大智度論 薩陀波崙品·卷九十八論段Dazhidulun — Mahāprajñāpāramitā-upadeśa · Sadāprarudita, Part 4 of 4

Sadāprarudita, Fascicle 98, Treatise Section: Why the Buddhas, at the Very Place Where He Obtained the Samādhis, Instead Teach That the Samādhis Have No Real Substance; Why, Having Already Heard That Dharmodgata Is His Good Friend Life after Life, He Asks Again Who His Good Friend Is; Why, Having Earlier Wept for Seven Days, He Now Does Not Grieve When He No Longer Sees the Buddhas; Why, Offering the Dharma Being the Higher, He Still Seeks Flowers and Incense; Why a Great Bodhisattva Is Poor, and Why, of the Two Kinds of Poverty, Poverty in the Dharma Is the Most Shameful; Why the Doubt as to Who Buys Him When He Sells Himself Is Answered by Saying That Giving Up the Body Is Itself a Great Offering; Why Māra Comes to Ruin Him and Why He Does Not Kill Him; Why a Mind Not Yet Settled Cannot Move Māra; Why the Names Brahmin and Householder Must Be Distinguished Just Here; Why the Elder's Daughter Alone Could Hear the Voice; Why Śakra, Having Obtained the Knowledge of Others' Minds, Still Has to Come and Test Him; Why False Speech Does Not Become an Offence Here; Why Great Benefit and the Foremost Benefit Must Be Distinguished Step by Step; Why the Elder's Daughter Comes Only When He Breaks His Body and Draws Out the Marrow; Why the Five Explanations of the Unsurpassed Dharma Jewel Stand Side by Side without Judgement; How He Could Teach the Dharma for Others While Cutting His Body; How the Wounds Could Be Made Whole as Before; Why, Having First Said to Ask Her for It, She Changes to Saying to Ask Her Parents; Why the Elder, on Once Hearing the Buddha's Merits, Could Send His Daughter Off; Why Dharmodgata, Having Already Mastered It, Needs a Terrace of the Seven Jewels to Write Out the Scroll of the Sūtra; Why He First Goes to the Terrace and Only Afterwards Bows to the Person; Why Arousing the Mind on Seeing Supernormal Power and Majestic Virtue Does Not Go against the Bodhisattva's Dharma of First Giving Rise to a Compassionate Mind; Why Relying on Love to Sever Love and Relying on Pride to Sever Pride Is Not Taking the Afflictions as the Path; Why, in the Final Explanation, One Who Has Obtained the Great Samādhis Still Grasps at the Mark of a Buddha and Gives Rise to Deep Love and Clinging

What Is Being Asked

This segment is the treatise-author's explanatory text on the long story of seeking the Dharma that precedes it. Anyone can read the story itself through—going east, weeping, selling himself, cutting his flesh, the elder's daughter arousing the mind, the terrace of the seven jewels, seeing Dharmodgata—but being able to read it through is not the same as understanding it. What the treatise-author does is precisely to drag out, one by one, the places that are ‘readable, yet in fact without footing’ and ask about them. The whole segment has twenty-three rounds of question and answer, together with fifteen places where divergent explanations are set out side by side (「有人言」 tr. "someone says" fourteen times, 「又人言」 tr. "again someone says" once); what is asked is not the plot of the story but the Dharma beneath the plot.

The very first question is asked at the place that looks smoothest. Sadāprarudita had already heard from the mouth of the conjured buddha 「曇無竭是汝世世善知識」 tr. "Dharmodgata is your good friend life after life", yet now, seeing the buddhas of the ten directions, he asks again 「何等是我善知識」 tr. "Who is my good friend?"—since he already knows, why ask again? The treatise-author's answer is only two sentences: one says that the Buddha commanded that toward the good friend one should redouble one's reverence; the other says that he wished to hear Dharmodgata's merits in person before the buddhas of the ten directions, so as to make his own faith firm and free of doubt. When one who seeks the Dharma asks once more about a matter already known, it is not a bad memory; it is that faith has to be set up once again before the highest of witnesses.

The next question shows its sense of measure still more. Earlier, he had only heard the voice in the sky and did not manage to ask, and so he wept for seven days; now the buddhas of the ten directions appear and vanish again, yet he is not greatly grieved, and only thinks with one mind of when he will see Dharmodgata. If this contrast between before and after is not asked about, the reader takes it only as the rise and fall of the story. The treatise-author's answer connects it back to the Dharma: earlier he had only the fleshly eye and had not yet obtained samādhi, so his clinging mind was heavy and he wept; now he has obtained the power of the samādhis and has also seen the buddhas of the ten directions, his afflictions have become slight and thin, and his clinging mind has already parted, and so he does not weep. Weeping and not weeping measure the depth of the mind-ground, not the rise and fall of emotion.

Further on, what the treatise-author asks is almost all of one type: this person is plainly already thus, so why would he still be like that?—Having obtained the power of samādhi, why does he not turn back and enter samādhi to ask the buddhas himself, but runs off to ask a person? Since he does not cling to worldly matters, why does he belittle himself as poor and seek flowers and incense? Being a great bodhisattva who can see the buddhas of the ten directions, why is he poor? Since he does not cherish his body, why does he still grieve when he cries out three times and no one buys? Śakra knows the minds of others by what he has obtained as retribution, so why must he still come to test him? Śakra is a great heavenly king, so why does he lie? Having already cut and severed his own body, how can he still teach the elder's daughter so much of the Buddha-Dharma? The flesh having already been cut, how can it be made whole as before? Since Dharmodgata has already mastered and retains prajñā, why use a terrace of the seven jewels to write out the scroll of the sūtra?—Every question points to the same sickness in reading: taking a state already accomplished as a fixed label stuck on a person, and then using the label to measure the plot that follows. The treatise-author's way of answering is uniformly to divide into layers: this person is accomplished in this layer and not yet accomplished in that layer; at this time his mind is not yet settled, at that time his mind is already settled; for himself it is not needed, for beings it is needed.

There is another line of questions and answers, which asks not about the person but about the marks of dharmas. At the moment when he cries out three times and no one buys, the treatise-author suddenly stops to distinguish the names 「婆羅門」 tr. "brahmin" and 「居士」 tr. "householder"—one who has received the precepts is named a brahmin, all others are commonly named householders, and this householder is 「居舍之士」 tr. "a gentleman who dwells in a house", not the householder among the four castes. When Śakra comes to test him and Sadāprarudita, rejoicing, says of himself 「我得大利」 tr. "I have obtained a great benefit", the treatise-author distinguishes great benefit and the foremost benefit step by step, giving six pairs in all, ranging from the avaivartika and the Buddha path all the way to the bodhisattva ground and the Buddha ground. When the elder's daughter asks what benefit he will obtain and Sadāprarudita answers with the unsurpassed Dharma Jewel, the treatise-author sets side by side five 「有人言」 tr. "someone says": the Dharma Jewel among the Three Jewels, the eighty-four thousand collections of the Dharma, anuttarā samyaksaṃbodhi, nirvāṇa, and the path to nirvāṇa—set side by side and not judged. This kind of question and answer pins down the names and marks that flash past in the story, so that they have a definite boundary of meaning to rely on.

The final question is the eye of the whole segment. Sadāprarudita has already obtained the great samādhis of breaking ignorance, of contemplating the nature of dharmas, and the rest; why does he still not know emptiness, but grasp at the mark of a Buddha and give rise to deep love and clinging? The treatise-author answers with the utmost honesty: a bodhisattva who has newly aroused the mind, although he can know by the general mark that dharmas are empty and signless, because he deeply loves and clings to the buddhas, 「不能解佛相畢竟空，雖知空而不能與空合」 tr. "cannot understand that the mark of a Buddha is ultimately empty; though he knows emptiness he cannot be united with emptiness". Knowing emptiness and being united with emptiness are two matters. This one sentence points out at a stroke the station of the whole story of seeking the Dharma—what Sadāprarudita practises is the practice of a person who knows emptiness but is not yet united with emptiness; he is able not to cherish his body precisely because he clings; and he still has to ask 「諸佛從何所來」 tr. "From where do the buddhas come?" also precisely because he clings. The questions and answers of the whole segment are gathered up here, and the answer to what is asked lies in the next chapter.

Passage by Passage

1. The buddhas teach the Dharma, and Sadāprarudita's mind rejoices and his intent is fulfilled. As he begins his explanation the treatise-author first sets down a sentence that holds the whole: 「薩陀波崙渴仰欲聞般若故，見十方諸佛為大眾說法，其心歡喜、其意得滿。」 tr. "Because Sadāprarudita thirsted and yearned to hear prajñā, he saw the buddhas of the ten directions teaching the Dharma for the great assembly; his mind rejoiced, and his intent was fulfilled." The reader must keep an eye on what the two Chinese characters 「渴仰」 tr. "thirsted and yearned" are tied to: it is 「欲聞般若」 tr. "to hear prajñā", not wishing to see the buddhas. What he rejoices in is that the Dharma is about to be obtainable, not that a state has appeared before him; the ground on which the buddhas below set about breaking his clinging to the samādhis lies right here: his original vow was from the first in the Dharma.

2. Because his power of faith is firm and his vigour hard to shake, the buddhas console him and praise him. The treatise-author points out the reason for the buddhas' consolation as lying in 「信力堅固、精進難動」 tr. "his power of faith was firm and his vigour hard to shake". The words of consolation are 「善哉！我本初行菩薩道求般若時，亦如汝今。汝莫憂愁自謂福薄！」 tr. "Excellent! When I first practised the bodhisattva path and sought prajñā, I too was as you are now. Do not grieve, calling yourself of thin merit!"—the buddhas do not say that he is already very good, but that I too was like this at the beginning. For anyone who feels himself to be of thin merit, the most powerful remedy is not praise but the testimony of one who has gone ahead on the same road. This way of speaking the reader can take up directly when encouraging people in daily life.

3. The buddhas teach him that when one searches for the nature of the samādhis, no real substance is seen. This is the first reversal of the whole segment. Sadāprarudita 「大得諸三昧力，其心深著」 tr. "greatly obtained the power of the samādhis, and his mind clung to them deeply"; the buddhas do not go along with his joy and add praise, but instead tell him 「求諸三昧性，不見實體，亦不見入三昧、出三昧者」 tr. "when one searches for the nature of the samādhis, no real substance is seen, nor is anyone seen who enters a samādhi or comes out of a samādhi", and the principle relied on is 「眾生空、法空故」 tr. "because beings are empty and dharmas are empty". Look clearly: what is broken is not samādhi but the mind that clings to samādhi; the medicine used is no other dharma but precisely the two emptinesses he can already know by the general mark. For anyone who gives rise to clinging toward a dharma he has obtained, the remedy has always lain in the dharma he himself already knows.

4. The buddhas briefly teach him the mark of prajñāpāramitā. The mark of prajñā the buddhas point out with only one passage: 「不念有是法，所謂一切法無相故不可念著。我等住是無所念法中，能具足六波羅蜜；具足六波羅蜜故，得佛金色身。」 tr. "Do not think that this dharma exists; that is, because all dharmas are signless, they cannot be thought of and clung to. We, abiding in this dharma of recollecting nothing, are able to be complete with the six perfections; because we are complete with the six perfections, we obtain the golden body of a Buddha." There is a gradation in these words that may not be passed over—recollecting nothing is not doing nothing at all; it is being able, within recollecting nothing, to be complete with the six perfections, and only after being complete with the six perfections is there the body of a Buddha. If 「不念」 tr. "do not think" is read as stopping everything, then the six perfections and the golden body both have nowhere to stand. At the end the treatise-author ties its source with 「如經中說」 tr. "as said in the sūtra", and records 「諸佛教化利喜，安慰其心」 tr. "the buddhas taught and transformed him, caused him to obtain benefit and joy, and consoled his mind".

5. The question: having already heard that Dharmodgata is his good friend life after life, why does he ask again who his good friend is? The treatise-author's first question asks about the repeated question. What he takes up is what the conjured buddha said earlier, 「曇無竭是汝世世善知識」 tr. "Dharmodgata is your good friend life after life", together with the present question 「何等是我善知識」 tr. "Who is my good friend?" Whenever the treatise-author sets up a question about a repeated sentence, he is reminding the reader: the sūtra text writes no idle strokes, and where something is repeated there is always a purpose.

6. The answer: because he should redouble his reverence, and because he wished to hear Dharmodgata's merits in the presence of the buddhas of the ten directions so as to make his faith firm. The answer has two layers: one layer is tied to the Buddha's command—「以佛勅於善知識中倍應恭敬愛念故」 tr. "because the Buddha commanded him that toward the good friend he should redouble his reverence and loving regard"; one layer is tied to his own mind—wishing to hear Dharmodgata's merits in person in the presence of the buddhas of the ten directions, 「欲自令信心堅固不疑故問」 tr. "he asked because he wished to make his own faith firm and free of doubt". The second layer is most worth taking as a model: knowing a matter and being able to trust a matter are two layers; one whose faith is insufficient should ask once more at the most trustworthy place—this is not superfluous; it is the work of turning knowing into faith.

7. The answer of the buddhas of the ten directions, and the meaning of the buddhas' assisting and guiding. Explaining why the buddhas of the ten directions were willing to answer, the treatise-author gives a general rule: 「薩陀波崙是曇無竭所度因緣人故，諸佛佐助示導。」 tr. "Sadāprarudita is a person whose causes and conditions are to be delivered by Dharmodgata, so the buddhas assisted and guided him." He also extends it: 「或有諸菩薩佐助佛所應度者，令至佛所。」 tr. "Or there are bodhisattvas who assist those whom a Buddha is to deliver, causing them to reach the Buddha's presence." This mutual help, going one way and coming the other, shows that delivering and transforming is not each acting on his own: one who has an affinity with this person leads the way for that one, and one who has an affinity with that person leads the way for this one. Here the reader can resolve the doubt ‘why is my good friend not the Buddha but a certain person?’

8. The question: earlier he wept for seven days; why now, no longer seeing the buddhas of the ten directions, is he instead not grieved? The treatise-author sets the earlier and later conduct side by side as a question: then, 「上聞虛空聲不問故，七日啼哭」 tr. "above, when he heard the voice in the sky, because he had not asked, he wept for seven days"; now, no longer seeing the buddhas of the ten directions, he is 「不大憂愁、更求見佛，但欲於曇無竭所問諸佛去來事」 tr. "not greatly grieved and does not seek again to see the buddhas, but wishes only to ask, in Dharmodgata's presence, about the coming and going of the buddhas". This question is asked with great fineness—the same person, with what he seeks equally absent, why are his reactions opposite?

