大智度論 畢定品之上Dazhidulun — Mahāprajñāpāramitā-upadeśa · Certainty, Part 1 of 2

Certainty, First Part: Four Questions on the Meaning of Assurance; Taking an Animal's Body without Losing the Roots of Goodness; Both Teachings Are Real; Why the Two Vehicles Are Rebuked

What Is Being Asked

The name of this chapter is only two Chinese characters—assured. The first of them means final, coming to an end; the second means decided. Taken together, the treatise-author gives, within the treatise section, an extremely short definition: 「畢定者，必當作佛。」 tr. "The assured will surely become a Buddha." What matters is that in these four Chinese characters there is no sense of ‘already being so now’. Assured speaks of the end point being decided; it does not say that one's stage at this moment is already high. Almost all the difficulties of the whole unit arise from this gap in time.

The sūtra text opens with Subhūti's question: 「是菩薩摩訶薩為畢定？為不畢定？」 tr. "Is this bodhisattva-mahāsattva assured? Or is he unassured?" The Buddha answers very directly: 「菩薩摩訶薩畢定，非不畢定。」 tr. "The bodhisattva-mahāsattva is assured; he is not unassured." Then three questions follow one after another, each one pressing this word 「定」 tr. "decided" into a narrower place. The second question asks where—「何處畢定？為聲聞道中？為辟支佛道中？為佛道中？」 tr. "Where is he assured? Is it in the path of the śrāvaka? Is it in the path of the pratyekabuddha? Or is it in the path of the Buddha?" The Buddha answers that it is not in the paths of the two vehicles, it is in the path of the Buddha; this layer fixes the place to which assurance is directed firmly in the Buddha path, and the decidedness of the two vehicles does not count. The third question asks who—is it the bodhisattva who has first aroused intent who is assured, or the bodhisattva in his last body? The Buddha answers that all three kinds of bodhisattva are assured, the one who has first aroused intent included; this layer is the most unexpected, because it places the person who has only just aroused the mind and the person about to become a Buddha under the same verdict. The fourth question is the hardest to answer, and is also the main axis of the first half of this unit: since he is assured, 「畢定菩薩墮惡道中生不？」 tr. "Will the assured bodhisattva fall into the evil destinies and be born there?"—The Buddha does not answer head-on at first, but turns and asks Subhūti: will these sages, the person of the eight and so on up to the pratyekabuddha, be born in the evil destinies? Since the answer is that they will not, then the bodhisattva is likewise. Yet in the jātakas (birth-stories) the Buddha himself has told, the bodhisattva plainly was an elephant, a deer, a tortoise, a dove, a peacock, a parrot, and underwent all kinds of suffering. So Subhūti at once follows up with a question: 「如佛自說本生受不善果報，是時善根為何所在？」 tr. "As the Buddha himself has said, in the jātakas he received unwholesome retribution—at that time, where were his roots of goodness?"

The first question the First Part has to answer is right here: how an animal's body and the position of assurance can stand together. The answer the sūtra text gives goes in two steps. First it says why he takes a body—「為利益眾生故，隨而受身」 tr. "for the sake of benefiting beings, he takes a body accordingly", and that among animals he can have a power the two vehicles do not have: 「若怨賊欲來殺害，以無上忍辱、無上慈悲心捨身，不惱怨賊；……」 tr. "if enemies and thieves come to kill him, with unsurpassed patience and an unsurpassed mind of kindness and compassion he gives up his body and does not vex the enemies and thieves; …" Then it says that he takes a body without losing anything—the Buddha does not dispute with Subhūti on the level of particular matters, but sets up three counter-questions in a row: if the Buddha himself conjures the body of an animal and does the Buddha's work, is that really an animal? When an arhat makes a transformation body, can he make beings rejoice? When a conjurer conjures up elephants, horses, oxen, sheep, men, and women for people to see, are they really existent? Three questions and one answer separate 「現」 tr. "manifesting" from 「是」 tr. "being": manifesting the form of an animal is not the same as undergoing an animal's retribution. So Sūtra ① closes on one sentence of Subhūti's praise—the bodhisattva, by the power of great skilful means, 「隨所應度眾生身，而作種種形以度眾生」 tr. "according to the bodies of the beings he should deliver, makes all kinds of forms to deliver beings".

The treatise section takes over, and the second question at once stands up: the "Avaivartika" chapter has already spoken broadly of the marks of the avaivartika, and avaivartika is precisely assured—why does Subhūti still ask again? The treatise-author answers in three layers in a row: prajñā has all kinds of gates, and this is asking again through a different gate of approach; in the Buddha's mind all dharmas are from the first assured, and it is because people's wisdom does not reach so far that they are called unassured; Subhūti had heard the Lotus Sūtra say that one who does a little merit, even to the point of once uttering the Buddha's name in jest, will become a Buddha, and had also heard that in the "Avaivartika" chapter there is retreat and there is non-retreat; the two sides differ, and only for that reason does he ask. The third layer especially must be looked at—the real point of doubt in this unit is not that a name recurs, it is that the words of two sūtras do not match.

So comes the weightiest set of questions and answers in this unit. The treatise-author himself pushes the difficulty to its extreme: the preceding chapter plainly said 「求佛如恒河沙，得阿鞞跋致者若一、若二」 tr. "those seeking Buddhahood are like the sands of the Ganges; of those who obtain avaivartika there are one or two", yet here it says that all three kinds of bodhisattva are without exception assured—of these two meanings, which one is real? The answer is only four Chinese characters—「二事皆實」 tr. "both matters are real"—and then it gives the criterion: 「佛口所說無不實者」 tr. "what the Buddha's mouth speaks is never unreal"; the difference lies in the capacity addressed. For those who have first aroused the mind he says dharmas exist; for those long in training who cling to wholesome dharmas he says they are empty; for people who are slack and not firm he says that of those who obtain avaivartika there are one or two, so that they know the difficulty and take their own measure; for those 「堪任得佛而大悲心薄、自愛身重」 tr. "fit to obtain Buddhahood, yet whose mind of great compassion is thin and whose love of their own body is heavy", who on hearing that Buddhahood is hard to obtain want to take nirvāṇa early, he says that all bodhisattvas, even those who have first aroused the mind, are assured, so that their minds are set at ease. One and the same matter, two ways of speaking it, each with the people it rescues.

The third question follows close behind: if all are assured, why does the Buddha still rebuke the two vehicles in all kinds of ways and not permit bodhisattvas to take the realisation of the two vehicles? The treatise-author's answer lies not in stages but in consequences—taking a realisation of a small portion of the nature of dharmas and then stopping of oneself, relinquishing the Buddha path and not delivering beings, is 「迂迴，於佛道稽留」 tr. "a roundabout way, a lingering on the Buddha path". From this is drawn out the passage on the arhat becoming a Buddha again: where the body whose outflows are exhausted abides so as to make complete the Buddha path; why, having received the Dharma-nature body, it is still called a roundabout way; how far this matter can be discussed. At the end the treatise-author himself seals it with one sentence—the Buddha-dharma is the foremost among the five inconceivables, this matter 「唯佛能知」 tr. "only a Buddha can know", 「不應戲論」 tr. "one should not make idle discourse".

The latter half of the unit returns to the particulars of not falling into the evil destinies and accounts for them item by item: why he does not fall into the three evil destinies, why he is not born in the heavens of long life, why he is not born in a border land, why he is not born in a family of wrong views, why among the sixty-two wrong views the view of no-doing alone is singled out, why the bodhisattva who has first aroused the mind does not practise the ten unwholesome paths with a deep mind. At the end it closes with the jātaka of the six-tusked white elephant, and answers the last question—since he can make a human body, why does he deliberately make the body of a beast to teach the Dharma.

Passage by Passage

1. Subhūti asks whether the bodhisattva is assured or unassured; the Buddha answers that he is assured, not unassured. Sūtra ① opens at once with one question and one answer, and the pivot of the whole chapter is set up right here: 「須菩提白佛言：『世尊！是菩薩摩訶薩為畢定？為不畢定？』佛告須菩提：『菩薩摩訶薩畢定，非不畢定。』」 tr. "Subhūti addressed the Buddha: ‘World-Honored One! Is this bodhisattva-mahāsattva assured? Or is he unassured?’ The Buddha told Subhūti: ‘The bodhisattva-mahāsattva is assured; he is not unassured.’" The Buddha's answer uses two clauses—first stating directly 「畢定」 tr. "assured", then negating the opposite with 「非不畢定」 tr. "not unassured". This negating clause is not a repetition; it first blocks off that vague line of thought, ‘perhaps assured, perhaps unassured’. Here it is not yet said what assurance is; only whether there is assurance or not is first fixed; the definition must wait until, within the treatise section, the treatise-author supplies that sentence 「畢定者，必當作佛」 tr. "the assured will surely become a Buddha". In reading, it is best to keep this definition in mind first, so that the earlier questions do not fall into emptiness.

2. Where is he assured—not in the paths of the two vehicles, but in the path of the Buddha. The second question presses out where the 「定」 tr. "decided" lies: 「何處畢定？為聲聞道中？為辟支佛道中？為佛道中？」 tr. "Where is he assured? Is it in the path of the śrāvaka? Is it in the path of the pratyekabuddha? Or is it in the path of the Buddha?" The Buddha answers: 「菩薩摩訶薩非聲聞、辟支佛道中畢定，是佛道中畢定。」 tr. "The bodhisattva-mahāsattva is not assured in the path of the śrāvaka or the pratyekabuddha; he is assured in the path of the Buddha." This layer is extremely important. Assurance is not an abstract 「決定」 tr. "decidedness"; it must have a path to which it is directed; one and the same person may be decided in the path of the two vehicles, yet not necessarily in the path of the Buddha. The sūtra text ties the bodhisattva's assurance solely to the Buddha path, which is as much as to say: the bodhisattva is named assured with respect to this matter, that he will surely become a Buddha, and not with respect to what he has realised at this moment. Later, when the treatise section explains this question, it also supplies the frame of mind behind Subhūti's need to ask—「須菩提心以入涅槃為畢定」 tr. "in Subhūti's mind, entering nirvāṇa was being assured"; he had originally taken entering nirvāṇa as the mark of decidedness, and so he asks in which path the decidedness lies.

