸佛色身，不以智慧眼見法身；雖少種善根，而不具足；雖得善知識，不親近諮受。」三事宛然俱在，卻三事皆空過——見了佛而沒見法身，供養只是見面；善根種得不夠，種只是堆積；遇了善知識而不親近諮受，得只是遇上。
末後，論主把布施拆成有心與無心兩面。有心不是攀緣：「有心者，所謂應薩婆若心布施，念諸佛種種無量功德，憐愍眾生故布施。」；無心不是斷念：「無心者，若施佛乃至凡人，不生三想，所謂施者、受者、財物。」二者不是兩種人、兩個階段，是同一次布施的兩面——所念的不空，所取的全空。其驗處論主說得極平實：「一切法無所能作，不生高心，無所悕望。」無所能作，所以無可自高；無可自高，所以不望其報；而後才有「如是方便力故，能增益善根、離不善根，教化眾生、淨佛世界。」
本品甚至留了一段給還做不到的人。初發意菩薩布施眾生「有量有限」，於是自念：「我先世不行深福德，今不能廣施眾生。我今當深實多行檀波羅蜜，得是果報已，能具足利益，廣施無量眾生，若今世利，若後世利，若道德利。」——不假裝自己已經無量，只是把方便用在自己現在的分量上。全品收在那句反照裡：沒有方便，三事做足了也還是「尚不得」；首尾兩個『尚……何況……』之間，隔的就是「方便」二字。而方便二字，論主早已解過：它就是般若。
This chapter opens with a question that seems not to need asking. Subhūti says to the Buddha: ‘World-Honored One! If a bodhisattva-mahāsattva does not make offerings to the buddhas, does not fulfil the roots of goodness, and does not obtain true friends, will he obtain sarvajñā?’—Without making offerings, without planting roots of goodness, without meeting good friends, can one become a Buddha? The answer looks ready-made. Yet the Buddha does not answer along the ready-made line; he moves the scale upward: ‘For a bodhisattva-mahāsattva who makes offerings to the buddhas, plants roots of goodness, and obtains true friends, the omniscience of all kinds is still hard to obtain, how much more for one who does not make offerings to the buddhas, does not plant roots of goodness, and does not obtain true friends!’—Even with all three things done in full it is still hard to obtain; of one who does not do them there is all the less need to speak. The gate of the whole chapter opens from this one phrase, ‘still hard to obtain’: since the hardness does not lie in the three things' falling short, where does it lie?
Subhūti at once presses into this crack: ‘World-Honored One! A bodhisattva-mahāsattva who makes offerings to the buddhas, plants roots of goodness, and obtains true friends—why is the omniscience of all kinds hard for him to obtain?’ The Buddha's answer is only one sentence: ‘This bodhisattva-mahāsattva is far from the power of skilful means; he has not heard the power of skilful means from the buddhas; the roots of goodness he plants are not complete; and he does not constantly follow the teaching of the good friend.’—The hardness lies not in the three things but in skilful means. Thereupon the third question follows in train: ‘World-Honored One! What is the power of skilful means, such that a bodhisattva-mahāsattva practising this power of skilful means obtains the omniscience of all kinds?’—The main text of the whole chapter is the answer to this question.
The Buddha answers with the six perfections in sequence, and the six passages come out in one pattern. In giving, ‘at that time he does not give rise to the thought of giving or the thought of a recipient.’; in keeping morality, ‘keeping morality, he does not receive worldly retribution’; in patience, ‘because the power of skilful means is accomplished, he practises the path of seeing the truths and the path of reflection, and yet does not take the fruit of the srota-āpanna, the fruits of the sakṛdāgāmin, the anāgāmin, and the arhat.’, and its concluding name is ‘this is named the bodhisattva's acceptance of the non-arising of dharmas.’—to practise its path and not take its fruit: this is what is called acceptance. In vigour he enters the four dhyānas, the four immeasurable minds, and the four formless absorptions, and ‘though he goes in and out of the dhyānas, he does not receive the retribution.’; in dhyāna, ‘he enters the eight liberations and the nine successive absorptions, and yet does not realise the fruit of the srota-āpanna, and so on up to not realising the fruit of the arhat.’; in prajñā, ‘up until he has not yet obtained the omniscience of all kinds, not yet purified buddha-lands, not yet brought beings to accomplishment, in the interval he should practise thus.’—What the six passages do not take rises one layer higher than the last: first the thought of giving is not taken, then worldly retribution, then the four fruits of the śramaṇa, and at the last not even any attainment in the interval. And what makes the not-taking possible, the six passages return to as one and the same matter, phrased in three ways: the passages on giving and morality read ‘he contemplates all dharmas as empty of specific marks, non-arising, without fixed mark, without anything turning, and enters the real mark of all dharmas, namely the mark of all dharmas without making and non-rising’; the three passages on patience, dhyāna, and prajñā read ‘he knows all dharmas to be empty of specific marks, non-arising, without fixed mark, without anything turning’; and the passage on vigour, in terms of what it practises, reads instead ‘he knows the dhyānas and absorptions to be empty of specific marks, non-arising, without fixed mark, without anything turning’. Skilful means is skilful means not because one more dharma is added, but because in every dharma one thing less is taken.
The treatise-author takes over, and the first thing he does is ask why this question needs to be asked: ‘Why does Subhūti ask so coarse a question?’ He brings out two doubts on others' behalf: one, that the meaning of emptiness has slipped its footing—‘If all dharmas are without any existent nature and ultimately empty, then within ultimate emptiness, planting roots of goodness and not planting roots of goodness are alike without difference.’; two, the thought that there is some other shortcut—‘There are all kinds of other gates to obtaining sarvajñā, so perhaps one need not plant roots of goodness and the rest.’ That the coarse question cannot but be asked is exactly because what it rests on is a fine meaning: once ultimate emptiness comes down upon the gate of practice, the first thing to come loose is this sentence, ‘planting and not planting are alike without difference’.
Then comes the shortest round of the whole chapter—this question and answer come from the treatise section and are not in the sūtra. Subhūti presses: ‘Since within ultimate emptiness there is neither merit nor non-merit, why is it obtained only by reason of merit?’ The Buddha answers in only eight Chinese characters: ‘Because within worldly truth there is merit, it is obtained.’ The treatise-author points out the mechanism of this question and answer: ‘Subhūti asks for the sake of beings who cling to there being nothing existent; the Buddha answers with a dharma that does not cling to existence’—the question is asked on behalf of those who cling to emptiness; the answer is given with a dharma that does not cling to existence. Were he to answer within ultimate emptiness, he would fall exactly into what they cling to; were he to answer with a really existent merit, he would fall to the other side. So the Buddha's words are: ‘Even cultivating merit with vigour, it is unfindable, how much less without cultivating merit!’
For this sentence the treatise-author matches a small affair of the marketplace. A home-leaver begging for food goes all through a village, from one house to the next, and ‘begging for food, obtains none’; coming out, he sees a hungry dog lying starving on the ground, strikes it with his staff and says: ‘You beast without knowledge! I, with all kinds of causes and conditions, seeking food from house to house, still cannot obtain it, how much less you, who lie down and hope to obtain it!’—The force of the simile lies wholly in the one word ‘lie’. That the man of the path can say these words is not because he got his food; it is exactly because he did not; the one who did not get it and yet still goes seeking from house to house, and the dog that lies starving and waits, have never differed in what is obtained, but in what is practised. The syntax of this sentence, ‘I myself cannot obtain it, how much less you who lie down and hope to obtain it’, is exactly a reprint of the Buddha's opening sentence, ‘still hard to obtain, how much more one who does not’; and at the chapter's end it appears a third time—‘Without such skilful means, though a bodhisattva makes offerings to the buddhas, plants roots of goodness, and obtains true friends, he still does not obtain it, how much less one who does not make offerings!’ The three places lock into one another and become the bone of the whole chapter.
Then what, after all, is skilful means? The treatise-author gives the most essential definition of the whole chapter: ‘Skilful means, namely prajñāpāramitā.’—Skilful means is not another set of cleverness prepared apart from prajñā; it is just the side of prajñā that comes down upon affairs. So when skilful means is left behind, the three things come to nothing one by one, and the treatise-author points to them in three sentences with the utmost precision: ‘Though he sees the buddhas' form bodies, he does not see the Dharma body with the eye of wisdom; though he plants a few roots of goodness, they are not complete; though he obtains good friends, he does not keep close to them and consult and receive from them.’ The three things are all plainly there, and yet all three pass by in vain—having seen the Buddha without seeing the Dharma body, the offering is merely a meeting; with the roots of goodness planted not enough, the planting is merely piling up; having met good friends without keeping close and consulting and receiving, the obtaining is merely running into them.
At the end the treatise-author splits giving into the two sides of with mind and without mind. With mind is not reaching out and clinging: ‘With mind means: giving with a mind that accords with sarvajñā, keeping in mind the buddhas' all kinds of immeasurable merits, and giving out of pity for beings.’; without mind is not cutting off thought: ‘Without mind means: whether giving to a Buddha or down to an ordinary person, he does not give rise to the three thoughts, namely giver, recipient, and the thing given.’ The two are not two kinds of people or two stages; they are the two sides of one and the same giving—what is kept in mind is not empty, what is taken is wholly empty. Its proving-place the treatise-author states most plainly: ‘All dharmas can make nothing; he does not give rise to a haughty mind and hopes for nothing.’ Since nothing can be made, there is nothing by which to exalt oneself; since there is nothing by which to exalt oneself, he does not hope for its retribution; and only after that is there ‘by such power of skilful means he can increase the roots of goodness and part from the roots that are not good, teach and transform beings, and purify buddha-worlds.’
This chapter even leaves a passage for those who cannot yet do it. The bodhisattva who has first aroused intent gives to beings ‘in measured and limited amounts’, and so thinks to himself: ‘In former lives I did not practise deep merit; now I cannot give widely to beings. I should now deeply, really, and much practise dānapāramitā, and having obtained this retribution, I will be able to benefit fully and give widely to immeasurable beings, whether benefit in this life, benefit in later lives, or the benefit of the path and its virtue.’—Not pretending that one is already immeasurable, but only applying skilful means to one's own present measure. The whole chapter gathers in that reflecting sentence: without skilful means, even with the three things done in full it is still ‘still not obtained’; between the two ‘still … how much less …’ at head and tail, what lies is the two Chinese characters ‘skilful means’. And the two Chinese characters skilful means, the treatise-author has already explained: they are prajñā.
卷85 〔T25 0657b16〕
大智度論釋種善根品第七十三 【經】 須菩提白佛言：「世尊！菩薩摩訶薩若不供養諸佛、不具足善根、不得真知識，當得薩婆若不？」 佛告須菩提：「菩薩摩訶薩供養諸佛、種善根、得真知識，一切種智尚難得，何況不供養諸佛、不種善根、不得真知識！」 須菩提白佛言：「世尊！菩薩摩訶薩供養諸佛、種善根、得真知識，何以故難得一切種智？」 佛告須菩提：「是菩薩摩訶薩遠離方便力，不從諸佛聞方便力，所種善根不具足，不常隨善知識教。」 「世尊！何等是方便力，菩薩摩訶薩行是方便力，得一切種智？」 佛言：「菩薩摩訶薩從初發意行檀波羅蜜，應薩婆若念，布施佛、若辟支佛、若聲聞、若人、若非人，是時不生布施想、受者想。何以〔T25 0657c〕故？觀一切法自相空，無生，無定相，無所轉，入諸法實相，所謂一切法無作無起相。菩薩以是方便力故，增益善根；增益善根故，行檀波羅蜜，淨佛國土，成就眾生。布施不受世間果報，但欲救度一切眾生故，行檀波羅蜜。 「復次，須菩提！菩薩摩訶薩從初發意行尸羅波羅蜜，應薩婆若念，持戒時不墮婬怒癡中，亦不墮諸煩惱、纏縛及諸不善破道法，若慳貪、破戒、瞋恚，懈怠、亂意、愚癡，慢、大慢、慢慢、我慢、增上慢、不如慢、邪慢，若聲聞心、若辟支佛心。何以故？是菩薩摩訶薩，觀一切法自相空，無生，無定相，無所轉，入諸法實相，所謂一切法無作無起相。菩薩成就是方便力故，增益善根；增益善根故，行尸羅波羅蜜，淨佛國土，成就眾生。持戒不受世間果報，但欲救度一切眾生故，行尸羅波羅蜜。 「復次，須菩提！菩薩摩訶薩從初發意行羼提波羅蜜，應薩婆若念，方便力成就故，行見諦道、思惟道，亦不取須陀洹果、斯陀含、阿那含、阿羅漢果。何以故？是菩薩摩訶薩知諸法自相空，無生，無定相，無所轉，雖行是助道法，而過聲聞、辟支佛地。須菩提！是名菩薩無生法忍。 「復次，須菩提！菩薩摩訶薩從初發意行毘梨耶波羅蜜，入初禪乃至入第四禪，入四無量心、四無色定，雖出入諸禪，而不受果報。何以故？是菩薩成就是方便力故，知諸禪定自相空，無生，無定相，無所轉，淨佛國土，成就眾生。精進不受世間果報，但欲救度一切眾生故，行毘梨耶波羅蜜。 「復次，須菩提！菩薩摩訶薩從初發意行禪〔T25 0658a〕波羅蜜，應薩婆若念，入八背捨、九次第定，亦不證須陀洹果，乃至不證阿羅漢果。何以故？是菩薩摩訶薩知諸法自相空，無生，無定相，無所轉。 「復次，須菩提！菩薩摩訶薩從初發意行般若波羅蜜，學佛十力、四無所畏、四無礙智、十八不共法、大慈大悲，乃至未得一切種智，未淨佛國土，未成就眾生，於其中間應如是行。何以故？是菩薩摩訶薩知諸法自相空，無生，無定相，無所轉。須菩提！是菩薩摩訶薩應如是行般若波羅蜜，不受果報。」 【論】 問曰： 須菩提何以故作是麁問——「不供養諸佛，不具足善根，不得真知識，當得薩婆若不」？ 答曰： 有人言：「若一切諸法無所有性畢竟空，畢竟空中，種善根、不種善根等無異。若爾者，可不供養諸佛，不種善根，不得真知識，得薩婆若耶？」 復有人疑言：「得薩婆若更有種種門，可不須種善根等。」是故問佛。 佛答：「若供養諸佛、種善根、得真知識，尚難得，何況不！」 須菩提問：「以畢竟空中無有福以非福，何以但以福德故得？」 佛答：「以世諦中有福故得。」 須菩提為眾生著無所有故問，佛以不著有法答，所謂：「精進修福尚不可得，何況不修福！」如受乞食道人，至一聚落，從一家至一家，乞食不得。見一餓狗飢臥，以杖打之言：「汝畜生無智，我種種因緣，家家求食尚不能得，何況汝臥而望得！」 須菩提問：「世尊！有是供養諸佛等因緣，何故不得其果報？」 佛答：「離方便故。」方便者，所謂般若波羅蜜。雖見諸佛色身，不〔T25 0658b〕以智慧眼見法身；雖少種善根，而不具足；雖得善知識，不親近諮受。 又佛自說因緣，所謂：「菩薩從初發意，以有、無心行檀波羅蜜。」有心者，所謂應薩婆若心布施，念諸佛種種無量功德，憐愍眾生故布施。無心者，若施佛乃至凡人，不生三想，所謂施者、受者、財物。何以故？施物等一切法自相空，從本已來常不生；無定相——若一、若異，若常、若無常等，是法自相空故；不可轉，安住如中故。如是觀，即入諸法實相，所謂無作無起相。一切法無所能作，不生高心，無所悕望。 如是方便力故，能增益善根、離不善根，教化眾生、淨佛世界。 布施若多、若少，不受世間果報，但欲救度一切眾生故。菩薩布施眾生有量有限，作是念：「我先世不行深福德，今不能廣施眾生。我今當深實多行檀波羅蜜，得是果報已，能具足利益，廣施無量眾生，若今世利，若後世利，若道德利。」 無如是方便，菩薩雖供養諸佛、種善根、得真知識，尚不得，何況不供養！ 餘五波羅蜜，亦如是。 大智度論卷第八十五
《大智度論》卷85 · T25n1509 0657b16–0658c02
The canonical text stands in Chinese only. This edition renders the essence, the plain reading, the exposition and the apparatus into English — never the sūtra itself. Switch to 漢讀本 or 並行雙語 above to read it.
本品題為《大智度論》釋〈種善根品〉第七十三，聖者龍樹所造，後秦鳩摩羅什奉詔所譯，在卷八十五。
經①：須菩提問不供養諸佛、不具足善根、不得真知識當得薩婆若不，佛答尚難得何況不——次問既供養種植何以猶難得，佛答遠離方便力所種善根不具足不常隨善知識教；末問何等是方便力，佛以六波羅蜜逐一答之，皆以應薩婆若念、觀諸法自相空無生無定相無所轉、入諸法實相無作無起相為方便力，增益善根、淨佛國土、成就眾生而不受世間果報
須菩提向佛稟白：『世尊！菩薩摩訶薩若不供養諸佛、不具足善根、不得真知識，還能得到薩婆若嗎？』
佛告訴須菩提：『菩薩摩訶薩供養諸佛、種善根、得真知識，一切種智尚且難得，何況不供養諸佛、不種善根、不得真知識！』
須菩提向佛稟白：『世尊！菩薩摩訶薩供養諸佛、種善根、得真知識，為什麼還難得一切種智？』
佛告訴須菩提：『這菩薩摩訶薩遠離方便力，不從諸佛聽聞方便力，所種的善根不具足，不常隨順善知識的教誨。』
『世尊！什麼是方便力？菩薩摩訶薩行這方便力，能得一切種智？』
佛說：『菩薩摩訶薩從初發意起行檀波羅蜜，以應合薩婆若的念，布施給佛、或辟支佛、或聲聞、或人、或非人，這時不生起布施之想、受者之想。為什麼呢？觀一切法自相空，無生，無定相，無所轉，入於諸法實相，就是一切法無作無起之相。菩薩因為這方便力的緣故，增益善根；因為增益善根的緣故，行檀波羅蜜，淨佛國土，成就眾生。布施而不受世間果報，只為救度一切眾生的緣故，行檀波羅蜜。
『再者，須菩提！菩薩摩訶薩從初發意起行尸羅波羅蜜，以應合薩婆若的念，持戒的時候不墮入婬怒癡中，也不墮入諸煩惱、纏縛以及諸不善破道之法——若慳貪、破戒、瞋恚，懈怠、亂意、愚癡，慢、大慢、慢慢、我慢、增上慢、不如慢、邪慢，若聲聞心、若辟支佛心。為什麼呢？這菩薩摩訶薩觀一切法自相空，無生，無定相，無所轉，入於諸法實相，就是一切法無作無起之相。菩薩因為成就這方便力的緣故，增益善根；因為增益善根的緣故，行尸羅波羅蜜，淨佛國土，成就眾生。持戒而不受世間果報，只為救度一切眾生的緣故，行尸羅波羅蜜。
『再者，須菩提！菩薩摩訶薩從初發意起行羼提波羅蜜，以應合薩婆若的念，因為方便力成就的緣故，行見諦道、思惟道，也不取須陀洹果、斯陀含、阿那含、阿羅漢果。為什麼呢？這菩薩摩訶薩知諸法自相空，無生，無定相，無所轉，雖然行這助道之法，卻超過聲聞、辟支佛地。須菩提！這就叫作菩薩無生法忍。
『再者，須菩提！菩薩摩訶薩從初發意起行毘梨耶波羅蜜，入初禪乃至入第四禪，入四無量心、四無色定，雖然出入諸禪，卻不受果報。為什麼呢？這菩薩因為成就這方便力的緣故，知諸禪定自相空，無生，無定相，無所轉，淨佛國土，成就眾生。精進而不受世間果報，只為救度一切眾生的緣故，行毘梨耶波羅蜜。
『再者，須菩提！菩薩摩訶薩從初發意起行禪波羅蜜，以應合薩婆若的念，入八背捨、九次第定，也不證須陀洹果，乃至不證阿羅漢果。為什麼呢？這菩薩摩訶薩知諸法自相空，無生，無定相，無所轉。
『再者，須菩提！菩薩摩訶薩從初發意起行般若波羅蜜，學佛十力、四無所畏、四無礙智、十八不共法、大慈大悲，乃至未得一切種智，未淨佛國土，未成就眾生，在這中間應當這樣行。為什麼呢？這菩薩摩訶薩知諸法自相空，無生，無定相，無所轉。須菩提！這菩薩摩訶薩應當這樣行般若波羅蜜，不受果報。』
論①：釋須菩提何以作是麁問而出二說，牒佛答與畢竟空中無福非福之難、世諦中有福故得之答，出乞食道人杖打餓狗喻，釋離方便之三相與方便即般若波羅蜜，釋有心無心行檀之二門與不生三想之由，結以無如是方便尚不得何況不供養、餘五波羅蜜亦如是
論主問道：
須菩提為什麼作這樣粗率的發問——「不供養諸佛，不具足善根，不得真知識，當得薩婆若不」？
論主答道：
有人說：『若一切諸法都是無所有性、畢竟空，那麼在畢竟空之中，種善根與不種善根平等而無差異。若是這樣，是不是可以不供養諸佛，不種善根，不得真知識，而得薩婆若呢？』
又有人這樣疑惑而說：『得薩婆若另有種種門徑，可以不必種善根等等。』因此纔問佛。
佛回答：『若供養諸佛、種善根、得真知識，尚且難得，何況不！』
須菩提發問：『以畢竟空中沒有福與非福，為什麼單以福德的緣故而得？』
佛回答：『以世諦之中有福的緣故而得。』
須菩提是為了眾生執著無所有的緣故而發問，佛則以不執著有法而回答，就是說：『精進修福尚且不可得，何況不修福！』如同一位受乞食法的道人，到了一個聚落，從這一家走到那一家，乞食不得。他見到一隻餓狗飢餓而臥，用杖打牠說：『你這畜生沒有智慧！我用種種因緣，一家一家求食尚且不能得到，何況你臥在那裡就指望得到！』
須菩提發問：『世尊！有這供養諸佛等等的因緣，為什麼不得它的果報？』
佛回答：『因為離了方便的緣故。』所謂方便，就是般若波羅蜜。雖然見到諸佛的色身，卻不以智慧眼見法身；雖然少分種了善根，卻不具足；雖然得到善知識，卻不親近諮受。
又佛自己說出因緣，就是：『菩薩從初發意起，以有心、無心行檀波羅蜜。』有心的，就是以應合薩婆若的心而布施，憶念諸佛種種無量的功德，憐愍眾生的緣故而布施。無心的，是若布施給佛乃至凡人，不生三種想，就是施者、受者、財物。為什麼呢？所施之物與一切法同樣自相空，從本以來常不生；無定相——若一、若異，若常、若無常等等，因為這法自相空的緣故；不可轉，因為安住在如之中的緣故。這樣觀，就入於諸法實相，就是無作無起之相。一切法無所能作，於是不生高心，無所悕望。
因為這樣的方便力的緣故，能夠增益善根、遠離不善根，教化眾生、淨佛世界。
布施若多、若少，都不受世間果報，只為了救度一切眾生的緣故。菩薩布施眾生有量有限，便作這樣的念：『我先世不修深厚的福德，如今不能廣施眾生。我如今應當深實地多行檀波羅蜜，得到這果報之後，能夠具足利益，廣施無量眾生——或是今世之利，或是後世之利，或是道德之利。』
沒有這樣的方便，菩薩雖然供養諸佛、種善根、得真知識，尚且不得，何況不供養！
其餘五波羅蜜，也是這樣。
This chapter is titled the Mahāprajñāpāramitā-upadeśa's commentary on the seventy-third chapter, "Planting Roots of Goodness", composed by the noble Nāgārjuna and translated by Kumārajīva of the Later Qin by imperial decree; it is in the eighty-fifth fascicle.
Sūtra ①: Subhūti Asks Whether One Who Does Not Make Offerings to the Buddhas, Does Not Fulfil the Roots of Goodness, and Does Not Obtain True Friends Will Obtain Sarvajñā, and the Buddha Answers That It Is Still Hard to Obtain, How Much More for One Who Does Not—Next He Asks Why, Having Made Offerings and Planted, It Is Still Hard to Obtain, and the Buddha Answers That He Is Far from the Power of Skilful Means, That the Roots of Goodness He Plants Are Not Complete, and That He Does Not Constantly Follow the Teaching of the Good Friend; Last He Asks What the Power of Skilful Means Is, and the Buddha Answers with the Six Perfections One by One, All Taking as the Power of Skilful Means the Thought That Accords with Sarvajñā, Contemplating All Dharmas as Empty of Specific Marks, Non-arising, without Fixed Mark, and without Anything Turning, and Entering the Real Mark of All Dharmas, the Mark of Being without Making and Non-rising; He Increases the Roots of Goodness, Purifies Buddha-Lands, and Brings Beings to Accomplishment, and yet Does Not Receive Worldly Retribution
Subhūti said to the Buddha: ‘World-Honored One! If a bodhisattva-mahāsattva does not make offerings to the buddhas, does not fulfil the roots of goodness, and does not obtain true friends, can he still obtain sarvajñā?’
The Buddha told Subhūti: ‘For a bodhisattva-mahāsattva who makes offerings to the buddhas, plants roots of goodness, and obtains true friends, the omniscience of all kinds is still hard to obtain, how much more for one who does not make offerings to the buddhas, does not plant roots of goodness, and does not obtain true friends!’
Subhūti said to the Buddha: ‘World-Honored One! A bodhisattva-mahāsattva makes offerings to the buddhas, plants roots of goodness, and obtains true friends; why is the omniscience of all kinds still hard for him to obtain?’
The Buddha told Subhūti: ‘This bodhisattva-mahāsattva is far from the power of skilful means, does not hear the power of skilful means from the buddhas, the roots of goodness he plants are not complete, and he does not constantly follow the teaching of the good friend.’
‘World-Honored One! What is the power of skilful means, such that a bodhisattva-mahāsattva practising this power of skilful means is able to obtain the omniscience of all kinds?’
The Buddha said: ‘From the first arousing of intent onward the bodhisattva-mahāsattva practises dānapāramitā: with a thought that accords with sarvajñā he gives to a Buddha, or to a pratyekabuddha, or to a śrāvaka, or to a human, or to a non-human, and at that time he does not give rise to the thought of giving or the thought of a recipient. Why? He contemplates all dharmas as empty of specific marks, non-arising, without fixed mark, without anything turning, and enters the real mark of all dharmas, namely the mark of all dharmas without making and non-rising. Because of this power of skilful means the bodhisattva increases the roots of goodness; because he increases the roots of goodness, he practises dānapāramitā, purifies buddha-lands, and brings beings to accomplishment. Giving, he does not receive worldly retribution; only for the sake of rescuing and delivering all beings does he practise dānapāramitā.
‘Furthermore, Subhūti! From the first arousing of intent onward the bodhisattva-mahāsattva practises śīlapāramitā: with a thought that accords with sarvajñā, when keeping morality he does not fall into lust, anger, and delusion, nor does he fall into the afflictions, the entanglements and bonds, and the unwholesome dharmas that break the path—whether stinginess and greed, breaking morality, hatred, laziness, a scattered mind, folly and delusion; pride, great pride, pride upon pride, the pride of self, overweening pride, the pride of inferiority, wrong pride; whether the mind of a śrāvaka or the mind of a pratyekabuddha. Why? This bodhisattva-mahāsattva contemplates all dharmas as empty of specific marks, non-arising, without fixed mark, without anything turning, and enters the real mark of all dharmas, namely the mark of all dharmas without making and non-rising. Because the bodhisattva accomplishes this power of skilful means, he increases the roots of goodness; because he increases the roots of goodness, he practises śīlapāramitā, purifies buddha-lands, and brings beings to accomplishment. Keeping morality, he does not receive worldly retribution; only for the sake of rescuing and delivering all beings does he practise śīlapāramitā.
‘Furthermore, Subhūti! From the first arousing of intent onward the bodhisattva-mahāsattva practises kṣāntipāramitā: with a thought that accords with sarvajñā, because the power of skilful means is accomplished, he practises the path of seeing the truths and the path of reflection, and yet does not take the fruit of the srota-āpanna, the sakṛdāgāmin, the anāgāmin, or the fruit of the arhat. Why? This bodhisattva-mahāsattva knows all dharmas to be empty of specific marks, non-arising, without fixed mark, without anything turning; though he practises these dharmas that aid the path, he passes beyond the grounds of the śrāvaka and the pratyekabuddha. Subhūti! This is called the bodhisattva's acceptance of the non-arising of dharmas.
