大智度論 涅槃如化品Dazhidulun — Mahāprajñāpāramitā-upadeśa · Nirvāṇa Is Like a Conjuration

I. Structural Placement

Within the sequence in which the Mahāprajñāpāramitā-upadeśa comments on the Larger Sūtra, this chapter belongs to the section of the "Commentary on the Remaining Chapters"; it lies wholly within Fascicle 96, as a single unit. In its form it is the opposite of the ‘placed within the fascicle · no fascicle title · no author's or translator's signature’ of Chapter 62, "Training Alike", and of the same type as the ‘chapter title is the fascicle title’ of Chapter 77, "The Six Similes": this chapter's title is precisely the fascicle-head title of Fascicle 96—the chapter title 「大智度論釋涅槃如化品第八十七」 tr. "Mahāprajñāpāramitā-upadeśa, Commentary on the Chapter Nirvāṇa Is Like a Conjuration, the Eighty-seventh"〔T25 0728b18〕 opens the fascicle at its head, and below the title is attached the interlinear note 「卷第九十六」 tr. "Fascicle Ninety-six"〔T25 0728b19〕; above it, at〔T25 0728b15〕, stands only the fascicle-end title of Fascicle 95, 「大智度論卷第九十五」 tr. "Fascicle 95 of the Mahāprajñāpāramitā-upadeśa ends here." (belonging to the range of the preceding chapter, "Equality"). The author's signature 「龍樹菩薩造」 tr. "Composed by the Bodhisattva Nāgārjuna"〔T25 0728b21〕 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 0728b22〕 are both present.

The body of the chapter ends with the sentence 「初自無故，不應恐怖，但為除顛倒耳。」 tr. "Because from the first they are non-existent of themselves, one should not be afraid; it is only in order to remove inversion."〔T25 0731a05〕, running on to〔T25 0731a06〕, and the title of the next chapter, 「大智度論釋薩陀波崙品第八十八」 tr. "Mahāprajñāpāramitā-upadeśa, Commentary on the Chapter on Sadāprarudita, the Eighty-eighth"〔T25 0731a07〕, follows straight after it. In the base text Fascicle 96 is not yet finished where this chapter ends—this section, locating it character by character, finds its fascicle-end title at〔T25 0733c21〕; that is, Fascicle 96 still holds the first half of the next chapter, "Sadāprarudita", which matches what the three texts of the Song, Yuan, and Palace record among the four variant readings noted on this chapter's title, 「訖八十八品上」 tr. "up to the first part of the eighty-eighth chapter" (see Section IV). Hence this chapter is of the type tied to the fascicle's head · not tied to the fascicle's end. Only the Ishiyama text has here another set of fascicle numbers of its own (see Sections IV and VIII).

The whole chapter has three thousand five hundred and forty-seven pure Chinese characters (a mechanically recounted value), a short chapter within the "Commentary on the Remaining Chapters". The structure within the chapter is one 【經】 and one 【論】, a single unit: 【經】〔T25 0728b23〕 and 【論】〔T25 0729a10〕. Whether each of the two structural markers is present has a collation note, and the two notes have the same wording—the three texts of the Song, Palace, and Shōgozō lack both of these markers (entries two and twelve of the ledger below). Whether a marker is present belongs to the layer of the base text's transmission, and the structural count still follows the base text's labels.

Counting by the anchor of each passage, the whole chapter has one hundred and six passages: three structural rows (the chapter title〔T25 0728b18〕 · the author's signature〔T25 0728b21〕 · the translator's signature〔T25 0728b22〕), two rows of structural markers (【經】【論】), and twenty-two rows of the bare labels 「問曰：」 tr. "Question:" and 「答曰：」 tr. "Answer:"; the remaining seventy-nine passages are passages of doctrinal main text, and the item-by-item count on which this section rests is precisely these seventy-nine passages, with no selective treatment and nothing skipped.

The number of questions and answers and the structure of speakers: Sūtra ① is from beginning to end a back-and-forth between Subhūti and the Buddha, with no third person taking a seat. It opens with Subhūti's question, 「須菩提白佛言」 tr. "Subhūti said to the Buddha"〔T25 0728b23〕, and ends with the Buddha's counter-question, 「諸法本有今無耶？」 tr. "Did dharmas exist from the first and now not exist?"〔T25 0729a08〕. Within the range of this chapter, 「須菩提白佛言」 tr. "Subhūti said to the Buddha" is seen five times (〔T25 0728b23〕〔T25 0728c12〕〔T25 0728c22〕〔T25 0729a07〕〔T25 0729c07〕, the last of them in the treatise section, belonging to the narrative form in which the treatise-author re-quotes the sūtra text), 「佛告須菩提」 tr. "the Buddha told Subhūti" five times (〔T25 0728b26〕〔T25 0728c17〕〔T25 0728c24〕〔T25 0729a02〕〔T25 0729a08〕), and 「須菩提言」 tr. "Subhūti said" four times (〔T25 0728c03〕〔T25 0728c06〕〔T25 0728c25〕〔T25 0728c27〕), all obtained by this section by locating each one in the stream of Chinese characters. The changes of speaker in the sūtra section number seventeen rounds in all; sixteen of them can be judged by the explicit wording 「白佛言」 tr. "said to the Buddha", 「言」 tr. "said", or 「告須菩提」 tr. "told Subhūti"; only at〔T25 0728c28〕 is there no marker of a new speaker—its text reads 「世尊！如佛自說……」 tr. "World-Honored One! As the Buddha himself has said …", turned toward the Buddha with the vocative 「世尊」 tr. "World-Honored One" and in the manner of a difficulty raised, while the sentence before it,〔T25 0728c27〕 「佛言：『無誑相涅槃，是法非變化。』」 tr. "The Buddha said: ‘Nirvāṇa with the mark of non-deception: this dharma is not transformation.’", is the Buddha's answer; so this place is Subhūti continuing from it to ask further. Recorded separately as it is, with no further doubt left hanging.

Treatise ① has no marker opening the treatise (no 「釋曰：」 tr. "The explanation says:"), but opens directly with 「問曰：」 tr. "Question:"〔T25 0729a10〕, on the same line as the 【論】 marker. The questions and answers form eleven pairs; this section, recounting independently character by character, obtained 「問曰：」 tr. "Question:" eleven times and 「答曰：」 tr. "Answer:" eleven times, their loci paired as follows:〔T25 0729a10〕 /〔T25 0729a12〕,〔T25 0729b07〕 /〔T25 0729b08〕,〔T25 0729b15〕 /〔T25 0729b16〕,〔T25 0729b27〕 /〔T25 0729b28〕,〔T25 0729c14〕 /〔T25 0729c16〕,〔T25 0730a05〕 /〔T25 0730a06〕,〔T25 0730a12〕 /〔T25 0730a14〕,〔T25 0730a26〕 (question and answer at the same locus · following each other within the same sentence),〔T25 0730b04〕 /〔T25 0730b05〕,〔T25 0730c05〕 /〔T25 0730c07〕,〔T25 0730c08〕 /〔T25 0730c09〕.

The treatise section has in addition two kinds of sentence-form that are not question and answer, recorded separately by this section. First, the form 「有人言」 tr. "someone says" is seen three times in this chapter—at〔T25 0729b10〕 it reads 「或有人言」 tr. "or someone says", at〔T25 0730a09〕 「復有人言」 tr. "again someone says", and at〔T25 0730a10〕 「有人言」 tr. "someone says"; all three places are citations of divergent views set side by side, and are not counted among the pairs of question and answer. Second, the form 「復次」 tr. "again" is seen twice—〔T25 0730b06〕 「復次，有二種業」 tr. "Again, there are two kinds of deeds" and〔T25 0730c18〕 「復次，有二道」 tr. "Again, there are two paths", both supplementing the meaning and not question and answer. Further, the treatise section has a great deal of the narrative form 「須菩提復問」 tr. "Subhūti asks again" (three times ·〔T25 0729a20〕〔T25 0730b10〕〔T25 0730c21〕) and 「佛答」 tr. "the Buddha answers" (eight times ·〔T25 0729a23〕〔T25 0729a26〕〔T25 0729b13〕〔T25 0729c12〕〔T25 0730b14〕〔T25 0730b20〕〔T25 0730c02〕〔T25 0730c27〕)—this is the treatise-author re-quoting the questions and answers of the sūtra text in order to unfold the explanation; it belongs to the treatise-author and is not an independent sūtra passage of the sūtra text itself, and it lies on a different layer from the questions and answers of the sūtra section; recorded separately as it is.

II. Terms Examined

Nirvāṇa is like a conjuration. The general name of this chapter. The counts of occurrence recorded in this section for each term are all counted on the main text of the base text—the wording of the collation notes is not counted, nor is the chapter name repeated in the general table of contents at the head of the fascicle (likewise below). And these four Chinese characters are seen twice in the main text of this treatise—the first is the chapter title 「大智度論釋涅槃如化品第八十七」 tr. "Mahāprajñāpāramitā-upadeśa, Commentary on the Chapter Nirvāṇa Is Like a Conjuration, the Eighty-seventh"〔T25 0728b18〕 itself, the second a sentence before the close of the treatise section: 「為斷是著故，說涅槃如化。」 tr. "In order to sever this clinging it is said that nirvāṇa is like a conjuration."〔T25 0730c16〕. That is, apart from the chapter title, only at this one place, in the treatise section, does the whole treatise itself bring out the general name, and its context is precisely where the treatise-author explains why the Buddha has the two sayings 「涅槃如化」 tr. "nirvāṇa is like a conjuration" and 「涅槃非如化」 tr. "nirvāṇa is not like a conjuration"; recorded separately as it is. The sūtra section from beginning to end does not bring out these four characters joined together; what it discusses it speaks of separately as 「如化」 tr. "like a conjuration" and 「非變化」 tr. "not transformation".

Like a conjuration · not like a conjuration. The backbone of this chapter. 「如化」 tr. "Like a conjuration" is seen twenty-nine times in this chapter and one hundred and fourteen times in the whole treatise; while 「不如化」 tr. "not like a conjuration" is seen eight times in the whole treatise, and all eight in this chapter (〔T25 0729a07〕〔T25 0730a27〕〔T25 0730b18〕〔T25 0730b19〕〔T25 0730b28〕〔T25 0730c02〕〔T25 0730c04〕〔T25 0730c08〕)—this name in negative form belongs to this chapter alone, and the doctrinal position of the chapter shows in the very count: everywhere the whole treatise says that dharmas are like a conjuration, while the question ‘what is not like a conjuration’ is set up only in this chapter.

Nirvāṇa with the mark of non-deception. The name of what the Buddha answers to be 「不生不滅非變化」 tr. "unarisen and unceasing and not transformation", seen three times in the whole treatise, and all three in this chapter: the definition in the sūtra section, 「無誑相涅槃，是法非變化。」 tr. "Nirvāṇa with the mark of non-deception: this dharma is not transformation."〔T25 0728c27〕; the re-quotation in the treatise section, 「所謂無誑相涅槃」 tr. "namely, nirvāṇa with the mark of non-deception"〔T25 0730b21〕; and Subhūti's further difficulty, 「今何以於生滅法中別說無誑相涅槃不如化」 tr. "why now, among the dharmas that arise and cease, do you separately say that nirvāṇa with the mark of non-deception is not like a conjuration"〔T25 0730c01〕. The character 「誑」 tr. "deceive" is the pivot of this name—where the treatise-author elsewhere explains why transformation is transformation, he uses precisely this character: 「本無今有、今有後無，誑惑人心故。」 tr. "Because from the first non-existent they now exist, and now existent they afterwards do not exist, they deceive and delude people's minds."〔T25 0730b15〕; since nirvāṇa is without arising and without ceasing, there is nothing to deceive with, and so it is called the mark of non-deception. The sūtra explained at the same position reads 「不誑相涅槃」 tr. "nirvāṇa with the mark of not deceiving" (see Section IV); the difference between the two sides lies in the one character, 「無」 tr. "without" against 「不」 tr. "not".

Empty because of the emptiness of emptiness. The words in which the sūtra section explains that the two things, emptiness and conjuration, cannot be discriminated, seen four times in the whole treatise, and all four in this chapter (〔T25 0728c08〕〔T25 0729b27〕〔T25 0729b28〕〔T25 0729c02〕): the sūtra brings it out first—「是空及化人二事不合不散，以空空故空，不應分別是空、是化。」 tr. "These two things, emptiness and the conjured person, are neither joined nor dispersed; because of the emptiness of emptiness they are empty, and one should not discriminate: this is emptiness, this is conjuration."〔T25 0728c07〕; the treatise-author at once sets up a question and answer on it〔T25 0729b27〕, answering himself: 「為破十八事實故有十八空，破眾生心中變化空法故用空空。」 tr. "To refute the eighteen matters as real there are the eighteen emptinesses; to refute the dharma of transformation and emptiness in the minds of beings one uses the emptiness of emptiness."〔T25 0729b28〕. 「十八空」 tr. "The eighteen emptinesses" is seen only this once in this chapter (ninety-nine times in the whole treatise); its use lies in making clear that what 「空空」 tr. "the emptiness of emptiness" counteracts is the mind that ‘grasps emptiness as real’, not that there is some further emptiness.

The emptiness of beings · the emptiness of dharmas. The treatise section, explaining why the Buddha first refutes the mark of self and afterwards refutes the mark of dharmas, marks each by name. 「是名『眾生空』」 tr. "this is called ‘the emptiness of beings’"〔T25 0729a29〕 and 「是名法空。」 tr. "This is called the emptiness of dharmas."〔T25 0729b07〕 come out set over against each other; why the two must be distinguished, the treatise-author grounds on the division of beings' diseases into two kinds: 「眾生有二種：一者、愛多，二者、見多。」 tr. "Beings are of two kinds: first, those in whom craving predominates; second, those in whom views predominate."〔T25 0729b01〕—those in whom craving predominates, on obtaining the dharma of non-self, at once give rise to weariness and parting; those in whom views predominate, although they know non-self, still engage in idle discourse about permanence and impermanence over form and the other dharmas, and so next he speaks of the emptiness of dharmas. 「眾生空」 tr. "The emptiness of beings" is seen three times in this chapter (〔T25 0729a29〕〔T25 0729b10〕〔T25 0729b14〕), 「法空」 tr. "the emptiness of dharmas" ten times in this chapter. The words of his general answer are 「以無所得畢竟空故，遠離一切相。」 tr. "By the ultimate emptiness of nothing to be attained, far from all marks."〔T25 0729b13〕—the six Chinese characters 「無所得畢竟空」 tr. "the ultimate emptiness of nothing to be attained" are seen only this once in the whole treatise, here in this chapter.

