大智度論 義疏通講 · 冊10Dazhidulun — Mahāprajñāpāramitā-upadeśa · Exposition Throughout · Vol. 10

Overview

When "The Great Suchness" opens, it is not the Buddha who first expounds the Dharma; it is the gods who first come to pay their respects. The gods of the desire realm and the form realm scatter heavenly powdered sandalwood incense and lotus flowers of four colours—blue, red, crimson, and white—from afar over the Buddha, come to where the Buddha is, bow their heads at the Buddha's feet, and stand to one side, and the very first sentence they speak is a sentence of praise: 「諸佛阿耨多羅三藐三菩提甚深、難見、難解、不可思惟知、微妙寂滅，智者能知，一切世間所不能信。」 tr. "The anuttarā samyaksaṃbodhi (unsurpassed, right, and complete awakening) of the buddhas is very deep, hard to see, hard to understand, not to be known by thought, subtle and quiescent; the wise can know it; all the world cannot believe it." Having praised, they at once state the reason themselves, and the reason they give is precisely the eye of this chapter's name—「色即是薩婆若，薩婆若即是色」 tr. "form is sarvajñā (omniscience); sarvajñā is form", 「色如相、薩婆若如相，是一如，無二無別」 tr. "the mark of suchness of form and the mark of suchness of sarvajñā are one suchness, without duality and without difference". With the one sentence 「如是！如是！」 tr. "Just so! Just so!" the Buddha confirms the whole of it, and carries the depth of this one suchness over to himself: 「以是義故，佛初成道時，心樂嘿然，不樂說法。」 tr. "For this reason, when the Buddha first attained the path, his mind delighted in silence and did not delight in expounding the Dharma." What makes the deep deep is here not that it cannot be fully spoken, but that there is no two—「阿耨多羅三藐三菩提，無得者、無得處、無得時，是名諸法甚深相，所謂無有二法」 tr. "anuttarā samyaksaṃbodhi has no one who obtains it, no place of obtaining, no time of obtaining; this is called the very deep mark of all dharmas—that is, there are no two dharmas"; after this come more than ten sentences in a row of 「是法甚深」 tr. "this Dharma is very deep", each one giving as its reason 「如虛空甚深故」 tr. "because it is very deep like space", 「如甚深故」 tr. "because suchness is very deep", 「法性甚深、實際甚深」 tr. "the nature of dharmas is very deep, the limit of reality is very deep". The whole chapter, four rounds of sūtra and four rounds of treatise, lies within a single fascicle, and by the boundaries of the sūtra and treatise sections it is divided into two arcs, the First Part and the Last Part: the two rounds of the First Part speak of suchness as substance—one suchness without two—and then say why one who obtains this suchness is called born following the Buddha and why he is called Tathāgata; the two rounds of the Last Part speak of suchness as function—whether, within suchness, awakening is hard to obtain or easy to obtain, whether the three vehicles are distinguished or not—and then comes the one question 「應云何行」 tr. "how should he practise", which the Buddha answers with a whole passage on the gate of practice.

The first round of the First Part first settles the meaning of 'very deep', then settles the meaning of 'born following the Buddha'. In the sūtra text the gods address the Buddha again: 「是甚深法，不為受色故說，不為捨色故說」 tr. "This very deep Dharma is not spoken for the sake of receiving form, and not spoken for the sake of relinquishing form", while what the world practises is exactly the opposite—「諸世間皆受著行，所謂色是我、是我所」 tr. "all the worlds practise receiving and clinging: that is to say, form is self, form is what belongs to self"; the Buddha approves their words and adds a verdict: if there is a bodhisattva who practises for the sake of receiving form, and so on up to for the sake of receiving the omniscience of all kinds, 「是菩薩不能修般若波羅蜜」 tr. "this bodhisattva cannot practise prajñāpāramitā". Subhūti takes it up and speaks of four marks of this Dharma: 「是法隨順一切法」 tr. "This Dharma accords with all dharmas", 「是法名無礙相，如虛空等故」 tr. "This Dharma is called the unobstructed mark, because it is equal to space", 「是法不生相」 tr. "This Dharma is the mark of non-arising", 「是法無處」 tr. "This Dharma has no place". The gods, hearing it, praise him: 「須菩提是佛子，隨佛生。何以故？須菩提所說皆與空合。」 tr. "Subhūti is a son of the Buddha, born following the Buddha. Why? What Subhūti says is all at one with emptiness." Subhūti does not accept this praise, but asks back 「云何為隨佛生」 tr. "what is it to be born following the Buddha", and then unfolds it with a string of 「復次」 tr. "furthermore"—not speaking from the side of persons, only from the side of suchness: 「如來如相不來不去，須菩提如相亦不來不去」 tr. "the mark of suchness of the Tathāgata does not come and does not go; the mark of suchness of Subhūti also does not come and does not go"; 「如來如相即是一切法如相，一切法如相即是如來如相。是如相中亦無如相」 tr. "the mark of suchness of the Tathāgata is the mark of suchness of all dharmas; the mark of suchness of all dharmas is the mark of suchness of the Tathāgata. And within this mark of suchness there is no mark of suchness either"; the suchness of the Tathāgata abides always, and this mark of suchness 「無作，終不不如」 tr. "is without making, and is never not such"; 「如來如相不過去、不未來、不現在」 tr. "the mark of suchness of the Tathāgata is not past, not future, not present"; and so on up to 「如來如不在過去如中，過去如亦不在如來如中」 tr. "the suchness of the Tathāgata is not within past suchness, nor is past suchness within the suchness of the Tathāgata". It speaks all the way to where there is not only no person able to follow, but also no dharma that is followed—「是故須菩提如不有異，為隨佛生，亦無所隨」 tr. "therefore the suchness of Subhūti is not different; he is born following the Buddha, and yet there is nothing followed"—and only then does the Buddha conclude it in one sentence: 「須菩提！菩薩摩訶薩得是如故，名為如來。」 tr. "Subhūti! The bodhisattva-mahāsattva, because he obtains this suchness, is called Tathāgata." When this suchness was spoken, 「是三千大千世界大地六種振動」 tr. "the great earth of this three-thousand great-thousand world shook in six ways". The treatise explanation begins from the most down-to-earth question: there is nothing in prajñā that is not very deep; why then must it still single it out and praise it as very deep? The answer is utterly plain: 「或時分別諸法空，是淺；或時說『世間法即同涅槃』，是深」 tr. "at times all dharmas are discriminated as empty, and this is shallow; at times it is said that ‘the dharmas of the world are the same as nirvāṇa’, and this is deep", and it is likened to river water—「有洄復深處、有淺處」 tr. "there are eddies and deep places, and there are shallow places". Of what is called 「一切世間所不能信」 tr. "all the world cannot believe it", that 「一切」 tr. "all" too the treatise-author divides into two kinds: 「一者、名字一切，二者、實一切」 tr. "one, the all of names; two, the real all"; here it is the all of names, 「以多不信故言『一切』」 tr. "because many do not believe, it says ‘all’". As for the difference between awakening and prajñā, the treatise-author says it all in one sentence: 「但名字異——在菩薩心中為般若，在佛心中名阿耨多羅三藐三菩提。」 tr. "They differ only in name—in the bodhisattva's mind it is prajñā; in the Buddha's mind it is called anuttarā samyaksaṃbodhi." And what is suchness? 「如名色等諸法真實相」 tr. "Suchness is the name for the real mark of form and the other dharmas"—the treatise-author then gives the simile of palaces and mean huts wholly removed, and sandalwood and mixed woods wholly burned: 「其處虛空無異」 tr. "the space where they stood is no different". The simile of the space in a wall is more pointed still: 「譬如壁中先有空相，小兒以橛釘之，力少故不入，大力者能入」 tr. "It is like a wall in which there is already the mark of space; a small child drives a peg into it, and because his strength is small it does not go in, while one of great strength can drive it in"—the mark of space was in the wall from the start; whether the peg goes in or not lies in strength, not in space. Last, in explaining 'born following the Buddha', it first sets out the three seeds—「一者、不隨順生，二者、隨順生，三者、勝生」 tr. "one, born not in accord; two, born in accord; three, born superior"—and 「佛法中惟欲一種：隨順生，以無有勝佛故」 tr. "in the Buddha's Dharma only one kind is wanted: born in accord, because there is none superior to the Buddha"; as for why the bodhisattva who has entered the Dharma-position is not said to be born in accord with the Buddha, the treatise-author sets three views side by side without judging between them, and they are recorded as they are. Last of all, the name Tathāgata is laid bare: 「如來者，如實行來到佛法中。」 tr. "The Tathāgata is one who, practising as it really is, has come into the Buddha's Dharma."

The second round of the First Part turns from praise into breaking, and from breaking into falling. The gods again scatter incense and speak a sentence of praise: 「須菩提以如來如隨佛生」 tr. "Subhūti is born following the Buddha by the suchness of the Tathāgata"; Subhūti at once cuts off what they prize with four clauses—「須菩提不從色中隨佛生，亦不從色如中隨佛生；不離色隨佛生，亦不離色如隨佛生」 tr. "Subhūti is not born following the Buddha from within form, nor is he born following the Buddha from within the suchness of form; he is not born following the Buddha apart from form, nor is he born following the Buddha apart from the suchness of form", and so on up to the unconditioned and the suchness of the unconditioned, all alike; the reason is only one sentence: 「是一切法皆無所有、不可得，無隨生者，亦無隨生法。」 tr. "All these dharmas are without anything existent and unfindable; there is no one born following, and no dharma of being born following." Śāriputra takes this up and speaks of the depth of suchness, in a syntax that steps back at every step: 「色尚不可得，何況色如當可得！」 tr. "Form itself is unfindable—how much less could the suchness of form be found!" The Buddha confirms the whole sentence. When this mark of suchness was spoken, the benefit the assembly gained differed from one to another: 「二百比丘不受一切法故，漏盡得阿羅漢」 tr. "two hundred bhikṣus, because they did not receive any dharma, exhausted their outflows and attained arhatship", five hundred bhikṣuṇīs, far from the dust and separated from defilement, obtained the purity of the Dharma-eye, five thousand bodhisattvas obtained the acceptance of non-arising, and 「六千菩薩諸法不受故，漏盡，心得解脫，成阿羅漢」 tr. "six thousand bodhisattvas, because they did not receive any dharma, exhausted their outflows, their minds attained liberation, and they became arhats". This last item is the most glaring stroke in the whole chapter: walking the bodhisattva path and realising arhatship. Without waiting to be asked, the Buddha himself tells Śāriputra its causes and conditions—these six thousand bodhisattvas 「先世值五百佛，親近供養」 tr. "in former lives met five hundred buddhas, drew near to them and made offerings", fully practised five matters, and yet 「無般若波羅蜜、無方便力故，行別異相」 tr. "because they had no prajñāpāramitā and no power of skilful means, they practised the mark of difference", thinking 「是施、是持戒、是忍辱、是精進、是禪定」 tr. "this is giving, this is keeping the precepts, this is patience, this is vigour, this is meditation", and so 「行別異相故，不得無異相；不得無異相故，不得入菩薩位」 tr. "because they practised the mark of difference, they did not obtain the mark of no difference; because they did not obtain the mark of no difference, they could not enter the bodhisattva's position". Śāriputra therefore asks: when it is the same emptiness, signlessness, and non-action, why does one with the power of skilful means obtain awakening, while one without the power of skilful means takes up the śrāvaka vehicle? The Buddha answers with the simile of a bird: 「譬如有鳥，身長百由旬，若二百、三百由旬，而無有翅，從三十三天，自投閻浮提」 tr. "It is like a bird whose body is a hundred yojana long, or two hundred or three hundred yojana, and which has no wings; from the Heaven of the Thirty-three it throws itself down toward Jambudvīpa"—midway it wishes to return and cannot; it wishes to be without pain and without vexation, and cannot either, only 「是鳥身大而無翅故」 tr. "because this bird's body is great and it has no wings". Those who practise for kalpas like the sands of the Ganges and yet 「遠離般若波羅蜜、方便力故」 tr. "because they stray far from prajñāpāramitā and the power of skilful means" are likewise. Conversely, one who from the first arousing of intent does not leave the mind of sarvajñā, and who grasps at no mark in the morality, concentration, wisdom, liberation, and knowledge and vision of liberation of the buddhas of the three times, 「不墮聲聞、辟支佛道，直至阿耨多羅三藐三菩提」 tr. "does not fall into the path of the śrāvaka or the pratyekabuddha, and goes straight on to anuttarā samyaksaṃbodhi"—the Buddha names this 「菩薩方便力，以離相心行布施、持戒、忍辱、精進、禪定」 tr. "the bodhisattva's power of skilful means: with a mind separated from marks he practises giving, keeping the precepts, patience, vigour, and meditation". The treatise explanation takes it up here section by section: first it brings out the intent of Subhūti's four clauses—he 「知諸天子心少貴尚是諸法如」 tr. "knew that the gods' minds had come a little to prize this suchness of dharmas", and so 「以四種破著如心」 tr. "with four kinds he broke the mind that clings to suchness"; next it distinguishes form and the other dharmas from the suchness of form and the other dharmas—form and the other dharmas are 「眼所見等諸法」 tr. "the dharmas seen by the eye and the rest", while suchness is the name for 「色等法實相，不虛誑」 tr. "the real mark of form and the other dharmas, not false and deceptive"; form and the other dharmas 「皆是作法、有為、虛妄、從顛倒生」 tr. "are all made dharmas, conditioned, false, born from inversion", and therefore 「不即是如」 tr. "are not simply suchness"; yet it is also 「因色等法得如名」 tr. "because of form and the other dharmas that suchness gets its name", and therefore 「不離色等法得如」 tr. "suchness is obtained not apart from form and the other dharmas". On the six thousand people becoming arhats, the treatise-author answers without shielding anyone at all: 「是人無般若波羅蜜、無方便力」 tr. "these people had no prajñāpāramitā and no power of skilful means", and, deeply weary of the world, 「慈悲心薄故求自利」 tr. "because their mind of kindness and compassion was thin, they sought their own benefit"—「即得阿羅漢，於般若無咎」 tr. "they at once attained arhatship; prajñā is without blame in this"—and it likens this to 「如人持器詣海，隨器大小，各自取足」 tr. "as when people carry vessels to the sea, each according to the size of his vessel takes his fill". It also forestalls one objection: since it is said that all noble ones obtain the unconditioned, which is non-discrimination, why is it said that these did not obtain the dharma of non-discrimination? The answer is: 「非說今世聽法時；乃是過去五百世時，不得般若、方便」 tr. "it does not speak of the time of hearing the Dharma in this life; it is that in the past, during five hundred lives, they did not obtain prajñā and skilful means", so that they came to 「失菩薩信等五根」 tr. "lose the bodhisattva's five faculties of faith and the rest". As for why, practising the same three gates of liberation, the fruits of retribution are so far apart, the great cause and condition is just one: 「離薩婆若心行空等故」 tr. "because they practise emptiness and the rest with a mind that has left sarvajñā". Last, in the simile of the great bird, the treatise-author matches it word by word: 「鳥身」 tr. "the bird's body" is the bodhisattva's body; 「大」 tr. "great" means 「世世廣集五波羅蜜功德」 tr. "life after life broadly gathering the merit of the five perfections"; 「無兩翅」 tr. "without two wings" is 「是無般若波羅蜜、無方便」 tr. "being without prajñāpāramitā and without skilful means"; 「虛空」 tr. "space" is the immeasurable dharmas of the Buddha; 「未應飛而飛」 tr. "flying when it should not yet fly" is wishing, before one's merit is complete and full, to roam in the space of the immeasurable dharmas of the Buddha; 「若死」 tr. "if it dies" is the path of the arhat; 「死等」 tr. "the equivalent of death" is the path of the pratyekabuddha; 「若痛、若惱」 tr. "if it suffers pain, if it suffers vexation" is 「失菩薩本願功德」 tr. "losing the merit of the bodhisattva's original vow".

The first round of the Last Part turns the same suchness over and asks about it from the side of obtaining. The gods say to the Buddha: 「阿耨多羅三藐三菩提難得！」 tr. "Anuttarā samyaksaṃbodhi is hard to obtain!" The Buddha confirms it, and takes himself as the proof: 「我亦得一切法、一切種智已，得阿耨多羅三藐三菩提，亦無所得，無能知、無可知、亦無知者。何以故？諸法畢竟淨故。」 tr. "I too, having obtained all dharmas and the omniscience of all kinds, obtained anuttarā samyaksaṃbodhi, and yet there was nothing obtained; there is no one able to know, nothing that can be known, and also no knower. Why? Because all dharmas are ultimately pure." Subhūti deliberately takes the opposite side: 「如我解佛所說義，我心思惟，是阿耨多羅三藐三菩提易得」 tr. "as I understand the meaning of what the Buddha says, when I reflect in my mind, this anuttarā samyaksaṃbodhi is easy to obtain"—the reason being 「一切法、一切法相空，無法可得、無能得者」 tr. "all dharmas and the marks of all dharmas are empty; there is no dharma that can be obtained and no one who can obtain it"; since there is nothing to be obtained, there is nowhere from which to speak of difficulty either. Śāriputra at once challenges him with the facts: if dharmas are empty like space and awakening is easy to obtain, 「今恒河沙等諸菩薩摩訶薩求阿耨多羅三藐三菩提，何以故退還？」 tr. "now bodhisattva-mahāsattvas equal to the sands of the Ganges seek anuttarā samyaksaṃbodhi; why do they retrogress and turn back?" Subhūti does not answer directly, but answers with questions instead, one sentence one question, each sentence asking only one thing—「色於阿耨多羅三藐三菩提退還不？」 tr. "Does form retrogress and turn back from anuttarā samyaksaṃbodhi, or not?"—and so on through the omniscience of all kinds, a dharma apart from form, the mark of suchness of form, apart from the mark of suchness of form, suchness, the nature of dharmas, the abiding of dharmas, the position of dharmas, the limit of reality, the nature of the inconceivable, a dharma apart from suchness; Śāriputra answers each one 「不」 tr. "no". Only after ten-odd answers does Subhūti gather it into one question: 「若諸法畢竟不可得，何等法於阿耨多羅三藐三菩提退還？」 tr. "If all dharmas are ultimately unfindable, what dharma retrogresses and turns back from anuttarā samyaksaṃbodhi?" Śāriputra now accepts Subhūti's words, but cites another saying of the Buddha to raise a difficulty: if there is none who retrogresses, then since 「佛說求道者有三種：阿羅漢道、辟支佛道、佛道」 tr. "the Buddha says those who seek the path are of three kinds: the path of the arhat, the path of the pratyekabuddha, the Buddha path", would it not follow that 「獨有一菩薩求佛道」 tr. "only one, the bodhisattva, seeks the Buddha path"? At this point Pūrṇa Maitrāyaṇīputra interjects a sentence, telling Śāriputra to ask further: 「應當問須菩提：『為有一菩薩乘不？』」 tr. "You should ask Subhūti: ‘Is there one bodhisattva vehicle or not?’" Subhūti then asks back with four clauses on the mark of suchness—within the suchness of all dharmas, would you have there be people of the three vehicles or not? Within the distinctions of the three vehicles, is there suchness to be found or not? Does this suchness have one mark, or two marks, or three marks, or not? Within suchness is there even one bodhisattva or not? Śāriputra answers all four 「不也」 tr. "No", and Subhūti then concludes: 「如是四種中，三乘人不可得。」 tr. "Within these four kinds, people of the three vehicles are unfindable." And the landing point of the whole round is not in breaking but in acceptance—「菩薩摩訶薩聞是諸法如相，心不驚、不沒、不悔、不疑，是名菩薩摩訶薩能成就阿耨多羅三藐三菩提。」 tr. "The bodhisattva-mahāsattva who hears this mark of suchness of all dharmas and whose mind is not startled, does not sink, has no regret, and has no doubt—this is called the bodhisattva-mahāsattva who is able to accomplish anuttarā samyaksaṃbodhi." The Buddha therefore praises him: 「善哉！善哉！須菩提！汝所說者，皆是佛力。」 tr. "Excellent! Excellent! Subhūti! What you say is all the Buddha's power." Śāriputra's last question is of the utmost importance: 「成就何等菩提？」 tr. "What awakening does he accomplish?" The Buddha's answer settles it: 「成就佛阿耨多羅三藐三菩提。」 tr. "He accomplishes the Buddha's anuttarā samyaksaṃbodhi." The treatise explanation does not spread out much here; it only grips a few joints: the Buddha approves the words and takes himself as the proof—「我坐道場，以一切種得一切法，亦無一定相可得」 tr. "I sat at the seat of awakening and obtained all dharmas in all kinds, and yet not one fixed mark could be found"; Subhūti's 'easy to obtain' is 「一切法畢竟常空故，是中無得者、無可得法，無障無礙、無所修、無所斷故」 tr. "because all dharmas are ultimately and always empty; herein there is no one who obtains and no dharma that can be obtained; because there is no hindrance and no obstruction, nothing practised and nothing severed"; apart from the suchness of form and the other dharmas there is no further dharma that could retrogress and turn back, because 「如破色等法已，如亦自空」 tr. "once suchness has broken form and the other dharmas, suchness too is itself empty". To the two words 'acceptance of dharmas' the treatise-author gives a definition: 「是法門、法修、法行」 tr. "it is the gate of the Dharma, the practice of the Dharma, the conduct of the Dharma"—「入須菩提所說法門中，則無退還；出是法門，則有退還」 tr. "if one enters the gate of the Dharma spoken of by Subhūti, then there is no retrogressing and turning back; if one leaves this gate of the Dharma, then there is retrogressing and turning back"; retrogressing or not retrogressing depends on being inside the gate or outside it, not on the person. And as for Śāriputra further asking what awakening is accomplished, the treatise-author has an explanation too: 「各各有無上」 tr. "each has its own unsurpassed", so the question must be settled; the answer is 「大乘無上」 tr. "the Great Vehicle is unsurpassed". The last sentence puts the two sides of the whole round together: 「若入畢竟空門，一切法盡一相；若出畢竟空，三乘則有異。今佛分別諸法故說有上、中、下乘，不為畢竟空故說。」 tr. "If one enters the gate of ultimate emptiness, all dharmas are wholly of one mark; if one comes out of ultimate emptiness, the three vehicles then differ. Now the Buddha, because he discriminates dharmas, says there are upper, middle, and lower vehicles; it is not said for the sake of ultimate emptiness."

The second round of the Last Part is the turn in the whole chapter from suchness down to practice. Subhūti asks: 「若菩薩摩訶薩欲成就阿耨多羅三藐三菩提，應云何行？」 tr. "If a bodhisattva-mahāsattva wishes to accomplish anuttarā samyaksaṃbodhi, how should he practise?" The Buddha's answer begins not from emptiness but from the mind: 「應起等心，於一切眾生亦以等心與語，無有偏黨」 tr. "he should arouse an equal mind, and speak to all beings too with an equal mind, without partiality", and in order below that come a mind of great kindness, a lowly intent, a mind of safety, an unobstructed mind, a mind without vexation, a mind of love and respect—the measure of love and respect the sūtra text gives in the most intimate terms: 「如父、如母、如兄、如弟、如姊、如妹、如兒子、如親族、知識」 tr. "as to a father, as to a mother, as to an elder brother, as to a younger brother, as to an elder sister, as to a younger sister, as to a son, as to kin and friends". The mind being so, the deeds are so too: himself not killing, teaching others not to kill, praising the dharma of not killing, and 「歡喜讚歎諸不殺生者」 tr. "rejoicing in and praising all who do not kill"—the four things practised together, carried all the way through the ten wholesome paths, the four dhyānas, the four immeasurable minds, the four formless absorptions, the six perfections, inner emptiness and so on up to the emptiness of non-existent and existent dharmas, the four foundations of mindfulness and so on up to the eightfold noble path, the three samādhi, the eight liberations, the nine successive absorptions, the ten powers, the four fearlessnesses, the four unobstructed knowledges, the eighteen unshared dharmas, great kindness and great compassion, contemplating the twelve links of causes and conditions in forward and reverse order and the four truths, up to the four fruits of the śramaṇa and the path of the pratyekabuddha—here the wording of the sūtra most needs a careful look: 「自生須陀洹果證智而不證實際」 tr. "himself giving rise to the knowledge that realises the fruit of the srota-āpanna, yet not realising the limit of reality"—he realises its knowledge without taking its realisation; the path of the pratyekabuddha likewise. Further up, he enters the bodhisattva's position, purifies buddha-worlds and brings beings to accomplishment, gives rise to the bodhisattva's supernormal powers, gives rise to the omniscience of all kinds, severs all the fetters and their habitual residues, takes up the accomplishment of life-span, accomplishes the abiding of the Dharma—each and every one practised in all four ways together. Only when the practice is exhausted does it speak of the fruit: 「當得無礙色，得無礙受、想、行、識，乃至得無礙法住」 tr. "he will obtain unobstructed form, obtain unobstructed feeling, perception, constructions, and consciousness, and so on up to obtaining the unobstructed abiding of the Dharma"; the reason is that 「是菩薩摩訶薩從本已來，不受色」 tr. "this bodhisattva-mahāsattva from the very beginning has not received form", and so on up to not receiving the omniscience of all kinds—「色不受者為非色，乃至一切種智不受者為非一切種智」 tr. "form not received is not form, and so on up to: the omniscience of all kinds not received is not the omniscience of all kinds". When this chapter was spoken, 「二千菩薩得無生法忍」 tr. "two thousand bodhisattvas obtained the acceptance of the non-arising of dharmas". The treatise explanation is most detailed in this round, explaining almost mind by mind: explaining the equal mind, it first breaks the reality of beings—「五眾和合，假名眾生，如車、如林」 tr. "the five aggregates coming together are provisionally named a being, like a cart, like a forest"—while worldly people, toward all beings, 「各行三分：怨、親、中人」 tr. "each practise three divisions: enemies, kin, and those in between", and the Buddha now teaches the bodhisattva to treat them all with the thought of kin and love; it further lists three evils and three goods: 「惡中惡者，如人以好心供給慈念，而反以惡心毀害」 tr. "the evil within evil is like a person whom one supplies with a good mind and kind thought, and who in return harms one with an evil mind", 「善中善者，如人以惡事害於己，而以善事乃至身命供養」 tr. "the good within good is like a person who harms one with evil deeds, while one makes offerings to him with good deeds, even to one's body and life"—the bodhisattva 「捨是三惡，過是二種善，行第六心於一切眾生」 tr. "gives up these three evils, passes beyond these two kinds of good, and practises the sixth mind toward all beings". Someone asks: how can one who has not yet obtained the Dharma body practise this? The treatise-author answers with several causes and conditions in a row—one must undergo hard ascetic practices before one accomplishes the unsurpassed path, 「譬如估客，於險道中備受諸苦，乃得大利」 tr. "like a merchant who undergoes every suffering on a dangerous road and only then gains great profit"; because one deeply believes in ultimate emptiness, one knows that 「所見、所聞、所知皆是虛誑，如幻、如夢」 tr. "what is seen, what is heard, and what is known are all false and deceptive, like an illusion, like a dream"; knowing that this body arose from the causes and conditions of sinful deeds and inversion, 「以此弊身而得無上道利，何為不與」 tr. "with this wretched body one gains the benefit of the unsurpassed path—why not give it?"; wishing to have beings imitate what he himself practises, he therefore 「以身教令其信受」 tr. "teaches with his body so that they believe and accept"; and it is also an antidote to those who speak of seeking the path while their bodily conduct does not match their words. Asked further how the equal mind and the mind of kindness differ, the treatise-author again sets several views side by side: 「等心者是四無量心，慈心者是一無量」 tr. "the equal mind is the four immeasurable minds; the mind of kindness is one immeasurable"; 「初捨怨親是等心，後加愍念是慈心」 tr. "first relinquishing enemy and kin is the equal mind; afterwards adding pity is the mind of kindness"; 「等心者，觀眾生如如、實際、法性」 tr. "the equal mind contemplates beings as like suchness, the limit of reality, the nature of dharmas". Why is the mind of compassion not spoken of? The answer is very down-to-earth: 「悲心或憂念眾生，積集此心，心則退沒」 tr. "the mind of compassion sometimes grieves over beings; when this mind accumulates, the mind then sinks back", and moreover some beings do not love the bodhisattva's compassionate concern. It asks further: since the bodhisattva's merit and wisdom are accumulated, why does he instead give rise to a lowly intent among beings? The treatise-author answers several times over: 「一切法無常，一切眾生上、中、下皆歸磨滅」 tr. "all dharmas are impermanent, and all beings, high, middle, and low, return alike to being ground away"; great and small are not fixed to begin with—「此國以為大，餘國以為小」 tr. "what this country takes as great, another country takes as small"; the causes and conditions of the Buddha path only a Buddha can know, and if one belittles people for their looks and abilities, 「則為輕未來佛」 tr. "then one belittles a future Buddha"; having vowed to deliver beings, 「若眾生無所得，我則孤負眾生」 tr. "if beings obtain nothing, I shall have failed beings", 「譬如主人請客，則應敬客而自卑」 tr. "as when a host invites guests, he should honour the guests and humble himself"; and the mind of self-exaltation most damages practice—「憍慢是瞋之本，瞋是一切重罪之根」 tr. "pride is the root of hatred, and hatred is the root of all grave sins", while with a lowly mind, when people beat or scold him, he has no anger, 「譬如大家打奴，奴不敢瞋恨」 tr. "as when a master beats a slave, the slave dares not hate". The mind of safety too has its proper measure: 「與今世、後世、究竟樂，非如父母、知識與現世樂」 tr. "it gives the happiness of this life, of the next life, and of the ultimate, not like the happiness of the present life that parents and friends give". With all these minds complete, there is then acceptance—「得是柔軟清淨好心，名眾生忍，是法忍初門」 tr. "obtaining this soft, pure, good mind is called the acceptance of beings; it is the first gate of the acceptance of dharmas". As for the dharmas practised, the treatise-author divides them into two kinds: the ten wholesome paths, 「有佛、無佛，世間常有」 tr. "whether there is a Buddha or no Buddha, are always in the world", and are old dharmas; 「六波羅蜜乃至法住，是客法，有佛說則有菩薩行」 tr. "the six perfections and so on up to the abiding of the Dharma are guest dharmas; only when a Buddha has spoken them is there the bodhisattva's practice"—「上來舊法、客法，本末具足」 tr. "the old dharmas and guest dharmas above are complete from root to branch". At the very end the whole chapter returns to one place: this chapter 「說如微妙深法，亦說有行，善門、智門，二行具足」 tr. "speaks of suchness, the subtle and deep Dharma, and also speaks of there being practice—the gate of goodness and the gate of wisdom, both practices complete", while 「但說如法，所利少；若說有法，所利亦少」 tr. "if only the dharma of suchness is spoken, the benefit is small; if the dharma of existence is spoken, the benefit is also small", and now both are complete, and so 「二千菩薩得無生法忍」 tr. "two thousand bodhisattvas obtained the acceptance of the non-arising of dharmas", 「譬如二輪具足故，能有所至」 tr. "as, because both wheels are complete, one can get somewhere".

The four rounds of sūtra and treatise advance in alternation, all within one fascicle, and the two arcs, first and last, each carry their own weight. The two rounds of the First Part speak of suchness as substance: one suchness without duality and without difference, and so it is called very deep; because one obtains this suchness one is called Tathāgata, and so one is called born following the Buddha; and the reason a warning about being without skilful means is set up right here is precisely that when suchness is spoken to its utmost, one kind of sickness most easily arises—taking knowing suchness to be arriving at suchness. The six thousand bodhisattvas are the ready proof: they met five hundred buddhas and practised the five perfections, and yet 「無般若波羅蜜、無方便力故，行別異相」 tr. "because they had no prajñāpāramitā and no power of skilful means, they practised the mark of difference", and in the end they 「不得入菩薩位」 tr. "could not enter the bodhisattva's position"; the bird is great and wingless—the greater the body, the heavier the fall. The two rounds of the Last Part speak of suchness as function: that within suchness there is no obtaining, no retrogressing, no division of the three vehicles is the side of 「若入畢竟空門，一切法盡一相」 tr. "if one enters the gate of ultimate emptiness, all dharmas are wholly of one mark"; while 「今佛分別諸法故說有上、中、下乘」 tr. "now the Buddha, because he discriminates dharmas, says there are upper, middle, and lower vehicles" is the side of coming out of ultimate emptiness—between going in and coming out is precisely where the gate of practice lies, and so at the one question 「應云何行」 tr. "how should he practise", the Buddha speaks from the equal mind all the way to accomplishing the abiding of the Dharma, and there is not one thing that is not practised in all four ways together. At the end the treatise-author himself pronounces a verdict on the whole chapter, binding the two arcs into one matter: 「但說如法，所利少；若說有法，所利亦少」 tr. "if only the dharma of suchness is spoken, the benefit is small; if the dharma of existence is spoken, the benefit is also small"; with the two dharmas complete, one arrives even at the acceptance of the non-arising of dharmas—「譬如二輪具足故，能有所至」 tr. "as, because both wheels are complete, one can get somewhere". The praise of one suchness without two at the head of the chapter, the simile of both wheels complete at its end: the meaning of the whole chapter lies entirely between these two ends.

Therefore, in reading each round of sūtra and treatise, one can ask at least three layers of questions. First, where does the suchness of this round fall—is it the one suchness of form and sarvajñā, the one suchness of the suchness of the Tathāgata and the suchness of all dharmas, the suchness of the three times without duality and without difference, or that within the distinctions of the three vehicles there is no suchness to be found? Second, when it is spoken so evenly, why are there still differences of gain and loss in the same assembly—hearing the same mark of suchness, two hundred bhikṣus exhausted their outflows and attained arhatship, five thousand bodhisattvas obtained the acceptance of non-arising, and six thousand bodhisattvas also became arhats: does the verdict lie in the person, or in the Dharma? The treatise-author's answer does not lie in the high or low grade of persons, but only in one thing: 「離薩婆若心行空等故」 tr. "because they practise emptiness and the rest with a mind that has left sarvajñā", 「無般若波羅蜜、無方便力」 tr. "they had no prajñāpāramitā and no power of skilful means". Third, once suchness has been fully spoken, why speak further a whole passage on the gate of practice—if 「一切法、一切法相空，無法可得、無能得者」 tr. "all dharmas and the marks of all dharmas are empty; there is no dharma that can be obtained and no one who can obtain it", then the equal mind, the lowly intent, the mind of safety, and so on up to the practices of the ten wholesome paths—for whom are they set up? Read on along the four rounds of sūtra and treatise, and one will come at last to that summary verdict of the treatise-author: 「此中善說二諦故，二千菩薩得無生法忍」 tr. "because here the two truths were well expounded, two thousand bodhisattvas obtained the acceptance of the non-arising of dharmas"—suchness is one truth, practice is one truth; speaking of suchness without speaking of practice, or speaking of practice without speaking of suchness, in either case the benefit is small; only with both wheels complete can one get somewhere.

Reading On in the Order of the Treatise

The Great Suchness, First Part: Why "Form Is Sarvajñā" Is Not a Blurring Together; Why "Very Deep" Is Not Merely Hard to Understand; Why What All the World Cannot Believe Must Still Be Spoken; Why "This Dharma Accords with All Dharmas" and Yet Is Unobstructed, Non-arising, and without a Place; Why Being Born Following the Buddha Is Neither from Form nor Apart from Form; Why One Suchness, without Duality and without Difference, Does Not Level Out Differences; Why Six Thousand Bodhisattvas Who Met Five Hundred Buddhas Became Arhats Instead; Why a Great Bird with a Great Body and No Wings Means Being without Prajñā and without Skilful Means

What Is Being Asked

The chapter's name is a single Chinese character, 「如」 tr. "suchness", and all the difficulty of the chapter presses down on this one character. The scroll opens with the gods of the desire realm and the form realm scattering flowers and coming to praise; yet what they praise with is not words of eulogy but a verdict that almost no one dares to take up: within prajñā it is said thus—「色即是薩婆若，薩婆若即是色」 tr. "form is sarvajñā; sarvajñā is form"—and moreover 「色如相、薩婆若如相，是一如，無二無別」 tr. "the mark of suchness of form and the mark of suchness of sarvajñā are one suchness, without duality and without difference". Form is this body before one's eyes that decays, it is mountains and rivers, tiles and gravel; sarvajñā is the Buddha's omniscience. When these two ends are spoken of as one, the world of course 「所不能信」 tr. "cannot believe" it. The gods themselves know this, and so as soon as their praise is finished they add at once: very deep, hard to see, hard to understand, not to be known by thinking. The Buddha not only does not soften it, but goes to meet it and acknowledges it: precisely because this Dharma is very deep, 「佛初成道時，心樂嘿然，不樂說法」 tr. "when the Buddha first attained the path, his mind delighted in silence and did not delight in expounding the Dharma"—the silence after the attaining of the path was, it turns out, pressed out by this very sentence, 「一如，無二無別」 tr. "one suchness, without duality and without difference".

What the single unit of the First Part must answer is a threefold question. The first: is one suchness without duality and without difference a levelling of differences into a single lump? The sūtra text's answer lies not on the side of affirmation but on the side of negation—「阿耨多羅三藐三菩提，無得者、無得處、無得時」 tr. "anuttarā samyaksaṃbodhi (unsurpassed, right, and complete awakening) has no one who obtains it, no place of obtaining, no time of obtaining"; one suchness can be one precisely because there is no obtainable thing standing there to divide you from me. The second: since the world cannot believe it, why speak it? The treatise-author distinguishes 「名字一切」 tr. "the all of names" from 「實一切」 tr. "the real all", and lays down a most important order—「知者必有信，先信後知故」 tr. "one who knows must have faith, because faith comes first and knowing after"; faith is not a substitute for knowing but the threshold of knowing. The third, to which the unit gives the most space: Subhūti is praised by the gods as 「隨佛生」 tr. "born following the Buddha"—can he bear this praise or not? Subhūti does not accept it, and treats the praise as a sickness to be cured—in a row he uses four rounds of 「復次」 tr. "furthermore" to unfold 「如相故，須菩提隨佛生」 tr. "because of the mark of suchness, Subhūti is born following the Buddha", every round saying that the suchness of the Tathāgata and the suchness of Subhūti are one and the same suchness; at the end the treatise-author takes over and, with nine further rounds of 「復次」 tr. "furthermore", brings them together, right up to 「五眾色等法中假名如來」 tr. "within form and the other dharmas of the five aggregates, ‘Tathāgata’ is a provisional name", returning even the two Chinese characters 「如來」 tr. "Tathāgata" to a provisional name.

The latter half of the unit changes the scene. The gods scatter incense again, and Subhūti speaks the four sharpest lines of the whole chapter—「不從色中」 tr. "not from within form", 「不從色如中」 tr. "not from within the suchness of form", 「不離色」 tr. "not apart from form", 「不離色如」 tr. "not apart from the suchness of form"—four lines that dismantle 「隨佛生」 tr. "born following the Buddha" cleanly from every place that could be grasped. Then Śāriputra and the Buddha ask and answer about the unfindability of the suchness of form, and in the assembly bhikṣus, bhikṣuṇīs, and bodhisattvas each attain their path: two hundred bhikṣus exhaust their outflows, five hundred bhikṣuṇīs obtain the purity of the Dharma-eye, five thousand bodhisattvas obtain the acceptance of non-arising, while 「六千菩薩」 tr. "six thousand bodhisattvas", having heard the Dharma, actually 「成阿羅漢」 tr. "became arhats". This stroke is the most glaring fact of the whole chapter: bodhisattvas who had met five hundred buddhas and practised five perfections, 「無般若波羅蜜、無方便力故」 tr. "because they were without prajñāpāramitā and without the power of skilful means", realised it at the limit of reality and fell back to being śrāvakas. For this the Buddha spoke the simile of the great bird—its body a hundred yojana long and without wings, throwing itself down from the Heaven of the Thirty-three to Jambudvīpa. The greatness of the merit is precisely the reason the fall is heavy. The last question the First Part must answer lies right here: practising alike emptiness, the signless, and non-action, why does one person become a Buddha and another an arhat?

Passage by Passage

1. The gods scatter flowers and come to praise—form is sarvajñā; the mark of suchness is one suchness, without duality and without difference. The gods of the desire realm and the form realm scatter heavenly powdered sandalwood incense and lotus flowers of four colours from afar over the Buddha, come to where the Buddha is, bow their heads at the Buddha's feet, stand to one side, and only then open their mouths. What they praise falls into two parts: the first part says 「諸佛阿耨多羅三藐三菩提甚深、難見、難解、不可思惟知、微妙寂滅，智者能知，一切世間所不能信」 tr. "the anuttarā samyaksaṃbodhi of the buddhas is very deep, hard to see, hard to understand, not to be known by thinking, subtle, wondrous, and quiescent; the wise can know it; all the world cannot believe it"; the second part says why this is so—「是深般若波羅蜜中，如是說：『色即是薩婆若，薩婆若即是色……』」 tr. "within this deep prajñāpāramitā it is said thus: ‘Form is sarvajñā; sarvajñā is form…’", and so on up to the omniscience of all kinds and sarvajñā being identical with each other, while 「色如相、薩婆若如相，是一如，無二無別」 tr. "the mark of suchness of form and the mark of suchness of sarvajñā are one suchness, without duality and without difference". First one must recognise the thread of this passage: the gods are not praising the greatness of the Buddha's merit; they are pointing out the difficulty of a sentence. The difficulty is not in the wording; it is that it requires one to see the form before one's eyes and the Buddha's omniscience as one and the same thing. Only by entering the chapter from this sentence does one avoid reading 「如」 tr. "suchness" as some remote and abstruse technical name.