‘Furthermore, Subhūti! From the first arousing of intent onward the bodhisattva-mahāsattva practises vīryapāramitā: he enters the first dhyāna and so on up to entering the fourth dhyāna, and enters the four immeasurable minds and the four formless absorptions; though he goes in and out of the dhyānas, he does not receive the retribution. Why? Because this bodhisattva accomplishes this power of skilful means, he knows the dhyānas and absorptions to be empty of specific marks, non-arising, without fixed mark, without anything turning, purifies buddha-lands, and brings beings to accomplishment. Practising vigour, he does not receive worldly retribution; only for the sake of rescuing and delivering all beings does he practise vīryapāramitā.
‘Furthermore, Subhūti! From the first arousing of intent onward the bodhisattva-mahāsattva practises dhyānapāramitā: with a thought that accords with sarvajñā he enters the eight liberations and the nine successive absorptions, and yet does not realise the fruit of the srota-āpanna, and so on up to not realising the fruit of the arhat. Why? This bodhisattva-mahāsattva knows all dharmas to be empty of specific marks, non-arising, without fixed mark, without anything turning.
‘Furthermore, Subhūti! From the first arousing of intent onward the bodhisattva-mahāsattva practises prajñāpāramitā: he trains in the Buddha's ten powers, the four fearlessnesses, the four unobstructed knowledges, the eighteen unshared dharmas, and great kindness and great compassion, and so on up to: while he has not yet obtained the omniscience of all kinds, not yet purified buddha-lands, and not yet brought beings to accomplishment, in the interval he should practise thus. Why? This bodhisattva-mahāsattva knows all dharmas to be empty of specific marks, non-arising, without fixed mark, without anything turning. Subhūti! This bodhisattva-mahāsattva should practise prajñāpāramitā thus, not receiving retribution.’
Treatise ①: Explaining Why Subhūti Asks So Coarse a Question, and Bringing Out Two Views; Citing the Buddha's Answer, the Difficulty That within Ultimate Emptiness There Is Neither Merit nor Non-merit, and the Answer That Because within Worldly Truth There Is Merit It Is Obtained; Bringing Out the Simile of the Man of the Path Begging for Food Who Strikes a Hungry Dog with His Staff; Explaining the Three Marks of Being Apart from Skilful Means, and That Skilful Means Is Prajñāpāramitā; Explaining the Two Gates of Practising Dāna with Mind and without Mind, and the Reason the Three Thoughts Do Not Arise; Concluding That without Such Skilful Means One Still Does Not Obtain It, How Much Less One Who Does Not Make Offerings, and That the Remaining Five Perfections Are Also Like This
The treatise-author asks:
Why does Subhūti ask so coarse a question—「不供養諸佛，不具足善根，不得真知識，當得薩婆若不」 tr. "Not making offerings to the buddhas, not fulfilling the roots of goodness, not obtaining true friends—will he obtain sarvajñā or not?"
The treatise-author answers:
Someone says: ‘If all dharmas are without any existent nature and ultimately empty, then within ultimate emptiness, planting roots of goodness and not planting roots of goodness are equal and without difference. If it is so, can one not make offerings to the buddhas, not plant roots of goodness, not obtain true friends, and yet obtain sarvajñā?’
Again someone, doubting in this way, says: ‘There are all kinds of other gates to obtaining sarvajñā; one need not plant roots of goodness and the rest.’ For this reason he asks the Buddha.
The Buddha answers: ‘If one makes offerings to the buddhas, plants roots of goodness, and obtains true friends, it is still hard to obtain, how much more if one does not!’
Subhūti asks: ‘Since within ultimate emptiness there is neither merit nor non-merit, why is it obtained only by reason of merit?’
The Buddha answers: ‘Because within worldly truth there is merit, it is obtained.’
Subhūti asks for the sake of beings who cling to being without anything existent, and the Buddha answers by not clinging to an existent dharma, that is: ‘Even cultivating merit with vigour, it is unfindable, how much less without cultivating merit!’ It is like a man of the path who has taken up the dharma of begging for food: he comes to a village and goes from this house to that house, begging for food and obtaining none. He sees a hungry dog lying down starving, strikes it with his staff and says: ‘You beast, without wisdom! I, with all kinds of causes and conditions, seek food from house to house and still cannot obtain it, how much less you, lying there and hoping to obtain it!’
Subhūti asks: ‘World-Honored One! Having these causes and conditions of making offerings to the buddhas and so on, why does he not obtain their retribution?’
The Buddha answers: ‘Because he is apart from skilful means.’ Skilful means, namely, is prajñāpāramitā. Though he sees the form bodies of the buddhas, he does not see the Dharma body with the eye of wisdom; though he has planted roots of goodness in a small portion, they are not complete; though he obtains good friends, he does not keep close to them and consult and receive from them.
Further, the Buddha himself states the causes and conditions, namely: ‘From the first arousing of intent the bodhisattva practises dānapāramitā with mind and without mind.’ With mind means giving with a mind that accords with sarvajñā, keeping in mind the buddhas' all kinds of immeasurable merits, and giving out of pity for beings. Without mind means: whether giving to a Buddha and so on down to an ordinary person, he does not give rise to the three kinds of thought, namely giver, recipient, and the thing given. Why? The thing given, together with all dharmas, is likewise empty of specific marks, from the beginning ever unarisen; without fixed mark—whether one or different, whether permanent or impermanent, and so on—because this dharma is empty of specific marks; it cannot be turned, because it abides within suchness. Contemplating thus, he enters the real mark of all dharmas, namely the mark of being without making and non-rising. All dharmas can make nothing, so he does not give rise to a haughty mind and hopes for nothing.
Because of such power of skilful means, he is able to increase the roots of goodness and part from the roots that are not good, to teach and transform beings, and to purify buddha-worlds.
Whether giving much or giving little, he does not receive worldly retribution; it is only for the sake of rescuing and delivering all beings. When the bodhisattva gives to beings in measured and limited amounts, he has this thought: ‘In former lives I did not cultivate deep and abundant merit; now I cannot give widely to beings. I should now, deeply and really, much practise dānapāramitā; having obtained this retribution, I will be able to benefit fully and give widely to immeasurable beings—whether the benefit of this life, or the benefit of later lives, or the benefit of the path and its virtue.’
Without such skilful means, though the bodhisattva makes offerings to the buddhas, plants roots of goodness, and obtains true friends, he still does not obtain it, how much less one who does not make offerings!
The remaining five perfections are also like this.
種善根品：三事俱缺而問當得薩婆若不何以被論主判為麁問，佛何以不直答不得而答尚難得何況不，既已供養諸佛種善根得真知識何以猶難得一切種智，佛所答的四句缺失何以句句繫在方便力上，何等是方便力何以佛不下定義而以六波羅蜜逐一示之，檀尸羅二度何以獨說增益善根，入諸法實相無作無起相何以只在前二度與論末出現，羼提段何以說的是見諦思惟道不取四果而結以無生法忍，毘梨耶段何以說的是四禪四無量四無色，禪段何以說的是八背捨九次第定而止於不證，般若段何以不說不受世間果報而說不受果報，畢竟空中種與不種等無異之疑何以不是戲論，世諦中有福故得何以不是退一步說，乞食道人杖打餓狗何以是全品最切身的一喻，離方便之三相何以都作雖得而不成之句法，有心無心行檀何以不是兩種人而是一事之兩面，不生三想何以要從施物自相空說起，初發意菩薩自念先世不行深福德何以被論主特為拈出，餘五波羅蜜亦如是何以是一句真話而不是省筆
在問什麼
這一品問的是善根與得道之間那一段距離。前品說到行者當供養諸佛、種善根、親近善知識，話說到此本已圓滿；這一品一開口，須菩提卻把這三件事一齊拿掉來問：若不供養諸佛、不具足善根、不得真知識，還能得薩婆若嗎？問法之突兀，論主自己也標了出來，稱之為麁問。全品的力量就在這一問之後不肯落到兩邊：不落在『三事既無，必定不得』的斷語，也不落在『三事既有，自然可得』的安心。
佛的答語兩次都用同一個句法。第一次答：供養諸佛、種善根、得真知識，一切種智尚且難得，何況不供養、不種、不得！這句話沒有正面說「不得」，卻把「難」字安在已具三事的人身上——難處不在缺少，而在別處。須菩提隨即抓住這個『別處』再問：既已供養、已種、已得，何以還難得一切種智？佛這纔說出四句：遠離方便力，不從諸佛聞方便力，所種善根不具足，不常隨善知識教。四句之中，前兩句直說方便力，後兩句則是前兩句的果——善根之所以不具足、教誨之所以不常隨，根子仍在方便力上。全品的樞紐字，至此纔露出來。
於是有第三問：何等是方便力？此處最可留意的是佛的答法。佛不曾為方便力立一個界說，卻從檀波羅蜜起，一度一度地示現它的樣子：布施而不生施想受者想，持戒而不墮諸煩惱與二乘心，行見諦思惟道而不取四果，出入諸禪而不受果報，入八背捨九次第定而不證四果，學十力四無所畏乃至大慈大悲而於未得一切種智之間如是行。六段的內容各異，句骨卻是同一個——每段都有「何以故」，每段的答案都是同一組語——或作「觀一切法自相空」，或作「知諸法自相空」，或作「知諸禪定自相空」，而下接「無生，無定相，無所轉」。方便力不是六度之外另有一物，是行六度時那一分不取著的知見。
論段所釋，順著經文的縫隙走。論主先問須菩提何以作是麁問，出兩種有人言以明此問之所自來；次牒佛答，並補出一段經中未見的問答——畢竟空中無福無非福，何以但以福德故得？佛答以世諦中有福故得。論主接著出一喻：乞食的道人一家一家求食不得，見餓狗飢臥，以杖打之而說「我種種因緣，家家求食尚不能得，何況汝臥而望得！」喻雖粗，所破的正是那個以空為據而懶於修福的心。末後論主釋「離方便」之三相，釋有心無心行檀之二門，結於「無如是方便，菩薩雖供養諸佛、種善根、得真知識，尚不得，何況不供養！」，並以「餘五波羅蜜，亦如是」收全品。全品自問三事之可缺起，至答三事之不足止——所缺者從來不是善根，是種善根時的那一分方便。
逐段解明
一、須菩提設三事俱缺之問。 品首是須菩提白佛：菩薩摩訶薩若不供養諸佛、不具足善根、不得真知識，當得薩婆若不？三事並列而一齊否定，是本品全部議論的起點。讀者初見此問，多半覺得答案顯然——既不供養、不種、不得，如何能得？正因為答案看似顯然，這一問纔值得追究：須菩提是不知而問，還是為別人問？論主後文自會分說，此處只須先記住三事的名目與次第——供養諸佛在前，種善根居中，得真知識在後，一頭是所奉之境，一尾是所依之人，中間是自己所作之業。
二、佛以尚難何況之句答。 佛的答語不從「不得」立說，卻說：供養諸佛、種善根、得真知識，一切種智尚難得，何況不供養諸佛、不種善根、不得真知識！此句法有兩層用處。其一，它不否定三事之必要——若三事無關，佛不會把它放在「尚難得」的主語位上。其二，它把重量移到「難」字：既已具足三事而猶難，可見得一切種智另有所須。讀經遇到『尚……何況……』之句，應先看它的前項是什麼；前項所舉越是充分，後項所遮越是徹底，而真正的教誨往往藏在前項的那個「尚」字裡。
三、須菩提就難字再問。 須菩提果然就此再問：菩薩摩訶薩供養諸佛、種善根、得真知識，何以故難得一切種智？這一問是全品的轉軸。第一問問的是『缺了三事可不可以』，第二問問的是『有了三事何以還不夠』——問題的方向整個掉轉過來。前一問若答成了，只是釋疑；這一問答成了，纔是立教。經文在此不加任何鋪陳，兩問緊接，正見得須菩提之問不是泛問。
四、佛答四句缺失。 佛答：是菩薩摩訶薩遠離方便力，不從諸佛聞方便力，所種善根不具足，不常隨善知識教。四句宜逐句看。第一句「遠離方便力」是總，說行者自身與方便力之間有距離。第二句「不從諸佛聞方便力」說其所以遠離之由——方便力是從佛聞來的，不聞則無由得。第三句「所種善根不具足」，回應品題之「種善根」：善根非無，是不具足；不具足非因種得少，是因種時離了方便。第四句「不常隨善知識教」，回應前文之「得真知識」：知識非不得，是得而不常隨。四句與第一問所舉三事恰成對照——三事皆在，而每一事都成了半截，病不在有無，在成與不成。
五、須菩提三問何等是方便力。 至此須菩提問：世尊！何等是方便力，菩薩摩訶薩行是方便力，得一切種智？此段經文沒有再出「須菩提白佛言」之類的起說語，逕以「世尊」呼格接續，是承前一問而下的第三問。問中有兩節：一問方便力之體，二問行此方便力而得一切種智之事。佛以下六段所答，正是對這兩節的合答——不別立一個方便力之體，而於六度之行中示其相。讀此段當預存一個心理準備：底下所要聽的不是定義，是樣子。
六、檀波羅蜜段——布施而不生施想受者想。 佛答之首段說檀。其文有四節：一者「從初發意行檀波羅蜜，應薩婆若念」，說發心之所繫；二者布施於佛、辟支佛、聲聞、人、非人，「是時不生布施想、受者想」，說行時之所離；三者「何以故」下出其所以能不生想之由——「觀一切法自相空，無生，無定相，無所轉，入諸法實相，所謂一切法無作無起相」；四者以是方便力故增益善根，因增益善根故行檀波羅蜜、淨佛國土、成就眾生，布施不受世間果報，但欲救度一切眾生故。所施之境自佛以至非人，上下齊收，正是要顯示不生想者不揀對象。此段之「增益善根」兩見，是本品正面回答品題的第一處：善根之具足，不在所種之多，在種時有無方便。
七、尸羅波羅蜜段——持戒不墮諸煩惱與二乘心。 次段說尸羅，句骨與檀段全同，所異者在中間一節之內容。持戒時不墮婬怒癡中，不墮諸煩惱、纏縛及諸不善破道法——經文隨即開列：慳貪、破戒、瞋恚，懈怠、亂意、愚癡，慢、大慢、慢慢、我慢、增上慢、不如慢、邪慢，若聲聞心、若辟支佛心。此列宜逐項看其來歷：慳貪、破戒、瞋恚、懈怠、亂意、愚癡六者，正是六波羅蜜各自所對治之障；經所開列之慢、大慢、慢慢、我慢、增上慢、不如慢、邪慢七者，是自高之心的七種分齊，自粗至細；末後二心則不屬煩惱而屬所趣——聲聞心、辟支佛心於二乘為正，於菩薩則為墮。故此段所遮者三層：一層是惡，一層是慢，一層是小。三層俱不墮，纔是菩薩之持戒。其下「何以故」以至「持戒不受世間果報」，與檀段同文，可見二度所依之方便同是一事。
八、羼提波羅蜜段——行見諦思惟道而不取四果，是名無生法忍。 第三段標羼提，而所說之事是「方便力成就故，行見諦道、思惟道，亦不取須陀洹果、斯陀含、阿那含、阿羅漢果」。讀者至此易生疑：羼提是忍，何以說的是道與果？當就經文自身尋解。此段之末，佛自己下了名目：「須菩提！是名菩薩無生法忍。」可知此處所說之忍不是忍受違逆之忍，是於無生法中安忍不動之忍；而所謂安忍不動，其驗處正在「行是助道法，而過聲聞、辟支佛地」——行其道而不取其果，是忍之極難者。又此段之「何以故」下，只說「知諸法自相空，無生，無定相，無所轉」而止，不更說「入諸法實相，所謂一切法無作無起相」。前二度說到入實相，此後四度皆止於「無所轉」，是經文自身的分際，讀者不必代為補足。
九、毘梨耶波羅蜜段——入四禪四無量四無色而不受果報。 第四段標毘梨耶，所說是入初禪乃至第四禪，入四無量心、四無色定，雖出入諸禪而不受果報。此段有三事可留意。其一，經文於此段未出「應薩婆若念」一語，與檀、尸羅、羼提、禪四段不同。其二，所觀之境亦隨所行而轉——檀、尸羅二段作「觀一切法自相空」，羼提段作「知諸法自相空」，此段獨作「知諸禪定自相空」，所觀者正是自己所入之定。其三，此段說「淨佛國土，成就眾生」而不說「增益善根」；增益善根一語，經中唯檀、尸羅二段有之。精進而不受世間果報，但欲救度一切眾生故行毘梨耶波羅蜜——所謂精進之相，於此段全落在出入諸禪而不取其報上。
十、禪波羅蜜段——入八背捨九次第定而不證四果。 第五段標禪，說入八背捨、九次第定，亦不證須陀洹果乃至不證阿羅漢果，其下「何以故」仍作「知諸法自相空，無生，無定相，無所轉」而止。此段最短，然有一字之別須看清：羼提段作「不取」四果，此段作「不證」四果。取者從其果報而受之，證者於其境界而親得之；八背捨、九次第定是四果聖者所共行之定門，行此定而不證其果，其難更甚於不取。又此段不言不受果報、不言增益善根、不言淨佛國土成就眾生，語止於知空，是經文於此收束得極儉。
十一、般若波羅蜜段——學十力乃至大慈大悲，於未得之間應如是行。 第六段標般若，所學者是佛十力、四無所畏、四無礙智、十八不共法、大慈大悲——皆是佛地之法，非因中所有。故經文隨即出一段限量之語：「乃至未得一切種智，未淨佛國土，未成就眾生，於其中間應如是行。」「於其中間」四字是此段之眼：所學既是佛地之法，而身猶在未得之地，那一段中間的路怎麼走，正是般若所司。其下「何以故」仍以知諸法自相空四句為答，末句作「應如是行般若波羅蜜，不受果報」——不作「不受世間果報」。世間果報是三界之報，果報則通因果之報；措辭之別，經文自有分齊，錄之不強解。六段至此而畢，六度皆以同一知見為方便，而所離之事各隨其度。
十二、論主設問：何以作是麁問。 論段起首即問曰：須菩提何以故作是麁問——「不供養諸佛，不具足善根，不得真知識，當得薩婆若不」？論主逐字重牒經中之問而加一「麁」字，是論主對此問的判語。所謂麁，不是責其粗率無知，是說此問所舉之事太過直白——三事一齊拿掉而逕問可得與否，不留餘地。論主立此一問，正為引出下文兩種有人言：問之所以麁，是因為問中所含之疑本身就麁；不把那個疑說破，經文佛答之妙處便看不出來。
十三、有人言：畢竟空中種與不種等無異。 論主答曰之首，出第一說。有人言：若一切諸法無所有性、畢竟空，畢竟空中，種善根、不種善根等無異；若爾者，可不供養諸佛、不種善根、不得真知識，得薩婆若耶？此說之來歷，正是般若一系自身之教——諸法畢竟空是前諸品所廣說，並非外道之論。難處在於這一步推論：既然畢竟空中一切平等，種與不種既無二相，行與不行又何必分？此疑不可以粗心看過，它是學空者最容易踏上的一條路；論主把它放在第一，正見其常見。
十四、復有人疑言：得薩婆若更有種種門。 第二說與第一說不同科。前說之疑在理上——以空為據而疑行之無用；此說之疑在事上——得薩婆若既有種種門，或不必經由種善根這一門。論主以「復有人疑言」領起，末綴一句「是故問佛」，把兩說一齊收在須菩提發問的緣由上。可見論主釋此問，不判須菩提自有此疑，只說有此二種人之疑而須菩提為之發問。讀論至此，須菩提之問便不麁了：麁的是疑，不是問的人。
十五、論主牒佛答。 論主接著牒出佛答：若供養諸佛、種善根、得真知識，尚難得，何況不！此處所牒即經段第二節之文，然論主牒之而不更釋，是因為此答之義已於下文兩番問答中說盡。牒經之語與論主自說之語當分兩層看——凡論中作「佛答」「須菩提問」者，是論主重現經中對話以為論證，不是論主自立問答；下文數節皆當如此讀。
十六、須菩提難：畢竟空中無有福以非福。 此下一節是論段中最要緊的一處：論主出一段經文所無的問答。須菩提問：以畢竟空中無有福以非福，何以但以福德故得？此難比第十三段之有人言更進一步——前者疑的是行之無用，此處難的是佛答自身：佛既以福德（供養、種善根）為得之所由，而畢竟空中福與非福俱不可得，佛答豈不自相違？凡讀般若經論，遇此類『以空難有』之處，不可跳過，因為佛的答語往往就在此處把兩諦的分際說明白。
十七、佛答：以世諦中有福故得。 佛的答語只有一句：以世諦中有福故得。此句不是退讓，也不是權說。畢竟空是第一義中之語，有福有得是世諦中之事；第一義不壞世諦，故空中無福而世諦有福，兩語各有其位而不相奪。若把「世諦」二字讀成『姑且這麼說』，則此答便成了敷衍；若讀成『於世諦之分位上這件事確實如此』，纔是論主所取之義。下文論主釋此一節，正是順這一句而發。
十八、論主釋二人之意，並出乞食道人杖打餓狗喻。 論主於此自陳其釋：須菩提為眾生著無所有故問，佛以不著有法答，所謂「精進修福尚不可得，何況不修福！」——一問一答各有所對：問是為破眾生之著無，答是為不落於著有。兩邊都不著，纔是這一節的分寸。其下出喻：如受乞食道人，至一聚落，從一家至一家，乞食不得；見一餓狗飢臥，以杖打之言：「汝畜生無智，我種種因緣，家家求食尚不能得，何況汝臥而望得！」喻中三事相配——道人之勤求配精進修福，餓狗之飢臥配不修而望得，杖打之語配佛「尚不可得，何況不修」之答。喻雖出於俗事而極切身：學空之人若因空而廢行，正是那隻臥而望得的狗；此喻之刺，是對著門內人說的。
十九、須菩提問：有是因緣何故不得果報。 論主再出一番問答。須菩提問：世尊！有是供養諸佛等因緣，何故不得其果報？此問所承者是經段第三節須菩提之再問，而措辭轉為因果之語——因緣既具，果報何以不現。以因果之語問，正好逼出佛以「離方便」為答；因為若照常途因果而論，因具則果必至，今因具而果不至，必是別有所闕。
二十、佛答離方便故，並釋方便即般若與三種雖得不成之相。 佛答只四字：離方便故。論主隨即下一轉語：方便者，所謂般若波羅蜜。這一句是全品的定名之語——前文經中屢說方便力而未釋其名，論主至此以般若釋之，則六度段中那四句「知諸法自相空，無生，無定相，無所轉」的知見，正是般若之用，前後遂通為一事。其下論主以三句釋離方便之相：雖見諸佛色身，不以智慧眼見法身；雖少種善根，而不具足；雖得善知識，不親近諮受。三句同一句法，皆作『雖……而不……』，與經段佛答之四句缺失逐一相應——見色身而不見法身，即是不從諸佛聞方便力；少種而不具足，即是所種善根不具足；得而不親近諮受，即是不常隨善知識教。經之四句是佛所舉之病相，論之三句是論主所指之病根：病不在所遇不真，在能受者離了般若。
廿一、論主釋有心無心行檀之二門。 論主又引佛自說之因緣：菩薩從初發意，以有、無心行檀波羅蜜。此下分二門。有心者，所謂應薩婆若心布施，念諸佛種種無量功德，憐愍眾生故布施——此門之相是有所繫：繫於薩婆若、繫於佛德、繫於眾生。無心者，若施佛乃至凡人，不生三想，所謂施者、受者、財物——此門之相是無所著。二門看似相反，實為一事之兩面：有心者不是取著，是願行不斷；無心者不是漠然，是三想不生。論主更為「不生三想」出其所以然，逐層而下：施物等一切法自相空，從本已來常不生；無定相——若一、若異，若常、若無常等，是法自相空故；不可轉，安住如中故。「無定相」一節之二對，是就常人於施物上所起之計而破——或計其為一為異，或計其為常為無常，四計皆從自相不空來。末結：如是觀，即入諸法實相，所謂無作無起相；一切法無所能作，不生高心，無所悕望。「不生高心，無所悕望」八字是此段落到行人身上的話——施而自高、施而有望，正是三想未除之驗。
廿二、論主結方便力之四用。 上文既明有心無心之行，論主以一句總收：如是方便力故，能增益善根、離不善根，教化眾生、淨佛世界。此句宜與經段檀、尸羅二段對看。經中作『增益善根……淨佛國土，成就眾生』三事，論中作「增益善根、離不善根，教化眾生、淨佛世界」四事——多出一「離不善根」，並以增益與離為一對。善根之事至此纔說得圓滿：不只是種得多，還要種得具足；不只是增其善，還要離其不善。本品題為種善根，而全品真正說到「種」之成就處，正在這一句。
廿三、布施不受世間果報，及初發意菩薩之自念。 論主次說布施若多、若少，不受世間果報，但欲救度一切眾生故。其下特出一段初發意菩薩的心理：菩薩布施眾生有量有限，作是念——「我先世不行深福德，今不能廣施眾生。我今當深實多行檀波羅蜜，得是果報已，能具足利益，廣施無量眾生，若今世利，若後世利，若道德利。」這一段極可貴，因為它說的是力有未逮之人。上文所說皆是不受果報、不生三想之高行，讀者或疑此事非初心所能；論主便拈出這一念——所施雖有量有限，而所願無量，且自知其所以有限在先世福薄，故今當深行以求其能廣。末三利之次第亦當看：今世利、後世利、道德利，由淺入深而以道德為歸，可見所求之果報非為自受，是為施之能廣。
廿四、總結：無如是方便尚不得，何況不供養；餘五波羅蜜亦如是。 論主末段收全品：無如是方便，菩薩雖供養諸佛、種善根、得真知識，尚不得，何況不供養！此語與經段第二節佛答之句法全同，而所加者是「無如是方便」五字——經之「尚難得」至此乃明其所以難。次句「餘五波羅蜜，亦如是」，不是省筆。上文論主釋方便，唯就檀波羅蜜之有心無心說得詳盡；此句是明白告訴讀者：尸羅以下五度，其有心無心、其不生三想、其不受果報，一一皆如檀中所說，讀者當自推之。經段以六度逐一示方便，論段以一度詳釋而以此句通其餘五——經詳而論略，合之乃備。
不要讀錯
不要把須菩提的三事俱缺之問讀成須菩提自己不信因果。論主釋此問，明說是「須菩提為眾生著無所有故問」，並先出兩種有人言以明疑之所自來。問者所懷不必是自己之疑，經中發問往往是為眾生發問；若把此問讀成須菩提之惑，則佛答中「尚難得」三字所針對的對象便失了。
不要把「畢竟空中，種善根、不種善根等無異」讀成本論所破斥的邪見。論主既以「有人言」出之而不加呵責，又於下文以「世諦中有福故得」正面作答，可見此說所據之理（畢竟空）本身無誤，誤在推論的那一步——以第一義中之平等，取消世諦中之差別。讀般若論當守此分寸：所破者是取空之偏，不是空義本身。
不要把「以世諦中有福故得」讀成佛退了一步說方便話。兩諦各有其位，此答是就世諦之分位如實而說，非權設。若讀成權說，則下文乞食道人之喻便無所繫——論主出此喻，正是要說明『不修而望得』在世諦上確實不得，並非姑妄言之。
不要把六度段中的差異讀成經文的疏漏。檀、尸羅二段有「增益善根」而其下四段無，前二段說到「入諸法實相，所謂一切法無作無起相」而後四段止於「無所轉」，毘梨耶、般若二段未出「應薩婆若念」，羼提段作「不取」四果而禪段作「不證」四果，般若段作「不受果報」而不作「不受世間果報」——這些分際皆是經文自身之文，義疏只可據實錄之，不可代經補齊，更不可據他段之文改讀此段。
不要把羼提段讀錯了名相。此段標羼提波羅蜜而通篇說見諦道、思惟道與不取四果，末乃自結為「是名菩薩無生法忍」。所謂忍，在此不是忍受違逆之忍，是於無生法中安住不動之忍；其驗處即在「雖行是助道法，而過聲聞、辟支佛地」。若以世間忍辱之義讀此段，則全段所說與忍無涉，反成錯簡之疑。
不要把有心、無心讀成兩種菩薩或兩個階位。論主是釋佛自說之一句「以有、無心行檀波羅蜜」，二門同繫於一人之一行：有心者所繫是薩婆若、佛德與眾生，無心者所離是施者、受者、財物三想。若讀成有心者低而無心者高、先有心而後無心，則「念諸佛種種無量功德，憐愍眾生故布施」一節便無安放之處——那正是本論處處所讚之行。
不要把「餘五波羅蜜，亦如是」讀成論主略而不釋。此句是論主明示推例之法：檀中所說之有心無心、不生三想、不受世間果報，五度皆然。若讀成省筆，則本品所立之方便便只成了布施一門之事，與經段六度並舉之旨相違。
修行作用
第一件受用，是把「尚難得，何況不」當作日常的自照之句。佛兩次用此句法，前項所舉皆是供養諸佛、種善根、得真知識這樣充分的因緣。行人日中所作，若與前項相比尚且遠不及，則不必更問後項；若自覺已在前項之列，那個「尚」字正是提醒——具足因緣而猶難，難處在方便，當回頭看自己行時的知見，不是回頭再加行數。
第二件受用，是以佛所答的四句作行門的檢查次第。遠離方便力、不從諸佛聞方便力、所種善根不具足、不常隨善知識教——四句可倒過來自問：我於善知識之教是常隨還是偶隨？我所種之善根是具足還是半截？我所聞之法，是聞其事相還是聞到方便？我與方便力之間，是遠離還是相親？四問由粗入細，末一問答得出來，前三問自明。
第三件受用，是六度段的句骨可以逐度自驗。每一度的驗處都在「何以故」之下那一句知見，而所離之事各有其名：布施時有無施想受者想？持戒時有無墮入慳貪破戒等諸不善、諸慢與二乘心？行道品時有無暗取果證之念？出入諸禪時有無受其報味？入深定時有無證取之心？學佛地之法時，有無因未得而生退？六問各就其行而問，不必混作一問。
第四件受用，是那隻飢臥的狗可以作一面鏡子。論主的喻極不留情：勤求者尚不得，何況臥而望得。行人若讀般若久而行門日疏，動輒以「畢竟空」自解，便當把這一喻拈出來自照一次——所學之空若使人怠於修福，那個空必不是論主所說的空，因為論主說空的同一段文裡，正立著「精進修福尚不可得」一句。
第五件受用，是初發意菩薩那一念可以逕直取用。所施有量有限而不因此自沮，反自知先世福薄而發願深行——這一念最切於初學。日用中所能施者少、所能利者近，不必以此為愧，亦不必以此為足；依論主所出之三利次第，今世之利、後世之利、道德之利，把眼前一施繫在最後一項上，則有量有限之施亦是檀波羅蜜之行。
承衍
本品的骨幹，是一段經文與一段論釋。經①自須菩提白佛問菩薩摩訶薩若不供養諸佛、不具足善根、不得真知識當得薩婆若不起，佛答供養諸佛、種善根、得真知識而一切種智尚難得，何況不供養不種不得；須菩提再問既供養種植而得知識何以故難得一切種智，佛答遠離方便力、不從諸佛聞方便力、所種善根不具足、不常隨善知識教；須菩提三問何等是方便力而行之得一切種智，佛乃以六波羅蜜逐一示之——檀波羅蜜段說應薩婆若念而布施佛辟支佛聲聞人非人不生布施想受者想，以觀一切法自相空無生無定相無所轉入諸法實相無作無起相為由，增益善根、行檀、淨佛國土、成就眾生而不受世間果報；尸羅波羅蜜段說持戒不墮婬怒癡及諸煩惱纏縛與慳貪破戒瞋恚懈怠亂意愚癡諸慢乃至聲聞辟支佛心，其由與果同前；羼提波羅蜜段說方便力成就故行見諦道思惟道而不取四沙門果，雖行助道法而過二乘地，結為菩薩無生法忍；毘梨耶波羅蜜段說入四禪四無量心四無色定雖出入諸禪而不受果報，知諸禪定自相空而淨佛國土成就眾生；禪波羅蜜段說入八背捨九次第定而不證四沙門果；般若波羅蜜段說學佛十力四無所畏四無礙智十八不共法大慈大悲，乃至未得一切種智未淨佛國土未成就眾生於其中間應如是行，結以應如是行般若波羅蜜不受果報。論①以問曰領起：先問須菩提何以故作是麁問而逐字重牒其問，答中出二種有人言——一者以畢竟空中種與不種等無異而疑可不種善根得薩婆若，二者疑得薩婆若更有種種門而不須種善根，並結以是故問佛；次牒佛答尚難得何況不，出須菩提以畢竟空中無有福以非福為難，佛答以世諦中有福故得；次自陳須菩提為眾生著無所有故問而佛以不著有法答，出精進修福尚不可得何況不修福之語，並以乞食道人從一家至一家乞食不得而杖打飢臥餓狗為喻；次出須菩提問有是供養諸佛等因緣何故不得其果報，佛答離方便故，論主釋方便者所謂般若波羅蜜，並以雖見諸佛色身不以智慧眼見法身、雖少種善根而不具足、雖得善知識不親近諮受三句釋其相；次引佛自說因緣而分有心無心行檀二門，有心者應薩婆若心布施念諸佛功德憐愍眾生，無心者不生施者受者財物三想，並逐層釋施物自相空、常不生、無定相、不可轉安住如中而入諸法實相無作無起相，結以一切法無所能作不生高心無所悕望；次總收如是方便力故能增益善根離不善根教化眾生淨佛世界；次說布施若多若少不受世間果報，並出初發意菩薩布施有量有限而自念先世不行深福德、今當深實多行檀波羅蜜以廣施無量眾生而有今世利後世利道德利；末結無如是方便雖供養諸佛種善根得真知識尚不得何況不供養，並以餘五波羅蜜亦如是通其餘。
本品與前後諸品的義脈，可見者有三線。其一、承前：上品末段說菩薩當供養諸佛、種善根、常不離真知識，本品即以此三事為問端而反問其可缺與否，故本品之起是上品之結的翻案式追問，非別立一端；上品既說不為善根故行般若，本品復說無善根則不得，兩品合觀，乃見不為善根而又不可無善根之相續。其二、品內自成一轉：前半經文自問三事之可缺轉入方便力之六度示現，樞紐在須菩提「何等是方便力」一問；後半論文自釋麁問轉入有心無心之行，樞紐在論主「方便者，所謂般若波羅蜜」一語。兩轉之間，「方便」二字一為所問，一為所釋。其三、垂後：本品結於無方便則三事俱不成，次品乃以遍學為題——所種之善根既須方便而成，則所學之門亦當遍而後備，讀者可合觀二品。
古德之釋與諸本之異，本品可誌者三事。其一、品題四造：本帙底本作「種善根品第七十三」，宋本、元本易「種」為「眾」而作眾善根品，宮本別稱三善根品並倒其品序與品名之次，石本則於品名之外別繫經名而作善根方便品並自報其卷第；聖本、石本之品次又皆較底本少一位。所釋之經本身，其章題作三善品第七十三，與本論之種善根品不同名而義相通；宮本之異稱正與經之章題相近，其間或有兩部品名互涉之跡，如實誌錄而不強解其先後。異名諸造並錄不判，諸本異讀之全帳詳考據層。其二、吉藏《大品經義疏》於此品有續段，其立目沿所釋之經而作三善品第七十三，不用本論種善根品之名，可見其疏乃依經之品名體系而非依論之品名體系。其釋立名之由云：「此明供養諸佛、脩善根、植善知識，皆名為善，故云三善。」——正以經之三事釋三善之目，與本論以此三事為問端者所指同一。吉藏又自出一異名云：「亦三善根品，此品中論菩薩善根，故以目品。」——此名正與本帙宮本品題之三善根品相合，可見品名諸造之異不獨見於藏經校記，古德疏中亦自並存。至於佛答之句法，吉藏釋此云：「佛舉有破無，明行三多尚難得道，況不行耶？」——所謂舉有破無，即以三事具足猶難得道之語，破時眾執無之心。其所以如此，吉藏繫之於前品云：「上品是用無破有，故云不為善故行。時眾著無，故舉有破無。」——前品以無破有而說不為善根故行，本品反以有破無而說無善根則不得，一破一立，正是上列第一線之所在。末則以有所得無所得判方便之有無，吉藏云：「無方便有所得行三品多故難得道，有方便無所得行故易得道也。」——本論以般若訓方便，吉藏以有所得無所得判方便，二說並錄不判，其指可互參。其疏文所釋之詳略，詳考據層。其三、慧影《大智度論疏》現存之本止於前卷，未及本品，是闕釋而非未提；均正《大乘四論玄義》中「所種善根」一語出於其引《金剛般若經》燃燈佛前事而論有所得無所得之善，與本品無涉，不作承接；今檢天台一系之《摩訶止觀》《法華玄義》《法華玄義釋籤》，亦未見引及本品之品題。此品所繫古德之證甚薄，與本論他品之厚者不同，據實誌之而不作推論。
Planting Roots of Goodness: Why the Question Whether One Will Obtain Sarvajñā When All Three Matters Are Lacking Is Judged by the Treatise-Author a Coarse Question; Why the Buddha Does Not Answer Directly That One Does Not Obtain, but Answers That It Is Still Hard to Obtain, How Much More for One Who Does Not; Why, Having Already Made Offerings to the Buddhas, Planted Roots of Goodness, and Obtained True Friends, One Still Finds the Omniscience of All Kinds Hard to Obtain; Why the Four Lacks in the Buddha's Answer Are Bound, Phrase by Phrase, to the Power of Skilful Means; Why, as to What the Power of Skilful Means Is, the Buddha Gives No Definition but Shows It One by One through the Six Perfections; Why the Two Perfections of Dāna and Śīla Alone Speak of Increasing the Roots of Goodness; Why Entering the Real Mark of All Dharmas, the Mark of Being without Making and Non-rising, Appears Only in the First Two Perfections and at the End of the Treatise; Why the Kṣānti Passage Speaks of the Path of Seeing the Truths and the Path of Reflection and of Not Taking the Four Fruits, and Concludes with the Acceptance of the Non-arising of Dharmas; Why the Vīrya Passage Speaks of the Four Dhyānas, the Four Immeasurables, and the Four Formless Absorptions; Why the Dhyāna Passage Speaks of the Eight Liberations and the Nine Successive Absorptions and Stops at Not Realising; Why the Prajñā Passage Does Not Say That He Does Not Receive Worldly Retribution but Says That He Does Not Receive Retribution; Why the Doubt That within Ultimate Emptiness Planting and Not Planting Are Equal and without Difference Is Not Idle Discourse; Why Its Being Obtained Because within Worldly Truth There Is Merit Is Not a Step Backward in Speaking; Why the Man of the Path Begging for Food Who Strikes the Hungry Dog with His Staff Is the Simile Closest to One's Own Person in the Whole Chapter; Why the Three Marks of Being Apart from Skilful Means All Take the Syntax of Obtaining and yet Not Accomplishing; Why Practising Dāna with Mind and without Mind Is Not Two Kinds of People but Two Sides of One Matter; Why Not Giving Rise to the Three Thoughts Must Be Spoken of Starting from the Thing Given Being Empty of Specific Marks; Why the Bodhisattva of the First Arousing of Intent Reflecting That in Former Lives He Did Not Practise Deep Merit Is Specially Picked Out by the Treatise-Author; and Why the Remaining Five Perfections Being Also Like This Is a True Sentence and Not an Abbreviation
What Is Being Asked
What this chapter asks about is that stretch of distance between the roots of goodness and obtaining the path. The preceding chapter came to say that the practitioner should make offerings to the buddhas, plant roots of goodness, and keep close to the good friend, and at that point the words were already complete; yet as soon as this chapter opens its mouth, Subhūti takes these three matters away all together and asks: if one does not make offerings to the buddhas, does not fulfil the roots of goodness, and does not obtain true friends, can one still obtain sarvajñā? The abruptness of this way of asking the treatise-author himself marks out, calling it a coarse question. The force of the whole chapter lies in its refusing, after this question, to fall to either side: it does not fall into the verdict ‘since the three matters are absent, one certainly does not obtain’, nor into the reassurance ‘since the three matters are present, one naturally can obtain’.
