大智度論 囑累品第九十Dazhidulun — Mahāprajñāpāramitā-upadeśa · Entrustment (Chapter 90)

Entrustment: Why the Buddha, Having Already Severed Love of Dharmas, Still Earnestly Entrusts without This Becoming Love and Clinging; Why He Entrusts Prajñā to Ānanda the Śrāvaka and Not to Maitreya and the Other Great Bodhisattvas; Why the Lotus and Other Sūtras Entrust, the Other Way Round, to Bodhisattvas; Why, Prajñā Not Being a Secret Dharma, It Is Said That Only Great Bodhisattvas Can Receive, Uphold, and Use It; Why, Having Already Entrusted It in "Seeing Akṣobhya Buddha", Entrusting It Again Now Is Not a Repetition; Why the Path of Prajñā and the Path of Skilful Means, One in Original Substance, Must Be Divided into Two Names; Why He Is Earnest and Solemn up to Three Tellings without Falling into the Craving and Clinging of Ordinary People; Why the Buddha, Knowing Full Well That Ānanda Is His Disciple, Still Asks before the Assembly Whether He Is His Disciple; Why, Prajñā Being the Teacher of the Buddhas, What Ānanda Reveres Is the Buddha; Why, One Entrustment Being Enough, It Goes to Three and beyond Three Adds No More; Why, an Earlier Chapter Having Made Clear That Prajñā Is Not Increased by Being Taught nor Decreased by Not Being Taught, It Now Says Do Not Let It Be Cut Off and Extinguished; On What Ground It Is Said That Prajñā Being in the World Is the Buddha Being in the World; How People of Heavy Sin Who Hear, Receive, Write Out, and Uphold It Can Be Not Apart from the Buddhas; Why the Great Arhats Who Have Already Realised the Limit of Reality Still Have Great Joy; Why, the Buddha Having Entrusted It to Ānanda, the Mahāyāna Is Not Seen in the Compiling of the Three Baskets; and Why the Whole Treatise Is Gathered In by the Colophon of the Translation Hall on How the Treatise Was Brought Out from Beginning to End

What Is Being Asked

This chapter is the last chapter of the whole treatise, and the matter it speaks of is extremely simple: the Buddha hands prajñāpāramitā over to Ānanda. The sūtra text is short, but the questions are large—so large that only when the whole treatise has walked this far can they be asked.

The Buddha first asks something that seems superfluous: 「佛是汝大師不？汝是佛弟子不？」 tr. "Is the Buddha your great teacher? Are you the Buddha's disciple?" Ānanda answers, the Buddha confirms it once more, and only then does he say what he means to hand over: in the way you loved, revered, and made offerings to me while I was in the world, after my passing into extinction turn all this loving, revering, and making offerings toward prajñāpāramitā; and so on up to a second time and a third time, I entrust prajñāpāramitā to you; do not forget it, do not lose it, do not be the last person who cuts off the lineage. The sūtra text then gives a criterion: 「隨爾所時般若波羅蜜在世，當知爾所時有佛在世說法。」 tr. "For however long a time prajñāpāramitā is in the world, know that for so long a time there is a Buddha in the world teaching the Dharma." Finally it says that those who write it out, uphold, read, recite, and make offerings to it are 「不離見佛、不離聞法、常親近佛」 tr. "not apart from seeing the Buddha, not apart from hearing the Dharma, and always close to the Buddha", and it concludes with the great assembly rejoicing.

What the treatise-author does on taking it over is not to say this passage once more, but to pick out fourteen places of unease within it and ask about them one by one. The first place is the most important: the Buddha has already severed love of dharmas, and even toward the omniscience of all kinds and nirvāṇa he does not cling and does not grasp at marks; now, by all kinds of causes and conditions, he entrusts this one Dharma—does that not look like exactly love and clinging? If this question is not broken, the whole chapter becomes the Buddha contradicting his own words. The treatise-author's way of answering does not argue from ‘the Buddha does not love and cling’, but speaks from ‘the Buddha's great compassion, from the first arousing of intent up to the gate of nirvāṇa, is never abandoned’—between the twin śāla trees he could even, by the vajra samādhi, break his body into pieces like hemp seeds and rice for the sake of beings; how much more a sūtra-dharma that enriches so many. The reason the entrustment is not love and clinging is that what is loved is not the Dharma itself but the beings who hear the Dharma and are saved.

The second place asks about the person: prajñā is the dharma of bodhisattvas; why hand it to a śrāvaka? The treatise-author sets out several sayings side by side: Ānanda always attended at the Buddha's left and right, obtained the dhāraṇī of hearing and retaining, hearing once and never losing it, and is the third teacher who can turn the wheel of the Dharma following the Buddha; the great bodhisattvas each scatter after the Buddha's passing into extinction, and moreover already deeply know the power of prajñā, so they need no bitter urging. The third place asks back in return: then why do the Lotus and other sūtras entrust them to bodhisattvas? The treatise-author answers that what those sūtras teach is a very deep dharma hard to believe, and that the śrāvakas were not present in the assembly, or heard and could not use it. The fourth place presses one layer further: is there then a dharma deeper than prajñā? The treatise-author answers with great steadiness—prajñā is not a secret dharma; it is only that the Lotus and the others say that arhats receive the prediction and become Buddhas, which only great bodhisattvas can put to use, 「譬如大藥師能以毒為藥」 tr. "just as a great physician can use poison as medicine".

Through a long middle section the treatise-author holds fast to the two Chinese characters 「慇懃」 tr. "earnest": the merchant chief is specially earnest about the precious jewels of great price because his son does not recognise their price; the Buddha entrusts it himself among his disciples and does not praise it in a different assembly, to avoid the suspicion of 「自稱讚法」 tr. "praising his own dharma"; first he taught that dharmas are empty to block the extreme of existence, now he earnestly entrusts to refute the extreme of non-existence, 「如是，則離二邊」 tr. "in this way he parts from the two extremes". When it comes to the question 「一囑累則足，何以至三」 tr. "one entrustment would be enough; why go to three", the answer is 「佛深愛般若波羅蜜故三囑」 tr. "because the Buddha deeply loves prajñāpāramitā, he entrusts it three times"; pressed by one more question, 「若深愛者，何限於三」 tr. "if he deeply loves it, why limit it to three", the answer is only eight Chinese characters: 「諸佛常法，語不過三。」 tr. "The constant way of the buddhas is that their speech does not exceed three."—even earnestness has its measure; going too far and falling short are both wrong.

The most perilous question of the whole chapter comes in the second half: an earlier chapter plainly said that prajñā is 「說亦不增、不說亦不減，畢竟寂滅相」 tr. "not increased by being taught, nor decreased by not being taught, having the mark of ultimate quiescent extinction", yet now it says 「莫令斷滅」 tr. "do not let it be cut off and extinguished"; like space, who could extinguish it? The treatise-author's answer is the pivot of the whole chapter: what is entrusted is the side of 「文字語言書般若波羅蜜經卷，為他人說」 tr. "the scrolls of the prajñāpāramitā sūtra written in letters and words, taught to others", which is 「於此因中而說其果」 tr. "its result is spoken of within this cause"; and what can truly 「滅般若」 tr. "extinguish prajñā" is not someone from outside either, but that one way of reading which grasps at marks and discriminates, gives rise to strife through clinging, and raises sinful deeds through strife. Reading 「有般若在世，則為佛在」 tr. "when there is prajñā in the world, the Buddha is present" again from here, one will not read it as a sentence of consolation—prajñā is the mother of the buddhas, the Dharma Jewel is not apart from the Buddha Jewel, and with the teacher present and the mother present, it is said that the root of the benefit is present.

The last question returns to a matter of history: since the Buddha entrusted it to Ānanda, why is the Mahāyāna not seen in the three baskets compiled by Mahākāśyapa? The treatise-author answers with its being hard to believe, answers with its great quantity, answers with 「小物應在大中，大物不得入小」 tr. "a small thing should be within a great one; a great thing cannot enter a small one", and records one saying: Mañjuśrī, Maitreya, and the other great bodhisattvas also led Ānanda to compile this Mahāyāna. What closes the whole treatise is not doctrine but a colophon of the translation hall—he arrived at Chang'an in the third year of Hongshi, and it was finished only on the twenty-seventh day of the twelfth month of the seventh year; the first chapter, thirty-four fascicles, is the complete text, and from the second chapter onward the Dharma master abridged it. Only on reading this far does one know: the ‘do not let it be cut off’ entrusted in this chapter was, in the land of Han, caught up precisely by this piece of history.

Passage by Passage

1. The Buddha asks Ānanda: is the Buddha your great teacher; are you the Buddha's disciple. The whole chapter begins from one question, and what this question asks about is a matter everyone takes to have been settled long ago. The relation of teacher and disciple between the Buddha and Ānanda was known to everyone in the assembly, yet before making his entrustment the Buddha first asks about it once before the assembly. When reading a sūtra and meeting such ‘asking what one well knows’, do not first take it as a courtesy: whenever the Buddha sets a question before entrusting a weighty matter, his question must establish something—what it establishes is the standing that the one entrusted acknowledges for himself before the assembly. What the treatise-author explains later in the seventh round of question and answer is exactly this meaning.

2. Ānanda answers: the Buddha is my great teacher, the Sugata is my great teacher, I am the Buddha's disciple. There is one place in Ānanda's answer worth stopping at: he does not only answer 「佛是我大師」 tr. "the Buddha is my great teacher", he adds one more phrase, 「脩伽陀是我大師」 tr. "the Sugata is my great teacher". Sugata is another name of the Buddha; Ānanda's bringing up the other name again and answering once more is to make the answer to the same matter more solid. Only at the end of the answer does he say 「我是佛弟子」 tr. "I am the Buddha's disciple"—first acknowledging the teacher, then acknowledging the disciple, the order clear. When the treatise-author says later 「阿難為欲令人信故重答」 tr. "Ānanda, in order to make people believe, answers again, repeating it", what he points to is just this one Chinese character 「重」 tr. "again, repeating".

3. The Buddha confirms it and three times entrusts prajñā, bidding that after his passing into extinction the love, reverence, and offerings given to the Buddha be given to prajñā; not to forget, not to lose, not to be the last person who cuts off the lineage; and showing that prajñā being in the world is the Buddha being in the world, and the benefit that those who write it out, uphold, and make offerings are not apart from seeing the Buddha. This passage is the main body of the whole chapter's sūtra text and contains four layers within it; the reader should look at them separately, layer by layer. The first layer is confirmation and reckoning up: from 「如是！如是！」 tr. "Just so! Just so!" onward it says that what a disciple ought to do 「汝已作竟」 tr. "you have already done it all", and enumerates that Ānanda made offerings and provided with deeds of kindness of body, speech, and mind, 「亦常如我意，無有違失」 tr. "and always accorded with my mind, without fault or failing". The second layer is a turning: the love, reverence, offerings, and provision you gave while my body was present—「我滅度後」 tr. "after my passing into extinction"—all of this turns toward prajñāpāramitā. The third layer is entrustment and admonition: 「乃至第二、第三，以般若波羅蜜囑累汝」 tr. "and so on up to a second time and a third time, I entrust prajñāpāramitā to you", 「汝莫忘莫失，莫作最後斷種人」 tr. "do not forget it, do not lose it, do not be the last person who cuts off the lineage". The fourth layer is the showing of two retributions: when prajñā is in the world, one knows there is a Buddha in the world teaching the Dharma; those who write it out, uphold, read, recite, rightly recollect, widely explain, and make all kinds of offerings are 「不離見佛、不離聞法、常親近佛」 tr. "not apart from seeing the Buddha, not apart from hearing the Dharma, and always close to the Buddha". Reading the four layers in one breath, one sees that what the Buddha hands over is not a scroll of a book but an unbroken line of the Dharma.

4. The great assembly, hearing what the Buddha said, all greatly rejoice. The sūtra section concludes with narration, and there is no further speaker. The assembly listed begins from Maitreya and the other bodhisattva-mahāsattvas, goes on to the venerable Subhūti, Śāriputra, Mahāmaudgalyāyana, Mahākāśyapa, Pūrṇa Maitrāyaṇīputra, Mahākauṣṭhila, Mahākātyāyana, Ānanda, and the others, and at the end sums up with 「并一切大眾，及一切世間諸天、人、犍闥婆、阿修羅等」 tr. "together with the whole great assembly, and the gods, humans, gandharvas, asuras, and others of all the world". Here the bodhisattvas are listed before the śrāvakas, while the one who receives the entrustment is Ānanda among the śrāvakas—the gap between this listing and this entrustment is exactly where the treatise-author's second round of question and answer arises from. The last phrase, the four Chinese characters 「皆大歡喜」 tr. "all greatly rejoiced", the treatise-author later explains with a question set up specially; it must not be read past carelessly.