Wrong recollection and imagining. The pivot of the treatise section's explanation of 「離一切法相」 tr. "far from the marks of all dharmas", seen only this once in the whole treatise: 「一切法不可盡壞，但離其邪憶想，一切法自離。」 tr. "All dharmas cannot be wholly destroyed; only leave their wrong recollection and imagining, and all dharmas are left of themselves."〔T25 0729b16〕. What is left is the recollection and imagining, not the dharmas—dharmas cannot be destroyed; what is destroyed is the mind that grasps dharmas; below it he proves this doubly, by supernormal power and by the Buddha's words (see Section III). That this expression stands alone fits the one meaning, ‘parting from marks without destroying dharmas’, belonging to this chapter alone; recorded as it is.

The six kinds of transformation. Listed in the sūtra section, the Buddha himself bringing out their heads: 「有聲聞法變化，有辟支佛法變化，有菩薩摩訶薩法變化，有諸佛法變化，有煩惱法變化，有業因緣法變化。」 tr. "There is the transformation of the śrāvaka dharmas, there is the transformation of the pratyekabuddha dharmas, there is the transformation of the bodhisattva-mahāsattva dharmas, there is the transformation of the dharmas of the buddhas, there is the transformation of the dharmas of the afflictions, there is the transformation of the dharmas of the causes and conditions of deeds."〔T25 0728c18〕. Of the six names, the three names 「聲聞法變化」 tr. "the transformation of the śrāvaka dharmas", 「煩惱法變化」 tr. "the transformation of the dharmas of the afflictions", and ‘the transformation of the dharmas of the causes and conditions of deeds’ are each seen only once in the whole treatise, in this chapter. When the treatise section explains them it changes to short names and explains each in turn: 「聲聞變化者，三十七品、四聖諦，乃至三解脫門。」 tr. "The śrāvaka transformation is the thirty-seven limbs of the path, the four noble truths, and so on up to the three gates of liberation."〔T25 0729c23〕, 「辟支佛變化者，所謂觀十二因緣等諸法。」 tr. "The pratyekabuddha transformation is, namely, contemplating the twelve links of causes and conditions and other such dharmas."〔T25 0729c28〕, 「菩薩變化者，所謂六波羅蜜，及二種神通：報得及修得。」 tr. "The bodhisattva transformation is, namely, the six perfections, together with the two kinds of supernormal power: obtained as retribution and obtained through cultivation."〔T25 0729c29〕, 「佛法變化者，三十二相、八十隨形好、十力、一切種智等無量佛法。」 tr. "The transformation of the dharmas of the Buddha is the thirty-two marks, the eighty minor marks, the ten powers, the omniscience of all kinds, and the other immeasurable dharmas of the Buddha."〔T25 0730a02〕, 「煩惱變化者，煩惱起種種業」 tr. "The transformation of the afflictions is the afflictions giving rise to all kinds of deeds"〔T25 0730a03〕, 「業變化者，生一切果報法，所謂六道」 tr. "The transformation of deeds is the dharma that gives birth to all retribution, namely the six destinies"〔T25 0730a19〕. Why they are all named transformation, the treatise-author also gives his own criterion: 「是法本無而今有、已有還無，是為聲聞變化。」 tr. "This dharma was from the first non-existent and now exists, and having existed returns to non-existence: this is the śrāvaka transformation."〔T25 0729c27〕—from the first non-existent and now existent, having existed returning to non-existence: this is the definition of transformation, and all six are judged by this one criterion. The counts of the short names: 「聲聞變化」 tr. "the śrāvaka transformation" four times in this chapter (five in the whole treatise), 「辟支佛變化」 tr. "the pratyekabuddha transformation" twice in this chapter (two in the whole treatise), 「菩薩變化」 tr. "the bodhisattva transformation" twice in this chapter (six in the whole treatise), 「佛變化」 tr. "the Buddha transformation" four times in this chapter (six in the whole treatise), 「煩惱變化」 tr. "the transformation of the afflictions" four times in this chapter (five in the whole treatise), 「業變化」 tr. "the transformation of deeds" five times in this chapter (six in the whole treatise).

The near cause · the far cause. A key item of gloss in the treatise-author's explanation of how the afflictions can give birth to wholesome deeds: 「有二種因：一者、近因，二者、遠因。」 tr. "There are two kinds of cause: first, the near cause; second, the far cause."〔T25 0730a06〕, settled at once by the facts of practice—「人有我心，為後身當常樂故修布施，是近因」 tr. "A person has the mind of self, and so that his later body shall be permanent and happy he cultivates giving: this is the near cause"〔T25 0730a07〕, 「為離欲界衰惱不淨身故修禪定，是為遠因。」 tr. "For the sake of leaving the decaying, vexed, and impure body of the desire realm he cultivates meditative concentration: this is the far cause."〔T25 0730a08〕. 「近因」 tr. "The near cause" is seen four times in the whole treatise and twice in this chapter, 「遠因」 tr. "the far cause" three times in the whole treatise and twice in this chapter—the two names coming out together as a pair occur in the whole treatise only at this one place in this chapter.

The mind of self. The pivotal term of the sixth question and answer of this chapter's treatise section, seen nine times in this chapter. Its meaning is not the loose 「我之心」 tr. "the mind that is mine"; the treatise-author himself sets its bounds: 「我心即是諸煩惱根本。」 tr. "The mind of self is the root of all the afflictions."〔T25 0730a12〕; and as to why it can arise together with wholesome deeds, he brings out a further meaning: 「我心無記柔軟故，是故煩惱心中生善業、無動業，無咎。」 tr. "Because the mind of self is indeterminate and soft, therefore within the afflicted mind wholesome deeds and unmoving deeds arise, and there is no fault."〔T25 0730a18〕—the mind of self belongs to the indeterminate and is soft, and so it is not like anger and the other hard afflictions that resist the good; this is a distinction brought out by this chapter alone. 「無動業」 tr. "Unmoving deeds" is seen three times in this chapter (four in the whole treatise).

Existing from the first and now not existing · existing before and now not existing. The two sides of the closing question of this chapter, and the sūtra and treatise layers use different wording; this section recounted it character by character and records it. The Buddha's counter-question in the sūtra section reads 「諸法本有今無耶？」 tr. "Did dharmas exist from the first and now not exist?"〔T25 0729a08〕—「本有今無」 tr. "existing from the first and now not existing" is seen three times in the whole treatise, this once in this chapter; the treatise-author twice re-quotes this question in the treatise section, both times as 「諸法先有今無耶？」 tr. "Did dharmas exist before and now not exist?"〔T25 0730c27〕〔T25 0730c28〕—「先有今無」 tr. "existing before and now not existing" is seen nine times in the whole treatise, these two times in this chapter; below it Subhūti's understanding is again put as 「先自無」 tr. "non-existent of themselves before"〔T25 0730c29〕, and these three Chinese characters are seen only this once in the whole treatise. The same question reads 「本」 tr. "from the first" in the sūtra and 「先」 tr. "before" in the treatise's re-quotation; on the side of the sūtra explained there is also a variant reading here (the Shōgozō text reads 「先」 tr. "before"; see Section IV); the three sides are set against one another, and this section records them side by side as they are, without fixing the reading.

III. Similes and Stories

This chapter has six key similes, all tied to the meaning being explained; none is set up idly. Of them, 「化人作化人」 tr. "a conjured person conjures a conjured person" is the backbone of the whole chapter; it does not enter the sub-items of this section but is set up separately at the head.

A conjured person conjures a conjured person (the sūtra's main simile · the backbone of the whole chapter). The Buddha does not answer question by question, but at once asks Subhūti in return with a simile: 「若有化人作化人，是化頗有實事不空者不？」 tr. "If there were a conjured person who conjured a conjured person, would this conjuration have any real matter that is not empty?"〔T25 0728c05〕—Subhūti answers 「不也！世尊！是化人無有實事而不空。」 tr. "No! World-Honored One! This conjured person has no real matter that is not empty."〔T25 0728c07〕. The force of the simile lies not in ‘conjuration is false’ but in ‘conjuring a further conjuration on top of a conjuration’: what is conjured already has no reality, what it further conjures still less, and in neither layer can one point to it as existent, nor point to it as non-existent. The Buddha at once gathers it up with this—「是空及化人二事不合不散，以空空故空，不應分別是空、是化。」 tr. "These two things, emptiness and the conjured person, are neither joined nor dispersed; because of the emptiness of emptiness they are empty, and one should not discriminate: this is emptiness, this is conjuration."〔T25 0728c07〕, and brings it straight down to the five aggregates and the omniscience of all kinds: 「色即是化，受、想、行、識即是化，乃至一切種智即是化。」 tr. "Form is precisely conjuration; feeling, perception, constructions, and consciousness are precisely conjuration; and so on up to the omniscience of all kinds, which is precisely conjuration."〔T25 0728c10〕. 「化人」 tr. "Conjured person" is seen six times in this chapter (〔T25 0728c05〕〔T25 0728c06〕〔T25 0728c07〕〔T25 0728c08〕〔T25 0729b25〕〔T25 0729b27〕), and seventy-five times in the whole treatise.

The patient and the physician (the treatise section explaining why the Buddha speaks of 「佛無恩力」 tr. "the Buddha's having no power of kindness"). The treatise-author explains the meaning of the Buddha's answer to Subhūti—if beings could themselves know that dharmas are equal and ultimately empty, the Buddha's supernormal power would have nowhere to be exerted—and brings out a short simile: 「若病人自知將適，則藥師無功。」 tr. "If the patient knows of himself how to tend himself, the physician has no work."〔T25 0729a20〕. The eye of the simile lies in 「無功」 tr. "has no work" and not in 「無藥」 tr. "has no medicine": the physician's work holds only for those who do not know of themselves how to tend themselves, and the Buddha's benefiting holds only for those who do not know equality of themselves; so although the equal dharma has the mark of non-doing, the mark of doing in benefiting beings does not go against it.

No water in fire · no fire in water (the treatise section explaining that emptiness is of all kinds). The treatise-author, distinguishing that 「空」 tr. "emptiness" is not of one kind, brings out the shallowest of examples: 「空有種種：如火中無水、水中無火，亦是空」 tr. "Emptiness is of all kinds: as there is no water in fire and no fire in water, that too is emptiness"〔T25 0729b08〕, and at once matches it with the five aggregates—「五眾中無我亦如是」 tr. "non-self within the five aggregates is also like this"〔T25 0729b09〕. The use of the simile lies in this: ‘the absence of this in that’ may also be named emptiness; hence the need to ask further, 「以何等空故，一切法空？」 tr. "By what emptiness are all dharmas empty?"〔T25 0729b12〕; below it a divergent view is at once cited to show the substance of this question—「諸法雖空，亦不盡空，如色空中有微塵根本在。」 tr. "Though dharmas are empty, they are not wholly empty; as within the emptiness of form the root atoms remain."〔T25 0729b11〕.

A person of supernormal power destroys the mark of form (the treatise section explaining parting from marks without destroying dharmas). After explaining 「但離其邪憶想」 tr. "only leave their wrong recollection and imagining", the treatise-author proves it by a matter of supernormal power: 「如神通人壞色相故，則石壁無礙。」 tr. "As when a person of supernormal power destroys the mark of form, stone walls do not obstruct him."〔T25 0729b17〕—what is destroyed is the mark of form, not the thing that is the stone wall; when the mark is destroyed, the obstruction of itself does not stand. Below this simile he at once cites the Buddha's words as a second proof: cultivating right recollection within the five aggregates and severing greed and desire, one obtains right liberation; hence one knows that the 「離相」 tr. "parting from marks" spoken of is precisely parting from recollection and imagining.

Dreams and images in a mirror (the treatise section explaining why, if all is conjuration, there are all kinds of distinctions). The similes of the answer of the fifth question and answer bring out three matters together: 「如佛所化及餘人所化，雖不實而有種種形像別異。」 tr. "As with what the Buddha transforms and what other people transform: though unreal, they have the distinctions of all kinds of shapes and images."〔T25 0729c16〕, 「夢中所見種種亦如是，人見夢中好、惡事，有生喜者、有生怖者。」 tr. "So too with the various things seen in a dream: people see good things and bad things in a dream, and some give rise to joy, some give rise to fear."〔T25 0729c17〕, 「如鏡中像，雖無實事，而隨本形，像有好醜。」 tr. "As with images in a mirror: though they have no real matter, they follow the original form, and the images are fair or ugly."〔T25 0729c18〕, gathered up with 「諸法亦如是，雖空而各各有因緣。」 tr. "Dharmas too are like this: though empty, each has its own causes and conditions."〔T25 0729c19〕. The three similes point to one meaning: unreal, and yet with differences—the mirror image follows the original form and is fair or ugly, the matter of a dream is unreal and yet can make people joyful or afraid; so 「皆空」 tr. "all empty" and 「各各有因緣」 tr. "each has its own causes and conditions" do not contradict each other.

The master of conjuration makes transformations from a distant place (the treatise section explaining why deeds are named transformation). The simile of the answer of the eighth question and answer, the simile in this chapter that comes closest to the retribution of deeds: 「凡夫人見諸法不如化；聖人知畢竟空相故，以天眼觀眾生皆無有終、始、中間。」 tr. "Ordinary people see dharmas as not like a conjuration; sages, because they know the mark of ultimate emptiness, contemplate beings with the divine eye as all without end, without beginning, and without middle."〔T25 0730a26〕, and below it the simile comes out—「如化主遠處作變化；業亦如是，在過去世中作今身變化。」 tr. "As the master of conjuration makes transformations from a distant place; deeds too are like this, making the transformation of the present body from within the past world."〔T25 0730a28〕. The eye of the simile lies in the two Chinese characters 「遠處」 tr. "from a distant place": the master who makes the conjuration is not in the place where the conjuration appears, the deeds of the past are likewise not within the present body, and yet the present body is plainly what they conjured. 「化主」 tr. "The master of conjuration" is seen only this once in this chapter (eleven times in the whole treatise), and 「天眼」 tr. "the divine eye" is likewise seen only this once in this chapter. Below it he further joins it to people's perverse arising of sorrow and joy: a transformed thing can make people give rise to sorrow, joy, fear, and dread; the wise contemplate it as all without reality, while people perversely give rise to sorrow and joy.