9. The answer: earlier he had only the fleshly eye; now he has obtained the power of samādhi and his afflictions are slight and thin. The answer ties each of the two reactions to its cause: earlier, 「但有肉眼，未得三昧，以深心信著善法故，大啼哭」 tr. "he had only the fleshly eye and had not yet obtained samādhi; because in his deep mind he believed in and clung to wholesome dharmas, he wept greatly"; now, 「得諸三昧力，又見十方佛，諸煩惱微薄，著心已離故」 tr. "because he has obtained the power of the samādhis and has also seen the buddhas of the ten directions, his afflictions have become slight and thin, and his clinging mind has already parted", so he only thinks with one mind: 「我當何時見曇無竭？」 tr. "When shall I see Dharmodgata?" Take note of the four Chinese characters 「信著善法」 tr. "believed in and clung to wholesome dharmas"—the root of the weeping lay not in sorrow but in clinging; when the clinging lessens, the weeping stops, and the vow remains. A practitioner need not take his being unable to weep as retreat, nor may he take his being able to weep as progress.

10. The question: having obtained the power of samādhi, why does he not turn back and enter samādhi to ask the buddhas himself, but wishes to ask Dharmodgata? The treatise-author presses one question further: since he has the power to see the buddhas of the ten directions, would it not be straight and quick to enter concentration himself and ask? Why seek a person? This question is raised on the reader's behalf; anyone who, relying on having a small share of concentration and wisdom, makes light of seeking a teacher is thinking precisely this question.

11. The answer: the buddhas of the ten directions, by all kinds of causes and conditions, praised Dharmodgata as his teacher life after life. The answer offers no theory and points only to the fact: since the buddhas of the ten directions had already, by all kinds of causes and conditions, praised him, saying 「曇無竭世世是汝師」 tr. "Dharmodgata has been your teacher life after life", to ask the teacher is precisely to follow the buddhas' teaching. From this the reader can know: having the ability to ask oneself and properly relying on a teacher are two different matters; where one's own power reaches, one does not abandon taking support—this is the rule of seeking the Dharma.

12. He recollects that Dharmodgata is a cause and condition of his former lives, and so gives rise to reverence and honour. Here the treatise-author separates two layers of the mind's conduct: 「以有大功德故尊重，是先世因緣故恭敬愛樂。」 tr. "Because he had great merit, he honoured him; because he was a cause and condition of his former lives, he revered, loved, and delighted in him." Honour is tied to the other's virtue; reverence, love, and delight are tied to the affinity between them. The two arise together but rest on different things—virtue everyone can revere; affinity belongs to each where it belongs. When the reader chooses teachers and friends, if these two layers are clearly separated, he will neither make light of a person's virtue nor force an affinity that is not there.

13. The question: since he does not cling to worldly matters, why does he belittle himself as poor and seek flowers and incense? The treatise-author takes up the earlier text, 「薩陀波崙不大著世間事，深愛般若波羅蜜故，愁憂啼哭」 tr. "Sadāprarudita did not greatly cling to worldly matters; because he deeply loved prajñāpāramitā, he grieved and wept", and asks why he now 「自鄙貧窮，無以供養」 tr. "belittles himself as poor, having nothing to offer". Within the question he also sets up a solution himself: 「但以好心隨師意，則是法供養，何用華香為？」 tr. "If only he follows the teacher's intent with a good mind, that is offering the Dharma; why must he use flowers and incense?" This posited solution is very forceful—it is almost exactly what an ordinary reader has in mind; the treatise-author first says it out in full, and only then answers—this is the treatise-author's habitual way of questioning: first saying the objector's words out in full for him.

14. The answer: although offering the Dharma is the higher, when worldly beings see one with nothing at all they do not give rise to a joyful mind. The first layer of the answer does not fall on himself but on the onlookers: 「世間眾生見遠來求法而空無所有，則不發喜心；以世法故，求供養具。」 tr. "When worldly beings see one who has come from afar seeking the Dharma with nothing at all, they do not give rise to a joyful mind; it is because of worldly dharmas that he seeks means of offering." One must keep an eye on the four Chinese characters 「以世法故」 tr. "because of worldly dharmas"—seeking means of offering is not because offering the Dharma is not enough, but because one must accord with what worldly people see and hear and cause them to give rise to joy. This is for others, not for oneself.

15. The answer, second: the five perfections aid prajñā, and giving is the first among them. The second layer is tied to the sequence of the Dharma: 「五波羅蜜為助般若波羅蜜法，助法中檀波羅蜜為首。」 tr. "The five perfections are dharmas that help prajñāpāramitā, and among the helping dharmas dānapāramitā is the first." So Sadāprarudita reflected: 「我得尊重福田曇無竭菩薩，當以助道法根本供養。」 tr. "I have found the honoured field of merit, the bodhisattva Dharmodgata; I should make offerings to him with the root of the dharmas that aid the path." He also had the intent of rousing the multitude: 「薩陀波崙是智人、善人，貧窮而能供養，何況我等！」 tr. "Sadāprarudita is a wise person and a good person; poor as he is, he can still make offerings—how much more we!"—that a poor person can give is precisely the most powerful encouragement. The reader may not read this layer as competing with others; what the treatise-author takes is its use as encouragement.

16. The answer, third: wholesome dharmas have different flavours at the time of practising them and at the time of reflecting on them. The third layer is the subtlest: 「諸善法行時、思惟時，其味各異；薩陀波崙欲行布施味，是故求供養具。」 tr. "Wholesome dharmas have flavours that differ from one another at the time of practising them and at the time of reflecting on them; Sadāprarudita wished to practise the flavour of giving, and therefore sought means of offering." Reflecting on giving and actually practising giving have different flavours—this sentence is a true word about practice. Anyone who excuses himself with ‘it is enough that I have this intention in my heart’ can look at himself in just this sentence.

17. The question: a great bodhisattva who can see the buddhas of the ten directions and has also obtained the deep samādhis—why is he poor? The treatise-author raises another question, asking about the mismatch between one's state and one's retribution. The reason this question must be asked is that readers mostly assume tacitly that one whose path is high must have abundant merit; if this tacit assumption is not dragged out, the two divergent explanations that follow have no use.

18. Someone says: he left home to seek the path, and although born into a rich family he went alone by himself and carried no wealth. The first explanation is tied to the outward matter: 「此人捨家求佛道，雖生富家，道里懸遠，一身獨去，不齎財物。」 tr. "This person left home to seek the Buddha path; although he was born into a rich family, the road was long and distant, he went alone by himself, and carried no wealth."—it is not that he had nothing; it is that he did not bring it. This explanation is the most plain and solid, and the reader may not make light of it because it is plain: that a person on the path has nothing on him is mostly from causes and conditions of this kind.

19. Someone says: because of small offences in former lives he was born into a poor family; and the two kinds of poverty are distinguished. The second explanation is tied to the cause in deeds: 「雖是大人，宿世小罪因緣故，生貧窮家。有雖是小人，先世少行布施因緣故，生大富家。」 tr. "Although he is a great person, because of the causes and conditions of small offences in former lives he was born into a poor family. And some, although they are small people, because of the causes and conditions of having practised a little giving in former lives, are born into greatly rich families." And it cites as proof 「如蘇陀夷、尼陀等，是諸天所供養人，而生小家」 tr. "like Sutuoyi, Nituo, and others, who were people to whom the gods made offerings, yet were born into lowly families". Below this it further sets up a boundary of meaning: 「貧有二種：一者、財貧，二者、功德法貧。功德法貧，最大可恥！財貧，好人亦有；法貧，好人所無。」 tr. "Poverty is of two kinds: first, poverty in wealth; second, poverty in the dharmas of merit. Poverty in the dharmas of merit is the greatest shame! Poverty in wealth even good people may have; poverty in the Dharma good people do not have." At the end it explains the words 「無有華香」 tr. "having no flowers and incense", saying 「無有上妙寶華，又以少故言無」 tr. "having no supremely wondrous jewelled flowers; and further, because what he had was little, it is said that he had none". Here the reader obtains a standard of judgement: what is shameful lies not in having no wealth but in having no Dharma.

20. If I go empty-handed, although the teacher has no need of it, my mind will not obtain great joy—therefore he wishes to sell himself. The treatise-author closes this section with Sadāprarudita's own thought: 「我若空往，師雖不須，我心不得大喜，是故欲賣身。」 tr. "If I go empty-handed, although the teacher has no need of it, my mind will not obtain great joy; therefore I wish to sell myself."—what offering aims at lies not in whether the teacher needs it or not, but in whether one's own mind is fulfilled or not. These words are the true starting point of the whole matter of selling himself in this segment; if the reader skips this sentence, the cutting of the body and drawing out of marrow below become a performance of austerities.

21. The question: if he sells himself to another, who is it that buys this thing to make offerings to the teacher? This question is asked very concretely: the body obtained by selling oneself already belongs to the buyer, and the buyer will not necessarily be willing to take it to make offerings—so how does the matter of selling oneself to make offerings stand in fact and in principle? The treatise-author does not dodge this objection, which comes close to quibbling, precisely because the reader will think this way in his own mind.

22. The answer: giving up the body is itself a great offering; going and staying are without any place. The first layer of the answer is only eight Chinese characters: 「捨身即是大供養，去住無在。」 tr. "Giving up the body is itself a great offering; going and staying are both without any place."—the offering is already accomplished in the one thought of giving up, and whether the body goes or stays does not hinder its accomplishment. This answer moves the place where an offering is established from the thing to the mind, and it is the pivot of the whole section; the two explanations set out side by side below (one each under 「有人言」 tr. "someone says" and 「又人言」 tr. "again someone says") supplement it on the side of the outward matter; they do not overturn this answer.

23. Someone says: he sells himself to obtain wealth and makes offerings by means of another. One explanation says 「是人賣身取財，因人供養，我為供養故，賣身為奴」 tr. "this person sells himself to obtain wealth and makes offerings by means of another person; I, for the sake of making offerings, sell myself as a slave"—the price obtained is precisely the thing offered, and the body becomes a slave in repayment. This explanation lets selling oneself and making offerings connect in the outward matter, and the reader can know that the treatise-author does not, because of the answer on the side of the mind, abandon the principle on the side of the matter.

24. Again someone says: at that time the world was good, and the master would certainly allow him to make offerings and return. Another explanation is tied to the times: 「爾時世好，人皆知法，雖自賣身，主必能聽供養而還。」 tr. "At that time the world was good, and everyone knew the Dharma; although he sold himself, his master would certainly allow him to go and make offerings and then return."—the buyer too knew the Dharma, so he would certainly permit him to go and make offerings and afterwards come back. What this explanation relies on is the custom of the time; the treatise-author sets it side by side and does not judge, and the reader need not force a ranking among the three explanations either.

25. Further, inner giving is the weightier, so he sells the inner thing. The treatise-author gives his own correct explanation: this person aroused a deep mind and wished to practise dānapāramitā, 「為供養法及法師，而無外物，唯有己身，是故賣是內物。於外、內物中，內施為重，惜之深故。是故欲不破布施願故，賣身供養。」 tr. "for the sake of making offerings to the Dharma and to the Dharma teacher he had no outer things, only his own body, and therefore he sold this inner thing. Among outer things and inner things, inner giving is the weightier, because one cherishes it more deeply. Therefore, so as not to break his vow of giving, he sold himself to make offerings." One must keep an eye on the four Chinese characters 「惜之深故」 tr. "because one cherishes it more deeply"—the reason inner giving is weighty is precisely that what is given up is what one cherishes most. The weight of a gift is not reckoned by the value of the thing but by the depth of one's cherishing; this is the true standard of judgement for dānapāramitā.

26. Here he himself states the causes and conditions of his having no regret. The treatise-author points out that the sūtra text carries its own reason for having no regret: 「我世世喪身無數，未曾為清淨法故，今為供養說法者故喪是身，大得法利。」 tr. "Life after life I have lost my body countless times, yet never for the sake of the pure Dharma; now, losing this body for the sake of making offerings to the one who teaches the Dharma, I greatly obtain the benefit of the Dharma."—it is the same losing of the body, but the former times were lost in vain, while this time there is a gain. Here the reader can see that this person is not making light of life; what he is reckoning is a very clear account.

27. With a settled mind he severs the intent of greedily cherishing his body, enters a great city, and cries out Who needs a person? The treatise-author narrates his entering the city, and points out the purpose of each step: entering a great city is 「欲得賣買如意故」 tr. "because he wished his buying and selling to go as he wished"; wishing with one mind to sell himself and crying out 「誰須人？」 tr. "Who needs a person?" is 「除羞愧、破憍慢故」 tr. "in order to remove shame and break down arrogance". To cry oneself for sale before the crowd is hard to bear as an outward matter, yet in the Dharma it is precisely a counteraction—for anyone who holds himself in esteem this step is the hardest, and the place of difficulty is the place of use.

28. The question: why does Māra wish to break his intent? The deeds of Māra suddenly break in here, and the treatise-author first asks the reason. Whenever one reads a sūtra to the place where Māra appears, it is fitting first to follow the treatise-author in asking 「何以」 tr. "why", and not to take it merely as plot.

29. The answer: Māra is always the enemy of the buddhas and bodhisattvas. The first layer of the answer is a general rule: 「魔常為諸佛、菩薩怨家，故欲來破。」 tr. "Māra is always the enemy of the buddhas and bodhisattvas, and therefore he wishes to come and ruin him."—there is no need to seek any other cause and condition; hostility is his normal state. This sentence first fixes Māra's position, and only then can what follows speak of what kind of person can be ruined and what kind cannot.

30. Further, small bodhisattvas can be ruined; those who have obtained the acceptance of the non-arising of dharmas cannot be ruined. The second layer sets up a standard of judgement: 「諸小菩薩未得諸法實相，魔及惡人能壞；若得無生法忍、住諸菩薩神通力，無能破者。」 tr. "Small bodhisattvas have not yet obtained the real mark of all dharmas, and Māra and evil people can ruin them; if they have obtained the acceptance of the non-arising of dharmas and abide within the supernormal power of the bodhisattvas, there is nothing that can ruin them." And it makes this clear with a simile: 「如小樹栽，小兒能破；大，不可破。」 tr. "It is like the seedling of a small tree, which a small child can ruin; once it has grown large, it cannot be ruined." From this the reader can measure himself: the reason one is easily carried off by circumstances is not that Māra's power is great, but that one is oneself still at the seedling stage.