The Buddha's answer uses the same syntax both times. The first time he answers: making offerings to the buddhas, planting roots of goodness, and obtaining true friends, the omniscience of all kinds is still hard to obtain, how much more not making offerings, not planting, not obtaining! This sentence does not say 「不得」 tr. "does not obtain" outright, yet it sets the word 「難」 tr. "hard" upon the person who already has the three matters—the hardness lies not in lacking, but elsewhere. Subhūti at once seizes this ‘elsewhere’ and asks again: having already made offerings, already planted, already obtained, why is the omniscience of all kinds still hard to obtain? Only then does the Buddha speak four phrases: far from the power of skilful means; not hearing the power of skilful means from the buddhas; the roots of goodness planted are not complete; not constantly following the teaching of the good friend. Of the four phrases, the first two speak directly of the power of skilful means, while the latter two are the fruit of the first two—the reason the roots of goodness are not complete and the reason the teaching is not constantly followed still has its root in the power of skilful means. The pivot-word of the whole chapter only now comes into view.
So there is a third question: what is the power of skilful means? What is most worth noticing here is the Buddha's way of answering. The Buddha never sets up a definition for the power of skilful means; instead, beginning from dānapāramitā, he shows its appearance perfection by perfection: giving without giving rise to the thought of giving or the thought of a recipient; keeping morality without falling into the afflictions or the minds of the two vehicles; practising the path of seeing the truths and the path of reflection without taking the four fruits; going in and out of the dhyānas without receiving the retribution; entering the eight liberations and the nine successive absorptions without realising the four fruits; training in the ten powers, the four fearlessnesses, and so on up to great kindness and great compassion, and practising thus in the interval before obtaining the omniscience of all kinds. The content of the six passages differs, yet the bone of the sentences is one and the same—every passage has 「何以故」 tr. "Why?", and every passage's answer is the same set of words—now written 「觀一切法自相空」 tr. "he contemplates all dharmas as empty of specific marks," now 「知諸法自相空」 tr. "he knows all dharmas to be empty of specific marks," now 「知諸禪定自相空」 tr. "he knows the dhyānas and absorptions to be empty of specific marks," and then continuing 「無生，無定相，無所轉」 tr. "non-arising, without fixed mark, without anything turning." The power of skilful means is not some other thing outside the six perfections; it is that portion of knowing and seeing which does not grasp and cling at the time of practising the six perfections.
What the treatise section explains goes along the seams of the sūtra text. The treatise-author first asks why Subhūti asks so coarse a question, and brings out two views of what someone says to make clear where this question comes from; next he cites the Buddha's answer, and supplies a question and answer not seen in the sūtra—since within ultimate emptiness there is neither merit nor non-merit, why is it obtained only by reason of merit? The Buddha answers that because within worldly truth there is merit, it is obtained. The treatise-author then brings out a simile: a man of the path begging for food seeks food from one house to the next and obtains none, sees a hungry dog lying down starving, strikes it with his staff and says 「我種種因緣，家家求食尚不能得，何況汝臥而望得！」 tr. "I, with all kinds of causes and conditions, seek food from house to house and still cannot obtain it, how much less you, lying there and hoping to obtain it!" Though the simile is coarse, what it breaks is precisely the mind that takes emptiness as its ground and is lazy in cultivating merit. At the end the treatise-author explains the three marks of 「離方便」 tr. "being apart from skilful means," explains the two gates of practising dāna with mind and without mind, concludes with 「無如是方便，菩薩雖供養諸佛、種善根、得真知識，尚不得，何況不供養！」 tr. "Without such skilful means, though the bodhisattva makes offerings to the buddhas, plants roots of goodness, and obtains true friends, he still does not obtain it, how much less one who does not make offerings!", and with 「餘五波羅蜜，亦如是」 tr. "The remaining five perfections are also like this" gathers in the whole chapter. The whole chapter begins from asking whether the three matters may be lacking and ends at answering that the three matters are not enough—what is lacking has never been the roots of goodness; it is that portion of skilful means at the time of planting the roots of goodness.
Passage by Passage
1. Subhūti sets up the question in which all three matters are lacking. At the head of the chapter Subhūti addresses the Buddha: if a bodhisattva-mahāsattva does not make offerings to the buddhas, does not fulfil the roots of goodness, and does not obtain true friends, will he obtain sarvajñā? Three matters are set side by side and all negated together; this is the starting point of all the discussion of this chapter. A reader seeing this question for the first time mostly feels the answer is obvious—not making offerings, not planting, not obtaining, how could one obtain? Precisely because the answer seems obvious, this question is worth pursuing: does Subhūti ask because he does not know, or does he ask for the sake of others? The treatise-author will explain this himself later in the text; here one need only first remember the names and order of the three matters—making offerings to the buddhas comes first, planting roots of goodness stands in the middle, obtaining true friends comes last; at one end is the object one serves, at the other end the person one relies on, and in the middle is the deed one does oneself.
2. The Buddha answers with the sentence of still hard … how much more. The Buddha's answer does not take its stand on 「不得」 tr. "does not obtain"; instead he says: making offerings to the buddhas, planting roots of goodness, and obtaining true friends, the omniscience of all kinds is still hard to obtain, how much more not making offerings to the buddhas, not planting roots of goodness, not obtaining true friends! This syntax serves two purposes. First, it does not deny that the three matters are necessary—if the three matters were irrelevant, the Buddha would not put them in the subject position of 「尚難得」 tr. "is still hard to obtain." Second, it moves the weight onto the word 「難」 tr. "hard": since one already complete in the three matters still finds it hard, it can be seen that obtaining the omniscience of all kinds requires something else. When reading the sūtras and meeting a sentence of the form ‘still … how much more …’, one should first look at what its first member is; the fuller what is raised in the first member, the more thoroughly the second member is blocked, and the real teaching is often hidden in that word 「尚」 tr. "still" of the first member.
3. Subhūti asks again on the word hard. Subhūti does indeed ask again on this point: a bodhisattva-mahāsattva makes offerings to the buddhas, plants roots of goodness, and obtains true friends; why is the omniscience of all kinds hard to obtain? This question is the turning axle of the whole chapter. The first question asked ‘whether lacking the three matters will do’; the second question asks ‘why having the three matters is still not enough’—the direction of the question is turned completely round. If the earlier question were answered, it would only resolve a doubt; only when this question is answered is a teaching established. The sūtra text adds no elaboration here; the two questions follow closely on each other, which shows precisely that Subhūti's questions are not idle questions.
4. The Buddha answers with four phrases of lack. The Buddha answers: this bodhisattva-mahāsattva is far from the power of skilful means, does not hear the power of skilful means from the buddhas, the roots of goodness he plants are not complete, and he does not constantly follow the teaching of the good friend. The four phrases should be looked at one by one. The first phrase, 「遠離方便力」 tr. "far from the power of skilful means," is the general one, saying that there is a distance between the practitioner himself and the power of skilful means. The second phrase, 「不從諸佛聞方便力」 tr. "does not hear the power of skilful means from the buddhas," states the cause of his being far from it—the power of skilful means comes from hearing it from the buddhas; not hearing it, there is no way to obtain it. The third phrase, 「所種善根不具足」 tr. "the roots of goodness he plants are not complete," answers to the chapter title's 「種善根」 tr. "planting roots of goodness": the roots of goodness are not absent, they are not complete; and they are not complete not because little was planted, but because in planting he was apart from skilful means. The fourth phrase, 「不常隨善知識教」 tr. "does not constantly follow the teaching of the good friend," answers to the earlier 「得真知識」 tr. "obtains true friends": it is not that the friend is not obtained, but that, obtained, he is not constantly followed. The four phrases stand in exact contrast to the three matters raised in the first question—the three matters are all present, and yet each matter has become only half; the illness lies not in having or not having, but in accomplishing or not accomplishing.
5. Subhūti asks a third time what the power of skilful means is. At this point Subhūti asks: World-Honored One! What is the power of skilful means, such that a bodhisattva-mahāsattva practising this power of skilful means obtains the omniscience of all kinds? This piece of sūtra text no longer has an opening phrase of the kind 「須菩提白佛言」 tr. "Subhūti said to the Buddha"; it continues directly with the vocative 「世尊」 tr. "World-Honored One," and is the third question, coming down in continuation of the previous one. Within the question there are two parts: one asks about the substance of the power of skilful means; the other asks about the matter of practising this power of skilful means and obtaining the omniscience of all kinds. What the Buddha answers in the six passages below is precisely a joint answer to these two parts—he does not set up a separate substance of the power of skilful means, but shows its marks within the practice of the six perfections. Reading this passage, one should keep a readiness of mind in advance: what one is about to hear below is not a definition; it is an appearance.
6. The dānapāramitā passage—giving without giving rise to the thought of giving or the thought of a recipient. The first passage of the Buddha's answer speaks of dāna. Its text has four parts: first, 「從初發意行檀波羅蜜，應薩婆若念」 tr. "from the first arousing of intent he practises dānapāramitā, with a thought that accords with sarvajñā," stating what the arousing of the mind is tied to; second, giving to a Buddha, a pratyekabuddha, a śrāvaka, a human, a non-human, 「是時不生布施想、受者想」 tr. "at that time he does not give rise to the thought of giving or the thought of a recipient," stating what is parted from at the time of practice; third, after 「何以故」 tr. "Why?" it brings out the reason he is able not to give rise to the thoughts—「觀一切法自相空，無生，無定相，無所轉，入諸法實相，所謂一切法無作無起相」 tr. "he contemplates all dharmas as empty of specific marks, non-arising, without fixed mark, without anything turning, and enters the real mark of all dharmas, namely the mark of all dharmas without making and non-rising"; fourth, because of this power of skilful means he increases the roots of goodness, and because he increases the roots of goodness he practises dānapāramitā, purifies buddha-lands, and brings beings to accomplishment; giving, he does not receive worldly retribution, only for the sake of rescuing and delivering all beings. The objects given to, from a Buddha down to a non-human, are gathered in from top to bottom alike, precisely to show that one who does not give rise to the thoughts does not pick and choose among recipients. In this passage 「增益善根」 tr. "increases the roots of goodness" appears twice; this is the first place where this chapter answers its title head-on: the completeness of the roots of goodness lies not in how many are planted, but in whether there is skilful means at the time of planting.
7. The śīlapāramitā passage—keeping morality without falling into the afflictions or the minds of the two vehicles. The next passage speaks of śīla; the bone of its sentences is entirely the same as the dāna passage, and what differs is the content of the middle part. When keeping morality he does not fall into lust, anger, and delusion, nor into the afflictions, the entanglements and bonds, and the unwholesome dharmas that break the path—the sūtra text at once lists them: stinginess and greed, breaking morality, hatred, laziness, a scattered mind, folly and delusion; pride, great pride, pride upon pride, the pride of self, overweening pride, the pride of inferiority, wrong pride; whether the mind of a śrāvaka or the mind of a pratyekabuddha. In this list one should look at the provenance of each item: the six—stinginess and greed, breaking morality, hatred, laziness, a scattered mind, folly and delusion—are precisely the obstructions that each of the six perfections counteracts; the seven listed by the sūtra—pride, great pride, pride upon pride, the pride of self, overweening pride, the pride of inferiority, wrong pride—are the seven grades of the mind that exalts itself, from coarse to fine; the two minds at the end do not belong to the afflictions but to where one tends—the mind of a śrāvaka and the mind of a pratyekabuddha are right for the two vehicles, but for the bodhisattva they are a fall. So what this passage blocks has three layers: one layer is evil, one layer is pride, one layer is smallness. Only not falling into any of the three layers is the bodhisattva's keeping of morality. Below it, from 「何以故」 tr. "Why?" through 「持戒不受世間果報」 tr. "keeping morality, he does not receive worldly retribution," the text is the same as the dāna passage, which shows that the skilful means the two perfections rely on is one and the same matter.
8. The kṣāntipāramitā passage—practising the path of seeing the truths and the path of reflection without taking the four fruits; this is called the acceptance of the non-arising of dharmas. The third passage is headed kṣānti, yet what it speaks of is 「方便力成就故，行見諦道、思惟道，亦不取須陀洹果、斯陀含、阿那含、阿羅漢果」 tr. "because the power of skilful means is accomplished, he practises the path of seeing the truths and the path of reflection, and yet does not take the fruit of the srota-āpanna, the sakṛdāgāmin, the anāgāmin, or the fruit of the arhat." Reaching this point, a reader easily feels a doubt: kṣānti is patience, so why does it speak of paths and fruits? The answer should be sought in the sūtra text itself. At the end of this passage the Buddha himself gives the name: 「須菩提！是名菩薩無生法忍。」 tr. "Subhūti! This is called the bodhisattva's acceptance of the non-arising of dharmas." From this it can be known that the acceptance spoken of here is not the patience that endures what goes against one, but the acceptance that rests unmoved within the dharma of non-arising; and where this resting unmoved is proved lies precisely in 「行是助道法，而過聲聞、辟支佛地」 tr. "he practises these dharmas that aid the path, and passes beyond the grounds of the śrāvaka and the pratyekabuddha"—to practise its path and not take its fruit is the hardest of acceptances. Again, after 「何以故」 tr. "Why?" this passage says only 「知諸法自相空，無生，無定相，無所轉」 tr. "he knows all dharmas to be empty of specific marks, non-arising, without fixed mark, without anything turning" and stops, and does not go on to say 「入諸法實相，所謂一切法無作無起相」 tr. "and enters the real mark of all dharmas, namely the mark of all dharmas without making and non-rising." The first two perfections speak as far as entering the real mark; the four perfections after this all stop at 「無所轉」 tr. "without anything turning"; this is a boundary of the sūtra text itself, and the reader need not supply it on the text's behalf.
9. The vīryapāramitā passage—entering the four dhyānas, the four immeasurables, and the four formless absorptions without receiving the retribution. The fourth passage is headed vīrya, and what it speaks of is entering the first dhyāna and so on up to the fourth dhyāna, entering the four immeasurable minds and the four formless absorptions, and though going in and out of the dhyānas, not receiving the retribution. In this passage three matters are worth noticing. First, the sūtra text in this passage does not bring out the phrase 「應薩婆若念」 tr. "with a thought that accords with sarvajñā," unlike the four passages of dāna, śīla, kṣānti, and dhyāna. Second, the object contemplated also turns according to what is practised—the two passages of dāna and śīla read 「觀一切法自相空」 tr. "he contemplates all dharmas as empty of specific marks," the kṣānti passage reads 「知諸法自相空」 tr. "he knows all dharmas to be empty of specific marks," and this passage alone reads 「知諸禪定自相空」 tr. "he knows the dhyānas and absorptions to be empty of specific marks"—what is contemplated is precisely the absorptions he himself enters. Third, this passage says 「淨佛國土，成就眾生」 tr. "purifies buddha-lands and brings beings to accomplishment," but does not say 「增益善根」 tr. "increases the roots of goodness"; the phrase increasing the roots of goodness appears in the sūtra only in the two passages of dāna and śīla. Practising vigour, he does not receive worldly retribution; only for the sake of rescuing and delivering all beings does he practise vīryapāramitā—the so-called mark of vigour falls, in this passage, entirely upon going in and out of the dhyānas without taking their retribution.
10. The dhyānapāramitā passage—entering the eight liberations and the nine successive absorptions without realising the four fruits. The fifth passage is headed dhyāna, and speaks of entering the eight liberations and the nine successive absorptions, and yet not realising the fruit of the srota-āpanna and so on up to not realising the fruit of the arhat; after it 「何以故」 tr. "Why?" still reads 「知諸法自相空，無生，無定相，無所轉」 tr. "he knows all dharmas to be empty of specific marks, non-arising, without fixed mark, without anything turning" and stops. This passage is the shortest, yet there is a difference of one Chinese character that must be seen clearly: the kṣānti passage reads 「不取」 tr. "does not take" the four fruits, while this passage reads 「不證」 tr. "does not realise" the four fruits. To take is to follow its fruit and retribution and receive it; to realise is to obtain it in person in its state; the eight liberations and the nine successive absorptions are the gates of absorption practised in common by the sages of the four fruits, and to practise these absorptions and not realise their fruit is harder still than not taking. Further, this passage does not speak of not receiving retribution, does not speak of increasing the roots of goodness, does not speak of purifying buddha-lands and bringing beings to accomplishment; its words stop at knowing emptiness—here the sūtra text gathers itself in with the utmost economy.
11. The prajñāpāramitā passage—training in the ten powers and so on up to great kindness and great compassion, he should practise thus in the interval before obtaining. The sixth passage is headed prajñā, and what is trained in is the Buddha's ten powers, the four fearlessnesses, the four unobstructed knowledges, the eighteen unshared dharmas, and great kindness and great compassion—all dharmas of the Buddha ground, not possessed within the cause. So the sūtra text at once brings out a sentence of limit: 「乃至未得一切種智，未淨佛國土，未成就眾生，於其中間應如是行。」 tr. "and so on up to: while he has not yet obtained the omniscience of all kinds, not yet purified buddha-lands, and not yet brought beings to accomplishment, in the interval he should practise thus." The four Chinese characters 「於其中間」 tr. "in the interval" are the eye of this passage: since what is trained in is the dharmas of the Buddha ground while one's person is still on ground not yet attained, how to walk that road in the interval is precisely what prajñā is in charge of. After it 「何以故」 tr. "Why?" again answers with the four phrases of knowing all dharmas to be empty of specific marks, and the last sentence reads 「應如是行般若波羅蜜，不受果報」 tr. "should practise prajñāpāramitā thus, not receiving retribution"—not 「不受世間果報」 tr. "not receiving worldly retribution." Worldly retribution is the retribution of the three realms, while retribution covers the retribution of cause and fruit in general; for this difference of wording the sūtra text has its own boundaries, and it is recorded without forcing an explanation. The six passages end here: the six perfections all take the same knowing and seeing as skilful means, while what is parted from follows each perfection.