Standing at the edge of a deep pit (the treatise section explaining why ordinary people fear the emptiness of nature). The simile of the closing passage: 「性空是凡夫人大怖畏處，聞性空無所有，如臨深坑。」 tr. "The emptiness of nature is the place of great fear for ordinary people; hearing that the emptiness of nature is without anything existent is like standing at the edge of a deep pit."〔T25 0730c22〕—「深坑」 tr. "Deep pit" is seen three times in the whole treatise, once in this chapter. What the simile points to is not the fearfulness of emptiness but the self-made fear of one who clings deeply with the mind of self; so below it the actual state of his thought comes out: he takes it that the Buddha teaches people to cultivate good conduct diligently, and in the end it returns into what is without anything existent.

IV. The Sūtra Passage Explained

The web of the three versions of the chapter name (recorded side by side without judgement). The chapter name of this chapter has three versions, each recorded according to the collation notes and the base texts of the two canons.

First, Nirvāṇa Is Like a Conjuration—the chapter title of this treatise's base text,〔T25 0728b18〕 「大智度論釋涅槃如化品第八十七」 tr. "Mahāprajñāpāramitā-upadeśa, Commentary on the Chapter Nirvāṇa Is Like a Conjuration, the Eighty-seventh"; this is the reading of the Taishō base text, and also what this edition follows.

Second, Like a Conjuration—this name is seen in three places: in the collation note on this treatise's chapter title the three texts of the Song, Yuan, and Palace read 「大智度論卷第九十六釋第八十七如化品」 tr. "Fascicle Ninety-six of the Mahāprajñāpāramitā-upadeśa, explaining the eighty-seventh chapter, Like a Conjuration", and the Ming edition reads 「大智度論卷第九十六釋如化品第八十七」 tr. "Fascicle Ninety-six of the Mahāprajñāpāramitā-upadeśa, explaining the Chapter Like a Conjuration, the Eighty-seventh" (entry one of the ledger below); the chapter title on the side of the sūtra explained, T223,〔T08 0415b27〕 「摩訶般若波羅蜜經如化品第八十七」 tr. "Mahāprajñāpāramitā Sūtra, Chapter Like a Conjuration, the Eighty-seventh", lacks the two Chinese characters 「涅槃」 tr. "nirvāṇa"; the chapter heading of Jizang's Commentary on the Larger Sūtra also reads 「如化品第八十七」 tr. "the eighty-seventh chapter, Like a Conjuration"〔X24n0451 0339b19〕; and Junzheng's Profound Meaning of the Four Mahāyāna Treatises, when it cites this chapter by name, also reads 「如化品」 tr. "the chapter Like a Conjuration"〔X46n0784 0605a08〕 (see Section VI). That is, apart from the one line of the Taishō base text, the sūtra explained, the two commentaries of the ancient masters, and the four texts of this treatise—Song, Yuan, Ming, and Palace—all use the short name 「如化品」 tr. "the chapter Like a Conjuration".

Third, Nirvāṇa Is Not Like a Conjuration—this name is seen only in the Ishiyama text in the collation note on this treatise's chapter title: 「大智度經品第八十六涅槃不如化」 tr. "Great Wisdom-Crossing Sūtra, Chapter the Eighty-sixth, Nirvāṇa Is Not Like a Conjuration" (entry one of the ledger below). The Ishiyama text does not read 「如化」 tr. "like a conjuration" but 「不如化」 tr. "not like a conjuration", opposite in sense to the name in the Taishō text; the treatise of this chapter is set up precisely to divide ‘what is like a conjuration and what is not like a conjuration’, so the two names each take one end of what is discussed. The three names are recorded side by side, without judging which is correct.

The full ledger of the note on chapter order (the two chains, Shōgozō -1 and Ishiyama -1 · recorded side by side without judgement). The note on the chapter title〔T25 0728b18〕 is a single note that covers five texts; the base text as it stands: 「大智度論釋涅槃如化品第八十七（卷第九十六）【大】，大智度論卷第九十六釋第八十七如化品（訖八十八品上）【宋】【元】【宮】，大智度論卷第九十六釋如化品第八十七【明】，大智度論卷第九十六釋第八十六品訖八十七品【聖】，大智度經品第八十六涅槃不如化【石】」 tr. "Mahāprajñāpāramitā-upadeśa, Commentary on the Chapter Nirvāṇa Is Like a Conjuration, the Eighty-seventh (Fascicle Ninety-six) (Taishō), Fascicle Ninety-six of the Mahāprajñāpāramitā-upadeśa, explaining the eighty-seventh chapter, Like a Conjuration (up to the first part of the eighty-eighth chapter) (Song, Yuan, Palace), Fascicle Ninety-six of the Mahāprajñāpāramitā-upadeśa, explaining the Chapter Like a Conjuration, the Eighty-seventh (Ming), Fascicle Ninety-six of the Mahāprajñāpāramitā-upadeśa, explaining the eighty-sixth chapter up to the end of the eighty-seventh chapter (Shōgozō), Great Wisdom-Crossing Sūtra, Chapter the Eighty-sixth, Nirvāṇa Is Not Like a Conjuration (Ishiyama)" (entry one of the ledger below). Within the one note three matters are contained: first, the three texts of the Song, Yuan, and Palace record what this fascicle contains as 「第八十七訖八十八品上」 tr. "the eighty-seventh up to the first part of the eighty-eighth chapter", which matches what Fascicle 96 of the base text actually contains (its fascicle-end title is at〔T25 0733c21〕, already crossing into the first half of the next chapter; see Section I); second, the Shōgozō text records 「第八十六品訖八十七品」 tr. "the eighty-sixth chapter up to the end of the eighty-seventh chapter", one step lower than each of the three texts; third, the Ishiyama text records 「品第八十六」 tr. "Chapter the Eighty-sixth", also one step lower, and writes the book title as 「大智度經」 tr. "Great Wisdom-Crossing Sūtra" rather than 「大智度論」 tr. "Mahāprajñāpāramitā-upadeśa".

This section, within the same base text, checked character by character three further ends that can be read against it; taking the four ends together, both chains are consistent, without exception:

• The note on the fascicle-end title of the preceding chapter〔T25 0728b15〕 (belonging to Fascicle 95, the range of the preceding chapter, "Equality"): below 「九十五」 tr. "ninety-five" the two texts of the Song and Yuan attach the interlinear note 「釋第八十五品訖八十六品」 tr. "explaining the eighty-fifth chapter up to the end of the eighty-sixth chapter", and the Shōgozō text attaches 「釋第八十四品訖第八十五品」 tr. "explaining the eighty-fourth chapter up to the end of the eighty-fifth chapter"—the Shōgozō text here too is -1.
• The note at the end of this chapter〔T25 0731a06〕: 「耳【大】，耳釋第八十六品竟【石】」 tr. "(the final particle) (Taishō), (the final particle) the explanation of the eighty-sixth chapter ends (Ishiyama)" (entry thirty-seven of the ledger below)—where this chapter ends the Ishiyama text reads 「第八十六品竟」 tr. "the eighty-sixth chapter ends", precisely -1 against the base text's Chapter 87.
• The note on the title opening the next chapter〔T25 0731a07〕: 「（大智度…八）十四字【大】，釋薩陀波崙品第八十八之上【明】，釋第八十七品上【聖】，大智度經品第八十七薩陀波崙品卷九十七【石】，卷九十七首【石】」 tr. "(Mahāprajñā … eight) fourteen characters (Taishō), explaining the Chapter on Sadāprarudita, the Eighty-eighth, first part (Ming), explaining the first part of the eighty-seventh chapter (Shōgozō), Great Wisdom-Crossing Sūtra, Chapter the Eighty-seventh, Chapter on Sadāprarudita, Fascicle Ninety-seven (Ishiyama), head of Fascicle Ninety-seven (Ishiyama)"—the Shōgozō text reads 「第八十七品上」 tr. "the first part of the eighty-seventh chapter" and the Ishiyama text 「品第八十七」 tr. "Chapter the Eighty-seventh", both -1 at the place of the base text's Chapter 88; and the Ishiyama text records here in addition 「卷九十七首」 tr. "head of Fascicle Ninety-seven".

That is: the Shōgozō's -1 is consistent at three ends—the fascicle end of the preceding chapter, this chapter's title, and the title opening the next chapter; the Ishiyama's -1 is consistent at three ends—this chapter's title, this chapter's end, and the title opening the next chapter, each chain without exception of its own (unlike the case of the drop to ‘the seventieth chapter’ once seen at the end of Chapter 77). Further, the Ishiyama text takes the place where the next chapter begins as the head of its Fascicle 97, that is, takes the end of this chapter as the end of its Fascicle 96—whereas the base text has the end of this chapter still in the middle of Fascicle 96; the division of fascicles and chapters of the two sides does not agree here; recorded as it is.

Duplicated chapter order in the T223 table of contents (continuing the standing practice already recorded). On the side of the sūtra explained, T223, the table-of-contents marker of this chapter has its chapter order marked as 「87」 tr. "the number 87", while the visible text marks 「87 如化品」 tr. "87 Like a Conjuration"〔T08 0415b27〕; the 「86 平等品」 tr. "86 Equality"〔T08 0413c10〕 before it is also marked 「87」 tr. "the number 87"—the two chapters share one chapter-order value, and it is the preceding chapter that steps into the duplication (coming right after 「85 七譬品」 tr. "85 The Seven Similes", which is marked 「85」 tr. "the number 85", it ought to read 「86」 tr. "the number 86"); this chapter's own chapter-order value agrees with the visible text, and the next chapter, 「88 常啼品」 tr. "88 Ever Weeping"〔T08 0416a23〕, marked 「88」 tr. "the number 88", is not duplicated either. This belongs to a habitual flaw of the marker layer of the base text, a duplicated chapter-order value being seen every few chapters; it is not peculiar to this chapter and not a doctrinal divergence; it continues the standing practice recorded from Chapter 48 onward, and is not judged again.

The chapter boundary on the T223 side tied to the fascicle's end (forming exactly the other end from this treatise's side). Below the place where this chapter of the sūtra explained ends,〔T08 0416a16〕, Fascicle 26 closes at once (the fascicle-end title 「摩訶般若波羅蜜經卷第二十六」 tr. "Fascicle 26 of the Mahāprajñāpāramitā Sūtra ends here."〔T08 0416a17〕), Fascicle 27 opens at〔T08 0416a20〕, and the title of the next chapter, 「常啼品第八十八」 tr. "Chapter on Ever Weeping, the Eighty-eighth", is at〔T08 0416a23〕—that is, the base text of the sūtra explained places this chapter at the end of Fascicle 26; this treatise's side places this chapter at the head of Fascicle 96 (see Section I). The two transmissions do not agree in their division of fascicles and chapters at this chapter—one tied to the fascicle's end, one tied to the fascicle's head; and the Ishiyama text, further, takes the end of this chapter as the end of its Fascicle 96 and the head of the next chapter as the head of its Fascicle 97, forming a third set of its own. The three sets are seen together; recorded as they are, not drawn into one matter. Further, the name of the next chapter of the sūtra explained also has two versions: the note at〔T08 0416a23〕 records 「常啼【大】，薩陀波崙【宋】【元】【明】【宮】」 tr. "Ever Weeping (Taishō), Sadāprarudita (Song, Yuan, Ming, Palace)"—the four texts of the sūtra explained, Song, Yuan, Ming, and Palace, read 「薩陀波崙」 tr. "Sadāprarudita", precisely the name of this treatise's next chapter〔T25 0731a07〕.