31. Further, here he himself states the causes and conditions of Māra's ruining. The third layer is tied to the sūtra text itself: namely 「是薩陀波崙愛法故，自賣身供養般若波羅蜜及法盛菩薩，當得正聞般若波羅蜜」 tr. "This Sadāprarudita, because he loves the Dharma, sells himself to make offerings to prajñāpāramitā and to the bodhisattva Dharma Flourishing; he will rightly hear prajñāpāramitā", as is told at length in the sūtra. The reason Māra comes is precisely that this matter is about to be accomplished—the greater what is about to be accomplished, the plainer the obstruction that comes. The reader can turn these words around and use them: where obstructions appear is mostly where a matter is about to be accomplished.

32. The question: why did he not ruin him earlier, but only now screens the brahmins and householders? The treatise-author again asks about timing: when he heard the voice in the sky and saw the buddhas of the ten directions, Māra did not stir at all; why, precisely at this time, does he screen the brahmins and householders so that they do not hear his cry of sale? This question draws out the timing of the deeds of Māra, and it is the most useful question of this section.

33. The answer: a mind not yet settled cannot move Māra; now the mark of a settled mind appears, and therefore Māra is alarmed. The answer sets up three divisions: 「若菩薩心未定，未能動魔；若大菩薩其心已定，魔亦不來。薩陀波崙今欲定心出魔境界，是故魔來。」 tr. "If a bodhisattva's mind is not yet settled, he cannot yet move Māra; if he is a great bodhisattva whose mind is already settled, Māra does not come either. Sadāprarudita now, with a settled mind, is about to leave Māra's realm, and therefore Māra comes."—one who is not yet settled is not enough to alarm Māra; one who is already settled Māra cannot reach; just at the moment of turning from not yet settled to settled, Māra exerts all his strength. It is concluded with a simile: 「譬如負債人，未欲遠去，債主不遮；欲出他界，則不聽去。」 tr. "It is like a debtor: while he does not yet wish to go far away, the creditor does not block him; when he is about to leave for another realm, he is not allowed to go." This simile fits exactly: what the creditor is anxious about is not that you owe, but that you are about to leave. When a practitioner suddenly meets adverse conditions just where his effort is growing tighter, he can read this and be at peace.

34. The question: Māra has great power; why does he not kill him but only ruin him? Since he wants to obstruct him, why not kill him outright? The treatise-author knows full well that the reader will think this way, and so sets up this question.

35. The answer: Māra is not jealous of his life but only hates his mind of becoming a Buddha; and by the dharma of the gods and spirits, a person without grave offence may not be killed recklessly. The answer has two layers: one layer is tied to Māra's intent—「魔本不嫉其壽命，但憎其作佛心，是故欲壞」 tr. "Māra from the first is not jealous of his life; he only hates his mind of becoming a Buddha, and therefore wishes to ruin it"; one layer is tied to the common dharma of the gods and spirits—「人無重罪，不得妄殺，但得壞亂恐怖」 tr. "if a person has no grave offence, they may not kill him recklessly, and may only disrupt and terrify him", and it is proved by the converse: 「若神無此法，則人無活者，是故不殺。」 tr. "If spirits did not have this dharma, then no person could live; therefore he does not kill him." From this the reader learns that what Māra hates has its fixed place, and what he is able to do also has its fixed limits.

36. Distinguishing the names brahmin and householder. Here the treatise-author stops to distinguish names: 「婆羅門性中生，受戒故，名婆羅門；除此，通名居士。居士，真是居舍之士，非四姓中居士。」 tr. "One who is born in the brahmin caste and has moreover received the precepts is named a brahmin; all others are commonly named householders. What is called a householder truly means a gentleman who dwells in a house; it is not the householder among the four castes."—the householder spoken of here takes the root meaning of a gentleman who dwells in a house, not that rank in the classification of the four castes. Once the name and mark are distinguished, the people meant by 「隱蔽諸婆羅門、居士」 tr. "screened the brahmins and householders" in the preceding text are without ambiguity. Wherever the reading of a sūtra meets a single name used in two ways, the treatise-author always distinguishes it; this is one example.

37. The one exception is an elder's daughter, because she had gathered merit life after life and so Māra could not screen her. Why could one person alone hear? The treatise-author first gives the correct explanation: 「以其為佛道世世集功德故，魔不能蔽。」 tr. "Because for the sake of the Buddha path she had gathered merit life after life, Māra could not screen her."—the place Māra's power does not reach is a person's own merit. These words are most solid for the reader: what one relies on is not outer protection but what one has oneself accumulated.

38. Again someone says: it is because Sadāprarudita was not to die that one woman was caused to hear. One explanation is tied to Sadāprarudita's allotted span: he was not to die, so someone had to hear and come to rescue him. The treatise-author records it alongside.

39. Someone says: it is because of the supernormal power of Dharmodgata that the elder's daughter was caused to hear. Another explanation is tied to Dharmodgata's supernormal power. The three explanations stand side by side—one belongs to the woman's merit, one to Sadāprarudita's allotted span, one to Dharmodgata's power—and the treatise-author does not judge which is right. The reader should learn this method of recording side by side without judging: where causes and conditions are intertwined, forcing a single cause into place often goes astray.

40. When he had cried out three times and no one bought, he grieved greatly. Having narrated the matter to this point, the treatise-author touches in a single sentence on the lack of response to the three cries and on his great grief, precisely to lay the ground for the next question. When reading this sentence the reader can first ask himself: has he not already ceased to cherish his body—why does he still grieve?—What the treatise-author asks below is exactly this.

41. The question: since he does not cherish his body, he should not grieve even though no one buys. This question is asked very directly, almost voicing it on the reader's behalf: not cherishing his body and yet still grieving—is that not self-contradictory? Whenever one sees a person whose conduct is inconsistent from before to after, it is mostly that what he cherishes and what he seeks are not in the same place; the treatise-author points this out below.

42. The answer: having aroused the great mind, he could not fulfil his vow, and therefore he grieved greatly. The answer is only ten Chinese characters: 「既發大心，不滿其願，是故大愁。」 tr. "Having aroused the great mind and being unable to fulfil his vow, he therefore grieved greatly."—what he grieves over is not that his body cannot be sold, but that his vow cannot be carried out. What he cherishes lies in the vow, not in the body; so not cherishing the body and grieving greatly do not contradict each other. Here the reader can distinguish clearly: grieving for oneself is clinging; grieving because one's vow is not accomplished is the power of the mind.

43. Śakra Devānām Indra has this thought, as is told at length in the sūtra. The treatise-author takes up Śakra's thought: 「薩陀波崙欲賣其身，無有買者。」 tr. "Sadāprarudita wishes to sell himself, and there is no buyer." And with 「如經中廣說」 tr. "as is told at length in the sūtra" he points to the details. This taking-up is the lead-in to the three questions that follow, and here the reader should note the boundary between the treatise-author's taking up the sūtra and his own explanation: what is taken up is the sūtra text; only what is explained is the treatise-author's own words.

44. The question: Śakra knows the minds of others by what he has obtained as retribution; why does he come to test him? Since Śakra has obtained the knowledge of others' minds through retribution, he should know of himself that Sadāprarudita's mind is already settled; why does he need to test him? This question forces out the limits of 「知他心」 tr. "knowing the minds of others".

45. The answer: the gods know only the minds of worldly people; the mind of becoming a Buddha or not becoming a Buddha is not something they know. The answer draws a boundary: 「諸天但知世間人心，作佛、不作佛心，非其所知。」 tr. "The gods know only the minds of worldly people; a mind of becoming a Buddha and a mind of not becoming a Buddha are not something they can know." And it takes the prediction as proof: 「除佛，無有能知其為佛道故與授記。」 tr. "Apart from the Buddha, there is no one who can know that he is for the sake of the Buddha path and give him the prediction."—what the knowledge of others' minds reaches is the worldly mind; the truth or falsity, depth or shallowness, of the arousing of the mind of awakening is not within its range of measure. From this the reader can know that supernormal powers are limited, and can also know why only the Buddha can give the prediction.

46. Further, he came to test him because he wished to lead many, so that those who heard and saw would all arouse the mind and seek buddhahood. The second layer of the answer moves the use of the test onto others: 「釋提桓因欲多所引導故來試之，令聞見者，皆發心求佛。」 tr. "Śakra Devānām Indra came to test him because he wished to lead many, so that those who heard and saw would all arouse the mind and seek buddhahood."—the test is not for knowing but for showing. What a public trial accomplishes is the people standing around watching.

47. And the simile of gold, silver, and the jewels being burnt, forged, ground, and beaten. The third layer makes it clear with a simile: 「又如金銀等諸寶，不以輕賤故燒鍛磨打」 tr. "Further, it is like gold, silver, and the other jewels, which are not burnt, forged, ground, and beaten because they are cheap"—they are forged and beaten not because they are cheap, but precisely because they are jewels. So 「菩薩亦如是，若能割肉出血、破骨出髓，其心不動，是正定菩薩」 tr. "the bodhisattva is also like this: if he can cut his flesh and draw blood, break his bone and draw out marrow, and his mind does not move, this is a bodhisattva rightly assured". In adversity the reader is most apt to raise the doubt ‘have I been abandoned?’; this simile breaks precisely this doubt: the reason one is forged is that one is gold.

48. The question: Śakra is a great heavenly king; why did he lie, saying he needed a human heart, blood, and marrow? False speech is what the precepts prohibit; how could Śakra do it? The treatise-author does not let this place go, and sets up a question. Whenever a figure in a sūtra has conduct that looks like breaking a precept, the treatise-author always makes a distinction for it; this is one example.

49. The answer: lying for one's own benefit out of afflictions is an offence; this time it was to make him believe and accept. The answer sets up a standard of judgement: 「若以慳貪、瞋恚煩惱欲求自利故妄語，是故為罪。」 tr. "If one lies because, through the afflictions of avarice and anger, one wishes to seek one's own benefit, only then does it become an offence."—the offence lies not in the untruth of the words, but in the afflictions from which the mind arises and in the self-benefit sought. Next it explains why he had no choice but to act thus: 「帝釋若作實身、實語，菩薩則不信；是故如其國法，天祠所須，為其信受故。」 tr. "If Śakra had shown his real body and spoken real words, the bodhisattva would not have believed him; so, according to the dharma of their country, he said it was what a sacrifice to the gods required, in order to make him believe and accept it." The reader may not extend this item into ‘with good intent one may lie’; the limits the treatise-author sets are very strict: what is done for is not self-benefit, what is done follows the dharma of their country, what is accomplished is to make the other believe and accept—only when all three are present is this the permitted exception here.

50. He believed his words and rejoiced greatly: I have obtained a great benefit! The treatise-author narrates that Sadāprarudita, hearing Śakra demand a heart, blood, and marrow, 「信其語而大歡喜」 tr. "believed his words and rejoiced greatly", saying of himself 「我得大利！」 tr. "I have obtained a great benefit!"—what others would call suffering and distress was for him the accomplishment of what he sought. The four layers of distinction below, six pairs in all, explain precisely these two Chinese characters 「大利」 tr. "great benefit".

51. Great benefit is the ground of the avaivartika; the foremost benefit is the Buddha path. The first layer of distinction sets the ground of non-retrogression against the Buddha path. The reason the avaivartika is put first is that this ground is the first fixed position that one who seeks the path can expect—reaching it one no longer retreats and falls, so it is called a great benefit; yet the ultimate of where one tends still lies in the Buddha path, so that is called the foremost. The reader should first remember the pattern of this layer: great benefit is what can be obtained and is enough to console oneself; the foremost benefit is where one tends and may not stop halfway.

52. Great benefit is the five perfections; the foremost benefit is prajñāpāramitā. The second layer sets the aids to the path against the main path. The five perfections are dharmas that aid prajñā, and the preceding text has already made clear 「助法中檀波羅蜜為首」 tr. "among the helping dharmas dānapāramitā is the first"; so the five perfections are great benefit and prajñā the foremost benefit. The reader may not on this account make light of the five perfections—great benefit is also benefit, not something insufficient to take up; only, one may not take the aid as the main thing.

53. Great benefit is prajñā; the foremost benefit is the power of skilful means of prajñā; and the first ground of the bodhisattva against the ten grounds. The third layer divides prajñā itself once more: prajñā is great benefit, 「般若波羅蜜方便力」 tr. "the power of skilful means of prajñāpāramitā" is the foremost benefit—to have prajñā without skilful means is still not the ultimate in delivering beings. The same passage gives another layer: the first ground of the bodhisattva is great benefit, the ten grounds the foremost benefit. The two layers stand side by side, and both make a division of shallow and deep within one and the same dharma; they do not set up a separate dharma outside prajñā.

54. Great benefit is from the first ground and so on up to the ten grounds; the foremost benefit is the tenth ground; and the bodhisattva ground against the Buddha ground. The fourth layer first sets the whole course from the first ground to the ten grounds against the ultimate position of the tenth ground, and then sets the bodhisattva ground against the Buddha ground. By this point the momentum of the distinctions has gone from dharma to position, from position to fruit, pushing all the way to the Buddha ground and stopping there. Here the reader can see the treatise-author's intent in distinguishing: it lies not in fixing a standard answer, but in letting people know that what they seek has a sequence, and that above the sequence there is still somewhere further to tend.

55. Distinguished in such ways as these. With the one sentence 「如是等分別」 tr. "in such ways as these they are distinguished" the treatise-author gathers up the preceding four layers, showing plainly that what is listed is not an exhaustive number but a pattern of examples. Though this sentence is short, it may not be passed over: it tells the reader that great benefit and the foremost benefit are a pair of relative names that can be applied anywhere, not two fixed dharmas. Whenever one meets a pair of relative names, once one has grasped how they are used one can give examples oneself, without having to keep to the number the treatise-author gave.

56. Although not yet complete, he already abides in the causes and conditions of completeness, so it says then it is complete. The treatise-author explains the phrase 「便為具足」 tr. "then it is complete" in the sūtra: the reason it can be called complete is not that it is already accomplished in fact, but that he 「已住具足因緣」 tr. "already abides within the causes and conditions of completeness". Since the cause is fixed, the fruit can be spoken of in advance. The reader must hold to this measure: speaking in advance is said with respect to the cause being decisive, not calling what is not yet accomplished already accomplished; if this measure is lost, it becomes overweening pride.

57. The question: if Śakra Devānām Indra came in a transformation body, why did he say What price do you need? Since he came in a transformation body and from the first was not really buying, why ask the price? The treatise-author sets up this question in order to show that Śakra's question was not an empty formality.