3. Who is assured—the three kinds, the one who has first aroused intent, the avaivartika, and the one in his last body, are all assured. The third question asks about the person: 「為初發意菩薩畢定？為最後身菩薩畢定？」 tr. "Is it the bodhisattva who has first aroused intent who is assured? Or is it the bodhisattva in his last body who is assured?" The Buddha's answer takes in all three without exception: 「初發意菩薩亦畢定，阿鞞跋致菩薩亦畢定，最後身菩薩亦畢定。」 tr. "The bodhisattva who has first aroused intent is also assured, the avaivartika bodhisattva is also assured, the bodhisattva in his last body is also assured." What Subhūti originally expected, the treatise-author says plainly later on—「須菩提意謂為『阿鞞跋致已上，畢定住佛道中』故」 tr. "this is because Subhūti's meaning was ‘only those from the avaivartika upward abide assured in the Buddha path’"; he thought one counts only from non-retrogressing upward. The reason the Buddha's answer counts in even the one who has first aroused intent is precisely that assurance speaks of the end point and not of this moment: the person who has first aroused intent is extremely far from becoming a Buddha, yet the end point of that road is still decided. This entry is the place in the whole chapter most easily misread, and the section ‘Do Not Misread’ below will speak of it again.

4. Does the assured bodhisattva fall into the evil destinies—the counter-question by way of the person of the eight and so on up to the pratyekabuddha. The fourth question pushes assurance onto particular matters to test it: 「畢定菩薩墮惡道中生不？」 tr. "Will the assured bodhisattva fall into the evil destinies and be born there?" The Buddha first answers 「不也」 tr. "he will not", and at once asks in return: 「於汝意云何？若八人，若須陀洹、斯陀含、阿那含、阿羅漢、辟支佛，生惡道中不？」 tr. "What do you think? Whether the person of the eight, or the srota-āpanna, the sakṛdāgāmin, the anāgāmin, the arhat, or the pratyekabuddha—will they be born in the evil destinies?" Subhūti answers 「不也」 tr. "they will not". What the Buddha uses is an analogy and not a proclamation—that sages are not born in the evil destinies is a ready-made fact both sides acknowledge; since the bodhisattva has entered the same path, the conclusion is self-evident. The stages listed here, the person of the eight and the four fruits and the pratyekabuddha, the sūtra text gives only by name and not by meaning, and this unit does not gloss them on its behalf; only one thing needs to be known: these are all people who have entered the noble path, and those who have entered the noble path are not born in the evil destinies.

5. From the first arousing of intent he cultivates the six practices and cuts off unwholesome deeds, so that the places of the eight difficulties are out of the question. The Buddha unfolds the reason: 「菩薩摩訶薩從初發意已來，布施、持戒、忍辱、精進、行禪定、修智慧，斷一切不善業」 tr. "The bodhisattva-mahāsattva, from the first arousing of intent onward, gives, keeps the precepts, is patient, is vigorous, practises meditative concentration, and cultivates wisdom, and cuts off all unwholesome deeds", and therefore 「若墮惡道、若生長壽天、若不得修善法處、若生邊國、若生惡邪見家、無作見家」 tr. "to say that he falls into the evil destinies, or is born in the heavens of long life, or is born in a place where he cannot cultivate wholesome dharmas, or is born in a border land, or is born in a family of evil wrong views or a family of the view that nothing is to be done"—all of these 「無有是處」 tr. "there is no such thing". The six practices listed are just the names of the six perfections, listed by the sūtra text itself; to the places in which he is not born that it lists, the sūtra text itself attaches their sickness—「是中無佛名、無法名、無僧名」 tr. "in these there is no name of the Buddha, no name of the Dharma, no name of the Saṅgha", that is, there are no Three Jewels to rely on. At the end it adds one more sentence, the weightiest: 「初發意菩薩於阿耨多羅三藐三菩提以深心行十不善道，無有是處！」 tr. "That a bodhisattva who has first aroused intent should, with regard to anuttarā samyaksaṃbodhi (unsurpassed, right, and complete awakening), practise the ten unwholesome paths with a deep mind—there is no such thing!" The two Chinese characters 「深心」 tr. "a deep mind" are the joint: it does not say that not a single evil thought arises in him; it says he will not do it with a deep mind. This measure the treatise section will explain again later.

6. Since his roots of goodness are accomplished, where are his roots of goodness when in the jātakas he receives unwholesome retribution. Subhūti's follow-up question comes extremely precisely: 「若菩薩摩訶薩有如是善根功德成就，如佛自說本生受不善果報，是時善根為何所在？」 tr. "If the bodhisattva-mahāsattva has such roots of goodness and merit accomplished, then, as the Buddha himself has said, in the jātakas he received unwholesome retribution—at that time, where were his roots of goodness?" He is not calling the Buddha's word into question; he is taking the jātakas the Buddha himself has told and checking them against it. What the question really amounts to is: since he has cut off unwholesome deeds, why is there still the retribution of undergoing suffering? If this question is not answered, the three answers before it all hang in the air.

7. The Buddha answers why he takes a body—for the sake of benefiting beings he takes a body accordingly; among animals he gives up his body with unsurpassed patience and kindness and compassion, which the two vehicles do not have. The Buddha's answer is in two parts. First he answers why he takes it: 「菩薩摩訶薩為利益眾生故，隨而受身，以是身利益眾生。」 tr. "The bodhisattva-mahāsattva, for the sake of benefiting beings, takes a body accordingly, and with this body benefits beings." The character 「隨」 tr. "accordingly" is the joint—he does not take it because his deeds drag him into it; he takes it according to those who are to be delivered. Next he answers what he does once he has taken it: 「菩薩摩訶薩作畜生時，有是方便力，若怨賊欲來殺害，以無上忍辱、無上慈悲心捨身，不惱怨賊；……」 tr. "When the bodhisattva-mahāsattva is an animal, he has such a power of skilful means: if enemies and thieves come to kill him, with unsurpassed patience and an unsurpassed mind of kindness and compassion he gives up his body and does not vex the enemies and thieves; …" And he sets the two vehicles opposite: 「汝諸聲聞、辟支佛，無有是力。」 tr. "You śrāvakas and pratyekabuddhas do not have such a power." The verdict falls on the last sentence: the bodhisattva takes an animal's body because he 「欲具足大慈悲心、為憐愍利益眾生」 tr. "wishes to make complete the mind of great kindness and compassion, and for the sake of pitying and benefiting beings". So the suffering undergone in the jātakas is not a remnant of retribution; it is the working of kindness and compassion.

8. Abiding in what roots of goodness does he take such bodies—from the first arousing of intent to the seat of awakening, there is no root of goodness not made complete. Subhūti asks again what he relies on: 「菩薩摩訶薩住何等善根中受如是諸身？」 tr. "Abiding in what kind of roots of goodness does the bodhisattva-mahāsattva take such bodies?" The Buddha's answer does not point to some single root of goodness but to the whole course: 「從初發意乃至道場，於其中間，無有善根不具足者；具足已，當得阿耨多羅三藐三菩提。」 tr. "From the first arousing of intent all the way to the seat of awakening, in between there is not a single root of goodness that he does not make complete; having made them complete, he will obtain anuttarā samyaksaṃbodhi." And from this he turns to an exhortation to cultivate and train—「從初發意，應當學具足一切善根；學善根已，當得一切種智，當斷一切煩惱習」 tr. "from the first arousing of intent he should train in making complete all roots of goodness; having trained in the roots of goodness, he will obtain the omniscience of all kinds, and will sever all the afflictions and their habitual residues". This answer echoes the third question: the reason the one who has first aroused intent is also assured is precisely that on that stretch of road 「無有善根不具足者」 tr. "there is not a single root of goodness that he does not make complete", and in the end he must arrive at completeness.

9. The question of accomplishing the white and pure dharmas without outflows and yet being born among animals; the Buddha's counter-question by way of himself conjuring an animal's body. Subhūti asks again from another angle: 「云何菩薩摩訶薩成就如是白淨無漏法，而生惡道畜生中？」 tr. "Why is it that the bodhisattva-mahāsattva, having accomplished such white and pure dharmas without outflows, is yet born among animals in the evil destinies?" The Buddha does not answer directly, but first sets up an example neither side can deny: 「佛成就白淨無漏法不？」 tr. "Has the Buddha accomplished the white and pure dharmas without outflows?" The answer: 「佛一切白淨無漏法成就」 tr. "the Buddha has accomplished all the white and pure dharmas without outflows". Then he infers: 「若佛自化作畜生身，作佛事，度眾生，實是畜生不？」 tr. "If the Buddha himself conjures the body of an animal, does the Buddha's work, and delivers beings, is he really an animal?" The answer: 「不也」 tr. "he is not". Thereupon the Buddha draws the conclusion: 「菩薩摩訶薩亦如是，成就白淨無漏法，為度眾生故受畜生身，用是身教化眾生。」 tr. "The bodhisattva-mahāsattva is also like this: having accomplished the white and pure dharmas without outflows, for the sake of delivering beings he takes the body of an animal, and with this body teaches and transforms beings." This step separates ‘manifesting a certain form’ from ‘being of a certain kind’—the form is what is manifested, the kind is what is undergone, and the two are not one and the same.

