大智度論 義疏通講 · 冊11Dazhidulun — Mahāprajñāpāramitā-upadeśa · Exposition Throughout · Vol. 11

Overview

"Turning and Not Turning" opens not with Māra coming to show a fearsome form, but with Māra coming to speak a passage that sounds extremely like the Buddha's Dharma: 「薩婆若與虛空等，無所有相；諸法亦與虛空等，空無有相。」 tr. "Sarvajñā (omniscience) is equal to space, without the mark of anything existent; dharmas too are equal to space, empty and without mark." Follow this on down and it becomes 「無有得阿耨多羅三藐三菩提者，亦無有不得者」 tr. "there is no one who obtains anuttarā samyaksaṃbodhi (unsurpassed, right, and complete awakening), and also no one who does not obtain it", and so comes the sentence 「汝唐受勤苦！」 tr. "You toil and suffer for nothing!", with one more sentence added, 「汝所聞阿耨多羅三藐三菩提皆是魔事，非佛所說」 tr. "the anuttarā samyaksaṃbodhi you have heard of is all a deed of Māra, not what the Buddha said"—the Māra of the preceding chapter conjured himself into a bhikṣu and conjured the body of a Buddha; the Māra of this chapter simply borrows the very language of prajñā itself. Nor does the bodhisattva's response lie in debate; it lies only in recognising: 「是惡魔事，壞我阿耨多羅三藐三菩提心。」 tr. "This is a deed of evil Māra, to ruin my mind of anuttarā samyaksaṃbodhi." The emptiness is true: 「諸法雖如虛空，無所有、自相空，而眾生不知、不見、不解」 tr. "though dharmas are like space, without anything existent and empty of specific marks, yet beings do not know, do not see, and do not understand it"; precisely because beings do not know, 「我亦以是如虛空等無所有、自相空大誓莊嚴得一切種智，為眾生說此法，令得解脫」 tr. "I too, with the adornment of this great vow—without anything existent and empty of specific marks, equal to space—shall obtain the omniscience of all kinds, and expound this Dharma for beings so that they obtain liberation"—emptiness does not cancel the vow; emptiness is precisely why the vow can stand. The sūtra text at once gives the bone of the whole chapter: hearing this Dharma, one 「應堅固其心，不動、不轉」 tr. "should make his mind firm, unmoved, not turning". The eye of the chapter's name lies right at the end of these three Chinese characters: what is meant by 「轉」 tr. "turning", and what is meant by 「不轉」 tr. "not turning"? Subhūti asks on the spot: 「不轉故名阿鞞跋致？轉故亦名阿鞞跋致？」 tr. "Is one called avaivartika because of not turning? Is one also called avaivartika because of turning?" The Buddha's answer is direct: 「不轉故名阿鞞跋致，轉故亦名阿鞞跋致。」 tr. "One is called avaivartika because of not turning, and one is also called avaivartika because of turning." The whole chapter is two sūtras and two treatises spanning the two fascicles seventy-three and seventy-four: the First Part, one sūtra and one treatise, lists the outward marks of non-retrogression and establishes its name and meaning; the Last Part, one sūtra and one treatise, investigates the self-realisation of non-retrogression and tests whether it is true or false; Māra's words at the head of the fascicle and the question at the end of the fascicle, 「得何事來名阿鞞跋致」 tr. "having obtained what matter, from then on is one called avaivartika", clasp head and tail together.

The First Part establishes the name and lists the marks. Sūtra ① first explains the meaning of turning and not turning: 「若菩薩摩訶薩於聲聞地、辟支佛地不轉，是故名不轉。若菩薩摩訶薩於聲聞地、辟支佛地轉，是故亦名不轉。」 tr. "If the bodhisattva-mahāsattva does not turn in the śrāvaka ground or the pratyekabuddha ground, for this reason he is called not turning. If the bodhisattva-mahāsattva turns in the śrāvaka ground or the pratyekabuddha ground, for this reason he is also called not turning." The same Chinese character 「轉」 tr. "turn": tied to the ground of the two vehicles, turning is leaving them behind; tied to the mind of awakening, turning is retrogressing and losing it—so one name has two uses. Below this the marks are listed item by item, and every item closes with 「以是行、類、相貌，當知是名阿鞞跋致菩薩摩訶薩相」 tr. "by this conduct, kind, and appearance, know that this is called the mark of an avaivartika bodhisattva-mahāsattva": if he wishes to enter the first dhyāna and so on up to the dhyāna of the absorption of cessation, he can enter at once; if he wishes to cultivate the four foundations of mindfulness and so on up to the five supernormal powers, he can cultivate them; and yet 「是菩薩雖修四念處乃至五神通，是人不受四念處果」 tr. "though this bodhisattva cultivates the four foundations of mindfulness and so on up to the five supernormal powers, this person does not receive the fruit of the four foundations of mindfulness", and so on up to not realising the path of the pratyekabuddha—cultivating without receiving the fruit: 「是菩薩故為眾生受身，隨其所應而利益之」 tr. "this bodhisattva deliberately takes a body for the sake of beings, and benefits them according to what suits them"; because he constantly recollects awakening, 「不貴色、不貴相，不貴聲聞、辟支佛」 tr. "he does not prize form, does not prize marks, does not prize the śrāvaka or the pratyekabuddha", and the six perfections, the four dhyānas, the supernormal powers, the ten powers, and so on up to seeing buddhas and planting roots of goodness—none of these does he prize; why? 「一切法自相空，不見可貴法、能生貴心者」 tr. "all dharmas are empty of specific marks; he sees no dharma that can be prized, nor any that can give rise to a prizing mind"; 「於四種身儀中，出入來去」 tr. "within the four kinds of bodily deportment, going out and coming in, coming and going", he is in all of them 「一心不亂」 tr. "single-minded and undisturbed"; if he dwells at home, 「以方便力為利益眾生故受五欲」 tr. "by the power of skilful means, for the sake of benefiting beings, he receives the five desires", and yet 「須食與食，須飲與飲」 tr. "to those who need food he gives food, to those who need drink he gives drink", filling Jambudvīpa and so on up to the three-thousand great-thousand world with treasures and giving them all away—「亦不自為，常修梵行，不凌易虜掠他人令其憂惱」 tr. "nor is it for himself; he always cultivates pure conduct, and does not bully or plunder others so as to cause them sorrow and vexation"; 「執金剛神王常隨逐」 tr. "the vajra-holding spirit king constantly follows him", making the vow, 「是菩薩摩訶薩當得阿耨多羅三藐三菩提，我常隨逐」 tr. "this bodhisattva-mahāsattva will obtain anuttarā samyaksaṃbodhi; I shall constantly follow him", 「乃至五姓執金剛神常隨守護」 tr. "and so on up to the vajra-holding spirits of the five clans constantly follow and guard him"; he is always complete in 「信根、精進根、念根、定根、慧根」 tr. "the faculty of faith, the faculty of vigour, the faculty of mindfulness, the faculty of concentration, the faculty of wisdom"; 「為上人，不為下人」 tr. "he is a superior person, not an inferior person", and what is called a superior person is only this: 「一心行阿耨多羅三藐三菩提心，不散亂，是名上人」 tr. "single-mindedly practising the mind of anuttarā samyaksaṃbodhi, without distraction—this is called a superior person"; at the last it returns to pure livelihood: 「不作呪術、合和諸藥」 tr. "he does not practise spell-craft or compound medicines", because 「知諸法自相空，不見諸法相，故行淨命」 tr. "knowing that all dharmas are empty of specific marks, he does not see the marks of dharmas, and so practises pure livelihood".

Treatise ① explains, section by section, the reasons for these, and three places are most essential. First, it explains the root of Māra's words: 「薩婆若有種種名字：或說一切智，或說一切種智，或說無上道」 tr. "Sarvajñā has names of every kind: it is called omniscience, or called the omniscience of all kinds, or called the unsurpassed path"—what Māra disparages is in fact awakening itself; Māra's way of speaking is 「是薩婆若空無所有，但諸師誑汝耳！」 tr. "This sarvajñā is empty and without anything existent; it is only your teachers deceiving you!", and further he turns the teachers' teaching upside down, saying that practising awakening is itself a deed of Māra—why? 「捨涅槃、取生死故」 tr. "because it gives up nirvāṇa and takes up birth and death"—and at last he presses him with 「汝今疾悔，捨是邪心」 tr. "now quickly repent and give up this wrong mind". Second, it explains why 「堅固其心，不動、不轉」 tr. "make his mind firm, unmoved, not turning" is three matters and not a redundant repetition of one word: 「一切諸煩惱箭不入故，名為堅。一切外道魔民不能轉故，名不動。於阿耨多羅三藐三菩提不退故，名不轉。」 tr. "Because none of the arrows of the afflictions enters, it is called firm. Because none of the outside paths or Māra's people can turn it, it is called unmoved. Because it does not retrogress from anuttarā samyaksaṃbodhi, it is called not turning." The afflictions within, Māra's people without, the fruit toward which one heads—each of the three sides has what it answers to: 「是菩薩以如是三種心，行六波羅蜜，入菩薩位」 tr. "this bodhisattva, with these three kinds of mind, practises the six perfections and enters the bodhisattva's position". Third, it explains why turning and not turning share one name: 「佛二種答，以二諦故，所謂世諦、第一義諦。」 tr. "The Buddha answers in two ways because of the two truths, namely worldly truth and the truth of the highest meaning." Spoken in terms of worldly truth, 「若菩薩入菩薩位，轉聲聞、辟支佛心，直入菩薩位，是名轉」 tr. "if the bodhisattva enters the bodhisattva's position, turning away the mind of the śrāvaka and pratyekabuddha and entering straight into the bodhisattva's position, this is called turning"; spoken in terms of the highest meaning, 「不轉者，入阿鞞跋致第一義，諸法一相中，所謂無相，尚無一乘定相，何況三乘！則無所轉；無所轉故，名阿鞞跋致」 tr. "as for not turning: he enters the highest meaning of the avaivartika; within the one mark of all dharmas, that is, the signless, there is not even a fixed mark of one vehicle, how much less of three vehicles! So there is nothing to turn; because there is nothing to turn, he is called avaivartika". One name, two answers—not an equivocation, but each of the two truths spoken out to the full. For the remaining marks too the treatise-author gives the reasons one by one: he enters dhyāna yet does not receive the fruit of dhyāna because 「雖入禪定，其心清淨柔軟故，不受長壽天福，於欲界教化」 tr. "though he enters the meditative concentrations, because his mind is pure and soft he does not receive the blessings of the heavens of long life, but teaches and transforms in the desire realm", and further 「是菩薩觀十方國土，知何處有可利益眾生處，故為受身生其國」 tr. "this bodhisattva contemplates the lands of the ten directions, knows where there is a place with beings who can be benefited, and so takes a body and is born in that land"; not prizing is itself what is worth prizing because 「有人有所貪貴故，心動、不能自安，若得則歡喜，失則憂慼」 tr. "some people, because they have something they crave and prize, are moved in mind and cannot be at ease in themselves: on gaining they rejoice, on losing they grieve", whereas 「菩薩無所貴、無所貪故，至於得失，心清淨不動故」 tr. "because the bodhisattva prizes nothing and craves nothing, in gain and loss alike his mind is pure and unmoved". The section on receiving the five desires is the most easily misread; the treatise-author poses the question and then makes it clear with a simile: 「譬如以鉗取火，雖捉而不燒。」 tr. "It is like taking up fire with tongs: though one holds it, one is not burned." 「五欲如火，能燒人善根」 tr. "The five desires are like fire; they can burn a person's roots of goodness"; the reason the bodhisattva enters the fire is 「我出家一身，云何能以布施攝眾生？眾生多須飲食、衣服，須法者少」 tr. "I, having gone forth, a single body, how can I gather in beings by giving? What beings need is mostly food, drink, and clothing; those who need the Dharma are few", and so he appears in a rich and noble body and gives widely, 「譬如大地，人民、鳥獸皆蒙利潤」 tr. "as with the great earth, on which people, birds, and beasts all receive its benefit"; moreover, when one who has gone forth praises giving, people may say 「汝自一身無財，但教人施」 tr. "you yourself are a single body without wealth, yet you only teach others to give" and not believe and accept it; 「是故菩薩方便作白衣，以財充滿一切而勸行施，人則信受」 tr. "therefore the bodhisattva by skilful means appears as a white-robed layman, fills everyone with wealth and urges them to practise giving, and people then believe and accept it", and so on up to 「如頂生王宮殿中，心生欲寶則寶至于膝」 tr. "as in the palace of King Crown-born, when the thought of wanting treasure arose in his mind, treasure piled up to the knees"—yet the key lies in receiving without clinging: 「人受五欲，則心生憍慢，凌易於人」 tr. "when people receive the five desires, their minds give rise to pride and they bully others", whereas this person, because he cuts off lust, has thin afflictions and does not give rise to pride. The section on the vajra-holding spirits also poses a question: since there are spirits guarding him, does the bodhisattva then have no power of his own? The answer is 「菩薩亦自有力」 tr. "the bodhisattva too has power of his own"; it is precisely because of his merit that he can draw the spirits to follow him, and because the spirits follow him, 「雖未得法身，而功德增益」 tr. "though he has not yet obtained the Dharma body, his merit increases", and it makes the gods, seeing it, all the more reverent and in awe. The section on the five faculties cites a difficulty from the Abhidharma Sūtra: it says 「誰成就五根？答曰：不斷善根者」 tr. "Who accomplishes the five faculties? The answer: one who has not severed his roots of goodness", in which case ordinary people too accomplish the five faculties—why are they here said to be absent? The answer lies in the distinction between 「用」 tr. "function" and 「有」 tr. "having": 「不斷善根眾生雖成就五根，而不能發起為用」 tr. "though beings who have not severed their roots of goodness accomplish the five faculties, they cannot rouse them into function", 「譬如小兒雖成就煩惱婬欲等，未能發用，故言無」 tr. "just as a small child, though he accomplishes the afflictions, lust, and the rest, cannot yet bring them into function, and so they are said to be absent"; further, the five faculties are of two kinds: the five faculties of the two vehicles have deep faith in nirvāṇa and quiescence, while the five faculties of the bodhisattva 「能生深慈悲心於怨惡眾生，亦能觀諸法實相」 tr. "can give rise to a deep mind of kindness and compassion toward hostile and evil beings, and can also contemplate the real mark of all dharmas", and it cites the Sūtra of Inconceivable Liberation as proof—「舍利弗、目連、須菩提等雖在佛左右，以無菩薩根故，不見是大菩薩會及所有神通力」 tr. "although Śāriputra, Maudgalyāyana, Subhūti, and the others were at the Buddha's left and right, because they did not have the bodhisattva faculties, they did not see this great assembly of bodhisattvas or all its supernormal power". The section on the superior person again poses a question: other sūtras speak of very many marks of the superior person; why here speak only of a single mind without distraction? The answer is 「此中佛自略說：一心不散亂，盡攝諸善法」 tr. "here the Buddha himself speaks briefly: a single mind without distraction gathers in all wholesome dharmas entirely", because 「貪重佛道故，一切諸煩惱折薄」 tr. "because he craves the Buddha's path with such weight, all the afflictions are broken down and thinned", and he deepens his kindness toward beings: 「能自以身命給施，何況不知報恩等！」 tr. "he can himself give his body and life—how much less would he fail to know to repay kindness, and the like!" At the last it explains the marks of wrong livelihood: 「祝術者，能翳身令人不見，能變人為畜獸」 tr. "as for spell-craft: it can hide the body so that people cannot see it, and can change people into animals and beasts"; yet if the same matters come from the bodhisattva, 「若有作者，為攝眾生，破其憍慢，不為財利名聞」 tr. "if he does do them, it is to gather in beings and break their pride, not for wealth, gain, or fame"—the same conduct is judged by the intent of the mind, not by the deed.

