大智度論 白話全本 · 冊4Dazhidulun — Mahāprajñāpāramitā-upadeśa · Complete Vernacular · Vol. 4

Subhūti Praises the Mahāyāna: Surpassing the World, Equal to Space, Equal in the Three Times

The venerable Subhūti said to the Buddha: ‘World-Honored One! The Mahāyāna (the Great Vehicle)—this so-called Mahāyāna—surpasses and rises above all the world as well as gods, humans, and asuras. World-Honored One! This Mahāyāna is equal to space. Just as space can contain and receive immeasurable, boundless, asaṃkhyeya beings, the Mahāyāna is also like this: it contains and receives immeasurable, boundless, asaṃkhyeya beings. World-Honored One! Of this Mahāyāna no place of coming is seen, no place of going is seen, and no place of abiding is seen either. Of this Mahāyāna the prior limit is unfindable, the later limit is unfindable, the middle limit is unfindable; that which is equal in the three times is the Mahāyāna. World-Honored One! Precisely because of this, this vehicle is named the Mahāyāna.’

The Buddha Approves and Marks Out the Substance of the Mahāyāna: The Six Perfections, the Samādhi Gates, the Eighteen Emptinesses, the Limbs of the Path and the Buddha's Dharmas

The Buddha told Subhūti: ‘Just so! Just so! The Mahāyāna of the bodhisattva-mahāsattva is the six perfections—dānapāramitā, śīlapāramitā, kṣāntipāramitā, vīryapāramitā, dhyānapāramitā, and prajñāpāramitā; this is named the Mahāyāna of the bodhisattva-mahāsattva. Furthermore, Subhūti! The Mahāyāna of the bodhisattva-mahāsattva is all the dhāraṇī gates and all the samādhi gates, that is, from the Śūraṃgama samādhi and so on up to the samādhi Free of Attachment, Undefiled as Space; this is named the Mahāyāna of the bodhisattva-mahāsattva. Furthermore, Subhūti! The Mahāyāna of the bodhisattva-mahāsattva is inner emptiness and so on up to the emptiness of non-existent and existent dharmas; this is named the Mahāyāna of the bodhisattva-mahāsattva. Furthermore, Subhūti! The Mahāyāna of the bodhisattva-mahāsattva is the four foundations of mindfulness and so on up to the eighteen unshared dharmas; this is named the Mahāyāna of the bodhisattva-mahāsattva.’

If the Three Realms Truly Existed, It Could Not Surpass Them: The Desire Realm, and the Form Realm and the Formless Realm

‘Just as Subhūti has said: 「這摩訶衍勝出一切世間以及諸天、人、阿修羅。」 tr. "This Mahāyāna surpasses all the world as well as gods, humans, and asuras." Subhūti! If the desire realm truly existed—were not false, not changing, true and real, not inverted, permanent, without the mark of destruction, and not a non-existent dharma—this Mahāyāna could not surpass all the world as well as gods, humans, and asuras. Subhūti! Precisely because the desire realm exists by way of false recollection, imagining, and discrimination, of coming together, and of names and the like, and is wholly the mark of impermanence, a non-existent dharma, therefore the Mahāyāna surpasses all the world as well as gods, humans, and asuras. Subhūti! If the form realm and the formless realm truly existed—were not false, not changing, true and real, not inverted, permanent, without the mark of destruction, and not non-existent dharmas—this Mahāyāna could not surpass all the world as well as gods, humans, and asuras. Subhūti! Precisely because the form realm and the formless realm exist by way of false recollection, imagining, and discrimination, of coming together, and of names and the like, and are wholly the mark of impermanence and destruction, non-existent dharmas, therefore the Mahāyāna surpasses all the world as well as gods, humans, and asuras.’

The Five Aggregates and the Sense-Fields Such as the Eye Are Likewise: From Form and So On Up to the Feeling Born from the Condition of Mind-Contact

‘Subhūti! If form truly existed—were not false, not changing, true and real, not inverted, permanent, without the mark of destruction, and not a non-existent dharma—this Mahāyāna could not surpass all the world as well as gods, humans, and asuras. Subhūti! Precisely because form exists by way of false recollection, imagining, and discrimination, of coming together, and of names and the like, and is wholly the mark of impermanence and destruction, a non-existent dharma, therefore this Mahāyāna surpasses all the world as well as gods, humans, and asuras. Feeling, perception, constructions, and consciousness are also like this. Subhūti! If the eye and so on up to the mind, forms and so on up to dharmas, eye-consciousness and so on up to mind-consciousness, eye-contact and so on up to mind-contact, the feeling born from the condition of eye-contact and so on up to the feeling born from the condition of mind-contact truly existed—were not false, not changing, true and real, not inverted, permanent, without the mark of destruction, and not non-existent dharmas—this Mahāyāna could not surpass all the world as well as gods, humans, and asuras. Subhūti! Precisely because everything from the eye and so on up to the feeling born from the condition of mind-contact exists by way of false recollection, imagining, and discrimination, of coming together, and of names and the like, and is wholly the mark of impermanence and destruction, non-existent dharmas, therefore the Mahāyāna surpasses all the world as well as gods, humans, and asuras.’

Dharma-Nature, Suchness, the Limit of Reality, the Nature of the Inconceivable: It Surpasses Because They Are Non-existent Dharmas and Non-dharmas

‘Subhūti! If dharma-nature were an existent dharma and not a non-existent dharma, this Mahāyāna could not surpass all the world as well as gods, humans, and asuras; Subhūti! Precisely because dharma-nature is a non-existent dharma and a non-dharma, therefore the Mahāyāna surpasses all the world as well as gods, humans, and asuras. Subhūti! If suchness, the limit of reality, and the nature of the inconceivable were existent dharmas and not non-existent dharmas, this Mahāyāna could not surpass all the world as well as gods, humans, and asuras; Subhūti! Precisely because suchness, the limit of reality, and the nature of the inconceivable are non-existent dharmas and non-dharmas, therefore the Mahāyāna surpasses all the world as well as gods, humans, and asuras.’

The Six Perfections Themselves Are Also Non-existent Dharmas and Non-dharmas

‘Subhūti! If dānapāramitā were an existent dharma and not a non-existent dharma, this Mahāyāna could not surpass all the world as well as gods, humans, and asuras; precisely because dānapāramitā is a non-existent dharma and a non-dharma, therefore the Mahāyāna surpasses all the world as well as gods, humans, and asuras. If śīlapāramitā, kṣāntipāramitā, vīryapāramitā, dhyānapāramitā, and prajñāpāramitā were existent dharmas and not non-existent dharmas, this Mahāyāna could not surpass all the world as well as gods, humans, and asuras; precisely because śīlapāramitā and so on up to prajñāpāramitā are non-existent dharmas and non-dharmas, therefore the Mahāyāna surpasses all the world as well as gods, humans, and asuras.’

Inner Emptiness and So On Up to the Emptiness of Non-existent and Existent Dharmas Are Likewise

‘Subhūti! If inner emptiness and so on up to the emptiness of non-existent and existent dharmas were existent dharmas and not non-existent dharmas, this Mahāyāna could not surpass all the world as well as gods, humans, and asuras; precisely because inner emptiness and so on up to the emptiness of non-existent and existent dharmas are non-existent dharmas and non-dharmas, therefore the Mahāyāna surpasses all the world as well as gods, humans, and asuras.’

The Four Foundations of Mindfulness and So On Up to the Eighteen Unshared Dharmas Are Likewise

‘Subhūti! If the four foundations of mindfulness and so on up to the eighteen unshared dharmas were existent dharmas and not non-existent dharmas, this Mahāyāna could not surpass all the world as well as gods, humans, and asuras; precisely because the four foundations of mindfulness and so on up to the eighteen unshared dharmas are non-existent dharmas and non-dharmas, therefore the Mahāyāna surpasses all the world as well as gods, humans, and asuras.’

The Dharma of the Person of Nature, the Dharma of the Person of the Eight, and So On Up to the Buddha's Dharma: The Dharmas Accomplished by the Worthy and the Noble Are No Exception

‘Subhūti! If the dharma of the person of nature were an existent dharma and not a non-existent dharma, this Mahāyāna could not surpass all the world as well as gods, humans, and asuras; precisely because the dharma of the person of nature is a non-existent dharma and a non-dharma, therefore the Mahāyāna surpasses all the world as well as gods, humans, and asuras. Subhūti! If the dharma of the person of the eight, the dharma of the srota-āpanna, the dharma of the sakṛdāgāmin, the dharma of the anāgāmin, the dharma of the arhat, the dharma of the pratyekabuddha, and the Buddha's dharma were existent dharmas and not non-existent dharmas, this Mahāyāna could not surpass all the world as well as gods, humans, and asuras; precisely because the dharma of the person of the eight and so on up to the Buddha's dharma are non-existent dharmas and non-dharmas, therefore the Mahāyāna surpasses all the world as well as gods, humans, and asuras.’

The Person of Nature, the Person of the Eight, and So On Up to the Buddha: The Worthy and the Noble Themselves Are No Exception

‘Subhūti! If the person of nature were an existent dharma and not a non-existent dharma, this Mahāyāna could not surpass all the world as well as gods, humans, and asuras. Precisely because the person of nature is a non-existent dharma and a non-dharma, therefore the Mahāyāna surpasses all the world as well as gods, humans, and asuras. Subhūti! If the person of the eight, and the srota-āpanna and so on up to the Buddha, were existent dharmas and not non-existent dharmas, this Mahāyāna could not surpass all the world as well as gods, humans, and asuras; precisely because the person of the eight and so on up to the Buddha are non-existent dharmas and non-dharmas, therefore the Mahāyāna surpasses all the world as well as gods, humans, and asuras.’

Even the World It Surpasses, and the Gods, Humans, and Asuras Themselves, Are Non-existent Dharmas and Non-dharmas

‘Subhūti! If all the world as well as gods, humans, and asuras were existent dharmas and not non-existent dharmas, this Mahāyāna could not surpass all the world as well as gods, humans, and asuras; precisely because all the world as well as gods, humans, and asuras are non-existent dharmas and non-dharmas, therefore the Mahāyāna surpasses all the world as well as gods, humans, and asuras.’

All the Minds of the Bodhisattva from the First Arousing of the Mind to the Seat of Awakening

‘Subhūti! If the various minds of the bodhisattva-mahāsattva in between—from the very first arousing of the mind all the way to the seat of awakening—truly were existent dharmas and not non-existent dharmas, this Mahāyāna could not surpass all the world as well as gods, humans, and asuras; precisely because the various minds of the bodhisattva from the very first arousing of the mind all the way to the seat of awakening are non-existent dharmas and non-dharmas, therefore the Mahāyāna surpasses all the world as well as gods, humans, and asuras.’

Wisdom Like Vajra: Able to Know the Fetters and Their Residues, and to Attain the Omniscience of All Kinds

‘Subhūti! If the vajra-like wisdom of the bodhisattva-mahāsattva were an existent dharma and not a non-existent dharma, this bodhisattva-mahāsattva could not know that all fetters and their habitual residues are non-existent dharmas and non-dharmas, and could not attain the omniscience of all kinds; Subhūti! Precisely because the vajra-like wisdom of the bodhisattva-mahāsattva is a non-existent dharma and a non-dharma, the bodhisattva is able to know that all fetters and their habitual residues are non-existent dharmas and non-dharmas, and attains the omniscience of all kinds; therefore the Mahāyāna surpasses all the world as well as gods, humans, and asuras.’

The Thirty-two Marks of the Buddhas: Because They Are Non-existent Dharmas and Non-dharmas, Their Majestic Virtue Shines Forth

‘Subhūti! If the thirty-two marks of the Buddhas were existent dharmas and not non-existent dharmas, the majestic virtue of the Buddhas could not shine forth resplendent and surpass all the world as well as gods, humans, and asuras; Subhūti! Precisely because the thirty-two marks of the Buddhas are non-existent dharmas and non-dharmas, therefore the majestic virtue of the Buddhas shines forth resplendent, surpassing all the world as well as gods, humans, and asuras.’

The Light of the Buddhas: Because It Is a Non-existent Dharma and a Non-dharma, It Shines Everywhere on Worlds as Many as the Sands of the Ganges

‘Subhūti! If the light of the Buddhas were an existent dharma and not a non-existent dharma, the light of the Buddhas could not shine everywhere on worlds as many as the sands of the Ganges; Subhūti! Precisely because the light of the Buddhas is a non-existent dharma and a non-dharma, therefore the Buddhas are able with their light to shine everywhere on worlds as many as the sands of the Ganges.’

The Voice Adorned in Sixty Ways: Because It Is a Non-existent Dharma and a Non-dharma, It Reaches Throughout the Ten Directions

‘Subhūti! If the voice of the Buddhas adorned in sixty ways were an existent dharma and not a non-existent dharma, the Buddhas could not, with the voice adorned in sixty ways, reach throughout the immeasurable asaṃkhyeya worlds of the ten directions; Subhūti! Precisely because the voice of the Buddhas adorned in sixty ways is a non-existent dharma and a non-dharma, therefore the Buddhas are able, with the voice adorned in sixty ways, to reach throughout the immeasurable asaṃkhyeya worlds of the ten directions.’

The Dharma-Wheel of the Buddhas and the Beings They Deliver: Because They Are Non-existent Dharmas and Non-dharmas, the Wheel Can Be Turned and the Beings Can Be Extinguished

‘Subhūti! If the dharma-wheel of the Buddhas were an existent dharma and not a non-existent dharma, the Buddhas could not turn the dharma-wheel which śramaṇas, brahmins, whether gods, whether Māras, whether Brahmās, and the rest of the multitudes of the world cannot turn in accordance with the Dharma; Subhūti! Precisely because the dharma-wheel of the Buddhas is a non-existent dharma and a non-dharma, therefore the Buddhas turn this dharma-wheel which śramaṇas, brahmins, whether gods, whether Māras, whether Brahmās, and the rest of the multitudes of the world cannot turn in accordance with the Dharma. Subhūti! The Buddhas turn the dharma-wheel for beings; if these beings truly were existent dharmas and not non-existent dharmas, they could not cause these beings to attain parinirvāṇa in nirvāṇa without remainder; Subhūti! Precisely because the Buddhas turn the dharma-wheel for beings and these beings are non-existent dharmas and non-dharmas, therefore beings, within nirvāṇa without remainder, have already been extinguished, are now being extinguished, and will be extinguished.’

What follows is the treatise's explanation.

Following the Five Earlier Questions: Subhūti Rejoices and Praises the Great Power and Force of the Mahāyāna

The treatise-author says: Earlier Subhūti asked about the Mahāyāna by way of five matters, and the Buddha has already answered them all. Subhūti, rejoicing, praises it, speaking thus: ‘World-Honored One! This Mahāyāna has great power and force; having destroyed the world of humans and gods, it is able to surpass it from within.’

The Simile of the Three Persons Crossing a Perilous Road: Fleeing by Night, Seeking Release with Money, a Great King Leading a Great Army

It is like three persons crossing a perilous road: the first person flees under cover of night and gets only his own body away; the second person uses money and wealth to seek release; the third person is like a great king leading a great army and its troops, who crushes the bandits, and the whole army crosses over safely, without fear or hardship.

Matching the Three Vehicles to the Three Similes: Their Paths of Skilful Means Differ, and So the Mahāyāna Alone Is Praised

The three vehicles are also like this. Take the arhat: he cannot know the general mark and the specific marks of all dharmas, nor can he defeat the Māra king, nor again can he subdue those of the outside paths; he only feels revulsion at old age, sickness, and death, and heads straight for nirvāṇa. Take the pratyekabuddha: he enters the real mark of all dharmas more deeply than the śrāvaka, has a little compassion, and by the power of supernormal abilities transforms and delivers beings; he can defeat the afflictions, but cannot defeat Māra's people and those of the outside paths. Take the bodhisattva: from the very first arousing of the mind he gives rise to great loving-kindness and compassion toward all beings; although he has not yet become a Buddha, in the meantime he already benefits immeasurable beings; because he knows with certainty the real mark of all dharmas and is complete in the six perfections, he can defeat the Māra kings and can also crush those of the outside paths; he cuts off the afflictions and their habitual residues, is complete in the omniscience of all kinds, knows the general mark and the specific marks entirely and understands them entirely, and accomplishes anuttarā samyaksaṃbodhi (unsurpassed, right, and complete awakening). Although all three persons have escaped birth and death, the paths of skilful means they travel are each different. Precisely because of this, Subhūti praises the Mahāyāna: ‘It crushes all the world and surpasses and rises above humans, gods, and asuras.’

Two Similes of Space: Containing and Receiving Without Being Exhausted; No Entering, No Leaving, No Abiding

It is like space containing and receiving all lands, yet because it is space, it is not exhausted; the Mahāyāna is also like this: it contains and receives the Buddhas of the three times and the disciples of the Buddhas, and the Mahāyāna too does not become full.

Again, it is like space: because it is of the mark of permanence, it has no mark of entering, no mark of leaving, and no mark of abiding; this vehicle is also like this: it has no place of entering in the future time, no place of leaving in the past time, and no place of abiding in the present time; because it has broken through the three times and is equal in the three times, it is named the Mahāyāna.

Why the Buddha Does Not Merely Say ‘Excellent’ Once: First Briefly Stating the Mark of the Mahāyāna

Someone asks: The Buddha ought to approve the words Subhūti praised and simply say 「善哉」 tr. "Excellent!"; why does he go on to speak of the Mahāyāna again?

The treatise-author answers: The Buddha wishes precisely to follow what Subhūti praised and add his own praise; and also, because the place where the Mahāyāna was spoken of earlier is already far away, he now first briefly states the mark of the Mahāyāna, and afterwards expounds it at length.

The Mahāyāna that Subhūti praised is the six perfections, the dhāraṇī gates, the samādhi gates, the eighteen emptinesses, the four foundations of mindfulness and so on up to the eighteen unshared dharmas, and the like.

The Three Realms Are False and Deceptive, Like an Illusion, Like a Dream: Because It Runs Counter to Them and Their Power Is Not Equal, It Can Crush Them

As Subhūti said, 「摩訶衍破壞一切世間，勝出於人、天、阿修羅之上」 tr. "the Mahāyāna destroys all the world and surpasses and rises above humans, gods, and asuras"—this matter is indeed so. Why? Because these three realms are false and deceptive, like an illusion, like a dream; they exist by reason of ignorance and falsity, by reason of causes and conditions; neither cause nor effect has a fixed real substance; all is impermanent, breaking apart, wearing away—wholly the mark of emptiness. Precisely because the Mahāyāna runs counter to the three realms, it can crush them and surpass them. If the three realms were fixed and truly existent, permanent, and not false, this Mahāyāna could not crush them and surpass them. Why? Because in that case the power of the two sides would be equal.

The five aggregates, the twelve sense-fields, the eighteen elements, and the feelings born from the six contacts are also like this. If dharma-nature were an existent dharma and not a non-existent dharma, the Mahāyāna could not defeat the world and attain surpassing; Subhūti! Precisely because dharma-nature is not existent, the Mahāyāna is able to surpass the world.

Why the Unconditioned Real Dharmas Are Also Said Not to Exist: Because the Unconditioned Is Empty, It Is Said Not to Exist

Someone asks: Conditioned dharmas, because they are the coming together of causes and conditions, false and deceptive and not real, are said not to exist; but suchness, dharma-nature, the limit of reality, and the nature of the inconceivable are unconditioned real dharmas, named the limit of reality—how can they too be said not to exist?

The treatise-author answers: Because the unconditioned too is empty, it is said not to exist.

Furthermore, the Buddha has said: ‘Apart from the conditioned, the unconditioned dharma is unfindable; the real mark of conditioned dharmas is itself the unconditioned dharma.’

Furthermore, this contemplation regards these conditioned dharmas as false and deceptive, while such things as 「如、法性、實際」 tr. "suchness, dharma-nature, the limit of reality" are real; because people grasp at marks with regard to dharma-nature and give rise to disputes, it is therefore said: 「沒有法性」 tr. "there is no dharma-nature". Whether one says 「有」 tr. "existent" or says 「無」 tr. "non-existent", each has its own causes and conditions, and so neither is at fault. Suchness, the limit of reality, and the nature of the inconceivable are also like this.

Saying ‘Existent’ and Saying ‘Non-existent’ Each Have Their Causes and Conditions: From Dānapāramitā and So On Up to Beings

Worldly dānapāramitā, because there is clinging in it, is existent; supramundane dānapāramitā, because it lacks this clinging, is empty. In order to refute stinginess, it is said: 「有檀波羅蜜」 tr. "there is dānapāramitā"; in order to refute wrong view, it is said: 「檀波羅蜜是無」 tr. "dānapāramitā is non-existent". To deliver beginners, one says 「有」 tr. "existent"; within the mind of the noble ones, one says 「無」 tr. "non-existent".

As with dānapāramitā, so too all the way up to beings—if beings were truly existent and not non-existent dharmas, one ought not to force them to cease and enter nirvāṇa without remainder.

Why "Surpassing" Is Not Said After the Thirty-two Marks: The Wording Would Be Cumbersome; Only the Names Differ

Someone asks: From the thirty-two marks onward, why is the phrase 「摩訶衍勝出」 tr. "the Mahāyāna surpasses" not said again?

The treatise-author answers: It ought to be said; only because the wording would be cumbersome is it not said.

Furthermore, the thirty-two marks and so on up to turning the dharma-wheel for beings are all the Mahāyāna too; only the names differ.

Surpassing Told by Specific Marks: The Fourfold Excellence of the Marks and Minor Marks, the Light, the Voice, and the Dharma-Wheel

Furthermore, above, the surpassing of the Mahāyāna was spoken of in terms of the general mark, and it was not yet known just how it surpasses; now it is spoken of in terms of the specific marks: namely, the Buddha adorns his body with the thirty-two marks, and so surpasses all beings; the light of the Buddha surpasses all the light of the sun and moon and of the gods; the voice of the Buddha surpasses all music, the wondrous sounds of the world, and the Brahmā-voices of the gods; the dharma-wheel of the Buddha surpasses the precious wheel of the wheel-turning sage king and all the dharma-wheels of those of the outside paths, without obstruction and without hindrance. The benefit given by other dharma-wheels is meagre, shallow, and short—perhaps one life, two lives, at most ten million lives; the dharma-wheel of the Buddha, however, can make people enter nirvāṇa without remainder forever, never again returning into birth and death.

If Beings Truly Existed, Leading Them into Nirvāṇa Would Instead Become a Great Fault

Furthermore, if beings truly existed, the Buddha ought not to make beings enter nirvāṇa and pull out their root forever—this would be more serious than killing a single bodily life; there would be such a great fault. Precisely because beings, with inverted minds, see that there is a 「我」 tr. "self", and the Buddha wishes to refute their inversion, he speaks of 「涅槃」 tr. "nirvāṇa"; in fact there are no beings to be extinguished, and so there is no fault.

Having such merits, the Mahāyāna is able to surpass all the world.

Why, Among the Six Destinies, Only Gods, Humans, and Asuras Are Mentioned

Someone asks: What is called 「一切世間」 tr. "all the world" is the beings of the six destinies in the ten directions; why is it said to surpass only gods, humans, and asuras?

The treatise-author answers: Among the six destinies, three are good destinies and three are evil destinies. The Mahāyāna can defeat and surpass even the three good destinies—how much more the evil destinies!

The Difficulty of Nāgas Attaining the Bodhisattva Path: Few Attain the Path, or They Are Transformations of Bodhisattvas

Someone asks: The Nāga King Sūtra says that nāgas can attain the bodhisattva path; why then are nāgas still said to be an evil destiny?

The treatise-author answers: Beings are immeasurable and boundless; among nāgas, those who attain the path are few.

Furthermore, some also say: ‘It is great bodhisattvas who, in order to teach and transform, transform their bodily form and take on the body of a nāga king.’

The Buddha Confirms "The Vehicle Is Equal to Space": No Directions, Neither Long nor Short, Square nor Round, None of the Five Colours

The Buddha told Subhūti: ‘What you said, "The vehicle is equal to space"—so it is! So it is! Subhūti! The Mahāyāna (the Great Vehicle) is equal to space.

‘Subhūti! Just as space has no east, has no south, west, or north, has no four intermediate directions (the four corners), no above and no below—Subhūti! the Mahāyāna is also like this: it has no east, has no south, west, or north, has no four intermediate directions, no above and no below.

‘Subhūti! Just as space is not long, not short, not square, not round—Subhūti! the Mahāyāna is also like this: not long, not short, not square, not round.

‘Subhūti! Just as space is not blue, not yellow, not red, not white, not black, the Mahāyāna is also like this: not blue, not yellow, not red, not white, not black. Precisely because of this, it is said that the Mahāyāna is equal to space.’

Not the Three Times; Neither Increasing nor Decreasing; Neither stained nor pure; Without the Four Marks; Neither Good nor Determinate

‘Subhūti! Just as space is not past, not future, not present, the Mahāyāna is also like this: not past, not future, not present. Precisely because of this, it is said that the Mahāyāna is equal to space.

‘Subhūti! Just as space does not increase and does not decrease, the Mahāyāna is also like this: neither increasing nor decreasing.

‘Subhūti! Just as space has without stain and without purity, the Mahāyāna is also like this: without defilement and without purity.

‘Subhūti! Just as space has no arising, no ceasing, no abiding, no changing, the Mahāyāna is also like this: without arising, without ceasing, without abiding, without changing.

‘Subhūti! Just as space is not good, not not-good, is not determinate, and is also not indeterminate (‘determinate’ means that it can be marked off as good or evil), the Mahāyāna is also like this: not good, not not-good, not determinate, not indeterminate. Precisely because of this, it is said that the Mahāyāna is equal to space.’

Without Seeing, Hearing, Knowing, or Cognising; Unknowable and Unrealisable; Neither Defiled nor Detached; Not Bound to the Three Realms

‘Just as space has no seeing, no hearing, no knowing, no cognising, the Mahāyāna is also like this: without seeing, without hearing, without knowing, without cognising.

‘Just as space cannot be known, cannot be cognised, cannot be seen, cannot be cut off, cannot be realised, cannot be cultivated, the Mahāyāna is also like this: it cannot be known, cannot be cognised, cannot be seen, cannot be cut off, cannot be realised, cannot be cultivated. Precisely because of this, it is said that the Mahāyāna is equal to space.

‘Just as space is not a mark of defilement and also not a mark of separation from defilement, the Mahāyāna is also like this: not a mark of defilement, not a mark of separation.

‘Just as space is not bound to the desire realm, not bound to the form realm, not bound to the formless realm, the Mahāyāna is also like this: not bound to the desire realm, not bound to the form realm, not bound to the formless realm.’

Without the Ten Minds or the Ten Stages, Without the Four Fruits, Without the Stages of the Three Vehicles

‘Just as space has no first arousing of the mind, and also no second, third, fourth, fifth, sixth, seventh, eighth, ninth, or tenth mind, the Mahāyāna is also like this: it has no first arousing of the mind, and so on up to no tenth mind.

‘Just as space has no ground of dry wisdom, ground of the stage of nature, ground of the person of the eight, ground of seeing, ground of thinning, ground of freedom from desire, or ground of what has been accomplished, the Mahāyāna is also like this: it has no ground of dry wisdom, and so on up to no ground of what has been done.

‘Just as space has no fruit of the srota-āpanna, no fruit of the sakṛdāgāmin, no fruit of the anāgāmin, no fruit of the arhat, the Mahāyāna is also like this: it has no fruit of the srota-āpanna, and so on up to no fruit of the arhat.

‘Just as space has no śrāvaka ground, no pratyekabuddha ground, no Buddha ground, the Mahāyāna is also like this: it has no śrāvaka ground, and so on up to no Buddha ground. Precisely because of this, it is said that the Mahāyāna is equal to space.’

From "Neither Form nor Formless" to "Neither Speakable nor Unspeakable"

‘Just as space is not form and also not formless, not visible and also not invisible, not with resistance and also not without resistance, not uniting and also not scattering, the Mahāyāna is also like this: not form, not formless; not visible, not invisible; not with resistance, not without resistance; not uniting, not scattering. Precisely because of this, it is said that the Mahāyāna is equal to space.

‘Subhūti! Just as space is not permanent and also not impermanent, not pleasure and also not suffering, not self and also not non-self, the Mahāyāna is also like this: not permanent, not impermanent; not pleasure, not suffering; not self, not non-self. Precisely because of this, it is said that the Mahāyāna is equal to space.

‘Subhūti! Just as space is not empty and also not non-empty, not with marks and also not signless, not with action and also not without action, the Mahāyāna is also like this: not empty, not non-empty; not a mark, not signless; not action, not non-action. Precisely because of this, it is said that the Mahāyāna is equal to space.

‘Subhūti! Just as space is not quiescent and also not non-quiescent, not detached and also not non-detached, the Mahāyāna is also like this: not quiescent, not non-quiescent; not detached, not non-detached. Precisely because of this, it is said that the Mahāyāna is equal to space.

‘Subhūti! Just as space is not darkness and also not light, the Mahāyāna is also like this: not darkness, not light. Precisely because of this, it is said that the Mahāyāna is equal to space.

‘Subhūti! Just as space is not findable and also not unfindable, the Mahāyāna is also like this: not findable, not unfindable. Precisely because of this, it is said that the Mahāyāna is equal to space.

‘Subhūti! Just as space is not speakable and also not unspeakable, the Mahāyāna is also like this: not speakable, not unspeakable. Precisely because of this, it is said that the Mahāyāna is equal to space.

‘Subhūti! For these causes and conditions of all kinds, it is said that the Mahāyāna is equal to space.’

What follows is the treatise's explanation.

The Treatise-Author's Summary, with Question and Answer: How Can the Conditioned Mahāyāna Be Equal to Space?

The treatise-author says: Subhūti praised the Mahāyāna as being like space, and the Buddha then set it out at length and established what he had praised: just as space has no ten directions, this Mahāyāna too has no ten directions; space has no marks of long and short, square and round, blue, yellow, red, white, and the like, and this Mahāyāna is also like this.

Question: It is fitting that space should be so, because it is an unconditioned dharma, without form and without location; but the Mahāyāna is a conditioned dharma, a dharma of form—namely giving, keeping the precepts, and so on—so how can it be said to be ‘equal to space’?

Answer: The six perfections are of two kinds: worldly and supramundane. The worldly six perfections are conditioned dharmas, dharmas of form, and are not the same as space; the supramundane six perfections, because they are joined together with suchness, dharma-nature, the limit of reality, and wisdom, resemble space. From the attainment of the acceptance of non-arising onward, there is nothing discriminated, and so it is just like space.

Furthermore, it is like the Buddha, who with unobstructed wisdom contemplates the real mark of all dharmas as being like space; the rest cannot do so, because their wisdom is not yet ultimately pure.

Furthermore, the Buddha, earlier and later, has said again and again that ‘all dharmas are ultimately empty, like the mark of nirvāṇa without remainder, like space’; one should not give rise to doubt about this. The remaining dharmas are also like this, up to ‘like space, neither spoken nor not spoken’, which is also like this.

Saying "Nothing Whatsoever" Once Would Suffice; Why Also Say It Lacks All Kinds of Marks?

Question: Of something like space, saying just ‘nothing whatsoever’ once would be enough; why also say that it has none of all these kinds of marks?

Answer: Bodhisattvas who have first aroused the mind give rise to a clinging mind toward the dharmas of all kinds of inner and outer causes and conditions; precisely because of this, the Buddha says that just as space has none of these kinds of marks, the Mahāyāna is also like this.

The Buddha Confirms "Space Receives Immeasurable Beings": Beings, Space, and the Mahāyāna Are All Unfindable

The sūtra goes on to say: ‘Subhūti! As for what you said, "Just as space contains and receives immeasurable, boundless, asaṃkhyeya (innumerable) beings, the Mahāyāna too contains and receives immeasurable, boundless, asaṃkhyeya beings"—so it is! So it is! Subhūti! Because beings are nothing whatsoever, know that space is nothing whatsoever; because space is nothing whatsoever, know that the Mahāyāna too is nothing whatsoever. For this cause and condition, the Mahāyāna contains and receives immeasurable, boundless, asaṃkhyeya beings. Why? Because beings, space, and the Mahāyāna—these dharmas are all unfindable.

‘Furthermore, Subhūti! Because the Mahāyāna is nothing whatsoever, know that asaṃkhyeya is nothing whatsoever; because asaṃkhyeya is nothing whatsoever, know that the immeasurable is nothing whatsoever; because the immeasurable is nothing whatsoever, know that the boundless is nothing whatsoever; because the boundless is nothing whatsoever, know that all dharmas are nothing whatsoever. For this cause and condition, Subhūti! this Mahāyāna contains and receives immeasurable, boundless, asaṃkhyeya beings. Why? Because beings, space, the Mahāyāna, asaṃkhyeya, the immeasurable, the boundless—all these dharmas are unfindable.’

The Nine "Furthermores", One to Three: Suchness, Dharma-Nature, and the Limit of Reality; the Nature of the Inconceivable; the Eye up to the Mind

‘Furthermore, Subhūti! Because the self is nothing whatsoever, and so on up to the knower and the seer being nothing whatsoever, know that suchness, dharma-nature, and the limit of reality are nothing whatsoever; because suchness, dharma-nature, and the limit of reality are nothing whatsoever, know that, and so on up to, the immeasurable, the boundless, and asaṃkhyeya are nothing whatsoever; because the immeasurable, the boundless, and asaṃkhyeya are nothing whatsoever, know that all dharmas are nothing whatsoever. For this cause and condition, Subhūti! the Mahāyāna contains and receives immeasurable, boundless, asaṃkhyeya beings. Why? Because beings, and so on up to the knower and the seer, and the limit of reality, and so on up to the immeasurable, the boundless, and asaṃkhyeya—all these dharmas are unfindable.

‘Furthermore, Subhūti! Because the self is nothing whatsoever, and so on up to the knower and the seer being nothing whatsoever, know that the nature of the inconceivable is nothing whatsoever; because the nature of the inconceivable is nothing whatsoever, know that form, feeling, perception, constructions, and consciousness are nothing whatsoever; because form, feeling, perception, constructions, and consciousness are nothing whatsoever, know that space is nothing whatsoever; because space is nothing whatsoever, know that the Mahāyāna is nothing whatsoever; because the Mahāyāna is nothing whatsoever, know that asaṃkhyeya is nothing whatsoever; because asaṃkhyeya is nothing whatsoever, know that the immeasurable is nothing whatsoever; because the immeasurable is nothing whatsoever, know that the boundless is nothing whatsoever; because the boundless is nothing whatsoever, know that all dharmas are nothing whatsoever. For this cause and condition, Subhūti! know that the Mahāyāna contains and receives immeasurable, boundless, asaṃkhyeya beings. Why? Subhūti! Because the self, and so on up to the knower, the seer, and all other dharmas, are unfindable.

‘Furthermore, Subhūti! Because the self is nothing whatsoever, and so on up to the knower and the seer being nothing whatsoever, know that the eye is nothing whatsoever, and that the ear, nose, tongue, body, and mind are nothing whatsoever; because the eye up to the mind is nothing whatsoever, know that space is nothing whatsoever; because space is nothing whatsoever, know that the Mahāyāna is nothing whatsoever; because the Mahāyāna is nothing whatsoever, know that asaṃkhyeya is nothing whatsoever; because asaṃkhyeya is nothing whatsoever, know that the immeasurable is nothing whatsoever; because the immeasurable is nothing whatsoever, know that the boundless is nothing whatsoever; because the boundless is nothing whatsoever, know that all dharmas are nothing whatsoever. For this cause and condition, Subhūti! the Mahāyāna contains and receives immeasurable, boundless, asaṃkhyeya beings. Why? Subhūti! Because the self, and so on up to all dharmas, are unfindable.’

The Nine "Furthermores", Four to Six: The Six Perfections; the Eighteen Emptinesses; the Four Foundations of Mindfulness up to the Eighteen Unshared Dharmas

‘Furthermore, Subhūti! Because the self is nothing whatsoever, and so on up to the knower and the seer being nothing whatsoever, know that dānapāramitā (the perfection of giving) is nothing whatsoever, and that śīlapāramitā (the perfection of morality), kṣāntipāramitā (the perfection of patience), vīryapāramitā (the perfection of vigour), dhyānapāramitā (the perfection of meditation), and prajñāpāramitā (the perfection of wisdom) are nothing whatsoever; because prajñāpāramitā is nothing whatsoever, know that space is nothing whatsoever; because space is nothing whatsoever, know that the Mahāyāna is nothing whatsoever; because the Mahāyāna is nothing whatsoever, know that the immeasurable, the boundless, and asaṃkhyeya are nothing whatsoever; because the immeasurable, the boundless, and asaṃkhyeya are nothing whatsoever, know that all dharmas are nothing whatsoever. For this cause and condition, Subhūti! the Mahāyāna contains and receives immeasurable, boundless, asaṃkhyeya beings. Why? Because the self, beings, and so on up to all dharmas, are unfindable.

‘Furthermore, Subhūti! Because the self is nothing whatsoever, and so on up to the knower and the seer being nothing whatsoever, know that inner emptiness is nothing whatsoever, and so on up to the emptiness of non-existent and existent dharmas being nothing whatsoever; because the emptiness of non-existent and existent dharmas is nothing whatsoever, know that space is nothing whatsoever; because space is nothing whatsoever, know that the Mahāyāna is nothing whatsoever; because the Mahāyāna is nothing whatsoever, know that asaṃkhyeya, the immeasurable, and the boundless are nothing whatsoever; because asaṃkhyeya, the immeasurable, and the boundless are nothing whatsoever, know that all dharmas are nothing whatsoever. For this cause and condition, Subhūti! the Mahāyāna contains and receives immeasurable, boundless, asaṃkhyeya beings. Why? Because the self, beings, and so on up to all dharmas, are unfindable.

‘Furthermore, Subhūti! Because the self, beings, and so on up to the knower and the seer, are nothing whatsoever, know that the four foundations of mindfulness are nothing whatsoever; because the four foundations of mindfulness are nothing whatsoever, and so on up to, the eighteen unshared dharmas are nothing whatsoever; because the eighteen unshared dharmas are nothing whatsoever, know that space is nothing whatsoever; because space is nothing whatsoever, know that the Mahāyāna is nothing whatsoever; because the Mahāyāna is nothing whatsoever, know that asaṃkhyeya, the immeasurable, and the boundless are nothing whatsoever; because asaṃkhyeya, the immeasurable, and the boundless are nothing whatsoever, know that all dharmas are nothing whatsoever. For this cause and condition, Subhūti! this Mahāyāna contains and receives immeasurable, boundless, asaṃkhyeya beings. Why? Because the self, beings, and so on up to all dharmas, are unfindable.’

The Nine "Furthermores", Seven to Nine: The Stage of Nature up to the Stage of What Has Been Done; the Four Fruits; the Three Vehicles up to the Omniscience of All Kinds

‘Furthermore, Subhūti! Because the self and beings are nothing whatsoever, and so on up to the knower and the seer being nothing whatsoever, know that the ground of the stage of nature is nothing whatsoever, and so on up to the ground of what has been done being nothing whatsoever; because the ground of what has been done is nothing whatsoever, know that space is nothing whatsoever; because space is nothing whatsoever, know that the Mahāyāna is nothing whatsoever; because the Mahāyāna is nothing whatsoever, know that asaṃkhyeya, the immeasurable, and the boundless are nothing whatsoever; because asaṃkhyeya, the immeasurable, and the boundless are nothing whatsoever, know that all dharmas are nothing whatsoever. For this cause and condition, this Mahāyāna contains and receives immeasurable, boundless, asaṃkhyeya beings. Why? Because the self, beings, and so on up to all dharmas, are unfindable.

‘Furthermore, Subhūti! Because the self, beings, and so on up to the knower and the seer, are nothing whatsoever, know that the srota-āpanna is nothing whatsoever; because the srota-āpanna is nothing whatsoever, know that the sakṛdāgāmin is nothing whatsoever; because the sakṛdāgāmin is nothing whatsoever, know that the anāgāmin is nothing whatsoever; because the anāgāmin is nothing whatsoever, know that the arhat is nothing whatsoever; because the arhat is nothing whatsoever, know that, and so on up to, all dharmas are nothing whatsoever. For this cause and condition, Subhūti! the Mahāyāna contains and receives immeasurable, boundless, asaṃkhyeya beings. Why? Subhūti! Because the self, and so on up to all dharmas, are unfindable.

‘Furthermore, Subhūti! Because the self, and so on up to the knower and the seer, are nothing whatsoever, know that the śrāvaka vehicle is nothing whatsoever; because the śrāvaka vehicle is nothing whatsoever, know that the pratyekabuddha vehicle is nothing whatsoever; because the pratyekabuddha vehicle is nothing whatsoever, know that the Buddha vehicle is nothing whatsoever; because the Buddha vehicle is nothing whatsoever, know that the śrāvaka person is nothing whatsoever; because the śrāvaka person is nothing whatsoever, know that the srota-āpanna is nothing whatsoever; because the srota-āpanna is nothing whatsoever, and so on up to, the Buddha is nothing whatsoever; because the Buddha is nothing whatsoever, know that the omniscience of all kinds is nothing whatsoever; because the omniscience of all kinds is nothing whatsoever, know that space is nothing whatsoever; because space is nothing whatsoever, know that the Mahāyāna is nothing whatsoever; because the Mahāyāna is nothing whatsoever, know that, and so on up to, all dharmas are nothing whatsoever. For this cause and condition, the Mahāyāna contains and receives immeasurable, boundless, asaṃkhyeya beings. Why? Because the self, and so on up to all dharmas, are unfindable.’