10. The two similes of the arhat's transformation body and the conjurer's conjuring; he manifests all kinds of bodies and yet does not undergo suffering. The Buddha adds two more similes. One is the arhat's transformation body: 「如阿羅漢作變化身，能使眾生歡喜不？」 tr. "When an arhat makes a transformation body, can he make beings rejoice?" The answer: 「能」 tr. "he can"; even the transformations of the two vehicles are of use and yet not real, how much more the bodhisattva's. The other is the conjurer: 「幻師幻作種種形，若象、馬、牛、羊、男、女等，以示眾人」 tr. "a conjurer conjures up all kinds of forms, such as elephants, horses, oxen, sheep, men, women, and so on, to show to the crowd"; asked whether these 「有實不」 tr. "are real or not", the answer is 「不實也」 tr. "they are not real". Both similes come down on the same verdict: the bodhisattva, 「現作種種身以示眾生故，以是身饒益一切，亦不受眾苦」 tr. "for the sake of manifesting all kinds of bodies for beings to see, with this body enriches all, and he himself does not undergo the many sufferings". The five Chinese characters 「亦不受眾苦」 tr. "and he himself does not undergo the many sufferings" are the eye of this passage—it does not say there is no such form; it says there is no retribution of suffering that comes along with that form. With this the sixth question has been fully answered.

11. The closing sentence of Sūtra ①—Subhūti praises the power of great skilful means. Sūtra ① does not close with the Buddha's words but with one sentence of Subhūti's praise: 「菩薩摩訶薩大方便力，得聖無漏智慧，而隨所應度眾生身，而作種種形以度眾生！」 tr. "The bodhisattva-mahāsattva has the power of great skilful means; having obtained the noble wisdom without outflows, he yet, according to the bodies of the beings he should deliver, makes all kinds of forms to deliver beings!" This sentence gathers the meaning made clear by the three similes above into one matter, and gives it a name—the power of great skilful means. The answer to what the earlier question doubted, ‘where are his roots of goodness’, lies right here: his roots of goodness are nowhere else; they are precisely in his being able to manifest bodies in this way without losing anything.

12. The treatise-author poses a question—the "Avaivartika" chapter has already spoken of it, so why ask again now. The treatise section asks at its very opening: 「上〈阿鞞跋致品〉中說：『如是相是阿鞞跋致，如是相非阿鞞跋致。』阿鞞跋致即是畢定，須菩提今何以更問？」 tr. "Above, in the ‘Avaivartika’ chapter, it was said: ‘Such marks are avaivartika; such marks are not avaivartika.’ Avaivartika is precisely assured; why does Subhūti now ask again?" The question is put directly: since avaivartika is precisely assured and the earlier chapter has already listed its marks, is this not a recurrence here? The first layer of the answer is: 「是般若波羅蜜有種種門、有種種道。阿鞞跋致是一門中說；今問畢定，更問異門。」 tr. "This prajñāpāramitā has all kinds of gates and all kinds of paths. Avaivartika was spoken of within one gate; now, in asking about assurance, he is asking again through a different gate of approach." One and the same matter can be entered through different gates; the gates differ and the matter does not—this is this treatise's general practice for handling 「重說」 tr. "repetition", not a makeshift expression of this chapter.

13. The second answer—in the Buddha's mind all beings and all dharmas are assured; because human knowledge does not reach so far, they are named unassured. The treatise-author next pushes it to the root: 「佛心中一切眾生、一切法皆畢定；人以智不及故，名為不畢定。」 tr. "In the Buddha's mind all beings and all dharmas are assured; because people's knowledge does not reach so far, they are named unassured." Then he cites two extremes as proof: the Buddha knows that there are people who, 「雖無量阿僧祇劫積大功德，必退作小乘」 tr. "although they accumulate great merit through immeasurable asaṃkhyeya kalpas, must yet retreat into the Small Vehicle", and he also knows that 「微細蜫虫雖未有善心，過爾所劫發心，後當作佛」 tr. "a tiny worm, though it has as yet no wholesome mind, after passing through so many kalpas will arouse the mind and will later become a Buddha". At one extreme is a person who seems extremely steady and in the end retreats; at the other a creature that seems extremely far away and in the end is accomplished—neither extreme can be judged by what is before one's eyes. The concluding sentence says it plainly: 「定知一切法皆如是，從是因得是果，是故名佛；……」 tr. "He knows decisively that all dharmas are like this—from this cause one obtains this fruit—and for this reason he is named the Buddha; …" So the three Chinese characters 「不畢定」 tr. "unassured" have never been a matter on the side of dharmas; they are a matter on the side of knowledge and views. Once this layer is set up, half the difficulty of the earlier 「三種菩薩皆畢定」 tr. "all three kinds of bodhisattva are assured" is loosened.

14. The third answer—the Lotus Sūtra and the "Avaivartika" chapter speak differently, and so the question arises. Only at the end does the treatise-author state the actual reason for Subhūti's asking: he had heard it said in the Lotus Sūtra that 「於佛所作少功德，乃至戲笑一稱南無佛，漸漸必當作佛」 tr. "one who has done a little merit toward the Buddha, even to the point of once saying in jest ‘Namo Buddha’, will little by little surely become a Buddha", had also heard that in the "Avaivartika" chapter there is retreat and there is non-retreat, and had also heard that the śrāvakas will all become buddhas—「若爾者，不應有退」 tr. "if that is so, then there should be no retreat". Set side by side, the words of the two sides do not fit together, and 「是故今問為畢定、為不畢定」 tr. "for this reason he now asks whether one is assured or unassured". This layer makes clear that the question of this chapter is not curiosity about names; it is an actual conflict between the texts of two sūtras. The closing sentence, 「如是等種種因緣故，問定、不定」 tr. "for all such kinds of causes and conditions as these, he asks about assured and unassured", sets the three answers side by side without choosing one.

15. The treatise-author takes up the sūtra's three questions and three answers, and supplies Subhūti's meaning. The treatise-author next takes up the sūtra text's three questions and three answers one by one: 「佛答：『菩薩是畢定。』」 tr. "The Buddha answers: ‘The bodhisattva is assured.’" 「須菩提心以入涅槃為畢定，是故問：『為何道中畢定？』佛答：『非畢定二乘，但於大乘中畢定。』」 tr. "In Subhūti's mind, entering nirvāṇa was being assured; for this reason he asks: ‘In which path is he assured?’ The Buddha answers: ‘He is not assured in the two vehicles; he is assured only in the Great Vehicle.’" 「求佛道者，有上、中、下，是故問：『為初發意？為阿鞞跋致？為最後身畢定？』」 tr. "Among those who seek the Buddha path there are the upper, the middle, and the lower; for this reason he asks: ‘Is it the one who has first aroused intent? Is it the avaivartika? Is it the one in his last body who is assured?’" Then he supplies what Subhūti expected—「須菩提意謂為『阿鞞跋致已上，畢定住佛道中』故」 tr. "this is because Subhūti's meaning was ‘only those from the avaivartika upward abide assured in the Buddha path’"—and again takes up the Buddha's answer: 「『三種菩薩皆畢定。』畢定者，必當作佛。」 tr. "‘All three kinds of bodhisattva are assured.’ What is called assured is precisely: he will surely become a Buddha." The last four Chinese characters are the direct definition of the word 「畢定」 tr. "assured"; though their position is not conspicuous, their weight is the greatest. Later there is another sentence, 「畢定者，即是阿鞞跋致」 tr. "what is called assured is precisely avaivartika", which speaks of the names of the stages containing one another, and the two complete each other.

16. The difficulty of the preceding chapter's 「若一、若二」 tr. "one or two" against this 「盡皆畢定」 tr. "without exception assured" ; both meanings are real. The treatise-author himself poses the hardest question of this unit: 「如上品中說『佛以佛眼見十方菩薩，求佛如恒河沙，得阿鞞跋致者若一、若二』；今何以言『三種菩薩盡皆畢定』？」 tr. "As was said in the preceding chapter, ‘the Buddha, with the Buddha-eye, sees the bodhisattvas of the ten directions seeking Buddhahood like the sands of the Ganges, yet of those who obtain avaivartika there are one or two’; why is it now said ‘all three kinds of bodhisattva are without exception assured’?" The answer first cites the immeasurable gates of prajñā as the general rule, and then cites in turn Subhūti's question in the "Avaivartika" chapter—from where does the one who retreats retreat, 「畢竟空故，諸法皆不退」 tr. "because of ultimate emptiness, no dharma retreats"—and asks in return 「此中佛何以更說不退」 tr. "why then does the Buddha here speak again of non-retreat". Thereupon the treatise-author poses one more question to lay the difficulty bare: 「是二義何者是實？」 tr. "Of these two meanings, which one is real?" The answer is only four Chinese characters: 「二事皆實。」 tr. "Both matters are real." The ground is 「佛口所說無不實者」 tr. "what the Buddha's mouth speaks is never unreal". And he cites a ready-made pair as an example: the Buddha sometimes says 「諸法空無所有」 tr. "dharmas are empty and without anything existent", and sometimes says 「布施、持戒等是有」 tr. "giving, keeping the precepts, and the rest exist"; 「為初發心者說『諸法有』，為久學人著善法者說『諸法空無所有』」 tr. "for those who have first aroused the mind he says ‘dharmas exist’; for people long in training who cling to wholesome dharmas he says ‘dharmas are empty and without anything existent’". So the difference between the two teachings has never lain in true and false; it lies in the people addressed.