5. The question of the first question and answer: the Buddha has already severed love of dharmas; why now does he by all kinds of causes and conditions entrust this Dharma, as if in love and clinging. The treatise-author begins his explanation with a very heavy question: even toward the omniscience of all kinds and nirvāṇa the Buddha 「不著不取相」 tr. "does not cling and does not grasp at marks", yet now by all kinds of causes and conditions he earnestly hands over one Prajñā, which looked at from outside is exactly the mark of love and clinging. This question is not fault-finding; it asks out first, on the reader's behalf, the doubt most easily raised. In reading the treatise one should learn this method: whenever one feels that the sūtra text and the doctrine do not fit at some point, first state the misfit to the utmost, and then look at the answer.

6. The answer of the first question and answer: the mind of great kindness and compassion of the buddhas, from the first arousing of intent until the gate of nirvāṇa, is never abandoned; it brings out the matter of breaking his body into pieces like hemp seeds and rice by the vajra samādhi between the twin śāla trees. The answer does not argue over the Chinese character 「愛」 tr. "love", but changes the object of what is loved: what the Buddha never abandons is beings, not the Dharma. The treatise-author brings up an extremely weighty matter as proof—between the twin śāla trees, by the vajra samādhi, he broke his body into pieces like hemp seeds and rice for the sake of beings. Even his body he broke and scattered in giving, 「何況經法多所饒益而不囑累」 tr. "how much more would he entrust the sūtra-dharma, which enriches so many!" One must see the weighting in this counter-question: the body can still be given up by the Buddha, but the Dharma cannot be left unhanded to beings. The entrustment is not love and clinging exactly because this is where it is directed.

7. Again, Ānanda is not yet free from desire and does not yet fully know the power, force, and retribution of prajñā; therefore it is earnestly entrusted. The treatise-author adds a second layer of reason, spoken from the side of the one entrusted: Ānanda is 「未離欲人」 tr. "one not yet free from desire", who cannot yet fully know how greatly the power, force, and retribution of prajñā benefit. Since the one entrusted cannot himself yet gauge the weight of what he receives, the one entrusting cannot but be earnest. The sentence 「汝當好受持無令忘失！」 tr. "You should receive and uphold it well, and not let it be forgotten or lost!" is spoken precisely to this kind of recipient. This reasoning is of one vein with the simile of the merchant chief later on.

8. Therefore, although the Buddha is without hatred and without love toward all dharmas, always having the mark of quiescence, he entrusts this prajñā. The treatise-author gathers the two layers of reason into one pronouncement: the Buddha's being 「無憎愛、常寂滅相」 tr. "without hatred and without love, always having the mark of quiescence" toward all dharmas, and his 「囑累是般若」 tr. "entrusting this prajñā", stand together without conflict. Here the reader should keep one general rule in mind—the non-clinging of a holy one does not equal doing nothing; within the mark of quiescence there are still all kinds of arrangements, and what is arranged is for beings, not for himself.

9. The question of the second question and answer: Ānanda is a śrāvaka; why is prajñā entrusted to him and not to Maitreya and the other great bodhisattvas. The second round of question and answer turns to 「人」 tr. "the person". This question is accurately aimed: prajñā is the dharma the bodhisattvas practise, yet the one entrusted is a śrāvaka, and the Dharma and the person seem ill-matched. Whenever, in reading the sūtras and treatises of the Great Vehicle, one sees śrāvakas and bodhisattvas set side by side, this kind of question arises most easily; the treatise-author answers it fully here once and for all.

10. The answer of the second question and answer cites what someone says: Ānanda always attended at the Buddha's left and right, obtained the dhāraṇī of hearing and retaining, is the third teacher who turns the wheel of the Dharma following the Buddha, and is the teacher of five hundred arhats. The treatise-author first cites the saying of one school, listing item by item the virtues by which Ānanda is fit to receive the entrustment: he always attended at the Buddha's left and right and provided what was needed; he obtained the dhāraṇī of hearing and retaining, 「一聞常不失」 tr. "hearing once, he never loses it"; he is both the Buddha's cousin and a man of much knowledge and wide acquaintance, his renown wide and universal, the one on whom the four assemblies rely; he is 「能隨佛轉法輪第三師」 tr. "the third teacher who can turn the wheel of the Dharma following the Buddha". In the middle is inserted one sentence of proof from the reverse side—「佛知舍利弗壽短早滅度故不囑累」 tr. "because the Buddha knew that Śāriputra's life was short and that he would pass into extinction early, he did not entrust it to him"—showing that the choosing of a person weighs not only virtue but also the length of his stay in the world. At the end it brings up that Ānanda is the teacher of five hundred arhats with the six supernormal powers, the three clarities, and liberation both ways. Every item is the plain text of this treatise, and the reader can check for himself: what makes one fit to receive the entrustment lies in ‘being able to pass it on’ and not in 「已證」 tr. "having already realised".

11. Maitreya and the other great bodhisattvas each scatter after the Buddha's passing into extinction, and moreover deeply know the power of prajñā, so they need no bitter entrusting. This is the other side of the same answer: the great bodhisattvas each scatter after the Buddha's passing into extinction, going to the lands of the beings they are each to save—Maitreya returns up to the Tuṣita heaven, and Vimalakīrti and Mañjuśrī too go to the places of the beings they are to save. Having scattered, each to the place where he is to save, they also 「深知般若波羅蜜力」 tr. "deeply know the power of prajñāpāramitā", and need no bitter, pressing exhortation. This passage gives an extremely plain principle: the reason for earnest exhortation is exactly that the person does not know; the one who knows, on the contrary, does not need it.

12. Ānanda is a śrāvaka who follows the dharma of the Small Vehicle; therefore the Buddha earnestly entrusts it. The treatise-author closes this round of question and answer with one sentence: the reason for earnestness is exactly that he 「隨小乘法」 tr. "follows the dharma of the Small Vehicle". Taken together from front to back, the answer of the second round of question and answer is not ‘Ānanda is more fit than the bodhisattvas to be entrusted’ but ‘precisely because he is a śrāvaka, he needs the more earnestness’—what the questioner took to be a shortcoming is exactly the reason the answerer takes up. When reading the treatise and meeting this kind of reversal, one should remember the method.

13. The question of the third question and answer: why do the Lotus and the other vaipulya sūtras entrust them to the bodhisattvas King of Joy and the others. Since it was said that because a śrāvaka needs earnestness the entrustment was made to Ānanda, the questioner at once brings up a counter-example: why do the Lotus Sūtra and the other vaipulya sūtras entrust them to the bodhisattvas King of Joy and the others? This question takes sūtra-proof to question sūtra-proof; it does not question with its own opinion. Throughout the whole chapter the questioner often uses this method, and the answerer often answers by distinguishing the capacities addressed.

14. The answer of the third question and answer cites what someone says: the very deep dharma hard to believe that was taught at that time had no śrāvakas present; again, as with the Sūtra of Inconceivable Liberation, the five hundred arhats, though at the Buddha's side, did not hear it. The treatise-author answers by citing a saying, and the reasons are two: first, when those sūtras were taught the śrāvakas were not present in the assembly; second, even if present they could not receive it—as when the Buddha taught the Sūtra of Inconceivable Liberation, the five hundred arhats, 「雖在佛邊而不聞，或時得聞而不能用」 tr. "though at the Buddha's side, did not hear it, or at times heard it and could not use it". These two phrases must be kept clearly apart: not hearing is one layer, hearing yet not being able to use is another. In the matter of entrustment, what is looked at is not whether one is present but whether one can use it.

15. The question of the fourth question and answer: is there some further dharma very deep and surpassing prajñā, that prajñā is entrusted to Ānanda and the other sūtras to bodhisattvas. The fourth question presses the previous answer to its extreme: if śrāvakas are not fit to hear the Lotus yet fit to receive the Prajñā, is that not saying that the Lotus is deeper than the Prajñā? If this question is not broken, the whole treatise's tenet of ‘prajñā first’ is shaken. The treatise-author sets up this question precisely to hold the tenet fast.

16. The answer of the fourth question and answer: prajñā is not a secret dharma; the Lotus and the others say that arhats receive the prediction and become Buddhas, which great bodhisattvas can receive, uphold, and use; just as a great physician can use poison as medicine. The answer comes in two parts. The first part establishes the tenet: 「般若波羅蜜非祕密法」 tr. "prajñāpāramitā is not a secret dharma"—prajñā is a dharma taught openly, which anyone can hear, and so it can be handed to a śrāvaka. The latter part resolves the difficulty: the Lotus and other sūtras say that arhats receive the prediction and become Buddhas, and such words are what 「大菩薩能受持用」 tr. "great bodhisattvas can receive, uphold, and use"; and it brings out a simile—「譬如大藥師能以毒為藥」 tr. "just as a great physician can use poison as medicine". One must see exactly what this simile compares: poison is not medicine, yet a great physician can use it as medicine; likewise, the saying 「阿羅漢受決作佛」 tr. "arhats receive the prediction and become Buddhas" can become an obstacle when heard by those of small capacity, and only in the hands of great bodhisattvas becomes a wondrous use. The judgement of deep and shallow lies not in the Dharma but in the person who uses the Dharma.

17. Again, prajñā is of two kinds: that taught in common with the śrāvakas and that taught only for the great bodhisattvas dwelling on the ten grounds; the general mark is one, yet in depth and shallowness there are differences. The treatise-author adds a further, finer distinction: prajñā is of two kinds—first, taught in common with the śrāvakas; second, taught only for the great bodhisattvas of the ten directions who dwell on the ten grounds, 「非九住所聞，何況新發意者」 tr. "not something those of the ninth abode can hear, how much less those who have newly aroused the mind"; further, there is what is heard on the ninth ground, and so on up to what is heard on the first ground, 「各各不同」 tr. "each different". At the end it gathers up in one sentence: 「般若波羅蜜總相是一，而深淺有異，是故囑累阿難無咎。」 tr. "The general mark of prajñāpāramitā is one, but in depth and shallowness there are differences; therefore to entrust it to Ānanda is without fault." This sentence should be remembered most of all: the general mark is one, so one cannot say there are two Prajñās; in depth and shallowness there are differences, so it can be handed over according to capacity. The earlier answer's 「非祕密法」 tr. "not a secret dharma" and this answer's 「深淺有異」 tr. "in depth and shallowness there are differences" combine into one meaning, and the difficulty resolves of itself.

18. The question of the fifth question and answer: earlier, in the chapter "Seeing Akṣobhya Buddha", it was entrusted; now it is entrusted again; what difference is there. The fifth question turns to the pattern of the text: this sūtra already had an entrustment earlier, in the chapter "Seeing Akṣobhya Buddha"; why entrust it once more here? Whenever the same matter appears twice in a sūtra, the reader easily judges it a repetition; the treatise-author does not allow carelessness and must find its proper place for it.

19. The answer of the fifth question and answer: the bodhisattva path is of two kinds—the path of prajñāpāramitā and the path of skilful means; the earlier entrustment was for having finished teaching the substance of prajñā, the present for having finished teaching skilful means; therefore after "Seeing Akṣobhya Buddha" the "Upāya-kauśalya" chapter is taught. The answer sets up one main line: 「菩薩道有二種：一者、般若波羅蜜道，二者、方便道。」 tr. "The bodhisattva path is of two kinds: first, the path of prajñāpāramitā; second, the path of skilful means." The earlier entrustment was 「為說般若波羅蜜體竟」 tr. "because the teaching of the substance of prajñāpāramitā had been completed"; this entrustment is because 「說令眾生得是般若方便竟」 tr. "the teaching of the skilful means by which beings are brought to obtain this prajñā has been completed". And it brings up the sūtra's order as proof: after "Seeing Akṣobhya Buddha" the "Upāya-kauśalya" chapter is taught. Each of the two entrustments has its own matter that it concludes, so it is not a repetition. When reading a sūtra and meeting a doubt of repetition, this passage can serve as a pattern—first look at what each of the two places concludes, not at whether the wording is the same.