The Last Part, whose fascicle head carries the continued title 「之餘」 tr. "the remainder", turns from the outward marks to self-realisation. Sūtra ② changes level from its very first words: 「今當更說阿鞞跋致菩薩摩訶薩行、類、相貌，一心諦聽！」 tr. "Now I shall further speak of the conduct, kind, and appearance of the avaivartika bodhisattva-mahāsattva; listen single-mindedly and attentively!" First it speaks of what he does not speak of—「不說五眾事，不說十二入事，不說十八界事」 tr. "he does not speak of matters of the five aggregates, does not speak of matters of the twelve sense-fields, does not speak of matters of the eighteen elements", because he constantly contemplates their mark of emptiness; below this come ten rounds of worldly matters, each round tied to its own 「何以故」 tr. "why?", each different from the others: 「不好說官事」 tr. "he does not like to speak of matters of officials", because 「不見法若貴、若賤」 tr. "he sees no dharma as noble or as base"; 「不好說賊事」 tr. "he does not like to speak of matters of thieves", because 「不見若得、若失」 tr. "he sees neither gain nor loss"; 「不好說軍事」 tr. "he does not like to speak of matters of armies", because 「不見若多、若少」 tr. "he sees neither many nor few"; 「不好說鬪事」 tr. "he does not like to speak of matters of fighting", because 「不見法若憎、若愛」 tr. "he sees no dharma as hated or as loved"; 「不好說婦女事」 tr. "he does not like to speak of matters of women", because 「不見好醜故」 tr. "because he sees neither fair nor ugly"; 「不好說聚落事」 tr. "he does not like to speak of matters of villages", because 「不見法若合、若散」 tr. "he sees no dharma as joined or as scattered"; 「不好說城邑事」 tr. "he does not like to speak of matters of towns", because 「不見有勝、有負」 tr. "he sees neither victory nor defeat"; 「不好說國事」 tr. "he does not like to speak of matters of the country", because 「不見法有所屬、有不屬」 tr. "he sees no dharma as belonging to anything or as not belonging"; 「不好說我事」 tr. "he does not like to speak of matters of self", because 「不見法是我、是無我」 tr. "he sees no dharma as self or as non-self"—what each of the ten rounds excludes has its own face of emptiness; it is not settled with a single sentence, ‘all is empty’; only 「但好說般若波羅蜜，不遠離薩婆若心」 tr. "he likes only to speak of prajñāpāramitā, and does not stray far from the mind of sarvajñā". Next it speaks of what he practises: 「行檀波羅蜜時，不為慳貪事」 tr. "when he practises dānapāramitā, he does not engage in matters of stinginess and greed", and with each of the six perfections he does not engage in the corresponding one of the six faults; 「是菩薩雖行一切法空，而樂法、愛法」 tr. "though this bodhisattva practises the emptiness of all dharmas, he still delights in the Dharma and loves the Dharma"; 「是人常願欲見諸佛，聞在所處國土中有現在佛，隨願往生」 tr. "this person always wishes to see the buddhas; hearing that in some land there is a Buddha now present, he is born there according to his wish", 「如是心常晝夜行，所謂念佛心」 tr. "such a mind is always practised day and night—namely, the mind of recollecting the Buddha"; though he practises the four dhyānas and so on up to the sphere of neither perception nor non-perception, by the power of skilful means he raises a mind of the desire realm and is born in a place where there are the ten wholesome paths and a Buddha now present. Then it speaks of his knowing himself: abiding in the emptinesses, abiding in the four foundations of mindfulness and so on up to the three gates of liberation, 「於自地中了了，不疑我是阿鞞跋致、非阿鞞跋致」 tr. "he is clear about his own ground, and does not doubt whether I am avaivartika or not avaivartika"—why? 「乃至不見少許法於阿耨多羅三藐三菩提中，若轉、若不轉」 tr. "he does not see even the least dharma within anuttarā samyaksaṃbodhi that either turns or does not turn"; for this the Buddha speaks two similes: first, 「譬如人得須陀洹果，住須陀洹地中，自了知，終不疑不悔」 tr. "it is like a person who has obtained the fruit of the srota-āpanna: he abides in the ground of the srota-āpanna, knows it clearly of himself, and never doubts or regrets"; second, 「譬如有人作五逆罪，五逆罪心乃至死時常逐不捨，雖有異心不能障隔」 tr. "it is like a person who has committed the five heinous sins: the mind of the five heinous sins follows him constantly even at the time of death and does not let go; though he has other minds, they cannot bar it off". Of one who abides in this ground: 「種種魔事起，即時覺知；亦不隨魔事，破壞魔事」 tr. "when deeds of Māra of every kind arise, he is at once aware of them; nor does he go along with the deeds of Māra, but breaks the deeds of Māra", and further 「以方便力處魔事著實際中」 tr. "by the power of skilful means he sets the deeds of Māra within the limit of reality"; and so on up to, even on changing bodies, he does not doubt whether he will obtain it or not—why? 「諸法自相空，即是阿耨多羅三藐三菩提」 tr. "all dharmas are empty of specific marks, and this is anuttarā samyaksaṃbodhi"; therefore 「住自證地中，不隨他語，無能壞者」 tr. "he abides in the ground of self-realisation, does not follow the words of others, and there is none who can ruin him", because 「成就不動智慧故」 tr. "he has accomplished unmoved wisdom". At the end come three rounds of Māra's trials, in each of which Māra takes the body of a Buddha: he may say 「汝今於是間取阿羅漢道。汝亦無阿耨多羅三藐三菩提記，汝亦未得無生法忍」 tr. "Take the path of the arhat here and now. You have no prediction of anuttarā samyaksaṃbodhi, nor have you yet obtained the acceptance of the non-arising of dharmas", and the bodhisattva, hearing it, 「心不異、不沒、不驚、不畏」 tr. "his mind does not change, does not sink, is not startled, is not afraid", knowing of himself, 「我必從諸佛受阿耨多羅三藐三菩提記」 tr. "I shall surely receive the prediction of anuttarā samyaksaṃbodhi from the buddhas"; or he appears in the form of a Buddha and gives the prediction of a śrāvaka or a pratyekabuddha, and the bodhisattva at once knows it is false, because 「佛不應教菩薩遠離阿耨多羅三藐三菩提，教住聲聞、辟支佛道」 tr. "the Buddha would not teach a bodhisattva to stray far from anuttarā samyaksaṃbodhi, and teach him to abide in the path of the śrāvaka or the pratyekabuddha"; or he says 「汝所學經書非佛所說、亦非聲聞說，是魔所說」 tr. "the sūtras and books you have studied were not spoken by the Buddha, nor spoken by śrāvakas; they were spoken by Māra", and one who is aware of this should know that he has already received the prediction from the buddhas of the past. After the three trials it speaks of his protecting the Dharma: 「為護持諸法故，不惜身命」 tr. "for the sake of protecting and upholding all dharmas he does not spare his body and life"; what he protects is not the Dharma of one Buddha—「我不為護持一佛法故，我為護持三世十方諸佛法故」 tr. "it is not for the sake of protecting and upholding one Buddha's Dharma; it is for the sake of protecting and upholding the Dharma of the buddhas of the three times and the ten directions"; someone hears that 「一切諸法真空」 tr. "all dharmas are truly empty" and breaks it and does not receive it, saying, 「是非法，非善，非世尊教！」 tr. "This is not the Dharma, not good, not the World-Honored One's teaching!", and the bodhisattva, for the sake of protecting this Dharma, does not spare his body and life, and thinks to himself, 「未來世諸佛，我亦在是數中，在中受記，是法亦是我法」 tr. "among the buddhas of the future I too am in this number, and receive the prediction among them; this Dharma is also my Dharma". It closes with dhāraṇī: 「聞佛說法，不疑、不悔，聞已受持，終不忘失」 tr. "hearing the Buddha expound the Dharma, he does not doubt, does not regret; having heard it he receives and upholds it, and never forgets or loses it", because 「得聞持等陀羅尼故」 tr. "he has obtained the dhāraṇī of hearing and retaining and the rest"; Subhūti presses further, asking whether this is so only for the Buddha's words or for all words, and the Buddha answers 「所有言說眾事，得陀羅尼菩薩皆不忘、不失，不疑、不悔」 tr. "in all the matters that are spoken, the bodhisattva who has obtained dhāraṇī does not forget, does not lose, does not doubt, does not regret".

The explanation of Treatise ② centres on how the two Chinese characters 「不疑」 tr. "not doubting" are possible, and on how the marks of non-retrogression are tested. First it explains not speaking: 「樂行畢竟空故，不喜說分別五眾、十二入、十八界決定相」 tr. "because he delights in practising ultimate emptiness, he does not like to speak of the fixed marks that discriminate the five aggregates, the twelve sense-fields, and the eighteen elements"; not speaking of kings and such matters has its own target—「如餘外道，受他供養，無正道故，虛妄深著，心懈怠故，說諸國事」 tr. "like the other outside paths, who receive others' offerings and, having no right path, cling deeply to what is false, and because their minds are lazy, speak of matters of countries", whereas the bodhisattva sees the whole world as 「常為無常火燒，眾生可愍」 tr. "constantly burned by the fire of impermanence; beings are to be pitied", and so thinks to himself, 「我未得佛道，我但應說度眾生法，不應說餘事」 tr. "I have not yet attained the Buddha path; I should speak only of the dharmas that ferry beings across, and should not speak of other matters"; the one sentence 「行六波羅蜜，不說六弊」 tr. "he practises the six perfections and does not speak of the six faults" gathers it all up. Next it explains why emptiness and loving the Dharma are not in conflict: 「是菩薩不著是一切法空故」 tr. "because this bodhisattva does not cling to this emptiness of all dharmas", and moreover he practises the graded dharmas and only then obtains the emptiness of all dharmas: 「此空不可但口說而心著，是故先行次第法」 tr. "this emptiness cannot be merely spoken with the mouth while the mind clings; therefore one first practises the graded dharmas"; he praises the dharma that is not destroyed, and for beings discriminates good and not good, because 「法性非破壞相」 tr. "the nature of dharmas is not a mark of breaking and ruin"; those he takes as intimates are also chosen—「更無親善，但以諸佛及大菩薩、諸能讚歎實相法者為親善」 tr. "he has no other intimates; he takes as intimates only the buddhas and the great bodhisattvas, and those who can praise the Dharma of the real mark"; as for being born in the desire realm, 「故為眾生留愛、慢分，不以此禪定果報生色、無色界」 tr. "he deliberately, for the sake of beings, keeps back a portion of love and pride, and is not born in the form or formless realms by the retribution of these meditative concentrations". The core lies in explaining doubt: of abiding securely in the emptinesses, 「安住者，深入通達」 tr. "abiding securely means entering deeply and penetrating", and 「疑，名取相有所得」 tr. "doubt means grasping at a mark with something attained": 「如人夜見樹杌，尋復生念，人形亦爾，便生疑心」 tr. "as when a person at night sees a tree stump, and then a thought arises that a human form is like this too, and so a doubting mind arises"—the place where doubt arises is in grasping marks, and so 「菩薩行無相三昧故，於一切法中不取相，則無生疑處」 tr. "because the bodhisattva practises the signless samādhi, he grasps no mark in any dharma, and so there is no place for doubt to arise"; further, 「諸生疑者，見違失事，不如本所聞故」 tr. "all who give rise to doubt do so because they see things that go against it and fall short, not matching what they had first heard", and the bodhisattva within ultimate emptiness does not find this dharma that falls short of what he heard, so doubt has no place to dwell: 「自知此是究竟道，不可論、不可破」 tr. "he knows of himself that this is the ultimate path, which cannot be argued and cannot be broken". The point of the two similes is also brought out: 「是二心厚重故不可却」 tr. "because these two minds are deep and heavy, they cannot be driven back": the mind of the srota-āpanna never shrinks back, and the mind of the five heinous sins is removed only when the sin is exhausted; 「如人著衰，鬼常隨逐。阿鞞跋致心，復過於是」 tr. "as when a person is beset by misfortune, a ghost follows him constantly. The mind of the avaivartika surpasses even this"; what is called none being able to move and turn him is this: 「種種苦事逼迫不能動，種種供養利樂因緣不能令捨實相心及慈悲心」 tr. "painful matters of every kind press upon him and cannot move him; causes and conditions of offerings, gain, and pleasure of every kind cannot make him give up the mind of the real mark and the mind of kindness and compassion"—only when neither end, suffering nor pleasure, can move him is it called unmoved. On the skilful means of dealing with the deeds of Māra, the treatise-author speaks most severely: 「觀是魔事如佛法，觀諸魔身如佛無異」 tr. "he contemplates these deeds of Māra as the Buddha's Dharma, and contemplates the bodies of Māra as no different from the Buddha"; why? 「一切法及實際同一相，所謂無相故」 tr. "because all dharmas and the limit of reality are of one and the same mark, namely the signless". In discerning the falseness of Māra taking the body of a Buddha, there is a further simile: 「如試金錢，彈之聲出，則知其真偽」 tr. "as when one tests a gold coin: flick it, the sound comes out, and one knows whether it is real or false"; the falseness lies not in the form but in the words: 「身是而言非」 tr. "the body is right but the words are wrong"; how does one know it is surely false? 「諸佛種種方便欲令一切人盡入佛道，云何引菩薩與聲聞記？」 tr. "The buddhas with skilful means of every kind wish to bring all people entirely into the path of the Buddha; how would they draw a bodhisattva aside and give him the prediction of a śrāvaka?" It also brings out a test that lies in oneself: because he deeply loves the Dharma, 「聞即心深，衣毛皆竪；念佛大悲，則歡喜悲泣」 tr. "as soon as he hears it his mind goes deep, the hair on his skin stands on end; recollecting the Buddha's great compassion, he rejoices and weeps"; this is like 「譬如大軍，退敗則怖懅迷悶，臥地似死」 tr. "a great army: when it is routed, the men are terrified and dazed and lie on the ground as if dead", and their kin 「以杖鞭之，若癮疹起者，則知必活」 tr. "flog them with a rod, and if a weal rises they know they will surely live"; the bodhisattvas 「皆是肉身，何以故知必能成佛？」 tr. "are all in fleshly bodies—how is it known that they will surely be able to become buddhas?"—it is known precisely when a mark appears in the body at the time of hearing the Dharma: 「餘人聞不入心，則無異相，如死人無異」 tr. "when others hear it, it does not enter their minds, and so there is no unusual mark; they are no different from dead men". In the section on protecting the Dharma, the treatise-author tells the matter in full: 「有一狂人，取音聲名字相，著是畢竟空，出其過罪」 tr. "there is a madman who grasps at the marks of sounds and names, clings to this ultimate emptiness, and brings forth its faults", saying, 「若諸法盡畢竟空，則無佛、無法，無罪福業因緣，亦無修行精進得道果報！」 tr. "If all dharmas are wholly ultimately empty, then there is no Buddha and no Dharma, no causes and conditions of deeds of sin and merit, and also no retribution of attaining the fruit of the path by practising with vigour!" The bodhisattva observes and weighs it, 「知說法有無著心、隨佛語憐愍故說」 tr. "knows that the expounder of the Dharma has a mind without clinging, and speaks in accord with the Buddha's words, out of pity", and so helps him at the risk of his life; even when it comes to death he does not out of fear ruin the nature of dharmas, and he thinks to himself, 「若有益而死，勝無益而生」 tr. "if I die with benefit, that is better than living without benefit". The section on dhāraṇī is spoken by dividing it into three powers: 「信力故能受，聞持陀羅尼力故不失，斷疑陀羅尼力故不疑」 tr. "by the power of faith he can receive; by the power of the dhāraṇī of hearing and retaining he does not lose; by the power of the dhāraṇī of severing doubt he does not doubt"; toward what is not the Buddha's words it also discriminates most finely—「所說有道理，能信、持、不疑；無道理者，持之無疑而不信」 tr. "what is said with reason in it he can believe, hold, and not doubt; what has no reason in it he holds without doubting, but does not believe". At the last it comes to one question: 「得何事來名阿鞞跋致？」 tr. "Having obtained what matter, from then on is one called avaivartika?" Two ancient views are set out side by side: one follows the Abhidharma Vibhāṣā: 「過三阿僧祇劫後，種三十二相因緣」 tr. "after three asaṃkhyeya kalpas have passed, one plants the causes and conditions of the thirty-two marks", and from then on one is called avaivartika; one follows the Vinaya Avadāna: 「從見然燈佛，以五莖花散佛，以髮布地；佛為授阿鞞跋致記」 tr. "from the time he saw Dīpaṃkara Buddha, scattered five stalks of flowers over the Buddha, and spread his hair on the ground; the Buddha gave him the prediction of avaivartika", and from then on one is called avaivartika. Yet the discrimination within prajñā has its own place: being complete in the six perfections, obtaining the power of wisdom and skilful means and not clinging to this ultimate emptiness, 「觀一切法不生不滅」 tr. "he contemplates all dharmas as non-arising and non-ceasing", and so on up to 「不垢不淨、不來不去、不一不異、不常不斷、非有非無」 tr. "neither stained nor pure, not coming and not going, not one and not different, not permanent and not annihilated, neither existent nor non-existent"; first he broke the inversion of permanence with impermanence; now he further gives up the contemplation of impermanence and the clinging to non-arising and non-ceasing, and does not fall into emptiness and being without anything existent either: 「是名菩薩得無生忍法，入菩薩位，名阿鞞跋致」 tr. "this is called the bodhisattva obtaining the dharma of the acceptance of non-arising, entering the bodhisattva's position, and being called avaivartika". Name and prediction must be further distinguished: 「雖從初發心以來名阿鞞跋致；阿鞞跋致相未具足故，不與授記」 tr. "though he is called avaivartika from the first arousing of the mind onward, because the marks of the avaivartika are not yet complete, he is not given the prediction", because others, not yet seeing the matter, would give rise to doubt—「佛見是人有何等事而與授記？」 tr. "What matter did the Buddha see in this person that he gave him the prediction?" The body too is of two kinds: 「一者、生死肉身，二者、法性生身」 tr. "first, the fleshly body within birth and death; second, the body born of the Dharma-nature", and the avaivartika in a fleshly body is again of two kinds: 「有於佛前得授記；有不於佛前授記」 tr. "some receive the prediction in the presence of a Buddha; some receive the prediction not in the presence of a Buddha". The final question faces the reader directly: one who reads, recites, rightly recollects, and accords with the acceptance of the non-arising of dharmas, yet has not obtained meditative concentration, or gives rise to a doubting mind or a clinging mind—is he avaivartika? The answer is no—「阿鞞跋致菩薩，於甚深佛法中尚無疑，何況無生忍初法門！」 tr. "The avaivartika bodhisattva has no doubt even within the very deep Dharma of the Buddha, how much less about the acceptance of non-arising, this first gate of the Dharma!" Those who have not obtained it are also of two kinds: 「一者、信少疑多，二者、疑少信多」 tr. "first, little faith and much doubt; second, little doubt and much faith"; the one of much faith and little doubt, 「若得禪定，即時得柔順忍，未斷法愛故，或生著心，或還退沒」 tr. "if he obtains meditative concentration, at once obtains compliant acceptance; because he has not yet severed love of dharmas, he may give rise to a clinging mind, or may again retreat and sink", and his way out lies right here: he constantly cultivates compliant acceptance, and 「柔順忍增長故，斷法愛，得無生忍」 tr. "because compliant acceptance grows, he severs love of dharmas and obtains the acceptance of non-arising". The whole chapter lays down its brush with one plain sentence: 「略說阿鞞跋致相義。」 tr. "The meaning of the marks of the avaivartika has been briefly explained."

The difference between the two arcs can be settled in a word: the First Part speaks of the name and the marks of the avaivartika; the Last Part speaks of the ground and the testing of the avaivartika. What the First Part lists are mostly matters others can see—entering absorption, cultivating the path, not prizing, deportment, giving as a householder, the spirit king following and guarding, the five faculties complete, pure livelihood without wrong; what the Last Part speaks of are mostly matters one can know oneself—clarity about one's own ground, awareness the moment Māra comes, the hair standing on end on hearing the Dharma, giving up one's life for the Dharma, hearing and retaining without loss. Outward marks can be listed, so the First Part lists them item by item, every item closing with 「以是行、類、相貌」 tr. "by this conduct, kind, and appearance"; self-realisation cannot be listed, so the Last Part everywhere speaks of 「不疑」 tr. "not doubting", speaks of 「不取相」 tr. "not grasping marks", speaks of 「不隨他語」 tr. "not following the words of others". And one thread runs through between the two arcs: at the head of the fascicle Māra snatches away the vow with 「與虛空等」 tr. "equal to space"; at the end of the fascicle the bodhisattva does not cling even to 「不生不滅」 tr. "non-arising and non-ceasing", and so obtains acceptance—the same emptiness: Māra uses it to cut off a person's practice, the bodhisattva uses it to accomplish his acceptance; there are not two emptinesses, only the users differ.

Therefore, in reading each appearance of this chapter, one can ask at least three layers of questions. First, is what this item tests an outward mark or self-realisation? If an outward mark, one must remember that the treatise-author again and again sets the reason on 「自相空」 tr. "the emptiness of specific marks": not prizing, not being disturbed, not living by wrong livelihood are none of them precepts imposed by force, but the natural result of 「不見可貴法、能生貴心者」 tr. "seeing no dharma that can be prized, nor any that can give rise to a prizing mind"; if self-realisation, one must remember that 「疑，名取相有所得」 tr. "doubt means grasping at a mark with something attained": knowing oneself to be non-retrogressing is not declaring oneself non-retrogressing; it is that the place of grasping marks is already gone, and doubt then has nowhere to dwell. Second, if this item were used in reverse, what would it become? In this chapter Māra's words and the Buddha's words often differ by only a single line: both say that sarvajñā is equal to space—the Buddha says it to accomplish the vow, Māra says it to snatch the vow away; both appear in the body of a Buddha—a true Buddha would not give a bodhisattva the prediction of a śrāvaka, and so 「身是而言非」 tr. "the body is right but the words are wrong"; both cultivate meditative concentration and the supernormal powers—receiving the fruit, one abides in the two vehicles; not receiving the fruit, one returns into the desire realm to ferry beings across. So the judgement of this chapter does not judge whether the words are empty or not empty; it judges whether the words accomplish awakening or do not. Third, I have not yet reached this ground—of what use is this chapter to me? That final question and answer of the treatise-author is set up precisely for this: one who reads, recites, and rightly recollects but has not yet removed doubt and clinging is not called avaivartika, yet the path has already been pointed out: as compliant acceptance grows, love of dharmas is severed and the acceptance of non-arising is obtained. Read on along the two sūtras and two treatises, and one will come at last to the three sentences in which the treatise-author explains firm, unmoved, and not turning: the arrows of the afflictions do not enter, the outside paths and Māra's people cannot turn it, it does not retrogress from awakening—each of the three sides guards one, and if one is lacking the name does not stand; and the three sides can be guarded only because of the one sentence 「一切法自相空」 tr. "all dharmas are empty of specific marks": within this there is nothing to prize, and nothing to be snatched away.