17. Each of the two teachings has the people it rescues—the slack hear 「若一、若二」 tr. "one or two" ; those thin in great compassion hear 「皆畢定」 tr. "all are assured" . The treatise-author divides the capacities addressed very finely. On one side are 「懈怠於阿耨多羅三藐三菩提不牢固者」 tr. "those who are slack and not firm with regard to anuttarā samyaksaṃbodhi": such people 「應從聲聞道得度而不求聲聞，久於生死中受苦」 tr. "ought to be delivered through the śrāvaka path, yet do not seek the śrāvaka path, and for a long time undergo suffering within birth and death", and so to them it is said 「發心如恒河沙，得阿鞞跋致者若一、若二」 tr. "those who arouse the mind are like the sands of the Ganges; of those who obtain avaivartika there are one or two"—having heard it, 「能堪受眾苦者，畢定阿耨多羅三藐三菩提；若不能者，取聲聞、辟支佛道」 tr. "those who can bear the many sufferings are then assured of anuttarā samyaksaṃbodhi; those who cannot bear them take up the path of the śrāvaka or the pratyekabuddha", each going according to his own strength. On the other side are 「有人堪任得佛而大悲心薄、自愛身重」 tr. "people who are fit to obtain Buddhahood, yet whose mind of great compassion is thin and whose love of their own body is heavy": such people in fact have enough strength, only because 「聞佛難得，多有退者」 tr. "they hear that Buddhahood is hard to obtain and that many retreat", they have the thought 「我或不能得佛，不如早取涅槃，何用世世受勤苦為」 tr. "perhaps I cannot obtain Buddhahood; better to take nirvāṇa early—what use is it to undergo toil and suffering life after life"—and for the sake of such people it is 「說一切菩薩乃至初發心皆畢定」 tr. "said that all bodhisattvas, even those who have first aroused the mind, are assured". One sentence is a barrier, one sentence is a support; what is barred is shallowness, what is supported is timidity. One and the same Dharma, simply medicine given according to the illness.

18. If all are assured, why are the two vehicles rebuked and the realisation not permitted—to take the realisation midway is to relinquish the Buddha path and not deliver beings. The third question follows on its heels: 「若菩薩皆畢定，佛何以故種種呵二乘，不聽菩薩取二乘證？」 tr. "If bodhisattvas are all assured, why does the Buddha rebuke the two vehicles in all kinds of ways, and not permit bodhisattvas to take the realisation of the two vehicles?" The treatise-author's answer does not speak from stages but from consequences: those who seek the Buddha path ought to know the nature of dharmas pervasively, yet this person, 「畏老、病、死故，於法性少分取證，便自止息，捨佛道、不度眾生」 tr. "because he fears old age, sickness, and death, takes a realisation of a small portion of the nature of dharmas and then stops of himself, relinquishes the Buddha path and does not deliver beings". Then he cites the words of rebuke of the buddhas and bodhisattvas: 「汝欲捨去，會不得離，得阿羅漢證時，不求諸菩薩深三昧，又不廣化眾生，是則迂迴，於佛道稽留。」 tr. "You wish to leave and go, yet in the end you will not be able to part from it; when you obtain the realisation of the arhat, you do not seek the deep samādhis of the bodhisattvas, nor do you widely transform beings—this is a roundabout way, a lingering on the Buddha path." The two verdicts are extremely precise—「會不得離」 tr. "in the end you will not be able to part from it" says that he wants to get away and in the end cannot get away; 「迂迴」 tr. "a roundabout way" and 「稽留」 tr. "lingering" say that it is not that he does not arrive, only that he goes the long way round and stops for long. So the rebuke is aimed at the long way round, not at his being unable to become a Buddha; on this point it does not conflict with 「皆畢定」 tr. "all are assured".

19. Since the body the arhat received in former lives is extinguished, where does he abide to make complete the Buddha path. The difficulty goes one layer further: 「阿羅漢先世因緣所受身必應當滅，住在何處而具足佛道？」 tr. "The body that the arhat received through the causes and conditions of his former lives must surely be extinguished; where then does he abide to make complete the Buddha path?" The treatise-author answers: 「得阿羅漢時，三界諸漏因緣盡，更不復生三界。有淨佛土，出於三界，乃至無煩惱之名，於是國土佛所，聞《法華經》，具足佛道。」 tr. "When one obtains arhatship, the causes and conditions of the outflows of the three realms are exhausted, and one is no longer born in the three realms. There are pure Buddha-lands, beyond the three realms, where even the name of the afflictions does not exist; in the presence of the Buddha of such a land he hears the Lotus Sūtra and makes complete the Buddha path." And he cites the text of the Lotus Sūtra as proof: 「有羅漢，若不聞《法華經》，自謂得滅度；我於餘國為說是事，汝皆當作佛。」 tr. "There are arhats who, if they do not hear the Lotus Sūtra, think of themselves that they have obtained passing into extinction; in another land I will speak this matter for them: you shall all become buddhas." Here only the place and what is heard are accounted for, and no further names are set up; what the treatise text does not have, this unit does not supply on its behalf.

20. Having received the Dharma-nature body, why is it still named a roundabout way and lingering. At once someone will ask: 「若阿羅漢往淨佛國土受法性身，如是應得疾作佛，何以言迂迴、稽留？」 tr. "If the arhat goes to the pure Buddha-land and receives the Dharma-nature body, then he ought to become a Buddha quickly; why is it said to be a roundabout way and a lingering?" The treatise-author answers without sparing him: 「是人著小乘因緣，捨眾生、捨佛道，又復虛言得道」 tr. "This person clung to the causes and conditions of the Small Vehicle, relinquished beings and relinquished the Buddha path, and moreover falsely said of himself that he had obtained the path", and therefore 「雖不受生死苦惱，於菩薩根鈍，不能疾成佛道，不如直往菩薩」 tr. "although he does not undergo the suffering and vexation of birth and death, yet in the bodhisattva's share his faculties are dull, and he cannot quickly accomplish the Buddha path; he is not equal to the bodhisattva who goes straight ahead". The three causes of the sickness all lie not in states but in the mind—clinging, relinquishing, false words. And the retribution is not undergoing suffering; it is 「根鈍」 tr. "dull faculties". So the verdict of 「迂迴」 tr. "a roundabout way" is from beginning to end spoken of speed, not of whether he can or cannot.

21. Among the five inconceivables the Buddha-dharma is foremost; that they become buddhas again only a Buddha can know, and one should not make idle discourse. At this point the treatise-author himself seals this topic: 「佛法於五不可思議中最第一，今言『漏盡阿羅漢還作佛』，唯佛能知。論議者正可論，其事不能測知，是故不應戲論。」 tr. "Among the five inconceivables the Buddha-dharma is the foremost; now it is said that ‘arhats whose outflows are exhausted become buddhas again’, and only a Buddha can know this. Those who discuss can only discuss; that matter cannot be fathomed, and for this reason one should not make idle discourse." The last sentence leaves a measure: 「若求得佛時，乃能了知；餘人可信而不可知。」 tr. "When one seeks and obtains Buddhahood, only then can one fully know it; other people can believe it, but cannot know it." This is the place in the whole unit where the tone is weightiest—it does not forbid thinking; it separates 「可論」 tr. "what can be discussed" from 「可知」 tr. "what can be known": discussion goes as far as the line of reasoning, and the particular matters further in are believed and accepted, not conjectured about. The items of the five inconceivables the treatise text does not list here, and this unit does not list them on its behalf.

22. The Buddha answers with a counter-question—the person of the eight and the other sages have no causes and conditions for falling into the evil destinies, and the bodhisattva is likewise. The treatise-author turns back to explain the fourth question of the sūtra text. First he states why Subhūti asked: he 「聞佛說無量本生因緣，或象、鹿、龜、鴿、孔雀、鸚鵡等受種種苦」 tr. "heard the Buddha tell of immeasurable causes and conditions of the jātakas, in which he was an elephant, a deer, a tortoise, a dove, a peacock, a parrot, and so on, and underwent all kinds of suffering", and so he asked 「若菩薩受如是等畜生身，云何言一切菩薩畢定」 tr. "if the bodhisattva takes the bodies of such animals as these, how can it be said that all bodhisattvas are assured", and he himself makes clear his ground—「畢定者，即是阿鞞跋致；阿鞞跋致者，不墮三惡趣」 tr. "what is called assured is precisely avaivartika; what is called avaivartika is one who does not fall into the three evil courses". Then he states the Buddha's way of answering: 「佛反問答：『於汝意云何？八人等聖人為墮三惡道不？』」 tr. "The Buddha answered with a counter-question: ‘What do you think? Do the person of the eight and the other sages fall into the three evil destinies or not?’" Subhūti reflected 「是諸聖人入聖道故，無墮三惡道因緣」 tr. "because these sages have entered the noble path, they have no causes and conditions for falling into the three evil destinies", and then answered 「不也」 tr. "they do not"; the Buddha accordingly concludes 「菩薩亦如是，墮三惡道因緣盡故，云何墮三惡道」 tr. "the bodhisattva is also like this: because the causes and conditions for falling into the three evil destinies are exhausted, how could he fall into the three evil destinies". The treatise-author further makes the two Chinese characters 「因緣」 tr. "causes and conditions" concrete: the causes and conditions for falling into the three evil destinies are 「所謂諸不善法」 tr. "precisely the unwholesome dharmas", while this bodhisattva, 「從初發心已來，修習布施、持戒等諸善法，斷諸殺生等十不善道」 tr. "from the first arousing of the mind onward, has cultivated and practised giving, keeping the precepts, and the other wholesome dharmas, and has cut off killing and the rest of the ten unwholesome paths". And he divides the unwholesome paths by weight: 「不善道有上、中、下：上者墮地獄，中者墮畜生，下者墮餓鬼。」 tr. "The unwholesome paths are of the upper, the middle, and the lower: the upper fall into the hells, the middle fall among animals, the lower fall among the hungry ghosts." The meaning of the three the treatise text itself gives, so they can be looked at item by item—unwholesomeness of the upper grade brings on the hells, of the middle grade animals, of the lower grade the hungry ghosts; this bodhisattva has 「三種已盡」 tr. "exhausted all three kinds", and adds to it 「深心悲念眾生」 tr. "with a deep mind thinks with compassion of beings", and so he does not fall.