20. Although within prajñāpāramitā there is skilful means and within skilful means there is prajñā, each takes its name from whichever is more; the original substance is one, and because there is a small difference in what they are used for they are spoken of separately, as a goldsmith makes different things out of gold. Fearing that people would judge prajñā and skilful means to be two things, the treatise-author at once adds clarification: the two contain each other and are only 「隨多受名」 tr. "each taking its name from whichever is more". The pronouncement is 「般若與方便，本體是一，以所用小異故別說」 tr. "prajñā and skilful means are one in their original substance; because there is a small difference in what they are used for, they are spoken of separately". Next it brings out a simile—a goldsmith, with clever skilful means, uses gold to make all kinds of different things, 「雖皆是金，而各異名」 tr. "although all are gold, each has a different name". This simile is extremely important: different names do not hinder one substance, and one substance does not prevent different uses. Wherever two dharmas are set against each other, the student can use this simile to look at himself.

21. When the bodhisattva obtains the real mark of prajñā, he wishes to pass into extinction; by the power of skilful means he does not take the realisation of nirvāṇa, passes beyond the two grounds and enters the bodhisattva's position, knows the dharma without letters and guides beings; this is called skilful means. Here the treatise-author speaks directly of the mark of skilful means, and speaks very concretely. When the bodhisattva obtains the real mark of prajñā—「一切法性空、無所有、寂滅相」 tr. "the nature of all dharmas is empty, without anything existent, the mark of quiescence"—he at once wishes to pass into extinction; that he does not take the realisation is the power of skilful means. The thought he makes in his mind the treatise-author cites word for word: 「一切法性空，涅槃亦空，我今於菩薩功德未具足，不應取證；功德具足，乃可取證。」 tr. "The nature of all dharmas is empty, and nirvāṇa too is empty; I have not yet made complete the merit of a bodhisattva, and should not take the realisation; when the merit is complete, only then may I take the realisation." Thereby he 「過二地，入菩薩位」 tr. "passes beyond the two grounds and enters the bodhisattva's position", and dwelling in the bodhisattva's position he knows the very deep and subtle dharma without letters and guides beings. In this passage one can see that skilful means is not a stratagem; it is the kind of power that, after having seen the real mark, is still willing to stay in the world.

22. Again, there is skilful means: knowing ultimate emptiness, yet able to rise again to wholesome dharmas and practise the six perfections, not following emptiness; among the four matters of doubt, wrong views, entering nirvāṇa, and becoming a Buddha, to remove wrong views and doubt and not enter nirvāṇa is skilful means. The treatise-author speaks of one more layer of skilful means, its emphasis in the three Chinese characters 「不隨空」 tr. "not following emptiness": knowing that all dharmas are 「畢竟空性、無所有」 tr. "of the nature of ultimate emptiness, without anything existent", and yet 「能還起善法、行六波羅蜜」 tr. "able to rise again to wholesome dharmas and practise the six perfections". Next it lists four kinds of matters—either doubt, or wrong views, or entering nirvāṇa, or becoming a Buddha—showing the four directions that can arise after hearing prajñā; one who can remove wrong views and doubt and does not enter nirvāṇa, that is skilful means. These four matters are a ready-made table for checking oneself: after hearing of emptiness, where does the mind land? To land in doubt and wrong views is loss; to land in entering nirvāṇa is stagnation; only the last matter is where one is headed.

23. Someone says: prajñā is the most excellent among the great heaps of precious jewels; the Buddha knew that after his passing into extinction many enemies and thieves would wish to destroy it; even to entrust it in chapter after chapter would be without fault, how much more in two places. The treatise-author cites one saying to close this round of question and answer: prajñā is 「於大珍寶聚中最勝」 tr. "the most excellent among great heaps of precious jewels", and the Buddha foreknew that after his passing into extinction 「多有怨賊欲毀壞者」 tr. "many enemies and thieves would wish to destroy it"; so even if he entrusted it in chapter after chapter there would be no fault, how much more in only two places. This saying overturns at a stroke the earlier question ‘why entrust it in two places’—the questioner thought two places already too many; the answerer says two places are still few. Here the reader can reflect on himself: the places where we feel ‘too much is said’ are often exactly the places the teacher knows cannot be held.

24. The question of the sixth question and answer: if he is to entrust it, why is he so earnest and solemn. The sixth question no longer asks ‘whether to entrust or not’, but instead asks ‘why so earnest’. The earlier questions asked whether the matter exists; this question asks the weight of the feeling. The treatise-author does not avoid this question, and afterwards brings out four passages of answer in a row; it is the place in the whole chapter where human feeling shows most.

25. The answer of the sixth question and answer: the Buddha guides beings in accordance with the worldly way; it brings out the simile of the merchant chief who, going far away to another country, is specially and earnestly insistent in entrusting to his son the precious jewels of great price. The answer first sets up one meaning—「佛隨世俗法引導眾生」 tr. "the Buddha guides beings in accordance with the worldly way"; earnestness and solemnity are the ordinary state of things in the world when entrusting something weighty, and nothing to wonder at. Next it brings out the simile: the merchant chief is about to go far away to another country; though he entrusts all his wealth and jewels to his son, toward the precious jewels of great price he is 「偏獨慇懃」 tr. "specially and earnestly insistent"—why? 「以其子未識妙寶價重故」 tr. "because his son does not yet recognise how heavy the price of the precious jewels is". There is one more turn within the simile that should least be passed over: bystanders, because the merchant chief is one who knows the price of jewels, on seeing him so earnest, will 「必知其貴」 tr. "certainly know that they are precious"; if they only heard his son praise the price of the jewels, they would 「不信之」 tr. "not believe it". So one sees that earnestness is set up not only for the one entrusted but also for the onlookers—the preciousness of the Dharma is made manifest through the solemnity of one who knows its worth.

26. Again, if he praised prajñā and entrusted it among other people or in a different assembly, people would ridicule the Buddha for praising his own dharma; entrusting it himself among his disciples, there is no suspicion. The treatise-author adds a second reason, which lands on avoiding suspicion: if he praised prajñā and handed it over in some other assembly, people would ridicule and suspect the Buddha of 「自稱讚法」 tr. "praising his own dharma", and would doubt and not believe; entrusting it among his own disciples, there is no such layer of suspicion. The sense of measure this passage shows is very usable: the more a dharma one teaches is something one holds weighty oneself, the more one must mind the setting in which one teaches it, lest suspicion arise before the Dharma has entered people's minds.

27. Again, someone says: in an earlier chapter it was taught that the mark of quiescence is without idle discourse and that there is no fixed dharma to be grasped, and people thought there was nothing worth valuing; now that he earnestly entrusts it, one knows that the Buddha does not cling to the dharma of emptiness. The third reason speaks from the earlier chapter: what the earlier chapter taught was 「寂滅相無戲論，是一切智，是中無有決定法可取」 tr. "the mark of quiescence is without idle discourse, this is omniscience, and within it there is no fixed dharma to be grasped", and hearers could easily give rise from this to a misunderstanding—since there is no dharma to be grasped, this Dharma has nothing worth valuing. Now with one display of earnest entrustment, 「則知佛不著空法」 tr. "then one knows that the Buddha does not cling to the dharma of emptiness". The last two sentences go a step further: among all beings none loves and cherishes prajñā more than the Buddha; the Buddha, 「知般若恩深故，貴重是般若而慇懃囑累」 tr. "because he knows how deep the kindness of prajñā is, values this prajñā highly and earnestly entrusts it". Here the two Chinese characters 「恩深」 tr. "deep kindness" must be read with care: what is valued is that prajñā shows kindness to beings, not that prajñā is precious in itself.

28. Someone says: the Buddha entrusts it because he wishes to show the middle way—first he taught that dharmas are empty to block the extreme of existence; now he earnestly entrusts it, and this refutes the extreme of non-existence; in this way he parts from the two extremes. The fourth reason is the most round and complete: earlier he taught that dharmas are empty, and what this blocks is the extreme of existence; now he earnestly entrusts, and what this refutes is the extreme of non-existence. The treatise-author also sets the two misunderstandings against each other—if someone says that the Buddha 「貪心愛著此法」 tr. "loves and clings to this dharma with a craving mind", the Buddha has already by all kinds of causes and conditions taught the mark of emptiness of prajñā; if someone says that the Buddha has 「墮斷滅中」 tr. "fallen into annihilation", therefore he earnestly entrusts it. One emptiness and one entrustment exactly cure these two illnesses: 「如是，則離二邊」 tr. "in this way he parts from the two extremes". Having read the whole chapter this far, one can look back: earnest entrustment is not an emotion; it is a move of the middle way.

29. The question of the seventh question and answer: the Buddha knows that Ānanda is his disciple; why does he ask: are you my disciple, am I your teacher. The seventh question returns to that question at the head of the chapter. The treatise-author does not let this ‘asking what one well knows’ pass, precisely because the entrustment of the whole chapter is established by this question. In reading the sūtras one should learn this eye: the places that look most like idle text are often the joints of the structure.

30. The answer of the seventh question and answer: the Buddha had evil disciples, Sunakṣatra and others, and Susīma became a disciple in order to steal the Dharma; these are named disciples in name. The answer first brings up the facts: the Buddha had evil disciples such as Sunakṣatra and others, who 「有少因緣故作弟子」 tr. "became disciples for some scant causes and conditions", their real intent being to obtain archery at the Buddha's place; the Buddha did not teach it, and so he gave up the precepts and said 「我非佛弟子」 tr. "I am not the Buddha's disciple"; again, as Susīma 「為盜法故作弟子」 tr. "became a disciple in order to steal the Dharma". The treatise-author marks their name as 「名字弟子」 tr. "disciples in name". Since there are disciples in name, the two Chinese characters 「弟子」 tr. "disciple" are not sufficient to rely on, and the reason the Buddha must ask before the assembly is exactly to sift the true from the false.

31. Further, those of the outside paths and others said that Ānanda stayed at the Buddha's side only because he had no choice; he had once been a disciple of the outside paths, wearing grass robes and seeking the spirit-immortals, and now attends on him out of respect because the Buddha is his kinsman. The second layer speaks of the doubt of bystanders: those of the outside paths and others said that Ānanda's attending on the Buddha was 「不得已」 tr. "because he had no choice"—he had once been a disciple of the outside paths, wore grass robes, and sought the spirit-immortals, and now he merely attends on him out of respect because the Buddha is his kinsman. If this doubt is not broken, the Dharma that Ānanda passes on is discounted in advance. The Buddha's one question before the assembly is exactly to dispel this doubt.

32. Because of such matters as these, in the midst of the great assembly he asks whether you are my disciple; if you say you are a true disciple, you should follow my command. The treatise-author gathers these two layers and brings out one extremely forceful sentence: 「若言是真弟子，當隨我勅。」 tr. "If you say you are a true disciple, you should follow my command."—acknowledging one's standing for oneself before the assembly at once becomes the reason why one must receive the command. That the entrustment can be established lies not in the Buddha handing it over one-sidedly, but in the recipient's confirming his own position before the assembly. Here the reader can reflect: whoever calls himself a student of some school takes on not only the name and standing, but the command that the name and standing carry.

33. Therefore Ānanda, in order to make people believe, answers again, repeating it. Here the treatise-author turns back to explain the 「重」 tr. "repeating" in Ānanda's answer: the reason for answering again a second time is not to make himself clear but 「令人信」 tr. "to make people believe". The bringing up again of 「脩伽陀是我大師」 tr. "the Sugata is my great teacher" seen in the second passage above has its use here. This small passage is extremely short, yet it settles a turn of feeling in the sūtra text that is not easy to notice.

34. The treatise-author cites the sūtra: the Buddha told Ānanda that the dharmas a disciple ought to do, you have made all of them complete. The treatise-author cites one sentence of the sūtra again in order to open the following explanation. Sentences that cite the sūtra like this appear often in the treatise; they are the treatise-author's way of carrying his explanation forward, and what is cited is still the Buddha's words, not a fresh passage of sūtra text. In reading the treatise one must keep two things apart: the treatise-author's own judgements, and the sūtra text the treatise-author cites, belong to different speakers.

35. The dharma of a disciple is to provide for the teacher with wholesome deeds of body, speech, and mind; some have good minds but body and speech do not match, some have good body and speech but the mind does not match; Ānanda, body and speech matching, not sparing body and life, has made all these matters complete. The treatise-author explains 「弟子所應作法」 tr. "the dharmas a disciple ought to do" layer by layer. The general mark is 「以善身、口、意業供給師」 tr. "to provide for the teacher with wholesome deeds of body, speech, and mind". Next it divides two kinds of insufficiency: 「有弟子心好，身、口業不稱」 tr. "some disciples have good minds, but their deeds of body and speech do not match"; 「有弟子身、口業好，而心不稱」 tr. "some disciples have good deeds of body and speech, but their minds do not match". Next it brings out the mark of being complete: with a wholesome mind deeply loving and delighting in the teacher, body and speech matching, 「不惜身命、不難懃勞，自捨其心，隨師教勅」 tr. "not sparing body and life, not counting diligent toil as hard, abandoning his own intentions and following the teacher's command". At the end it pronounces that Ānanda 「盡具足此事」 tr. "has made all these matters complete". This passage can serve as the standard for serving a teacher: the mind matching body and speech is the first pass, 「自捨其心」 tr. "abandoning his own intentions" is the second pass—what is abandoned is one's own views, not one's own power of judgement.