Collation of the whole re-quoted sūtra (comparison of the two sides · fifteen differences · recording at each place whether there is a collation note). This treatise's Sūtra ①〔T25 0728b23–0729a09〕 and the chapter "Like a Conjuration" of the sūtra explained〔T08 0415b28–0416a16〕 are nearly identical word for word; this section collated them character by character in the stream of Chinese characters, each side about seven hundred and fifty characters, and they differ at fifteen places; at each place the collation notes of both sides are recorded together:

• What is done / what can be done—this treatise reads 「若諸法平等、無所為作」 tr. "if dharmas are equal and there is nothing to be done"〔T25 0728b23〕, the sūtra explained reads 「若諸法平等、無可為作」 tr. "if dharmas are equal and there is nothing that can be done"〔T08 0415b28〕. The sūtra explained has the note 「可【大】，所【元】【明】【宮】【聖】」 tr. "can (Taishō), that which (Yuan, Ming, Palace, Shōgozō)"—the four texts of the sūtra explained, Yuan, Ming, Palace, and Shōgozō, read 「所」 tr. "that which", precisely the reading of this treatise's base text; this treatise's side has no collation note here.
• Within equality / within the equal dharma—this treatise reads 「於平等中不動而行菩薩事」 tr. "not moving within equality and yet practising the bodhisattva's business"〔T25 0728b24〕, the sūtra explained reads 「於平等法中不動而行菩薩事」 tr. "not moving within the equal dharma and yet practising the bodhisattva's business"〔T08 0415b29〕. This treatise's side has the note 「平等【大】，平等法【聖】【石】」 tr. "equality (Taishō), the equal dharma (Shōgozō, Ishiyama)" (entry three of the ledger below)—this treatise's two texts, Shōgozō and Ishiyama, read 「平等法」 tr. "the equal dharma", precisely the reading of the base text of the sūtra explained; the sūtra explained has no collation note here. The two sides mirror each other.
• What you say / what you speak—this treatise reads 「如是！如是！如汝所說：『是諸法平等、無所作。』」 tr. "Just so! Just so! As you say: ‘These dharmas are equal and there is nothing to be done.’"〔T25 0728b26〕, the sūtra explained reads 「如是，如是！如汝所言。是諸法平等、無所作。」 tr. "Just so, just so! As you speak. These dharmas are equal and there is nothing to be done."〔T08 0415c02〕. This treatise's side has the note 「說【大】，言【石】」 tr. "say (Taishō), speak (Ishiyama)" (entry four of the ledger below)—this treatise's Ishiyama text reads 「言」 tr. "speak", precisely the reading of the base text of the sūtra explained; the sūtra explained has no collation note here.
• Empty because of the emptiness of emptiness / empty because of emptiness—this treatise reads 「是空及化人二事不合不散，以空空故空，不應分別是空、是化。」 tr. "These two things, emptiness and the conjured person, are neither joined nor dispersed; because of the emptiness of emptiness they are empty, and one should not discriminate: this is emptiness, this is conjuration."〔T25 0728c07〕, the sūtra explained reads 「是空及化人，二事不合不散，以空故。空不應分別是空、是化。」 tr. "This emptiness and the conjured person: the two things are neither joined nor dispersed, because of emptiness. Emptiness should not be discriminated: this is emptiness, this is conjuration."〔T08 0415c13〕. The sūtra explained has the note 「空【大】，空空【宋】【元】【明】【宮】【聖】」 tr. "emptiness (Taishō), the emptiness of emptiness (Song, Yuan, Ming, Palace, Shōgozō)"—the five texts of the sūtra explained read 「空空」 tr. "the emptiness of emptiness", precisely the reading of this treatise's base text; this treatise's side has no collation note here. The punctuation of the two sides also differs because of this: this treatise's 「以空空故空」 tr. "because of the emptiness of emptiness they are empty" is one sentence, while in the sūtra explained 「以空故」 tr. "because of emptiness" is a sentence by itself and 「空不應分別」 tr. "emptiness should not be discriminated" starts afresh; recorded as it is, without judging which is correct.
• For what reason / why—this treatise reads 「所以者何？須菩提！色即是化」 tr. "For what reason? Subhūti! Form is precisely conjuration"〔T25 0728c10〕, the sūtra explained reads 「何以故？須菩提！色即是化」 tr. "Why? Subhūti! Form is precisely conjuration"〔T08 0415c16〕. This treatise's side has the note 「所以者何【大】，何以故【石】」 tr. "for what reason (Taishō), why (Ishiyama)" (entry seven of the ledger below); the sūtra explained has the note 「何以故【大】，所以者何【元】【明】【聖】」 tr. "why (Taishō), for what reason (Yuan, Ming, Shōgozō)". The collation notes of the two sides mirror each other completely—the reading of this treatise's Ishiyama text is precisely the reading of the base text of the sūtra explained, and the reading of the three texts of the sūtra explained, Yuan, Ming, and Shōgozō, is precisely the reading of this treatise's base text; recorded as it is, without judging which is correct.
• If worldly dharmas / worldly dharmas—this treatise reads 「若世間法是化」 tr. "if worldly dharmas are conjuration"〔T25 0728c12〕, the sūtra explained reads 「世間法是化」 tr. "worldly dharmas are conjuration"〔T08 0415c18〕. The sūtra explained has the note 「世【大】，若世【宋】【元】【明】【宮】【聖】」 tr. "world (Taishō), if world (Song, Yuan, Ming, Palace, Shōgozō)"—the five texts of the sūtra explained read 「若世」 tr. "if world", precisely the reading of this treatise's base text; this treatise's side has no collation note here.
• Are world-transcending dharmas also conjuration or not (the presence or absence of one sentence)—this treatise reads 「出世間法，所謂四念處……世尊！是法亦是化不？」 tr. "world-transcending dharmas, namely the four foundations of mindfulness … World-Honored One! Are these dharmas also conjuration?"〔T25 0728c12〕, the sūtra explained reads 「出世間法亦復是化不？所謂四念處……」 tr. "Are world-transcending dharmas also conjuration or not? Namely the four foundations of mindfulness …"〔T08 0415c18〕; that is, below 「出世間法」 tr. "world-transcending dharmas" the sūtra explained first brings out a question, which this treatise does not. This treatise's side has the note 「法【大】，法亦復是化不【聖】【石】」 tr. "dharmas (Taishō), dharmas also conjuration or not (Shōgozō, Ishiyama)" (entry eight of the ledger below); the sūtra explained has the note 「亦復是化不【大】，〔－〕【聖】」 tr. "also conjuration or not (Taishō), omitted (Shōgozō)". The collation notes of the two sides mirror each other—this treatise's two texts, Shōgozō and Ishiyama, add these five characters, while the Shōgozō text of the sūtra explained deletes these five characters; recorded as it is.
• All are conjuration / all are transformation—this treatise reads 「以是因緣故，須菩提！一切法皆是化。」 tr. "For these causes and conditions, Subhūti, all dharmas are conjuration."〔T25 0728c21〕, the sūtra explained reads 「一切法皆是變化。」 tr. "All dharmas are transformation."〔T08 0415c27〕. The sūtra explained has the note 「變【大】，〔－〕【宮】【聖】」 tr. "change (Taishō), omitted (Palace, Shōgozō)"—the two texts of the sūtra explained, Palace and Shōgozō, lack the character 「變」 tr. "change", precisely the reading of this treatise's base text; this treatise's side has another note here, 「皆【大】，〔－〕【石】」 tr. "all (Taishō), omitted (Ishiyama)" (entry ten of the ledger below), which does not collate the same character.
• Pratyekabuddha; the Buddha path / the pratyekabuddha path—this treatise reads 「阿羅漢果、辟支佛；佛道，斷諸煩惱習」 tr. "the fruit of the arhat, the pratyekabuddha; and the Buddha path, which severs the afflictions and their habitual residues"〔T25 0728c23〕, the sūtra explained reads 「阿羅漢果、辟支佛道。斷諸煩惱習斷」 tr. "the fruit of the arhat, the pratyekabuddha path. The severing of the afflictions and their habitual residues, the severing"〔T08 0415c29〕; that is, this treatise has one character more, 「佛」 tr. "Buddha", and the sūtra explained one character more, 「斷」 tr. "sever". The sūtra explained has three notes here: 「佛【大】，佛佛【宮】」 tr. "Buddha (Taishō), Buddha Buddha (Palace)", 「斷諸【大】，諸佛【聖】」 tr. "severing all (Taishō), all buddhas (Shōgozō)", 「斷【大】，〔－〕【宮】」 tr. "sever (Taishō), omitted (Palace)"—the Palace text of the sūtra explained reads 「佛佛」 tr. "Buddha Buddha" and deletes the final 「斷」 tr. "sever", and the reading so formed comes close to the sentence pattern of this treatise's base text; this treatise's side has the note 「諸【大】，〔－〕【石】」 tr. "all (Taishō), omitted (Ishiyama)" (entry nine of the ledger below). The sentence structures of the two sides differ; recorded as it is.
• Nirvāṇa with the mark of non-deception / nirvāṇa with the mark of not deceiving—this treatise reads 「無誑相涅槃，是法非變化。」 tr. "Nirvāṇa with the mark of non-deception: this dharma is not transformation."〔T25 0728c27〕, the sūtra explained reads 「不誑相涅槃，是法非變化。」 tr. "Nirvāṇa with the mark of not deceiving: this dharma is not transformation."〔T08 0416a05〕. The sūtra explained has the note 「不【大】，無【宋】【元】【明】【宮】【聖】」 tr. "not (Taishō), without (Song, Yuan, Ming, Palace, Shōgozō)"—the five texts of the sūtra explained read 「無」 tr. "without", precisely the reading of this treatise's base text; this treatise's side has no collation note here. This is the difference in this chapter that bears most closely on doctrine: 「無誑」 tr. "without deception" and 「不誑」 tr. "not deceiving" are close in meaning, and in the whole of this treatise only this chapter brings out this name (see Section II); the difference between the two sides is recorded as it is, without judging which is correct.
• All dharmas are all ultimately empty of nature / all dharmas are ultimately empty of nature—this treatise reads 「若新發意菩薩聞是一切法皆畢竟性空」 tr. "If a bodhisattva who has newly aroused the mind hears that all dharmas are all ultimately empty of nature"〔T25 0729a04〕, the sūtra explained reads 「若新發意菩薩聞是一切法畢竟性空」 tr. "If a bodhisattva who has newly aroused the mind hears that all dharmas are ultimately empty of nature"〔T08 0416a11〕. The sūtra explained has the note 「法【大】，法皆【宋】【元】【明】」 tr. "dharmas (Taishō), dharmas all (Song, Yuan, Ming)"—the three texts of the sūtra explained, Song, Yuan, and Ming, read 「法皆」 tr. "dharmas all", precisely the reading of this treatise's base text; this treatise's side has no collation note here.
• What does not arise or cease / what is unarisen and unceasing—this treatise reads 「分別生滅者如化、不生滅者不如化。」 tr. "I distinguish what arises and ceases as like a conjuration, and what does not arise or cease as not like a conjuration."〔T25 0729a06〕, the sūtra explained reads 「分別生滅者如化，不生不滅者不如化。」 tr. "I distinguish what arises and ceases as like a conjuration, and what is unarisen and unceasing as not like a conjuration."〔T08 0416a13〕. The sūtra explained has the note 「不【大】，〔－〕【宮】」 tr. "not (Taishō), omitted (Palace)"—the Palace text of the sūtra explained lacks this character 「不」 tr. "not", precisely the reading of this treatise's base text; this treatise's side has no collation note here.
• So that he knows this emptiness of nature / so that he knows the emptiness of nature—this treatise reads 「云何教新發意菩薩，令知是性空？」 tr. "How is a bodhisattva who has newly aroused the mind to be taught, so that he knows this emptiness of nature?"〔T25 0729a07〕, the sūtra explained reads 「云何教新發意菩薩令知性空？」 tr. "How is a bodhisattva who has newly aroused the mind to be taught so that he knows the emptiness of nature?"〔T08 0416a15〕. The sūtra explained has another note here, 「令【大】，令得【宮】」 tr. "make (Taishō), make him obtain (Palace)", which does not collate the same character; this treatise's side has no collation note here.
• Existing from the first and now not existing (the Shōgozō text reads ‘before’)—the base texts of the two canons both read 「諸法本有今無耶？」 tr. "Did dharmas exist from the first and now not exist?"〔T25 0729a08〕 /〔T08 0416a16〕, while the sūtra explained has the note 「本【大】，先【聖】」 tr. "from the first (Taishō), before (Shōgozō)"—the Shōgozō text of the sūtra explained reads 「先有今無」 tr. "existing before and now not existing", which agrees with 「諸法先有今無耶？」 tr. "Did dharmas exist before and now not exist?"〔T25 0730c27〕, used when this treatise's treatise section re-quotes this question. That is, the two readings 「本」 tr. "from the first" and 「先」 tr. "before" are not only a difference between variant texts of the two canons, but also a difference within this treatise between its own sūtra section and treatise section (see Section II); the three sides are set against one another and recorded side by side as they are, without fixing the reading.
• Whether the 【經】 structural marker is present—at the head of this treatise's sūtra section is attached the 【經】 marker〔T25 0728b23〕; the sūtra explained has no such marker (being a sūtra and not an explanatory treatise, its form does not bring one out in the first place). This is not a variant text but a difference of form between the two canons, recorded together for the completeness of the collation.

The Shōgozō's variant word order of forty-four characters in the sūtra explained at〔T08 0416a11〕 (listed separately and recorded side by side · without judgement). The sūtra explained attaches a collation note at the pivotal sentence of this chapter, whose text as it stands reads 「（聞是…不如化）四十四字【大】，分別生滅者如化不生滅者不如化若新發意菩薩聞一切畢竟性空乃至涅槃亦如化心則恐怖【聖】」 tr. "(hears this … not like a conjuration) forty-four characters (Taishō), distinguishes what arises and ceases as like a conjuration what does not arise or cease as not like a conjuration if a bodhisattva who has newly aroused the mind hears that all is ultimately empty of nature and so on up to nirvāṇa too being like a conjuration his mind is then afraid (Shōgozō)"—what is collated is not a single character or a single word, but a whole passage of forty-four characters. The Taishō base text reads this passage 「聞是一切法畢竟性空，乃至涅槃亦皆如化，心則驚怖。為是新發意菩薩故，分別生滅者如化，不生不滅者不如化」 tr. "hears that all dharmas are ultimately empty of nature, and so on up to nirvāṇa too being all like a conjuration, his mind is then startled and afraid. It is for the sake of these bodhisattvas who have newly aroused the mind that I distinguish what arises and ceases as like a conjuration, and what is unarisen and unceasing as not like a conjuration"〔T08 0416a11〕; that is, first the startled fear of the bodhisattva who has newly aroused the mind comes out, and afterwards the Buddha's answer distinguishing what arises and ceases from what does not arise or cease; while the Shōgozō's order is exactly the reverse—the Shōgozō text as recorded in the collation note reads as it stands 「分別生滅者如化不生滅者不如化若新發意菩薩聞一切畢竟性空乃至涅槃亦如化心則恐怖」 tr. "distinguishes what arises and ceases as like a conjuration what does not arise or cease as not like a conjuration if a bodhisattva who has newly aroused the mind hears that all is ultimately empty of nature and so on up to nirvāṇa too being like a conjuration his mind is then afraid" (the text of the collation note originally has no punctuation), that is, first the Buddha's answer comes out, and only afterwards the startled fear that is its reason. In the wording too there are small differences: the Taishō's 「聞是一切法畢竟性空」 tr. "hears that all dharmas are ultimately empty of nature" the Shōgozō reads 「聞一切畢竟性空」 tr. "hears that all is ultimately empty of nature", 「乃至涅槃亦皆如化」 tr. "and so on up to nirvāṇa too being all like a conjuration" reads 「乃至涅槃亦如化」 tr. "and so on up to nirvāṇa too being like a conjuration", 「不生不滅者不如化」 tr. "what is unarisen and unceasing as not like a conjuration" reads 「不生滅者不如化」 tr. "what does not arise or cease as not like a conjuration", 「為是新發意菩薩故」 tr. "for the sake of these bodhisattvas who have newly aroused the mind" reads 「若新發意菩薩」 tr. "if a bodhisattva who has newly aroused the mind", and the close reads 「心則恐怖」 tr. "his mind is then afraid" and not 「心則驚怖」 tr. "his mind is then startled and afraid". The sentence at the same position in this treatise's base text reads 「若新發意菩薩聞是一切法皆畢竟性空乃至涅槃亦皆如化，心則驚怖；為是新發意菩薩故，分別生滅者如化、不生滅者不如化。」 tr. "If a bodhisattva who has newly aroused the mind hears that all dharmas are all ultimately empty of nature, and so on up to nirvāṇa too being all like a conjuration, his mind is then startled and afraid; it is for the sake of these bodhisattvas who have newly aroused the mind that I distinguish what arises and ceases as like a conjuration and what does not arise or cease as not like a conjuration."〔T25 0729a04〕—the same order, fear first and answer after, as the Taishō base text of the sūtra explained; this treatise's side has no collation note here. The three sides set side by side: the base texts of the two canons have the same order, and the Shōgozō alone reverses it; this section records them side by side character by character, without judging which is the original order, nor using the Shōgozō's order to change the reading of this treatise.