23. Why he is not born in the heavens of long life—he does not cling to the flavour of dhyāna, and because he thinks of the dharmas of the realm of desire he retreats from the path of dhyāna. Since he is not born in the three evil destinies, a question at once follows: 「是菩薩福德多，何以不於長壽天中生？」 tr. "This bodhisattva has much merit—why is he not born in the heavens of long life?"—one with much merit ought by rights to be born among the gods, so why is he not born even among the gods? The treatise-author answers: this bodhisattva 「憐愍眾生，行六波羅蜜；雖能入禪波羅蜜，和合慈悲行，不著禪味」 tr. "pities beings and practises the six perfections; although he can enter the perfection of dhyāna, he practises it in accord with kindness and compassion and does not cling to the flavour of dhyāna", and so 「命欲終盡，念欲界法故退禪道」 tr. "when his life is about to end, because he thinks of the dharmas of the realm of desire, he retreats from the path of dhyāna". The reason is supplemented by one more layer: the heavens of long life are 「無苦惱、深著禪味，難可得度」 tr. "without suffering or vexation; they cling deeply to the flavour of dhyāna and are hard to deliver". The dividing line here is extremely clear—not being born in the heavens of long life is not that he cannot get there; it is that he will not dwell there; meditative concentration he has, he simply does not take its flavour. And the reason for not taking it is still the delivering of beings: the beings in that place are hard to deliver.

24. Why he is not born in a border land—he has pulled out the root of stinginess with the Dharma and always loves the middle way; the meaning of a border land. Next he answers not being born in a border land: 「以邊國障礙，不得修善法，故不生。」 tr. "Because a border land has obstructions and one cannot cultivate wholesome dharmas there, he is not born there." There are two reasons: one is that 「是菩薩拔出悋法根本」 tr. "this bodhisattva has pulled out the root of stinginess with the Dharma", while 「悋法因緣故，生邊國不知法處」 tr. "it is through the causes and conditions of stinginess with the Dharma that one is born in a border land, a place where the Dharma is not known"—the deed-cause of being born in a border land is precisely stinginess with the Dharma, and this bodhisattva has already pulled out its root. The other is that 「是菩薩常好中道、捨離二邊故，不生邊國」 tr. "because this bodhisattva always loves the middle way and relinquishes the two extremes, he is not born in a border land". After this the treatise-author himself gives the definition of the word 「邊國」 tr. "border land": 「邊國者，無三寶之名，不識七眾，但貴今世現事不貴福德道法，故名邊地，……」 tr. "What is called a border land is a place where there is no name of the Three Jewels, where the seven assemblies are not known, where only the present matters of this life are valued and merit and the dharma of the path are not valued; therefore it is named a border land; …" And at once he clears away a misunderstanding—「不但生邊國故名為邊地」 tr. "it is not only being born in a border country that is named a border land"; conversely, 「若識三寶，知罪福相續因緣，解諸法實相，是人雖生閻浮提外，不名為邊」 tr. "if one knows the Three Jewels, knows the causes and conditions by which sin and merit continue, and understands the real mark of all dharmas, then although this person is born outside Jambudvīpa, it is not named a border". So border and not border are judged by whether there is the Dharma or not, not by geography.

25. Why he is not born in a family of wrong views—life after life he himself practises right view and teaches others right view. He answers next not being born in a family of wrong views. The treatise-author first states its direct cause: this bodhisattva 「常樂為他說法，亦深愛善法故，得隨意善眾生共生，所謂為中國」 tr. "always delights in teaching the Dharma for others, and moreover deeply loves wholesome dharmas, and so is able, according to his wish, to receive birth together with good beings; this is what is called the Middle Country"; born within the Middle Country, he naturally 「不生邪見家」 tr. "is not born in a family of wrong views". Then he states why it is so: 「是菩薩世世常自行正見，亦教他正見，讚正見法，歡喜讚歎行正見者，……」 tr. "This bodhisattva, life after life, always himself practises right view, also teaches others right view, praises the dharma of right view, and joyfully praises those who practise right view; …" The four clauses are one string—practising oneself, teaching others, praising the dharma, praising the people; from oneself reaching to others, layer upon layer growing thicker. The reason the retribution is like this is not some separate arrangement; it is the manifestation of what he himself has practised life after life.

26. The distinction between the two kinds, the bodhisattva of great power and the bodhisattva who has newly aroused the mind. Here there is a very natural counter-objection: 「是菩薩大福德、智慧力，應生邊地、邪見家而教化之，何以畏而不生？」 tr. "This bodhisattva has the power of great merit and wisdom; he ought to be born in border lands and in families of wrong views and teach and transform them—why does he fear them and is not born there?"—since he has the power, he ought to go to the hard places to deliver people, so why does he on the contrary avoid them? The treatise-author's answer is to distinguish persons: 「菩薩有二種：一者、成就大力菩薩，二者、屬因緣新發心菩薩。」 tr. "Bodhisattvas are of two kinds: the first is the bodhisattva who has accomplished great power; the second is the bodhisattva who, depending on causes and conditions, has newly aroused the mind." The meaning of the two the treatise text itself gives—the great bodhisattva 「為眾生隨所應度受身，不避邊地、邪見」 tr. "for the sake of beings takes a body according to those who are to be delivered, and does not avoid border lands or wrong views"; the bodhisattva who has newly aroused the mind, 「若生是處，既不能度人，又自敗壞，是故不生」 tr. "if he is born in such places, can neither deliver people nor keep himself from being ruined; for this reason he is not born there". And it is closed with a simile: 「譬如真金在泥，終不敗壞；銅鐵則壞。」 tr. "It is like true gold in the mud, which in the end is not spoiled; copper and iron are spoiled." So avoiding or not avoiding is judged by whether one is equal to it oneself, not by whether one has kindness and compassion. That earlier it is said 「皆畢定」 tr. "all are assured" while here it is said that the one who has newly aroused the mind must avoid such places—the two teachings do not conflict either: assurance is a word about the end point, avoiding places is a matter of the road.

27. Among the sixty-two wrong views the view of no-doing is the heaviest. The treatise-author explains specifically why the sūtra text marks out 「無作見家」 tr. "a family of the view that nothing is to be done": 「邪見者，所謂無作見。雖六十二種皆是邪見，無作最重。」 tr. "What is called wrong view is precisely the view of no-doing. Although all sixty-two kinds are wrong views, that of no-doing is the heaviest." Why it is the heaviest the treatise text itself explains: 「無作言不應作功德、求涅槃。」 tr. "No-doing says that one should not make merit or seek nirvāṇa." And it compares other wrong views: 「若言天作、若言世界始來，雖是邪見，而不遮作福德。」 tr. "To say that things are made by a god, or to say that the world has been like this from its very beginning—although these are wrong views, they do not stop people from making merit." The dividing line thus becomes very clear—alike errors of view, some err yet are still willing to make merit, while some err so far that even making merit is abandoned. 「以無作大惡，故不生。」 tr. "Because no-doing is a great evil, he is not born there." The items of the sixty-two kinds the treatise text does not list here, and this unit does not list them on its behalf; all that needs to be known is this one judgement of weight.

28. The bodhisattva who has first aroused the mind does not practise the ten unwholesome paths with a deep mind; he is not born in the eight difficulties and always obtains the eight good places. The treatise-author returns to the weightiest sentence of the sūtra text to explain it: 「又初發心菩薩深惡心行十不善道，無有是處！」 tr. "Also, that a bodhisattva who has first aroused the mind should practise the ten unwholesome paths with a deeply evil mind—there is no such thing!" The reason is that 「是菩薩一心迴向，貴重阿耨多羅三藐三菩提，不貴世間法」 tr. "this bodhisattva dedicates with one mind, values anuttarā samyaksaṃbodhi, and does not prize worldly dharmas". Then he gives an extremely important measure: 「是人未離欲因緣故，雖起諸煩惱，終不深心作惡；雖加杖楚，終不奪命，不取他財令其失命。」 tr. "Because this person has not yet parted from desire, although he gives rise to the afflictions, in the end he does not do evil with a deep mind; although he inflicts beatings with staves, in the end he does not take a life, and does not take another's wealth so as to cause him to lose his life." It admits that he will still give rise to afflictions, and will even still raise his hand, but there is a bottom line he does not cross—not with a deep mind, not taking life. So 「無有是處」 tr. "there is no such thing" judges the deep mind; it does not judge that not a single thought arises in him. The last sentence sums it up: 「是菩薩斷一切不善法、修集一切善法故，不生八難處，常得八好處。」 tr. "Because this bodhisattva cuts off all unwholesome dharmas and cultivates and gathers all wholesome dharmas, he is not born in the eight places of difficulty, and always obtains the eight good places." The items of the eight difficulties and the eight good places the treatise text does not list, and this unit does not list them on its behalf.