36. The treatise-author cites the sūtra: the Buddha told Ānanda: you now at present revere me; after my passing into extinction, in revering prajñā you should also be like this. The treatise-author cites the sūtra text again, taking exactly the backbone sentence of the whole chapter's entrustment. What this sentence establishes is an equation: the reverence toward the Buddha now turns, after the passing into extinction, toward prajñā, without diminishing in weight. The eighth round of question and answer below arises from this equation.

37. The question of the eighth question and answer: prajñā is the teacher of the buddhas; why then does Ānanda not revere that teacher but revere the Buddha. This question is asked very cleverly: since it is said that prajñā is the teacher of the buddhas, what Ānanda ought to revere first should be prajñā; why is what he reveres before him the Buddha? The questioner does not mean to belittle the Buddha; he means to ask out the reason for ‘using the Buddha as a simile for prajñā’.

38. The answer of the eighth question and answer: though Ānanda has obtained the first path, because his outflows are not yet exhausted he does not deeply know the reality of dharmas; therefore the Buddha tells him: revere prajñā as you revere me. The answer speaks from Ānanda's rank: 「雖得初道」 tr. "although he has obtained the first path", yet 「漏未盡故，不深知法實，如佛所知」 tr. "because his outflows are not yet exhausted, he does not deeply know the reality of dharmas as the Buddha knows it". Since he cannot yet know the real virtue of prajñā, he has no way to give rise to a matching reverence; the Buddha therefore uses the reverence he already has as a bridge—「汝恭敬般若，如恭敬我」 tr. "revere prajñā as you revere me". This answer gives a general rule of teaching: to teach people to revere what they do not yet recognise, one must lead from what they already recognise.

39. Again, beings seeing the Buddha's marks, minor signs, and radiance mostly love and revere; prajñā is subtle, very deep, without shape and without form, and the wise can know it; therefore the Buddha uses his body as a simile for prajñā. The treatise-author speaks further of beings in general: those who see the Buddha's 「三十二相、八十隨形好、大光明、金色身」 tr. "thirty-two marks, eighty minor marks, great radiance, and golden-coloured body" mostly give rise to love and reverence, whereas prajñā is 「微妙甚深，無形、無色」 tr. "subtle and very deep, without shape, without form", and only 「智者能知」 tr. "the wise can know it". He adds one more sentence: as for the marks and minor signs of the Buddha's body, 「愚、智視之，皆無厭足」 tr. "whether the foolish or the wise look at them, none is ever satisfied"—the foolish and the wise alike can take them in, and so they are fit to serve as a simile. The pronouncement is 「是故佛以身喻般若」 tr. "therefore the Buddha uses his body as a simile for prajñā". Here the reader can know: the Buddha's using himself as a simile is not self-exaltation; it takes a thing seen alike by the foolish and the wise to point to a dharma that only the wise can know.

40. While the Buddha was in the world he could himself ward off Māra; therefore the Buddha told Ānanda: after my passing into extinction, guard and protect prajñā well. The treatise-author adds the reason of the entrustment as regards time: while the Buddha was in the world he 「能自遮魔」 tr. "could himself ward off Māra", so prajñā needed no one to protect it; after the passing into extinction, the matter of warding off Māra falls upon the disciples. The weight of the sentence 「我滅度後，好守護般若」 tr. "after my passing into extinction, guard and protect prajñā well" lies precisely between this ‘himself’ and ‘not himself’. The origin of the duty of guarding is made clear here.

41. The question of the ninth question and answer: one entrustment would be enough; why go to three. The ninth question turns to the number of times. The questions before this all asked 「何以囑累」 tr. "why entrust"; this question is ‘why three’. It is asked very finely, and the treatise-author's answer thereby speaks the boundary of the matter of 「慇懃」 tr. "earnestness" through to the bottom.

42. The answer of the ninth question and answer: because the Buddha deeply loves prajñāpāramitā, he entrusts it three times. The answer is only one sentence, and it uses the two Chinese characters 「深愛」 tr. "deeply loves". This must not be read as the Buddha having love and clinging—the first round of question and answer has already broken this doubt; what is called 「深愛」 tr. "deep love" is deeply knowing its kindness to beings. The answer is this brief in order to draw out the next question.

43. The question of the tenth question and answer: if he deeply loves it, why limit it to three. This question is the necessary question that follows from the previous answer: since it is deep love, why stop exactly at three? The previous question found it too many; this question finds it too few—with the two questions pressing from both sides, the measure of the middle way shows of itself. The intent of the treatise-author in setting up these two linked questions lies here.

44. The answer of the tenth question and answer: the constant way of the buddhas is that their speech does not exceed three; if after three someone does not comply, the vajra-holding spirit raises his pestle at him; further, his intent is that if someone does not comply after three times he is a rebellious person and should be killed. The answer first sets up the general rule: 「諸佛常法，語不過三。」 tr. "The constant way of the buddhas is that their speech does not exceed three." Next it brings up its strictness: if someone does not comply after three times, the vajra-holding spirit 「則以杵擬之」 tr. "will raise his pestle at him"; further, the intent of the vajra-holding spirit is that one who does not comply after three times is a rebellious person, and 「便當殺之」 tr. "should be killed". It concludes 「是故佛問不過三」 tr. "therefore the Buddha's questions do not exceed three". What this passage speaks of is the fixed rule of entrustment in the Buddha-dharma, not something set up for this chapter at one time. Here the reader need not seek the fine details of the matter; he should take its meaning: the limit of three both leaves the one entrusted ample room to turn around, and sets for the one entrusting a boundary of not forcing people.

45. Again, if said once it is still too slack; beyond three, too urgent, like an ordinary person who craves and clings. The treatise-author speaks further from the sense of measure: saying it once is 「猶緩」 tr. "still too slack"; beyond three it is 「太急」 tr. "too urgent", so urgent that it seems to have become the craving and clinging of an ordinary person. These words are well worth savouring—if earnestness exceeds its measure, it falls back on the contrary into the reproach of 「似如愛著」 tr. "as if in love and clinging" that the treatise-author's first round of question and answer broke. So one sees that the middle way is not only in doctrine; it is also in the lightness and weight of speech.

46. Again, the minds of the recipients are of three kinds; those of dull faculties give rise to a wholesome mind only at the third time; though Ānanda has keen faculties, his mind turns toward the śrāvakas, seeking only to be saved in his own person; therefore he is told three times. The treatise-author speaks further from the side of the recipient: the minds of the recipients are of three kinds, and people of dull faculties 「至三乃生善心」 tr. "give rise to a wholesome mind only at the third time". Next, as for Ānanda: though he has keen faculties, his 「心向聲聞，但一身求度」 tr. "mind turns toward the śrāvakas, seeking only to be saved in his own person", his aim being to save himself and not to pass it on widely, so he still needs to be told three times. This passage brings the reason for 「三」 tr. "three" down onto a concrete person, and the general rule spoken of above here finds its footing. The reader too can reflect on himself: toward the teaching I have received, do I receive it at one hearing, or must it come again and again before my mind is moved?

47. The reason for entrusting is so as not to let the Dharma be extinguished; teaching one another in turn is like one lamp lighting other lamps, its light growing ever more; not being the last person who cuts off the lineage is as when people of the world have sons who do not continue the line, which is named cutting off the lineage, the greatest shame. Here the treatise-author speaks in general of what the entrustment is for: 「為不令法滅故。」 tr. "So as not to let the Dharma be extinguished." Its method is teaching one another in turn—「汝當教化弟子，弟子復教餘人」 tr. "you should teach and transform disciples, and the disciples in turn teach others"—and he brings out a simile: 「譬如一燈復然餘燈，其明轉多。」 tr. "Just as one lamp lights other lamps, and its light grows ever more." Next he explains the sentence 「莫作最後斷種人」 tr. "do not be the last person who cuts off the lineage": when people of the world have sons who do not continue the line, it is named cutting off the lineage, 「最為可恥」 tr. "the greatest shame", and with this comparison the Buddha tells Ānanda: 「汝莫於汝身上令般若斷絕！」 tr. "Do not let prajñā be cut off in your own person!" The responsibility this passage establishes is extremely heavy and extremely plain—it lies not in how many grounds one has realised, but in not letting this lamp go out in one's own hands.

48. The question of the eleventh question and answer: an earlier chapter made clear that prajñā is not increased by being taught nor decreased by not being taught, having the mark of ultimate quiescent extinction; why now does it say do not let it be cut off and extinguished; like space, who could extinguish it. The eleventh question is the most perilous question of the whole chapter, and the questioner takes the earlier text of this treatise as his ground: the earlier chapter had already made clear that 「般若波羅蜜，說亦不增、不說亦不減，畢竟寂滅相」 tr. "prajñāpāramitā is not increased by being taught, nor decreased by not being taught, having the mark of ultimate quiescent extinction"; this being so, why then say 「莫令斷滅」 tr. "do not let it be cut off and extinguished"? And he brings out a simile in proof: 「譬如虛空，誰能滅者？」 tr. "Like space, who could extinguish it?" If this question is not broken, the entrustment of the whole chapter falls empty in its doctrine. Here the reader can first answer it once himself, and then see how the treatise-author divides it.

49. The answer of the eleventh question and answer: although prajñā is quiescent extinction, without arising and ceasing, like space, and cannot be made the object of idle discourse, yet the scrolls of the sūtra written in letters and words and taught to others are the prajñā here; its result is spoken of within this cause. The answer divides the two Chinese characters 「般若」 tr. "prajñā" into two layers: prajñā as the real mark is 「寂滅、無生無滅相、如虛空、不可戲論」 tr. "quiescent extinction, the mark of non-arising and non-ceasing, like space, not to be made the object of idle discourse", and in this layer there is truly nothing to extinguish; whereas 「文字語言書般若波羅蜜經卷，為他人說」 tr. "the scrolls of the prajñāpāramitā sūtra written in letters and words, taught to others" are 「此中般若」 tr. "the prajñā here"—what this chapter entrusts is exactly this layer. The last sentence is the key: 「於此因中而說其果。」 tr. "Within this cause its result is spoken of." The letters and scrolls are the cause, prajñā as the real mark is the fruit, and in the sūtra the name of the fruit is spoken upon the cause; so one can speak of its being cut off and of its not being cut off. This distinction is the key to reading every saying about ‘the Dharma's extinction’ and ‘the Dharma's abiding’.

50. Ordinary people, hearing that prajñā is subtle, at once give rise to a clinging mind, grasp at the mark of prajñā, and discriminate dharmas; because of discriminating they give rise to clinging, because of clinging fighting and strife, because of fighting and strife they raise up all sinful deeds; such people are named those who extinguish prajñāpāramitā. The treatise-author next gives 「滅般若」 tr. "extinguishing prajñā" an unexpected definition: those who extinguish prajñā are not those of the outside paths, not enemies and thieves, but people who hear prajñā and give rise to a clinging mind. The treatise-author states its sequence very distinctly: hearing of the subtle, they give rise to a clinging mind, grasp at the mark of prajñā, and discriminate 「是善、是不善，是世間、是涅槃」 tr. "this is wholesome, this is unwholesome; this is worldly, this is nirvāṇa" and so on; because of discriminating they give rise to clinging within the Dharma, because of clinging fighting and strife, because of fighting and strife they raise up all sinful deeds. 「如是人名為滅般若波羅蜜。」 tr. "Such people are named those who extinguish prajñāpāramitā." Here the reader should be struck with awe: the ones most able to cut off the lineage of prajñā are exactly those who take themselves to be guarding and upholding prajñā.

51. The Buddha told Ānanda: you should, in accordance with the mark of prajñā, not cling to letters and words, and teach and transform beings; this is called not extinguishing. Having said what extinguishing is, it at once says what not extinguishing is. The treatise-author cites the Buddha's words as the answer: 「汝當如般若波羅蜜相，莫著文字語言，教化眾生。」 tr. "You should, in accordance with the mark of prajñāpāramitā, not cling to letters and words, and teach and transform beings."—what is kept to is not refraining from using letters, but using letters without clinging. The last words, 「是名不滅」 tr. "this is called not extinguishing", stand against the previous passage's 「名為滅」 tr. "are named those who extinguish", and the two definitions combine into one meaning: whether the Dharma survives or perishes lies not in whether there are scrolls and volumes, but in whether readers grasp at marks.