2. The Buddha approves and tells why he kept silent on first attaining the path—no one who obtains it, no place of obtaining, no time of obtaining. The Buddha answers 「如是！如是！」 tr. "Just so! Just so!", claiming as his own, sentence by sentence, the words the gods have cited, and at once follows with a rare account of himself: 「以是義故，佛初成道時，心樂嘿然，不樂說法。」 tr. "For this reason, when the Buddha first attained the path, his mind delighted in silence and did not delight in expounding the Dharma." Why, if it is very deep, did he not delight in speaking? The Buddha himself gives the verdict—「阿耨多羅三藐三菩提，無得者、無得處、無得時，是名諸法甚深相，所謂無有二法」 tr. "anuttarā samyaksaṃbodhi has no one who obtains it, no place of obtaining, no time of obtaining; this is called the very deep mark of all dharmas—that is, there are no two dharmas". To attain the path and yet attain nothing—no one obtains, no place of obtaining, no time of obtaining: content of this kind has nothing that can be handed over, and so between speaking and not speaking there arises a difficulty. Then the Buddha spreads out a long string in the pattern 「甚深故，是法甚深」 tr. "because it is very deep, this Dharma is very deep": space, suchness, the nature of dharmas, the limit of reality, the inconceivable, the limitless, no coming and no going, non-arising and non-ceasing, without stain and without purity, without knowing and without obtaining, and so on up to self and the knower and the seer, form and feeling, perception, constructions, and consciousness, dānapāramitā and so on up to prajñāpāramitā, inner emptiness and so on up to the emptiness of non-existent and existent dharmas, the four foundations of mindfulness and so on up to the omniscience of all kinds—not one is not very deep. This string of parallel clauses must be read as a single whole: to be very deep is not a property of some one dharma; it is the one same mark of all dharmas within suchness.

3. The gods speak again—it is not expounded for the sake of receiving form, nor for the sake of relinquishing form. The gods acknowledge that 「是所說法，一切世間所不能信」 tr. "this Dharma that is expounded, all the world cannot believe", and go further to state why the world cannot believe it: this Dharma 「不為受色故說，不為捨色故說」 tr. "is not expounded for the sake of receiving form, and is not expounded for the sake of relinquishing form", and so too with feeling, perception, constructions, and consciousness, and so on up to the fruit of the srota-āpanna, and so on up to the omniscience of all kinds; whereas 「諸世間皆受著行」 tr. "all the worlds practise receiving and clinging"—form is self, is mine, and so on up to the omniscience of all kinds is self, is mine. What matters most in this passage is the two Chinese characters 「受」 tr. "receive" and 「捨」 tr. "relinquish". Every inclination of the world goes by no road other than these two: to want it, or not to want it; and the Dharma that prajñā expounds walks neither road. The human mind has nowhere to set itself down, and so it cannot believe. It is not that the principle is too abstruse; it is that there is nothing to grasp.

4. The Buddha approves and judges that one who practises for the sake of receiving form cannot cultivate the perfections. The Buddha again answers 「如是！如是！」 tr. "Just so! Just so!", restates that it is not expounded for receiving or relinquishing, and at once brings it down onto the practitioner: 「若有菩薩為受色故行，乃至為受一切種智故行，是菩薩不能修般若波羅蜜」 tr. "if there is a bodhisattva who practises for the sake of receiving form, and so on up to practising for the sake of receiving the omniscience of all kinds, this bodhisattva cannot cultivate prajñāpāramitā"; dhyāna, vīrya, kṣānti, śīla, and so on up to dānapāramitā—none can be cultivated, and so on up to the omniscience of all kinds cannot be cultivated. Here the names of the six perfections are set out one by one: dāna is giving, śīla is morality, kṣānti is patience, vīrya is vigour, dhyāna is meditation, prajñā is wisdom—the sūtra text counts backwards from prajñā all the way down to dāna. One must see the weight of this sentence: it does not say that one who grasps at marks cultivates less or cultivates more slowly; it says he 「不能修」 tr. "cannot cultivate". When the six perfections are practised with a mind that receives and takes, what is practised is already not pāramitā.

5. Subhūti expounds—it accords with all dharmas and yet is unobstructed, non-arising, and without a place. Subhūti takes up the word and says 「是法隨順一切法」 tr. "this Dharma accords with all dharmas", and asks and answers himself why it accords: it accords with prajñā and so on up to dānapāramitā, accords with inner emptiness and so on up to the emptiness of non-existent and existent dharmas, accords with the four foundations of mindfulness and so on up to the omniscience of all kinds. After according, he speaks of a threefold mark—「是法無礙」 tr. "this Dharma is unobstructed": it does not obstruct form, and so on up to it does not obstruct the omniscience of all kinds, 「如虛空等故」 tr. "because it is equal to space", because it is equal to suchness, the nature of dharmas, the abiding of dharmas, the limit of reality, the nature of the inconceivable, and the rest, because it is equal to emptiness, the signless, non-action, and the rest; 「是法不生相」 tr. "this Dharma is of the mark of non-arising": form does not arise, and so on up to the omniscience of all kinds does not arise, all because they are unfindable; 「是法無處」 tr. "this Dharma is without a place": the place of form is unfindable, and so on up to the place of the omniscience of all kinds is unfindable. The point in this passage that is easily misread is that 「隨順」 tr. "according" and ‘unobstructed, non-arising, without a place’ seem opposed: if it can accord with all dharmas, how can it also be said to be non-arising and without a place? Subhūti's meaning is precisely that they complete each other—only because it has no substance of its own and no location can it accord with everything everywhere without obstructing anything. Only things that have bulk crowd one another out.

6. The gods praise Subhūti as born following the Buddha. Hearing these words the gods at once praise him: 「須菩提是佛子，隨佛生。何以故？須菩提所說皆與空合。」 tr. "Subhūti is a son of the Buddha, born following the Buddha. Why? Because what Subhūti says all tallies with emptiness." The criterion is given with great clarity—it is not because Subhūti's eloquence is good or his seniority deep, but because 「所說皆與空合」 tr. "what he says all tallies with emptiness". This sentence at the same time plants a problem in advance for what follows: if one is called a son of the Buddha on the strength of 「與空合」 tr. "tallying with emptiness", then are those who tally with emptiness only Subhūti? The four rounds of 「復次」 tr. "furthermore" below discuss precisely where this 「合」 tr. "tallying" actually tallies.

7. Subhūti does not accept the praise and asks in return—born following the Buddha because of the mark of suchness, not coming and not going. Subhūti does not thank them for the praise; first he lifts the words of praise up and asks them once more: 「汝等言：『須菩提是佛子，隨佛生。』云何為隨佛生？」 tr. "You say: ‘Subhūti is a son of the Buddha, born following the Buddha.’ What is being born following the Buddha?"—this is the first time in this unit that he demonstrates his way of handling praise: not denying it, not receiving it, only pressing after its reason. At once he gives the first meaning: 「如相故，須菩提隨佛生」 tr. "because of the mark of suchness, Subhūti is born following the Buddha", because 「如來如相不來不去，須菩提如相亦不來不去」 tr. "the mark of suchness of the Tathāgata does not come and does not go; the mark of suchness of Subhūti also does not come and does not go". That being born following the Buddha holds lies not in lineage from a teacher, nor in walking the same way, but in the marks of suchness on both sides being alike without coming and going. Once the praise lands on suchness, there is no longer a subject standing there to receive it with self-satisfaction.

8. The second round—born following the Buddha from the very beginning; within this mark of suchness there is no mark of suchness either. 「復次，須菩提從本已來隨佛生」 tr. "Furthermore, Subhūti from the very beginning has been born following the Buddha": it is not that he follows only now, on hearing the Dharma today; he has followed from the beginning. The reason is that 「如來如相即是一切法如相，一切法如相即是如來如相」 tr. "the mark of suchness of the Tathāgata is the mark of suchness of all dharmas; the mark of suchness of all dharmas is the mark of suchness of the Tathāgata". Most crucial is the final sentence—「是如相中亦無如相」 tr. "within this mark of suchness there is no mark of suchness either". Having gathered everything back into suchness, if this sentence were not added, 「如」 tr. "suchness" would become a new entity. At this very point the discussion takes itself apart: within suchness there is no thing called suchness to be found. This sentence is the floodgate of the whole chapter that keeps 「如」 tr. "suchness" from being gripped into a substance.

9. The third round—permanent abiding, without otherness and without difference, without a place of obstruction, without making and never not such, without thought and without difference, not far from the mark of suchness of all dharmas. This passage is the longest, raising six aspects in one breath: the suchness of the Tathāgata is of 「常住相」 tr. "the mark of permanent abiding", and the suchness of Subhūti is likewise of the mark of permanent abiding; the mark of suchness of the Tathāgata is 「無異無別」 tr. "without otherness and without difference", and the mark of suchness of Subhūti is likewise without otherness and without difference; the mark of suchness of the Tathāgata 「無有礙處」 tr. "has no place of obstruction", the mark of suchness of all dharmas likewise has no place of obstruction, and the two are 「一如，無二無別」 tr. "one suchness, without duality and without difference"; 「是如相無作，終不不如」 tr. "this mark of suchness is without making; it is never not such"; the mark of suchness of the Tathāgata is 「一切處無念無別」 tr. "everywhere without thought and without difference", the mark of suchness of Subhūti is likewise, and moreover 「不異不別、不可得」 tr. "not other and not different, and unfindable"; at the end it says 「如來如相不遠離諸法如相，是如終不不如」 tr. "the mark of suchness of the Tathāgata is not far from the mark of suchness of all dharmas; this suchness is never not such", and so 「須菩提如不有異，為隨佛生，亦無所隨」 tr. "the suchness of Subhūti has no otherness; this is being born following the Buddha, and there is nothing followed either". Layer upon layer it is the same pattern—raise one mark of the suchness of the Tathāgata, and prove that the suchness of Subhūti is the same in this one mark. And the closing phrase 「亦無所隨」 tr. "there is nothing followed either" is the eye of the needle of the whole passage: following all the way to the end, there is not even anything followed. If there were a Buddha out in front to be followed, being born following the Buddha would once more become a relation between two things.

10. The fourth round—not past, not future, not present. 「復次，如來如相不過去、不未來、不現在，諸法如相亦不過去、不未來、不現在，是故須菩提為隨佛生。」 tr. "Furthermore, the mark of suchness of the Tathāgata is not past, not future, not present; the mark of suchness of all dharmas is also not past, not future, not present; therefore Subhūti is born following the Buddha." The preceding rounds spoke in terms of space and of marks and appearances; this round speaks in terms of time. If suchness fell into any one of the three times, there would be arising and passing away; only by not falling into the three times can one speak of 「從本已來」 tr. "from the very beginning". This round echoes the eighth: the 「本」 tr. "beginning" in being born following the Buddha from the very beginning is not some moment long ago; it is not being within time.

11. The fifth round—the suchness of the three times and the suchness of the Tathāgata, the suchness of form and so on up to the suchness of the omniscience of all kinds and the suchness of the Tathāgata, are one suchness, without duality and without difference. The previous round said it does not fall into the three times; this round goes a step further and says they are not within each other: 「如來如不在過去如中，過去如亦不在如來如中」 tr. "the suchness of the Tathāgata is not within the suchness of the past, and the suchness of the past is not within the suchness of the Tathāgata", and the future and the present are all likewise; then it gathers all into 「過去未來現在如、如來如，一如，無二無別」 tr. "the suchness of past, future, and present and the suchness of the Tathāgata are one suchness, without duality and without difference". Then from time it pushes on to all dharmas: the suchness of form, the suchness of feeling, perception, constructions, and consciousness, the suchness of self and so on up to the suchness of the knower and the seer, the suchness of dānapāramitā and so on up to the suchness of prajñāpāramitā, the suchness of inner emptiness and so on up to the suchness of the emptiness of non-existent and existent dharmas, the suchness of the four foundations of mindfulness and so on up to the suchness of the omniscience of all kinds—each one with the suchness of the Tathāgata 「一如，無二無別」 tr. "one suchness, without duality and without difference". One must see clearly the way of inference here: first it says ‘not within it’, then it says 「一如，無二無別」 tr. "one suchness, without duality and without difference". Not containing or including each other and yet one suchness—this is exactly the precise meaning of 「一」 tr. "one" here: not a merging, but that there were never two to merge.

12. The Buddha's decisive seal—because he obtains this suchness he is called Tathāgata. When Subhūti has finished his five rounds, the Buddha puts forth a single decisive verdict: 「須菩提！菩薩摩訶薩得是如故，名為如來。」 tr. "Subhūti! The bodhisattva-mahāsattva, because he obtains this suchness, is called Tathāgata." The name Tathāgata is established not from the marks and signs, nor from supernormal power, but from obtaining this suchness. And according to the treatise-author's explanation below, this sentence is precisely the Buddha's words—the treatise marks it itself, saying 「佛語須菩提：『是名為如，佛因此如故，名為如來。』」 tr. "The Buddha said to Subhūti: ‘This is called suchness; because of this suchness the Buddha is called Tathāgata.’" Therefore, though here there is no wording 「佛告」 tr. "the Buddha told", the speaker must not be mistaken for Subhūti calling himself by name. On reaching this sentence one should look back to the eighth's 「是如相中亦無如相」 tr. "within this mark of suchness there is no mark of suchness either"—only an obtaining that obtains nothing is what the Tathāgata obtains.

13. When the chapter on the Mark of Suchness was spoken, the great earth shook in six ways. Sūtra ① closes with a sentence of narration: 「說是〈如相品〉時，是三千大千世界大地六種振動」 tr. "when this chapter on the Mark of Suchness was spoken, the great earth of this three-thousand great-thousand world shook in six ways"—the east rose and the west sank, the west rose and the east sank, the south rose and the north sank, the north rose and the south sank, the centre rose and the four sides sank, the four sides rose and the centre sank. The six marks of the six kinds of shaking each form a pair, each of the two overturning the other—and these marks of themselves mirror the meaning of the chapter: wherever something rises there must be somewhere that sinks, and there is not one place that is a fixed and real footing. This is not an ornamental stroke; it is 「無二無別」 tr. "without duality and without difference" played out on the great earth.

14. The treatise-author's first question and answer—why it is at times praised as very deep; the simile of the eddies of river water. At the very opening of the scroll the treatise-author asks: 「若般若波羅蜜無不甚深，何以或時讚甚深？」 tr. "If prajñāpāramitā is nowhere not very deep, why is it at times praised as very deep?" Since prajñā is very deep everywhere, why must the two Chinese characters rendered here as ‘very deep’ be specially singled out? Answer: within prajñā, 「或時分別諸法空，是淺；或時說『世間法即同涅槃』，是深」 tr. "at times all dharmas are discriminated as empty, and this is shallow; at times it is said that ‘the dharmas of the world are the same as nirvāṇa’, and this is deep". Form and the other dharmas are the Buddha's Dharma; the hearer believes the Buddha's words in his mind, but his own wisdom does not reach it, and therefore he says it is very deep. It closes with a simile: 「譬如河水，有洄復深處、有淺處。」 tr. "It is like the water of a river, which has eddies and deep places and has shallow places." In this passage one misreading must be guarded against—shallow and deep do not mean that prajñā itself is thick or thin; it is that one and the same river shows people different degrees of difficulty at different places. What is called very deep is a name set up with respect to the hearer's wisdom not reaching it.

15. The second question and answer—if all the world cannot believe it, what is the use of speaking it; the all of names and the real all. The question: since the Dharma the gods praise cannot be believed by all the world, what is the point of speaking it? Answer: 「一切有二種：一者、名字一切，二者、實一切。」 tr. "‘All’ is of two kinds: one, the all of names; two, the real all." The all spoken of here is the all in name: because the greater number do not believe, it says 「一切」 tr. "all". This is a most practical rule for reading the sūtras: in the sūtra's 「一切世間所不能信」 tr. "all the world cannot believe", the 「一切」 tr. "all" is not a quantifier meaning exhaustive without remainder; it is a name set up with respect to the greater part. If one took it as the real all, the sūtra text would contradict itself—if not a single person could believe, the Buddha's expounding of the Dharma would be in vain. The treatise-author goes on to say 「如此中說『微妙寂滅，智者能知』，知者必有信，先信後知故」 tr. "as it says here, ‘subtle, wondrous, and quiescent; the wise can know it’—one who knows must have faith, because faith comes first and knowing after", and the order of faith and knowing is settled by this.

16. Where faith lies—when wisdom has known it, that is called faith. 「復次，是般若波羅蜜，惟佛能知。眾生聞所說而信者，此中不名為信；智慧知已，名為信。」 tr. "Furthermore, this prajñāpāramitā only the Buddha can know. Beings who hear what is said and believe it—here that is not called faith; when wisdom has known it, that is called faith." This sentence and the preceding passage's 「先信後知」 tr. "faith first and knowing after" seem opposed, but in fact they belong to two different places: at the point of entry one must first believe and only then can one know; at the point of culmination only when wisdom illuminates and sees does it count as true faith. Assent that arises from hearing others speak, the treatise-author does not allow to be called faith. Taking the two passages together, the word faith has two levels, shallow and deep, which must not be confused—shallow faith is the gate, deep faith is the fruit.

17. The third question and answer—if only the Buddha can know, why say the wise can know? Question: 「若爾者，何以言『微妙，智者能知』？」 tr. "If that is so, why does it say ‘subtle and wondrous; the wise can know it’?" Just above it was said that only the Buddha can know; here it is said that the wise can know—is that not contradictory? Answer: 「一切世間無能遍盡知諸佛智者，寂滅，智者能知少分。」 tr. "In all the world there is none who can know the wisdom of the buddhas completely and exhaustively; it is quiescent, and the wise can know a small part of it." The joint lies in the difference between 「少分」 tr. "a small part" and 「遍盡」 tr. "completely and exhaustively": the one who knows completely and exhaustively is only the Buddha; what the wise know is a small part. The contradiction is resolved. When, in reading a prajñā treatise, one meets statements that contradict each other before and after, this passage is a model—most often a difference of quantity has had its word left out.

18. The proof of the small part—the srota-āpanna severs the three fetters; the paths increase in turn. The treatise-author gives proof: 「如須陀洹於無上道得少分，所謂斷三結；如是諸道，展轉增多。」 tr. "As the srota-āpanna obtains a small part of the unsurpassed path, namely the severing of the three fetters; in this way the paths increase more and more in turn." What the srota-āpanna obtains on the unsurpassed path is very little, yet it is truly obtained; from there it increases stage by stage in turn. It closes with a proof from the contrary: 「若世間都不信者，云何有諸道？」 tr. "If the world did not believe at all, how would there be the paths?" Since there really are people of the srota-āpanna and so on up to all the paths, it is evident that the world is not without a single one who can believe. The answer to this question comes down at last on fact and not on argument.

19. Prajñā and anuttarā samyaksaṃbodhi differ in name and are one in substance. 「阿耨多羅三藐三菩提即是般若波羅蜜，但名字異——在菩薩心中為般若，在佛心中名阿耨多羅三藐三菩提。」 tr. "Anuttarā samyaksaṃbodhi is prajñāpāramitā; only the names differ—in the bodhisattva's mind it is prajñā; in the Buddha's mind it is called anuttarā samyaksaṃbodhi." The same dharma is named prajñā in the causal position and named unsurpassed awakening in the position of the fruit. This judgement is most important: if prajñā and awakening were two things, then what one who practises prajñā tends toward would be some other thing; since they differ in name and are one in substance, to practise prajñā is already to be within awakening. The treatise-author then sets two sentences of the sūtra side by side—「是中說『色等法即是薩婆若，薩婆若即是色等法』」 tr. "here it says ‘form and the other dharmas are sarvajñā; sarvajñā is form and the other dharmas’", and 「此中說『色等法如、薩婆若如，無二無別』」 tr. "here it says ‘the suchness of form and the other dharmas and the suchness of sarvajñā are without duality and without difference’"—the former sentence speaks of identity in terms of dharmas, the latter speaks of oneness in terms of suchness; the two sentences have one meaning.

20. The Buddha further states the cause and condition—suchness is the name for the real mark of form and the other dharmas; the simile of burning sandalwood and mixed woods. The treatise-author explains why the Buddha approved the gods: 「佛可諸天子意，更說因緣：『如名色等諸法真實相。』」 tr. "The Buddha approved the gods' meaning and further stated the cause and condition: ‘Suchness is the name for the real mark of form and the other dharmas.’" Then comes the simile: 「譬如除宮殿及諸陋廬，如燒栴檀及雜木，其處虛空無異……」 tr. "As when palaces and mean huts are removed, or as when sandalwood and mixed woods are burned, the space where they stood is no different…" Palaces and mean huts differ in nobility, sandalwood and mixed woods differ in fragrance and stench, yet once they are torn down or burned away, the space that remains is no different. The difference between form and sarvajñā is just like the difference between palaces and mean huts; 「求其實，皆是如」 tr. "seeking their reality, all are suchness". This simile also explains the sūtra's silence on first attaining the path—「知甚深法，凡夫人難悟故」 tr. "because he knew that the very deep Dharma is hard for ordinary people to awaken to". What must be noticed in the simile is the two Chinese characters 「除」 tr. "remove" and 「燒」 tr. "burn": one does not seek space outside the things; one exhausts their reality right in these very things.

21. The three causes of being very deep. 「復次，是法無二故甚深，如虛空故甚深，如、法性等甚深故甚深。」 tr. "Furthermore, this Dharma is very deep because it is without duality; very deep because it is like space; very deep because suchness, the nature of dharmas, and the rest are very deep." The treatise-author gathers the long string of very-deeps that the Buddha spoke above into three: no duality, like space, and suchness, the nature of dharmas, and the rest being very deep in themselves. The first speaks in terms of principle, the second in terms of simile, the third in terms of the names of dharmas. When one meets a long string of parallel clauses in reading a sūtra, one can learn this method—first find how many heads it can be gathered into, then make each head concrete in turn; only then will one not be left with nothing but a string of sounds.

22. The treatise-author restates the gods' second address—knowing that this Dharma has no mark that can be taken. The treatise-author restates the sūtra text in the third person: 「爾時，諸天子知是法無可取相，白佛言：『是所說法，一切世間所不能信，是法不為受色等法故說。』」 tr. "At that time the gods, knowing that this Dharma has no mark that can be taken, said to the Buddha: ‘This Dharma that is expounded, all the world cannot believe; this Dharma is not expounded for the sake of receiving form and the other dharmas.’" In the restatement one judgement is added that the sūtra text does not have—「知是法無可取相」 tr. "knowing that this Dharma has no mark that can be taken". This is the treatise-author supplying the working of mind behind the gods' words: the gods say it is not expounded for receiving or relinquishing because they already know that this Dharma has no mark that can be taken. Here the speakers are still the gods; it is not a separate view set up by the treatise-author, and in reading one must not mistake it for a new party to the dialogue.

23. The Buddha approves their words—one who practises for the sake of receiving form and the rest cannot cultivate the merits. 「佛可其言，『若有菩薩為受色等故行菩薩道，不能修般若波羅蜜等諸功德』。」 tr. "The Buddha approved their words: ‘If there is a bodhisattva who practises the bodhisattva path for the sake of receiving form and the rest, he cannot cultivate prajñāpāramitā and the other merits.’" Of the Buddha's answer to the gods in Sūtra ① the treatise-author gives only a one-sentence summary and does not unfold it further. Why so brief? Because the meaning has already appeared before—when one practises by grasping at marks, what is practised is not a perfection; that was judged above. Between detail and brevity the explanation has its own sense of measure: what was not said before is given in detail; what was said before is given briefly.

24. Subhūti tells the cause and condition of being unobstructed—the simile of the mark of space in a wall and the peg. The treatise-author explains what Subhūti said, 「是般若波羅蜜相，隨順一切法，無所障礙」 tr. "this mark of prajñāpāramitā accords with all dharmas and has nothing that obstructs it", first adding a sentence on why it is unobstructed—「於般若波羅蜜亦不著」 tr. "he does not cling even to prajñāpāramitā"; then saying that the cause and condition of not obstructing is 「如虛空等故」 tr. "because it is equal to space". Then comes the simile: 「譬如壁中先有空相，小兒以橛釘之，力少故不入，大力者能入……」 tr. "As in a wall there is already the mark of space; a small child drives a peg into it, and because his strength is small it does not go in, while one of great strength can drive it in…" The wall was never truly solid; within it there was already the mark of space; it is only that the small child's strength is small and he cannot drive the peg in. 「行者亦如是，色等諸法中，自有如實相，智慧力少故，不能令空，大智者能知。」 tr. "The practitioner is likewise: within form and the other dharmas there is of itself the mark of things as they really are; because the power of his wisdom is small, he cannot make them empty, while one of great wisdom can know it." One must aim precisely at what this simile breaks: what it breaks is not ‘the dharmas are originally not empty and the power of wisdom can make them empty’—quite the opposite—the mark of emptiness is there from the start, and what the power of wisdom reaches is only 「能入」 tr. "can drive it in" and 「能知」 tr. "can know"; it does not create an emptiness. The last sentence: 「是故說：『諸法無礙，如虛空平等。』」 tr. "Therefore it is said: ‘All dharmas are unobstructed, equal like space.’"

25. Non-arising and no place of abiding—if a non-arising dharma were findable, it would not be ultimate emptiness. 「色等法不生，亦不可得，以是故名『不生』。」 tr. "Form and the other dharmas do not arise, and they are also unfindable; for this reason it is called ‘non-arising’." The treatise-author at once adds a sentence that goes to the vital point: 「非但色等不生，若不生法可得，則非畢竟空，非名無得。無住處亦如是。」 tr. "Not only do form and the rest not arise; if a dharma of non-arising were findable, it would not be ultimate emptiness, and would not be called without obtaining. No place of abiding is likewise." This is one of the sharpest self-dismantlings in this unit. Hearing that form and the rest do not arise, the easiest thing for people to do is to seize the conclusion 「不生」 tr. "non-arising"; the treatise-author cuts it off on the spot—if there were a dharma called non-arising that could be found, ultimate emptiness would not hold. Only when the meaning of non-arising, together with the two Chinese characters 「不生」 tr. "non-arising", is unfindable, is it ultimate emptiness. No place of abiding follows the same principle.

26. The treatise-author restates the gods' praise—what he knows and what he says all tally with emptiness. 「爾時，諸天子白佛言：『世尊！須菩提隨佛生。何以故？所知所說皆與空合。』」 tr. "At that time the gods said to the Buddha: ‘World-Honored One! Subhūti is born following the Buddha. Why? Because what he knows and what he says all tally with emptiness.’" The treatise-author restates the sūtra's praise as the starting point of the long explanation of 「隨佛生」 tr. "born following the Buddha" below. The sūtra text originally reads 「所說皆與空合」 tr. "what he says all tallies with emptiness"; in restating it the treatise-author writes 「所知所說」 tr. "what he knows and what he says", one more Chinese character, rendered here as ‘know’—besides what is said, what is known is also raised, the meaning being to mark that this praise does not stop at words. Here the speakers are still the gods; the treatise-author is only citing the sūtra, not setting up a new question.

27. The three kinds of seed—born not in accord, born in accord, born superior. 「復次，經說有三種子：一者、不隨順生，二者、隨順生，三者、勝生。」 tr. "Furthermore, the sūtras say there are three kinds of seed: first, born not in accord; second, born in accord; third, born superior." Seed here has the sense of offspring: born not in accord is an unworthy son; born in accord is a son who takes after his father; born superior is a son who surpasses his father. The treatise-author then points out how worldly dharmas and the Buddha's Dharma differ here—「世人皆願二種子：隨順子，勝子。佛法中惟欲一種：隨順生，以無有勝佛故。」 tr. "Worldly people all wish for two kinds of seed: the son in accord and the superior son. In the Buddha's Dharma only one kind is wished for: born in accord, because there is none who surpasses the Buddha." Worldly parents all hope their children will outdo them; in the Buddha's Dharma only the one kind, in accord, is sought, and the reason is very simple and clear—there is no one who can surpass the Buddha. The standing of the name 「隨佛生」 tr. "born following the Buddha" is fixed by this classification.

28. The sons of the Buddha are five—born from his mouth, born from the Dharma; the pratyekabuddha is not among them. 「佛子有五，皆從口生、法生：須陀洹乃至阿羅漢，入正位菩薩。」 tr. "The sons of the Buddha are five, all born from his mouth, born from the Dharma: the srota-āpanna and so on up to the arhat, and the bodhisattva who has entered the right position." The four stations from the srota-āpanna to the arhat, together with the bodhisattva who has entered the right position, make five kinds, all born from hearing the Dharma the Buddha spoke, and so it says born from his mouth, born from the Dharma. Then he speaks of one who is not counted among them: 「辟支佛雖佛法中種因緣，無佛時自能得道，不得言從佛口生，因緣遠故。」 tr. "Though the pratyekabuddha planted causes and conditions within the Buddha's Dharma, he can attain the path by himself at a time when there is no Buddha; it cannot be said that he is born from the Buddha's mouth, because the causes and conditions are distant." It is not that the pratyekabuddha has no affinity with the Dharma; it is that the affinity is distant—though in the past he planted the cause, in this life he appears at a time without a Buddha and awakens by himself, not through the Buddha's mouth. This distinction gives the name 「佛子」 tr. "son of the Buddha" a clear boundary: not everyone who attains the path is called a son of the Buddha; he must, in this life, be born from the Buddha's mouth and from the Dharma.

29. Subhūti belongs to those born in accord—the dharma he practises cannot be broken or ruined, like space. 「諸漏盡者，是隨順生。須菩提於漏盡中，常樂畢竟空，是隨順生。」 tr. "Those whose outflows are exhausted are born in accord. Subhūti, among those whose outflows are exhausted, always delights in ultimate emptiness; he is born in accord." All whose outflows are exhausted belong to those born in accord, and Subhūti among them in particular always delights in ultimate emptiness. Why does delighting in ultimate emptiness count as following the Buddha? The treatise-author answers himself: 「所行法不可破壞如虛空，佛法如是相，是名隨佛生。」 tr. "The dharma he practises cannot be broken or ruined, like space; the Buddha's Dharma is of such a mark; this is called being born following the Buddha." The criterion lies not in status but in the mark of the dharma practised—the mark of the Buddha's Dharma is that it cannot be broken or ruined, like space; whoever's practice matches this mark is born following the Buddha. This sentence turns the gods' praise into a standard that can be tested.

30. The question—why is the bodhisattva who has entered the Dharma-position not said to be born in accord with the Buddha? Since the preceding passage took the dharma practised as the criterion, a difficulty arises at once: 「何以不說入法位菩薩隨順佛生？」 tr. "Why is the bodhisattva who has entered the Dharma-position not said to be born in accord with the Buddha?" Does not what the bodhisattva who has entered the Dharma-position practises match the mark of the Buddha's Dharma even better? Why does the sūtra single out Subhūti and not them? This question is asked exactly rightly—it forces the criterion of the preceding passage to account for its own scope. The treatise-author does not give a single decisive answer to it but lists the views of three schools, which is a special stroke in the form of this unit.

31. The first ‘someone says’—the difference between outflows exhausted and not exhausted. 「有人言：漏未盡故不說，須菩提漏盡故說。」 tr. "Someone says: because their outflows are not yet exhausted, they are not spoken of; because Subhūti's outflows are exhausted, he is spoken of." The first school judges by whether the outflows are exhausted or not: the bodhisattva who has entered the Dharma-position still has subtle outflows not yet exhausted, while Subhūti's outflows are already exhausted, and so the sūtra raises Subhūti. This view is the most direct; it relies on the preceding passage's words 「諸漏盡者，是隨順生」 tr. "those whose outflows are exhausted are born in accord", and follows them without complication.

32. The second ‘someone says’—near the gate of nirvāṇa without remainder, and going back and forth in birth and death. 「有人言：入無餘涅槃者，是第一清淨。阿羅漢末後身住有餘涅槃，近無餘涅槃門故說。菩薩雖有深利智慧，往返生死中，是故不說。」 tr. "Someone says: one who enters nirvāṇa without remainder is foremost in purity. The arhat in his final body abides in nirvāṇa with remainder and is near the gate of nirvāṇa without remainder, and so he is spoken of. The bodhisattva, though he has deep and keen wisdom, goes back and forth within birth and death, and therefore he is not spoken of." The second school speaks not in terms of outflows but in terms of where one is headed: the arhat has already arrived at the edge of the gate of nirvāṇa, while the bodhisattva goes deep into birth and death, going back and forth to deliver beings. This view turns the reason for not speaking of him from ‘insufficient’ to ‘not on the same road’—the bodhisattva is not said to be born following, not because he is lower, but because he is still walking back and forth.

33. The third ‘someone says’—the two kinds of prajñā, and the great bodhisattvas with bodies born of the Dharma-nature. The third school is the most detailed: 「般若有二種：一者、唯與大菩薩說，二者、三乘共說。共聲聞說中，須菩提是隨佛生；但與菩薩說時，不說須菩提隨佛生。」 tr. "Prajñā is of two kinds: first, that expounded only to the great bodhisattvas; second, that expounded in common to the three vehicles. In what is expounded in common with the śrāvakas, Subhūti is born following the Buddha; when it is expounded only to the bodhisattvas, Subhūti is not said to be born following the Buddha." The reason for not speaking of it lies in the occasion of the expounding. Why, when it is expounded only to the bodhisattvas, is there no place for the śrāvakas? Because 「法性生身大菩薩，是中無有結業生身，但有變化生身，滅三毒、出三界，教化眾生、淨佛世界故，住於世間，此中都無一切聲聞人」 tr. "the great bodhisattvas with bodies born of the Dharma-nature—among them there is no body born of fetters and karma, there is only a body born of transformation; they have extinguished the three poisons and left the three realms, and abide in the world in order to teach and transform beings and purify buddha-worlds; here there are no śrāvakas at all". The Buddha and the bodhisattvas share one mind of great kindness and compassion, and so the bodhisattva is called born following; 「須菩提但取涅槃故，不說隨生」 tr. "because Subhūti takes only nirvāṇa, he is not said to be born following". The last sentence determines where this sūtra belongs: 「此經共二乘說。」 tr. "This sūtra is expounded in common with the two vehicles." The three schools are set side by side and the treatise-author does not judge which is right—this is the practice, consistent throughout this work, of recording without judging; the reader should let the three views stand together, and should not take up one view for himself and discard the other two.

34. Subhūti does not accept the gods' praise—the suchness of all dharmas is of one mark, namely the signless. 「諸天雖讚，不應受，語諸天子言：『諸法如一相，所謂無相，是因緣故隨佛生，如不異故。』」 tr. "Though the gods praise him, he should not accept it, and he said to the gods: ‘The suchness of all dharmas is of one mark, namely the signless; by this cause and condition he is born following the Buddha, because suchness is not other.’" The treatise-author speaks for Subhūti the reason for not accepting the praise: the 「隨佛生」 tr. "born following the Buddha" that the praise points to is itself a matter of suchness; suchness is of one mark, and one mark is the signless, so there is no one who can accept this praise. This sentence at the same time sets the general outline for the ten rounds of bringing-together below—all the 「復次」 tr. "furthermore" that follow say one and the same thing: suchness is not other.

35. Citing the sūtra to prove the first round—not coming and not going. 「如經中說如：『如來如相不來不去，須菩提如相亦不來不去。』」 tr. "As the sūtra speaks of suchness: ‘The mark of suchness of the Tathāgata does not come and does not go; the mark of suchness of Subhūti also does not come and does not go.’" The treatise-author first brings the sūtra's original sentence back in as the starting point of the ten rounds of bringing-together. The form of the Expository Treatise can be seen here: first cite the sūtra, then unfold the meaning; citing the sūtra uses the sūtra's own words, unfolding the meaning uses its own words, and the two are not mixed.

36. The second round—the suchness of the Tathāgata is ultimately empty; the suchness of all dharmas includes the suchness of Subhūti. 「復次，如來如畢竟空，一切法如亦畢竟空。一切法如中攝須菩提如，是故須菩提用如來如故隨佛生。」 tr. "Furthermore, the suchness of the Tathāgata is ultimately empty, and the suchness of all dharmas is also ultimately empty. Within the suchness of all dharmas the suchness of Subhūti is included; therefore Subhūti, by means of the suchness of the Tathāgata, is born following the Buddha." This round adds one more layer, the frame of an inference: first both ends are set up as ultimately empty, then it is said that the suchness of Subhūti is included by the suchness of all dharmas, so that he can be born following the Buddha by way of the suchness of the Tathāgata. The several rounds below all use this frame—raise one virtue of the suchness of the Tathāgata, prove that the suchness of all dharmas equally has this virtue, and conclude with the suchness of Subhūti entering the suchness of all dharmas. Once this frame is recognised, the nine rounds of 「復次」 tr. "furthermore" no longer read as repetition.

37. The third round—without recollection, imagining, and discrimination; permanently abiding; like space. 「復次，如如來如無憶想分別、常住、如虛空，須菩提如亦如是。」 tr. "Furthermore, just as the suchness of the Tathāgata is without recollection, imagining, and discrimination, permanently abiding, and like space, the suchness of Subhūti is likewise." The three virtues raised in this round are precisely the meaning, in Sūtra ①'s third round of 「復次」 tr. "furthermore", of 「常住相」 tr. "the mark of permanent abiding" and 「一切處無念無別」 tr. "everywhere without thought and without difference". Here the treatise-author turns the sūtra's words into the words of a treatise-writer and says them once again; this is not superfluous—the sūtra text's weight is on listing the marks, the treatise-author's weight is on proving the inclusion, and the same mark bears different duties in the two layers.

38. The fourth round—because of unobstructed liberation, there is no impediment among all dharmas. 「復次，如如來如得無礙解脫故，一切法中無罣礙；一切法如亦如是，於一切法中亦無罣礙。如來如、一切法如，一如無異；須菩提如亦入一切法如故，是以隨佛生。」 tr. "Furthermore, just as the suchness of the Tathāgata, because it has obtained unobstructed liberation, is without impediment among all dharmas, the suchness of all dharmas is likewise, and is also without impediment among all dharmas. The suchness of the Tathāgata and the suchness of all dharmas are one suchness without otherness; because the suchness of Subhūti also enters the suchness of all dharmas, he is therefore born following the Buddha." This round speaks in terms of being unobstructed. Note that the phrase 「得無礙解脫」 tr. "has obtained unobstructed liberation" is a virtue of the fruit spoken on the side of the Tathāgata, and the treatise-author at once turns it into a universal mark of suchness—it is not that the Tathāgata alone has a kind of unobstructedness; it is that suchness itself is unobstructed, and the Tathāgata is unobstructed because he has obtained this suchness.

39. The fifth round—the mark of suchness of all dharmas is without making and without a maker. 「復次，諸法如相無作、無作者，如來如相亦如是；須菩提如，一切法如攝，故隨佛生。」 tr. "Furthermore, the mark of suchness of all dharmas is without making and without a maker, and the mark of suchness of the Tathāgata is likewise; the suchness of Subhūti is included by the suchness of all dharmas, and so he is born following the Buddha." This round speaks in terms of making and the maker. The previous round broke obstruction; this round breaks making. The phrase without a maker is especially important: since there is no one who can make, 「隨佛生」 tr. "born following the Buddha" is also not someone causing someone to be born.

40. The sixth round—everywhere always without recollection, imagining, and discrimination. 「復次，如如來如相，一切處常無憶想分別；須菩提如，一切法如攝，故隨佛生。」 tr. "Furthermore, just as the mark of suchness of the Tathāgata is everywhere always without recollection, imagining, and discrimination, the suchness of Subhūti is included by the suchness of all dharmas, and so he is born following the Buddha." This round raises being without recollection, imagining, and discrimination just as the third round did, but adds the four Chinese characters 「一切處常」 tr. "everywhere always", saying it once more in terms of the universality of place and time. The same virtue spoken in two rounds shows exactly where the treatise-author does not shrink from repetition—he wants the reader to run into the same thing again and again on different facets.

41. The seventh round—the suchness of the Tathāgata is not apart from the suchness of all dharmas; rightly contemplating all dharmas is called Buddha. 「復次，如來如相不離一切法如。正觀一切法，名為佛；一切法是因緣，佛是果報，是故說：『如來如不離一切法如。』」 tr. "Furthermore, the mark of suchness of the Tathāgata is not apart from the suchness of all dharmas. Rightly contemplating all dharmas is called Buddha; all dharmas are the causes and conditions, the Buddha is the fruit and retribution; therefore it is said: ‘The suchness of the Tathāgata is not apart from the suchness of all dharmas.’" This round brings out an exceedingly weighty sentence—「正觀一切法，名為佛」 tr. "rightly contemplating all dharmas is called Buddha". The Buddha is not some separate thing; it is the name of one who rightly contemplates all dharmas; all dharmas are the cause, the Buddha is the fruit. Since cause and fruit are not apart, the suchness of the Tathāgata and the suchness of all dharmas are naturally not apart. At the end it concludes: 「是如實故常如，無不如時；須菩提如亦如是不異，故隨佛生，亦無法可隨。」 tr. "Because this suchness is real, it is always such; there is no time when it is not such; the suchness of Subhūti is likewise not other, and so he is born following the Buddha, and there is no dharma that can be followed either." Again a closing phrase of 「無所隨」 tr. "nothing followed", at one with the way the third round of Sūtra ① closes.

42. The eighth round—passing out beyond the three times. 「復次，如來如相無憶想分別、出過三世，一切法如亦如是；須菩提如亦出三世，是故隨佛生。」 tr. "Furthermore, the mark of suchness of the Tathāgata is without recollection, imagining, and discrimination and passes out beyond the three times, and the suchness of all dharmas is likewise; the suchness of Subhūti also goes out of the three times, and therefore he is born following the Buddha." This round speaks in terms of time, corresponding to Sūtra ①'s 「不過去、不未來、不現在」 tr. "not past, not future, not present". Passing out beyond the three times does not mean that it has some other place outside the three times; it means that it is not gathered in by the three times.

43. The ninth round—emptiness does not abide in emptiness; the simile of space not abiding in space; the three times without end and without limit. 「復次，如來如不在過去如中，何以故？如來空，過去亦畢竟空，是故空不在空中住；譬如虛空不住虛空中。」 tr. "Furthermore, the suchness of the Tathāgata is not within the suchness of the past. Why? The Tathāgata is empty, and the past is also ultimately empty; therefore emptiness does not abide within emptiness—just as space does not abide within space." This is the most beautiful explanation of the whole passage—the sūtra says ‘not within it’, and people mostly take it to mean that two things repel each other; the treatise-author instead says that both sides are empty, and emptiness has no place in which to abide, so they are not within each other. The simile uses space not abiding in space, direct and to the point. Then he explains the sūtra's 「三世如、如來如，不二不分別」 tr. "the suchness of the three times and the suchness of the Tathāgata are not two and not discriminated": the suchness of the three times is empty, signless, without arising and without ceasing, and so on, and the suchness of the Tathāgata is likewise; the suchness of the three times is without obstruction, the past is without end and without limit, the future and the present are also without end and without limit, and the suchness of the Tathāgata is likewise; 「此三世十方無窮無邊，須菩提如亦如是」 tr. "these three times and ten directions are without end and without limit, and the suchness of Subhūti is likewise". Not within each other and yet not two—this is the meaning of the fifth round of Sūtra ①, and only here does the treatise-author supply its reason in full.