12. The treatise-author sets up a question: why ask such a coarse question. The treatise section opens at once with a Question: why does Subhūti ask so coarse a question—「不供養諸佛，不具足善根，不得真知識，當得薩婆若不」 tr. "not making offerings to the buddhas, not fulfilling the roots of goodness, not obtaining true friends—will he obtain sarvajñā or not?" The treatise-author repeats the question in the sūtra word for word and adds the one word 「麁」 tr. "coarse"; this is the treatise-author's verdict on this question. What is called coarse does not reproach it for crude ignorance; it says that what this question raises is too blunt—taking the three matters away all at once and asking straight out whether one can obtain, leaving no room. The treatise-author sets up this question precisely to lead into the two views of what someone says below: the question is coarse because the doubt contained in it is itself coarse; if that doubt is not spelled out, the wonder of the Buddha's answer in the sūtra text cannot be seen.
13. Someone says: within ultimate emptiness, planting and not planting are equal and without difference. At the head of the treatise-author's Answer: he brings out the first view. Someone says: if all dharmas are without any existent nature and ultimately empty, then within ultimate emptiness planting roots of goodness and not planting roots of goodness are equal and without difference; if it is so, can one not make offerings to the buddhas, not plant roots of goodness, not obtain true friends, and obtain sarvajñā? The provenance of this view is precisely the teaching of the prajñā line itself—that all dharmas are ultimately empty is what the earlier chapters have spoken of broadly; it is not a doctrine of the outside paths. The difficulty lies in this one step of inference: since within ultimate emptiness all is equal, and planting and not planting have no two marks, why must practising and not practising be distinguished? This doubt must not be passed over carelessly; it is a road that one who studies emptiness most easily sets foot on; the treatise-author places it first precisely because he sees how common it is.
14. Again someone, doubting, says: there are all kinds of other gates to obtaining sarvajñā. The second view is not of the same category as the first. The doubt of the former view lies in principle—taking emptiness as its ground, it doubts the use of practice; the doubt of this view lies in affairs—since there are all kinds of gates to obtaining sarvajñā, perhaps one need not pass through this one gate of planting roots of goodness. The treatise-author introduces it with 「復有人疑言」 tr. "again someone, doubting, says," and appends at the end the sentence 「是故問佛」 tr. "for this reason he asks the Buddha," gathering both views together into the cause of Subhūti's asking. It can be seen that in explaining this question the treatise-author does not judge that Subhūti himself has this doubt; he only says that there are the doubts of these two kinds of people and that Subhūti asks for their sake. Reading the treatise to this point, Subhūti's question is no longer coarse: what is coarse is the doubt, not the one who asks.
15. The treatise-author cites the Buddha's answer. The treatise-author next cites the Buddha's answer: if one makes offerings to the buddhas, plants roots of goodness, and obtains true friends, it is still hard to obtain, how much more if one does not! What is cited here is the text of the second section of the sūtra segment, yet the treatise-author cites it without explaining it further, because the meaning of this answer is fully spoken in the two rounds of question and answer below. The words citing the sūtra and the words the treatise-author speaks himself should be looked at as two layers—wherever the treatise writes 「佛答」 tr. "the Buddha answers" or 「須菩提問」 tr. "Subhūti asks," it is the treatise-author re-presenting the dialogue in the sūtra as argument, not the treatise-author setting up a question and answer of his own; the several sections below should all be read in this way.
16. Subhūti's objection: within ultimate emptiness there is neither merit nor non-merit. This next section is the most important place in the treatise section: the treatise-author brings out a question and answer that the sūtra text does not have. Subhūti asks: since within ultimate emptiness there is neither merit nor non-merit, why is it obtained only by reason of merit? This objection goes one step further than what someone says in passage 13—the former doubts the use of practice, while here the objection is to the Buddha's answer itself: since the Buddha takes merit (making offerings, planting roots of goodness) as the means of obtaining, and within ultimate emptiness merit and non-merit are both unfindable, does not the Buddha's answer contradict itself? Whenever one reads the prajñā sūtras and treatises and meets a place of this kind, ‘using emptiness to object to existence’, one must not skip over it, because the Buddha's answer often makes clear precisely here the boundary between the two truths.
17. The Buddha answers: because within worldly truth there is merit, it is obtained. The Buddha's answer is only one sentence: because within worldly truth there is merit, it is obtained. This sentence is not a concession, nor is it a provisional teaching. Ultimate emptiness is a word within the highest meaning; that there is merit and there is obtaining is a matter within worldly truth; the highest meaning does not break worldly truth, so within emptiness there is no merit while within worldly truth there is merit, and the two words each have their place and do not usurp each other. If the two Chinese characters 「世諦」 tr. "worldly truth" are read as ‘let us say so for the time being’, this answer becomes a mere fobbing-off; only when they are read as ‘in the station of worldly truth this matter really is so’ is it the meaning the treatise-author takes. The treatise-author's explanation of this section below proceeds precisely along this sentence.
18. The treatise-author explains the intent of the two persons, and brings out the simile of the man of the path begging for food who strikes a hungry dog with his staff. Here the treatise-author sets out his own explanation: Subhūti asks for the sake of beings who cling to being without anything existent, and the Buddha answers by not clinging to an existent dharma, namely 「精進修福尚不可得，何況不修福！」 tr. "Even cultivating merit with vigour, it is unfindable, how much less without cultivating merit!"—the question and the answer each have what they face: the question is to break beings' clinging to non-existence, and the answer is so as not to fall into clinging to existence. Clinging to neither side is the measure of this section. Below it he brings out the simile: it is like a man of the path who has taken up the dharma of begging for food: he comes to a village and goes from one house to the next, begging for food and obtaining none; he sees a hungry dog lying down starving, strikes it with his staff and says: 「汝畜生無智，我種種因緣，家家求食尚不能得，何況汝臥而望得！」 tr. "You beast, without wisdom! I, with all kinds of causes and conditions, seek food from house to house and still cannot obtain it, how much less you, lying there and hoping to obtain it!" In the simile three things are matched—the man of the path's diligent seeking is matched with cultivating merit with vigour; the hungry dog's lying starving is matched with hoping to obtain without cultivating; the words spoken as he strikes with the staff are matched with the Buddha's answer 「尚不可得，何況不修」 tr. "it is unfindable, how much less without cultivating." Though the simile comes out of a worldly affair, it touches one's own person most closely: if one who studies emptiness abandons practice because of emptiness, he is precisely that dog lying there and hoping to obtain; the sting of this simile is spoken to those inside the gate.
19. Subhūti asks: having these causes and conditions, why does he not obtain the retribution? The treatise-author brings out another round of question and answer. Subhūti asks: World-Honored One! Having these causes and conditions of making offerings to the buddhas and so on, why does he not obtain their retribution? What this question continues is Subhūti's renewed question in the third section of the sūtra segment, while its wording turns into the language of cause and fruit—since the causes and conditions are complete, why does the retribution not appear? Asking in the language of cause and fruit is just right for drawing out the Buddha's answer of 「離方便」 tr. "apart from skilful means"; for if one reasons by ordinary cause and fruit, when the cause is complete the fruit must arrive; now the cause is complete and the fruit does not arrive, so something else must be lacking.
20. The Buddha answers that it is because he is apart from skilful means; and the explanation that skilful means is prajñā, and of the three marks of obtaining and yet not accomplishing. The Buddha's answer is only four Chinese characters: because he is apart from skilful means. The treatise-author at once gives a turning word: Skilful means, namely prajñāpāramitā. This sentence is the naming word of the whole chapter—the sūtra text before repeatedly spoke of the power of skilful means without explaining its name; here the treatise-author explains it by prajñā, and then the knowing and seeing of those four phrases in the passages on the six perfections, 「知諸法自相空，無生，無定相，無所轉」 tr. "he knows all dharmas to be empty of specific marks, non-arising, without fixed mark, without anything turning," is precisely the function of prajñā, and before and after become one matter throughout. Below it the treatise-author explains the marks of being apart from skilful means in three phrases: though he sees the form bodies of the buddhas, he does not see the Dharma body with the eye of wisdom; though he has planted roots of goodness in a small portion, they are not complete; though he obtains good friends, he does not keep close to them and consult and receive from them. The three phrases have one syntax, all of the form ‘though … yet not …’, and correspond one by one with the four phrases of lack in the Buddha's answer in the sūtra segment—seeing the form body without seeing the Dharma body is precisely not hearing the power of skilful means from the buddhas; planting a little without completeness is precisely the roots of goodness planted not being complete; obtaining and yet not keeping close and consulting and receiving is precisely not constantly following the teaching of the good friend. The four phrases of the sūtra are the marks of the illness that the Buddha raises; the three phrases of the treatise are the root of the illness that the treatise-author points to: the illness lies not in what is met being untrue, but in the one who receives being apart from prajñā.
21. The treatise-author explains the two gates of practising dāna with mind and without mind. The treatise-author further cites the causes and conditions the Buddha himself states: from the first arousing of intent the bodhisattva practises dānapāramitā with mind and without mind. Below this it divides into two gates. With mind means giving with a mind that accords with sarvajñā, keeping in mind the buddhas' all kinds of immeasurable merits, and giving out of pity for beings—the mark of this gate is being tied to something: tied to sarvajñā, tied to the Buddha's virtues, tied to beings. Without mind means: whether giving to a Buddha and so on down to an ordinary person, he does not give rise to the three thoughts, namely giver, recipient, and the thing given—the mark of this gate is clinging to nothing. The two gates look opposite, but are in fact two sides of one matter: with mind is not grasping and clinging, it is vow and practice unbroken; without mind is not indifference, it is the three thoughts not arising. The treatise-author further brings out, for 「不生三想」 tr. "does not give rise to the three thoughts," why it is so, going down layer by layer: the thing given, together with all dharmas, is empty of specific marks, from the beginning ever unarisen; without fixed mark—whether one or different, whether permanent or impermanent, and so on—because this dharma is empty of specific marks; it cannot be turned, because it abides within suchness. The two pairs of the section 「無定相」 tr. "without fixed mark" break what ordinary people reckon about the thing given—reckoning it as one or as different, or reckoning it as permanent or as impermanent; all four reckonings come from specific marks not being empty. At the end it concludes: contemplating thus, he enters the real mark of all dharmas, namely the mark of being without making and non-rising; all dharmas can make nothing, so he does not give rise to a haughty mind and hopes for nothing. The eight Chinese characters 「不生高心，無所悕望」 tr. "does not give rise to a haughty mind and hopes for nothing" are the words by which this paragraph comes down upon the practitioner—giving and exalting oneself, giving and having hopes, are precisely the proof that the three thoughts have not been removed.
22. The treatise-author concludes with the four functions of the power of skilful means. The above having made clear the practice with mind and without mind, the treatise-author gathers it in with one sentence: because of such power of skilful means, he is able to increase the roots of goodness and part from the roots that are not good, to teach and transform beings, and to purify buddha-worlds. This sentence should be read against the two passages of dāna and śīla in the sūtra segment. The sūtra reads as three matters, ‘increases the roots of goodness … purifies buddha-lands, and brings beings to accomplishment’; the treatise reads as four matters, 「增益善根、離不善根，教化眾生、淨佛世界」 tr. "increase the roots of goodness and part from the roots that are not good, teach and transform beings, and purify buddha-worlds"—adding one 「離不善根」 tr. "part from the roots that are not good," and making increasing and being far from into a pair. Only here is the matter of the roots of goodness spoken of completely: it is not only planting many; one must also plant them to completeness; it is not only increasing one's good; one must also be far from one's not-good. This chapter is titled planting roots of goodness, and the place where the whole chapter really speaks of the accomplishment of 「種」 tr. "planting" is precisely this sentence.
23. Giving without receiving worldly retribution, and the reflection of the bodhisattva who has first aroused intent. The treatise-author next says that whether giving much or giving little, he does not receive worldly retribution; it is only for the sake of rescuing and delivering all beings. Below this he specially brings out a passage of the mind of the bodhisattva who has first aroused intent: when the bodhisattva gives to beings in measured and limited amounts, he has this thought—「我先世不行深福德，今不能廣施眾生。我今當深實多行檀波羅蜜，得是果報已，能具足利益，廣施無量眾生，若今世利，若後世利，若道德利。」 tr. "In former lives I did not practise deep merit; now I cannot give widely to beings. I should now deeply, really, and much practise dānapāramitā; having obtained this retribution, I will be able to benefit fully and give widely to immeasurable beings—whether the benefit of this life, or the benefit of later lives, or the benefit of the path and its virtue." This passage is most precious, because what it speaks of is the person whose strength does not yet reach. What is said above is all lofty practice—not receiving retribution, not giving rise to the three thoughts—and a reader may doubt that this is a matter within reach of the beginner's mind; so the treatise-author picks out this one thought—though what is given is measured and limited, what is vowed is immeasurable; and he knows for himself that the reason it is limited lies in the thinness of his merit in former lives, so now he should practise deeply in order to seek the ability to give widely. The sequence of the three benefits at the end should also be looked at: the benefit of this life, the benefit of later lives, the benefit of the path and its virtue, going from shallow into deep and returning to the path and its virtue, from which it can be seen that the retribution sought is not for receiving it oneself, but for the ability to give widely.
24. General conclusion: without such skilful means one still does not obtain, how much less one who does not make offerings; the remaining five perfections are also like this. In the final paragraph the treatise-author gathers in the whole chapter: without such skilful means, though the bodhisattva makes offerings to the buddhas, plants roots of goodness, and obtains true friends, he still does not obtain it, how much less one who does not make offerings! These words have exactly the same syntax as the Buddha's answer in the second section of the sūtra segment, and what is added is the five Chinese characters 「無如是方便」 tr. "without such skilful means"—the sūtra's 「尚難得」 tr. "still hard to obtain" here at last makes clear why it is hard. The next sentence, 「餘五波羅蜜，亦如是」 tr. "the remaining five perfections are also like this," is not an abbreviation. Above, the treatise-author explained skilful means in detail only with respect to the with mind and without mind of dānapāramitā; this sentence tells the reader plainly: for the five perfections from śīla onward, their with mind and without mind, their not giving rise to the three thoughts, their not receiving retribution, are each and every one as was said within dāna, and the reader should infer them for himself. The sūtra segment shows skilful means through the six perfections one by one, the treatise segment explains one perfection in detail and with this sentence extends it to the remaining five—the sūtra is detailed and the treatise brief, and joined together they are complete.
Do Not Misread
Do not read Subhūti's question in which all three matters are lacking as Subhūti himself not believing in cause and fruit. The treatise-author, explaining this question, says plainly that it is 「須菩提為眾生著無所有故問」 tr. "Subhūti asks for the sake of beings who cling to being without anything existent," and first brings out two views of what someone says to make clear where the doubt comes from. What the questioner harbours need not be his own doubt; questions in the sūtras are often asked for the sake of beings; if this question is read as Subhūti's confusion, then the object at which the three Chinese characters 「尚難得」 tr. "still hard to obtain" in the Buddha's answer are aimed is lost.
Do not read 「畢竟空中，種善根、不種善根等無異」 tr. "within ultimate emptiness, planting roots of goodness and not planting roots of goodness are equal and without difference" as a wrong view that this treatise refutes and rebukes. Since the treatise-author brings it out with 「有人言」 tr. "someone says" and adds no rebuke, and further below answers it head-on with 「世諦中有福故得」 tr. "because within worldly truth there is merit, it is obtained," it can be seen that the principle this view relies on (ultimate emptiness) is itself not mistaken; the mistake lies in that one step of inference—using the equality within the highest meaning to cancel the differences within worldly truth. Reading the prajñā treatise one should keep this measure: what is broken is the one-sidedness of grasping emptiness, not the meaning of emptiness itself.
Do not read 「以世諦中有福故得」 tr. "because within worldly truth there is merit, it is obtained" as the Buddha taking a step back to speak words of expedience. The two truths each have their place; this answer is spoken as it really is in the station of worldly truth, not set up provisionally. If it is read as provisional speech, then the simile of the man of the path begging for food below has nothing to attach to—the treatise-author brings out this simile precisely to make clear that ‘hoping to obtain without cultivating’ really does not obtain within worldly truth, and is not said idly.
Do not read the differences among the passages on the six perfections as oversights of the sūtra text. The two passages of dāna and śīla have 「增益善根」 tr. "increases the roots of goodness" while the four passages below them do not; the first two passages speak as far as 「入諸法實相，所謂一切法無作無起相」 tr. "enters the real mark of all dharmas, namely the mark of all dharmas without making and non-rising" while the latter four passages stop at 「無所轉」 tr. "without anything turning"; the two passages of vīrya and prajñā do not bring out 「應薩婆若念」 tr. "with a thought that accords with sarvajñā"; the kṣānti passage reads 「不取」 tr. "does not take" the four fruits while the dhyāna passage reads 「不證」 tr. "does not realise" the four fruits; the prajñā passage reads 「不受果報」 tr. "not receiving retribution" and not 「不受世間果報」 tr. "not receiving worldly retribution"—these boundaries are all the sūtra text's own wording; the exposition can only record them as they really are, may not fill them out on the sūtra's behalf, and still less may it alter the reading of this passage on the basis of another passage's text.
Do not misread the names and marks of the kṣānti passage. This passage is headed kṣāntipāramitā, yet throughout it speaks of the path of seeing the truths, the path of reflection, and not taking the four fruits, and at the end concludes of itself 「是名菩薩無生法忍」 tr. "this is called the bodhisattva's acceptance of the non-arising of dharmas." The acceptance meant here is not the patience that endures what goes against one, but the acceptance that abides unmoved within the dharma of non-arising; its proving-place is precisely 「雖行是助道法，而過聲聞、辟支佛地」 tr. "though he practises these dharmas that aid the path, he passes beyond the grounds of the śrāvaka and the pratyekabuddha." If this passage is read with the worldly meaning of patient endurance, then what the whole passage says has nothing to do with acceptance, and instead becomes a suspicion of misplaced slips.
Do not read with mind and without mind as two kinds of bodhisattvas or two stages. The treatise-author is explaining the one sentence the Buddha himself speaks, 「以有、無心行檀波羅蜜」 tr. "practises dānapāramitā with mind and without mind," and the two gates are both tied to one practice of one person: what with mind is tied to is sarvajñā, the Buddha's virtues, and beings; what without mind is parted from is the three thoughts of giver, recipient, and the thing given. If it is read as with mind being low and without mind high, or as first with mind and afterwards without mind, then the section 「念諸佛種種無量功德，憐愍眾生故布施」 tr. "keeping in mind the buddhas' all kinds of immeasurable merits, and giving out of pity for beings" has nowhere to be placed—and that is precisely the practice this treatise praises everywhere.
Do not read 「餘五波羅蜜，亦如是」 tr. "the remaining five perfections are also like this" as the treatise-author abridging and not explaining. This sentence is the treatise-author's plain showing of the method of inference by example: the with mind and without mind, the not giving rise to the three thoughts, and the not receiving worldly retribution spoken of within dāna hold for all five perfections. If it is read as an abbreviation, then the skilful means this chapter establishes becomes only a matter of the one gate of giving, contrary to the purport of the sūtra segment, which raises the six perfections together.
Bearing on Practice
The first use to be had is to take 「尚難得，何況不」 tr. "still hard to obtain, how much more one who does not" as a sentence for shining on oneself every day. The Buddha uses this syntax twice, and what is raised in the first member each time is causes and conditions as full as making offerings to the buddhas, planting roots of goodness, and obtaining true friends. If what the practitioner does through the day falls far short even of the first member, he need not go on to ask about the second member; if he feels himself already among those of the first member, that word 「尚」 tr. "still" is precisely the reminder—complete in causes and conditions and still finding it hard, the hardness lies in skilful means, and he should turn back to look at the knowing and seeing with which he practises, not turn back to add more practices.
The second use to be had is to take the four phrases of the Buddha's answer as an order of examination for the gate of practice. Far from the power of skilful means, not hearing the power of skilful means from the buddhas, the roots of goodness planted not complete, not constantly following the teaching of the good friend—the four phrases can be turned round and asked of oneself: toward the teaching of the good friend, do I follow it constantly or only now and then? Are the roots of goodness I plant complete or only half? The Dharma I hear—do I hear its outward matters, or do I hear through to skilful means? Between me and the power of skilful means, is there distance or closeness? The four questions go from coarse into fine; when the last question can be answered, the first three become clear of themselves.
The third use to be had is that the bone of the sentences of the passages on the six perfections can be used to examine oneself perfection by perfection. The proving-place of each perfection lies in that one sentence of knowing and seeing after 「何以故」 tr. "Why?", while what is parted from has its own name in each: when giving, are there or are there not the thought of giving and the thought of a recipient? When keeping morality, is there or is there not falling into stinginess and greed, breaking morality, and the other unwholesome things, the prides, and the minds of the two vehicles? When practising the factors of the path, is there or is there not a hidden thought of taking the fruit and its realisation? When going in and out of the dhyānas, is there or is there not a tasting of their retribution? When entering the deep absorptions, is there or is there not a mind of realising and taking? When training in the dharmas of the Buddha ground, is there or is there not a falling back because one has not yet obtained? The six questions each ask according to its practice, and need not be mixed into one question.
The fourth use to be had is that the dog lying starving can serve as a mirror. The treatise-author's simile shows no mercy: one who seeks diligently still does not obtain, how much less one who lies there and hopes to obtain. If a practitioner, having read prajñā long while his gate of practice grows sparser by the day, excuses himself at every turn with 「畢竟空」 tr. "ultimate emptiness," he should pick out this simile and shine it on himself once—if the emptiness one studies makes one slack in cultivating merit, that emptiness is certainly not the emptiness the treatise-author speaks of, because in the same passage where the treatise-author speaks of emptiness there stands precisely the sentence 「精進修福尚不可得」 tr. "even cultivating merit with vigour, it is unfindable."
The fifth use to be had is that the one thought of the bodhisattva who has first aroused intent can be taken up and used directly. What is given is measured and limited, and yet he is not disheartened by this; instead he knows for himself that his merit in former lives was thin, and vows to practise deeply—this one thought is most apt for the beginner. In daily use, if what one can give is little and whom one can benefit is near, there is no need to be ashamed of this, nor any need to be content with it; following the sequence of the three benefits the treatise-author brings out—the benefit of this life, the benefit of later lives, the benefit of the path and its virtue—tie the one gift before one's eyes to the last item, and then even measured and limited giving is the practice of dānapāramitā.
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, asking whether a bodhisattva-mahāsattva who does not make offerings to the buddhas, does not fulfil the roots of goodness, and does not obtain true friends will obtain sarvajñā; the Buddha answers that making offerings to the buddhas, planting roots of goodness, and obtaining true friends, the omniscience of all kinds is still hard to obtain, how much more not making offerings, not planting, not obtaining; Subhūti asks again why, having made offerings and planted and obtained friends, the omniscience of all kinds is hard to obtain, and the Buddha answers: far from the power of skilful means, not hearing the power of skilful means from the buddhas, the roots of goodness planted not complete, not constantly following the teaching of the good friend; Subhūti asks a third time what the power of skilful means is, such that practising it one obtains the omniscience of all kinds, and the Buddha then shows it one by one through the six perfections—the dānapāramitā passage says that with a thought that accords with sarvajñā he gives to a Buddha, a pratyekabuddha, a śrāvaka, a human, a non-human, without giving rise to the thought of giving or the thought of a recipient, taking as the reason that he contemplates all dharmas as empty of specific marks, non-arising, without fixed mark, without anything turning, and enters the real mark of all dharmas, the mark of being without making and non-rising, and that he increases the roots of goodness, practises dāna, purifies buddha-lands, and brings beings to accomplishment, and yet does not receive worldly retribution; the śīlapāramitā passage says that keeping morality he does not fall into lust, anger, and delusion, nor into the afflictions, the entanglements and bonds, nor into stinginess and greed, breaking morality, hatred, laziness, a scattered mind, folly and delusion, the prides, and so on up to the mind of a śrāvaka or a pratyekabuddha, its reason and its fruit being the same as before; the kṣāntipāramitā passage says that because the power of skilful means is accomplished he practises the path of seeing the truths and the path of reflection and yet does not take the four fruits of the śramaṇa, that though he practises the dharmas that aid the path he passes beyond the grounds of the two vehicles, and concludes it as the bodhisattva's acceptance of the non-arising of dharmas; the vīryapāramitā passage says that he enters the four dhyānas, the four immeasurable minds, and the four formless absorptions, and though he goes in and out of the dhyānas he does not receive the retribution, knowing the dhyānas and absorptions to be empty of specific marks and purifying buddha-lands and bringing beings to accomplishment; the dhyānapāramitā passage says that he enters the eight liberations and the nine successive absorptions and yet does not realise the four fruits of the śramaṇa; the prajñāpāramitā passage says that he trains in the Buddha's ten powers, the four fearlessnesses, the four unobstructed knowledges, the eighteen unshared dharmas, and great kindness and great compassion, and so on up to: while not yet having obtained the omniscience of all kinds, not yet having purified buddha-lands, and not yet having brought beings to accomplishment, in the interval he should practise thus, and concludes with practising prajñāpāramitā thus, not receiving retribution. Treatise ① is led off with a Question: first it asks why Subhūti asks so coarse a question and repeats his question word for word, and in the answer brings out two views of what someone says—one, that within ultimate emptiness planting and not planting are equal and without difference, and so doubts whether one might obtain sarvajñā without planting roots of goodness; two, the doubt that there are all kinds of other gates to obtaining sarvajñā and one need not plant roots of goodness—and concludes them with: for this reason he asks the Buddha; next it cites the Buddha's answer, still hard to obtain, how much more one who does not, and brings out Subhūti's objection that within ultimate emptiness there is neither merit nor non-merit, and the Buddha's answer that because within worldly truth there is merit it is obtained; next it states for itself that Subhūti asks for the sake of beings who cling to being without anything existent and that the Buddha answers by not clinging to an existent dharma, brings out the words that even cultivating merit with vigour it is unfindable, how much less without cultivating merit, and takes as a simile the man of the path who begs for food from one house to the next and obtains none and strikes with his staff the hungry dog lying starving; next it brings out Subhūti's asking why, having these causes and conditions of making offerings to the buddhas and so on, he does not obtain their retribution, and the Buddha's answer that it is because he is apart from skilful means, and the treatise-author explains that skilful means is namely prajñāpāramitā, and explains its marks in three phrases: though he sees the form bodies of the buddhas he does not see the Dharma body with the eye of wisdom; though he has planted roots of goodness in a small portion they are not complete; though he obtains good friends he does not keep close to them and consult and receive from them; next it cites the causes and conditions the Buddha himself states and divides practising dāna into the two gates of with mind and without mind—with mind is giving with a mind that accords with sarvajñā, keeping in mind the buddhas' merits, and pitying beings; without mind is not giving rise to the three thoughts of giver, recipient, and the thing given—and explains layer by layer that the thing given is empty of specific marks, ever unarisen, without fixed mark, cannot be turned, abiding within suchness, and enters the real mark of all dharmas, the mark of being without making and non-rising, concluding that all dharmas can make nothing, so he does not give rise to a haughty mind and hopes for nothing; next it gathers it all in: because of such power of skilful means he is able to increase the roots of goodness and part from the roots that are not good, to teach and transform beings, and to purify buddha-worlds; next it says that whether giving much or giving little he does not receive worldly retribution, and brings out the bodhisattva who has first aroused intent, who gives in measured and limited amounts and reflects that in former lives he did not practise deep merit, that now he should deeply, really, and much practise dānapāramitā so as to give widely to immeasurable beings, with the benefit of this life, the benefit of later lives, and the benefit of the path and its virtue; at the end it concludes that without such skilful means, though one makes offerings to the buddhas, plants roots of goodness, and obtains true friends, one still does not obtain it, how much less one who does not make offerings, and with the remaining five perfections being also like this extends it to the rest.
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 final section of the preceding chapter says that the bodhisattva should make offerings to the buddhas, plant roots of goodness, and never be apart from true friends; this chapter takes these very three matters as the starting point of its question and asks in reverse whether they may be lacking, so the rise of this chapter is a probing question that overturns the conclusion of the preceding chapter, not a separate start; the preceding chapter having said that one practises prajñā not for the sake of the roots of goodness, this chapter then says that without the roots of goodness one does not obtain; looking at the two chapters together, one sees the continuity of practising not for the sake of the roots of goodness and yet not being able to be without the roots of goodness. Second, within the chapter it makes a turn of its own: the first half, the sūtra text, turns from asking whether the three matters may be lacking into the showing of the power of skilful means through the six perfections, its pivot being Subhūti's question 「何等是方便力」 tr. "what is the power of skilful means"; the latter half, the treatise text, turns from explaining the coarse question into the practice with mind and without mind, its pivot being the treatise-author's words 「方便者，所謂般若波羅蜜」 tr. "Skilful means, namely prajñāpāramitā." Between the two turns, the two Chinese characters 「方便」 tr. "skilful means" are in the one what is asked and in the other what is explained. Third, handing on to what follows: this chapter concludes that without skilful means the three matters are all unaccomplished, and the next chapter then takes "Training in All" as its title—since the roots of goodness planted must be accomplished by skilful means, the gates trained in should also be all-pervading before they are complete; the reader may look at the two chapters together.