52. The treatise-author cites the sūtra: for however long a time prajñā is in the world, know that for so long a time the Buddha is in the world, as is said at length in the sūtra. The treatise-author cites the words of the fourth layer of the sūtra and notes 「如經中廣說」 tr. "as is said at length in the sūtra", showing that this meaning is already complete in the sūtra text. He cites without explaining, wanting the reader to look back at the sūtra text; only the next passage properly explains why it is so.

53. The Buddha states the causes and conditions of the entrustment: when there is prajñā in the world, the Buddha is present; prajñā is the mother of the buddhas, the buddhas take the Dharma as their teacher, and if the teacher is present and the mother is present, it is not named losing the benefit. The treatise-author first states how it arose: at the moment of the Buddha's earnest entrustment, 「在會眾生有疑」 tr. "the beings in the assembly had doubts", so the Buddha stated the causes and conditions of the entrustment, namely 「有般若在世，則為佛在」 tr. "when there is prajñā in the world, the Buddha is present". Next he explains its principle, and the principle has three steps: first, 「般若波羅蜜是諸佛母」 tr. "prajñāpāramitā is the mother of the buddhas"; second, 「諸佛以法為師。法者，即是般若波羅蜜」 tr. "the buddhas take the Dharma as their teacher. The Dharma is precisely prajñāpāramitā"; third, 「若師在、母在，不名為失利」 tr. "if the teacher is present and the mother is present, it is not named losing the benefit"—why? 「利本在故。」 tr. "Because the root of the benefit is present." So he concludes: 「若般若在世，佛亦在世。」 tr. "If prajñā is in the world, the Buddha too is in the world." This step is not words of consolation; it establishes its saying on the relation of the Dharma and the Buddha—that by which a Buddha is a Buddha has its root in this Dharma; with the root present, the benefit obtained is not lost.

54. Again, the Dharma Jewel is not apart from the Buddha Jewel: a bodhisattva with the marks and minor signs is not named Buddha, and is named Buddha because he obtains the Dharma Jewel; as people obtain benefit from the Buddha up to liberation and nirvāṇa, those who can believe and practise within prajñā also enter nirvāṇa by the dharmas of the three vehicles. The treatise-author speaks again from another side: the Dharma Jewel is not apart from the Buddha Jewel. Its proof is a matter anyone can verify—a bodhisattva already has 「三十二相、八十隨形好」 tr. "the thirty-two marks and the eighty minor marks" and yet is 「不名為佛」 tr. "not named Buddha"; 「得法寶故名為佛」 tr. "because he obtains the Dharma Jewel, he is named Buddha". Since the name of Buddha is established by the Dharma Jewel, and 「法寶即是般若波羅蜜」 tr. "the Dharma Jewel is precisely prajñāpāramitā", then prajñā being in the world and the Buddha being in the world are not two. At the end he speaks further from the side of receiving its use: as people obtain benefit from the Buddha and so on up to obtaining liberation and nirvāṇa, if people 「於般若中能信行」 tr. "can believe and practise within prajñā", they too enter nirvāṇa by the dharmas of the three vehicles. The pronouncement is 「說法無異」 tr. "teaching the Dharma with no difference".

55. The treatise-author cites the sūtra: if someone hears and receives prajñā, writes it out, upholds it, and so on, know that this person is not apart from seeing the Buddha, hearing the Dharma, and drawing close to the buddhas. The treatise-author cites the words of the last layer of retribution in the sūtra, in order to open the next round of question and answer. This sentence is the great benefit granted by the sūtra text, and precisely because it is great, it draws out the following difficulty, ‘does a person of heavy sin also obtain this or not’.

56. The question of the twelfth question and answer: a person of heavy sin, with the three unwholesome deeds accomplished, hears, receives, writes out, and upholds prajñā; how can he come to be not apart from the buddhas, hearing the Dharma, and drawing close to the Buddha. The twelfth question is asked very practically: can a person of heavy sin, with the three unwholesome deeds of body, speech, and mind accomplished, obtain such a retribution merely by hearing, receiving, writing out, and upholding prajñā? This question asks right to the heart on behalf of all those who ‘hear the Dharma while their practice is not yet pure’, and the treatise-author's answer is accordingly very measured.

57. The answer of the twelfth question and answer: this matter was already answered in an earlier chapter; those who hear the Dharma are of two kinds—those who only hear and do not believe, receive, and practise, and those who hear and believe, receive, and carry it out; hearing with one mind, believing, receiving, and carrying it out, growing weary of the world and loving nirvāṇa, leaving the Small Vehicle and delighting in the Great Vehicle, is called true hearing; reciting and reading are likewise. The treatise-author first points out that this difficulty was already answered in an earlier chapter, and at once restates its distinction: those who hear the Dharma are of two kinds—「但聽而不信受行」 tr. "those who only hear and do not believe, receive, and practise", and 「聽而信受奉行」 tr. "those who hear and believe, receive, and carry it out". And he brings out a comparison to fix the name: as when a disciple does not listen to, and does not believe, receive, and carry out, the teacher's words, 「是名不聽」 tr. "this is called not hearing". The mark of true hearing has four matters: hearing with one mind, believing, receiving, and carrying it out, growing weary of the world and loving nirvāṇa, leaving the Small Vehicle and delighting in the Great Vehicle. At the end he adds one sentence, 「誦、讀亦如是」 tr. "reciting and reading are likewise", which shows that the writing out, upholding, reading, and reciting listed earlier must each and every one take this as the standard. The reason there is doubt about the ‘person of heavy sin’ the earlier question doubted is exactly that people look only at whether he has read, not at whether he truly hears.

58. Right recollection is following the Buddha's intent, parting from the two extremes of existence and non-existence, and practising the middle way; receiving and upholding as one has heard, understanding its meaning, and explaining it to others, at first thin and slight, and so on until the mind grows ever thicker and the merit ever greater, firm and unmoving. The treatise-author goes on to explain the 「正憶念」 tr. "right recollection" listed in the sūtra text: its mark is 「隨如佛意，離有無二邊，行於中道」 tr. "following the Buddha's intent, parting from the two extremes of existence and non-existence, and practising the middle way". Next he lists the matters practised: receiving and upholding as one has heard, understanding the meaning, explaining it to others, and revering, honouring, making offerings, praising, flowers and incense, and so on. At the end he speaks of its gradual course: 「初始微薄，乃至正憶念、為他人說，其心轉厚，功德轉多，牢固不動。」 tr. "At first it is thin and slight, and so on up to rightly recollecting and explaining it for others, the mind grows ever thicker and the merit ever greater, firm and unmoving." What this passage gives is a road from shallow to deep—one need not arrive at 「牢固不動」 tr. "firm and unmoving" from the very start, but one must be able to see whether one is growing thicker.

59. If a wise person who knows the merit of prajñā makes offerings, the merit is heavy; if one makes offerings without knowing, the merit is thin and slight; those of pure and thick merit, after changing bodies, are not apart from seeing the Buddha and hearing the Dharma; those of thin and slight merit, after repaying their many sins, after a long time will also certainly attain buddhahood. Here the treatise-author properly answers the earlier question. He divides two grades: those who know the merit of prajñā and make offerings have 「福德重」 tr. "heavy merit", those who do not know have 「福德微薄」 tr. "thin and slight merit". The fruits of the two grades also part into two roads: those of pure and thick merit, 「轉身不離見佛、聞法、親近諸佛」 tr. "after changing bodies, are not apart from seeing the Buddha, hearing the Dharma, and drawing close to the buddhas"; as for those of thin and slight merit, 「不言轉身得三福報」 tr. "it is not said that after changing bodies they obtain the three kinds of reward of merit"; they must, 「償眾罪已，久後亦必當得佛」 tr. "after they have repaid their many sins, after a long time, also certainly attain buddhahood". The excellence of this answer lies in not allowing people to trust to luck, nor letting people despair—it is not that a person of heavy sin does not obtain this benefit, only that he does not obtain it at the time of changing bodies; after repaying his sins, in the end he too attains buddhahood. Here the reader should keep his eye on two places: first, the difference between 「知」 tr. "knowing" and 「不知」 tr. "not knowing" lies in the weight of merit; second, the two Chinese characters 「久後」 tr. "after a long time" are not empty words.

60. Here the Buddha speaks generally of pure and thick merit and of thin and slight merit: little by little all will come to see the buddhas of the ten directions and hear what the buddhas teach, little by little make complete the six perfections, and all will become Buddhas. The treatise-author closes the previous passage, pointing out that here the Buddha is 「總說」 tr. "speaking generally"—whether pure and thick or thin and slight, at the last they return to one place: 「漸漸皆當見十方佛、聞佛所說，漸漸具足六波羅蜜，皆得作佛。」 tr. "Little by little all will come to see the buddhas of the ten directions and hear what the buddhas teach, little by little make complete the six perfections, and all will become Buddhas." The two occurrences of 「漸漸」 tr. "little by little" must be read with care: what is granted is not sudden attainment but certain arrival. Only by looking at the distinction of the previous passage together with the general statement of this passage does one have the sūtra's meaning.

61. Because the Buddha with the Buddha-eye sees that prajñā has such great benefit for beings, he therefore earnestly entrusts it. The treatise-author sums up the long preceding section with one sentence: the reason the Buddha is earnest is that with the Buddha-eye he himself sees that prajñā has such great benefit for beings. By now the doubt raised in the first round of question and answer—「似如愛著」 tr. "as if in love and clinging"—has been filled out on every side by all the answers: what is seen is the benefit of beings, so what is done is entrustment and not love and clinging.

62. The question of the thirteenth question and answer: the great arhats have already realised the limit of reality and no longer have sorrow or joy; even small joy they do not have, how much less great joy. The thirteenth question returns to the last phrase of the sūtra text, 「皆大歡喜」 tr. "all greatly rejoiced". This question carries great weight: one who has realised the limit of reality should not be moved by sorrow or joy; even small joy he does not have—why does the sūtra text say 「大歡喜」 tr. "greatly rejoiced"? The stock phrase most easily slid past in reading a sūtra is exactly where the treatise-author chooses to set up a question.

63. The answer of the thirteenth question and answer: the great arhats, though free from the desire of the three realms, have not yet obtained all wisdom, and within the very deep dharmas still have doubts they do not clearly understand; now it is clearly explained and their doubts are severed, therefore they greatly rejoice. The answer speaks from where they are not yet sufficient: the great arhats, 「雖離三界欲」 tr. "although they have parted from the desire of the three realms", have 「未得一切智慧」 tr. "not yet obtained all wisdom", so 「於諸甚深法中猶疑不了」 tr. "within all the very deep dharmas they still have doubts and do not understand them clearly". Now within the Mahāprajñāpāramitā these are 「了了解說，斷除其疑」 tr. "clearly explained, severing their doubts", and so they greatly rejoice. One sees that this joy is not a stirring of emotion; it is the clarity after doubt is gone. Here the reader can test for himself: the kind of lightness and ease that follows truly resolving a doubt differs in its nature from the joy drawn by pleasing things of the world.

64. Again, these great disciples have already realised the limit of reality; the limit of reality is emptiness, the signless, the immeasurable, without anything discriminated; the Buddha widely teaches this dharma of quiescent extinction by all kinds of discriminating names, words, and similes, and yet does not destroy the nature of dharmas nor go against the world; the arhats realised within this dharma, so they greatly rejoice. The treatise-author brings out one more layer of reason, and opens up the two Chinese characters 「實際」 tr. "the limit of reality": 「即是空、無相、無量，無所分別。」 tr. "It is emptiness, the signless, the immeasurable, without anything discriminated." And the Buddha can, with this quiescent dharma without anything discriminated, 「種種分別名字、語言、譬喻廣說」 tr. "widely explain it by all kinds of discriminating names, words, and similes", and 「亦不壞法性，又不與世間相違」 tr. "yet not destroy the nature of dharmas, nor go against the world". The great arhats are exactly those who realised within this dharma; seeing that the Buddha can teach in this way without destroying what they have realised, they greatly rejoice. What this passage praises is the Buddha's power of teaching—to make discriminations within non-discrimination with neither hindering the other is in itself a thing to rejoice at.