29. The question of being a deer or a horse in the jātakas and the Buddha's answer; among animals he has kindness and pity toward enemies and thieves, which the two vehicles do not have. The treatise-author restates the question and answer of the sūtra text: 「須菩提問：『若菩薩有如是善根成就，云何本生因緣作鹿、馬等？』佛答：『菩薩實有福德善根成就，為利益眾生，故受畜生形，亦無畜生罪。』」 tr. "Subhūti asked: ‘If the bodhisattva has such roots of goodness accomplished, how is it that in the causes and conditions of the jātakas he was a deer, a horse, and the like?’ The Buddha answered: ‘The bodhisattva in truth has merit and roots of goodness accomplished; it is for the sake of benefiting beings that he takes the form of an animal, and he also has no sin of an animal.’" The last four Chinese characters are the verdict—he takes its form and has none of its sin. After this the treatise-author points to the causes and conditions the Buddha himself states: 「菩薩在畜生中慈愍怨賊，阿羅漢、辟支佛所無有。」 tr. "The bodhisattva, among animals, has kindness and pity toward enemies and thieves, which the arhat and the pratyekabuddha do not have." And he states the limit of the two vehicles quite plainly: 「阿羅漢、辟支佛，怨賊來害，雖不加報，不能愛念供養供給。」 tr. "When enemies and thieves come to do harm to the arhat or the pratyekabuddha, although they do not retaliate, they cannot love and cherish them, or make offerings to them and supply them." Not retaliating is already hard to do, and the bodhisattva goes one layer further—not only does he not retaliate, he also loves and cherishes, makes offerings, and supplies. The difference does not lie in whether one can hold back, but in where one goes after holding back.

30. The jātaka of the six-tusked white elephant—pulling out his tusks for the hunter, with the master of spells treating the ghost as a simile. The treatise-author cites a jātaka as proof, and this is the longest narrative in the whole unit. The bodhisattva was a six-tusked white elephant, and 「獵師以毒箭射胸」 tr. "a hunter shot him in the chest with a poisoned arrow", yet the bodhisattva-elephant's first act was to protect the hunter—「以鼻擁抱獵者，不令餘象得害」 tr. "he embraced the hunter with his trunk and did not let the other elephants harm him". Next he stopped the anger of the female elephant, and the words he spoke are the eye of the whole passage: 「汝為菩薩婦，何緣生惡心？獵師是煩惱罪，非人過也！我得阿耨多羅三藐三菩提，當滅除其煩惱罪；……」 tr. "You are the wife of a bodhisattva; for what reason do you give rise to an evil mind? The hunter is the sin of the afflictions, not the fault of the person! When I obtain anuttarā samyaksaṃbodhi, I shall extinguish the sin of his afflictions; …" He ties the sin to the afflictions and not to the person, and makes it clear with a simile: 「譬如鬼著人，呪師來但治鬼而不瞋人。」 tr. "Just as when a ghost possesses a person and the master of spells comes, he only treats the ghost and is not angry at the person." Then comes the asking and the giving: slowly he asks 「汝何以射我」 tr. "why did you shoot me", the answer is 「我須汝牙」 tr. "I need your tusks", and thereupon 「就石罅，拔牙與之，血肉俱出，不以為痛」 tr. "he went to a cleft in the rock, pulled out his tusks and gave them to him, blood and flesh both coming out, and did not take it as pain", and at the end he also 「供給糧食，示語道徑」 tr. "supplied him with provisions and showed and told him the way". The treatise-author's concluding words connect it back to the main topic: 「如是好心，云何受畜生身？當知是變化，度於眾生。」 tr. "With a good mind such as this, how could it be the taking of the body of an animal? You should know that this was transformation, for the sake of delivering beings."—testing the body by the mind: since the mind is like this, the body is surely not retribution.

31. Why he does not make a human body but makes the body of a beast to teach the Dharma. The last question of the unit: 「何以不作人身而為說法，而作此獸身？」 tr. "Why does he not make a human body and teach the Dharma for beings, but makes the body of a beast like this?" The treatise-author answers with two meanings. One is spoken from the side of those who are transformed: 「有時眾生見人身則不信受，見畜生身說法則生信樂，受其教化。」 tr. "There are times when beings see a human body and do not believe or accept, but seeing the body of an animal teaching the Dharma, they give rise to faith and delight, and accept his teaching and transformation." The other is spoken from the side of the one who transforms: 「菩薩欲具足大慈悲心，欲行其實事；眾生見之驚喜，皆得入道。」 tr. "The bodhisattva wishes to make complete the mind of great kindness and compassion, and wishes to carry out the real matter; beings, seeing it, are startled and delighted, and all are able to enter the path." The former is responding to capacity; the latter is his own practice—if kindness and compassion are to be made complete, he cannot speak only in the places where speaking comes easily. The unit closes with this, and fascicle ninety-three also ends here.

Do Not Misread

Do not read 「畢定」 tr. "assured" as having already arrived. The definition the treatise-author gives is 「畢定者，必當作佛」 tr. "the assured will surely become a Buddha"—the two Chinese characters 「必當」 tr. "will surely" point to a decision about the future, not to a stage at present. That the sūtra text counts even the bodhisattva who has first aroused intent among the assured is precisely speaking of the end point; if it is read as the person who has first aroused intent being at this moment at the same stage as the person in his last body, then the passage below, 「新發意菩薩若生是處，既不能度人，又自敗壞」 tr. "if the bodhisattva who has newly aroused the mind is born in such places, he can neither deliver people nor keep himself from being ruined", is left with nothing to rest on. Within one and the same unit it is said both that all are assured and that the one who has newly aroused the mind must avoid hard places; the two sentences do not conflict: one sentence speaks of the end point, one sentence speaks of the road.

Do not read 「二事皆實」 tr. "both matters are real" as equivocation. The ground the treatise-author gives is 「佛口所說無不實者」 tr. "what the Buddha's mouth speaks is never unreal", and he at once points out where the difference lies—for those who have first aroused the mind he says dharmas exist, for those long in training who cling to wholesome dharmas he says they are empty; for those who are slack and not firm he says that of those who obtain avaivartika there are one or two, for those whose great compassion is thin and whose love of their own body is heavy he says that all bodhisattvas are assured. Each of the two teachings has the people it addresses, each has the sickness it rescues. If it is read as ‘whatever is said is right’, then this layer of the capacity addressed is lost, and that is precisely the only criterion of this passage.

Do not read 「皆畢定」 tr. "all are assured" as not needing to make effort. In the very same passage of the sūtra text that says all are assured, the Buddha also says 「從初發意，應當學具足一切善根」 tr. "from the first arousing of intent he should train in making complete all roots of goodness", and 「無有善根不具足者」 tr. "there is not a single root of goodness that he does not make complete" is precisely the reason why assurance holds. Assurance is not a result issued in advance; it is that on that stretch of road the roots of goodness of necessity come to completeness. To take assurance as grounds for being able to dispense with cultivation and training is exactly to cancel its ground.

Do not read the rebuke of the two vehicles as the two vehicles being unable to become buddhas. What the treatise-author rebukes is 「於法性少分取證，便自止息，捨佛道、不度眾生」 tr. "taking a realisation of a small portion of the nature of dharmas and then stopping of oneself, relinquishing the Buddha path and not delivering beings", and the verdict is 「迂迴」 tr. "a roundabout way" and 「稽留」 tr. "lingering"—what is spoken of is going the long way round and stopping for long, not failing to arrive. In the very same passage it is plainly said that the arhat, in a pure Buddha-land, hears the Lotus Sūtra and 「具足佛道」 tr. "makes complete the Buddha path". So rebuke and assurance go together without contradicting each other: assurance speaks of its end, rebuke speaks of its course.

Do not read 「唯佛能知」 tr. "only a Buddha can know" as discussion not being permitted. The treatise-author's own words are 「論議者正可論，其事不能測知，是故不應戲論」 tr. "those who discuss can only discuss; that matter cannot be fathomed, and for this reason one should not make idle discourse", and he adds 「餘人可信而不可知」 tr. "other people can believe it, but cannot know it"—「可論」 tr. "what can be discussed" is permitted; what is forbidden is 「戲論」 tr. "idle discourse", that is, taking particular matters that cannot be fathomed and conjecturing about them to win the argument. The dividing line lies in this: the line of reasoning may be spoken to its end; the particular matters are, at this point, kept and not discussed.

Do not read the bodhisattva's taking an animal's body as undergoing evil retribution. The sūtra text sets up three similes in a row—the Buddha himself conjuring an animal's body, the arhat making a transformation body, the conjurer conjuring up elephants, horses, men, and women—and all of them come down on 「現」 tr. "manifesting" and not on 「受」 tr. "undergoing"; the verdict is 「現作種種身以示眾生故，以是身饒益一切，亦不受眾苦」 tr. "for the sake of manifesting all kinds of bodies for beings to see, with this body he enriches all, and he himself does not undergo the many sufferings", and the treatise-author too closes it with 「亦無畜生罪」 tr. "and he also has no sin of an animal" and 「當知是變化」 tr. "you should know that this was transformation". If it is read as the bodhisattva still paying off retribution, then the question 「善根為何所在」 tr. "where were his roots of goodness" is as good as unanswered.

Do not read not being born in the heavens of long life and not being born in a border land as being unable to be born there. The treatise-author says it plainly: he is not born in the heavens of long life because there they are 「無苦惱、深著禪味，難可得度」 tr. "without suffering or vexation; they cling deeply to the flavour of dhyāna and are hard to deliver"; meditative concentration he has from the first, he simply does not take its flavour; he is not born in a border land because he has already 「拔出悋法根本」 tr. "pulled out the root of stinginess with the Dharma", and moreover 「常好中道」 tr. "always loves the middle way". In both places it is that he will not, not that he cannot. More important still is that the definition of 「邊」 tr. "border" lies in the Dharma and not in the land—「若識三寶，知罪福相續因緣，解諸法實相，是人雖生閻浮提外，不名為邊」 tr. "if one knows the Three Jewels, knows the causes and conditions by which sin and merit continue, and understands the real mark of all dharmas, then although this person is born outside Jambudvīpa, it is not named a border".