44. The tenth round—the suchness of the five aggregates and the suchness of the Tathāgata are without duality and without difference; six things that may not be said; ‘Tathāgata’ as a provisional name. 「復次，五眾如乃至一切種智如、如來如，無二無別。何以故？色等諸法和合故有如來。」 tr. "Furthermore, the suchness of the five aggregates and so on up to the suchness of the omniscience of all kinds, and the suchness of the Tathāgata, are without duality and without difference. Why? Because form and the other dharmas come together, there is the Tathāgata." From this come six sentences of negation: it may not be said 「但是色等法」 tr. "it is only form and the other dharmas"; it may not be said 「離色等法」 tr. "apart from form and the other dharmas"; it may not be said 「色等法在如來中」 tr. "form and the other dharmas are within the Tathāgata"; it may not be said 「如來在色等法中」 tr. "the Tathāgata is within form and the other dharmas"; it may not be said 「色等法屬如來」 tr. "form and the other dharmas belong to the Tathāgata"; it may not be said 「無如來」 tr. "there is no Tathāgata". The six sentences form pairs—identity and separation, being within and containing, belonging and total absence—sealing off one by one every possible relation between the Tathāgata and the five aggregates, and at the end leaving only one sentence: 「五眾色等法中假名如來。」 tr. "Within form and the other dharmas of the five aggregates, ‘Tathāgata’ is a provisional name." Then it closes on suchness: 「如來如即是一切法如，是故說『色等法如、如來如，不二不別』。」 tr. "The suchness of the Tathāgata is the suchness of all dharmas; therefore it is said, ‘the suchness of form and the other dharmas and the suchness of the Tathāgata are not two and not different’." The last sentence judges the views of ordinary people and sages: 「凡夫人見有二有別，聖人觀無二無別；聖人可信，凡夫人所見不可信。」 tr. "Ordinary people see duality and difference; the sages contemplate it as without duality and without difference; the sages can be believed; what ordinary people see cannot be believed." This chapter returns even the two Chinese characters 「如來」 tr. "Tathāgata" to a provisional name, and only here does it reach the bottom.

45. The Buddha's decisive seal—Tathāgata means one who, practising as it really is, has come into the Buddha's Dharma. 「佛語須菩提：『是名為如，佛因此如故，名為如來。』」 tr. "The Buddha said to Subhūti: ‘This is called suchness; because of this suchness the Buddha is called Tathāgata.’" The treatise-author then explains the meaning of the name Tathāgata: 「如來者，如實行來到佛法中。」 tr. "Tathāgata means one who, practising as it really is, has come into the Buddha's Dharma." Practising as it really is, and by practising coming into the Buddha's Dharma—therefore he is called Tathāgata. This explanation returns Tathāgata from an honorific title to a course of practice—such is the reality of what is practised; come is where the practice arrives. The sentence in the twelfth passage on Sūtra ① is explained by this, and that its speaker is the Buddha is also made certain by this sentence.

46. When this suchness was spoken, the earth shook in six ways, as said above. Treatise ① closes with one sentence: 「說是如時，地六種震動，如上說。」 tr. "When this suchness was spoken, the earth shook in six ways, as said above." The sūtra text has already listed the six marks in detail; the treatise-author does not list them again, but only ties them on with the three Chinese characters 「如上說」 tr. "as said above". This too is the form of the Expository Treatise—marks the sūtra text has already made clear, the treatise does not bring out again.

47. The gods scatter incense again and praise Subhūti as born following the Buddha by the suchness of the Tathāgata. Sūtra ② begins afresh: the gods of the desire realm and the gods of the form realm scatter heavenly powdered sandalwood incense over the Buddha 「及散須菩提上」 tr. "and scatter it over Subhūti", and say to the Buddha: 「未曾有也！世尊！須菩提以如來如隨佛生。」 tr. "It has never been before, World-Honored One! Subhūti, by the suchness of the Tathāgata, is born following the Buddha." Read against the scattering of flowers at the opening of Sūtra ①, this passage has one more joint—this time the incense is also scattered on Subhūti. The words of praise also go a step further than before: before it said only 「是佛子，隨佛生」 tr. "is a son of the Buddha, born following the Buddha"; now it says 「以如來如隨佛生」 tr. "born following the Buddha by the suchness of the Tathāgata", already using the meaning of the discussion. The gods' understanding is advancing, and the sickness Subhūti treats in the next passage arises precisely at this point of advance.

48. Subhūti's four lines break clinging—not from form, not from the suchness of form, not apart from form, not apart from the suchness of form. Subhūti speaks again to the gods, four lines in a row: 「須菩提不從色中隨佛生，亦不從色如中隨佛生；不離色隨佛生，亦不離色如隨佛生」 tr. "Subhūti is not born following the Buddha from within form, nor is he born following the Buddha from within the suchness of form; he is not born following the Buddha apart from form, nor is he born following the Buddha apart from the suchness of form"; feeling, perception, constructions, and consciousness, and so on up to the omniscience of all kinds, and so on up to the unconditioned, are all the same four lines. It closes with the overall cause: 「是一切法皆無所有、不可得，無隨生者，亦無隨生法。」 tr. "All these dharmas are without anything existent and unfindable; there is no one born following, and no dharma of being born following." The arrangement of the four lines must be seen clearly—from and apart from are one pair, and the dharma and the suchness of the dharma form another level, together making four corners; when the four corners are sealed off there is nowhere to cling. Pay particular attention to the line 「不離色隨佛生，亦不離色如隨佛生」 tr. "he is not born following the Buddha apart from form, nor is he born following the Buddha apart from the suchness of form": what is excluded is ‘being born following the Buddha apart from form or apart from the suchness of form’—after breaking ‘born from form’, people most easily fall into ‘something separately born apart from form’ and settle down there; this line blocks exactly that road; both not-from and not-apart are dismissed, and only then does being born following the Buddha have nowhere to cling. The last sentence, 「無隨生者，亦無隨生法」 tr. "there is no one born following, and no dharma of being born following", dismisses both person and dharma.

49. Śāriputra addresses the Buddha—form itself is unfindable, how much less the suchness of form. Śāriputra takes up the word: 「是如實不虛，法相、法住、法位甚深；是中色不可得，色如不可得。」 tr. "This suchness is real and not false; the mark of dharmas, the abiding of dharmas, and the position of dharmas are very deep; within this, form is unfindable, and the suchness of form is unfindable." And he gives his own reason: 「色尚不可得，何況色如當可得！」 tr. "Form itself is unfindable—how much less could the suchness of form be findable!" Feeling, perception, constructions, and consciousness, and so on up to the omniscience of all kinds, are all inferred in this way. This way of inference is itself worth learning: from coarse to fine, from what is relied on to what relies on it—if even coarse, manifest form is unfindable, there is still less reason for the suchness of form, set up in dependence on form, to be findable. Śāriputra here is not asking a question but confirming; he says Subhūti's four lines over again in his own idiom.

50. The Buddha approves Śāriputra. The Buddha answers 「如是！如是！」 tr. "Just so! Just so!", and restates Śāriputra's words exactly as they were: this suchness is real and not false, the mark of dharmas, the abiding of dharmas, and the position of dharmas are very deep, form is unfindable, the suchness of form is unfindable, and so on up to the omniscience of all kinds is unfindable, the suchness of the omniscience of all kinds is unfindable. The Buddha's restating is not a saving of effort but a sealing—here the Buddha says it again in the disciple's own words, which is to permit these words to stand as a settled statement.

51. Bhikṣus, bhikṣuṇīs, and bodhisattvas, hearing the mark of suchness, each attain their path. 「舍利弗說是如相時」 tr. "When Śāriputra spoke this mark of suchness"—this is an inserted clause of narration, not a change of speaker—in the assembly four kinds gained different benefits: 「二百比丘不受一切法故，漏盡得阿羅漢；五百比丘尼，遠塵離垢，諸法中得法眼淨，生天、人中；五千諸菩薩摩訶薩得無生忍法；六千菩薩諸法不受故，漏盡，心得解脫，成阿羅漢。」 tr. "Two hundred bhikṣus, because they did not receive any dharma, exhausted their outflows and became arhats; five hundred bhikṣuṇīs, far from the dust and free of defilement, obtained the purity of the Dharma-eye with regard to all dharmas and were born among gods and humans; five thousand bodhisattva-mahāsattvas obtained the acceptance of non-arising; six thousand bodhisattvas, because they did not receive any dharma, exhausted their outflows, their minds attained liberation, and they became arhats." Four kinds side by side: the first three are all favourable benefits, but the fourth is an adverse turn—the six thousand were originally bodhisattvas, yet having heard the Dharma they actually 「成阿羅漢」 tr. "became arhats". One and the same session of Dharma, four kinds of result; and the most glaring one falls precisely on the kind highest in station. The several passages below are all occasioned by this matter.

52. The causes and conditions of the six thousand bodhisattvas—they met five hundred buddhas and practised the mark of difference. The Buddha himself tells Śāriputra how it came about: 「是六千菩薩先世值五百佛，親近供養」 tr. "these six thousand bodhisattvas in former lives met five hundred buddhas, drew near to them and made offerings", and within the Dharma of the five hundred buddhas practised giving, morality, patience, vigour, and meditation; 「無般若波羅蜜、無方便力故，行別異相」 tr. "because they were without prajñāpāramitā and without the power of skilful means, they practised the mark of difference", giving rise to the discriminating thought 「是施、是持戒、是忍辱、是精進、是禪定」 tr. "this is giving, this is morality, this is patience, this is vigour, this is meditation". Because they practised the mark of difference they did not obtain the mark of no difference; because they did not obtain the mark of no difference they could not enter the bodhisattva's position; because they could not enter the bodhisattva's position, 「得須陀洹果乃至阿羅漢果」 tr. "they obtained the fruit of the srota-āpanna and so on up to the fruit of the arhat". This chain of cause and effect must be seen clearly link by link; the root of the sickness is not that they practised the five perfections too little, but lies in the three Chinese characters 「別異相」 tr. "the mark of difference"—seeing the five perfections as five things unrelated to one another, each with a substance of its own. The last sentence pushes one layer further: 「菩薩摩訶薩雖有道，若空、若無相、若無作法，遠離般若波羅蜜、無方便力故，便於實際作證，取聲聞乘。」 tr. "Though a bodhisattva-mahāsattva has the path—whether emptiness, or the signless, or the dharma of non-action—because he is far from prajñāpāramitā and without the power of skilful means, he then realises it at the limit of reality and takes the śrāvaka vehicle." Even having cultivated the three gates of liberation, one can still fall back to being a śrāvaka—what is lacking is only prajñā and skilful means.

53. Śāriputra's question—practising the three gates of liberation alike, why do the fruits differ? Śāriputra at once asks: 「何因緣故，俱行空、無相、無作法，遠離方便力故，於實際作證取聲聞乘？菩薩摩訶薩亦修空、無相、無作法，有方便力故，得阿耨多羅三藐三菩提？」 tr. "For what cause and condition do those who alike practise the dharmas of emptiness, the signless, and non-action, because they are far from the power of skilful means, realise it at the limit of reality and take the śrāvaka vehicle, while bodhisattva-mahāsattvas, who also cultivate the dharmas of emptiness, the signless, and non-action, because they have the power of skilful means, obtain anuttarā samyaksaṃbodhi?" This question is the axis of the latter half of the unit: the dharmas cultivated are the same, the fruits obtained are opposite—where after all does the difference lie? The question can be asked so cleanly because the preceding passage has already laid out the fact of ‘having the path and yet falling’.

54. The Buddha's answer—far from, or not far from, the mind of sarvajñā. The Buddha's answer is very short: 「有菩薩遠離薩婆若心，修空、無相、無作法，無方便力故，取聲聞乘」 tr. "there are bodhisattvas who, far from the mind of sarvajñā, cultivate the dharmas of emptiness, the signless, and non-action, and because they are without the power of skilful means, take the śrāvaka vehicle"; 「復有菩薩摩訶薩不遠離薩婆若心，修空、無相、無作法，有方便力故，入菩薩位，得阿耨多羅三藐三菩提」 tr. "and again there are bodhisattva-mahāsattvas who, not far from the mind of sarvajñā, cultivate the dharmas of emptiness, the signless, and non-action, and because they have the power of skilful means, enter the bodhisattva's position and obtain anuttarā samyaksaṃbodhi". There is only one criterion—whether or not the mind of sarvajñā is left. Cultivating the three gates of liberation alike, when the mind is tied to omniscience it is skilful means; when the mind is not tied, it becomes a step toward realising and entering the limit of reality. Note that this answer neither denies the three gates of liberation nor says that what the śrāvakas cultivate is wrong; it only points out that the same dharma bears different fruit on different minds.

55. The simile of the great bird, first question—having thrown itself down without wings, can it get back up? The Buddha puts forth a simile: 「譬如有鳥，身長百由旬，若二百、三百由旬，而無有翅，從三十三天，自投閻浮提。」 tr. "It is like a bird whose body is a hundred yojana long, or two hundred, or three hundred yojana, and which has no wings, throwing itself down from the Heaven of the Thirty-three to Jambudvīpa." Then he sets a question: if this bird, midway, has the thought of wanting to return to the Heaven of the Thirty-three, 「能得還不？」 tr. "can it get back or not?" Śāriputra answers: 「不得也！世尊！」 tr. "It cannot, World-Honored One!" Three points in the simile need attention—its body is a hundred yojana long and so on up to three hundred, stating its greatness to the utmost; 「而無有翅」 tr. "and has no wings", lacking only one thing; 「自投」 tr. "throws itself down", it jumps of itself, it is not pushed. Greatness, lacking wings, throwing itself down—only when the three come together is there this simile.

56. The second question—if it wishes its body to be without pain and without vexation, can it be? The Buddha asks again: this bird further makes a wish, 「到閻浮提，欲使身不痛不惱」 tr. "on reaching Jambudvīpa, I wish my body to be without pain and without vexation"—can it be without pain and vexation? Śāriputra answers: 「不得也！世尊！是鳥到地，若痛、若惱、若死、若死等苦。」 tr. "It cannot, World-Honored One! When this bird reaches the ground, there is pain, or vexation, or death, or suffering equal to death." And he gives the reason himself: 「是鳥身大而無翅故。」 tr. "Because this bird's body is great and it has no wings." The order of the two questions is deliberate: the first asks whether it can go back, the second whether it can keep its body whole. The former cuts off its retreat; the latter cuts off its hope of good luck. And of Śāriputra's two answers, the second states the reason himself—the body is great and it has no wings—so the key to the simile comes out of the listener's own mouth, and the Buddha below need only apply the simile.

57. Applying the simile—cultivating five perfections for kalpas like the sands of the Ganges and falling into the two vehicles; dedicating by grasping the sound of the names. The Buddha applies the simile: though a bodhisattva 「如恒河沙等劫修布施、持戒、忍辱、精進、禪定，發大事、生大心」 tr. "for kalpas equal to the sands of the Ganges cultivates giving, morality, patience, vigour, and meditation, sets out on a great undertaking and gives rise to a great mind", and takes on immeasurable vows for the sake of attaining awakening, if he is 「遠離般若波羅蜜、方便力故」 tr. "far from prajñāpāramitā and the power of skilful means", then he falls either into the arhat or into the path of the pratyekabuddha. The reason is still that he practises the five perfections 「遠離薩婆若心」 tr. "far from the mind of sarvajñā". The Buddha further points out another sickness: though the bodhisattva recollects the morality, concentration, wisdom, liberation, and knowledge and vision of liberation of the buddhas of past, future, and present, it is by 「取相受持」 tr. "receiving and upholding them by grasping at marks"; he really does not know or understand these five-part virtues of the buddhas, and 「但聞空、無相、無作名字聲，而取名字聲迴向阿耨多羅三藐三菩提」 tr. "only hears the sound of the names emptiness, the signless, and non-action, and grasping the sound of the names dedicates it to anuttarā samyaksaṃbodhi". Dedicating in this way, he 「住聲聞、辟支佛地中，不能得過」 tr. "abides in the śrāvaka ground or the pratyekabuddha ground and cannot get beyond it". This passage points out a kind of effort that is very easily mistaken—recollecting the virtues of the buddhas while grasping at marks, reciting the names of the three gates of liberation while grasping at the sound—the outward form entirely alike, yet with no real understanding.

58. The positive side—from the first arousing of intent not far from the mind of sarvajñā, not grasping at marks. The reverse side told, the Buddha brings out the positive side: 「有菩薩摩訶薩從初發意已來，不遠離薩婆若心」 tr. "there are bodhisattva-mahāsattvas who from the first arousing of intent onward are not far from the mind of sarvajñā", who practise the five perfections and, 「不遠離般若波羅蜜及方便力故，不取相」 tr. "because they are not far from prajñāpāramitā and the power of skilful means, do not grasp at marks"; with regard to the morality, concentration, wisdom, liberation, and knowledge and vision of liberation of the buddhas of the three times, 「不取空解脫門相，不取無相、無作解脫門相」 tr. "they do not grasp at the mark of the emptiness gate of liberation, and do not grasp at the marks of the signless and non-action gates of liberation". In this way they 「不墮聲聞、辟支佛道，直至阿耨多羅三藐三菩提」 tr. "do not fall into the path of the śrāvaka or the pratyekabuddha, but go straight to anuttarā samyaksaṃbodhi". Read item by item against the preceding passage, the difference lies entirely in grasping at marks or not grasping at marks: the things practised are the same, the virtues of the buddhas recollected are the same, even the three gates of liberation are the same; the only difference is not grasping at marks upon them.

59. The name of the power of skilful means concluded—practising the six perfections and so on up to the omniscience of all kinds with a mind free of marks. The Buddha concludes with the definition of the power of skilful means: 「是名菩薩方便力，以離相心行布施、持戒、忍辱、精進、禪定，乃至離相心行一切種智。」 tr. "This is called the bodhisattva's power of skilful means: with a mind free of marks he practises giving, morality, patience, vigour, and meditation, and so on up to practising the omniscience of all kinds with a mind free of marks." Skilful means here is not a clever technique; it is a mind free of marks. At this point the whole chapter has made the four Chinese characters 「無方便力」 tr. "without the power of skilful means" clear—what the six thousand bodhisattvas lacked was not technique, but that one thought, while practising the perfections, of not grasping at marks.

60. Śāriputra's understanding—being far from them one may attain or may not attain; one should cultivate with a mind of no obtaining and no marks. Śāriputra addresses the Buddha, saying 「如我解佛所說義」 tr. "as I understand the meaning of what the Buddha has said": the bodhisattva who is not far from prajñā and skilful means is 「近阿耨多羅三藐三菩提」 tr. "near anuttarā samyaksaṃbodhi", because 「從初發心已來無法可知」 tr. "from the first arousing of the mind onward there is no dharma that can be known"; whereas good men and good women who are far from prajñā and skilful means 「或得、或不得」 tr. "may attain or may not attain" awakening, because the giving and so on up to meditation they practise all grasp at marks, and so they are 「於阿耨多羅三藐三菩提不定」 tr. "not fixed with regard to anuttarā samyaksaṃbodhi". At the end the right practice is given: a bodhisattva who wishes to attain awakening 「不應遠離般若波羅蜜、方便力」 tr. "should not be far from prajñāpāramitā and the power of skilful means", should abide within prajñā and skilful means, and 「以無得無相心，應修布施、持戒、忍辱、精進、禪定；乃至以無得無相心，應修一切種智」 tr. "with a mind of no obtaining and no marks should cultivate giving, morality, patience, vigour, and meditation; and so on up to: with a mind of no obtaining and no marks should cultivate the omniscience of all kinds". The five Chinese characters 「或得、或不得」 tr. "may attain or may not attain" deserve the most attention—practising while grasping at marks is not certain not to attain; it is unfixed; precisely because it is unfixed, prajñā is needed all the more. Sūtra ② closes with this right practice.

61. The treatise-author explains the gods' intent—they think that by Subhūti's power of wisdom all dharmas are made like the Buddha's Dharma. Treatise ② is headed with 「釋曰」 tr. "Explanation:"; it first cites the sūtra's account of the gods scattering incense and praising, and at once lays bare the intent held in the gods' minds: 「須菩提智慧力故，令一切法皆如佛法，是故說隨佛生。」 tr. "By Subhūti's power of wisdom all dharmas are made to be like the Buddha's Dharma; therefore they say he is born following the Buddha." This sentence is the treatise-author's diagnosis for the next passage—the gods take 「一切法皆如佛法」 tr. "all dharmas are like the Buddha's Dharma" as something brought about by Subhūti's power of wisdom. Once a maker and a made are set up, suchness becomes a thing that has been made.

62. Subhūti cuts off their esteem—four ways of breaking the mind that clings to suchness. 「須菩提知諸天子心少貴尚是諸法如，是故須菩提欲斷諸天子心故說：『是如畢竟空相。』」 tr. "Subhūti knew that the gods' minds slightly esteemed and prized this suchness of all dharmas; therefore, wishing to cut off the gods' minds, Subhūti said: ‘This suchness is of the mark of ultimate emptiness.’" The key lies in the three Chinese characters 「少貴尚」 tr. "slightly esteemed and prized"—the gods did not cling to it as real; there was only a slight intent of valuing and admiring in their minds; and Subhūti would cut off even this one subtle portion of esteem. The treatise-author then points out the function of the sūtra's four lines: 「以四種破著如心，所謂：『須菩提不在色中，不在色如中，不以色等、不以色等如，不離色等、不離色等如，隨佛生。』」 tr. "By four ways he breaks the mind that clings to suchness, namely: ‘Subhūti is born following the Buddha not within form, not within the suchness of form, not by means of form and the rest, not by means of the suchness of form and the rest, not apart from form and the rest, not apart from the suchness of form and the rest.’" Once words of praise are prized, they become a new place of clinging—what this passage demonstrates is how to treat the love and reverence that arise from the Dharma, not how to treat coarse and heavy afflictions.

63. The Buddha himself states the cause and condition—these dharmas are all empty and unfindable. 「佛此中自說因緣：『此法皆空、不可得。』」 tr. "Here the Buddha himself states the cause and condition: ‘These dharmas are all empty and unfindable.’" With one sentence the treatise-author ties on the overall cause of the last part of the sūtra passage. Subhūti's four lines breaking clinging speak in terms of marks; this sentence of the Buddha speaks in terms of substance; the four lines can break precisely because the substance of dharmas is originally empty.

64. Śāriputra says this suchness is very deep. 「舍利弗言：『世尊！是如甚深！是如中但色等法不可得，何況色等法如當可得！』」 tr. "Śāriputra said: ‘World-Honored One! This suchness is very deep! Within this suchness even form and the other dharmas are unfindable—how much less could the suchness of form and the other dharmas be findable!’" The treatise-author restates Śāriputra's words in Sūtra ②. In restating, he gathers the sūtra's long parallel string into a single sentence, while keeping the momentum of 「何況」 tr. "how much less"—when the Expository Treatise cites the sūtra it takes the sinews and bones, not the whole body; this is one example.

65. Question and answer—what is form and the other dharmas, and what is the suchness of form and the other dharmas? The treatise-author sets himself a question: 「何者是色等法？何者是色等法如？」 tr. "What is form and the other dharmas? What is the suchness of form and the other dharmas?" This question is very plain, yet it is the foundation of the whole of Treatise ②—above, a great deal has been said about form and the other dharmas and the suchness of form and the other dharmas being unfindable; what, after all, does each refer to? Answer: 「色等法，眼所見等諸法；如名『色等法實相，不虛誑』。」 tr. "Form and the other dharmas are the dharmas seen by the eye and the rest; suchness is the name for ‘the real mark of form and the other dharmas, not false and deceptive’." Form and the other dharmas are the dharmas presently before one, seen by the eye and the rest; suchness is the real mark of these dharmas, not false and deceptive. Only once the definitions are set can one speak below of misrecognising and of knowing the real.

66. The retribution of error—unwholesome deeds fall into the evil destinies, wholesome deeds are born among humans and gods, deeds without outflows take the Small Vehicle. 「人於色等如法中錯謬故」 tr. "Because people err with regard to form and the other dharmas and the dharma of suchness", they either give rise to unwholesome deeds and fall into the evil destinies, or give rise to wholesome deeds and are born among humans and gods, 「終歸磨滅，還生諸苦」 tr. "in the end returning to being ground away and giving rise again to all kinds of suffering"; or they give rise to deeds without outflows, and 「應求大利而取小乘，不得畢竟清淨如相故」 tr. "should seek the great benefit yet take the Small Vehicle, because they do not obtain the ultimately pure mark of suchness". Three roads side by side: evil deeds fall into the evil destinies; wholesome deeds are born among humans and gods yet in the end return to being ground away; deeds without outflows yet taking the Small Vehicle. One must see that the treatise-author counts the third road as error too—giving rise to deeds without outflows is already a world-transcending practice, yet because they do not obtain the ultimately pure mark of suchness they lose the great benefit. This passage corresponds exactly to the matter of the six thousand bodhisattvas in Sūtra ②: the harm of misrecognition does not stop at the evil destinies; the most regrettable kind occurs in a good place.

67. Form and the other dharmas are false and are not themselves suchness; knowing them as they really are is suchness. 「色等法皆是作法、有為、虛妄、從顛倒生、凡夫所憶想分別行處，是故色等法虛妄，不即是如。」 tr. "Form and the other dharmas are all made dharmas, conditioned, false, born from inversion, the sphere in which the recollection, imagining, and discrimination of ordinary people move; therefore form and the other dharmas are false and are not themselves suchness." This sentence must be read together with the sūtra's 「色即是薩婆若」 tr. "form is sarvajñā" at the head of the chapter, lest it be read as a contradiction. The treatise-author goes on to complete it: 「知色等法如實故即是如，因色等法得如名，是故言：『不離色等法得如。』」 tr. "Knowing form and the other dharmas as they really are is precisely suchness; it is because of form and the other dharmas that suchness gets its name; therefore it is said: ‘Suchness is obtained not apart from form and the other dharmas.’" Regarding form and the other dharmas as the sphere in which the recollection, imagining, and discrimination of ordinary people move, they are false and not themselves suchness; regarding knowing them as they really are, these very form and other dharmas are suchness, and the name of suchness, moreover, is established because of form and the other dharmas. So the 「即」 tr. "is" at the head of the chapter is not a blurring together; it is the identity of the moment of knowing as it really is; and the phrase 「不離色等法得如」 tr. "suchness is obtained not apart from form and the other dharmas" guards against seeking a suchness separately, apart from form.

68. Form and the other dharmas entering suchness are all of one mark—Subhūti's humility. 「色等法入如中，皆一相無異；是故須菩提謙言：『非但我隨佛生，一切法亦如是相。』」 tr. "Form and the other dharmas, entering suchness, are all of one mark, without otherness; therefore Subhūti humbly says: ‘Not only am I born following the Buddha; all dharmas too are of this mark.’" Here the treatise-author brings out a flavour in Subhūti's four lines breaking clinging—humility. Since all dharmas entering suchness are alike of one mark, the matter of being born following the Buddha is shared by all dharmas; why should it be mine alone? The gods' praise thereby falls empty—not refuted, but extended until there is nothing left to praise.

69. Śāriputra praises—if the cause is empty, how much more the fruit. 「舍利弗讚歎須菩提所說：『色等法亦畢竟空，何況如！』因若空，何況果！」 tr. "Śāriputra praised what Subhūti said: ‘Even form and the other dharmas are ultimately empty—how much more suchness!’ If the cause is empty, how much more the fruit!" The treatise-author makes Śāriputra's words into a single inference of cause and fruit: form and the other dharmas are the cause; the name of suchness is obtained from form and the other dharmas, so in this position suchness is the fruit. Since the cause is ultimately empty, the fruit is all the more unfindable. This sentence at the same time answers passage sixty-seven—the name of suchness is established because of form and the other dharmas, so the momentum of inferring emptiness from the dharmas to suchness follows naturally.

70. Hearing the very deep mark of suchness, beings each gain the benefit of the path. 「聞如是甚深如相，眾生各得道利益。」 tr. "Hearing such a very deep mark of suchness, beings each gained the benefit of the path." With one sentence the treatise-author ties on the sūtra text of Sūtra ② on the four kinds attaining the path, without listing them again one by one. The Chinese character 「各」 tr. "each" is the eye—hearing the same Dharma, what each obtains is different, which is precisely what sets up the four questions below.

71. Question and answer—prajñā is expounded for bodhisattvas, so why did six thousand people become arhats; the simile of carrying vessels to the sea. Question: 「是般若波羅蜜為菩薩說，何故六千人成阿羅漢道？」 tr. "This prajñāpāramitā is expounded for bodhisattvas; why did six thousand people accomplish the path of the arhat?" Answer: the treatise-author first points out that the Buddha had already answered this difficulty in advance—「佛知必有難者，自為舍利弗說因緣：『是人無般若波羅蜜、無方便力。』」 tr. "The Buddha knew there would surely be someone to raise this difficulty, and himself told Śāriputra the cause and condition: ‘These people were without prajñāpāramitā and without the power of skilful means.’" Then he unfolds their course of practice: in the past they made merit without skilful means and so practised crookedly, not rightly; being apart from prajñā, they clung deeply to wholesome dharmas; now, hearing prajñā from the Buddha, 「深厭世間，慈悲心薄故求自利，不受一切法，即得阿羅漢」 tr. "they were deeply weary of the world, and because their minds of kindness and compassion were thin, they sought their own benefit, did not receive any dharma, and at once attained arhatship". At the end comes an exceedingly important verdict: 「於般若無咎。」 tr. "There is no fault in prajñā." Prajñā is not at fault. And it closes with a simile: 「如人持器詣海，隨器大小，各自取足。」 tr. "As when people carry vessels to the sea, each according to the size of his vessel takes his fill." The sea water is without limit and what is obtained is limited; the limit lies in the vessel, not in the sea. This simile connects exactly with the Chinese character 「各」 tr. "each" of passage seventy.

72. Question and answer—not obtaining the dharma without discrimination refers to the past five hundred lifetimes. Question, citing the sūtra: 「六千菩薩無般若波羅蜜、方便力故，行五波羅蜜，不得是無分別法，作阿羅漢。」 tr. "The six thousand bodhisattvas, because they were without prajñāpāramitā and the power of skilful means, practised the five perfections, did not obtain this dharma without discrimination, and became arhats." At once it raises a difficulty: 「若一切聖人皆得無為法，得無為法即是無分別，何以此中說『不得無分別法，作阿羅漢』？」 tr. "If all sages obtain the unconditioned dharma, and obtaining the unconditioned dharma is being without discrimination, why does it say here ‘did not obtain the dharma without discrimination, and became arhats’?" The difficulty is very finely made—having become an arhat, one has obtained the unconditioned, which is being without discrimination; why does the sūtra text say he did not obtain non-discrimination? Answer: 「非說今世聽法時；乃是過去五百世時，不得般若、方便，修集五波羅蜜功德，以是故言：『不得無分別。』」 tr. "It is not speaking of the time of hearing the Dharma in this life; it is that in the past five hundred lifetimes, not having obtained prajñā and skilful means, they cultivated and gathered the merit of the five perfections; for this reason it says: ‘did not obtain non-discrimination’." Once the times are distinguished, the contradiction is resolved: not obtaining non-discrimination speaks of the past five hundred lifetimes, not of today. The treatise-author then supplies the consequence: 「失菩薩信等五根；失菩薩信等五根故，雖聞般若，不得如菩薩所聞即於實際作證。」 tr. "They lost the bodhisattva's five faculties, faith and the rest; because they lost the bodhisattva's five faculties, faith and the rest, though they heard prajñā, they could not hear it as bodhisattvas hear it, and at once realised it at the limit of reality." The accumulated habits of five hundred lifetimes caused the bodhisattva's five faculties, faith and the rest, to be lost; though today they hear prajñā, what they hear is already different from what bodhisattvas hear. The method of this answer is worth remembering: when the sūtra text contradicts itself before and after, first see whether it is not speaking of the same time.

73. Question and answer—practising emptiness, the signless, and non-action alike, one becomes a Buddha and one an arhat. Question: 「俱行空、無相、無作，何以一人得作佛、一人作阿羅漢？」 tr. "Practising emptiness, the signless, and non-action alike, why does one person attain buddhahood and one person become an arhat?" This is Śāriputra's question in Sūtra ②, raised once more by the treatise-author, and answered even more briefly than in the sūtra text: 「雖有種種因緣，得阿羅漢大因緣，所謂離薩婆若心行空等故。」 tr. "Though there are causes and conditions of many kinds, the great cause and condition of becoming an arhat is practising emptiness and the rest with a mind that has left sarvajñā." It acknowledges that the causes and conditions are of many kinds, yet marks out only the one great cause and condition—practising emptiness and the rest with a mind that has left sarvajñā. The three gates of liberation are a shared dharma; the mind of sarvajñā is the distinguishing condition; the shared dharma determines the mark of what is practised, and the distinguishing condition determines the fruit toward which it tends.

74. The matter of the great bird—the golden-winged bird just out of the shell, its wings not yet formed. The treatise-author first explains what the bird in the simile is: 「『大鳥』者，金翅鳥在於天上，如此間人鳥雀等無異。」 tr. "‘The great bird’: the golden-winged bird is in the heavens, no different from sparrows and the like among people here." The heavens are to the golden-winged bird what the human world is to sparrows—its ordinary place. He also explains why it does not come to the human world: 「此鳥食龍，翅出毒風，扇一切人眼失明故。」 tr. "This bird eats nāgas, and its wings give off a poisonous wind which, fanning, makes the eyes of all people lose their sight." Then he supplies the factual ground for the plot of the simile: 「是鳥初出𣫘，羽翼未成，意欲飛去，即時墮落，中道心悔：『我未應飛。』還欲住本天，上舍摩梨樹上；是鳥身大，羽翼未成，不能舉身。」 tr. "This bird, just out of the shell, its wings not yet formed, wished to fly away, and at once fell; midway its mind regretted: ‘I ought not yet to have flown.’ It wished to go back and dwell in its own heaven, up on the śālmalī tree; this bird's body was great, its wings not yet formed, and it could not lift its body." The sūtra text says only 「無有翅」 tr. "has no wings"; the treatise-author supplies 「羽翼未成」 tr. "its wings not yet formed"—it was not born without wings; it flew before the time of having wings had come. With this one addition, the meaning of the simile turns from a lack to rashness.

75. Clause-by-clause correspondence—the bird's body, great, without two wings, Mount Sumeru, space, flying when it ought not yet fly, death, what equals death, pain or vexation. The treatise-author assigns them clause by clause: 「『鳥身』，是菩薩身。『大』者，世世廣集五波羅蜜功德。『無兩翅』者，是無般若波羅蜜、無方便。『須彌山』者，是三界。『虛空』，是無量佛法。」 tr. "‘The bird's body’ is the bodhisattva's body. ‘Great’ is the merit of the five perfections gathered broadly life after life. ‘Without two wings’ is being without prajñāpāramitā and without skilful means. ‘Mount Sumeru’ is the three realms. ‘Space’ is the immeasurable dharmas of the Buddha." Then he explains the plot: 「『未應飛而飛』者，是菩薩功德未成滿，欲行菩薩三解脫門、欲遊無量佛法虛空中而自退沒，是心雖欲願作佛而不能得。」 tr. "‘Flying when it ought not yet fly’ is the bodhisattva whose merit is not yet complete and full, who wishes to practise the bodhisattva's three gates of liberation, wishes to roam in the space of the immeasurable dharmas of the Buddha, and of himself falls back and sinks; this mind, though it wishes and vows to become a Buddha, cannot attain it." Finally he assigns the results: 「『若死』者，是阿羅漢道；『死等』者，辟支佛道。『若痛、若惱』者，失菩薩本願功德。」 tr. "‘Death’ is the path of the arhat; ‘what equals death’ is the path of the pratyekabuddha. ‘Pain or vexation’ is losing the merit of the bodhisattva's original vow." Among these, the two phrases 「須彌山」 tr. "Mount Sumeru" and 「虛空」 tr. "space" do not appear in the sūtra text of this chapter (the sūtra says only 「無有翅」 tr. "has no wings" and 「從三十三天，自投閻浮提」 tr. "throwing itself down from the Heaven of the Thirty-three to Jambudvīpa"); they are words the treatise-author brings out in making the assignments. Nine items correspond one by one, and among them the assignment of 「大」 tr. "great" is most worth savouring—a great body is not a sickness; it is the merit of the five perfections gathered broadly life after life; precisely because the merit is great and there is no prajñā or skilful means, the fall hurts so badly. The three gates of liberation are here assigned to the matter of 「欲飛」 tr. "wishing to fly": they may be wished for but not rushed at; to set out before merit is full is to fall back and sink of oneself.

76. The Buddha's own concluding sentence—where the simile is applied, the meaning is clear of itself, so it is not spoken. 「佛自結句：『乃至住是無得無相心中應布施等。』此經中合喻，義自明了，故不說。」 tr. "The Buddha's own concluding sentence: ‘…and so on up to: abiding in this mind of no obtaining and no marks, one should give and so on.’ Where the simile is applied in this sūtra, the meaning is clear of itself, so it is not spoken." Treatise ② closes with this: of the right practice Śāriputra set out at the end of the sūtra passage, the treatise-author cites only its concluding sentence; as for the part where the Buddha has already applied the simile himself, 「義自明了，故不說」 tr. "the meaning is clear of itself, so it is not spoken". Where the Expository Treatise stops is also a rule: a simile already applied in the sūtra text is not applied again; a meaning already made clear in the sūtra text is not explained again. The single unit of the First Part ends here.

Do Not Misread

Do not read 「色即是薩婆若」 tr. "form is sarvajñā" as lumping ordinary people and sages into one. The treatise-author says it clearly: 「色等法皆是作法、有為、虛妄、從顛倒生、凡夫所憶想分別行處，是故色等法虛妄，不即是如。」 tr. "Form and the other dharmas are all made dharmas, conditioned, false, born from inversion, the sphere in which the recollection, imagining, and discrimination of ordinary people move; therefore form and the other dharmas are false and are not themselves suchness." Regarding form as the object of the recollection, imagining, and discrimination of ordinary people, form is not itself suchness; one must 「知色等法如實故即是如」 tr. "know form and the other dharmas as they really are, and that is precisely suchness". The sūtra's 「即」 tr. "is" is the identity of the moment of knowing as it really is, not a mixing of the false and the true into one. If it is read as a blurring together, then practice and non-practice, delusion and awakening, would all be without distinction, and the matter of the six thousand bodhisattvas in the whole chapter could not be spoken of at all.

Do not read 「如」 tr. "suchness" as some final substance. The second round in Sūtra ① itself blocks this road—「如來如相即是一切法如相，一切法如相即是如來如相。是如相中亦無如相」 tr. "the mark of suchness of the Tathāgata is the mark of suchness of all dharmas; the mark of suchness of all dharmas is the mark of suchness of the Tathāgata. Within this mark of suchness there is no mark of suchness either". The treatise-author further says 「若不生法可得，則非畢竟空」 tr. "if a dharma of non-arising were findable, it would not be ultimate emptiness". Whoever grips suchness, non-arising, or ultimate emptiness into something that can be found—what he grips is, at that very moment, not what it points to. This chapter judges even the two Chinese characters 「如來」 tr. "Tathāgata" to be 「五眾色等法中假名如來」 tr. "within form and the other dharmas of the five aggregates, ‘Tathāgata’ is a provisional name"—how much more a single character, suchness.

Do not read 「一切世間所不能信」 tr. "all the world cannot believe" as meaning that everyone is unable to believe. The treatise-author has already distinguished 「名字一切」 tr. "the all of names" from 「實一切」 tr. "the real all", and says 「如此中說名字一切，以多不信故言『一切』」 tr. "as here it speaks of the all of names: because many do not believe, it says ‘all’". If read as the real all, the Buddha's expounding of the Dharma would become vain, and the matter 「如須陀洹於無上道得少分」 tr. "as the srota-āpanna obtains a small part of the unsurpassed path" could not be established either. For the quantifiers in the sūtras one must see whether it is the all of names or the actual all—this is a commonly used measuring rod for reading the prajñā sūtras and treatises.

Do not read the matter of the six thousand bodhisattvas as prajñā having a fault. The treatise-author specially sets down a verdict: 「於般若無咎。」 tr. "There is no fault in prajñā." In one and the same session of Dharma, two hundred bhikṣus exhaust their outflows, five thousand bodhisattvas obtain the acceptance of non-arising, six thousand bodhisattvas become arhats—the difference is not in the Dharma heard but in 「持器詣海，隨器大小」 tr. "carrying vessels to the sea, each according to the size of his vessel". Still less should one conclude from this that hearing the deep Dharma is dangerous and not dare to hear it; the retreat of the six thousand bodhisattvas was caused by practising the mark of difference in the past five hundred lifetimes and losing the bodhisattva's five faculties, faith and the rest, not by today's hearing.

Do not read 「無方便力」 tr. "without the power of skilful means" as lacking a clever technique. The Buddha himself gave the definition: 「是名菩薩方便力，以離相心行布施、持戒、忍辱、精進、禪定，乃至離相心行一切種智。」 tr. "This is called the bodhisattva's power of skilful means: with a mind free of marks he practises giving, morality, patience, vigour, and meditation, and so on up to practising the omniscience of all kinds with a mind free of marks." Skilful means is simply the mind free of marks, not another set of techniques. Likewise, the fall of the 「大鳥」 tr. "great bird" is not due to insufficient merit—「『大』者，世世廣集五波羅蜜功德」 tr. "‘great’ is the merit of the five perfections gathered broadly life after life"—it is precisely because the merit is great and this one mind is absent that the fall is so heavy.