65. The Buddha well teaches this dharma of emptiness, the signless, the immeasurable, and quiescent extinction; the rest of the great assembly, though not all have exhausted their outflows, because their power of faith is deep also greatly rejoice, saying: this dharma can end the suffering of our birth and death and cause us to obtain the Buddha path. The treatise-author speaks further of the rest of the great assembly present: they have 「未悉漏盡」 tr. "not yet all exhausted their outflows", and what they rely on is that their 「信力深」 tr. "power of faith is deep". As for why they rejoice, the treatise-author records their words verbatim: 「此法能盡我等生死苦，令得佛道。」 tr. "This dharma can end the suffering of our birth and death, and cause us to obtain the Buddha path." The previous passage says the joy of those who have realised comes from resolving doubt; this passage says the joy of those who have not realised comes from the power of faith—the two joys each have their ground, and both return to the Dharma.

66. Because of immeasurable causes and conditions such as these, the great assembly all rejoice. The treatise-author sums up this round of question and answer in one sentence: the causes and conditions brought up are not only the several kinds listed above, so he says 「無量」 tr. "immeasurable". Here the four Chinese characters of the sūtra text, 「皆大歡喜」 tr. "all greatly rejoiced", have a real meaning: not a stock phrase at the end of the text, but each, according to his position, obtaining his own joy.

67. The question of the fourteenth question and answer: since the Buddha entrusted this prajñā to Ānanda, and after the Buddha's parinirvāṇa Ānanda together with Mahākāśyapa compiled the three baskets, why is it not mentioned therein. The fourteenth question, which is also the last question of the whole chapter, asks about a matter of history: since the Buddha entrusted prajñā to Ānanda, and Ānanda later compiled the three baskets together with Mahākāśyapa, why is this Dharma not seen within the three baskets? If this question is not explained, the entrustment spoken of before falls empty in fact. The treatise-author brings out several answers in a row, and answers very concretely.

68. The answer of the fourteenth question and answer: the Mahāyāna is very deep, hard to believe, hard to understand, hard to practise; while the Buddha was in the world there were bhikṣus who heard the Mahāyāna, did not believe or understand it, and rose from their seats and left, how much more after the Buddha's parinirvāṇa. The first answer speaks from capacity: the Mahāyāna is 「甚深難信、難解難行」 tr. "very deep, hard to believe, hard to understand, hard to practise". And it brings up a matter of the time when the Buddha was in the world as proof—there were bhikṣus who heard the Mahāyāna and did not believe or understand it, and 「從坐而去」 tr. "rose from their seats and left". If it was so even with the Buddha himself present in the assembly, how much more after his nirvāṇa. The sentence 「以是故不說」 tr. "for this reason it is not mentioned" speaks of the actual situation at the time of the compiling, not of the Mahāyāna being unworthy of being passed on.

69. Again, the three baskets have exactly three hundred thousand verses, making nine million six hundred thousand words, while the Mahāyāna is very much more, immeasurable and unlimited; the gods, nāgas, and spirits, with long lives and strong powers of memory and recollection, can keep a thousand koṭi of myriads of verses, while the people of this world now, with short lives and weak powers of memory and recollection, cannot read even the small Prajñā. The second answer speaks from quantity. The treatise-author first gives the number of the three baskets: 「三藏正有三十萬偈，并為九百六十萬言。」 tr. "The three baskets have exactly three hundred thousand verses, making nine million six hundred thousand words." Next he gives the quantity of the Mahāyāna: the "Prajñāpāramitā" chapter has twenty-two thousand verses, the "Great Prajñā" chapter has a hundred thousand verses, and in the palaces of the nāga kings, the asura kings, and the gods there are a thousand koṭi of myriads of verses, and so on. The reason they can keep them is 「此諸天、龍、神壽命長久、識念力強故」 tr. "because these gods, nāgas, and spirits have long lives and strong powers of memory and recollection". Looking back at the people of this world now, with 「壽命短促、識念力薄」 tr. "short lives and weak powers of memory and recollection", they cannot read even the "Small Prajñāpāramitā" chapter, how much less more than that. What this passage speaks of is not that people are unfit to hear, but that the vessel cannot take the quantity—what the compilers chose was the portion that this land could keep.

70. The prajñā known by the other great bodhisattvas is immeasurable and unlimited; the Buddha did not teach with one body only, and in immeasurable ages sometimes transformed himself into countless bodies, so what he taught is immeasurable. The treatise-author pushes one layer further: the prajñā known by the great bodhisattvas is 「無量無限」 tr. "immeasurable and unlimited". The reason it is immeasurable he gives very plainly—「佛非但一身所說」 tr. "the Buddha did not teach with one body only"; in immeasurable ages he 「或變化作無數身」 tr. "sometimes transformed himself into countless bodies", and therefore what he taught is immeasurable. These words can resolve a common doubt: the Buddha taught the Dharma for no more than some decades of his life; how can there be so many great scriptures? What the treatise-author answers lies not in disputing the years and months but in making clear that it is not the teaching of one body and one life.

71. Further, there are the Sūtra of Inconceivable Liberation and the other great sūtras, each with a hundred thousand verses, immeasurable and boundless like the jewels in the great ocean; how could they be put into the three baskets; a small thing should be within a great one, a great thing cannot enter a small one; if one is to ask, one should say: why is the Small Vehicle not within the Mahāyāna. The treatise-author goes on to list the titles of the great sūtras: the Sūtra of Inconceivable Liberation with a hundred thousand verses; the Sūtra of the Origins of the Buddhas, the Jewel Cloud Sūtra, the Great Cloud Sūtra, and the Dharma Cloud Sūtra, each with a hundred thousand verses; and the Lotus Sūtra, the Flower Hand Sūtra, the Great Compassion Sūtra, the Skilful Means Sūtra, the Sūtra of the Nāga King's Questions, the Sūtra of the Asura King's Questions, and the other great sūtras, 「無量無邊，如大海中寶」 tr. "immeasurable and boundless, like the jewels in the great ocean". At once he brings out a principle: 「小物應在大中，大物不得入小。」 tr. "A small thing should be within a great one; a great thing cannot enter a small one." And he turns the question over and hands it back to the questioner: if one is to ask, one should say 「小乘何以不在摩訶衍中？」 tr. "Why is the Small Vehicle not within the Mahāyāna?" At the end he pronounces 「摩訶衍能兼小乘法故，是故不應如汝所問」 tr. "because the Mahāyāna can include the dharma of the Small Vehicle, therefore one should not ask as you have asked". This reversal is a key example of the discussion in this chapter—if, at the point of asking, great and small are set up wrongly, the answer can never settle; the treatise-author first corrects what is asked, and the difficulty does not stand of itself.

72. Again, someone says: as Mahākāśyapa led the bhikṣus on Mount Gṛdhrakūṭa to compile the three baskets, after the Buddha's passing into extinction Mañjuśrī, Maitreya, and the other great bodhisattvas also led Ānanda to compile this Mahāyāna. The treatise-author cites one saying that answers directly ‘where was the Mahāyāna compiled’: Kāśyapa led the bhikṣus to compile the three baskets on Mount Gṛdhrakūṭa, while Mañjuśrī, Maitreya, and the other great bodhisattvas 「亦將阿難集是摩訶衍」 tr. "also led Ānanda to compile this Mahāyāna". It is worth noting that in both compilations Ānanda is present—the prajñā entrusted before here finds where its transmission lands. The treatise-author brings this saying out with 「有人言」 tr. "someone says", so the speaker it belongs to is clear; the reader should receive it as it is attributed, and not force it into a settled conclusion.

73. Further, Ānanda knew how to weigh the greatness or smallness of beings' aspirations and deeds, so he did not teach the Mahāyāna among the śrāvakas; the Buddha-dharma is all of one kind and one flavour, namely the flavour of liberation that is the exhaustion of suffering; this flavour has two kinds—being only for one's own person and being also for all beings; therefore there is the difference of the Great and Small Vehicles. The treatise-author adds one more layer, and speaks to the very source of the division of the Great and Small Vehicles. Ānanda 「知籌量眾生志業大小」 tr. "knew how to weigh the greatness or smallness of beings' aspirations and deeds", so he did not teach the Mahāyāna among the śrāvakas—「說則錯亂，無所成辦」 tr. "if it were taught, it would give rise to confusion and nothing would be accomplished". Next he establishes a meaning: 「佛法皆是一種一味，所謂苦盡解脫味。」 tr. "The Buddha-dharma is all of one kind and one flavour, namely the flavour of liberation that is the exhaustion of suffering." Though the flavour is one, the minds of the recipients are two: 「一者、但自為身，二者、兼為一切眾生。」 tr. "First, being only for one's own person; second, being also for all beings." Although alike they seek one gate of liberation, 「而有自利、利人之異」 tr. "there is the difference of benefiting oneself and benefiting others", and the distinction of the Great and Small Vehicles is established from this. At the end he concludes: for the sake of these two kinds of people, what the Buddha's mouth taught was 「以文字語言分為二種：三藏是聲聞法，摩訶衍是大乘法」 tr. "divided by letters and words into two kinds: the three baskets are the śrāvaka Dharma; the Mahāyāna is the Great Vehicle Dharma". This passage is extremely important—the division of great and small lies not in the flavour of the Dharma but in the arousing of the mind; dividing the teaching is an arrangement made according to capacity, not the Dharma having two substances.

74. Again, while the Buddha was in the world there was no name "three baskets", only bhikṣus who held the sūtra, held the Vinaya, and held the mātṛkā; the sūtra has two divisions, and the Vinaya too has two divisions—the Vinaya of the land of Mathurā includes the avadāna and the jātaka, with eighty sections; the Vinaya of the land of Jibin removes the jātaka and the avadāna, taking only what is essential to make ten sections. At the very end the treatise-author speaks from the source and course of names and categories. While the Buddha was in the world there was originally no name 「三藏」 tr. "three baskets"; there were only 「持修多羅比丘、持毘尼比丘、持摩多羅迦比丘」 tr. "bhikṣus who held the sūtra, bhikṣus who held the Vinaya, and bhikṣus who held the mātṛkā". Next he explains sūtra: it is the name of the scriptures in the four Āgamas, and also the name of the scriptures in the Mahāyāna; it has two divisions—the sūtra within the four Āgamas, and the Mahāyāna scriptures, which are named great; so 「修多羅入二分，亦大乘、亦小乘」 tr. "the sūtra enters both divisions; it is both the Great Vehicle and the Small Vehicle", and the two hundred and fifty precepts and the like are also named sūtra. Next he explains the Vinaya: 「名比丘作罪，佛結戒：應行是、不應行是，作是事得是罪」 tr. "it speaks of the offences bhikṣus commit; the Buddha lays down the precepts: one should do this, one should not do that; doing this matter incurs this offence"; briefly told there are eighty sections, and it too has two divisions—the Vinaya of the land of Mathurā includes the avadāna and the jātaka, with eighty sections; the Vinaya of the land of Jibin removes the jātaka and the avadāna, 「但取要用作十部」 tr. "taking only what is essential to make ten sections", and there are eighty sections of vibhāṣā explaining it. What this passage shows is something readers of the teaching often overlook: the names of the categories arose later, and what was compiled differed from place to place; using later names to measure the reality of an earlier age often gives rise to pointless disputes.

75. Therefore one knows that the Mahāprajñāpāramitā Sūtra and the others are within the sūtra scriptures; because the sūtras are great and their matters different they are spoken of separately, and therefore they are not within the compiling of the three baskets. The treatise-author settles the whole question with one sentence: the Mahāprajñāpāramitā Sūtra and the others are originally within the sūtra scriptures, and are set out separately only because 「經大、事異」 tr. "the sūtras are great and their matters different"; it is not that outside the three baskets there is some separate Dharma. The doubt of the earlier question, 「何以不說」 tr. "why is it not mentioned", is here wholly resolved—it is not that it was not passed on, but that it circulated separately. The fourteen rounds of question and answer of the whole chapter end here, and the matter of doctrine is finished.