Just as Within the Nature of Nirvāṇa Immeasurable Beings Are Received

‘It is just as, Subhūti! within the nature of nirvāṇa immeasurable, boundless, asaṃkhyeya beings are contained and received; this Mahāyāna too contains and receives immeasurable, boundless, asaṃkhyeya beings. For this cause and condition, Subhūti! just as space contains and receives immeasurable, boundless, asaṃkhyeya beings, this Mahāyāna is also like this: it contains and receives immeasurable, boundless, asaṃkhyeya beings.’

What follows is the treatise's explanation.

Why Not Say "It Can Receive Because It Is Vast", but Rather "It Can Receive Because It Is Nothing Whatsoever"?

Question: Why is it not said, ‘Space is vast and boundless, and therefore contains and receives all things’, but instead, ‘Space is nothing whatsoever, and therefore can contain and receive all things and beings; the Mahāyāna too is nothing whatsoever’?

Answer: It is plainly seen before us that space is nothing whatsoever, and yet all the myriad things are within it—precisely because it is nothing whatsoever, it can contain and receive.

Mind and Mental Factors Also Lack Form and Substance; Why Can They Not Receive All Things?

Question: The dharmas of mind and mental factors (the mind and its various mental activities) also have no form or substance; why can they not contain and receive all things?

Answer: The dharmas of mind and mental factors have the mark of awareness and knowing, not the mark of containing and receiving; moreover, they have no place of abiding—whether within or without, near or far—and it is only through the mark of discrimination that one knows there is mind. Dharmas that have shape and form have a place of abiding; it is because there is a place of form that one knows there is space. Because form does not contain and receive things, one knows that space contains and receives things; form and space run counter to each other—since form does not receive, one knows that space is what receives; just as it is because of ‘ignorance’ that one knows there is ‘clarity’, and because of suffering that one knows there is pleasure. It is because of the absence of form that space is said to exist; apart from this there is no other mark.

Furthermore, the dharmas of mind and mental factors also have a side that does not contain and receive: a mind that holds wrong view does not receive right view, and a mind that holds right view does not receive wrong view; space is not like this, because it contains and receives everything. Again, the dharmas of mind and mental factors have the mark of arising and ceasing and are dharmas that can be cut off; space is not like this.

The dharmas of mind and mental factors and space are alike only on this one point of being formless and shapeless; it cannot be said that they are entirely without difference. Precisely because of this, among all dharmas it is said that space can contain and receive everything.

Space Has No Own-Mark: Space Is Spoken of Only in Dependence on the Mark of Form

Question: What I meant by my earlier question was not this! Why is it not said, ‘Space is immeasurable and boundless and can contain and receive all things’, but instead, ‘What is nothing whatsoever contains and receives all things’?

Answer: I am saying that space has no own-mark; it is only in dependence on the mark of form that space is spoken of. If it has no own-mark, there is no space—how then could it still be said to be immeasurable and boundless?

Question: You say, ‘The mark of containing and receiving is space’; how can you also say ‘it does not exist’?

Answer: The mark of containing and receiving is the mark of the absence of form; the place that form does not reach is called space—precisely because of this, there is no space at all.

If space truly existed, then there should have been space even when there was not yet form! If there were already space when there was not yet form, space would be without a mark. Why? Because there was not yet form. It is because of form that one knows there is space; only when there is form is there what is called a place without form. If there were first form and afterwards space, space would be a made dharma; a made dharma is not called permanent.

If there were a dharma without a mark, it would be unfindable. Precisely because of this, there is no space at all.

Mark and Marked Both Have Nowhere to Abide: Cutting Off All Speech, Quiescent like Nirvāṇa

Question: Space exists permanently; it is only because of form that the mark of space appears, and afterwards this mark rests upon space.

Answer: If space was formerly without a mark, the later mark too has nothing to rest on and abide in.

If space already had a mark beforehand, that mark would have nothing marked for it to mark; if it was formerly without a mark, the mark too has nothing to rest on and abide in.

If, apart from having a mark and being without a mark, the mark has no place of abiding; if the mark has no place of abiding, the place that is marked does not exist either; if the place that is marked does not exist, the mark does not exist either; apart from the mark and the place the mark rests on, there is no other dharma.

Precisely because of this, space is not called a mark, not called the marked, not called a dharma, not called a non-dharma, not called existent, not called non-existent; it cuts off all kinds of speech and is quiescent like nirvāṇa without remainder. All other dharmas are also like this.

If All Dharmas Are Like This, Why Still Use Space as a Simile?

Question: If all dharmas are like this, then all dharmas are space; why still use space as a simile?

Answer: The causes and the fruits of all dharmas are false and deceptive; they exist because of ignorance and deceive the minds of beings. Beings give rise to clinging toward these dharmas, yet they do not give rise to clinging toward space; the dharmas of the six sense-objects deceive the minds of beings, and although space is likewise deceptive, it is not like that! Precisely because of this, space is taken as the simile—using a coarse matter, plainly before us, to refute a subtle matter hard to see.

Just as space exists because of form, has only a provisional name, and is no fixed dharma, beings too are like this: they exist because of the coming together of the five aggregates, have only a provisional name, and are likewise no fixed dharma. The Mahāyāna is also like this: in terms of the emptiness of beings, there is no Buddha and no bodhisattva; because there are beings, there are Buddhas and bodhisattvas; if there were no Buddha and no bodhisattva, there would be no Mahāyāna. Precisely because of this, the Mahāyāna can contain and receive immeasurable, boundless, asaṃkhyeya beings; if it were a really existent dharma, it could not contain and receive immeasurable Buddhas and their disciples.

If Space Truly Does Not Exist, How Can It Receive? The Buddha Himself States the Causes and Conditions of Receiving

Question: If there truly is no space, how can it contain and receive immeasurable, boundless, asaṃkhyeya beings?

Answer: Precisely because of this the Buddha says: ‘Because the Mahāyāna does not exist, asaṃkhyeya does not exist; because asaṃkhyeya does not exist, the immeasurable too does not exist; because the immeasurable does not exist, the boundless too does not exist; because the boundless does not exist, all dharmas too do not exist—precisely because of this, it can contain and receive.’

Explaining "Asaṃkhyeya", "Immeasurable", and "Boundless": Number Is Unfindable, like Measuring Things with a Bushel

As for ‘asaṃkhyeya’: ‘saṃkhyeya’ in the language of Qin is ‘number’; ‘a’ in the language of Qin is ‘without’. Beings and dharmas—for each of them no limit can be found, and so they are called ‘numberless’; counting the distances, near and far, of space in the ten directions, no limit can be found, and so it is called ‘numberless’. Counting the six perfections one by one—all kinds of giving, all kinds of keeping the precepts, and so on—there is no number that can count them; counting how many beings have already mounted this vehicle, will mount this vehicle, and now mount this vehicle, they cannot be counted through: this is what is called ‘numberless’.

Furthermore, some say: the first number is one, and in fact there is only one; one added to one is then called two—and reckoning on in this way, all of it is one, and there is no other way of numbering. If all of it is one, then there is no number.

Some say: all dharmas have names only through coming together, just as wheels, rims, spokes, and hubs come together and only then are called a carriage; there is no definitely real dharma. Since one dharma does not exist, many too do not exist, because first there is one and afterwards many.

Furthermore, number is bound to the things numbered; since the things numbered do not exist, number too does not exist.

As for ‘immeasurable’: it is like measuring things with a bushel and a steelyard; measuring all dharmas with wisdom is also like this. Because all dharmas are empty, they are numberless; being numberless, they are immeasurable and boundless. Since there is no real wisdom to be found, how could the fixed mark of dharmas be arrived at? Because they are immeasurable, they are boundless—‘measure’ speaks of the general mark, ‘bound’ speaks of the particular mark; ‘measure’ is the very beginning, ‘bound’ is the final end.

Furthermore, because the self, and so on up to the knower and the seer, do not exist, the limit of reality too does not exist; because the limit of reality does not exist, the numberless too does not exist; because the numberless does not exist, the immeasurable too does not exist; because the immeasurable does not exist, the boundless too does not exist; because the boundless does not exist, all dharmas too do not exist. Precisely because of this, all dharmas do not exist, and are ultimately pure.

Containing and Receiving All Beings and Dharmas: The Two Matters Are Causes of Each Other

This Mahāyāna can contain and receive (enclose and hold) all beings and dharmas; these two matters are causes of each other: if there were no beings there would be no dharmas, and if there were no dharmas there would be no beings.

First, in terms of the general mark, all dharmas are said to be empty; then, one by one and in particular, the dharmas are said to be empty. The limit of reality is the final, wondrous dharma; if even this dharma does not exist, how much less the other dharmas!

From the nature of the inconceivable up to ‘like the nature of nirvāṇa’, it is also like this.

The Buddha Confirms "No Place of Coming, Going, or Abiding Is Seen": Five Aspects of the Five Aggregates, Coming from Nowhere

The sūtra goes on to say: ‘Subhūti! As for what you said, "Of this Mahāyāna, no place of coming is seen, no place of going is seen, no place of abiding is seen"—so it is! So it is! Subhūti! Of this Mahāyāna, no place of coming is seen, no place of going is seen, no place of abiding is seen. Why? Subhūti! Because all dharmas have the unmoving mark, this dharma has no place of coming, no place of going, no place of abiding. Why? Subhūti! Form comes from nowhere, also goes nowhere, also abides nowhere; feeling, perception, constructions, and consciousness come from nowhere, also go nowhere, also abide nowhere. Subhūti! The dharma of form comes from nowhere, also goes nowhere, also abides nowhere; the dharma of feeling, perception, constructions, and consciousness comes from nowhere, also goes nowhere, also abides nowhere. Subhūti! The suchness of form comes from nowhere, also goes nowhere, also abides nowhere; the suchness of feeling, perception, constructions, and consciousness comes from nowhere, also goes nowhere, also abides nowhere.

‘Subhūti! The nature of form comes from nowhere, also goes nowhere, also abides nowhere; the nature of feeling, perception, constructions, and consciousness comes from nowhere, also goes nowhere, also abides nowhere. Subhūti! The mark of form comes from nowhere, also goes nowhere, also abides nowhere; the mark of feeling, perception, constructions, and consciousness comes from nowhere, also goes nowhere, also abides nowhere.’

Eye, Ear, Nose, Tongue, Body, Mind; Earth, Water, Fire, Wind, Space, Consciousness: Five Aspects for Each Category

‘Subhūti! The eye, the dharma of the eye, the suchness of the eye, the nature of the eye, the mark of the eye come from nowhere, also go nowhere, also abide nowhere; the ear, nose, tongue, body, and also the mind, the dharma of the mind, the suchness of the mind, the nature of the mind, the mark of the mind come from nowhere, also go nowhere, also abide nowhere. Forms, sounds, smells, tastes, tangibles, and dharmas are also like this.

‘Subhūti! The earth element, the dharma of the earth element, the suchness of the earth element, the nature of the earth element, the mark of the earth element come from nowhere, also go nowhere, also abide nowhere; water, fire, wind, space, and also the consciousness element, the dharma of the consciousness element, the suchness of the consciousness element, the nature of the consciousness element, the mark of the consciousness element are also like this.’

Suchness, the Limit of Reality, the Inconceivable, and the Six Perfections

‘Subhūti! Suchness, the dharma of suchness, the suchness of suchness, the nature of suchness, the mark of suchness come from nowhere, also go nowhere, also abide nowhere. Subhūti! The limit of reality, the dharma of the limit of reality, the suchness of the limit of reality, the nature of the limit of reality, the mark of the limit of reality come from nowhere, also go nowhere, also abide nowhere. Subhūti! The inconceivable, the dharma of the inconceivable, the suchness of the inconceivable, the nature of the inconceivable, the mark of the inconceivable come from nowhere, also go nowhere, also abide nowhere.

‘Subhūti! Dānapāramitā, the dharma of dānapāramitā, the suchness of dānapāramitā, the nature of dānapāramitā, the mark of dānapāramitā come from nowhere, also go nowhere, also abide nowhere; śīlapāramitā, kṣāntipāramitā, vīryapāramitā, dhyānapāramitā, and also prajñāpāramitā, the dharma of prajñāpāramitā, the suchness of prajñāpāramitā, the nature of prajñāpāramitā, the mark of prajñāpāramitā come from nowhere, also go nowhere, also abide nowhere.’

The Four Foundations of Mindfulness up to the Eighteen Unshared Dharmas; the Bodhisattva; the Buddha; Awakening; the Conditioned and the Unconditioned

‘Subhūti! The four foundations of mindfulness, the dharma of the four foundations of mindfulness, the suchness of the four foundations of mindfulness, the nature of the four foundations of mindfulness, the mark of the four foundations of mindfulness come from nowhere, also go nowhere, also abide nowhere; and so on up to the eighteen unshared dharmas, which are also like this.

‘Subhūti! The bodhisattva, the dharma of the bodhisattva, the suchness of the bodhisattva, the nature of the bodhisattva, the mark of the bodhisattva come from nowhere, also go nowhere, also abide nowhere.

‘The Buddha, the dharma of the Buddha, the suchness of the Buddha, the nature of the Buddha, the mark of the Buddha come from nowhere, also go nowhere, also abide nowhere.

‘Anuttarā samyaksaṃbodhi (unsurpassed, right, and complete awakening), and also the dharma, the suchness, the nature, and the mark of anuttarā samyaksaṃbodhi, come from nowhere, also go nowhere, also abide nowhere.

‘Subhūti! The conditioned dharma, the dharma of the conditioned dharma, the suchness of the conditioned dharma, the nature of the conditioned dharma, the mark of the conditioned dharma come from nowhere, also go nowhere, also abide nowhere. Subhūti! The unconditioned dharma, the dharma of the unconditioned dharma, the suchness of the unconditioned dharma, the nature of the unconditioned dharma, the mark of the unconditioned dharma come from nowhere, also go nowhere, also abide nowhere.

‘For this cause and condition, Subhūti! of this Mahāyāna no place of coming is seen, no place of going is seen, no place of abiding is seen.’

What follows is the treatise's explanation.

The Real Mark of All Dharmas Is Unmoving—Not Only the Mahāyāna

The treatise-author says: The Buddha is saying: ‘Subhūti! Why do you praise only the Mahāyāna as without coming, without going, without abiding? All dharmas too are likewise without coming, without going, without abiding, because the real mark of all dharmas is unmoving.’

Coming and Going Are Plainly Seen; How Can It Be Called Unmoving? Sought in the Three Times, Going Is Unfindable

Question: Dharmas are plainly seen before us to have coming and going; how can one speak of ‘the unmoving mark’ and ‘without coming and without going’?

Answer: The mark of coming and going has already been refuted before; now it is spoken of once more. Throughout the whole of the Buddha's dharma there is no self, no being, and so on up to no knower and no seer; this being so, there is no one who comes and no one who goes; since there is no one who comes and no one who goes, the mark of coming and going too should not exist.

Furthermore, seek ‘going’ within the three times, and it is utterly unfindable. Why? Within the already-gone there is no going, and within the not-yet-gone there is also no going; apart from the already-gone and the not-yet-gone, in the time of going there is also no going.

Refuting "Going in the Time of Going" Layer by Layer: What Ordinary People See Cannot Be Trusted

Question: Wherever there is movement of the body, that is called going; within the already-gone and the not-yet-gone there is no movement of the body, so since in the time of going there is movement of the body, there should be going!

Answer: Not so! Apart from the mark of going, the time of going is unfindable; apart from the time of going, the mark of going is also unfindable—how can one say ‘going in the time of going’?

Furthermore, if in the time of going there were the mark of going, there should be a time of going separate from the mark of going. Why? Because you say, ‘In the time of going there is going.’

Furthermore, if there is ‘going in the time of going’, there should be two goings: first, knowing that there is a time of going; second, knowing the going of the time of going.

Question: If so, what fault is there?

Answer: If so, there would be two goers. Why? Apart from the goer there is no mark of going; if apart from the goer there is no mark of going, then apart from the mark of going there is also no goer. Therefore the goer does not go, and the non-goer also does not go; apart from going and not going, there is also no further going.

The one who comes and the one who abides are also like this.

Precisely because of this the Buddha says: ‘The dharmas of ordinary people are false, deceptive, and without reality; although they are seen by the fleshly eye, in truth this is no different from what animals see, and it cannot be trusted.’ Therefore it is said: ‘All dharmas are without coming, without going, without a place of abiding, and also without movement.’

Form, the Dharma of Form, the Suchness of Form, the Nature of Form, the Mark of Form: The Five Dharmas Explained One by One

Which dharmas are being spoken of? Namely form, the dharma of form, the suchness of form, the nature of form, and the mark of form.

‘Form’ means the things seen by the eye, before one has gone on to discriminate whether they are fair or ugly, real or unreal, of their own mark or of another's mark.

‘The dharma of form’ means impermanence, arising and ceasing, impurity, and the like.

‘The suchness of form’ means that form exists through coming together, like foam on water, not firm; when it disperses it is gone; it is false and without reality, and only deceives people's eyes. Form is like this in the present, and so too in the past and the future. Just as present fire is hot, one infers by comparison that past and future fire is also like this.

Furthermore, just as all the Buddhas contemplate the mark of form as ultimately pure and empty, the bodhisattva too should contemplate it in this way. Form, this dharma seen by the eye, and the suchness of form—by what cause and condition are they not as ordinary people see them? Because their nature is fundamentally so!

This nature is deep and wondrous; how can it be known? It can be known by the power of the mark of form. Just as fire has smoke as its mark, and on seeing smoke one knows there is fire, so now, seeing that the form before one's eyes has the marks of impermanence, breaking apart, suffering and vexation, coarseness and roughness, one knows that its nature is fundamentally so.

These five dharmas do not go, do not come, do not abide, as was said before.

And so on up to the unconditioned, the dharma of the unconditioned, and the suchness, nature, and mark of the unconditioned: they do not come, do not go, do not abide; it is also like this.

The Buddha Confirms "Equal in the Three Times": The Three Times Are All Empty, and Emptiness Is Not One, Two, Three, Four, or Five

The sūtra goes on to say: ‘Subhūti! As for what you said, "Of this Mahāyāna, the prior limit is unfindable, the later limit is unfindable, the middle limit is unfindable; this vehicle is equal in the three times, and therefore it is called the Mahāyāna"—so it is! So it is! Subhūti! Of this Mahāyāna, the prior limit is unfindable, the later limit is unfindable, the middle limit is unfindable; this vehicle is called the equality of the three times, and therefore it is called the Mahāyāna. Why? Subhūti! The past world—the past world is empty; the future world—the future world is empty; the present world—the present world is empty; the equality of the three times—the equality of the three times is empty; the Mahāyāna—the Mahāyāna is empty; the bodhisattva—the bodhisattva is empty. Why? Subhūti! This emptiness is not one, not two, not three, not four, not five, and also not different. Precisely because of this, it is called the equality of the three times, the Mahāyāna of the bodhisattva-mahāsattva.’

The Marks of Equality and Inequality Are Unfindable, up to the Three Realms and Crossing Beyond the Three Realms Being Unfindable

‘Within this vehicle, because the mark of equality and the mark of inequality are unfindable, lust and non-lust are unfindable, anger and non-anger are unfindable, delusion and non-delusion are unfindable, conceit and non-conceit are unfindable, and so on up to all wholesome dharmas and not-wholesome dharmas being unfindable. Within this vehicle, permanence is unfindable and impermanence is unfindable; pleasure is unfindable and suffering is unfindable; the real is unfindable and the empty is unfindable; self is unfindable and non-self is unfindable; the desire realm is unfindable, the form realm is unfindable, the formless realm is unfindable; crossing beyond the desire realm is unfindable, crossing beyond the form realm is unfindable, crossing beyond the formless realm is unfindable. Why? Because the very dharma of this Mahāyāna itself is unfindable.’

The Five Aggregates and the Six Perfections of the Three Times Are Unfindable: Within Emptiness, Emptiness—and Within Equality, Equality—Is Also Unfindable

‘Subhūti! Past form—past form is empty; future and present form—future and present form is empty; past feeling, perception, constructions, and consciousness—past feeling, perception, constructions, and consciousness are empty; future and present feeling, perception, constructions, and consciousness—future and present feeling, perception, constructions, and consciousness are empty. Within emptiness, past form is unfindable. Why? Within emptiness even emptiness is unfindable—how much less could past form be found within emptiness! Within emptiness, future and present form is unfindable. Why? Within emptiness even emptiness is unfindable—how much less could future and present form be found within emptiness! Within emptiness, past feeling, perception, constructions, and consciousness are unfindable. Why? Within emptiness even emptiness is unfindable—how much less could past feeling, perception, constructions, and consciousness be found within emptiness! Within emptiness, future and present feeling, perception, constructions, and consciousness are unfindable. Why? Within emptiness even emptiness is unfindable—how much less could future and present feeling, perception, constructions, and consciousness be found within emptiness!

‘Subhūti! Past dānapāramitā is unfindable, future dānapāramitā is unfindable, present dānapāramitā is unfindable, and within the equality of the three times dānapāramitā is also unfindable. Why? Within equality the past world is unfindable, the future world is unfindable, the present world is unfindable; within equality even equality is unfindable—how much less could the past world, the future world, and the present world be found within equality! Śīlapāramitā, kṣāntipāramitā, vīryapāramitā, dhyānapāramitā, and prajñāpāramitā are also like this.’

The Limbs of the Path in the Three Times, and Ordinary People, the Worthy, and the Noble Are All Unfindable

‘Furthermore, Subhūti! In the past world the four foundations of mindfulness are unfindable, and so on up to: in the past world the eighteen unshared dharmas are unfindable; the future world and the present world are also like this.

‘Furthermore, Subhūti! Within the equality of the three times the four foundations of mindfulness are unfindable, and within the equality of the three times, and so on up to, the eighteen unshared dharmas are also unfindable. Why? Within equality the four foundations of mindfulness of the past world are unfindable, within equality the four foundations of mindfulness of the future world are unfindable, within equality the four foundations of mindfulness of the present world are unfindable; within equality even equality is unfindable—how much less could the four foundations of mindfulness of the past world, or the four foundations of mindfulness of the future and present worlds, be found within equality! Within equality even equality is unfindable—how much less could the past, and so on up to the eighteen unshared dharmas, be found within equality! The future and present worlds are also like this.

‘Furthermore, Subhūti! In the past world ordinary people are unfindable, in the future world and the present world ordinary people are unfindable, and within the equality of the three times ordinary people are also unfindable. Why? Because beings are unfindable, and so on up to the knower and the seer being unfindable. In the past world śrāvakas, pratyekabuddhas, bodhisattvas, and Buddhas are unfindable; in the future and present worlds śrāvakas, pratyekabuddhas, bodhisattvas, and Buddhas are unfindable; within the equality of the three times śrāvakas, pratyekabuddhas, bodhisattvas, and Buddhas are unfindable. Why? Because beings are unfindable, and so on up to the knower and the seer being unfindable.’

Conclusion: Training in the Mark of the Equality of the Three Times Surpasses the World; Subhūti Says "Excellent", and the Buddha Confirms It

‘Just so, Subhūti! The bodhisattva-mahāsattva, abiding within prajñāpāramitā and training in the mark of the equality of the three times, will be able to fulfil the omniscience of all kinds; this is called the Mahāyāna of the bodhisattva-mahāsattva—namely, the mark of the equality of the three times. The bodhisattva-mahāsattva, abiding within this vehicle, surpasses all the world, together with gods, humans, and asuras, and accomplishes sarvajñā (omniscience).’

Then Subhūti said to the Buddha: ‘World-Honored One! Excellent! Excellent! This Mahāyāna of the bodhisattva-mahāsattva! Why? The bodhisattvas of the past trained within this vehicle and attained the omniscience of all kinds; the bodhisattva-mahāsattvas of the future world too will train within this vehicle and will attain the omniscience of all kinds.

‘World-Honored One! Now the bodhisattva-mahāsattvas in immeasurable asaṃkhyeya worlds of the ten directions also train within this vehicle and attain the omniscience of all kinds. Precisely because of this, World-Honored One! this vehicle truly is the Mahāyāna of the bodhisattva-mahāsattva.’

The Buddha told Subhūti: ‘So it is! So it is! The Buddhas of the past, the future, and the present all train within this Mahāyāna—they have attained the omniscience of all kinds, will attain it, and now attain it.’

What follows is the treatise's explanation.

The Treatise-Author: Subhūti Praises in Brief, and the Buddha Expounds at Length What He Praised

The treatise-author says: Subhūti praised it briefly, saying: ‘Of this Mahāyāna, the prior limit, the later limit, and the middle limit are all unfindable; because it is equal in the three times, it is called the Mahāyāna.’ Now the Buddha expounds at length what Subhūti praised.

Why are these three times unfindable? It is this: the past world—the past world is empty; the future world—the future world is empty; the present world—the present world is empty—and therefore they are unfindable. The equality of the three times: this ‘equality’ is itself emptiness; the Mahāyāna: the Mahāyāna itself is empty; the bodhisattva: the bodhisattva himself is empty. Within these three times, the mark of the three times is empty. The meaning of emptiness is as was said before.

The Buddha Himself States the Causes and Conditions of Emptiness: Not Different, Not United, Not Scattered, Without Discrimination

Here the Buddha himself states the causes and conditions of emptiness, namely: ‘Emptiness and the mark of emptiness are not one, not two, not three, not four, not five, and so on; not different, not united, not scattered, without discrimination.’ Therefore the empty mark of the equality of the three times is nothing whatsoever, and so this ‘equality’ too is empty.

When the bodhisattva can understand in this way the equality of all dharmas in the three times, he is not wearied by the long reach of beginningless time, and does not shrink in fear from the boundlessness of the future world—this is the bodhisattva's equality of the three times, called the Mahāyāna.

The Mark of Equality and the Mark of Inequality Are Both Unfindable: So It Is with All Mutually Dependent Dharmas

Within this Mahāyāna the mark of equality is unfindable, and the mark of inequality is also unfindable. On attaining this samādhi of the equality of the three times, one refutes and removes this mark of inequality. It is in dependence on inequality that there is equality; since inequality is ultimately non-existent, equality too is non-existent.

Desire and non-desire, and so on up to the three realms and crossing beyond the three realms—these mutually dependent dharmas are also like this.

Here the Buddha himself says: ‘These dharmas all exist from the coming together of causes and conditions, and therefore have no self-nature; since self-nature is absent, they are empty.’

The Five Aggregates Are Empty in the Three Times; the Six Perfections and the Limbs of the Path Are Unfindable; Training in the Emptiness of the Equality of the Three Times, One Surpasses the World

Furthermore, past form—the mark of past form is empty; the future and the present are also like this. As with form, so too with the other four aggregates. Why? Within emptiness even the mark of emptiness is unfindable—how much less could there be, within emptiness, the mark of the five aggregates of the three times!

The bodhisattva contemplates the emptiness of the five aggregates, cuts off greed and desire, and enters the practice of the path—namely dānapāramitā and the rest; these too are likewise unfindable within the five aggregates of the three times. Because the three times are equal, and equality is emptiness, within this equality dānapāramitā is unfindable.

Question: Why is dānapāramitā unfindable within the three times and within the equality of the three times?

Answer: Within the equality of dharmas there are no three times; within the equality of equality, even the mark of equality is unfindable—how much less the three times! The six perfections, and so on up to the eighteen unshared dharmas, are also like this.

Furthermore, within the three times the mark of the ordinary person is unfindable, and the śrāvaka, and so on up to the Buddha, are also unfindable, because beings are empty.

The bodhisattva, abiding in prajñāpāramitā, able to train in this way in the emptiness of the equality of the three times and to gather all kinds of good merits, then fulfils the omniscience of all kinds. The Buddha says: ‘If the bodhisattva can abide in this way within the equality of the three times, he can surpass all the world, together with gods, humans, and asuras.’

Then Subhūti praised it, saying: ‘World-Honored One! Excellent! Excellent! This Mahāyāna benefits the bodhisattvas. Why? The bodhisattvas of the past trained in this Mahāyāna and attained the omniscience of all kinds; those who have not yet attained and those who now attain are also like this.’

Close of the Chapter: Four Divergent Accounts of Attaining the Path, and the Complete Causes and Conditions

Some say: attaining purity has no causes and conditions, and becoming stained with defilement also has no causes and conditions; great and small, fair and ugly, bondage and liberation are none of them bestowed by some one who acts as master.

Some say: fair and ugly, bondage and release are attained naturally when the time comes.

Some say: because merit is accomplished, the Buddha path is attained.

Some say: one need only attain pure, true wisdom, and the Buddha path is attained.

All such accounts of every kind are teachings of no causes and conditions, or teachings of few causes and conditions; they are what Subhūti does not praise.

Now the Buddha sets aside the teaching of no causes and conditions, and also sets aside the teaching of incomplete causes and conditions, and teaches these complete causes and conditions—namely the six perfections: the bodhisattvas of the three times train in this vehicle, bring it to completion, and attain the Buddha path.

The Buddha also approves what Subhūti praised, saying: ‘So it is! So it is!’

Pūrṇa Asks: The Buddha Sent Subhūti to Expound Prajñā; How Is It That He Now Speaks of the Mahāyāna?

At that time the venerable Pūrṇa Maitrāyaṇīputra said to the Buddha: ‘World-Honored One! The Buddha sent Subhūti to expound prajñāpāramitā for the bodhisattva-mahāsattvas; how is it that he has now, of all things, come to speak of the Mahāyāna (the Great Vehicle)?’

Subhūti Examines Himself: In Speaking of the Mahāyāna, Could I Have Departed from Prajñā?

Subhūti said to the Buddha: ‘World-Honored One! In speaking of the Mahāyāna, I have not, surely, departed from prajñāpāramitā?’

The Buddha Confirms: In Accord and Not Apart; All Wholesome Dharmas Are Included within Prajñā

The Buddha said: ‘You have not! Subhūti! Your speaking of the Mahāyāna is in accord with prajñāpāramitā; it is not apart from prajñāpāramitā. Why? All the wholesome dharmas there are, the dharmas that aid the path—whether śrāvaka dharmas, pratyekabuddha dharmas, bodhisattva dharmas, or Buddha dharmas—all these dharmas are included within prajñāpāramitā.’

Which Wholesome Dharmas Are Included in Prajñā: The Six Perfections, the Seven Groups of the Limbs of the Path, the Three Gates of Liberation, and the Seven Dharmas Unique to the Buddha

Subhūti said to the Buddha: ‘World-Honored One! Which wholesome dharmas, which dharmas that aid the path—śrāvaka dharmas, pratyekabuddha dharmas, bodhisattva dharmas, Buddha dharmas—are all included within prajñāpāramitā?’

The Buddha told Subhūti: ‘They are dānapāramitā (the perfection of giving), śīlapāramitā (the perfection of morality), kṣāntipāramitā (the perfection of patience), vīryapāramitā (the perfection of vigour), dhyānapāramitā (the perfection of meditation), and prajñāpāramitā (the perfection of wisdom); the four foundations of mindfulness, the four right efforts, the four bases of supernormal power, the five faculties, the five powers, the seven limbs of awakening, and the eight limbs of the noble path; the liberation gate of emptiness, the liberation gate of signlessness, and the liberation gate of non-action; the Buddha's ten powers, the four fearlessnesses, the four unobstructed knowledges, great kindness and great compassion, the eighteen unshared dharmas, the mark of being free of error, and the practice of constant equanimity. Subhūti! These remaining wholesome dharmas, the dharmas that aid the path—whether śrāvaka dharmas, pratyekabuddha dharmas, bodhisattva dharmas, or Buddha dharmas—are all included within prajñāpāramitā.’

From the Mahāyāna to Nirvāṇa: All Dharmas Neither Unite nor Scatter; One Mark, the Signless

‘Subhūti! Whether the Mahāyāna, or prajñāpāramitā, dhyānapāramitā, vīryapāramitā, kṣāntipāramitā, śīlapāramitā, or dānapāramitā; whether form, feeling, perception, constructions, or consciousness; the eye, forms (the form-objects that the eye faces), eye-consciousness, eye-contact, and the various feelings born from the condition of eye-contact, and so on up to the mind, dharmas (the dharma-objects that the mind faces), mind-consciousness, mind-contact, and the various feelings born from the condition of mind-contact; the earth element up to the consciousness element; the four foundations of mindfulness up to the eight limbs of the noble path; the liberation gate of emptiness, the liberation gate of signlessness, and the liberation gate of non-action; and all kinds of wholesome dharmas, whether with outflows or without outflows, conditioned or unconditioned; whether the truth of suffering, the truth of origination, the truth of cessation, or the truth of the path; whether the desire realm, the form realm, or the formless realm; whether inner emptiness up to the emptiness of non-existent and existent dharmas; the samādhi gates and the dhāraṇī gates; the Buddha's ten powers up to the eighteen unshared dharmas; whether the Buddha, the Buddha's Dharma, dharma-nature, suchness, the limit of reality, the nature of the inconceivable, or nirvāṇa—all these dharmas, every one of them, neither unite nor scatter; they are without form, without shape, without resistance (without obstruction); they are of one mark, which is to say the signless.’

Without Duality and Without Difference: To Speak of the Mahāyāna Is to Speak of Prajñāpāramitā

‘Subhūti! For this cause and condition, the Mahāyāna that you speak of is in accord with prajñāpāramitā. Why? Subhūti! The Mahāyāna is not different from prajñāpāramitā, and prajñāpāramitā is not different from the Mahāyāna; prajñāpāramitā and the Mahāyāna are without duality and without difference. Dānapāramitā is not different from the Mahāyāna, and the Mahāyāna is not different from dānapāramitā; dānapāramitā and the Mahāyāna are without duality and without difference; and so on up to dhyānapāramitā, which is likewise. Subhūti! The four foundations of mindfulness are not different from the Mahāyāna, and the Mahāyāna is not different from the four foundations of mindfulness; the four foundations of mindfulness and the Mahāyāna are without duality and without difference; and so on up to the eighteen unshared dharmas: the eighteen unshared dharmas are not different from the Mahāyāna, and the Mahāyāna is not different from the eighteen unshared dharmas; the eighteen unshared dharmas and the Mahāyāna are without duality and without difference. For this cause and condition, Subhūti, your speaking of the Mahāyāna is speaking of prajñāpāramitā.’

What follows is the treatise's explanation.

For Whom Pūrṇa Asks: The Newly Learning of Dull Faculties, Who Do Not Understand That the Meaning Is One while the Names Differ

The treatise-author says: although Pūrṇa himself had no doubt at all, he asked for the sake of those who are newly learning and of dull faculties, who do not understand that the meaning is one and only the names differ. Subhūti then put this matter before the Buddha: ‘The Buddha's Dharma is extremely deep; what I have said—surely there is no fault in it?’

The Buddha Confirms There Is No Error: The Wholesome Dharmas of the Three Vehicles Are All for Nirvāṇa, and So They Gather Together in Prajñā

The Buddha answered: ‘Your speaking of the Mahāyāna is in accord with prajñā; it is without contradiction and without error.’

This principle has already been discussed at the very beginning; now the Buddha explains for him the causes and conditions of ‘being in accord’, namely: all the wholesome dharmas contained in the three vehicles gather and assemble together within prajñāpāramitā. Why? Because all the wholesome dharmas of the three vehicles are for the sake of nirvāṇa.

The Gates of Nirvāṇa Are of Three Kinds: Emptiness, Signlessness, Non-action

The gates of nirvāṇa are of three kinds: all dharmas enter by the gate of emptiness, the gate of signlessness, and the gate of non-action. It is just as keeping the precepts can give rise to meditative concentration, and meditative concentration can give rise to true wisdom, because it does not cling to the world.

Which Dharmas Aiding the Path Are Included in Prajñā: From the Six Perfections to the Practice of Constant Equanimity

Which are the dharmas of the three vehicles that aid the path and are included within prajñā? They are the six perfections, the thirty-seven limbs (the thirty-seven limbs of the path), the three gates of liberation (the three gates of liberation), the Buddha's ten powers, the four fearlessnesses, the four unobstructed knowledges, great kindness and great compassion, the eighteen unshared dharmas, the mark of being free of error, and the practice of constant equanimity.

The Treatise-Author's Threefold Division and One School's Differing Account: Shared Dharmas, Bodhisattva Dharmas, Buddha Dharmas

Among these, the thirty-seven limbs and the three gates of liberation are dharmas shared by the three vehicles; the six perfections are the dharmas of the bodhisattva; the ten powers up to the practice of constant equanimity are the dharmas of the Buddha.

Some say: ‘The six perfections are either complete or not complete. Those not complete are dharmas shared with the two vehicles; those complete are dharmas of the bodhisattva alone.’

Two ‘Furthermore’s: Because the Meaning of Emptiness Is One, It Accords Without Error; Because the Mark Is the Same, There Is No Duality and No Difference

Furthermore, the Mahāyāna is empty, and prajñāpāramitā is also empty; the meaning of emptiness is one, and therefore what Subhūti said is in accord and without error. Just as prajñāpāramitā is empty, so too are the five perfections, and so on up to suchness, dharma-nature, the limit of reality, the nature of the inconceivable, and nirvāṇa.

Furthermore, from prajñāpāramitā all the way to nirvāṇa, all neither unite nor scatter; they are without form, without shape, without resistance; they are of one mark, which is to say the signless. Because they are of the same one mark, it is said: ‘The Mahāyāna is prajñāpāramitā; the Mahāyāna and prajñāpāramitā are without duality and without difference.’

Subhūti Sets Out the Ten Points Together: From the Unfindability of the Three Limits to Hearing This without Being Startled or Frightened

The venerable Subhūti said to the Buddha: ‘World-Honored One! The prior limit (the limit of the past) of the bodhisattva-mahāsattva is unfindable, the later limit (the limit of the future) is unfindable, the middle limit (the limit in between) is unfindable. Because form is boundless, know that the bodhisattva-mahāsattva too is boundless; because feeling, perception, constructions, and consciousness are boundless, know that the bodhisattva-mahāsattva too is boundless. To say that form is the bodhisattva-mahāsattva—this too is unfindable; to say that feeling, perception, constructions, and consciousness are the bodhisattva-mahāsattva—this too is unfindable. In this way, World-Honored One! when the bodhisattva is sought in all kinds and in all places, he is in every case unfindable. World-Honored One! What kind of bodhisattva-mahāsattva should I teach prajñāpāramitā? World-Honored One! The bodhisattva-mahāsattva has only a name. It is like speaking of the name “self”: the “self” is ultimately non-arising; as with the “self”, so too all dharmas are in this way without self-nature. What form is it that is ultimately non-arising? What feeling, perception, constructions, and consciousness are they that are ultimately non-arising? World-Honored One! This ultimate non-arising is not called form; this ultimate non-arising is not called feeling, perception, constructions, and consciousness. World-Honored One! If it is a dharma that is ultimately non-arising, to whom should prajñāpāramitā be taught? Apart from ultimate non-arising, there is also no bodhisattva who practises anuttarā samyaksaṃbodhi (unsurpassed, right, and complete awakening). If a bodhisattva hears a teaching such as this and his mind does not sink, does not regret, is not startled, is not frightened, and is not afraid, know that this bodhisattva-mahāsattva is able to practise prajñāpāramitā.’

Śāriputra Asks in a Linked Chain: For What Cause and Condition Are These Ten Statements Made

Śāriputra asked:

‘Subhūti! For what cause and condition do you say that the bodhisattva-mahāsattva's prior limit is unfindable, the later limit is unfindable, the middle limit is unfindable?

‘Subhūti! For what cause and condition do you say that because form is boundless, know that the bodhisattva too is boundless; because feeling, perception, constructions, and consciousness are boundless, know that the bodhisattva too is boundless?

‘Subhūti! For what cause and condition do you say that form is the bodhisattva—this too is unfindable; feeling, perception, constructions, and consciousness are the bodhisattva—this too is unfindable?

‘Subhūti! For what cause and condition do you say that in all kinds and in all places the bodhisattva is unfindable, so what kind of bodhisattva should be taught prajñāpāramitā?

‘Subhūti! For what cause and condition do you say that the bodhisattva-mahāsattva has only a name?

‘Subhūti! For what cause and condition do you say that it is like speaking of the name of the self: the self is ultimately non-arising; as with the self, so too all dharmas are in this way without self-nature? What form is ultimately non-arising, and what feeling, perception, constructions, and consciousness are ultimately non-arising?

‘Subhūti! For what cause and condition do you say that ultimate non-arising is not called form? That ultimate non-arising is not called feeling, perception, constructions, and consciousness? Subhūti! For what cause and condition do you say that if it is a dharma that is ultimately non-arising, to whom should prajñāpāramitā be taught?

‘Subhūti! For what cause and condition do you say that apart from ultimate non-arising, there is also no bodhisattva who practises anuttarā samyaksaṃbodhi?

‘Subhūti! For what cause and condition do you say that if a bodhisattva hears a teaching such as this and his mind does not sink, does not regret, is not startled, is not frightened, and is not afraid—if he is able to practise in this way, this is called the bodhisattva-mahāsattva practising prajñāpāramitā?’

Subhūti's General Answer: The Gate of Beings and the Gate of the Five Aggregates, Passing through All Four Aspects

At that time Subhūti answered Śāriputra, saying: ‘Because beings are nothing at all, the bodhisattva's prior limit is unfindable; because beings are empty, the bodhisattva's prior limit is unfindable; because beings are apart, the bodhisattva's prior limit is unfindable. Śāriputra! Because form does not exist, the bodhisattva's prior limit is unfindable; because feeling, perception, constructions, and consciousness do not exist, the bodhisattva's prior limit is unfindable. Because form is empty, the bodhisattva's prior limit is unfindable; because feeling, perception, constructions, and consciousness are empty, the bodhisattva's prior limit is unfindable. Because form is apart, the bodhisattva's prior limit is unfindable; because feeling, perception, constructions, and consciousness are apart, the bodhisattva's prior limit is unfindable. Śāriputra! Because the nature of form is non-existent, the bodhisattva's prior limit is unfindable; because the nature of feeling, perception, constructions, and consciousness is non-existent, the bodhisattva's prior limit is unfindable.