58. The answer: knowing that he wished to make offerings, to fulfil his vow; and also fearing that what he would demand would be great. The answer has two layers: one layer is for the other—「知其欲供養曇無竭菩薩，滿其願故」 tr. "knowing that he wished to make offerings to the bodhisattva Dharmodgata, he did so in order to fulfil his vow"; one layer is for himself—「釋提桓因苦困薩陀波崙，畏其所索者大」 tr. "Śakra Devānām Indra had afflicted and pressed Sadāprarudita, and feared that what he would demand would be great", and therefore he said 「須何等價」 tr. "what price do you need". The two layers come out together and do not hinder each other: he wanted to bring the matter to completion, and he also had misgivings. Here the reader can see the truth of the treatise-author's portrayal of human feeling: he does not write the heavenly emperor as simply perfect.

59. The explanation of give me as you wish. The treatise-author explains the meaning of Sadāprarudita's reply, saying: 「於汝不大貪惜、不致悔恨者與我。」 tr. "Give me what you do not greatly covet or begrudge, and what will not bring you regret."—what he asks for is limited by the other's not regretting it. To ask someone for something and first set a limit on the other's behalf—this is the measure of one who asks. In matters of seeking alms or asking for help, the reader can take these words directly as a plumb line.

60. Why he took the knife himself and broke his body. The treatise-author explains why he held the knife with his own hand: 「薩陀波崙無力勢故，不能得使旃陀羅，故自捉刀；婆羅門亦畏罪故不能破，是以自執刀破身。」 tr. "Because Sadāprarudita had no power or influence, he could not employ a caṇḍāla, and so he took up the knife himself; the brahmin too, because he feared the offence, could not break his body; therefore he himself took the knife and broke his body."—there was no one to do it for him; it was not that he wished to torment himself. This explanation pulls the matter of cutting his body back from the imagination of austerities into fact and principle: he did not choose the most terrible way; he had no other way.

61. The question: if the elder's daughter heard the voice, why did she not come and ask Why do you sell yourself? The treatise-author again asks about timing: since the preceding text said that the elder's daughter alone heard the voice, why did she not come at the time she heard it, but only came at the moment he broke his body? This question links the two places, earlier and later; if the reader did not pass through this question, he would feel that the elder's daughter's appearance was abrupt.

62. The answer: merely speaking with empty words of selling oneself is a light matter, breaking the body and drawing out the heart and marrow is a heavy matter, so the elder's daughter aroused the mind. The answer makes only one division of light and heavy: 「但空言賣身事輕，破身出心髓事重故，長者女發心。」 tr. "Merely to speak with empty words of selling oneself is a light matter; to break the body and draw out the heart and marrow is a heavy matter; therefore the elder's daughter aroused the mind."—words move people only so far; giving up the body moves them deeply. Here the reader can understand a common matter: with one and the same dharma, when it is spoken people are unmoved; when they see someone truly practise it, people are moved.

63. The elder's daughter sees him cutting and piercing himself and thinks: all beings seek pleasure and fear suffering. The treatise-author narrates what she saw and what she thought: 「一切眾生皆求樂畏苦、貪愛其身；薩陀波崙而自割刺，是為希有！」 tr. "All beings seek pleasure and fear suffering, and greedily love their bodies; yet Sadāprarudita cuts and pierces himself—this is rare!"—the reason she was shaken is that she saw a matter running counter to the common nature of beings. He also adds a cause: 「以先世福德因緣所牽故，即往到其所而問。」 tr. "Because she was drawn by the causes and conditions of merit from former lives, she at once went to the place where he was and asked him." What she saw is the condition, her merit from former lives the cause; only when the two came together was there this one going.

64. Sadāprarudita answers that he wishes to make offerings to the bodhisattva Dharmodgata. What he answers is only one sentence; he does not narrate his suffering or describe his poverty, but says directly what it is for. The reader can note this person's manner of answering a question: the questioner asks about his conduct, and he answers with his aim; only when she next asks about the benefit does he open it out. There is a question and only then an answer; he does not first set forth his own case—this is the sequence of teaching the Dharma.

65. She asks again what benefit he will obtain. The elder's daughter's second question goes to the matter of benefit. This question seems worldly, yet it is in fact where all arousing of the mind comes from: a person must first see how great the benefit is, and only then is willing to give up what he holds weighty. The treatise-author does not take this question as shallow; the whole long account of the Buddha's merits below is given precisely in answer to this one question.

66. He answers that prajñā is what is trained in, that he shall become a Buddha and be a support for all beings, and sets out the present matters of the Buddha's merits. What he answers first puts forth the main purport: 「般若波羅蜜名菩薩所學，當從彼聞；我學是道，當得作佛，與一切眾生作依止。」 tr. "Prajñāpāramitā is named what bodhisattvas train in, and I shall hear it from him; training in this path, I shall become a Buddha and be a support for all beings." Next, with two similes he makes clear the meaning of support—「譬如厚葉樹多所蔭覆；又如熱時曠野險道清涼大池」 tr. "it is like a tree with thick leaves that gives much shade and cover; and again, like a great cool pool on a dangerous road in the wilderness in the time of scorching heat". Next he 「為說佛功德現事可以發心者」 tr. "told her those matters among the Buddha's merits that are present before the eyes and can cause people to arouse the mind": the golden body, the thirty-two marks, the great light, immeasurable light. The treatise-author sets a boundary for each one: he explains the great light as 「為閻浮提惡世眾生，諸佛真實光明無有限量」 tr. "spoken for the beings of the evil age of Jambudvīpa; the real light of the buddhas has no limit"; the meaning of great kindness and so on up to the six supernormal powers is 「如先說」 tr. "as said earlier"; inconceivable pure morality, meditative concentration, and wisdom are 「如佛戒等五眾中說」 tr. "as said in the five aggregates of the Buddha—morality and the rest"; he explains 「於諸法中得一切無礙知見」 tr. "obtaining all unobstructed knowledge and vision within all dharmas" as 「諸佛有無礙解脫，是解脫相應知見，一切法中無所礙」 tr. "the buddhas have unobstructed liberation, and the knowledge and vision associated with this liberation is without obstruction within all dharmas", and the distinction between knowledge and vision is also 「如先說」 tr. "as said earlier". One must keep an eye on the phrase 「現事可以發心者」 tr. "matters present before the eyes that can cause people to arouse the mind"—all that is cited are matters that can be seen and imagined; no deep dharma is cited. Teaching in response to the capacity of the hearer—this is an example of it.

67. I shall obtain such immeasurable merits of a Buddha, and with the unsurpassed Dharma Jewel distribute them to all beings. This sentence is the conclusion of Sadāprarudita's answer, and also what the five explanations below are based on. The reader should note the momentum of its words: the merits of a Buddha that he seeks are not for his own enjoyment and there an end; they are 「分布與一切眾生」 tr. "distributed to all beings"—seeking buddhahood and returning it to distribution, this sentence turns all the merits set out before into a use for others.

68. Someone says: the unsurpassed jewel is the Dharma Jewel among the Three Jewels. The first explanation is the most straightforward: the unsurpassed jewel is the Dharma Jewel among the Three Jewels. Judging by the Three Jewels, the Dharma is one of them and is what one returns to, so it is called unsurpassed. The treatise-author records it alongside as the first explanation.

69. Someone says: all the eighty-four thousand collections of the Dharma are the Dharma Jewel. The second explanation speaks of the whole extent of the Dharma: 「一切八萬四千法眾是為法寶，得是故，除諸煩惱、滅諸戲論，得脫一切苦。」 tr. "All the eighty-four thousand collections of the Dharma are the Dharma Jewel; because one obtains this, one removes the afflictions, extinguishes idle discourse, and obtains liberation from all suffering."—it proves that it is a jewel by its function: it can remove the afflictions, extinguish idle discourse, and free one from all suffering. The reader can note that the standard of judgement of this explanation lies in function, not in name or rank.

70. Someone says: the unsurpassed Dharma Jewel is precisely anuttarā samyaksaṃbodhi. The third explanation takes the wisdom of the fruit of buddhahood as the unsurpassed jewel, and the principle relied on is 「更無過上者故」 tr. "because there is nothing further above it". This explanation takes the root meaning of the two Chinese characters 「無上」 tr. "unsurpassed" as its standard—whatever still has something above it may not be called unsurpassed.

71. Someone says: nirvāṇa is the unsurpassed Dharma Jewel, and the Abhidharma is cited. The fourth explanation takes nirvāṇa as the unsurpassed jewel; its proof says 「一切有為法皆有上」 tr. "all conditioned dharmas have something above them", and it cites the words of the Abhidharma: 「一切有為法及虛空、非數緣盡，名為有上法；數緣盡是無上法。」 tr. "All conditioned dharmas, together with space and the exhaustion not through the condition of reckoning, are named dharmas that have something above them; the exhaustion through the condition of reckoning is the unsurpassed dharma." The treatise-author further explains the name for it: 「數緣盡即是涅槃之別名。」 tr. "The exhaustion through the condition of reckoning is precisely another name for nirvāṇa."—what this explanation relies on is the division between the conditioned and the unconditioned, so it sets up the unsurpassed separately outside the conditioned dharmas. Here the reader should know the treatise-author's manner of citing a treatise: he cites its text and explains its names for it, so that the reader is not cut off by names and marks.

72. Someone says: although the path to nirvāṇa is conditioned, because it is for the sake of nirvāṇa it is unsurpassed among conditioned dharmas. The fifth explanation takes a step back to set up its account: the path to nirvāṇa originally belongs to the conditioned, yet because where it tends is nirvāṇa, it is unsurpassed among conditioned dharmas. This explanation and the preceding one do not exclude each other—the preceding one stands on the unconditioned, this one stands on the highest within the conditioned. The five explanations are set side by side and stop here, and the treatise-author judges none of them at all. The reader may not pick one of them and reject the rest; the five explanations each have their ground, which shows precisely that the one name 「無上法寶」 tr. "the unsurpassed Dharma Jewel" can be set up from five places.

73. Such Dharma Jewels as these are distributed as the three vehicles and given to beings. The treatise-author gathers up the five explanations and returns them to their use: 「如是等法寶，分布為三乘與眾生。」 tr. "Such Dharma Jewels as these are distributed as the three vehicles and given to beings."—what is distributed is one; those who receive it are three. This sentence brings the preceding discussion of names and marks back down to the matter of delivering beings; this is the treatise-author's constant way of closing divergent explanations: distinguish, and then return to use.

74. Such immeasurable dharmas of the Buddha as these should be obtained from the teacher, so he gives up this impure, foul body. With this sentence the treatise-author connects back to the original matter of selling himself: since he knows that the Buddha-Dharma should be obtained from the teacher, 「是故我捨是老、病、死所住處不淨臭穢之身，為供養般若波羅蜜故，當得佛身」 tr. "therefore I give up this impure, foul, and filthy body in which old age, sickness, and death dwell, and for the sake of making offerings to prajñāpāramitā I shall obtain the body of a Buddha", while the golden colour and the other marks are 「如先說」 tr. "as said earlier". Keep an eye on the contrast between what is given up and what is obtained: what is given up is the body in which old age, sickness, and death dwell; what is obtained is the body of a Buddha—this is not making light of life; it is an exchange.

75. The elder's daughter, hearing the Dharma, enters deeply in her mind and greatly obtains the joy of the Dharma, so much so that her mind is startled and her hair stands on end. The treatise-author sets up the cause of her being able to receive the Dharma: 「世世供養諸佛種善根，智慧明利」 tr. "life after life she had made offerings to the buddhas and planted roots of goodness, and her wisdom was bright and keen", so 「聞是法其心深入，大得法喜，乃至心驚毛竪」 tr. "hearing this Dharma, her mind entered into it deeply and she greatly obtained the joy of the Dharma, so much so that her mind was startled and her hair stood on end". Her words are: 「甚為希有！汝所讚法大微妙！為是一一法故，應捨如恒河沙等身，何況一身！」 tr. "This is most rare! The Dharma you praise is greatly subtle and wondrous! For the sake of each one of these dharmas one should give up bodies as many as the sands of the Ganges, how much more a single body!"—what she exclaims at is not his courage but the subtlety of the Dharma. Here the reader can examine himself: seeing someone's austerities and exclaiming at the person, and hearing the Dharma and exclaiming at the Dharma, are far apart.

76. The elder's daughter earlier did not know the reason and pitied him; now, hearing the Dharma, she rejoices greatly. The treatise-author sets her two minds, earlier and later, side by side: earlier, she 「不知何因緣故困苦其身，而怜愍之，心謂不可」 tr. "had not known for what cause and condition he was afflicting his body, and so she pitied him and in her mind did not approve"; now, 「聞是無量無邊無比清淨佛法，以是因緣可得故大歡喜」 tr. "hearing this immeasurable, boundless, incomparable pure Buddha-Dharma, she rejoiced greatly because by this cause and condition it could be obtained", and so she said 「為是法故，應捨如恒河沙身」 tr. "for the sake of this Dharma one should give up bodies as many as the sands of the Ganges".—From pity she turned to joy, and what turned lay only in knowing or not knowing what the matter was for. When the reader sees someone doing what is hard to do and feels he cannot bear it, this turn can serve as a mirror.

77. The woman says: Because you are poor you torment and afflict your own body; now you may stop; whatever you need, as much as you wish. What the elder's daughter promises does not stop at wealth but extends to the path: 「恣汝所須，當以相與，我亦隨汝而求是道。」 tr. "Whatever you need, as much as you wish, I shall give you; and I too shall follow you and seek this path."—first she stops his suffering, next she gives him what he needs, and finally she pledges herself to go with him. The three layers are clearly in sequence; the reader can see that what a person who arouses the mind arouses is not only a single thought of helping someone, but also settles at the same time where she herself is going.

78. The question: having himself cut and severed his body, how could he teach the elder's daughter so much of the Buddha-Dharma? The treatise-author again asks about fact and principle: how can a gravely wounded person teach the Dharma at ease? This question is very concrete; were it not asked, the reader would only feel it to be the convenience of the story.

79. The answer: the bodhisattva's power of mind was great, and though there was bodily suffering it could not cover his mind; and it is narrated that at that time he had not yet greatly swooned. The answer has two layers: one layer is tied to the power of mind—「是菩薩心力大，雖有身苦不能覆心」 tr. "this bodhisattva's power of mind was great; although there was bodily suffering, it could not cover his mind"; one layer is tied to the timing—「始以刀割肉流血，方欲破骨出髓，而長者女來，未大悶故，能得說法」 tr. "he had only just begun to cut his flesh with the knife and let the blood flow, and was about to break his bone and draw out the marrow, when the elder's daughter came; because he had not yet greatly swooned, he was able to teach the Dharma". The former layer speaks of why he could; the latter of why he could at this time. The reader should learn this way of bringing out two layers together: neither settling it as a wonder nor exhausting it by common feeling.