Do not read 「隨佛生」 tr. "born following the Buddha" as an honour that can be received. Subhūti handles this praise twice: at first he asks in return 「云何為隨佛生」 tr. "what is being born following the Buddha", and in the end he says 「非但我隨佛生，一切法亦如是相」 tr. "not only am I born following the Buddha; all dharmas too are of this mark". The treatise-author further points out that the gods' 「心少貴尚是諸法如」 tr. "minds slightly esteemed and prized this suchness of all dharmas", and what Subhūti would cut off is precisely this one exceedingly subtle portion of esteem. Even the mind of reverence toward the Dharma counts, here, as something clung to.

Do not read the three 「有人言」 tr. "someone says" as meaning that the treatise-author already has a settled judgement. As to why the bodhisattva who has entered the Dharma-position is not said to be born in accord with the Buddha, the treatise-author lists three views without judging—the first in terms of outflows exhausted or not exhausted, the second in terms of being near the gate of nirvāṇa without remainder or going back and forth in birth and death, the third in terms of the two kinds of prajñā and the place of expounding. The three views standing together is the consistent form of this treatise; the reader should not take up one view for himself and cut off the other two.

Bearing on Practice

Check one's own view by the two sides, 「即」 tr. "is" and 「不即」 tr. "is not". One who can recite 「色即是薩婆若」 tr. "form is sarvajñā" while nothing stirs in his mind has, most likely, only accepted a way of speaking. One can use the treatise-author's two sentences to question oneself: is the form I am now taking as object the form that is 「凡夫所憶想分別行處」 tr. "the sphere in which the recollection, imagining, and discrimination of ordinary people move", or the form known as it really is? The former is false and not itself suchness; the latter is it, right here. This question pulls the great verdict at the head of the chapter back from the lips to the object of the present thought.

Let 「先信後知」 tr. "faith first and knowing after" settle the order of entry, and let 「智慧知已，名為信」 tr. "when wisdom has known it, that is called faith" settle the measure of culmination. At the start, when one hears the deep Dharma and cannot understand it, one need not reproach oneself as faithless—the treatise-author says 「知者必有信，先信後知故」 tr. "one who knows must have faith, because faith comes first and knowing after"; faith was always meant to come before knowing. And after long practice one must not rest content with hearing and believing; the treatise-author also says 「眾生聞所說而信者，此中不名為信；智慧知已，名為信」 tr. "beings who hear what is said and believe it—here that is not called faith; when wisdom has known it, that is called faith". The first sentence settles a person; the second spurs a person on; the two sentences must be carried on one's person together.

Use the method of the four lines breaking clinging to treat the mind that esteems the Dharma. Whenever a sense of treasuring arises toward some dharma—treasuring some view, some moment of accord, some passage of scripture—one can take Subhūti's four lines to illuminate oneself: was it obtained from within this? Was it obtained from within the suchness of this? Was it obtained apart from this? Was it obtained apart from the suchness of this? When none of the four corners offers a place to settle, the mind of esteem comes to rest of itself. The gods Subhūti treated were only 「少貴尚」 tr. "slightly esteeming and prizing", which shows that this method is used at the subtlest places.

Use 「離相心」 tr. "the mind free of marks" to examine the manner of practice of each perfection, rather than examining how much is practised. The six thousand bodhisattvas practised the five perfections in the presence of five hundred buddhas—one cannot say they practised little; the sickness lay in giving rise to the thought 「是施、是持戒、是忍辱、是精進、是禪定」 tr. "this is giving, this is morality, this is patience, this is vigour, this is meditation" and in 「行別異相」 tr. "practising the mark of difference". When practising giving one can ask oneself: at this moment is there standing in my mind a thing called giving? If there is, this perfection has already fallen into the mark of difference. The power of skilful means is not to be sought elsewhere; it lies just in whether this one thought is free of marks or not.

Use 「持器詣海」 tr. "carrying vessels to the sea" to measure oneself without making light of oneself. Hearing the same Dharma, what each obtains differs; the limit lies in the vessel, not in the sea. A small vessel is not the sea's fault, nor need one therefore not go to draw water; what can be done is to change the vessel for a larger one—the treatise-author points out that the vessel of the six thousand bodhisattvas was small because 「慈悲心薄故求自利」 tr. "because their minds of kindness and compassion were thin, they sought their own benefit". So the way to enlarge the vessel lies in kindness and compassion and in not abandoning the mind of sarvajñā, not in how much of the Dharma one hears.

Use the simile of the great bird to warn oneself that merit and prajñā must not be one-sidedly neglected. A great body without wings—the thicker the merit, the fiercer the momentum of the fall. When one has practised the path a long time and practice has gradually accumulated, one should most of all question oneself by this simile: are my two wings there?—prajñā is one wing, skilful means is one wing; lacking one, all the merit accumulated becomes weight dragging downward. And the four Chinese characters 「羽翼未成」 tr. "its wings not yet formed" that the treatise-author supplies are one more medicine: it is not that one should not fly, but that one flies before they are formed; while merit is not yet full, to go on gathering it honestly is steadier than rushing to rise high.

Further Resonances

The single unit of the First Part, two sūtra passages and two treatise passages, sets up the general outline of the whole chapter. Sūtra ① opens with the gods praising 「色即是薩婆若」 tr. "form is sarvajñā" and 「一如，無二無別」 tr. "one suchness, without duality and without difference"; the Buddha takes this up and tells why he kept silent on first attaining the path, judging 「無得者、無得處、無得時」 tr. "no one who obtains it, no place of obtaining, no time of obtaining" to be the very deep mark of all dharmas; Subhūti expounds that 「是法隨順一切法」 tr. "this Dharma accords with all dharmas" and yet is unobstructed, non-arising, and without a place, and with four rounds of 「復次」 tr. "furthermore" unfolds 「如相故，須菩提隨佛生」 tr. "because of the mark of suchness, Subhūti is born following the Buddha"; it is sealed at the end with 「得是如故，名為如來」 tr. "because he obtains this suchness he is called Tathāgata", and closes with the great earth shaking in six ways. Treatise ① first clears the way through the gods' words with three matters—the judgement of shallow and deep, the all of names and the real all, and faith first and knowing after—then explains their meaning by prajñā and anuttarā samyaksaṃbodhi differing in name and one in substance, the simile of burning sandalwood and mixed woods, and the simile of the mark of space in a wall and the peg; it further fixes the standing of 「隨佛生」 tr. "born following the Buddha" by the three kinds of seed and the five sons of the Buddha, lists the three schools of 「有人言」 tr. "someone says" without judging, and at the end brings together the suchness of the Tathāgata and the suchness of Subhūti with nine rounds of 「復次」 tr. "furthermore", stopping at 「五眾色等法中假名如來」 tr. "within form and the other dharmas of the five aggregates, ‘Tathāgata’ is a provisional name". Sūtra ② turns to practice and fruit: Subhūti's four lines break clinging, Śāriputra confirms that the suchness of form is unfindable, the four kinds who hear the Dharma attain the path differently while the six thousand bodhisattvas instead become arhats, the Buddha judges the reason by the simile of the great bird without wings, and concludes that 「離相心行布施」 tr. "practising giving with a mind free of marks" is precisely the power of skilful means. Treatise ② then explains them item by item—the four ways of breaking clinging, the definitions of form and the other dharmas and of the suchness of form and the other dharmas, the three roads of error, the simile of carrying vessels to the sea, not obtaining non-discrimination belonging to the past five hundred lifetimes, leaving the mind of sarvajñā as the great cause and condition of becoming an arhat—and closes with the matter of the golden-winged bird and the nine-item clause-by-clause correspondence. The principle of 「如」 tr. "suchness" and the practice of 「方便」 tr. "skilful means" have, in the First Part, already become one matter: knowing suchness without skilful means, there is the fall of the great bird; practising the perfections without leaving the mind of sarvajñā, one goes straight to awakening.

As for the ancient masters' sectional divisions of this chapter, Jizang judges it the fourth of four chapters, and his commentary opens: 「此第四、合中下根人如如而學，具成上三品。」 tr. "This is the fourth: it has people of middling and lower faculties training in accord with suchness, fully completing the three chapters above."—taking this chapter as the overall gathering-in of the three chapters before it: people of middling and lower faculties training in accord with suchness, and so this chapter is set up. This places the chapter in terms of the order of the whole work; it does not explain the meaning of this chapter's sūtra text, and the reader may take its placement and leave it at that. Further, Junzheng cites the matter of the six thousand bodhisattvas of this chapter, and his text reads 「有六十菩薩於五百佛所行六波羅蜜等，具行萬行而無方便故、實際作證故，不得入菩薩位」 tr. "there were sixty bodhisattvas who, in the presence of five hundred buddhas, practised the six perfections and the rest, fully practising the myriad practices, yet because they were without skilful means and because they realised it at the limit of reality, could not enter the bodhisattva's position"; the number he cites is sixty, which differs from the 「六千菩薩」 tr. "six thousand bodhisattvas" of this work's base text. The two readings are recorded side by side without judging which is correct; the text of the base text is not altered because of what an ancient master cites.

The single unit of the Last Part continues from here and turns to the discussion of hard to obtain and easy to obtain: the gods say anuttarā samyaksaṃbodhi is hard to obtain; the Buddha approves and says 「亦無所得，無能知、無可知、亦無知者」 tr. "there is also nothing to be attained; there is no one able to know, nothing that can be known, and also no knower"; Subhūti, on the contrary, says it is easy to obtain because all dharmas are empty of nature; Śāriputra raises the retrogressing and turning back of bodhisattvas like the sands of the Ganges as a challenge; Subhūti then, with form, apart from form, the suchness of form, apart from the suchness of form, suchness, the nature of dharmas and the rest, and apart from suchness and the rest, asks back sentence by sentence 「於阿耨多羅三藐三菩提退還不」 tr. "does it retrogress and turn back from anuttarā samyaksaṃbodhi or not", and Śāriputra answers each time that it does not retrogress; Pūrṇa has Śāriputra further ask about a single bodhisattva vehicle; Subhūti, since within suchness there is no discrimination of three vehicles, establishes the meaning of one vehicle, and the Buddha praises him as excellent. After that the Buddha broadly shows the gates of practice for accomplishing awakening—an equal mind, a mind of kindness, a lowly intent, a mind of safety, an unobstructed mind, a mind without vexation, a mind of love and respect, and, with regard to the ten wholesome paths and so on up to the omniscience of all kinds, the four matters ‘practising it oneself, teaching others, praising, rejoicing’ carried out together—and closes the sūtra with two thousand bodhisattvas obtaining the acceptance of the non-arising of dharmas; the treatise explains the equal mind, the nine grades of people, the meaning of a lowly intent, the mind of safety, the acceptance of beings as the first gate of the acceptance of dharmas, and the ten wholesome paths as the guest and old dharmas, and gathers the whole chapter together with obtaining the acceptance of non-arising through the completeness of both dharmas. That is not anticipated here.

The Great Suchness, Last Part: Awakening Hard to Obtain and Easy to Obtain, the Four Rounds of Questioning on Retrogressing and Turning Back, No Discrimination of the Three Vehicles within Suchness, How One Who Wishes to Accomplish Awakening Should Practise, and the Equal Mind, the Lowly Intent, the Mind of Safety, and the Two Truths Complete

What Is Being Asked

The First Part carried 「如」 tr. "suchness" all the way to the point beyond which it cannot be pushed: form is sarvajñā and sarvajñā is form; the mark of suchness of form and the mark of suchness of sarvajñā are 「一如，無二無別」 tr. "one suchness, without duality and without difference"; the mark of suchness of the Tathāgata does not come and does not go, abides permanently, is without distinction and without difference, is a place without obstruction, and is not within the three times—and therefore Subhūti is born following the Buddha; and it closed with the three-thousand great-thousand world shaking in six ways. The treatise-author, following the text, distinguished the very deep from the shallow, the all of names from the real all, and why the Buddha, when he first attained the path, was silent and did not expound the Dharma; and with the six thousand bodhisattvas who, lacking the power of skilful means, fell into arhatship, and the simile of the great bird without wings falling to the ground, he showed that though the practice of emptiness is the same, the fruits differ. The Last Part carries on from this, and what it asks about is the two difficulties that spring up at once when this 「如」 tr. "suchness" is put back onto the field of cultivating the path.

The first difficulty is the dispute over hard and easy. Since all dharmas are ultimately empty, and there is no one who obtains and no dharma that can be obtained, is anuttarā samyaksaṃbodhi, then, hard to obtain or easy to obtain? The gods say it is hard to obtain; the Buddha approves that it is hard to obtain and bears witness himself that 「亦無所得」 tr. "yet there is also nothing attained"; Subhūti, for his part, says 「易得」 tr. "easy to obtain"; and Śāriputra brings out the fact before their eyes and asks back: if it is truly easy to obtain, why do bodhisattvas equal to the sands of the Ganges retrogress and turn back? The way this dispute is brought to a close is where this fascicle most shows its hand and eye—Subhūti does not argue hard or easy, but asks four rounds in a row: form, apart from form, the mark of suchness of form, apart from the mark of suchness of form, and so on up to suchness and the nature of dharmas, the abiding of dharmas, the position of dharmas, the limit of reality, and the nature of the inconceivable; of each he asks 「於阿耨多羅三藐三菩提退還不」 tr. "does it retrogress and turn back from anuttarā samyaksaṃbodhi or not", and Śāriputra answers each 「不」 tr. "no". Since for the matter of retrogressing and turning back no subject can be found among the dharmas, the dispute over hard and easy naturally loses what it rests on.

The second difficulty is the one vehicle and the three vehicles. Śāriputra, following this conclusion, turns it round and presses: if no one retrogresses and turns back, will not everyone then become a Buddha—why does the Buddha say there are three vehicles? Subhūti again breaks the discrimination of the three vehicles with the four sentences on the mark of suchness, and the Buddha from the side approves: 「汝所說者，皆是佛力」 tr. "what you have said is all the Buddha's power"; yet Śāriputra in the end must ask the one sentence 「成就何等菩提」 tr. "what awakening does he accomplish", and the Buddha answers 「成就佛阿耨多羅三藐三菩提」 tr. "he accomplishes the Buddha's anuttarā samyaksaṃbodhi". Here the treatise-author lays bare the hinge of the whole passage: 「若入畢竟空門，一切法盡一相；若出畢竟空，三乘則有異」 tr. "if one enters the gate of ultimate emptiness, all dharmas are wholly of one mark; if one comes out of ultimate emptiness, the three vehicles then differ"—whether there are three vehicles or not hangs on going in and out of the gate of ultimate emptiness; these are not two contradictory verdicts.

Having finished breaking views, Sūtra ④ turns to practice. Subhūti asks 「應云何行」 tr. "how should he practise", and what the Buddha answers is not abstruse principle but seven kinds of mind—an equal mind, a mind of great kindness, a lowly intent, a mind of safety, an unobstructed mind, a mind without vexation, a mind of love and respect—and in addition the ten wholesome paths, the four dhyānas, the four immeasurable minds, the sphere of boundless space and so on up to the sphere of neither perception nor non-perception, the six perfections, the emptinesses, the limbs of the path, samādhi, the liberations, the successive absorptions, the ten powers and so on up to great kindness and great compassion, the twelve links of causes and conditions, knowing suffering, severing origination, realising cessation, and cultivating the path, the fruits, the bodhisattva's position, purifying lands and bringing beings to accomplishment, the supernormal powers, the omniscience of all kinds, severing the fetters and their habitual residues, the accomplishment of life-span, the accomplishment of the abiding of the Dharma—each of them set forth with the four matters together, ‘practising it oneself, teaching others, praising, rejoicing.’ The treatise-author explains, item by item, the real state of human feeling in each: why enemies, kin, and those in between must alike be regarded with the thought of affection; why the bodhisattva, being a great person, must arouse a lowly intent; how the mind of safety differs from the love of father and mother; at the end he threads the seven minds together with 「眾生忍，是法忍初門」 tr. "the acceptance of beings is the first gate of the acceptance of dharmas", gathers up the gates of practice with old dharmas and guest dharmas, root and branch complete, and brings the two thousand bodhisattvas' obtaining of the acceptance of the non-arising of dharmas back to 「善說二諦」 tr. "the two truths well expounded". The overall answer of the whole fascicle of the Last Part is only one sentence: suchness, spoken of to its very limit, does not obstruct having practice; having practice, spoken of to its very limit, does not depart from suchness—only when the two are complete, as a cart with both wheels complete, can one get somewhere.

Passage by Passage

1. The gods say awakening is hard to obtain. The gods of the desire and form realms address the Buddha: anuttarā samyaksaṃbodhi is hard to obtain; why? These bodhisattva-mahāsattvas should know all dharmas and then obtain awakening, and 「是法亦不可得」 tr. "this dharma too is unfindable". Where does the hardness lie? It lies not in the road being long, but in both ends being empty—all the dharmas that should be known must be known to the end, and yet the dharma that is obtained is unfindable. What the gods praised in the First Part was the very depth of the Dharma; what they praise in the Last Part is the hardness of obtaining it: very deep speaks of the Dharma; hard to obtain speaks of the real state of a person applying effort upon the Dharma.

2. The Buddha approves that it is hard to obtain, and bears witness in his own person that there is also nothing attained. The Buddha answers 「如是！如是！」 tr. "Just so! Just so!" and bears witness himself: I too obtained all dharmas and the omniscience of all kinds and then obtained awakening, 「亦無所得，無能知、無可知、亦無知者」 tr. "yet there is also nothing attained: there is no knowing, nothing knowable, and no knower either"; why? 「諸法畢竟淨故」 tr. "because all dharmas are ultimately pure". This answer is the pivot of the whole passage: the Buddha does not deny that it is hard to obtain, but he shifts the hardness from ‘not being able to obtain it’ to ‘obtaining with nothing attained’. The three things—knowing, the knowable, and the knower—are all absent; what is hard is not that the road is long, but that neither a person who can obtain nor a dharma that can be obtained can stand. Do not read 「畢竟淨」 tr. "ultimately pure" as the purity of some state—the purity here is precisely non-obtaining; it is that all dharmas from the first have no stain to be removed.

3. Subhūti says awakening is easy to obtain. Subhūti, taking up the meaning of what the Buddha said, reflects in his mind and says 「易得」 tr. "easy to obtain": there is no one who obtains and no dharma that can be obtained; all dharmas and the marks of all dharmas are empty, there is no dharma that can be obtained and no one who can obtain; 「亦無法可增，亦無法可減」 tr. "there is also no dharma that can be increased, and no dharma that can be decreased"; in giving, morality, patience, vigour, meditation, and so on up to the omniscience of all kinds, there is in every case nothing that can be obtained and no one who can obtain; and so on up to 「色，色相空」 tr. "form: the mark of form is empty", 「識相空」 tr. "the mark of consciousness is empty", and the mark of the omniscience of all kinds is empty. Why, with the same ultimate emptiness, does the Buddha say hard and Subhūti say easy? What Subhūti relies on is precisely the 「無所得」 tr. "nothing to be attained" the Buddha had just spoken of—since there is nothing to increase and nothing to decrease, there is not one thing waiting to be added, not one stage waiting to be walked, and so he says easy. The two accounts, hard and easy, do not cancel each other: the Buddha speaks of hard with respect to the real state of persons; Subhūti speaks of easy with respect to the original mark of the Dharma. What matters is that Subhūti himself marks it, 「如我解佛所說義，我心思惟」 tr. "as I understand the meaning of what the Buddha has said, I reflect in my mind", making clear that this is an inference carried on from the Buddha's words, not the setting up of a separate thesis.

4. Śāriputra raises the difficulty of space and of retrogressing and turning back. Śāriputra says to Subhūti: if all dharmas are empty like space, 「虛空不作是念：『我當得阿耨多羅三藐三菩提。』」 tr. "space does not think: ‘I shall obtain anuttarā samyaksaṃbodhi.’" If believing and understanding that all dharmas are empty like space were itself easy obtaining, then the bodhisattvas equal to the sands of the Ganges who now seek awakening—「何以故退還」 tr. "why do they retrogress and turn back"? For this reason one knows that awakening is not easy to obtain. This difficulty has two edges: the front edge says that in emptiness there is no one able to arouse the mind—space does not give rise to the thought of seeking awakening; the back edge brings out, as something directly seen, that the matter of retrogressing and turning back can be verified case by case. It is not that Śāriputra does not understand emptiness; he sets emptiness against the facts of the field of cultivating the path, and forces out a question that must be answered—who, after all, is the one that retrogresses and turns back.

5. The first round of questioning: does form, and so on up to the omniscience of all kinds, retrogress and turn back or not? Subhūti asks back: does form retrogress and turn back from anuttarā samyaksaṃbodhi or not? Śāriputra answers 「不」 tr. "no". Do feeling, perception, constructions, and consciousness retrogress and turn back or not? He answers 「不」 tr. "no". And so on up to: does the omniscience of all kinds retrogress and turn back or not? He answers 「不」 tr. "no". This round first checks, one by one, the five aggregates and the omniscience of all kinds—that is, the dharmas at the two ends, the ordinary and the noble. Subhūti does not argue hard or easy; he only checks the subject: if there is said to be retrogressing and turning back, what retrogresses and turns back must surely be some dharma; so he begins by asking about what is most ready to hand, form, feeling, perception, constructions, and consciousness. Śāriputra's three answers of 「不」 tr. "no" are his own admission: among the five aggregates the one who retrogresses and turns back cannot be found.

6. The second round of questioning: apart from form and the rest, is there a dharma that retrogresses and turns back or not? Apart from form, is there a dharma that retrogresses and turns back from awakening or not? He answers 「不」 tr. "no". Apart from feeling, perception, constructions, and consciousness, is there a dharma that retrogresses and turns back or not? He answers 「不」 tr. "no". And so on up to: apart from the omniscience of all kinds, is there a dharma that retrogresses and turns back or not? He answers 「不」 tr. "no". The first round searched within the dharmas; the second round searches outside the dharmas. People often think that since the subject is not within the five aggregates, there must surely be another one outside the five aggregates; this round seals off exactly that line of retreat. To search inside and outside and find nothing is the preliminary work for the later question, 「若諸法畢竟不可得，何等法於阿耨多羅三藐三菩提退還」 tr. "if all dharmas are ultimately unfindable, what dharma retrogresses and turns back from anuttarā samyaksaṃbodhi".

7. The third round of questioning: does the mark of suchness of form, and so on up to the mark of suchness of the omniscience of all kinds, retrogress and turn back or not? Śāriputra! What do you think? Does the mark of suchness of form retrogress and turn back from awakening or not? He answers 「不」 tr. "no". Does the mark of suchness of feeling, perception, constructions, and consciousness, and so on up to the mark of suchness of the omniscience of all kinds, retrogress and turn back or not? He answers 「不」 tr. "no". The first two rounds asked about the dharmas; this round turns to ask about the mark of suchness of the dharmas. The First Part has already established 「色如相、薩婆若如相，是一如，無二無別」 tr. "the mark of suchness of form and the mark of suchness of sarvajñā are one suchness, without duality and without difference"; since the mark of suchness is one suchness, within the one suchness there is no this and that which could be moved, and so there is no retrogressing and turning back to speak of either. This round lifts the question from the marks of things to the original mark, and this is exactly where the chapter raises its banner of 「如」 tr. "suchness".

8. The fourth round of questioning: apart from the mark of suchness of form, and so on up to apart from the mark of suchness of the omniscience of all kinds, is there a dharma that retrogresses and turns back or not? Apart from the mark of suchness of form, is there a dharma that retrogresses and turns back from awakening or not? He answers 「不」 tr. "no". Apart from the mark of suchness of feeling, perception, constructions, and consciousness, and so on up to apart from the mark of suchness of the omniscience of all kinds, is there a dharma that retrogresses and turns back or not? He answers 「不」 tr. "no". This round follows the same method as the second but is one layer higher: it is neither within the mark of suchness nor outside the mark of suchness. With this the four rounds form a complete net—within the dharmas, outside the dharmas, within suchness, outside suchness: in all four places there is nothing. The four rounds share one method and advance layer by layer, which shows that they are one whole set and not scattered questioning. As for what the treatise-author later calls 「如相四句」 tr. "the four sentences on the mark of suchness", this refers to the four questions with which Subhūti, after Śāriputra has raised the difficulty of the three vehicles, breaks the three vehicles in turn by the mark of suchness (see below), not to the four rounds on retrogressing and turning back here; do not confuse them in reading.

9. Do suchness and the nature of dharmas and the rest, six names in all, retrogress and turn back or not? Śāriputra! What do you think? Does suchness retrogress and turn back from awakening or not? He answers 「不」 tr. "no". Do the nature of dharmas, the abiding of dharmas, the position of dharmas, the limit of reality, and the nature of the inconceivable retrogress and turn back from awakening or not? He answers 「不」 tr. "no". The single name suchness having already been asked about, five further names—the nature of dharmas, the abiding of dharmas, the position of dharmas, the limit of reality, the nature of the inconceivable—are opened out and asked about together; these five names, together with suchness, are other names for the real mark of all dharmas, and the sūtra asks them side by side precisely to guard against someone's thinking that 「如」 tr. "suchness" does not move while the other headings might perhaps move. The names are six but what they point to is one, and so the answer too is one.

10. Apart from suchness, apart from the nature of dharmas and the rest, is there a dharma that retrogresses and turns back or not? Śāriputra! What do you think? Apart from suchness, is there a dharma that retrogresses and turns back from awakening or not? He answers 「不」 tr. "no". Apart from the nature of dharmas, the abiding of dharmas, the position of dharmas, the limit of reality, and the nature of the inconceivable, is there a dharma that retrogresses and turns back or not? He answers 「不」 tr. "no". This is the close of the four rounds of questioning, applying the word 「離」 tr. "apart from" to suchness and the five names as well. With this, the two roads, inside and outside, the two layers, the marks of things and the original mark, and the two forms, the single name and the names together, have all been asked through—the one who retrogresses and turns back has nowhere to be placed.

11. Subhūti's concluding question: what dharma retrogresses and turns back? Subhūti says to Śāriputra: 「若諸法畢竟不可得，何等法於阿耨多羅三藐三菩提退還？」 tr. "If all dharmas are ultimately unfindable, what dharma retrogresses and turns back from anuttarā samyaksaṃbodhi?" Only here do the four rounds of questioning show their real intent: not to deny that the matter of retrogressing and turning back exists, but to ask who is the subject of retrogressing and turning back. Whenever one speaks of retrogressing and turning back, there must be a dharma that retreats from there toward here; if all dharmas are ultimately unfindable, then the three things—the one able to retrogress, the place retrogressed from, and the station retrogressed from—all lose what they are tied to. This question is the eye of the whole passage and must not be read as forced argument—the dozen and more 「不」 tr. "no" that Śāriputra gave before were answered by himself, step by step.

12. Śāriputra accepts it and presses a further difficulty: are not the three vehicles then without distinction? Śāriputra says to Subhūti: as Subhūti has said, 「是法忍中，無有菩薩於阿耨多羅三藐三菩提退還者」 tr. "within this acceptance of dharmas, there is no bodhisattva who retrogresses and turns back from anuttarā samyaksaṃbodhi"; if they do not retrogress and turn back, then of the three kinds of seekers of the path the Buddha speaks of—the arhat path, the pratyekabuddha path, the Buddha path—「是三種為無分別」 tr. "these three kinds would be without distinction"; as Subhūti says, 「獨有一菩薩求佛道」 tr. "there is only a single bodhisattva seeking the Buddha path". This is where Śāriputra most shows himself as the questioner: he first truthfully accepts what Subhūti has established within the acceptance of dharmas, and at once points out that this position, pushed to the end, will contradict the three vehicles the Buddha himself taught. Accepting and then raising the difficulty is what gives the difficulty its force; this is not going back and forth, but lifting the contradiction into the open.

13. Pūrṇa has Śāriputra put the question. At that time Pūrṇa Maitrāyaṇīputra says to Śāriputra: 「應當問須菩提：『為有一菩薩乘不？』」 tr. "You should ask Subhūti: ‘Is there a single bodhisattva vehicle or not?’" Pūrṇa is the fifth speaker, found only in this chapter; he interjects just this one sentence and then withdraws. His function is not to answer but to give the topic its shape: he rewrites the inference Śāriputra has just made, with its note of refutation, into a clean, straightforward question. The words of one who raises difficulties are often mixed with feeling; once a question is set up, the answerer can more easily answer according to the meaning.

14. Śāriputra asks as he was told. Then Śāriputra asks Subhūti: 「須菩提！為欲說有一菩薩乘？」 tr. "Subhūti! Do you mean to say there is a single bodhisattva vehicle?" Śāriputra receives the words and at once asks, which shows the manner in which the great disciples built up a discussion together: a question need not come from one's own idea, so long as it can press the meaning out. Once this question is put, Subhūti below no longer discusses retrogressing and turning back, but turns to the discernment of whether or not there are three vehicles within suchness.

15. Within suchness, would you have there be people of the three vehicles? Subhūti says to Śāriputra: 「於諸法如中，欲使有三乘人——聲聞乘、辟支佛乘、佛乘耶？」 tr. "Within the suchness of all dharmas, would you have there be people of the three vehicles—the śrāvaka vehicle, the pratyekabuddha vehicle, the Buddha vehicle?" Śāriputra answers 「不也」 tr. "no indeed". Subhūti does not answer head-on, ‘there is one vehicle’ or ‘there is no one vehicle’, but moves the question back into suchness. The headings of the three vehicles are here listed one by one: the śrāvaka vehicle, the pratyekabuddha vehicle, the Buddha vehicle. Since he asks 「於諸法如中」 tr. "within the suchness of all dharmas", the answerer can only answer with respect to suchness; Śāriputra himself answers 「不也」 tr. "no indeed", and the meaning of the one vehicle no longer waits for Subhūti to state it himself.

16. Within the discrimination of the three vehicles, can suchness be found or not? 「舍利弗！三乘分別中，有如可得不？」 tr. "Śāriputra! Within the discrimination of the three vehicles, is there suchness to be found or not?" He answers 「不也」 tr. "no indeed". The former question was whether there are three vehicles within suchness; this question turns it around: whether suchness can be found within the discrimination of the three vehicles. Only by asking in both directions is the relation of suchness and the three vehicles checked out clearly—within suchness there are no three vehicles, and within the three vehicles there is no suchness to be found either. This does not say that the three vehicles are false talk; it says that the discrimination of the three vehicles is not established upon suchness.

17. Does this suchness have one mark, two marks, or three marks? 「舍利弗！是如有若一相、若二相、若三相不？」 tr. "Śāriputra! Does this suchness have either one mark, or two marks, or three marks, or not?" He answers 「不也」 tr. "no indeed". This question guards against a misunderstanding that very easily arises: since it is said that within suchness there are no three vehicles, people will want to say that suchness is 「一相」 tr. "one mark". Subhūti asks away even the one mark along with the rest. One, two, and three are all marks, and whatever sets up a mark is not suchness; so when this chapter speaks of the one vehicle, it is not using one to break three and setting up a separate one.

18. Within suchness, is there even a single bodhisattva? 「舍利弗！汝欲於如中乃至有一菩薩不？」 tr. "Śāriputra! Would you have there be, within suchness, even a single bodhisattva?" He answers 「不也」 tr. "no indeed". The former question broke marks; this one breaks persons. Śāriputra had earlier said 「獨有一菩薩求佛道」 tr. "there is only a single bodhisattva seeking the Buddha path", and here that sentence is dealt with in its turn: within suchness not even a single bodhisattva can be found. Subhūti's position here shows no partiality whatsoever—he does not allow the people of the three vehicles to be found within suchness, nor does he allow his own side's 「一菩薩」 tr. "single bodhisattva" to be found within suchness.

19. Within these four kinds, the people of the three vehicles are unfindable. 「如是四種中，三乘人不可得。舍利弗！云何作是念『是求聲聞乘人，是求辟支佛乘人，是求佛乘人』？」 tr. "Within these four kinds, the people of the three vehicles are unfindable. Śāriputra! How can you think, ‘This is a person seeking the śrāvaka vehicle, this is a person seeking the pratyekabuddha vehicle, this is a person seeking the Buddha vehicle’?" At the end he sets out the positive verdict: when a bodhisattva-mahāsattva hears this mark of suchness of all dharmas and 「心不驚、不沒、不悔、不疑」 tr. "his mind is not startled, does not sink, has no regret, and does not doubt", this is called being able to accomplish anuttarā samyaksaṃbodhi. What are called the four kinds are the four questions before—the three vehicles within suchness, suchness within the three vehicles, the one, two, or three marks of suchness, and a single bodhisattva within suchness. In all four places nothing can be found, and so the discriminations of persons have nowhere to be established. And the conclusion of the sūtra lies not in ‘the three vehicles are false’ but in the mind's not moving on hearing this: being startled is the shock of first hearing; sinking is the mind's collapsing because it cannot take it on; regret is looking back after one has already set out; doubt is wavering between two and not deciding—when these four sicknesses do not arise, that is the mark of being fit to bear it.

20. The Buddha praises Subhūti: all of it is the Buddha's power. Then the Buddha praises Subhūti, saying: 「善哉！善哉！須菩提！汝所說者，皆是佛力。」 tr. "Excellent! Excellent! Subhūti! What you have said is all the Buddha's power." And he himself seals it: if a bodhisattva hears it said that 「是如無有諸法別異」 tr. "in this suchness there is no distinction or difference among dharmas", and 「心不驚、不怖、不畏、不難、不沒、不悔」 tr. "his mind is not startled, not terrified, not afraid, does not find it hard, does not sink, and has no regret", know that this bodhisattva can accomplish anuttarā samyaksaṃbodhi. The Buddha praises and returns it to the Buddha's power, which does not allow the disciple to take what he said as his own possession, and also gives surety for the hearers: these four rounds of questioning just now were not the cleverness of a debater, but the line of reasoning of the Buddha's Dharma itself. The six negations raised here are closer-knit than the four negations Subhūti raised—adding 「怖」 tr. "terrified" and 「畏」 tr. "afraid" speaks of fear in its shallower and deeper degrees; adding 「難」 tr. "finding it hard" speaks of the mind's thinking this Dharma hard to practise and so giving rise to retrogression.

21. Śāriputra asks what awakening is accomplished; the Buddha answers that it is the Buddha's awakening. Śāriputra addresses the Buddha: 「世尊！成就何等菩提？」 tr. "World-Honored One! What awakening does he accomplish?" The Buddha says: 「成就佛阿耨多羅三藐三菩提。」 tr. "He accomplishes the Buddha's anuttarā samyaksaṃbodhi." The whole passage speaks of there being no discrimination of the three vehicles within suchness, and yet at the end a question draws out an answer that has discrimination—this question and answer look like a reversal but are in fact the closing of the whole passage. Śāriputra asks with great precision: since there are no three vehicles, which awakening is it that is accomplished? The Buddha answers with great precision too: it is the Buddha's awakening. The treatise-author explains the causes and conditions of this himself below; here the reader need only remember that the sūtra has not, by speaking of suchness, done away with the fruit that is tended toward.

22. The treatise-author relates the thought of the gods. In explaining this passage, the treatise-author first relates the causes and conditions of the sūtra: at that time the gods had this thought, and addressed the Buddha that awakening is hard to obtain; why? 「一切法畢竟空」 tr. "all dharmas are ultimately empty", while the bodhisattva seeks the Buddha path, contemplates, practises, cultivates and gathers, becomes a Buddha and delivers beings, and 「是法亦不可得」 tr. "this dharma too is unfindable". Here the treatise-author unfolds the sūtra's 「應知一切諸法已」 tr. "should know all dharmas, and then" into 「觀行修集，成佛、度眾生」 tr. "contemplating, practising, cultivating and gathering, becoming a Buddha, and delivering beings"—the hardness is stated more concretely: it is not a hardness of understanding, but the need, within ultimate emptiness, actually to travel this whole great journey to its end, while the dharma travelled is unfindable.

23. The Buddha approves his words, and bears witness in his own person. The Buddha approves his words and bears witness in his own person: 「我坐道場，以一切種得一切法，亦無一定相可得。」 tr. "I sat at the seat of awakening and by all kinds obtained all dharmas, yet no single fixed mark could be found." The treatise-author specially marks the four Chinese characters 「自身為證」 tr. "bearing witness in his own person": the Buddha does not win people over by principle; he brings out the matter of his own attaining of the path as witness. What is called 「以一切種得一切法」 tr. "by all kinds obtained all dharmas" is the meaning of the sūtra's 「得一切法、一切種智已」 tr. "having obtained all dharmas and the omniscience of all kinds"; and 「亦無一定相可得」 tr. "yet no single fixed mark could be found" is the meaning of the sūtra's 「亦無所得」 tr. "yet there is also nothing attained". What gives the witness its force is that the one speaking is exactly the person who has already obtained it.

24. Why Subhūti says it is easy to obtain. Subhūti says: 「世尊！如我意：『阿耨多羅三藐三菩提易得。』」 tr. "World-Honored One! In my view: ‘Anuttarā samyaksaṃbodhi is easy to obtain.’" Why? 「一切法畢竟常空故」 tr. "because all dharmas are ultimately and always empty"; within this there is no one who obtains and no dharma that can be obtained, 「無障無礙、無所修、無所斷故」 tr. "because there is no hindrance and no obstruction, nothing to be cultivated, and nothing to be severed". The treatise-author fills in three pairs of reasons for Subhūti: no one who obtains and no dharma that can be obtained—this is said with respect to the one who obtains and what is obtained; no hindrance and no obstruction—this is said with respect to the road; nothing to cultivate and nothing to sever—this is said with respect to the effort. Cultivating and severing are the two great matters on the path; if neither has anything to act upon, where would hardness come from? The one Chinese character 「易」 tr. "easy" here is said with respect to the directness of the line of reasoning, not with respect to a person's slackness—Śāriputra's difficulty below is meant precisely to guard against this mistake.

25. Śāriputra's difficulty: one or two become buddhas, and the rest all retrogress and turn back. Then Śāriputra says: 「若佛道易得者，何以故恒河沙等無量菩薩求佛道，若一、若二作佛，餘者皆退還？」 tr. "If the Buddha path is easy to obtain, why is it that of the countless bodhisattvas equal to the sands of the Ganges who seek the Buddha path, one or two become buddhas and the rest all retrogress and turn back?" The treatise-author states the sūtra's 「何以故退還」 tr. "why do they retrogress and turn back" more piercingly: those who arouse the mind are like the sands of the Ganges; those who accomplish it are only one or two. This difficulty lies not in principle but in fact; whoever speaks of ease by principle must pass this barrier. The learner reading this should ask himself: can the principle I believe in give a place to the facts I see before my eyes?

26. Subhūti asks back, and the treatise-author explains the reason for 「不也」 tr. "no indeed" . Subhūti answers Śāriputra: 「色於阿耨多羅三藐三菩提退還不？受、想、行、識乃至一切種智退還不？」 tr. "Does form retrogress and turn back from anuttarā samyaksaṃbodhi or not? Do feeling, perception, constructions, and consciousness, and so on up to the omniscience of all kinds, retrogress and turn back or not?" The answer is 「不也」 tr. "no indeed". The treatise-author himself explains why: 「色等法畢竟空，無有退還。」 tr. "Form and the other dharmas are ultimately empty; there is no retrogressing and turning back." The sūtra records only a question and an answer; the treatise-author supplies the principle in the answerer's mind—Śāriputra's answer 「不也」 tr. "no indeed" is not because he has been stumped by the question, but because he himself also knows that form and the other dharmas are ultimately empty. With this one supplement, the dozen and more 「不」 tr. "no" before are not perfunctory.

27. The suchness of form and the other dharmas has no two marks, and so there is no retrogressing and turning back. The treatise-author continues his explanation: 「色等法如無二相，亦無分別，故無退還。」 tr. "The suchness of form and the other dharmas has no two marks and no discrimination either; therefore there is no retrogressing and turning back." This sentence explains the sūtra's third round—asking about retrogressing and turning back with respect to the mark of suchness. No two marks: the suchness of form and the suchness of awakening are not two; no discrimination: between them there is no boundary on the basis of which advance and retreat could be spoken of. Retrogressing and turning back must depend on there being two: only when there is this shore and the other shore can retreat be spoken of. Since suchness has no two, the name retrogressing and turning back has nothing on which to be set up.

28. Apart from form and the rest there is no further dharma. 「離色等法，更有法退還不？」 tr. "Apart from form and the other dharmas, is there a further dharma that retrogresses and turns back or not?" The treatise-author explains the answer: 「離色等更無有法，是故言『不也』。」 tr. "Apart from form and the rest there is no further dharma; therefore he says ‘no indeed’." This explains the second round. People think there is a dharma outside the dharmas, taking the word 「離」 tr. "apart from" as if it could really separate out something; the treatise-author says straight out that outside form and the rest there is not a single dharma. Since there is no such dharma, to ask whether it retrogresses and turns back becomes an empty supposition.

29. Suchness too is itself empty; therefore he says no. 「離色等法如，更有法退還不？」 tr. "Apart from the suchness of form and the other dharmas, is there a further dharma that retrogresses and turns back or not?" The treatise-author explains: 「如破色等法已，如亦自空，是故言『不』。」 tr. "When suchness has broken form and the other dharmas, suchness too is itself empty; therefore he says ‘no’." This explains the fourth round, and is where the whole passage most needs one's attention. What breaks form and the other dharmas is suchness; once they are broken, will that 「如」 tr. "suchness" itself remain behind as something attained? The treatise-author answers: suchness too is itself empty. If suchness were not itself empty, all the dharmas broken before would grow back again out of suchness. This sentence is the way prajñā always closes—of the knife used to break, in the end not even the knife is kept.

30. The nature of dharmas, the position of dharmas, and so on up to the nature of the inconceivable are likewise. The treatise-author passes over it in a word: 「法性、法位乃至不可思議性亦如是。」 tr. "The nature of dharmas, the position of dharmas, and so on up to the nature of the inconceivable are likewise." The sūtra asks about six names side by side; since the treatise-author has already explained that suchness is itself empty, the remaining names follow the same principle and he does not explain them again. The 「亦如是」 tr. "are likewise" here is not an omission; it says that the six names are of one substance: the verdict made about suchness is the verdict made about the nature of dharmas, the position of dharmas, the limit of reality, and the nature of the inconceivable.