The control group (three strings · the count in each of the two canons honestly recorded · equal at corresponding positions). 「若有化人作化人」 tr. "If there were a conjured person who conjured a conjured person"〔T25 0728c05〕 /〔T08 0415c11〕; 「有聲聞法變化，有辟支佛法變化」 tr. "There is the transformation of the śrāvaka dharmas, there is the transformation of the pratyekabuddha dharmas"〔T25 0728c18〕 /〔T08 0415c24〕; 「性空即是涅槃」 tr. "The emptiness of nature is precisely nirvāṇa"〔T25 0729a01〕 /〔T08 0416a08〕. All three strings are equal at the corresponding positions in the two canons—the first two strings are each seen once in each canon, and the third string, 「性空即是涅槃」 tr. "the emptiness of nature is precisely nirvāṇa", twice in each canon (in this treatise it first comes out at〔T25 0729a01〕, when Subhūti raises his difficulty, and at〔T25 0729a04〕 the Buddha's answer repeats his words; in the sūtra explained,〔T08 0416a08〕〔T08 0416a11〕 have the same structure); the counts of the two sides are equal string by string, not one string diverging, and they can serve as a counter-proof group for the variant texts listed above—the fifteen places that differ have all been recorded place by place; the rest match character for character.

The modern editorial-layer notes on the side of the sūtra explained (their existence recorded · not cited as a basis). Below the chapter title of this chapter of the sūtra explained〔T08 0415b27〕 is attached a note whose text reads 「梵無區分」 tr. "the Sanskrit has no division", an editorial remark made by the editorial layer on the division of chapters in the Sanskrit text; at the end of the note on the title opening the next chapter〔T08 0416a23〕 there is also recorded 「以下梵闕」 tr. "from here on the Sanskrit is lacking". Neither is transmitted by the ancient masters; for the basis in Sanskrit only what the ancient masters transmitted is taken, so this section only records their existence and position, and does not cite their wording as a basis for this chapter's doctrine or Sanskrit source. Further, within the range of comparison for this chapter in the sūtra explained〔T08 0415b27–0416a16〕 there are in addition two star anchors (〔T08 0415c05〕 「五」 tr. "five",〔T08 0415c07〕 「相」 tr. "mark"), whose corresponding collation entries both fall outside this chapter (at the two notes〔T08 0411032〕 and〔T08 0415014〕 respectively); there is also one star anchor,〔T08 0416a17〕 「六」 tr. "six", attached to the line of the fascicle-end title of Fascicle 26, already outside the range of comparison for this chapter, its corresponding collation entry likewise outside this chapter (the note〔T08 0407009〕); they are recorded together to make clear that they do not enter this chapter's ledger. That is, the side of the sūtra explained is of the type ‘borrowing in from outside’ for this chapter, differing from this treatise's side, where this chapter has no stars (see Section VIII).

V. The Prajñā Eye

The eye of this chapter lies in a close that seems to contradict itself: everywhere the whole treatise says that all dharmas are ultimately empty, like an illusion, like a conjuration, while this chapter insists on setting up one dharma called 「不如化」 tr. "not like a conjuration". This is not a flaw in the theory but a necessity of teaching—the faculties of the hearers differ, and the same thing can only be said in two turns. The sūtra and the treatise go back and forth over this nine times, and its meaning can be summed up in six layers.

First, the question lies not in emptiness but in whether, after emptiness, one can still do anything. Subhūti's question at the opening is utterly concrete: 「若諸法平等、無所為作，云何菩薩摩訶薩行般若波羅蜜，於平等中不動而行菩薩事，以布施、愛語、利益、同事？」 tr. "If dharmas are equal and there is nothing to be done, how can the bodhisattva-mahāsattva practising prajñāpāramitā not move within equality and yet practise the bodhisattva's business, by giving, kind speech, beneficial action, and shared endeavour?"〔T25 0728b23〕. The treatise-author puts this difficulty more plainly on his behalf: 「平等法無作相，利益是有作相。」 tr. "The equal dharma has the mark of non-doing; benefiting has the mark of doing."〔T25 0729a16〕—on one side is non-doing, on the other doing; how can the two hold at the same time. The Buddha's answer, however, does not lie in reconciling the two, but in pointing out that ‘if beings knew of themselves, the Buddha would have nothing to exert’: the treatise-author gathers it up with a simile—「若病人自知將適，則藥師無功。」 tr. "If the patient knows of himself how to tend himself, the physician has no work."〔T25 0729a20〕. Benefiting is not another thing added on top of equality; it is spoken for ‘those who do not know equality of themselves’; if beings already knew of themselves, the name of benefiting would from the first not stand.

Second, the answer lies in a simile of conjuring a further conjuration on top of a conjuration. The Buddha does not answer question by question, but brings it out at once with a counter-question: 「若有化人作化人，是化頗有實事不空者不？」 tr. "If there were a conjured person who conjured a conjured person, would this conjuration have any real matter that is not empty?"〔T25 0728c05〕; Subhūti answers 「不也！世尊！是化人無有實事而不空。」 tr. "No! World-Honored One! This conjured person has no real matter that is not empty."〔T25 0728c07〕. The grammar of this answer must be seen clearly: it does not say ‘conjuration is empty’, but ‘there is not one real matter that is not empty’. The Buddha at once establishes from this the meaning that they cannot be discriminated: 「是空及化人二事不合不散，以空空故空，不應分別是空、是化。」 tr. "These two things, emptiness and the conjured person, are neither joined nor dispersed; because of the emptiness of emptiness they are empty, and one should not discriminate: this is emptiness, this is conjuration."〔T25 0728c07〕—emptiness and conjuration are not two things joined together, nor two things set apart; if 「空」 tr. "emptiness" is set up as what refutes and 「化」 tr. "conjuration" as what is refuted, one falls into one more layer. Here the treatise-author sets himself a question and answers himself as to why: 「為破十八事實故有十八空，破眾生心中變化空法故用空空。」 tr. "To refute the eighteen matters as real there are the eighteen emptinesses; to refute the dharma of transformation and emptiness in the minds of beings one uses the emptiness of emptiness."〔T25 0729b28〕—the eighteen emptinesses refute dharmas; the emptiness of emptiness refutes the mind that ‘takes emptiness as real’; so below it he says that ordinary people use conjuration as a simile while sages need none: ordinary people know that transformation is empty and unreal yet say that the other dharmas are real, so conjuration is used as a simile to make them know that the other dharmas are no different from conjuration; as for the way sages understand, conjuration cannot be used as a simile, because there is no discrimination〔T25 0729c05〕.

Third, all dharmas are conjuration, and yet each has its own causes and conditions. The Buddha pushes the scope of conjuration to the utmost: worldly dharmas are conjuration, and the world-transcending thirty-seven limbs of the path, the three gates of liberation, the ten powers, the four fearlessnesses, and so on up to the four fruits, the pratyekabuddha, the bodhisattva, and the buddhas are all conjuration—「一切法皆是化。」 tr. "All dharmas are conjuration."〔T25 0728c18〕—and he divides them into six kinds of transformation. Subhūti's doubt follows: since all is empty and all is conjuration, why are there still all kinds of distinctions? The treatise-author's answer does not block the distinctions but blocks the real: 「如佛所化及餘人所化，雖不實而有種種形像別異。」 tr. "As with what the Buddha transforms and what other people transform: though unreal, they have the distinctions of all kinds of shapes and images."〔T25 0729c16〕, 「如鏡中像，雖無實事，而隨本形，像有好醜。」 tr. "As with images in a mirror: though they have no real matter, they follow the original form, and the images are fair or ugly."〔T25 0729c18〕, gathered up with 「諸法亦如是，雖空而各各有因緣。」 tr. "Dharmas too are like this: though empty, each has its own causes and conditions."〔T25 0729c19〕—emptiness does not cancel causes and conditions; it cancels only the ‘real’ on top of the causes and conditions. As to why the six kinds of transformation are alike named transformation, the treatise-author also gives a criterion that can be tested one by one: 「是法本無而今有、已有還無，是為聲聞變化。」 tr. "This dharma was from the first non-existent and now exists, and having existed returns to non-existence: this is the śrāvaka transformation."〔T25 0729c27〕.

Fourth, how the afflictions can give birth to wholesome deeds—the pivot of the passage on the retribution of deeds. If all retribution arises from deeds, and deeds in turn arise from the afflictions, then the afflictions are evil; from where are wholesome deeds born? The treatise-author answers with 「有二種因：一者、近因，二者、遠因。」 tr. "There are two kinds of cause: first, the near cause; second, the far cause."〔T25 0730a06〕: giving for the sake of permanence and happiness in a later body is the near cause; cultivating meditative concentration in order to leave the impure body of the desire realm is the far cause. Someone presses further: 「煩惱是垢心，善心是淨心，垢、淨不得和合」 tr. "The afflictions are a stained mind, a wholesome mind is a pure mind; stain and purity cannot come together"〔T25 0730a12〕. The treatise-author's answer shows the greatest skill—he does not argue whether stain and purity can come together, but cites a matter of the same kind: 「慧與無明相違法而一心中起。」 tr. "Wisdom and ignorance are mutually contrary dharmas, and yet they arise within one mind."〔T25 0730a15〕; since even within the mind of ignorance there is wisdom, there is nothing strange in there being good within the stained mind. Only at the end does his real distinction come out: 「我心無記柔軟故，是故煩惱心中生善業、無動業，無咎。」 tr. "Because the mind of self is indeterminate and soft, therefore within the afflicted mind wholesome deeds and unmoving deeds arise, and there is no fault."〔T25 0730a18〕—the mind of self is not evil; it is indeterminate; what is indeterminate is soft, and so it can carry good and can also carry evil, which anger and the other hard afflictions cannot.

Fifth, the pivot of the whole chapter: why nirvāṇa alone is said to be not like a conjuration. The Buddha first sets it up—「若有法生滅相者，皆是變化。」 tr. "If there is a dharma that has the mark of arising and ceasing, it is all transformation."〔T25 0728c24〕, 「若法無生無滅，是非變化。」 tr. "If a dharma is without arising and without ceasing, it is not transformation."〔T25 0728c26〕, 「無誑相涅槃，是法非變化。」 tr. "Nirvāṇa with the mark of non-deception: this dharma is not transformation."〔T25 0728c27〕. Subhūti at once makes a difficulty with the Buddha's own words: the equality of dharmas is not made by śrāvakas, pratyekabuddhas, bodhisattvas, or buddhas, 「有佛、無佛諸法性常空」 tr. "whether there is a Buddha or no Buddha, the nature of dharmas is ever empty"〔T25 0729a01〕, and 「性空即是涅槃，云何言涅槃一法非如化？」 tr. "the emptiness of nature is precisely nirvāṇa; how is it said that the one dharma, nirvāṇa, is not like a conjuration?"〔T25 0729a01〕—if the emptiness of nature is precisely nirvāṇa, nirvāṇa ought to share the emptiness of all dharmas and share their being like a conjuration, and ought not to stand alone in a class of its own. The Buddha's answer is not a defence but an account of to whom the teaching is addressed: 「為是新發意菩薩故，分別生滅者如化、不生滅者不如化。」 tr. "It is for the sake of these bodhisattvas who have newly aroused the mind that I distinguish what arises and ceases as like a conjuration and what does not arise or cease as not like a conjuration."〔T25 0729a06〕. The treatise-author pursues to the end this meaning of 「為人」 tr. "for the sake of people": 「唯佛一人是無誑人」 tr. "the Buddha alone is the one who does not deceive"〔T25 0730c05〕—then does the Buddha not change his teaching to suit the person? The answer lies in ‘what is turned is not the marks of dharmas’—when the Buddha first obtained the real mark, his mind tended only toward nirvāṇa and quiescent extinction〔T25 0730c10〕, and the buddhas of the ten directions and the gods begged the Buddha not to enter nirvāṇa〔T25 0730c11〕; 「佛即受請，佛但為度眾生故住。」 tr. "The Buddha then accepted the request; the Buddha abides only in order to deliver beings."〔T25 0730c12〕; since there are beings who can be benefited, he speaks according to the matter, and what he follows is the matter, not the marks of dharmas. Below it the treatise-author brings out two layers of reason to gather it up: first, 「有新發意菩薩著是涅槃，因是著起諸煩惱；為斷是著故，說涅槃如化。」 tr. "There are bodhisattvas who have newly aroused the mind who cling to this nirvāṇa, and because of this clinging raise up the afflictions; in order to sever this clinging it is said that nirvāṇa is like a conjuration."〔T25 0730c15〕—saying that nirvāṇa is like a conjuration is precisely in order to undo the clinging to nirvāṇa; second, 「復次，有二道：小乘道、大乘道。」 tr. "Again, there are two paths: the path of the Small Vehicle and the path of the Great Vehicle."〔T25 0730c18〕, 「小乘論議，以涅槃為實；大乘論議，以利智慧深入故，觀色等諸法皆如涅槃。」 tr. "The discussion of the Small Vehicle takes nirvāṇa as real; the discussion of the Great Vehicle, because it enters deeply with keen wisdom, contemplates form and the other dharmas as all like nirvāṇa."〔T25 0730c18〕. So he concludes: 「是故二說無咎。」 tr. "Therefore the two sayings are without fault."〔T25 0730c20〕. The two sayings are not one right and one wrong; they are one medicine for one disease.