Do not read 「終不深心作惡」 tr. "in the end he does not do evil with a deep mind" as having no afflictions at all. The treatise-author admits that 「是人未離欲因緣故，雖起諸煩惱」 tr. "because this person has not yet parted from desire, although he gives rise to the afflictions", and even admits 「雖加杖楚」 tr. "although he inflicts beatings with staves"; the bottom line kept is only two items—not doing evil with a deep mind, not taking a person's life. What the sūtra text calls 「無有是處」 tr. "there is no such thing" judges this one matter, practising the ten unwholesome paths with a deep mind; it does not judge that he has no more afflictions to arise. To raise the standard to having no afflictions at all would, on the contrary, lead readers to take their own afflictions as grounds for concluding that assurance has nothing to do with them.

Bearing on Practice

Fix the far term with 「必當作佛」 tr. "will surely become a Buddha", and fix the near term with 「應當學具足一切善根」 tr. "should train in making complete all roots of goodness". This unit hands both things to the reader at once: the end point is decided, the road must be walked. In daily effort these two sentences divide the work exactly—when the mind hesitates, ‘can I really do it or not’, use the first sentence; when the mind slackens, ‘I will become a Buddha in the end anyway’, use the second. Taking only one sentence will go astray.

Read teachings that seem opposed with the eye of ‘the capacity addressed’. The examples the treatise-author gives are entirely ready to hand: alike spoken by the Buddha, in one place it is said that dharmas are empty and without anything existent, in another that giving, keeping the precepts, and the rest exist; in one place it is said that of those who obtain avaivartika there are one or two, in another that all bodhisattvas are assured. On meeting words between scriptures that do not fit together, do not be in a hurry to judge which sentence is the definitive meaning, but ask: to what kind of person is this sentence spoken, and what sickness does it treat? What this unit demonstrates is precisely this way of reading.

Warn yourself with 「若一、若二」 tr. "one or two", support yourself with 「皆畢定」 tr. "all are assured"—and use each in the right place. The treatise-author divides the use of the two sentences very clearly: to the self that is slack and not firm, apply 「若一、若二」 tr. "one or two"; to the self that is timid and wants to take nirvāṇa early, apply 「皆畢定」 tr. "all are assured". Used the wrong way round, they become a disaster—when slack, taking 「皆畢定」 tr. "all are assured" to set the mind at ease; when timid, taking 「若一、若二」 tr. "one or two" to deepen one's self-belittling. Each time, before taking one up, first see clearly which sickness it is at the present moment.

Take 「迂迴、稽留」 tr. "a roundabout way, lingering" as the measuring rule for choosing the road. What the treatise-author rebukes is not a measure of realisation; it is 「少分取證，便自止息」 tr. "taking a realisation of a small portion and then stopping of oneself". The daily counterpart is: whenever there is a little benefit, a little peace and stability, one wants to stop there. At such times these four Chinese characters can be used to question oneself—is this step going forward, or turning round on the spot? Stopping is not falling, but stopping is going the long way round.

Turn resentment with 「煩惱罪，非人過也」 tr. "the sin of the afflictions, not the fault of the person". The passage of the six-tusked white elephant gives the most concrete method of all: after being struck by the arrow, the bodhisattva-elephant's first act is to protect the person who shot him, and his first words tie the sin to the afflictions and not to the person, with the master of spells treating the ghost and not being angry at the person as a simile. When harmed by someone in daily life, this turn is extremely usable—it is not forcibly suppressing anger; it is changing what is faced: if what is hated is that person, there is no way to resolve it; if what is faced is the afflictions, then there is naturally something that can be done.

Do not take not retaliating as enough; go one layer further, to loving and cherishing. The treatise-author deliberately marks out the dividing line between the two vehicles and the bodhisattva: 「怨賊來害，雖不加報，不能愛念供養供給。」 tr. "When enemies and thieves come to do harm, although they do not retaliate, they cannot love and cherish them, or make offerings to them and supply them." Not retaliating is already not easy, yet this passage counts it as not yet enough. This gives a very practical sequence: first manage not to retaliate, then see whether one can ask after the person, whether one can give. With the sequence clear, one will not, through being unable to take the later step, also give up the earlier one.

Examine yourself with the two Chinese characters ‘deep mind’, not with ‘whether there are afflictions or not’. The treatise-author admits that the bodhisattva who has first aroused the mind still gives rise to afflictions and may still inflict beatings with staves, and only holds the two lines, not doing evil with a deep mind and not taking life. In daily self-reflection, rather than asking ‘how many times did afflictions arise in me today’, it is better to ask ‘did I set my mind on doing it’. The former way of asking easily leads to discouragement; only the latter way of asking is the boundary this passage sets up.

Do not take the flavour of dhyāna; take the delivering of beings. The treatise-author says the bodhisattva, 「雖能入禪波羅蜜，和合慈悲行，不著禪味」 tr. "although he can enter the perfection of dhyāna, practises it in accord with kindness and compassion and does not cling to the flavour of dhyāna", and so is not born in the heavens of long life. When one's effort has obtained a little and one feels at ease, this sentence can be taken up to calibrate: is the ease obtained for resting in, or for using? The criterion this unit gives is only one—whether the beings of that place can be delivered.

Settle border and not border for yourself by ‘knowing the Three Jewels, knowing sin and merit, understanding the real mark’. The treatise-author draws the definition of 「邊地」 tr. "border land" extremely broadly—it lies not inside or outside Jambudvīpa, but in whether there is the Dharma. This gives a criterion that sets people very much at ease: whether the place one lives is lively, whether it has a great place of practice, is not the joint; whether one can know the Three Jewels, know the continuity of sin and merit, understand the real mark of all dharmas—that is. Conversely, if these three matters are all empty, every place is a border land.

Further Resonances

The First Part is one sūtra segment and one treatise segment. The sūtra text sets up the skeleton of this chapter with four questions—is he assured or unassured, where is he assured, who is assured, does the assured one fall into the evil destinies—and takes the passage on taking an animal's body as its difficulty, resolving it with the three similes of the Buddha's own conjuring, the arhat's transformation, and the conjurer's conjuring, and closes with Subhūti praising the power of great skilful means. The treatise-author first answers the three meanings of 「何以更問」 tr. "why ask again", next takes up the sūtra's three questions and three answers and brings out the definition 「畢定者，必當作佛」 tr. "the assured will surely become a Buddha", then judges the differing teachings of the two sūtras with 「二事皆實」 tr. "both matters are real", judges the intent of the rebuke of the two vehicles with 「迂迴、稽留」 tr. "a roundabout way, lingering", seals the discussion of arhats becoming buddhas again with 「唯佛能知」 tr. "only a Buddha can know", and at the end explains item by item why he does not fall into the evil destinies, is not born in the heavens of long life, is not born in a border land, is not born in a family of wrong views, closing with the jātaka of the six-tusked white elephant and the two meanings of teaching the Dharma in a beast's body. The centre of gravity of the whole section can be gathered into one sentence: assurance speaks of the end point being decided, not of having arrived at this moment.

Jizang's Commentary on the Larger Sūtra has a dedicated section on this chapter, and it matches the range of sūtra and treatise of this unit. His sectional division first fixes the position of this chapter within the whole sūtra: 「此下第二大段，明自他行成位階不退。就中為二：第一明自德成；第二明化他德成。」 tr. "From here on is the second great section, making clear that, the practice for self and others being accomplished, the stages do not retreat. Within it there are two: first, making clear the accomplishment of one's own virtue; second, making clear the accomplishment of the virtue of transforming others." Then within the first he opens two again—「第一所但大乘畢定作佛；第二明畢定菩薩所於果報永無八難」 tr. "first, that only in the Great Vehicle is one assured of becoming a Buddha; second, making clear that the assured bodhisattva, in his retribution, forever has none of the eight difficulties"—which corresponds exactly to the first half of this unit (the four questions of assurance) and the latter half (not falling into the evil destinies, not being born in the places of the eight difficulties). His explanation of why Subhūti asks says: 「上章明菩薩大行成就兼濟無方，應形同迹真偽難明，未達之源懷疑不決……故釋其所疑而致問。」 tr. "The section above made clear that the bodhisattva's great practice is accomplished and that he aids others together with himself without limit; responding in form and sharing the same traces, the true and the false are hard to make clear, and those who have not reached the source harbour doubts and cannot decide … therefore, to resolve what they doubt, he raises the question."

On the treatise-author's three answers to 「何以更問」 tr. "why ask again", Jizang records them entry by entry, corresponding to the treatise text of this unit: 「論生起三義：一者上不退品已明不退，今更以異門明菩薩相，故云畢定也。」 tr. "The treatise gives three meanings for how this arises: first, the Non-retreat chapter above has already made non-retreat clear; now, through a different gate of approach, the marks of the bodhisattva are made clear again, and therefore it speaks of being assured." 「二者佛三達洞照已知其畢定，但於餘人智身未及，故云不畢定耳。」 tr. "Second, the Buddha, with the three penetrations illuminating thoroughly, already knows that they are assured; it is only that the wisdom-body of other people does not reach it, and therefore it is said they are unassured." 「三者須菩提聞法華經所作功德皆作佛，又聞上不退品有退不退，是故生疑為畢竟為不畢竟空也。」 tr. "Third, Subhūti heard in the Lotus Sūtra that whatever merit is done all become buddhas, and also heard that in the Non-retreat chapter above there is retreat and non-retreat; therefore doubt arose as to whether it is ultimately empty or not ultimately empty." The order of the three meanings agrees with the treatise text. On the Buddha's answer he says: 「佛答皆是畢定者，明一切不退無有退也。」 tr. "The Buddha's answer that all are assured makes clear that all are non-retreating and there is no retreat."