31. Subhūti asks again why retrogressing and turning back is spoken of. Subhūti says to Śāriputra: 「若法無退還，何以故言『如恒河沙等菩薩退還』？」 tr. "If dharmas do not retrogress and turn back, why do you say, ‘bodhisattvas equal to the sands of the Ganges retrogress and turn back’?" The four rounds being finished, Subhūti hands Śāriputra's original words back to him intact. The questioner had earlier raised facts against principle; now that the principle stands, how are the facts to be placed—this question is not pressing an advantage, but handing the difficulty back to the one who raised it, so that he himself says how the two can stand together.

32. Śāriputra answers with the acceptance of dharmas; the treatise-author glosses 「法忍」 tr. "acceptance of dharmas" as the gate of the Dharma, the practice of the Dharma, the conduct of the Dharma. Śāriputra answers: 「如須菩提所說，法忍中則無退還。」 tr. "As Subhūti has said, within the acceptance of dharmas there is no retrogressing and turning back." The treatise-author immediately glosses: 「『法忍』者，是法門、法修、法行。入須菩提所說法門中，則無退還；出是法門，則有退還。」 tr. "‘Acceptance of dharmas’ is the gate of the Dharma, the practice of the Dharma, the conduct of the Dharma. Having entered the gate of the Dharma that Subhūti speaks of, there is no retrogressing and turning back; having come out of this gate of the Dharma, there is retrogressing and turning back." This passage unties the first difficulty of the whole fascicle. Whether there is retrogressing and turning back is not an absolute verdict; it hangs on whether or not one is within this gate: within the gate, ultimate emptiness is the measure, and there is not a single dharma that can retrogress; outside the gate, persons and dharmas are the measure, and cases of retrogressing and turning back can be counted one by one. The acceptance of dharmas is not a kind of forbearance; it is a gate that can be entered and left—the three Chinese characters for gate, practice, and conduct say precisely that it is both the place entered and the thing practised.

33. Śāriputra himself cites the Buddha's Dharma to raise a difficulty. The treatise-author records the real state of things: 「舍利弗雖現受須菩提語，亦自引佛法作難：『若無退者，盡當作佛，何以說有三乘？』」 tr. "Although Śāriputra visibly accepts Subhūti's words, he also himself cites the Buddha's Dharma to raise a difficulty: ‘If there is no one who retrogresses, all should become buddhas; why is it said that there are three vehicles?’" To accept openly and yet raise a difficulty again is the virtue of a questioner. The treatise-author uses the four Chinese characters 「自引佛法」 tr. "himself cites the Buddha's Dharma" to point out the weight of this difficulty—it is not that Śāriputra personally is unconvinced; it is that the three vehicles which the Buddha himself taught run up against this conclusion; whenever a difficulty takes the holy words as its ground, the answerer cannot suppress it by force.

34. Subhūti in turn breaks the three vehicles with the four sentences on the mark of suchness. 「須菩提還以如相四句破三乘。」 tr. "Subhūti in turn breaks the three vehicles with the four sentences on the mark of suchness." The treatise-author wraps up in one sentence that whole long stretch of four questions in the sūtra. What are called the four sentences on the mark of suchness are: the three vehicles within suchness, suchness within the three vehicles, the one, two, or three marks of suchness, and a single bodhisattva within suchness. It is called 「還」 tr. "in turn" because what Subhūti uses is still the very same knife-work with which he had just broken retrogressing and turning back: he does not contend with others over existence and non-existence, but only asks where within suchness the thing contended over can be found.

35. The Buddha praises Subhūti. 「佛歎須菩提：『善哉！若菩薩聞如中無三乘分別，不恐怖，是菩薩即能成無上道。』」 tr. "The Buddha praises Subhūti: ‘Excellent! If a bodhisattva hears that within suchness there is no discrimination of the three vehicles and is not afraid and terrified, this bodhisattva can then accomplish the unsurpassed path.’" The treatise-author gathers the sūtra's six 「不」 tr. "not" into the three Chinese characters 「不恐怖」 tr. "is not afraid and terrified", and moves the weight onto 「即能成無上道」 tr. "can then accomplish the unsurpassed path". Why is not being afraid and terrified on hearing the Dharma the mark of being able to accomplish it? Because the discrimination of the three vehicles is exactly where practitioners settle body and life; once one hears that this discrimination cannot be found within suchness and the mind does not move, one already does not take the position one has set up as one's home—only one who does not take a position as home can walk all the way to the unsurpassed.

36. Question: why does Śāriputra further ask what awakening is accomplished? The treatise-author poses a question: 「若佛說『菩薩成阿耨多羅三藐三菩提』，舍利弗何以故問『成就何等菩提』？」 tr. "If the Buddha has said, ‘the bodhisattva accomplishes anuttarā samyaksaṃbodhi’, why does Śāriputra ask, ‘what awakening does he accomplish’?" The Buddha's words have already made it clear—why ask again? This question is raised on the reader's behalf—the question and answer in the sūtra look superfluous, but the treatise-author does not let them pass, which shows precisely the fineness of his reading of the sūtra.

37. Answer: each has its own unsurpassed; the Great Vehicle is unsurpassed. The treatise-author answers: 「各各有無上，舍利弗疑故，問：『何等道無上？』答：『大乘無上。』」 tr. "Each has its own unsurpassed; because Śāriputra doubted, he asked: ‘Which path is unsurpassed?’ The answer: ‘The Great Vehicle is unsurpassed.’" This answer is of the utmost importance. What is meant by each having its own unsurpassed is that the śrāvaka path is ultimate for the śrāvaka, and the pratyekabuddha path is ultimate for the pratyekabuddha, and each can call itself unsurpassed; so merely saying ‘unsurpassed awakening’ is not yet enough to fix what is meant, and Śāriputra's doubt lies exactly here. The Buddha's answer, 「成就佛阿耨多羅三藐三菩提」 tr. "he accomplishes the Buddha's anuttarā samyaksaṃbodhi", designates one among the three ‘each its own unsurpassed’. Do not read this answer as the Buddha contradicting what he said before—what he said before was that within suchness there is no discrimination; this answer is that within speech a name must be fixed.

38. Furthermore: the Buddha says "Excellent!" because the mind that clings to the three vehicles is broken. The treatise-author gives a further explanation: 「復次，須菩提以畢竟空智慧，破著三乘心，佛讚：『善哉！』」 tr. "Furthermore, Subhūti with the wisdom of ultimate emptiness broke the mind that clings to the three vehicles, and the Buddha praised him: ‘Excellent!’" The previous explanation speaks from Śāriputra's doubt; this explanation speaks from the Buddha's praise. What the Buddha praises is not that Subhūti spoke cleverly, but that what he used was the wisdom of ultimate emptiness, and what he broke was 「著」 tr. "clinging"—not breaking the three vehicles, but breaking the mind that clings to the three vehicles. The three vehicles are the teaching the Buddha himself set up—how could there be any principle for breaking them? What is broken is only the human mind's holding them as real.

39. Subhūti says that if the mind does not sink and is not terrified, one can accomplish it. The treatise-author restates Subhūti's words: 「菩薩聞是，心不沒、不怖，則能成就阿耨多羅三藐三菩提。」 tr. "When the bodhisattva hears this and his mind does not sink and is not terrified, he can accomplish anuttarā samyaksaṃbodhi." This is the treatise-author restating the sūtra in the third person, not another dialogue. The purpose of the restatement is to carry what came before on to what follows: having spoken of breaking the mind that clings to the three vehicles, he at once says that one who hears without moving can accomplish it, precisely as a lead-in to Śāriputra's question below.

40. Śāriputra asks what awakening is accomplished. The treatise-author relates Śāriputra's question: 「三乘菩提無定相，今言成就菩提，成何等菩提？」 tr. "The awakening of the three vehicles has no fixed mark; now, when it is said that awakening is accomplished, what awakening is accomplished?" Here the treatise-author fills out Śāriputra's intent in asking more clearly: what he relies on is 「三乘菩提無定相」 tr. "the awakening of the three vehicles has no fixed mark". Since there is no fixed mark, the phrase 「成就菩提」 tr. "awakening is accomplished" falls into emptiness; asking 「成何等」 tr. "what is accomplished" is exactly asking for a fixed name. Because the question is put so clearly, the answer below shows its measure.

41. The Buddha says: he accomplishes the Buddha's anuttarā samyaksaṃbodhi. The treatise-author relates the Buddha's answer: 「成就佛阿耨多羅三藐三菩提。」 tr. "He accomplishes the Buddha's anuttarā samyaksaṃbodhi." It does not shift a single character from the sūtra. The treatise-author records it directly without adding explanation, letting the answer stand on its own; the explanation is kept for the general verdict of the next passage.

42. Entering the gate of ultimate emptiness there is one mark; coming out, the three vehicles differ. The treatise-author's general verdict: 「若入畢竟空門，一切法盡一相；若出畢竟空，三乘則有異。今佛分別諸法故說有上、中、下乘，不為畢竟空故說。」 tr. "If one enters the gate of ultimate emptiness, all dharmas are wholly of one mark; if one comes out of ultimate emptiness, the three vehicles then differ. Now the Buddha, because he discriminates dharmas, says there are the higher, middle, and lower vehicles; he does not say it for the sake of ultimate emptiness." This is the culmination of Treatise ③, and also the resolution of the second difficulty of the whole fascicle. One mark and difference are not two contradictory claims, but two ways of speaking of the same Dharma inside the gate and outside the gate: entering, all dharmas are wholly of one mark, and so within suchness there are no three vehicles; coming out, dharmas must be discriminated, and so the higher, middle, and lower vehicles are spoken of. The Buddha's speaking of three vehicles is a speaking at the time of 「分別諸法」 tr. "discriminating dharmas", not a speaking at the time of 「為畢竟空」 tr. "for the sake of ultimate emptiness"—once these two places of speaking are distinguished, the three vehicles and the one suchness do not obstruct each other. If the learner clings to one mark and slanders the three vehicles, or clings to the three vehicles and fears one mark, in both cases he is lumping together the words spoken inside the gate and outside it.

43. Subhūti asks how one who wishes to accomplish awakening should practise. Sūtra ④ begins: Subhūti addresses the Buddha: 「世尊！若菩薩摩訶薩欲成就阿耨多羅三藐三菩提，應云何行？」 tr. "World-Honored One! If a bodhisattva-mahāsattva wishes to accomplish anuttarā samyaksaṃbodhi, how should he practise?" View being settled, practice must now be asked about. This question follows directly on the Buddha's answer 「成就佛阿耨多羅三藐三菩提」 tr. "he accomplishes the Buddha's anuttarā samyaksaṃbodhi": since the fruit to be accomplished is settled as the Buddha's awakening, one naturally asks for its road. The whole great passage below that sets out the gates of practice at large all flows from this one question.

44. The Buddha answers with the seven minds and the four matters of the ten wholesome paths. The Buddha answers: he should arouse an equal mind, 「於一切眾生亦以等心與語，無有偏黨」 tr. "and speak to all beings too with an equal mind, without partiality"; among all beings he should arouse a mind of great kindness, and speak to them too with a mind of great kindness; 「於一切眾生中下意」 tr. "among all beings, a lowly intent", and speak to them too with a lowly intent; he should give rise to a mind of safety, an unobstructed mind, and a mind without vexation, and speak to them too, each with that mind; he should give rise to a mind of love and respect, 「如父、如母、如兄、如弟、如姊、如妹、如兒子、如親族、知識」 tr. "as to a father, as to a mother, as to an elder brother, as to a younger brother, as to an elder sister, as to a younger sister, as to a son, as to kin and friends", and speak to them too with a mind of love and respect. Next he shows the way of practising the ten wholesome paths: 「亦應自不殺生，亦教人不殺生，讚不殺生法，歡喜讚歎諸不殺生者」 tr. "he should also himself not kill living beings, also teach others not to kill living beings, praise the dharma of not killing living beings, and joyfully praise all who do not kill living beings"; and so on up to himself practising no wrong view, teaching others not to practise wrong view, praising the dharma of no wrong view, and joyfully praising those without wrong view. This passage sets the pattern for the whole of Sūtra ④, and two things must first be seen clearly. First, the seven minds side by side—an equal mind, a mind of great kindness, a lowly intent, a mind of safety, an unobstructed mind, a mind without vexation, a mind of love and respect: seven in all; and each mind carries a sentence, ‘speak to them too with such-and-such a mind’—beyond the mind, it demands the words as well, not allowing mind and mouth to be in different places. Second, the four matters together—practising it oneself, teaching others, praising its dharma, and joyfully praising the people who practise its dharma; these four matters will run through all the gates of practice below. As for the ten items of the ten wholesome paths, the sūtra here gives only the two ends, beginning with 「不殺生」 tr. "not killing living beings" and ending with 「不邪見」 tr. "no wrong view", abbreviating the middle with 「乃至」 tr. "and so on up to", and does not name them one by one; the treatise-author below calls them the ten wholesome paths without giving their items either, and the reader need not fill them in here on their behalf.

45. The four dhyānas. Furthermore, one who wishes to accomplish awakening 「應自行初禪，亦教他人行初禪，讚歎行初禪法，歡喜讚歎行初禪者」 tr. "should himself practise the first dhyāna, also teach others to practise the first dhyāna, praise the dharma of practising the first dhyāna, and joyfully praise those who practise the first dhyāna"; the second dhyāna, the third dhyāna, and the fourth dhyāna are likewise. The items of the four dhyānas the sūtra lists itself: the first dhyāna, the second dhyāna, the third dhyāna, the fourth dhyāna. This passage is the first re-performance of the four-matter pattern—first the full text for one member, then the remaining members covered by 「亦如是」 tr. "are likewise". In reading the sūtra one must restore 「亦如是」 tr. "are likewise" into one round of the four matters for each member, and not take it as passing over.

46. The four immeasurable minds; the sphere of boundless space and so on up to the sphere of neither perception nor non-perception; the six perfections. Furthermore, practising a mind of kindness oneself, teaching others to practise a mind of kindness, praising its dharma, and joyfully praising those who practise it—「悲、喜、捨心亦如是」 tr. "the minds of compassion, joy, and equanimity are likewise"; the items of the four immeasurable minds appear here: kindness, compassion, joy, equanimity. Practising the sphere of boundless space oneself, and so on up to joyfully praising those who practise it—「識處、無所有處、非有想非無想處亦如是」 tr. "the sphere of boundless consciousness, the sphere of nothing whatsoever, and the sphere of neither perception nor non-perception are likewise"; their items appear here: the sphere of boundless space, the sphere of boundless consciousness, the sphere of nothing whatsoever, the sphere of neither perception nor non-perception. Oneself fully practising dānapāramitā, and so on up to joyfully praising—「尸羅、羼提、毘梨耶、禪、般若波羅蜜亦如是」 tr. "śīla, kṣānti, vīrya, dhyāna, and prajñāpāramitā are likewise"; the items of the six perfections appear here: giving, morality, patience, vigour, meditation, prajñā. Three groups of practice-gates stand side by side in one passage, and each group has all four matters. What is most worth noting in this passage is that the six perfections stand in the same line with the four dhyānas, the four immeasurables, and the four formless absorptions, and are not set up as a separate, higher stage: under the frame of ‘practising it oneself, teaching others, praising the dharma, rejoicing’, all the gates of practice are laid out flat alike.

47. The emptinesses, the limbs of the path, samādhi, the liberations, the successive absorptions, the ten powers and so on up to great kindness and great compassion, and the twelve links of causes and conditions. Furthermore, practising inner emptiness oneself, and so on up to joyfully praising, 「乃至無法有法空亦如是」 tr. "and so on up to the emptiness of non-existent and existent dharmas, likewise"; practising the four foundations of mindfulness oneself, and so on up to joyfully praising, 「乃至八聖道分亦如是」 tr. "and so on up to the eightfold noble path, likewise"; himself cultivating 「空三昧、無相、無作三昧」 tr. "the emptiness samādhi, the signless, and the non-action samādhi", also teaching others to cultivate them, praising, and joyfully praising; practising the eight liberations oneself, practising the nine successive absorptions oneself, each also with the four matters; oneself fully possessing the Buddha's ten powers, also teaching others to possess them fully, praising, and joyfully praising; 「自行四無所畏、四無礙智、十八不共法、大慈大悲」 tr. "himself practising the four fearlessnesses, the four unobstructed knowledges, the eighteen unshared dharmas, and great kindness and great compassion", likewise; 「自逆順觀十二因緣」 tr. "himself contemplating the twelve links of causes and conditions in reverse and forward order", likewise. It closes: the bodhisattva-mahāsattva who wishes to accomplish awakening 「應如是行」 tr. "should practise thus". What is listed in this passage the sūtra mostly covers with its two ends plus 「乃至」 tr. "and so on up to": from inner emptiness to the emptiness of non-existent and existent dharmas, the sūtra does not give the names one by one; from the four foundations of mindfulness to the eightfold noble path, it does not give the names one by one either; of the eight liberations, the nine successive absorptions, the Buddha's ten powers, the four fearlessnesses, the four unobstructed knowledges, and the eighteen unshared dharmas, the sūtra gives only the general names and does not list their members. The only one that can be counted out item by item is this samādhi—emptiness, the signless, non-action. The gates of practice are many, but the format does not change: the four matters and nothing else.

48. Knowing suffering, severing origination, realising cessation, and cultivating the path; the fruit of srota-āpanna and so on up to the fruit of arhat; the path of the pratyekabuddha; the bodhisattva's position; purifying lands and bringing beings to accomplishment; the supernormal powers; the omniscience of all kinds; severing the fetters and their habitual residues. Furthermore, 「自應知苦、斷集、滅證、修道」 tr. "he himself should know suffering, sever origination, realise cessation, and cultivate the path", also teaching others, praising, and joyfully praising—their aspects of practice appear here: knowing suffering, severing origination, realising cessation, cultivating the path. 「自生須陀洹果證智而不證實際」 tr. "himself giving rise to the knowledge of realisation of the fruit of srota-āpanna, yet not realising the limit of reality", also teaching others to settle in the fruit of srota-āpanna, praising its dharma, and joyfully praising those who obtain the fruit; 「斯陀含果、阿那含果、阿羅漢果亦如是」 tr. "the fruit of sakṛdāgāmin, the fruit of anāgāmin, and the fruit of arhat are likewise"—the items srota-āpanna, sakṛdāgāmin, anāgāmin, and arhat appear here. 「自生辟支佛道證知而不證辟支佛道」 tr. "himself giving rise to the realising knowledge of the path of the pratyekabuddha, yet not realising the path of the pratyekabuddha", also teaching others to settle in the path of the pratyekabuddha, and so on up to joyfully praising. Next it comes to himself entering the bodhisattva's position, himself purifying buddha-worlds and bringing beings to accomplishment, himself arousing the bodhisattva's supernormal powers, himself giving rise to the omniscience of all kinds, himself severing all the fetters and their habitual residues—each with the four matters. It closes: 「應如是行」 tr. "should practise thus". In this passage there is a stroke most worth noting: for the four fruits and the path of the pratyekabuddha, the sūtra in each case adds a turning phrase, 「證智而不證實際」 tr. "the knowledge of realisation, yet not realising the limit of reality" and 「證知而不證辟支佛道」 tr. "realising knowledge, yet not realising the path of the pratyekabuddha". That the bodhisattva gives rise to the knowledge of realisation of the fruits of the two vehicles and yet does not take their realisation is the eye of this passage—it is not that he does not know the two vehicles; he knows them and does not abide in them; and toward others he still teaches them, praises them, and rejoices in them. Do not read 「教人著須陀洹果中」 tr. "teaching others to settle in the fruit of srota-āpanna" as urging people to take the small; the sūtra, precisely with the word 「著」 tr. "settle in", truthfully records the capacity of those whom it teaches.

49. The accomplishment of life-span and the accomplishment of the abiding of the Dharma; training in the power of skilful means and obtaining non-obstruction; from the very first not receiving. Furthermore, himself taking up the accomplishment of life-span, himself accomplishing the abiding of the Dharma, also teaching others, praising, and joyfully praising. Then comes the general conclusion: one who wishes to accomplish awakening 「應如是行，亦應如是學般若波羅蜜方便力」 tr. "should practise thus, and should also thus train in the power of skilful means of prajñāpāramitā"; when he trains thus and practises thus, 「當得無礙色，得無礙受、想、行、識，乃至得無礙法住」 tr. "he will obtain unobstructed form, obtain unobstructed feeling, perception, constructions, and consciousness, and so on up to obtaining the unobstructed abiding of the Dharma". Why? 「是菩薩摩訶薩從本已來，不受色，不受受、想、行、識，乃至不受一切種智」 tr. "this bodhisattva-mahāsattva, from the very first, does not receive form, does not receive feeling, perception, constructions, and consciousness, and so on up to does not receive the omniscience of all kinds"; why? 「色不受者為非色，乃至一切種智不受者為非一切種智」 tr. "form not received is not form, and so on up to the omniscience of all kinds not received is not the omniscience of all kinds". The gates of practice close here, and the place where they close is exactly this chapter's 「如」 tr. "suchness". That one can practise all these things widely and yet be unobstructed lies not in adding strength to the things, but in the two Chinese characters 「不受」 tr. "not receiving": from the very first not receiving form, and so on up to not receiving the omniscience of all kinds. And why not receiving can stand, the sūtra itself gives the principle—form not received is not form; the omniscience of all kinds not received is not the omniscience of all kinds. The passage before spoke of practice; here it speaks of what practice relies on; with this section, the vast gates of practice of Sūtra ④ do not fall into a heap of the marks of things.

50. Two thousand bodhisattvas obtain the acceptance of the non-arising of dharmas. 「說是菩薩行品時，二千菩薩得無生法忍。」 tr. "When this chapter on the bodhisattva's practice was expounded, two thousand bodhisattvas obtained the acceptance of the non-arising of dharmas." Sūtra ④ closes with this narrative sentence. It should be noticed that the sūtra here calls itself 「菩薩行品」 tr. "the chapter on the bodhisattva's practice", which differs from what the chapter's title calls it—the sūtra itself labels the passage it expounds as the bodhisattva's practice, which fits exactly the fact that this passage speaks only of the gates of practice. The assembly that benefits is two thousand bodhisattvas; the mark of the benefit is the acceptance of the non-arising of dharmas; at the very end of the fascicle the treatise-author will explain, with regard to this sentence alone, why it is so.

51. The treatise-author relates Subhūti's question. Treatise ④ begins; the treatise-author explains, first relating the question: 「菩薩欲成無上道者，云何應行？」 tr. "The bodhisattva who wishes to accomplish the unsurpassed path—how should he practise?" It has the same meaning as the sūtra's 「應云何行」 tr. "how should he practise" but changes the word order. In explaining this great passage, the treatise-author's pattern is first to cite one sentence of the sūtra and then at once to explain it by human feeling and the principles of things; the reader can read on following the rhythm of ‘first cite, then explain’.

52. The Buddha answers: arouse an equal mind, without partiality. The treatise-author cites the Buddha's answer: 「應起等心，於一切眾生無有偏黨。」 tr. "He should arouse an equal mind, without partiality toward all beings." Among the seven minds he cites the equal mind alone first, because the equal mind is the root of the six minds that follow: only once partiality is broken do the mind of kindness, the lowly intent, and so on up to the mind of love and respect have ground on which to stand. The treatise-author below gives three successive explanations of the equal mind, which shows precisely its weight.

53. The equal mind, first: all three divisions—enemies, kin, and those in between—are regarded with the thought of affection. The treatise-author first explains 「眾生」 tr. "beings": 「五眾和合，假名眾生，如車、如林。」 tr. "The five aggregates come together and are provisionally named beings, like a cart, like a forest." Next he explains 「一切」 tr. "all": 「一切眾生者，盡舉十方六道，無有遺餘。」 tr. "‘All beings’ takes up entirely the ten directions and the six destinies, with nothing left out." Next he brings out what is to be remedied: 「一切眾生法，各行三分：怨、親、中人。」 tr. "The way of all beings is each to act in three divisions: enemies, kin, and those in between." Therefore the Buddha teaches the bodhisattva the equal mind: toward all beings 「皆有親愛想，莫生怨心，莫生中人心」 tr. "to have the thought of affection for all, not to give rise to the mind toward an enemy, not to give rise to the mind toward someone in between". These three steps are very orderly: first he takes apart the person who is the object—the five aggregates come together and are provisionally named beings, like a cart, like a forest, cart and forest both being provisional names gathered from many parts; then he stretches out the extent of the object—the ten directions and the six destinies, with nothing left out; last he points out the three compartments into which the human mind naturally divides people. The equal mind is not levelling the three compartments into indifference; it is raising all three alike into affection. The phrase ‘not to give rise to the mind toward someone in between’ is especially fine: not to feel enmity toward an enemy is already hard, but not even the unrelated person is allowed to be set aside as ‘unrelated’—only this is equal.

54. The equal mind, second: leaving the two minds of hatred and love and practising the mind of kind affection. The treatise-author explains further: 「復次，眾生有二種：愛及憎。」 tr. "Furthermore, beings have two kinds: love and hatred." The Buddha says that toward all beings one should leave these two minds: 「莫生憎、愛」 tr. "do not give rise to hatred or love". He also draws a distinction himself: 「愛者，貪欲，煩惱心，不應行；當行慈愛心。」 tr. "Love is greed and desire, a mind of affliction, and should not be practised; one should practise the mind of kind affection." Next he brings up the ways of the world: 「世間法，愛念妻子、牛馬等，憎惡怨賊等。菩薩轉此世間法，但行慈愛心於一切眾生。」 tr. "The way of the world is to love and cherish wife and children, oxen and horses, and the like, and to hate and loathe enemies and thieves and the like. The bodhisattva turns this way of the world and practises only the mind of kind affection toward all beings." The previous explanation spoke in three divisions; this one speaks in two, and is more direct. And the most important thing in it is a distinction: having said 「莫生憎、愛」 tr. "do not give rise to hatred or love", he also says 「當行慈愛心」 tr. "one should practise the mind of kind affection"—is this not self-contradictory? The treatise-author separates them clearly—the love to be left is the love of greed, desire, and affliction; the love to be practised is kind affection. The two share a name but differ in substance: greedy love is tied to one's own desire; kind affection is tied to the other's obtaining happiness. The five Chinese characters 「轉此世間法」 tr. "turns this way of the world" are the place to set one's hand: it is not making some other kind of mind; it is turning the love and cherishing people already have, away from wife and children, oxen and horses, to bestow it on all.

55. The equal mind, third: people of six grades, three evil and three good; the bodhisattva practises the sixth mind. The treatise-author's third explanation: 「復次，『等心』者，菩薩生法喜，於一切眾生，欲令皆至佛道」 tr. "Furthermore, ‘the equal mind’ is that the bodhisattva gives rise to the joy of the Dharma and, toward all beings, wishes to bring them all to the Buddha path"; the bodhisattva 「自捨憎愛心，亦捨眾生憎愛心加己」 tr. "himself gives up the mind of hatred and love, and also gives up the hatred and love that beings direct at him". Next he lists the grades of people in the world: evil, great evil, evil within evil; good, great good, good within good. The evil: 「如人以惡事加己，還報之以惡事」 tr. "as when someone does an evil thing to him, and he repays it with an evil thing"; yet the Dharma of the buddhas holds an equal mind toward all beings: 「不應起惡念，何況起身行、口行」 tr. "one should not give rise to an evil thought, how much less to acts of body and acts of speech"; the great evil: 「如無人侵己，而以惡加人」 tr. "as when no one has encroached on him, and yet he does evil to others"; evil within evil: 「如人以好心供給慈念，而反以惡心毀害」 tr. "as when someone with a good mind provides for him and thinks of him with kindness, and he in return harms him with an evil mind". The good: 「如人以好事於己，還以善報」 tr. "as when someone does a good thing for him, and he repays it with good"; the great good: 「如人於己無善，而以善事利益」 tr. "as when someone has done him no good, and yet he benefits him with good things"; good within good: 「如人以惡事害於己，而以善事乃至身命供養」 tr. "as when someone harms him with an evil thing, and yet he makes offerings to him with good things, even with his body and life". At the end he decides: 「菩薩捨是三惡，過是二種善，行第六心於一切眾生。」 tr. "The bodhisattva gives up these three evils, passes beyond these two kinds of good, and practises the sixth mind toward all beings." The order of this passage is the treatise-author's own listing; the six names in order are evil, great evil, evil within evil, good, great good, good within good; what is called the sixth mind is the last of these six names, good within good. Giving up the first three, passing beyond the first two of the latter three, and practising the sixth—the treatise-author's numbers correspond one by one with his list, with no need to seek outside. And the criterion of the six grades is consistent: all are set up in terms of ‘how others act on me, and how I repay them.’ Evil within evil repays a good mind with evil; good within good repays an evil deed with body and life—the two ends stand facing each other, which shows that what is called the equal mind is extended alike even to the hardest place. Besides this, the sentence 「自捨憎愛心，亦捨眾生憎愛心加己」 tr. "himself gives up the mind of hatred and love, and also gives up the hatred and love that beings direct at him" must be looked at closely: not only does one not give rise to hatred and love oneself, one also lets go of the hatred and love that others direct at one; otherwise, the moment someone directs hatred at one, the equal mind is broken.

56. Question: not yet having obtained the Dharma body, how can he practise this mind? The treatise-author poses a question: 「是菩薩未得法身，云何能行是心？」 tr. "This bodhisattva has not yet obtained the Dharma body; how can he practise this mind?" This question is asked with great realism. Making offerings to enemies and thieves with one's body and life is the business of a bodhisattva of the Dharma body; while the ordinary fleshly body is still there, how can one bear it? Whoever, reading a lofty teaching, thinks ‘this is not something I can practise’—this question is raised on his behalf. The five rounds of answer below mean precisely to put this matter back where it can be practised.

57. Answer, first: seeking the unsurpassed path, one should practise the unsurpassed Dharma—the simile of the merchant on a dangerous road. The treatise-author answers: 「是菩薩求無上道，應行無上法，受如是難為苦行，乃成無上道。」 tr. "This bodhisattva seeks the unsurpassed path; he should practise the unsurpassed Dharma and take on such ascetic practices hard to do, and then he accomplishes the unsurpassed path." And he gives a simile: 「譬如估客，於險道中備受諸苦，乃得大利。」 tr. "It is like a merchant who, on a dangerous road, undergoes every kind of suffering, and then obtains great profit." The first answer speaks from the matching of cause and effect: since what is sought is unsurpassed, what is practised cannot but be unsurpassed; to wish to take an unsurpassed fruit with ordinary practice does not make sense. The simile of the merchant takes his willing acceptance: it is not that the merchant does not know the suffering of the dangerous road, only that, because the profit he aims at is great, the suffering can be borne. This simile does not allow one to see ascetic practice as a penalty imposed from outside—it is the price one is willing to pay after doing one's own reckoning.

58. Answer, second: because he deeply believes in ultimate emptiness, he can make offerings to enemies and thieves. 「復次，是菩薩聞佛法正體——所謂畢竟空，無我、無我所，無一定實法，所見、所聞、所知皆是虛誑，如幻、如夢；深信是法故，能以身命供養怨賊。」 tr. "Furthermore, this bodhisattva hears the proper substance of the Buddha's Dharma—namely ultimate emptiness: no self, nothing belonging to a self, no single fixed real dharma; what is seen, what is heard, and what is known are all false and deceptive, like an illusion, like a dream; because he deeply believes this Dharma, he can make offerings to enemies and thieves with his body and life." The second answer turns to view. The previous answer spoke of the power of vow; this answer speaks of the power of view: since he deeply believes in no self and nothing belonging to a self, the body he gives up was never his own, and the harm done by enemies and thieves is also like a thing in an illusion or a dream. This answer runs in one vein with this chapter's 「如」 tr. "suchness"—the First Part spoke of the non-duality of suchness, and the Last Part redeems it here as the power to give up.

59. Answer, third: this body is the root of sin and defilement; exchanging a worn-out body for great profit. 「復次，菩薩知此身從罪業煩惱顛倒因緣生，所見、所聞皆是虛誑罪垢之本；若有人來欲加害於我，我宜歡喜受之，以此弊身而得無上道利，何為不與！」 tr. "Furthermore, the bodhisattva knows that this body is born from the causes and conditions of sinful deeds, afflictions, and inversion, and that what is seen and what is heard are all false and deceptive, the root of sin and defilement; if someone comes wishing to harm me, I should gladly accept it; with this worn-out body I obtain the profit of the unsurpassed path—why should I not give it!" The third answer speaks of the body itself. The previous answer broke its reality with illusion and dream; this answer makes plain its inferiority by sin and defilement: since it is born of the causes and conditions of sinful deeds, afflictions, and inversion, keeping it has nothing to prize. The four Chinese characters 「何為不與」 tr. "why should I not give it" portray the bodhisattva's frankness—not enduring pain, but having done the sum and found that it adds up.

60. Answer, fourth: teaching by the body so that beings believe and accept. 「復次，菩薩發心，深愛眾生，欲利益故，自以己身供養怨賊，欲令眾生効己所行；以有眾生說法教者不必肯受故，以身教令其信受。」 tr. "Furthermore, the bodhisattva, having aroused the mind, deeply loves beings, and because he wishes to benefit them, himself makes offerings to enemies and thieves with his own body, wishing to have beings imitate what he does; because there are beings who, taught by the expounding of the Dharma, will not necessarily accept it, he teaches them with his body so that they believe and accept." The fourth answer turns from benefiting oneself to benefiting others. The first three answers all say why the bodhisattva himself can give up; this answer says that giving up is teaching: there is a kind of being who, taught by words, does not accept, and believes only on seeing the person's bodily conduct. Here a very weighty verdict is set down—the reason teaching by the body cannot be abandoned is not that it is higher than teaching by words, but that there is a kind of capacity that can be delivered only by it.

61. Answer, fifth: for those who speak of seeking the path while their bodily conduct does not match, he teaches with his body. 「復次，多有人發言求無上道而身行不稱；亦以是故，菩薩以身教之，令堅心行此難事。欲求無上道，當行善中善法，為此難事，爾乃可得。」 tr. "Furthermore, there are many who declare in words that they seek the unsurpassed path, while their bodily conduct does not match; for this reason too the bodhisattva teaches them with his body, so that they make their minds firm and do this hard thing. Wishing to seek the unsurpassed path, one should practise the dharma of good within good; doing this hard thing, only then can one obtain it." This answer follows the previous one and advances further: what it remedies is the sickness of speech and bodily conduct being apart. And the sentence 「當行善中善法」 tr. "one should practise the dharma of good within good" links straight back to the sixth mind set up in passage 55—when someone harms one with an evil thing and one makes offerings to him with body and life, that is good within good; so the hard thing here is the sixth mind of that passage. The treatise-author ties before and after together; he is not giving examples offhand.

62. By countless causes and conditions such as these. 「如是等無量因緣，自以身命供養怨賊。」 tr. "By countless causes and conditions such as these, he himself makes offerings to enemies and thieves with his body and life." With this sentence the treatise-author gathers up the five answers. Marking it 「無量」 tr. "countless" says that the five answers given are not an exhaustive number, only those that can be spoken of. This closing sentence also reminds the reader: what was asked before was 「未得法身，云何能行」 tr. "not yet having obtained the Dharma body, how can he practise", and the answers never lay in the realm of supernormal powers at all, but wholly in the weighing of vow, view, and the body, and in the capacity for teaching—whether it can be practised or not is decided in these few places.

63. Question: what difference is there between the equal mind and the mind of kindness? The treatise-author poses a question: 「等心、慈心有何等異？」 tr. "What difference is there between the equal mind and the mind of kindness?" The first two of the seven minds are the equal mind and the mind of great kindness; both are aroused toward all beings, and their boundary is easily blurred. This question is not a quibble over words—if the two minds were not different, why would the Buddha set them side by side; if they are different, where does the difference lie? Below, three accounts are set side by side in answer.

64. Answer, first: the equal mind is the four immeasurable minds; the mind of kindness is one immeasurable. The treatise-author answers: 「等心者是四無量心，慈心者是一無量。」 tr. "The equal mind is the four immeasurable minds; the mind of kindness is one immeasurable." The first account explains by inclusion: the equal mind is the general, containing the four immeasurables; the mind of kindness is the particular, one of the four. The items of the four immeasurables Sūtra ④ has already given itself above—kindness, compassion, joy, equanimity. By this account, the two minds are not two side by side but a difference of general and particular.

65. Someone says: first giving up enemy and kin is the equal mind; afterwards adding pity is the mind of kindness. 「有人言：初捨怨親是等心，後加愍念是慈心。」 tr. "Someone says: first giving up enemy and kin is the equal mind; afterwards adding pity is the mind of kindness." The second account explains by sequence: first level the discrimination, then arouse the pity; the equal mind comes first as the ground, the mind of kindness comes after as the function. The treatise-author marks it 「有人言」 tr. "someone says" and records it, noting that it is another's account, not his own verdict. Setting the three accounts side by side without forcing them into one is precisely this treatise's constant way of preserving difference.

66. Furthermore, someone says: the equal mind contemplates suchness, the limit of reality, and the nature of dharmas; the mind of kindness loves and cherishes beings. 「復次，有人言：等心者，觀眾生如如、實際、法性，是法皆無為、無量故等；愛念眾生，是名慈心。」 tr. "Furthermore, someone says: the equal mind contemplates beings as like suchness, the limit of reality, and the nature of dharmas; these dharmas are all unconditioned and immeasurable, and therefore it is equal; loving and cherishing beings is called the mind of kindness." The third account explains by the object: the 「等」 tr. "equal" of the equal mind comes from the dharmas contemplated being unconditioned and immeasurable—since suchness, the limit of reality, and the nature of dharmas have no bounds, the mind contemplating them is of itself without partiality; the kindness of the mind of kindness falls upon loving and cherishing beings. This account runs most closely with this chapter's 「如」 tr. "suchness": the First Part spoke of suchness as without duality and without difference, and here it is taken as that from which the equal mind comes. Yet the mind of kindness is still spoken of with respect to beings, which shows that the treatise-author does not dissolve the mind of kindness too into the contemplation of emptiness.

67. Why the mind of compassion is not spoken of. 「所以不說悲心者，悲心或憂念眾生，積集此心，心則退沒。」 tr. "The reason the mind of compassion is not spoken of is that the mind of compassion sometimes grieves over beings, and when this mind accumulates, the mind retreats and sinks." Also: 「或有眾生不愛菩薩悲念，言：『汝何以不自憂其身而念他人？』慈心無如是事，易攝眾生故，但說慈心。」 tr. "Or there are beings who do not love the bodhisattva's compassionate concern and say: ‘Why do you not worry about yourself instead of thinking of others?’ The mind of kindness has no such matter, and because it easily gathers in beings, only the mind of kindness is spoken of." This passage answers a question the sūtra itself never asked: since the four immeasurables are the substance of the equal mind, why among the seven minds does the Buddha mark out the mind of great kindness alone and not the mind of compassion? The treatise-author brings out two causes and conditions: one concerns oneself—the grieving of the mind of compassion, accumulated over time, makes the mind retreat and sink; the other concerns others—beings do not necessarily welcome another's pity, and on the contrary take receiving it as being slighted. Kindness and compassion originally go together; the choice here is made with respect to this one point, ‘meeting with people’—the sūtra says precisely 「亦以大慈心與語」 tr. "and speak to them too with a mind of great kindness", and what is being discussed is the moment of speaking or keeping silent and responding to people.

68. Question: the bodhisattva is a great person; how does he arouse a lowly intent among beings? The treatise-author poses a question: 「若眾生有三種：上、中、下，菩薩福德智慧積集故，應是大人，云何言『於一切眾生中起下意』？」 tr. "If beings are of three kinds, high, middle, and low, and the bodhisattva, because he has accumulated merit and wisdom, should be a great person, how can it be said, ‘among all beings arouse a lowly intent’?" The third of the seven minds is the lowly intent. What the questioner holds to is a ready-made principle: positions are high and low, and courtesy has its degrees; since the bodhisattva is a great person, would not placing himself low misrepresent the fact? This question is asked squarely and properly, and so the six answers below each answer from principle, not muddling through with a word about the virtue of humility.

69. Answer, first: all dharmas are impermanent; great and small are set up by worldly ways. The treatise-author answers: the bodhisattva thinks thus: 「一切法無常，一切眾生上、中、下皆歸磨滅，是中何者是大？何者是小？人以世法故有大小。」 tr. "All dharmas are impermanent; all beings, high, middle, and low, return alike to being ground away; among these, which is great? Which is small? It is by worldly ways that people have great and small." The first answer speaks from impermanence. Since the three grades, high, middle, and low, return alike to being ground away, what one relies on to divide great and small does not abide long; and what is called great and small is a name established 「人以世法故」 tr. "by people through worldly ways", not a mark really existing in dharmas. This answer first dismantles the questioner's premise—it is not that the bodhisattva is being modest, but that the matter of great and small has no place to stand in the first place.

70. Answer, second: great and small are not fixed; they change with place and time. 「復次，大小不定，此國以為大，餘國以為小；於此為大，於彼為小；如今世卑賤，後世為天王。如是業因緣，在世間輪轉，貴賤大小無定。如水火貴賤隨時，用捨無定。」 tr. "Furthermore, great and small are not fixed: this country takes something as great, another country takes it as small; here it is great, there it is small; as one lowly and mean in this life becomes a heavenly king in the next. By the causes and conditions of deeds such as these, turning round in the world, noble and mean, great and small are not fixed. As water and fire are dear or cheap according to the time, and whether they are used or set aside is not fixed." The second answer speaks from non-fixity. The previous answer broke its permanence by impermanence; this answer breaks its fixity by relativity: the same person, the same thing, when place and time change, is judged wholly differently. The simile of water and fire is very plain—in drought water is dear, in cold fire is dear; dearness and cheapness do not lie in water and fire themselves. That being so, to rely on one's present position and take oneself as great is to take a judgement of the moment as the reality.