80. Śakra, knowing his mind was settled, at once resumes his own body and praises him: Excellent! Your mind firmly undertakes this matter. The treatise-author explains the meaning of Śakra's praise: 「如汝今生死肉身，未得佛道，能如是不惜身，汝不久當於一切法中得無所著，住無生法忍中，疾得阿耨多羅三藐三菩提。」 tr. "With a fleshly body of birth and death such as yours now, not yet having obtained the Buddha path, you can be thus unsparing of your body; before long, within all dharmas, you will obtain non-clinging, abide within the acceptance of the non-arising of dharmas, and swiftly obtain anuttarā samyaksaṃbodhi."—what he praises is not his enduring pain, but what he infers from this one matter: that he will obtain non-clinging. The reader can note this way of inferring: not cherishing the body is the forerunner of non-clinging to dharmas.

81. He takes the buddhas of the past as witness to console his mind, and himself sets out his purpose in coming to test him. Having praised him, Śakra further 「以過去佛為證，如是等種種因緣，安慰其心」 tr. "took the buddhas of the past as witness, and by all kinds of such causes and conditions as these consoled his mind", and himself sets out his purpose: 「我是天王，愛樂佛道，故來相試，欲知汝心堅軟云何？欲令汝信故，言須人心髓祠天，實不須也。汝願何等？當以相與。汝是好人，為是佛種，當相擁護。」 tr. "I am a heavenly king who loves and delights in the Buddha path, and so I came to test you, wishing to know whether your mind was firm or soft. To make you believe, I said that I needed a human heart and marrow to sacrifice to the gods; in truth I have no need of them. What do you wish for? I shall give it to you. You are a good person; you are the seed of the Buddha; I shall protect you."—the test over, he himself sets out why he tested, and says plainly 「實不須也」 tr. "in truth I have no need of them". Here the reader can look back at the answer to the earlier question about false speech: the exception that was opened closes of itself at this point, leaving nothing over.

82. Sadāprarudita, with a straightforward, believing mind, good and gentle, does not discriminate among beings, and at once asks for anuttarā samyaksaṃbodhi. The treatise-author sets up the cause of the greatness of what he asks for: 「直信心善軟，深著佛道故，不分別眾生」 tr. "he had a straightforward, believing mind, good and gentle, and because he deeply clung to the Buddha path, he did not discriminate among beings"—not discriminating among beings, he did not sort out who could give what and who could not, and on hearing the promise he asked for unsurpassed awakening. This sentence is very finely written: his rashness is precisely his straightforward faith. The reader may not laugh at him for not knowing proper measure; the treatise-author plainly explains it by 「深著佛道」 tr. "deeply clung to the Buddha path".

83. Śakra says: This is not something my power can accomplish; it is the realm of a Buddha. Śakra answers according to the facts and does not force a response to what was asked. The reason this sentence is recorded is to show the limits of heavenly power—before, it was said that the gods do not know the mind of becoming a Buddha; here again it says they cannot grant the vow of the Buddha path; the one follows consistently on the other. In matters of seeking help the reader can draw a rule from this: to give what can be given, and to say plainly that what cannot be given cannot be—only this is true speech.

84. Further, someone says: Śakra apologises to him with these words. One explanation supplies the human feeling: 「帝釋大苦困薩陀波崙，今以此語謝之。帝釋意謂求金銀寶物，不知乃索阿耨多羅三藐三菩提；既不能與，愧負而已！」 tr. "Śakra had greatly afflicted Sadāprarudita, and now apologises to him with these words. Śakra thought he would ask for gold, silver, and precious things, not knowing that he would demand anuttarā samyaksaṃbodhi; since he could not give it, he could only feel ashamed and in his debt!"—what he had promised was originally of the order of wealth, and what was asked for went beyond his expectation. This explanation speaks out Śakra's embarrassment; the treatise-author records it alongside, and does not delete it for being undignified.

85. He speaks again: I must make you an offering; ask for some other wish. The treatise-author explains the meaning of these words of Śakra: 「我既大相苦困，不得直爾而去，要相供養。」 tr. "Since I have greatly afflicted you, I may not simply go away like this; I must make you an offering."—having afflicted someone, one may not just walk away. This is a mind of responsibility, not a calculation of exchange. Here the reader can see that in portraying gods and humans the sūtra and treatise do not lose the rightness of human feeling.

86. Sadāprarudita, wishing to use this body to make offerings, asks that his body be made whole again as before. The treatise-author sets up the cause of the vow he turns to: 「雖不惜身，欲以此身供養曇無竭，聞般若波羅蜜」 tr. "although he did not cherish his body, he wished to use this body to make offerings to Dharmodgata and to hear prajñāpāramitā"—the reason he asks for it to be made whole is not fear of suffering, but that this body still has a use. So his words are: 「若汝無此力，令我身體平復如故。」 tr. "If you do not have this power, make my body whole again as before." The reader must hold to this measure: not cherishing the body and preserving this body to accomplish a matter go together without conflict; what decides it is what one preserves it for.

87. Śakra says As you say, and the wounds are at once made whole, not different from how they were originally. The treatise-author narrates his assent and its proof: the wounds were at once made whole, not different from how they had been originally. One word of response, and the matter is at once accomplished—here no colouring is added, precisely to leave room for the next question.

88. The question: the flesh having already been cut away, how could it be made whole? The treatise-author does not let this wondrous matter go, and still wants to ask its reason. Wherever a matter in a sūtra goes beyond common feeling, the treatise-author always asks its principle and does not settle it with the two Chinese characters for supernormal power—this is the consistent way of reading in this treatise.

89. The answer: the Buddha said there are five inconceivables; and the explanation of the atoms in space coming together. The answer has three layers: one layer cites the teaching—「佛說有五不可思議。龍事所作，尚不可思議，何況天！」 tr. "The Buddha said there are five inconceivables. Even what nāgas do is inconceivable, how much more the gods!"; one layer speaks of the fact and principle of it—「又虛空中微塵充滿，帝釋福德生心，便能和合平滿」 tr. "further, space is filled with atoms; when Śakra, by his merit, gives rise to the thought, he can make them come together and make the body whole"; one layer compares it with its kind—「如諸天及地獄中身，非是三生身，罪福因緣故，和合便有」 tr. "it is like the bodies of the gods and of those in the hells, which are not bodies of the three kinds of birth; through the causes and conditions of sin and merit, as soon as they come together they exist". One must keep an eye on the second layer: what is made whole is not something produced out of nothing, but atoms already present coming together by the power of merit. Here the reader can know the treatise-author's manner of explaining supernormal transformations: he still returns them to the coming together of causes and conditions, and does not set up any matter without a cause.

90. Śakra, knowing his mind was firm, gives him his wish and at once vanishes. One sentence makes the conclusion, and the matter of the test ends here. Here the treatise-author adds no further words—the matter being finished, he stops. The reader can note this kind of closing stroke: where it should close, it closes, without making a conclusion of it.

91. His offences of former lives exhausted and his merit bright and flourishing, the elder's daughter takes him home. The treatise-author sets up the cause for the next section: 「薩陀波崙宿世微罪已畢、福德明盛」 tr. "Sadāprarudita's slight offences of former lives had been exhausted and his merit was bright and flourishing", and so the elder's daughter took him home, and there are the words 「有所須者，從我父母索之」 tr. "whatever you need, ask my parents for it", as is told at length in the sūtra. Since the preceding text explained his poverty by small offences in former lives, here it explains his obtaining wealth by the offences being exhausted and the merit flourishing—earlier and later correspond, and the reader can see the consistency of the treatise-author's explanation of matters.

92. The question: earlier she said to ask all of it from her; why does she now say to ask her parents? The treatise-author again asks about words inconsistent from before to after: earlier she said 「汝所須物，盡從我索之」 tr. "whatever things you need, ask all of them from me", yet now she says 「從我父母索」 tr. "ask my parents for it". This question is fine down to the difference of a single Chinese character, which is exactly the character of the questions and answers in this segment.

93. The answer: she was ashamed that she could not match her earlier words; and also, by the dharma of a child, she asked her parents. The answer has two layers: one layer is tied to shame—「今既將歸到舍，以薩陀波崙目見入舍從父母得之，愧不稱前言」 tr. "now that she is about to take him home, since Sadāprarudita would see with his own eyes that once they entered the house the things came from her parents, she was ashamed that she could not match her earlier words", so she first said herself 「從我父母索之。」 tr. "Ask my parents for it."; one layer is tied to proper measure—「又女雖力能得寶，以子女法故，從父母索之。」 tr. "Further, although the woman had the power to obtain the jewels herself, because it is the dharma of a child, she asked them from her parents." The former layer is human feeling, the latter is due measure. Here the reader can learn her generosity in dealing with people: knowing that what she promised cannot be honoured in full, she explains it herself first, without waiting for the other to notice.

94. The woman, having entered the house, as she had promised, asks her parents and gives them. One sentence narrates her keeping her word. Although the place from which what was promised is taken has changed, the thing promised is in the end given—here the reader can see that the treatise-author does not let the earlier words fall empty, and the two sections, earlier and later, close together here.

95. Because her country had no Buddha-Dharma, her parents asked Who is the bodhisattva Sadāprarudita? The treatise-author points out a fact easily passed over: 「其國無有佛法」 tr. "her country had no Buddha-Dharma", so her parents did not know the man and asked 「阿誰是薩陀波崙菩薩？」 tr. "Who is this bodhisattva Sadāprarudita?" The daughter then 「如所見、如所聞，盡向父母說薩陀波崙事」 tr. "as she had seen and as she had heard, told her parents everything about Sadāprarudita".—To speak as one has seen and as one has heard, neither adding nor subtracting, is the rule for passing on words; that the elder below can awaken on a single hearing depends precisely on this sentence being spoken truly.

96. Now, father and mother, you should allow me to go together with the bodhisattva Sadāprarudita, along with five hundred attendant maidens and the means of offering. What the woman requests is three things: herself going along, five hundred attendant maidens, and the means of offering. The three things are requested at once, without distinguishing first and last—the reader can see that her mind is already settled; she is not asking tentatively.

97. Her parents hear her words and at once allow it, as you wish. With one sentence they consent, adding no cross-examination. The treatise-author records the brevity of this sentence precisely to lay the ground for the question below: reading to here, the reader will naturally feel that it was too easy.

98. The question: the elder was noble and powerful; how was it that, not knowing him earlier, he could send them off? The treatise-author does indeed set up the question, and asks it thoroughly: since he had not known him before, why, on once hearing of his merits, was he willing to hand over his daughter, retinue, and jewels all together? This question is raised on behalf of the reader's doubt.

99. The answer: the elder too had planted roots of virtue, and briefly hearing the Buddha's merits roused his knowing from former lives; and the simile of the lotus flower seeing the sun. The answer is tied to a cause from former lives: 「長者亦植德本，以少因緣故生無佛國；暫聞佛德，發其宿識，心即開悟，故能發遣。」 tr. "The elder too had once planted roots of virtue; because of a small share of causes and conditions, he was born in a country without a Buddha. On briefly hearing the Buddha's merits, his knowing from former lives was roused and his mind at once awoke; therefore he could send them off." And it makes this clear with a simile: 「譬如蓮花，生長具足，見日開敷。」 tr. "It is like the lotus flower, which, when its growth is complete, opens on seeing the sun."—the opening of the flower does not come into being because of the sun; the sun is only its condition; the elder's awakening does not arise because of a single hearing; the single hearing is only its condition. Here the reader can resolve the perplexity ‘why does one person believe as soon as he hears, while another is unmoved even when it is spelled out?’: what is waited on is what was planted in former lives, not words.

100. The parents know their daughter's mind is pure and mature and cannot be restrained; having reflected and weighed it, they joyfully let her go. The treatise-author writes the parents' minds in detail: 「知女心淳熟，無不淨行，持操不妄，不樂世樂，但求法利；知其心至，不可制止，若違其意，恐其自害。」 tr. "The parents knew that their daughter's mind was pure and mature, that she had no impure conduct, kept her integrity and was not false, did not delight in worldly pleasures, and sought only the benefit of the Dharma; they knew that her mind was earnest to the utmost and could not be restrained, and feared that if they went against her intent she would harm herself."—the reason they let her go involves both trust and misgiving. 「思惟籌量已，既全其意，自得功德，歡喜令去。」 tr. "Having reflected and weighed it, since they would both fulfil her intent and themselves obtain merit, they joyfully let her go." At the end it concludes with a sentence that shows by contrast: 「世間因緣，深著難解，愛之至故，尚不能違，何況為佛道故其心清淨無所染著而不聽之！」 tr. "Worldly causes and conditions are clung to deeply and hard to undo; because they loved her to the utmost, they could not go against her even in that; how much less, when it was for the sake of the Buddha path and her mind was pure and without any stain or attachment, could they not allow it!" The reader should keep an eye on this showing by contrast: even worldly love cannot go against what she wishes, how much less when what she wishes is the Buddha path.

101. Because her parents allowed her in accordance with the Dharma, the woman did not begrudge the jewels, and with a mind of rejoicing was glad of it. The treatise-author explains the woman's mind: her parents gave their permission in accordance with the Dharma, so she neither begrudged the jewels, and also, with a mind of rejoicing, was glad of this matter.—what she is glad of is not having obtained the jewels, but that her parents were willing to accord with the Dharma. Here the reader can see the right use of rejoicing: to be glad of others' according with the Dharma, not to be glad of getting one's own way.

102. The minds of the multitude being settled, they adorned carriages of the seven jewels and, surrounded by the great multitude, went little by little toward the east. One sentence narrates the setting out. The reason it says 「眾心既定」 tr. "the minds of the multitude being settled" is that it continues the preceding text, in which the minds of the parents, the daughter, and the attendant maidens have all become one—only once the minds are settled do the carriages set out. The reader can note the four Chinese characters 「稍稍東行」 tr. "went little by little toward the east", which still correspond to the voice in the sky's teaching at the head of the chapter, 「從是東行」 tr. "go east from here"; all the way the road has never forked.