The Gate of the Six Perfections: Emptiness, the Bodhisattva, and the Prior Limit, without Duality and without Difference

‘Śāriputra! Because dānapāramitā (the perfection of giving) does not exist, the bodhisattva's prior limit is unfindable; because śīlapāramitā (the perfection of keeping the precepts), kṣāntipāramitā (the perfection of patience), vīryapāramitā (the perfection of vigour), dhyānapāramitā (the perfection of meditation), and prajñāpāramitā (the perfection of wisdom) do not exist, the bodhisattva's prior limit is unfindable. Why is this? Śāriputra! Within emptiness, the prior limit is unfindable, the later limit is unfindable, the middle limit is unfindable; emptiness is not different from the bodhisattva, and the bodhisattva is not different from the prior limit. Śāriputra! Emptiness, the bodhisattva, and the prior limit—these dharmas are without duality and without difference. By this cause and condition, Śāriputra! the bodhisattva's prior limit is unfindable.

‘Śāriputra! Because dānapāramitā is empty, because dānapāramitā is apart, because the nature of dānapāramitā is non-existent, the bodhisattva's prior limit is unfindable; śīlapāramitā, kṣāntipāramitā, vīryapāramitā, and dhyānapāramitā are likewise; because prajñāpāramitā is empty, because prajñāpāramitā is apart, because the nature of prajñāpāramitā is non-existent, the bodhisattva's prior limit is unfindable. Why is this? Śāriputra! Within emptiness, the prior limit is unfindable, the later limit is unfindable, the middle limit is unfindable; emptiness is not different from the bodhisattva, and the bodhisattva too is not different from the prior limit. Śāriputra! Emptiness, the bodhisattva, and the prior limit—these dharmas are without duality and without difference. By this cause and condition, Śāriputra! the bodhisattva's prior limit is unfindable.

From the Eighteen Emptinesses to Omniscience of All Kinds: Gate after Gate Pressed Through, One and the Same Conclusion

‘Furthermore, Śāriputra! Because inner emptiness is nothing at all, the bodhisattva's prior limit is unfindable; and so on up to: because the emptiness of non-existent and existent dharmas (the last of the eighteen emptinesses) is nothing at all, the bodhisattva's prior limit is unfindable. Because inner emptiness is empty, because inner emptiness is apart, because the nature of inner emptiness is non-existent, and so on up to: because the emptiness of non-existent and existent dharmas is empty, because it is apart, because its nature is non-existent, the bodhisattva's prior limit is unfindable. The rest is as said above.

‘Furthermore, Śāriputra! Because the four foundations of mindfulness are nothing at all, the bodhisattva's prior limit is unfindable; because the four foundations of mindfulness are empty, because they are apart, because their nature is non-existent, the bodhisattva's prior limit is unfindable. And so on up to: because the eighteen unshared dharmas are nothing at all, the bodhisattva's prior limit is unfindable; because the eighteen unshared dharmas are empty, because they are apart, because their nature is non-existent, the bodhisattva's prior limit is unfindable. The rest is as said above. By this cause and condition, Śāriputra! the bodhisattva's prior limit is unfindable.

‘Furthermore, Śāriputra! Because all the samādhi gates (gates of concentration in which the mind abides on a single object) and all the dhāraṇī gates (gates of total retention) do not exist, the bodhisattva's prior limit is unfindable; because the samādhi gates and the dhāraṇī gates are empty, because they are apart, because their nature is non-existent, the bodhisattva's prior limit is unfindable. The rest is as said above.

‘Furthermore, Śāriputra! Because dharma-nature does not exist, the bodhisattva's prior limit is unfindable; because dharma-nature is empty, because it is apart, because its nature is non-existent, the bodhisattva's prior limit is unfindable. The rest is as said above. Furthermore, Śāriputra! Because suchness does not exist, because it is empty, because it is apart, because its nature is non-existent; because the limit of reality does not exist, because it is empty, because it is apart, because its nature is non-existent; because the nature of the inconceivable does not exist, because it is empty, because it is apart, because its nature is non-existent, the bodhisattva's prior limit is unfindable. The rest is as said above.

‘Furthermore, Śāriputra! Because the śrāvaka does not exist, the bodhisattva's prior limit is unfindable; because the śrāvaka is empty, because he is apart, because his nature is non-existent, the bodhisattva's prior limit is unfindable. Because the pratyekabuddha does not exist, because he is empty, because he is apart, because his nature is non-existent, the bodhisattva's prior limit is unfindable. Because the Buddha does not exist, because he is empty, because he is apart, because his nature is non-existent, the bodhisattva's prior limit is unfindable. Because anuttarā samyaksaṃbodhi does not exist, and so on up to because its nature is non-existent, the bodhisattva's prior limit is unfindable.

‘Furthermore, because omniscience of all kinds does not exist, and so on up to because its nature is non-existent, the bodhisattva's prior limit is unfindable. Why is this? Śāriputra! Within emptiness, the prior limit is unfindable, the later limit is unfindable, the middle limit is unfindable, the bodhisattva is unfindable. Śāriputra! Emptiness is not different from the bodhisattva, nor is it different from the prior limit; emptiness, the bodhisattva, and the prior limit—these dharmas are without duality and without difference. By this cause and condition, Śāriputra! the bodhisattva's prior limit is unfindable; the later limit and the middle limit are likewise.’

What follows is the treatise's explanation.

Why Say It Again and Again: Foremost in the Practice of Emptiness, a Broad Discrimination in Ten Ways

Question: Above it has already been said, ‘the bodhisattva and the name of the bodhisattva are unfindable—for whom is prajñāpāramitā to be spoken?’ Why now is it said again?

Answer: You should not ask in this way! Subhūti is foremost in the practice of emptiness and always delights in speaking of emptiness; whenever he says anything, he always benefits beings through the gate of emptiness.

Furthermore, above it was said in brief; here, in ten ways, it is broadly discriminated that the bodhisattva is unfindable.

If the practitioner contemplates all dharmas as all empty, he then accords with the signless and with non-action; because his mind is without making, he does not wish to do anything, and cannot even bring benefit to himself—how much less benefit others! If a person abides in a mind that holds a self, he can discriminate the marks of dharmas as good and not good, gather all kinds of wholesome dharmas and abandon dharmas that are not good; but now the Buddha says: ‘Within prajñāpāramitā one should not cling to the thought of a self, one should not discriminate dharmas, and one should simply practise all good.’ This matter is difficult.

The practitioner thinks thus: ‘If there is no self, for whom is good cultivated?’ Before, there was a self; now, because of prajñāpāramitā, it has become nothing, and his mind then gives rise to sorrow. Therefore Subhūti explains it once more: ‘The self, from the very beginning, is nothing; it is not that it existed before and only now does not.’ When the practitioner understands that it is thus, thus, originally of itself non-existent, then now he loses nothing, and so he has nothing to sorrow over either. It is like a great tree with deep roots, which cannot be felled with one stroke of the axe; only with much force of the axe can it be cut through. The emptiness of the bodhisattva is likewise: it cannot be received at a single telling, and therefore it must be broadly discriminated.

Examining by the Three Times and Examining by the Five Aggregates: Where Does the Bodhisattva Stand

When Subhūti questioned the Buddha, he thought thus in his mind: ‘If there were definitely such a dharma as a bodhisattva, it should exist throughout the three times. Now, in the former time there is no bodhisattva. Why? Because the former time has no beginning. The future time is likewise, because there are not yet causes and conditions. Only through the mutual dependence of former and later is there a middle; if there is no former and later, there is no middle.’

Suppose it is said that the five aggregates (the five heaps) are the bodhisattva; the five aggregates are boundless—as said before through all kinds of causes and conditions, the five aggregates, because they are ultimately empty, are immeasurable and boundless, and because they are immeasurable and boundless, they are the same as unconditioned dharmas.

If the bodhisattva is boundless, this matter cannot be established! By this cause and condition, the bodhisattva is unfindable; for whom should prajñā be spoken?

Constantly, in all places, in all kinds, and at all times, the bodhisattva is sought, and in every case he is unfindable; for whom should it be spoken?

Just as the ‘self’ is ultimately non-arising, empty, and nothing at all, the five aggregates too are in this way ultimately non-arising and nothing at all. Since there are no beings and no dharmas of the five aggregates, where is there a bodhisattva?

Is the One Who Understands the Dharma the Bodhisattva: In Ultimate Non-arising There Is No Such Discrimination

Question: Beings and the dharmas of the five aggregates are ultimately non-arising; then is the person who understands this dharma the bodhisattva?

Answer: ‘Ultimate non-arising’ is not called form, is not called feeling, perception, constructions, and consciousness. Why? The five aggregates are the mark of arising; within ultimate non-arising there is no such discrimination.

The five aggregates are ultimately non-arising and cannot be used to teach and transform; apart from ultimate non-arising, there is also no bodhisattva practising the path—whom should one teach?

The bodhisattva hears these things and is not frightened and not afraid; this is being able to practise the bodhisattva path.

Why the Self Is Used as a Simile for the Bodhisattva: First Refuting the Self, Then Refuting Dharmas, as Rock Sugar Is a Simile for Ambrosia

Question: The self and the bodhisattva are one and the same thing; why use the self as a simile for the bodhisattva?

Answer: Within this prajñāpāramitā all dharmas are empty, but for a beginner one may not speak of emptiness right at the outset! One should first discriminate wrongdoing and merit for him, teaching him to abandon wrongdoing and to cultivate and gather merit; the fruit of merit is impermanent, and because it is impermanent it gives rise to suffering; therefore he abandons merit, turns away from the world in disgust, seeks the path, and enters nirvāṇa. At that time he should reflect thus: ‘Because there is a self, all kinds of afflictions arise; this self, sought within the six consciousnesses, is in every case unfindable; only because of inversion does one cling to there being a self.’ Therefore understanding non-self is comparatively easy, and one is readily transformed by it.

If it is said, ‘form is empty’, this is hard to understand; although the ears hear emptiness being spoken of, the eyes constantly see it as really existent. Therefore one first refutes the self within evil and wrongdoing, and only afterwards refutes all dharmas.

Among all the Buddha's disciples, those who have attained the path know and realise non-self for themselves; those who have not yet attained the path must believe that all other dharmas are empty, and they cannot believe this as easily as they believe non-self; therefore non-self is used as the simile.

Here Subhūti says that all dharmas are empty, and, searching, knows that there is no bodhisattva, using non-self as the simile; he uses the small as a simile for the great, as rock sugar (crystallised sugar) is used as a simile for ambrosia.

Why Śāriputra Asks about Each Thing: To Cut Off the Doubts of New Learners

Question: Śāriputra knows deeply the meaning of emptiness and of non-self; why does he still ask about each thing?

Answer: Subhūti is a śrāvaka person, whose merits do not equal those of a bodhisattva, yet before the Buddha he proclaims the most profound prajñā; in the minds of newly-learning bodhisattvas doubt may arise. Although the Buddha earlier said, ‘You speak the Mahāyāna, in accord with prajñā’, people might still think that the Buddha was merely humouring Subhūti. Śāriputra wished to cut off this doubt, and so he asked.

Furthermore, the Buddha wished to proclaim prajñā together with Subhūti right to the end; therefore Śāriputra questions him about each thing, causing Subhūti to discriminate the profound meaning well, so that the assembly might revere and believe.

Therefore he asks: from the bodhisattva being unfindable in the past time, all the way to being not fearful and not frightened.

The meaning of Subhūti's answer is this: self, being, and person are one and the same thing. When one has not yet attained the path, one is called an ordinary person; from first entering the path up to arhat, one is called a śrāvaka person; one who contemplates the dharma of causes and conditions, awakens to emptiness somewhat more deeply, and has somewhat more pity for beings is called a pratyekabuddha person; one who enters deeply into the dharma of emptiness, practises the six perfections, and is endowed with great kindness and great compassion is called a bodhisattva person—because the merits of each are different, the names too are different. Just as self, being, and person are one thing, because the eye sees things it is called the seer, because the mind attains something it is called the knower, because it receives suffering and pleasure it is called the receiver. This self, being, person, and so on have already been shown before, through all kinds of causes and conditions, to be non-existent; the bodhisattva too should be non-existent. Therefore Subhūti said to Śāriputra: ‘Because beings are non-existent, within the three times there is no bodhisattva.’

The Coming Together of the Five Aggregates and the Emptiness of the Five Aggregates: Neither Can Establish a Bodhisattva

Question: Only when the five aggregates come together is there a bodhisattva; then the bodhisattva should be non-existent, and the five aggregates should exist!

Answer: It is precisely to refute this matter that it is said, ‘there are no beings, there is no self’; because there is no self, the five aggregates belong to nothing; because they belong to nothing, they are empty; because they are empty, there is no bodhisattva.

Question: If the five aggregates are empty, then is emptiness the bodhisattva?

Answer: The emptiness of the five aggregates is not the bodhisattva either, because emptiness is nothing at all and without discrimination.

The five aggregates being apart, the five aggregates being without nature—there is also no bodhisattva. If it is said that there is no bodhisattva, then in all three times there is none.

Contemplating these worldly dharmas such as the five aggregates, and dharmas of the path such as the six perfections, is what is called a bodhisattva; because these dharmas are empty, the bodhisattva too is empty. Here the Buddha himself states the cause and condition: ‘The emptiness of all dharmas is not different from the bodhisattva, the bodhisattva is not different from emptiness; the emptiness of the bodhisattva and the emptiness of the three times are without duality and without difference.’

From the six perfections up to omniscience of all kinds—because one practises these dharmas, one is called a bodhisattva; because these dharmas are empty, the bodhisattva too is empty. As for this emptiness of dharmas here: śrāvakas and pratyekabuddhas who attain this emptiness are called śrāvaka and pratyekabuddha persons; because śrāvaka and pratyekabuddha persons are empty, the bodhisattva is likewise.

The sūtra text starts up again, taking up Śāriputra's earlier questions one by one and answering them one by one.

Taking Up and Answering ‘Form Is Boundless’: Like Space, without Boundary and without Middle

‘As Śāriputra has said, because form is boundless, know that the bodhisattva too is boundless; because feeling, perception, constructions, and consciousness are boundless, know that the bodhisattva too is boundless.—Śāriputra! Form is like space; feeling, perception, constructions, and consciousness are like space. Why? Śāriputra! It is like space: its boundary is unfindable, its middle is unfindable; because it is without boundary and without middle, it is only called by the name space. In the same way, Śāriputra! the boundary of form is unfindable, its middle is unfindable, because this form is empty, and within emptiness there is neither boundary nor middle; the boundary of feeling, perception, constructions, and consciousness is unfindable, their middle is unfindable, because consciousness is empty, and within emptiness there is neither boundary nor middle. By this cause and condition, Śāriputra! because form is boundless, know that the bodhisattva too is boundless; because feeling, perception, constructions, and consciousness are boundless, know that the bodhisattva too is boundless. And so on up to the eighteen unshared dharmas, likewise.

Taking Up and Answering ‘Form Is the Bodhisattva—This Too Is Unfindable’: Each and Every Dharma Empty of Its Own Mark

‘As Śāriputra has said, form is the bodhisattva—this too is unfindable; feeling, perception, constructions, and consciousness are the bodhisattva—this too is unfindable.—Śāriputra! Form: the mark of form is empty; feeling, perception, constructions, and consciousness: the mark of consciousness is empty. Dānapāramitā: the mark of dānapāramitā is empty; and so on up to prajñāpāramitā, likewise. Inner emptiness: the mark of inner emptiness is empty; and so on up to the emptiness of non-existent and existent dharmas: the mark of the emptiness of non-existent and existent dharmas is empty. The four foundations of mindfulness: the mark of the four foundations of mindfulness is empty; and so on up to the eighteen unshared dharmas: the mark of the eighteen unshared dharmas is empty. Suchness, dharma-nature, the limit of reality, the nature of the inconceivable: the mark of the nature of the inconceivable is empty. The samādhi gates: the mark of the samādhi gates is empty; the dhāraṇī gates: the mark of the dhāraṇī gates is empty. Omniscience: the mark of omniscience is empty; knowledge of the kinds of paths: the mark of knowledge of the kinds of paths is empty; omniscience of all kinds: the mark of omniscience of all kinds is empty. The śrāvaka vehicle: the mark of the śrāvaka vehicle is empty; the pratyekabuddha vehicle: the mark of the pratyekabuddha vehicle is empty; the Buddha vehicle: the mark of the Buddha vehicle is empty. The śrāvaka person: the mark of the śrāvaka person is empty; the pratyekabuddha: the mark of the pratyekabuddha is empty; the Buddha: the mark of the Buddha is empty. Within emptiness form is unfindable, feeling, perception, constructions, and consciousness are unfindable. By this cause and condition, Śāriputra! form is the bodhisattva—this too is unfindable; feeling, perception, constructions, and consciousness are the bodhisattva—this too is unfindable.

Taking Up and Answering the Question of the Thorough Search: In Its Own Dharma and in Other Dharmas, Sought Everywhere and Not Found

‘As Śāriputra has said, for what cause and condition, in all kinds and in all places, is the bodhisattva unfindable, so what kind of bodhisattva should be taught prajñāpāramitā.—Śāriputra! Form is unfindable in form; form is unfindable in feeling. Feeling is unfindable in feeling; feeling is unfindable in form; feeling is unfindable in perception. Perception is unfindable in perception; perception is unfindable in form and feeling; perception is unfindable in constructions. Constructions are unfindable in constructions; constructions are unfindable in form, feeling, and perception; constructions are unfindable in consciousness. Consciousness is unfindable in consciousness; consciousness is unfindable in form, feeling, perception, and constructions. Śāriputra! The eye is unfindable in the eye; the eye is unfindable in the ear. The ear is unfindable in the ear; the ear is unfindable in the eye; the ear is unfindable in the nose. The nose is unfindable in the nose; the nose is unfindable in the eye and ear; the nose is unfindable in the tongue. The tongue is unfindable in the tongue; the tongue is unfindable in the eye, ear, and nose; the tongue is unfindable in the body. The body is unfindable in the body; the body is unfindable in the eye, ear, nose, and tongue; the body is unfindable in the mind. The mind is unfindable in the mind; the mind is unfindable in the eye, ear, nose, tongue, and body. The six sense-fields, the six consciousnesses, the six contacts, and the feelings born from the conditions of the six contacts are likewise. Dānapāramitā up to prajñāpāramitā, inner emptiness up to the emptiness of non-existent and existent dharmas, the four foundations of mindfulness up to the eighteen unshared dharmas, all the samādhi gates and all the dhāraṇī gates, the dharmas of the ground of the stage of nature up to the dharmas of the pratyekabuddha, the first ground up to the tenth ground, omniscience, knowledge of the kinds of paths, and omniscience of all kinds are likewise; srota-āpanna up to arhat, pratyekabuddha, bodhisattva, and Buddha are likewise. The bodhisattva is unfindable in the bodhisattva; the bodhisattva is unfindable in prajñāpāramitā. Prajñāpāramitā is unfindable in prajñāpāramitā; prajñāpāramitā is unfindable in the bodhisattva. Within prajñāpāramitā, teaching and transforming is nothing at all and unfindable; within teaching and transforming, teaching and transforming is nothing at all and unfindable; within teaching and transforming, the bodhisattva and prajñāpāramitā are nothing at all and unfindable. Śāriputra! In this way, all dharmas are nothing at all and unfindable. By this cause and condition, in all kinds and in all places the bodhisattva is unfindable; what kind of bodhisattva should be taught prajñāpāramitā?’

Taking Up and Answering ‘Only a Provisional Name’: Name and Dharma, Neither Is Found in the Other

‘As Śāriputra has said, for what cause and condition is it said that the bodhisattva-mahāsattva has only a provisional name.—Śāriputra! Form is a provisional name, feeling, perception, constructions, and consciousness are provisional names; the name of form is not form, the name of feeling, perception, constructions, and consciousness is not consciousness. Why? A name: the mark of the name is empty; if it is empty, it is not the bodhisattva. By this cause and condition, Śāriputra! the bodhisattva has only a provisional name. Furthermore, Śāriputra! Dānapāramitā has only a name; it is not that within the name there is dānapāramitā, and it is not that within dānapāramitā there is the name. By this cause and condition, the bodhisattva has only a provisional name. Śīlapāramitā, kṣāntipāramitā, vīryapāramitā, and dhyānapāramitā are likewise. Prajñāpāramitā has only a name; within the name there is no prajñāpāramitā, and within prajñāpāramitā there is no name. By this cause and condition, the bodhisattva has only a provisional name. Śāriputra! Inner emptiness has only a name, and so on up to the emptiness of non-existent and existent dharmas, which has only a name; within the name there is no inner emptiness, and within inner emptiness there is no name. Why? The name and inner emptiness are both unfindable. And so on up to the emptiness of non-existent and existent dharmas, likewise. By this cause and condition, Śāriputra! the bodhisattva has only a provisional name. Śāriputra! The four foundations of mindfulness have only a name, and so on up to the eighteen unshared dharmas, which have only a name; all the samādhi gates and all the dhāraṇī gates, and so on up to omniscience of all kinds, are likewise. By this cause and condition, Śāriputra! I say that the bodhisattva has only a provisional name.’

Taking Up and Answering ‘The Name of the Self Is Ultimately Non-arising’: From the Self to the Buddha, Ultimately Unfindable—Where Could There Be Arising

‘As Śāriputra has said, for what cause and condition is it said that the name of the self is ultimately non-arising.—Śāriputra! The self is ultimately unfindable; where could there be arising? And so on up to the knower and the seer, which are ultimately unfindable; where could there be arising? Śāriputra! Form is ultimately unfindable; where could there be arising? Feeling, perception, constructions, and consciousness are ultimately unfindable; where could there be arising? The eye is ultimately unfindable, and so on up to the feeling born from the condition of mind-contact, which is ultimately unfindable; where could there be arising? Dānapāramitā is ultimately unfindable, and so on up to prajñāpāramitā, which is ultimately unfindable; where could there be arising? Inner emptiness is ultimately unfindable, and so on up to the emptiness of non-existent and existent dharmas, which is ultimately unfindable; where could there be arising? The four foundations of mindfulness are ultimately unfindable, and so on up to the eighteen unshared dharmas, which are ultimately unfindable; where could there be arising? The samādhi gates and the dhāraṇī gates are ultimately unfindable; where could there be arising? The śrāvaka up to the Buddha are ultimately unfindable; where could there be arising? By this cause and condition, Śāriputra! I say: as with the name of the self, the self too is ultimately non-arising.’

What follows is the treatise's explanation.

How Can Form, Which Has Shape, Be Boundless: Four Explanations

Question: Mind and mental-factor dharmas (mental factors) are without shape and cannot be seen, so they can be said to be boundless; form has shape and can be seen—how can it be boundless?

Answer: There is no place where form is not, and its nearness and farness, lightness and heaviness cannot be reckoned. As the Buddha said: the four great elements (earth, water, fire, and wind) are present everywhere, and therefore they are called great; their limits cannot be known by the five faculties (the five sense-roots), and their quantity and weight cannot be measured with a bushel or weighed with a scale; therefore it is said, ‘form is boundless’.

Furthermore, when this form is in the past, its very first beginning is unfindable; when it is in the future, there is no number of kalpas, even as many as the sands of the Ganges, at which it can be said that form will come to an end, and so it has no later boundary; since there is neither a first boundary nor a later boundary, there is also no middle.

Furthermore, what is called a ‘boundary’ is a mark of form; when this form is discriminated and broken apart and scattered, the boundary is unfindable, and there is no original mark.

Furthermore, because unconditioned dharmas neither arise nor cease, they are without number, without measure, and without boundary; when form is contemplated with the contemplation of the emptiness of dharmas, form is all empty, and is of one and the same mark with space and with unconditioned dharmas.

Within immeasurable, numberless, boundless dharmas, even a single mote of dust is unfindable—how much less a bodhisattva! Therefore it is said, ‘the five aggregates are boundless, and the bodhisattva too is boundless’. Just as form is boundless, so too up to the eighteen unshared dharmas, discriminated according to their marks, as said before.

Form Is Not the Bodhisattva, and Apart from Form There Is No Bodhisattva

Because these five aggregates are immeasurable, numberless, and boundless, it cannot be said that form is the bodhisattva; the remaining four aggregates (feeling, perception, constructions, and consciousness) are likewise.

Furthermore, if form were apart from mind and mental-factor dharmas, it would be like grass, trees, tiles, and stones—how could it be called a bodhisattva? If mind and mental-factor dharmas were apart from form, they would have no place to rest upon and could do nothing—how could they be called a bodhisattva?

Furthermore, the six perfections, the eighteen emptinesses, the thirty-seven limbs of the path, the ten powers up to the eighteen unshared dharmas, suchness, dharma-nature, the limit of reality, the nature of the inconceivable, the three gates of liberation, the dhāraṇī gates and the samādhi gates, sarvajñā (omniscience), path-knowledge, omniscience of all kinds, the three vehicles and the persons of the three vehicles—only when these dharmas are cultivated or contemplated is one called a bodhisattva. These dharmas are all empty through the emptiness of their own marks: that is, dānapāramitā, the mark of dānapāramitā is empty, and so on up to the Buddha, the mark of the Buddha is empty.

All Places and Omniscience of All Kinds: Distinguishing Names and Marks

What is called ‘all places’ is the five aggregates, the twelve sense-fields, the eighteen elements, and so on up to omniscience of all kinds.

What is called ‘omniscience of all kinds’ is the eighteen emptinesses and the three gates of liberation. Prajñāpāramitā contemplates dharmas as permanent or impermanent and so on, entering one gate, two gates, up to immeasurable gates and so on; this is called omniscience of all kinds. Seeking the bodhisattva within it, he is unfindable.

Again, within its own dharma there is no own dharma, and there is also no other dharma. As it is said here: ‘Form is unfindable in form; form is unfindable in feeling. Feeling is unfindable in feeling; feeling is unfindable in form; and so on up to: prajñāpāramitā is unfindable in prajñāpāramitā; and so on up to: within teaching and transforming, teaching and transforming is unfindable.’

Within Provisional Names, a Name Is Further Set Up

What is called ‘having only a name’ means that these five aggregates break down, scatter, and perish, and are no different from space. This bodhisattva has only a name, like a conjured person: within provisional names a further name is set up for him.

Subhūti said to Śāriputra: ‘Not only is the bodhisattva a provisional name; the five aggregates too are all provisional names; within provisional names, the mark of provisional names is unfindable, and all enter into the highest meaning. If it is empty in this way, it is not the bodhisattva.’

Furthermore, from the six perfections up to omniscience of all kinds—because one practises these dharmas, one is called a bodhisattva; these dharmas too are provisional names, the bodhisattva too is a provisional name, empty and nothing at all. These dharmas all have names set up for them by force; they exist only through the coming together of causes and conditions, and they have no real substance either.

The Substance of a Dharma Is Non-existent from the Start—How Could There Be Arising: The Close of the First Part

What is called ‘the name of the self is ultimately non-arising’ is as was already said at the opening of this chapter. Here Subhūti too, likewise, refutes the self by the emptiness of beings and the emptiness of dharmas, as it is said: ‘The self is ultimately unfindable, and so on up to the knower and the seer being unfindable; where could there be arising? The five aggregates are ultimately unfindable; where is there any arising of the five aggregates? And so on up to the feeling born from the condition of mind-contact, which is ultimately unfindable; where could there be arising? The six perfections are ultimately unfindable, and so on up to the dhāraṇī gates, the samādhi gates, the śrāvaka, the pratyekabuddha, and the Buddha, which are ultimately unfindable; where could there be arising?’

If a dharma existed first, then one could ask about its arising; the substance of the dharma is from the first of itself non-existent—where is there arising?

Arising from Coming Together, Therefore Without Self-Nature: Counting All the Way from the Five Aggregates to the Eighteen Unshared Dharmas

‘It is just as Śāriputra said: "As with me, so too dharmas are thus without self-nature." Śāriputra! Because dharmas arise from coming together, they are without self-nature. Śāriputra! Which dharmas arise from coming together and are without self-nature? Śāriputra! Form arises from coming together and is without self-nature; feeling, perception, constructions, and consciousness arise from coming together and are without self-nature. The eye arises from coming together and is without self-nature, and so on up to: the mind arises from coming together and is without self-nature. Form up to dharmas (the six outer sense-objects), the eye element up to the dharma element (the eighteen elements), the earth element up to the consciousness element (the six elements of earth, water, fire, wind, space, and consciousness), eye-contact up to mind-contact, the feeling born from the condition of eye-contact up to the feeling born from the condition of mind-contact—all arise from coming together and are without self-nature. Dānapāramitā (giving) up to prajñāpāramitā arise from coming together and are without self-nature. The four foundations of mindfulness up to the eighteen unshared dharmas arise from coming together and are without self-nature.

Impermanent Yet Not Lost, Neither Permanent nor Extinguished: The Mark of Movement Is the Mark of Emptiness

‘Furthermore, Śāriputra! All dharmas are impermanent, and yet they are not lost or destroyed.’

Śāriputra asked Subhūti: ‘Which dharmas are impermanent and yet not lost or destroyed?’

Subhūti said: ‘Form is impermanent and yet not lost or destroyed; feeling, perception, constructions, and consciousness are impermanent and yet not lost or destroyed. Why? If a dharma is impermanent, it is the mark of movement, it is the mark of emptiness. For this cause and condition, Śāriputra, all conditioned dharmas are impermanent and yet not lost or destroyed. Whether contaminated dharmas or uncontaminated dharmas, whether determinate dharmas or indeterminate dharmas—all are impermanent and yet not lost or destroyed. Why? If a dharma is impermanent, it is the mark of movement, it is the mark of emptiness. For this cause and condition, Śāriputra, all made dharmas are impermanent and yet not lost or destroyed.

‘Furthermore, Śāriputra! All dharmas are neither permanent nor extinguished.’

Śāriputra said: ‘Which dharmas are neither permanent nor extinguished?’

Subhūti said: ‘Form is neither permanent nor extinguished. Why? Its nature is simply so. Feeling, perception, constructions, and consciousness are neither permanent nor extinguished. Why? Their nature is simply so. And so on up to: the feeling born from the condition of mind-consciousness is neither permanent nor extinguished. Why? Its nature is simply so. For this cause and condition, Śāriputra, dharmas arise from coming together and are without self-nature.

Ultimately Non-arising: A Maker Is Unfindable, the Nature of Form Is Empty from the Beginning

‘Again, as Śāriputra said: "By what cause and condition is form ultimately non-arising, and are feeling, perception, constructions, and consciousness ultimately non-arising?"’

Subhūti said: ‘Form is not a dharma that is made; feeling, perception, constructions, and consciousness are not dharmas that are made. Why? Because a maker is unfindable. Śāriputra! The eye is not a dharma that is made. Why? Because a maker is unfindable; and so on up to the mind, which is likewise. The eye element up to the feeling born from the condition of mind-contact is likewise. Furthermore, Śāriputra! All dharmas are neither arisen nor made. Why? Because a maker is unfindable. For this cause and condition, Śāriputra, form is ultimately non-arising, and feeling, perception, constructions, and consciousness are ultimately non-arising.

‘Again, as Śāriputra said: "By what cause and condition is what is ultimately non-arising not called form? Is what is ultimately non-arising not called feeling, perception, constructions, and consciousness?"’

Subhūti said: ‘The nature of form is empty, and this emptiness has no arising, no ceasing, and also no abiding and no alteration; the nature of feeling, perception, constructions, and consciousness is empty, and this emptiness has no arising, no ceasing, no abiding and no alteration. The eye, up to all conditioned dharmas—their nature is empty, and this emptiness has no arising, no ceasing, no abiding and no alteration. For this cause and condition, Śāriputra, what is ultimately non-arising is not called form; what is ultimately non-arising is not called feeling, perception, constructions, and consciousness.’

Non-arising Is Itself Prajñā: Without Duality and Without Difference, and Apart from Non-arising There Is No Bodhisattva

‘Again, as Śāriputra said: "By what cause and condition is it said that a dharma which is ultimately non-arising should still be taught prajñāpāramitā?"’

Subhūti said: ‘Ultimate non-arising is prajñāpāramitā, and prajñāpāramitā is ultimate non-arising; prajñāpāramitā and ultimate non-arising are without duality and without difference. For this cause and condition, Śāriputra, I said—should what is ultimately non-arising still be taught prajñāpāramitā?’

‘Again, as Śāriputra said: "By what cause and condition is it said that, apart from ultimate non-arising, there is no bodhisattva who practises unsurpassed, right, and complete awakening?"’

Subhūti said: ‘When the bodhisattva-mahāsattva practises prajñāpāramitā, he does not see ultimate non-arising as different from prajñāpāramitā, nor does he see ultimate non-arising as different from the bodhisattva; ultimate non-arising and the bodhisattva are without duality and without difference. He does not see ultimate non-arising as different from form. Why? This ultimate non-arising and form are without duality and without difference; he does not see ultimate non-arising as different from feeling, perception, constructions, and consciousness. Why? Ultimate non-arising and feeling, perception, constructions, and consciousness are without duality and without difference. And so on up to omniscience of all kinds, which is likewise. For this cause and condition, Śāriputra, apart from ultimate non-arising there is no bodhisattva who practises unsurpassed, right, and complete awakening.’

Not Sinking, Not Regretting: Seeing All Dharmas as Like a Dream, Like an Illusion, Like a Mirage, Like a Shadow, Like a Transformation

‘Again, as Śāriputra said: "By what cause and condition is it that, when a bodhisattva hears such a teaching and his mind does not sink, does not regret, is not startled, not frightened, and not afraid, he is called a bodhisattva who practises prajñāpāramitā?"’

Subhūti said: ‘The bodhisattva-mahāsattva does not see in dharmas any mark of being able to awaken or able to know; he sees all dharmas as like a dream, like an illusion, like a mirage, like a shadow, like a transformation. Śāriputra! For this cause and condition, when a bodhisattva hears such a teaching, his mind does not sink, does not regret, is not startled, not frightened, and not afraid.’

The Commentary on Arising from Coming Together: The Simile of Eye-Consciousness—the One Who Sees Is Wholly Unfindable

What follows is the treatise-author's explanation.

The treatise-author explains: what is called ‘dharmas are without self-nature’ uses the emptiness of nature to refute each individual nature of dharmas.

Here Subhūti himself states the reason: ‘Dharmas arise from coming together and are without self-nature.’ For example, the five aggregates and other dharmas, together with the six perfections and other wholesome dharmas, come together, and from this the name ‘bodhisattva’ arises; this bodhisattva arises from made dharmas, from the coming together of many conditions, and is not formed by a single dharma alone—therefore he is said to be a provisional name. These many dharmas themselves also arise from the side of coming together. It is like this: there is the eye, there is form, there is light, there is space, there is a mind that thinks to see—when these causes and conditions come together, eye-consciousness then arises; within this, one cannot say that the eye is the one who sees, nor can one say that consciousness is the one who sees, that form is the one who sees, or that light is the one who sees. Since the eye, form, consciousness, and the rest each cannot see anything, there ought also to be no seeing within their coming together. Therefore this matter of seeing is ultimately empty, like an illusion, like a dream. All dharmas are likewise.

The Commentary on Impermanent Yet Not Lost and on Ultimate Non-arising: Refuting the Inversion of Permanence, and Refuting the Inversion of Annihilation Too

The treatise-author explains: furthermore, ‘all dharmas are impermanent and yet not lost or destroyed’—impermanence refutes the inversion that clings to permanence; not lost refutes the inversion of annihilation. This dharma that is impermanent and yet not lost is the gate of entry into the real mark, and so Subhūti says to Śāriputra: ‘Impermanence is the mark of movement, it is the mark of emptiness.’ All dharmas are likewise.

Furthermore, what is called ‘all dharmas are neither permanent nor lost’ is as was said earlier in the meaning that follows the eighteen emptinesses.

What is called ‘form is ultimately non-arising’ is because the maker, the producer, and the one who gives rise to the five aggregates are all unfindable.

Furthermore, the mark of arising is unfindable, as was said earlier in the passage that refutes ‘arising’.

All dharmas are likewise.

As for ‘why it is said that if form does not arise it is not form, not feeling, perception, constructions, and consciousness’, here Subhūti himself explains: ‘Form arises from causes and conditions, is without self-nature, and is always the mark of emptiness. If a dharma is always the mark of emptiness, this dharma has no mark of arising, no mark of ceasing, and no mark of abiding and alteration. Feeling, perception, constructions, and consciousness are likewise.’ Therefore a dharma with the mark of non-arising is unconditioned, and not of the mark of the conditioned. The remaining dharmas are likewise.

The Commentary on Teaching Prajñā and on Not Fearing: One Who Wakes from a Dream, the Wise Before a Conjuring

The treatise-author explains: what is called ‘what is ultimately non-arising—who should still be taught prajñā?’—ultimate non-arising is the real mark of all dharmas, and the real mark of all dharmas is prajñāpāramitā; how could one take prajñāpāramitā and teach it to prajñāpāramitā?

If, apart from this ultimate non-arising, there were a separate bodhisattva, then he should be taught prajñāpāramitā; but the bodhisattva, prajñāpāramitā, and ultimate non-arising—the three are without duality and without difference, so how can one still speak of teaching a practitioner of the path who is apart from ultimate non-arising? This has already been explained together in the exposition above.

What is called ‘the bodhisattva hears this and does not sink, does not regret’—within all dharmas the bodhisattva does not see a self, does not see a being, and so on up to one who knows and one who sees; there is no speaker and there is no hearer, there is no wrong teaching and no right teaching, and there is also no ‘one who does not speak’; he knows that all dharmas arise because causes and conditions come together, and are destroyed because the many conditions scatter apart, and that there is no one who makes them arise and no one who makes them cease—so he is not afraid, not frightened, does not sink, does not regret. The bodhisattva knows that all dharmas are false and deceptive, without reality and without fixity; even when death presses right before his eyes, even if he falls into the Avīci hell, his mind still does not stir—how much less would he be terrified on hearing empty words! It is like a person who in a dream sees frightening things; after he wakes he has no fear in his mind, because he knows that the dharma of dreams can deceive the human mind and that there is no real event; the bodhisattva is likewise: when he enters the dream of the worldly mind he sees things to fear, but when he realises the real mark of all dharmas and wakes, he has nothing to fear; he knows that dharmas are only false and deceptive, with nothing true.

Furthermore, it is like the things conjured up by a conjurer's art: although a person of wisdom sees them, his mind is not deluded, because he knows they are deceptive dharmas; the bodhisattva is likewise: he knows that all dharmas are like an illusion, able to deceive the human mind, with nothing real in them, and therefore he is not afraid. Like a mirage, like a shadow, like a transformation—these are likewise.

The Five Nots: From Not Receiving Form to Not Saying ‘This Is Omniscience of All Kinds’

Subhūti said to the Buddha: ‘World-Honored One! When the bodhisattva-mahāsattva practises prajñāpāramitā and contemplates dharmas in this way, the bodhisattva-mahāsattva does not receive form, does not display form, does not abide in form, does not cling to form, and also does not say "this is form"; feeling, perception, constructions, and consciousness he likewise does not receive, does not display, does not abide in, does not cling to, and also does not say "this is feeling, perception, constructions, and consciousness". The eye he does not receive, does not display, does not abide in, does not cling to, and also does not say "this is the eye"; the ear, nose, tongue, and body are the same; the mind too he does not receive, does not display, does not abide in, does not cling to, and also does not say "this is the mind". Dānapāramitā he does not receive, does not display, does not abide in, does not cling to, and also does not say "this is dānapāramitā"; śīlapāramitā, kṣāntipāramitā, vīryapāramitā, and dhyānapāramitā are the same; prajñāpāramitā he does not receive, does not display, does not abide in, does not cling to, and also does not say "this is prajñāpāramitā". Inner emptiness he does not receive, does not display, does not abide in, does not cling to, and also does not say "this is inner emptiness"; and so on up to the emptiness of non-existent and existent dharmas, which is likewise. Furthermore, World-Honored One! When the bodhisattva-mahāsattva practises prajñāpāramitā, the four foundations of mindfulness he does not receive, does not display, does not abide in, does not cling to, and also does not say "these are the four foundations of mindfulness"; and so on up to the eighteen unshared dharmas, which he does not receive, does not display, does not abide in, does not cling to, and also does not say "these are the eighteen unshared dharmas". All the samādhi gates, all the dhāraṇī gates, and so on up to omniscience of all kinds—none of them does he receive, display, abide in, or cling to, and he also does not say "this is omniscience of all kinds".

Non-arising Is Not Form, Non-ceasing Is Not Form: All Dharmas Enter the Count of the Non-dual

‘Furthermore, World-Honored One! When the bodhisattva-mahāsattva practises prajñāpāramitā, he does not see form, and so on up to he does not see omniscience of all kinds. Why? Form not arising is not form; feeling, perception, constructions, and consciousness not arising is not consciousness. The eye not arising is not the eye; the ear, nose, tongue, body, and mind not arising is not the mind. Dānapāramitā not arising is not dānapāramitā; and so on up to prajñāpāramitā not arising is not prajñāpāramitā. Why? Form and non-arising are neither two nor different; and so on up to prajñāpāramitā and non-arising are neither two nor different. Inner emptiness not arising is not inner emptiness; and so on up to the emptiness of non-existent and existent dharmas not arising is not the emptiness of non-existent and existent dharmas. Why? Inner emptiness up to the emptiness of non-existent and existent dharmas and non-arising are neither two nor different. World-Honored One! The four foundations of mindfulness not arising are not the four foundations of mindfulness. Why? The four foundations of mindfulness and non-arising are neither two nor different. Why? World-Honored One! This dharma of non-arising is not one, not two, not three, not different. Therefore the four foundations of mindfulness and non-arising are neither two nor different. And so on up to the eighteen unshared dharmas not arising are not the eighteen unshared dharmas. Why? The eighteen unshared dharmas and non-arising are neither two nor different. Why? World-Honored One! This dharma of non-arising is not one, not two, not three, not different. Therefore the eighteen unshared dharmas not arising are not the eighteen unshared dharmas. World-Honored One! Suchness not arising is not suchness; and so on up to the nature of the inconceivable not arising is not the nature of the inconceivable. World-Honored One! This unsurpassed, right, and complete awakening does not arise, and omniscience is likewise; omniscience of all kinds not arising is not omniscience of all kinds. Why? This unsurpassed, right, and complete awakening, up to omniscience of all kinds, and non-arising are neither two nor different. Why? World-Honored One! This dharma of non-arising is not one, not two, not three, not different. Therefore, and so on up to: omniscience of all kinds not arising is not omniscience of all kinds.