Sixth, why the emptiness of nature is not to be feared—the whole chapter closes on the plainest of distinctions. Subhūti finally asks how those who have newly aroused the mind are to be taught to know the emptiness of nature; the treatise-author first writes out the actual state of their fear: 「性空是凡夫人大怖畏處，聞性空無所有，如臨深坑。」 tr. "The emptiness of nature is the place of great fear for ordinary people; hearing that the emptiness of nature is without anything existent is like standing at the edge of a deep pit."〔T25 0730c22〕, their thought being 「佛教人勤修善行，終歸入無所有中！」 tr. "The Buddha teaches people to cultivate good conduct diligently, and in the end it returns into what is without anything existent!"〔T25 0730c25〕. The Buddha's answer is only a counter-question: 「諸法本有今無耶？」 tr. "Did dharmas exist from the first and now not exist?"〔T25 0729a08〕. The treatise-author spells out its meaning for the reader: what those who fear are afraid of is 「後當無」 tr. "afterwards there will be nothing", so the Buddha asks in return whether it ever existed before. The last passage is where the whole chapter comes to rest—「若諸法先有，以行道故無，應當恐怖」 tr. "If dharmas existed before and became non-existent because of practising the path, one should be afraid"〔T25 0731a04〕, 「初自無故，不應恐怖，但為除顛倒耳。」 tr. "Because from the first they are non-existent of themselves, one should not be afraid; it is only in order to remove inversion."〔T25 0731a05〕. If cultivating the path were to make what existed from the first into nothing, then indeed one should fear; since from the first there was nothing, what cultivating the path removes is only inversion, and nothing whatever has been lost. Here the treatise-author adds one more sentence to set their minds at rest: 「為除顛倒，令得實見，竟無所失」 tr. "to remove inversion and make them obtain true seeing; in the end nothing is lost"〔T25 0731a01〕. The whole chapter begins with 「化人喻」 tr. "the simile of the conjured person" and ends with 「不應恐怖」 tr. "one should not be afraid", one meaning from head to tail.

VI. Divergent Readings of the Masters

The Mahāprajñāpāramitā-upadeśa has no tradition of a complete commentary following its text line by line, and the ancient masters' citations and explanations are for the most part partial, according to what is actually there. For this chapter two ancient masters have been read through again: Jizang's commentary, explaining the sūtra explained, preserves a complete dedicated chapter; Junzheng's Profound Meaning of the Four Mahāyāna Treatises cites this chapter by name and gives a doctrinal paraphrase (not a word-for-word citation); Huiying's commentary, explaining this treatise, lacks an explanation of this chapter (its extant text does not reach this fascicle; see below); the two calming-and-contemplation works of the Tiantai line, together with the commentaries and records on the Lotus, and Sengzhao and others' Commentary on the Vimalakīrti Sūtra, six files in all, have zero hits for the words of the chapter title, and the hits for the loose term, checked entry by entry, are none of them citations of this chapter. This section records the correspondence of what they comment on and cite with this chapter, without judging the relative merits of each master's interpretation.

Jizang's Commentary on the Larger Sūtra (X24n0451). His line-by-line commentary on the chapter "Like a Conjuration" of the sūtra explained begins at 「如化品第八十七」 tr. "the eighty-seventh chapter, Like a Conjuration"〔X24n0451 0339b19〕 and ends at〔X24n0451 0340c05〕, before the next chapter, 「常啼品第八十八」 tr. "the eighty-eighth chapter, Ever Weeping"〔X24n0451 0340c06〕, begins, covering the whole of this chapter's sūtra. The category used by the chapter-boundary marker of this file differs from the usual category of 「品」 tr. "chapter" (a technical difference, recorded for later reference). Six points can be recorded.

First, the placing of the chapter and its matching with the three preceding chapters—「此下第二、明涅槃果。」 tr. "From here below is the second: making clear the fruit of nirvāṇa."〔X24n0451 0339b20〕, below which he matches the three preceding chapters one by one: the chapter "Difference" makes clear awakening, which is the fruit of knowledge; the chapter "The Seven Similes" makes clear that being without stain and purity manifests the fruit of liberation; the chapter "Equality" distinguishes that the equality of the true Dharma is the fruit of the Dharma body; so he takes this chapter as making clear in general the fruit of nirvāṇa that is the three virtues—「今明此品，即是總明三德為涅槃果也。」 tr. "Now I make clear that this chapter, precisely, makes clear in general the three virtues as the fruit of nirvāṇa."〔X24n0451 0339b22〕. But Jizang here makes a reservation of his own: he says this matching 「亦復可然」 tr. "may also be so", and yet adds that forcing the three virtues of the great sūtra onto this place 「少成傷巧也」 tr. "becomes a little strained and contrived". This treatise has no such matching of the three virtues in this chapter; the treatise-author's explanation simply follows the sūtra text sentence by sentence; what the two value differs; recorded separately as it is.

Second, the division into two parts—「此品論諸法如化不如化，故以目品之為二」 tr. "This chapter discusses dharmas as like a conjuration and not like a conjuration; therefore it is used to name the chapter, and it is in two"〔X24n0451 0339b24〕, 「第一、因上只菩提化眾生義；二者、正論諸法如化。」 tr. "First, on the meaning, from above, of awakening only transforming beings; second, properly discussing dharmas as like a conjuration."〔X24n0451 0339c01〕. Jizang takes the first half of this chapter as belonging to the meaning, carried over from above, of transforming beings, and only the latter half as properly discussing being like a conjuration; this treatise's treatise section too first explains, in its first question and answer, ‘why he asks again when the Buddha had already answered’, and only afterwards enters the simile of the conjured person; the two agree in their judgement of the flow of the text, except that this treatise does not itself mark its sections.

Third, the explanation of the first question and answer and the two siddhānta—Jizang sets up the question why, when this matter has already been asked above, it is asked again now, and answers himself 「是事甚深」 tr. "this matter is very deep"〔X24n0451 0339c03〕, and explains the meaning of the Buddha's answer: 「佛答：眾生自知平等，菩提於不平等利物。」 tr. "The Buddha answers: beings know equality of themselves; awakening benefits things within what is not equal."〔X24n0451 0339c06〕, at once bringing out a simile, 「如人病久，自知治病得差，無俟藥。」 tr. "As when a person has long been ill and knows of himself how to treat the illness and get well, he has no need of medicine."〔X24n0451 0339c07〕—the same simile pointing to the same thing as this treatise's 「若病人自知將適，則藥師無功。」 tr. "If the patient knows of himself how to tend himself, the physician has no work."〔T25 0729a20〕; the two agree here. Below it Jizang divides two meanings and matches each with one siddhānta: one meaning, 「此就第一義悉檀為問」 tr. "this asks from the siddhānta of the highest meaning"〔X24n0451 0339c13〕; the other meaning he gathers up with 「此是用對治悉檀答也。」 tr. "this answers by using the siddhānta of counteraction."〔X24n0451 0339c15〕—this treatise too divides by the two siddhānta at the same place: 「菩薩教化眾生，是為對治悉檀；須菩提以第一義悉檀無利益為難。」 tr. "The bodhisattva teaching and transforming beings is the siddhānta of counteraction; Subhūti makes his difficulty from the siddhānta of the highest meaning, in which there is no benefit."〔T25 0729a25〕. The assignment of the siddhānta used by the two is entirely the same; recorded as an agreement, as it is.

Fourth, the explanation of the two emptinesses and the gap in the commentary text—Jizang, explaining the Buddha's first refuting the mark of self and afterwards refuting the mark of dharmas, writes 「雖我相是人空」 tr. "though the mark of self is the emptiness of persons"〔X24n0451 0339c16〕; below it the base text has a gap: from〔X24n0451 0339c17〕 down to〔X24n0451 0340a20〕, more than twenty lines in a row are blank and the commentary text does not continue, and only at〔X24n0451 0340a21〕 does it continue with 「雖色相是法空，故為物說二空也。」 tr. "though the mark of form is the emptiness of dharmas; therefore for the sake of beings he speaks of the two emptinesses." This section records where this gap begins and ends, and does not fill it by conjecture. Below it, explaining the question 「何等空故一切法空」 tr. "by what emptiness are all dharmas empty", he says: 「次問何等空故一切法空」 tr. "Next he asks by what emptiness all dharmas are empty"〔X24n0451 0340a21〕, and lists the differences in how people reckon emptiness—「或言人空法不空，或言法空人空但微塵不空」 tr. "some say persons are empty and dharmas are not empty; some say dharmas are empty and persons are empty, but atoms are not empty"〔X24n0451 0340a23〕—citing the same example of atoms as the divergent view cited in this treatise's treatise section, 「諸法雖空，亦不盡空，如色空中有微塵根本在。」 tr. "Though dharmas are empty, they are not wholly empty; as within the emptiness of form the root atoms remain."〔T25 0729b11〕; the divergent views recorded by the two correspond; recorded as an agreement, as it is.

Fifth, the four sections and the collation note on a ‘wrong section division’—Jizang starts the second great section at 「須菩提於意云何下」 tr. "From ‘Subhūti, what do you think’ below"〔X24n0451 0340b05〕, marking it 「第二正明諸法如化不如化。」 tr. "the second, properly making clear that dharmas are like a conjuration and not like a conjuration."〔X24n0451 0340b06〕, and divides it into four sections: 「文為四：初、明一切如化無化差別；第二、明一切法如化差別；第三、明涅槃不如化；第四、明涅槃如化。」 tr. "The text is in four: first, making clear that all is like a conjuration and that in conjuration there is no distinction; second, making clear the distinctions of all dharmas being like a conjuration; third, making clear that nirvāṇa is not like a conjuration; fourth, making clear that nirvāṇa is like a conjuration."〔X24n0451 0340b06〕. This file attaches a collation note at the place where this sentence begins, whose text reads 「此下疑有錯科」 tr. "below this there is probably a wrong section division"〔X24n0451 0340b05〕—that is, the editors of the Supplement to the Canon here suspected of themselves that its section division was mistaken. This section records the existence and position of this collation note, and does not judge on its behalf whether the division is wrong. Under the four sections he comments passage by passage: explaining the simile of the conjured person he says 「須菩提為新發意菩薩聞上佛答一切法畢竟空，心便驚故，佛舉化答之」 tr. "Subhūti, on behalf of bodhisattvas who have newly aroused the mind, on hearing the Buddha's answer above that all dharmas are ultimately empty, was startled in mind—therefore the Buddha raised conjuration to answer it"〔X24n0451 0340b09〕—pointing to the same thing as this treatise's 「須菩提聞是已，心驚」 tr. "When Subhūti had heard these words, his mind was startled"〔T25 0729b19〕 and 「須菩提雖是阿羅漢，深貴佛法，亦為新發意菩薩故問。」 tr. "Although Subhūti is an arhat and deeply values the dharmas of the Buddha, he also asks for the sake of bodhisattvas who have newly aroused the mind."〔T25 0729b22〕; explaining the emptiness of emptiness he says 「空故一切空者，十八空空諸法故言如化，今復空此化法故言空也。」 tr. "As for all being empty because of emptiness: the eighteen emptinesses empty dharmas, therefore it says like a conjuration; now again this dharma of conjuration is emptied, therefore it says empty."〔X24n0451 0340b12〕—using the same one meaning of the eighteen emptinesses as this treatise's 「為破十八事實故有十八空，破眾生心中變化空法故用空空。」 tr. "To refute the eighteen matters as real there are the eighteen emptinesses; to refute the dharma of transformation and emptiness in the minds of beings one uses the emptiness of emptiness."〔T25 0729b28〕.