Among the explanations of the ancient masters and the differences of the texts, three matters can be recorded for this chapter. First, the chapter title in four forms: this edition's base text writes 「種善根品第七十三」 tr. "Planting Roots of Goodness, the Seventy-third"; the Song and Yuan editions change 「種」 tr. "planting" to 「眾」 tr. "many" and write "The Many Roots of Goodness"; the Palace edition calls it otherwise "The Three Roots of Goodness" and inverts the order of chapter number and chapter name; the Ishiyama-dera manuscript, besides the chapter name, attaches a separate sūtra name, writes "Roots of Goodness and Skilful Means", and reports its own fascicle number; and the chapter order in the Shōgozō manuscript and the Ishiyama-dera manuscript is moreover in both one place lower than in the base text. The sūtra explained has as its own chapter heading "The Three Goods", the Seventy-third, a name different from this treatise's "Planting Roots of Goodness" while the meaning is connected; the Palace edition's variant name is precisely close to the sūtra's chapter heading, and there may be a trace of the chapter names of the two works touching on each other; this is recorded as it is, without forcing an explanation of which came first. The variant names in their several forms are recorded side by side without judgement; the full register of the variant readings of the texts is detailed in the Apparatus layer. Second, Jizang's Commentary on the Larger Sūtra has a continuing section on this chapter; the heading he sets up follows the sūtra explained and is written "The Three Goods", the Seventy-third, not using this treatise's name "Planting Roots of Goodness", from which it can be seen that his commentary relies on the sūtra's system of chapter names and not on the treatise's system of chapter names. He explains the reason for the name, saying: 「此明供養諸佛、脩善根、植善知識，皆名為善，故云三善。」 tr. "This makes clear that making offerings to the buddhas, cultivating roots of goodness, and planting good friends are all named good; therefore it is called the three goods."—explaining the heading of the three goods precisely by the sūtra's three matters, which points to the same thing as this treatise's taking these three matters as the starting point of its question. Jizang further brings out a variant name of his own, saying: 「亦三善根品，此品中論菩薩善根，故以目品。」 tr. "It is also the chapter of the Three Roots of Goodness; within this chapter the bodhisattva's roots of goodness are discussed, and therefore this is used to name the chapter."—this name accords precisely with the chapter title "The Three Roots of Goodness" of this edition's Palace edition, from which it can be seen that the differences among the forms of the chapter name are not found only in the collation notes of the canons; in the commentaries of the ancient masters too they stand side by side. As for the syntax of the Buddha's answer, Jizang explains it, saying: 「佛舉有破無，明行三多尚難得道，況不行耶？」 tr. "The Buddha raises existence to break non-existence, making clear that even practising the three abundantly it is still hard to obtain the path—how much less not practising them?"—what is called raising existence to break non-existence is to use the words that even with the three matters complete it is still hard to obtain the path to break the mind of the assembly of the time that clung to non-existence. As for why this is so, Jizang ties it to the preceding chapter, saying: 「上品是用無破有，故云不為善故行。時眾著無，故舉有破無。」 tr. "The preceding chapter used non-existence to break existence; therefore it said that one practises not for the sake of the good. The assembly of the time clung to non-existence; therefore he raises existence to break non-existence."—the preceding chapter used non-existence to break existence and said that one practises not for the sake of the roots of goodness; this chapter in reverse uses existence to break non-existence and says that without the roots of goodness one does not obtain; one breaking and one establishing—this is precisely where the first line listed above lies. At the end he judges the presence or absence of skilful means by having something to be attained and having nothing to be attained; Jizang says: 「無方便有所得行三品多故難得道，有方便無所得行故易得道也。」 tr. "Without skilful means, practising the three kinds abundantly with something to be attained, therefore it is hard to obtain the path; with skilful means, practising with nothing to be attained, therefore it is easy to obtain the path."—this treatise glosses skilful means by prajñā, while Jizang judges skilful means by having something to be attained and having nothing to be attained; the two explanations are recorded side by side without judgement, and what they point to may be consulted together. The detail and brevity of what his commentary explains are detailed in the Apparatus layer. Third, the extant text of Huiying's Commentary stops at the preceding fascicle and does not reach this chapter; this is an absence of explanation, not an omission of mention; the phrase 「所種善根」 tr. "the roots of goodness planted" in Junzheng's Profound Meaning of the Four Mahāyāna Treatises comes from his citing the matter before Dīpaṃkara Buddha in the Diamond Prajñā Sūtra in discussing goodness with something to be attained and with nothing to be attained; it is unrelated to this chapter and is not taken as continuing it; examining now the Tiantai line's Great Calming and Contemplation, Profound Meaning of the Lotus, and Annotations on the Profound Meaning of the Lotus, no citation of this chapter's title is seen either. The evidence of the ancient masters bearing on this chapter is very thin, unlike the thickness of other chapters of this treatise; it is recorded as it really is, and no inference is drawn.
考據Apparatus
一、科判
本品在《大智度論》釋《大品般若》之次第中屬〈釋餘品〉一段，居卷八十五之末，單一單元。卷八十五起於〔T25 0651c06〕、訖於〔T25 0658b22〕；其卷首題所繫者乃前前品——「大智度論釋」〔T25 0651c06〕下接「道樹品第七十一」，並夾註「卷八十五」，其下即造署「聖者龍樹菩薩造」〔T25 0651c08〕與譯署「後秦龜茲國三藏鳩摩羅什譯」〔T25 0651c09〕——造署譯署皆繫卷首，不繫本品。本品品題「大智度論釋種善根品第七十三」〔T25 0657b16〕逕接前品〈菩薩行品第七十二〉之末而起，品首無卷題、無造署譯署。
品身訖於「餘五波羅蜜，亦如是。」〔T25 0658b20〕一句迄〔T25 0658b21〕，卷末題「大智度論卷第八十五」〔T25 0658b22〕即繫本品之末；次品〈遍學品第七十四〉之品題已在卷八十六〔T25 0658c07〕，卷八十六起於〔T25 0658c02〕。故本品為居卷末·品尾繫卷尾·次品跨卷之型——與品六十二〈同學品〉之「居卷中·不涉卷界」異，與品四十八〈佛母品〉之跨卷型亦異，而與品五十三〈趣一切智品〉之「居卷末·品尾繫卷尾」同型。
全品純漢字一千五百二十四，為釋餘品諸品中之最輕者之一。品內結構一【經】一【論】、單一單元：【經】〔T25 0657b17〕、【論】〔T25 0658a11〕。兩結構標記皆有校記——【經】宋、宮二本無此標記，【論】宋、宮、聖三本無此標記（下帳第二、十五條）；標記存否屬底本傳承層，結構計數仍依底本標籤為準。
問答之數與說者結構：經①全以須菩提與佛之三輪問答發端，其下轉入佛之連續開示。「須菩提白佛言」本品二見（〔T25 0657b17〕〔T25 0657b21〕）、「佛告須菩提」二見（〔T25 0657b19〕〔T25 0657b23〕），皆本帳以漢字流逐一定位所得。三問之第三問〔T25 0657b25〕作「世尊！何等是方便力，菩薩摩訶薩行是方便力，得一切種智？」——其前無「須菩提白佛言」一類重新起說之標記，依「世尊」呼格與問句語氣、並承前二輪之問答序，繫為須菩提之續問，如實分記其無明文標記。佛之長篇答自「佛言」〔T25 0657b27〕起，訖〔T25 0658a10〕「不受果報。」，其間「復次，須菩提！」五見（〔T25 0657c05〕〔T25 0657c16〕〔T25 0657c22〕〔T25 0657c29〕〔T25 0658a04〕），皆佛之連續開示，未見換說標記，即六波羅蜜六段之分節詞。
論①之問答結構非典型：「問曰」一見〔T25 0658a11〕、「答曰」一見〔T25 0658a13〕，正式問答唯一組；其後「有人言」〔T25 0658a13〕、「復有人疑言」〔T25 0658a16〕、「佛答」三見（〔T25 0658a18〕〔T25 0658a20〕〔T25 0658a28〕）、「須菩提問」二見（〔T25 0658a19〕〔T25 0658a27〕）——此七處皆在「答曰」展開之內，為論主敘述體重述經中問答以為論證，非現場另立問答對，故問答對數計一，內部轉折七次另列，兩數不重複計。此為本帙釋論體之常見寫法，如實分記。
六波羅蜜六段之配屬有一端宜誌：羼提段所說為見諦道、思惟道與無生法忍，毘梨耶段所說為初禪乃至第四禪、四無量心、四無色定，禪波羅蜜段所說為八背捨、九次第定——精進段承禪定之目，與常途配屬不同。本帳雙向核之：所釋經同位亦作「行毘梨耶波羅蜜，入初禪乃至入第四禪」〔T08 0380b02〕、「行禪那波羅蜜，應薩婆若念，入八背捨、九次第定」〔T08 0380b09〕，兩藏於此配屬完全一致，非傳寫之訛；論主於此亦無釋，唯以「餘五波羅蜜，亦如是。」〔T25 0658b20〕總收。如實誌錄，不強解其故。
二、術語考
種善根。 全品之總名。其經證在經段開卷之三事並舉：「世尊！菩薩摩訶薩若不供養諸佛、不具足善根、不得真知識，當得薩婆若不？」〔T25 0657b17〕——供養諸佛·種善根·得真知識三事，全品之問答皆環此三事而轉。「真知識」一語於本論全書十二見，其中本品八見（〔T25 0657b18〕〔T25 0657b20〕〔T25 0657b21〕〔T25 0657b22〕〔T25 0658a12〕〔T25 0658a16〕〔T25 0658a18〕〔T25 0658b19〕）、前品〈菩薩行品〉四見（〔T25 0655c07〕〔T25 0655c09〕〔T25 0655c18〕〔T25 0657a05〕）、他處無，本帳漢字流重掃所得——此語之密度，本品居全論之冠。品名諸造之異見第四目。
方便力。 本品之樞。經以此為三事具足而猶難得一切種智之故：「是菩薩摩訶薩遠離方便力，不從諸佛聞方便力，所種善根不具足，不常隨善知識教。」〔T25 0657b23〕；論則直訓其體：「方便者，所謂般若波羅蜜。」〔T25 0658a28〕——方便即般若，非般若之外別有一術。其所以離方便則三事皆虛，論出三句對治：「雖見諸佛色身，不以智慧眼見法身；雖少種善根，而不具足；雖得善知識，不親近諮受。」〔T25 0658a29〕——三句正對經之三事，一一指其虛在何處。「方便力」一語於本品範圍九見（〔T25 0657b24〕二見·〔T25 0657b26〕二見·〔T25 0657c03〕〔T25 0657c13〕〔T25 0657c17〕〔T25 0657c26〕〔T25 0658b12〕），本帳逐一定位所得。
自相空·無生·無定相·無所轉。 本品之定型句，六度段之共式。經每段皆以此四事釋其「何以故」：「觀一切法自相空，無生，無定相，無所轉，入諸法實相，所謂一切法無作無起相。」〔T25 0657c01〕。「自相空」於本品範圍八見、「無定相，無所轉」六見，本帳漢字流重掃所得。論於末段自釋此四事之所以：「施物等一切法自相空，從本已來常不生」〔T25 0658b07〕釋無生，「無定相——若一、若異，若常、若無常等，是法自相空故」〔T25 0658b08〕釋無定相，「不可轉，安住如中故。」〔T25 0658b09〕釋無所轉——論之釋逐字扣經之四目，非泛說。
無作無起相。 諸法實相之所謂。經：「入諸法實相，所謂一切法無作無起相。」〔T25 0657c01〕；論同：「如是觀，即入諸法實相，所謂無作無起相。」〔T25 0658b09〕，並下一轉語：「一切法無所能作，不生高心，無所悕望。」〔T25 0658b10〕——自「無所能作」引出「不生高心」，是從法相落到行者之心。「一切法無作無起相」之漢字流於本論全書五見（〔T25 0647c19〕〔T25 0651b02〕〔T25 0657c02〕〔T25 0657c12〕〔T25 0688c28〕），本品二見，本帳重掃所得。
無生法忍。 羼提段之結名。經：「雖行是助道法，而過聲聞、辟支佛地。」〔T25 0657c21〕，「是名菩薩無生法忍。」〔T25 0657c22〕——本品所立之無生法忍，其判準不在證量之名，而在「行見諦道、思惟道，亦不取須陀洹果、斯陀含、阿那含、阿羅漢果」〔T25 0657c18〕一事：行其道而不取其果，是為忍。「是名菩薩無生法忍」之漢字流於本論全書唯一見，即此處，本帳重掃所得。
有心·無心行檀。 論段自出之一對。論引經而標其目：「菩薩從初發意，以有、無心行檀波羅蜜。」〔T25 0658b03〕，其下分訓：「有心者，所謂應薩婆若心布施，念諸佛種種無量功德，憐愍眾生故布施。」〔T25 0658b04〕、「無心者，若施佛乃至凡人，不生三想，所謂施者、受者、財物。」〔T25 0658b05〕——有心者有其所念，無心者無其所著，二者同在一施之中，非二種人。
世諦有福·畢竟空無福。 二諦之一問一答，全品最短之一輪。論：「以畢竟空中無有福以非福，何以但以福德故得？」〔T25 0658a19〕，「以世諦中有福故得。」〔T25 0658a21〕——問出於畢竟空，答落在世諦；論並自釋此問之所由：「須菩提為眾生著無所有故問，佛以不著有法答」〔T25 0658a21〕。
薩婆若·一切種智。 本品兩名並用。經之設問用梵音：「當得薩婆若不？」〔T25 0657b18〕；佛之答則用漢譯：「一切種智尚難得」〔T25 0657b20〕。「薩婆若」於本品範圍九見（〔T25 0657b18〕〔T25 0657b28〕〔T25 0657c07〕〔T25 0657c17〕〔T25 0658a01〕〔T25 0658a12〕〔T25 0658a16〕二見·〔T25 0658b04〕），「一切種智」四見，兩名所指同一，如實分記。
三、譬喻與故事
本品要喻一，引事一，實為同一事；其餘皆直說無喻，此亦本品之體。
乞食道人杖打餓狗（論主所引之事·全論唯一見）。 論釋「精進修福尚不可得，何況不修福！」〔T25 0658a22〕一義，引一事為證：「如受乞食道人，至一聚落，從一家至一家，乞食不得。」〔T25 0658a23〕，「見一餓狗飢臥，以杖打之言」〔T25 0658a24〕，「汝畜生無智，我種種因緣，家家求食尚不能得，何況汝臥而望得！」〔T25 0658a25〕——喻之力全在「臥」之一字：道人所以能說此語，非因其得食，正因其不得食；不得食而猶家家求之者，與飢臥而望之者，其間之差不在所得而在所行。此事之漢字流於本論全書唯一見，即此處，本帳重掃所得。
杖打之語與經之格式相扣。 此事之「我……尚不能得，何況汝……而望得！」一格，正是經之「一切種智尚難得，何況不供養諸佛、不種善根、不得真知識！」〔T25 0657b20〕之同一句法——論主取一市井之事，為經之句法作一活注；其與品末「無如是方便，菩薩雖供養諸佛、種善根、得真知識，尚不得，何況不供養！」〔T25 0658b18〕前後三處相扣，成全品之骨。
四、所釋經文
品名四造網（並錄不判）。 本品品名，逐一據原樣誌之，凡四造。其一，種善根品——本論底本品題「大智度論釋種善根品第七十三」〔T25 0657b16〕。其二，眾善根品——品題「種」字之注（下帳第一條）作「種【大】，眾【宋】【元】」，宋、元二本以「眾」易「種」。其三，三善根品——品題注〔T25 0657b16〕之宮本讀法，其注全文原樣作「大智度論【大】，〔－〕【明】，卷第八十六首【石】，（（大智度…三））十三字＝（（大智度論釋第七十三品三善根品））十四字【宮】，（（釋第七十二品））六字【聖】，（（摩訶般若波羅蜜品第七十二善根方便品八十六））二十字【石】」——宮本作「大智度論釋第七十三品三善根品」十四字，較底本十三字多一字，且品序詞與品名詞之序互易（宮本先標「第七十三品」後綴「三善根品」，底本先標品名後綴品序）。其四，善根方便品——即上注石本讀法之中段，石本作經題式「摩訶般若波羅蜜品第七十二善根方便品八十六」，其中「善根方便品」為石本之品名，「八十六」為石本自身之卷次。四造各取本品一義：底本與宋元取所種之善根，宮本取三善根之數，石本取善根方便之合；並錄不判。
所釋經品名之鏡像兩讀（本目之眼）。 所釋經 T223 側本品品題〔T08 0379c21〕作「三善品第七十三」，其注曰「三善品【大】，種善根品【宋】【元】【明】【宮】【聖】」——T223 底本作「三善品」，宋、元、明、宮、聖五本反作「種善根品」。以之對本論側品題注（底本作「種善根品」，宮本作「三善根品」、石本作「善根方便品」），兩造校記恰成鏡像：本論之底本讀法正是所釋經諸異本之讀法，所釋經之底本讀法「三善」則與本論宮本之「三善根」同系。品名之兩讀，非一藏之內部游移，而是兩藏傳承各自並存之兩讀，如實誌錄，不判孰正。品題另有夾註一枚〔T08 0379c22〕，其校記作「丹本…品【大】，〔－〕【宋】【元】【明】【宮】【聖】」，其本讀之原樣為夾註〔丹本種善根品〕——丹本夾註所標之名亦作「種善根品」，與本論底本同系，如實誌錄。
聖·石 -1 階（續存·三端互證）。 品題注之聖本讀法作「釋第七十二品」、石本讀法作「摩訶般若波羅蜜品第七十二善根方便品八十六」，兩本之品次皆較底本「第七十三」少一——與品四十四以下逐品順推、同向同幅，-1 階鏈於本品續存。本品範圍內 -1 階另見二端：其一，卷末題之注（下帳第二十六條）石本作「釋第七十二品竟」；其二，卷末題「五」字之注（下帳第二十八條）作「五【大】，五釋第七十一品訖第七十三品【宋】【元】【宮】，五釋第七十品訖第七十二品【聖】」——宋元宮言本卷所釋為品七十一至七十三，聖本則言品七十至七十二，恰整卷同向少一。品題、品末、卷末三端互證，非孤證。
石本卷次雙軌（卷端記與不分卷記）。 品題注首記「卷第八十六首【石】」——石本以本品品題處為其卷八十六之首；而本品身之末〔T25 0658b21〕另有一圓點錨之注作「不分卷【石】」——石本於底本卷八十五之收束處不分卷。二記相合可見：石本之卷界提前於本品品題處，故至底本卷末處已無可分。底本則以本品居卷八十五之末、卷末題繫本品之尾。底本與石本之卷品雙軌不疊合，如實誌錄不強解。此二注皆為圓點錨，不入二十八條之帳（見第八目）。
所釋經品界繫卷中（與本論側異）。 所釋經本品品題〔T08 0379c21〕上承〈道行品第七十二〉〔T08 0378c19〕、下接〈遍學品第七十四〉〔T08 0380b20〕，三品同在一卷之內，未涉卷界；本論側則以本品居卷八十五之末而次品跨入卷八十六（見第一目），兩傳承於此品之卷品分劃不合，如實誌錄。所釋經側另有一端可誌：本品與前品〈道行品〉之總目屬性值同標七十三〔T08 0378c19〕〔T08 0379c21〕，即目次層之序號於此處一度未遞增，屬所釋經標記層之瑕疵，非義理歧異，如實誌錄不判，其型與品四十八既誌之同款（常設體例，不重判）。
全量牒經對讀（兩側對勘·異文五處·逐處誌其校記之有無）。 本論經①與所釋經〈三善品〉逐字比對，本帳以漢字流獨立重掃兩藏本品全段（本論八百七十九字、所釋經八百八十二字），除【經】結構標記外，差異恰五處，無他：
- 難得／不能得——本論作「何以故難得一切種智？」〔T25 0657b23〕，所釋經作「何以故不能得一切種智？」〔T08 0379c29〕。所釋經此處有注「不能【大】，難【宮】【聖】」——宮、聖二本作「難」，正與本論底本合；本論側此處無校記。兩造互為異本，鏡像於品名之外再見一處。
- 檀波羅蜜／檀那波羅蜜——本論作「菩薩摩訶薩從初發意行檀波羅蜜，應薩婆若念」〔T25 0657b27〕，所釋經作「行檀那波羅蜜，應薩婆若念」〔T08 0380a05〕。本論檀段三處皆無「那」字，所釋經三處皆有，兩藏之譯名習慣各自成系，非一處之偶異；兩造於此皆無校記。
- 禪波羅蜜／禪那波羅蜜——本論作「菩薩摩訶薩從初發意行禪波羅蜜」〔T25 0657c29〕，所釋經作「行禪那波羅蜜，應薩婆若念」〔T08 0380b09〕。同上一系之異，兩造於此皆無校記。
- 應如是行／應如是學——本論作「於其中間應如是行。」〔T25 0658a07〕，所釋經作「於其中間應如是學。」〔T08 0380b16〕。本論側此處有注「行【大】，學【石】」（下帳第十三條）——石本作「學」，正是所釋經底本之讀；所釋經側此處無校記。
- 是菩薩摩訶薩／菩薩摩訶薩——本論作「是菩薩摩訶薩應如是行般若波羅蜜，不受果報。」〔T25 0658a09〕，所釋經作「菩薩摩訶薩應如是行般若波羅蜜，不受果報。」〔T08 0380b18〕，少「是」字。本論側此處有星錨注「是【大】＊，〔－〕【宋】【元】【明】【宮】＊」（下帳第十四條）——宋、元、明、宮四本無「是」字，所成之讀正是所釋經底本之讀；所釋經側此處無校記。
四處互印之總相（兩側對勘所得）。 上五處之中，三處各有一造之異本讀法恰合另一造之底本讀法（難／不能、行／學、是／無「是」）；品名之種善根／三善雖不在五處之列，亦屬同型，唯檀那·禪那之譯名一系兩造各自成習而無校記。兩藏之異本網於此品互相穿插，非單向承襲，如實誌錄，不判孰先孰後。
對照組（五串·兩藏各自見數誠實記）。 「所種善根不具足，不常隨善知識教。」〔T25 0657b25〕；「雖行是助道法，而過聲聞、辟支佛地。」〔T25 0657c21〕；「入八背捨、九次第定」〔T25 0658a01〕；「知諸禪定自相空」〔T25 0657c26〕；「未淨佛國土，未成就眾生」〔T25 0658a07〕。以上五串之漢字流，本帳逐串於兩藏原檔以容錯法獨立重掃，皆對位唯一、無他品可淆。本論【論】層為論體之結構性擴增，所釋經無此層，非異文。
五、般若義眼
本品之眼，在「難得」二字的位置——不是三事不足故難，而是三事具足猶難；難之所在既已挪出三事之外，全品所指遂只剩一物。其義可約為五重。
其一，問之所以名「麁」。經之首問是一個看似不必問的問：不供養諸佛、不具足善根、不得真知識，當得一切種智不？論主自設一問：「須菩提何以故作是麁問」〔T25 0658a11〕，並代出二解：一者畢竟空之滑轉——「若一切諸法無所有性畢竟空，畢竟空中，種善根、不種善根等無異。」〔T25 0658a13〕；二者別有他門之疑——「得薩婆若更有種種門，可不須種善根等。」〔T25 0658a16〕。麁問之所以必問，正因其所本者細：空義一旦落到行門上，最先鬆脫的就是『種與不種等無異』這一句。
其二，答之所以不在畢竟空中答。須菩提進一步逼問：「以畢竟空中無有福以非福，何以但以福德故得？」〔T25 0658a19〕，佛之答只八字：「以世諦中有福故得。」〔T25 0658a21〕。論主點出這一問一答的機關：「須菩提為眾生著無所有故問，佛以不著有法答」〔T25 0658a21〕——問是為了著空的人問的，答是用不著有的法答的；若在畢竟空中答，正中所著；若以實有之福答，又落一邊。乞食道人之事隨即而來：「精進修福尚不可得，何況不修福！」〔T25 0658a22〕——不是說修福可得，是說連修都還不可得，何況不修，秤仍懸在空中，而腳必須落地。
其三，方便即般若，不是般若之外的手段。經以「遠離方便力」〔T25 0657b24〕釋三事具足而猶難得之故，論直訓其體：「方便者，所謂般若波羅蜜。」〔T25 0658a28〕——方便不是般若之外另備的一套善巧，而是般若在事上的那一面。故其缺失處也不在事之多寡，而在事之虛實：「雖見諸佛色身，不以智慧眼見法身；雖少種善根，而不具足；雖得善知識，不親近諮受。」〔T25 0658a29〕——三事宛然俱在，而三事皆空過。見佛而不見法身，則供養是見；善根不具足，則種是積；得知識而不諮受，則得是遇。
其四，六度之方便相，一格貫通。經以六波羅蜜答「何等是方便力」，六段同出一式：行其事、觀其空、增其善根、而不受其果報。布施則「是時不生布施想、受者想。」〔T25 0657b29〕；持戒則「持戒不受世間果報」〔T25 0657c15〕；忍則「行見諦道、思惟道，亦不取須陀洹果、斯陀含、阿那含、阿羅漢果。」〔T25 0657c18〕；精進則「雖出入諸禪，而不受果報。」〔T25 0657c24〕；禪則「入八背捨、九次第定，亦不證須陀洹果，乃至不證阿羅漢果。」〔T25 0658a01〕；般若則「乃至未得一切種智，未淨佛國土，未成就眾生，於其中間應如是行。」〔T25 0658a06〕。六段所不取者遞次升高——先不取施想，次不取世報，再不取四果，終不取中間之任何一得；而所以能不取，六段所繫之句同旨而措辭實三式：施、戒二段作「觀一切法自相空，無生，無定相，無所轉，入諸法實相，所謂一切法無作無起相。」〔T25 0657c01〕〔T25 0657c11〕；忍、禪、般若三段作「知諸法自相空，無生，無定相，無所轉」〔T25 0657c20〕〔T25 0658a03〕〔T25 0658a08〕；精進一段別作「知諸禪定自相空，無生，無定相，無所轉」〔T25 0657c26〕——三式分記，不併為一句。方便之為方便，不在多出一法，在每一法上少取一物。
其五，有心與無心，在同一施中。論於末段自出一對：「菩薩從初發意，以有、無心行檀波羅蜜。」〔T25 0658b03〕。有心者不是攀緣：「應薩婆若心布施，念諸佛種種無量功德，憐愍眾生故布施。」〔T25 0658b04〕；無心者不是斷念：「不生三想，所謂施者、受者、財物。」〔T25 0658b06〕。二者不是兩種人、兩段時，是同一施之兩面：所念者不空，所取者全空。其效驗論說得極平實：「一切法無所能作，不生高心，無所悕望。」〔T25 0658b10〕——無所能作，故無可自高；無可自高，故不望其報；而後方有「能增益善根、離不善根，教化眾生、淨佛世界。」〔T25 0658b12〕。全品收在一句反照上：「無如是方便，菩薩雖供養諸佛、種善根、得真知識，尚不得，何況不供養！」〔T25 0658b18〕——首尾兩處『尚……何況……』之間，隔的正是「方便」二字。
六、諸家異釋
《大智度論》本無逐文全疏之傳統，古德引釋率屬據實偏倚。本品古德覆讀唯一家：釋所釋經之吉藏疏存完整專章；釋本論之慧影疏現存文本未及本卷，屬闕釋；天台系智顗《摩訶止觀》、《妙法蓮華經玄義》、《法華玄義釋籤》、《妙法蓮華經文句》與僧肇等《注維摩詰經》皆零命中；均正書二命中而經核皆無涉本品。此目誌錄其所疏所引與本品之對應，不判各家詮釋高下。
吉藏《大品經義疏》（X24n0451）。 於所釋經〈三善品〉之逐文疏，起「三善品第七十三」〔X24n0451 0326a24〕，迄次品「遍學品第七十四」〔X24n0451 0327a07〕起前。其可誌者五。
其一，立名之由與自出異名——「此明供養諸佛、脩善根、植善知識，皆名為善，故云三善。」〔X24n0451 0326b01〕：吉藏以經之三事釋「三善」之名，即供養諸佛、脩善根、植善知識三者皆名為善。其下更自出一異名：「亦三善根品，此品中論菩薩善根，故以目品。」〔X24n0451 0326b02〕——吉藏所出之「三善根品」，正與本論宮本品題之讀法同（見第四目），二者互證此名非孤出，如實誌錄不判其源流先後。
其二，品位之科——「此是第二明方便善成就中為二：第一論上具足善根義，二正菩薩方便善本也。」〔X24n0451 0326b02〕：吉藏以本品為「方便善成就」一大科之第二，而品內自分二段：前段承前品之具足善根義，後段正明菩薩之方便善本。本論於此無科段之陳，兩家所重不同，如實分記。
其三，有無互破之對舉——「佛舉有破無，明行三多尚難得道，況不行耶？」〔X24n0451 0326b07〕，「上品是用無破有，故云不為善故行。時眾著無，故舉有破無。」〔X24n0451 0326b08〕：吉藏以「上品用無破有、此品用有破無」立兩品之對，其所指之上品文即前品〈菩薩行品〉之「菩薩摩訶薩亦不為善根故行般若波羅蜜，亦不為非善根故行般若波羅蜜。」〔T25 0655c04〕（本帳回檢，見第七目）。本論論段於此但云「須菩提為眾生著無所有故問，佛以不著有法答」〔T25 0658a21〕——同指眾生著無、佛以有法破之，而說法各異：本論就一問一答而言，吉藏就兩品相對而言，如實分記。
其四，方便之有所得與無所得——「無方便有所得行三品多故難得道，有方便無所得行故易得道也。」〔X24n0451 0326b11〕：吉藏以有所得／無所得分方便之有無。本論則以「方便者，所謂般若波羅蜜。」〔T25 0658a28〕直訓其體，並以三句指其虛（見第二目）——一以得失立義，一以體用立義，二家並錄不判。
其五，因有無為方便之自設問答——「三事宛然有故不著無礙，未曾三事故不著有巧，離有無故是方便也。」〔X24n0451 0326b16〕，「問：餘處云離有無是方便，今云何因有無為方便？」〔X24n0451 0326b17〕：吉藏以「三事宛然有」與「未曾三事」之並立釋不著二邊，其所謂三事即論段之施者、受者、財物三想。本論同段作「不生三想，所謂施者、受者、財物。」〔T25 0658b06〕，唯言其不生，未及「宛然有而不著」一轉；吉藏之轉為其自立，如實誌錄不代定讀。
慧影《大智度論疏》（X46n0791）·闕釋（非零命中）。 為釋本論之唯一古疏，僅殘卷存世。本帳獨立核之：該檔現存文本之末一原版行止於〔X46n0791 0917b12〕，而其文之所及，最後一品自標為「釋第八十二卷論」下之「第六十八品者，名為方便品」〔X46n0791 0916c16〕，其品題並自記「不完」——現存文本止於釋本論卷八十二、品六十八一段而不完，未及卷八十五、品七十三。本帳另於全檔回搜「種善根品」「三善根品」「三善品」「善根方便品」四串，皆零命中。故本品之無慧影疏，其因在疏本殘佚而非疏家不釋，依實記「闕釋」，不記「零命中」——二者判斷基礎不同，如實分記。
均正《大乘四論玄義》（X46n0784）·二命中而皆無涉本品。 本帳於全檔回搜上列四串皆零命中；另搜「種善根」得二命中：一在「所種善根不得授記」〔X46n0784 0644b13〕，一在「多種善根故，生生世世不離見佛」〔X46n0784 0591b01〕，後者泛言見佛之因，與本品無涉。核其上下文，此句係均正引《金剛般若》燃燈佛前承事諸佛一段，以論摩訶衍有所得善與無所得善之判——與本品供養諸佛、種善根、得真知識三事之經脈無涉，屬「種善根」一詞之偶合共用，非對本品之引用或承接，如實誌錄，不判定為承衍。
智顗《摩訶止觀》（T46n1911）·《妙法蓮華經玄義》（T33n1716）·《法華玄義釋籤》（T33n1717）·《妙法蓮華經文句》（T34n1718）·《注維摩詰經》（T38n1775）·零命中（如實誌）。 本帳於五檔全檔獨立回搜「種善根品」「三善品」「善根方便品」「種善根得真知識」四串，皆零命中——本品於此五書無明稱之引，候補不登，如實誌錄負結果。此為關鍵詞掃描之結果，不構成「彼書無此義」之推論。
湛然《止觀輔行傳弘決》（T46n1912）·零命中（如實誌）。 同四串於全檔回搜零命中。與品六十二〈同學品〉之湛然兩處明引相較，本品於天台系諸書皆無承接之跡，如實誌錄。
七、互讀與承衍
本品之義脈，前後相承者有四，皆此目所誌，不代定讀。
其一，前品〈菩薩行品〉之硬鏈（本論自身·逐字互證）。 本品開卷之問，其所反者正是前品佛語之正面陳述：前品作「須菩提！菩薩摩訶薩法，未供養諸佛、未具足善根、未得真知識，不能得一切種智。」〔T25 0655c06〕——此句之漢字流於本論全書唯一見，本帳重掃所得；本品開卷即以其反面設問：「若不供養諸佛、不具足善根、不得真知識，當得薩婆若不？」〔T25 0657b17〕。前品論段並已重出此義：「菩薩未供養諸佛、未得真知識，不能得一切種智」〔T25 0657a04〕。前品立其正，本品問其反，二品相接無隙——此亦論主所以名之為「麁問」之底：義已在前品說盡，故其問為麁。
其二，『不為善根故行般若』之前品文（吉藏所指·本帳回檢屬實）。 吉藏釋本品時自指上品文云「上品是用無破有，故云不為善故行。」〔X24n0451 0326b08〕。本帳回檢本論，前品確有其文：「菩薩摩訶薩亦不為善根故行般若波羅蜜，亦不為非善根故行般若波羅蜜。」〔T25 0655c04〕——「不為善根故行般若」之漢字流於本論全書唯一見，即在前品，本帳重掃所得。吉藏之指有實文可徵，非泛說；惟其「用無破有／用有破無」之兩品配屬，係吉藏自立之科，本論無此配，如實分記，誌其關聯不代定讀。