‘World-Honored One! The non-ceasing mark of form is not form. Why? Form and the non-ceasing mark are neither two nor different. Why? World-Honored One! This dharma of non-ceasing is not one, not two, not three, not different. Therefore the non-ceasing mark of form is not form; the non-ceasing mark of feeling, perception, constructions, and consciousness is not consciousness. Why? Consciousness and non-ceasing are neither two nor different. Why? World-Honored One! This dharma of non-ceasing is not one, not two, not three, not different. Therefore the non-ceasing mark of consciousness is not consciousness. Dānapāramitā up to prajñāpāramitā, inner emptiness up to the emptiness of non-existent and existent dharmas, the four foundations of mindfulness up to the eighteen unshared dharmas—all are likewise.

‘World-Honored One! Therefore form enters the count of non-dual dharmas; feeling, perception, constructions, and consciousness enter the count of non-dual dharmas; and so on up to omniscience of all kinds, which enters the count of non-dual dharmas.’

The Commentary on the Five Right Contemplations: The Fire of Impermanence, the Empty Village, and Immeasurable Faults

The treatise-author explains: Subhūti reports to the Buddha that the bodhisattva's being able to contemplate dharmas in this way is the practice of five right contemplations within the five aggregates. What is called ‘not receiving’ is because within the five aggregates there is the fire of impermanence, which can burn the mind.

What is called ‘not viewing’ is not grasping marks—not only contemplating impermanence and the other faults, but also contemplating these five aggregates as empty, because he does not grasp marks.

What is called ‘not abiding’ is not relying on the five aggregates; because he fears the coming of the many thieves of the afflictions, he does not dare to abide long. It is like an empty village where no one lives, a place where robbers stop and roam; a person of wisdom should not abide there long.

What is called ‘not clinging’—even if the five aggregates had only a single fault, one still ought not to cling to them; how much more so when the body has hunger and thirst, cold and heat, old age, sickness, death, and the rest, the mind has sorrow, fear, jealousy, anger, and the rest, and in later lives one will still fall into the three evil destinies! All is impermanent, suffering, empty, and without self, not free to be its own master; faults like these, immeasurable and boundless—how could one cling to them?

What is called ‘not saying this is form’ is not using wrong view to say that form is permanent, is impermanent, and so on; not saying that the five aggregates have such a fixed mark. And so on up to omniscience of all kinds, which is likewise.

Why? When these five right practices are carried out within form, these five aggregates all have no mark of arising and are all of one mark, and one mark is no mark; if there is no mark, there are no five aggregates to be set up. And so on up to omniscience of all kinds, which is likewise.

The Commentary on the One Mark of Non-arising: Attaining the Mind of Non-arising Is Itself Prajñā

The treatise-author explains: the mark of non-arising of all dharmas and prajñāpāramitā are neither two nor different; attaining this mind of non-arising is itself prajñāpāramitā; having attained prajñāpāramitā, one knows that dharmas neither arise nor cease. Therefore prajñāpāramitā is itself non-arising, neither two nor different.

Furthermore, Subhūti himself states the cause and condition, namely: this dharma of non-arising is not one mark, not two marks, not three, not different. Why? Because dharmas and non-arising are alike of one mark. And so on up to omniscience of all kinds, which is likewise.

As with non-arising, so too is non-ceasing.

The Commentary on the Final Question: Having Broken Clinging to Form, Do Not Then Cling to Form as Empty

Someone asks: why, at the very end, is it said that ‘form up to omniscience of all kinds enters the count of non-dual dharmas’?

The answer: if the bodhisattva has not yet broken form, he will give rise to craving and other fetters and cling to form and the other dharmas; once he has broken form, he will again give rise to wrong view and cling to this ‘form is empty’ and the like. Now, because form and the other dharmas are illuminated and contemplated with the wisdom of emptiness, all of them are empty, of a non-dual mark.

These dharmas are false and deceptive and unreal; because they are gathered in by the inner sense-fields and the outer sense-fields, they are named two; form and the rest, up to omniscience of all kinds, being apart from this two, are named non-dual. Now Subhūti, out of compassion for beings and to benefit the bodhisattvas, says: ‘These dharmas are non-dual, and enter into the count of non-dual dharmas.’

Śāriputra's Three Questions, and Subhūti's Answer on the Meaning of Bodhisattva: Arousing the Great Mind, Knowing Without Clinging

At that time the venerable Śāriputra said to Subhūti: ‘The bodhisattva-mahāsattva practises prajñāpāramitā and contemplates all dharmas—what is a bodhisattva? What is prajñāpāramitā? What is contemplation?’

Subhūti said to Śāriputra: ‘As to what you ask, “What is a bodhisattva?”—for the sake of anuttarā samyaksaṃbodhi (unsurpassed, right, and complete awakening) this person arouses the great mind, and therefore he is called a bodhisattva. He also knows all dharmas and all their kinds of marks, and yet within them he does not cling; he knows the mark of form and does not cling, up to knowing the eighteen unshared dharmas and also not clinging.’

Śāriputra asked Subhūti: ‘What is the mark of all dharmas?’

Subhūti said: ‘If, by way of names, the coming together of causes and conditions, and so on, one knows of dharmas that this is form, that this is sound, smell, taste, touch, and dharmas, that this is inner, that this is outer, that this is a conditioned dharma, that this is an unconditioned dharma—knowing dharmas by such names, marks, and words is called knowing the mark of dharmas.

Answering the Meaning of Prajñā and the Meaning of Contemplation: It Is Called Prajñā Because of Far Removal, and Contemplation Is the Eightfold Double Negation

‘As to what Śāriputra asks, “What is prajñāpāramitā?”—because of far removal, it is called prajñāpāramitā. From what dharmas is it far removed? It is far removed from the aggregates (the five aggregates), the elements (the eighteen elements), and the sense-fields (the twelve sense-fields); far removed from dānapāramitā (the perfection of giving) up to dhyānapāramitā (the perfection of meditation); far removed from inner emptiness up to the emptiness of non-existent and existent dharmas (the last of the eighteen emptinesses); therefore far removal is called prajñāpāramitā. Furthermore, it is far removed from the four foundations of mindfulness, up to far removed from the eighteen unshared dharmas, far removed from omniscience. Through this cause and condition, far removal is called prajñāpāramitā.

‘As to what Śāriputra asks, “What is contemplation?”—Śāriputra! When the bodhisattva-mahāsattva practises prajñāpāramitā, he contemplates form as neither permanent nor impermanent, neither pleasure nor suffering, neither self nor non-self, neither empty nor not empty, neither a mark nor signless, neither action nor non-action, neither quiescent nor not quiescent, neither removed nor not removed; feeling, perception, constructions, and consciousness are likewise. Dānapāramitā up to prajñāpāramitā, inner emptiness up to the emptiness of non-existent and existent dharmas, the four foundations of mindfulness up to the eighteen unshared dharmas, all the samādhi gates (the gates of concentration in which the mind abides on a single object), all the dhāraṇī gates (the gates of total retention), up to omniscience of all kinds—all of these he contemplates as neither permanent nor impermanent, neither pleasure nor suffering, neither self nor non-self, neither empty nor not empty, neither a mark nor signless, neither action nor non-action, neither quiescent nor not quiescent, neither removed nor not removed. Śāriputra! This is called the bodhisattva-mahāsattva contemplating all dharmas when he practises prajñāpāramitā.’

What follows is the commentary.

Why Ask Again What Was Already Asked: A Great Tree Is Not Felled at One Stroke, and at a Fine Pool All May Come to Drink, Earlier or Later

Someone asks: The so-called ‘meaning of bodhisattva, the meaning of prajñāpāramitā, and the meaning of the contemplations’ were already asked about above; why are they asked about again now?

The treatise-author answers: The simile of the great tree has already been given in answer earlier—a great tree cannot be felled at one stroke; this matter is difficult, and so it is asked again.

Furthermore, this prajñāpāramitā has immeasurable meanings, as is said in the chapter on Dharmodgata: ‘Prajñāpāramitā is immeasurable like the water of the great ocean, and like Mount Sumeru with all its kinds of adornment.’ Therefore the question is put.

Again, although this question is the same, the meanings given in answer differ in all kinds of ways.

Furthermore, the Buddhas have cut off love of dharma; they do not set up scriptures, nor do they adorn their words; solely to rescue beings, they speak according to those who are to be liberated. It is like a vast, clear, and cool fine pool: immeasurable beings come to drink, earlier or later, and each goes away satisfied. Those who hear the Dharma are likewise—the Buddha has earlier spoken of the bodhisattva, of prajñā, and of contemplation; those who came first gained some understanding and went away, while those who came later have not yet heard it, and so it is asked again.

Explaining ‘Bodhisattva’: Of the Three Kinds of Awakening, Only the Buddha's Awakening Is Taken

As to what is called ‘bodhisattva’:

‘Awakening’ (bodhi) is of three kinds: there is the awakening of the arhat, there is the awakening of the pratyekabuddha, and there is the awakening of the Buddha. The wisdom of one beyond training is pure and without stain, and so it is called awakening. Although the bodhisattva has great wisdom, the residual habits of the afflictions have not yet been wholly removed, and so it is not called awakening. Here only one kind is spoken of, namely the awakening of the Buddha. ‘Sattva’ is rendered in the language of Qin as “beings”. These beings, for the sake of the unsurpassed path, arouse the mind and practise.

Furthermore, ‘sattva’ is also called the great mind. This person arouses the great mind and seeks unsurpassed awakening but has not yet realised it, and therefore he is called a ‘bodhisattva’. The Buddha has already attained this awakening and so is not called a bodhisattva, because the great mind has already been fulfilled.

The remaining meanings of ‘bodhisattva’ are as was said at length earlier.

Furthermore, the Buddha here himself states the cause and condition: ‘This person practises for the sake of the Buddha path, and knows the mark of all dharmas and yet does not cling.’ What is called ‘the mark of all dharmas’ is the approach by which dharmas can be known—that this is form, that this is sound, and so on. To speak of the meaning of bodhisattva in brief: first he knows the specific mark of each dharma, such as the hard mark of earth, and afterwards he knows the mark of ultimate emptiness; within these two kinds of wisdom he also does not cling, but acts solely for the sake of liberating beings.

Having attained such wisdom, the bodhisattva is able to be far removed from all dharmas with specific marks. For instance, within form he is removed from form; being removed from form is the emptiness of specific marks; what is called ‘far removal’ is another name for ‘emptiness’. The bodhisattva attains prajñāpāramitā, and toward all dharmas his mind is entirely far removed. Why? Because he sees the faults of all dharmas.

Explaining Prajñā and Contemplation: Far Removal Is Another Name for Emptiness

‘Aluomi’ is rendered in the language of Qin as “far removal”; ‘pāramitā’ is rendered in the language of Qin as “crossing to the other shore”. These two sounds are close, and their meanings also meet, and so ‘aluomi’ is used to explain ‘pāramitā’.

From what dharmas is it far removed? From the aggregates, the elements, and the sense-fields, up to omniscience. Because it is far removed from these dharmas, it is called prajñāpāramitā; just as dhyānapāramitā is able to tame a person's mind, prajñāpāramitā is able to make a person far removed from all dharmas.

What is called ‘contemplation’ is not contemplating dharmas as permanent, impermanent, and so on, as was said earlier.

Why Not Arising Is Not Form: In the Emptiness of Form There Is No Form and No Arising

Śāriputra asked Subhūti: ‘Through what cause and condition is form not arising then not form? Feeling, perception, constructions, and consciousness not arising then not consciousness, up to omniscience of all kinds not arising then not omniscience of all kinds?’

Subhūti said: ‘Form—the mark of form is empty, and within the emptiness of form there is no form and no arising; through this cause and condition, form not arising is then not form. Feeling, perception, constructions, and consciousness—the mark of consciousness is empty, and within the emptiness of consciousness there is no consciousness and no arising; through this cause and condition, feeling, perception, constructions, and consciousness not arising are then not feeling, perception, constructions, and consciousness. Śāriputra! Dānapāramitā—the mark of dānapāramitā is empty, and within the emptiness of dānapāramitā there is no dānapāramitā and no arising; śīlapāramitā (the perfection of morality), kṣāntipāramitā (the perfection of patience), vīryapāramitā (the perfection of vigour), dhyānapāramitā, prajñāpāramitā (the perfection of wisdom)—prajñāpāramitā: the mark of prajñāpāramitā is empty, and within the emptiness of prajñāpāramitā there is no prajñāpāramitā and no arising; through this cause and condition, Śāriputra, prajñāpāramitā not arising is then not prajñāpāramitā. Inner emptiness up to the emptiness of non-existent and existent dharmas, the four foundations of mindfulness up to the eighteen unshared dharmas, and omniscience of all kinds are likewise; through this cause and condition, inner emptiness not arising is then not inner emptiness, up to omniscience of all kinds not arising is then not omniscience of all kinds.’

Why Not Two Is Not Form, and Enters the Number of Non-dual Dharmas: One Mark, the Signless—Form Is Itself Non-arising

Śāriputra asked Subhūti: ‘Through what cause and condition do you say, “Form not two is then not form; feeling, perception, constructions, and consciousness not two are then not consciousness; up to omniscience of all kinds not two is then not omniscience of all kinds”?’

Subhūti answered: ‘All that is form is all that is not two; all that is feeling, perception, constructions, and consciousness is all that is not two. All these dharmas neither come together nor disperse; they are without form, without shape, without resistance, of one mark—what is called the signless. The eye up to omniscience of all kinds are likewise. Through this cause and condition, Śāriputra, form not two is then not form; feeling, perception, constructions, and consciousness not two are then not consciousness; up to omniscience of all kinds not two is then not omniscience of all kinds.’

Śāriputra asked Subhūti: ‘Through what cause and condition do you say, “This form enters the number of non-dual dharmas; feeling, perception, constructions, and consciousness enter the number of non-dual dharmas; up to omniscience of all kinds enters the number of non-dual dharmas”?’

Subhūti answered: ‘Form is not different from non-arising, and non-arising is not different from form; form is itself non-arising, and non-arising is itself form. Feeling, perception, constructions, and consciousness are not different from non-arising, and non-arising is not different from consciousness; consciousness is itself non-arising, and non-arising is itself consciousness. Through this cause and condition, Śāriputra, form enters the number of non-dual dharmas; feeling, perception, constructions, and consciousness enter the number of non-dual dharmas; up to omniscience of all kinds is likewise.’

What follows is the commentary.

The Simile of Clearing Away a Privy to Make a Dwelling: The Nature of Form Is Always of Itself Non-arising, Not Made So by the Power of Wisdom

Someone asks: When the previous chapter ended, the question of ‘not arising’ should have followed at once; why is it asked only here?

The treatise-author answers: The three great dharmas are easy to understand and benefit many beings, and so they were asked first.

‘Through what cause and condition is form not arising not form, up to omniscience of all kinds not arising not omniscience of all kinds?’

Subhūti answers: ‘Form is empty; within form there is no mark of form.’

The practitioner uses this wisdom of non-arising to make form non-arising; if he is able to attain this non-arising, he forms in his mind the thought, ‘Now I have attained the real mark of form’—and so it is said, ‘form not arising is not form’. In truth the nature of form is always of itself non-arising; it is not that the power of wisdom now makes it non-arising. It is as when someone breaks form down and makes it empty, yet still keeps the notion of the form that was there originally; for example, one clears away a privy and makes it into a dwelling, and although now there is no longer a privy, the notion of impurity still remains. If one is able to know that the privy was from the beginning non-existent, merely made by illusory transformation, one no longer has the notion of a privy. The practitioner is likewise: if he is able to know that form from the very beginning has been naturally non-arising, he no longer keeps the notion of form. Therefore it is said, ‘form not arising is not form’. Up to omniscience of all kinds is likewise.

Non-arising and Not Two: One in Meaning, Different in Gate—the Emptiness of Specific Marks and the Emptiness of Dispersal

Someone asks: You yourself said earlier, ‘Non-arising is itself non-duality’; why is it asked again now?

The treatise-author answers: Although the meaning is one, the gate of contemplation by which one enters differs.

What was said above breaks down the views that the effect already exists within the cause, or that there is no effect; whether arising and the dharma are one or different, and so on; whether this arising is the first arising or a later arising—breaking down all such kinds of arising is called ‘non-arising’. What is now spoken of breaks down all kinds of twos, such as the eye and form, existence and non-existence, and so it is called ‘not two’.

Some practitioners first enter the gate of the contemplation of non-arising and afterwards enter not-two; some first enter not-two and afterwards enter the contemplation of non-arising. Although the meaning is one, practitioners each make their own distinctions.

Breaking down the two of form, it is said to be ‘not two’; breaking down the arising of form, it is said to be ‘non-arising’.

The cause and condition of non-arising spoken of above is ‘the emptiness of specific marks’; the cause and condition of not-two spoken of now is ‘neither coming together nor dispersing, of one mark—what is called the signless’, and so on. Although the meaning is the same single emptiness, above it is the emptiness of specific marks, while here it is the emptiness of dispersal.

Breaking Down and Dispersing Is Itself Non-arising; There Can Be No Further Non-arising

As to what is called ‘form enters the number of non-dual dharmas’—the practitioner contemplates the mark of form as neither arising nor ceasing; at this time the form he discriminates is now turned into non-arising, and so it is said that form not arising is itself not two. Why? Once form is broken down and dispersed, it is non-arising. Just as, when dharmas were discriminated earlier, there could be no separate arising apart from form, so now, form being broken down and dispersed is itself non-arising, and there can also be no further, separate non-arising. Therefore form itself enters the number of non-dual dharmas.

These two arhats have finished their joint discussion before the Buddha; Subhūti reports to the Buddha and speaks this meaning again because he wishes the Buddha to bear witness to it.

Subhūti Reports to the Buddha: He Sees All Dharmas as Non-arising, Because of Ultimate Purity

At that time Subhūti said to the Buddha: ‘World-Honored One! If the bodhisattva-mahāsattva practises prajñāpāramitā and contemplates all dharmas in this way, at this time he sees form as non-arising, because of ultimate purity; he sees feeling, perception, constructions, and consciousness as non-arising, because of ultimate purity. He sees the self as non-arising, up to the knower and the seer as non-arising, because of ultimate purity. He sees dānapāramitā as non-arising up to prajñāpāramitā as non-arising, because of ultimate purity. He sees inner emptiness as non-arising up to the emptiness of non-existent and existent dharmas as non-arising, because of ultimate purity. He sees the four foundations of mindfulness as non-arising up to the eighteen unshared dharmas as non-arising, because of ultimate purity. He sees all samādhi and all dhāraṇī as non-arising, because of ultimate purity; up to seeing omniscience of all kinds as non-arising, because of ultimate purity. He sees the ordinary person and the dharmas of the ordinary person as non-arising, because of ultimate purity. He sees the srota-āpanna and the dharmas of the srota-āpanna, the sakṛdāgāmin and the dharmas of the sakṛdāgāmin, the anāgāmin and the dharmas of the anāgāmin, the arhat and the dharmas of the arhat, the pratyekabuddha and the dharmas of the pratyekabuddha, the bodhisattva and the dharmas of the bodhisattva, the Buddha and the dharmas of the Buddha as non-arising, because of ultimate purity.’

Śāriputra Raises a Difficulty: If All Dharmas Do Not Arise, Why Cut Off the Fetters and Cultivate the Path, Attain Awakening and Turn the Dharma Wheel?

Śāriputra said to Subhūti: ‘According to the meaning of what I have heard Subhūti say—form is not arising, feeling, perception, constructions, and consciousness are not arising, up to the Buddha and the dharmas of the Buddha are not arising. If that is so, one ought not to attain the srota-āpanna and the fruit of the srota-āpanna, the sakṛdāgāmin and the fruit of the sakṛdāgāmin, the anāgāmin and the fruit of the anāgāmin, the arhat and the fruit of the arhat, the pratyekabuddha and the path of the pratyekabuddha; one ought not to attain the bodhisattva-mahāsattva, or omniscience of all kinds; nor would there be the distinctions of the six paths; nor would one attain the five kinds of awakening of the bodhisattva-mahāsattva. Subhūti! If all dharmas are of the mark of not arising, why does the srota-āpanna cultivate the path in order to cut off the three fetters, why does the sakṛdāgāmin cultivate the path in order to make lust, hatred, and delusion grow thin, why does the anāgāmin cultivate the path in order to cut off the five fetters of the lower part, and why does the arhat cultivate the path in order to cut off the five fetters of the upper part? Why does the pratyekabuddha cultivate the path for the sake of the dharmas of the pratyekabuddha? Why does the bodhisattva-mahāsattva do what is hard to do and undergo all kinds of suffering for the sake of beings? Why does the Buddha attain anuttarā samyaksaṃbodhi? Why does the Buddha turn the Dharma wheel?’

Subhūti Answers: Within the Dharma of Non-arising Nothing Is Attained, and the Bodhisattva Does Not Practise the Path with a Mind That Finds It Hard

Subhūti said to Śāriputra: ‘I do not wish that there be any attainment in the dharma of non-arising. Nor do I wish that within the dharma of non-arising one attain the srota-āpanna and the fruit of the srota-āpanna, up to not wishing that within the dharma of non-arising one attain the arhat and the fruit of the arhat, the pratyekabuddha and the path of the pratyekabuddha. Nor do I wish that within the dharma of non-arising the bodhisattva do what is hard to do and undergo all kinds of suffering for the sake of beings. Nor does the bodhisattva practise the path with a mind that finds it hard. Why? Śāriputra! One who gives rise to a mind of hardship and a mind of suffering cannot benefit immeasurable asaṃkhyeya beings. Śāriputra! Now the bodhisattva has compassion for beings and regards beings as his father and mother, brothers, as his children, and as his own self; in this way he is able to benefit immeasurable asaṃkhyeya beings, and this is because he employs nothing to be attained. Why? The bodhisattva-mahāsattva should give rise to such a mind: “Just as I am unfindable in all places and in all kinds, so too are inner and outer dharmas.” If he gives rise to such a notion, there is no mind of hardship and no mind of suffering. Why? Because this bodhisattva does not receive anything in all kinds, in all places, and in all dharmas. Śāriputra! Nor do I wish that within the dharma of non-arising the Buddha attain anuttarā samyaksaṃbodhi, nor do I wish that within the dharma of non-arising the Dharma wheel be turned, nor do I wish that the path be attained by means of the dharma of non-arising.’

What follows is the commentary.

The Two Kinds of Contemplation of Non-arising: Compliant Acceptance and the Acceptance of Non-arising

The treatise-author explains: The contemplation of non-arising is of two kinds—first, the contemplation of compliant acceptance; second, the contemplation of the acceptance of non-arising. The non-arising spoken of before is the contemplation of compliant acceptance, and is not ultimately pure; gradually cultivating the compliant contemplation, one attains the acceptance of non-arising, and then it is ultimately pure.

Someone asks: The bodhisattva has not yet wholly cut off the fetters, has not yet attained the Buddha path, and his wisdom is not yet fully pure; how can it be called ‘ultimately pure’?

The treatise-author answers: When this bodhisattva attains the acceptance of non-arising, he extinguishes the afflictions, attains the bodhisattva path, and enters the bodhisattva position; although there still remain traces of the afflictions, which come to an end only when he sits at the seat of awakening, because they cause no obstruction, it is ultimately pure.

Furthermore, what is called ‘ultimately pure’ is ultimate purity spoken of with respect to the compliant path, not spoken of with respect to the Buddha path.

Because of the emptiness of beings and the emptiness of dharmas, from seeing form as non-arising and ultimately pure, up to the Buddha and the dharmas of the Buddha being non-arising and ultimately pure.

Subhūti, through all kinds of causes and conditions, has said that the mark of all dharmas is definitely non-arising; because of this matter, Śāriputra raises such a difficulty: among the worthies and sages, the least is the srota-āpanna and the dharmas of the srota-āpanna; the greatest is the Buddha and the dharmas of the Buddha. If that is so, then among the sages there would be neither great nor small, among the dharmas of the sages neither superior nor inferior, and there would also be no distinctions of the six paths—this is the brief difficulty; the later questions, about cultivating the path in order to cut off the three fetters and so on, are the extended difficulty.

The Five Kinds of Awakening: From Arousing the Mind to the Unsurpassed

Someone asks: What are the five kinds of awakening?

The treatise-author answers: First, compliant acceptance; second, the acceptance of non-arising; with the three kinds of awakening added to these. Among the three awakenings, one passes beyond the first two and abides in the third awakening.

There are also another five kinds of awakening: the first is called ‘the awakening of arousing the mind’—amid immeasurable births and deaths, one arouses the mind for the sake of anuttarā samyaksaṃbodhi, and so it is called awakening; this is speaking of the fruit within the cause. The second is called ‘the awakening of subduing the mind’—breaking the afflictions, subduing one's own mind, and practising the perfections. The third is called ‘the awakening of illumination’—contemplating the root and branch, the general marks, and the specific marks of the dharmas of the three times, discriminating and weighing them, and attaining the real mark of all dharmas, which is ultimately pure, and is precisely the mark of prajñāpāramitā. The fourth is called ‘the awakening of going forth and arriving’—within prajñāpāramitā one attains the power of skilful means, and also does not cling to prajñāpāramitā; one extinguishes all afflictions, sees all the Buddhas of the ten directions, attains the acceptance of the non-arising of dharmas, goes out of the three realms, and arrives at sarvajñā (omniscience). The fifth is called ‘unsurpassed awakening’—sitting at the seat of awakening, cutting off the residual habits of the afflictions, and attaining anuttarā samyaksaṃbodhi.

The above is the meaning of the five awakenings.

The meaning of how the other worthies and sages cut off the fetters is as was said earlier.

Why the Practice of the Pratyekabuddha and the Many Practices of the Bodhisattva Are Not Spoken Of

Someone asks: The path of the śrāvaka speaks at length of the meaning of cutting off the fetters; why is the practice of the pratyekabuddha not spoken of, nor the bodhisattva's having all kinds of practices?

The treatise-author answers: Compared with the śrāvaka, the pratyekabuddha has no separate path; it is only that his merit is greater, his faculties sharper, and he enters a little more deeply into the real mark of all dharmas—in this he differs. Although the bodhisattva path has all kinds of many practices, the practices that are hard to do and the ascetic practices are rare matters; beings, seeing them, say with joy: ‘The bodhisattva does such practices for our sake!’ The other practices, though deep and wondrous, are not known to people and cannot move people, and so they are not spoken of.

Furthermore, as to the intent of Śāriputra's difficulty: if all dharmas are non-arising, empty, and quiescent, and all beings crave pleasure, why does the bodhisattva alone undergo ascetic practice?

Furthermore, the Buddhas always delight in far removal and quiescent extinction, have cut off love of dharma, and know definitely that dharmas neither turn nor return; why then do they still turn the Dharma wheel for the sake of beings?

The Six Kinds of Sages and the Two Kinds of Fault: Within the Dharma of Non-arising There Is Nothing at All

Subhūti spoke of the dharma of non-arising before the Buddha, and the Buddha did not rebuke or refute him; he gained a gladdened mind and the power of unobstructed delight in speaking, and answered Śāriputra: I too do not in any way wish that within the dharma of non-arising there be the six kinds of sages—the bodhisattva is left out, and so it says ‘six’—or the distinctions of the six paths. Why? Because he has attained realisation of the dharma of non-arising. The so-called distinctions among the dharmas of the sages and among the sages—within the dharma of non-arising, none of these exists at all.

Furthermore, within the dharma of non-arising there are two kinds of fault: the ‘coarse fault’—because of the wrongdoing of killing, stealing, and so on, there are the three evil destinies; and the ‘subtle fault’—because of practising the merits of giving, morality, and so on with a clinging mind, there are the three good destinies.

Great Compassion Forms the Cause and Condition: As with Father and Mother, Children, and One's Own Self, Love Arises Naturally

If the bodhisattva gives rise to a mind of hardship and a mind of suffering, he cannot liberate all beings. Just as with the small affairs of the world, if one's mind finds them hard and takes them as suffering, one still cannot accomplish them—how much less the accomplishing of the Buddha path!

The cause and condition by which one is able to accomplish it is the mind of great kindness and great compassion—regarding beings as father and mother, as children, and as one's own self. Why? Toward father and mother, children, and one's own self, love arises naturally; it is not that one first reasons it out and only then loves. Because the bodhisattva has well cultivated the mind of great compassion, toward all beings, even enemies and foes, he is equally loving and mindful. Whatever means of benefit are brought about as the recompense of great compassion, he begrudges none of them at all; all that he has, inner and outer, he gives wholly to beings. The cause and condition of not begrudging spoken of here is ‘in all places, in all kinds, and in all dharmas unfindable’. If the practitioner has first entered the Buddha-dharma, he uses the emptiness of beings and knows that dharmas are without self; now he uses the emptiness of dharmas and knows that dharmas too are empty. Through these two causes and conditions, this mind of great compassion and the emptiness of all dharmas, he is then able not to begrudge anything he has, inner or outer, to benefit beings; he does not give rise to the notion of practice that is hard to do or the notion of ascetic practice, but is single-minded, vigorous, and joyful. It is like a person who, for his own sake and for the sake of his father and mother, wife and children, toils in body and labours at his work and does not regard it as suffering; if he does it for others, he has no joyful mind.

Ascetic practice and practice that is hard to do are as is said in a later chapter, in ‘the causes and conditions of the jātaka, in which he transformed himself and manifestly took on the form of an animal’.

Returning and Not Turning: Because It Breaks Down False Inversion, It Is Called Turning the Dharma Wheel

Because all dharmas are ultimately empty and are of an inconceivable mark, all dharmas return and there is nothing that is turned, and so it is not called turning; it is only for the sake of breaking down false inversion that it is called ‘turning the Dharma wheel’.

The Path Attained by an Arising Dharma? The Path Attained by a Non-arising Dharma?—There Is Knowing and There Is Attaining, but Not by Two Dharmas

Śāriputra said to Subhūti: ‘Now, do you wish that a person attain the path by an arising dharma? Or attain the path by a non-arising dharma?’

Subhūti said to Śāriputra: ‘I do not wish that a person attain the path by an arising dharma.’

Śāriputra said: ‘Now, does Subhūti wish that a person attain the path by a non-arising dharma?’

Subhūti said: ‘Nor do I wish that a person attain the path by a non-arising dharma.’

Śāriputra said: ‘According to what Subhūti says, then there is no knowing and no attaining.’

Subhūti said: ‘There is knowing and there is attaining, only not by two dharmas. Now, because of the names of the world there is knowing and there is attaining; because of the names of the world there are the srota-āpanna up to the arhat, the pratyekabuddha, and the Buddhas; within the first real meaning there is no knowing and no attaining, no srota-āpanna up to no Buddhas.’

‘Subhūti! If because of the names of the world there is knowing and there is attaining, do the distinctions of the six paths likewise exist because of the names of the world, and not according to the first real meaning?’

Subhūti said: ‘Just so! Just so! Śāriputra! Just as because of the names of the world there is knowing and there is attaining, the distinctions of the six paths likewise exist because of the names of the world, not according to the first real meaning. Why? Śāriputra! Within the first real meaning there is no deed and no recompense, no arising and no ceasing, without purity and without stain.’

Does a Non-arising Dharma Arise? Does an Arising Arise?—Arising and Not Arising, the Two Dharmas, Are of One Mark, the Signless

Śāriputra said to Subhūti: ‘Is it that a non-arising dharma arises? Or that an arising dharma arises?’

Subhūti said: ‘I do not wish that a non-arising dharma arise, nor do I wish that an arising dharma arise.’

Śāriputra said: ‘What kind of non-arising dharma is it that you do not wish to arise?’

Subhūti said: ‘Form is a non-arising dharma, empty of self-nature, and I do not wish it to arise; feeling, perception, constructions, and consciousness are non-arising dharmas, empty of self-nature, and I do not wish them to arise; up to anuttarā samyaksaṃbodhi is a non-arising dharma, empty of self-nature, and I do not wish it to arise.’

Śāriputra said to Subhūti: ‘Does arising arise? Or does not-arising arise?’

Subhūti said: ‘Neither does arising arise, nor does not-arising arise. Why? Śāriputra! Arising and not-arising—these two dharmas neither come together nor disperse; they are without form, without shape, without resistance, of one mark—what is called the signless. Śāriputra! Through this cause and condition, neither does arising arise, nor does not-arising arise.’

Delighting in Speaking of Non-arising: Even Delight in Speaking and Words Do Not Arise

At that time Śāriputra said to Subhūti: ‘Does Subhūti delight in speaking of the dharma of non-arising and the mark of non-arising?’

Subhūti said to Śāriputra: ‘I delight in speaking of the dharma of non-arising, and I also delight in speaking of the mark of non-arising. Why? The non-arising dharmas and the mark of non-arising, and also delight in speaking and words—all these dharmas neither come together nor disperse; they are without form, without shape, without resistance, of one mark—what is called the signless.’

Śāriputra said to Subhūti: ‘You delight in speaking of the non-arising dharma, and you also delight in speaking of the non-arising mark; is this delight in speaking and these words themselves also non-arising?’

Subhūti said: ‘Just so! Just so! Śāriputra! Why? Śāriputra! Form does not arise, feeling, perception, constructions, and consciousness do not arise; the eye does not arise, up to the mind does not arise; the earth element does not arise, up to the consciousness element does not arise; bodily action does not arise, verbal action does not arise, mental action does not arise; dānapāramitā does not arise, up to omniscience of all kinds does not arise. Through this cause and condition, Śāriputra, I delight in speaking of the non-arising dharma, and I also delight in speaking of the non-arising mark, and this delight in speaking and these words also do not arise.’

What follows is the commentary.

Śāriputra's Question of the Two Barriers: Apart from the Conditioned and the Unconditioned, How Can Attaining the Path Be Spoken Of?

The treatise-author explains: At that time Śāriputra, knowing that Subhūti's delight in speaking was unobstructed, asked: ‘If all dharmas are of the mark of non-arising, how is this mark of non-arising to be realised? Is it realised by an arising dharma? Or is it realised by a non-arising dharma? If it is realised by an arising dharma—the arising dharma is false and deceptive, and you have already broken it down through all kinds of causes and conditions; moreover, it is impossible to use an arising dharma to be liberated from arising dharmas. If it is realised by a non-arising dharma—non-arising does not yet have the mark of a dharma and cannot be used to realise anything; then how is it realised?’

Subhūti does not receive either of the two dharmas, because both sides have faults, as was said earlier.

Śāriputra thinks thus: ‘The Buddha's sūtras say that two dharmas gather up all dharmas—either the conditioned or the unconditioned. Arising is conditioned; non-arising is unconditioned. Now Subhūti has departed from these two dharmas; how can he speak of the matter of attaining the path?’ Having thought thus, he then asks Subhūti: ‘Is there then no such matter as attaining the path?’

Subhūti is a great arhat, foremost in practising the samādhi of non-contention; he speaks of this non-arising only for the sake of bodhisattvas—‘How can you hold a wrong view and say that there is no one who attains the path?’ And so he says, ‘there is knowing and there is attaining’. ‘Knowing’ and ‘attaining’ are other names for attaining the fruit of the path.

For the Sake of the Worldly It Is Said to Exist: Within the First Meaning There Is No Sage and No Ordinary Person

Subhūti, fearing to contradict his earlier words, therefore says: it is because it is not by two dharmas. It is only for the sake of the worldly that it is said there are the srota-āpanna up to the Buddha. Why? All dharmas truly have no mark of self; now using “self” to distinguish the srota-āpanna up to the Buddha—this is a worldly dharma.

Furthermore, it is because the emptiness of dharmas has not yet been attained that one says, ‘this is wholesome, this is unwholesome, this is conditioned, this is unconditioned’, and so on; within the first meaning, because there are no beings, there is no srota-āpanna up to no Buddha; because dharmas are empty, there is no fruit of the srota-āpanna up to no Buddha path. The sages and the dharmas of the sages are themselves false and deceptive, without any fixed reality—how much more the deeds of the six paths of ordinary people and their recompense!

Breaking Down Arising by Four Alternatives: What Has Arisen Does Not Arise Again, and What Does Not Yet Exist Ought Not to Arise

Someone asks: Subhūti has already, through all kinds of causes and conditions, spoken definitely of the non-arising dharma; why does Śāriputra now ask again, ‘Does a non-arising dharma arise, does an arising dharma arise’?

The treatise-author answers: Because Subhūti spoke above of the causes and conditions of attaining the path, Śāriputra grasped Subhūti's intent—that although he speaks of the non-arising dharma and breaks down all dharmas, he speaks so for the sake of causes and conditions, and his mind does not cling to the non-arising dharma—and so he asks again. Again, because this dharma is very deep, he wishes the hearers to understand it clearly and distinctly, and so he asks again. What was asked above concerned the practice of attaining the path; what is now asked is, in general, how all dharmas arise. Looking with the wisdom eye, one knows that all dharmas do not arise; yet now one presently sees dharmas arising, and so he asks ‘how do they arise?’

Subhūti answers: Both matters are wrong. If ‘arising’ arises—the arising dharma has already arisen and ought not to arise again! If ‘not-arising’ arises—the arising dharma does not yet exist and ought not to arise. If it is said that at the moment of arising it is ‘half arisen and half not arisen’, that too does not arise—the part already arisen has already finished arising; the part not yet arisen has no arising. Therefore Subhūti does not use this view of the fleshly eye, because it does not penetrate; he does not receive either of the two dharmas, but only says: this arising is like an illusion, like a dream, arising from false and deceptive dharmas; one should be far removed from it, and should not grasp its marks.

Śāriputra asks: ‘What kind of dharma is it, that both are not received?’

Subhūti, for the sake of worldly truth, says that form up to omniscience of all kinds are ultimately non-arising and naturally of the mark of emptiness, and does not wish that there be arising within the real; if it is spoken of in terms of the falsity and deception of worldly truth, there can be arising, but the arising too is like an illusory transformation.

The cause and condition of not arising spoken of here is ‘neither coming together nor dispersing’.

Arising and the Dharma Are Not Different; Receiving the Question and Receiving the Praise, His Mind Too Is Without Shame

Someone says: Arising and the dharma are different, holding that ‘arising is permanent, while the dharma that arises is impermanent’, and so it is asked again. The one who answers holds that arising and the dharma are not different—if one has spoken of the arising dharma, one has already spoken of the mark of arising.

Arising and not arising are as was said above.

Śāriputra, having heard what Subhūti said, knew that Subhūti's mind loved and delighted in the dharma of non-arising, and so said to Subhūti: ‘You truly love and delight in speaking of the dharma of non-arising!’

Subhūti at once received this question, and his mind was without shame. Why? Because this discussion cannot be broken down and has no fault or wrongdoing. How is this known? Subhūti himself said: ‘There is no dharma that can come together, no dharma that can disperse; without form, without shape, empty, of one mark—what is called the signless.’ He does not receive even the mark of emptiness—how much less any other mark?

Śāriputra praised him once more: the dharma of non-arising that you delight in speaking of, and the words too, are all non-arising—this indeed is real purity! If delight in speaking and words were not non-arising, and one spoke only of outer things as non-arising, that would not be purity.

Subhūti at once received this praise too, and answered Śāriputra: ‘Not only are delight in speaking and words non-arising; form up to omniscience of all kinds, too, all have nothing that arises.’

Why He Can Answer Whatever Is Asked: All Dharmas Have Nothing to Rely On, Because Their Nature Is Always Empty

At that time Śāriputra said to Subhūti: ‘Subhūti, among those who expound the Dharma, ought to be the very highest! Why? Whatever people ask Subhūti, he is able to answer.’

Subhūti said: ‘This is because all dharmas have nothing to rely on.’

Śāriputra said to Subhūti: ‘Why is it said that all dharmas have nothing to rely on?’

Subhūti said: ‘The nature of form is always empty; it does not rely on the inner, does not rely on the outer, and does not rely on what is between the two; the nature of feeling, perception, constructions, and consciousness is always empty; it does not rely on the inner, does not rely on the outer, and does not rely on what is between the two. The nature of the eye, ear, nose, tongue, body, and mind is always empty; it does not rely on the inner, does not rely on the outer, and does not rely on what is between the two. The nature of form (here meaning form among the six outer sense-objects) is always empty, and so on up to: the nature of dharmas is always empty; it does not rely on the inner, does not rely on the outer, and does not rely on what is between the two. The nature of dānapāramitā (the perfection of giving) is always empty, and so on up to: the nature of prajñāpāramitā (the perfection of wisdom) is always empty; it does not rely on the inner, does not rely on the outer, and does not rely on what is between the two. The nature of inner emptiness (the first of the eighteen emptinesses) is always empty, and so on up to: the nature of the emptiness of non-existent and existent dharmas (the last of the eighteen emptinesses) is always empty; it does not rely on the inner, does not rely on the outer, and does not rely on what is between the two.