Sixth, the six kinds of transformation and the two sayings on nirvāṇa—Jizang explains the six kinds of transformation saying 「化義不同，故有六種變化」 tr. "the meanings of conjuration differ, therefore there are six kinds of transformation"〔X24n0451 0340b16〕; what he lists corresponds to the six heads of this treatise's sūtra text, except that for the last head Jizang writes 「乘能得六道身為果變化」 tr. "the transformation in which the vehicle can obtain the bodies of the six destinies as fruit" while this treatise has 「業因緣法變化」 tr. "the transformation of the dharmas of the causes and conditions of deeds"〔T25 0728c20〕; the names of the last head differ between the two; recorded side by side as it is. Jizang also cites the treatise to prove his point: 「論云：凡聖德論皆是變化，垢果是凡化，淨果是聖化。」 tr. "The treatise says: the virtues of the ordinary and the holy, as discussed, are all transformation; the stained fruit is the transformation of the ordinary, the pure fruit is the transformation of the holy."〔X24n0451 0340b19〕—this treatise at the same place reads 「業有二種：淨業，垢業。」 tr. "Deeds are of two kinds: pure deeds and stained deeds."〔T25 0730b05〕 and matches pure deeds with the śrāvaka transformation and so on up to the Buddha transformation, and stained deeds with the transformation of the afflictions; Jizang's 「垢果」 tr. "stained fruit" and 「淨果」 tr. "pure fruit" and this treatise's 「垢業」 tr. "stained deeds" and 「淨業」 tr. "pure deeds" differ in wording yet point to nearly the same thing; the two sides are recorded side by side, without judging which is right. As for the two sayings on nirvāṇa, Jizang too divides two sides—「白佛下，第三、明一往，明無為法不如化。」 tr. "From ‘said to the Buddha’ below is the third, making clear the first approach: making clear that unconditioned dharmas are not like a conjuration."〔X24n0451 0340b21〕, 「世尊如佛自設下，第四、論涅槃如化也。」 tr. "From ‘World-Honored One, as the Buddha himself has set out’ below is the fourth, discussing that nirvāṇa is like a conjuration."〔X24n0451 0340b23〕—and explains himself why: 「自有為始行，說生死涅槃法皆如化」 tr. "there are cases in which, for beginning practitioners, it is said that the dharmas of birth and death and of nirvāṇa are all like a conjuration"〔X24n0451 0340c01〕, below which he brings out another side, saying that for beginning practitioners it is said that birth and death are like a conjuration while nirvāṇa is really existent and not like a conjuration. This treatise's two sayings are tied to 「著」 tr. "clinging" and 「不著」 tr. "not clinging" (because of clinging to nirvāṇa it is said to be like a conjuration · when there is no clinging mind it is said to be not like a conjuration〔T25 0730c15〕) and to the division of ‘the two paths, Small Vehicle and Great Vehicle’〔T25 0730c18〕, while Jizang's two sayings are tied to two ways of speaking at the one end of 「始行人」 tr. "beginning practitioners"; the two masters establish their meanings differently; recorded side by side without judgement. Finally, explaining the closing question, Jizang says 「本有今無耶者，始行人聞涅槃亦空，故生斷見」 tr. "As for ‘did they exist from the first and now not exist’: beginning practitioners, hearing that nirvāṇa too is empty, therefore give rise to the view of annihilation"〔X24n0451 0340c04〕, gathering it up with 「亦明涅槃本不有今不無，何斷之有？生死亦然。」 tr. "it also makes clear that nirvāṇa did not exist from the first and does not not exist now—what annihilation is there? Birth and death are likewise."〔X24n0451 0340c05〕—pointing to the same thing as this treatise's 「初自無故，不應恐怖」 tr. "Because from the first they are non-existent of themselves, one should not be afraid"〔T25 0731a05〕, though the ways of speaking differ. Note: the text of these several passages in this file has transmission errors (at 「因上只菩提化眾生義」 tr. "the meaning, from above, of awakening only transforming beings", 「課平等法中」 tr. "a lesson within the equal dharma", 「歡論釋維問答」 tr. "joyfully discussing the explanation of the Vimala- question and answer", 「世尊如佛自設下」 tr. "From ‘World-Honored One, as the Buddha himself has set out’ below", and 「凡聖德論」 tr. "the virtues of the ordinary and the holy, as discussed"); this section records them character by character as the base text has them, and does not change them on its behalf.

Huiying's Commentary (X46n0791) · lacking an explanation (not zero hits). This section verified independently: the extant text of this commentary begins at〔X46n0791 0794a01〕 and ends at〔X46n0791 0917b12〕, and its last chapter heading is 「釋大方便品第六十九」 tr. "Explaining the Chapter on the Great Skilful Means, the Sixty-ninth", carrying the note ‘incomplete’—far before this treatise's Fascicle 96. This chapter falls definitely outside the range of the extant text of Huiying's commentary, so it is recorded as 「闕釋」 tr. "lacking an explanation", not as ‘zero hits’ (consistent with the limit of Huiying's commentary already fixed for several chapters from Chapter 44 onward; this chapter lies still further beyond it). The words of the chapter title, 「涅槃如化」 tr. "nirvāṇa is like a conjuration" and 「無誑相涅槃」 tr. "nirvāṇa with the mark of non-deception", have zero hits in the whole text of that file, and the loose term 「如化」 tr. "like a conjuration" is seen only once in the whole file〔X46n0791 0907c05〕, falling around Chapter 69, not this chapter; this zero value is due to the missing fascicles, not to an omitted citation; recorded separately as it is.

Junzheng's Profound Meaning of the Four Mahāyāna Treatises (X46n0784) · a doctrinal paraphrase citing this chapter by name (not a word-for-word citation). This section searched back through the whole file: 「涅槃如化」 tr. "nirvāṇa is like a conjuration" has zero hits; 「如化品」 tr. "the chapter Like a Conjuration" has one hit〔X46n0784 0605a08〕, whose words read 「故大論釋大品，如化品云：為新發意菩薩說涅槃是真實善妙有也。」 tr. "Therefore the Great Treatise, explaining the Larger Sūtra, says in the chapter Like a Conjuration: for the sake of bodhisattvas who have newly aroused the mind it is said that nirvāṇa is a true, real, good, and wondrous existence."〔X46n0784 0605a08〕. This is the only witness of an ancient master explicitly citing this chapter by name, but its nature must be distinguished clearly: what Junzheng says, 「為新發意菩薩說涅槃是真實善妙有」 tr. "for the sake of bodhisattvas who have newly aroused the mind it is said that nirvāṇa is a true, real, good, and wondrous existence", corresponds fully in doctrine to this chapter's 「為是新發意菩薩故，分別生滅者如化、不生滅者不如化。」 tr. "It is for the sake of these bodhisattvas who have newly aroused the mind that I distinguish what arises and ceases as like a conjuration and what does not arise or cease as not like a conjuration."〔T25 0729a06〕 and 「為新發意菩薩故，說涅槃不如化。」 tr. "For the sake of bodhisattvas who have newly aroused the mind, I say that nirvāṇa is not like a conjuration."〔T25 0730c07〕, except that the five Chinese characters 「真實善妙有」 tr. "true, real, good, and wondrous existence" are not this chapter's own words but a doctrinal paraphrase made by Junzheng within the context of his own discussion of the four virtues of the Buddha-nature and nirvāṇa (the text just above it is discussing precisely the meaning of the Buddha-nature in the lion's roar of the Mahāparinirvāṇa Sūtra). So this item belongs to doctrinal citation and not to word-for-word quotation; this section records the fact that it is a citation by name, does not treat it in the format of verbatim quotation marked with 「」 tr. "the corner brackets of verbatim quotation", and does not judge on its behalf whether the paraphrase exhausts the meaning of this chapter.

The Tiantai line and the Commentary on the Vimalakīrti Sūtra, six files (zero hits for the words of the chapter title · the loose term checked entry by entry, none a citation of this chapter). This section searched back independently through the whole of the six files—Great Calming and Contemplation (T46n1911), Supporting Practice and Broad Resolution of Calming and Contemplation (T46n1912), Profound Meaning of the Lotus (T33n1716), Annotations on the Profound Meaning of the Lotus (T33n1717), Words and Phrases of the Lotus (T34n1718), and the Commentary on the Vimalakīrti Sūtra (T38n1775): the words of the chapter title, 「涅槃如化」 tr. "nirvāṇa is like a conjuration" and 「如化品」 tr. "the chapter Like a Conjuration", and this chapter's core terms 「無誑相涅槃」 tr. "nirvāṇa with the mark of non-deception", 「性空即是涅槃」 tr. "the emptiness of nature is precisely nirvāṇa", and 「一切法皆是化」 tr. "all dharmas are conjuration" have zero hits in all six files; the loose term 「如化」 tr. "like a conjuration" yields in the six files six, seven, nine, three, two, and seven occurrences, thirty-four occurrences in all; this section checked the context of each, and none of the thirty-four is a citation of this chapter; they fall into three classes:

• The class of general rhetoric (the most numerous)—the joined expression 「如幻如化」 tr. "like an illusion, like a conjuration", speaking generally of dharmas as false and unreal, of the kind of 「色、色者如幻如化，名『般若』。」 tr. "Form, and that which has form, are like an illusion, like a conjuration; this is named ‘prajñā’."〔T46n1911 0017a14〕 in Great Calming and Contemplation and 「觀諸法如幻、如化」 tr. "contemplating dharmas as like an illusion, like a conjuration"〔T33n1716 0757b24〕 in the Profound Meaning of the Lotus, unrelated to the dedicated discussion of this chapter.
• The class of similes of another set—of the kind of the Supporting Practice and Broad Resolution of Calming and Contemplation explaining the tenth of the ten similes, 「十如化者。諸天聖人能有所化」 tr. "Tenth, like a conjuration: the gods and sages can conjure"〔T46n1912 0317a06〕, and of 「如〈化城品〉」 tr. "as in the chapter on the Conjured City"〔T34n1718 0097a27〕 in the Words and Phrases of the Lotus, each tied to the system of similes of its own text.
• Explicit citations of the Great Treatise that do not point to this chapter (most in need of sifting)—three places in all, each marking its own fascicle number: in the Annotations on the Profound Meaning of the Lotus, 「《大論》第五十先引經云」 tr. "Fascicle Fifty of the Great Treatise first cites the sūtra, saying"〔T33n1717 0876c16〕 (that is, Fascicle 50 of this treatise); in the Supporting Practice and Broad Resolution of Calming and Contemplation, 「大論五十三引經云」 tr. "the Great Treatise, fifty-three, cites the sūtra, saying"〔T46n1912 0337b17〕 (that is, Fascicle 53 of this treatise); and in the Annotations on the Profound Meaning of the Lotus, 「《大論》八十七『問云：生身菩薩，貪惜未除割截則難……』」 tr. "The Great Treatise, eighty-seven: ‘The question says: for the bodhisattva in a fleshly body, whose greed and attachment are not yet removed, being cut and severed is hard …’"〔T33n1717 0912a11〕 (that is, Fascicle 87 of this treatise, the question being about the cutting and severing of the bodhisattva in a fleshly body). Although the meaning of the three places in part comes near to this chapter (the first two both discuss the argument that 「涅槃亦如幻化」 tr. "nirvāṇa too is like an illusion and a conjuration"), their sources, as marked by themselves, are all other fascicles and passages of this treatise, not Fascicle 96, where this chapter lies; this section confirms that they are not mis-assigned as citations of this chapter.

So in this chapter there is indeed no trace of citation in the four Tiantai files or in Sengzhao and others' Commentary on the Vimalakīrti Sūtra; only Junzheng's one book has an explicit paraphrase by name; the negative result is recorded as it is, and hits on the face of the words are not taken as a relation of citation.

VII. Cross-reading and Further Resonances

The vein of meaning of this chapter, carried on before and after, has five points, all recorded in this section without fixing the reading.

First, the pointer to "Distinguishing Deeds" (seen only once in this treatise · the book pointed to is not made clear by this treatise itself). Where the treatise section explains that the transformation of deeds gives birth to the retribution of the six destinies, after listing the highest, middle, and lowest of good and evil deeds it points to another text: 「餘道亦如〈分別業品〉中說。」 tr. "The other destinies too are as spoken of in the chapter on Distinguishing Deeds."〔T25 0730a25〕. This section rescanned in both directions: the four Chinese characters 「分別業品」 tr. "the chapter on Distinguishing Deeds" are seen only this once in the whole of this treatise, zero times in the whole of the sūtra explained, T223, and they are not among the ninety chapters explained by this treatise either. That is, to what book the "Distinguishing Deeds" pointed to by the treatise-author here belongs, this treatise does not itself make clear; this section records it as a pointer and does not fix on its behalf what it points to, nor fill it with a chapter of the same name in another book. Above it in the same sentence there is another pointer—「次第輕重，如地獄中說」 tr. "the sequence of light and heavy is as spoken of within the hells"〔T25 0730a25〕; 「地獄中說」 tr. "as spoken of within the hells" is seen twice in this treatise (〔T25 0501a02〕〔T25 0730a25〕), and both occurrences are pointing words, not the passage pointed to itself; recorded separately as it is.

Second, the treatise-author's own pointer 「上品中處處說」 tr. "said everywhere in the earlier chapters" (this treatise itself · a hard link). Where the treatise section explains why Subhūti makes a further difficulty about nirvāṇa, it brings out his meaning: 「深入般若波羅蜜中，涅槃亦空，上品中處處說」 tr. "deep within prajñāpāramitā, nirvāṇa too is empty, as is said everywhere in the earlier chapters"〔T25 0730b27〕—that is, the treatise-author himself acknowledges that the meaning 「涅槃亦空」 tr. "nirvāṇa too is empty" has been said again and again in the earlier text, and so Subhūti, hearing in this chapter 「唯一涅槃不如化」 tr. "only nirvāṇa alone is not like a conjuration", comes to doubt. What these words point to is not one chapter or one place, but is called 「處處」 tr. "everywhere"; this section does not point on its behalf to any chapter or passage, but only records it as a carrying-over from what came before, stated by the treatise-author himself. Further, the answer to the first question of the treatise section also has words of carrying-over: 「又經將訖」 tr. "Again, the sūtra is about to end"〔T25 0729a13〕, pointing to the sūtra explained being near its end—this chapter stands eighty-seventh among the ninety chapters of the sūtra explained, and after it there are only three chapters, Ever Weeping, Dharmodgata, and Entrustment, which fits these words.

Third, the carrying-over of chapter order—"Equality" and "Sadāprarudita". The preceding chapter is "Equality", Chapter 86 (its title at〔T25 0724a08〕), and the next chapter "Sadāprarudita", Chapter 88 (its title at〔T25 0731a07〕). The opening question of this chapter carries on from the 「平等」 tr. "equality" of the preceding chapter—「若諸法平等、無所為作」 tr. "if dharmas are equal and there is nothing to be done"〔T25 0728b23〕, and the treatise-author also himself points to this carrying-over: 「以是事難解故，雖先說而更問。」 tr. "Because this matter is hard to understand, although it was spoken of before he asks again."〔T25 0729a13〕. As for the next chapter, within the range of this chapter this treatise has no explicit words pointing to the next chapter (this section searched back through this chapter character by character, and 「薩陀波崙」 tr. "Sadāprarudita" and 「常啼」 tr. "Ever Weeping" both have zero hits), so the carrying-over between the two chapters is seen only in their order and not in a statement of the treatise-author; recorded separately as it is. Jizang's explanation at the end of this chapter likewise stops within this chapter, without pointing to the next chapter.

Fourth, the thread of the two siddhānta (a point where this treatise and Jizang agree). This chapter's treatise section divides, by the two siddhānta of counteraction and of the highest meaning, the bodhisattva's teaching and transforming from Subhūti's difficulty—「菩薩教化眾生，是為對治悉檀；須菩提以第一義悉檀無利益為難。」 tr. "The bodhisattva teaching and transforming beings is the siddhānta of counteraction; Subhūti makes his difficulty from the siddhānta of the highest meaning, in which there is no benefit."〔T25 0729a25〕; 「對治悉檀」 tr. "the siddhānta of counteraction" is seen once in this chapter (nine times in the whole treatise), 「第一義悉檀」 tr. "the siddhānta of the highest meaning" once in this chapter (fourteen times in the whole treatise), and the two names coming out together as a pair occur only at this one place in this chapter. Jizang at the same passage also makes the same assignment of the two siddhānta (see Section VI); the two agree here; their agreement is recorded without judging which came first. The full list of the four siddhānta does not come out in this chapter, only two of them; recorded separately as it is.