103. The relatives of the five hundred women and the people of the city, seeing this rare matter, all followed them as well. The treatise-author narrates the number of the followers and their minds: 「見是希有難及之事，皆亦隨去。人眾既集，歡悅共行，渴仰眾香城，如渴者思飲。」 tr. "Seeing this rare matter hard to equal, they all followed them as well. The crowd having gathered, they went forward together in delight, thirsting and yearning for the City of Many Fragrances as a thirsty person longs for water." And so on up to 「漸漸進路，遙見眾香城」 tr. "advancing little by little along the road, they saw the City of Many Fragrances in the far distance", and with the elder's daughter and the five hundred women 「恭敬圍遶，欲往曇無竭所」 tr. "reverently surrounding him, they wished to go to Dharmodgata's place".—One person gives up his body to seek the Dharma, and the whole city follows him; the intent of Śakra's 「欲多所引導故來試」 tr. "came to test him because he wished to lead many" in the preceding text here at last shows its fruit. The reader can look back at section forty-six; only by looking at the two places together does one know what that trial accomplished.

104. The question: since Dharmodgata has already mastered and retains it himself, why use a terrace of the seven jewels to write out the scroll of the prajñā sūtra? The treatise-author asks about the vessels of offering: since the one who teaches the Dharma has already mastered and retains it, setting up a scroll of the sūtra adds nothing for him; why write it out and place it within a terrace of the seven jewels and make offerings to it? This question forces out the matter of ‘for whom the offering is’.

105. The answer: briefly, there are two meanings; and it is narrated that the gods, nāgas, and spirits all came to make offerings, increasing the faculty of faith. The answer says 「雖有種種因緣，略說有二義」 tr. "although there are all kinds of causes and conditions, briefly speaking there are two meanings": first, the mental conduct of beings differs—「或樂見經卷，或樂聞演說」 tr. "some delight in seeing scrolls of the sūtra, some delight in hearing it expounded"; second, 「曇無竭身為白衣，現有家屬」 tr. "Dharmodgata is himself one of the white-robed and at present has a household", and beings of dull faculties might have this thought: 「此有居家，必有染著，何能以畢竟清淨無著般若波羅蜜利益眾生？自未無著，何能以無著法教化？」 tr. "This man has a household, so he must have stains and attachments; how can he benefit beings with prajñāpāramitā, which is of ultimate purity and without clinging? Not yet being without clinging himself, how can he teach and transform with the dharma of non-clinging?"—therefore his sūtra text was written out and placed on tablets of the seven jewels, and offerings were made to it with the many jewels; the gods, nāgas, and spirits all came to revere it, offering flowers and incense, banners and canopies, and raining down the seven jewels; 「眾生見者，增益信根，則以此法示傳佛語，案文演教勸發」 tr. "beings who saw this increased their faculty of faith; and so by this dharma he showed and transmitted the Buddha's words, and, following the sentences of the text, expounded the teaching and exhorted them". One must keep an eye on the second meaning: the setting up of the scroll of the sūtra is precisely to counteract the sickness of ‘abandoning the Dharma because of the person’. If the reader has ever doubted a teaching because of the conduct of the one who teaches it, this section is set up precisely for you.

106. The adornments of the jewelled terrace are as said in the sūtra, and the seal of the seven jewels is explained. The treatise-author passes over the adornments and the section of Sadāprarudita's asking Śakra Devānām Indra with only 「如經中說」 tr. "as said in the sūtra", and explains one name alone: 「七寶印印者，是曇無竭真實印，常自手執以印於經。」 tr. "What is called sealing with the seal of the seven jewels: it is Dharmodgata's real seal, which he always held in his own hand and used to seal the sūtra."—what he gives in detail is the name and mark; what he abbreviates is the description. The reader can see the treatise-author's standard of what to take and what to leave: what the sūtra text has already made clear he does not repeat; a name and mark not yet clear he always explains.

107. Someone says: the seal of the seven jewels is seven great spirits who hold vajras and guard the sūtra text. One explanation interprets this name differently: 「有求佛道七大神，是執金剛杵，常給曇無竭菩薩使守護經文，不令魔及魔民改更錯亂，為貴敬般若故。」 tr. "There are seven great spirits who seek the Buddha path; these hold vajras, are always at the service of the bodhisattva Dharmodgata, and guard the sūtra text, not letting Māra and Māra's people alter or confuse it, because they value and revere prajñā."—it explains the seven seals by seven great spirits, taking the meaning of guarding and not letting it be altered or confused. The treatise-author records the two explanations alongside and does not judge. Here the reader can note: when one name and mark has two explanations, the treatise-author's method is to keep the meaning of each, not to force them into one.

108. Some arouse the mind only on hearing it expounded, some on seeing the adorned writing; so it was written on golden tablets and sealed with the seal of the seven jewels. The treatise-author closes this section, still returning it to the difference of capacities: 「有人但聞演說而發心者，有人見其莊嚴文字而歡喜發心者」 tr. "some people arouse the mind only on hearing it expounded; some people rejoice and arouse the mind on seeing the adorned writing", and therefore the jewelled terrace was adorned, the text written on golden tablets, and sealed with the seal of the seven jewels.—the adornments are not set up to look fine but to respond to capacities. From this the reader can understand what all the adornment of Dharma assemblies and places of practice is for.

109. The question: prajñā is in both places, and the place where it is written cannot benefit people; why does he first go to the terrace? The treatise-author asks about the order of first and after: expounding can benefit people while writing cannot, so why go first to the place of the writing instead? What this question relies on is the single standard of 「利益」 tr. "benefit", while the answer below sets up another standard.

110. The answer: the written prajñā is included in the Dharma Jewel, and the Dharma Jewel comes in sequence after the Buddha Jewel, so it should be offered to first. The first layer of the answer is tied to the sequence of the Three Jewels: 「所書般若，入法寶中。佛寶次第有法寶故，應先供養；曇無竭一人故，僧寶所不攝，是故先供養法寶。」 tr. "The prajñā that is written out is included within the Dharma Jewel. Because the Dharma Jewel comes in sequence after the Buddha Jewel, it should be offered to first; because Dharmodgata is a single person, he is not included in the Saṅgha Jewel; therefore he first made offerings to the Dharma Jewel."—what is judged is not who is more useful, but who occupies which position. Here the reader must turn his thought once: the order of offering is fixed by the position in the Dharma, not by effectiveness.

111. Further, although what Dharmodgata teaches is the Dharma, beings grasp at the mark of a person, so he first made offerings to the sūtra. The second layer of the answer is tied to the sickness of those who receive: 「眾生取人相故，多生著心；若見所書般若，不生人相，雖取餘相，著心少於著人生患，是故先供養經。」 tr. "Because beings grasp at the mark of a person, they mostly give rise to a clinging mind; if they see the prajñā that is written out, they do not give rise to the mark of a person, and although they grasp at other marks, the clinging mind is less than the fault and harm that arise from clinging to a person; therefore he first made offerings to the sūtra."—it is not that there is no clinging at all; it is that the harm of clinging to the Dharma is lighter than the harm of clinging to a person. The treatise-author speaks with the utmost honesty: he does not promise a scheme without clinging, but only compares the weight of two kinds of clinging. The reader can take this way of weighing when choosing a dharma.

112. Even the buddhas make offerings to the Dharma of the sūtra, how much more Dharmodgata and Sadāprarudita; so the means of offering were divided into two portions. The third layer of the answer infers from the root of the honoured and the lowly: 「經法諸佛尚供養，何況曇無竭及薩陀波崙！曇無竭因般若波羅蜜故得供養，所因之本，何得不先供養？」 tr. "Even the buddhas make offerings to the Dharma of the sūtra, how much more Dharmodgata and Sadāprarudita! Dharmodgata receives offerings because of prajñāpāramitā; how could the root through which he receives them not be offered to first?" Therefore he 「分所供養具為二分」 tr. "divided the means of offering into two portions".—The reason the one who teaches the Dharma receives offerings is the Dharma he holds; so the Dharma is the root and the person the branch; root first and branch after—the principle cannot be changed. In the matter of revering a teacher, these words can most serve as a standard for the reader.

113. The question: Dharmodgata has sixty thousand court maidens, the five desires, and palaces; how could he transform the scattered flowers into a flower-terrace? The treatise-author again asks about his supernormal power in view of his status: since he presently shows the appearance of enjoying the five desires, where does such a power of transformation come from? This question and the earlier section 「鈍根眾生或作是念」 tr. "beings of dull faculties might have this thought" are from the same loom: both are tied to the one matter of ‘a white-robed man presently enjoying the five desires’, and the reader can look at them together.

114. Someone says: it is the supernormal power of the buddhas that made this transformation by means of what was offered. One explanation attributes it to the power of the buddhas: the transformation does not come from Dharmodgata, but is made by the supernormal power of the buddhas by means of the things Sadāprarudita offered. This explanation avoids the doubt about Dharmodgata's status and sets up a different cause.

115. Someone says: Dharmodgata is a great bodhisattva whose body is born of the Dharma-nature, and he receives the five desires for the sake of delivering beings. Another explanation answers head-on: Dharmodgata is 「大菩薩法性生身，為度眾生故受五欲」 tr. "a great bodhisattva whose body is born of the Dharma-nature, and for the sake of delivering beings he receives the five desires", and with 「如曇無竭菩薩名字義中說」 tr. "as said in the meaning of the name of the bodhisattva Dharmodgata" it points to where the details are.—Receiving the five desires is a trace left for the sake of delivering beings, not his own self. The two explanations stand side by side, and the treatise-author does not judge. Here the reader can know: doubting a person's virtue on seeing his traces often comes from not knowing his root; yet the root, as root, is also not something the eye can see, so the treatise-author only records the two explanations alongside and stops.

116. The question: the bodhisattva's dharma is first to give rise to a compassionate mind toward beings; now they merely saw supernormal power and majestic virtue—how did they arouse the mind? This is the first question of the final group of questions and answers in this segment, and it is asked very weightily: the right dharma of a bodhisattva's arousing the mind is first to give rise to a compassionate mind toward beings, wishing to deliver beings from suffering, and only then to seek awakening; now what the elder's daughter and the others saw was only Dharmodgata's supernormal power and majestic virtue—why did they arouse the mind? If this were not asked, this arousing of the mind would become admiration of power.

117. The answer: arousing the mind is of all kinds, and the Sūtra of the Wisdom Seal is cited. The answer first breaks the view that ‘there is only one road to arousing the mind’: 「發心有種種：有聞說法而發心者，有於眾生起慈悲而發心者，有見神通力、大威德而發心者，然後漸漸而生悲心，如《智印經》中說。」 tr. "Arousing the mind is of all kinds: there are those who arouse the mind on hearing the Dharma taught; there are those who arouse the mind by giving rise to kindness and compassion toward beings; there are those who arouse the mind on seeing the power of supernormal abilities and great majestic virtue, and only afterwards give rise little by little to a compassionate mind; as said in the Sūtra of the Wisdom Seal."—One must keep an eye on the clause 「然後漸漸而生悲心」 tr. "and only afterwards give rise little by little to a compassionate mind": those who arouse the mind on seeing supernormal power do not fail to return to compassion; it is that the compassion comes after. The treatise-author does not deny the right order; he only says that the place of entry is not one.

118. Relying on love one severs love, relying on pride one severs pride; with the examples of leaving home and of growing haughty on hearing that a person obtained the path. The treatise-author further sets up a general rule: 「依愛而斷愛，依慢而斷慢。」 tr. "Relying on love one severs love; relying on pride one severs pride." And he gives an example of each—for love, 「如人聞道法，愛著是法故，捨五欲出家」 tr. "as when a person hears the dharma of the path and, because he loves and clings to this Dharma, gives up the five desires and leaves home"; for pride, hearing that so-and-so has obtained the path of the arhat, one gives rise to a haughty mind: 「此人無勝我事，彼尚能爾，我何不能？」 tr. "This person has nothing in which he surpasses me; if even he can do it, why can I not?" And so he gives rise to great vigour and obtains the path of the arhat. One must hold to the character 「斷」 tr. "sever": what is relied on is love and pride; what is accomplished is the severing of love and pride, not taking love and pride as the ultimate. If the reader reads these words as the afflictions being themselves the path, an error of a hair's breadth at the start leads a thousand miles astray.

119. Within the Buddha path it is also like this; and the explanation of why the elder's daughter and the others all aroused the mind to become buddhas. The treatise-author uses this general rule to explain the matter at hand: the elder's daughter and the others, and the five hundred women, 「常深貪勢力自在樂」 tr. "had ordinarily been deeply greedy for the pleasures of power and sovereignty"; first they heard that in ancient times there were people whose supernormal power worked transformations, who were complete with jewels and, while among humans, received heavenly pleasures; afterwards they saw Dharmodgata, his terraces and towers and palaces, seated upon the great Dharma seat with gods and humans making offerings; further they saw the things that had been offered transformed in space into a great terrace; 「心即大喜，發難遭想，知皆從福德因緣可辦是事，是故皆發作佛心」 tr. "their minds at once rejoiced greatly, they gave rise to the thought of how hard this is to meet, and knew that all this could be accomplished through the causes and conditions of merit; and therefore they all aroused the mind to become buddhas".—One must keep an eye on the clause 「知皆從福德因緣可辦是事」 tr. "knew that all this could be accomplished through the causes and conditions of merit": what they aroused was not admiration of the fruit but faith in the cause. Admiring the fruit without believing in the cause becomes mere envy; only believing in the cause and then arousing the mind is arousing the mind.

120. Those who arouse the mind from hearing all practise in sequence; the Vimalakīrti Sūtra is cited, with the simile of the lotus flower born in mud. The treatise-author further cites a sūtra as proof: 「愛、慢等諸煩惱，皆是佛道根本。」 tr. "Love, pride, and the other afflictions are all the root of the Buddha path." So the women, seeing the matter, gave rise to a mind of love and delight, knew that by the causes and conditions of merit such things could be obtained, and so they all aroused the mind; 「因是愛、慢，後得清淨好心，故言佛道根本，譬如蓮花生污泥」 tr. "because of this love and this pride, they afterwards obtained a pure and good mind; therefore it is said to be the root of the Buddha path, just as the lotus flower is born in mud".—What is called the root is the ground from which something is born, not the substance of what is accomplished. The lotus is born in mud, yet the lotus is not mud; this simile is precisely a guard against the reader's misunderstanding. The treatise-author also first sets down the sentence 「所聞發心者，行皆次第行」 tr. "those who arouse the mind because of what they hear all practise in sequence", making clear that it is not arriving in a single step, but must be practised in sequence.