71. Answer, third: knowing that merit is ultimately empty, he does not have great and small. 「復次，菩薩雖有功德，知是功德畢竟空、如幻、如夢，不著此功德，不有是大小。」 tr. "Furthermore, though the bodhisattva has merit, he knows that this merit is ultimately empty, like an illusion, like a dream; he does not cling to this merit and does not have this great and small." The third answer speaks of merit itself. The first two answers broke the worldly ways relied upon; this answer breaks the merit leaned upon. The questioner said that the bodhisattva, 「福德智慧積集故，應是大人」 tr. "because he has accumulated merit and wisdom, should be a great person", taking merit precisely as the basis; the treatise-author sets his hand directly on this basis—merit is not absent, but it is ultimately empty, like an illusion, like a dream, and cannot be clung to so as to exalt oneself. This answer follows the same line of reasoning as passage 58: this chapter's suchness is redeemed here as not relying on oneself.

72. Answer, fourth: only the Buddha can know who has the causes and conditions of the Buddha path; belittling them is belittling a future buddha. 「復次，一切眾生中有佛道因緣者，唯佛能知。」 tr. "Furthermore, among all beings, who has the causes and conditions of the Buddha path only the Buddha can know." The bodhisattva thinks thus: 「若我以眾生形貌、才能——以此事輕者，則為輕未來佛；若輕佛則為永了。」 tr. "If I belittle beings for their appearance and abilities—belittling them for such things—then I belittle a future buddha; and if I belittle a buddha, then I am finished for ever." The fourth answer speaks of the one belittled. The first three answers said that oneself is not to be relied on; this answer says that the other cannot be measured: among beings, who has the causes and conditions of the Buddha path none but the Buddha can know; judging people by appearance and ability, the one belittled may be a future buddha. This answer gives the lowly intent its hardest reason—it is not a posture; it is not daring to gamble.

73. Answer, fifth: having vowed to deliver beings, if they have attained nothing he fails them—the simile of the host inviting guests. 「復次，菩薩作是念：『我誓度一切眾生；若眾生無所得，我則孤負眾生。』譬如主人請客，則應敬客而自卑；若無所供設，是則負愧於客。」 tr. "Furthermore, the bodhisattva thinks thus: ‘I have vowed to deliver all beings; if beings have attained nothing, then I have failed beings.’ It is like a host who invites guests: he should honour the guests and humble himself; if he has nothing to set before them, he is ashamed before his guests." The fifth answer speaks from the original vow. Since the bodhisattva has himself vowed to deliver beings, beings are like guests who have received an invitation; a host should of course honour his guests and humble himself, how much more when what he is to set out is not yet prepared. This simile moves the lowly intent from virtuous conduct to one's due role: it is not that the bodhisattva is of a modest temperament, but that he has already placed himself in the host's seat while the guests have not yet received what is to be provided—he is too taken up with his shame to have leisure for anything else; how could he be self-important?

74. Answer, sixth: self-importance gives rise to hatred; with a lowly mind there is no resentment—the simile of the master beating the slave. 「復次，以自大心故，則喜生瞋恚；憍慢是瞋之本，瞋是一切重罪之根。」 tr. "Furthermore, because of a self-important mind, hatred readily arises; pride is the root of hatred, and hatred is the root of all grave sins." If the bodhisattva arouses a lowly mind toward beings, 「眾生若罵、若打，則無恚恨；譬如大家打奴，奴不敢瞋恨」 tr. "if beings scold him or beat him, he has no resentment; as when a master beats a slave, the slave dares not hate"; if the bodhisattva exalts himself and in his thoughts looks down on beings, 「眾生侵害，忿然生怒；如奴打大家，則起瞋怒」 tr. "when beings encroach on and harm him, he flares up in anger; as when a slave beats the master, hatred and anger arise". It closes: 「下意有如是等種種利益故，菩薩應當行。」 tr. "Because the lowly intent has benefits of all kinds such as these, the bodhisattva should practise it." The sixth answer speaks of faults and benefits, and is the most practically useful of the six. Its line of reasoning is a chain: pride gives rise to hatred, and hatred is the root of grave sins; and the reason a person's being insulted turns into anger is mostly that he has first placed himself high in his mind. The simile takes the two directions of master and slave in contrast, taking only the one meaning ‘when the position one occupies differs, the reaction to insult differs’. The learner here should recognise how to use it: putting the mind low is not an ornament of self-cultivation; it is taking the firewood out from under the pot of hatred.

75. The mind of safety: giving the happiness of this life, of the next life, and of the ultimate. The treatise-author explains the fourth of the seven minds: 「『安隱心』者，與今世、後世、究竟樂，非如父母、知識與現世樂。」 tr. "‘A mind of safety’ gives the happiness of this life, of the next life, and of the ultimate—not as father and mother and friends give the happiness of the present life." The method of explanation is to mark it off by the happiness given: what father, mother, and friends give stops at the present life; what the mind of safety gives extends through this life, the next life, and on to the ultimate. This distinction is very important—if safety were only making people comfortable for the moment, it would not differ from worldly kind love; only with the addition of the two further layers, the next life and the ultimate, does it show itself as the mind of a bodhisattva.

76. The unobstructed mind: penetrating without obstruction toward those who do not know kindness and those sent by Māra. The treatise-author explains the fifth of the seven minds. When the bodhisattva benefits beings with an equal mind, a mind of kindness, and a lowly mind, 「若有不知恩人來惱菩薩，不信所行，謂為欺誑，為求名故，無有實事」 tr. "if there are people who do not know kindness who come and vex the bodhisattva, not believing what he does, calling it deceit, done to seek fame, with nothing real in it"; and there are those who, 「為魔所使，來惱菩薩」 tr. "sent by Māra, come and vex the bodhisattva"—these are 「惡中之惡，不識恩分」 tr. "the evil within evil, who do not recognise a kindness done"; and 「菩薩等心，於此通達無礙」 tr. "the bodhisattva's equal mind penetrates this without obstruction". The unobstructed mind is not a loose way of saying the mind is broad; it is named with respect to a specific obstruction: to bestow kindness and on the contrary be suspected of deceit and of seeking fame is one of the obstructions most easily met by one who walks the bodhisattva path. The treatise-author here calls such people 「惡中之惡」 tr. "the evil within evil", linking back exactly to the name set up in passage 55—those who, when someone with a good mind provides for them and thinks of them with kindness, in return harm him with an evil mind. The name set up before is used here, which shows that the verdict of the six grades is not idle text.

77. The mind without vexation: though beings have great sins and faults, he wishes only to benefit them. 「得是無礙心已，眾生雖有大罪大過，但欲利益，不生惱心。慈心、安隱，無礙、不惱心。」 tr. "Having obtained this unobstructed mind, though beings have great sins and great faults, he wishes only to benefit them and does not give rise to a mind of vexation. The mind of kindness, safety, non-obstruction, the mind without vexation." The treatise-author explains the sixth of the seven minds, and with one sentence threads four minds together: the mind of kindness, the mind of safety, the unobstructed mind, and the mind without vexation arise in order one from another—having kindness, one can then give ultimate happiness; able to give happiness, one is then unobstructed toward slander and vexation; unobstructed toward slander and vexation, one then does not give rise to a mind that vexes and harms, even on seeing a person's great sins and faults. Not giving rise to a mind of vexation is not failing to see their faults; it is seeing the faults while what one wishes is still only to benefit them.

78. The mind of love and respect: like a filial son's love and respect for his parents, yet extended to all. 「譬如孝子愛敬父母，如兄、如弟、如姊妹、如兒女，無婬欲心而生愛敬慈念。世人但能愛敬所親，菩薩普及一切。」 tr. "It is like a filial son who loves and respects his father and mother, and, as to an elder brother, as to a younger brother, as to sisters, as to sons and daughters, gives rise without a mind of lust to love, respect, and kind thought. Worldly people can love and respect only those close to them; the bodhisattva extends it universally to all." The treatise-author explains the last of the seven minds. The sūtra originally gave as father, as mother, as elder brother, as younger brother, as elder sister, as younger sister, as son, as kin and friends; the treatise-author takes the filial son's love and respect as the simile and specially adds a distinction: 「無婬欲心」 tr. "without a mind of lust". The love of relatives is the most intimate, and so it is taken as the simile; and the love of relatives is also the most easily mixed with the taint of feeling, and so this distinction is set down at once. The last sentence points out the difference between the simile and what it illustrates: the love and respect of worldly people stop at those close to them, while the bodhisattva extends the same intimacy universally to all—the simile is taken for its quality, not for its extent.

79. The acceptance of beings is the first gate of the acceptance of dharmas. 「得是柔軟清淨好心，名眾生忍，是法忍初門。」 tr. "Obtaining this soft, pure, good mind is called the acceptance of beings; it is the first gate of the acceptance of dharmas." With this sentence the treatise-author sums up the seven minds. The seven minds are not seven scattered virtues; taken together they are one soft and pure mind; this mind, accomplished upon beings, is called the acceptance of beings. And the acceptance of beings is again not the end point but 「法忍初門」 tr. "the first gate of the acceptance of dharmas"—Treatise ③ above has already glossed 「法忍」 tr. "acceptance of dharmas" as the gate of the Dharma, the practice of the Dharma, the conduct of the Dharma, and here it fits exactly into place: only one who can hold firm in acceptance upon beings can step into that gate where there is no retrogressing and turning back. The two great sections of the whole fascicle secretly interlock here: on the side of view it is said that within the acceptance of dharmas there is no retrogressing and turning back; on the side of practice it is said that the acceptance of beings is the first gate of the acceptance of dharmas.

80. The ten wholesome paths are old dharmas, practised by forty kinds of practice. 「次行十善道。十善道，有佛、無佛，世間常有，是善法教。菩薩先以四十種行，行是十善道。何以故？是菩薩深念善法，心慈眾生故。」 tr. "Next he practises the ten wholesome paths. The ten wholesome paths, whether there is a Buddha or no Buddha, are always in the world; this is the teaching of wholesome dharmas. The bodhisattva first practises these ten wholesome paths by forty kinds of practice. Why? Because this bodhisattva is deeply mindful of wholesome dharmas and his mind is kind toward beings." Here the treatise-author judges the character of the ten wholesome paths: whether there is a Buddha or no Buddha they are always in the world, and so they are old dharmas—not waiting for a Buddha's appearance to exist. What are called the forty kinds of practice can be counted from the pattern of the sūtra: each item of the ten wholesome paths has the four matters—practising it oneself, teaching others, praising its dharma, and joyfully praising those who practise it—and ten times four is exactly forty. The treatise-author here does not give the items of the ten wholesome paths again, and the sūtra too gives only the two ends, not killing living beings and no wrong view, so their ten items do not appear in this fascicle. And what is answered after 「何以故」 tr. "Why?" is why the bodhisattva practises the goodness always present in the world with so close-knit a method: because he is deeply mindful of wholesome dharmas and his mind is kind toward beings, he will not treat even old dharmas carelessly.

81. The twelve matters of the dharmas of the ordinary person separated from desire: forty-eight kinds of practice. 「離欲凡夫法有十二事，亦以四十八種行。」 tr. "The dharmas of the ordinary person separated from desire have twelve matters, also practised by forty-eight kinds of practice." The treatise-author passes over it in one sentence, and the numbers are clear: each of the twelve matters has the four matters, and so there are forty-eight. What are called the twelve matters the treatise-author does not name; going by the order of listing in Sūtra ④, what the Buddha shows in order after the ten wholesome paths is the four dhyānas, four; the four immeasurable minds, four; the sphere of boundless space and so on up to the sphere of neither perception nor non-perception, four—exactly the number twelve; and all three of these classes are common to the ordinary person separated from desire and not exclusive to the Buddha's Dharma, which fits the name 「離欲凡夫法」 tr. "the dharmas of the ordinary person separated from desire". What is relied on here is only the sūtra's own order and numbers; since the treatise-author does not list the names, the reader need not seek elsewhere to match them.

82. The six perfections and so on up to the abiding of the Dharma are guest dharmas. 「六波羅蜜乃至法住，是客法，有佛說則有菩薩行。」 tr. "The six perfections and so on up to the abiding of the Dharma are guest dharmas: when there is a Buddha who expounds them, there is the bodhisattva's practice." This forms a pair with the verdict of passage 80: old dharmas are always in the world; guest dharmas exist only after a Buddha expounds them. What is called 「乃至法住」 tr. "and so on up to the abiding of the Dharma" is the long list in Sūtra ④ from the six perfections down to the accomplishment of life-span and the accomplishment of the abiding of the Dharma. The meaning of ‘guest’ is that these gates of practice are not originally in the world but are brought by a Buddha's appearing in the world; for the practitioner they are not old things of the household but must be received from a Buddha. With the two verdicts standing side by side, the gates of practice acquire a clear layering.

83. Old dharmas and guest dharmas, root and branch complete. 「上來舊法、客法，本末具足，今世得善法，智慧無礙；捨身，得法身無礙，隨意至十方教化眾生，於十方佛前修集善法。」 tr. "The old dharmas and guest dharmas above, root and branch complete: in this life one obtains wholesome dharmas, and wisdom is unobstructed; on giving up the body, one obtains an unobstructed Dharma body, goes at will to the ten directions to teach and transform beings, and cultivates and gathers wholesome dharmas before the buddhas of the ten directions." Here the treatise-author concludes the whole of the gates of practice of Sūtra ④. Root and branch: old dharmas are the root, guest dharmas the branch—root does not mean higher and lower; it is an order of before and after: the goodness always present in the world is the ground, and the Dharma the Buddha expounds is built upon it. When the two are complete, the effect in this life is wholesome dharmas and unobstructed wisdom, and the effect after giving up the body is the unobstructed Dharma body, travelling the ten directions to teach and transform, and continuing to cultivate before the buddhas of the ten directions. Only when a passage on the gates of practice has been spoken this far does its destination appear: it does not stop at non-obstruction in this life.

84. Two thousand bodhisattvas obtain the acceptance of the non-arising of dharmas—the two dharmas, existence and non-existence, complete, and the simile of the two wheels. The treatise-author cites the last sentence of the sūtra and explains it: 「『聞是法時，二千菩薩得無生法忍』者，是品說如微妙深法，亦說有行，善門、智門，二行具足。」 tr. "‘When this Dharma was heard, two thousand bodhisattvas obtained the acceptance of the non-arising of dharmas’: this chapter speaks of suchness, the subtle and deep Dharma, and also speaks of having practice—the gate of goodness and the gate of wisdom, both practices complete." Why must completeness be awaited? 「但說如法，所利少；若說有法，所利亦少。今說有、無二法，具足故，得無生法忍；譬如二輪具足故，能有所至。」 tr. "If only the dharma of suchness is spoken of, the benefit is small; if the dharma of existence is spoken of, the benefit is also small. Now the two dharmas, existence and non-existence, are spoken of, and because both are complete, one obtains the acceptance of the non-arising of dharmas; as a cart with both wheels complete can get somewhere." This passage is the culmination of the whole fascicle, and also the reason the chapter's two great sections form one chapter. The subtle and deep Dharma of suchness spoken of in the First Part and in Sūtra ③ is the gate of non-existence, the gate of wisdom; the vast gates of practice spoken of in Sūtra ④—practising oneself, teaching others, praising, rejoicing—are the gate of existence, the gate of goodness. Speaking of only one of them, the benefit is small either way; only when both are complete is there the obtaining of the acceptance of the non-arising of dharmas. The simile of the two wheels takes the point that neither can go alone: a single wheel, however round, cannot get anywhere. The learner who has read the chapter to this point should know that the emptiness of the first half and the practice of the second half are not two separate pieces of writing, but exactly the two wheels of this one cart.

85. Because the two truths are well expounded, the acceptance of the non-arising of dharmas is obtained. 「此中善說二諦故，二千菩薩得無生法忍。」 tr. "Because here the two truths were well expounded, two thousand bodhisattvas obtained the acceptance of the non-arising of dharmas." At the very end the treatise-author changes the words 「有無二法」 tr. "the two dharmas, existence and non-existence" into 「二諦」 tr. "the two truths", bringing the simile of the passage before back to the Dharma: speaking of suchness and of there being no one who obtains is the truth of the highest meaning; speaking of practice, of practising oneself, teaching others, praising, and rejoicing, is worldly truth. The reason it could bring two thousand bodhisattvas to obtain the acceptance of the non-arising of dharmas lies not in speaking deeply but in 「善說」 tr. "well expounded"—the two truths spoken together without robbing each other, so that hearers do not fall into annihilation in emptiness and do not fall into existence in practice. The conclusion of the whole chapter is just this one sentence, and the pattern of the one chapter and the dividing and joining of its two units are all within it.

Do Not Misread

Do not read 「難得」 tr. "hard to obtain" and 「易得」 tr. "easy to obtain" as the Buddha and Subhūti contradicting each other. The Buddha says hard to obtain and bears witness himself that 「亦無所得」 tr. "yet there is also nothing attained"; Subhūti says easy to obtain and marks himself 「如我解佛所說義」 tr. "as I understand the meaning of what the Buddha has said"—the two accounts come from one source. Hard is said with respect to the real state of a person contemplating, practising, cultivating and gathering, becoming a Buddha and delivering beings within ultimate emptiness; easy is said with respect to the Dharma's being originally without increase and without decrease, with nothing to cultivate and nothing to sever. In explaining the dispute over hard and easy, the treatise-author at the end does not judge which is right, but gathers it up with going in and out of the gate of the Dharma: 「入須菩提所說法門中，則無退還；出是法門，則有退還。」 tr. "Having entered the gate of the Dharma that Subhūti speaks of, there is no retrogressing and turning back; having come out of this gate of the Dharma, there is retrogressing and turning back." Hard and easy should be read in the same way.

Do not read 「無有菩薩於阿耨多羅三藐三菩提退還者」 tr. "there is no bodhisattva who retrogresses and turns back from anuttarā samyaksaṃbodhi" as denying that retrogression happens. What the four rounds of questioning in the sūtra break is the subject of retrogressing and turning back, not the phenomenon of retrogressing and turning back; what Śāriputra raised—「恒河沙等無量菩薩求佛道，若一、若二作佛，餘者皆退還」 tr. "of the countless bodhisattvas equal to the sands of the Ganges who seek the Buddha path, one or two become buddhas and the rest all retrogress and turn back"—the treatise-author does not refute by a single word. The matter of retrogressing and turning back can be counted case by case outside the gate of the Dharma; the one who retrogresses and turns back is utterly unfindable within ultimate emptiness—each of the two sentences has its own place of speaking; mix them and both are lost.

Do not read the absence of discrimination of the three vehicles within suchness as meaning that the three vehicles the Buddha taught are false. The treatise-author's verdict is very clear: 「若入畢竟空門，一切法盡一相；若出畢竟空，三乘則有異。今佛分別諸法故說有上、中、下乘，不為畢竟空故說。」 tr. "If one enters the gate of ultimate emptiness, all dharmas are wholly of one mark; if one comes out of ultimate emptiness, the three vehicles then differ. Now the Buddha, because he discriminates dharmas, says there are the higher, middle, and lower vehicles; he does not say it for the sake of ultimate emptiness." The three vehicles are the right teaching at the time of discriminating dharmas; the one suchness is the right teaching at the time of entering the gate of ultimate emptiness. Clinging to the one suchness and slandering the three vehicles, and clinging to the three vehicles and fearing the one suchness, are equally not knowing the place of speaking.

Do not read 「獨有一菩薩求佛道」 tr. "there is only a single bodhisattva seeking the Buddha path" as the thesis this chapter sets up. It is a difficulty Śāriputra inferred along the line of Subhūti's words; Subhūti at once breaks it with the four sentences, and at the end asks 「汝欲於如中乃至有一菩薩不」 tr. "would you have there be, within suchness, even a single bodhisattva", and Śāriputra answers 「不也」 tr. "no indeed"—even this 「一菩薩」 tr. "single bodhisattva" is broken along with the rest. When this chapter speaks of the one vehicle, it is not replacing three with one; three and one are alike unfindable.

Do not read 「莫生憎、愛」 tr. "do not give rise to hatred or love" and 「當行慈愛心」 tr. "one should practise the mind of kind affection" as self-contradictory. The treatise-author makes the distinction himself: 「愛者，貪欲，煩惱心，不應行；當行慈愛心。」 tr. "Love is greed and desire, a mind of affliction, and should not be practised; one should practise the mind of kind affection." What is left is the greedy love tied to one's own desire; what is practised is the kind affection tied to the other's happiness—the same name, a different substance. If this distinction is not made, the whole passage on the equal mind cannot be understood.

Do not read 「下意」 tr. "the lowly intent" as self-abasement or putting on an act. Not one of the treatise-author's six answers says that the bodhisattva is of a modest temperament: one breaks the permanence of great and small by impermanence; one breaks the fixity of great and small by relativity; one breaks self-reliance by the ultimate emptiness of merit; one breaks the belittling of others by the immeasurability of future buddhas; one makes plain his shame by the distinction of host and guest in the original vow; one makes plain its harm by pride's being the root of hatred. The lowly intent is set up on principle, not on posture.

Do not read 「教人著須陀洹果中」 tr. "teaching others to settle in the fruit of srota-āpanna" as urging people to take the fruit of the Small Vehicle. The same passage of the sūtra says plainly of the bodhisattva himself, 「自生須陀洹果證智而不證實際」 tr. "himself giving rise to the knowledge of realisation of the fruit of srota-āpanna, yet not realising the limit of reality", and 「自生辟支佛道證知而不證辟支佛道」 tr. "himself giving rise to the realising knowledge of the path of the pratyekabuddha, yet not realising the path of the pratyekabuddha"—not himself taking the realisation while teaching others to obtain the fruit is precisely giving according to capacity, not taking the small as sufficient. Nor does this contradict 「著三乘心」 tr. "the mind that clings to the three vehicles", rejected in Treatise ③: what is broken is clinging on one's own part; what is practised is responding to capacity.

Do not read 「四十種行」 tr. "forty kinds of practice" and 「四十八種行」 tr. "forty-eight kinds of practice" as other named items still awaiting investigation. Forty: each of the ten items of the ten wholesome paths has the four matters—practising it oneself, teaching others, praising the dharma, rejoicing; forty-eight: each of the twelve matters has these four matters. The ten items of the ten wholesome paths are not named here in sūtra or treatise; the twelve matters of the dharmas of the ordinary person separated from desire Sūtra ④ lists itself—the four dhyānas, the four immeasurables of kindness, compassion, joy, and equanimity, and the four formless absorptions from the sphere of boundless space to the sphere of neither perception nor non-perception—and Treatise ④ totals them as twelve matters. Beyond this, nothing may be filled in on their behalf.

Bearing on Practice

Use the four rounds of questioning to examine one's own mind of retrogressing. When a thought of retrogressing arises, ask oneself once through, in the order of the sūtra: is it form that retrogresses, is it feeling, perception, constructions, and consciousness; is there, apart from form, some self that retrogresses; is it the mark of suchness of form that retrogresses; is there, apart from the mark of suchness of form, some other thing that retrogresses. Having asked in the four places, that feeling of ‘I am going to retrogress’ finds no place to stand. This is not a word of self-consolation; it is the same road by which Subhūti that day pressed Śāriputra to answer a dozen and more 「不」 tr. "no" in a row.

Use ‘having entered this gate of the Dharma there is no retrogressing and turning back; having come out of this gate of the Dharma there is retrogressing and turning back’ to check whether one is inside the gate or outside it. There is no need to ask whether one is retrogressing; first ask which ruler one is using at this moment: if ultimate emptiness is the measure, retrogressing and turning back has no place to be established; if the gains and losses of persons and dharmas are the measure, retrogressing and turning back can be counted step by step. To notice that one has gone out of the gate is the very moment of returning to it.

Use ‘practising it oneself, teaching others, praising its dharma, joyfully praising those who practise its dharma’ as the frame of one's daily practice. Whatever dharma one cultivates, do not stop at cultivating it oneself; ask further: have I taught others? Have I praised this dharma? When I see others practising it, does my mind rejoice along with them, or not? If one of the four matters is lacking, the gate of practice leans toward oneself. Sūtra ④ threads all the gates of practice with these four matters precisely so that the practitioner turns a matter of solitary cultivation into a matter accomplished in common.

Use the seven minds, one by one, to look over how one treats people today. Before speaking with someone, check through them once: is this moment an equal mind, is there a mind of great kindness, am I willing to have a lowly intent, is what I give safety, am I unobstructed toward his faults, do I not give rise to vexation toward his vexing, do I regard him as kin and friend. In the sūtra each mind is tied to ‘speak to them too with such-and-such a mind’, which says precisely that these seven are to be tested at the point of opening the mouth, not at the point of sitting quietly.

Use 「莫生中人心」 tr. "not to give rise to the mind toward someone in between" to treat the least related people. Not to feel enmity toward an enemy is already a hard thing, yet what one fails to hold far more often is that great crowd of people who have nothing to do with me—the sūtra does not allow them to be set aside as ‘nothing to do with me’. The passers-by, colleagues, and complete strangers one meets today—try treating them once with the thought of affection, and whether the equal mind is true or false is seen at once.

Use the sixth mind to measure one's own hard places. When someone harms me with an evil thing and I make offerings to him with good things, even with my body and life, the treatise-author calls it good within good, which is also what is called the sixth mind. There is no need to leap in one step to body and life; start from the smallest place: someone treats me badly—can I today still do him one good thing of real benefit? To practise one part of it is to practise one part of the sixth mind.

Use 「憍慢是瞋之本，瞋是一切重罪之根」 tr. "pride is the root of hatred, and hatred is the root of all grave sins" to cut off the road by which anger comes. Next time anger stirs, do not deal with the anger first; turn back and find the mind that has placed itself high: being insulted and becoming angry is mostly because in the mind there was first ‘I should not have to suffer this’. The treatise-author makes the simile of master and slave in two directions to say only one thing—once the position one occupies changes, the same event is no longer an insult.

Use ‘not receiving form, and so on up to not receiving the omniscience of all kinds’ to gather in all the gates of practice. That one practises all these things widely and yet does not fall onto the marks of things lies only in the two Chinese characters 「不受」 tr. "not receiving"; and why not receiving can stand, the sūtra says itself: form not received is not form. Where practice gains strength, a mind of possession easily arises; at that moment shine this sentence on it: if what is obtained could be received, it would not be what is obtained.

Use the simile of the two wheels to examine one's own lopsidedness. Those lopsided toward emptiness love, in listening to the Dharma, to hear the highest meaning, and as soon as it comes to practising oneself, teaching others, praising, and rejoicing, they find it trivial; those lopsided toward existence are diligent in the marks of things and give rise to fear of ultimate emptiness. The treatise-author says it plainly: speak only of the dharma of suchness and the benefit is small; speak only of the dharma of existence and the benefit is also small. Take what is lacking and supply it, and the cart can then move.

Further Resonances

What the Last Part carries on from the First Part is to put a 「如」 tr. "suchness" already spoken of to its very limit back onto the field of cultivating the path, and to see whether it can withstand a threefold pressing. The First Part set up its substance with form being sarvajñā and the mark of suchness of form and the mark of suchness of sarvajñā being one suchness, without duality and without difference; it spoke of Subhūti's being born following the Buddha by the mark of suchness of the Tathāgata's not coming and not going, abiding permanently, being without distinction and without difference, and not being within the three times; and it closed with the great earth shaking in six ways; there the treatise-author had already planted a question in advance—since the practice of emptiness is the same, why did six thousand bodhisattvas, lacking the power of skilful means, fall into arhatship, like a great bird without wings that throws itself down from on high and falls? The first pressing of the Last Part is hard and easy: the gods say it is hard to obtain, the Buddha approves and bears witness himself that there is nothing attained, Subhūti insists that it is easy to obtain, and Śāriputra raises the difficulty with the fact of bodhisattvas like the sands of the Ganges retrogressing and turning back. The second pressing is the one vehicle and the three vehicles: if there is no retrogressing and turning back, will not all become buddhas—why does the Buddha speak of three vehicles? The third pressing appears not in the form of a question but in the form of practice—Subhūti asks 「應云何行」 tr. "how should he practise", and the Buddha answers at large with the seven minds and the gates of practice, which is precisely asking whether this suchness can grow practice.

The answers to the three pressings each have their key. The key to hard and easy is the acceptance of dharmas: the acceptance of dharmas is the gate of the Dharma, the practice of the Dharma, the conduct of the Dharma; inside the gate there is no retrogressing, outside the gate there is retrogressing, and so the two accounts, hard and easy, each have their place of speaking. The key to one and three is going in and out of the gate of ultimate emptiness: entering, all dharmas are wholly of one mark; coming out, the three vehicles differ; the Buddha's speaking of three vehicles is a speaking at the time of discriminating dharmas. The key to practice is the four matters and not receiving: the four matters of practising oneself, teaching others, praising, and rejoicing thread through all the gates of practice, and they are gathered up with 「從本已來，不受色」 tr. "from the very first, does not receive form", so that practice, though wide, does not fall onto the marks of things. And the three answers thread through one another—Treatise ③ takes the acceptance of dharmas as the gate of no retrogressing; Treatise ④ takes the acceptance of beings as the first gate of the acceptance of dharmas; the gate on the side of view and the gate on the side of practice are originally one road.

And why one chapter is divided into two units and yet is still one chapter, the last passage itself says clearly: 「是品說如微妙深法，亦說有行，善門、智門，二行具足。」 tr. "This chapter speaks of suchness, the subtle and deep Dharma, and also speaks of having practice—the gate of goodness and the gate of wisdom, both practices complete." The First Part and Sūtra ③ are the one wheel of suchness; Sūtra ④ is the one wheel of practice; speaking of only one of them, the benefit is small either way; only with both wheels complete can one get somewhere. At the very end the treatise-author changes this into the two truths: 「此中善說二諦故，二千菩薩得無生法忍。」 tr. "Because here the two truths were well expounded, two thousand bodhisattvas obtained the acceptance of the non-arising of dharmas." This chapter bears the banner 「大如」 tr. "the Great Suchness", yet the fruit obtained is not obtained alone where suchness is spoken of, but at the juncture where the two truths are spoken together—this is the sentence the Last Part hands back to the whole chapter. As for the chapter title's variant names, the variant readings of the editions, and the positions assigned by the sectional divisions of the ancient masters, none of these are the business of this layer; each belongs to the apparatus and to the chapter-level texts.

Further Resonances

The vein of meaning in the chapter "The Great Suchness" has something it inherits before it and something it opens after it, and the join where it takes over is so close that there is almost no seam. What it inherits is the preceding chapter, "Tending toward Omniscience": at that chapter's opening Subhūti asks where one who understands the deep prajñā should tend, and the Buddha answers 「是菩薩摩訶薩解深般若波羅蜜者，當趣一切種智」 tr. "This bodhisattva-mahāsattva who understands the deep prajñāpāramitā should tend toward the omniscience of all kinds"; the treatise's explanation in that chapter, as soon as it opens its mouth, first clears away the view that 「般若波羅蜜非趣、非不趣」 tr. "prajñāpāramitā neither tends nor does not tend", explaining that this tending is not the outside paths' tending from cause to fruit, from this life to the next life, but a tending 「因果相似故」 tr. "because cause and fruit resemble each other". At the end of that chapter, the Buddha himself speaks of the causes and conditions by which awakening cannot be obtained through form and so on up to the omniscience of all kinds, and lets fall a sentence: 「色即是薩婆若，乃至一切種智即是薩婆若。色如相乃至一切種智如相皆是一如，無二無別。」 tr. "Form is sarvajñā, and so on up to: the omniscience of all kinds is sarvajñā. The mark of suchness of form, and so on up to the mark of suchness of the omniscience of all kinds, are all one suchness, without duality and without difference." The treatise's explanation in that chapter also closes with the same sentence: 「色等諸法即是薩婆若，薩婆若即是色等諸法。何以故？色等諸法如即是薩婆若如，薩婆若如即是色等諸法如，以是故說如，是如無二無別。」 tr. "Form and the other dharmas are sarvajñā; sarvajñā is form and the other dharmas. Why? The suchness of form and the other dharmas is the suchness of sarvajñā; the suchness of sarvajñā is the suchness of form and the other dharmas; for this reason suchness is spoken of, and this suchness is without duality and without difference."—at this chapter's opening, what the gods of the desire realm and the form realm cite from the deep prajñā as 「如是說」 tr. "it is said thus" is precisely this sentence: 「色即是薩婆若，薩婆若即是色」 tr. "Form is sarvajñā; sarvajñā is form", 「色如相、薩婆若如相，是一如，無二無別」 tr. "The mark of suchness of form and the mark of suchness of sarvajñā are one suchness, without duality and without difference." The preceding chapter speaks up to this point and stops; this chapter begins its teaching from this point: the preceding chapter concludes the meaning of tending with 「如」 tr. "suchness", and this chapter opens the gate of a whole chapter with 「如」 tr. "suchness"; the preceding chapter's 「如」 tr. "suchness" is that the fruit tended toward and the practice that does the tending are from the start not two, while this chapter's 「如」 tr. "suchness" unfolds into the one suchness, without duality and without difference, of the suchness of the Tathāgata, the suchness of all dharmas, and the suchness of the three times. As for what it opens, it is seen at once at the opening of the next chapter, "Avaivartika": Subhūti asks 「以何等行、何等類、何等相貌知是阿鞞跋致菩薩摩訶薩」 tr. "By what conduct, what kind, and what appearance is one to know that this is an avaivartika bodhisattva-mahāsattva?", and the first mark the Buddha raises is still this chapter's suchness—「若菩薩摩訶薩能知凡夫地、聲聞地、辟支佛地、佛地；是諸地，如相中無二無別，亦不念，亦不分別。入是如中，聞是事，直過無疑。何以故？是如中無一無二相故。」 tr. "If the bodhisattva-mahāsattva can know the ground of ordinary people, the śrāvaka ground, the pratyekabuddha ground, and the Buddha ground—these grounds, within the mark of suchness, are without duality and without difference, and he neither thinks of them nor discriminates them. Entering into this suchness and hearing this matter, he passes straight through without doubt. Why? Because within this suchness there is no mark of one and no mark of two." At this chapter's end, the bodhisattva who, hearing the mark of suchness, 「心不驚、不沒、不悔、不疑」 tr. "his mind is not startled, does not sink, has no regret, and has no doubt" is called able to accomplish awakening; the next chapter turns this sentence into the test-mark of non-retrogression: one who enters this suchness and passes straight through without doubt is an avaivartika. The pattern set up in this chapter's Sūtra ④, ‘practising it oneself, teaching others, praising, rejoicing’, the four matters practised together, is carried on unchanged in the next chapter too—「常行十善道：自不殺生，不教人殺生，讚歎不殺生法，歡喜讚歎不殺生者」 tr. "He constantly practises the ten wholesome paths: he himself does not kill living beings, does not teach others to kill living beings, praises the dharma of not killing living beings, and rejoices in and praises those who do not kill living beings." This chapter speaks of the practice of accomplishment; the next chapter speaks of the marks of non-retrogression; when the practice has gone on long, the marks can of themselves be tested—and the vein of meaning flows on downward from this.

Among the later ancient masters who read this chapter, what they preserved on the matter of the chapter's name is worth recording. This treatise's base text heads it "Chapter Fifty-four, The Great Suchness"; in the Ishiyama-dera manuscript this chapter's title reads otherwise, 「摩訶般若波羅蜜品第五十三大如品」 tr. "Mahāprajñāpāramitā, Chapter Fifty-three, The Great Suchness", its numbering one step lower than the base text, consistent with the several preceding chapters, and this is recorded as it is. In the great sūtra that it explains, this chapter's title likewise reads 「大如品第五十四」 tr. "Chapter Fifty-four, The Great Suchness", while beneath the title an interlinear note records a variant name, saying 「丹本大如相品」 tr. "the Khitan edition has ‘The Great Mark of Suchness’", with one character more, 「相」 tr. "mark"; and in the Shōgozō manuscript this chapter's title reads otherwise again, 「摩訶般若波羅蜜經如相品」 tr. "Mahāprajñāpāramitā Sūtra, The Mark of Suchness"—the name 「如相」 tr. "the Mark of Suchness" is not one devised by later people; the treatise uses it itself: at the close of Sūtra ① it reads word for word 「說是〈如相品〉時，是三千大千世界大地六種振動」 tr. "When this ‘Mark of Suchness’ chapter was expounded, the great earth of this three-thousand great-thousand world shook in six ways", and at the close of Sūtra ④ it again names itself: 「說是菩薩行品時，二千菩薩得無生法忍」 tr. "When this ‘Bodhisattva's Practice’ chapter was expounded, two thousand bodhisattvas obtained the acceptance of the non-arising of dharmas." Within one chapter it names itself in two places, once as the Mark of Suchness and once as Bodhisattva's Practice, corresponding precisely to the two arcs of this chapter's First Part and Last Part; both are recorded without judgement. The one house that composed a sectional commentary on the great sūtra it explains, laying the greatest weight on the opening and closing of the outline, heads both its outline and the opening of its commentary text 「大如品第五十四」 tr. "Chapter Fifty-four, The Great Suchness", while in its passage surveying the structural division of four chapters it calls this chapter outright 「大女品」 tr. "the Great Woman chapter"—within the same passage the preceding chapter, "Tending toward Omniscience", is likewise called 「超智品」 tr. "Surpassing Knowledge" rather than by its own title, 「趣智品」 tr. "Tending toward Knowledge", from which it can be seen that the variant names in this passage's wording are not confined to one place and belong to the manner of that passage's summary; both are recorded without judgement, without judging which of 「女」 tr. "woman" and 「如」 tr. "suchness" is correct. This house's placing of this chapter is stated with great clarity where it begins its exposition: 「此第四、合中下根人如如而學，具成上三品。以如如而學故，是有方便；不如如而學，名無方便。」 tr. "This is the fourth: it brings together people of middling and lower faculties who train in accord with suchness, fully completing the three chapters above. Because they train in accord with suchness, there is skilful means; not training in accord with suchness is called being without skilful means." It judges this chapter by the four Chinese characters 「如如而學」 tr. "training in accord with suchness", and further divides gain and loss by the presence or absence of skilful means, which meets face to face precisely the passage on the six thousand bodhisattvas in this chapter. There is another ancient master who, in his book on the profound meaning of the treatises of his school, cites this chapter twice, both times citing the matter of the six thousand bodhisattvas to prove the meaning that without skilful means one does not enter the bodhisattva's position; one of these says: 「故大品經大如品云：有六十菩薩於五百佛所行六波羅蜜等，具行萬行而無方便故、實際作證故，不得入菩薩位。」 tr. "Therefore the ‘Great Suchness’ chapter of the Larger Sūtra says: there were sixty bodhisattvas who, in the presence of five hundred buddhas, practised the six perfections and the rest; because, though fully practising the myriad practices, they were without skilful means, and because they realised the limit of reality, they could not enter the bodhisattva's position."—what he cites reads 「六十菩薩」 tr. "sixty bodhisattvas", while the original text of this treatise's base text reads 「六千菩薩」 tr. "six thousand bodhisattvas"; 「十」 tr. "ten" and 「千」 tr. "thousand" are close in shape; whether it was a different text that he relied on or a difference arising in copying, both are recorded without judgement, and the base text is not altered. As for the one house that once composed a commentary on this treatise itself and survives today in incomplete fascicles, in all that could be searched it was not seen to touch on this chapter's title; in the commentaries and records on calming and contemplation of the Tiantai line, too, no citation of this chapter's title by name, nor any quotation of this chapter's text, was seen—this chapter's reflection in the mirror of the ancient masters is thinner than that of the several preceding chapters, and this too is recorded as it is.

Bringing this line of further resonances back to this chapter, the several divergences the ancient masters recorded each happen to illuminate one joint of the chapter. The divergence in the chapter's name illuminates substance and function: within one chapter its own name appears twice; the Mark of Suchness is the substance, and Bodhisattva's Practice is the function, which is precisely the two arcs of the First Part speaking of suchness and the Last Part speaking of practice; if one reads it only by the name the Mark of Suchness, then the whole passage on the gates of practice in Sūtra ④ has nowhere to be placed; if one reads it only by the name Bodhisattva's Practice, then the treatise-author's final sentence, 「但說如法，所利少；若說有法，所利亦少」 tr. "If only the dharma of suchness is spoken of, the benefit is small; if the dharma of existence is spoken of, the benefit is also small," comes to nothing. The divergence in the number within a citation illuminates something else: what is at issue is the number, 「六十」 tr. "sixty" or 「六千」 tr. "six thousand", while the meaning it proves differs not at all between the two—without the power of skilful means, 「行別異相故，不得無異相；不得無異相故，不得入菩薩位」 tr. "because they practised the mark of difference, they did not obtain the mark of no difference; because they did not obtain the mark of no difference, they could not enter the bodhisattva's position"; more or fewer in number does not change this principle. And the account that judges this chapter by 「如如而學」 tr. "training in accord with suchness" further points out the place in this chapter most easily read past too smoothly: the whole chapter speaks of suchness, and the most dangerous misreading is precisely to take knowing suchness for arriving at suchness. The six thousand bodhisattvas were not people who had never heard of suchness; 「先世值五百佛，親近供養」 tr. "in former lives they met five hundred buddhas, drew near to them and made offerings", and they practised five matters; what they lacked was only one item—「無般若波羅蜜、無方便力故，行別異相」 tr. "because they were without prajñāpāramitā and without the power of skilful means, they practised the mark of difference." The bird was not lacking in size, its body a hundred yojana long and even up to three hundred yojana; what it lacked was also only one item—「是鳥身大而無翅故」 tr. "because this bird's body is great and it has no wings." training in accord with suchness, there is skilful means; not training in accord with suchness is called being without skilful means: this judging sentence of the ancient master and the treatise-author's simile of the great bird speak of the same thing.