Reading On in the Order of the Treatise

Turning and Not Turning, First Part: Māra Ruins the Arousing of the Mind by the Meaning of Emptiness; Turning and Not Turning Are Both Called Non-retrogression; The Gloss of the Three Names Firm, Unmoved, and Not Turning; The Marks of Non-retrogression Item by Item

What Is Being Asked

Avaivartika means non-retrogressing. The marks of non-retrogression have already been set out before; this chapter goes on to set out more of them, and yet the moment it opens its mouth, what comes first is a passage spoken by Māra. What deserves attention in this passage is this: Māra does not urge people to do evil; Māra expounds the Dharma. He says that sarvajñā, omniscience, is equal to space, and that dharmas are equal to space; since emptiness is without anything existent, then 「無有得阿耨多羅三藐三菩提者，亦無有不得者」 tr. "there is no one who obtains anuttarā samyaksaṃbodhi, and no one who does not obtain it", and so this whole toil and suffering of yours is endured in vain, and the unsurpassed awakening you have heard of 「皆是魔事，非佛所說」 tr. "is all a deed of Māra, not spoken by the Buddha". Every sentence sounds like prajñā, yet the conclusion is to make a person give up his vow. The first question of the First Part, a single unit, lies right here—when the meaning of emptiness itself is taken up to cancel the arousing of the mind, on what does the practitioner stand firm?

The answer the sūtra text gives is not to refute the meaning of emptiness but to use the meaning of emptiness to the very end: the bodhisattva should reflect that although dharmas are empty, 「眾生不知、不見、不解」 tr. "beings do not know, do not see, do not understand", and so 「我亦以是如虛空等無所有、自相空大誓莊嚴得一切種智」 tr. "I too, adorned with this great vow—like space, equal to it, without anything existent, empty of specific marks—shall obtain the omniscience of all kinds". Emptiness does not cancel the adornment; emptiness is precisely the shape of the adornment. Next the sūtra text itself shakes out an answer that seems self-contradictory: Subhūti asks whether it is not turning that is called avaivartika, or whether turning too is called avaivartika; the Buddha answers that both are so—not turning in the grounds of the two vehicles is called not turning, and turning in the grounds of the two vehicles is also called not turning. The treatise-author gathers these two answers together by the two truths. From here on the sūtra text sets out the marks of non-retrogression all the way through: entering the dhyānas and samādhis at will yet not receiving their fruit, prizing nothing among all wholesome dharmas, as a householder receiving the five desires and gathering in beings by skilful means, the vajra-holding spirit king following and guarding him, constantly being complete in the five faculties, being a superior person, practising pure livelihood—and every mark is stamped with the same seal-sentence, 「以是行、類、相貌，當知是名阿鞞跋致菩薩摩訶薩」 tr. "by this conduct, kind, and appearance, know that this is called an avaivartika bodhisattva-mahāsattva".

The treatise-author explains, mark by mark, why each is so, and in four places sets up question and answer to probe the difficulties: why is receiving the five desires called skilful means? Since there are spirit kings to guard him, does the bodhisattva then have no strength of his own? The Abhidharma says that one who has not severed his roots of goodness is accomplished in the five faculties; why does it say here that one without the five faculties is an ordinary person? The marks of the superior person spoken of in other sūtras are very many; why is only the single matter of a single mind without distraction taken here? What the First Part must answer is these two questions—‘how to remain unmoved when Māra's words accord with the Dharma’ and ‘why turning and not turning are both called non-retrogression’—together with the reasons behind each of the marks of non-retrogression.

Passage by Passage

1. Māra ruins the mind by the meaning of emptiness; the bodhisattva turns the meaning of emptiness back into adornment. The sūtra text sets out the first mark, yet begins from a hindrance: 「惡魔到菩薩所，壞其心」 tr. "evil Māra comes to where the bodhisattva is and ruins his mind"; the skeleton of Māra's words is three sentences—sarvajñā is equal to space, dharmas are equal to space, and in emptiness 「無有得阿耨多羅三藐三菩提者，亦無有不得者」 tr. "there is no one who obtains anuttarā samyaksaṃbodhi, and no one who does not obtain it"; the conclusion is 「汝唐受勤苦」 tr. "you toil and suffer for nothing", that the awakening he has heard of 「皆是魔事，非佛所說」 tr. "is all a deed of Māra, not spoken by the Buddha", and 「汝當放捨是願」 tr. "you should give up this vow". The reflection the bodhisattva should make, the sūtra text gives as well: although dharmas are like space, 「而眾生不知、不見、不解」 tr. "yet beings do not know, do not see, do not understand", and so 「我亦以是如虛空等無所有、自相空大誓莊嚴得一切種智」 tr. "I too, adorned with this great vow—like space, equal to it, without anything existent, empty of specific marks—shall obtain the omniscience of all kinds", and he expounds this Dharma for beings so that they obtain the four fruits, the path of the pratyekabuddha, and so on up to unsurpassed awakening. At the end it concludes in three minds—「應堅固其心，不動、不轉」 tr. "he should make his mind firm, unmoved, not turning"—and says that 「堅固心、不轉、不動心行六波羅蜜，當入菩薩位中」 tr. "with a firm mind, a mind not turning and unmoved, he practises the six perfections and shall enter into the bodhisattva's position". What must be seen clearly is this contrast: Māra uses emptiness to arrive at ‘no need’; the bodhisattva uses emptiness to arrive at ‘all the more need’. The emptiness is the same emptiness; the difference lies in whether the side of 「眾生不知」 tr. "beings do not know" is taken into view along with it.

2. Subhūti asks—of turning and not turning, which one is called avaivartika. 「須菩提白佛言：『世尊！不轉故名阿鞞跋致？轉故亦名阿鞞跋致？』」 tr. "Subhūti said to the Buddha: ‘World-Honored One! Is one called avaivartika because of not turning? Is one also called avaivartika because of turning?’" This question is asked with great precision: in the passage just before, the Buddha had only just said 「不動、不轉」 tr. "unmoved, not turning", and the literal sense of the name avaivartika is precisely non-retrogression; how then could 「轉」 tr. "turning" also be called non-retrogression? Subhūti brings the contradiction into the open on the reader's behalf—he is not seeking a name, but asking whether this name can be used both ways.

3. The Buddha answers that both are so. 「佛言：『不轉故名阿鞞跋致，轉故亦名阿鞞跋致。』」 tr. "The Buddha said: ‘One is called avaivartika because of not turning; one is also called avaivartika because of turning.’" The Buddha does not pick one; he acknowledges both sides. The answer is given before the reason, and this is a common order of teaching in the sūtra text: first lay down a verdict that seems not to make sense, force out the next question, and then resolve it within the next question. On reaching this point there is no need to hurry to reconcile them; the sense of contradiction is exactly what is meant to be kept.

4. Subhūti asks again how. 「須菩提白佛言：『世尊！云何不轉故名阿鞞跋致，轉故亦名阿鞞跋致？』」 tr. "Subhūti said to the Buddha: ‘World-Honored One! How is it that one is called avaivartika because of not turning, and also called avaivartika because of turning?’" The same sentence is asked a second time, the only difference being the two added Chinese characters 「云何」 tr. "how"—the first question asked whether it holds; this question asks how it holds. That the sūtra text sets out the two questions separately shows precisely that this meaning cannot be passed over in one leap.

5. The Buddha explains the two turnings—not turning in the grounds of the two vehicles is not turning, and turning in the grounds of the two vehicles is also not turning. The Buddha tells Subhūti: 「若菩薩摩訶薩於聲聞地、辟支佛地不轉，是故名不轉。若菩薩摩訶薩於聲聞地、辟支佛地轉，是故亦名不轉。」 tr. "If the bodhisattva-mahāsattva does not turn in the śrāvaka ground or the pratyekabuddha ground, for this reason he is called not turning. If the bodhisattva-mahāsattva turns in the śrāvaka ground or the pratyekabuddha ground, for this reason he is also called not turning." The key lies in what the word 「轉」 tr. "turn" is set against: not falling into the grounds of the two vehicles is not turning; having fallen and turning out of the grounds of the two vehicles is still not turning. One word with two meanings, hinging entirely on the preceding 「於聲聞地、辟支佛地」 tr. "in the śrāvaka ground or the pratyekabuddha ground"—turning away from the two vehicles and not entering the two vehicles are, with respect to unsurpassed awakening, one and the same matter. At the end it stamps the seal-sentence for the first time in this passage, 「以是行、類、相貌，當知是名阿鞞跋致菩薩摩訶薩相」 tr. "by this conduct, kind, and appearance, know that this is called the mark of an avaivartika bodhisattva-mahāsattva", and says that for this reason 「惡魔不能壞其意」 tr. "evil Māra cannot ruin his intent"—turning back to fasten onto Māra's hindrance at the opening.

6. He enters the dhyānas and samādhis at will, yet does not receive their fruit. The avaivartika, 「若欲入初禪，第二、第三、第四禪，乃至滅定禪，即得入」 tr. "if he wishes to enter the first dhyāna, the second, the third, the fourth dhyāna, and so on up to the dhyāna of the absorption of cessation, is at once able to enter"; if he wishes to cultivate the four foundations of mindfulness and so on up to the eightfold noble path, the emptiness, signless, and non-action samādhis, and so on up to the five supernormal powers, 「即能修」 tr. "he is at once able to cultivate them". And yet 「不受四念處果」 tr. "he does not receive the fruit of the four foundations of mindfulness", 「不受諸禪果」 tr. "does not receive the fruit of the dhyānas", and so on to 「不證須陀洹果，乃至不證辟支佛道」 tr. "does not realise the fruit of the srota-āpanna, and so on up to not realising the path of the pratyekabuddha"; rather, 「故為眾生受身，隨其所應而利益之」 tr. "he deliberately takes a body for the sake of beings, and benefits them according to what suits them". The crux of this mark is ‘able yet not taking’: the samādhis all obtained, the limbs of the path all cultivated, yet not a single fruit received. It is not that he cannot cultivate his way up; it is that he will not cash it in halfway—once the fruit is cashed in, the road of taking bodies to ferry beings is cut off.

7. Prizing nothing among all wholesome dharmas; in the four deportments a single mind undisturbed. This mark is listed at great length: he does not prize form, does not prize marks, does not prize the two vehicles, does not prize each limb of the six perfections, does not prize the four dhyānas, the four immeasurable minds, or the four formless absorptions, does not prize the five supernormal powers, does not prize the limbs of the path, does not prize the ten powers of the Buddha and so on up to the eighteen unshared dharmas, and so on to 「不貴淨佛世界、不貴成就眾生，不貴見佛，不貴種善根」 tr. "does not prize purifying buddha-worlds, does not prize bringing beings to accomplishment, does not prize seeing buddhas, does not prize planting roots of goodness". The reason is 「一切法自相空，不見可貴法、能生貴心者」 tr. "all dharmas are empty of specific marks; he sees no dharma that can be prized, nor any that can give rise to a prizing mind". This is where it is easiest to misread: not prizing even purifying buddha-worlds, seeing buddhas, and planting roots of goodness is not to slight these matters; it is rather to refrain from setting down upon these matters an entity that is 「可貴」 tr. "prizable"—the moment what is prized becomes real, the mind has somewhere to hang. So the sūtra text says immediately after that he, 「於四種身儀中，出入來去、坐臥行住，一心不亂」 tr. "within the four kinds of bodily deportment, going out and coming in, coming and going, sitting, lying, walking, standing, is single-minded and undisturbed"—the testing mark of prizing nothing falls upon these four bodily deportments of walking, standing, sitting, and lying.

8. As a householder he receives the five desires, yet himself practises the six perfections and teaches others to practise them; he gives the precious things filling Jambudvīpa. This mark places non-retrogression in the place least like a seat of awakening: 「若在居家，以方便力為利益眾生故受五欲」 tr. "if he dwells in a household, by the power of skilful means, for the sake of benefiting beings, he receives the five desires". And what he does is giving—「須食與食，須飲與飲，衣服、臥具乃至資生所須盡給與之」 tr. "to those who need food he gives food, to those who need drink he gives drink; clothing, bedding, and so on up to whatever is needed to support life, he gives them all"; moreover he himself practises dānapāramitā, teaches others to practise it, praises its dharma, and rejoices in and praises those who practise it, the four matters all complete, and likewise for śīla and so on up to prajñā. As a householder he can give 「滿閻浮提珍寶」 tr. "precious things filling Jambudvīpa", and so on up to 「三千大千世界滿中珍寶」 tr. "the three-thousand great-thousand world filled with precious things", and yet 「亦不自為，常修梵行，不凌易虜掠他人令其憂惱」 tr. "he does not do it for himself either; he always cultivates pure conduct, and does not insult, belittle, plunder, or rob others so as to cause them sorrow and vexation". Receiving the five desires set side by side with cultivating pure conduct—this is exactly what is most glaring in this mark; the dividing line lies in the four Chinese characters 「亦不自為」 tr. "does not do it for himself either"—he receives in order to gather in beings, not for himself.

9. The vajra-holding spirit king constantly follows and guards him. 「執金剛神王常隨逐」 tr. "The vajra-holding spirit king constantly follows him", and makes a vow: 「是菩薩摩訶薩當得阿耨多羅三藐三菩提，我常隨逐。」 tr. "This bodhisattva-mahāsattva will obtain anuttarā samyaksaṃbodhi; I shall constantly follow him." And so on up to 「五姓執金剛神常隨守護」 tr. "the vajra-holding spirits of the five clans constantly follow and guard him". Therefore 「若天、若魔、若梵、若餘世間大力者不能破壞是菩薩摩訶薩薩婆若心」 tr. "whether gods, or Māra, or Brahmā, or any other of great strength in the world, none can break this bodhisattva-mahāsattva's mind of sarvajñā". Note that the object of the sūtra text's guarding is not body and life but 「薩婆若心」 tr. "the mind of sarvajñā"—what is guarded is the mind, and what would be broken is also the mind. As for what the five clans refer to, the sūtra text gives only their number and not their names; here, following the sūtra, nothing is added.

10. He is constantly complete in the five faculties of the bodhisattva. 「菩薩摩訶薩常具足菩薩五根：信根、精進根、念根、定根、慧根，是名阿鞞跋致相。」 tr. "The bodhisattva-mahāsattva is constantly complete in the five faculties of the bodhisattva: the faculty of faith, the faculty of vigour, the faculty of mindfulness, the faculty of concentration, the faculty of wisdom; this is called the mark of the avaivartika." The names of the five faculties the sūtra text itself lists; as for their meaning in present-day words (the sūtra and treatise do not gloss them faculty by faculty here; following the common meaning, briefly stated): faith is believing and receiving, vigour is diligence that does not retrogress, mindfulness is not forgetting the object, concentration is the mind on a single object, wisdom is illuminating clearly. This mark looks ordinary, yet it is where the treatise-author below expands at length—the presence or absence of the five faculties is exactly the boundary between the ordinary and the noble.

11. He is a superior person, not an inferior person. 「阿鞞跋致菩薩摩訶薩為上人，不為下人。」 tr. "The avaivartika bodhisattva-mahāsattva is a superior person, not an inferior person." A single verdict, with no explanation added, hence the question below. The sūtra text uses 「上人」 tr. "superior person", a term the world also commonly uses, and this is exactly what forces out where the criterion of 「上」 tr. "superior" actually lies.

12. Subhūti asks what a superior person is. 「須菩提白佛言：『世尊！云何為上人？』」 tr. "Subhūti said to the Buddha: ‘World-Honored One! What is a superior person?’" This question is of the same form as the earlier 「云何不轉故名阿鞞跋致」 tr. "how is it that one is called avaivartika because of not turning"—the sūtra text establishes a name, and Subhūti seeks its criterion. If readers first answered it themselves, most would answer with virtuous conduct, with wisdom, with the breadth of ferrying beings; the Buddha's answer is narrower than all of these.

13. The Buddha answers—practising the mind of awakening single-mindedly, without distraction, is a superior person. 「若菩薩摩訶薩一心行阿耨多羅三藐三菩提心，不散亂，是名上人。」 tr. "If the bodhisattva-mahāsattva single-mindedly practises the mind of anuttarā samyaksaṃbodhi, without distraction, this is called a superior person." Only one matter is taken, and it is the innermost matter. No merits are listed, no stations of fruit are listed; it asks only whether this one mind is scattered or not. The advantage of setting the criterion here is that it cannot be feigned, nor does it increase or decrease with the richness or poverty of one's circumstances.

14. Not practising spell-craft, compounding medicines, or casting spells on ghosts—this is practising pure livelihood. The last mark speaks of the purity of making a living: 「不作呪術、合和諸藥，不呪鬼神令著男女問其吉凶、男女祿相、壽命長短」 tr. "he does not practise spell-craft or compound medicines, and does not cast spells on ghosts and spirits to make them possess men and women so as to ask about their fortune, the marks of emolument of men and women, and the length or shortness of life". The reason still returns to emptiness—「知諸法自相空，不見諸法相，故行淨命」 tr. "knowing that all dharmas are empty of specific marks, he does not see the marks of dharmas, and so practises pure livelihood". This mark pulls non-retrogression back to the most everyday level: fortune and misfortune, emolument, and long or short life are exactly the four things the human heart can least let go of; he does not make his living by them because he fundamentally does not see any such real mark that could be divined or averted.

15. The treatise-author begins his explanation, first citing Māra's words. The treatise-author explains, first marking 「復有阿鞞跋致菩薩相」 tr. "there are further marks of the avaivartika bodhisattva", and then cites that one sentence of Māra's from the sūtra text: 「薩婆若與虛空等。」 tr. "Sarvajñā is equal to space." It is the method of the Expository Treatise that every extended explanation first raises the text being explained; here only one sentence is cited, which shows that the treatise-author holds this sentence to be the pivot of the whole passage of Māra's hindrance—the several passages below all take apart these seven Chinese characters.

16. The other names of sarvajñā—first fixing what is meant. 「薩婆若有種種名字：或說一切智，或說一切種智，或說無上道，或說無量諸佛法，或說菩提，皆是薩婆若名字。」 tr. "Sarvajñā has names of many kinds: it is called omniscience, or called the omniscience of all kinds, or called the unsurpassed path, or called the immeasurable dharmas of the buddhas, or called awakening; all these are names of sarvajñā." Having listed five other names, the treatise-author nails down what is meant in this passage: 「此中說薩婆若，當知是阿耨多羅三藐三菩提。」 tr. "Where sarvajñā is spoken of here, know that it is anuttarā samyaksaṃbodhi." This step is a rule of explaining a sūtra—the same noun in different places refers more broadly or more narrowly; only when what it refers to here is fixed first will the disputation that follows not fall into the void.