121. Having aroused the mind they made a vow: As Dharmodgata has done, we too shall obtain this. After arousing the mind comes a vow. The treatise-author records the plainness of the words of their vow, which shows precisely the mark of those who have first aroused the mind: what they vow is just the matter they see before their eyes. The reader need not take the coarseness and shallowness of their vow as a fault—a coarse and shallow vow can deepen as practice goes on; without a vow there is nothing from which to deepen.

122. They bow with head and face to Dharmodgata; and the explanation of the order, offerings first and bowing afterwards, and of the causes and conditions of his original seeking of prajñā that he told. The treatise-author explains their sequence: 「花、香等供養不貴故，先以供養；身貴重，故後禮拜。」 tr. "Because offerings of flowers, incense, and the like are not weighty, they offered them first; because the body is weighty, they bowed afterwards."—first and after are fixed by the weight of what is presented: the light first, the heavy after. After bowing he told the causes and conditions of his original seeking of prajñā, as said in the sūtra: 「我本求般若時，聞空中聲，乃至我今問大師：『諸佛從何所來？去至何處？』」 tr. "When I first sought prajñā, I heard the voice in the sky, and so on up to: now I ask the great teacher, ‘From where do the buddhas come? Where do they go?’" This question is precisely the question toward which the whole chapter tends, and its answer comes later. Arriving here, the reader can look back over the whole segment: from the consolation of the buddhas of the ten directions up to this one question, all the matters in between—selling himself, cutting his body, obtaining wealth, going east, making offerings—were only so that he could ask this one sentence.

123. The question: having obtained the great samādhis, how could he not know emptiness, but grasp at the mark of a Buddha and give rise to deep love and clinging? The last question of the whole segment, and also the most crucial: having already obtained the great samādhis of breaking ignorance, of contemplating the nature of dharmas, and the rest, why does he still grasp at the mark of a Buddha and give rise to deep love and clinging?—If this question were not asked, the reader would take 「得三昧」 tr. "obtaining samādhi" as a matter already finished, and would not understand why there is still this one question and this one clinging.

124. The answer: a bodhisattva who has newly aroused the mind, although he knows emptiness by the general mark, cannot be united with emptiness. The answer divides 「知」 tr. "knowing" and 「合」 tr. "being united" into two layers: 「若新發意菩薩雖能總相知諸法空、無相，於諸佛所深愛著故，不能解佛相畢竟空，雖知空而不能與空合。」 tr. "If he is a bodhisattva who has newly aroused the mind, although he can know by the general mark that dharmas are empty and signless, because he deeply loves and clings to the buddhas he cannot understand that the mark of a Buddha is ultimately empty; though he knows emptiness he cannot be united with emptiness." The reason is 「諸佛有無量無邊實功德，是菩薩利根故，深入、深著」 tr. "the buddhas have immeasurable, boundless real merits, and because this bodhisattva's faculties are keen, he enters deeply and clings deeply"—keen faculties instead become his deep clinging; these words most need attention: the depth of clinging is not inversely proportional to the keenness of faculties. The treatise-author further sets up an extreme statement to show how deep the clinging is: 「若佛不為是菩薩說空者，是菩薩為愛佛故，能自滅親族，何況餘人！但以解空故無是事。」 tr. "If the Buddha did not teach emptiness to this bodhisattva, this bodhisattva, out of love for the Buddha, could even destroy his own kin, how much more other people! Only because he understands emptiness does no such thing happen."—Loving the Buddha to the point of being able to destroy his own kin shows the force of clinging to the mark of a Buddha; and the reason he never comes to this is precisely that he understands emptiness. Here the reader obtains a conclusion: understanding emptiness is not not loving; it is keeping love from turning into harm.

125. Sadāprarudita, because he clung deeply to the buddhas, could not know, and asked the great teacher. The treatise-author closes the whole segment with one sentence: 「薩陀波崙深著諸佛故不能知，而問大師」 tr. "because Sadāprarudita clung deeply to the buddhas, he could not know, and so he asked the great teacher"—「今為我說諸佛來去相，我見佛身無厭足故，常不離見諸佛。」 tr. "Now tell me the mark of the coming and going of the buddhas; because I look at the Buddha's body without ever being satisfied, I never part from seeing the buddhas."—Because he cannot know, there is this question; because he clings deeply, there is this vow. The whole segment stops here, and the answer to what is asked is not in this segment. The reader should know the treatise-author's intent in closing: he does not answer on his behalf here; he wants the reader to carry this one question onward.

Do Not Misread

Do not read 「諸佛為說求諸三昧性，不見實體」 tr. "the buddhas told him that when one searches for the nature of the samādhis, no real substance is seen" as samādhi being useless. Here the treatise-author first says that Sadāprarudita 「大得諸三昧力」 tr. "greatly obtained the power of the samādhis", and only then says that the buddhas told him there is no real substance; what is broken is 「其心深著」 tr. "his mind clung to them deeply", not the samādhis obtained. If it is read as samādhi being useless, then the passage below, 「今得諸三昧力，又見十方佛，諸煩惱微薄，著心已離故」 tr. "because he has now obtained the power of the samādhis and has also seen the buddhas of the ten directions, his afflictions have become slight and thin, and his clinging mind has already parted", has nowhere to stand—it is precisely these powers of the samādhis that make him no longer weep. To obtain a dharma and not cling to the dharma is the consistent intent of this segment; it is not that obtaining a dharma is of no benefit.

Do not read 「捨身即是大供養，去住無在」 tr. "giving up the body is itself a great offering; going and staying are both without any place" as the treatise-author denying the two explanations set out side by side after it (one each under 「有人言」 tr. "someone says" and 「又人言」 tr. "again someone says"). The treatise-author first gives this answer, next records alongside the two explanations of selling himself to obtain wealth and of the master certainly allowing him to return, and at the end gives his own correct explanation with 「於外、內物中，內施為重，惜之深故」 tr. "among outer things and inner things, inner giving is the weightier, because one cherishes it more deeply". The three explanations coexist, each with its own fitting place: one explanation is accomplished in the mind, two explanations are accomplished in the matter. If one holds to the one sentence 「去住無在」 tr. "going and staying are without any place" and rejects the explanations on the side of the matter, why would the treatise-author have recorded them alongside? If one holds to the explanations on the side of the matter and forgets the answer on the side of the mind, then selling himself becomes a mere business deal.

Do not read the section on Śakra's false speech as ‘if the motive is good one may lie’. The standard of judgement the treatise-author gives is very strict: what becomes an offence is 「以慳貪、瞋恚煩惱欲求自利故妄語」 tr. "lying because, through the afflictions of avarice and anger, one wishes to seek one's own benefit"; the reason it does not become an offence here is that what is done for is not self-benefit, what is relied on is the constant dharma of their country, and what is accomplished is making the other believe and accept. If any one of the three is missing, this example cannot be invoked. If the reader takes this section out and uses it as a general rule, that is exactly what the treatise-author does not permit.

Do not read 「依愛而斷愛，依慢而斷慢」 tr. "relying on love one severs love; relying on pride one severs pride" as taking the afflictions as the path. The weight of both sentences lies on the character 「斷」 tr. "sever", and the two examples given both end in severing—because he loves and clings to the Dharma he gives up the five desires and leaves home; because he gives rise to a haughty mind he gives rise to great vigour and obtains the path of the arhat. Although the proof cited says 「愛、慢等諸煩惱，皆是佛道根本」 tr. "love, pride, and the other afflictions are all the root of the Buddha path", the treatise-author immediately follows it with the simile 「譬如蓮花生污泥」 tr. "just as the lotus flower is born in mud": the mud is where it is born from, not the flower that is accomplished. If root is read as substance and nature, then the earlier sentence 「後得清淨好心」 tr. "afterwards obtained a pure and good mind" has nothing to rest on.

Do not read the elder's daughter and the others arousing the mind on seeing supernormal power as admiration of power. The treatise-author says plainly that the reason they aroused the mind was that they 「知皆從福德因緣可辦是事」 tr. "knew that all this could be accomplished through the causes and conditions of merit"—what they believed in was the cause, not the fruit. Moreover the treatise-author first sets up the general rule 「發心有種種」 tr. "arousing the mind is of all kinds", and adds the sentence 「然後漸漸而生悲心」 tr. "and only afterwards give rise little by little to a compassionate mind", making clear that it does not stop there. If the reader simply dismisses it as admiration of power, he will not see what the treatise-author wants to say: the occasion for entering the gate can be any place at all, yet what is practised after entering the gate is still a sequence.

Do not read 「雖知空而不能與空合」 tr. "though he knows emptiness he cannot be united with emptiness" as the emptiness Sadāprarudita knows being false. The treatise-author says clearly that he 「能總相知諸法空、無相」 tr. "can know by the general mark that dharmas are empty and signless"—what he knows is not false; it is only by the general mark and does not yet reach the mark of a Buddha; it is not that he knows wrongly, but that between knowing and being united there is still a stretch. If it is read as what he knows being wholly false, then the earlier matters—the buddhas teaching him the two emptinesses, his clinging mind having already parted because of this, and the rest—would all fall empty. Knowing emptiness but not yet being united with emptiness is precisely the real ground of a bodhisattva who has newly aroused the mind, and it is also precisely where all the austerities of the whole segment arise from.

Bearing on Practice

The first use is to learn the treatise-author's form of questioning. Of the twenty-three questions in this segment, eight or nine out of ten have the same sentence pattern—this person is plainly already thus, so why would he still be like that? One can read the sūtra this way, and one can read oneself this way too: I plainly already understand this principle, so why, when a matter comes, do I still act as before? Every time, the treatise-author's way of answering is to divide into layers—this layer is accomplished, that layer is not yet accomplished. Having learned to ask and answer oneself in this way, one will not deny everything one has understood because of a single slip, nor mistakenly think, because one understands clearly, that one can already practise it.

The second use is to remember the sentence 「功德法貧，最大可恥」 tr. "poverty in the dharmas of merit is the greatest shame". Here the treatise-author plainly sets up two kinds of poverty, poverty in wealth and poverty in the dharmas of merit, and pronounces 「財貧，好人亦有；法貧，好人所無」 tr. "poverty in wealth even good people may have; poverty in the Dharma good people do not have". In daily life people are mostly ashamed of poverty in wealth and at ease with poverty in the Dharma. One can place these words upon the heart, and whenever one feels hard pressed, first ask: which kind of poverty is it that presses me? This one question is enough to turn much needless self-abasement into needful self-urging.

The third use is to take ‘the time of practising and the time of reflecting have different flavours’ to test oneself. The treatise-author says that wholesome dharmas have different flavours at the time of practising and at the time of reflecting, and that Sadāprarudita 「欲行布施味，是故求供養具」 tr. "wished to practise the flavour of giving, and therefore sought means of offering". Anyone who says of himself ‘it is enough that I have this intention in my heart’ can test himself by this: have you tasted the flavour of practising that intention or not? If you have not tasted it, it is only the flavour of reflection. This test is the simplest, and also the hardest to deceive oneself about.

The fourth use is to keep 「今欲定心出魔境界，是故魔來」 tr. "now, with a settled mind, he is about to leave Māra's realm, and therefore Māra comes" in mind at the place where effort grows tighter. The treatise-author sets up three divisions—one whose mind is not yet settled cannot move Māra, one whose mind is already settled Māra cannot come to, and just at the moment of being about to settle and not yet settled Māra exerts all his strength—and makes it clear with the simile of the debtor whom the creditor will not let go when he is about to leave for another realm. When a practitioner, just as his effort gradually gains strength, suddenly meets adverse conditions or suddenly gives rise to the intent to retreat, reading this passage he knows what it is he has met: he need not be alarmed, nor may he slacken.

The fifth use is to learn this kind of weighing, ‘the harm of clinging to the Dharma is lighter than the harm of clinging to a person’. Explaining why offerings were first made to the scroll of the sūtra, the treatise-author does not promise a way wholly without clinging, but only says 「雖取餘相，著心少於著人生患」 tr. "although they grasp at other marks, the clinging mind is less than the fault and harm that arise from clinging to a person". In daily life, in choosing a dharma, choosing a teacher, choosing a place of practice, there is often no option clean through and through; one can use this method of the treatise-author, not asking which is wholly without fault and harm, but only asking whose harm is lighter. This is wisdom on real ground, not in an ideal.

The sixth use is to take 「雖知空而不能與空合」 tr. "though he knows emptiness he cannot be united with emptiness" to look at oneself. What the last question of the whole segment points to is precisely the position where every person who studies prajñā is: the principle is known, yet as soon as a state appears before one, one still clings. The treatise-author does not reproach this clinging; instead he says it is precisely because his faculties are keen that he enters deeply and clings deeply, and also says 「但以解空故無是事」 tr. "only because he understands emptiness does no such thing happen"—the function of understanding emptiness is not to make one not love, but to keep love from turning into harm. Here a practitioner can put down the self-reproach ‘why do I still cling?’, and use his strength to bring his understanding by the general mark, step by step, into union with what he meets.