‘Śāriputra! The nature of the four foundations of mindfulness is always empty, and so on up to: the nature of omniscience of all kinds is always empty; it does not rely on the inner, does not rely on the outer, and does not rely on what is between the two.

‘For this cause and condition, Śāriputra, all dharmas have nothing to rely on, because their nature is always empty. In just this way, Śāriputra, when the bodhisattva-mahāsattva practises the six perfections, he ought to purify form, feeling, perception, constructions, and consciousness, and so on up to: he ought to purify omniscience of all kinds.’

Worldly Giving and World-Transcending Giving: Bound by Three Hindrances, Pure in Three Parts

Śāriputra asked Subhūti: ‘How does the bodhisattva-mahāsattva, when practising the six perfections, purify the bodhisattva path?’

Subhūti said: ‘There is a worldly dānapāramitā, and there is a world-transcending dānapāramitā; śīlapāramitā (the perfection of morality), kṣāntipāramitā (the perfection of patience), vīryapāramitā (the perfection of vigour), dhyānapāramitā (the perfection of meditation), and prajñāpāramitā likewise each have a worldly and a world-transcending kind.’

Śāriputra asked Subhūti: ‘What is the worldly dānapāramitā? What is the world-transcending dānapāramitā?’

Subhūti said: ‘Suppose the bodhisattva-mahāsattva acts as a donor and is able to give to śramaṇas, to brahmins, to the poor, and to those who beg—giving food to those who need food, drink to those who need drink, clothing to those who need clothing, bedding, couches, dwellings, incense and flowers, necklaces, medicines, and all kinds of requisites for living that they need; and so on up to wife and children, kingdom and lands, head, eyes, hands, feet, and limbs—things inner and outer—all of these he gives away. When giving, he thinks thus: 「我給與、他領取，我不慳貪，我是施主，我能捨掉一切，我依隨佛的教導布施，我修行檀波羅蜜。」 tr. "I give, he receives; I am not stingy; I am the donor; I am able to give up everything; I give in accordance with the Buddha's teaching; I practise dānapāramitā." Having given in this way, he shares the dharma thus gained with all beings and dedicates it to anuttarā samyaksaṃbodhi (unsurpassed, right, and complete awakening), saying in his mind: 「以這布施的因緣，使眾生得到今世的安樂，此後還要使他們得以進入涅槃。」 tr. "By the causes and conditions of this giving, may beings gain happiness in this present life, and after this may they further be enabled to enter nirvāṇa." This person's giving has three kinds of hindrance. What are the three? The mark of self, the mark of the other, and the mark of giving. Giving while clinging to these three marks is called the worldly dānapāramitā. By what cause and condition is it called worldly? Because within the world it does not move and does not go out, it is called the worldly dānapāramitā.

‘What is called the world-transcending dānapāramitā? It is purity in three parts. What are the three parts? When the bodhisattva-mahāsattva gives, the 「我」 tr. "I" is unfindable, he does not see the person who receives the gift, the thing given is unfindable, and he does not hope for any reward—this is called the bodhisattva-mahāsattva's dānapāramitā pure in three parts. Furthermore, Śāriputra, when the bodhisattva-mahāsattva gives, he gives to all beings, and yet beings too are unfindable; he dedicates this giving to anuttarā samyaksaṃbodhi, and so on up to: he does not see even the subtlest mark of a dharma. Śāriputra! This is called the world-transcending dānapāramitā. Why is it called world-transcending? Because within the world it is able to move and able to go out, it is called the world-transcending dānapāramitā.

All Six Perfections Are Divided into Worldly and World-Transcending; the Path to Awakening, from the Four Foundations of Mindfulness to Great Kindness and Great Compassion

‘Śīlapāramitā that has something to rely on is the worldly śīlapāramitā; that which has nothing to rely on is the world-transcending śīlapāramitā. The rest is as was said concerning dānapāramitā. Kṣāntipāramitā, vīryapāramitā, dhyānapāramitā, and prajñāpāramitā, when they have something to rely on, are called worldly; when they have nothing to rely on, they are called world-transcending; the rest is likewise as was said concerning dānapāramitā. In just this way, Śāriputra, when the bodhisattva-mahāsattva practises the six perfections, he purifies the bodhisattva path.’

Śāriputra asked Subhūti: ‘What is the path that the bodhisattva-mahāsattva cultivates for the sake of anuttarā samyaksaṃbodhi?’

Subhūti said: ‘The four foundations of mindfulness are the path that the bodhisattva-mahāsattva cultivates for the sake of anuttarā samyaksaṃbodhi, and so on up to the eight limbs of the noble path; the gate of liberation of emptiness, the gate of liberation of signlessness, and the gate of liberation of non-action; inner emptiness up to the emptiness of non-existent and existent dharmas; all the samādhi gates and all the dhāraṇī gates; the Buddha's ten powers, four fearlessnesses, four unobstructed knowledges, eighteen unshared dharmas, and great kindness and great compassion. Śāriputra! This is called the path that the bodhisattva-mahāsattva cultivates for the sake of anuttarā samyaksaṃbodhi.’

The Commentary on Each Being Foremost: Among the Five Hundred Arhats, Why Is Subhūti Alone Praised?

What follows is the treatise-author's explanation.

Someone asks: Of the five hundred arhats, the Buddha declared each of them foremost in some particular respect—as Śāriputra is foremost in wisdom, Maudgalyāyana foremost in supernormal power, Mahākāśyapa foremost among those who practise the dhūta practices, Subhūti foremost in attaining the samādhi of non-contention, Mahākātyāyana foremost in analysing the sūtras, and Pūrṇa foremost among those who expound the Dharma. Why now does Śāriputra praise Subhūti as the one who ought to be the very foremost among those who expound the Dharma?

The answer: The Buddha, with the Buddha-eye, observes the sharp faculties and dull faculties of all beings, and weighs the general marks and specific marks of all dharmas; according to the dharma each has attained, he declares them foremost one by one, without error!

The treatise-author explains: Pūrṇa, among the fourfold assembly, expounds the Dharma with the twelve divisions of scripture, all kinds of Dharma-gates, and all kinds of causes, conditions, similes, and parables, and is foremost in being able to benefit beings. Subhūti, however, constantly practises the samādhi of non-contention, shares in the same deeds and practice as the bodhisattvas, and is skilful in means and delights in expounding the Dharma-gate of 「一種空相」 tr. "the single mark of emptiness"; in this he surpasses Pūrṇa. It is like a skilled craftsman who has many talents: precisely because he can do so much, he cannot master and perfect every one of them; whereas if a person is devoted to one thing alone, he will certainly bring that thing to utmost perfection. Although Pūrṇa is capable in many ways, he is not equal to Subhūti, who, because he constantly delights in practising emptiness, is therefore able to speak skilfully of emptiness. Therefore, when Śāriputra heard Subhūti skilfully explaining the meaning of emptiness, he praised him, saying: ‘You ought to be foremost among those who expound the Dharma!’ Śāriputra saw that Subhūti was able to answer whatever people asked, like the wind moving through space, without any hindrance.

The Commentary on Neither Declining Nor Accepting: Established in What Is Even and True, the Mark of a Good Person

The treatise-author explains: At this time Subhūti neither declined modestly nor accepted the praise. Why? Because he was established in what is even and true, and this is the mark of a good person. The so-called mark of a good person: he does not praise himself and does not disparage himself, and toward others he likewise does not falsely praise and does not falsely disparage. If he praises himself, that is not the mark of a great person—no one has praised him, yet he goes ahead and extols himself; if he disparages himself, he is a person of artful self-abasement. If he slanders others, he is a person who harms by slander; if he does nothing but praise others, he is a flatterer. Because what Subhūti spoke of was the dharma of non-arising, Śāriputra's praise, though it was praise, was not flattery.

Because Śāriputra's praise was praise according to the truth, Subhūti did not decline it modestly; and because he had already cut off the love of dharma, his mind was not elated and did not cling to it with love; he simply answered with the causes and conditions of his own being without hindrance and without obstruction: namely, that all dharmas have nothing to rely on; because there is nothing to rely on, there is no obstruction and no hindrance.

The meaning of ‘having nothing to rely on’ is as was said earlier. Here Subhūti himself explains: ‘Because inner dharmas are empty, form does not rely on the inner; because outer dharmas are empty, form does not rely on the outer; because what is between has nothing at all, form does not rely on what is between.’ As with form, so too, up to omniscience of all kinds.

If the bodhisattva knows that all the three realms, because they are impermanent and empty, are not worth relying on, then at that time the afflictions are crushed, and he is able to purify the bodhisattva path. Therefore Subhūti said: ‘When the bodhisattva practises the six perfections, he ought to purify form, up to omniscience of all kinds.’

The Commentary on the Two Kinds of Perfection: Reliance Is Like an Old, Sick Man Leaning for Support; Purifying the Path Is Like Clearing Away Thorns

Someone asks: Purifying form up to purifying omniscience of all kinds is already purifying the bodhisattva path; why ask again?

The answer: For the bodhisattva to be able to make form ultimately empty is called purifying; this matter is deep and subtle, and cannot be done all at once. Therefore what Śāriputra asks is: ‘How should the newly training bodhisattva cultivate this first path of skilful means?’

Subhūti's answer is: ‘If the bodhisattva is able to practise the two kinds of perfection.’ The six perfections are what first open up the bodhisattva path; to be able, through the emptiness of nothing to be attained, to practise the thirty-seven limbs of the path is what opens up the Buddha-path. What is called ‘purifying’ is called opening; just as clearing away the thorns from a road is called opening the road.

What are the two kinds of perfection? The first is worldly, the second is world-transcending.

As for the worldly perfection, Subhūti himself stated its meaning, namely ‘giving food to those who need food’ and so on. This meaning is as was said in the First Chapter. If, when giving, there is something relied on—like an old and sick man who relies on the strength of others and only so is able to walk, only so is able to stand; the giver, because he is apart from true wisdom and the strength of his mind is thin and slight, therefore has something relied on. What is called reliance is this: taking up marks in such dharmas as one's own body, one's wealth, and the recipient, the mind giving rise to clinging, and arrogance and all kinds of other afflictions arising—this is called worldly, not moving and not going out. What moves is compliant acceptance; what goes out is the acceptance of the non-arising of dharmas. In the Dharma of the śrāvakas, what moves is the person still in training; what goes out is the person beyond training.

The remaining five perfections are likewise.

This is called first opening up the bodhisattva path.

The Commentary on the Far Path and the Near Path: The Six Perfections Are Far Because Mixed, the Thirty-Seven Limbs Near Because Pure

Someone asks: The bodhisattva path is precisely the path of anuttarā samyaksaṃbodhi; why ask again?

The answer: While one is a bodhisattva, there is a path to walk; the Buddha has already arrived, and no longer needs a path. Because this path is for the sake of attaining anuttarā samyaksaṃbodhi, it is called the path to awakening; because the bodhisattva walks this path, it is called the bodhisattva path.

Here the Buddha has spoken: the far path is the bodhisattva path of the six perfections; the near path is the path to awakening of the thirty-seven limbs. Within the six perfections, giving, morality, and the rest are mixed together with one another, so it is far; the thirty-seven limbs have only meditation and wisdom, so they are near. The six perfections have the worldly and the world-transcending mixed together with one another, so they are far; the thirty-seven limbs, the three gates of liberation, and so on up to great kindness and great compassion, are ultimately pure, so they are near.

Furthermore, what is called the path of anuttarā samyaksaṃbodhi: from the first arousing of intent up to the vajra samādhi, the bodhisattva practices carried out in between for the sake of awakening are all the path to awakening.

This Is the Power of Prajñāpāramitā: It Can Give Rise to All Wholesome Dharmas, It Can Receive All Wholesome Dharmas

At that time Śāriputra praised Subhūti, saying: ‘Excellent! Excellent! Of which perfection is this the power?’

Subhūti said: ‘This is the power of prajñāpāramitā. Why? Prajñāpāramitā is able to give rise to all wholesome dharmas: whether the dharmas of the śrāvakas, the dharmas of the pratyekabuddhas, the dharmas of the bodhisattvas, or the dharmas of the Buddhas. Śāriputra! Prajñāpāramitā is able to contain and receive all wholesome dharmas: the dharmas of the śrāvakas, the dharmas of the pratyekabuddhas, the dharmas of the bodhisattvas, and the dharmas of the Buddhas. Śāriputra! The Buddhas of the past practised prajñāpāramitā and attained anuttarā samyaksaṃbodhi; the Buddhas of the future will also practise prajñāpāramitā and will attain anuttarā samyaksaṃbodhi; Śāriputra! The Buddhas now present in the lands of the ten directions also practise this prajñāpāramitā and attain anuttarā samyaksaṃbodhi. Śāriputra! If the bodhisattva-mahāsattva, when hearing prajñāpāramitā explained, does not doubt and does not object, you should know that this bodhisattva-mahāsattva is walking the path to awakening. What is called the bodhisattva path is: for the sake of saving all beings, the mind does not abandon all beings, because there is nothing to be attained. This bodhisattva ought constantly not to be apart from this thought, namely the thought of great compassion.’

You Wished to Refute Me and Instead Established My Meaning: Because Beings Are Non-existent, the Thought Too Is Non-existent

Śāriputra asked again: ‘You wish to make the bodhisattva-mahāsattva constantly not apart from this thought, namely the thought of great compassion; but if the bodhisattva-mahāsattva is constantly not apart from the thought of great compassion, that would make all beings bodhisattvas. Why? Subhūti! Because all beings too are not apart from all kinds of thoughts.’

Subhūti said: ‘Excellent! Excellent! Śāriputra! You wished to refute me, and instead you have established my meaning. Why? Because beings are non-existent, the thought too is non-existent; because the nature of beings is non-existent, the thought too is non-existent in nature; because the dharma of beings is non-existent, the thought too is non-existent as a dharma; because beings are apart, the thought too is apart; because beings are empty, the thought too is empty; because beings cannot be known, the thought too cannot be known. Śāriputra! Because form is non-existent, the thought too is non-existent; because the nature of form is non-existent, the thought too is non-existent in nature; because the dharma of form is non-existent, the thought too is non-existent as a dharma; because form is apart, the thought too is apart; because form is empty, the thought too is empty; because form cannot be known, the thought too cannot be known; feeling, perception, constructions, and consciousness are likewise; the eye up to the mind, form up to dharmas, the earth element up to the consciousness element (the six elements of earth, water, fire, wind, space, and consciousness), dānapāramitā up to prajñāpāramitā, inner emptiness up to the emptiness of non-existent and existent dharmas, the four foundations of mindfulness up to the eighteen unshared dharmas, all the samādhi gates, all the dhāraṇī gates, omniscience, omniscience of all kinds, and so on up to: because anuttarā samyaksaṃbodhi is non-existent, the thought too is non-existent; and so on up to: because anuttarā samyaksaṃbodhi cannot be known, the thought too cannot be known. Śāriputra! When the bodhisattva-mahāsattva walks such a path, it is precisely this that I wish: to make him not apart from this thought, namely the thought of great compassion.’

The Buddha Himself Gives His Seal: One Should Train as You Have Said; the Great Earth Shakes in Six Ways, and the Buddha Smiles and Speaks of the Ten Directions

At that time the Buddha praised Subhūti, saying: ‘Excellent! Excellent! This is the bodhisattva-mahāsattva's prajñāpāramitā; those in the future who explain it ought also to explain it in this way. The prajñāpāramitā as you have spoken it is all because you receive the Buddha's intent. The bodhisattva-mahāsattva who trains in prajñāpāramitā ought to train as you have said!’

When Subhūti was explaining this chapter of prajñāpāramitā, the three-thousand great-thousand world shook in six ways: the east rose up and the west sank down, the west rose up and the east sank down, the south rose up and the north sank down, the north rose up and the south sank down, the centre rose up and the four edges sank down, the four edges rose up and the centre sank down.

At that time the Buddha smiled. Subhūti addressed the Buddha, saying: ‘For what cause and what condition do you smile?’

The Buddha told Subhūti: ‘Just as I, in this world, expound prajñāpāramitā, so the Buddhas of the immeasurable asaṃkhyeya worlds of the east are also now expounding prajñāpāramitā for the bodhisattva-mahāsattvas; in the south, west, and north, the four intermediate directions, above and below, they are also expounding this prajñāpāramitā. When this chapter of prajñāpāramitā was expounded, twelve nayuta of gods and humans attained the acceptance of the non-arising of dharmas. When the Buddhas of the ten directions expound this prajñāpāramitā, immeasurable asaṃkhyeya beings also arouse the mind of anuttarā samyaksaṃbodhi.’

The Commentary on the Praise in Joy and the Power of Prajñā: Like the Great Sea Receiving the Many Rivers, Like the Croton Seed Having the Greatest Strength

The treatise-author explains: Śāriputra thought thus: ‘What Subhūti has said distinguishes the worldly and world-transcending in the six perfections, as well as the path to awakening, and greatly benefits beings.’ Therefore, in joy, he praised him, saying: ‘Excellent! Excellent!’ Saying it twice shows that the excellence has reached its utmost.

Then he asked: ‘Of which perfection is this the power?’

Subhūti reflected thus: ‘Among all the mental-factor dharmas (the dharmas associated with mind), apart from wisdom, there is nothing that can distinguish in this way, cut off doubt, and open the path; among the perfections, apart from prajñāpāramitā, each cannot even accomplish its own substance—how much less could it distinguish and open the path!’ Having reflected thus, he answered Śāriputra: ‘It is the power of prajñāpāramitā.’

As was said earlier: within all dharmas there is no self, no knower, no seer; now by this it is known with certainty: this is the power of prajñāpāramitā, not the power of the Buddha, nor the power of Subhūti. Why? Subhūti stated the causes and conditions: what is called prajñāpāramitā, because it is apart from the two extremes of annihilation and permanence, existence and non-existence, and so on, is able to give rise to all wholesome dharmas, namely the mark of certainty of the dharmas of the three vehicles, the mark of their being firm and indestructible. Again, because prajñāpāramitā is immeasurable and boundless, it is able to contain and receive all wholesome dharmas, just as the great sea is able to contain and receive the many rivers and the ten thousand streams.

What is called ‘the wholesome dharmas of the three vehicles’ is the six perfections up to the eighteen unshared dharmas.

The Buddhas of the ten directions and the three times, because they practised prajñāpāramitā, all attained anuttarā samyaksaṃbodhi; although they also practised the other perfections, prajñāpāramitā is the most honoured and the greatest, having the power of distinguishing and penetrating. It is like a compounded purgative medicine, within which the croton seed has the greatest strength; prajñāpāramitā is likewise: although it is combined with the other perfections, in breaking all kinds of afflictions, pulling out wrong views, and abandoning idle discourse, the power of prajñāpāramitā is the most surpassing. Therefore it is said: ‘It is all the power of prajñāpāramitā.’

The Commentary on Who Can Practise Prajñā: Great Compassion and Ultimate Emptiness Go Together Without Obstructing Each Other

Someone asks: Prajñāpāramitā is thus praised in all kinds of ways as subtle, wondrous, and extremely deep; who is able to practise in conformity and in accord with prajñāpāramitā?

The answer: There are bodhisattvas who, over immeasurable lifetimes, have accumulated all kinds of merit, whose faculties are keen and sharp, and whose various afflictions have already been crushed and thinned; although they have not yet reached the ground of avaivartika (non-retrogressing), as soon as they hear prajñāpāramitā they at once believe and accept it and penetrate it deeply. One who penetrates marks such as these is able to walk the path of prajñāpāramitā, namely saving all beings and freeing them from the sorrows and troubles of the world; because of the mind of great compassion, he is not apart from all beings. The bodhisattva ought constantly not to be apart from these two thoughts, great compassion and ultimate emptiness—ultimate emptiness breaks the various afflictions of the world and reveals nirvāṇa; while great compassion leads him back to enter into wholesome dharmas, so as to benefit beings.

At that time Śāriputra raised a difficulty against Subhūti: ‘If the bodhisattva is not apart from this thought of great compassion and the thought of ultimate emptiness, then all beings ought to be bodhisattvas! Why? This ultimate emptiness is signless and has nothing to discriminate; it should not be that the bodhisattva has it and beings do not have it! If it exists, all beings ought to have it in common; if it does not exist, the bodhisattva too ought not to have it.’

Subhūti answered: ‘You wished to refute me, and instead you have helped to establish my meaning. Why? Because the mark of all dharmas is ultimately empty, beings too are empty; because beings are empty, the thought of ultimate emptiness too is empty. If all dharmas are ultimately empty, where would there still be real beings—they are in fact empty—to come and refute me, saying 「眾生不離這個念，都應當是菩薩」 tr. "since beings are not apart from this thought, they all ought to be bodhisattvas"?’ Therefore it is said: ‘Because beings are without anything at all, the thought of ultimate emptiness too is without anything at all; beings are without nature, beings are apart, beings are empty, beings cannot be known, and the thought of ultimate emptiness too is ultimately empty.’ Form up to anuttarā samyaksaṃbodhi is likewise.

Someone asks: The thought here is not being apart from the thought of great compassion; why is it also said, ‘not apart from the thought of ultimate emptiness’?

The answer: The bodhisattva is not apart from this thought, and his mind does not abandon beings, because there is nothing to be attained. The emptiness of nothing to be attained and ultimate emptiness differ in name but are one in meaning. The emptiness of the unfindable comes first, ultimate emptiness comes after; because ultimate emptiness is great, the compassion it gives rise to is also great. As for great compassion, as is said in the Akṣayamati Sūtra, there are three kinds of compassion: compassion that takes beings as its object, compassion that takes dharmas as its object, and compassion without an object. Compassion without an object arises from ultimate emptiness, and with this the difficulty Śāriputra raised is answered.

The Commentary on the Buddha's Attestation and Receiving the Buddha's Intent: Without Receiving the Buddha's Intent, One Could Not Even Ask

The treatise-author explains: The Buddha bears witness to what he has said, and therefore praises him, saying: ‘Excellent! If one wishes to explain prajñāpāramitā, one ought to do so as you have said.’

At that time the gods, humans, and bodhisattvas in the assembly thought thus: ‘Prajñāpāramitā is extremely deep, and the Buddhas of the three times are all born from within it; Subhūti is a person of the Small Vehicle—why does the Buddha praise him, saying 「想要解說般若波羅蜜，應當如你所說」 tr. "if one wishes to explain prajñāpāramitā, one ought to do so as you have said"?’ Therefore it goes on to say: ‘What Subhūti has said is all by receiving the Buddha's intent.’ Even Maitreya and the other bodhisattvas, the Brahmā king and the others—if they did not receive the Buddha's intent, they could not even ask a question; how much less could Subhūti, before the Buddha, freely and at will delight in speaking!

It further says: ‘The bodhisattvas who wish to train in prajñāpāramitā ought also to train as you have said!’

The Commentary on the Six Causes and Conditions of the Earth's Shaking: To Take the Essentials, All Come from Expounding the Real Mark of All Dharmas

The treatise-author explains: As for ‘when this chapter was expounded, the great earth of the three-thousand great-thousand world shook in six ways’—at that time many bodhisattvas in the assembly aroused the mind of anuttarā samyaksaṃbodhi, and all of them were going to become Buddhas. The Buddha is the great lord of heaven and earth, and the earth-spirits rejoiced: ‘Our lord has now been born!’ Therefore they made the great earth shake greatly.

Furthermore, a human mind able to believe and accept the extremely deep prajñāpāramitā is hard to find and rare; by the causes and conditions of the merit of such people, a great wind is stirred which moves the great waters; because the waters move, the earth moves.

Furthermore, the great nāga kings beneath the earth, wishing to come and hear prajñāpāramitā, emerge from the waters, so the waters move; because the waters move, the earth moves.

Furthermore, the Buddha by his spiritual power makes the great earth shake, because prajñāpāramitā is hard to see and hard to know, and he wishes to lead the assembly and make them believe and delight in it all the more.

The other causes and conditions of the earth's shaking are as was said earlier.

Here the Buddha himself states the causes and conditions, namely: I expound prajñāpāramitā, and the Buddhas of the ten directions also expound this prajñāpāramitā. Twelve nayuta of gods and humans attained the ground of avaivartika and entered the dharma-position, so the earth moved; again, the beings of the worlds of the ten directions also aroused the intention for the unsurpassed path, so the earth moved.

At that time the gods too scattered all kinds of lotus flowers, as well as all kinds of mixed incense, heavenly garments, and heavenly canopies, and played a thousand myriad kinds of heavenly music; the nāga kings and others surged forth from the waters of the four great seas, and the yakṣas, rākṣasas, and others all gave rise to minds of kindness, joined their palms, and praised the Buddha. Again, when the Buddha smiled, immeasurable light spread over and covered worlds of the ten directions as many as the sands of the Ganges—there were this many rare events.

To take the essentials and say it: the shaking of the great earth all comes from the expounding of the real mark of all dharmas, namely prajñāpāramitā.

The Gods Gather Like Clouds: The Buddha's Constant Light Surpasses All the Light of Karmic Result

At that time, the gods of the Four Heavenly Kings of the three-thousand great-thousand world, each with countless hundreds of thousands of koṭi of gods, came together into the assembly. The Śakra Devānām Indras of the three-thousand great-thousand world and all the Trāyastriṃśa gods, the Suyāma heavenly kings and all the Yāma gods, the Saṃtuṣita heavenly kings and all the Tuṣita gods, the Sunirmita heavenly kings and all the gods of Wondrous Transformation, and the Vaśavartin heavenly kings and all the gods of Sovereign Conduct, each with countless hundreds of thousands of koṭi of gods, came together into the assembly. The Brahmā kings of the three-thousand great-thousand world, and so on up to the Śuddhāvāsa gods, each with countless hundreds of thousands of koṭi of gods, came together into the assembly.

The light of the bodies born of karmic result of these gods, from the gods of the Four Heavenly Kings up to the Śuddhāvāsa gods, compared with the Buddha's constant light, does not reach one part in a hundred, one part in a thousand, or one part in ten thousand koṭi, and so on up to: it cannot be compared by calculation or by simile. The light of the World-Honored One is the most excellent, the most wondrous, the highest and foremost; the light of the gods' karmic result, beside the Buddha's constant light, neither shines nor shows, just as a charred lamp-wick placed beside jambūnada gold.

Śakra's Three Questions: How the Bodhisattva Abides in Prajñā, What Prajñā Is, and How He Practises Prajñā

At that time Śakra Devānām Indra said to the venerable Subhūti: ‘The gods of the Four Heavenly Kings of this three-thousand great-thousand world, up to the Śuddhāvāsa gods, have all gathered here, wishing to hear Subhūti speak the meaning of prajñāpāramitā. Subhūti! How should the bodhisattva-mahāsattva abide in prajñāpāramitā? What is the bodhisattva-mahāsattva's prajñāpāramitā? How should the bodhisattva-mahāsattva practise prajñāpāramitā?’

Subhūti said to Śakra Devānām Indra: ‘Kauśika! I shall now, in accord with the Buddha's intent and relying on the Buddha's spiritual power, expound prajñāpāramitā for the bodhisattva-mahāsattvas, that is, the prajñāpāramitā in which the bodhisattva-mahāsattva should abide. Gods! Those who have not yet aroused the mind of anuttarā samyaksaṃbodhi (unsurpassed, right, and complete awakening) should now arouse the mind. Gods! If one has already entered the right position of the śrāvaka, this person can no longer arouse the mind of anuttarā samyaksaṃbodhi. Why? Because between the right position of the śrāvaka and birth-and-death a barrier has already been made. If this person can arouse the mind of anuttarā samyaksaṃbodhi, I too rejoice. Why? The superior person ought to seek a still more superior dharma; I will never cut off his merit.’

What Prajñā Is: With a Mind Accordant with Sarvajñā, Contemplating the Five Aggregates as Impermanent, up to Quiescent

‘Kauśika! What is prajñāpāramitā? The bodhisattva-mahāsattva, with a mind accordant with sarvajñā (omniscience), is mindful that form is impermanent, mindful that form is suffering, mindful that form is empty, mindful that form is non-self; mindful that form is like a sickness, like a boil and abscess, like a sore, like an arrow shot into the body; mindful that form is pain, is vexation, is decline, is decay, is sorrow, is fear, is not secure—all this because of there being nothing to be attained; feeling, perception, constructions, and consciousness are likewise. The eye, ear, nose, tongue, body, and mind, the earth element, and the water, fire, wind, space, and consciousness elements—he contemplates them as impermanent, up to sorrow, fear, and not secure, and this too because of there being nothing to be attained. He contemplates form as quiescent, as apart, as neither arising nor ceasing, as neither stained nor pure; feeling, perception, constructions, and consciousness are likewise. He contemplates the earth element up to the consciousness element as quiescent, as apart, as neither arising nor ceasing, as neither stained nor pure, and this too because of there being nothing to be attained.

The Twelve Links of Causes and Conditions, the Four Foundations of Mindfulness, and the Six Perfections Are All Cultivated Because of There Being Nothing to Be Attained

‘Furthermore, Kauśika! The bodhisattva-mahāsattva, with a mind accordant with sarvajñā, contemplates that with ignorance as condition there are constructions, up to: with old age and death as cause and condition there is the gathering of the great mass of suffering—this because of there being nothing to be attained; he contemplates that when ignorance ceases, constructions cease, up to: when birth ceases, old age and death cease, and when old age and death cease, sorrow, grief, distress, vexation, and the great mass of suffering cease—this because of there being nothing to be attained.

‘Furthermore, Kauśika! The bodhisattva-mahāsattva, with a mind accordant with sarvajñā, cultivates the four foundations of mindfulness, because of there being nothing to be attained; up to cultivating the Buddha's ten powers and the eighteen unshared dharmas, because of there being nothing to be attained.

‘Furthermore, Kauśika! The bodhisattva-mahāsattva, with a mind accordant with sarvajñā, practises dānapāramitā (the perfection of giving), because of there being nothing to be attained; practises śīlapāramitā (the perfection of morality), kṣāntipāramitā (the perfection of patience), vīryapāramitā (the perfection of vigour), and dhyānapāramitā (the perfection of meditation), because of there being nothing to be attained.

Dharmas Are Only Causes and Conditions for One Another: The Mind of Dedication and the Mind of Awakening Are Not in Each Other

‘Furthermore, Kauśika! When the bodhisattva-mahāsattva practises prajñāpāramitā, he makes this contemplation: it is only that dharmas and dharmas serve together as causes and conditions for one another, moistening and increasing one another, being discriminated, compared, and reckoned; and within this there is no self and no what-belongs-to-self. The bodhisattva's mind of dedication is not within the mind of anuttarā samyaksaṃbodhi, and the mind of anuttarā samyaksaṃbodhi is not within the mind of dedication; the mind of dedication, within the mind of anuttarā samyaksaṃbodhi, is unfindable, and the mind of anuttarā samyaksaṃbodhi, within the mind of dedication, is also unfindable. Although the bodhisattva contemplates all dharmas throughout, there is also not a single dharma to be found—this is called the bodhisattva-mahāsattva's prajñāpāramitā.’

Śakra Asks Again About Dedication: Subhūti Answers That in the Mark of Non-Mind There Is Nothing to Be Dedicated

Śakra Devānām Indra asked the venerable Subhūti: ‘Why is the bodhisattva's mind of dedication not within the mind of anuttarā samyaksaṃbodhi? Why is the mind of anuttarā samyaksaṃbodhi not within the mind of dedication? Why is the mind of dedication, within the mind of anuttarā samyaksaṃbodhi, unfindable? Why is the mind of anuttarā samyaksaṃbodhi, within the mind of dedication, unfindable?’

Subhūti said to Śakra Devānām Indra: ‘Kauśika! The mind of dedication and the mind of anuttarā samyaksaṃbodhi are both not mind; this is the mark of non-mind, and within the mark of non-mind there is nothing that can be dedicated. This mark of non-mind is constantly the mark of non-mind; this inconceivable mark is constantly the inconceivable mark—this is called the bodhisattva-mahāsattva's prajñāpāramitā.’

The Buddha Praises Him, ‘Excellent’, and Subhūti Tells the Buddha, ‘I Should Repay the Kindness’

At that time the Buddha praised Subhūti, saying: ‘Excellent! Excellent! Subhūti! You have expounded prajñāpāramitā for the bodhisattva-mahāsattvas and have comforted the minds of the bodhisattva-mahāsattvas.’

Subhūti addressed the Buddha: ‘World-Honored One! I should repay the kindness; I should not fail to repay the kindness. The Buddhas of the past and their disciples expounded the six perfections for the bodhisattvas, showing, teaching, benefiting, and gladdening them; the World-Honored One at that time also trained among them and attained anuttarā samyaksaṃbodhi. I too should now expound the six perfections for the bodhisattvas, showing, teaching, benefiting, and gladdening them, so that they attain anuttarā samyaksaṃbodhi.’

What follows is the treatise-author's explanation.

Why the Assembly Gathers Again: It Is the Earlier Assembly; the Buddha Smiles and His Constant Light Shines Forth All the More

Someone asks: In the first chapter the Buddha has already emitted a surpassing light, and the gods have already gathered in a great assembly; why is it said here once again?

The treatise-author answers: Some say this is a later, separate assembly; some say it is that very earlier assembly—because Subhūti is skilled at expounding the very profound prajñāpāramitā, the gods rejoice, and the Buddha therefore smiles; his constant light shines forth all the more, and the light of the gods no longer appears. It is like when the sun comes out, and the stars, the moon, lamps, and candles no longer have any light; it is like a charred lamp-wick placed beside jambūnada gold.

Explaining the Names of the Gods: From the Four Heavenly Kings up to the Pure Abodes

As to what is called ‘the gods of the Four Heavenly Kings’: the one in the east is named Dhṛtarāṣṭra, who governs the gandharvas and the piśācas; the one in the south is named Virūḍhaka, who governs the kumbhāṇḍas and the pretas; the one in the west is named Virūpākṣa, who governs the nāga kings and the pūtanas; the one in the north is named Vaiśravaṇa, who governs the yakṣas and the rākṣasas. As to what is called ‘Śakra Devānām Indra’: ‘Śakra’ is rendered in the language of Qin as “able”; ‘deva’ is rendered in the language of Qin as “god”; ‘indra’ is rendered in the language of Qin as “lord”—put together, it is called ‘Śakra devānām’. ‘Suyāma’ is the name of the king of the Yāma gods, rendered in the language of Qin as “Wondrous Goodness”. ‘Saṃtuṣita’ is the name of the king of the Tuṣita gods, rendered in the language of Qin as “Wondrous Contentment”. ‘Sunirmita’ is rendered in the language of Qin as “Delight in Transformation”. ‘Vaśavartin’ is rendered in the language of Qin as “the gods Sovereign over Others' Transformations”. Here there is a Brahmā king named Śikhin, rendered in the language of Qin as “fire”. From the Brahmā heaven up to ‘the Śuddhāvāsa gods’—rendered in the language of Qin as “the Pure Abodes”.

Three Kinds of Light: In the Desire Realm Gained by Giving, in the Form Realm Gained by Meditation, and for Those Free of Desire Gained by Purity of Mind

As to what is called ‘the light of the body born of karmic result’: the gods of the desire realm, because they gave lamps, candles, bright pearls, and such things, and because of the purity of giving, keeping the precepts, meditation, and so on, constantly have light on their bodies and do not need the sun and moon. The gods of the form realm cultivate meditation and are free of desire; because they cultivate the fire samādhi, their bodies constantly emit a wondrous light that surpasses the sun and moon and the light of karmic result of the desire realm. As for the gods free of desire, to put it briefly, the light of these gods is all gained because the mind is pure.

As to what is called ‘the Buddha's constant light’: toward each of the four directions it extends ten feet. Among the lights of the gods, the great ones, though as broad as immeasurable yojanas, beside the Buddha's light are also eclipsed and do not appear.

Śakra Reflects That the Buddha Can Break Through Foolish Darkness; the Three Questions Ask About the Substance, the Practice, and the Abiding

Śakra Devānām Indra, seeing the light of the Buddha's spiritual power, had this thought: ‘The Buddha's light can eclipse the light of the gods; the illuminating brightness of the Buddha's wisdom should likewise be able to break through the foolish darkness of us and our kind.’ Also, because the Buddha had bidden Subhūti to speak of prajñā, Śakra said: ‘All the gods have gathered in a great assembly, wishing to hear Subhūti expound the meaning of prajñā.’ Now the gods of great merit and virtue have all gathered, wishing to hear the meaning of prajñā.

‘What is prajñāpāramitā’—this asks about the substance of prajñāpāramitā. ‘How does he practise’—this asks about the practice of skilful means on first entering. ‘How does he abide’—this asks about the ultimate abiding of deep entry.

The Simile of Repaying Kindness: When the Hungry and Thirsty Are Given Food, Their Gratitude Is Deep

Subhūti received Śakra's words and answered thus: If someone is hungry and thirsty and is given food and drink to satisfy him, his gratitude is deep; the bodhisattva is likewise—he arouses the mind and seeks the Buddha path, and when prajñā is expounded for such a person, he gains great benefit and his gratitude too is deep; therefore prajñā is to be expounded.

Those who have not yet aroused the mind should arouse the mind; those who have already entered the noble path are no longer fit to receive it—because their outflows are already exhausted and there is no further birth in a later life; for these and all kinds of causes and conditions, it is said ‘not fit’.

Why It Is Said ‘If He Arouses It, I Too Rejoice’: He Does Not Obstruct Merit and Virtue, and the Superior Person Seeks a Still More Superior Dharma

Someone asks: If such a person is not fit to receive it, why is it also said, ‘If this person arouses the mind, I too rejoice; I do not obstruct his merit; the superior person ought to seek a still more superior dharma’?

The treatise-author answers: Although Subhūti is a person of the Small Vehicle, because he constantly practises emptiness he does not cling to the śrāvaka path; therefore he speaks by way of supposition for the moment: ‘If he arouses the mind, what fault is there!’ Here Subhūti himself states two causes and conditions: first, he does not obstruct that person's mind that seeks merit and virtue; second, the superior person ought to seek a still more superior dharma. Therefore, for a superior person to seek anuttarā samyaksaṃbodhi is without fault; if a superior person instead seeks a small dharma, that indeed is shameful.

Because in between other matters were touched upon, it is stated once again and the question asked.

Fifteen Contemplations of the Five Aggregates: From ‘Like a Sickness’ to ‘Not Secure’, Spoken According to the Three Kinds of Faculties

‘What is prajñāpāramitā’—what is said is: with a mind accordant with sarvajñā, contemplating form as impermanent, suffering, empty, and non-self, as was said before. Contemplating that the five aggregates can give rise to all kinds of afflictions, it says ‘like a sickness’. Some people, hearing that the five aggregates are like a sickness, take it as slight, and so it says ‘like an abscess and boil’. Some people think that although an abscess and boil is hard to heal, it may perhaps still be cured, and so it says ‘like an arrowhead entering the body, which cannot be drawn out’. Some people think that although an arrowhead in the body is sunk deep and hard to pull out, with a good prescription and a skilled technique it may perhaps still be removed, and so it says constant ‘pain’ and constant ‘vexation’. Just as a person who meets with ‘decline’ constantly has ill fortune, the five aggregates are likewise: if a person follows after them, there is no security. Because there is ‘decline’, one constantly harbours ‘sorrow and dread’. These five aggregates are like living together with lions, tigers, and wolves; one constantly harbours ‘sorrow and fear’. Because of faults such as impermanence and false deception, these five aggregates are constantly ‘not secure’.

Someone asks: Do the five aggregates have only these fifteen kinds of evil, or are there other matters besides? The treatise-author answers: Stated briefly there are fifteen; stated at length they are immeasurable and boundless—as in the Miscellaneous Āgama, where the five aggregates are rebuked for a hundred kinds of fault.

Someone asks: Why are impermanence, suffering, emptiness, and non-self constantly spoken of, while sometimes the eight matters such as ‘like a sickness’ and ‘like an abscess and boil’ are spoken of, and the remaining seven matters are seldom spoken of anywhere? The treatise-author answers: People are of three grades—superior, middling, and inferior. For people of sharp faculties the four matters are spoken, and they enter directly into the truth of suffering. For people of middling faculties, if only the four matters are spoken, they cannot give rise to a mind of revulsion and departure; when the eight matters such as ‘like a sickness’ and ‘like an abscess’ are spoken for them, they give rise to revulsion. People of dull faculties, having heard these eight matters, still do not give rise to revulsion; then the seven matters such as ‘pain’ and ‘vexation’ are further spoken for them, and only then do they feel revulsion. People of sharp faculties are easy to deliver, and so the four matters are constantly and often spoken; among people of dull faculties there are at times some who can be delivered, and so only occasionally are the remaining matters spoken.

The eight matters above are named ‘noble practices’; the remaining seven matters are practised in common by ordinary people and noble ones. The first four matters enter into the sixteen noble practices, and so they are constantly spoken in prajñā; also, because prajñā is spoken for bodhisattvas of sharp faculties, the noble practices are much spoken. Now what is asked is ‘what is the dharma of first practice’, and so here they are all spoken.

The Twelve Sense-Fields and the Eighteen Elements Are All Other Names for the Five Aggregates; Śrāvakas and Bodhisattvas Contemplate Quiescence with Differing Depth

The twelve sense-fields, up to the six elements and so on, should likewise be rebuked in this way. The eighteen elements and so on should also be spoken in full; it is only that those who recited and kept the text forgot and lost them. Why? Because these dharmas such as the eighteen elements are all other names for the five aggregates, and therefore they should not go unspoken.

If the practitioner contemplates the five aggregates and so on as quiescent, far removed, neither arising nor ceasing, neither stained nor pure, and so on, this is only for the sake of prajñāpāramitā, and does not fit with the fifteen kinds of statement above; those fifteen matters are shared by the three vehicles.