其三，次品〈遍學品〉之無前指（負結果誠實記）。 本品末句「餘五波羅蜜，亦如是。」〔T25 0658b20〕之後即卷末題，次品〈遍學品第七十四〉之品題已在次卷〔T25 0658c07〕。本帳於本品範圍逐字查「遍學」零命中——本論本品內無前指次品之明文，如實誌錄，不代為之立配。所釋經側三品則同在一卷（見第四目），兩傳承於此品之收束處分劃不同，並誌不判。
其四，寶庫掛鏈（穩定徵引·軟引）。 本品「方便者，所謂般若波羅蜜」之訓、「雖見諸佛色身，不以智慧眼見法身」一系之三句指虛、六度段「行其道而不取其果」之一貫格式、與「有、無心行檀」之一對，為後世論方便與般若之相、論福德與畢竟空之相攝所本，落穩定徵引〔T25n1509 種善根品·卷八十五〕；諸帙引本論處尚未定稿，故軟引，俟其逐字核存。此屬般若義下貫行門之承衍，誌錄不判。
八、校本與版本說明
本品底本為《大智度論》卷八十五〔T25 0657b16–0658c02〕（品身正文自品題〔T25 0657b16〕起，終於「餘五波羅蜜，亦如是。」句迄〔T25 0658b21〕；卷末題「大智度論卷第八十五」〔T25 0658b22〕繫本品之末，次卷起於〔T25 0658c02〕）；所釋經校本為《摩訶般若波羅蜜經》〈三善品〉〔T08 0379c21–0380b20〕；古德疏校本為吉藏《大品經義疏》（X24n0451，覆所釋經〔X24n0451 0326a24–0327a07〕）；慧影《大智度論疏》（X46n0791）現存文本未及本卷、闕釋，均正《大乘四論玄義》（X46n0784）二命中而皆無涉本品，智顗諸書、《釋籤》、《注維摩詰經》、湛然《止觀輔行傳弘決》皆零命中（見第六目）。異讀校記依大正校勘，涉大正底本與宋、元、明、宮、聖、石（石山寺本）諸本之異——本品二十八條之帳內未見聖乙本、亦未見校訂層增補型之條；聖本入帳七見（下帳第六、七、十五、十九、二十、二十七、二十八條中之聖本讀法，本帳逐條核之得七條七標記），石本入帳九見。
品題注（品名四造與 -1 階之底據·專列·不入二十八條之帳）。 品題〔T25 0657b16〕之注全文原樣：「大智度論【大】，〔－〕【明】，卷第八十六首【石】，（（大智度…三））十三字＝（（大智度論釋第七十三品三善根品））十四字【宮】，（（釋第七十二品））六字【聖】，（（摩訶般若波羅蜜品第七十二善根方便品八十六））二十字【石】」——此即品名四造、聖石 -1 階與石本卷端記之底據，如實並錄，不強加調解（析論見第四目）。此注之錨為圓點型點錨，繫於品題之內，無起訖對，故不入工作底本二十八條之帳；本帳仍以二十八條為帳數，此品題注另列於此。
品身末之「不分卷」注（專列·不入二十八條之帳）。 本品身末〔T25 0658b21〕另有圓點型點錨一枚，其注全文原樣：「不分卷【石】」——石本於底本卷八十五之收束處不分卷，與品題注之「卷第八十六首【石】」相合而成石本卷次之雙軌（析論見第四目）。此注同為點錨，不入二十八條之帳。
星錨二枚·皆品內自共用（專列）。 本品範圍內星錨二枚，本帳逐枚解其校勘條之對應目標並定位所屬品：
- 〔T25 0658a09〕「是」字——其所繫者即本品〔T25 0657b23〕之注（下帳第三條），品內自共用。兩處之本讀與異讀全同：底本作「是」，宋、元、明、宮四本無之。
- 〔T25 0658b18〕「利」字——其所繫者即本品〔T25 0658b16〕行下〔T25 0658b18〕之注（下帳第二十四條），品內自共用。兩處之本讀與異讀全同：底本作「利」，石本作「利益」。
二枚之目標既定，星錨之分佈為二枚俱在品內、無跨品者——與品六十二〈同學品〉之「一枚跨品、兩枚品內」異，如實分記。星目標之注文於原檔帶「＊」記，本帳依原樣保留（下帳第三、十四、二十四、二十五條）。
多字跨行之條二則（專列）。 本品二十八條之中，有二條其本讀非單字而為一段：其一，〔T25 0657c11〕之條，注作「（無定…法）十六字【大】，〔－〕【聖】」，其本讀原樣為「無定相，無所轉，入諸法實相，所謂一切法」——聖本無此十六字，即聖本於尸羅段略去六度共式之半，屬義理負載之省文，如實誌錄不判。其二，〔T25 0658b22〕之條，注作「（大智…五）九字【大】，釋第七十二品竟【石】」，其本讀原樣為卷末題「大智度論卷第八十五」九字——石本徑以品次終，不書卷數，即 -1 階之第二端證（見第四目）。此條並為一含括型之條，其內另含「論」「五」二條（下帳第二十七、二十八條），本帳依原檔出現序分列，不合併計數。
校勘總帳（二十八條全量對帳·原樣）。 下依原檔出現序全量列之，內含星錨二條，隨條標明其目標與所屬品。異本讀法並列保存，正文仍從現行底本讀法：
app 條（二十八·原檔出現序·星錨隨條標明）
- 〔T25 0657b16〕種【大】｜眾【宋】【元】（品題「種善根品」之「種」字·宋元作「眾善根品」·見第四目）
- 〔T25 0657b17〕【經】【大】｜〔－〕【宋】【宮】（結構標記存否注）
- 〔T25 0657b23〕是【大】＊｜〔－〕【宋】【元】【明】【宮】＊（星錨定義處·所共用者見下第十四條）
- 〔T25 0657c07〕怒【大】｜恚【石】
- 〔T25 0657c08〕縛【大】｜〔－〕【宮】
- 〔T25 0657c11〕（無定…法）十六字【大】｜〔－〕【聖】（多字跨行之條·本讀原樣「無定相，無所轉，入諸法實相，所謂一切法」·聖本省之·見上專列）
- 〔T25 0657c12〕作【大】｜空【聖】
- 〔T25 0657c13〕相【大】｜〔－〕【宋】【宮】
- 〔T25 0657c18〕須【大】｜斯【明】
- 〔T25 0657c21〕而【大】｜〔－〕【宋】【元】【明】【宮】
- 〔T25 0657c24〕入【大】｜〔－〕【宋】【元】【明】【宮】
- 〔T25 0658a01〕入【大】｜〔－〕【宮】
- 〔T25 0658a08〕行【大】｜學【石】（石本之讀正是所釋經底本之讀·見第四目）
- 〔T25 0658a09〕是【大】＊｜〔－〕【宋】【元】【明】【宮】＊（星錨·所繫者即本品〔T25 0657b23〕之注·品內自共用·四本之讀正是所釋經底本之讀·見第四目）
- 〔T25 0658a11〕【論】【大】｜〔－〕【宋】【宮】【聖】（結構標記存否注）
- 〔T25 0658a18〕若【大】｜若為【石】
- 〔T25 0658a19〕不【大】｜不也【宋】【元】【明】
- 〔T25 0658a20〕以【大】｜與【宮】
- 〔T25 0658a20〕以【大】｜〔－〕【聖】
- 〔T25 0658a26〕能【大】｜〔－〕【宋】【元】【明】【宮】【聖】【石】（六本俱無·本品唯一之六本齊缺條）
- 〔T25 0658b06〕人【大】｜夫【宋】【元】【明】【宮】
- 〔T25 0658b15〕量【大】｜果【石】
- 〔T25 0658b16〕施【大】｜布施【石】
- 〔T25 0658b18〕利【大】＊｜利益【石】＊（星錨定義處·所共用者見下一條）
- 〔T25 0658b18〕利【大】＊｜利益【石】＊（星錨·所繫者即上一條·品內自共用）
- 〔T25 0658b22〕（大智…五）九字【大】｜釋第七十二品竟【石】（含括型之條·本讀原樣為卷末題「大智度論卷第八十五」·石本徑以品次終·-1 階第二端證·見第四目）
- 〔T25 0658b22〕論【大】｜經論【聖】（在上一條之含括範圍內·依原檔出現序分列）
- 〔T25 0658b22〕五【大】｜五釋第七十一品訖第七十三品【宋】【元】【宮】｜五釋第七十品訖第七十二品【聖】（卷所攝品次之異·宋元宮言品七十一至七十三·聖本言品七十至七十二·-1 階第三端證·見第四目）
以上二十八條與工作底本錨點校記之數機械相合（工作底本檔末清單二十八條·本帳獨立重計值二十八），星錨之目標已隨條標明。品題注、品身末「不分卷」注二枚點錨不入此二十八條之帳，已於上文另列。
所釋經 witness 對讀（已展開四處·全量四條皆已展開）。 所釋經 T223 側本品對讀範圍〔T08 0379c21–0380b20〕內，本帳逐條掃得編號注四條、星錨一枚（繫於品題之經題「摩訶般若波羅蜜經」）。四條逐一誌之：〔T08 0379c21〕「三善品【大】，種善根品【宋】【元】【明】【宮】【聖】」（品名鏡像兩讀之底據）、〔T08 0379c22〕「丹本…品【大】，〔－〕【宋】【元】【明】【宮】【聖】」（丹本夾註，其本讀原樣為〔丹本種善根品〕）、〔T08 0379c29〕「不能【大】，難【宮】【聖】」（與本論底本互印）、〔T08 0380b14〕「不【大】，下【聖】」。四條全量已展開，無誌闕待補之項；其與本論互印之三處已逐條誌於第四目。
I. Structural Placement
Within the sequence in which the Mahāprajñāpāramitā-upadeśa comments on the Larger Sūtra, this chapter belongs to the section of the Commentary on the Remaining Chapters; it lies at the end of Fascicle 85, as a single unit. Fascicle 85 begins at〔T25 0651c06〕 and ends at〔T25 0658b22〕; what its fascicle-head title is tied to is the chapter before the preceding one—「大智度論釋」 tr. "Mahāprajñāpāramitā-upadeśa, Commentary"〔T25 0651c06〕 is followed by 「道樹品第七十一」 tr. "Chapter on the Tree of the Path, the Seventy-first", with the interlinear note 「卷八十五」 tr. "Fascicle Eighty-five" tied below it, and directly beneath come the author's signature, 「聖者龍樹菩薩造」 tr. "Composed by the noble Bodhisattva Nāgārjuna"〔T25 0651c08〕, and the translator's signature, 「後秦龜茲國三藏鳩摩羅什譯」 tr. "Translated by Kumārajīva, Tripiṭaka master of Kucha, in the Later Qin"〔T25 0651c09〕—the author's and the translator's signatures are both tied to the head of the fascicle, not to this chapter. This chapter's title, 「大智度論釋種善根品第七十三」 tr. "Mahāprajñāpāramitā-upadeśa, Commentary on the Chapter on Planting Roots of Goodness, the Seventy-third"〔T25 0657b16〕, begins directly upon the end of the preceding chapter, "The Bodhisattva's Practice", the Seventy-second; at the head of the chapter there is no fascicle title and no author's or translator's signature.
The body of the chapter ends with the one sentence 「餘五波羅蜜，亦如是。」 tr. "The remaining five perfections are also like this."〔T25 0658b20〕, running on to〔T25 0658b21〕; the fascicle-end title 「大智度論卷第八十五」 tr. "Fascicle 85 of the Mahāprajñāpāramitā-upadeśa ends here"〔T25 0658b22〕 is tied precisely to the end of this chapter; the title of the next chapter, "Training in All", the Seventy-fourth, already lies in Fascicle 86〔T25 0658c07〕, and Fascicle 86 begins at〔T25 0658c02〕. Hence this chapter is of the type placed at the end of the fascicle · the chapter's end tied to the fascicle's end · the next chapter crossing into the next fascicle—differing from the 「居卷中·不涉卷界」 tr. "placed within the fascicle · not touching a fascicle boundary" of Chapter 62, "Training Alike", differing also from the fascicle-crossing type of Chapter 48, "The Mother of the Buddhas", and of the same type as the 「居卷末·品尾繫卷尾」 tr. "placed at the end of the fascicle · the chapter's end tied to the fascicle's end" of Chapter 53, "Tending toward Omniscience".
The whole chapter has one thousand five hundred and twenty-four pure Chinese characters, one of the lightest among the chapters of the Commentary on the Remaining Chapters. The structure within the chapter is one 【經】 and one 【論】, a single unit: 【經】〔T25 0657b17〕 and 【論】〔T25 0658a11〕. Both structural markers have collation notes—for the 【經】 the two Song and Palace texts lack this marker, and for the 【論】 the three Song, Palace, and Shōgozō texts lack this marker (entries two and fifteen of the ledger below); whether a marker is present or absent belongs to the layer of the base text's transmission, and the structural count still follows the labels of the base text.
The number of questions and answers and the structure of the speakers: Sūtra ① opens entirely with three rounds of questions and answers between Subhūti and the Buddha, and below them turns into the Buddha's continuous teaching. 「須菩提白佛言」 tr. "Subhūti said to the Buddha" is seen twice in this chapter (〔T25 0657b17〕〔T25 0657b21〕), and 「佛告須菩提」 tr. "the Buddha told Subhūti" twice (〔T25 0657b19〕〔T25 0657b23〕), all located one by one by this ledger in the stream of Chinese characters. The third of the three questions〔T25 0657b25〕 reads 「世尊！何等是方便力，菩薩摩訶薩行是方便力，得一切種智？」 tr. "World-Honored One! What is the power of skilful means, such that a bodhisattva-mahāsattva practising this power of skilful means obtains the omniscience of all kinds?"—before it there is no marker of speech begun afresh of the kind 「須菩提白佛言」 tr. "Subhūti said to the Buddha"; by the vocative 「世尊」 tr. "World-Honored One" and the tone of a question, and carrying on from the order of questions and answers of the two preceding rounds, it is assigned as Subhūti's continued question, and its lack of an explicit marker is recorded separately, as it is. The Buddha's long answer begins from 「佛言」 tr. "The Buddha said"〔T25 0657b27〕 and ends at〔T25 0658a10〕 with 「不受果報。」 tr. "not receiving retribution."; within it 「復次，須菩提！」 tr. "Furthermore, Subhūti!" is seen five times (〔T25 0657c05〕〔T25 0657c16〕〔T25 0657c22〕〔T25 0657c29〕〔T25 0658a04〕), all within the Buddha's continuous teaching, with no marker of a change of speaker seen—they are precisely the dividing phrases of the six passages on the six perfections.
The question-and-answer structure of Treatise ① is not typical: 「問曰」 tr. "Question" is seen once〔T25 0658a11〕 and 「答曰」 tr. "Answer" once〔T25 0658a13〕—the formal questions and answers are only one group; after it 「有人言」 tr. "someone says"〔T25 0658a13〕, 「復有人疑言」 tr. "again someone, doubting, says"〔T25 0658a16〕, 「佛答」 tr. "the Buddha answers" three times (〔T25 0658a18〕〔T25 0658a20〕〔T25 0658a28〕), and 「須菩提問」 tr. "Subhūti asks" twice (〔T25 0658a19〕〔T25 0658a27〕)—these seven places all lie within the unfolding of the 「答曰」 tr. "Answer", and are the treatise-author's narrative re-telling of the questions and answers in the sūtra by way of argument, not further question-and-answer pairs set up on the spot; hence the number of question-and-answer pairs is counted as one, and the seven internal turns are listed separately, the two numbers not counted twice. This is a common way of writing in the expository-treatise form of this work; recorded separately, as it is.
On the assignment of the six passages on the six perfections one point should be recorded: the passage on kṣānti speaks of the path of seeing the truths, the path of reflection, and the acceptance of the non-arising of dharmas; the passage on vīrya speaks of the first dhyāna and so on up to the fourth dhyāna, the four immeasurable minds, and the four formless absorptions; the passage on dhyānapāramitā speaks of the eight liberations and the nine successive absorptions—the passage on vigour takes up the items of dhyāna and concentration, an assignment differing from the usual one. This ledger checks it in both directions: the sūtra explained at the same position likewise reads 「行毘梨耶波羅蜜，入初禪乃至入第四禪」 tr. "practises vīryapāramitā: he enters the first dhyāna and so on up to entering the fourth dhyāna"〔T08 0380b02〕 and 「行禪那波羅蜜，應薩婆若念，入八背捨、九次第定」 tr. "practises dhyānapāramitā: with a thought that accords with sarvajñā he enters the eight liberations and the nine successive absorptions"〔T08 0380b09〕—the two canons agree completely in this assignment, and it is not a corruption in transmission; the treatise-author offers no explanation of it either, only gathering it all in with 「餘五波羅蜜，亦如是。」 tr. "The remaining five perfections are also like this."〔T25 0658b20〕. Recorded as it is, without forcing an explanation of its reason.
II. Terms Examined
Planting roots of goodness. The general name of the whole chapter. Its sūtra proof lies in the three matters raised together at the opening of the sūtra section: 「世尊！菩薩摩訶薩若不供養諸佛、不具足善根、不得真知識，當得薩婆若不？」 tr. "World-Honored One! If a bodhisattva-mahāsattva does not make offerings to the buddhas, does not fulfil the roots of goodness, and does not obtain true friends, will he obtain sarvajñā or not?"〔T25 0657b17〕—making offerings to the buddhas · planting roots of goodness · obtaining true friends: the questions and answers of the whole chapter all turn around these three matters. The phrase 「真知識」 tr. "true friends" is seen twelve times in the whole of this treatise, of which eight are in this chapter (〔T25 0657b18〕〔T25 0657b20〕〔T25 0657b21〕〔T25 0657b22〕〔T25 0658a12〕〔T25 0658a16〕〔T25 0658a18〕〔T25 0658b19〕) and four in the preceding chapter, "The Bodhisattva's Practice" (〔T25 0655c07〕〔T25 0655c09〕〔T25 0655c18〕〔T25 0657a05〕), and none elsewhere, obtained by this ledger's rescan of the stream of Chinese characters—in the density of this phrase, this chapter ranks first in the whole treatise. For the differences among the several forms of the chapter name see Section IV.
The power of skilful means. The pivot of this chapter. The sūtra takes it as the reason why, with the three matters fulfilled, the omniscience of all kinds is still hard to obtain: 「是菩薩摩訶薩遠離方便力，不從諸佛聞方便力，所種善根不具足，不常隨善知識教。」 tr. "This bodhisattva-mahāsattva is far from the power of skilful means, does not hear the power of skilful means from the buddhas, the roots of goodness he plants are not complete, and he does not constantly follow the teaching of the good friend."〔T25 0657b23〕; the treatise glosses its substance directly: 「方便者，所謂般若波羅蜜。」 tr. "Skilful means, namely prajñāpāramitā."〔T25 0658a28〕—skilful means is prajñā; it is not some separate technique apart from prajñā. As to why, apart from skilful means, all three matters are hollow, the treatise brings out three phrases as their remedy: 「雖見諸佛色身，不以智慧眼見法身；雖少種善根，而不具足；雖得善知識，不親近諮受。」 tr. "Though he sees the form bodies of the buddhas, he does not see the Dharma body with the eye of wisdom; though he has planted roots of goodness in a small portion, they are not complete; though he obtains good friends, he does not keep close to them and consult and receive from them."〔T25 0658a29〕—the three phrases answer exactly to the three matters of the sūtra, pointing out one by one where each is hollow. The phrase 「方便力」 tr. "the power of skilful means" is seen nine times within the range of this chapter (〔T25 0657b24〕 twice · 〔T25 0657b26〕 twice · 〔T25 0657c03〕〔T25 0657c13〕〔T25 0657c17〕〔T25 0657c26〕〔T25 0658b12〕), located one by one by this ledger.
Empty of specific marks · non-arising · without fixed mark · without anything turning. The fixed sentence of this chapter, the common formula of the passages on the six perfections. In every passage the sūtra explains its 「何以故」 tr. "Why?" by these four matters: 「觀一切法自相空，無生，無定相，無所轉，入諸法實相，所謂一切法無作無起相。」 tr. "He contemplates all dharmas as empty of specific marks, non-arising, without fixed mark, without anything turning, and enters the real mark of all dharmas, namely the mark of all dharmas without making and non-rising."〔T25 0657c01〕. 「自相空」 tr. "empty of specific marks" is seen eight times within the range of this chapter, and 「無定相，無所轉」 tr. "without fixed mark, without anything turning" six times, obtained by this ledger's rescan of the stream of Chinese characters. In its last passage the treatise itself explains the reason for these four matters: 「施物等一切法自相空，從本已來常不生」 tr. "The thing given, together with all dharmas, is empty of specific marks, from the beginning ever unarisen"〔T25 0658b07〕 explains non-arising; 「無定相——若一、若異，若常、若無常等，是法自相空故」 tr. "without fixed mark—whether one or different, whether permanent or impermanent, and so on—because this dharma is empty of specific marks"〔T25 0658b08〕 explains without fixed mark; 「不可轉，安住如中故。」 tr. "it cannot be turned, because it abides within suchness."〔T25 0658b09〕 explains without anything turning—the treatise's explanation fastens word by word onto the sūtra's four items; it is not a general statement.
The mark of being without making and non-rising. That which the real mark of all dharmas is said to be. The sūtra: 「入諸法實相，所謂一切法無作無起相。」 tr. "and enters the real mark of all dharmas, namely the mark of all dharmas without making and non-rising."〔T25 0657c01〕; the treatise likewise: 「如是觀，即入諸法實相，所謂無作無起相。」 tr. "Contemplating thus, he enters the real mark of all dharmas, namely the mark of being without making and non-rising."〔T25 0658b09〕, and adds a turning phrase: 「一切法無所能作，不生高心，無所悕望。」 tr. "All dharmas can make nothing, so he does not give rise to a haughty mind and hopes for nothing."〔T25 0658b10〕—from 「無所能作」 tr. "can make nothing" it draws out 「不生高心」 tr. "does not give rise to a haughty mind": this comes down from the mark of dharmas to the practitioner's mind. The stream of Chinese characters of 「一切法無作無起相」 tr. "the mark of all dharmas without making and non-rising" is seen five times in the whole of this treatise (〔T25 0647c19〕〔T25 0651b02〕〔T25 0657c02〕〔T25 0657c12〕〔T25 0688c28〕), twice in this chapter, obtained by this ledger's rescan.
The acceptance of the non-arising of dharmas. The concluding name of the passage on kṣānti. The sūtra: 「雖行是助道法，而過聲聞、辟支佛地。」 tr. "though he practises these dharmas that aid the path, he passes beyond the grounds of the śrāvaka and the pratyekabuddha."〔T25 0657c21〕, 「是名菩薩無生法忍。」 tr. "This is called the bodhisattva's acceptance of the non-arising of dharmas."〔T25 0657c22〕—the criterion of the acceptance of the non-arising of dharmas established in this chapter lies not in the name of a level of realisation but in the one matter 「行見諦道、思惟道，亦不取須陀洹果、斯陀含、阿那含、阿羅漢果」 tr. "he practises the path of seeing the truths and the path of reflection, and yet does not take the fruit of the srota-āpanna, the sakṛdāgāmin, the anāgāmin, or the fruit of the arhat"〔T25 0657c18〕: to practise its path and not take its fruit—this is acceptance. The stream of Chinese characters of 「是名菩薩無生法忍」 tr. "This is called the bodhisattva's acceptance of the non-arising of dharmas" is seen only once in the whole of this treatise, namely here, obtained by this ledger's rescan.