Therefore what the chapter "The Great Suchness" finally leaves behind is a way of asking the road that can be used again and again: when I hear it said that dharmas are equal and of one suchness and feel that I have already grasped its depth, I remember that the six thousand bodhisattvas too 「聞如是甚深如相」 tr. "heard such a very deep mark of suchness" and in the end 「成阿羅漢」 tr. "became arhats"—between hearing suchness and practising suchness there stands this one wing, the power of skilful means; when I, prizing myself on long cultivation, see others who at present have no practice, I remember the treatise-author's sentence explaining the lowly intent: 「若我以眾生形貌、才能——以此事輕者，則為輕未來佛」 tr. "If I, on account of beings' looks and abilities—if on account of these matters I make light of them, then I make light of future buddhas"; when I think that awakening is hard to obtain and my mind shrinks back, I remember Subhūti's contrary saying—「一切法、一切法相空，無法可得、無能得者」 tr. "All dharmas and the marks of all dharmas are empty; there is no dharma that can be obtained and no one who can obtain it"; the hard is hard only because of a mind that has something to obtain: 「如破色等法已，如亦自空」 tr. "once form and the other dharmas have been broken, suchness too is itself empty"; when I think that, since ultimate emptiness has been spoken of, there is no need to discuss sequence any further, I remember that the Buddha's answer to 「應云何行」 tr. "How should one practise?" starts from 「應起等心，於一切眾生亦以等心與語，無有偏黨」 tr. "he should arouse an equal mind, and speak to all beings too with an equal mind, without partiality" and goes all the way to the accomplishment of the abiding of the Dharma, not a single step to be omitted; when I have practised long and feel the toil without seeing its fruit, I remember the overall verdict the treatise-author gives the whole chapter—「此中善說二諦故，二千菩薩得無生法忍」 tr. "because here the two truths were well expounded, two thousand bodhisattvas obtained the acceptance of the non-arising of dharmas", 「譬如二輪具足故，能有所至」 tr. "as a cart with both wheels complete can get somewhere." Speaking of suchness is one wheel; speaking of practice is one wheel; if one wheel turns alone, the cart cannot move.

Avaivartika: Why the Marks of Non-retrogression Must Be Asked About through the Three Matters of Conduct, Kind, and Appearance; Why Only Turning within Form and the Other Dharmas Is Called Not Turning; Why, There Being No Conduct, No Kind, and No Appearance, the Marks Are Nonetheless Listed Item by Item; Why a Body without Eighty Thousand Families of Worms and Clean Clothes Count as Proofs of Non-retrogression; Why Never Giving Rise to Stinginess, Greed, and the Other Evil Minds Does Not Contradict Not Yet Having Severed the Afflictions; Why Māra Conjures Up the Eight Great Hells and Falsely Claims the True Buddha-Dharma; Why the Dharma of the Semblance Path Turns Instead into the Bodhisattva's Great Benefit; Why the Two Similes of False Gold and of a Dog Wearing a Lion's Skin Can Tell the Real from the False; and Why the Acceptance of the Non-arising of Dharmas Is Glossed as Even the Subtlest Dharma Being Unfindable

What Is Being Asked

The preceding chapter spoke of the great suchness, spoke of the suchness of all dharmas and of the nature of dharmas and the limit of reality, and came to say that the bodhisattva enters suchness by suchness and does not discriminate; what this chapter goes on to ask is an utterly practical question: can such a person be seen from the outside? Subhūti's question uses three words—conduct, kind, and appearance: by what conduct, by what kind, by what appearance is it known that this is an avaivartika bodhisattva-mahāsattva? Avaivartika the sūtra text itself glosses as the non-retrogressing of 「不退轉菩薩摩訶薩相」 tr. "the marks of the non-retrogressing bodhisattva-mahāsattva"; it is a decisive pass on the bodhisattva path: once past this pass, one will certainly become a Buddha and no longer retrogress and fall back to ordinary people or the two vehicles. The intent of asking about this matter is not hard to understand—however high the merits are spoken of, the practitioner must always know where he has walked to; and between teachers and friends, too, one must always know whether the person one draws near to is already at this station.

The Buddha's answer runs along two roads, and what matters most in reading this chapter is first to recognise these two roads clearly. The first road is a positive enumeration: he can know that the four grounds, in the mark of suchness, are without duality and without difference; he does not utter useless talk; he does not look at others' strengths and shortcomings; he does not look at the outside paths; he does not give rise to doubt; he does not cling to grasping at precepts; he is not born in a low and mean family; he does not receive a woman's body; he constantly practises the ten wholesome paths, and even in dreams does not practise the unwholesome; he practises the six perfections for the sake of beings; he gives the gift of Dharma and dedicates it; in the deep Dharma he does not doubt and does not regret; his deeds of body, speech, and mind are soft; he is accomplished in the three deeds by kindness; he is not together with the five hindrances; in every place he has nothing he loves and clings to; walking, standing, sitting, and lying he is ever mindful and single-minded and walks looking at the ground; his clothes and bedding are clean, and he is little troubled by illness; his body has no eighty thousand families of worms; his body and mind are pure and pass beyond the grounds of the two vehicles; he does not prize gain and offerings, nor does he prize the dhūta practices; he never gives rise to stinginess, greed, and the other evil minds; his mind abides unmoved, and all the dharmas he hears join with prajñā—item by item, each closes with the same sentence: by this conduct, kind, and appearance, know that this is called an avaivartika bodhisattva-mahāsattva. The second road, however, pulls the firewood out from under the cauldron: the Buddha also says that all dharmas are without conduct, without kind, and without appearance; Subhūti at once seizes on this difficulty and presses: if all dharmas are without conduct, without kind, and without appearance, in what dharma, in the end, does the bodhisattva turn, so as to be called not turning? The Buddha answers with the utmost brevity: turning within form, turning within feeling, perception, constructions, and consciousness, and so on up to turning within anuttarā samyaksaṃbodhi—only this is called not turning. The whole doctrinal sinew and bone of this chapter lies in this one paradoxical sentence—what is called non-retrogression is not seizing a station called 「不退」 tr. "non-retrogression" and refusing to let go of it; it is turning away the clinging mind toward form and all dharmas; once the clinging mind is turned, within the Buddha path he naturally does not turn.

The latter half of the chapter changes scene: from the discernment of marks and appearance it turns to the testing by the deeds of Māra. Evil Māra strikes three times: he conjures up the eight great hells and, pointing at the bodhisattvas being burned and boiled inside, says ‘these are all avaivartikas who received the prediction; your receiving the prediction is receiving the prediction of hell’; he conjures himself into a bhikṣu's robes and comes to say that what you heard before is not the Buddha's Dharma, that what I say is the true Buddha-Dharma, and that you should give it up quickly; again he conjures himself into a bhikṣu and says that what you practise is the dharma of birth and death, teaches you to take the realisation of the end of suffering, expounds to you the dharma of the semblance path, and at the last conjures up countless arhat bhikṣus, saying that they, having long practised the Buddha path, still only became arhats—by what would you become a Buddha? Three trials: if the bodhisattva's mind is startled, doubts, and regrets, know that he has not received the prediction; if he is unmoved, unstartled, without doubt and without regret, and instead rejoices and says 「是比丘益我不少」 tr. "this bhikṣu benefits me not a little," only this is true non-retrogression. For this passage the treatise-author sets out two similes for judging real and false: false gold must be burned in fire, rubbed on stone, and beaten with a hammer before black, red, or white shows; a dog wears a lion's skin, and though the beasts fear it, the moment they hear its voice they know it is a dog. At the very end Subhūti asks once more 「於何法轉名為不轉」 tr. "in what dharma does he turn, so as to be called not turning," and the Buddha still answers 「於色相等法中轉還」 tr. "he turns back within the mark of form and the other such dharmas"; the treatise-author points out: above was the brief explanation, now is the extended explanation—the whole chapter, head and tail, is the one same sentence, and the marks item by item in between, together with the three deeds of Māra, are all the unfolding of this one sentence.

Passage by Passage

1. The question of conduct, kind, and appearance. Subhūti raises the question with three parallel expressions: what conduct, what kind, what appearance. First a question: since it is non-retrogression that is being asked about, would it not be enough to say directly ‘how is it known that this is an avaivartika?’—why divide it into three? Here, simply remember the form of the question; the treatise-author has two schools' explanations of the difference among the three matters further on; what is to be seen at this moment is the direction of the question—what is asked is not the substance and nature of non-retrogression but where non-retrogression can be tested. Because it can be tested, there is the checklist item by item below; if it could not be tested, non-retrogression would become only a name. A practitioner reading this question should know that he too is being asked: this stretch of my effort—what testable marks has it left in body, speech, and mind?

2. The first mark: knowing the four grounds to be not two in the mark of suchness, not uttering useless talk, not looking at others' strengths and shortcomings. The Buddha's first item answers beyond all expectation: the bodhisattva can know the ground of ordinary people, the śrāvaka ground, the pratyekabuddha ground, and the Buddha ground, that these four grounds, within the mark of suchness, are without duality and without difference, and neither recollects nor discriminates them; entering this suchness and hearing this matter, he passes straight through without doubt. Why is he without doubt? The Buddha himself gives the reason: 「是如中無一無二相故」 tr. "because within this suchness there is no mark of one and no mark of two." A further question: this is a matter of the ground of the mind; how can it count as 「相貌」 tr. "appearance"? The answer is in the second half of the sentence—precisely because the ground of the mind is equal, two visible marks appear in the deeds of speech: he does not utter useless talk but speaks only speech that accords with benefit; he does not look at others' strengths and shortcomings. First a misunderstanding must be cleared away: not looking at others' strengths and shortcomings is not indifference that does not care about people; it is not using one's eyes on others' shortcomings. If the mind still looks up to the Buddha ground and looks down on the ground of ordinary people, the mouth will certainly keep weighing and appraising people; once the four grounds' being not two in the mark of suchness enters the mind, the appraising mouth naturally comes to rest. Brought down into daily use, this item is the easiest to test: in the course of a day, how many of the words spoken are speech that accords with benefit, and how many are only talk of people's strengths and shortcomings.

3. The question asked again, and the answer that pulls the firewood out from under the cauldron. Subhūti asks once more 「復以何等行、類、相貌」 tr. "again, by what conduct, kind, and appearance," but the Buddha answers: if the bodhisattva-mahāsattva can contemplate all dharmas as without conduct, without kind, and without appearance, know that this is called an avaivartika. First a question: the marks and appearance were only just listed—why is it now said that there is no appearance? Is this not self-contradiction? Here there is no need to hurry to reconcile them—the treatise-author has a dedicated question and answer further on that resolves this, saying that at the time of the first question beings did not yet cling to the mark of the avaivartika, and that now, to break their clinging to marks, he says there are none. For the moment, first hold to one thing: this chapter's checklist is for people to examine themselves with, not for people to grasp; the moment it is grasped, the Buddha at once pulls it away.

4. In what dharma does he turn, so as to be called not turning. Subhūti, following the momentum, forces out the most important question of the whole chapter: if all dharmas are without conduct, without kind, and without appearance, in what dharma does the bodhisattva turn, so as to be called not turning? The Buddha answers: turning within form, turning within feeling, perception, constructions, and consciousness—this is called the bodhisattva's not turning; and so on up to turning within the six perfections, turning within inner emptiness and so on up to the emptiness of non-existent and existent dharmas, turning within the four foundations of mindfulness and so on up to the eighteen unshared dharmas, turning within the grounds of the two vehicles and so on up to anuttarā samyaksaṃbodhi—know that this bodhisattva does not turn. The word 「轉」 tr. "turn" here must be read rightly: it is not turning away from the dharma of form to go and dwell somewhere else; it is turning away, sending back, the clinging to form and the other dharmas. How is this known? The Buddha himself states the reason: the nature of form is non-existent—where would this bodhisattva abide? and so on up to: the nature of anuttarā samyaksaṃbodhi is non-existent—where would this bodhisattva abide? Since even the self-nature of unsurpassed awakening is non-existent, there is not one place where the clinging mind can settle—this is precisely the true meaning of the word 「不退」 tr. "non-retrogression": having no place of abiding, there is nothing to retrogress from. The misunderstanding to clear away is this: non-retrogression does not equal holding fast to a station to the death; the mind that holds fast to a station is precisely still among those who retrogress and turn.

5. Not looking at the outside paths. The second kind of mark: he does not look at the features and words of the śramaṇas and brahmins of the outside paths, and does not have the thought 「是諸外道，若沙門、若婆羅門，實知實見」 tr. "these outside paths, whether śramaṇas or brahmins, really know and really see"; that they should be said to have right view—there is no such thing. First a question: is this not slighting others? The answer: what is spoken of here is not taking their deportment and manner of speech as proof of real knowing and real seeing. The bearing of the outside paths can be most impressive, and their words most pleasing to hear; what wins people's trust is often precisely features and words. The bodhisattva's not looking is not relying on these to give trust—and this does not contradict the preceding item, 「不視他人長短」 tr. "not looking at others' strengths and shortcomings": not looking at people's shortcomings, and also not judging from people's outward marks that they have real wisdom. Where it lands is in choosing teachers and dharmas: in the one relied upon, what must be looked at is whether what he says accords with the real mark of all dharmas, not his display.

6. Not giving rise to doubt, not clinging to grasping at precepts, not falling into wrong view, not seeking auspicious matters. Following on from the above: since he does not take the outside paths as really knowing and really seeing, he naturally does not give rise to doubt, does not cling to grasping at precepts, does not fall into wrong view, and also does not seek worldly auspicious matters and take them for purity, and does not with flowers and incense, necklaces, banners and canopies, and music pay homage and make offerings to other gods. First a question: what harm does seeking a little good fortune do to the path? The answer lies in the treatise's explanation: because he deeply believes in the retribution of the fruits of the causes and conditions of deeds, he does not seek auspicious matters. Once one believes in deeds and their fruits, one naturally knows that purity comes from causes and conditions, not from paying homage to other gods; put the other way round, whoever seeks purity in auspicious matters in fact does not believe in deeds and their fruits. This item can serve as a check in daily use: when something happens, does the first thought ask about causes and conditions and about deeds and conduct, or does it ask about good and ill fortune?

7. Not being born in a low and mean family, not receiving a woman's body. The Buddha says that the avaivartika is never born in a low and mean family, and so on up to not being born in the eight places of difficulty, and never receives a woman's body. For this item the treatise-author later gives three reasons—because in seeking the path he breaks the root of pride, he is not born in a low and mean family; because he does not obstruct others' merit and constantly encourages and assists, he is not born in the eight places of difficulty; because he breaks down and thins lust and keeps far from a flattering mind, he does not receive a woman's body. In reading this item one must see clearly: what the sūtra and treatise speak of is causal conduct; they speak of the places of retribution brought about by the three kinds of mental conduct—pride, obstructing others, and lust with flattery; the reason the difficult places are difficult lies precisely in its being difficult to hear the Dharma and difficult to cultivate the path. Where it lands is only in the cause: break pride, assist others' merit, break down and thin lust, and the retribution naturally does not fall into the difficult places.

8. Constantly practising the ten wholesome paths, complete in four ways. The Buddha says that he constantly practises the ten wholesome paths, and says it most finely: he himself does not kill, does not teach others to kill, praises the dharma of not killing, and rejoices in and praises those who do not kill; and so on up to the item of wrong view, the same. First a question: not killing is simply not killing—why divide it into four? The answer lies in the treatise's explanation: though other people practise the ten wholesome paths, some do one, some two, some three, and they cannot be complete in the four kinds; this bodhisattva, because of the mind of great compassion and because he deeply loves wholesome dharmas, practises all four kinds completely. Not doing it oneself is one part; not teaching others to do it is the second part; praising its dharma is the third part; seeing others practise it and rejoicing in and praising them is the fourth part—only when the four parts are all complete is it called constantly practising. In daily use one can examine oneself item by item: I do not do evil—but have I also never encouraged others to stop evil? When I see others do good, do I rejoice sincerely, or does my mind have other calculations?

9. Even in dreams not practising the ten unwholesome paths. This item is the acceptance test of the preceding one. The treatise-author breaks it open in one sentence: because he constantly cultivates and gathers the ten wholesome paths, even in dreams he does not practise the ten unwholesome paths. First a question: how can what happens in dreams be taken as a standard? The answer: precisely because in dreams one cannot be master, the habit of ordinary days can be tested there—what can be upheld when awake but cannot be held in dreams has not yet been cultivated into a habitual nature. This item should not be used to reproach others; it should only be used to illuminate oneself: what appears in dreams is often what was pressed down in the daytime and not dissolved.

10. Practising the six perfections for the sake of all beings. The Buddha says that the bodhisattva practises dānapāramitā for the benefit of all beings, and so on up to practising prajñāpāramitā for the benefit of all beings. What must be looked at are the two words ‘for whom’. The same act of giving, the same stretch of patience, the same sitting in meditation—for oneself or for beings, the conduct and marks are the same but the kind is different—this is precisely where the word 「類」 tr. "kind" among the three matters comes into use.

11. The gift of Dharma and dedication. The bodhisattva, toward all the dharmas there are, receives, reads, recites, expounds, and rightly recollects—namely the sūtra and so on up to the upadeśa; when giving the gift of Dharma he has this thought: 「是法施因緣故，滿一切眾生願。以是法施功德，與一切眾生共之，迴向阿耨多羅三藐三菩提。」 tr. "By the causes and conditions of this gift of Dharma, may the wishes of all beings be fulfilled. The merit of this gift of Dharma I share with all beings and dedicate to anuttarā samyaksaṃbodhi." First a question: the gift of Dharma is already for others—why add dedication as well? The answer: if one gives the Dharma without sharing it and without dedicating it, the merit falls into one's own retribution; only by sharing it and dedicating it does it continue on into the unsurpassed path. The treatise-author later says it even more sharply: all the merit the avaivartika makes is for beings, not for his own person; if merit could be given to others, he would give it all to beings and cultivate it again for himself—only it cannot be given.

12. In the very deep Dharma not doubting and not regretting. The Buddha says that the bodhisattva does not doubt and does not regret within the very deep Dharma; Subhūti presses specifically on the causes and conditions of this, and the Buddha answers: this avaivartika bodhisattva does not see any dharma at all as a place where doubt can arise—whether form, feeling, perception, constructions, and consciousness, and so on up to anuttarā samyaksaṃbodhi, he does not see these dharmas as places where doubt or regret can arise. This answer must be read clearly: it is not that doubt has been pressed down; it is that not even a place for doubt is seen—doubt must have a dharma it doubts, and since the dharmas are unfindable, doubt has nothing to cling to. The misunderstanding to clear away is reading 「不疑」 tr. "not doubting" as not being allowed to ask questions; this chapter itself is question and answer throughout, and the treatise-author moreover sets up his own objections passage by passage. Not doubting is not giving rise to a mind of retrogression and regret toward the deep Dharma; it is not a prohibition on reflection and discernment.

13. The deeds of body, speech, and mind soft; accomplished in the three deeds by kindness. The two items are read together: the deeds of body, speech, and mind are soft; he is accomplished in deeds of body, speech, and mind of kindness. The treatise-author points out their order: because this bodhisattva constantly practises the mind of kindness and compassion, his deeds of mind are soft; because his deeds of mind are soft, the deeds of kindness of body and speech are accomplished. First a question: why not start from body and speech? The answer: body and speech are the branch; mind is the root; once the deeds of mind are soft, the deeds of kindness of body and speech naturally follow. Where it lands is a very concrete observation: the hardness or softness of one's own speech is often not a matter of wording; it is the hardness or softness of that one thought at the moment of speaking.

14. Not together with the five hindrances. The Buddha lists the names of the five hindrances: lust, ill will, sloth and torpor, restlessness and remorse, doubt. The treatise-author explains why: this bodhisattva censures the five desires, removes the five hindrances, and enters the five-limbed first dhyāna, and therefore is not together with the five hindrances; he also says it is because the five hindrances cover the mind and can wear away wisdom, break the Buddha path, and open the road of Māra. The three Chinese characters rendered here as 「開魔路」 tr. "open the road of Māra" must be remembered—the latter half of this chapter speaks precisely of Māra, and Māra's point of entry lies first in the five hindrances.

15. In every place nothing he loves and clings to. The Buddha says that the bodhisattva in every place has nothing he loves and clings to. The treatise-author's explanation pushes this item to the extreme: among beings, he does not cling even to the Buddha; among dharmas, he does not cling even to nirvāṇa. First a question: not clinging to the Buddha, not clinging to nirvāṇa—would that not leave nothing to return to and tend toward? The answer: clinging is grasping at marks, and grasping at marks goes against the real mark of all dharmas; not clinging is not failing to revere, not failing to seek; it is not seeking with a mind that grasps at marks. The treatise-author has another distinction especially worth noting: hatred is a coarse sin, which the small bodhisattva has already severed, and so it is not spoken of; love is deep, subtle, and hard to sever, and so it is spoken of now—what this chapter speaks of here is love, not hatred, precisely because love is a later and finer pass.

16. Walking, standing, sitting, and lying ever mindful and single-minded, walking looking at the ground. The Buddha says that going out and coming in, going and coming, sitting, lying, walking, and standing, he is ever mindful and single-minded; lifting the foot and setting it down he is safe and composed, and walks looking at the ground. The treatise-author gives two reasons: to protect beings, and to avoid a distracted mind. First a misunderstanding must be cleared away: lowering the eyes to the ground is not cramped attention to small details, nor a performance of deportment; the treatise-author says clearly that one reason is protecting life—there are lives under one's feet, and by lowering one's head one is spared how much unintended killing; the other is gathering in the mind—once the eye-faculty scatters, the mind goes after it. Because he enters deeply into meditative concentration, he guards beings; because he guards beings, he is ever mindful single-mindedly and does not vex beings: here meditative concentration and the mind of kindness are bound into a single matter.

17. Clothes and bedding clean, little troubled by illness. The Buddha says that the clothes the bodhisattva wears and all his bedding are not found foul by people; he delights in cleanliness and is little troubled by illness. First a question: does this too count as a mark of non-retrogression? This item must be read together with the next—the treatise-author joins it with the body's having no eighty thousand families of worms and being little troubled by illness and pain into one matter: because he has long cultivated and gathered measureless, boundless wholesome dharmas, his body has no eighty thousand families of worms, and because he is also little troubled by illness and pain, his clothes, bedding, and the rest are always clean and unsoiled. From this it can be seen that what is spoken of here is not fastidiousness about clothes; it is that the purity of the bodily marks brought about by merit naturally extends to the things he uses.

18. The body without eighty thousand families of worms, body and mind pure, passing beyond the grounds of the two vehicles. The Buddha says that in the body of an ordinary person there are eighty thousand families of worms that eat away at his body, and that the body of the avaivartika has no such worms, and himself states the reason: this bodhisattva's merit passes beyond the world. Subhūti asks specifically how purity of body and purity of mind are obtained, and the Buddha answers: according to what he obtains, he increases his roots of goodness and removes crookedness of mind and deviousness of mind; because of this purity of body and mind, he can pass beyond the śrāvaka and pratyekabuddha grounds and enter the bodhisattva's position. The teaching order of this passage is most clear: the increase of merit is the cause, purity of body and mind is the fruit, and passing beyond the grounds of the two vehicles and entering the bodhisattva's position is the fruit of the fruit. The treatise-author adds one more layer: because the mind is pure, body, speech, and the rest are also pure; because he is apart from false and deceptive, devious and crooked, and other base afflictions, the mind is pure; because the two matters are pure, though he walks in the world, he is apart from all pressing pain and distress. The misunderstanding to clear away is reading the sentence ‘his body has no such worms’ as a strange tale and gliding lightly past it—what the sūtra and treatise say here is that once crookedness and deviousness of mind are removed, even what the body brings about is different, and so the body is taken as proof.

19. Not prizing gain and offerings, nor prizing the dhūta practices. The Buddha says that the bodhisattva does not prize gain and offerings; though he practises the twelve dhūta practices, he does not prize the practice of dwelling in the araṇya, and so on up to not prizing the practice of keeping only the three robes. The blade of this item is in its second half: not prizing gain and offerings is easy to understand; not prizing the dhūta practices is hard to understand. The treatise-author's explanation is: because this bodhisattva prizes the Buddha path he does not prize gain and offerings; though he practises the dhūta practices, he does not prize these practices, because these practices are a cause and condition of a small part of the ultimate path, not the ultimate path. First a question: then why practise the dhūta practices at all? The answer: practise them without prizing them—practised, they are causes and conditions that aid the path; prized, they become a new attainment. In daily use, whoever exalts himself by some method of practice is precisely what this item illuminates.

20. Never giving rise to stinginess, greed, and the other evil minds. The Buddha lists seven minds—stinginess and greed, breaking precepts, agitation by hatred, laziness, distraction, folly and delusion, jealousy—and says that the bodhisattva never gives rise to them. This item invites the most objection, and the treatise-author later explains it specifically by question and answer; here we first record its text and leave the difficulty for passage 48.

21. The mind abiding unmoved, all the dharmas he hears joining with prajñā. The closing item of Sūtra ①: the bodhisattva's mind abides unmoved, his wisdom enters deeply, single-mindedly he listens and receives, and whatever he hears of the Dharma and of worldly matters, all of it joins with prajñāpāramitā; he does not see any matter of livelihood that does not enter the nature of dharmas. First a question: how can worldly livelihood join with prajñā? The answer lies in the treatise-author's three similes further on and in his explanation of the nature of dharmas—what is to be seen here is the Buddha's intent in closing all the marks with this item: the preceding items were stated in terms of the body, or of speech, or of the mind; with this item even worldly matters are gathered in, and the marks of non-retrogression here become all-encompassing. The sūtra text concludes with 「是名阿鞞跋致菩薩阿鞞跋致相」 tr. "this is called the avaivartika marks of the avaivartika bodhisattva."

22. Why ask again what has already been said—the brief explanation and the extended explanation. At the very opening of Treatise ① the treatise-author sets up his own objection: everywhere above the marks of the avaivartika have been spoken of; why ask again now? The answer: though above they were spoken of briefly in place after place, now he wishes to speak of them at length; within this chapter there are many marks of the avaivartika, and therefore it is called "Marks of the Avaivartika." This question and answer is a pattern used habitually throughout the treatise: it does not avoid repetition but distinguishes the difference by brief and extended. Here the reader can obtain a rule for reading the treatise—whenever one feels ‘this was said before’, what should be asked is whether this place is brief or extended, and to what capacity it is addressed.

23. This chapter's place among the chapters before and after. The treatise-author gives a further explanation: above, the marks of prajñāpāramitā were explained; next, the causes and conditions by which Māra ruins the marks of prajñāpāramitā were spoken of; now it is said that the one who believes in and receives prajñāpāramitā is the avaivartika, and because he wishes to speak of his marks and appearance, Subhūti asks. Three sentences set this chapter securely in place between those before and after: first the marks of prajñā are made clear, next Māra who ruins prajñā is made clear, and now the marks of the one who receives and upholds prajñā and cannot be ruined are made clear—why the latter half of this chapter suddenly speaks at length of the deeds of Māra has its thread laid down here in advance.

24. Receiving the prediction is like receiving an office and obtaining its seal. The treatise-author's third explanation says directly why the avaivartika is to be prized: the causes and conditions the bodhisattva has practised since first arousing the mind, and the retribution he has obtained, are the avaivartika, and having received the prediction he will certainly become a Buddha. The treatise-author sets down two similes in succession: as a person who receives an office and has already obtained its seal has no further doubt in his mind; and again, as all the practices the śrāvaka practises are for the four fruits of the śramaṇa. First a question: what is to be seen in the simile of the seal? What is to be seen is that 「心無復疑」 tr. "no further doubt in the mind"—not the glory of the station, but the ending of doubt. The treatise-author next gives the real meaning of this station: the avaivartika is the ground of certainty and safety, passing beyond ordinary people and not entering the grounds of the two vehicles; though he has not yet completed the Buddha path, he can be a field of merit for the world. Because this matter is subtle, wondrous, and hard to obtain, Subhūti asks about his conduct and appearance—he asks so solemnly precisely because what is asked about is the ground of certainty and safety.

25. Why it is Subhūti who asks. The treatise-author adds a sentence: the Buddha originally commissioned Subhūti to expound prajñāpāramitā, and therefore Subhūti asks: 「世尊！阿鞞跋致有何行、類、相貌？」 tr. "World-Honored One! What conduct, kind, and appearance does the avaivartika have?" This is a discernment of who belongs to whom—the questioner in this chapter is not arranged at random; he is the one who expounds prajñā on the Buddha's commission. In reading the sūtras, paying attention to who asks and who answers often spares one a great many misunderstandings.

26. The difference among the three matters of conduct, kind, and appearance: the views of two schools. The treatise-author asks himself: what difference is there among these three matters? In the answer two views are set side by side. Someone says: these three matters are all of one meaning; by them it is known whether one is an avaivartika or not an avaivartika—three names with one meaning, only to say it fully. Again someone says: conduct is the avaivartika bodhisattva's deeds of body, speech, and mind being different from other people's, and by this conduct the very deep wisdom of the avaivartika is expressed; kind is knowing by discrimination whether bodhisattvas are avaivartika or not avaivartika; appearance is whatever, apart from conduct and kind, allows the mark of the avaivartika to be known through causes and conditions of various sorts. The two views stand together; the treatise-author does not judge between them, and neither need the reader force a judgement; what matters is to know that the second view gives a useful division: conduct is one's own deeds and conduct, kind is the discernment between one and another, and appearance is what can be verified from surrounding conditions.

27. The meaning and intent of the Buddha's teaching: entering suchness by suchness. The treatise-author summarises the Buddha's intent: if the bodhisattva can fulfil the five perfections and enter deeply into prajñāpāramitā, then by the power of skilful means he does not cling to prajñāpāramitā but only contemplates suchness, namely the real mark of all dharmas. Here there are three levels to be counted clearly: fulfilling the five perfections is the provisions, entering deeply into prajñā is the right contemplation, and not clinging to prajñā is what the power of skilful means brings to completion—the further on, the finer, until at the last even prajñā is not clung to. Therefore the bodhisattva does not take the grounds of ordinary people and the two vehicles as low and mean, nor take the Buddha ground as high and noble, because he enters the suchness of all dharmas; within the suchness of all dharmas there are no two dharmas to discriminate; he only enters suchness by suchness, with nothing further, and also does not discriminate and grasp at marks. Why? Because suchness is equal. One who can enter thus enters the Dharma treasury of the buddhas; his mind does not give rise to doubt and seek further a fixed mark of dharmas. Therefore the sūtra says: 「須菩提！凡夫地乃至佛地，如相中無二無別。」 tr. "Subhūti! The ground of ordinary people, and so on up to the Buddha ground, are without duality and without difference in the mark of suchness." That first mark in passage 2, which looked lofty and remote, here gains its origin: it is not an unwillingness to discriminate the four grounds; it is that after entering suchness there are from the root no two marks to discriminate.

28. The division into the proper substance and the fruit of the practice. The treatise-author further briefly states one meaning: because of the suchness of all dharmas, namely ultimate emptiness, the bodhisattva relinquishes all worldly matters, and also does not abide in ultimate emptiness. Why? Because he obtains the ultimately pure real mark of all dharmas. If the bodhisattva hears this dharma without support, his mind has no doubt or regret, and he does not think of a support. Next comes the most important sentence of sectional division: the matters above are the proper substance of the avaivartika; from here down, all is the fruit of the practice of ultimate emptiness. One sentence divides all the marks of the chapter into two sections—the former is the substance, the latter is the function. If one reads this chapter without knowing this division, one sees only a string of trivial items; knowing it, every item that follows becomes a fruit borne by ultimate emptiness.

29. Where beneficial speech comes from. The treatise-author begins explaining item by item following the text. First he explains 「不作無益語」 tr. "does not utter useless talk": because he has obtained ultimate emptiness, his mind is ripened and pure in the mark of quiescence, and he does not speak useless talk; what he speaks is always the Dharma, not what is not the Dharma; what he speaks is all real, not false speech; what he says is soft, not coarse and harsh; he speaks all with a mind of kindness and compassion, not with a mind of hatred; what he speaks suits the time, always finds the right occasion, observes people's minds, and follows their local customs. This is a most excellent checklist for the deeds of speech: Dharma or not Dharma, real or false, soft or coarse and harsh, kindness and compassion or hatred, timely or untimely. The treatise-author also briefly says what beneficial words are: whether teaching the Buddha path, or the two vehicles, or the path of humans and gods, or the blameless happiness obtained in this life—benefit need not always be the teaching of the highest vehicle; giving according to what each can bear is all called benefit. As for why he can be so, the treatise-author gives three reasons: because he always keeps far from the four evils of speech, because his mind of kindness and compassion toward beings is great, and because he can also himself crush and thin the afflictions.

30. The difficulty about not looking at others' strengths and shortcomings. The treatise-author poses a good objection: the śrāvaka goes straight to nirvāṇa and may refrain from looking at others; the bodhisattva regards beings as his children and always wishes to teach and transform them—how can he not look at their strengths and shortcomings? The answer has two layers. First, if beings cannot be subdued and cannot be transformed and brought across, such as these he should not look at; if he instructs them with a good mind, they will say he is jealous of them, and it is like a knife piercing their hearts—since there is no benefit, it only increases their sin. Second, the bodhisattva should have this thought: 「如諸佛一切智，煩惱習盡，尚不能盡度眾生；何況我未得菩薩神通、未得無礙智，云何能普觀眾生？」 tr. "Even the buddhas, omniscient, their afflictions and habitual residues exhausted, still cannot bring all beings across; how much less I, who have not yet obtained the bodhisattva's supernormal powers, have not yet obtained unobstructed knowledge—how could I look over all beings?" The treatise-author further makes a distinction concerning the supernormal powers: among avaivartikas some have obtained the supernormal powers and some have not; having obtained the avaivartika station, they obtain them only by cultivating the path of the supernormal powers separately; and if one has obtained the supernormal powers earlier, because they are not complete he cannot look over all. Where this passage lands is most intimate: when one exhorts someone and he does not accept it, it is often not that the Dharma is wrong but that the capacity has not arrived; knowing that he cannot be transformed and stopping for the time being is precisely kindness and compassion, not abandonment.

31. Why, at the first question, he did not at once answer that there is no conduct, no kind, and no appearance. The treatise-author sets up another question: when Subhūti first asked about conduct, mark, and kind, why did the Buddha not at once answer 「無行、相、類」 tr. "no conduct, mark, or kind," but says it only here? The answer: at the time of the first question, because beings did not yet cling to the mark of the avaivartika, the Buddha answered sometimes speaking of the mark of emptiness, sometimes speaking of marks that exist; now, because beings cling to the mark of the avaivartika and wish to enter the avaivartika ground from the ground of ordinary people, the Buddha therefore says 「一切無行、無類、無相貌」 tr. "all is without conduct, without kind, without appearance." The contradiction left over from passage 3 is here untied: speaking of existence and speaking of emptiness are both issued in response to capacity, not contradictions between earlier and later. This is also a general rule for reading all sūtras and treatises—where within one and the same sūtra existence is spoken of and emptiness is spoken of, first ask what sickness is being treated, and then ask whether they contradict each other.

32. The question and answer on turning and not turning. The treatise-author follows the text: Subhūti asks further: 「若諸法盡空者，何以言於何法轉名不轉法？」 tr. "If all dharmas are wholly empty, why is it said: in what dharma does he turn, so as to be called a dharma of not turning?" One ought to turn from the ground of ordinary people and not turn at the Buddha ground! The Buddha answers: 「若菩薩能觀色等諸法空無所有，轉諸著心，故於佛道中不轉。」 tr. "If the bodhisattva can contemplate form and the other dharmas as empty and without anything existent, he turns all clinging minds; therefore within the Buddha path he does not turn." The treatise-author further sets out its meaning: form and the other dharmas arise from the coming together of causes and conditions; the bodhisattva knows the faults and sins of the conditioned, and so ought not to abide within them; because dharmas are empty, he can turn the clinging mind; because he turns the clinging mind, he is called not turning. Subhūti's difficulty is precisely the difficulty of ordinary people reading this passage—by common sense, ‘leaving the ground of ordinary people’ is what should be called turning; the treatise-author points out the Buddha's intent: what is turned is the clinging mind, not the station. This one sentence can serve as the key to the whole chapter.

33. Because he has entered the right position he does not doubt about the outside paths. The treatise-author explains why 「不觀外道」 tr. "he does not look at the outside paths": because the avaivartika bodhisattva has entered the right position, his mind is certain and does not doubt: 「一切外道中有實智！若有實智，不名外道！」 tr. "How could there be real wisdom within all the outside paths! If they had real wisdom, they would not be called outside paths!" The force of this sentence must be seen accurately—it is not slighting the people of the outside paths; it judges by name and meaning: the reason the outside paths are called outside paths is precisely that what they see does not accord with the real mark; if what they saw were already real wisdom, they would no longer be called outside paths.

34. The difference between two kinds of not doubting; grasping at precepts and the other four views. The treatise-author poses a question: now it is said 「不生疑」 tr. "does not give rise to doubt," and later it is said 「深法不疑」 tr. "does not doubt the deep Dharma"—what difference is there between these two non-doubtings? The answer: the non-doubting now is what, within the four truths, the srota-āpanna severs; the non-doubting later is not doubting within the deep Dharma known by the Buddha. By the power of this bodhisattva's merit and wisdom, though he does not become a srota-āpanna and has not yet become a Buddha, he can be without these two doubts. This is a very fine distinction: the former is the doubt severed by the first fruit, the latter is the doubt about the deep Dharma of the Buddha's realm; the bodhisattva is without both, yet the reason he is so differs from the severance of the two vehicles. The treatise-author goes on to explain grasping at precepts: grasping at precepts means the precepts of the outside paths; practising these precepts of the outside paths, one does not obtain nirvāṇa; he also explains that the remaining four views are all called wrong view—grasping at precepts is set apart, and the remaining four are called wrong view collectively; this is the boundary of names and marks in this passage.

35. Why he does not seek auspicious matters. The treatise-author in one sentence: because he deeply believes in the retribution of the fruits of the causes and conditions of deeds, he does not seek auspicious matters and does not make offerings to gods with flowers, incense, and the rest. Passage 6 already borrowed this meaning; here its text properly appears. Believing in cause and effect and seeking good fortune are minds on two roads; this item gives the practitioner a very simple criterion.

36. The causes of the three matters of not being born in a low and mean family and the rest. The treatise-author gives three causes: because in seeking the path he breaks the root of pride, he is never born in a low and mean family; because he does not obstruct others' merit and constantly encourages and assists, he is not born in the eight places of difficulty; because he breaks down and thins lust and keeps far from a flattering mind, he does not receive a woman's body. Passage 7 already cited it; here it is made clear that these are the retributions of causal conduct. Whenever one reads a text on retribution, one should look back to its cause—when the sūtras and treatises speak of the fruit, their intent is to encourage the cause.

37. The discernment of the fourfold completeness of the ten wholesome paths. The treatise-author: though other people practise the ten wholesome paths, some do one, some two, some three, and they cannot be complete in the four kinds; this bodhisattva, because of the mind of great compassion and because he deeply loves wholesome dharmas, practises all four kinds completely. This is precisely what passage 8 relies on. The distinction of the four kinds comes from great compassion and love of the Dharma, not from diligent toil in keeping precepts—once the motive differs, the same wholesome act at once differs in depth.

38. Why he does not practise them even in dreams. The treatise-author: because he constantly cultivates and gathers the ten wholesome paths, even in dreams he does not practise the ten unwholesome paths. One sentence points out the cause and effect between 「常」 tr. "constantly" and 「乃至夢中」 tr. "even in dreams": it is not that there is a separate effort in dreams; it is what the constancy of ordinary days has accumulated.

39. All the merit he makes is for beings. The treatise-author distinguishes three grades of people: the merit other people cultivate is only for their own persons; the small bodhisattva, though he acts for beings, also acts for himself; all the merit the avaivartika makes is for beings, not for his own person. He also sets up a moving supposition: if merit could be given to others, he would give it all to beings and cultivate it again for himself; but it cannot be given. Therefore the bodhisattva teaches and transforms beings by the twelve divisions of the scriptures, likewise only for beings, not for himself. The sūtra text of passages 10 and 11 here obtains its heart and marrow: the reason the gift of Dharma must be dedicated is precisely that in his mind there is from the root no share he takes for himself.

40. Because the five faculties are sharp he can believe; the Buddha further speaks of the causes and conditions of emptiness. The treatise-author: because this bodhisattva's five faculties, faith and the rest, are sharp, though he has not yet become a Buddha, he can believe in all dharmas. Here the Buddha further speaks of the causes and conditions of emptiness: 「菩薩不見色等法故，無生疑處。」 tr. "Because the bodhisattva does not see form and the other dharmas, there is no place for doubt to arise." This explains passage 12. First a question: why are faith and emptiness spoken of together? The answer: shallow faith relies on people and on events; deep faith relies on seeing that dharmas have no place to be doubted—when the faculty of faith is sharp to the utmost, it meets with the wisdom of emptiness.

41. The softness of the deeds of mind as the root. The treatise-author: because this bodhisattva constantly practises the mind of kindness and compassion, his deeds of mind are soft; because his deeds of mind are soft, the deeds of kindness of body and speech are accomplished. This explains the two items of passage 13, and fixes their order: the mind of kindness and compassion is the root, softness of mind is the middle, the deeds of kindness of body and speech are the branch.

42. The kindness of the outside paths and the kindness of the bodhisattva. The treatise-author poses a question: the outside paths too have the mind of kindness and compassion—how can it be said to be a mark of the avaivartika? The answer: though the outside paths have it, it is not deep, it cannot think of all beings everywhere, and it is not constant, because it is not joined with the real mark of all dharmas; the bodhisattva is not so. Four boundaries must be remembered clearly: deep or not deep, everywhere or not everywhere, constant or not constant, joined with the real mark or not. Whoever credits himself with a good mind can check himself again by these four matters.

43. The five hindrances and the first dhyāna. The treatise-author: this bodhisattva censures the five desires, removes the five hindrances, and enters the five-limbed first dhyāna, and is not together with the five hindrances; because the five hindrances cover the mind and can wear away wisdom, break the Buddha path, and open the road of Māra. Passage 14 already raised 「開魔路」 tr. "open the road of Māra"; here its text properly appears—the deeds of Māra in the latter half of this chapter have their doorway in the five hindrances, consistent from beginning to end.