On the sūtra text's three questions and three answers, Jizang also attaches his comment question by question: 「次問三乘中何乘畢定者，須菩提入涅槃為畢定者，問三乘何乘畢定？佛答大乘中畢定也。」 tr. "Next, the question in which of the three vehicles one is assured: Subhūti took entering nirvāṇa as being assured, and so asks in which of the three vehicles one is assured. The Buddha answers that one is assured in the Great Vehicle." 「第三問大乘中初心中後心故問何心人畢定？佛答上中下三人皆畢定也。」 tr. "The third question: within the Great Vehicle there are the first mind, the middle mind, and the last mind, and so he asks the person of which mind is assured. The Buddha answers that the upper, the middle, and the lower, all three persons, are assured." His judgement of 「初心中後心」 tr. "the first mind, the middle mind, and the last mind" as the items of three persons points to the same thing as the treatise text's division 「求佛道者，有上、中、下」 tr. "among those who seek the Buddha path there are the upper, the middle, and the lower", though the wording is not borrowed from it. Jizang also poses a question of his own, asking why the Buddha says that all bodhisattvas do not retreat, and his answer brings out a separate meaning: 「此即證一切眾生皆有佛性，無有二乘性，無退詺也。」 tr. "This proves that all beings have the Buddha-nature, that there is no nature of the two vehicles, and that there is no name of retreat." This explanation takes the Buddha-nature as its ground, while the treatise-author takes 「佛心中一切眾生、一切法皆畢定」 tr. "in the Buddha's mind all beings and all dharmas are assured" as his ground; each of the two forms a teaching of its own, recorded without judgement.

On reconciling the preceding chapter's 「若一若二」 tr. "one or two" with this chapter's 「皆畢定」 tr. "all are assured", Jizang also has his explanation: 「此亦如大經，以遲得故名退也，終無有退。」 tr. "This too is as in the Great Sūtra: it is because of obtaining late that it is named retreat; in the end there is no retreat." Explaining retreat by obtaining late, and the treatise-author's explaining the two teachings by the capacity addressed, show between them the full and the brief. In stating the treatise's intent he says that the teaching of retreat is set up for those 「為人增惡小乘，不求小乘欲求大乘，而於大乘後生懈怠」 tr. "who loathe the Small Vehicle all the more, who do not seek the Small Vehicle but wish to seek the Great Vehicle, and yet afterwards become slack in the Great Vehicle", and 「為此人說：汝若能取小乘，則宜取之；若不能取大乘，宜退取小。為此人故說退也」 tr. "for this person it is said: ‘If you are able to take the Small Vehicle, then you had better take it; if you cannot take the Great Vehicle, you had better retreat and take the small.’ It is for the sake of this person that retreat is spoken of". He also records the capacity on the other side: 「又有人堪任得佛，而大悲亦得，云菩提難得，多有退者，不如早取涅槃。」 tr. "Again, there are people who are fit to obtain Buddhahood, and great compassion too they obtain; it is said that awakening is hard to obtain and that many retreat, and so it is better to take nirvāṇa early."—which points to the same thing as the passage of the treatise text 「有人堪任得佛而大悲心薄、自愛身重」 tr. "there are people who are fit to obtain Buddhahood, yet whose mind of great compassion is thin and whose love of their own body is heavy".

On the objection about rebuking the two vehicles, Jizang's question and answer run parallel to the treatise text: 「問：若此文云菩薩皆不退，何故呵二乘不許言取？」 tr. "Question: if this text says that bodhisattvas all do not retreat, why does it rebuke the two vehicles and not permit them to be taken?" His answer says: 「菩薩欲退作二乘，會不得離，汝從目迂迴，於佛道稽留也，是故呵之。」 tr. "The bodhisattva wishes to retreat and become one of the two vehicles, yet in the end cannot part from it; you thereby take a roundabout way and linger on the Buddha path—therefore he is rebuked." On the objection about where the arhat abides, his answer says: 「生於三界淨土，此中無煩惱之名，於中發心修行作佛也。」 tr. "He is born in a pure land of the three realms; in it there is no name of the afflictions, and within it he arouses the mind, cultivates practice, and becomes a Buddha." On the objection about why, having received the Dharma-nature body, it is still named a roundabout way, his answer says: 「此人著小，捨眾生及佛道，又虗言得道，是故相鈍。」 tr. "This person clings to the small, relinquishes beings and the Buddha path, and moreover falsely says he has obtained the path; therefore his marks are dull." The order of the three objections and three answers is entirely the same as the treatise text. At the end, at the sentence 「唯佛能知」 tr. "only a Buddha can know", Jizang too stops along with the treatise-author: 「論云二乘作此，唯佛能知，不敢釋也。」 tr. "The treatise says that the two vehicles' becoming this only a Buddha can know; I do not dare to explain it."

On the latter half of this unit, Jizang judges its section thus: 「隨惡道中生者，第二、明畢定菩薩不生八難。前是得果，今是難果也。先問，次答。」 tr. "As to falling and being born within the evil destinies: second, it makes clear that the assured bodhisattva is not born in the eight difficulties. The former is the fruit obtained; now it is the fruit of difficulty. First the question, then the answer." And he states why Subhūti raised the question: 「以上言初意菩薩只畢定時，橫謂此菩薩未勉惡道，是以致問也。」 tr. "Because above it was said that the bodhisattva of first intent is already assured, he wrongly supposed that this bodhisattva had not yet escaped the evil destinies, and so raised the question." On the item of the view of no-doing, his explanation and the treatise text throw light on each other: 「惡邪見家六十二見皆名耶見也。無作見家者，無作見亦是耶見，但無作見最重，不作一切善以求涅槃名無作，是故別說也。」 tr. "As for ‘a family of evil wrong views’, the sixty-two wrong views are all named wrong views. As for ‘a family of the view that nothing is to be done’, the view of no-doing is also a wrong view, but the view of no-doing is the heaviest; not doing any good in order to seek nirvāṇa is named no-doing, and therefore it is spoken of separately." Explaining no-doing by 「不作一切善以求涅槃」 tr. "not doing any good in order to seek nirvāṇa" has the same meaning as the treatise-author's 「無作言不應作功德、求涅槃」 tr. "no-doing says that one should not make merit or seek nirvāṇa", though the wording differs; the two are seen side by side.

The extant text of Huiying's Commentary stops, in its fascicles, far before this chapter, and has no commentary on this chapter that can be examined; here the lack is marked according to the facts, and it is not filled with general remarks on 「畢定」 tr. "assurance" from elsewhere.

The two Tiantai masters also cite this unit, and this too is recorded. Zhiyi's Profound Meaning of the Lotus, discussing the order in time of the teaching of the Prajñā and the Lotus, directly cites the treatise-author's question in this unit as evidence: 「《釋論》云：須菩提何故更問菩薩畢定不畢定？答云：須菩提於《法華》中，聞諸菩薩受記作佛，今於《般若》中，更問畢定不畢定。當知《法華》之後，更明般若也。」 tr. "The Expository Treatise says: Why does Subhūti ask again whether the bodhisattva is assured or unassured? The answer says: in the Lotus, Subhūti heard that the bodhisattvas receive the prediction of becoming buddhas; now, in the Prajñā, he asks again whether they are assured or unassured. It should be known that after the Lotus, prajñā is made clear again." What he takes is precisely the passage of this unit's Treatise ①, 「復次，須菩提聞《法華經》中說」 tr. "Further, Subhūti heard it said in the Lotus Sūtra"; but that passage of the treatise-author explains why Subhūti came to doubt, while Zhiyi takes it to fix the order of the two sūtras—the judgement of an ancient master, recorded without judgement. Zhanran's Annotations on the Profound Meaning of the Lotus, explaining this entry of the Profound Meaning, cites the sūtra text of this unit word for word, first saying 「《大論》九十三先舉經云」 tr. "fascicle ninety-three of the Great Treatise first cites the sūtra, saying", and below this citing 「須菩提白佛言：世尊！菩薩摩訶薩為畢定，為不畢定？佛告須菩提：畢定，非不畢定。」 tr. "Subhūti addressed the Buddha: World-Honored One! Is the bodhisattva-mahāsattva assured, or is he unassured? The Buddha told Subhūti: He is assured, not unassured." on to 「佛言：初心及跋致，皆悉畢定。」 tr. "The Buddha said: The first mind and the avaivartika are all without exception assured.", which are precisely the four questions at the opening of this unit. But his citation is an abridged citation and not wholly word for word—this treatise's 「非聲聞、辟支佛道中畢定」 tr. "not assured in the path of the śrāvaka or the pratyekabuddha" is abridged as 「非二乘道中」 tr. "not in the path of the two vehicles", and this treatise's 「初發意菩薩亦畢定，阿鞞跋致菩薩亦畢定，最後身菩薩亦畢定」 tr. "the bodhisattva who has first aroused intent is also assured, the avaivartika bodhisattva is also assured, the bodhisattva in his last body is also assured" is combined as 「初心及跋致，皆悉畢定」 tr. "the first mind and the avaivartika are all without exception assured"—the differences of abridged citation are recorded as they are, and are not taken as a variant edition.

As for such topics as the three dharmas—the one who clings, the dharma clung to, and the place of clinging—being unfindable, the marks of all dharmas all being empty and neither entering nor not entering prajñā, giving rise to the perfection of the supernormal powers by the power of the skilful means of prajñā, teaching the Dharma according to the faculties and capacities of beings, and awakening being obtained only when the causes and conditions are complete—the Last Part of this chapter unfolds them in continuation of this, and they are not anticipated here.