17. The substance of Māra's words—empty and without anything existent, your teachers deceive you. 「一切菩薩皆願欲得薩婆若」 tr. "All bodhisattvas vow and wish to obtain sarvajñā", and so Māra sets to work from here. The treatise-author fills out Māra's words: 「是薩婆若空無所有，但諸師誑汝耳！如虛空無所有、無色無形、不可知；薩婆若亦如是。」 tr. "This sarvajñā is empty and without anything existent; it is only that your teachers deceive you! As space is without anything existent, without colour, without shape, and cannot be known, so too is sarvajñā."—「是故說與虛空等」 tr. "therefore it is said to be equal to space". Filling out the sentence 「但諸師誑汝耳」 tr. "it is only that your teachers deceive you" shows his discerning eye most of all: where Māra truly puts his effort is not in the meaning of emptiness but in sowing discord; first he says the Dharma is empty, then he says the teachers deceive, and only thus can he uproot a person from both ends at once, the Dharma and the teacher.

18. Māra's words go on to break down the aids to the path, and urge regret and the giving up of the vow. The treatise-author goes on to explain the two Chinese characters 「諸法」 tr. "dharmas" in the sūtra: 「諸法者，六波羅蜜等趣薩婆若助道法；是法亦空」 tr. "‘Dharmas’ means the six perfections and the other dharmas that aid the path tending toward sarvajñā; these dharmas too are empty", and so 「無得薩婆若者、無趣薩婆若、無有助道者」 tr. "there is no one who obtains sarvajñā, no tending toward sarvajñā, and nothing that aids the path". Māra goes a step further and reverses right and wrong: 「汝師常教汝離魔事，薩婆若即是魔事。何以故？捨涅槃、取生死故。」 tr. "Your teacher always teaches you to keep away from the deeds of Māra, yet sarvajñā is itself a deed of Māra. Why? Because it abandons nirvāṇa and takes up birth and death." And so on to saying 「汝先所聞經、若六波羅蜜義，非是佛法，皆是人造」 tr. "the sūtras you heard before, and the meaning of the six perfections, are not the Buddha's Dharma; they were all made by people", and he frightens him with the marks of the three evil destinies. This whole passage can be read as a lesson in reverse: it employs the meaning of emptiness, the teaching lineage, the scriptural teaching, and karmic retribution, all four, and every one of them is twisted to support the same conclusion—give up. Discerning Māra lies not in discerning words but in discerning where these words lead a person.

19. The bodhisattva is aware of the deed of Māra—only adornment by the emptiness of specific marks is fitting. The avaivartika, hearing these things, 「即覺知魔事」 tr. "is at once aware that it is a deed of Māra", knowing that 「是魔毀呰薩婆若」 tr. "this is Māra disparaging sarvajñā". His reason has two layers: first, 「一切法雖空無所有，而凡夫眾生顛倒覆心故，不知、不見」 tr. "although all dharmas are empty and without anything existent, ordinary beings, because inversion covers their minds, do not know and do not see"—emptiness does not mean there is no need to speak; precisely because beings do not know, someone must speak; second, 「若一切法空，我以實莊嚴，是不相應；若諸法空，莊嚴亦空者，是則相稱」 tr. "if all dharmas are empty and I adorn with what is real, that does not correspond; if dharmas are empty and the adornment too is empty, then this is fitting". This is the finest turn in the whole passage: Māra says that because of emptiness adornment is useless; the treatise-author answers that because of emptiness adornment is fitting—to adorn empty dharmas with real dharmas would instead be amiss. The meaning of emptiness is not a reason to abolish the gates of practice; it is the ruler that corrects the gates of practice.

20. The fruit of the srota-āpanna is of two kinds; the conditioned and the unconditioned are both empty. The treatise-author cites the sūtra text's 「令眾生得須陀洹果」 tr. "causes beings to obtain the fruit of the srota-āpanna" and at once distinguishes: 「須陀洹果有二種：一者，三結斷——無為法，二者，空、無相、無作三昧相應——有為須陀洹果。」 tr. "The fruit of the srota-āpanna is of two kinds: first, the severance of the three fetters—an unconditioned dharma; second, what corresponds to the emptiness, signless, and non-action samādhis—the conditioned fruit of the srota-āpanna." Both are empty, but the reasons for their emptiness differ: 「有為法中，三解脫門故空；無為法中，無生、無住、無滅相故即是空」 tr. "among conditioned dharmas, it is empty because of the three gates of liberation; among unconditioned dharmas, because of the marks of non-arising, non-abiding, and non-ceasing, it is itself empty"; and so on up to unsurpassed awakening likewise. This passage follows on from the one above—since he has said he would cause beings to obtain the fruit, he must make clear that the fruit obtained is also empty, or else the sickness of 「以實莊嚴」 tr. "adorning with what is real" slips back in by way of the fruit. The names of the two kinds the treatise-author's own text already gives; there is no need to seek them elsewhere.

21. The gloss of the three names firm, unmoved, and not turning. The treatise-author explains the three minds of the sūtra text, one name, one meaning: 「一切諸煩惱箭不入故，名為堅。一切外道魔民不能轉故，名不動。於阿耨多羅三藐三菩提不退故，名不轉。」 tr. "Because none of the arrows of the afflictions enters, it is called firm. Because none of the outside paths or Māra's people can turn it, it is called unmoved. Because it does not retrogress from anuttarā samyaksaṃbodhi, it is called not turning." The boundaries of the three lie in the enemy each faces—firm faces the inner afflictions, unmoved faces the outside paths and Māra's people, not turning faces retrogression from awakening. 「是菩薩以如是三種心，行六波羅蜜，入菩薩位」 tr. "This bodhisattva, with these three kinds of mind, practises the six perfections and enters the bodhisattva's position", and 「入菩薩位者，名阿鞞跋致」 tr. "one who has entered the bodhisattva's position is called avaivartika". These three Chinese characters are often taken as a stack of synonyms, but the treatise-author gives each its own face of counteraction; only by reading this layer clearly does one know that non-retrogression is not some undifferentiated firmness but three gates each guarded on its own. As for the meaning of the bodhisattva's position, the treatise-author notes himself 「如先說」 tr. "as said before", and does not explain it again here.

22. Subhūti's question re-cited. The treatise-author restates the question in the sūtra in the third person: 「須菩提問：『不轉故名阿鞞跋致？轉故名阿鞞跋致？』」 tr. "Subhūti asks: ‘Is one called avaivartika because of not turning? Is one called avaivartika because of turning?’" Here the treatise-author is narrating the sūtra text; it is not that another Subhūti speaks within the treatise; such is the method of the Expository Treatise, and in reading one must keep distinct the question in the sūtra and the question and answer in the treatise.

23. The Buddha answers in two ways because of the two truths. The treatise-author judges: 「佛二種答，以二諦故，所謂世諦、第一義諦。」 tr. "The Buddha answers in two ways because of the two truths, namely worldly truth and the truth of the highest meaning." On the side of worldly truth: 「若菩薩入菩薩位，轉聲聞、辟支佛心，直入菩薩位，是名轉。」 tr. "If the bodhisattva enters the bodhisattva's position, turning away the mind of the śrāvaka and pratyekabuddha and entering straight into the bodhisattva's position, this is called turning." On the side of the highest meaning: 「不轉者，入阿鞞跋致第一義，諸法一相中，所謂無相，尚無一乘定相，何況三乘！則無所轉；」 tr. "Not turning: entering the highest meaning of the avaivartika, within the one mark of all dharmas, that is, the signless, there is not even a fixed mark of one vehicle, how much less of three vehicles! So there is nothing to turn;" The resolution by the two truths untangles the contradiction very thoroughly—at the level of names and marks, there really is a movement of turning out from the mind of the two vehicles, and to say 「轉」 tr. "turning" is the truth; at the level of the one mark, the signless, of all dharmas, even one vehicle has no fixed mark, and since the boundaries of the three vehicles are not set up, there is no place that can be turned, and to say 「不轉」 tr. "not turning" is the truth as well. It is not taking one of two answers; it is two levels each speaking its own truth.

24. Sovereign in meditative concentration yet not receiving the blessings of the long-life heavens; surveying the ten directions and choosing where to take a body. The treatise-author explains the sixth mark: the avaivartika, 「雖行欲界法度眾生，於禪定出入自在」 tr. "though he practises the dharmas of the desire realm to ferry beings, is sovereign in entering and leaving meditative concentration"; from this sovereignty, in teaching others to cultivate the limbs of the path, the three gates of liberation, and so on up to the five supernormal powers, 「皆得自在」 tr. "he attains sovereignty in all of them". And 「雖入禪定，其心清淨柔軟故，不受長壽天福，於欲界教化」 tr. "though he enters meditative concentration, because his mind is pure and soft, he does not receive the blessings of the long-life heavens, but teaches and transforms in the desire realm"; 「雖修四念處道法，亦不證須陀洹果，乃至不證辟支佛道」 tr. "though he cultivates the dharmas of the path of the four foundations of mindfulness, he does not realise the fruit of the srota-āpanna, and so on up to not realising the path of the pratyekabuddha". At the end it says, 「觀十方國土，知何處有可利益眾生處，故為受身生其國」 tr. "he surveys the lands of the ten directions, knows where there is a place where beings can be benefited, and so takes a body and is born in that land". The sūtra text says only that he does not receive the fruit; the treatise-author adds the two concrete places to which he does not go—one is the blessings of the long-life heavens, the other is the realisation of the two vehicles—and adds that taking a body is not being dragged by the force of karma but surveying, choosing a place, and going there. Able to enter yet not taking, able to be born yet choosing for himself—this is the twofold sovereignty of this mark.

25. Prizing only unsurpassed awakening, and so prizing nothing in other matters. The treatise-author explains the seventh mark: 「一心深念，常不離阿耨多羅三藐三菩提故，但貴阿耨多羅三藐三菩提，不貴餘事」 tr. "because he single-mindedly and deeply recollects it and never leaves anuttarā samyaksaṃbodhi, he prizes only anuttarā samyaksaṃbodhi and does not prize other matters"—the example raised is 「諸佛三十二相金色身」 tr. "the golden-coloured bodies of the buddhas with the thirty-two marks"; 「不捨本願度眾生故，不貴聲聞、辟支佛道」 tr. "because he does not abandon his original vow to ferry beings, he does not prize the path of the śrāvaka or the pratyekabuddha"; 「貴無所得、畢竟空故，不貴是布施，乃至不貴種善根，何況五欲世間利養」 tr. "because he prizes nothing to be attained and ultimate emptiness, he does not prize this giving, and so on up to not prizing the planting of roots of goodness, how much less the five desires and worldly gain and offerings". This passage supplies the pivot for the sūtra text's long list: it is not that nothing at all is prized; only one thing is prized, and so the rest is light by comparison. Even the Buddha's marks and signs are not among what is prized, precisely because what is prized is awakening itself, not the adorning marks of awakening.

26. Prizing nothing, he is unmoved by gain and loss. The treatise-author goes one layer deeper, speaking from the reverse side: 「有人有所貪貴故，心動、不能自安，若得則歡喜，失則憂慼」 tr. "some people, because there is something they crave and prize, are moved in mind and cannot be at ease in themselves; if they gain it they rejoice, if they lose it they grieve"; the bodhisattva, 「無所貴、無所貪故，至於得失，心清淨不動」 tr. "because he prizes nothing and craves nothing, when it comes to gain and loss, his mind is pure and unmoved". This sentence turns 「不貴」 tr. "not prizing" from an attitude into a mechanism—the mind shakes because something cherished is staked at both ends, gain and loss; when the stake is withdrawn, gain and loss naturally cannot move it. Above it spoke of non-retrogression; here it gives the inner principle of non-retrogression.

27. Body and speech in harmony; in the four deportments nothing amiss. The treatise-author explains the four kinds of bodily deportment in the sūtra: 「身行、口行調和不異故，身四威儀一心常念，無所違失」 tr. "because the conduct of body and the conduct of speech are in harmony and not at variance, in the four deportments of the body he is single-minded and ever mindful, with nothing amiss"; and he gives a second cause: 「深入禪波羅蜜故，身四威儀無所違失，」 tr. "because he has entered deeply into dhyānapāramitā, in the four deportments of the body there is nothing amiss," The two reasons are one inner and one outer—one is that body and speech correspond and are not at odds, the other is that the power of meditative concentration flows through the four deportments. That in walking, standing, sitting, and lying he can be single-minded and undisturbed rests not on deliberate self-restraint, but on these two layers.

28. Question—what kind of skilful means is receiving the five desires? The treatise-author poses a question, first citing the sūtra text: 「經中說：『阿鞞跋致菩薩方便力，為利益眾生故受五欲。』是何等方便？」 tr. "The sūtra says: ‘The avaivartika bodhisattva, by the power of skilful means, receives the five desires for the sake of benefiting beings.’ What kind of skilful means is this?" This question asks, on the reader's behalf, about the most unsettling sentence. The sūtra text sets receiving the five desires side by side with non-retrogression; if no reason were given, readers would either give rise to doubt or give rise to licence. Posing the question is an interception.

29. Answer—the simile of taking up fire with tongs; born in a rich and noble family, he is then able to give. The treatise-author answers with a simile: 「譬如以鉗取火，雖捉而不燒。五欲如火，能燒人善根。」 tr. "It is as when one takes up fire with tongs: though one holds it, one is not burned. The five desires are like fire; they can burn up a person's roots of goodness." At once he states the bodhisattva's practical consideration: 「我出家一身，云何能以布施攝眾生？眾生多須飲食、衣服，須法者少。」 tr. "I, having gone forth, a single body, how can I gather in beings by giving? Beings mostly need food and drink and clothing; those who need the Dharma are few." So he is 「生富貴家，布施眾生，恣其所須」 tr. "born in a rich and noble family, gives to beings, and gives them whatever they need", and can benefit widely both beings who have gone forth and those at home, 「譬如大地，人民、鳥獸皆蒙利潤」 tr. "as with the great earth, on which people, birds, and beasts all receive its benefit"; the last sentence says 「是時四種行六波羅蜜」 tr. "at this time he practises the six perfections in four ways". The point of the simile lies in those tongs: what holds the fire is not the hand but the implement; what receives the five desires is not the craving mind but skilful means. To grasp fire without tongs is to burn one's hand. As for the so-called four ways of the last sentence, the treatise-author does not give their names here; following the text, nothing is added.

30. When one who has gone forth praises giving, people do not believe and accept it; so by skilful means he becomes one of the white-robed. The treatise-author goes on to give a second reason: 「若出家讚布施，或有人言：『汝自一身無財，但教人施。』則不信受。」 tr. "If one who has gone forth praises giving, someone may say: ‘You yourself are a single body without wealth, and only teach others to give.’ Then they do not believe and accept it." So 「菩薩方便作白衣，以財充滿一切而勸行施，人則信受」 tr. "the bodhisattva by skilful means becomes one of the white-robed, fills everyone with wealth and urges them to practise giving, and people then believe and accept it". This is the reality of speaking the Dharma: if the one who urges giving has nothing to give himself, his words carry no weight. That skilful means is skilful means lies precisely in its attending to whether the listener can believe and take it in, and not only to whether the speaker himself is clean.

31. He becomes a wheel-turning sage king, Śakra, or the Brahmā king; having severed lust, he is not proud. The treatise-author sets out these matters at length: he may become a wheel-turning sage king, and 「心念施時，則滿閻浮提珍寶」 tr. "when he thinks of giving, then precious things fill Jambudvīpa", as in the palace of King Crown-born, 「心生欲寶則寶至于膝」 tr. "when his mind gave rise to a wish for treasure, the treasure came up to the knee"; or he may become Śakra or the Brahmā king, 「能雨珍寶滿三千世界，供養於佛」 tr. "able to rain down precious things filling the three-thousand world, as offerings to the Buddha". And the key lies in 「為攝眾生故，而自不受」 tr. "it is for the sake of gathering in beings, and he himself does not receive it". Then he explains the sentence in the sūtra about not insulting and belittling: 「人受五欲，則心生憍慢，凌易於人。是人常斷婬欲故，諸煩惱薄，不生憍慢；不生憍慢故，不凌易眾生。」 tr. "When people receive the five desires, their minds give rise to pride, and they insult and belittle others. Because this person has always severed lust, his afflictions are thin and he does not give rise to pride; because he does not give rise to pride, he does not insult and belittle beings." Rich and noble yet not overbearing toward others—this rests not on self-restraint but on afflictions being thin from the start—the outward mark of enjoyment and the inner reality can be wholly two separate things; this is where the tongs simile above takes concrete form.

32. Having obtained the acceptance of the non-arising of dharmas and received the prediction, the spirit kings by rule should follow and guard him. The treatise-author explains the ninth mark: 「若菩薩得無生法忍、入菩薩位、得受記，即時執金剛神王等法應隨逐守護」 tr. "if the bodhisattva obtains the acceptance of the non-arising of dharmas, enters the bodhisattva's position, and receives the prediction, at that very moment the vajra-holding spirit king and the others by rule should follow and guard him"; 「得佛道時，則現其身，時令人見。」 tr. "When he attains the path of the Buddha, they then manifest their bodies, and at times let people see them." The two Chinese characters 「法應」 tr. "by rule should" are the most important—it is not protection sought for, but a matter that naturally corresponds to arriving at this station; and ordinarily they do not appear, letting people see them only when he attains the path—which shows that they guard without disturbing.

33. The marks of breaking by humans and breaking by non-humans. The treatise-author points out the cause and condition the sūtra text itself states: 「此中自說因緣：『若人、若非人無能破壞。』」 tr. "Here it states the cause and condition itself: ‘Whether human or non-human, none can break him.’" At once he lists two kinds: 「人破者，若殺、若縛、若論議得勝等」 tr. "breaking by humans: killing, or binding, or winning in debate, and so on"; 「非人破者，與病，令狂，若奪命，若作惡身令其恐怖，若變作佛身說邪道。」 tr. "breaking by non-humans: giving illness, driving mad, or seizing life, or taking on an evil body to terrify him, or transforming into the body of a Buddha to preach a wrong path." Three things done by humans, five things done by non-humans, and 「如是等不能折伏菩薩」 tr. "such things as these cannot subdue the bodhisattva". Worth noting is that the treatise-author sets 「論議得勝」 tr. "winning in debate" side by side with killing and binding as breaking by humans, and puts 「變作佛身說邪道」 tr. "transforming into the body of a Buddha to preach a wrong path" in the last place of breaking by non-humans—the two heaviest items both do no harm to the body; what they harm is one's view; and this follows exactly the same road as the opening, where Māra ruins the mind with words of Dharma.

34. Question—since the spirit kings guard him, does the bodhisattva then have no strength of his own? The treatise-author poses a question: 「若為金剛神王所守護者，菩薩自無有力？」 tr. "If he is guarded by the vajra spirit king, does the bodhisattva himself have no strength?" This question strikes a real concern: if protection is spoken of too heavily, the practitioner's own strength appears dispensable; what the relation between protection and one's own strength actually is must be accounted for.