The śrāvaka's power of wisdom is weak; at first he cannot contemplate how the five aggregates are far removed, how they are quiescent, and so on, but can only contemplate impermanence and so on; only on entering the third truth can he contemplate quiescence. Because the bodhisattva is of sharp faculties, as soon as he contemplates the five aggregates he gains the mark of quiescence.

As to what is called ‘using nothing to be attained’: it is constantly using the wisdom of emptiness in which there is nothing to be attained to contemplate the marks of dharmas.

The Mark of Prajñā: The Real Mark of the Five Aggregates Is Nirvāṇa; the Four Foundations of Mindfulness Are Shared Dharmas, the Six Perfections Unshared Dharmas

Furthermore, what Śakra Devānām Indra asks about is the mark of prajñāpāramitā, not the matter of the five aggregates as affliction to be wearied of, and so only the mark of prajñā is spoken. As to what is called ‘the mark of prajñā’: there is no nirvāṇa apart from the five aggregates, and there are no five aggregates apart from nirvāṇa; the real mark of the five aggregates is precisely nirvāṇa. Therefore people of dull faculties who have first aroused the mind first use contemplations such as impermanence, and afterwards contemplate the five aggregates as quiescent and so on. The twelve links of causes and conditions are likewise.

Furthermore, cultivating the four foundations of mindfulness up to the limbs of the eightfold noble path—these are shared dharmas; it is because of a mind accordant with sarvajñā and using nothing to be attained that these are then named the mark of prajñāpāramitā. The six perfections up to the eighteen unshared dharmas are the dharmas that belong solely to the Great Vehicle.

Dharmas Are Only Moistened and Benefited by Causes and Conditions: The Ten Dharmas Each Have Power, Yet There Is No Maker

Someone asks: The marks and practice of prajñāpāramitā ought to be expounded; why is it said in between, ‘dharmas and dharmas are in turn causes and conditions for one another, moistening, benefiting, and increasing’?

The treatise-author answers: Subhūti first spoke of ‘the faults of dharmas such as impermanence’, afterwards spoke of ‘dharmas as far removed, quiescent, nothing to be attained, empty’, then spoke of ‘although dharmas are empty, they exist because causes and conditions come together’, and next spoke of ‘practising the Buddha path through the four foundations of mindfulness up to the eighteen unshared dharmas’.

The hearers had this thought: ‘Above, far removal, quiescence, and emptiness are spoken of, from which one can know that dharmas are not permanent; the twelve links of causes and conditions are spoken of, from which one can know that dharmas do not cease. Yet since there is no knower and no seer, who is it that practises these dharmas and attains buddhahood?’

Therefore it says that the bodhisattva has this thought: ‘Dharmas are empty, without self and without beings; yet because of causes and conditions there are the four great elements and the six consciousnesses, and these ten dharmas each have power, able to produce, able to give rise, able to do something—as earth is able to bear and hold, water is able to soak and rot, fire is able to melt, wind is able to turn round, and consciousness is able to discriminate. These ten dharmas each have what they do; because beings are inverted, it is said that such-and-such a person is doing it, that I am doing it—just as, because skin and bone come together, there is the sound of speech, and people say that a person is speaking. It is like fire burning a dry bamboo grove, giving off a great noise, and within this there is no maker; again, like a wooden puppet, a conjured person, or a transformed person, although they can move and act, there is no maker—these ten dharmas are likewise. Dharmas born earlier and dharmas born later are causes and conditions for one another—whether as the co-arising cause-and-condition, the associated cause-and-condition, the retribution cause-and-condition, and so on; constantly cultivating and constantly accumulating these causes and conditions makes the fruit of retribution increase. It is like planting fruit trees in spring and watering them at the proper times, so that the flowers and fruit flourish. Discriminating with wisdom, one knows that all dharmas have no maker.’

The Dedication of the First Arousing of Intent and the Buddha-Mind Act as Causes and Conditions: Within the Real Mark There Is Neither Permanence nor Impermanence

The dedication of the bodhisattva's first arousing of intent and the Buddha-mind act as causes and conditions for each other; yet at the time of the dedication of the first arousing of intent there is not yet the Buddha-mind, and within the Buddha-mind there is also no mind of the first dedication; although neither is there, they can still act as causes and conditions for each other.

Someone asks: If, at the time of dedication when the mind is first aroused, there is no mind of awakening, where is it to be dedicated? The treatise-author answers: Within the real mark of prajñāpāramitā, dharmas have neither the mark of permanence nor the mark of impermanence, neither the mark of existence nor the mark of non-existence; therefore one should not raise the objection: ‘The mind of dedication has already ceased and is without anything existent; how can it act as a cause for awakening?’ If dharmas neither arise nor cease, and are neither not-arising nor not-ceasing, how can one take non-arising and non-ceasing to raise the objection, ‘There is no mind of awakening; to what is it dedicated’? Furthermore, the Buddha himself said that the mark of awakening is not past, not future, and not present; how can one object, ‘Because awakening does not exist in the future, to what is it dedicated’? Furthermore, as is said in the chapter "The Great Suchness": ‘The past world is not apart from the future world, and the future world is not apart from the past world; the suchness of the past world and the suchness of the future world are one suchness without duality’—how can one say, ‘The mind of awakening is not in the mind of dedication, and the mind of dedication is not in the mind of awakening’? It is only that the bodhisattva, hearing these words praising the Buddha-Dharma, arouses the mind and delights in it: ‘All the merit I have, I dedicate to the Buddha path.’ From arousing the mind up to the Buddha path, he cultivates this merit without stopping and without resting; because he uses nothing to be attained, like an illusion, like a dream, this is called ‘the bodhisattva's prajñāpāramitā’—being able to know that dharmas give rise to the fruit of retribution from causes and conditions, and yet have no fixed mark.

Śakra Challenges How Dedication Can Be Findable: Both Minds Are Empty; the Simile of Riding a Cart Westward

Śakra Devānām Indra raised the challenge: ‘Why is it findable that “the mind of dedication is not in the mind of awakening”? Why is it findable that “the mind of awakening is not in the mind of dedication”?’ Subhūti does not speak by way of worldly truth, as like an illusion, like a dream, but speaks only by way of the truth of the highest meaning: ‘These two minds are both empty; neither is the mark of mind.’ Why? Because within the ultimate emptiness of all dharmas there is no ‘this is mind’ and no ‘not mind’. Since the dharma is thus, how could there be any dedication to speak of? Only if there are two dharmas can there be dedication; for example, riding a cart heading west, there is a place to stop and lodge to the south, and so one turns the cart's head round and heads toward it. Because the cart and the place turned toward are two different places, there can be dedication; one cannot speak of dedication with only a single cart, because there is no difference of two places.

The Mark of Non-Mind Is Constantly the Mark of Non-Mind: The Inconceivable Is Also Constantly Inconceivable

As to what is called ‘the mark of non-mind is constantly the mark of non-mind’: Subhūti's meaning is ‘this mark of mind is as if constantly abiding, neither arising nor ceasing, neither stained nor pure’. Because it is the mark of non-mind, it is not mind, and there is also no such ‘non-mind’; therefore it is said to be inconceivable; the inconceivable is also constantly inconceivable, and cannot be measured, thought about, or have its marks grasped.

The Causal Mind Resembles the Fruit: As in Smelting Iron into Gold; the Buddha Praises Him, ‘Excellent’, Comforting the Minds of the Bodhisattvas

For this reason, the causal mind on which anuttarā samyaksaṃbodhi depends resembles the fruit; if it did not resemble it, it could not produce the fruit. If the first mind is not pure, later a pure mind cannot be aroused; just as smelting iron cannot smelt it into gold.

Because Subhūti had entered deeply into the prajñāpāramitā of causes and conditions—this is precisely a name of prajñāpāramitā, because he could deeply attain the causes and conditions of dharmas, it takes this as its name—without deviation or error, the Buddha praised him in the midst of the great assembly, saying: ‘Excellent! Excellent! You are a person of the Small Vehicle, and yet you are able to expound skilfully the very profound prajñāpāramitā!’

As to what is called ‘comforting the minds of the bodhisattvas’: it is teaching the bodhisattvas by means of prajñāpāramitā: do not, thinking that your afflictions are not yet exhausted and that you have not yet accomplished the Buddha path, grow lax and give up of your own accord! Dharmas have nothing that obstructs them; the first mind and the later mind have no different mark; only exert yourselves diligently with vigour, and you will be able to accomplish the Buddha path.

‘I Should Repay the Kindness’: Four Layers of Meaning in Repaying Kindness, Returning to the Three Jewels

As to what is called ‘I should repay the kindness’: Subhūti had this thought—‘I practise the real mark of these dharmas and have been able to be liberated from the suffering of old age, sickness, and death; how could I not remember the great kindness of this Dharma?’ Therefore he always delights in expounding the Dharma.

Furthermore, the Buddha has the mind of great compassion and delights in expounding the Dharma to deliver beings; I have attained the path because of the Buddha's kindness, and I too help the Buddha expound the Dharma to deliver beings—this is repaying the kindness.

Again, he knows that the present World-Honored One was able to accomplish the Buddha path because of the past Buddhas, and so I too love and revere the past Buddhas; just as a son, because he loves and reveres his father, also loves and esteems his grandfather. He also loves and reveres the past bodhisattvas and disciples, because they were able to expound the Dharma and instruct, and it was also through this that the present World-Honored One was able to accomplish it. Because Subhūti with a deep mind believed in and revered the Three Jewels, he said: ‘I know the kindness of the present World-Honored One and of the Dharma, of the past Buddhas and of their disciples.’ The Dharma is the Dharma Jewel; the present Buddha and the past Buddhas are the Buddha Jewel; the bodhisattvas and disciples are the Saṅgha Jewel.

Showing, Teaching, Benefiting, and Gladdening: Four Matters That Adorn the Expounding of the Dharma

The six perfections are as was said before.

As to what is called ‘showing’: it is pointing out to people the fair and the ugly, the wholesome and the unwholesome, what should be practised and what should not be practised; birth-and-death is ugly, and the security of nirvāṇa is fair. Distinguishing the three vehicles, distinguishing the six perfections—such things as these are called ‘showing’.

As to what is called ‘teaching’: it is instructing, saying, “Abandon evil and practise good”; this is called ‘teaching’.

As to what is called ‘benefiting’: because one has not yet tasted the flavour of wholesome dharmas, the mind retreats and sinks; one expounds the Dharma for him and guides him, so that he may get out—‘Do not seek the fruit while still at the stage of the cause! Although you now toil diligently, when the fruit of retribution appears you will gain great benefit!’ Because it makes his mind gain benefit, it is called ‘benefiting’.

As to what is called ‘gladdening’: it is praising him according to what he practises, making his mind give rise to joy; if he delights in giving, one praises giving, and he then rejoices; therefore it is called ‘gladdening’.

With these four matters, one expounds the Dharma with adornment.

The Emptiness of the Five Aggregates and the Emptiness of the Bodhisattva Are Not Two and Not Different: Within Prajñā One Should Abide Thus

At that time Subhūti said to Śakra Devānām Indra: ‘Kauśika! You should now listen to how, within prajñāpāramitā, the bodhisattva-mahāsattva has what he should abide in and what he should not abide in. Kauśika! Form—form is empty; feeling, perception, constructions, and consciousness—consciousness is empty; the bodhisattva—the bodhisattva too is empty. This emptiness of form and the emptiness of the bodhisattva are not two and not different; the emptiness of feeling, perception, constructions, and consciousness and the emptiness of the bodhisattva are likewise not two and not different. Kauśika! Within prajñāpāramitā the bodhisattva-mahāsattva should abide in just this way.

‘Furthermore, the eye—the eye is empty; and so on up to the mind—the mind is empty; the bodhisattva—the bodhisattva too is empty. The emptiness of the eye, and so on up to the emptiness of the bodhisattva, are not two and not different. The six sense-objects (form, sound, smell, taste, touch, and dharmas) are likewise. The earth element—the earth element is empty; and so on up to the consciousness element—the consciousness element is empty; the bodhisattva—the bodhisattva too is empty. Kauśika! The emptiness of the earth element, and so on up to the emptiness of the consciousness element, and the emptiness of the bodhisattva are not two and not different. Kauśika! Within prajñāpāramitā the bodhisattva-mahāsattva should abide in just this way. Ignorance—ignorance is empty; and so on up to old age and death—old age and death are empty; the cessation of ignorance—the cessation of ignorance too is empty; and so on up to the cessation of old age and death—the cessation of old age and death too is empty; the bodhisattva—the bodhisattva too is empty. Kauśika! The emptiness of ignorance up to the emptiness of old age and death, the emptiness of the cessation of ignorance up to the emptiness of the cessation of old age and death, and the emptiness of the bodhisattva are not two and not different. Kauśika! Within prajñāpāramitā the bodhisattva-mahāsattva should abide in just this way. Dānapāramitā up to prajñāpāramitā (the six perfections), inner emptiness up to the emptiness of non-existent and existent dharmas (the eighteen emptinesses), the four foundations of mindfulness up to the eighteen unshared dharmas, all the samādhi gates, all the dhāraṇī gates, the śrāvaka vehicle, the pratyekabuddha vehicle, the Buddha vehicle, the śrāvaka, the pratyekabuddha, the bodhisattva, the Buddha—all of these are likewise. Omniscience of all kinds—omniscience of all kinds is empty; the bodhisattva—the bodhisattva too is empty; the emptiness of omniscience of all kinds and the emptiness of the bodhisattva are not two and not different. Kauśika! Within prajñāpāramitā the bodhisattva-mahāsattva should abide in just this way.’

What Is It That One Should Not Abide In: One Should Not Abide, Because in All Dharmas There Is Something to Be Attained

At that time Śakra Devānām Indra asked Subhūti: ‘Within prajñāpāramitā, what is it that the bodhisattva should not abide in?’

Subhūti said: ‘Kauśika! The bodhisattva-mahāsattva should not abide in form, because there is something to be attained; he should not abide in feeling, perception, constructions, and consciousness, because there is something to be attained. He should not abide in the eye, and so on up to: he should not abide in the mind; he should not abide in forms, and so on up to: he should not abide in dharmas; in eye-consciousness up to mind-consciousness, in eye-contact up to mind-contact, in the feeling born from the condition of eye-contact up to the feeling born from the condition of mind-contact—in none of these should he abide, because there is something to be attained. In the earth element up to the consciousness element he should not abide, because there is something to be attained. In dānapāramitā up to prajñāpāramitā, in the four foundations of mindfulness up to the eighteen unshared dharmas he should not abide, because there is something to be attained. In the fruit of srota-āpanna he should not abide, because there is something to be attained; and so on up to: in the fruit of arhat, in the pratyekabuddha path, in the bodhisattva path, in the Buddha path, in omniscience of all kinds—in none of these should he abide, because there is something to be attained.

‘Furthermore, Kauśika! The bodhisattva-mahāsattva should not abide in 「色是常」 tr. "form is permanent", and should not abide in 「色是無常」 tr. "form is impermanent" either; feeling, perception, constructions, and consciousness are likewise. Whether form is pleasant or is suffering, pure or impure, self or non-self, empty or not empty, calmly extinguished or not calmly extinguished, apart or not apart—in none of these should he abide, because there is something to be attained; feeling, perception, constructions, and consciousness are likewise.

‘Furthermore, Kauśika! The bodhisattva-mahāsattva should not abide in the unconditioned mark of the fruit of srota-āpanna, the unconditioned mark of the fruit of sakṛdāgāmin, the unconditioned mark of the fruit of anāgāmin, the unconditioned mark of the fruit of arhat; in the unconditioned mark of the pratyekabuddha path and the unconditioned mark of the Buddha path he likewise should not abide. In the field of merit of the srota-āpanna he should not abide; in the field of merit of the sakṛdāgāmin, the anāgāmin, the arhat, the pratyekabuddha, and the Buddha he likewise should not abide.

‘Furthermore, Kauśika! The bodhisattva-mahāsattva should not abide in the first ground, because there is something to be attained; and so on up to: he should not abide in the tenth ground, because there is something to be attained.

From the First Arousing of the Mind to Becoming a Buddha and Saving Beings: In Each and Every Vow One Should Not Abide

‘Furthermore, the bodhisattva-mahāsattva, abiding in the very first arousing of the mind, should not abide in 「我當圓滿檀波羅蜜」 tr. "I shall fulfil dānapāramitā", and so on up to: he should not abide in 「我當圓滿般若波羅蜜」 tr. "I shall fulfil prajñāpāramitā"; 「圓滿六波羅蜜便當入菩薩位」 tr. "having fulfilled the six perfections, I shall then enter the bodhisattva position"—he should not abide in this; 「入菩薩位之後，當住阿鞞跋致（不退轉）地」 tr. "after entering the bodhisattva position, I shall abide in the ground of avaivartika (non-retrogressing)"—he should not abide in this; 「菩薩當圓滿五神通」 tr. "the bodhisattva shall fulfil the five supernormal powers"—he should not abide in this, because there is something to be attained. 「菩薩安住五神通之後，我當遊歷無量阿僧祇佛界，禮敬、供養諸佛，聽聞正法；聽法之後，為他人宣說」 tr. "after the bodhisattva abides in the five supernormal powers, I shall travel through immeasurable asaṃkhyeya Buddha-realms, pay homage to and make offerings to the Buddhas, and hear the true Dharma; having heard the Dharma, I shall proclaim it for others"—in this way the bodhisattva-mahāsattva should not abide, because there is something to be attained. 「如同諸佛世界的莊嚴清淨，我也當莊嚴世界」 tr. "just as the worlds of the Buddhas are adorned and pure, I too shall adorn a world"—he should not abide in this, because there is something to be attained. 「成就眾生，令他們進入佛道」 tr. "to bring beings to maturity and cause them to enter the Buddha path"—he should not abide in this; 「前往無量阿僧祇世界諸佛的處所，尊重、愛敬、供養，用香華、瓔珞、澤香、搗香、幢幡、華蓋、百千億種寶衣供養諸佛」 tr. "to go to the places of the Buddhas of immeasurable asaṃkhyeya worlds, to honour, love, revere, and make offerings to them, making offerings to the Buddhas with incense and flowers, necklaces, ointment incense, powdered incense, banners and pennants, flower canopies, and a hundred thousand koṭi kinds of jewelled robes"—he should not abide in this, because there is something to be attained. 「我當令無量阿僧祇眾生發起阿耨多羅三藐三菩提心」 tr. "I shall cause immeasurable asaṃkhyeya beings to arouse the mind of anuttarā samyaksaṃbodhi"—in this way the bodhisattva should not abide; 「我當生起五眼——肉眼、天眼、慧眼、法眼、佛眼」 tr. "I shall give rise to the five eyes—the fleshly eye, the divine eye, the wisdom eye, the Dharma eye, and the Buddha eye"—he should not abide in this; 「我當生起一切三昧門」 tr. "I shall give rise to all the samādhi gates"—he should not abide in this; 「隨心所欲遊戲於諸三昧」 tr. "to sport in the samādhis just as the mind wishes"—he should not abide in this; 「我當生起一切陀羅尼門」 tr. "I shall give rise to all the dhāraṇī gates"—he should not abide in this; 「我當得佛的十力」 tr. "I shall attain the ten powers of a Buddha"—he should not abide in this; 「我當得四無所畏、四無礙智、十八不共法」 tr. "I shall attain the four fearlessnesses, the four unobstructed knowledges, and the eighteen unshared dharmas"—he should not abide in this; 「我當圓滿大慈大悲」 tr. "I shall fulfil great kindness and great compassion"—he should not abide in this; 「我當圓滿三十二相」 tr. "I shall fulfil the thirty-two marks"—he should not abide in this; 「我當圓滿八十隨形好」 tr. "I shall fulfil the eighty minor marks"—he should not abide in this, because there is something to be attained.

The Persons of the Eight and the Sequence of the Four Fruits: From the Faith-Follower and the Dharma-Follower up to Entering Nirvāṇa Without Remainder, One Should Not Abide in Any

‘These persons of the eight—this is a faith-follower, this is a dharma-follower—in this way he should not abide; 「須陀洹極多七世受生」 tr. "the srota-āpanna receives birth seven times at the most"—he should not abide in this; 「家家（須陀洹之一類）」 tr. "the one who goes from family to family (a kind of srota-āpanna)"—he should not abide in this; 「須陀洹此生命終、垢染盡除」 tr. "the srota-āpanna who, when this life ends, has his defilements entirely removed"—he should not abide in this; 「須陀洹於中間入涅槃」 tr. "the srota-āpanna who enters nirvāṇa in between"—he should not abide in this; 「這人趣向斯陀含、取證果位」 tr. "this person is heading for sakṛdāgāmin and for the realisation of its fruit"—he should not abide in this; 「這人是斯陀含，一往一來便入涅槃」 tr. "this person is a sakṛdāgāmin: going once and coming once, he then enters nirvāṇa"—he should not abide in this; 「這人趣向阿那含、取證果位」 tr. "this person is heading for anāgāmin and for the realisation of its fruit"—he should not abide in this; 「斯陀含之一種子」 tr. "the single-seed sakṛdāgāmin"—he should not abide in this; 「這人是阿那含，於彼處入涅槃」 tr. "this person is an anāgāmin, who enters nirvāṇa in that other place"—he should not abide in this; 「這人趣向阿羅漢、取證果位」 tr. "this person is heading for arhatship and for the realisation of its fruit"—he should not abide in this; 「這人是阿羅漢，此生入無餘涅槃」 tr. "this person is an arhat, who in this life enters nirvāṇa without remainder"—he should not abide in this; 「這是辟支佛」 tr. "this is a pratyekabuddha"—he should not abide in this; 「越過聲聞、辟支佛地，我當安住菩薩地」 tr. "passing beyond the grounds of the śrāvaka and the pratyekabuddha, I shall abide in the bodhisattva ground"—he should not abide in this; in the knowledge of the kinds of paths he should not abide, because there is something to be attained. 「一切種、一切法都了知之後，斷盡諸煩惱以及習氣」 tr. "having fully known all kinds and all dharmas, to cut off completely the afflictions together with their residual habits"—he should not abide in this; 「佛得阿耨多羅三藐三菩提，當轉法輪」 tr. "the Buddha, having attained anuttarā samyaksaṃbodhi, shall turn the wheel of the Dharma"—he should not abide in this; 「作佛所作之事，度無量阿僧祇眾生令入涅槃」 tr. "to do the work that a Buddha does, saving immeasurable asaṃkhyeya beings and causing them to enter nirvāṇa"—he should not abide in this.

‘In the four bases of supernormal power he should not abide; 「入這三昧，住世如恒河沙等劫那樣長的壽命」 tr. "entering this samādhi, to remain in the world with a lifespan as long as kalpas equal to the sands of the Ganges"—he should not abide in this; 「我當得無有殃咎、無可計數之劫的壽命」 tr. "I shall attain a lifespan without calamity, of kalpas beyond counting"—he should not abide in this; 「三十二相，一一相都以百福莊嚴」 tr. "the thirty-two marks, each and every mark adorned with a hundred merits"—he should not abide in this; 「我的一個世界，如十方恒河沙等世界那麼廣」 tr. "a single world of mine as vast as worlds equal to the sands of the Ganges in the ten directions"—he should not abide in this; 「我的三千大千世界純是金剛」 tr. "my three-thousand great-thousand world made purely of vajra"—he should not abide in this; 「使我的菩提樹當出如此妙香，眾生聞到的，都沒有婬欲、瞋恚、愚癡，也沒有聲聞、辟支佛之心，這一切人必當得阿耨多羅三藐三菩提；若眾生聞到這香的，身病、意病都全部除盡」 tr. "may my bodhi tree give forth such a wondrous fragrance that the beings who smell it are all without lust, hatred, and delusion, and without the mind of the śrāvaka or the pratyekabuddha, and all these people shall surely attain anuttarā samyaksaṃbodhi; and if beings smell this fragrance, their illnesses of body and illnesses of mind are all entirely removed"—he should not abide in this.

‘「當使我的世界之中沒有色、受、想、行、識的名字」 tr. "I shall cause there to be, within my world, no names of form, feeling, perception, constructions, and consciousness"—he should not abide in this; 「當使我的世界之中沒有檀波羅蜜的名字，乃至沒有般若波羅蜜的名字，當使我的世界之中沒有四念處的名字乃至沒有十八不共法的名字，也沒有須陀洹的名字乃至沒有佛的名字」 tr. "I shall cause there to be, within my world, no name of dānapāramitā, and so on up to no name of prajñāpāramitā; I shall cause there to be, within my world, no name of the four foundations of mindfulness, and so on up to no name of the eighteen unshared dharmas, and also no name of srota-āpanna, and so on up to no name of Buddha"—he should not abide in this, because there is something to be attained. Why is that? Because when the Buddhas attain anuttarā samyaksaṃbodhi, all dharmas are nothing to be attained. Just so, Kauśika! Within prajñāpāramitā the bodhisattva should not abide, because there is nothing to be attained.’

Where Do the Buddhas Abide: As the Buddhas Abide in Dharmas, Neither Abiding Nor Not Abiding

At that time Śāriputra thought in his mind: ‘How, now, in the end, does the bodhisattva abide within prajñāpāramitā?’

Subhūti, knowing what Śāriputra was thinking in his mind, then said to Śāriputra: ‘What do you think? Where do the Buddhas abide?’

Śāriputra said to Subhūti: ‘The Buddhas have no place of abiding. The Buddhas do not abide in form, do not abide in feeling, perception, constructions, and consciousness; they do not abide in the conditioned nature, do not abide in the unconditioned nature; they do not abide in the four foundations of mindfulness, and so on up to: they do not abide in the eighteen unshared dharmas, do not abide in omniscience of all kinds.’

Subhūti said: ‘Śāriputra! Within prajñāpāramitā the bodhisattva-mahāsattva should abide in just this way: as the Buddhas abide within dharmas, neither abiding nor not abiding. Śāriputra! Within prajñāpāramitā the bodhisattva-mahāsattva should train in just this way: I shall abide by way of 「住於不住之法」 tr. "abiding in the dharma of non-abiding".’

The Treatise Explains Abiding and Not Abiding: The Five Aggregates Are Empty of Mark, as the Going-Out of a Sandalwood Fire Is No Different from the Going-Out of a Fire of Dung, Grass, and Wood

What follows is the treatise-author's explanation.

The treatise-author says: What is called abiding within prajñāpāramitā is this: the five aggregates (form, feeling, perception, constructions, and consciousness) and the mark of the five aggregates are all empty.

The five aggregates are empty of mark because they are contemplated by means of the eighteen emptinesses.

Furthermore, the Prajñāpāramitā Sūtra speaks the meaning of emptiness: the mark of the five aggregates is empty; it is only because ordinary people are inverted that they cling to the mark of the five aggregates, and, within the coming together of the five aggregates, further cling to the mark of a bodhisattva. Within prajñāpāramitā, beings are removed by the emptiness of beings, and so there is no mark of a bodhisattva; the five aggregates are removed by the emptiness of dharmas, and so there is no mark of the five aggregates. These two kinds of emptiness are without distinction, and therefore it is said: ‘The emptiness of the five aggregates and the emptiness of the bodhisattva are without duality and without difference.’ It is like a fire of sandalwood going out and a fire of dung, grass, and wood going out: the matter of going out is in itself no different. It is by taking the mark from the time before the going-out and speaking of it at the time after the going-out that there comes to be a difference; within the going-out there is no difference.

And so on up to omniscience of all kinds: it is likewise.

The Treatise Explains Why Not Abiding Is Spoken Of: When the Mind Is Apart from the Five Aggregates and Does Not Abide, That Is the Meaning of Abiding

‘Should not abide’ means that one should not abide within the five aggregates.

Someone asks: One ought to speak of what the meaning of abiding is; why then is ‘not abiding’ spoken of?

The answer: If, within the five aggregates, the mind can be apart from them and not abide, this is the meaning of abiding. Therefore it is said: ‘One should not abide, because there is something to be attained.’

And so on up to omniscience of all kinds: it is likewise.

Earlier it was said, ‘within the five aggregates one should not abide’, and it was not yet known by which gate one should not abide; now it says, ‘within the gates of permanence, impermanence, and so on, one should not abide, and so on up to: within being apart, too, one should not abide’.

The Treatise Explains Why One Should Not Abide in the Unconditioned Mark of the Four Fruits: Nirvāṇa Is Precisely the Unconditioned Mark, and to Grasp It Is to Fall Back

Someone asks: The unconditioned mark of the fruit of srota-āpanna and the rest should not be abided in—what sequence is there here?

The answer: The bodhisattva first contemplates all dharmas as empty and without anything existent, and his mind then shrinks back and sinks, wishing to grasp nirvāṇa; nirvāṇa is precisely the unconditioned mark, and therefore it now says, ‘the unconditioned mark of the fruit of srota-āpanna and the rest should not be abided in’.

Supposing it is the unconditioned mark of the fruit of srota-āpanna, then there is no dharma that can be clung to—what is there to love? What is there to grasp? Supposing it is a conditioned mark, a conditioned mark is deceptive and unreal, and likewise should not be abided in. Therefore it is said, ‘the unconditioned mark of the fruit of srota-āpanna should not be abided in, and so on up to: the unconditioned mark of the Buddha should not be abided in—it is likewise’.

The Treatise Explains Why One Should Not Abide in the Field of Merit: The Karmic Result of a Good Field Is Immeasurable, Yet to Discriminate Fields of Merit Destroys Great Compassion

It is as when the bodhisattva, wishing to practise the Buddha path, first practises dānapāramitā and ought to seek a field of merit. Why is that? Because of the merit arising from the causes and conditions of the field of merit, the vows he has made can be fulfilled. It is like sowing in a good field: the profit of the harvest is great; as the Buddha said, the result of other fields has a limit, but the field of the worthy and noble is immeasurable, and its result too is immeasurable. The bodhisattva, hearing that the result of these fields of merit—the srota-āpanna and the rest—is immeasurable, then wishes to become a srota-āpanna; therefore it is said: ‘The field of merit of the srota-āpanna should not be abided in, and so on up to the pratyekabuddha: it is likewise.’

Someone asks: Because the two vehicles are small, one ought to pass beyond them and not abide in them; but why is the field of merit of the Buddha also not to be abided in?

The answer: In the Dharma of the bodhisattva, one ought to be even toward all dharmas; if one takes the Buddha as great and beings as small, one destroys the even mark of dharmas.

Furthermore, because of emptiness, in no place at all should one abide.

Furthermore, the bodhisattva ought to give with an even mind; if he discriminates fields of merit, he destroys great compassion, and also destroys the giving that is pure in three parts.

The Treatise Explains Not Abiding in Ground after Ground: Without Letting Go of the First Ground One Does Not Attain the Second; Let Go of the Small Gain to Seek the Great Benefit

‘Should not abide in the first ground’: if one does not let go of the first ground, one cannot attain the second ground; for the sake of seeking a great benefit, one ought to let go of a small gain. Furthermore, because one takes marks with a clinging mind, one should not abide. And so on up to the tenth ground: it is likewise.

Someone asks: If the Dharma of the bodhisattva-mahāsattva is that from the first arousing of the mind one should practise the six perfections, that by practising the six perfections one enters the position of dharma, that by entering the position of dharma one should abide in the ground of avaivartika, and that after abiding in the ground of avaivartika one should give rise to the five supernormal powers and make offerings to the Buddhas of the ten directions—as is spoken of at length in the text below—why now is it all said, ‘one should not abide’?

The answer: This does not destroy pure abiding; it only destroys the abiding of the wrong view that reckons on and clings to 「我」 tr. "a self" and of the mind that takes marks—as, for example, in tending a field one removes the weeds from it.

Furthermore, it is for the sake of cutting off love of dharma that one should not abide; it is so as not to go against the wisdom of ultimate emptiness spoken by the Buddhas that one should not abide. If, with skilful means and a mind that does not cling, one does so out of pity for beings, then even though one abides there is no fault.

And so on up to the eighty minor marks: it is likewise.

The Treatise Explains the Persons of the Eight and the Realisation of the Fruits: From the Faith-Follower and the Dharma-Follower up to the Nine Kinds of Arhat

‘The persons of the eight’ are the faith-follower and the dharma-follower within the path of seeing the truths.

The srota-āpanna receives birth seven times at the very longest; some srota-āpannas have their afflictions entirely removed in this life and attain arhatship.

There is the srota-āpanna who goes from family to family, receiving birth three times; after receiving birth three times, he enters nirvāṇa. There is the srota-āpanna who enters in between: leaving aside the third, the rest enter nirvāṇa in between. Those who abide within the six non-obstructions and the five liberations are all srota-āpannas heading for sakṛdāgāmin.

One who cuts off six kinds of fetters of the desire realm, is born in the heavens, and from the heavens comes again to the human world and enters nirvāṇa, is called a sakṛdāgāmin.

Cutting off the seventh portion of the fetters of the desire realm is called heading for anāgāmin. Cutting off the eighth portion of the fetters is also called heading for anāgāmin, and is also called the single-seed sakṛdāgāmin: dying in this place and being born in that place, he enters nirvāṇa.

One who is able to cut off all the fetters of the desire realm is called an anāgāmin: dying in this place, he is born in the form realm or the formless realm and enters nirvāṇa, and does not come back to receive birth again.

There is the anāgāmin who passes into extinction in this very life; there is the anāgāmin who passes into extinction in the intermediate existence; there is the anāgāmin who enters nirvāṇa at the moment of receiving birth; there is the anāgāmin who, after receiving birth, cultivates and arouses the practices and enters nirvāṇa; there is the anāgāmin who enters nirvāṇa without diligently seeking the practices; there is the anāgāmin who goes upward, as far as the Akaniṣṭha heaven; there is the anāgāmin who is born in the formless realm and enters nirvāṇa; there is the anāgāmin who attains the bodily witness and enters nirvāṇa. These are called anāgāmins, and are also called those heading for arhatship.

There are nine kinds of arhat; at the time when, the outflows exhausted, they give up the body, it is called entering nirvāṇa without remainder.

Passing beyond the grounds of the śrāvaka and the pratyekabuddha, abiding in the bodhisattva ground; accomplishing the knowledge of the kinds of paths and omniscience of all kinds, and knowing all dharmas; cutting off all afflictions together with their residual habits; becoming a Buddha and turning the wheel of the Dharma; being endowed with the thirty-two marks; adorning a world and saving immeasurable beings; an immeasurable lifespan—all of these are as was said in the earlier discussions.

The Treatise Explains Supernormal Powers, Lifespan, and the Vajra World: The Bodhisattva Thinking to Himself Gives Rise to a Lofty Mind, and Here One Should Not Abide

The śrāvaka, having cultivated the four bases of supernormal power well, gains the power of this samādhi and can remain alive for a kalpa or for somewhat less than a kalpa. The bodhisattva, having cultivated the samādhi of the four bases of supernormal power well, if he wishes for a lifespan of kalpas like the sands of the Ganges, can also accomplish it as he wishes.

‘The three-thousand great-thousand world made purely of vajra’: in other worlds, although there is vajra at the bottom, and there is vajra where the Buddha walks and where he sits, the other places have none; this is a vow the bodhisattva makes: that the world be entirely vajra.

‘The fragrance of the bodhi tree converting beings’: it is as was said in the earlier discussion of meaning.

Someone asks: Although the matters here are rare, they are all still believable; but to say 「沒有色、受、想、行、識的名字，沒有檀波羅蜜的名字乃至佛的名字」 tr. "there are no names of form, feeling, perception, constructions, and consciousness, no name of dānapāramitā, and so on up to the name of Buddha"—this is truly hard to believe!

The answer: There is a kind of world that is the place where people of great merit and wisdom are born; there the trees, the sky, the earth, the mountains and waters, and so on, constantly give forth the sound of the real mark of all dharmas—that all dharmas are neither arising nor ceasing, neither pure nor stained, empty, signless, without action, and so on; beings, as soon as they are born, hear this sound and naturally attain the acceptance of the non-arising of dharmas. Within a world such as this, there is no need to explain the names of dharmas one by one—that is, the so-called five aggregates, twelve sense-fields, and so on, dānapāramitā up to the eighteen unshared dharmas, the srota-āpanna up to the Buddhas. The beings within this world all have their bodies adorned with the thirty-two marks and the eighty minor marks, immeasurable light, one kind of path, and one kind of fruit.

‘Here one should not abide’: the bodhisattva thinks to himself: ‘I am able to give rise to such a world’—and then a mind of lofty pride would arise; therefore he should not take marks and abide.

Here Subhūti himself explains the causes and conditions of not abiding: ‘When the Buddhas attain the Buddha path, within all dharmas they do not find any fixed, real mark—where then would they still abide!’

Now Śāriputra thinks thus: ‘If there is nowhere at all to abide, where must one abide in order to accomplish the Buddha path?’

Subhūti, knowing what Śāriputra was thinking in his mind, then said to Śāriputra: ‘The bodhisattvas are all children of the Buddha; by the dharma of being a son or a daughter, one ought to do as the father does.’

The mind of the Buddhas abides nowhere within all dharmas—that is, form up to omniscience of all kinds; the bodhisattva too ought to train in this way, practising prajñāpāramitā with a mind that abides nowhere. Just as the Buddhas do not abide even in the mind that abides nowhere, and do not abide in the mind that is not non-abiding either, because of ultimate purity, so the bodhisattvas too ought to abide following the Buddha; because of ultimate purity, the bodhisattvas too ought to train following the Buddha.

The Speech of Yakṣas Can Still Be Understood: What Subhūti Says Cannot Be Understood at All

What follows is the sūtra text.

At that time, among the assembly, there were gods who thought thus: ‘What the words and phrases of the yakṣas' speech say can still be understood; but the words and the discussion of meaning that Subhūti speaks in explaining prajñāpāramitā cannot be understood at all!’

Subhūti, knowing what the gods were thinking in their minds, then said to the gods: ‘Do you not understand, do you not know?’

The gods said: ‘Venerable One! We do not understand, we do not know.’

Subhūti said to the gods: ‘By the Dharma you ought, from the very first, not to know! I have nothing I discourse on; I do not speak even a single word, and there is no listener either. Why is that? Words are not prajñāpāramitā; within prajñāpāramitā there is no listener; the anuttarā samyaksaṃbodhi of the Buddhas is without words and without speaking.

Four Similes Showing That There Is No Speaking and No Hearing: The Conjured Person, the Dream, the Two Echoes in the Deep Ravine, and the Skilled Conjurer

‘Gods! Suppose the Buddha conjures up a conjured person, and this conjured person in turn conjures up the fourfold assembly—bhikṣus, bhikṣuṇīs, upāsakas, and upāsikās—and the conjured person expounds the Dharma within the fourfold assembly. What do you think? Within this, is there one who speaks, one who hears, one who knows?’

The gods said: ‘There is not, Venerable One!’

Subhūti said: ‘All dharmas are like a conjured transformation; within this there is no one who speaks, no one who hears, no one who knows. Gods! It is as when a person in a dream sees the Buddha expounding the Dharma. What do you think? Within this, is there one who speaks, one who hears, one who knows?’

The gods said: ‘There is not, Venerable One!’

Subhūti said to the gods: ‘All dharmas are like a dream: there is no one who speaks, no one who hears, no one who knows. Gods! It is as when two people are in a great deep ravine, each standing on one side, praising the Buddha, the Dharma, and the Saṅgha, and two kinds of echo come forth. What do the gods think? Can the echoes of these two people understand each other in turn?’

The gods said: ‘They cannot, Venerable One!’

Subhūti said to the gods: ‘All dharmas are likewise: there is no one who speaks, no one who hears, no one who knows. Gods! It is as when a skilled conjurer, at a crossroads open in all four directions, conjures up a Buddha and the fourfold assembly and expounds the Dharma among them. What do the gods think? Within this, is there one who speaks, one who hears, one who knows?’

The gods said: ‘There is not, Venerable One!’

Subhūti said to the gods: ‘All dharmas are like an illusion: there is no one who speaks, no one who hears, no one who knows.’

Deeper and Ever More Subtle: Form Is Neither Deep Nor Subtle; Within This Dharma Names and Speech Are Not Spoken

At that time the gods thought in their minds: ‘What Subhūti says was meant to make it easy for people to understand, but instead it becomes deeper and more subtle!’

Subhūti, knowing what the gods were thinking in their minds, then said to the gods: ‘Form is neither deep nor subtle; feeling, perception, constructions, and consciousness are neither deep nor subtle; the nature of form is neither deep nor subtle; the nature of feeling, perception, constructions, and consciousness is neither deep nor subtle. The nature of the eye up to the nature of the mind, the nature of forms up to the nature of dharmas, the nature of the eye element up to the nature of the mind element, eye-consciousness up to mind-consciousness, eye-contact up to mind-contact, the feeling born from the condition of eye-contact up to the feeling born from the condition of mind-contact, dānapāramitā up to prajñāpāramitā, inner emptiness up to the emptiness of non-existent and existent dharmas, the four foundations of mindfulness up to the eighteen unshared dharmas, all the samādhi gates, all the dhāraṇī gates, and so on up to omniscience of all kinds and the nature of omniscience of all kinds—all are neither deep nor subtle.’

The gods again thought thus: ‘Within this dharma that is spoken, form is not spoken of; feeling, perception, constructions, and consciousness are not spoken of; the eye up to the feeling born from the condition of mind-contact is not spoken of; dānapāramitā up to prajñāpāramitā is not spoken of; inner emptiness up to the emptiness of non-existent and existent dharmas is not spoken of; the four foundations of mindfulness up to the eighteen unshared dharmas are not spoken of; the dhāraṇī gates, the samādhi gates, up to omniscience of all kinds are not spoken of; the fruit of srota-āpanna up to the fruit of arhat is not spoken of, the pratyekabuddha path is not spoken of, the path of anuttarā samyaksaṃbodhi is not spoken of—within this dharma, names and speech are not spoken.’