Practising dāna with mind · without mind. A pair brought out by the treatise section itself. The treatise cites the sūtra and marks its heading: 「菩薩從初發意，以有、無心行檀波羅蜜。」 tr. "From the first arousing of intent the bodhisattva practises dānapāramitā with mind and without mind."〔T25 0658b03〕; below it glosses them separately: 「有心者，所謂應薩婆若心布施，念諸佛種種無量功德，憐愍眾生故布施。」 tr. "With mind means: giving with a mind that accords with sarvajñā, keeping in mind the buddhas' all kinds of immeasurable merits, and giving out of pity for beings."〔T25 0658b04〕, 「無心者，若施佛乃至凡人，不生三想，所謂施者、受者、財物。」 tr. "Without mind means: whether giving to a Buddha and so on down to an ordinary person, he does not give rise to the three thoughts, namely giver, recipient, and the thing given."〔T25 0658b05〕—with mind, there is something kept in mind; without mind, there is nothing clung to; the two lie within one and the same giving, and are not two kinds of people.
Within worldly truth there is merit · within ultimate emptiness there is no merit. One question and one answer on the two truths, the shortest round of the whole chapter. The treatise: 「以畢竟空中無有福以非福，何以但以福德故得？」 tr. "Since within ultimate emptiness there is neither merit nor non-merit, why is it obtained only by reason of merit?"〔T25 0658a19〕, 「以世諦中有福故得。」 tr. "Because within worldly truth there is merit, it is obtained."〔T25 0658a21〕—the question comes out of ultimate emptiness; the answer comes down in worldly truth; the treatise also explains for itself where this question comes from: 「須菩提為眾生著無所有故問，佛以不著有法答」 tr. "Subhūti asks for the sake of beings who cling to being without anything existent, and the Buddha answers by not clinging to an existent dharma"〔T25 0658a21〕.
Sarvajñā · the omniscience of all kinds. This chapter uses the two names side by side. The question set by the sūtra uses the Sanskrit sound: 「當得薩婆若不？」 tr. "will he obtain sarvajñā or not?"〔T25 0657b18〕; the Buddha's answer uses the Chinese rendering: 「一切種智尚難得」 tr. "the omniscience of all kinds is still hard to obtain"〔T25 0657b20〕. 「薩婆若」 tr. "sarvajñā" is seen nine times within the range of this chapter (〔T25 0657b18〕〔T25 0657b28〕〔T25 0657c07〕〔T25 0657c17〕〔T25 0658a01〕〔T25 0658a12〕〔T25 0658a16〕 twice · 〔T25 0658b04〕), and 「一切種智」 tr. "the omniscience of all kinds" four times; what the two names refer to is one and the same; recorded separately, as it is.
III. Similes and Stories
This chapter has one key simile and one cited event, and they are in fact one and the same event; the rest is all direct statement without simile, and this too is the character of this chapter.
The man of the path begging for food strikes a hungry dog with his staff (an event cited by the treatise-author · seen only once in the whole treatise). The treatise, explaining the meaning of 「精進修福尚不可得，何況不修福！」 tr. "Even cultivating merit with vigour, it is unfindable, how much less without cultivating merit!"〔T25 0658a22〕, cites an event as proof: 「如受乞食道人，至一聚落，從一家至一家，乞食不得。」 tr. "It is like a man of the path who has taken up begging for food: he comes to a village, goes from one house to the next, and begging for food obtains none."〔T25 0658a23〕, 「見一餓狗飢臥，以杖打之言」 tr. "he sees a hungry dog lying down starving, strikes it with his staff and says"〔T25 0658a24〕, 「汝畜生無智，我種種因緣，家家求食尚不能得，何況汝臥而望得！」 tr. "You beast without knowledge! I, with all kinds of causes and conditions, seek food from house to house and still cannot obtain it, how much less you, who lie down and hope to obtain it!"〔T25 0658a25〕—the whole force of the simile lies in the one character 「臥」 tr. "lie down": the man of the path can say these words not because he has obtained food, but exactly because he has not; between the one who does not obtain food and yet still seeks it from house to house and the one who lies starving and hopes for it, the difference lies not in what is obtained but in what is practised. The stream of Chinese characters of this event is seen only once in the whole of this treatise, namely here, obtained by this ledger's rescan.
The words that go with the staff-blow interlock with the pattern of the sūtra. The pattern of this event, 「我……尚不能得，何況汝……而望得！」 tr. "I … still cannot obtain it, how much less you … hoping to obtain it!", is the very same syntax as the sūtra's 「一切種智尚難得，何況不供養諸佛、不種善根、不得真知識！」 tr. "the omniscience of all kinds is still hard to obtain, how much more for one who does not make offerings to the buddhas, does not plant roots of goodness, and does not obtain true friends!"〔T25 0657b20〕—the treatise-author takes an event of the marketplace and makes of it a living annotation on the sūtra's syntax; together with the chapter-end 「無如是方便，菩薩雖供養諸佛、種善根、得真知識，尚不得，何況不供養！」 tr. "Without such skilful means, though the bodhisattva makes offerings to the buddhas, plants roots of goodness, and obtains true friends, he still does not obtain it, how much less one who does not make offerings!"〔T25 0658b18〕, the three places interlock front and back and form the bone of the whole chapter.
IV. The Sūtra Passage Explained
The network of the four forms of the chapter name (recorded side by side without judgement). The name of this chapter, recorded one by one as it stands, has four forms in all. First, Planting Roots of Goodness—the chapter title of this treatise's base text, 「大智度論釋種善根品第七十三」 tr. "Mahāprajñāpāramitā-upadeśa, Commentary on the Chapter on Planting Roots of Goodness, the Seventy-third"〔T25 0657b16〕. Second, The Many Roots of Goodness—the note on the character 「種」 tr. "planting" in the chapter title (entry one of the ledger below) reads 「種【大】，眾【宋】【元】」 tr. "planting (Taishō), many (Song, Yuan)"; the two Song and Yuan texts put 「眾」 tr. "many" in place of 「種」 tr. "planting". Third, The Three Roots of Goodness—the Palace reading in the note on the chapter title〔T25 0657b16〕, the full text of which note, as it stands, reads 「大智度論【大】，〔－〕【明】，卷第八十六首【石】，（（大智度…三））十三字＝（（大智度論釋第七十三品三善根品））十四字【宮】，（（釋第七十二品））六字【聖】，（（摩訶般若波羅蜜品第七十二善根方便品八十六））二十字【石】」 tr. "Mahāprajñāpāramitā-upadeśa (Taishō), omitted (Ming), head of Fascicle Eighty-six (Ishiyama), the thirteen characters ((Mahāprajñāpāramitā-upadeśa … Seventy-third)) = the fourteen characters ((Mahāprajñāpāramitā-upadeśa, Commentary on the Seventy-third Chapter, Chapter on the Three Roots of Goodness)) (Palace), the six characters ((Commentary on the Seventy-second Chapter)) (Shōgozō), the twenty characters ((Mahāprajñāpāramitā, Chapter the Seventy-second, Chapter on Roots of Goodness and Skilful Means, Eighty-six)) (Ishiyama)"—the Palace edition reads 「大智度論釋第七十三品三善根品」 tr. "Mahāprajñāpāramitā-upadeśa, Commentary on the Seventy-third Chapter, Chapter on the Three Roots of Goodness", fourteen characters, one character more than the thirteen of the base text, and the order of the chapter-number phrase and the chapter-name phrase is inverted (the Palace edition first marks 「第七十三品」 tr. "the Seventy-third Chapter" and then appends 「三善根品」 tr. "Chapter on the Three Roots of Goodness"; the base text first marks the chapter name and then appends the chapter number). Fourth, Roots of Goodness and Skilful Means—namely the middle part of the Ishiyama reading in the note above: the Ishiyama text reads, in the form of a sūtra title, 「摩訶般若波羅蜜品第七十二善根方便品八十六」 tr. "Mahāprajñāpāramitā, Chapter the Seventy-second, Chapter on Roots of Goodness and Skilful Means, Eighty-six", of which 「善根方便品」 tr. "Chapter on Roots of Goodness and Skilful Means" is the Ishiyama text's chapter name and 「八十六」 tr. "Eighty-six" is the Ishiyama text's own fascicle number. Each of the four forms takes one meaning of this chapter: the base text and the Song and Yuan take the roots of goodness that are planted, the Palace edition takes the number of the three roots of goodness, and the Ishiyama text takes the union of roots of goodness and skilful means; recorded side by side without judgement.
The mirror-image double reading of the chapter name of the sūtra explained (the eye of this section). On the side of the sūtra explained, T223, this chapter's title〔T08 0379c21〕 reads 「三善品第七十三」 tr. "Chapter on the Three Goods, the Seventy-third", and its note says 「三善品【大】，種善根品【宋】【元】【明】【宮】【聖】」 tr. "The Three Goods (Taishō), Planting Roots of Goodness (Song, Yuan, Ming, Palace, Shōgozō)"—the T223 base text reads 「三善品」 tr. "Chapter on the Three Goods", while the five Song, Yuan, Ming, Palace, and Shōgozō texts read instead 「種善根品」 tr. "Chapter on Planting Roots of Goodness". Set against the note on the chapter title on this treatise's side (the base text reading 「種善根品」 tr. "Chapter on Planting Roots of Goodness", the Palace edition 「三善根品」 tr. "Chapter on the Three Roots of Goodness", the Ishiyama text 「善根方便品」 tr. "Chapter on Roots of Goodness and Skilful Means"), the collation notes of the two sides form an exact mirror image: the reading of this treatise's base text is precisely the reading of the variant texts of the sūtra explained, while the base-text reading of the sūtra explained, 「三善」 tr. "three goods", is of the same line as this treatise's Palace reading 「三善根」 tr. "three roots of goodness". The two readings of the chapter name are not a wavering within one canon, but two readings each preserved side by side in the transmissions of the two canons; recorded as it is, without judging which is correct. The chapter title has in addition one interlinear note〔T08 0379c22〕, whose collation note reads 「丹本…品【大】，〔－〕【宋】【元】【明】【宮】【聖】」 tr. "Khitan edition … Chapter (Taishō), omitted (Song, Yuan, Ming, Palace, Shōgozō)", and the original form of its base reading is the interlinear note [Khitan edition: Chapter on Planting Roots of Goodness]—the name marked in the Khitan edition's interlinear note is likewise 「種善根品」 tr. "Chapter on Planting Roots of Goodness", of the same line as this treatise's base text; recorded as it is.
The -1 step of the Shōgozō and Ishiyama texts (continuing · three ends confirming one another). In the note on the chapter title the Shōgozō reading is 「釋第七十二品」 tr. "Commentary on the Seventy-second Chapter" and the Ishiyama reading is 「摩訶般若波羅蜜品第七十二善根方便品八十六」 tr. "Mahāprajñāpāramitā, Chapter the Seventy-second, Chapter on Roots of Goodness and Skilful Means, Eighty-six"; in both texts the chapter number is one less than the base text's 「第七十三」 tr. "Seventy-third"—in the same direction and by the same amount as in the chapters from Chapter 44 onward, followed chapter by chapter, so that the chain of the -1 step continues in this chapter. Within the range of this chapter the -1 step is seen at two further ends: first, in the note on the fascicle-end title (entry twenty-six of the ledger below) the Ishiyama text reads 「釋第七十二品竟」 tr. "Commentary on the Seventy-second Chapter ends"; second, the note on the character 「五」 tr. "five" of the fascicle-end title (entry twenty-eight of the ledger below) reads 「五【大】，五釋第七十一品訖第七十三品【宋】【元】【宮】，五釋第七十品訖第七十二品【聖】」 tr. "five (Taishō), five: Commentary on the Seventy-first Chapter to the Seventy-third Chapter (Song, Yuan, Palace), five: Commentary on the Seventieth Chapter to the Seventy-second Chapter (Shōgozō)"—the Song, Yuan, and Palace say that what this fascicle explains is Chapters 71 to 73, while the Shōgozō says Chapters 70 to 72: the whole fascicle is exactly one less, in the same direction. The chapter title, the chapter's end, and the fascicle's end, three ends confirming one another: it is not a lone proof.
The double track of the Ishiyama fascicle numbering (the record at the head of the fascicle and the record of not dividing the fascicle). The note on the chapter title first records 「卷第八十六首【石】」 tr. "head of Fascicle Eighty-six (Ishiyama)"—the Ishiyama text takes the place of this chapter's title as the head of its Fascicle 86; and at the end of this chapter's body〔T25 0658b21〕 there is in addition a note on a round-dot anchor reading 「不分卷【石】」 tr. "the fascicle is not divided (Ishiyama)"—the Ishiyama text does not divide the fascicle at the place where the base text's Fascicle 85 closes. Taking the two records together one can see that the Ishiyama text's fascicle boundary comes earlier, at the place of this chapter's title, and so by the place of the base text's fascicle end there is nothing left to divide. The base text, for its part, places this chapter at the end of Fascicle 85, with the fascicle-end title tied to the chapter's end. The double track of fascicle and chapter in the base text and in the Ishiyama text do not coincide; recorded as it is, without forcing an explanation. Both of these notes are on round-dot anchors and are not entered in the ledger of twenty-eight entries (see Section VIII).
The chapter boundaries of the sūtra explained lie within a fascicle (differing from this treatise's side). The chapter title of this chapter in the sūtra explained〔T08 0379c21〕 carries on from "Practice of the Path", the Seventy-second〔T08 0378c19〕, above, and is followed by "Training in All", the Seventy-fourth〔T08 0380b20〕, below; the three chapters lie together within one fascicle, without touching a fascicle boundary; on this treatise's side, by contrast, this chapter lies at the end of Fascicle 85 and the next chapter crosses into Fascicle 86 (see Section I); the two transmissions do not agree in their division of fascicles and chapters at this chapter; recorded as it is. On the side of the sūtra explained there is one further point to record: this chapter and the preceding chapter, "Practice of the Path", are both marked seventy-three in the value of the table-of-contents attribute〔T08 0378c19〕〔T08 0379c21〕; that is, the sequence number of the table-of-contents layer here once fails to advance—a flaw of the marking layer of the sūtra explained, not a divergence of doctrine; recorded as it is without judgement; its type is the same as the one already recorded at Chapter 48 (a standing convention, not judged again).
Full side-by-side reading of the cited sūtra (the two sides collated · five places of variant text · recording at each place whether there is a collation note). Comparing this treatise's Sūtra ① character by character with "The Three Goods" of the sūtra explained, this ledger independently rescanned in the stream of Chinese characters the whole passage of this chapter in both canons (eight hundred and seventy-nine characters in this treatise, eight hundred and eighty-two in the sūtra explained): apart from the structural marker 【經】, the differences are exactly five places, and no others:
- Hard to obtain / cannot obtain—this treatise reads 「何以故難得一切種智？」 tr. "why is the omniscience of all kinds hard to obtain?"〔T25 0657b23〕, the sūtra explained reads 「何以故不能得一切種智？」 tr. "why can he not obtain the omniscience of all kinds?"〔T08 0379c29〕. At this place the sūtra explained has the note 「不能【大】，難【宮】【聖】」 tr. "cannot (Taishō), hard (Palace, Shōgozō)"—the two Palace and Shōgozō texts read 「難」 tr. "hard", agreeing exactly with this treatise's base text; at this place this treatise's side has no collation note. The two sides are variant texts of each other: the mirror image is seen once more, beyond the chapter name.
- Tan boluomi / tanna boluomi—this treatise reads 「菩薩摩訶薩從初發意行檀波羅蜜，應薩婆若念」 tr. "from the first arousing of intent the bodhisattva-mahāsattva practises dānapāramitā (tan boluomi): with a thought that accords with sarvajñā"〔T25 0657b27〕, the sūtra explained reads 「行檀那波羅蜜，應薩婆若念」 tr. "practises dānapāramitā (tanna boluomi): with a thought that accords with sarvajñā"〔T08 0380a05〕. In the three places of this treatise's passage on dāna there is no character 「那」 tr. "na", while the three places of the sūtra explained all have it: the translation-name habits of the two canons each form their own line; it is not a chance variation at one place; neither side has a collation note here.
- Chan boluomi / channa boluomi—this treatise reads 「菩薩摩訶薩從初發意行禪波羅蜜」 tr. "from the first arousing of intent the bodhisattva-mahāsattva practises dhyānapāramitā (chan boluomi)"〔T25 0657c29〕, the sūtra explained reads 「行禪那波羅蜜，應薩婆若念」 tr. "practises dhyānapāramitā (channa boluomi): with a thought that accords with sarvajñā"〔T08 0380b09〕. A difference of the same line as the one above; neither side has a collation note here.
- Should practise thus / should train thus—this treatise reads 「於其中間應如是行。」 tr. "in the interval he should practise thus."〔T25 0658a07〕, the sūtra explained reads 「於其中間應如是學。」 tr. "in the interval he should train thus."〔T08 0380b16〕. At this place this treatise's side has the note 「行【大】，學【石】」 tr. "practise (Taishō), train (Ishiyama)" (entry thirteen of the ledger below)—the Ishiyama text reads 「學」 tr. "train", which is precisely the reading of the base text of the sūtra explained; at this place the side of the sūtra explained has no collation note.
- This bodhisattva-mahāsattva / the bodhisattva-mahāsattva—this treatise reads 「是菩薩摩訶薩應如是行般若波羅蜜，不受果報。」 tr. "This bodhisattva-mahāsattva should practise prajñāpāramitā thus, not receiving retribution."〔T25 0658a09〕, the sūtra explained reads 「菩薩摩訶薩應如是行般若波羅蜜，不受果報。」 tr. "The bodhisattva-mahāsattva should practise prajñāpāramitā thus, not receiving retribution."〔T08 0380b18〕, lacking the character 「是」 tr. "this". At this place this treatise's side has the star-anchor note 「是【大】＊，〔－〕【宋】【元】【明】【宮】＊」 tr. "this (Taishō) *, omitted (Song, Yuan, Ming, Palace) *" (entry fourteen of the ledger below)—the four Song, Yuan, Ming, and Palace texts lack the character 「是」 tr. "this", and the reading they produce is precisely the reading of the base text of the sūtra explained; at this place the side of the sūtra explained has no collation note.
The overall shape of the places of mutual confirmation (obtained by collating the two sides). Of the five places above, at three places the variant reading of one side agrees exactly with the base-text reading of the other side (hard / cannot, practise / train, this / without 「是」 tr. "this"); the chapter name, Planting Roots of Goodness / Three Goods, though not among the five places, is of the same kind, while only the translation names tanna and channa, one line, are the habits each side forms for itself, without a collation note. The variant networks of the two canons interweave with one another at this chapter, not as a one-directional inheritance; recorded as it is, without judging which came first.
Control group (five strings · the number of occurrences in each canon honestly recorded). 「所種善根不具足，不常隨善知識教。」 tr. "the roots of goodness he plants are not complete, and he does not constantly follow the teaching of the good friend."〔T25 0657b25〕; 「雖行是助道法，而過聲聞、辟支佛地。」 tr. "though he practises these dharmas that aid the path, he passes beyond the grounds of the śrāvaka and the pratyekabuddha."〔T25 0657c21〕; 「入八背捨、九次第定」 tr. "he enters the eight liberations and the nine successive absorptions"〔T25 0658a01〕; 「知諸禪定自相空」 tr. "he knows the dhyānas and absorptions to be empty of specific marks"〔T25 0657c26〕; 「未淨佛國土，未成就眾生」 tr. "not yet purified buddha-lands, not yet brought beings to accomplishment"〔T25 0658a07〕. The streams of Chinese characters of the five strings above were rescanned independently by this ledger, string by string, in the original files of the two canons by the full-text method; each corresponds to a unique position, with no other chapter to confuse it. This treatise's 【論】 layer is a structural expansion of the treatise form; the sūtra explained has no such layer, and it is not a variant text.
V. The Prajñā Eye
The eye of this chapter lies in where the two Chinese characters 「難得」 tr. "hard to obtain" are placed—it is not that the three matters fall short and so it is hard, but that with the three matters fulfilled it is still hard; since the place of the hardness has already been moved outside the three matters, what the whole chapter points to is left as only one thing. Its meaning can be summed up in five layers.
First, why the question is called 「麁」 tr. "coarse". The sūtra's first question is one that seems not to need asking: not making offerings to the buddhas, not fulfilling the roots of goodness, not obtaining true friends—will one obtain the omniscience of all kinds or not? The treatise-author sets up a question of his own: 「須菩提何以故作是麁問」 tr. "Why does Subhūti ask so coarse a question?"〔T25 0658a11〕, and brings out two explanations on others' behalf: one, the slipping of ultimate emptiness—「若一切諸法無所有性畢竟空，畢竟空中，種善根、不種善根等無異。」 tr. "If all dharmas are without any existent nature and ultimately empty, then within ultimate emptiness, planting roots of goodness and not planting roots of goodness are alike without difference."〔T25 0658a13〕; two, the doubt that there is some other gate—「得薩婆若更有種種門，可不須種善根等。」 tr. "There are all kinds of other gates to obtaining sarvajñā, so perhaps one need not plant roots of goodness and the rest."〔T25 0658a16〕. That the coarse question must be asked is exactly because what it rests on is fine: once the meaning of emptiness comes down upon the gate of practice, the first thing to come loose is the sentence ‘planting and not planting are alike without difference’.
Second, why the answer is not given within ultimate emptiness. Subhūti presses one step further: 「以畢竟空中無有福以非福，何以但以福德故得？」 tr. "Since within ultimate emptiness there is neither merit nor non-merit, why is it obtained only by reason of merit?"〔T25 0658a19〕, and the Buddha's answer is only eight Chinese characters: 「以世諦中有福故得。」 tr. "Because within worldly truth there is merit, it is obtained."〔T25 0658a21〕. The treatise-author points out the mechanism of this question and answer: 「須菩提為眾生著無所有故問，佛以不著有法答」 tr. "Subhūti asks for the sake of beings who cling to being without anything existent, and the Buddha answers by not clinging to an existent dharma"〔T25 0658a21〕—the question is asked for those who cling to emptiness; the answer is given with a dharma that does not cling to existence; were he to answer within ultimate emptiness, he would hit exactly what they cling to; were he to answer with a really existent merit, he would again fall to one side. The event of the man of the path begging for food follows at once: 「精進修福尚不可得，何況不修福！」 tr. "Even cultivating merit with vigour, it is unfindable, how much less without cultivating merit!"〔T25 0658a22〕—it is not saying that cultivating merit makes it findable; it is saying that even with cultivation it is still unfindable, how much less without cultivation: the scale still hangs in the air, and yet the feet must come down to the ground.
Third, skilful means is prajñā, not a device apart from prajñā. The sūtra explains by 「遠離方便力」 tr. "far from the power of skilful means"〔T25 0657b24〕 why, with the three matters fulfilled, it is still hard to obtain; the treatise glosses its substance directly: 「方便者，所謂般若波羅蜜。」 tr. "Skilful means, namely prajñāpāramitā."〔T25 0658a28〕—skilful means is not a separate set of cleverness prepared apart from prajñā; it is the side of prajñā that bears upon affairs. Hence where it falls short is not in the number of affairs but in whether the affairs are real or hollow: 「雖見諸佛色身，不以智慧眼見法身；雖少種善根，而不具足；雖得善知識，不親近諮受。」 tr. "Though he sees the form bodies of the buddhas, he does not see the Dharma body with the eye of wisdom; though he has planted roots of goodness in a small portion, they are not complete; though he obtains good friends, he does not keep close to them and consult and receive from them."〔T25 0658a29〕—the three matters are all plainly present, and yet all three pass by in vain. Seeing the Buddha without seeing the Dharma body, the offering is a mere seeing; the roots of goodness not complete, the planting is a mere piling up; obtaining friends without consulting and receiving, the obtaining is a mere encounter.
Fourth, the mark of skilful means in the six perfections runs through in one pattern. The sūtra answers 「何等是方便力」 tr. "What is the power of skilful means?" with the six perfections, and the six passages come out of one formula: practise the thing, contemplate its emptiness, increase its roots of goodness, and yet not receive its retribution. In giving, 「是時不生布施想、受者想。」 tr. "at that time he does not give rise to the thought of giving or the thought of a recipient."〔T25 0657b29〕; in keeping morality, 「持戒不受世間果報」 tr. "keeping morality, he does not receive worldly retribution"〔T25 0657c15〕; in patience, 「行見諦道、思惟道，亦不取須陀洹果、斯陀含、阿那含、阿羅漢果。」 tr. "he practises the path of seeing the truths and the path of reflection, and yet does not take the fruit of the srota-āpanna, the sakṛdāgāmin, the anāgāmin, or the fruit of the arhat."〔T25 0657c18〕; in vigour, 「雖出入諸禪，而不受果報。」 tr. "though he goes in and out of the dhyānas, he does not receive the retribution."〔T25 0657c24〕; in dhyāna, 「入八背捨、九次第定，亦不證須陀洹果，乃至不證阿羅漢果。」 tr. "he enters the eight liberations and the nine successive absorptions, and yet does not realise the fruit of the srota-āpanna, and so on up to not realising the fruit of the arhat."〔T25 0658a01〕; in prajñā, 「乃至未得一切種智，未淨佛國土，未成就眾生，於其中間應如是行。」 tr. "and so on up to: while he has not yet obtained the omniscience of all kinds, not yet purified buddha-lands, and not yet brought beings to accomplishment, in the interval he should practise thus."〔T25 0658a06〕. What the six passages do not take rises step by step—first the thought of giving is not taken, then worldly retribution, then the four fruits, and at the last not any attainment whatever in the interval; and as for what makes the not-taking possible, the sentences tied to the six passages share one purport but are in fact worded in three ways: the two passages on giving and morality read 「觀一切法自相空，無生，無定相，無所轉，入諸法實相，所謂一切法無作無起相。」 tr. "He contemplates all dharmas as empty of specific marks, non-arising, without fixed mark, without anything turning, and enters the real mark of all dharmas, namely the mark of all dharmas without making and non-rising."〔T25 0657c01〕〔T25 0657c11〕; the three passages on patience, dhyāna, and prajñā read 「知諸法自相空，無生，無定相，無所轉」 tr. "he knows all dharmas to be empty of specific marks, non-arising, without fixed mark, without anything turning"〔T25 0657c20〕〔T25 0658a03〕〔T25 0658a08〕; the one passage on vigour reads instead 「知諸禪定自相空，無生，無定相，無所轉」 tr. "he knows the dhyānas and absorptions to be empty of specific marks, non-arising, without fixed mark, without anything turning"〔T25 0657c26〕—the three forms are recorded separately and not merged into one sentence. Skilful means is skilful means not because one more dharma is added, but because in every dharma one thing less is taken.
Fifth, with mind and without mind lie within one and the same giving. In its last passage the treatise brings out a pair of its own: 「菩薩從初發意，以有、無心行檀波羅蜜。」 tr. "From the first arousing of intent the bodhisattva practises dānapāramitā with mind and without mind."〔T25 0658b03〕. With mind is not reaching out to objects: 「應薩婆若心布施，念諸佛種種無量功德，憐愍眾生故布施。」 tr. "giving with a mind that accords with sarvajñā, keeping in mind the buddhas' all kinds of immeasurable merits, and giving out of pity for beings."〔T25 0658b04〕; without mind is not cutting off thought: 「不生三想，所謂施者、受者、財物。」 tr. "he does not give rise to the three thoughts, namely giver, recipient, and the thing given."〔T25 0658b06〕. The two are not two kinds of people or two stretches of time; they are the two sides of one and the same giving: what is kept in mind is not empty, what is taken is wholly empty. The treatise states its proof most plainly: 「一切法無所能作，不生高心，無所悕望。」 tr. "All dharmas can make nothing, so he does not give rise to a haughty mind and hopes for nothing."〔T25 0658b10〕—since nothing can be made, there is nothing by which to exalt oneself; since there is nothing by which to exalt oneself, he does not hope for its retribution; and only after that is there 「能增益善根、離不善根，教化眾生、淨佛世界。」 tr. "he is able to increase the roots of goodness and part from the roots that are not good, to teach and transform beings, and to purify buddha-worlds."〔T25 0658b12〕. The whole chapter gathers in one reflecting sentence: 「無如是方便，菩薩雖供養諸佛、種善根、得真知識，尚不得，何況不供養！」 tr. "Without such skilful means, though the bodhisattva makes offerings to the buddhas, plants roots of goodness, and obtains true friends, he still does not obtain it, how much less one who does not make offerings!"〔T25 0658b18〕—between the two ‘still … how much more …’ at head and tail, what lies is precisely the two Chinese characters 「方便」 tr. "skilful means".