35. Answer—the bodhisattva has his own strength, and his merit can draw the spirits' protection. The treatise-author answers: 「菩薩亦自有力。復以菩薩功德故，能使金剛神所守護」 tr. "The bodhisattva also has strength of his own. Further, because of the bodhisattva's merit, he can bring about being guarded by the vajra spirits"; because he is guarded by the spirits, 「雖未得法身，而功德增益」 tr. "though he has not yet obtained the Dharma body, his merit increases"; and 「使天神見金剛神侍衛故，益加敬畏」 tr. "because it lets the gods and spirits see the vajra spirits attending and guarding him, they grow all the more in reverence and awe". The answer has an order: first it straightforwardly acknowledges that his own strength is not lacking; then it says that the spirits' protection is itself drawn by merit—it is not that strength is insufficient and outside help is borrowed, but that virtue is abundant and brings others to come and take refuge; the third layer further says that protection in turn increases merit and increases the gods' reverence. The causes and effects accord with one another; they do not replace one another.

36. Complete in the bodhisattva's faculties—the simile of the five faculties. The treatise-author explains the five faculties in the sūtra: 「『具足菩薩根』者，如人無眼等五情根，則無異木石；五情力故，能見、能聞。菩薩心中無信等五根，即是凡夫，不入聖數。」 tr. "‘Complete in the bodhisattva's faculties’: as a person without the eye and the other four faculties is no different from wood or stone; by the power of the five faculties one can see and can hear. If in the bodhisattva's mind there are not faith and the other four faculties, he is an ordinary person and does not enter the count of the noble." The simile is taken very heavily: without the five faculties one is the same as wood or stone. Faith, vigour, mindfulness, concentration, and wisdom are to the Dharma body and the life of wisdom exactly what the eye and ear are to form and sound—not dispensable auxiliary conditions, but the organs by which one can or cannot receive.

37. Question—the Abhidharma says that one who has not severed his roots of goodness is accomplished in the five faculties. The treatise-author poses a question, citing another scripture to raise a difficulty: 「如《阿毘曇經》說：『誰成就五根？答曰：不斷善根者。』今何以言『無信等五根，即是凡夫』？」 tr. "As the Abhidharma Sūtra says: ‘Who is accomplished in the five faculties? Answer: one who has not severed his roots of goodness.’ Why now does it say, ‘without faith and the other four faculties, one is an ordinary person’?" The difficulty is forceful: if all who have not severed their roots of goodness are accomplished in the five faculties, then most ordinary people too have the five faculties; why does it say that one without the five faculties is an ordinary person? The two texts contradict each other, and a distinction is needed.

38. Answer—accomplished yet not brought into use; the simile of the small child. The treatise-author distinguishes two meanings, 「成就」 tr. "accomplished" and 「發用」 tr. "brought into use": 「不斷善根眾生雖成就五根，而不能發起為用」 tr. "beings who have not severed their roots of goodness, though accomplished in the five faculties, cannot bring them forth into use"; the simile says, 「譬如小兒雖成就煩惱婬欲等，未能發用，故言無」 tr. "as a small child, though accomplished in the afflictions, lust and the rest, cannot yet bring them into use, and so it is said he has none"; so 「信等五根亦如是，眾生雖有，不發不用，是故不數」 tr. "faith and the other four faculties are likewise: though beings have them, they do not bring them forth and do not use them, and therefore they are not counted". This judgement shows great measure: the two texts do not in fact contradict each other; the Abhidharma speaks of the presence of the substance, while here it speaks of the absence of the function. The simile of the small child is especially apt—the seeds of affliction are really there; only the time has not yet come; to say he 「無」 tr. "has none" is said with respect to what is presently active, not with respect to the seeds.

39. Faith and the other four faculties are of two kinds—belonging to the two vehicles and belonging to the buddhas and bodhisattvas. The treatise-author further judges that the five faculties are of two kinds: 「一者、屬聲聞、辟支佛，二者、屬佛、諸菩薩。」 tr. "First, those belonging to śrāvakas and pratyekabuddhas; second, those belonging to the buddhas and the bodhisattvas." the five faculties of the two vehicles 「能深信涅槃，能以智慧知世間無常、空，能知涅槃寂滅」 tr. "can deeply believe in nirvāṇa, can by wisdom know the world as impermanent and empty, can know nirvāṇa as quiescence"; the five faculties of the bodhisattva 「能生深慈悲心於怨惡眾生，亦能觀諸法實相，所謂無生無滅等；雖未得佛，亦能信受佛事」 tr. "can give rise to a deep mind of kindness and compassion toward hostile and evil beings, and can also contemplate the real mark of all dharmas, namely non-arising, non-ceasing, and the rest; though he has not yet attained buddhahood, he can also believe and accept the matters of the Buddha". Faculties of the same name, but with different objects: one side takes nirvāṇa and quiescence as its object; the other takes hostile and evil beings and the real mark of non-arising and non-ceasing. That the sūtra text says 「菩薩五根」 tr. "the five faculties of the bodhisattva" and not the five faculties in general—this is precisely where the dividing line lies.

40. Because of the bodhisattva's faculties he can see the supernormal powers of the buddhas. The treatise-author raises one further test: 「有以菩薩根故，能見、能聞、能知諸佛神通力，非諸聲聞、辟支佛所及」 tr. "there are those who, because of the bodhisattva's faculties, can see, can hear, and can know the power of the supernormal powers of the buddhas, which the śrāvakas and pratyekabuddhas cannot reach", and cites the Sūtra of Inconceivable Liberation as proof: 「舍利弗、目連、須菩提等雖在佛左右，以無菩薩根故，不見是大菩薩會及所有神通力，亦不聞佛說不可思議解脫。」 tr. "Śāriputra, Maudgalyāyana, Subhūti, and the others, though at the Buddha's left and right, because they lacked the bodhisattva's faculties, did not see this great assembly of bodhisattvas or all its supernormal powers, nor did they hear the Buddha speak of inconceivable liberation." So he concludes: 「若菩薩具足得是信等五根故，名阿鞞跋致」 tr. "because the bodhisattva completely obtains these faculties, faith and the other four, he is called avaivartika". This proof is very forceful: at the Buddha's side alike, great arhats alike, yet what they saw and heard was not the same—seeing or not seeing lies not in distance but in the faculties.

41. Question—the marks of the superior person in other sūtras are very many; why is only one matter taken? The treatise-author poses a question: in other sūtras it is said that 「善人身、口、意業無惡」 tr. "the deeds of body, speech, and mind of a good person are without evil", 「知恩、報恩」 tr. "knowing the debt of kindness and repaying kindness", 「能為一切眾生故，自捨身樂，安隱眾生」 tr. "for the sake of all beings being able to give up one's own bodily pleasure to make beings safe", 「有所利益，不求果報」 tr. "benefiting without seeking a reward", and so on—all are marks of the superior person; 「何以故但說『不散亂心行無上道一事，名為上人』？」 tr. "why is it said only that ‘practising the unsurpassed path with an undistracted mind, this one matter, is called a superior person’?" This question asks about the narrowness of the criterion—with so many virtues, why keep only one.

42. Answer—a single mind without distraction gathers in all wholesome dharmas entirely. The treatise-author answers: 「此中佛自略說：一心不散亂，盡攝諸善法。」 tr. "Here the Buddha himself speaks briefly: a single mind without distraction gathers in all wholesome dharmas entirely." The reason is: 「貪重佛道故，一切諸煩惱折薄，是故於眾生深加慈心，能自以身命給施，何況不知報恩等！」 tr. "Because he craves and values the path of the Buddha, all the afflictions are broken and thinned; therefore toward beings he deepens his mind of kindness and can give even his own body and life—how much less would he fail to know to repay kindness and the like!" It is not that the Buddha left the other virtues out as unwanted; it is that once this one is established, the rest naturally follow—once the afflictions are thin, the mind of kindness is naturally deep; if even body and life can be given, how much more such lighter matters as knowing and repaying kindness. It is narrow because it is at the source; the many virtues are the streams of this one source.

43. Practising pure livelihood—explaining the three matters of spell-craft, compounding medicines, and casting spells on ghosts. The last passage explains pure livelihood: 「常一心念阿耨多羅三藐三菩提，清淨持戒故，不行邪命」 tr. "because he always single-mindedly recollects anuttarā samyaksaṃbodhi and upholds the precepts purely, he does not practise wrong livelihood". The treatise-author sets out the reality of each item: spell-craft 「能翳身令人不見，能變人為畜獸」 tr. "can screen the body so that people do not see it, can change people into domestic animals and beasts"; compounding medicines is 「餌食求仙，亦合和諸藥療疾，求財及求名聲」 tr. "eating elixirs seeking to become an immortal, and also compounding medicines to cure illness, seeking wealth and seeking fame"; casting spells on ghosts is 「有人欲知未來事，祝鬼令著男女，問其吉凶、生男生女、壽命脩短、豐樂勝負等」 tr. "someone wishes to know future matters, casts a spell on a ghost to make it possess a man or a woman, and asks about fortune, whether a boy or a girl will be born, the length or shortness of life, abundance and joy, victory and defeat, and so on". At once he gives the boundary of what is permitted: 「若有作者，為攝眾生，破其憍慢，不為財利名聞。」 tr. "If there are those who do it, it is to gather in beings and break their pride, not for wealth, gain, or fame." At the end it returns to emptiness: 「是人知一切諸法自相空故，不見諸法相——所謂己身、妻子、男女等；不見是相故，不行邪命。」 tr. "Because this person knows that all dharmas are empty of specific marks, he does not see the marks of dharmas—namely his own body, wife and children, sons and daughters, and the like; because he does not see these marks, he does not practise wrong livelihood." Within one passage all three layers are complete—first setting out the reality of wrong livelihood, then opening the gate of skilful means while limiting its motive, and at the end gathering it up with the emptiness of specific marks. What is forbidden has never been the art itself, but the mind that uses it to trade for wealth, gain, and fame.

Do Not Misread

Do not read Māra's words as a heresy recognisable at a glance. Māra opens by saying that sarvajñā is equal to space and that dharmas are equal to space; these two sentences are not in themselves wrong, and in the sūtra the Buddha too says 「是一切法與虛空等，無所有、自相空」 tr. "all these dharmas are equal to space, without anything existent, empty of specific marks". Māra's sleight of hand lies in the conclusion—from emptiness he draws out 「汝唐受勤苦」 tr. "you toil and suffer for nothing" and 「汝當放捨是願」 tr. "you should give up this vow". If one discerns Māra only by discerning words and sentences, one will certainly fail to discern him; what must be seen is toward which side of the arousing of the mind these words lead a person. In the same passage Māra also adds the sentence 「但諸師誑汝耳」 tr. "it is only that your teachers deceive you", precisely to uproot a person from both ends at once, the Dharma and the teacher; if a single speech both belittles the Dharma and sows discord against the teaching lineage, then however much its words and sentences resemble prajñā, one may first give rise to suspicion.

Do not read 「轉故亦名阿鞞跋致」 tr. "one is also called avaivartika because of turning" as meaning that retrogressing also counts as not retrogressing. The 「轉」 tr. "turning" of the sūtra text has an explicit thing it is set against—「於聲聞地、辟支佛地轉」 tr. "turns in the śrāvaka ground or the pratyekabuddha ground" is turning out of the grounds of the two vehicles, not turning back from the mind of awakening. The treatise-author further distinguishes by the two truths: on the side of worldly truth there is the matter of turning out; on the side of the highest meaning, because 「尚無一乘定相，何況三乘」 tr. "there is not even a fixed mark of one vehicle, how much less of three vehicles", there is nothing to turn. Both meanings are fastened to the same direction; neither meaning permits a retrogressing mind.

Do not read 「不貴淨佛世界、不貴成就眾生，不貴見佛，不貴種善根」 tr. "does not prize purifying buddha-worlds, does not prize bringing beings to accomplishment, does not prize seeing buddhas, does not prize planting roots of goodness" as abandoning wholesome dharmas. The sūtra text itself states the reason as 「一切法自相空，不見可貴法、能生貴心者」 tr. "all dharmas are empty of specific marks; he sees no dharma that can be prized, nor any that can give rise to a prizing mind", and the treatise-author further makes clear that he 「但貴阿耨多羅三藐三菩提，不貴餘事」 tr. "prizes only anuttarā samyaksaṃbodhi and does not prize other matters"—it is not that wholesome dharmas are not done, but that no prizable reality is set up upon wholesome dharmas. The treatise-author then gives the mechanism: with something craved and prized, 「若得則歡喜，失則憂慼」 tr. "if they gain it they rejoice, if they lose it they grieve"; prizing nothing, 「至於得失，心清淨不動」 tr. "when it comes to gain and loss, his mind is pure and unmoved". So 「不貴」 tr. "not prizing" is in order to be able to keep practising, not in order not to practise.

Do not read receiving the five desires as a householder as opening the gate to indulgence. The sūtra text itself sets alongside it 「亦不自為，常修梵行，不凌易虜掠他人令其憂惱」 tr. "he does not do it for himself either; he always cultivates pure conduct, and does not insult, belittle, plunder, or rob others so as to cause them sorrow and vexation"; the treatise-author uses the simile of taking up fire with tongs to explain how one can hold it without being burned, and points out that this person 「常斷婬欲故，諸煩惱薄」 tr. "because he has always severed lust, his afflictions are thin". Skilful means has its qualifications—only when there is first a mind that does not do it for itself, and first the reality of afflictions already thin, can there be talk of gathering in beings by the five desires. Reverse the order, and it is burning one's hand.

Do not read the protection of the vajra spirits as meaning that one's own strength is unnecessary. The treatise-author poses this question and answers plainly 「菩薩亦自有力」 tr. "the bodhisattva also has strength of his own", and says 「以菩薩功德故，能使金剛神所守護」 tr. "because of the bodhisattva's merit, he can bring about being guarded by the vajra spirits"—protection is the fruit drawn by merit, not a substitute for insufficient strength of one's own. Further, what the sūtra text guards is 「薩婆若心」 tr. "the mind of sarvajñā", not body and life; of the matters of breaking by humans and by non-humans that the treatise-author lists, the two heaviest are 「論議得勝」 tr. "winning in debate" and 「變作佛身說邪道」 tr. "transforming into the body of a Buddha to preach a wrong path", neither of which touches the body. To read the protection as insurance for bodily safety is to mistake entirely what it guards.

Do not read 「無信等五根，即是凡夫」 tr. "without faith and the other four faculties, one is an ordinary person" as contradicting the Abhidharma. The treatise-author's distinction is the two meanings of substance and function: one who has not severed his roots of goodness, 「雖成就五根，而不能發起為用」 tr. "though accomplished in the five faculties, cannot bring them forth into use", just as a small child, though accomplished in the afflictions, cannot yet bring them into use, 「故言無」 tr. "and so it is said he has none". The two texts each speak of one meaning; there is no need, nor is it permissible, to force a judgement of which is right and which is wrong.

Bearing on Practice

Test every speech that resembles the Dharma by ‘where does this lead me’. The First Part opens with a hindrance of the highest grade—what is spoken is emptiness, what is cited is prajñā, and the conclusion is to give up the vow. The waverings met with in daily life are mostly cruder, but their structure is the same: a line of reasoning that sounds thoroughly lucid, which in the end draws out ‘there is no need any more’. Take this passage as a measuring rule: do not first dispute the words, only ask on which side of the arousing of the mind it lands; if it would have one let go, however lofty the words, set it aside first.

Use 「若諸法空，莊嚴亦空者，是則相稱」 tr. "if dharmas are empty and the adornment too is empty, then this is fitting" to correct one's own attitude in practice. After practising a long time two sicknesses often arise: one thinks that because of emptiness there is no need to practise; the other practises real dharmas with a real mind and finds no peace. This sentence of the treatise-author's cures both sicknesses together—emptiness does not abolish adornment; it only forbids adorning with a real mind. In doing things one still gives one's full strength, only one does not set upon the matter a ‘this is really existent merit’.

Check oneself by each of the three names, firm, unmoved, and not turning. The three faces of counteraction the treatise-author gives are very usable: the arrows of the afflictions cannot shoot in—this is firm, and this barrier is within; the outside paths and Māra's people cannot turn it—this is unmoved, and this barrier is in outer conditions; not retrogressing from awakening—this is not turning, and this barrier is in the vow. When one feels oneself wavering, first recognise which barrier has loosened: whether afflictions have arisen within, whether a different condition has come from outside, or whether the vow itself has grown faint. The methods of counteraction for the three barriers are each different; recognise the wrong barrier, and one applies the wrong strength.

Untie the bond of gain and loss by 「不貴」 tr. "not prizing". Whenever one feels that gaining some matter brings great joy and losing it great grief, know that a prizable reality has been set up there. Following the treatise-author's prescription, it is not to press down joy and grief, but to turn back and look at what is prized—gather what is prized into one place, and the rest naturally cannot move the mind. This takes far less effort than counteracting the emotions directly.

Settle oneself by the two meanings of substance and function, and do not give up on oneself because what is present has not yet become active. the five faculties, 「雖有，不發不用，是故不數」 tr. "though they have them, they do not bring them forth and do not use them, and therefore they are not counted"; so too with the small child's afflictions. Practitioners often, having practised long without seeing any benefit, come to doubt that they have any roots of goodness at all. The treatise-author's distinction gives another answer: the substance is present but the function has not yet been brought forth; what is lacking is bringing it forth, not whether it exists. What should be done is to find a way to bring it forth, not to judge oneself as having no share.

Take a single mind without distraction as what holds everything together, and do not set oneself long lists of virtues. Of the marks of the superior person, the Buddha takes only one matter, and the treatise-author says it 「盡攝諸善法」 tr. "gathers in all wholesome dharmas entirely". The longer the curriculum, the easier it is to scatter; bring one's strength back to this one—craving and valuing the path of the Buddha, without distraction—and the rest, the mind of kindness, giving, knowing and repaying kindness, will follow along. Work at the narrow place, and the broad place accomplishes itself.

Further Resonances

The First Part, a single unit of one sūtra passage and one treatise passage, establishes the pivot of this chapter and the first half of the marks of non-retrogression. The sūtra text opens with Māra's words and closes with pure livelihood, and in between sets out one after another—entering the dhyānas and samādhis at will yet not receiving their fruit, prizing nothing among all dharmas, as a householder receiving the five desires by skilful means, the vajra-holding spirit king following and guarding him, constantly being complete in the five faculties, being a superior person, practising pure livelihood; the treatise-author explains, mark by mark, why each is so, and fixes what is meant by the other names of sarvajñā, resolves Māra's hindrance by 「若諸法空，莊嚴亦空者，是則相稱」 tr. "if dharmas are empty and the adornment too is empty, then this is fitting", divides three barriers by the three glosses of firm, unmoved, and not turning, resolves the two answers on turning and not turning by the two truths, and at the end settles one meaning each by the three similes of taking up fire with tongs, the five faculties, and the small child. The weight of the whole passage can be gathered into one sentence: emptiness is not a reason to let go; it is the reason one can keep practising.