44. Why in every place he has nothing he loves and clings to. The treatise-author: this bodhisattva knows that all conditioned, made dharmas are false and unreal, like an illusion, like a dream, and that unconditioned dharmas are empty, without anything existent, of the mark of quiescence; therefore in every place he has nothing he loves and clings to. The conditioned is shown to be false by the similes of illusion and dream; the unconditioned is shown to be without anything existent by emptiness and quiescence—both roads are exhausted, and love and clinging have no place to arise. Among beings he does not cling even to the Buddha; among dharmas he does not cling even to nirvāṇa. He also gives the distinction between hatred and love: hatred is a coarse sin, which the small bodhisattva has already severed, and so it is not spoken of; love is deep, subtle, and hard to sever, and so it is spoken of now. This distinction should be remembered: the deeper the cultivation of the path, the finer what it treats.

45. Why he is ever single-minded, and the gloss on walking looking at the ground. The treatise-author: because this bodhisattva enters deeply into meditative concentration, he guards all beings; because he guards all beings, he is ever mindful single-mindedly and does not vex beings; because he does not break the precepts, going out and coming in, coming and going, and the rest, he is calm and single-minded. As for the sūtra text 「舉足下足，視地而行」 tr. "lifting the foot and setting it down, he walks looking at the ground," the treatise-author glosses its meaning clearly: to protect beings, and to avoid a distracted mind. Passage 16 already described its use; this is its proper gloss—for every word about deportment in the sūtra text, the treatise-author always brings out its meaning, so that the reader does not see only the bearing.

46. The worms, the two purities, and passing beyond the two vehicles. The treatise-author: this bodhisattva has long cultivated and gathered measureless, boundless wholesome dharmas; his body has no eighty thousand families of worms, and because he is also little troubled by illness and pain, his clothes, bedding, and the rest are always clean and unsoiled; because of the power of roots of goodness such as obtaining the real mark of all dharmas, his body has no eighty thousand families of worms. Because the mind is pure, body, speech, and the rest are also pure; because he is apart from false and deceptive, devious and crooked, and other base afflictions, the mind is pure. Because the two matters are pure, though he walks in the world, he is apart from all pressing pain and distress; because his mind neither wearies nor sinks, he passes out beyond the śrāvaka and pratyekabuddha grounds. The sūtra text of passages 17 and 18 here joins into one string of cause and effect: long cultivation of wholesome dharmas is the cause; the body without worms, little illness, and clean clothes and bedding are the marks; the mind neither wearying nor sinking and passing out beyond the two vehicles is where it returns.

47. The proper explanation of not prizing the dhūta practices. The treatise-author: because this bodhisattva prizes the Buddha path, he does not prize gain and offerings; though he practises the dhūta practices, he does not prize these practices, because these practices are a cause and condition of a small part of the ultimate path, not the ultimate path. This is called the conduct, kind, and appearance of the avaivartika bodhisattva. The two Chinese characters rendered here as 「少分」 tr. "a small part" are the key: it is not saying that the dhūta practices are useless; it is saying that they are only a small part of the causes and conditions of the ultimate path, and to exalt oneself on the basis of them becomes an obstruction.

48. Why, not having severed the afflictions, he never gives rise to evil minds. The treatise-author poses the sharpest question of this chapter: this bodhisattva has not yet obtained the Buddha path and has not severed all the afflictions—how does he never give rise to stinginess, greed, and the other evil minds? The answer: the avaivartika bodhisattva severs all the afflictions at the time he obtains the acceptance of the non-arising of dharmas, but has not yet severed the habitual residues; if he had not severed the afflictions, how could he never give rise to stinginess, greed, and the other minds that obstruct the path? As a sūtra says: 「須陀洹乃至阿羅漢，即是菩薩無生法忍。」 tr. "The srota-āpanna and so on up to the arhat are precisely the bodhisattva's acceptance of the non-arising of dharmas." This answer unties the difficulty of passage 20: what is called not yet severed is not yet having severed the habitual residues, not not yet having severed the afflictions. The treatise-author also gives a second view: furthermore, someone says: because the bodhisattva practises the six perfections and deeply cultivates and gathers all merits, the afflictions are broken down and thinned and do not arise in the mind, and this is called 「常不生」 tr. "never gives rise." The two views are set out together without judgement—one view is in terms of having severed the afflictions but not yet the habitual residues, the other in terms of breaking down and thinning so that they do not arise; the reader should know that the treatise-author leaves room here.

49. The mind abiding unmoved, and the three similes. The treatise-author explains the closing item of Sūtra ①: because this bodhisattva has practised dhyānapāramitā for measureless ages, his mind abides unmoved; because he has accumulated and trained in prajñā, he enters deeply into wisdom; because he knows the subtle and wondrous flavour of the Dharma, when he hears the Dharma from others he listens and receives single-mindedly; because his delight in the Dharma is deep, whatever he hears—whether the Dharma of the three vehicles or the dharmas of the outside paths and of the world—because his own mind is wondrous, all of it joins with prajñā and does not break the mark of the Dharma. Then three similes follow in succession, the finest part of this passage: as a strong man without illness digests whatever he eats; again, as the Buddha has obtained the mark of the supreme flavour, so that even bitter, pungent, unpleasant food is of the highest flavour in the Buddha's mouth; again, as when rock sugar being boiled is about to be done, all the various things inside it become rock sugar, because the power of its wondrous flavour is abundant. The three similes each have their own emphasis—the strong man shows that the power of digestion lies in oneself, not in the food; the Buddha's mouth shows that the power of transforming flavour lies in the faculty, not in the object; the rock sugar shows that the power of joining lies in the abundance of force, not in the fineness of the things. The bodhisattva is also so: because the power of prajñāpāramitā is abundant, he can make all the various dharmas join with prajñā into one flavour, without any faults or sins. The misunderstanding to clear away: this is not saying that any dharma whatever may be mixed in together; it is saying that the power of prajñā is enough to digest them—eating indiscriminately when the power is not abundant is precisely what the simile of the strong man sets apart.

50. Worldly matters entering the nature of dharmas. The treatise-author continues: worldly matters are the deeds of body and speech the bodhisattva initiates, all for the sake of pitying and bringing beings across; this mind of pity all enters the first gate of prajñāpāramitā. Again, the causes and conditions of all worldly matters, down to sitting, rising, walking, eating and drinking, and speaking, he is always mindful of making beings safe; these dharmas of coming and going and the rest all enter the nature of dharmas, as is said in 「破來去」 tr. "Refuting Coming and Going"; the matters of livelihood are likewise so. At the end one sentence closes Treatise ①: this is called the marks of the avaivartika. What is to be seen here are two lines of reasoning—one in terms of the mind: the mind of pity is the first gate of prajñā; the other in terms of dharmas: the dharmas of coming and going and the rest originally of themselves enter the nature of dharmas. The former anyone can practise; the latter is that the principle is originally so.

51. The first deed of Māra: conjuring up the eight great hells. Sūtra ② opens a new round. Evil Māra, before the avaivartika bodhisattva, conjures up the eight great hells, and in each hell there are thousands of myriads of koṭi of bodhisattvas all being burned and boiled, suffering every bitter, sour, painful poison, and he says to the bodhisattva: 「是諸菩薩皆是阿鞞跋致，佛所授記，墮大地獄中。汝若為佛授阿鞞跋致記者，當入是大地獄中；佛為授汝地獄記，汝不如還捨菩薩心，可得不墮地獄，得生天上。」 tr. "These bodhisattvas are all avaivartikas to whom the Buddha gave the prediction, and they have fallen into the great hells. If the Buddha has given you the prediction of avaivartika, you will enter these great hells; the Buddha has given you the prediction of hell. You had better give up the bodhisattva mind again; then you can avoid falling into hell and be born in the heavens." The poison of this speech of Māra lies in using marks of suffering seen with the eyes to shake the Dharma one believes in. The bodhisattva sees this thing and hears this thing, and his mind is unmoved, without doubt, unstartled, and he has this thought: 「阿鞞跋致菩薩若墮地獄、畜生、餓鬼中，終無是處！」 tr. "That an avaivartika bodhisattva should fall among the hells, the animals, or the hungry ghosts—there is in the end no such thing!" The criterion is not in what is seen but in the principle one believes—what the eye sees can be conjured; the principle cannot be conjured.

52. The second deed of Māra: falsely claiming the true Buddha-Dharma. Evil Māra conjures himself into a bhikṣu's robes and comes, teaching the bodhisattva to give up quickly the dharma of the six perfections he heard before, to let go quickly of the rejoicing and dedication of the roots of goodness he made before, saying that all you heard before is not the Buddha's Dharma, not the Buddha's teaching, but is all mere ornamented compilation, and that what I say is the true Buddha-Dharma. Here the sūtra text lays down a clear judgement: if the bodhisattva, hearing this said, is startled in mind, doubts, and regrets, know that this bodhisattva has not obtained the prediction of the buddhas and does not firmly abide in the nature of avaivartika; if his mind is unmoved, unstartled, without doubt, and without regret, according with and relying on the dharma without making and without arising, he does not believe others' words and does not follow others' practice, and even when practising the six perfections and so on up to practising anuttarā samyaksaṃbodhi he likewise does not follow others' words. The Buddha at once gives a simile: just as the arhat whose outflows are exhausted does not believe others' words and does not follow others' practice, sees directly the real mark of all dharmas, and evil Māra cannot turn him. The sūtra text pushes it further to the extreme: this bodhisattva does not simply believe and take even the Buddha's words, how much less the words of those seeking the śrāvaka or pratyekabuddha, or of evil Māra, or of the brahmin ascetics of the outside paths! Why? Because this bodhisattva sees no dharma that can be followed in belief—namely form, or feeling, perception, constructions, and consciousness, or the suchness of form and so on up to the suchness of consciousness, and so on up to not seeing anuttarā samyaksaṃbodhi, how much less the suchness of anuttarā samyaksaṃbodhi. This sentence is the easiest to misread and must be cleared with effort: 「乃至佛語不直信取」 tr. "even the Buddha's words he does not simply believe and take" is not slighting the Buddha's words, nor saying one may disbelieve the Buddha; it says that one does not take and cling directly by listening to what others transmit—what is believed is the mark of dharmas seen directly, not the words in another's mouth; precisely because he sees no dharma that can be followed in belief, there is nothing by which he can be turned.

53. The third deed of Māra: the dharma of the semblance path and the three rounds of luring back. Evil Māra takes the body of a bhikṣu and comes and says: 「汝所行者，是生死法，非薩婆若道，汝今身取苦盡證！」 tr. "What you practise is the dharma of birth and death, not the path of sarvajñā; in this very body take the realisation of the end of suffering!" Then for the bodhisattva he uses worldly practice to expound the dharma of the semblance path—this dharma of the semblance path is bound to the three realms, namely the mark of the skeleton, or the first dhyāna and so on up to neither perception nor non-perception—and promises the fruit of the srota-āpanna and so on up to the fruit of the arhat, urging him to end suffering in this life and not receive a future body. The bodhisattva's mind is unstartled, without doubt, without regret, and instead he has this thought: 「是比丘益我不少，為我說似道法。行是似道法，不得至須陀洹果證，不得至阿羅漢、辟支佛道證，何況得至阿耨多羅三藐三菩提！」 tr. "This bhikṣu benefits me not a little, expounding to me the dharma of the semblance path. Practising this dharma of the semblance path, one does not reach the realisation of the fruit of the srota-āpanna, does not reach the realisation of the arhat or of the pratyekabuddha path, how much less reach anuttarā samyaksaṃbodhi!" Māra, seeing him rejoice, turns out a second round: he cites as examples bodhisattvas who made offerings to buddhas as many as the sands of the Ganges, practised the six perfections in the presence of buddhas as many as the sands of the Ganges, and drew near to them and consulted them on the bodhisattva path, and says that even they did not obtain anuttarā samyaksaṃbodhi, how much less you. The bodhisattva's mind does not change and is not startled; he rejoices all the more, and still has the thought 「為我說障道法」 tr. "he expounds to me the dharmas that obstruct the path." Māra, knowing that his mind does not sink, then in that place conjures up many bhikṣus and says that these are all bodhisattvas who aroused the intent to seek the Buddha path and now all abide on the arhat ground; if even they could not obtain it, how can you obtain it? The bodhisattva at once has this thought: 「此是惡魔說相似道行，菩薩摩訶薩行般若波羅蜜，不應轉阿耨多羅三藐三菩提心，亦不應墮聲聞、辟支佛道中。」 tr. "This is evil Māra expounding the practice of the semblance path; the bodhisattva-mahāsattva practising prajñāpāramitā ought not to turn from the mind of anuttarā samyaksaṃbodhi, nor ought he to fall into the path of the śrāvaka or pratyekabuddha." He further has this thought: to practise the six perfections and so on up to the omniscience of all kinds and not obtain anuttarā samyaksaṃbodhi—there is no such thing. The poison of the three rounds deepens layer by layer: first he moves him with talk of suffering, next he bends him with the example of great bodhisattvas, finally he presses him with the testimony of a crowd before his eyes—and the bodhisattva's way of answering is the same in every round: he recognises it as the semblance path, as obstructing the path, and does not contend with it.

54. Aware of the deeds of Māra, he does not lose awakening. The closing item of Sūtra ②: the bodhisattva has this thought: 「若菩薩能如佛所說，不遠離般若波羅蜜心乃至一切種智，是菩薩終不退阿耨多羅三藐三菩提。若菩薩覺知魔事，亦不失阿耨多羅三藐三菩提。」 tr. "If a bodhisattva can, as the Buddha has said, not stray far from the mind of prajñāpāramitā and so on up to the omniscience of all kinds, this bodhisattva will in the end not retrogress from anuttarā samyaksaṃbodhi. If a bodhisattva is aware of the deeds of Māra, he likewise does not lose anuttarā samyaksaṃbodhi." The two sentences stand side by side: not straying far from prajñā is the proper upholding; being aware of the deeds of Māra is the supporting upholding. What matters lies in the two words 「覺知」 tr. "be aware of"—the deeds of Māra need not be wholly extinguished; being aware of them, one is not lost to them.

55. In what dharma does he turn, so as to be called not turning: the answer of Sūtra ② and the acceptance of the non-arising of dharmas. Subhūti asks again: in what dharma does he turn, so as to be called not turning? The Buddha answers: he turns within the mark of form, turns within the marks of feeling, perception, constructions, and consciousness, within the mark of the twelve sense-fields, the mark of the eighteen elements, the marks of lust, hatred, and delusion, the mark of wrong view, the mark of the four foundations of mindfulness and so on up to the marks of the śrāvaka and pratyekabuddha, and so on up to turning within the mark of the Buddha; for this reason it is called the mark of the non-retrogressing bodhisattva-mahāsattva. Why? Because this avaivartika bodhisattva-mahāsattva enters the bodhisattva's position by this dharma of the emptiness of specific marks and obtains the acceptance of the non-arising of dharmas, down to the least dharma being unfindable; because it is unfindable he does not make; because he does not make, there is no arising; this is called the acceptance of the non-arising of dharmas. Here the Buddha lists the objects of 「轉」 tr. "turning" more exhaustively than in passage 4: not only the five aggregates such as form, but even the mark of the four foundations of mindfulness, the marks of the śrāvaka and pratyekabuddha, and so on up to the mark of the Buddha are all among what is turned—whatever becomes a mark must be turned. And what enables the turning is the emptiness of specific marks; where the turning arrives is entering the bodhisattva's position and obtaining the acceptance of the non-arising of dharmas. The gloss on the acceptance of the non-arising of dharmas is also established here: because it is unfindable he does not make; because he does not make, there is no arising.

56. The explanation: why Māra tests. At the very opening of Treatise ② the intent of Māra is explained: when Māra knows clearly that this bodhisattva is an avaivartika, he no longer obstructs and ruins him; if he does not yet know clearly, then by various causes and conditions he tests, breaks, and ruins. This sentence is most useful—Māra's testing arises from 「未了了知」 tr. "not yet knowing clearly"; put the other way round, being tested is precisely because one is still among those in doubt. The treatise-author then restates the first deed of Māra: sometimes he makes the eight great hells, conjures up countless bodhisattvas being burned and boiled within them, and says to the bodhisattva: 「此皆是阿鞞跋致，諸佛授記者；汝若受記，為受地獄記。」 tr. "These are all avaivartikas, those to whom the buddhas gave the prediction; if you have received the prediction, you have received the prediction of hell."

57. The question and answer on receiving the prediction of hell. The treatise-author poses a question: for what causes and conditions does evil Māra say 「行善者受地獄記」 tr. "those who practise good receive the prediction of hell"? The answer: evil Māra, because this bodhisattva wishes to take on suffering in place of all beings, says he receives the prediction of hell; if you practise merit and are born in the heavens, then it is for your own person, and has nothing to do with the affairs of beings. This answer takes apart the mechanism of Māra's speech: Māra sets his hand to the bodhisattva's vow to take on suffering in place of beings, secretly swaps ‘taking on suffering in place of beings’ for ‘receiving the prediction of hell’, and then lures him with settling himself by birth in the heavens—what he attacks is precisely the bodhisattva's weightiest vow. Whoever lures people into retrogression always sets his hand to what they hold weightiest; this is a general rule.

58. The judgement of moved and unmoved; the simile of water within fire. The treatise-author: if the bodhisattva hears this thing and his mind is moved, doubts, and regrets, or if he believes and receives Māra's words, know that he has not received the prediction of avaivartika. If the bodhisattva hears this thing and does not doubt, is not moved, is not startled, and has this thought: 「阿鞞跋致，得諸法實相故，不著一切法者，乃至不生小罪，何況三惡道罪！如火中有水、水中生火，無有是處！」 tr. "The avaivartika, because he has obtained the real mark of all dharmas and clings to no dharma, does not give rise even to a small sin, how much less the sins of the three evil destinies! As for there being water within fire, or fire arising within water—there is no such thing!" This simile takes its force from what is necessarily impossible—that one who clings to no dharma should fall into the three evil destinies is like water coming out of fire, impossible in principle. What the bodhisattva relies on is the necessity of the principle, not self-confidence in his own merit.

59. The restatement of the second deed of Māra, and the simile of false gold. The treatise-author restates: again Māra, in a bhikṣu's robes, comes and speaks to the bodhisattva, saying that the dharma of cultivating the six perfections you heard before from a lesser teacher is all false, and the merit of the mind of rejoicing you gathered is also false and deceptive, ornamented and not genuine, not spoken by the Buddha's mouth; what I now say to you is truly the Buddha's Dharma; give it up quickly. The verdict follows at once: if this bodhisattva, hearing this, is moved in mind, angered, and doubts, know that the buddhas have not given him the prediction; as with false gold: burned in fire, rubbed, and beaten, whether it turns black, or red, or white, one then knows it is not real. In the simile of false gold three matters must be seen: first, the test must be by burning in fire, rubbing, and beating, not by the eye's looking; second, what shows—black, red, white—is its own original colour appearing of itself, not something added from outside; third, Māra's disparagement is precisely that fire—being disparaged and being moved in mind, angered, and doubting is not that Māra's power is great; it is that the original colour is so.

60. Not angered and not doubting is the real; the simile of the arhat whose outflows are exhausted and the simile of the dog wearing a lion's skin. The treatise-author continues: if the bodhisattva hears this and is not angered and does not doubt, following the dharma without arising and without ceasing, without origination and without making; practising within the marks of the six perfections, he himself knows not to follow others' words—know that he is a true avaivartika. Just as the arhat, because his outflows are exhausted, cannot be broken by the deeds of Māra that come, the avaivartika bodhisattva is likewise so: there is none who can subdue him, because he himself knows directly the real mark of all dharmas. It is pushed one layer further: even if Māra comes taking the body of a Buddha, whatever he says that differs from the mark of the Dharma he likewise does not believe and receive. As when a dog wears a lion's skin: though the beasts fear it when they see it, when they hear its voice they know it is a dog—how much less when Māra transforms into other bodies! Seen together, the two similes complete the method of judging real and false: the simile of exhausted outflows shows that within there is no place to attack; the simile of the dog's skin shows that the outward mark can be feigned but the voice cannot be feigned—what is relied on is whether the Dharma spoken accords with the mark of the Dharma, not the bodily mark before one's eyes. This sentence illuminates passage 52's 「乃至佛語不直信取」 tr. "even the Buddha's words he does not simply believe and take": even the body of a Buddha is examined by the mark of the Dharma, how much more other bodies.

61. The Buddha himself states the causes and conditions. The treatise-author brings out the causes and conditions that the Buddha himself states in the sūtra: 「是菩薩見色等法空故，誰當隨他語？」 tr. "Because this bodhisattva sees form and the other dharmas as empty, who would follow others' words?" The root of not following others' words is not in a stiff backbone but in seeing that dharmas are empty—since dharmas are empty, there is not one sentence that can be set down as a place to follow.

62. Māra says the six perfections are all the path of birth and death. The treatise-author restates the first round of the third deed of Māra: evil Māra comes taking the body of a bhikṣu and says to the bodhisattva: these six perfections are all the path of birth and death—by the causes and conditions of the merit of giving and the rest, one receives the pleasure of merit in the desire realm; by the causes and conditions of dhyānapāramitā, one receives pleasure in the form realm; this prajñāpāramitā, because it has no fixed mark, is called a false and deceptive dharma, revolving within the five destinies, unable to get out by itself; it is the path of birth and death; people deceive you, saying 「是一切種智道」 tr. "this is the path of the omniscience of all kinds"; I now speak the truth: take nirvāṇa, and end suffering in this life. The cleverness of this speech of Māra lies in its first two sentences being almost true—giving and dhyāna do indeed bring about the pleasures of the desire realm and the form realm; the cleverness is in the final turn, which speaks of the fixed-marklessness of prajñā as falsehood and deception. Words that seem true are the hardest to recognise, precisely because they have true words mixed within them.

63. The headings of the dharma of the semblance path. The treatise-author: if this bodhisattva is silent, Māra then expounds for him the dharma of the semblance path—whether contemplating the thirty-six kinds of impurity, or contemplating the skeleton, or the breath going out and in; by this path one obtains the four dhyānas and the four formless absorptions; by this meditative concentration you can obtain the srota-āpanna and so on up to the arhat; this body of yours now is born of the causes and conditions of sin; the Buddha said he does not praise receiving a body again even for the space of a finger-snap, how much less dwelling long within birth and death. The dharmas listed are originally the Buddha's Dharma—the contemplation of impurity, the perception of the skeleton, counting the breath, the four dhyānas and the four formless absorptions: not one of them is a dharma of the outside paths. What most needs to be cleared away here: the semblance of the dharma of the semblance path lies not in the headings of the dharmas listed—the contemplation of impurity, counting the breath, and meditative concentration are originally the Buddha's Dharma—but in the fruit Māra promises and the direction he points to: Māra says ‘using this path, using this practice, you will obtain the fruit of the srota-āpanna and so on up to the arhat’, and the bodhisattva at once judges against it: 「行是似道法，不得至須陀洹果證，不得至阿羅漢、辟支佛道證，何況得至阿耨多羅三藐三菩提」 tr. "practising this dharma of the semblance path, one does not reach the realisation of the fruit of the srota-āpanna, does not reach the realisation of the arhat or of the pratyekabuddha path, how much less reach anuttarā samyaksaṃbodhi"; the realisation of the fruit promised is false, and the direction pointed to is not the bodhisattva path either, and therefore it is called the semblance path.

64. Knowing the wrong track, one knows the right road. The treatise-author: the avaivartika bodhisattva, hearing this thing, is glad in mind and has this thought: 「是比丘大益我，為我說似道法；我得是似道法，即知真道。」 tr. "This bhikṣu greatly benefits me, expounding to me the dharma of the semblance path; obtaining this dharma of the semblance path, I know at once the true path." The treatise-author gives a simile for it: as a traveller who knows the wrong track thereby knows the right road; obstructions to the path are likewise so. He adds a stroke of character: the avaivartika is a great person; being of weight, he does not wrangle with this bhikṣu. This passage is one of the most savourable places in the whole chapter: Māra comes to harm a person and instead becomes his benefit—not because Māra has changed his mind, but because the bodhisattva knows how to use it. Where it lands is in the doubts and difficulties of daily use—meeting a wrong teaching and being able to recognise its wrongness, the mark of the right path becomes clear through it; arguing with it, one falls into it instead.

65. Māra sees his silence and rejoices. The treatise-author: Māra sees the bodhisattva silent and says with joy: 「是人信受我語！」 tr. "This person believes and receives my words!" He says to the bodhisattva: 「善男子！有無量菩薩供養如恒河沙等諸佛，諮問、奉行六波羅蜜及菩薩道法，面受佛教，盡受行諸菩薩行，尚不得無上道，今皆作阿羅漢，汝欲見不？」 tr. "Good son! There are measureless bodhisattvas who made offerings to buddhas equal to the sands of the Ganges, consulted them about and carried out the six perfections and the dharmas of the bodhisattva path, received the Buddha's teaching face to face, and received and practised all the bodhisattva practices, and still did not obtain the unsurpassed path; now they have all become arhats. Do you wish to see them?" The bodhisattva, having heard this, is silent. The two instances of 「默然」 tr. "silent" differ: the bodhisattva's silence is not contending; Māra's taking it as belief and acceptance is his own cleverness. In reading this place one should know one thing—not contending is not necessarily agreeing; yet in Māra's eyes not contending is his plan succeeding, and so his luring advances further.

66. The conjuring up of countless arhats, and the bodhisattva's rejoicing. The treatise-author: Māra, in that place, at once conjures up countless arhat bhikṣus and says to the bodhisattva: 「是諸比丘皆久行無上道，今皆取阿羅漢，汝今云何獨欲作佛？」 tr. "These bhikṣus all long practised the unsurpassed path, and now they have all taken arhatship; how is it that you alone now wish to become a Buddha?" The avaivartika at once rejoices again, thinking that this bhikṣu expounds to him the semblance path and the dharmas that obstruct the path; this bodhisattva really practises the six perfections and all the merits, and will certainly not retrogress and fall into the two vehicles; as the Buddha has said, if the mind never leaves the six perfections and all the merits, that one should not obtain the unsurpassed path—there is no such thing. The treatise-author sets down a concluding sentence: if the bodhisattva knows this to be a deed of Māra, he gains great benefit and loses nothing; for this reason the bodhisattva's mind is not moved or turned, and this is called the mark of the avaivartika. Pressing a person with the testimony of a crowd is the heaviest blow—countless people before your eyes are all thus; how can you alone not be so? What breaks this blow is still that sentence 「無有是處」 tr. "there is no such thing": the principle of cause and effect does not change with the number of people.

67. The final question and answer: the brief explanation and the extended explanation. The treatise-author restates the question and answer of the sūtra text in narrative form: at that time Subhūti said to the Buddha: 「世尊！於何法轉名為不轉？」 tr. "World-Honored One! In what dharma does he turn, so as to be called not turning?" The Buddha said: 「於色相等法中轉還。」 tr. "He turns back within the mark of form and the other such dharmas." The treatise-author at once points out: above was the brief explanation; now is the extended explanation. Then he sets out its meaning: if the bodhisattva can turn within the marks of form and the rest, this is called practising the emptiness of nature of all dharmas, obtaining the acceptance of the non-arising of dharmas, and entering the bodhisattva's position. The acceptance of the non-arising of dharmas: even the subtlest dharma is unfindable, how much less a great one! This is called non-arising. Having obtained this dharma of non-arising, not making and not initiating any deeds and conduct—this is called obtaining the acceptance of the non-arising of dharmas. The bodhisattva who has obtained the acceptance of the non-arising of dharmas is called an avaivartika. Here the names and marks of the whole chapter are gathered into one line: turning the marks of form and the rest is practising the emptiness of the nature of dharmas; practising the emptiness of the nature of dharmas is obtaining the acceptance of the non-arising of dharmas; obtaining the acceptance of the non-arising of dharmas is being called an avaivartika. The misunderstanding to clear away is reading the acceptance of the non-arising of dharmas as some lofty, wondrous felt state; the treatise-author's gloss is utterly plain—even the subtlest dharma is unfindable; this is called non-arising.

68. The close of the whole chapter. The treatise-author's last sentence: conducts, kinds, and appearances such as these, without measure, are the marks of the avaivartika. The one word 「等」 tr. "such as these" and the one word 「無量」 tr. "without measure" answer exactly the last question the reader may raise: are the marks listed already exhaustive? The answer: they are not exhaustive, nor need they be—what is cited are testable examples; what is pointed to is that one person who has turned the clinging mind.

Do Not Misread

Do not read 「不退」 tr. "non-retrogression" as a station that can be held onto. The whole chapter twice asks 「於何法轉名為不轉」 tr. "in what dharma does he turn, so as to be called not turning," and twice answers in terms of form and the other dharmas; the treatise-author says still more directly: because dharmas are empty, he can turn the clinging mind; because he turns the clinging mind, he is called not turning. To read it as holding onto some ground or keeping some state is precisely the clinging mind this chapter sets out to turn. The sūtra text lists even 「佛相」 tr. "the mark of the Buddha" among what is turned, and its meaning has been said to the full: whatever becomes a mark that can be held onto is not the place of non-retrogression.

Do not read these marks and appearances as a checklist for grading oneself and so give rise to a mind of higher and lower. Before listing the marks the Buddha first says that all dharmas are without conduct, without kind, and without appearance, and the treatise-author also says plainly: at the time of the first question beings did not yet cling to the mark of the avaivartika, so he spoke sometimes of the mark of emptiness and sometimes of marks that exist; now, because beings cling to marks, he says there is no conduct, no kind, and no appearance. The checklist is for people to illuminate themselves with, not for measuring others; the moment a mind of measuring others arises, the very first item, 「不視他人長短」 tr. "not looking at others' strengths and shortcomings," has already been broken.

Do not read items such as the body's having no eighty thousand families of worms, and the clothes and bedding being clean and little illness, as strange tales, nor, conversely, as arts of nourishing health. The treatise-author's explanation is bound to the mind all the way through: because he has long cultivated and gathered measureless, boundless wholesome dharmas, his body has no worms; because of the power of roots of goodness such as obtaining the real mark of all dharmas, his body has no worms; because the mind is pure, body and speech are also pure. What is spoken of is the bodily mark brought about by merit, not a method of cultivating the body; what the reader should look at is the order 「隨其功德，得身清淨、得心清淨」 tr. "according to his merit, he obtains purity of body and obtains purity of mind," not the bodily mark itself.

Do not read 「常不生慳貪等諸惡心」 tr. "never gives rise to stinginess, greed, and the other evil minds" as meaning that the bodhisattva has already become a Buddha. The treatise-author sets up this difficulty himself and answers it himself: at the time he obtains the acceptance of the non-arising of dharmas he severs all the afflictions but has not yet severed the habitual residues; and he gives a second view: because he practises the six perfections and deeply cultivates merit, the afflictions are broken down and thinned and do not arise in the mind. The boundary between severed and not severed lies in the word 「習」 tr. "habitual residue"—what this chapter speaks of is not giving rise to evil minds in their present activity, not that the habitual residues are already exhausted.

Do not read 「乃至佛語不直信取」 tr. "even the Buddha's words he does not simply believe and take" as meaning one may disbelieve the Buddha. The premise of this sentence the sūtra text itself states plainly: this bodhisattva sees no dharma that can be followed in belief. What is set apart is 「隨他語」 tr. "following others' words"—taking by another's mouth, not by the mark of dharmas seen directly. The treatise-author says it still more clearly with the simile of the dog wearing a lion's skin: even if Māra comes taking the body of a Buddha, whatever he says that differs from the mark of the Dharma is likewise not believed and received—what is relied on is always the mark of the Dharma, not the bodily mark or the name. To read it as slighting the Dharma and disdaining the Buddha runs exactly against this chapter's sentence 「隨順依止無作無生法」 tr. "according with and relying on the dharma without making and without arising."

Do not read the dharma of the semblance path as a counterfeit wrong dharma. What Māra expounds is the contemplation of impurity, the perception of the skeleton, the breath going out and in, the four dhyānas and the four formless absorptions—all of them the Buddha's Dharma. What makes it an obstruction to the path lies in the direction 「汝今身取苦盡證」 tr. "in this very body take the realisation of the end of suffering." What this chapter rebukes is the fruit Māra promises and the direction he points to, not the headings of the dharmas; the bodhisattva says plainly that by this semblance path not even the realisation of the first fruit, of the arhat, or of the pratyekabuddha path is obtained, how much less unsurpassed awakening—to read it as meaning that the Great Vehicle need not cultivate the contemplation of impurity, counting the breath, and meditative concentration is to read the sūtra text backwards. The reason the bodhisattva rejoices is precisely that knowing the wrong track, one knows the right road—only by recognising it as the semblance path can one make use of it.

Do not read the bodhisattva's silence as timidity or as agreement. The treatise-author points it out in two places: the avaivartika is a great person; being of weight, he does not wrangle with this bhikṣu; and Māra, seeing the silence, rejoices, taking it for belief and acceptance. Not contending and being persuaded are two different things. Here the practitioner can obtain a share of the method of keeping and guarding: there is no need to argue every kind of teaching to the end; it is enough to recognise in one's mind that it is the semblance path.

Bearing on Practice

The first use is a table of the marks of conduct that one can illuminate oneself against item by item. The marks of this chapter item by item—from not uttering useless talk and not looking at others' strengths and shortcomings in the deeds of speech, to not being together with the five hindrances and having nothing one loves and clings to in every place in the ground of the mind, to being ever mindful and single-minded and walking looking at the ground in deportment, to clean clothes and bedding and little illness in daily living, to practising the six perfections for the sake of all beings and always dedicating the gift of Dharma in motive—item after item are marks one can recognise in daily use. The way to use it is not in giving oneself a score but in illuminating oneself: in the course of today, which item has become present, and which item is still only a name. The knack the treatise-author gives is to look at the word 「常」 tr. "constantly"—constantly practising the ten wholesome paths, being ever mindful and single-minded, never giving rise to stinginess and greed; whether it can be called constant matters much more than whether one can do it once.

The second use is the key of 「轉著心」 tr. "turning the clinging mind." When one has practised for a long time, what arises most easily is clinging to the dharma one cultivates and to the state one has attained; this chapter's remedy is most clean-cut: turning within form and the other dharmas, and so on up to turning within the mark of the four foundations of mindfulness and within the mark of the Buddha. Whenever something is attained and the mind begins to hold onto it, one can ask directly: what I hold onto at this moment—is it the Dharma, or my mark of the Dharma? Holding onto a mark is among those who retrogress and turn; turning the mark is non-retrogression. This move is not asking one to abandon practice—the treatise-author says it clearly: what is turned is the clinging mind, not the gate of practice.

The third use is the power of digestion shown by the three similes. A strong man without illness digests whatever he eats; the Buddha's mouth, having obtained the mark of the supreme flavour, makes bitter and pungent food all of the highest flavour; rock sugar about to be done makes the various things inside it all become rock sugar. Practitioners listening to the Dharma and reading books often worry about mixture—the Dharma of the three vehicles, the teachings of the outside paths, the matters of the world: will they disturb right mindfulness? This chapter's way of answering is not prohibition but nourishing strength: because the power of prajñāpāramitā is abundant, all the various dharmas join with prajñā into one flavour. Put the other way round, dabbling indiscriminately when the strength is not yet abundant is precisely what the simile of the strong man sets apart; nourishing strength and choosing one's food do not contradict each other here.

The fourth use is the method of recognition given by Māra's three rounds of testing. The first round uses marks of suffering seen with the eyes to shake the principle one believes—the remedy is that the principle does not turn with the marks, as there being water within fire or fire arising within water: there is no such thing. The second round uses 「我所說是真佛法」 tr. "what I say is the true Buddha-Dharma" to rob him of what he has learned—the remedy is in the simile of false gold: being unmoved and not angered is the original colour of real gold. The third round uses the headings of the Buddha's Dharma to expound the semblance path and presses with the example of the crowd—the remedy is in recognising the falseness of the fruit promised and the wrongness of the direction: by this path not even the first fruit is obtained, still less is it the path of sarvajñā; the crowd is thus, but the principle is not thus: there is still no such thing. The remedies of the three rounds each differ, but they return to the same place: what is relied on is the mark of dharmas seen directly, not the marks of events seen with the eyes, not the mouths of others, not the number of people.

The fifth use is the comfort and the strictness of the sentence 「覺知魔事，亦不失阿耨多羅三藐三菩提」 tr. "being aware of the deeds of Māra, he likewise does not lose anuttarā samyaksaṃbodhi." The comfort lies in this: when the deeds of Māra appear before one, it is not losing the path; being aware of them, one does not lose it. The strictness lies in this: what is prized is being aware, not having nothing happen—the deeds of Māra listed in this chapter mostly occur just when one's effort is taking hold; the more it takes hold, the more refined the forks in the road one meets, even to being promised deep meditative concentration and the fruit of the arhat. In daily use the practitioner can always hold to the treatise-author's verdict: when Māra knows clearly that one is an avaivartika he no longer obstructs and ruins him; when he does not yet know clearly, he tests in various ways—being tested is not a bad thing—the one who 「未了了知」 tr. "does not yet know clearly" is Māra: Māra has not yet made out whether this person is non-retrogressing, and so comes to test; being able to remain unmoved in the test shows precisely that one is non-retrogressing.

Further Resonances

The backbone of this chapter is two sūtra sections and two treatise sections. Sūtra ① begins from Subhūti's asking by the three matters of conduct, kind, and appearance; the Buddha enumerates item by item the marks of non-retrogression, circling three times in between by question and answer—one asking, since there is no conduct, no kind, and no appearance, in what dharma he turns so as to be called not turning; one asking by what causes and conditions he does not doubt and does not regret within the deep Dharma; one asking how purity of body and purity of mind are obtained—and concludes with the mind abiding unmoved and all that is heard, and worldly matters too, joining with prajñā. Treatise ① first distinguishes by the brief and extended explanations why the question is asked again, next attaches this chapter to the chapters before and after, gives the simile of receiving an office and its seal to make clear that the avaivartika is the ground of certainty and safety, discerns the difference among the three matters of conduct, kind, and appearance and keeps two views together, summarises the meaning and intent of the Buddha's teaching as entering suchness by suchness, sets up the sectional division ‘the matters above are the proper substance; from here down, all is the fruit of the practice of ultimate emptiness’, and then explains the marks of Sūtra ① item by item following the text, four times in between setting up its own question and answer—the difficulty about not looking at strengths and shortcomings, why the first question was not at once answered with no marks and appearance, the difference between two kinds of not doubting, and why, not having severed the afflictions, he never gives rise to evil minds—and closes with the three similes of the strong man, the Buddha's mouth, and rock sugar, and with worldly matters entering the nature of dharmas. Sūtra ② recounts evil Māra's three rounds of testing: conjuring up the eight great hells and speaking of receiving the prediction of hell, conjuring himself into a bhikṣu's robes and falsely claiming the true Buddha-Dharma, taking the body of a bhikṣu and expounding the dharma of the semblance path and even conjuring up countless arhat bhikṣus—each taking the bodhisattva's mind being unmoved, unstartled, without doubt, and without regret as the proof of non-retrogression, and at the end, by the question and answer 「於何法轉名為不轉」 tr. "in what dharma does he turn, so as to be called not turning," it makes clear entering the bodhisattva's position by the emptiness of specific marks and obtaining the acceptance of the non-arising of dharmas. Treatise ② explains why Māra tests, sets up the question and answer on receiving the prediction of hell, gives the similes of water within fire, of false gold burned in fire, rubbed, and beaten, of the arhat whose outflows are exhausted, and of the dog wearing a lion's skin, sets out in detail the headings of the dharma of the semblance path and the three rounds of luring back, at the end restates the question and answer and sets out 「上略說，今廣說」 tr. "above was the brief explanation; now is the extended explanation," glosses the acceptance of the non-arising of dharmas as even the subtlest dharma being unfindable, and closes with 「如是等無量行、類、相貌，是阿鞞跋致相」 tr. "conducts, kinds, and appearances such as these, without measure, are the marks of the avaivartika."

The title of this chapter runs on two tracks among the texts, transliteration and translation by meaning: the base text has the transliteration, while the catalogues of variant texts and variant translations and the commentaries of the ancient masters mostly use the translation by meaning, 「不退」 tr. "non-retrogression." Jizang in his commentary glosses the name of this chapter with 「此云不退」 tr. "here it is called non-retrogression," and divides retrogression into three kinds—of practice, of station, and of mindfulness—and also records the difference between the explanations of the two schools of the South and the North: the Northerners' view takes it as non-retrogression of station that one who, at the beginning of the lineage of cultivation, once arouses the mind of awakening will certainly become a Buddha and afterwards, meeting hardship and difficulty, cannot be moved or turned; and takes it as non-retrogression of practice that one can cultivate all practices, giving, keeping precepts, and the rest, and that the outside paths and the Māra of the heavens cannot obstruct and ruin them. Huiying, in his later commentary, refers back to this chapter and likewise calls it directly the "Non-retrogression" chapter. The judgement and explanation of the three non-retrogressions, the divergent views of the two schools, and the similarities and differences of the chapter titles on both sides have their ancient accounts, and are recorded here without judgement; the discrepancies in the characters of the chapter title among the texts, the division and joining of fascicles, and the study of later citations are detailed in the Apparatus.

The doctrinal veins between this chapter and the chapters before and after can be seen along three lines. First, the treatise-author himself marks its continuation: above, the marks of prajñāpāramitā were explained; next, the causes and conditions by which Māra ruins the marks of prajñāpāramitā were spoken of; now it is said that the one who believes in and receives prajñāpāramitā is the avaivartika—the preceding chapter spoke of suchness and of the nature of dharmas and the limit of reality, and this chapter takes ‘being able to know that the four grounds are not two in the mark of suchness’ as the first mark of non-retrogression, the doctrinal vein continuing unbroken. Second, the deeds of Māra in the latter half of this chapter and the earlier chapters on the deeds of Māra are outside and inside to each other: there, the marks of the deeds of Māra are spoken of; here, the marks of one who is not moved by Māra are spoken of; and the three Chinese characters rendered here as 「開魔路」 tr. "open the road of Māra," which the treatise-author sets down in explaining the item of the five hindrances, are precisely the hinge between the two places. Third, the meaning this chapter establishes, ‘turning within the marks of form and the rest is entering the bodhisattva's position and obtaining the acceptance of the non-arising of dharmas’, runs through the meanings of turning and not turning, abiding and not abiding, that the chapters after it go on to speak of; the reader may view the chapters before and after together, to see the single continuity of the teaching of non-retrogression.