VI. Divergent Readings of the Masters
The Mahāprajñāpāramitā-upadeśa has, at root, no tradition of complete line-by-line commentary, and the citations and explanations of the ancient masters are for the most part partial, according to what is actually there. For this chapter only one master's re-reading survives: Jizang's commentary on the sūtra explained preserves a complete dedicated section; Huiying's commentary on this treatise in its extant text does not reach this fascicle, so that the explanation is lacking; in the Tiantai line, Zhiyi's Great Calming and Contemplation, Profound Meaning of the Lotus, Annotations on the Profound Meaning of the Lotus, and Words and Phrases of the Lotus, together with Sengzhao and others' Commentary on the Vimalakīrti Sūtra, all have zero hits; Junzheng's book has two hits, which on checking are both unrelated to this chapter. This section records the correspondence of what they comment on and cite with this chapter, without judging the merits of the masters' interpretations.
Jizang's Commentary on the Larger Sūtra (X24n0451). His line-by-line commentary on "The Three Goods" of the sūtra explained begins at 「三善品第七十三」 tr. "Chapter on the Three Goods, the Seventy-third"〔X24n0451 0326a24〕 and ends before the beginning of the next chapter, 「遍學品第七十四」 tr. "Chapter on Training in All, the Seventy-fourth"〔X24n0451 0327a07〕. There are five things in it to record.
First, the reason for the name, and a variant name he brings out himself—「此明供養諸佛、脩善根、植善知識，皆名為善，故云三善。」 tr. "This makes clear that making offerings to the buddhas, cultivating roots of goodness, and planting good friends are all named good; therefore it is called the three goods."〔X24n0451 0326b01〕: Jizang explains the name 「三善」 tr. "the three goods" by the three matters of the sūtra, namely that making offerings to the buddhas, cultivating roots of goodness, and planting good friends are all three named good. Below this he further brings out a variant name of his own: 「亦三善根品，此品中論菩薩善根，故以目品。」 tr. "It is also the chapter of the Three Roots of Goodness; within this chapter the bodhisattva's roots of goodness are discussed, and therefore this is used to name the chapter."〔X24n0451 0326b02〕—the 「三善根品」 tr. "Chapter on the Three Roots of Goodness" that Jizang brings out is precisely the same as the reading of the chapter title in this treatise's Palace edition (see Section IV); the two confirm each other that this name does not come out in isolation; recorded as it is, without judging the order of their origin.
Second, the division of the chapter's place—「此是第二明方便善成就中為二：第一論上具足善根義，二正菩薩方便善本也。」 tr. "This is the second, making clear the accomplishment of goodness in skilful means, within which there are two: first, discussing the meaning of fulfilling the roots of goodness above; second, properly the bodhisattva's wholesome foundation of skilful means."〔X24n0451 0326b02〕: Jizang takes this chapter as the second of a great division, 「方便善成就」 tr. "the accomplishment of goodness in skilful means", and divides the chapter itself into two passages: the former passage carries on the meaning of fulfilling the roots of goodness from the preceding chapter, the latter passage makes clear properly the bodhisattva's wholesome foundation of skilful means. This treatise sets out no sectional division here; what the two value differs; recorded separately, as it is.
Third, the paired setting-out of existence and non-existence breaking each other—「佛舉有破無，明行三多尚難得道，況不行耶？」 tr. "The Buddha raises existence to break non-existence, making clear that even practising the three abundantly it is still hard to obtain the path—how much more not practising them?"〔X24n0451 0326b07〕, 「上品是用無破有，故云不為善故行。時眾著無，故舉有破無。」 tr. "The chapter above uses non-existence to break existence, and so says that one does not practise for the sake of goodness. The assembly at the time clung to non-existence, and so he raises existence to break non-existence."〔X24n0451 0326b08〕: Jizang sets up a pair between the two chapters by 「上品用無破有、此品用有破無」 tr. "the chapter above uses non-existence to break existence, this chapter uses existence to break non-existence"; the text of the chapter above to which he points is the preceding chapter, "The Bodhisattva's Practice", with its 「菩薩摩訶薩亦不為善根故行般若波羅蜜，亦不為非善根故行般若波羅蜜。」 tr. "The bodhisattva-mahāsattva also does not practise prajñāpāramitā for the sake of roots of goodness, and also does not practise prajñāpāramitā for the sake of what are not roots of goodness."〔T25 0655c04〕 (checked back by this ledger; see Section VII). This treatise's treatise section says here only 「須菩提為眾生著無所有故問，佛以不著有法答」 tr. "Subhūti asks for the sake of beings who cling to being without anything existent, and the Buddha answers by not clinging to an existent dharma"〔T25 0658a21〕—both point to beings clinging to non-existence and the Buddha breaking it with the dharma of existence, yet their ways of putting it differ: this treatise speaks of one question and one answer, Jizang speaks of two chapters set against each other; recorded separately, as it is.
Fourth, skilful means with something to be attained and with nothing to be attained—「無方便有所得行三品多故難得道，有方便無所得行故易得道也。」 tr. "Without skilful means, practising with something to be attained, the three kinds being many, it is hard to obtain the path; with skilful means, practising with nothing to be attained, it is easy to obtain the path."〔X24n0451 0326b11〕: Jizang divides the presence and absence of skilful means by with something to be attained / with nothing to be attained. This treatise, for its part, glosses its substance directly with 「方便者，所謂般若波羅蜜。」 tr. "Skilful means, namely prajñāpāramitā."〔T25 0658a28〕, and points to its hollowness in three phrases (see Section II)—the one establishes the meaning by gain and loss, the other by substance and function; the two masters are recorded side by side without judgement.
Fifth, the self-posed question and answer on taking existence and non-existence as skilful means—「三事宛然有故不著無礙，未曾三事故不著有巧，離有無故是方便也。」 tr. "Because the three matters plainly exist, he does not cling to non-existence—unobstructed; because there have never been three matters, he does not cling to existence—skilful; because he is apart from existence and non-existence, this is skilful means."〔X24n0451 0326b16〕, 「問：餘處云離有無是方便，今云何因有無為方便？」 tr. "Question: elsewhere it is said that being apart from existence and non-existence is skilful means; how is it now said that existence and non-existence are taken as skilful means?"〔X24n0451 0326b17〕: Jizang explains not clinging to the two extremes by setting side by side 「三事宛然有」 tr. "the three matters plainly exist" and 「未曾三事」 tr. "there have never been three matters"; the three matters he means are the three thoughts of giver, recipient, and the thing given in the treatise section. This treatise, in the same passage, reads 「不生三想，所謂施者、受者、財物。」 tr. "he does not give rise to the three thoughts, namely giver, recipient, and the thing given."〔T25 0658b06〕—it speaks only of their not arising, and does not reach the turn 「宛然有而不著」 tr. "plainly existing and yet not clung to"; Jizang's turn is his own; recorded as it is, without settling the reading on his behalf.
Huiying's Commentary (X46n0791) · explanation lacking (not zero hits). It is the only ancient commentary explaining this treatise, and survives only in a fragmentary fascicle. This ledger checked it independently: the last original line of that file's extant text stops at〔X46n0791 0917b12〕, and of what its text reaches, the last chapter is self-labelled, under 「釋第八十二卷論」 tr. "the treatise explaining Fascicle Eighty-two", as 「第六十八品者，名為方便品」 tr. "The Sixty-eighth Chapter is named the Chapter on Skilful Means"〔X46n0791 0916c16〕, and its chapter title records of itself 「不完」 tr. "incomplete"—the extant text stops at a passage on Fascicle 82 and Chapter 68 of this treatise, incomplete, and does not reach Fascicle 85 or Chapter 73. This ledger further searched back through the whole file for four strings, 「種善根品」 tr. "Chapter on Planting Roots of Goodness", 「三善根品」 tr. "Chapter on the Three Roots of Goodness", 「三善品」 tr. "Chapter on the Three Goods", and 「善根方便品」 tr. "Chapter on Roots of Goodness and Skilful Means", all with zero hits. Hence the absence of Huiying's commentary for this chapter is caused by the loss of the commentary text, not by the commentator's not explaining it; recorded according to the facts as 「闕釋」 tr. "explanation lacking", not as 「零命中」 tr. "zero hits"—the two judgements rest on different grounds; recorded separately, as they are.
Junzheng's Profound Meaning of the Four Mahāyāna Treatises (X46n0784) · two hits, both unrelated to this chapter. This ledger searched back through the whole file for the four strings listed above, all with zero hits; searching in addition for 「種善根」 tr. "plant roots of goodness" gave two hits: one in 「所種善根不得授記」 tr. "the roots of goodness planted do not obtain the prediction"〔X46n0784 0644b13〕, one in 「多種善根故，生生世世不離見佛」 tr. "because one plants many roots of goodness, life after life one is not parted from seeing the Buddha"〔X46n0784 0591b01〕; the latter speaks in general of the cause of seeing the Buddha, and is unrelated to this chapter. On checking its context, this sentence is Junzheng's citation of the passage of the Diamond Prajñā on serving the buddhas before Dīpaṃkara Buddha, used to discuss the distinction in the Mahāyāna between goodness with something to be attained and goodness with nothing to be attained—it is unrelated to the sūtra-thread of this chapter's three matters of making offerings to the buddhas, planting roots of goodness, and obtaining true friends; it belongs to a chance shared use of the term 「種善根」 tr. "plant roots of goodness", and is not a citation of or succession from this chapter; recorded as it is, without judging it a further resonance.
Zhiyi's Great Calming and Contemplation (T46n1911) · Profound Meaning of the Lotus (T33n1716) · Annotations on the Profound Meaning of the Lotus (T33n1717) · Words and Phrases of the Lotus (T34n1718) · Commentary on the Vimalakīrti Sūtra (T38n1775) · zero hits (honestly recorded). This ledger searched back independently through the whole of the five files for four strings, 「種善根品」 tr. "Chapter on Planting Roots of Goodness", 「三善品」 tr. "Chapter on the Three Goods", 「善根方便品」 tr. "Chapter on Roots of Goodness and Skilful Means", and 「種善根得真知識」 tr. "plant roots of goodness and obtain true friends", all with zero hits—in these five books this chapter has no named citation; candidates are not entered; the negative result is recorded as it is. This is the result of a keyword scan, and does not ground the inference 「彼書無此義」 tr. "those books do not have this meaning".
Zhanran's Supporting Practice and Broad Resolution of Calming and Contemplation (T46n1912) · zero hits (honestly recorded). The same four strings searched back through the whole file give zero hits. Compared with Zhanran's two explicit citations at Chapter 62, "Training Alike", this chapter shows no trace of succession in any of the books of the Tiantai line; recorded as it is.
VII. Cross-reading and Further Resonances
The thread of meaning of this chapter has four successions, before and after, all recorded in this section, without settling the reading on anyone's behalf.
First, the hard link to the preceding chapter, "The Bodhisattva's Practice" (within this treatise itself · confirmed word by word). What the question opening this chapter turns around is precisely the positive statement of the Buddha's words in the preceding chapter: the preceding chapter reads 「須菩提！菩薩摩訶薩法，未供養諸佛、未具足善根、未得真知識，不能得一切種智。」 tr. "Subhūti! It is the dharma of the bodhisattva-mahāsattva that, while he has not yet made offerings to the buddhas, not yet fulfilled the roots of goodness, and not yet obtained true friends, he cannot obtain the omniscience of all kinds."〔T25 0655c06〕—the stream of Chinese characters of this sentence is seen only once in the whole of this treatise, obtained by this ledger's rescan; this chapter at its opening sets the question from its reverse side: 「若不供養諸佛、不具足善根、不得真知識，當得薩婆若不？」 tr. "If he does not make offerings to the buddhas, does not fulfil the roots of goodness, and does not obtain true friends, will he obtain sarvajñā or not?"〔T25 0657b17〕. The treatise section of the preceding chapter has already repeated this meaning: 「菩薩未供養諸佛、未得真知識，不能得一切種智」 tr. "while the bodhisattva has not yet made offerings to the buddhas and not yet obtained true friends, he cannot obtain the omniscience of all kinds"〔T25 0657a04〕. The preceding chapter establishes the positive, this chapter asks the reverse, and the two chapters join without a gap—and this is also the ground on which the treatise-author calls it a 「麁問」 tr. "coarse question": the meaning has already been fully stated in the preceding chapter, so the question is coarse.
Second, the text of the preceding chapter on ‘not practising prajñā for the sake of roots of goodness’ (pointed to by Jizang · checked back by this ledger and found true). Jizang, explaining this chapter, himself points to the text of the chapter above, saying 「上品是用無破有，故云不為善故行。」 tr. "The chapter above uses non-existence to break existence, and so says that one does not practise for the sake of goodness."〔X24n0451 0326b08〕. This ledger checked back through this treatise, and the preceding chapter does have the text: 「菩薩摩訶薩亦不為善根故行般若波羅蜜，亦不為非善根故行般若波羅蜜。」 tr. "The bodhisattva-mahāsattva also does not practise prajñāpāramitā for the sake of roots of goodness, and also does not practise prajñāpāramitā for the sake of what are not roots of goodness."〔T25 0655c04〕—the stream of Chinese characters of 「不為善根故行般若」 tr. "does not practise prajñā for the sake of roots of goodness" is seen only once in the whole of this treatise, namely in the preceding chapter, obtained by this ledger's rescan. What Jizang points to has real text to attest it; it is not a general statement; only his assignment of the two chapters to 「用無破有／用有破無」 tr. "using non-existence to break existence / using existence to break non-existence" is a division Jizang set up himself, and this treatise has no such assignment; recorded separately, the connection noted without settling the reading on anyone's behalf.
Third, the absence of a forward pointer to the next chapter, "Training in All" (a negative result honestly recorded). After this chapter's last sentence, 「餘五波羅蜜，亦如是。」 tr. "The remaining five perfections are also like this."〔T25 0658b20〕, comes at once the fascicle-end title, and the title of the next chapter, "Training in All", the Seventy-fourth, already lies in the next fascicle〔T25 0658c07〕. This ledger checked character by character within the range of this chapter for 「遍學」 tr. "training in all" with zero hits—within this chapter of this treatise there is no explicit text pointing forward to the next chapter; recorded as it is, without setting up a link on anyone's behalf. On the side of the sūtra explained the three chapters lie together in one fascicle (see Section IV); the two transmissions divide differently at the close of this chapter; recorded side by side without judgement.
Fourth, linking to the treasury (stable citation · soft citation). This chapter's gloss 「方便者，所謂般若波羅蜜」 tr. "Skilful means, namely prajñāpāramitā"; the three phrases pointing to hollowness in the line of 「雖見諸佛色身，不以智慧眼見法身」 tr. "Though he sees the form bodies of the buddhas, he does not see the Dharma body with the eye of wisdom"; the consistent pattern of 「行其道而不取其果」 tr. "practising its path and not taking its fruit" in the passages on the six perfections; and the pair of 「有、無心行檀」 tr. "practising dāna with mind and without mind"—these are the basis on which later ages discussed the marks of skilful means and prajñā, and the mutual containment of merit and ultimate emptiness; they rest on a stable citation〔T25n1509 種善根品·卷八十五〕; since the places in the various volumes that cite this treatise are not yet in final form, the citation is soft, awaiting their character-by-character verification. This belongs to the further resonances of the meaning of prajñā running down into the gates of practice; recorded without judgement.
VIII. Witnesses and Editions
The base text of this chapter is Fascicle 85 of the Mahāprajñāpāramitā-upadeśa〔T25 0657b16–0658c02〕 (the main text of the chapter body begins from the chapter title〔T25 0657b16〕 and ends with the sentence 「餘五波羅蜜，亦如是。」 tr. "The remaining five perfections are also like this.", running on to〔T25 0658b21〕; the fascicle-end title 「大智度論卷第八十五」 tr. "Fascicle 85 of the Mahāprajñāpāramitā-upadeśa ends here"〔T25 0658b22〕 is tied to the end of this chapter, and the next fascicle begins at〔T25 0658c02〕); the collation text for the sūtra explained is "The Three Goods" of the Mahāprajñāpāramitā Sūtra〔T08 0379c21–0380b20〕; the ancient-master commentary text for collation is Jizang's Commentary on the Larger Sūtra (X24n0451, covering the sūtra explained at〔X24n0451 0326a24–0327a07〕); Huiying's Commentary (X46n0791) in its extant text does not reach this fascicle, so that the explanation is lacking; Junzheng's Profound Meaning of the Four Mahāyāna Treatises (X46n0784) has two hits, both unrelated to this chapter; Zhiyi's books, the Annotations, the Commentary on the Vimalakīrti Sūtra, and Zhanran's Supporting Practice and Broad Resolution of Calming and Contemplation all have zero hits (see Section VI). The variant collation notes follow the Taishō collation, covering differences between the Taishō base text and the Song, Yuan, Ming, Palace, Shōgozō, and Ishiyama (the Ishiyama-dera manuscript) texts—within this chapter's ledger of twenty-eight entries no entry of the Shōgozō B is seen, and no entry of the supplement type of the emendation layer either; the Shōgozō text enters the ledger seven times (the Shōgozō readings in entries six, seven, fifteen, nineteen, twenty, twenty-seven, and twenty-eight of the ledger below, which this ledger, checking entry by entry, finds to be seven entries with seven marks), and the Ishiyama text enters the ledger nine times.
The note on the chapter title (the basis of the four forms of the chapter name and of the -1 step · listed separately · not entered in the ledger of twenty-eight entries). The full text, as it stands, of the note on the chapter title〔T25 0657b16〕: 「大智度論【大】，〔－〕【明】，卷第八十六首【石】，（（大智度…三））十三字＝（（大智度論釋第七十三品三善根品））十四字【宮】，（（釋第七十二品））六字【聖】，（（摩訶般若波羅蜜品第七十二善根方便品八十六））二十字【石】」 tr. "Mahāprajñāpāramitā-upadeśa (Taishō), omitted (Ming), head of Fascicle Eighty-six (Ishiyama), the thirteen characters ((Mahāprajñāpāramitā-upadeśa … Seventy-third)) = the fourteen characters ((Mahāprajñāpāramitā-upadeśa, Commentary on the Seventy-third Chapter, Chapter on the Three Roots of Goodness)) (Palace), the six characters ((Commentary on the Seventy-second Chapter)) (Shōgozō), the twenty characters ((Mahāprajñāpāramitā, Chapter the Seventy-second, Chapter on Roots of Goodness and Skilful Means, Eighty-six)) (Ishiyama)"—this is precisely the basis of the four forms of the chapter name, of the -1 step of the Shōgozō and Ishiyama texts, and of the Ishiyama record at the head of the fascicle; recorded side by side as it is, without forcing a reconciliation (for the analysis see Section IV). The anchor of this note is a point anchor of the round-dot type, tied within the chapter title, without a beginning-and-end pair, and so it is not entered in the working base text's ledger of twenty-eight entries; this ledger still takes twenty-eight entries as its ledger count, and lists this note on the chapter title separately here.
The note 「不分卷」 tr. "the fascicle is not divided" at the end of the chapter body (listed separately · not entered in the ledger of twenty-eight entries). At the end of this chapter's body〔T25 0658b21〕 there is in addition one point anchor of the round-dot type, the full text of whose note, as it stands, is 「不分卷【石】」 tr. "the fascicle is not divided (Ishiyama)"—the Ishiyama text does not divide the fascicle at the place where the base text's Fascicle 85 closes; this agrees with 「卷第八十六首【石】」 tr. "head of Fascicle Eighty-six (Ishiyama)" of the note on the chapter title, and together they form the double track of the Ishiyama fascicle numbering (for the analysis see Section IV). This note is likewise a point anchor, and is not entered in the ledger of twenty-eight entries.
Two stars · both shared within the chapter itself (listed separately). Within the range of this chapter there are two star anchors; this ledger resolves one by one the target of the corresponding collation entry of each, and locates the chapter to which it belongs:
- 〔T25 0658a09〕 the character 「是」 tr. "this"—what it is tied to is the note at〔T25 0657b23〕 in this chapter (entry three of the ledger below), shared within the chapter itself. The base reading and the variant reading of the two places are wholly the same: the base text reads 「是」 tr. "this", and the four Song, Yuan, Ming, and Palace texts lack it.
- 〔T25 0658b18〕 the character 「利」 tr. "benefit"—what it is tied to is, in this chapter, the note below the line〔T25 0658b16〕, at〔T25 0658b18〕 (entry twenty-four of the ledger below), shared within the chapter itself. The base reading and the variant reading of the two places are wholly the same: the base text reads 「利」 tr. "benefit", and the Ishiyama text reads 「利益」 tr. "benefit".
The targets of the two being settled, the distribution of the stars is both within the chapter, none across chapters—differing from the 「一枚跨品、兩枚品內」 tr. "one across chapters, two within the chapter" of Chapter 62, "Training Alike"; recorded separately, as it is. The notes of the star targets carry the mark 「＊」 tr. "star" in the original file, and this ledger keeps it as it stands (entries three, fourteen, twenty-four, and twenty-five of the ledger below).
Two entries spanning several characters and lines (listed separately). Among the twenty-eight entries of this chapter, two have as their base reading not a single character but a stretch of text: first, the entry at〔T25 0657c11〕, whose note reads 「（無定…法）十六字【大】，〔－〕【聖】」 tr. "the sixteen characters (without fixed … all dharmas) (Taishō), omitted (Shōgozō)", and whose base reading, as it stands, is 「無定相，無所轉，入諸法實相，所謂一切法」 tr. "without fixed mark, without anything turning, and enters the real mark of all dharmas, namely all dharmas"—the Shōgozō text lacks these sixteen characters, that is, in the śīla passage the Shōgozō text drops half of the common formula of the six perfections, an omission that bears doctrinal weight; recorded as it is without judgement. Second, the entry at〔T25 0658b22〕, whose note reads 「（大智…五）九字【大】，釋第七十二品竟【石】」 tr. "the nine characters (Mahāprajñāpāramitā-upadeśa … five) (Taishō), Commentary on the Seventy-second Chapter ends (Ishiyama)", and whose base reading, as it stands, is the nine characters of the fascicle-end title 「大智度論卷第八十五」 tr. "Fascicle 85 of the Mahāprajñāpāramitā-upadeśa ends here"—the Ishiyama text ends directly with the chapter number and does not write the fascicle number, that is, the second end-proof of the -1 step (see Section IV). This entry is moreover an entry of the enclosing type, within which are contained two further entries, on 「論」 tr. "treatise" and 「五」 tr. "five" (entries twenty-seven and twenty-eight of the ledger below); this ledger lists them separately in the order of their appearance in the original file, without merging the count.
Complete collation ledger (all twenty-eight entries reconciled · as they stand). Below, all are listed in the order of their appearance in the original file, including the two star entries, with their targets and the chapters to which they belong marked with each entry. The readings of the variant texts are preserved side by side, while the main text still follows the reading of the current base text:
App entries (twenty-eight · in order of appearance in the original file · stars marked with each entry)
- 〔T25 0657b16〕種【大】｜眾【宋】【元】 (in the chapter title 「種善根品」 tr. "Chapter on Planting Roots of Goodness", the character 「種」 tr. "planting" · the Song and Yuan read 「眾善根品」 tr. "Chapter on the Many Roots of Goodness" · see Section IV)
- 〔T25 0657b17〕【經】【大】｜〔－〕【宋】【宮】 (note on the presence or absence of a structural marker)
- 〔T25 0657b23〕是【大】＊｜〔－〕【宋】【元】【明】【宮】＊ (place of definition of a star · for the one that shares it see entry fourteen below)
- 〔T25 0657c07〕怒【大】｜恚【石】
- 〔T25 0657c08〕縛【大】｜〔－〕【宮】
- 〔T25 0657c11〕（無定…法）十六字【大】｜〔－〕【聖】 (an entry spanning several characters and lines · base reading as it stands 「無定相，無所轉，入諸法實相，所謂一切法」 tr. "without fixed mark, without anything turning, and enters the real mark of all dharmas, namely all dharmas" · the Shōgozō text omits it · see the separate listing above)
- 〔T25 0657c12〕作【大】｜空【聖】
- 〔T25 0657c13〕相【大】｜〔－〕【宋】【宮】
- 〔T25 0657c18〕須【大】｜斯【明】
- 〔T25 0657c21〕而【大】｜〔－〕【宋】【元】【明】【宮】
- 〔T25 0657c24〕入【大】｜〔－〕【宋】【元】【明】【宮】
- 〔T25 0658a01〕入【大】｜〔－〕【宮】
- 〔T25 0658a08〕行【大】｜學【石】 (the Ishiyama reading is precisely the reading of the base text of the sūtra explained · see Section IV)
- 〔T25 0658a09〕是【大】＊｜〔－〕【宋】【元】【明】【宮】＊ (star · what it is tied to is the note at〔T25 0657b23〕 in this chapter · shared within the chapter · the reading of the four texts is precisely the reading of the base text of the sūtra explained · see Section IV)
- 〔T25 0658a11〕【論】【大】｜〔－〕【宋】【宮】【聖】 (note on the presence or absence of a structural marker)
- 〔T25 0658a18〕若【大】｜若為【石】
- 〔T25 0658a19〕不【大】｜不也【宋】【元】【明】
- 〔T25 0658a20〕以【大】｜與【宮】
- 〔T25 0658a20〕以【大】｜〔－〕【聖】
- 〔T25 0658a26〕能【大】｜〔－〕【宋】【元】【明】【宮】【聖】【石】 (all six texts lack it · the only entry in this chapter that all six texts lack together)
- 〔T25 0658b06〕人【大】｜夫【宋】【元】【明】【宮】
- 〔T25 0658b15〕量【大】｜果【石】
- 〔T25 0658b16〕施【大】｜布施【石】
- 〔T25 0658b18〕利【大】＊｜利益【石】＊ (place of definition of a star · for the one that shares it see the next entry)
- 〔T25 0658b18〕利【大】＊｜利益【石】＊ (star · what it is tied to is the entry above · shared within the chapter)
- 〔T25 0658b22〕（大智…五）九字【大】｜釋第七十二品竟【石】 (an entry of the enclosing type · its base reading as it stands is the fascicle-end title 「大智度論卷第八十五」 tr. "Fascicle 85 of the Mahāprajñāpāramitā-upadeśa ends here" · the Ishiyama text ends directly with the chapter number · the second end-proof of the -1 step · see Section IV)
- 〔T25 0658b22〕論【大】｜經論【聖】 (within the enclosing range of the entry above · listed separately in the order of appearance in the original file)
- 〔T25 0658b22〕五【大】｜五釋第七十一品訖第七十三品【宋】【元】【宮】｜五釋第七十品訖第七十二品【聖】 (a difference in the chapter numbers the fascicle contains · the Song, Yuan, and Palace speak of Chapters 71 to 73 · the Shōgozō speaks of Chapters 70 to 72 · the third end-proof of the -1 step · see Section IV)
The twenty-eight entries above agree mechanically with the number of collation notes at the anchors of the working base text (the list at the end of the working base-text file has twenty-eight entries · the value independently recounted by this ledger is twenty-eight), and the targets of the stars have been marked with each entry. The two point-anchor notes, the note on the chapter title and the note 「不分卷」 tr. "the fascicle is not divided" at the end of the chapter body, are not entered in this ledger of twenty-eight entries, and have been listed separately above.
Witness collation of the sūtra explained (four places expanded · all four entries expanded). Within the range of collation for this chapter on the side of the sūtra explained, T223〔T08 0379c21–0380b20〕, this ledger found by scanning entry by entry four numbered notes and one star anchor (tied to the sūtra title 「摩訶般若波羅蜜經」 tr. "Mahāprajñāpāramitā Sūtra" in the chapter title). The four are recorded one by one: 〔T08 0379c21〕 「三善品【大】，種善根品【宋】【元】【明】【宮】【聖】」 tr. "The Three Goods (Taishō), Planting Roots of Goodness (Song, Yuan, Ming, Palace, Shōgozō)" (the basis of the mirror-image double reading of the chapter name), 〔T08 0379c22〕 「丹本…品【大】，〔－〕【宋】【元】【明】【宮】【聖】」 tr. "Khitan edition … Chapter (Taishō), omitted (Song, Yuan, Ming, Palace, Shōgozō)" (the Khitan edition's interlinear note, whose base reading as it stands is [Khitan edition: Chapter on Planting Roots of Goodness]), 〔T08 0379c29〕 「不能【大】，難【宮】【聖】」 tr. "cannot (Taishō), hard (Palace, Shōgozō)" (confirming each other with this treatise's base text), 〔T08 0380b14〕 「不【大】，下【聖】」 tr. "not (Taishō), below (Shōgozō)". All four entries have been expanded in full, with no item recorded as missing and awaiting supply; the three places at which it and this treatise confirm each other have been recorded entry by entry in Section IV.