On the chapter title the editions are not uniform. The base text titles it "Turning and Not Turning", while the sūtra text of the Larger Sūtra and Jizang's Commentary on the Larger Sūtra both title it "Firmness"; the sūtra text further has an interlinear note beneath the chapter title, 「丹本轉不轉品」 tr. "the Khitan edition: the chapter Turning and Not Turning", which accords with the wording of the base text. The two sides' names each have their basis; here they are recorded side by side without judgement. Jizang, at the very opening of this chapter, explains how the two names complete each other: 「有人言：不退與堅固，左右相成。所以不退者，由堅固也；所以堅固者，由不退也。又人解云：內煩惱不能壞為不退，外惡緣不能動為堅固也。」 tr. "Someone says: non-retrogression and firmness complete each other from left and right. The reason one does not retrogress is firmness; the reason one is firm is non-retrogression. Another person explains: that inner afflictions cannot ruin it is non-retrogression; that outer evil conditions cannot move it is firmness." And he matches them with this treatise's gloss of the three minds: 「二、論釋三心，言煩惱箭射不能入為堅固，於三菩提不退為不退，外惡緣不能動為不動心也。」 tr. "Second, the treatise explains the three minds, saying that the arrows of the afflictions, when shot, being unable to enter is firmness; not retrogressing from saṃbodhi is non-retrogression; outer evil conditions being unable to move it is the unmoved mind." The names Jizang matches differ slightly from this treatise—this treatise names firm by 「煩惱箭不入」 tr. "the arrows of the afflictions do not enter", names unmoved by 「外道魔民不能轉」 tr. "the outside paths and Māra's people cannot turn it", and names not turning by ‘not retrogressing from awakening’, whereas Jizang puts non-retrogression in the place of not turning; the two are seen side by side, recorded without judgement. Huiying's Commentary has no dedicated section on this chapter, but in his commentary on a later chapter points back to this chapter twice: once saying 「但據從上不退品已來皆說故」 tr. "only because it is all spoken from the Non-retrogression chapter above onward", and once, in the passage on the vajra-holding spirits, saying 「五種執金剛神已下，上不退品中言五性，今言五種」 tr. "From ‘the five kinds of vajra-holding spirits’ on: in the Non-retrogression chapter above it says five natures; now it says five kinds"—both take 「上不退品」 tr. "the Non-retrogression chapter above" as a general name for the chapters before this, so that Huiying's division takes this chapter as continuous with the preceding chapter in one thread. Both masters lean toward non-retrogression and firmness explaining each other and running through from before to after, which exactly throws light on the two-way tone of this unit's sūtra text, 「不轉故名阿鞞跋致，轉故亦名阿鞞跋致」 tr. "one is called avaivartika because of not turning; one is also called avaivartika because of turning".

As for the remaining items of the marks of the avaivartika—not speaking of worldly matters such as the five aggregates, the twelve sense-fields, and the eighteen elements, but liking to speak only of prajñā; abiding in the emptinesses and the limbs of the path, clear about his own ground and without doubt; the trial in which Māra takes the body of a Buddha and gives the prediction of the two vehicles; and on to protecting the Dharma without sparing body and life, the dhāraṇī of hearing and retaining, and the rest—the Last Part of this chapter goes on to unfold them; they are not anticipated here.

Turning and Not Turning, Last Part: Not Speaking of Worldly Matters, Abiding in the Ground of Self-realisation and Never Doubting, Evil Māra's Three Trials in Conjured Form, Not Begrudging Body and Life for the Dharma, and the Dhāraṇī of Hearing and Retaining

What Is Being Asked

The First Part opened the chapter and first established the meaning of the name 「轉不轉」 tr. "turning and not turning": evil Māra comes with sarvajñā being equal to space and without the mark of anything existent, to ruin the bodhisattva's mind, saying that since within emptiness there is no one who obtains awakening and no one who does not obtain it, you toil and suffer for nothing; the bodhisattva does not follow these words, but on the contrary spurs himself on with 「諸法雖如虛空，無所有、自相空，而眾生不知、不見、不解」 tr. "though all dharmas are like space, without anything existent, empty of specific marks, yet beings do not know, do not see, do not understand", and still seeks the omniscience of all kinds, adorned with the great vow that is like space. Then Subhūti asks directly the most important question of all: is it 「不轉故名阿鞞跋致」 tr. "because of not turning that one is called avaivartika", or 「轉故亦名阿鞞跋致」 tr. "because of turning that one is also called avaivartika"? The Buddha answers yes to both sides—because he does not turn in the śrāvaka and pratyekabuddha grounds, he is called not turning; because he turns in the śrāvaka and pratyekabuddha grounds, he is also called not turning. The one Chinese character 「轉」 tr. "turn" is used two ways: turning away from the two grounds is turning, not turning into the two grounds is not turning; the names are opposite, yet the matter is only one matter. Once this name is settled, the First Part lists the marks of the avaivartika item by item: when he wishes to enter the dhyānas he enters at once and yet does not receive their fruit; he constantly recollects awakening, and toward all meritorious dharmas he 「不貴」 tr. "does not prize"; in the four deportments his single mind is undistracted; living as a householder he receives the five desires and yet can fill Jambudvīpa with his giving; the vajra-holding spirit king constantly follows him; the vajra-holding spirits of the five clans constantly follow and guard him; he is always complete in the five faculties; he is a superior person, not an inferior person. The treatise-author explains the reason for each one by one, and distinguishes whether Māra's tests are real or false.

The Last Part carries on from this, pushing 「相貌」 tr. "appearance" one layer finer, and pushing it one layer more dangerous. The finer: the Buddha himself says 「今當更說阿鞞跋致菩薩摩訶薩行、類、相貌，一心諦聽」 tr. "now I shall further speak of the conduct, kind, and appearance of the avaivartika bodhisattva-mahāsattva; listen single-mindedly and attentively"—this is a marker the Buddha adds in person: what is said below is not repetition; it is detailed explanation. So it is listed passage by passage, six in all: first, he does not speak of the various worldly matters but speaks only of prajñā; second, abiding in the emptinesses, in the four foundations of mindfulness, and in the three gates of liberation, he is clear about his own ground and does not doubt; third, when Māra takes the body of a Buddha to urge him to take arhatship and to give him the prediction of the two vehicles, he does not take in the deception; fourth, when Māra takes the body of a Buddha to slander the sūtras and books he has studied as not spoken by the Buddha, he knows that it is Māra; fifth, for the sake of protecting and upholding the Dharma of the buddhas of the three times and the ten directions, he does not begrudge body and life; sixth, hearing what the Buddha and those who are not the Buddha say, he neither forgets nor loses it, because he has obtained the dhāraṇī of hearing and retaining. The more dangerous: in this unit Māra no longer makes hindrances from outside as circumstance, but puts on the image of a Buddha directly and speaks the words that most resemble the Dharma—urging you to take arhatship in this life, giving you the prediction of the two vehicles, telling you that the sūtras and books you have studied were all spoken by Māra.

So what the Last Part asks is three questions. The first: how does the bodhisattva himself know that he does not retrogress? The sūtra's answer is not ‘someone approves him’, but 「於自地中了了，不疑我是阿鞞跋致、非阿鞞跋致」 tr. "he is clear about his own ground, and does not doubt whether I am avaivartika or not avaivartika"—self-realisation. The second: since it is self-realisation, on what ground is it not self-deception? The treatise-author's answer lies in the one sentence 「疑，名取相有所得」 tr. "doubt means grasping at a mark with something attained": not doubting is not holding doubt down; it is that within the signless samādhi there is simply no place for doubt to arise. The third: since Māra can take the body of a Buddha, what is there to rely on? The treatise-author's answer lies in the five Chinese characters 「身是而言非」 tr. "the body is right but the words are wrong": one takes not the body one sees as the basis, only the Dharma that is spoken—as when one tests a gold coin: flick it, the sound comes out, and real and false are at once told apart. The three questions are one line, entirely a matter of moving 「不退」 tr. "not retrogressing" from a guarantee given by outer conditions back to the self-realisation of wisdom. At the end the treatise-author sets up one more section, asking directly 「得何事來名阿鞞跋致」 tr. "from obtaining what matter onward is one called avaivartika"; he sets three accounts side by side and returns them to obtaining the acceptance of non-arising and entering the bodhisattva's position, and fixes the station of those who read, recite, and accord with it but have not obtained meditative concentration—this is where the whole chapter is gathered in.

Passage by Passage

1. Now I shall further speak; listen single-mindedly and attentively. Carrying on from the teaching of the preceding section, the Buddha speaks further: 「復次，須菩提！今當更說阿鞞跋致菩薩摩訶薩行、類、相貌，一心諦聽！」 tr. "Furthermore, Subhūti! Now I shall further speak of the conduct, kind, and appearance of the avaivartika bodhisattva-mahāsattva; listen single-mindedly and attentively!" The First Part has already listed the marks; why speak further here? The two Chinese characters 「更說」 tr. "further speak" are exactly the joint of the pattern: that the Buddha is willing to speak once more on the item of appearance shows that what was said before was not exhausted, and what is said after is finer. 「一心諦聽」 tr. "Listen single-mindedly and attentively" is the Buddha's reminder to the listener—the finer the mark, the more easily it slips by; it is not that one cannot understand it, but that one hears it too smoothly and does not keep hold of it. In reading this passage, first slow the mind down: every item below is a graduation one can take up and check against oneself, not background narration.

2. He does not speak of worldly matters, but speaks only of prajñā. The Buddha tells Subhūti: when the bodhisattva practises prajñā, because he never leaves the mind of awakening, 「不說五眾事，不說十二入事，不說十八界事」 tr. "he does not speak of matters of the five aggregates, does not speak of matters of the twelve sense-fields, does not speak of matters of the eighteen elements"; why? 「常念觀五眾空相、十二入、十八界空相故」 tr. "because he constantly recollects and contemplates the mark of emptiness of the five aggregates, and the mark of emptiness of the twelve sense-fields and the eighteen elements". The five aggregates are the gathering of body and mind in five classes; the twelve sense-fields are the places of entry where the inner ‘six sense-roots’ and the outer ‘six sense-objects’ face each other; the eighteen elements are the divisions formed where ‘root, object, and consciousness’ face one another—all of them are the Buddha's Dharma's own formats of analysis. That even the Buddha's Dharma's own formats are 「不說」 tr. "not spoken of" is not discarding them; it is not speaking of their 「決定相」 tr. "fixed marks". Then the worldly talk is listed item by item: he does not like to speak of matters of officials, because 「諸法空相中住，不見法若貴、若賤」 tr. "abiding within the mark of emptiness of all dharmas, he sees no dharma as either noble or base"; he does not like to speak of matters of thieves, because, dharmas being empty of specific marks, 「不見若得、若失」 tr. "he sees neither gain nor loss"; he does not like to speak of matters of armies, seeing neither many nor few; he does not like to speak of matters of fighting, abiding within the suchness of all dharmas and seeing neither hatred nor love; he does not like to speak of matters of women, abiding within the emptiness of all dharmas and seeing neither fair nor ugly; he does not like to speak of matters of villages, seeing neither joining nor scattering; he does not like to speak of matters of towns, abiding within the real mark and seeing neither victory nor defeat; he does not like to speak of matters of the country, abiding within the limit of reality and seeing neither what belongs nor what does not belong; he does not like to speak of matters of self, abiding within the nature of dharmas and seeing neither self nor non-self, and so on up to seeing neither knower nor seer. The pattern of this string is extremely even: beneath every item of worldly talk there is a pair of mutually dependent dharmas holding it up—noble and base, gain and loss, many and few, hatred and love, fair and ugly, joining and scattering, victory and defeat, belonging and not belonging, self and non-self. A topic can be talked about because that pair still stands; once one sees that it is empty of specific marks, the talk falls away of itself—it is not forcing oneself not to speak. So this passage must not be read as a precept-style ban on speech; it says that where wisdom arrives, the relish for talk exhausts itself. Next comes the pairing of the six perfections against the six faults: when he practises dāna he does not engage in matters of stinginess and greed; when he practises śīla he does not engage in matters of breaking precepts; when he practises kṣānti he does not engage in matters of hatred and quarrelling; when he practises vīrya he does not engage in matters of laziness; when he practises dhyāna he does not engage in matters of distraction; when he practises prajñā he does not engage in matters of folly and delusion—here the sūtra itself marks out the list of the six faults, which is exactly the side each of the six perfections counters. At the end come three turns: though he practises the emptiness of all dharmas, 「而樂法、愛法」 tr. "yet he delights in the Dharma and loves the Dharma"; though he practises the nature of dharmas, he constantly praises the dharma that is not destroyed, and loves and delights in good friends—namely the buddhas, and the bodhisattvas, śrāvakas, and pratyekabuddhas who can teach and transform and make people delight to abide in awakening; he constantly wishes to see buddhas, and on hearing where there is a buddha at present he is reborn there according to his wish, and day and night he constantly practises 「所謂念佛心」 tr. "what is called the mind of recollecting the Buddha". Last it says that he practises the first dhyāna and so on up to the sphere of neither perception nor non-perception, and yet 「以方便力故起欲界心」 tr. "by the power of skilful means he gives rise to a mind of the desire realm", and is born where beings can practise the ten wholesome paths and where there is a buddha at present. The ten wholesome paths are the ten paths of wholesome conduct of ‘the three deeds of body, speech, and mind’; here they serve only to select the place of birth, not to set up a separate gate of practice. Empty and yet delighting in the Dharma, free of desire and yet born back into the desire realm—these two sentences are what in this passage can least be skipped: emptiness is not coldness, and skilful means is not retrogression.

3. Abiding in the emptinesses, he is clear about his own ground—the simile of the srota-āpanna and the simile of the five heinous sins. The Buddha says that when the avaivartika practises prajñā, he abides in inner emptiness, outer emptiness, and so on up to the emptiness of non-existent and existent dharmas, abides in the four foundations of mindfulness and so on up to the gates of liberation of emptiness, the signless, and non-action, and 「於自地中了了，不疑我是阿鞞跋致、非阿鞞跋致」 tr. "he is clear about his own ground, and does not doubt whether I am avaivartika or not avaivartika". How can he not doubt? 「乃至不見少許法於阿耨多羅三藐三菩提中，若轉、若不轉。」 tr. "Even to the point that he does not see the least dharma within anuttarā samyaksaṃbodhi that either turns or does not turn." First ask a question: how could a person possibly know that he himself does not retrogress? If he compares by merit, there is always a portion left uncompared; if he relies on others' approval, the one who approves must in turn be approved. The road the sūtra gives is completely different—not that he has found affirming evidence, but that even the pair of marks ‘turning, not turning’ has gone unseen, and doubt therefore has nothing to attach to. The Buddha then illuminates it with two similes: first, 「譬如人得須陀洹果，住須陀洹地中，自了知，終不疑不悔」 tr. "as when a person obtains the fruit of the srota-āpanna and abides in the ground of the srota-āpanna: he knows it clearly of himself, and never doubts or regrets"; second, 「譬如有人作五逆罪，五逆罪心乃至死時常逐不捨，雖有異心不能障隔」 tr. "as when a person commits the five heinous sins: the mind of the five heinous sins constantly follows him and does not let go, even up to the time of his death; though he has other minds, they cannot screen it off". The former simile takes the certainty of self-realisation, the latter takes the length of its accompanying—the five heinous sins are the gravest evil; here only the weight of that mind, which cannot be moved, is borrowed, not the deed itself. It goes on to say that abiding in this ground he will 「淨佛世界、成就眾生」 tr. "purify buddha-worlds and bring beings to accomplishment", and when deeds of Māra of every kind arise he is 「即時覺知」 tr. "at once aware of them and knows them" and does not follow them, but on the contrary breaks them; abiding in his own ground, his mind is ever unmoved, and no gods, humans, or asuras of any world can move or turn it. Why? Because, rising above these three, he has 「入正法位中，自證地中住」 tr. "entered the position of the right Dharma and abides in the ground of self-realisation". Below it makes clear his undertakings: he is complete in the supernormal powers of the bodhisattvas, can purify buddha-worlds and bring beings to accomplishment, goes from one buddha-realm to another buddha-realm, plants roots of goodness in the presence of the buddhas of the ten directions, and draws near to the buddhas and consults them. When deeds of Māra arise he is 「覺而不隨」 tr. "aware of them and does not follow them", and further 「以方便力處魔事著實際中」 tr. "by the power of skilful means places the deeds of Māra within the limit of reality"—not avoiding the deeds of Māra, but putting them back into the limit of reality, where the deeds of Māra have no separate substance. The last three sentences tighten layer by layer: within the limit of reality there is no mark of doubt, and 「知是實際非一非二」 tr. "he knows that this limit of reality is neither one nor two"; even when he turns his body he never heads toward the grounds of the two vehicles; within the emptiness of specific marks of all dharmas he sees neither arising nor ceasing, neither stain nor purity; even when he turns his body he does not doubt whether or not he will obtain awakening, because 「諸法自相空，即是阿耨多羅三藐三菩提」 tr. "the emptiness of specific marks of all dharmas is itself anuttarā samyaksaṃbodhi"; abiding in the ground of self-realisation, 「不隨他語，無能壞者」 tr. "he does not follow others' words, and there is no one who can ruin him", because 「成就不動智慧故」 tr. "he has accomplished immovable wisdom". The four Chinese characters 「不隨他語」 tr. "does not follow others' words" matter most: this is not obstinacy in one's own views; it is that what he has realised was not set up by others' words, and so is not ruined by others' words either.

4. Māra's first trial in the body of a Buddha—urging arhatship and giving the prediction of the two vehicles. The Buddha says: suppose evil Māra takes the body of a Buddha and comes, and says to the bodhisattva: take the path of the arhat here and now; you have no prediction of awakening, you have not obtained the acceptance of the non-arising of dharmas, you have no conduct, kind, and appearance of this avaivartika, nor any of the marks by which one may receive the prediction. The poison of these words lies in the five Chinese characters rendered here as ‘cannot produce the evidence’: Māra does not slander the Dharma; he only presses you to hand over proof—and the marks of not retrogressing are by nature not things that can be pointed out and displayed; the moment one is pressed, they seem not to exist. The bodhisattva hears these words and 「心不異、不沒、不驚、不畏」 tr. "his mind does not change, does not sink, is not startled, is not afraid", and knows of himself 「我必從諸佛受阿耨多羅三藐三菩提記」 tr. "I shall certainly receive the prediction of anuttarā samyaksaṃbodhi from the buddhas", and his reason is: 「諸菩薩以是法受記，我亦有是法得受記。」 tr. "The bodhisattvas receive the prediction by this dharma; I too have this dharma, and will receive the prediction." What he relies on is the Dharma—not feeling, and not resistance. Next, Māra, or one sent by Māra, takes the image of a Buddha and comes to give the bodhisattva the prediction of a śrāvaka or a pratyekabuddha; the bodhisattva at once thinks: the Buddha would not teach a bodhisattva to depart far from awakening and teach him to abide in the path of the two vehicles. Here the measuring-line for judging Māra has already changed—it looks not at the image but at whether the Dharma spoken accords with the Buddha's intent.