Subhūti, knowing what the gods were thinking in their minds, then said to the gods: ‘Just so! Just so! Gods! Within this dharma, the anuttarā samyaksaṃbodhi attained by the Buddhas is of an unspeakable mark, and within it too there is no one who speaks, no one who hears, no one who knows. Therefore, gods, when good men and good women wish to abide in the fruit of srota-āpanna and wish to realise the fruit of srota-āpanna, these people are not apart from this 「忍」 tr. "acceptance"; those who wish to abide in and wish to realise sakṛdāgāmin, anāgāmin, the fruit of arhat, the pratyekabuddha path, and the Buddha path are likewise not apart from this 「忍」 tr. "acceptance". Just so, gods! From the first arousing of the mind, the bodhisattva-mahāsattva should abide within prajñāpāramitā in just this way, because there is no speaking and no hearing.’

The Treatise Explains the Yakṣa Simile: It Simply Takes What People Do Not Understand to Compare with What the Gods Have Not Yet Awakened To

What follows is the treatise-author's explanation.

Someone asks: Although the speech of the yakṣas is obscure and not correct, what it refers to is vulgar and shallow; the explanation of deep prajñāpāramitā, though it uses ordinary words, has a hidden and far-reaching purport—the matters differ and the purports run contrary; why are they brought together in comparison?

The answer: The gods simply take what people cannot understand to compare with what they themselves have not yet awakened to; it is not necessary for the matters referred to and the purports to be the same before a simile can be made.

Some say: The lord of the gods has nine hundred and ninety-nine gates, and each gate is guarded by sixteen blue-robed yakṣas. The speech of these yakṣas is loose and false, and their manner is bewitching and fawning; the gods hold them in contempt and pay them no mind, and so do not understand their speech; yet the drift of their speech can be recognised without argument in words, and so it is said ‘can still be understood’. Now, hearing the deep prajñā, the words seem within reach, but the hidden, profound purport is deep; though one searches it deeply, one loses it the farther; and so the speech of the yakṣas is used as a comparison for how hard prajñā is to understand.

Again, because although the speech of the yakṣas is hard to understand, when the eyes see their appearance, and one conveys their speech and gauges their intent, it can all be known; it is like the swift current of a deep abyss: once one has a boat, one can cross it.

The Treatise Explains That Names Are All Empty: Ultimate Emptiness Has No Fixed Mark, and One Cannot Be Brought to Awakening by Its Being Relayed and Translated

The prajñāpāramitā that Subhūti speaks—the meaning of ultimate emptiness—has no fixed mark and cannot be clung to; one cannot be brought to awakening by its being relayed and translated; one may not say 「有」 tr. "existent", may not say 「無」 tr. "non-existent", may not say 「有無」 tr. "both existent and non-existent", may not say 「非有非無」 tr. "neither existent nor non-existent", and even 「非非有非非無」 tr. "neither not-existent nor not-non-existent" is not there, because the place of all the mind's activity is extinguished and the way of words is cut off. Therefore the gods were startled, doubtful, bewildered, and oppressed.

Subhūti answered the gods: ‘What you do not understand—you ought, from the very first, to be just so! This Dharma has nothing that can be said, down to there not being even a single word that can be clung to or grasped; without words and without speech—this indeed is the path of the Buddhas.’ Why is that? These names are all empty, deceptive and unreal, as was said within names at the time when form was refuted. By using names there is speech; if there are no names, there is no speech.

The gods thought thus: ‘If there is no speaking and no hearing, then this coming together in assembly today—what is it for?’

Subhūti, wishing to explain this meaning, then used similes to make it clear.

The gods again thought thus: ‘Subhūti wishes to use similes to make us awaken, but these similes have become deeper and more subtle still!’

A simile is fundamentally the use of the coarse to illustrate the fine, and of a fixed matter to make clear an unfixed principle; but now these similes too are subtle and without a fixed mark.

The Treatise Explains That Prajñā Is Not Different from the Five Aggregates: It Is Not I Alone Who Am So; When the Buddha Attained Awakening There Was Likewise No Speaking

Subhūti, knowing that the minds of the gods were lost and sunk within deep prajñā and could not get themselves out, therefore said: ‘Prajñāpāramitā is not different from the five aggregates; the real mark of the five aggregates is precisely prajñāpāramitā. Now these five aggregates are neither deep nor subtle, and so on up to omniscience of all kinds: neither deep nor subtle.’

The gods at this time knew deeply that although Subhūti spoke of form with his mouth, in his mind there was in truth nothing spoken, and so on up to anuttarā samyaksaṃbodhi: it was likewise.

Subhūti, knowing the minds of the gods, answered: ‘Just so! Just so! It is not I alone who am so! When the Buddha attained awakening there was likewise no speaking; in the mark of calm extinction there is in truth no one who speaks and no one who hears. Therefore the fruit of srota-āpanna up to the Buddha path all exist by virtue of the unconditioned dharma; apart from this dharma, apart from this 「忍」 tr. "acceptance", there is no srota-āpanna, and so on up to the Buddha path: it is likewise. From the bodhisattva's first arousing of the mind up to his becoming a Buddha, in all that time, all dharmas are without speaking and without hearing.’

Because all contemplations have come to rest, and because speech is cut off, it cannot be spoken; because it cannot be spoken, it cannot be heard; because it cannot be heard, it cannot be known; because it cannot be known, toward all dharmas there is no receiving and no clinging—and this is entering nirvāṇa.

Mahāprajñāpāramitā-upadeśa, Fascicle Fifty-Four.

The gods Wonder in Their Minds ‘What Kind of Person Should Listen?’; Subhūti Answers: Listen as a Conjured Person

At that time a thought arose in the minds of the gods: ‘What kind of person should listen to the Dharma that Subhūti speaks?’ Subhūti knew what the gods were thinking in their minds, and said to them: ‘One should listen to the Dharma the way a conjured person, as if brought forth by illusion, would; this Dharma of mine should be listened to by just such a person. Why? Because such a person has no one able to hear, no one able to listen, no one able to know, and no one able to realise.’

The gods then said to Subhūti: ‘These beings are like an illusion, like a transformation; is the one who listens to the Dharma also like an illusion, like a transformation?’

Beings, the Self, and Even the Path of the Buddha Are All Like an Illusion, Like a Dream

Subhūti answered: ‘Just so! Just so! Gods! Beings are like an illusion, and the one who listens to the Dharma is also like an illusion; beings are like a transformation, and the one who listens to the Dharma is also like a transformation. Gods! I am like an illusion, like a dream; beings, and so on up to the one who is able to know and the one who is able to see, are also like an illusion, like a dream. Gods! Form is like an illusion, like a dream; feeling, perception, constructions, and consciousness are also like an illusion, like a dream.

‘From the eye all the way up to the various feelings born from the condition of mind-contact—all are like an illusion, like a dream; inner emptiness all the way up to the emptiness of non-existent and existent dharmas, and the dānapāramitā of giving all the way up to the prajñāpāramitā of wisdom, are also like an illusion, like a dream. Gods! The four foundations of mindfulness all the way up to the eighteen unshared dharmas—all are like an illusion, like a dream; the fruit of the srota-āpanna is like an illusion, like a dream, and the fruit of the sakṛdāgāmin, the fruit of the anāgāmin, the fruit of the arhat, and the path of the pratyekabuddha are also like an illusion, like a dream. Gods! The path of the Buddha too is like an illusion, like a dream.’

The gods, Startled, Ask Again: Is Even Nirvāṇa Like an Illusion, Like a Dream?—Illusion, Dream, and Nirvāṇa Are Without Duality and Without Difference

At that time the gods asked Subhūti: ‘You say that the path of the Buddha is like an illusion, like a dream; do you say that nirvāṇa too is like an illusion, like a dream?’

Subhūti said to the gods: ‘I say that the path of the Buddha is like an illusion, like a dream; I say that nirvāṇa too is like an illusion, like a dream. Even if there were a dharma that surpassed nirvāṇa, I would say that it too is likewise like an illusion, like a dream. Why? Gods! This illusion, this dream, and this nirvāṇa are not two at all, and are not different at all.’

What follows is the commentary.

The Treatise-Author Asks and Answers Himself (1): Since ‘No Speaking, No Listening’ Has Already Been Said, Why Ask Again ‘What Kind of Person Should Listen’?

Question: It has already been said above: ‘like an illusion, like a dream, there is no one who speaks and no one who listens’. Why, then, is it now asked again: ‘What kind of person should listen to the Dharma in accord with Subhūti's meaning?’

Answer: Because the gods had said earlier, ‘What Subhūti says is hard to understand’, Subhūti here answered them with the simile of the conjured person. Now the gods again have this thought: ‘What kind of person listening would be in accord with what Subhūti says, so as to be able to believe it, able to receive it, able to practise it, and able to attain the fruit of the path?’ Subhūti then answers: ‘One who listens as a conjured person would is in accord with the Dharma I speak.’

A Conjured Person Has No Mind and No Mental-Factor Dharmas—Why Speak the Dharma to It? Only to Make the Practitioner Use the Mind Without Clinging

Question: This conjured person has no mind and no mental factors at all; it simply cannot listen and cannot receive. Why speak the Dharma to it?

Answer: It is not that a conjured person is really meant to listen; it is only to make the practitioner use the mind toward all dharmas without clinging to anything, just like a conjured person—that conjured person has neither anything able to hear nor anything able to realise. Beings are like an illusion, like a dream, and listening to the Dharma is also like an illusion, like a dream—here ‘beings’ refers to the one who speaks the Dharma, and ‘listening to the Dharma’ refers to the one who receives the Dharma.

Subhūti says: ‘Not only are the one who speaks the Dharma and the one who listens to the Dharma like an illusion, like a dream; I, and so on up to the one who is able to know and the one who is able to see, are all like an illusion, like a dream; form too is like an illusion, like a dream; all the way up to nirvāṇa, all are like an illusion, like a dream—that is, the Dharma that is spoken is like an illusion, like a dream.’

The Buddha and Nirvāṇa Are Highest and Most Wondrous—How Can They Too Be Like an Illusion, Like a Dream? Subhūti Answers Firmly: Precisely Like an Illusion, Like a Dream

Among all beings, the Buddha is foremost; among all dharmas, nirvāṇa is foremost. When the gods heard these two spoken of as like an illusion, like a dream, alarm and doubt arose in their minds: ‘The Buddha and nirvāṇa are highest and most wondrous; how can they be like an illusion, like a dream?’ For this reason they pressed the matter once more, earnestly: ‘Are the Buddha and nirvāṇa truly like an illusion, like a dream?’ ‘Could it be that Subhūti has misspoken? Could it be that we have misheard?’ Therefore they steadied their minds and pressed the question again.

Subhūti said to the gods: ‘I say that the Buddha and nirvāṇa are precisely like an illusion, like a dream.’

Though the Two Dharmas of the Buddha and Nirvāṇa Are Wondrous, Both Come Forth from False Dharmas and Are Empty; Even If a Dharma Surpassed Nirvāṇa, It Too Would Be Like an Illusion

Though these two dharmas, the Buddha and nirvāṇa, are subtle and wondrous, both come forth from false dharmas, and therefore they are empty. Why? Because it is from false dharmas that there is nirvāṇa, and from merit and wisdom that there is the Buddha; both these dharmas are bound to causes and conditions and have no real, fixed own-nature—as was said in the meaning of the recollection of the Buddha and the recollection of the Dharma.

Subhūti has this thought: ‘By the power of prajñāpāramitā, even if there were a dharma surpassing nirvāṇa, it could be made like an illusion—how much more nirvāṇa!’ Why is this said? Nirvāṇa is the place where all sorrow, suffering, and affliction come to a complete end; for this reason there is no dharma at all that can surpass nirvāṇa.

Since No Dharma Surpasses Nirvāṇa, Why Say ‘If a Dharma Surpassed Nirvāṇa, It Too Would Be Like an Illusion’?—A Simile Either Uses a Real Matter or Is a Supposition

Question: If there is no dharma at all that surpasses nirvāṇa, why say, ‘If there were a dharma surpassing nirvāṇa, it too would likewise be like an illusion’?

Answer: In the manner of speaking by simile, sometimes a real matter is used, and sometimes it is only a supposition; either way it is said in accordance with causes and conditions. It is as the Buddha once said: ‘If trees could understand the Dharma I speak, I would also predict of them that they had attained srota-āpanna.’ But trees have no causes and conditions for understanding; the Buddha merely brought in this simile in order to awaken people's minds.

Nirvāṇa Is the Ultimate and Unsurpassed Dharma Among All Dharmas, Where All the Many Sufferings Come to a Complete End

Nirvāṇa is the ultimate and unsurpassed dharma among all dharmas. Just as among the many rivers and the ten thousand streams the great ocean is highest, among the mountains Mount Sumeru is highest, and among all dharmas space is highest, so too is nirvāṇa: it has no suffering of old age, sickness, and death; no wrong views, greed, hatred, and the other kinds of decline and affliction; no suffering of separation from what is loved; no suffering of meeting with what is hated; no suffering of not getting what is sought; and impermanence, falsity and deceit, decay, and alteration—none of these are there at all. To put it briefly, nirvāṇa is the ending of all suffering, ultimately permanent and blissful; it is the place to which the buddhas of the ten directions, the bodhisattvas, and the assemblies of disciples all go for refuge; secure and at peace, permanent and blissful, no dharma can surpass it, and in the end it cannot be destroyed by the Māra-king or Māra's people. As is said in the Abhidharma: ‘Surpassable dharmas are all conditioned dharmas, together with space and cessation not through the condition of knowledge; the unsurpassed dharma is cessation through the condition of knowledge, that is, nirvāṇa.’ From this it can be known that there is no dharma at all that surpasses nirvāṇa.

Subhūti Praises the Great Power of Prajñā: Were There a Dharma Surpassing Nirvāṇa, Prajñā Could Still Break It—the Simile of the Hot Iron Ball Burning Down

It was in order to praise the greatness of the power of prajñāpāramitā that Subhūti said: ‘If there were a dharma surpassing nirvāṇa, it too would likewise be like an illusion.’ It is like an extremely hot iron ball placed on fine down that has been plucked and fluffed: it burns straight downward through it, and its heat is not diminished in the least—there is simply nothing more to burn. The wisdom of prajñāpāramitā breaks all conditioned dharmas, and so on up to breaking even nirvāṇa, passing straight through without any obstruction; the power of that wisdom does not recede—there is simply no dharma left to break. For this reason it is said: ‘Even if there were a dharma surpassing nirvāṇa, the power of wisdom could break it all the same.’

The Great Disciples Ask Together: Prajñā So Profound as This—Who, After All, Can Receive It?

At that time the venerable Śāriputra, Mahāmaudgalyāyana, Mahākauṣṭhila, Mahākātyāyana, Pūrṇa Maitrāyaṇīputra, Mahākāśyapa, and countless thousands of bodhisattvas together asked Subhūti: ‘Prajñāpāramitā is profound in this way, hard to see, hard to understand, hard to know, quiescent, subtle and wondrous; who, after all, can receive it?’

Ānanda Answers on His Behalf: There Are Four Kinds of People Who Can Receive This Profound Prajñā

At that time Ānanda said to the great disciples and to the bodhisattvas: ‘The bodhisattva-mahāsattvas who are avaivartika (non-retrogressing) can receive this prajñāpāramitā that is profound, hard to see, hard to understand, hard to know, quiescent, subtle and wondrous; people who are accomplished in right view, and arhats whose outflows are exhausted and whose vows are fulfilled, can also receive it; and further, those good men and good women who have seen many buddhas, who have made many offerings where the buddhas are, who have planted roots of goodness, who draw near to good friends, and who also have sharp faculties—such people too can receive it, and will not say of this Dharma whether it is right or wrong.’

Subhūti Expounds: Do Not Discriminate Form by Emptiness, Nor Discriminate Emptiness by Form

Subhūti said: ‘Do not discriminate form by emptiness, nor discriminate emptiness by form; feeling, perception, constructions, and consciousness are likewise. Do not discriminate form by the signless and non-action, nor discriminate the signless and non-action by form; feeling, perception, constructions, and consciousness are likewise. Do not discriminate form by non-arising, non-ceasing, quiescence, and separation, nor discriminate non-arising, non-ceasing, quiescence, and separation by form; feeling, perception, constructions, and consciousness are likewise. From the eye all the way up to the various feelings born from the condition of mind-contact are likewise. The dānapāramitā of giving all the way up to prajñāpāramitā, inner emptiness all the way up to the emptiness of non-existent and existent dharmas, the four foundations of mindfulness all the way up to the eighteen unshared dharmas, all the gates of samādhi, all the gates of dhāraṇī, the srota-āpanna all the way up to the arhat, the pratyekabuddha, and the Buddha; and so on up to omniscience: do not discriminate omniscience by emptiness, nor discriminate emptiness by omniscience; do not discriminate the omniscience of all kinds by emptiness, nor discriminate emptiness by the omniscience of all kinds; the signless, non-action, non-arising, non-ceasing, quiescence, and separation are all likewise.’

Prajñā Is Profound: Within It There Is No Dharma to Be Shown and No Dharma to Be Spoken, and Even the One Who Receives the Dharma Is Altogether Unfindable

Subhūti further said to the gods: ‘This prajñāpāramitā is profound; who can receive it? Within this prajñāpāramitā there is not a single dharma that can be shown, not a single dharma that can be spoken; since there is no dharma to be shown and no dharma to be spoken, the one who receives the Dharma is then altogether unfindable.’

Śāriputra Praises It: Prajñā Widely Teaches the Three Vehicles and Gathers In the Bodhisattvas, Enabling Bodhisattvas to Attain the Seven Kinds of Eloquence

At that time Śāriputra said to Subhūti: ‘Within prajñāpāramitā the teachings of the three vehicles are widely taught, together with the Dharma-gates that gather in the bodhisattvas: from the very first ground of arousing intent all the way up to the tenth ground, the dānapāramitā of giving all the way up to prajñāpāramitā, the four foundations of mindfulness all the way up to the eight limbs of the noble path, the ten powers of the Buddha all the way up to the eighteen unshared dharmas—all of these protect and uphold the bodhisattvas' teaching. The bodhisattva-mahāsattva who practises prajñāpāramitā in this way always takes on a body by apparitional birth, does not lose the supernormal powers, travels through the lands of the buddhas, fulfils all the roots of goodness, makes offerings to the buddhas according to his wishes and has his wish fulfilled on the spot, hears and receives the teaching where the buddhas are, and never ceases until he accomplishes omniscience; never being apart from samādhi, he is able to attain swift eloquence, sharp eloquence, inexhaustible eloquence, unbreakable eloquence, responsive eloquence, eloquence of meaning, and the eloquence foremost in all the world.’

Subhūti Affirms What Śāriputra Said and Brings It Back to ‘Altogether Unfindable’

Subhūti said: ‘Just so! Just so! As Śāriputra has said, prajñāpāramitā widely teaches the teachings of the three vehicles and protects and upholds the bodhisattvas' teaching, and so on up to the bodhisattva-mahāsattva attaining the eloquence foremost in all the world—all of this is because of being altogether unfindable. I, and so on up to the one who is able to know and the one who is able to see, am altogether unfindable; form, feeling, perception, constructions, and consciousness, the dānapāramitā of giving all the way up to prajñāpāramitā, are also altogether unfindable; inner emptiness all the way up to the emptiness of non-existent and existent dharmas is also altogether unfindable; the four foundations of mindfulness all the way up to the eight limbs of the noble path, and the ten powers of the Buddha all the way up to the omniscience of all kinds, are also all altogether unfindable.’

Śāriputra Asks Again What the Cause and Condition Is; Subhūti Answers: Because of Inner Emptiness, and So On Up to the Emptiness of Non-existent and Existent Dharmas

Śāriputra again asked Subhūti: ‘By what cause and condition does prajñāpāramitā widely teach the three vehicles and yet they are altogether unfindable? By what cause and condition does prajñāpāramitā protect and uphold the bodhisattvas? And by what cause and condition does the bodhisattva-mahāsattva attain swift eloquence, and so on up to the eloquence foremost in all the world, and yet it is altogether unfindable?’

Subhūti said to Śāriputra: ‘Because of inner emptiness, prajñāpāramitā widely teaches the three vehicles and yet they are altogether unfindable; because of outer emptiness all the way up to the emptiness of non-existent and existent dharmas, it widely teaches the three vehicles and yet they are altogether unfindable. Because of inner emptiness, protecting and upholding the bodhisattvas, and so on up to the eloquence foremost in all the world, are altogether unfindable; because of outer emptiness all the way up to the emptiness of non-existent and existent dharmas, protecting and upholding the bodhisattvas, and so on up to the eloquence foremost in all the world, are altogether unfindable.’

What follows is the commentary.

The Treatise-Author Explains the Sixfold Meaning of ‘Profound, Hard to See, Hard to Understand and Hard to Know, Quiescent, Subtle and Wondrous’

The treatise-author explains: At this time the great disciples, Śāriputra and the others, said to Subhūti: ‘This Dharma of prajñāpāramitā is profound and hard to understand.’ Because dharmas have no fixed mark, it is called ‘profound’; because all thinking and all contemplative practice have come to rest, it is called ‘hard to see’; and because there is no clinging even to prajñāpāramitā, it is named ‘hard to understand, hard to know’; because the three poisons and all idle discourse have come to rest, it is named ‘quiescent’; because the wondrous taste of this wisdom has been gained, one is always content and seeks nothing further, and all other wisdom by comparison is coarse and rough and hard to delight in—therefore it is called ‘subtle and wondrous’.

Worldly People's Wisdom Is Shallow; They Crave the Rewards of Merit Yet Do Not Cultivate Merit—Who Among Such People Can Believe and Receive It?

The great disciples speak thus: ‘The wisdom of prajñāpāramitā is profound, but the wisdom of worldly people is shallow and thin; they only crave the karmic result of merit and do not delight in cultivating merit. When clinging to "existence", their will is keen and bold; once "existence" is broken, their minds grow timid. To the books of wrong views they have heard and practised from the start they cling firmly and will not let go; such people always delight in the pleasures of the world.’ For this reason it is said: ‘Who can believe and receive this profound prajñāpāramitā? If no one believes and receives it, why speak it at all?’

Ānanda Steps Forward to Help Answer: There Are Four Kinds of People Who Can Believe and Receive It

Ānanda steps forward to help answer: there are four kinds of people who can believe and receive it, so what the venerable Subhūti says will certainly be believed and received by someone; it is not spoken in vain. The first kind is the bodhisattva-mahāsattva who is avaivartika: knowing that all dharmas neither arise nor cease, he does not grasp at the marks of dharmas and clings to nothing, and therefore he can believe and receive it. The second kind is the arhat whose outflows are exhausted: because the outflows are exhausted he clings to nothing, has attained the highest, unconditioned dharma, his vows are fulfilled and he seeks nothing further; therefore he always abides in the samādhi of emptiness, the signless, and non-action, in accord with prajñāpāramitā, and therefore he can believe and receive it. The third kind is the three kinds of trainees: right view is already accomplished, and although their afflictions are not yet entirely exhausted, because of the four kinds of power of faith they too can believe and receive it. The fourth kind is the bodhisattva who, although he has not yet attained the state of avaivartika, is deep in merit, sharp in faculties, pure in wisdom, and always follows good friends; such a person too can believe and receive it. The mark of believing and receiving is precisely this: one does not say, ‘This Dharma is not what the Buddha, the bodhisattvas, or the great disciples spoke’; and although one hears prajñāpāramitā teach that all dharmas are ultimately empty, one does not, out of attachment to the dharmas one learned before, say that prajñā is ‘not the Dharma’.

Ānanda Has Always Been Silent—Why Does He Answer Here on Subhūti's Behalf?

Question: All along from the beginning Ānanda has had nothing to say; why does he now answer on Subhūti's behalf?

Answer: Ānanda is the great general of the third turning of the Dharma wheel, able to act as teacher of the great assembly, and is the close attendant of the World-Honored One. Although he has realised the first path, because his afflictions are not yet entirely cut off—though he has abundant wisdom from hearing and knowledge—he is not yet himself skilled in the wisdom of emptiness. If he were to speak the dharma of emptiness, since he himself has not yet realised and entered it, what he said would all become another person's matter; so he has nothing to say. At times, when a matter that has marks is under discussion, he is able to ask and able to answer. It is as in a later chapter he asks the Buddha: ‘Why does the World-Honored One praise only prajñāpāramitā and not praise the other five perfections?’ What is asked here is ‘Who can believe and receive this profound prajñāpāramitā?’, which is not a matter of emptiness; so Ānanda steps forward to answer. Subhūti has always delighted in speaking of the matter of emptiness and does not like to speak of existence.

Furthermore, because Ānanda at this time gave rise to a mind that delighted in speaking, he stepped forward to answer. Ānanda's afflictions are not yet entirely cut off, so the power of his wisdom is somewhat dull; yet the power of his faith is keen, and so he is able to ask and answer in accordance with the Dharma within the profound prajñāpāramitā.

Prajñā Is Without Anything Existent and Has No Fixed Dharma—How Can It Be Said That ‘Four Kinds of People Believe and Receive It and Do Not Slander It as Not the Dharma’?

Question: Prajñāpāramitā is without anything existent and has not a single fixed dharma; how can it be said that ‘four kinds of people believe and receive it and do not say it is not the Dharma’?

Answer: Now Subhūti himself states the cause and condition here: ‘Do not discriminate form by emptiness; form is emptiness, and emptiness is form.’ For this reason prajñāpāramitā has nothing lost and nothing broken; since there is nothing broken, there is no fault, and so no one says it is not the Dharma. Emptiness is precisely prajñāpāramitā; it is not that the wisdom of emptiness breaks form and makes it become empty, nor that emptiness exists because form has been broken; rather, it is because emptiness is from the beginning form, and form is from the beginning emptiness. Because within prajñāpāramitā all idle discourse is broken, and it has merits such as these, there is no one who does not believe and receive it. The signless and non-action, non-arising and non-ceasing, quiescence and separation, are all likewise. And so on up to the omniscience of all kinds: all should be widely explained in this way.

The Great Disciples Asked About This Principle—Why Does Subhūti Instead Answer the gods?

Question: The great disciples asked about this principle; why does Subhūti instead answer the gods?

Answer: The great disciples have already realised arhatship and ask only because of their own doubts, so the benefit gained is not great; the gods have aroused the mind to become bodhisattvas, and the benefit is deep and wide, so it is spoken for their sake. Furthermore, although it is spoken for the gods, in fact it answers the great disciples. Earlier it was said, ‘all dharmas are empty’; now it is said, ‘within profound prajñāpāramitā, beings are ultimately empty’. For this reason, within prajñāpāramitā there is no one who is able to speak—how much less anyone who is able to listen and receive! If one can understand in this way that all dharmas are empty, with the mind clinging to nothing, one can believe and receive it.

Śāriputra Praises and Helps Complete It: Prajñā Is Not Only to Be Received as Empty, but Also Widely Teaches the Three Vehicles, Gathers In the Bodhisattvas, Apparitional Birth, and the Seven Kinds of Eloquence

At that time, as Subhūti was speaking the profound prajñāpāramitā, Śāriputra praised and helped complete the matter: ‘Prajñāpāramitā can be received not only because of emptiness; it also widely teaches that there are three vehicles.’ The meaning of the three vehicles is as explained earlier.

As for ‘gathering in the bodhisattvas’: it means using prajñāpāramitā to benefit the bodhisattvas, so that they may grow and increase. Furthermore, ‘gathering in’ means that within prajñāpāramitā there are the ten grounds, which lead the bodhisattva from one ground on to the next, and so on up to the tenth ground. The meaning of the ten grounds, and the meaning from the six perfections and so on up to the omniscience of all kinds, are as explained earlier. As for ‘apparitional birth’: this refers to the result of the practice of cultivating prajñāpāramitā. Because one cultivates prajñāpāramitā and is unobstructed toward all dharmas, one attains ‘swift eloquence’. Some people, though able to be swift, cannot go deep because their faculties are dull; because one can go deep it is called sharp—this is ‘sharp eloquence’. Because one proclaims the real mark of all dharmas, without limit and without end, it is named ‘the inexhaustible eloquence of delight in speaking’. Because within prajñā there is no idle discourse of any kind, and no one can pose a difficulty that defeats it and cuts it off, it is named ‘unbreakable eloquence’. Because attachment to dharmas has been cut off, and one can speak the Dharma in response to the faculties of beings, it is named ‘responsive eloquence’. Because one proclaims matters that lead toward nirvāṇa and benefit beings, it is named ‘eloquence of meaning’. Because one proclaims the foremost matter in all the world, namely the Great Vehicle, it is named ‘the eloquence foremost in the world’.

Conclusion: Prajñā Widely Teaches the Three Vehicles Yet Has No Fixed Mark; All Is Taught Because of the Coming Together of the Eighteen Emptinesses, Because of the Wisdom of Emptiness

Subhūti approved Śāriputra's question, saying: ‘Just so! Just so!’ A thought arose in Śāriputra's mind: ‘Subhūti has always delighted in speaking of emptiness; why, then, does he accept what I have said, that prajñā widely teaches the teachings of the three vehicles? There must be another cause and condition.’ Subhūti then answered: ‘Although prajñāpāramitā widely teaches the dharmas of the three vehicles, they have no fixed mark at all; all are taught because of the coming together of the eighteen emptinesses. Gathering in the bodhisattvas, and the seven kinds of eloquence, are also likewise: all exist by virtue of the wisdom of emptiness.’

The Gods Scatter Flowers: They Conjure Heavenly Flowers, Which Fill All of Space and Turn into Flower-Terraces

At that time Śakra Devānām Indra, together with the gods of the three-thousand great-thousand world—from the heavens of the Four Heavenly Kings up to the Akaniṣṭha heaven (the Heaven of Ultimate Form, highest in the form realm)—all gave rise to this thought: ‘The venerable Subhūti (“wisdom-life” is an honorific for a venerable one) is now raining down the Dharma-rain; why should we not conjure heavenly flowers and scatter them over the Buddha, the bodhisattva-mahāsattvas, the bhikṣu Saṅgha, Subhūti, and prajñāpāramitā!’ Thereupon Śakra Devānām Indra and the gods of the three-thousand great-thousand world conjured heavenly flowers and scattered them over the Buddha, the bodhisattva-mahāsattvas, the bhikṣu Saṅgha, and Subhūti, and with them also made offerings to prajñāpāramitā. At this moment, throughout the three-thousand great-thousand world, the heavenly flowers all filled the whole of space and turned into flower-terraces, upright and adorned, surpassingly beautiful.

Subhūti thought to himself: ‘The flowers scattered by these the gods—even in the heavens such flowers have never been seen. These flowers are conjured flowers, not flowers grown on trees; the flowers these the gods have scattered arise from the heart-tree, they are not flowers arising on trees.’

Śakra Devānām Indra, knowing what Subhūti was thinking, said to Subhūti: ‘Venerable One! These flowers are not arisen flowers, nor do they arise from the mind-tree.’

Subhūti said to Śakra Devānām Indra: ‘Kauśika! You said just now, “These flowers are not arisen flowers, nor do they arise from the mind-tree.” Kauśika! If this is a dharma that does not arise, it cannot be called a flower.’

Śakra Devānām Indra again said to Subhūti: ‘Venerable One! Is it only these flowers that do not arise? Does form also not arise? Do feeling, perception, constructions, and consciousness also not arise?’

Subhūti said: ‘Kauśika! It is not only these flowers that do not arise; form also does not arise—if it does not arise, it cannot be called form. Feeling, perception, constructions, and consciousness also do not arise—if they do not arise, it cannot be called consciousness. The six sense-fields, the six consciousnesses, the six contacts, and the various feelings born from the condition of the six contacts are all likewise. Dānapāramitā (the perfection of giving) does not arise—if it does not arise, it cannot be called dānapāramitā; and so on up to prajñāpāramitā, which does not arise—if it does not arise, it cannot be called prajñāpāramitā. Inner emptiness does not arise—if it does not arise, it cannot be called inner emptiness; and so on up to the emptiness of non-existent and existent dharmas, which does not arise—if it does not arise, it cannot be called the emptiness of non-existent and existent dharmas. The four foundations of mindfulness do not arise—if they do not arise, they cannot be called the four foundations of mindfulness. And so on up to the eighteen unshared dharmas, which do not arise—if they do not arise, they cannot be called the eighteen unshared dharmas. And so on up to omniscience of all kinds, which does not arise—if it does not arise, it cannot be called omniscience of all kinds.’

What follows is the treatise's commentary.

Why the Gods Scatter Flowers as an Offering: The Dharma-Rain, Like the Fall of a Timely Rain

Śakra Devānām Indra and the gods had heard the meaning of prajñā spoken by Subhūti—that all dharmas are wholly the real mark, with nothing to discriminate; that although he speaks of emptiness, he destroys nothing in dharmas, nor does he lose the karmic results of the various deeds.

That a śrāvaka should be able to proclaim so profound a Dharma in the presence of the Buddha—for this reason Śakra Devānām Indra and the others all rejoiced, and gave rise to this thought: ‘The Dharma spoken by Subhūti is unobstructed and unhindered, like a timely rain.’ It is like certain lands where irrigation, ploughing and sowing, and all kinds of uses of water constantly suffer from shortage; if a timely rain falls everywhere, there is nothing that is not moistened, nothing that does not have its wish fulfilled. The Small Vehicle Dharma is also like this: at first it praises giving, keeping the precepts, meditative absorption, impermanence, and all kinds of contemplations, which are measured and limited, and only at the end does it speak of nirvāṇa. What Subhūti makes clear here is the path from the very first arousing of the mind right up to becoming a Buddha, proclaiming only the real mark of all dharmas, with nothing to discriminate. It is like a great rain filling all of Jambudvīpa, leaving nothing unmoistened. It is also like the earth: although there are already seeds of grain within it, without rain they will not grow. The practitioner is likewise: although he has the causes and conditions, if he does not obtain the Dharma-rain, those who have already aroused the mind fall back and lose it, and those who have not yet aroused it stop and do not advance; if they obtain the Dharma-rain, those who have already aroused the mind grow, and those who have not yet aroused it arouse it. For this reason it is said, ‘as rain falls, so he rains the Dharma-rain’.

Furthermore, just as foul winds, dust and dirt, all kinds of heat, poisonous vapours, and the like are extinguished when they meet rain, so too with the Dharma-rain: evil initial and sustained thought, which is like dust and dirt; the three kinds of the unwholesome, which are like poison; wrong views, which are like a foul wind; wrong teachers, which are like evil insects; and all kinds of evil friends and the like—once they meet this Dharma-rain of prajñāpāramitā, are all removed and extinguished.

When people receive a timely rain, they go and make offerings to the heavens above; the gods, having heard the Dharma-rain and gained great benefit, wished to make offerings, and gave rise to this thought: ‘Why should we not conjure heavenly flowers and scatter them over the Buddha, the great bodhisattvas, the bhikṣu Saṅgha, and Subhūti, and also make offerings to prajñāpāramitā.’ Because Subhūti is skilled at proclaiming prajñā, and out of reverence for him, his name is singled out specially for the offering.

This prajñāpāramitā for the most part proclaims that dharmas are empty; added to this, earlier the gods wished to hear the Dharma as a conjured person would, in accord with the mark of emptiness; therefore they make their offering with conjured flowers.

Furthermore, when the gods are just rejoicing, they make offerings as their minds wish, and do not allow a long delay only to draw back afterwards; so at once they conjure heavenly flowers and scatter them over the Buddha, Subhūti, the bodhisattvas, the bhikṣu Saṅgha, and prajñāpāramitā—flowers scattered over the Buddha are an offering to the Buddha Jewel; those scattered over the bodhisattvas, Subhūti, and prajñāpāramitā are an offering to the Dharma Jewel; those scattered over the bhikṣu Saṅgha are an offering to the Saṅgha Jewel. Having given rise to this thought, they then transform at will and make offerings to the Three Jewels. Because great merit has been accomplished, the wishes arising in their minds are all fulfilled as they intend, without needing to seek from others.

Someone asks: These flower-terraces are so upright and adorned—whose power is this? The treatise-author answers: It is the power of the gods. Because the gods are sovereign in merit, they can make the small into the great.

Some say: ‘This is the Buddha's spiritual power. Because this prajñāpāramitā has great merit—the time spent on it is short while its fruit is very great, accomplishing the Buddha-path—the Buddha manifests such an extraordinary event.’

Subhūti at once discerned it, and knew that these were not real flowers.

Śakra Devānām Indra, knowing that Subhūti had perceived these to be conjured flowers, said to Subhūti: ‘Venerable One! These flowers are not arisen flowers.’ As to ‘not arisen flowers’, it means: these flowers are non-arising, empty, and have nowhere from which they come forth.

Subhūti proclaims this prajñāpāramitā, in which dharmas are non-arising, empty and quiescent; therefore the offering is made with non-arising flowers.

As to ‘mind-tree’, it means that the gods obtain whatever their minds think of. To put it briefly, the trees in the heavens, according to whatever the mind desires, bring it the moment it is thought of; therefore they are called ‘mind-trees’.

Śakra Devānām Indra, in order to challenge Subhūti, said ‘these flowers are non-arising’; how then does he also say ‘these flowers do not arise from trees’?

Subhūti questioned him back in turn, saying: ‘If they do not arise, how can they still be called flowers?’ Within a dharma that does not arise, there is no discrimination at all—of the kind ‘this is a flower, this is not a flower’.

At this Śakra Devānām Indra was inwardly won over, and asked: ‘Is it only these flowers that are non-arising, or are all dharmas non-arising too?’ Subhūti answered: ‘It is not only these flowers that do not arise; form also does not arise.’

Why? If one dharma is empty, then all dharmas are empty; if the practitioner, within one dharma, knows clearly and decisively that it is empty, then within all dharmas too he penetrates and understands clearly. If the five aggregates do not arise, they are not the mark of the five aggregates. And so on up to omniscience of all kinds, which is likewise.

The five aggregates arise from the coming together of causes and conditions; they have no fixed own-nature, and have only a provisional name. As to ‘the real mark of provisional names’, it is the suchness, the dharma-nature, and the limit of reality of the five aggregates. What Subhūti says does not go against this principle. Why? The noble ones know that names are the mundane truth (the truth commonly accepted by the world) and that the real mark is the truth of the highest meaning (the ultimate truth); what they proclaim is in accord with ordinary people, while within the truth of the highest meaning there is no this and that, and no dispute either. And so on up to omniscience of all kinds, which is likewise. Because beings are empty, up to the knower and the seer being empty, the srota-āpanna too is only a provisional name, and so on up to the Buddha, who is likewise.

Returning Now to the Sūtra Text: Śakra Praises Subhūti's Wisdom as Profound—Without Destroying Provisional Names, He Proclaims the Real Mark of All Dharmas

At that time Śakra Devānām Indra gave rise to this thought: ‘This venerable Subhūti—his wisdom is profound; he is able, without destroying provisional names, to proclaim the real mark of all dharmas.’

The Buddha, knowing what Śakra Devānām Indra was thinking, said to Śakra Devānām Indra: ‘Just so! Just so! Kauśika! Subhūti's wisdom is profound; he is able, without destroying provisional names, to proclaim the real mark of all dharmas.’

Śakra Devānām Indra addressed the Buddha: ‘How is it that the venerable Subhūti, without destroying provisional names, proclaims the real mark of all dharmas?’

The Buddha told Śakra Devānām Indra: ‘Form is only a provisional name; Subhūti does not destroy this provisional name, yet proclaims the real mark of all dharmas. Feeling, perception, constructions, and consciousness are only provisional names; Subhūti likewise does not destroy the provisional names, yet proclaims the real mark of all dharmas. Why? Because this real mark of all dharmas is fundamentally without destroying or not destroying, what Subhūti says is also without destroying or not destroying. The eye, up to the various feelings born from the condition of mind-contact, are likewise; dānapāramitā up to prajñāpāramitā, inner emptiness up to the emptiness of non-existent and existent dharmas, the four foundations of mindfulness up to the eighteen unshared dharmas, are all likewise. The fruit of srota-āpanna up to the fruit of arhat, the path of the pratyekabuddha, the path of the bodhisattva, the path of the Buddha, omniscience, and omniscience of all kinds are all likewise. The srota-āpanna up to the arhat, the pratyekabuddha, and the Buddha—these are all only provisional names; Subhūti does not destroy provisional names, yet proclaims the real mark of all dharmas. Why? Because this real mark of all dharmas is without destroying or not destroying, what Subhūti says is also without destroying or not destroying. It is just so, Kauśika! Subhūti does not destroy provisional names, yet proclaims the real mark of all dharmas.’

Subhūti said to Śakra Devānām Indra: ‘Just so! Just so! Kauśika! As the Buddha has said, all dharmas are only provisional names; the bodhisattva-mahāsattva should know thus: all dharmas are only provisional names; and he should train in prajñāpāramitā in this way. Kauśika! When the bodhisattva-mahāsattva trains in this way, this is not to train in form, not to train in feeling, perception, constructions, and consciousness. Why? Because he does not see that there is any form that can be trained in, does not see that there are feeling, perception, constructions, and consciousness that can be trained in. When the bodhisattva-mahāsattva trains in this way, this is not to train in dānapāramitā. Why? Because he does not see that there is any dānapāramitā that can be trained in. And so on up to not training in prajñāpāramitā. Why? Because he does not see that there is any prajñāpāramitā that can be trained in. Training in this way, this is not to train in inner emptiness up to the emptiness of non-existent and existent dharmas. Why? Because he does not see that there is inner emptiness up to the emptiness of non-existent and existent dharmas that can be trained in. Training in this way, this is not to train in the four foundations of mindfulness up to the eighteen unshared dharmas. Why? Because he does not see that there are the four foundations of mindfulness up to the eighteen unshared dharmas that can be trained in. Training in this way, this is not to train in the fruit of srota-āpanna up to omniscience of all kinds. Why? Because he does not see that there is the fruit of srota-āpanna up to omniscience of all kinds that can be trained in.’