Fifth, linking to the treasury (stable citation · soft citation). This chapter's main simile of 「化人作化人」 tr. "a conjured person conjures a conjured person", its blocking in 「空空故空，不應分別是空、是化」 tr. "empty because of the emptiness of emptiness; one should not discriminate: this is emptiness, this is conjuration", its judgement in 「一切法皆是化」 tr. "all dharmas are conjuration" and in the six kinds of transformation, its setting-up in 「無誑相涅槃，是法非變化」 tr. "nirvāṇa with the mark of non-deception: this dharma is not transformation", its meaning of teaching for the sake of people in 「為新發意菩薩故，說涅槃不如化」 tr. "for the sake of bodhisattvas who have newly aroused the mind, I say that nirvāṇa is not like a conjuration", and its words that set the mind at rest in 「初自無故，不應恐怖」 tr. "because from the first they are non-existent of themselves, one should not be afraid" are what later discussions rest on—of whether nirvāṇa is like a conjuration, of the two truths as two medicines, and of the emptiness of nature not being annihilation—and are entered as stable citations〔T25n1509 涅槃如化品·卷九十六〕; the places in the other volumes that cite this treatise are not yet finalised, so the citation is soft, awaiting word-for-word verification of their holding. This belongs to the further resonances of the gate of proof running down from the meaning of prajñā; recorded without judgement.

VIII. Witnesses and Editions

The base text of this chapter is Fascicle 96 of the Mahāprajñāpāramitā-upadeśa〔T25 0728b18–0731a07〕 (the main text of the chapter body begins from the chapter title〔T25 0728b18〕 and ends with the sentence 「但為除顛倒耳」 tr. "it is only in order to remove inversion", running on to〔T25 0731a06〕; before the title of the next chapter〔T25 0731a07〕; this chapter's title is precisely the fascicle-head title of Fascicle 96, while the fascicle-end title of Fascicle 96 is at〔T25 0733c21〕, already within the range of the next chapter); the collation text for the sūtra explained is "Like a Conjuration" of the Mahāprajñāpāramitā Sūtra〔T08 0415b27–0416a16〕; the ancient-master commentary text for collation is Jizang's Commentary on the Larger Sūtra (X24n0451, covering the sūtra explained at〔X24n0451 0339b19–0340c05〕); Huiying's Commentary (X46n0791) lacks an explanation of this chapter, Junzheng's Profound Meaning of the Four Mahāyāna Treatises (X46n0784) has one doctrinal paraphrase by name, and the four Tiantai files and the Commentary on the Vimalakīrti Sūtra have zero citations (see also Section VI). The variant collation notes follow the Taishō collation, covering the 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 thirty-seven entries no entry of the Shōgozō B text is seen, and no entry of the Korean Canon or of the CBETA emendation layer is seen; the numbers with which the texts enter the ledger (mechanically recounted values · one entry may involve several texts): the Ishiyama twenty-three, the Palace fourteen, the Ming thirteen, the Song twelve, the Yuan twelve, the Shōgozō ten. The Ishiyama text's number of entries stands first and exceeds each of the other texts by more than half, a feature of the distribution of this chapter's collation notes, recorded as it is.

Two notes on structural markers · entering the ledger of thirty-seven entries (a type differing from Chapter 77 · listed separately). The notes on this chapter's two structural markers, 【經】 and 【論】, each carry a paired anchor and each generates a collation entry, so they enter this section's thirty-seven entries (entries two and twelve of the ledger below), differing from Chapter 77, whose notes on structural markers are anchorless point notes that do not enter the ledger. The two notes have the same wording: 「【經】【大】，〔－〕【宋】【宮】【聖】」 tr. "sūtra marker (Taishō), omitted (Song, Palace, Shōgozō)"〔T25 0728b23〕 and 「【論】【大】，〔－〕【宋】【宮】【聖】」 tr. "treatise marker (Taishō), omitted (Song, Palace, Shōgozō)"〔T25 0729a10〕—the three texts of the Song, Palace, and Shōgozō lack both structural markers in this chapter. Whether a marker is present belongs to the layer of the base text's transmission, and the structural count of this edition still follows the base text's labels.

Zero stars (listed separately · an honest record of a negative proposition). This section scanned the whole range of this chapter〔T25 0728b18–0731a07〕 for star anchors, with zero hits—within the range of this chapter there is no star anchor and nothing is borrowed in from outside; however, the collation wording of the note on the sūtra marker at this chapter's〔T25 0728b23〕 is shared by a star anchor later in the text at〔T25 0731a08〕, this chapter's collation wording being lent out, and this chapter's own thirty-seven entries are still all collation entries of the paired-anchor type. The nearest cluster of star anchors lies within the passage of the preceding chapter, "Equality", far before the starting point of this chapter, not within the range of this chapter, and is not mis-assigned. The side of the sūtra explained is otherwise: within the range of this chapter it has two star anchors, while their corresponding collation entries both lie outside this chapter (see Section IV); the distribution of stars of the two canons in this chapter forms exactly the two ends of presence and absence; recorded as it is.

The list of the working base text agreeing entry by entry with the base text (listed separately · one entry once in doubt now settled by the base text). The thirty-seven entries of the ledger below were mechanically collated entry by entry with the list at the end of the working base-text file, and all thirty-seven agree. Among them, entry twenty-five〔T25 0730a28〕 is written in two different ways at two places within the base text itself; this section records both character by character: first, the lemma of the base text's collation entry reads as it stands 「終、始」 tr. "end, beginning" (the enumerating comma lying within the lemma), and the base text's main text also reads 「以天眼觀眾生皆無有終、始、中間。」 tr. "contemplate beings with the divine eye as all without end, without beginning, and without middle."〔T25 0730a28〕; second, the wording of the collation note of the same entry reads as it stands 「終始【大】，始終【元】【明】」 tr. "end beginning (Taishō), beginning and end (Yuan, Ming)" (without the enumerating comma). That is, the enumerating comma is seen in the base text's main text and in the lemma of the collation entry, but not in the wording of the collation note—both come from the base text and yet are written differently; this section, following the lemma of the collation entry, records it as 「終、始【大】｜始終【元】【明】」 tr. "end, beginning (Taishō) | beginning and end (Yuan, Ming)", and explicitly records that the wording of the collation note reads 「終始」 tr. "end beginning", without judging which is correct for the base text. Among this chapter's thirty-seven entries, this is the only one in which the lemma of the collation entry and the wording of the collation note differ on the face of the text in this way; the other thirty-six agree (the notes of the three entries of the chapter title and the two structural markers abbreviate by a character count, which is not a difference on the face of the text).

General collation ledger (a full reckoning of thirty-seven entries · the base text as it stands). Below they are listed in full in the order of their appearance in the base text. The readings of the variant texts are preserved side by side, while the main text still follows the reading of the current base text:

Collation entries (thirty-seven · in order of appearance in the base text)

• 〔T25 0728b18〕大智度論釋涅槃如化品第八十七（卷第九十六）【大】｜大智度論卷第九十六釋第八十七如化品（訖八十八品上）【宋】【元】【宮】｜大智度論卷第九十六釋如化品第八十七【明】｜大智度論卷第九十六釋第八十六品訖八十七品【聖】｜大智度經品第八十六涅槃不如化【石】 (three versions of the chapter name · the Shōgozō and Ishiyama chains both -1 · inside the round brackets is the base text's interlinear note · see Section IV)
• 〔T25 0728b23〕【經】【大】｜〔－〕【宋】【宮】【聖】 (note on the presence of the structural marker · see the separate listing above)
• 〔T25 0728b24〕平等【大】｜平等法【聖】【石】 (the reading of the two texts Shōgozō and Ishiyama is precisely the reading of the base text of the sūtra explained · see Section IV)
• 〔T25 0728b26〕說【大】｜言【石】 (the Ishiyama reading is precisely the reading of the base text of the sūtra explained · see Section IV)
• 〔T25 0728b29〕想【大】｜相【宋】【元】【明】【宮】【聖】 (the notion of I and self / the mark of I and self · the side of the sūtra explained also has a note of the same kind at the same position)
• 〔T25 0728c06〕化【大】｜化人【聖】【石】
• 〔T25 0728c10〕所以者何【大】｜何以故【石】 (mirroring the note on the side of the sūtra explained · see Section IV)
• 〔T25 0728c13〕法【大】｜法亦復是化不【聖】【石】 (mirroring the note on the side of the sūtra explained · see Section IV)
• 〔T25 0728c22〕諸【大】｜〔－〕【石】
• 〔T25 0728c24〕皆【大】｜〔－〕【石】
• 〔T25 0728c24〕須【大】｜〔－〕【石】
• 〔T25 0729a10〕【論】【大】｜〔－〕【宋】【宮】【聖】 (note on the presence of the structural marker · the same wording as entry two · see the separate listing above)
• 〔T25 0729a17〕還【大】｜〔－〕【宋】【元】【明】【宮】
• 〔T25 0729a26〕檀【大】｜檀無檀【宋】【元】【明】【宮】 (a variant reading of the expression ‘the siddhānta of counteraction’)
• 〔T25 0729b07〕名【大】｜〔－〕【石】
• 〔T25 0729b07〕何【大】｜〔－〕【石】
• 〔T25 0729b19〕是【大】｜〔－〕【宋】【元】【明】【宮】
• 〔T25 0729b22〕貴【大】｜敬【石】 (deeply values the dharmas of the Buddha / deeply reveres the dharmas of the Buddha)
• 〔T25 0729b25〕化【大】｜化人【石】
• 〔T25 0729c13〕是【大】｜〔－〕【石】
• 〔T25 0729c19〕形【大】｜〔－〕【聖】【石】 (shapes and images / images)
• 〔T25 0729c21〕說【大】｜說於【石】
• 〔T25 0730a08〕當常【大】｜富【宋】【元】【明】【宮】 (so that his later body shall be permanent and happy / so that his later body shall be rich and happy · a variant reading of the sentence on the near cause)
• 〔T25 0730a19〕咎【大】｜各【宮】
• 〔T25 0730a28〕終、始【大】｜始終【元】【明】 (the enumerating comma lies within the base text's lemma · see the separate listing above)
• 〔T25 0730a29〕主【大】｜生【明】 (the master of conjuration / conjured birth)
• 〔T25 0730a29〕作【大】｜化【元】【明】
• 〔T25 0730b07〕夫【大】｜夫人【聖】【石】 (ordinary / ordinary people)
• 〔T25 0730b15〕惑【大】｜或【石】 (deceive and delude / deceive and the variant character for ‘perhaps’)
• 〔T25 0730b20〕求【大】｜〔－〕【宋】【元】【明】【宮】
• 〔T25 0730c07〕為【大】｜〔－〕【石】
• 〔T25 0730c22〕空【大】｜空法【宋】【元】【明】【宮】【聖】【石】 (the only entry in which all six texts differ from the base text)
• 〔T25 0730c23〕坑【大】｜想【宮】 (like standing at the edge of a deep pit / like standing at the edge of a deep thought)
• 〔T25 0731a01〕發意【大】｜學【宋】【元】【明】【宮】【石】 (those who have newly aroused the mind / those new to the training)
• 〔T25 0731a04〕新【大】｜〔－〕【石】
• 〔T25 0731a04〕諸【大】｜謂【宋】【元】【明】【宮】
• 〔T25 0731a06〕耳【大】｜耳釋第八十六品竟【石】 (the Ishiyama text's closing record at the end of the chapter · -1 · see Section IV)

The thirty-seven entries above agree mechanically with the number of anchored collation notes of the working base text (the list of the working base text, thirty-seven entries · the base text's collation entries with paired anchors, thirty-seven · collation entries of the star type, zero · mechanically recounted values). The two notes on structural markers have been listed separately above; this chapter has no stars and no point-anchor notes that do not enter the ledger, so the thirty-seven entries are the whole of this chapter's collation notes.

Witnesses of the sūtra explained compared (fifteen places unfolded · the rest not unfolded · the gap recorded, awaiting supplement). Within the range of comparison for this chapter on the side of the sūtra explained, T223,〔T08 0415b27–0416a16〕, this section scanned entry by entry and found seventeen collation notes of the paired-anchor type and two star anchors; the fifteen variant places that bear on this treatise have been recorded entry by entry in Section IV, among which in five places the collation notes of the two sides form an exact mirror image (the equal dharma · for what reason / why · are world-transcending dharmas also conjuration or not · empty because of the emptiness of emptiness · without deception / not deceiving), four places can be matched in one direction (what is done / what can be done · if worldly dharmas · all dharmas are all ultimately empty of nature · what does not arise or cease), and in the remaining six places the collation notes of the two sides do not collate the same character, or one side has no collation note, all marked place by place. Of the seventeen entries on the side of the sūtra explained, the one entry at〔T08 0416a11〕 (the Shōgozō's variant word order of forty-four characters), because what it collates is precisely the pivotal sentence of this chapter, has been recorded side by side character by character in Section IV; the entry-by-entry recording side by side of the other sixteen entries has not been unfolded, and the fact that it has not been unfolded is recorded as it is, awaiting a later supplementary check, not filled with estimated values. Further, at the head and at the end of this chapter on the side of the sūtra explained there is one note each added by the editorial layer (below the chapter title, 「梵無區分」 tr. "the Sanskrit has no division", and at the end of the note on the title opening the next chapter, 「以下梵闕」 tr. "from here on the Sanskrit is lacking"), added by the modern editorial layer and not transmitted by the ancient masters; for the basis in Sanskrit only what the ancient masters transmitted is taken, so this section only records their existence and position, and does not cite their wording as a basis for this chapter's doctrine or Sanskrit source; the same note on the title opening the next chapter also records 「不分卷【聖】」 tr. "not divided into fascicles (Shōgozō)", a record of fascicle numbering on the side of the sūtra explained, recorded together.