5. Māra's second trial in the body of a Buddha—slandering the sūtras and books he has studied. Evil Māra takes the body of a Buddha, comes to where the bodhisattva is, and says: 「汝所學經書非佛所說、亦非聲聞說，是魔所說。」 tr. "The sūtras and books you have studied were not spoken by the Buddha, nor spoken by śrāvakas; they were spoken by Māra." This trial is fiercer than the one before: the earlier trial takes away your position; this trial takes away the very root of your Dharma. The bodhisattva should know it thus: 「是惡魔、若魔所使，教我遠離阿耨多羅三藐三菩提。」 tr. "This is evil Māra, or one sent by Māra, teaching me to depart far from anuttarā samyaksaṃbodhi." The judging of the Dharma is still by the same rule—whatever makes me depart far from awakening, no matter whose mouth it borrows, is a deed of Māra. The Buddha then seals it: know that this bodhisattva 「已為過去佛所受記，住阿鞞跋致地」 tr. "has already received the prediction from the buddhas of the past, and abides in the avaivartika ground"; why? Whatever conduct, kind, and appearance the bodhisattvas have, this bodhisattva too has. Not retrogressing does not mean never meeting Māra; it means meeting Māra and recognising him.

6. For the sake of protecting and upholding the Dharma, he does not begrudge body and life. The Buddha says that when the avaivartika practises prajñā, for the sake of protecting and upholding the Dharma he 「不惜身命，何況餘物」 tr. "does not begrudge body and life, how much less other things". The measure of his mind is first made plain: 「我不為護持一佛法故，我為護持三世十方諸佛法故。」 tr. "It is not for the sake of protecting and upholding one Buddha's Dharma; it is for the sake of protecting and upholding the Dharma of the buddhas of the three times and the ten directions." The Buddha asks himself: what is called not begrudging body and life in protecting and upholding the Buddha's Dharma? The answer lies in one concrete scene—at the time 「如佛說：『一切諸法真空。』」 tr. "as the Buddha says: ‘All dharmas are truly empty’", there are foolish people who break it and do not receive it, saying 「是非法，非善，非世尊教」 tr. "this is not the Dharma, it is not good, it is not the World-Honored One's teaching"; for the sake of protecting and upholding such a Dharma, the bodhisattva does not begrudge body and life. So the Dharma protected is not the Buddha's teaching spoken of in general; it is precisely the one statement of ultimate emptiness, the Dharma most easily slandered as annihilation. The bodhisattva further thinks: 「未來世諸佛，我亦在是數中，在中受記，是法亦是我法……」 tr. "Among the buddhas of the future, I too am in this number, receiving the prediction among them; this Dharma is also my Dharma..." That protecting the Dharma can reach the point of not begrudging body and life is because that Dharma is no longer a thing outside himself. At the end it says that the bodhisattva protects and upholds this Dharma because he sees this benefit—the three Chinese characters rendered here as ‘sees the benefit’ guard against a misreading: this is not a flare of temper; it is having clearly seen the benefit in it.

7. Hearing the Dharma, he does not forget or lose it—because he has obtained dhāraṇī. The Buddha says that the avaivartika, 「聞佛說法，不疑、不悔，聞已受持，終不忘失」 tr. "hearing the Buddha expound the Dharma, does not doubt, does not regret; having heard it, he receives and upholds it and never forgets or loses it"; why? 「得陀羅尼故。」 tr. "Because he has obtained dhāraṇī." Dhāraṇī here is the general name for the power that carries receiving and upholding; the treatise-author below divides its kinds further. This passage first sets up the fruit and then asks the cause, precisely to draw out the question and answer that follow.

8. Subhūti asks: which dhāraṇī does he obtain? Subhūti says: 「世尊！得何等陀羅尼，聞佛所說諸經而不忘失？」 tr. "World-Honored One! Which dhāraṇī does he obtain, that on hearing the sūtras the Buddha expounds he does not forget or lose them?" This question is asked with great precision: it asks not whether there is one, but which kind. Not forgetting or losing is the result; one who can avoid forgetting and losing must have the name of a gate of the Dharma—only when one asks as far as the name can it come down to practice.

9. The Buddha answers: the dhāraṇī of hearing and retaining and the rest. The Buddha tells Subhūti: 「菩薩得聞持等陀羅尼故，聞佛說諸經，不忘、不失，不疑、不悔。」 tr. "Because the bodhisattva has obtained the dhāraṇī of hearing and retaining and the rest, on hearing the Buddha expound the sūtras he does not forget, does not lose, does not doubt, does not regret." The answer contains the Chinese character 「等」 tr. "and the rest", showing that there is not only one kind; hearing and retaining is only the first named—the treatise-author below supplies the gate of severing doubt. 「不忘、不失」 tr. "Does not forget, does not lose" belongs to retaining; 「不疑、不悔」 tr. "does not doubt, does not regret" belongs to faith and certainty; the four are always spoken together, which shows that receiving and upholding is not only being able to remember.

10. Subhūti asks again: is it so too with what others say? Subhūti says to the Buddha: is it only on hearing the Buddha expound the Dharma that he does not forget or lose, does not doubt or regret? Or when śrāvakas and pratyekabuddhas speak, when gods, nāgas, ghosts and spirits, asuras, kiṃnaras, and mahoragas speak, is it likewise? This question pushes the scope out to every speaker other than the Buddha. It is a reasonable question: if it is so only toward the Buddha's words, that is reverence; if it is so toward all words, that is power.

11. The Buddha answers: all the many matters of speech, he forgets and loses none. The Buddha tells Subhūti: 「所有言說眾事，得陀羅尼菩薩皆不忘、不失，不疑、不悔。」 tr. "All the many matters of speech there are, the bodhisattva who has obtained dhāraṇī in every case does not forget, does not lose, does not doubt, does not regret." The Buddha takes the latter. This answer must be guarded against one misreading: not forgetting, not losing, not doubting, not regretting is not the same as believing and accepting everything alike—the treatise-author below has his own distinction; here only the universality of the power of retaining is made clear. At the end, 「如是行、類、相貌成就故，當知是阿鞞跋致菩薩摩訶薩」 tr. "because such conduct, kind, and appearance are accomplished, know that this is an avaivartika bodhisattva-mahāsattva" closes Sūtra ②.

12. The treatise-author begins his explanation—because the Buddha wished to speak in finer detail, he says ‘listen single-mindedly and attentively’. After the marker that opens the treatise section, the treatise-author at once explains the first sentence: 「佛更欲細說阿鞞跋致相故，告須菩提：『一心諦聽！』」 tr. "Because the Buddha wished to speak in further detail of the marks of the avaivartika, he told Subhūti: ‘Listen single-mindedly and attentively!’" One sentence points out why the sūtra starts up once more here—it is not setting up a new topic, but the same topic in finer detail. The method of reading the treatise can be seen here: the treatise-author first accounts for the sūtra's line of approach and then explains its meaning, so the reader need not guess which section a passage belongs to.

13. He does not like to speak of the fixed marks of the five aggregates and the rest. The treatise-author explains the reason for not speaking: 「是菩薩常不離阿耨多羅三藐三菩提，樂行畢竟空故，不喜說分別五眾、十二入、十八界決定相。」 tr. "This bodhisattva never leaves anuttarā samyaksaṃbodhi, and because he delights in practising ultimate emptiness, he does not like to speak of the fixed marks that discriminate the five aggregates, the twelve sense-fields, and the eighteen elements." The key lies in the three Chinese characters 「決定相」 tr. "fixed marks". Where the sūtra says he does not speak of the five aggregates, the twelve sense-fields, and the eighteen elements, the treatise-author reads it not as discarding names and marks but as not talking of their fixed marks—names and marks can be used to carry people across, while fixed marks run counter to ultimate emptiness. And the two Chinese characters 「不喜」 tr. "does not like" weigh exactly right: it is not a prohibition; his interest is simply no longer there.

14. He does not like to speak of kings and such matters—set against the outside paths. The treatise-author uses the outside paths as a contrast: 「如餘外道，受他供養，無正道故，虛妄深著，心懈怠故，說諸國事，分別過去世諸王力勢等樂。」 tr. "Like the other outside paths: receiving others' offerings, because they have no right path they cling deeply to what is false, and because their minds are lazy they speak of matters of countries, and discriminate the power, might, pleasures, and the like of the kings of past ages." Three causes stand side by side: no right path, deep clinging, laziness. Receiving people's offerings and having no right path to speak of, the talk naturally tilts toward the world—this is the precept closest to the skin for one who expounds the Dharma. The avaivartika does not speak of these matters; his mind is: 「見一切世間常為無常火燒，眾生可愍，我未得佛道，我但應說度眾生法，不應說餘事。」 tr. "He sees that the whole world is constantly burned by the fire of impermanence, and that beings are to be pitied: I have not yet obtained the Buddha's path; I should speak only the Dharma that carries beings across, and should not speak of other matters." Below it returns to principle: 「一切法畢竟空故，大小相不可得」 tr. "because all dharmas are ultimately empty, the marks of great and small are unfindable", and matters of thieves and the rest are likewise; the last sentence gathers the root in further—「畢竟空即是如、法性、實際。」 tr. "Ultimate emptiness is itself suchness, the nature of dharmas, the limit of reality." Ultimate emptiness is not the name of some other realm; it and suchness, the nature of dharmas, and the limit of reality are different names for one matter, and so the phrases in the sūtra of the preceding passage—「住諸法如中」 tr. "abiding within the suchness of all dharmas", 「住諸法實相中」 tr. "abiding within the real mark of all dharmas", 「住實際中」 tr. "abiding within the limit of reality", 「法性中住」 tr. "abiding within the nature of dharmas"—do not each abide in a separate place.

15. Practising the six perfections, he does not speak of the six faults. The treatise-author has only one sentence: 「行六波羅蜜，不說六弊。」 tr. "Practising the six perfections, he does not speak of the six faults." The six faults are the side that each of the six perfections listed in the sūtra counters—stinginess and greed, breaking precepts, hatred and quarrelling, laziness, distraction, folly and delusion. The treatise-author does not lay them out again one by one, since the sūtra has listed them itself; here he only points out that the overall structure of that string of ‘not engaging in such-and-such matters’ in the sūtra is the six perfections against the six faults. Only when sūtra and treatise are read together is this sentence not empty.

16. Though he abides in the emptiness of all dharmas, he delights in the Dharma and loves the Dharma. The treatise-author sets up a difficulty and resolves it himself: 「菩薩雖安住一切法空中，而樂法、愛法。何以故？是菩薩不著是一切法空故。」 tr. "Though the bodhisattva abides securely within the emptiness of all dharmas, yet he delights in the Dharma and loves the Dharma. Why? Because this bodhisattva does not cling to this emptiness of all dharmas." Is not delighting in and loving the Dharma a grasping and clinging? The answer lies in not clinging to emptiness. He adds one more layer on the order of practice: 「我行次第法，禪定、智慧等，然後得一切法空。此空不可但口說而心著，是故先行次第法。」 tr. "I practise the graded dharmas, meditative concentration, wisdom, and the rest, and afterwards obtain the emptiness of all dharmas. This emptiness cannot merely be spoken by the mouth while the mind clings; therefore one first practises the graded dharmas." This is the most practical sentence of the passage: emptiness can be spoken by the mouth while the mind still clings, so the order cannot be skipped. Whoever takes ‘all is empty’ as lip-talk while still acting from old habit—the treatise-author has already exposed it here in advance.

17. The nature of dharmas is not a mark of breaking and destroying—not clinging to the nature of dharmas, he discriminates for the sake of beings. The treatise-author says: 「法性中不分別諸法故，法性非破壞相。」 tr. "Because within the nature of dharmas one does not discriminate dharmas, the nature of dharmas is not a mark of breaking and destroying." Not discriminating means not giving rise to discrimination; it does not mean breaking dharmas down. Since the bodhisattva does not cling to the nature of dharmas, he can pity beings and 「為種種分別善、不善法等，令眾生得解」 tr. "for their sake discriminate in every way wholesome and unwholesome dharmas and the rest, so that beings may come to understand"; though he speaks thus, he also 「常讚歎不壞法，引導眾生令入法性中故」 tr. "constantly praises the dharma that is not destroyed, in order to guide beings and make them enter the nature of dharmas". Discriminating on one side and praising what is not destroyed on the other, the two do not hinder each other: discriminating is the use of receiving and leading, and what is not destroyed is the place of return. The sūtra's phrase 「雖行法性，常讚不壞法」 tr. "though he practises the nature of dharmas, he constantly praises the dharma that is not destroyed" becomes clear through this explanation.

18. He has no other intimates; he takes only the buddhas and the great bodhisattvas as intimates. The treatise-author explains loving and delighting in good friends: 「阿鞞跋致菩薩更無親善，但以諸佛及大菩薩、諸能讚歎實相法者為親善。」 tr. "The avaivartika bodhisattva has no other intimates; he takes as intimates only the buddhas and the great bodhisattvas, and all who can praise the Dharma of the real mark." The standard of selection lies not in status but in what is said—「能讚歎實相法者」 tr. "those who can praise the Dharma of the real mark" is it. This sentence answers to the earlier passage on not liking to speak of worldly matters: since what one talks of has become different, whom one is intimate with becomes different of itself.

19. Being reborn wherever he wishes, and the meaning of being born in the desire realm. The treatise-author explains wishing to see the buddhas and being reborn according to one's wish: 「是人功德、智慧大故，隨意所往……」 tr. "Because this person's merit and wisdom are great, he goes wherever he wishes..." Next he explains the difficulty of the sūtra's 「起欲界心」 tr. "gives rise to a mind of the desire realm": though the bodhisattva is free of desire and has obtained the absorptions of meditative concentration, by the power of skilful means he is born, for the sake of beings, in the desire realm where there is a buddha at present. How can one free of desire be born in the desire realm? The treatise-author answers with great fineness: 「『生欲界』者，故為眾生留愛、慢分，不以此禪定果報生色、無色界；但以禪定柔和其心，不受其報。」 tr. "‘Born in the desire realm’: for the sake of beings he deliberately keeps a portion of love and pride, and is not born in the form or formless realms as the retribution of this meditative concentration; he only uses meditative concentration to make his mind soft and pliant, and does not receive its retribution." The one Chinese character 「故」 tr. "deliberately" means an intentional keeping, not a failure yet to sever. What is kept is a portion of love and of pride, and its use lies only in taking birth; of meditative concentration he takes its use of softening, not its fruit of retribution. This passage can resolve a common kind of perplexity: since the great bodhisattva is already free of desire, why does he still appear in the desire realm?—the answer is skilful means, not retrogressive falling.

20. Abiding securely in the emptinesses, he gives rise to no doubt—doubt means grasping at a mark with something attained. The treatise-author explains the two Chinese characters 「安住」 tr. "abiding securely": 「安住者，深入通達。」 tr. "Abiding securely means entering deeply and penetrating thoroughly." Because his mind clings to nothing, he does not give rise to the doubt 「我是阿鞞跋致、非阿鞞跋致」 tr. "am I avaivartika or not avaivartika"; 「自心中深入智慧故，是名自地證」 tr. "because within his own mind he has entered deeply into wisdom, this is called the realisation of his own ground". Further, he does not see any dharma as either turning or not turning, and therefore gives rise to no doubt. Below he sets up a general judgement: 「疑，名取相有所得。」 tr. "Doubt means grasping at a mark with something attained." And he illustrates it with a simile: 「如人夜見樹杌，尋復生念，人形亦爾，便生疑心；若取此二相故名疑。」 tr. "As when a person at night sees a tree stump, and then a thought arises that a human form is like this too, and so a doubting mind arises; because one grasps these two marks, it is called doubt." Walking at night and seeing a tree stump, one doubts whether it is a person; doubt can arise because one has first grasped two marks, the tree and the person; once both marks are grasped, there is room in between for wavering. Because the bodhisattva practises the signless samādhi, he grasps no mark in any dharma, and so 「則無生疑處」 tr. "there is then no place for doubt to arise". This passage is the most important doctrinal landing-point of the whole unit: not doubting is not pressing doubt down; it is leaving doubt no room. Whoever presses doubt down by will presses down the mark of doubt, not the cause of doubt.

21. Explaining the simile of the srota-āpanna—doubt has no place to dwell, and so there is no doubt. The treatise-author explains the simile in the sūtra: 「如須陀洹從無始世來，未得是無漏智慧；三結斷故，即自知得無漏法，於四諦中定心不疑，若苦、若樂。」 tr. "As the srota-āpanna, from beginningless ages, had never obtained this wisdom without outflows; because the three fetters are severed, he knows at once of himself that he has obtained the dharma without outflows, and within the four truths his mind is settled and without doubt, whether in suffering or in happiness." The three fetters are the fetters the srota-āpanna severs; the treatise-author does not list their names here, taking only the meaning ‘because they are severed, he knows at once of himself’; the four truths are the four kinds of reality, ‘suffering, origination, cessation, and path’, and to have a settled mind without doubt within them is the self-realisation of the first fruit. 「阿鞞跋致亦如是，從無始世來，未得諸法實相，所謂阿鞞跋致地；得時，亦不生疑。」 tr. "The avaivartika is also like this: from beginningless ages he had never obtained the real mark of all dharmas, that is, the avaivartika ground; when he obtains it, he likewise gives rise to no doubt." He further explains where doubt arises from: 「諸生疑者，見違失事，不如本所聞故。」 tr. "Those who give rise to doubt do so because they see matters that go against it and fall short, not as they originally heard." Doubt arises from what one meets not fitting what one has heard. Because for the bodhisattva all dharmas are ultimately empty, 「不得是不如所聞法，疑無住處故無疑」 tr. "he does not find this dharma that is not as he heard; doubt has no place to dwell, and so there is no doubt"; he knows of himself: 「此是究竟道，不可論、不可破」 tr. "this is the ultimate path; it cannot be debated, it cannot be broken". At the end it says that, abiding in this ground, he teaches and transforms beings and purifies buddha-worlds, and by the power of skilful means can break every kind of deed of Māra.

22. The dharma of the avaivartika constantly follows the bodhisattva until he becomes a Buddha. The treatise-author gives one sentence as a general heading: 「是阿鞞跋致法常隨逐菩薩，乃至成佛。」 tr. "This dharma of the avaivartika constantly follows the bodhisattva, until he becomes a Buddha." This sentence is the groundwork for the two similes of the next passage—first it states the length, and then the two similes show why it lasts so long.

23. The meaning of the two similes—the mind of the srota-āpanna and the mind of the five heinous sins. The treatise-author says: 「此中佛說二譬喻：一者、須陀洹，二者、五逆。是二心厚重故不可却：須陀洹心，常不却；五逆心，罪畢乃除……」 tr. "Here the Buddha speaks two similes: first, the srota-āpanna; second, the five heinous sins. These two minds are heavy and thick, and so cannot be driven back: the mind of the srota-āpanna never shrinks back; the mind of the five heinous sins is removed only when the sin is exhausted..." And he adds a simile: 「如人著衰，鬼常隨逐。」 tr. "As when a person is beset by misfortune, a ghost follows him constantly." The last sentence is the most vital: 「阿鞞跋致心，復過於是。」 tr. "The mind of the avaivartika surpasses even this." One must guard against a misreading: taking the five heinous sins as a simile is not likening good to evil; it takes only the one meaning of a mind heavy, thick, and immovable; one good and one evil taken at the same point—this is precisely the method of simile.