76. The colophon of the translation hall: the Dharma master Kumārajīva arrived at Chang'an in the third year of Hongshi of the Qin; in the summer of the fourth year in the Xiaoyao Garden he brought out this Expository Treatise for the Heavenly King Yao, and on the twenty-seventh day of the twelfth month of the seventh year it was finished; he also brought out sūtras, Vinaya, and treatises of nearly five hundred thousand words, which with this Expository Treatise make one million five hundred thousand words; the first chapter, thirty-four fascicles, is the full complete text of the treatise, and from the second chapter onward the Dharma master abridged it. What stands at the end of the whole treatise is not doctrine but a record of the translation hall; it is enough to read it as it is, without forcing a doctrinal explanation on it. What it records are four matters: time and place—in the third year of Hongshi, the year xinchou, on the twentieth day of the twelfth month, he arrived at Chang'an; in the summer of the fourth year, in the upper storey of the western gate in the Xiaoyao Garden, he brought out this Expository Treatise for the Heavenly King Yao, and on the twenty-seventh day of the twelfth month of the seventh year it was finished; what was done alongside—in the meantime he also brought out sūtra texts, dhyāna sūtras, precepts and Vinaya, the Hundred Treatise, and the Essential Explanations of the Dhyāna Method, 「向五十萬言」 tr. "nearly five hundred thousand words", which together with this Expository Treatise make 「一百五十萬言」 tr. "one million five hundred thousand words"; the pattern of the text—「論初品三十四卷，解釋一品，是全論具本；二品已下，法師略之，取其足以開釋文意而已，不復備其廣釋」 tr. "the treatise's first chapter, thirty-four fascicles, explains one chapter, and is the full complete text of the treatise; from the second chapter onward the Dharma master abridged it, taking what sufficed to open up and explain the meaning of the text, and no longer providing its full extended explanation"; the quantity—「得此百卷，若盡出之，將十倍於此」 tr. "as for these hundred fascicles that we have obtained, were it brought out in full, it would be ten times this". These four matters stand exactly in contrast with the entrustment spoken of in this chapter: what the sūtra hands over is ‘do not let it be cut off’, and what is recorded here is how this treatise, in the land of Han, caught up that one entrustment. Having read the whole treatise to this point, one should pause a little—the hundred fascicles one has read are the one-tenth that remains after 「略之」 tr. "he abridged it".

Do Not Misread

Do not read 「囑累」 tr. "entrustment" as the Buddha having given rise to love and clinging toward prajñā. The treatise-author's first round of question and answer has already broken this doubt head-on: what the Buddha never abandons is beings, not the Dharma; between the twin śāla trees he even broke his body into pieces like hemp seeds and rice by the vajra samādhi for the sake of beings, 「何況經法多所饒益而不囑累」 tr. "how much more would he entrust the sūtra-dharma, which enriches so many!" If it is read as the Buddha loving and clinging to this Dharma, then the later sentence 「佛雖於一切法無憎愛、常寂滅相，而囑累是般若」 tr. "although the Buddha is without hatred and without love toward all dharmas, always having the mark of quiescence, he entrusts this prajñā" has nowhere to stand.

Do not read ‘entrusting it to Ānanda and not to the bodhisattvas’ as śrāvakas surpassing bodhisattvas. The reasons the treatise-author gives are three-sided: Ānanda is fit and able to pass it on and keep it; the great bodhisattvas each scatter after the passing into extinction and already deeply know the power of prajñā; and Ānanda 「隨小乘法」 tr. "follows the dharma of the Small Vehicle" and so needs earnestness. Taking the three sides together, what is taken up is ‘needing earnestness’ and ‘being able to stay long in this land to pass it on and keep it’, not high or low in rank. If it is read as a judgement of high and low, then the text in the same treatise, ‘the unshared prajñā is taught only for the great bodhisattvas dwelling on the ten grounds’, contradicts it.

Do not read 「莫令斷滅」 tr. "do not let it be cut off and extinguished" as prajñā itself being something people can extinguish. The treatise-author answers very distinctly: prajñā as the real mark is 「寂滅、無生無滅相、如虛空、不可戲論」 tr. "quiescent extinction, the mark of non-arising and non-ceasing, like space, not to be made the object of idle discourse", and in this layer there is nothing to extinguish; what is entrusted is the layer of 「文字語言書般若波羅蜜經卷，為他人說」 tr. "the scrolls of the prajñāpāramitā sūtra written in letters and words, taught to others", which is 「於此因中而說其果」 tr. "its result is spoken of within this cause". What can be cut off is the layer of the circulation of letters that serves as the cause; the layer that is like space has nothing to extinguish—if the two layers are not kept apart, ‘neither increased nor decreased’ and 「莫令斷滅」 tr. "do not let it be cut off and extinguished" must become a self-contradiction.

Do not read 「滅般若波羅蜜」 tr. "extinguishing prajñāpāramitā" as a thing done by people from outside. The extinguishers of the Dharma the treatise-author points to are those who hear prajñā and 「生著心，取般若相，分別諸法」 tr. "give rise to a clinging mind, grasp at the mark of prajñā, and discriminate dharmas"—because of discriminating they give rise to clinging, because of clinging fighting and strife, because of fighting and strife they raise up all sinful deeds. If a mind that protects the Dharma carries grasping at marks, it falls right into this. On the contrary, only 「如般若波羅蜜相，莫著文字語言，教化眾生」 tr. "in accordance with the mark of prajñāpāramitā, not clinging to letters and words, teaching and transforming beings" is 「是名不滅」 tr. "this is called not extinguishing".

Do not read 「有般若在世，則為佛在」 tr. "when there is prajñā in the world, the Buddha is present" as a sentence of consolation. What the treatise-author gives is a reason, not words of comfort: prajñā is the mother of the buddhas, 「諸佛以法為師。法者，即是般若波羅蜜」 tr. "the buddhas take the Dharma as their teacher. The Dharma is precisely prajñāpāramitā", so 「若師在、母在，不名為失利」 tr. "if the teacher is present and the mother is present, it is not named losing the benefit"—why? 「利本在故。」 tr. "Because the root of the benefit is present." And he takes as proof that a bodhisattva possessing the marks and minor signs is not named Buddha, and 「得法寶故名為佛」 tr. "because he obtains the Dharma Jewel, he is named Buddha". What is established is the relation of root and branch between the Dharma and the Buddha, not an emotional substitute.

Do not read ‘hearing, receiving, writing out, and upholding, one at once obtains not being apart from seeing the Buddha’ as not needing faith and practice. The treatise-author divides those who hear the Dharma into two kinds, and only those who 「一心聽聞，信受奉行，厭世、愛涅槃，離小乘、樂大乘」 tr. "hear with one mind, believe, receive, and carry it out, grow weary of the world and love nirvāṇa, leave the Small Vehicle and delight in the Great Vehicle" are such that 「是名真聽」 tr. "this is called true hearing"; offerings too are divided into knowing and not knowing, and merit is heavy or thin. It is not that a person of heavy sin does not obtain this benefit, but that 「償眾罪已，久後亦必當得佛」 tr. "after he has repaid his many sins, after a long time he too will certainly attain buddhahood". If these distinctions are left out, what the sūtra text grants becomes a gate of trusting to luck.

Do not read ‘the Mahāyāna is not mentioned in the three baskets’ as the Mahāyāna not being the Buddha's teaching. The treatise-author's answers are three: because it is hard to believe and hard to understand, it was not taught at that time; because the quantity is great and the vessel small, it did not enter those collections; because it circulated separately, 「以經大、事異故別說」 tr. "because the sūtras are great and their matters different, they are spoken of separately". He also records the saying that Mañjuśrī, Maitreya, and the other great bodhisattvas led Ānanda to compile this Mahāyāna. At the end he further sets the point of asking right—if one is to ask, one should say 「小乘何以不在摩訶衍中？」 tr. "Why is the Small Vehicle not within the Mahāyāna?" If the reader takes ‘not within the three baskets’ straight to mean ‘not from the Buddha's mouth’, it wholly contradicts the treatise-author's establishing that 「佛法皆是一種一味」 tr. "the Buddha-dharma is all of one kind and one flavour".

Bearing on Practice

The first use to receive is to take ‘revering prajñā as one reveres the Buddha’ as a thing one can do right now. What the Buddha gives Ānanda is not a new assignment but a turning: the love, reverence, offerings, and provision now given to the Buddha are, after the passing into extinction, turned just as they are toward prajñā. The treatise-author explains why—prajñā is 「無形、無色，智者能知」 tr. "without shape, without form; the wise can know it", so the Buddha's body, seen alike by the foolish and the wise, is used as a simile. The practitioner can ask himself here: the portion of solemnity that arises in me toward images of the Buddha and toward a place of practice—has the same portion turned toward the sūtras and the Dharma?

The second use to receive is to recognise whether one is oneself 「真聽」 tr. "truly hearing". The criteria the treatise-author gives are four: hearing with one mind, believing, receiving, and carrying it out, growing weary of the world and loving nirvāṇa, leaving the Small Vehicle and delighting in the Great Vehicle; he takes as the comparison for 「不聽」 tr. "not hearing" a disciple who does not believe, receive, and carry out his teacher's words, and at the end adds 「誦、讀亦如是」 tr. "reciting and reading are likewise". This one can be tested daily—the passage read today, did it enter the mind, or only pass before the eyes?

The third use to receive is to keep the measure of ‘not clinging to letters and words’. The extinguishers of the Dharma the treatise-author rebukes are exactly those who grasp at the mark of prajñā and discriminate this is wholesome, this is unwholesome, this is worldly, this is nirvāṇa, give rise to clinging through discrimination, and give rise to strife through clinging. The practitioner reading the sūtras falls into this most easily: the more familiar one's reading, the more easily one measures others by the words one has gained. At such a time one can hold up one sentence of the treatise-author's to look at oneself—「汝當如般若波羅蜜相，莫著文字語言，教化眾生。」 tr. "You should, in accordance with the mark of prajñāpāramitā, not cling to letters and words, and teach and transform beings."

The fourth use to receive is to learn the measure of 「語不過三」 tr. "speech does not exceed three". The Buddha deeply loves prajñā and entrusts it three times, and beyond three says no more; the treatise-author says it plainly: said once it is still too slack, beyond three too urgent, 「似如凡夫貪著者」 tr. "like an ordinary person who craves and clings". Anyone who urges the Dharma on others can take this as a rule—speak when one should speak; if one has spoken to the second and third time and the other does not receive it, stop. Stopping is not abandoning; it is not letting the Dharma be made light of through forceful clamour.

The fifth use to receive is to take up that lamp. The treatise-author states what the entrustment is for in one sentence only: 「為不令法滅故。」 tr. "So as not to let the Dharma be extinguished." Its method is 「汝當教化弟子，弟子復教餘人，展轉相教」 tr. "you should teach and transform disciples, and the disciples in turn teach others, teaching one another in turn", and its simile is 「一燈復然餘燈，其明轉多」 tr. "one lamp lights other lamps, and its light grows ever more"; the reverse side is 「莫作最後斷種人」 tr. "do not be the last person who cuts off the lineage". This one asks neither high or low position nor deep or shallow realisation—everyone who has gained a portion of benefit from the Dharma stands at the place where this lamp is passed on. The whole treatise closes with this; its intent is worth pondering.