At that time Śakra Devānām Indra said to Subhūti: ‘For what reason does the bodhisattva-mahāsattva not see form, up to not seeing omniscience of all kinds?’

Subhūti said: ‘Form is precisely the emptiness of form; up to omniscience of all kinds is precisely the emptiness of omniscience of all kinds. Kauśika! The emptiness of form does not train in the emptiness of form; up to the emptiness of omniscience of all kinds does not train in the emptiness of omniscience of all kinds.

‘Kauśika! If one can in this way not train in emptiness, this is called training in emptiness, because emptiness and what is trained in are not two. This bodhisattva-mahāsattva trains in the emptiness of form by way of non-duality; up to training in the emptiness of omniscience of all kinds by way of non-duality. If he trains in the emptiness of form by way of non-duality, up to training in the emptiness of omniscience of all kinds by way of non-duality, this bodhisattva-mahāsattva is then able to train in dānapāramitā by way of non-duality, up to being able to train in prajñāpāramitā by way of non-duality; able to train in the four foundations of mindfulness by way of non-duality, up to being able to train in the eighteen unshared dharmas by way of non-duality; able to train in the fruit of srota-āpanna by way of non-duality, up to being able to train in omniscience of all kinds by way of non-duality. This bodhisattva is then able to train in immeasurable, boundless, asaṃkhyeya (countless) Buddha-dharmas.

‘If he is able to train in immeasurable, boundless, asaṃkhyeya Buddha-dharmas, this bodhisattva does not train for the increase of form, does not train for the decrease of form, up to not training for the increase of omniscience of all kinds, not training for the decrease of omniscience of all kinds. If he does not train for the increase or decrease of form, up to not training for the increase or decrease of omniscience of all kinds, this bodhisattva does not train for the sake of receiving form, does not train for the sake of eliminating form; nor does he train for the sake of receiving feeling, perception, constructions, and consciousness, nor train for the sake of eliminating them. And so on up to omniscience of all kinds: he neither trains for the sake of receiving it nor trains for the sake of eliminating it.’

Śāriputra said to Subhūti: ‘When the bodhisattva-mahāsattva trains in this way, does he not train for the sake of receiving form, not train for the sake of eliminating form, up to omniscience of all kinds, neither training for the sake of receiving it nor training for the sake of eliminating it?’

Subhūti said: ‘If the bodhisattva-mahāsattva trains in this way, he does not train for the sake of receiving form, does not train for the sake of eliminating form, up to omniscience of all kinds, neither training for the sake of receiving it nor training for the sake of eliminating it.’

Śāriputra asked again: ‘Subhūti! For what reason does the bodhisattva-mahāsattva not train for the sake of receiving form, not train for the sake of eliminating form, up to omniscience of all kinds, neither training for the sake of receiving it nor training for the sake of eliminating it?’

Subhūti said: ‘Because this form cannot be received, and there is also no one who can receive form, up to: omniscience of all kinds cannot be received, and there is also no one who can receive it—this is because of inner-and-outer emptiness. It is just so, Śāriputra! Because the bodhisattva-mahāsattva receives nothing in all dharmas, he is able to arrive at omniscience of all kinds.’

At this Śāriputra again said to Subhūti: ‘When the bodhisattva-mahāsattva trains in prajñāpāramitā in this way, is he able to arrive at omniscience of all kinds?’

Subhūti said: ‘When the bodhisattva-mahāsattva trains in prajñāpāramitā in this way, he is able to arrive at omniscience of all kinds, because he receives nothing in all dharmas.’

Śāriputra asked again: ‘If the bodhisattva-mahāsattva trains neither receiving nor eliminating all dharmas, how can the bodhisattva-mahāsattva arrive at omniscience of all kinds?’

Subhūti said: ‘When the bodhisattva-mahāsattva practises prajñāpāramitā, he does not see form arise, does not see form cease; does not see form received, does not see form not received; does not see form defiled, does not see form pure; does not see form increase, does not see form decrease. Why? Śāriputra! Because form is the emptiness of the nature of form. Of feeling, perception, constructions, and consciousness, too, he sees neither arising nor ceasing, sees neither receiving nor not receiving, sees neither defilement nor purity, sees neither increase nor decrease. Why? Because consciousness is the emptiness of the nature of consciousness. And so on up to omniscience of all kinds: he sees neither its arising nor its ceasing, sees neither its being received nor its not being received, sees neither its defilement nor its purity, sees neither its increase nor its decrease. Why? Because omniscience of all kinds is the emptiness of the nature of omniscience of all kinds. It is just so, Śāriputra! The bodhisattva-mahāsattva, for the sake of all dharmas being neither arising nor ceasing, neither received nor relinquished, neither stained nor pure, neither combining nor scattering, neither increasing nor decreasing, trains in prajñāpāramitā and is able to arrive at omniscience of all kinds, because there is nothing trained in and nothing arrived at.’

What follows is the treatise's commentary.

Why the Buddha Praises Subhūti: Showing That a Teacher Does Not Exalt Himself, and, out of Great Compassion, Causing Beings to Believe and Accept

Śakra Devānām Indra said joyfully: ‘Subhūti's wisdom is profound; he is able, without destroying provisional names, to proclaim the real mark of all dharmas.’

At that time the Buddha praised Subhūti, saying: ‘Just so! Just so! It is as Śakra has said.’

Someone asks: Why does the Buddha praise Subhūti? The treatise-author answers: It is to show that the teacher does not exalt himself, and that the disciple follows the teacher's Dharma. There are cases where what the teacher says, the disciple does not accept; and what the disciple says, the teacher does not allow. It is like ordinary people who, when speaking the Dharma in a great assembly, refute everything others say and accept none of it. Because the Buddha has no mind of clinging to a ‘self’, he praises Subhūti, saying: ‘Just so! Just so!’

Furthermore, the Buddha, with a mind of great compassion, wishes to cause beings to believe and accept what Subhūti says, and therefore praises him, saying: ‘His wisdom is profound.’

The bodhisattva, knowing that all dharmas are provisional names, should then train in prajñāpāramitā. Why? Because all dharmas have only provisional names, and all accord with the mark of the ultimate emptiness of prajñāpāramitā.

As to ‘training thus, he does not train in form’, it means: within the dharma of provisional names there is no fixed form; if there is no form, how could one ‘train in form’? Why? The bodhisattva seeks form with the five eyes, yet does not see in this form such marks as ‘self or non-self’; and so on up to omniscience of all kinds, which is likewise. As to ‘why does he not see form’, the answer is: the mark of form within form is empty; because it is unfindable, it cannot be seen—this is the emptiness of specific marks. And so on up to omniscience of all kinds, which is likewise.

Furthermore, as to ‘does not train in form’, it means: this emptiness of form cannot itself train in the emptiness of form, because dharmas act only upon other marks, not upon their own marks; it is like a man riding a horse—it is not a horse riding a horse.

Someone asks: If one does not train in all dharmas in this way, how does one ‘train in omniscience’? The treatise-author answers: What is said here is this: if one can be without clinging within the emptiness of dharmas, this is truly training in the emptiness of form. If one clings to emptiness, that is refuting dharmas without refuting emptiness. If a person refutes form yet does not cling to emptiness, then form and emptiness are not two and not different, and this is being able to train in the emptiness of form—because by way of unfindable emptiness, one also does not see that there is emptiness. And so on up to omniscience of all kinds, which is likewise.

As to ‘immeasurable, boundless, asaṃkhyeya Buddha-dharmas’, this praises omniscience of all kinds. The omniscience of all kinds spoken of earlier is, in the bodhisattva's mind, still measured and limited; in the Buddha's mind it is measureless and limitless. For this reason, although ‘training in the Buddha-dharmas’ was already spoken of earlier, here it is spoken of once more, separately.

If one can train in this way, one is rightly practising the bodhisattva path, and does not train for the increase or decrease of form. As to ‘not increasing’, it means: if one merely sees the four great elements and the form derived from them coming together to make up a body, one will not give rise to clinging. If within this body one gives rise to marks of male and female, beautiful and ugly, long and short, takes them to be fixed and real, and gives rise to a mind of defiled attachment, this is ‘increase’. If one refutes form so that it becomes empty, and the mind then clings to this emptiness, this is ‘decrease’. And so on up to omniscience of all kinds, which is likewise.

As to ‘not receiving, not eliminating’, it means: because of emptiness, ‘not receiving’; because the causes and conditions of deed and fruit continue in succession, ‘not eliminating’. Here Subhūti himself states the causes and conditions: the receiver of form is unfindable, and therefore there is no receiving. Again, because of the inner-and-outer emptiness of form, ‘not receiving’; because the inner-and-outer emptiness within form is also empty, ‘not eliminating’.

Someone asks: One ought to use the eighteen emptinesses to empty and dispel dharmas; why here speak only of ‘inner and outer emptiness’? The treatise-author answers: There is no one who can receive form, so it is said to be ‘inner emptiness’; form cannot be received, so it is called ‘outer emptiness’. This inner and outer emptiness gathers in the emptiness of all dharmas. And so on up to omniscience of all kinds, which is likewise.

If the bodhisattva can train in this way, he gives birth to omniscience of all kinds. Omniscience of all kinds is the mark of non-obstruction; if the bodhisattva contemplates all dharmas as unobstructed like space, this is training in omniscience of all kinds, because cause and fruit resemble each other.

Śāriputra gave rise to this thought: ‘The bodhisattva's Dharma ought to eliminate all afflictions and ought to receive all wholesome dharmas; now, training without receiving and without eliminating, how can he go forth and arrive at sarvajñā (omniscience)?’ Having given rise to this thought, he asked Subhūti.

Subhūti answered: ‘Because the mark of arising of all dharmas is refuted, there is no arising; because the mark of impermanence of all dharmas is refuted, there is no ceasing; because all kinds of faults in all dharmas are contemplated, there is no receiving; because all kinds of benefits in all dharmas are contemplated, there is no relinquishing; because the nature of all dharmas is always pure, there is no stain; because all dharmas can give rise to a clinging mind, there is no purity. Although all dharmas have action and non-action, rising and ceasing, entering and exiting, coming and going, and so on, yet they are neither more nor fewer, neither increasing nor decreasing. It is like the great ocean: the many streams flow into it and it does not grow more; fire-pearls boil it and it does not grow less. Dharmas are likewise, because the dharma-nature always abides, and because the own-nature of all dharmas is unfindable. One who can train in this way goes forth and arrives at sarvajñā, yet does not see a mark of being able to train, does not see a mark of going forth, does not see a mark of a bodhisattva, does not see a mark of prajñāpāramitā.’

Because this is said in brief, only ‘no training, no going forth’ is said.

Where Prajñā Should Be Sought: Śāriputra Answers That It Should Be Sought in Subhūti's Chapters

At that time Śakra Devānām Indra asked Śāriputra: ‘Where should the prajñāpāramitā of the bodhisattva-mahāsattva be sought?’

Śāriputra said: ‘The prajñāpāramitā of the bodhisattva-mahāsattva should be sought in the chapters spoken by Subhūti.’

Whose Spiritual Power: Not My Spiritual Power, but the Buddha's Spiritual Power

Śakra Devānām Indra then asked Subhūti: ‘Is it your spiritual power that made Śāriputra speak the words 「菩薩摩訶薩般若波羅蜜，當於須菩提品中求」 tr. "The prajñāpāramitā of the bodhisattva-mahāsattva should be sought in Subhūti's chapters"?’

Subhūti said to Śakra Devānām Indra: ‘It is not my spiritual power.’

Śakra Devānām Indra asked: ‘Then whose spiritual power is it?’

Subhūti said: ‘It is the Buddha's spiritual power.’

Śakra Devānām Indra said: ‘All dharmas are without a place of receiving; why do you say it is the Buddha's spiritual power? Apart from the mark of there being no place of receiving, the Tathāgata is unfindable; apart from suchness, the Tathāgata is also unfindable.’

Within Non-receiving and Within Suchness the Tathāgata Is Unfindable: Neither Coming Together nor Dispersing within All Dharmas Is the Buddha's Spiritual Power

Subhūti said to Śakra Devānām Indra: ‘Just so! Just so! Kauśika! Apart from the mark of there being no place of receiving, the Tathāgata is unfindable; apart from suchness, the Tathāgata is also unfindable. Within the mark of there being no place of receiving the Tathāgata is unfindable; within suchness the Tathāgata is unfindable.

‘Within the suchness of form, the suchness of the Tathāgata is unfindable; within the suchness of the Tathāgata, the suchness of form is unfindable. Within the dharma-mark of form, the dharma-mark of the Tathāgata is unfindable; within the dharma-mark of the Tathāgata, the dharma-mark of form is unfindable. Within the dharma-marks of feeling, perception, constructions, and consciousness, and so on up to omniscience of all kinds, it is likewise.

‘Kauśika! The Tathāgata, within the suchness of form, neither comes together nor disperses; within the suchness of feeling, perception, constructions, and consciousness, he neither comes together nor disperses. The Tathāgata, apart from the suchness of form, also neither comes together nor disperses; apart from the suchness of feeling, perception, constructions, and consciousness, he also neither comes together nor disperses. And so on up to omniscience of all kinds, it is likewise. The Tathāgata, within the dharma-mark of form, neither comes together nor disperses; within the dharma-marks of feeling, perception, constructions, and consciousness, he neither comes together nor disperses. The Tathāgata, apart from the dharma-mark of form, also neither comes together nor disperses; apart from the dharma-marks of feeling, perception, constructions, and consciousness, he also neither comes together nor disperses. And so on up to omniscience of all kinds, it is likewise. Kauśika! Within all dharmas of these many kinds he neither comes together nor disperses: this is the Buddha's spiritual power, because it uses the dharma of nothing received.

Prajñā Is Not Sought within Form, nor Sought Apart from Form: All Dharmas Are without Anything Existent and Unfindable

‘As for what you, Kauśika, asked—「菩薩摩訶薩般若波羅蜜，當於何處求」 tr. "Where should the prajñāpāramitā of the bodhisattva-mahāsattva be sought?"—Kauśika! Prajñāpāramitā should not be sought within form, nor should prajñāpāramitā be sought apart from form; it should not be sought within feeling, perception, constructions, and consciousness, nor should it be sought apart from feeling, perception, constructions, and consciousness. Why? Because this prajñāpāramitā, together with form, feeling, perception, constructions, and consciousness—all these dharmas neither come together nor disperse; they are without form, without shape, and without resistance; they are of one mark, that is, what is called the signless. And so on up to: prajñāpāramitā should not be sought within omniscience of all kinds, nor should prajñāpāramitā be sought apart from omniscience of all kinds. Why? Because this prajñāpāramitā and omniscience of all kinds—all these dharmas neither come together nor disperse; they are without form, without shape, and without resistance; they are of one mark, that is, what is called the signless. Why? Because prajñāpāramitā is not form, nor is it apart from form; it is not feeling, perception, constructions, and consciousness, nor is it apart from feeling, perception, constructions, and consciousness; and so on up to: it is not omniscience of all kinds, nor is it apart from omniscience of all kinds. Prajñāpāramitā is not the suchness of form, nor is it apart from the suchness of form; it is not the suchness of feeling, perception, constructions, and consciousness, nor is it apart from the suchness of feeling, perception, constructions, and consciousness. Prajñāpāramitā is not the dharma of form, nor is it apart from the dharma of form; it is not the dharma of feeling, perception, constructions, and consciousness, nor is it apart from the dharma of feeling, perception, constructions, and consciousness. And so on up to: it is not the suchness of omniscience of all kinds, nor is it apart from the suchness of omniscience of all kinds; prajñāpāramitā is not the dharma of omniscience of all kinds, nor is it apart from the dharma of omniscience of all kinds. Why? Kauśika! Because all these dharmas are without anything existent and unfindable; precisely because they are without anything existent and unfindable, prajñāpāramitā is not form, nor is it apart from form; it is not the suchness of form, nor is it apart from the suchness of form; it is not the dharma of form, nor is it apart from the dharma of form; and so on up to: it is not omniscience of all kinds, nor is it apart from omniscience of all kinds; it is not the suchness of omniscience of all kinds, nor is it apart from the suchness of omniscience of all kinds; it is not the dharma of omniscience of all kinds, nor is it apart from the dharma of omniscience of all kinds.’

The Treatise Explains Why He Asks Where to Seek: He Does Not Ask about the Substance of Prajñā, Only about the Names That Can Be Read and Recited

What follows is the treatise-author's explanation.

Question: From the beginning up to now, the Buddha, Śāriputra, and Subhūti have made clear the mark of prajñāpāramitā through all kinds of causes and conditions; why, now, does Śakra Devānām Indra instead ask ‘where should prajñāpāramitā be sought’?

Answer: This is not asking about the substance of prajñā; it is only asking about the words, the names, and the things that can be read and recited of prajñā. That is why Śāriputra said: ‘It should be sought in the chapters spoken by Subhūti.’ This is because Subhūti delights in speaking of emptiness, and moreover is always skilled in cultivating emptiness. Śāriputra, although foremost in wisdom, has no view of I and self and no jealous mind, and has moreover cut off the love of dharma; therefore he said, ‘It should be sought in the chapters spoken by Subhūti.’

The Treatise Explains Why He Does Not Say to Seek It in the Buddha's Chapters: The Buddha Teaches the Dharma According to the Occasion, without Fixity, while Subhūti Heads Solely toward Emptiness

Question: The Buddha expounds prajñāpāramitā everywhere; compared with what Subhūti speaks, it surpasses it a hundred, a thousand, ten thousand times, beyond what counting or simile can compare. Why does he not say ‘seek it in the chapters spoken by the Buddha’?

Answer: Śakra Devānām Indra's meaning was: ‘Apart from the Buddha alone, who else can speak well?’ Therefore he honours Subhūti.

Furthermore, the Buddha constantly, in the six periods of a day and a night, observes beings with the buddha eye, not letting anyone fall for not having heard the Dharma; therefore he speaks according to what beings ought to understand, ought to attain, and ought to cultivate and practise. At times he says that prajñāpāramitā is impermanent, suffering, empty, and non-self, like a sickness, like a boil, and so on, and this is called ‘prajñāpāramitā’; at times he distinguishes the general marks and specific marks of dharmas; at times he says that dharmas arise from the coming together of causes and conditions, with no maker and no receiver, no knower and no seer, and this is called ‘prajñāpāramitā’; at times he speaks of the emptiness of dharmas, at times of ultimate emptiness, and this is called ‘prajñāpāramitā’. For this reason, he does not say ‘seek it in the chapters spoken by the Buddha’.

Moreover, Śakra Devānām Indra thought in his mind: ‘I do not know which one is definitely the fixed mark of prajñā.’ Therefore Śāriputra said: ‘Subhūti constantly enters deeply into emptiness; all that he says heads toward emptiness, and even the emptiness he speaks of is also empty. Therefore I say it should be sought in the chapters spoken by Subhūti.’

The Treatise Explains the Difficulty about Spiritual Power: What Difference Is There between the Mark of Non-receiving and Suchness

Śakra Devānām Indra rejoiced and praised Subhūti, saying: ‘The Venerable One's spiritual power is very great!’

Subhūti declined humbly, saying: ‘This is not my power; it is the spiritual power bestowed by the Buddha.’

Śakra Devānām Indra said: ‘If all dharmas have nothing received, why do you say it is the spiritual power bestowed by the Buddha? If one is apart from the mark of non-receiving, the Tathāgata is unfindable; apart from within suchness, the Tathāgata is unfindable.’

Śakra Devānām Indra thought thus: ‘All dharmas have the mark of non-receiving; all dharmas are empty and have no place of reliance; how can it be said that there definitely is a Tathāgata? If there is no Tathāgata, how could there be a bestowed spiritual power? Moreover, apart from the mark of non-receiving the Tathāgata is also unfindable; and now, apart from this suchness, the Tathāgata is also unfindable.’

Question: What difference is there between the mark of non-receiving and suchness?

Answer: The real mark of all dharmas is also called non-receiving, and is also called suchness. Within dharmas one must not cling, therefore it is called non-receiving; idle discourses cannot destroy it, therefore it is called suchness.

Now the Tathāgata is unfindable within emptiness, and unfindable apart from emptiness as well. Subhūti affirmed his words: ‘Just so! Just so!’ Now Subhūti speaks of this matter at length.

The Treatise Explains the Name Tathāgata: Because He Comes from within Suchness He Is Called Tathāgata

‘Within the mark of non-receiving and the mark of suchness the Tathāgata is unfindable’: either the Buddha's name is called Tathāgata, or the name of beings is called Tathāgata.

As one came from a former life, so one goes thus to a later life; this too is called Tathāgata (thus-come), and also called thus-gone. It is as said among the fourteen set-aside difficult questions: ‘The one thus-gone after death—does he exist? Does he not exist? Does he both exist and not exist? Does he neither exist nor not exist?’

As for the Buddha being named Tathāgata: just as Dīpaṃkara Buddha and the others practised the six perfections and attained the path of the Buddha, Śākyamuni Buddha too came thus, and therefore is named Tathāgata. Just as Dīpaṃkara Buddha and the others, with wisdom, knew the suchness of dharmas and came from within suchness, and therefore are named Tathāgata, Śākyamuni Buddha too came thus, and therefore is named Tathāgata.

Of these two kinds of Tathāgata, what is spoken of here is the Buddha-Tathāgata.

Because one understands that the Buddha-Tathāgata is without anything existent, all beings and all dharmas too are likewise without anything existent.

The meaning of non-receiving and of the Tathāgata is as was said earlier. Now a brief account is given once more: the mark of non-receiving and the mark of the Tathāgata are both empty, both without anything existent. Because the mark of non-receiving and the mark of suchness have no fixed nature, therefore there is no Tathāgata.

Someone says: the real mark of all dharmas is spoken of in two ways. The first: the mark of dharmas is ultimate emptiness, and this alone is real. The second: again, someone says that ultimate emptiness can be shown and can be spoken, and so it does not count as real; just as the mark of nirvāṇa cannot be shown and cannot be spoken, only this is called real. Of these two matters: within ultimate emptiness the Tathāgata is unfindable, and within the real mark that breaks ultimate emptiness the Tathāgata is also unfindable. Ultimate emptiness is the mark of non-receiving; the real mark that breaks ultimate emptiness is suchness.

The Treatise Explains the Extended Account of the Two Meanings: The Five Aggregates Are Not the Tathāgata; Sought in Five Ways, the Tathāgata Is Unfindable

From here onward, these two meanings are spoken of at length.

Within the five aggregates, and so on up to omniscience of all kinds, the Tathāgata is unfindable; since the Tathāgata is unfindable, how could there be the Tathāgata's spiritual power?

The Tathāgata being unfindable is as was said earlier.

These five aggregates are not the Tathāgata; apart from the five aggregates, too, there is no Tathāgata; the five aggregates are not in the Tathāgata; the Tathāgata is not in the five aggregates; and the Tathāgata does not possess the five aggregates either.

Because the five aggregates have the marks of arising and ceasing, impermanence, suffering, emptiness, and non-self, they are not the Tathāgata; if the five aggregates were the Tathāgata, the Tathāgata too would have to arise and cease.

Furthermore, the five aggregates are five dharmas and the Tathāgata is one; how can five dharmas make one? If five were one, one would also have to be five; if that were so, worldly dharmas and world-transcending dharmas would all fall into confusion and ruin!

For all kinds of causes and conditions such as these, the five aggregates are not the Tathāgata.

If there were a Tathāgata separately, apart from the five aggregates, the Tathāgata would have to be without seeing, without hearing, without knowing, without cognising, and would not feel suffering or pleasure either. Why? Because knowing, feeling, and the like are all dharmas of the five aggregates.

Question: The Tathāgata uses the eye, the ear, wisdom, and so on, and so is able to know and able to see; what fault is there in that?

Answer: What is able to see is the eye, not the Tathāgata. If the Tathāgata is not of the mark of seeing and yet uses the eye to see, then before he has taken up form, how does he know to use this eye? He might as well use the ear to see!

Question: The Tathāgata uses wisdom to discriminate and so is able to know—the eye is able to see and the others cannot see; therefore he uses the eye and does not take up the other faculties!

Answer: Knowing has the same fault as the eye: knowing is the five aggregates, not the Tathāgata. If knowing is used to know the eye, then with what could this knowing be known?

Question: The Tathāgata uses knowing to know the eye, and uses the eye to know form; if one wishes to know the Tathāgata, with what can he be known? If the Tathāgata is known by the Tathāgata, that would be endless, without limit!

Answer: The mark of knowing abides within knowing. If the Tathāgata knows, he is of the mark of knowing; if of the mark of knowing, he is impermanent; if impermanent, there is no later life!

Furthermore, if there were a Tathāgata separately, apart from the five aggregates, the Tathāgata would have to be permanent, like the mark of space; he ought not to change, ought not to undergo suffering and pleasure, and would also have to be without bondage and without liberation. There are all kinds of faults such as these.

Because ‘difference’ has been broken, the five aggregates are not in the Tathāgata, the Tathāgata is not in the five aggregates, and the Tathāgata does not possess the five aggregates either.

Question: It is by taking the five aggregates as causes and conditions that there is the Tathāgata; if there were no five aggregates, there would be no Tathāgata.

Answer: If the Tathāgata exists by taking the five aggregates as causes and conditions, then the Tathāgata has no own-nature; since he has no own-nature, how could he arise from other-nature?

Within the five aggregates, when the Tathāgata is sought in five ways, he is in no way findable; therefore there is no Tathāgata.

Only because of idle discourse is it said that there is a Tathāgata; because idle discourse has been cut off, it is said that there is no Tathāgata. The Tathāgata is a dharma that neither arises nor ceases; how can one seek the Tathāgata by means of idle discourse? If one seeks the Tathāgata by means of idle discourse, one does not see the Tathāgata. If there were in the end no Tathāgata at all, one would fall into wrong view! Therefore, if one seeks the Tathāgata by means of the idle discourse of existence and non-existence, all of this is wrong!

The mark of the Tathāgata is the mark of all dharmas; the mark of all dharmas is the mark of the Tathāgata; the mark of the Tathāgata is the mark of ultimate emptiness; the mark of ultimate emptiness is the mark of all dharmas.

The Treatise Explains Why Only Two Matters Are Spoken Of: The Suchness of the Five Aggregates Is the Dharma-Mark; the Simile of Touching Fire and Burning the Hand

Question: Why are only two matters spoken of here, saying ‘within the suchness of the five aggregates there is no suchness of the Tathāgata; within the suchness of the Tathāgata there is no suchness of the five aggregates’?

Answer: This is a brief account; in speaking of these two matters, the five matters are all included.

Furthermore, the twenty kinds of self-view, although all ordinary people have them, cannot arise all at one time. In this assembly now, perhaps only these two matters arise; therefore only two matters are spoken of.

As with the five aggregates, so it is likewise up to omniscience of all kinds.

The dharma-marks of the five aggregates, and so on up to the dharma-marks of omniscience of all kinds, are likewise. The suchness of the five aggregates is the dharma-mark.

Question: If suchness is the dharma-mark, why is it spoken of again?

Answer: When practitioners have arrived at the suchness of the five aggregates, their minds are startled and doubtful: why is the dharma-mark, after all, ultimately empty and without anything existent! Therefore it is said that the dharmas and dharma-marks of the five aggregates are of themselves thus. It is like a person who touches fire and burns his hand, yet gives rise to no resentment, because the mark of fire is of itself thus; but if someone grasps fire and burns him with it, he becomes angry and enraged, because someone held fire and burned him with it.

‘The Tathāgata, within the suchness of the five aggregates and within the dharma-marks of the five aggregates, neither comes together nor disperses’: apart from the suchness of the five aggregates there is no Tathāgata; this is one mark, that is, what is called the signless. Why? Because one dharma has no coming together and no dispersing; only two dharmas have coming together and dispersing. Apart from the dharma-marks of the five aggregates, too, there is no coming together and no dispersing. Why? Because apart from the dharma-marks of the five aggregates the Tathāgata is unfindable. The suchness and dharma-mark of the Tathāgata and the suchness and dharma-marks of the five aggregates are without duality and without difference; therefore it is said: ‘Apart from the suchness of the five aggregates and the dharma-marks of the five aggregates, too, he neither comes together nor disperses.’ And so on up to omniscience of all kinds, it is likewise.

It is because he is able to know in this way that the suchness and dharma-marks of dharmas neither come together nor disperse that there is this spiritual power.

The Treatise Explains Where It Should Be Sought: As Precious Treasure Is Always Sought in the Great Ocean and the Mountains of Treasure

‘Where should it be sought’: above, the mark of prajñā was spoken of by means of the Buddha's spiritual power; now it is said directly how prajñā is to be sought.

The treatise-author says: the five aggregates are false, deceptive, and impermanent; originally non-existent and now existent, having existed they again cease to exist, like an illusion, like a dream. Prajñāpāramitā is the true and real wisdom of the Buddhas; how could it be sought within the five aggregates? It is like seeking precious treasure: one always seeks it in the great ocean and in the mountains of treasure; one should not seek it in ditches and gutters or foul and filthy places. Apart from the five aggregates there is no arising and no ceasing, no making and no rising up, and no dharma-mark; within this, how could it be sought?

Furthermore, the five aggregates and prajñāpāramitā are neither one nor different, neither come together nor disperse; they are without form, without shape, and without resistance; they are of one mark, that is, what is called ‘the signless’.

Question: Prajñāpāramitā is a dharma of the mental factor of wisdom, so it can be said to be without form, without shape, and without resistance; the aggregate of form among the five aggregates—how can it be said to be without shape and without resistance?

Answer: The noble ones, with the wisdom eye, contemplate dharmas as equal and all empty, of one mark, that is, what is called the signless; for this reason, the aggregate of form too is without shape and without resistance.

Furthermore, the form that ordinary people see is not real; the various lines of reasoning are as refuted earlier.

Furthermore, there is another cause and condition: prajñāpāramitā is not the five aggregates of the kind that ordinary people see; but when the five aggregates that ordinary people see are broken, that very moment is prajñāpāramitā; therefore it is said not to be apart from the five aggregates.

And so on up to omniscience of all kinds, it is likewise.

The marks of the mark of suchness and of the dharma-mark are as was said earlier.

Three Praises of Prajñā: The Mahāpāramitā, the Immeasurable, and the Boundless Pāramitā

What follows is the sūtra text.

Śakra Devānām Indra said to Subhūti: ‘This is the mahāpāramitā; it is the prajñāpāramitā of the bodhisattva-mahāsattva! This is the immeasurable pāramitā, the boundless pāramitā; it is the prajñāpāramitā of the bodhisattva-mahāsattva! The srota-āpannas and the fruit of srota-āpanna are all accomplished by training within this prajñāpāramitā; and so on up to: the arhats and the fruit of arhat, the pratyekabuddhas and the path of the pratyekabuddha, and the bodhisattva-mahāsattvas are all accomplished by training within this prajñāpāramitā; bringing beings to maturity, purifying buddha-worlds, and attaining anuttarā samyaksaṃbodhi are also all accomplished by training within this prajñā.’

Subhūti said to Śakra Devānām Indra: ‘Just so! Just so! Kauśika! This is the mahāpāramitā; it is the prajñāpāramitā of the bodhisattva-mahāsattva! This is the immeasurable pāramitā, the boundless pāramitā; it is the prajñāpāramitā of the bodhisattva-mahāsattva. By training within it one accomplishes the fruit of srota-āpanna, and so on up to the fruit of arhat, the path of the pratyekabuddha, and the bodhisattva-mahāsattvas; by training within this prajñāpāramitā one brings beings to maturity, purifies buddha-worlds, and attains anuttarā samyaksaṃbodhi—has already attained, attains now, and will attain in the future.

Great: Because Form Is Great, Prajñā Is Great; the Three Limits Are Unfindable

‘Kauśika! Because form is great, prajñāpāramitā too is great. Why? Because the prior limit of this form is unfindable, the later limit is unfindable, and the middle limit is unfindable. Because feeling, perception, constructions, and consciousness are great, prajñāpāramitā too is great. Why? Because the prior limit of feeling, perception, constructions, and consciousness is unfindable, the later limit is unfindable, and the middle limit is unfindable. And so on up to omniscience of all kinds, it is likewise. For this cause and condition, Kauśika, this is the mahāpāramitā; it is the prajñāpāramitā of the bodhisattva-mahāsattva.

Immeasurable: Because Form Is Immeasurable, Prajñā Is Immeasurable; Like Space, Its Measure Is Unfindable

‘Kauśika! Because form is immeasurable, prajñāpāramitā is immeasurable. Why? Because the measure of form is unfindable. Kauśika! Just as the measure of space is unfindable, so too with form: its measure is unfindable. Because space is immeasurable, form is immeasurable; because form is immeasurable, prajñāpāramitā is immeasurable. Because feeling, perception, constructions, and consciousness, and so on up to omniscience of all kinds, are immeasurable, prajñāpāramitā is immeasurable. Why? Because the measure of omniscience of all kinds is unfindable. Just as the measure of space is unfindable, so too with omniscience of all kinds: its measure is unfindable. Because space is immeasurable, omniscience of all kinds is immeasurable; because omniscience of all kinds is immeasurable, prajñāpāramitā is immeasurable. For this cause and condition, this prajñāpāramitā of the bodhisattva-mahāsattva is immeasurable.

Boundless: Because Form Is Boundless, Conditions Are Boundless, and Suchness Is Boundless, Prajñā Is Boundless

‘Kauśika! Because form is boundless, the prajñāpāramitā of the bodhisattva-mahāsattvas is boundless. Why? Kauśika! Because the prior limit of form is unfindable, the later limit is unfindable, and the middle limit is unfindable. Because feeling, perception, constructions, and consciousness are boundless, prajñāpāramitā is boundless. Why? Because the prior limit, the later limit, and the middle limit of feeling, perception, constructions, and consciousness are all unfindable. And so on up to: because omniscience of all kinds is boundless, prajñāpāramitā is boundless. Why? Because the prior, later, and middle limits of omniscience of all kinds are unfindable. For this cause and condition, Kauśika, this prajñāpāramitā is boundless. Form is boundless, and so on up to omniscience of all kinds is boundless. Furthermore, Kauśika! Because conditions are boundless, prajñāpāramitā is boundless.’

‘Subhūti! How is it that because conditions are boundless, prajñāpāramitā is boundless?’

Subhūti said: ‘Because it takes as its object all boundless dharmas, prajñāpāramitā is boundless.’

‘How is it that because it takes as its object all boundless dharmas, prajñāpāramitā is boundless?’

Subhūti said: ‘Because it takes as its object the boundless dharma-nature, prajñāpāramitā is boundless.

‘Furthermore, Kauśika! Because it takes as its object boundless suchness, prajñāpāramitā is boundless.’

Śakra Devānām Indra said: ‘How is it that because it takes as its object boundless suchness, prajñāpāramitā is boundless?’

Subhūti said: ‘Because suchness is boundless, conditions too are boundless; because conditions are boundless, suchness too is boundless. For this cause and condition, the prajñāpāramitā of the bodhisattva-mahāsattvas is boundless.

Because Beings Are Boundless, Prajñā Is Boundless: Beings Are Only a Provisional Name, Always Pure from the Very Beginning

‘Furthermore, Kauśika! Because beings are boundless, prajñāpāramitā is boundless.’

Śakra Devānām Indra asked Subhūti: ‘How is it that because beings are boundless, prajñāpāramitā is boundless?’

Subhūti said: ‘What do you think? What dharma is called a being?’

Śakra Devānām Indra said: ‘There is no dharma that is called a being; it is only by a provisional name that one speaks of a being. This name originally has no real dharma, and has nothing toward which it tends either; it is only a name forcibly set up for it.’

Subhūti said: ‘Kauśika! What do you think? Within this prajñāpāramitā, is it said that beings truly exist?’

Śakra Devānām Indra said: ‘No!’

Subhūti said: ‘Kauśika! If within prajñāpāramitā it is indeed not said that beings exist, then the boundlessness of beings too is unfindable. Kauśika! What do you think? When the Buddha, with a lifespan as long as kalpas as many as the sands of the Ganges, speaks of beings and speaks the names of beings, is there any dharma of beings that arises or ceases?’

Śakra Devānām Indra said: ‘No! Why? Because beings, from the very beginning, are always pure.’

Subhūti said: ‘For this cause and condition, Kauśika, because beings are boundless, know that prajñāpāramitā too is boundless.’

The Treatise Explains How Śakra Devānām Indra Can Ask: The Present Śakra Devānām Indra Is a Great Bodhisattva

What follows is the treatise-author's explanation.

Question: Śakra Devānām Indra is a srota-āpanna; how can he ask about such profound prajñāpāramitā?

Answer: Just as Subhūti is a complete arhat, and yet, to benefit bodhisattvas and out of compassion for beings, asks about what the bodhisattva practises; so Śakra Devānām Indra, although a śrāvaka, is lord of the gods, has keen wisdom, and has compassion for beings, and therefore asks about prajñāpāramitā; it is likewise.

Furthermore, someone says: ‘Within the three-thousand great-thousand world there are a hundred koṭi Śakra Devānām Indras. The Śakra Devānām Indra spoken of in the Madhyama Āgama as having attained srota-āpanna is not the same as the present Śakra Devānām Indra. The present Śakra Devānām Indra is a great bodhisattva; out of compassion for beings, he praises prajñāpāramitā in three ways, namely the mahāpāramitā, the immeasurable pāramitā, and the boundless pāramitā—this is prajñāpāramitā; because the noble paths are accomplished by training within this prajñāpāramitā.’

The Treatise Explains Great and Immeasurable: Great Because It Brings Beings into Nirvāṇa without Remainder; Sumeru, Though Great, Has a Measure

Subhūti affirmed Śakra Devānām Indra's praise and explained his words of praise at length. Because the five aggregates are great, prajñāpāramitā is great. As for ‘the five aggregates are great’: it is because the three limits are unfindable. It is also because they are immeasurable and boundless that ‘great’ is said. Breaking these immeasurable and boundless five aggregates, it sends all beings into nirvāṇa without remainder; therefore it is said, ‘prajñāpāramitā is great’. And so on up to omniscience of all kinds, it is likewise.

‘Immeasurable’ is also thus, only it differs in taking space as the simile. Some dharmas, though great, are not necessarily immeasurable; therefore space cannot always be taken as the simile. Just as Mount Sumeru, though great among the mountains, has a measure, namely eighty-four thousand yojanas.

‘Boundless’: because the five aggregates are vast, great, and immeasurable, therefore ‘boundless’ is said; also because, if the five aggregates had a bound, they would have a beginning, and if they had a beginning, they would have an end, and then they would be without cause and without condition, falling into annihilation and all kinds of such faults. Furthermore, the five aggregates are unfindable in the three times; therefore ‘boundless’ is said.

The Treatise Explains the Boundlessness of Conditions: The Four Conditions Are Present in All Places and at All Times

‘Conditions are boundless’: that is, the four conditions of all dharmas. The causal condition is able to give rise to all conditioned dharmas; the sequential condition is past and present mind and mental-factor dharmas; the object condition and the dominant condition extend to all dharmas. These four kinds of condition are present in all places and at all times; therefore it is said, ‘conditions are boundless’; because conditions are boundless, prajñāpāramitā is boundless.

Furthermore, ‘conditions are boundless’: because the dharmas of the four conditions are false, deceptive, without reality, and ultimately empty, therefore they are boundless.

Furthermore, because it takes as its object suchness, dharma-nature, and the limit of reality, which are boundless, prajñāpāramitā is boundless. As for ‘suchness, dharma-nature, and the limit of reality’: because they are of the mark of the naturally unconditioned, therefore they are immeasurable and boundless; as for the boundlessness of the five aggregates, it is because of the power of contemplative illumination that they are forcibly said to be boundless.

The Treatise Explains the Boundlessness of Beings: A Name Forcibly Made, Beings Originally Pure

Furthermore, ‘beings are boundless’: because beings are very many; immeasurable asaṃkhyeyas of beings of the three times and the ten directions—no one can know their number; therefore ‘boundless’ is said.

Furthermore, here the emptiness of beings is spoken of; therefore ‘boundless’ is said; it is only a name forcibly set up for it.

‘Has nothing toward which it tends either’: because beings have no fixed dharma toward which they can tend; just as fire necessarily has something toward which it tends, whereas for the name of beings there is no real being toward which to tend.

‘What do you think—within prajñāpāramitā is it ever said that beings truly exist?’ ‘No! Venerable One!’

‘If beings are truly non-existent, how could there be a bound?’

It is like this: the Buddhas are foremost among all speakers of truth; though with a lifespan as long as immeasurable kalpas as many as the sands of the Ganges they speak the names of beings, this dharma of beings does not, because of being spoken of, arise or cease—how much less so for the others, inverted, false, and deceptive, who speak for only a short time! Only because the mind of ‘I’ arises should there be beings.

These beings are not said to be ‘non-existent’ because they are taken into prajñāpāramitā; rather, it is because from the very beginning they are always pure and without anything existent, and idle discourses such as existence and non-existence have all been extinguished. Therefore it is said: ‘Because beings are boundless, prajñāpāramitā is boundless.’

The Treatise Explains Why Boundlessness Is Spoken of at Length: When the Mark of Beings Is Broken, All the Rest Is Easily Broken

Question: Why, within ‘boundless’, is it spoken of at length, while ‘great’ and ‘immeasurable’ are spoken of briefly?

Answer: Because of the causes and conditions of beings, all ordinary people give rise to all kinds of afflictions and, within the five aggregates, commit all kinds of wrong practices, which are hard to break; therefore it is spoken of at length. If the mark of beings is broken, all the rest is easily broken.

Mahāprajñāpāramitā-upadeśa, fascicle fifty-five.