Further Resonances

The backbone of this segment is the twenty-three rounds of question and answer the treatise-author makes on the preceding sūtra text, interspersed with re-explanations of passages taken up from the sūtra and fifteen places where divergent explanations are set out side by side (「有人言」 tr. "someone says" fourteen, 「又人言」 tr. "again someone says" one). Its order: first it explains the consolation of the buddhas of the ten directions, their teaching that the samādhis have no real substance, and their brief account of the mark of prajñā; next it answers why he asks again who his good friend is, giving the two meanings of the Buddha's command to redouble reverence and of wishing to make his own faith firm; next it answers why he does not greatly grieve and seek again to see the buddhas, judging his weeping and not weeping by the difference between the fleshly eye and samādhi; next it answers why he does not re-enter samādhi but wishes to ask Dharmodgata, returning it to the buddhas of the ten directions' praising him as his teacher life after life; next it answers why he belittles himself as poor and seeks means of offering, giving the three meanings of according with worldly people, giving as the first of the aids to the path, and the different flavours of practising and reflecting; next it answers why a great bodhisattva is poor, recording alongside the two explanations of leaving home without carrying wealth and of being born into a poor family because of small offences in former lives, and setting up the judgement between poverty in wealth and poverty in the dharmas of merit; next it answers the doubt as to who buys him when he sells himself, the correct explanation being that giving up the body is itself a great offering and that inner giving is the weightier, recording alongside the two explanations of selling himself to obtain wealth and of the master certainly allowing him to return; next it answers why Māra wished to ruin him, giving the three meanings of his always being an enemy, of small bodhisattvas being ruinable, and of the sūtra itself stating the cause; it also answers why he did not ruin him earlier but screens only now, setting up the three divisions of a mind not yet settled and a mind already settled together with the simile of the debtor; it also answers why he does not kill but only ruins, giving the two meanings of Māra's hating the mind of becoming a Buddha and of the dharma of the gods and spirits forbidding reckless killing; and it distinguishes the names brahmin and householder, and records the three explanations of the elder's daughter alone hearing; next it answers why, after three cries with no buyer, he still grieves, returning it to his vow not being fulfilled; next it answers why Śakra came to test him, giving the three meanings of the gods not knowing the mind of becoming a Buddha, of wishing to lead many, and the simile of the burning and forging of gold and silver; it also answers why he lied, setting up the judgement that it is an offence only when it is from afflictions and for self-benefit; next it distinguishes great benefit and the foremost benefit step by step, and explains the phrase 「便為具足」 tr. "then it is complete"; next it answers why he asked the price, explains the limit of give me as you wish, and explains why he took the knife himself and broke his body; next it answers why the elder's daughter came only at this time, judging it by the lightness of the matter of empty words and the weight of the matter of breaking the body, and thereupon narrates the present matters of the Buddha's merits he gave in answer and the five explanations of the unsurpassed Dharma Jewel, recording alongside the five interpretations—the Dharma Jewel among the Three Jewels, the eighty-four thousand collections of the Dharma, anuttarā samyaksaṃbodhi, nirvāṇa, and the path to nirvāṇa—and returning them to distribution as the three vehicles; next it answers how he could teach the Dharma at the moment of cutting his body, giving the two meanings of the great power of his mind and of his not yet having greatly swooned; next it explains Śakra's praise on resuming his own body, his setting out his purpose in coming to test, his being ashamed and in debt at being unable to grant awakening, his asking for some other wish, the request that the body be made whole, and the wounds at once being made whole, and answers how they could be made whole, giving the two meanings of the five inconceivables and of the atoms coming together; next it explains the reason for ask my parents for it, giving the two meanings of being ashamed that she could not match her earlier words and of the dharma of a child, answers how the elder could send his daughter off, setting up the roots of virtue planted in former lives and the simile of the lotus flower seeing the sun, and portrays the parents' mind of weighing; next it narrates the multitude's minds being settled and their going east, and the crowd following; next it answers why a terrace of the seven jewels was used to write out the scroll of the prajñā sūtra, giving two meanings, explains the sealing with the seal of the seven jewels and records alongside the one explanation of the seven great spirits, and answers why he first went to the terrace, giving the three meanings of the sequence of the Three Jewels, of the heavier harm of clinging to a person, and of the Dharma as the root through which offerings are received; next it answers how Dharmodgata could transform the flower-terrace, recording alongside the two explanations of the supernormal power of the buddhas and of the body born of the Dharma-nature; next it answers how they could arouse the mind merely on seeing supernormal power and majestic virtue, setting up the general rules that arousing the mind is of all kinds and that relying on love one severs love and relying on pride one severs pride, citing two sūtras as proof and taking the lotus flower born in mud as a simile; finally it narrates the bowing with head and face, the order of offerings first and bowing afterwards, and the causes and conditions of his original seeking of prajñā that he told, and closes the whole segment with the answer 「雖知空而不能與空合」 tr. "though he knows emptiness he cannot be united with emptiness", stopping at Sadāprarudita's one question about the mark of the coming and going of the buddhas.

Two strands of meaning can be seen linking this segment with what comes before and after. First, continuing what precedes: what this segment explains is precisely the preceding sūtra text, so the order of its questions and answers follows the sūtra text down one by one; where the sūtra text is brief the treatise-author gives details, and where the sūtra text is hidden the treatise-author asks about it. Second, handing on to what follows: the answer to the final question of the whole segment, 「諸佛從何所來？去至何處？」 tr. "From where do the buddhas come? Where do they go?", is not in this segment but in the next chapter, the "Dharmodgata" chapter; the reader should look at the two chapters together, and only then see where this question comes to rest.

Of the ancient masters' explanations, one school is worth recording for this segment. Jizang, explaining this chapter in his Commentary on the Larger Sūtra, gives its chapter heading as 「常啼品第八十八」 tr. "Ever Weeping, Chapter Eighty-Eight", using the chapter name of the line of the Larger Sūtra, which differs from this treatise's title 「薩陀波崙品第八十八」 tr. "Sadāprarudita, Chapter Eighty-Eight"; his division of the whole chapter says: 「白佛下，第二、於其人求般若相，為三三：第一、廣明其人求法之相使物喜之；二者、佛精苦求法故得具足聞；三、明聞科益諸三昧。」 tr. "From ‘addressed the Buddha’ on, second: the marks of that person's seeking prajñā, which are three, three: first, broadly making clear the marks of that person's seeking the Dharma so that beings rejoice in it; second, the Buddha—because of diligent and painful seeking of the Dharma he obtains complete hearing; third, making clear hearing, the division of benefit, and the samādhis." For the great section below this he divides it into five and gives the general heading: 「見諸佛下，大段第二、更勸尋善友求般若也。」 tr. "From ‘saw the buddhas’ on, great section two: further encouraging him to look for the good friend and seek prajñā." [Note: he himself heads it 「五者」 tr. "five", yet the numerals of the items read one, two, three, five, six; this is recorded faithfully as it stands, without change.] The section on selling himself he heads separately, saying: 「復作是念下，第二、賣身供養。」 tr. "From ‘further had this thought’ on, second: selling himself to make offerings." This differs from the format of this treatise, which questions and answers following the text; his divisions are taken so that they can be read alongside the order of this treatise's questions and answers. Of his item-by-item explanations, several matters can be set against this segment. On selling himself, explaining why offerings were needed, he says: 「所以須供養：一、為他人見其遠來，空無有物，則不生喜心，故須供養具；二者、欲引導眾人，其是貧窮，尚辦供養等，云何而不行耶？二者、欲明般若，檀為其初。」 tr. "The reason offerings were needed: first, because when others see that he has come from afar with nothing at all, they do not give rise to a joyful mind, so means of offering were needed; second, he wished to lead the multitude—he being poor still provides offerings and the like, so how could they not do it? Second, he wished to make clear that for prajñā, giving is its beginning."—the three meanings broadly correspond to this treatise's three meanings, except that the numeral of its headings is repeated, before and after, which is recorded as it stands without change. Explaining why he was poor, he says: 「問：常啼得六萬三昧，見十方佛，何故貧耶？答：其人雖有見佛之緣，過去復少罪，生貧窮家，故無財物；二者、雖生富家，去家遠，在深山學道，故不取財物也。」 tr. "Question: Ever Weeping obtained sixty thousand samādhis and saw the buddhas of the ten directions; why was he poor? Answer: although that person had the affinity to see the buddhas, in the past he also had small offences, and was born into a poor family, so he had no wealth; second, although he was born into a rich family, he went far from home and trained in the path in the deep mountains, so he did not take wealth."—the order of the two explanations is the reverse of the two schools recorded in this treatise; they are recorded side by side without judgement. Explaining who makes the offerings when the one who sells himself belongs to another, he says: 「問：賣身屬他，誰供養善友耶？一解云：寄他供養。二解云：此是及世，身雖屬他，許其前供養，聞般若便歸也。」 tr. "Question: having sold himself he belongs to another; who makes offerings to the good friend? One explanation says: he makes offerings by entrusting it to another. A second explanation says: this was an age that reached it; although his body belonged to another, he was permitted first to make offerings, and on hearing prajñā he would then return." And he gives an explanation of his own, saying: 「今謂於市賣身，則眾人無不感其奇時，必招致財物，復得友人心，是故賣身。」 tr. "Now I say: when he sells himself in the market, then among the crowd there is no one who is not moved by its strangeness at that time; he would certainly attract wealth and also win the hearts of friends; therefore he sold himself."—this explanation is not found in this treatise, and is recorded without judgement. Explaining why Māra did not kill him, he says: 「問：魔何故不煞常啼而惱亂之耶？答：魔不減其壽命，但破其求佛心也。又天神法，人無大罪，不得害之；若無此法，人無活者也。」 tr. "Question: why does Māra not kill Ever Weeping but trouble and disrupt him? Answer: Māra does not reduce his life; he only breaks his mind of seeking buddhahood. Further, by the dharma of the gods and spirits, if a person has no great offence, they may not harm him; if there were not this dharma, no person would live."—this agrees with the two meanings answered in this treatise. Explaining why Māra did not come earlier, he says: 「問：其在空林之時，魔何不來耶？答：爾時未得諸三昧，未能決定忘身，故不能動魔；亦得諸三昧，能決定忘身，故魔乃驚也。小菩薩未能動魔，已得無生，亦不動魔，將出魔境，將入道門，故魔來也。」 tr. "Question: when he was in the empty forest, why did Māra not come? Answer: at that time he had not yet obtained the samādhis and could not yet decisively forget his body, so he could not move Māra; having also obtained the samādhis, he could decisively forget his body, so Māra was then alarmed. A small bodhisattva cannot yet move Māra; one who has already obtained non-arising also does not move Māra; one who is about to leave Māra's realm and about to enter the gate of the path—therefore Māra comes."—the judgement by three divisions is the same as this treatise's, with the additional phrase 「將入道門」 tr. "about to enter the gate of the path". Explaining the name householder, he says: 「長者、居士不聞自賣聲者，此是居舍之士，非四姓中居士也。」 tr. "That the elders and householders did not hear the sound of his selling himself: these are gentlemen who dwell in houses, not the householders among the four castes."—this agrees with this treatise's distinction. Explaining why the elder's daughter alone heard, he says: 「長者女獨聞聲者，一解：是人不死因緣故其得聞。二解：是法尚神力今其得取。三云：與常啼宿世善友，善根既深魔不能弊也。」 tr. "That the elder's daughter alone heard the sound: one explanation: it is because of the causes and conditions of this person's not dying that she was able to hear. A second explanation: it is the supernormal power of Dharmodgata that now lets her obtain it. A third says: she was Ever Weeping's good friend in former lives, and her roots of goodness being deep, Māra could not obscure her."—the three explanations correspond to the three explanations recorded in this treatise, except that their order and this treatise's differ, each in places coming before the other. Explaining Śakra's coming to test him, he says: 「問：帝釋得他心智，何不知其心而來誡耶？答：天主但知世人心，世人以作佛必非其知。二者、雖知其心，為欲發起眾人示希有事故誡也。」 tr. "Question: Śakra has obtained the knowledge of others' minds; why did he not know his mind, but came to admonish him? Answer: the lord of the gods knows only the minds of worldly people; a worldly person's becoming a Buddha is certainly not within his knowing. Second: although he knew his mind, because he wished to rouse the multitude by showing a rare matter, he admonished him."—the two meanings agree with the first two meanings of this treatise. Explaining great benefit and the foremost benefit, he says: 「大利第一利者，十地為大利、佛道第一利、般若為大利。方便第一利者，五度為大利、般若為第一利也。」 tr. "As for great benefit and the foremost benefit: the ten grounds are great benefit, the Buddha path the foremost benefit, prajñā great benefit. As for skilful means as the foremost benefit: the five perfections are great benefit, prajñā the foremost benefit."—the items paired differ in places from the four layers listed in this treatise; they are recorded side by side without judgement. Explaining the wounds being made whole again, he says: 「身即平後後者，五不可思議中龍力尚不思議，況復天耶？以空中有魔故，福業力聚塵令身平復也。」 tr. "As for the body being at once made whole, after, after: among the five inconceivables, even the power of nāgas is inconceivable, how much more the gods? Because there is Māra in space, the power of meritorious deeds gathers the dust and makes the body whole again."—the five inconceivables cited and the meaning of gathering the dust are the same as in this treatise; its wording has places open to question, and it is recorded faithfully as it stands without change. Explaining the writing out of the sūtra on the terrace of the seven jewels, he says: 「論解云：善根深人者，從曇無竭聞般若；善根淺者，從經卷中，故有金牒書般若也。」 tr. "The treatise explains: people whose roots of goodness are deep hear prajñā from Dharmodgata; those whose roots of goodness are shallow hear it from within the scroll of the sūtra; therefore there is prajñā written on golden tablets." He also says: 「此中又解云：眾生所樂不同，或見經卷，或樂聞法。又解云：鈍根人見曇無竭為白衣受五欲法，必眾護著，治何為也？說無著法，是故於其經文為此人也。」 tr. "Here it is further explained: what beings delight in differs—some see the scroll of the sūtra, some delight in hearing the Dharma. It is further explained: people of dull faculties see that Dharmodgata is one of the white-robed receiving the dharma of the five desires; he must be guarding many attachments, so what is he to do? He teaches the dharma of non-clinging; therefore the sūtra text is for this person."—the latter two explanations correspond to this treatise's two meanings, while the first explanation divides the scroll of the sūtra and the expounding by the depth or shallowness of roots of goodness, which differs in the meaning taken from this treatise's dividing them by the difference of mental conduct; they are recorded side by side without judgement. Explaining the seal of the seven jewels, he says: 「一解：是十寶印印曇無竭手，常自報將。次解：是求佛道七大神王，如金剛神之類，守護金牒，不令魔等，改汎其文，故言七印也。」 tr. "One explanation: it is a seal of the ten jewels, sealed on Dharmodgata's hand, which he always himself bears and holds. The next explanation: these are seven great spirit kings seeking the Buddha path, of the kind of the vajra spirits, guarding the golden tablets and not letting Māra and the others alter and blur its text; therefore it is called the seven seals."—the two explanations correspond to this treatise's two explanations. Further, Zhanran, in his Supporting Practice and Broad Resolution of Calming and Contemplation, cites the final question of this segment and joins it with the answer of the next chapter, saying: 「故引大品。薩陀波崙空中見佛。後見曇無竭。乃問言。佛從何所來。答言。不來不去即是佛。無生法即是佛。」 tr. "Therefore the Larger Sūtra is cited. Sadāprarudita saw the Buddha in the sky. Afterwards he saw Dharmodgata. Then he asked, saying: From where does the Buddha come? The answer said: Not coming and not going is precisely the Buddha. The dharma of non-arising is precisely the Buddha."—the question cited is in this segment, while the answer cited is in the next chapter; this is a citation joining across chapters, recorded without judgement, and its answer is not taken as belonging to this segment. The extant part of Huiying's Commentary does not reach this chapter; this segment has no explanatory text of his to cite, and the lack is marked according to the facts, not filled with text from elsewhere; Junzheng's book is not in the form of a commentary explaining the sūtra following its text, and has no bearing on this chapter. The variant readings of the various editions touched on in this segment, and the two forms of the chapter title, are examined in detail in the apparatus layer.