Further Resonances

The backbone of this chapter is one passage of sūtra text and one passage of treatise explanation. Sūtra ① begins with the Buddha asking Ānanda 「佛是汝大師不？汝是佛弟子不？」 tr. "Is the Buddha your great teacher? Are you the Buddha's disciple?"; Ānanda answers that the Buddha is his great teacher, the Sugata is his great teacher, and he is the Buddha's disciple; the Buddha confirms it and says that what a disciple ought to do he has already done, then bids him after the passing into extinction to love, revere, and make offerings to prajñāpāramitā with the love, reverence, offerings, and provision given to the Buddha, 「乃至第二、第三，以般若波羅蜜囑累汝」 tr. "and so on up to a second time and a third time, I entrust prajñāpāramitā to you", admonishes him not to forget, not to lose, and not to be the last person who cuts off the lineage, and shows two matters—that as long as prajñā is in the world one knows there is a Buddha in the world teaching the Dharma, and that those who write it out, uphold, read, recite, rightly recollect, widely explain, and make all kinds of offerings are not apart from seeing the Buddha, not apart from hearing the Dharma, and always close to the Buddha; at the end it concludes by narration with Maitreya and the other bodhisattva-mahāsattvas, the venerable Subhūti and the other great disciples, together with the whole great assembly, and the gods, humans, gandharvas, asuras, and others, hearing what the Buddha said and all greatly rejoicing. Treatise ① takes fourteen rounds of question and answer as its skeleton, interspersed with re-explanations that cite the sūtra, and with supplements introduced by what someone says or by a further point: first it answers why the Buddha, having already severed love of dharmas, entrusts, and brings out the never-abandoned mind of great kindness and compassion and the matter of breaking his body into pieces like hemp seeds and rice; next it answers why he entrusts to the śrāvaka Ānanda and not to Maitreya and the other great bodhisattvas, setting out Ānanda's virtues fit for passing it on and the reasons why the bodhisattvas scatter and deeply know; next it answers why the Lotus and the other vaipulya sūtras are entrusted to the bodhisattvas King of Joy and the others; next it answers whether there is some further dharma very deep and surpassing prajñā, establishing that prajñā is not a secret dharma, bringing out the simile of the great physician using poison as medicine, and the division of the two kinds of prajñā, shared and unshared; next it answers what difference there is between the entrustment in the earlier chapter "Seeing Akṣobhya Buddha" and the present entrustment, establishing the two gates of the path of prajñā and the path of skilful means, and teaching the simile of the goldsmith making different things out of gold and the marks of two layers of skilful means; next it answers why he is so earnest and solemn, bringing out four sayings: the simile of the merchant chief entrusting precious jewels, that entrusting it himself among his disciples there is no suspicion, that the Buddha does not cling to the dharma of emptiness, and that wishing to show the middle way he parts from the two extremes; next it answers why the Buddha asks whether he is his disciple, bringing up the disciples in name and the doubt of those of the outside paths; next it cites the sūtra and explains the dharmas a disciple ought to do and revering prajñā as one reveres me, answers why, prajñā being the teacher of the buddhas, Ānanda reveres the Buddha, and brings out the meaning of the Buddha using his body as a simile for prajñā; next it answers why go to three when one entrustment would be enough, establishing three sayings: the constant way of the buddhas, that speech does not exceed three; once is still too slack and beyond three too urgent; and the minds of the recipients are of three kinds; next it explains that the reason for entrusting is so as not to let the Dharma be extinguished, the simile of one lamp lighting other lamps, and the admonition not to be the last person who cuts off the lineage; next it answers why, the earlier chapter having made clear that it is neither increased nor decreased, it now says do not let it be cut off and extinguished, dividing prajñā as the real mark from prajñā as letters and speaking of the result within the cause, and defines what is named extinguishing prajñā and what is named not extinguishing; next it explains the principle that when prajñā is in the world the Buddha is present, and the meaning that the Dharma Jewel is not apart from the Buddha Jewel; next it answers how people of heavy sin who hear, receive, write out, and uphold it can be not apart from the buddhas, dividing true hearing from not hearing, and pure and thick merit from thin and slight; next it answers why the great arhats who have already realised the limit of reality greatly rejoice, bringing out the two meanings of severing doubt and of the Buddha's being able to make discriminations within non-discrimination; at the end it answers why the Mahāyāna is not mentioned in the compiling of the three baskets, bringing out three answers—hard to believe, great in quantity, circulating separately—and records the saying that Mañjuśrī and Maitreya led Ānanda to compile the Mahāyāna, the meaning that the Great and Small Vehicles are divided by the arousing of the mind, and the source and course of the names of the three baskets; the whole treatise closes with the colophon on how the Dharma master Kumārajīva brought out this Expository Treatise from beginning to end.

As for the vein of meaning between this chapter and the chapters before and after it, two things can be seen. First, continuing from what precedes: the preceding chapter, "Dharmodgata", ends with the matter of Ever Weeping seeking the Dharma, and this chapter begins with the Buddha entrusting Ānanda to protect and uphold prajñā; seeking the Dharma and protecting the Dharma face each other, front and back, the one in being able to seek, the other in being able to keep. Second, this chapter is the last chapter of the whole treatise, and after it there is no next chapter to hand down to—the whole treatise is gathered in by the end-of-fascicle title 「大智度論卷第一百」 tr. "Fascicle one hundred of the Mahāprajñāpāramitā-upadeśa", and before the end of the fascicle there is first a passage of colophon from the translation hall, recording how this treatise was translated in the land of Han from beginning to end. The 「莫作最後斷種人」 tr. "do not be the last person who cuts off the lineage" admonished in the sūtra and the matter of its translation recorded at the end of the fascicle join exactly head to tail: the one charges that it not be cut off, the other records that in fact it was not cut off.

Of the explanations of the ancient masters, for this chapter one school can be recorded. Jizang's Commentary on the Larger Sūtra explains this chapter; there its chapter title is written 「囑累品第九十」 tr. "Entrustment, Chapter Ninety", the same as this treatise's chapter title. His sectioning of the main divisions of this chapter says: 「此下第二、明付屬流通方便。」 tr. "From here below is the second: it clarifies entrusting the circulation of skilful means." He at once sets up a question about the sameness and difference of prajñā and skilful means and answers it himself, saying: 「般若此品別而為論，付屬流通方便智慧與方便云何異耶？答：論云般若方便無有二物，隨用不同故開二耳。如金剛與金更無有異，而善巧以金為釧，故有金有釧二事不同也。」 tr. "Prajñā is discussed separately in this chapter; in entrusting the circulation of skilful means, how do wisdom and skilful means differ? Answer: the treatise says prajñā and skilful means are not two things; because their uses are not the same, they are opened into two. As vajra and gold have no further difference, yet with skill gold is made into a bracelet, so there are gold and bracelet, two things not the same."—the 「論云」 tr. "the treatise says" that he cites takes the same meaning as this chapter of this treatise's 「般若與方便，本體是一，以所用小異故別說」 tr. "prajñā and skilful means are one in their original substance; because there is a small difference in what they are used for, they are spoken of separately" and its simile of the goldsmith making different things out of gold, while the simile he sets up is of gold and bracelet, differing in fullness from this treatise's goldsmith making all kinds of different things; they are recorded side by side without judgement. His explanation of why the Buddha entrusts says: 「問：何故佛付屬流通耶？答：慈悲攝物何俟問耶？佛尚破身利益，況法寶耶？又上說空破有捨，今何屬破空？欲示中道故付屬也。」 tr. "Question: why does the Buddha entrust its circulation? Answer: kindness and compassion gather in beings; why wait to ask? The Buddha even broke his body to benefit them, how much more the Dharma Jewel! Again, above he taught emptiness to break existence and let it go; now, why does the entrustment break emptiness? Because he wishes to show the middle way, he entrusts it."—explaining it in two steps, first by kindness and compassion gathering in beings (taking the Buddha's even breaking his body to benefit them as a comparison) and next by wishing to show the middle way, which correspond to this treatise's first round of question and answer and to the saying 「佛欲現中道故囑累」 tr. "the Buddha entrusts it because he wishes to show the middle way". His explanation of why it is entrusted to Ānanda says: 「問：知付屬有利，何故不付屬菩薩而屬阿難？阿難是聲聞人，般若是菩薩法也。答：欲令物信故。」 tr. "Question: knowing that entrusting is of benefit, why not entrust it to the bodhisattvas, but entrust it to Ānanda? Ānanda is a śrāvaka, and prajñā is the dharma of bodhisattvas. Answer: because he wishes to make beings believe." And again he says: 「菩薩知般若恩德，自弘宣之，不須付屬。阿難是小乘人，不知般若恩，是故佛付屬也。」 tr. "The bodhisattvas know the kindness and virtue of prajñā and spread it of themselves; they need no entrusting. Ānanda is a person of the Small Vehicle who does not know the kindness of prajñā; therefore the Buddha entrusts it." His explanation of why the Lotus and other sūtras are entrusted to bodhisattvas says: 「答：法華明二乘作佛是秘密法，般若是顯現法。顯現法易用，秘密法難用。小藥師能用藥為藥，大藥師乃用毒作藥也。」 tr. "Answer: the Lotus makes clear that those of the two vehicles become Buddhas, which is a secret dharma; prajñā is a manifest dharma. A manifest dharma is easy to use; a secret dharma is hard to use. A lesser physician can use medicine as medicine; a great physician even uses poison to make medicine." And again he says: 「又有共、不共二般若，不共般若付屬菩薩，共者付聲聞也。」 tr. "Again, there are two prajñās, shared and unshared; the unshared prajñā is entrusted to bodhisattvas, the shared one to śrāvakas."—this treatise says 「般若波羅蜜非祕密法」 tr. "prajñāpāramitā is not a secret dharma" and takes what the Lotus and others say of arhats receiving the prediction and becoming Buddhas as what great bodhisattvas can receive, uphold, and use, while Jizang directly sets 「秘密」 tr. "secret" and 「顯現」 tr. "manifest" against each other and assigns them separately; the meaning taken is close while the names set up differ; they are recorded side by side without judgement. His question about where the Mahāyāna was compiled says: 「問：付屬阿難三藏，三藏在屬山，與迦葉結集。付阿難般若，何處集耶？答：文殊將阿難結集，未知何處。一云還在屬山，二云是鐵圍山邊也。」 tr. "Question: the three baskets were entrusted to Ānanda; the three baskets were at Mount Shu, compiled with Kāśyapa. Prajñā was entrusted to Ānanda; where was it compiled? Answer: Mañjuśrī led Ānanda to compile it; it is not known where. One saying is that it was again at Mount Shu; a second says it was beside the Iron Ring Mountains."—this treatise only records that Mañjuśrī, Maitreya, and the other great bodhisattvas led Ānanda to compile this Mahāyāna and does not state the place, while Jizang sets two sayings side by side about the place and himself marks 「未知何處」 tr. "it is not known where"; this is recorded without judgement. His sectioning of the passages of the sūtra text says: 「品為二：初、明付屬流通；二、大眾歡喜奉行。初三：第一、明慇懃付屬，令尊重供養；二、明付屬阿難，令流通不絕；三、明付囑之意也。今是初文。」 tr. "The chapter is in two: first, clarifying the entrusting of circulation; second, the great assembly rejoicing and carrying it out. The first has three: first, clarifying the earnest entrusting, bidding him honour and make offerings; second, clarifying the entrusting to Ānanda, bidding him circulate it without break; third, clarifying the intent of the entrustment. Now this is the first text." His explanation of why the Buddha asks Ānanda says: 「問：佛知阿難是弟子，何故今方問耶？答：二義：一、為簡真偽。」 tr. "Question: the Buddha knows that Ānanda is his disciple; why does he only now ask? Answer: there are two meanings: first, to sift the true from the false."—the same in intent as this treatise's bringing up the two matters of the disciples in name and the doubt of those of the outside paths. His explanation of the second and third entrustments says: 「第二、第三者，佛法不過三事，不受佛語便是逆人，金剛神便煞之。又過多則大，過不足故，但其三也。」 tr. "As for ‘a second time and a third time’: in the Buddha-dharma a matter does not exceed three; one who does not receive the Buddha's words is then a rebellious person, and the vajra spirit then kills him. Again, going beyond into many would be too great, and falling short would not suffice; therefore it is only three." His explanation of the section on not forgetting and not losing says: 「汝莫忘莫失下，第一、付囑令流通不斷絕也。人子不能紹繼家業，為斷種人，最為耻。」 tr. "From ‘do not forget it, do not lose it’ below is the first: entrusting it so that its circulation is not cut off. When a son cannot continue the family's work, he is a person who cuts off the lineage, the greatest shame." His explanation of the passage of the great assembly rejoicing says: 「問：無憂無喜是羅漢功德，尚無不喜云何言大喜？答：羅漢於四諦無疑、於一切法中皆疑，今說般若破其種種疑心，喜也，盡此無餘也。」 tr. "Question: being without sorrow and without joy is the merit of an arhat; since they have not even non-joy, how can it say great joy? Answer: the arhats have no doubt about the four truths, but within all dharmas they have doubts throughout; now prajñā is taught and breaks all kinds of doubting minds in them, so they rejoice; this exhausts them without remainder."—this treatise explains it by 「未得一切智慧故，於諸甚深法中猶疑不了」 tr. "because they have not yet obtained all wisdom, within all the very deep dharmas they still have doubts and do not understand them clearly", while Jizang says 「於四諦無疑、於一切法中皆疑」 tr. "they have no doubt about the four truths, but within all dharmas they have doubts throughout"; the placing of the doubt judged differs slightly, and they are recorded side by side without judgement. Jizang's commentary stops its explanation at this chapter, and right after it is titled 「大品經義疏卷第十」 tr. "Fascicle ten of the Commentary on the Larger Sūtra", so his book too ends with the Entrustment chapter, closing at the same place in the chapter order as this treatise; at the end of the fascicle there is separately a colophon of the copyist of the manuscript, recording the text he collated against: 「嘉元三年二月下旬候，以東南院古本終，交合切了……」 tr. "In the last ten days of the second month of the third year of Kagen, the collation against the old text of the Tōnan-in was finished and completed ……"; it belongs to the copyist, not to Jizang, and is recorded for reference. The extant part of Huiying's Commentary does not reach this chapter, and the lack is marked as it is, without filling it with text from elsewhere; only a few words of his sectioning point ahead to this chapter (see the Apparatus layer); his book also has an explanation of a chapter of the same name, "Entrustment", but what it explains is a different chapter of the same name in the earlier part of this treatise, not an explanation of this chapter, and it must not be cited to make up the number. Junzheng's book is not in the form of a chapter-by-chapter commentary, and for this chapter there is no text that can be cited; its lack too is recorded as it is. The variant titles of this chapter's name in the various editions and the differences of chapter names in the sūtra line are detailed in the Apparatus layer.