24. The meaning of ‘nothing at all can move or turn it’. The treatise-author cites the sūtra and explains: 「『阿鞞跋致心，一切無能動轉』者，種種苦事逼迫不能動，種種供養利樂因緣不能令捨實相心及慈悲心。」 tr. "‘The mind of the avaivartika, nothing at all can move or turn it’: when every kind of painful matter presses on it, it cannot be moved; every kind of cause and condition of offerings, gain, and pleasure cannot make it abandon the mind of the real mark and the mind of kindness and compassion." Pressure and enticement are both raised. That it is not moved under pressure is easy to understand; that it does not abandon under enticement is hard to understand—offerings, gain, and pleasure are not evil matters, yet they are what most readily, without one's noticing, replace the direction of a person's mind. The treatise-author specially marks the two, 「實相心及慈悲心」 tr. "the mind of the real mark and the mind of kindness and compassion", as what is not abandoned, showing that what not retrogressing hangs on is not the presence or absence of outer matters.

25. The appearances have been told; now his undertakings are told. The treatise-author divides the sūtra into sections: 「上來種種說阿鞞跋致相貌；今說其行事……」 tr. "Above, the appearances of the avaivartika have been told in every way; now his undertakings are told..." The undertakings are: teaching and transforming beings, purifying buddha-worlds, newly planting roots of goodness in the presence of the buddhas, and going from one buddha to consult the buddhas on the deep essentials of the Dharma and on every kind of gate for carrying beings across. Appearances are traces that can be tested; undertakings are the work that is done; traces without work make the appearances hollow, and work without knowing its traces leaves the practitioner no way to examine himself—the sūtra sets the two side by side, and the treatise-author marks them with headings.

26. Contemplating the deeds of Māra as the Buddha's Dharma. The treatise-author explains placing the deeds of Māra within the limit of reality by the power of skilful means: 「十方種種魔事起而不隨逐，以方便力，觀是魔事如佛法，觀諸魔身如佛無異。所以者何？一切法及實際同一相，所謂無相故。」 tr. "Every kind of deed of Māra arises in the ten directions and he does not follow after it; by the power of skilful means he contemplates these deeds of Māra as the Buddha's Dharma, and contemplates the bodies of the Māras as no different from the Buddha. Why is this? Because all dharmas and the limit of reality are of one and the same mark, namely the signless." This passage is extremely easy to read askew. Contemplating Māra's body as the Buddha does not say that Māra is the Buddha and may be followed; above it is stated plainly, 「不隨逐」 tr. "he does not follow after it", and what is said here is that the marks contemplated are all signless, so that there is no body of Māra to be feared or clung to. The judging of the matter still follows the earlier method; the contemplating of the mark returns to the signless—the two go together without contradiction.

27. Turning his body, he does not head toward the two grounds. The treatise-author says: 「是人轉身，亦不向聲聞、辟支佛地。何以故？是菩薩初得阿鞞跋致地時，知一切法實相空；轉身，心亦不向二地。心不自疑若得無上道、若不得。」 tr. "When this person turns his body, he also does not head toward the śrāvaka or pratyekabuddha ground. Why? When this bodhisattva first obtains the avaivartika ground, he knows that the real mark of all dharmas is empty; turning his body, his mind also does not head toward the two grounds. His mind does not doubt itself as to whether it will obtain the unsurpassed path or not." Turning his body means giving up this body and receiving a later body. The reason ordinary practitioners fear turning the body is the fear that across the gap between one set of aggregates and the next they will forget; the guarantee the treatise-author gives lies not in memory but in the Dharma known—once the emptiness of the real mark is known, the mind of the later body also does not head toward the two grounds.

28. From life to life no one can subdue or ruin him. The treatise-author has one sentence: 「是菩薩世世無人能降伏破壞者。」 tr. "From life to life there is no one who can subdue or ruin this bodhisattva." This sentence carries on from not following others' words and immovable wisdom above, and opens onto Māra's three rounds of testing below—having said that no one can ruin him, the text then brings Māra in to test him, just as the flow of the text requires.

29. Explaining Māra's first round of testing—his mind does not retreat or sink, and so he knows of himself that he will receive the prediction. The treatise-author says that 「佛為驗是菩薩故作譬喻」 tr. "the Buddha makes a simile in order to test this bodhisattva": Māra takes the body of a Buddha wishing to deceive and test him, and says: you may take arhatship in this life; you have no avaivartika mark by which you could attain the Buddha's path; 「無生忍法即是無一切法，是中云何可得忍？」 tr. "The dharma of the acceptance of non-arising is itself the non-existence of all dharmas; within this, how can any acceptance be obtained?" The cleverness of Māra's words lies in the second half: it uses the Buddha's Dharma's own words—since the acceptance of non-arising is the non-existence of all dharmas, there is no acceptance to be obtained, and what you call obtaining acceptance is self-deception. If the bodhisattva hears this and 「心不退沒」 tr. "his mind does not retreat or sink", he knows of himself that he will certainly receive the prediction from the buddhas; why? 「我有無生法忍，聞是魔事，心不怖畏故。」 tr. "Because I have the acceptance of the non-arising of dharmas: hearing this deed of Māra, my mind is not terrified or afraid." The method of testing lies right here: not winning the argument against him, but hearing it and not being afraid. Fear or no fear is the present self-realisation of whether acceptance is there or not.

30. Explaining Māra's second round of testing—the body is right but the words are wrong, as when testing a gold coin. The treatise-author says: evil Māra, knowing that the bodhisattva is glad, then gives him the prediction of the path of the śrāvaka or pratyekabuddha—in this life you will obtain arhatship, in a later life you will obtain the path of the pratyekabuddha. If the bodhisattva does not follow the words of this conjured body of a Buddha, he is aware at once that this is Māra or one sent by Māra. Why? 「身是而言非。」 tr. "The body is right but the words are wrong." These five Chinese characters are the headrope of the whole passage: the bodily image is real, the words are not. It continues with a simile: 「如試金錢，彈之聲出，則知其真偽。」 tr. "As when one tests a gold coin: flick it, the sound comes out, and then one knows whether it is real or false." Real and false lie not in looking but in listening—the Dharma that is spoken is the flick that tests the gold. At the end he decides it by principle: 「若佛與菩薩受聲聞、辟支佛記，終無是處！」 tr. "That a Buddha should give a bodhisattva the prediction of a śrāvaka or pratyekabuddha—there is no such case at all!" Why is there no such case? 「諸佛種種方便欲令一切人盡入佛道，云何引菩薩與聲聞記？」 tr. "The buddhas, with skilful means of every kind, wish to bring all people entirely into the path of the Buddha; how would they draw a bodhisattva aside and give him the prediction of a śrāvaka?" The Buddha's intent is directed toward bringing all people entirely into the path of the Buddha; whatever goes against this is surely not the Buddha's word.

31. Explaining Māra's third round of testing—slandering the sūtras and books is itself a deed of Māra. The treatise-author says: 「復次，魔作佛身，語菩薩言：『汝所行經書，盡是魔所說。』是菩薩覺知是魔事，當知是菩薩已得受記，安住阿鞞跋致中。」 tr. "Furthermore, Māra takes the body of a Buddha and says to the bodhisattva: ‘The sūtras and books you practise were all spoken by Māra.’ This bodhisattva is aware and knows that this is a deed of Māra; know that this bodhisattva has already received the prediction, and abides securely in the avaivartika." The two Chinese characters for ‘aware and knows’ are themselves the mark. Seen together, these three rounds show Māra's three places of attack: seizing his position, exchanging his fruit, destroying his root; and what the bodhisattva uses in all three rounds is only one method—testing by the Dharma that is spoken.

32. On hearing the Dharma the bodily marks appear of themselves—the simile of flogging the routed army. The treatise-author sets up a separate test: 「阿鞞跋致菩薩深愛樂法故，聞即心深，衣毛皆竪；念佛大悲，則歡喜悲泣；或於甚深法中生大歡喜……」 tr. "Because the avaivartika bodhisattva deeply loves and delights in the Dharma, as soon as he hears it his mind goes deep, and the hair on his skin stands on end; recollecting the Buddha's great compassion, he rejoices and weeps; or within the very deep Dharma he gives rise to great joy..." And he illustrates it with a simile: 「譬如大軍，退敗則怖懅迷悶，臥地似死；親族見之，欲知活不，以杖鞭之，若癮疹起者，則知必活。」 tr. "As with a great army: when it is routed, the men are terrified and dazed and lie on the ground as if dead; their kin, seeing them and wishing to know whether they live, flog them with a rod, and if a weal rises, they know they will surely live." What the simile takes is an extremely plain criterion: though a person has fainted and seems to have no sensation, if the skin can still respond to pain, one knows that life is there. The bodhisattva is likewise—「皆是肉身，何以故知必能成佛？若聞說佛法，身中相現——衣毛為竪，顏色相異；餘人聞不入心，則無異相，如死人無異。」 tr. "All are fleshly bodies; by what does one know that one will surely be able to become a Buddha? If on hearing the Buddha's Dharma expounded, marks appear in the body—the hair on the skin stands on end, the colour of the face changes; when other people hear it, it does not enter their minds, and there are no unusual marks, no different from a dead person." This passage can serve as side evidence for the passages before: the marks of not retrogressing are not all in lofty places; if on hearing the Dharma body and mind respond, that is the mark of life. Yet one must not turn it round and rely on bodily marks—the treatise-author below has a deeper test of his own.

33. Giving up one's life for the Dharma—a madman slanders ultimate emptiness, and the bodhisattva helps the Dharma. The treatise-author sets up a complete scene: the Buddha or a disciple of the Buddha, in a great assembly, expounds by every kind of cause and condition that all dharmas are ultimately empty; 「有一狂人，取音聲名字相，著是畢竟空，出其過罪」 tr. "there is a madman who grasps at the marks of sounds and names, clings to this ultimate emptiness, and brings out its faults", saying: if all dharmas are entirely ultimately empty, then there is no Buddha, no Dharma, no causes and conditions of deeds of sin and merit, and no retribution of practising with vigour and obtaining the fruit of the path. The sickness of this objection the treatise-author has already pointed out in advance—「取音聲名字相」 tr. "grasps at the marks of sounds and names": what he breaks is the three Chinese characters 「畢竟空」 tr. "ultimate emptiness", not the meaning of ultimate emptiness. The avaivartika observes and weighs, and knows that the one expounding the Dharma 「有無著心、隨佛語憐愍故說」 tr. "has a mind without clinging, and speaks following the Buddha's words, out of pity", and knows that the madman 「著語言取相，破是畢竟空」 tr. "clings to words and grasps at marks, breaking this ultimate emptiness". So he 「則沒命佐助」 tr. "then gives up his life to help", saying: these are a madman's words; this is a person of wrong view, who himself sinks in wrong view and also converts many people and makes them fall into wrong view, destroying the Buddha's Dharma. Because the madman harbours deep hatred, he 「或自殺，或使弟子殺」 tr. "either kills him himself, or has his disciples kill him". The last sentence is the landing-point of this passage: 「菩薩若死事至，為佐法故，不以怖畏而壞諸法性。」 tr. "If the matter of death arrives, for the sake of helping the Dharma the bodhisattva does not, out of terror, ruin the nature of dharmas." Not ruining the nature of dharmas means that even with death at hand he does not change his words to say that ultimate emptiness is not empty—what he protects is not his own standpoint but the real nature of the Dharma.

34. The causes and conditions spoken by the Buddha—I too am in this number. The treatise-author explains the causes and conditions spoken of in the sūtra: the bodhisattva thinks: 「未來世佛，我亦在是數中，是法亦是我法；是我法故，不惜身命而守護之。」 tr. "Among the buddhas of the future, I too am in this number; this Dharma is also my Dharma; because it is my Dharma, I do not begrudge body and life in guarding it." And he reflects: 「我無量世中，為煩惱邪見故喪身無數；今為十方三世諸佛法佐助發起，若有益而死，勝無益而生。」 tr. "In countless lives, because of afflictions and wrong views, I have lost my body countless times; now I help and bring forth the Dharma of the buddhas of the ten directions and the three times: to die with benefit is better than to live without benefit." The first thought establishes his share—the Dharma is not outside himself; the latter thought does the accounts—it is a death either way, and to die for the Dharma is a death with benefit. Only when these two thoughts are put together is the giving up of body and life not vehemence but clarity.

35. Receiving and upholding by three powers—the power of faith, hearing and retaining, and severing doubt. The treatise-author explains why he does not forget, lose, or doubt: 「是菩薩未成佛道，從佛聞甚深法，能盡受、不失。信力故能受，聞持陀羅尼力故不失，斷疑陀羅尼力故不疑。」 tr. "This bodhisattva, not yet having accomplished the Buddha's path, hears the very deep Dharma from the Buddha and can receive it entirely and not lose it. By the power of faith he can receive; by the power of the dhāraṇī of hearing and retaining he does not lose; by the power of the dhāraṇī of severing doubt he does not doubt." The division of labour among the three is very clear: the power of faith is in charge of ‘getting it in’, hearing and retaining of ‘keeping hold of it’, severing doubt of ‘not wavering’. In the sūtra the Buddha's answer names only 「聞持等陀羅尼」 tr. "the dhāraṇī of hearing and retaining and the rest"; what the one Chinese character for ‘and the rest’ contains, the treatise-author here supplies as the gate of severing doubt. A learner checking himself can also go by this threefold division: if the Dharma does not enter the mind, that is a matter of the power of faith; if it is not remembered, that is a matter of hearing and retaining; if it is remembered and still doubted, that is a matter of severing doubt—three sicknesses and three medicines, not to be treated interchangeably.

36. Subhūti asks whether it is so too with other words. The treatise-author, in narrative form, re-tells the question in the sūtra: 「須菩提問：『但聞佛語能信持不疑，聞餘語亦爾？』」 tr. "Subhūti asks: ‘Is it only on hearing the Buddha's words that he can believe, uphold, and not doubt, or is it so too on hearing other words?’" This is the treatise-author re-telling the question and answer in the sūtra, not another person asking within the treatise. What the question points to is whether the power of dhāraṇī is effective only toward the Buddha's words, or toward all speech.

37. Explaining the Buddha's answer—what has reason in it he can believe; what has no reason in it he holds but does not believe. The treatise-author re-tells the Buddha's answer: 「佛言：『一切有所說者皆能持，若二乘、天、龍等。』」 tr. "The Buddha says: ‘Whatever anyone says, he can hold it all—whether of the two vehicles, or the gods, the nāgas, and the rest.’" He at once supplies a layer of distinction the sūtra does not state: 「所說有道理，能信、持、不疑；無道理者，持之無疑而不信。」 tr. "What is said with reason in it he can believe, hold, and not doubt; what has no reason in it he holds without doubt, yet does not believe." This sentence unties the place in the sūtra most easily misread—‘he forgets and loses none of it’ is the universality of the power of holding, not an indiscriminateness of believing and accepting. To hold and not believe is to hear clearly and remember plainly, yet not take it as right. Holding and believing here part ways—this is precisely the mark of wisdom.

38. The first ‘someone says’—faith is a wrong dharma; not doubting the unwholesome is wholesome. The treatise-author records a different account: 「復次，有人言：信是邪法，不疑不善、是善。」 tr. "Furthermore, someone says: faith is a wrong dharma; not doubting the unwholesome is wholesome." This is another school's explanation, which the treatise-author sets alongside without judging at once. Its meaning is: in the one matter of faith, if what is believed is a wrong dharma, then faith on the contrary becomes a fault; while in the one matter of not doubting, even if what it faces is unwholesome, not doubting in itself is still wholesome. The treatise-author's recording of this account shows that the preceding distinction between faith and holding already had differing explanations from of old.

39. The second ‘someone says’—what the gods, the nāgas, and the two vehicles say is all the Buddha's Dharma. Another different account: 「有人言：諸天、龍、二乘所說皆是佛法。」 tr. "Someone says: what the gods, the nāgas, and the two vehicles say is all the Buddha's Dharma." This account opens the scope very wide—whatever accords with the Dharma may be called the Buddha's Dharma, so there is no distinction of believing and not believing. The treatise-author likewise sets it side by side without judging. The reader need not hurry here to choose: the treatise-author records the two accounts after his own in order to show that this question had differing explanations of old, not in order to change his earlier judgement.

40. Hearing, he can hold; within the real mark there is no doubt at all. The treatise-author concludes: 「是阿鞞跋致相，聞則能持，無疑、無悔。是菩薩雖未作佛，於諸法實相中都無有疑。」 tr. "This is the mark of the avaivartika: hearing, he can hold, without doubt, without regret. Though this bodhisattva has not yet become a Buddha, within the real mark of all dharmas he has no doubt at all." The four Chinese characters 「雖未作佛」 tr. "though he has not yet become a Buddha" are an important measure: not retrogressing is not having already accomplished, but having no doubt within the real mark. The merit is not yet full, while what is seen is already settled—this is precisely the real meaning of the avaivartika position.

41. Such conduct, kind, and appearance are the avaivartika bodhisattva. The treatise-author closes the preceding passages in one sentence: 「如是等行、類、相貌，是阿鞞跋致菩薩。」 tr. "Such conduct, kind, and appearance as these are the avaivartika bodhisattva." Here the explanation of the six passages listed in the sūtra is complete; below, the treatise-author sets up a question of his own and starts a new section.

42. Question: from obtaining what matter onward is one called avaivartika? The treatise-author asks himself: 「得何事來名阿鞞跋致？」 tr. "From obtaining what matter onward is one called avaivartika?" All that was said before was appearances; this question asks about the time—from the accomplishment of which matter onward one counts as having entered this position. Appearances can test a person; the time fixes the station; what the two ask differs, so the treatise-author sets up a separate question and answer.

43. Answer, first—the account of the Abhidharma Vibhāṣā. In his answer the treatise-author first lists the accounts of other schools: 「《阿毘曇毘婆沙》中說：『過三阿僧祇劫後，種三十二相因緣。』從是以來名阿鞞跋致。」 tr. "In the Abhidharma Vibhāṣā it is said: ‘After passing three asaṃkhyeya kalpas, one plants the causes and conditions of the thirty-two marks.’ From then on one is called avaivartika." Three asaṃkhyeya kalpas are the long stretch of the bodhisattva's practice; the thirty-two marks are the marks and excellences of the Buddha's body; this account takes ‘beginning to plant the causes of the marks and excellences’ as the dividing line. The treatise-author cites it without refuting it, first laying out the accounts in full—a pattern common in this treatise.

44. Answer, second—the account of the Vinaya Avadāna. Another account: 「《毘泥阿波陀那》中說：『從見然燈佛，以五莖花散佛，以髮布地；佛為授阿鞞跋致記；騰身虛空，以偈讚佛。』從是已來，名阿鞞跋致。」 tr. "In the Vinaya Avadāna it is said: ‘From seeing Dīpaṃkara Buddha, scattering five stalks of flowers over the Buddha, and spreading his hair on the ground; the Buddha gave him the prediction of avaivartika; he rose bodily into the air and praised the Buddha in verse.’ From then on, one is called avaivartika." This account takes the one event of receiving the prediction as the dividing line; the event is concrete and the time is clear. The former account takes the length of practice and position; this account takes the event of the prediction; the two accounts are set side by side, and the text below then brings out the meaning of this sūtra.

45. Answer, third—within this prajñā, one is so named by obtaining the acceptance of non-arising and entering the bodhisattva's position. The treatise-author brings out the account of this sūtra: 「此般若波羅蜜中，若菩薩具足行六波羅蜜，得智慧方便力，不著是畢竟空波羅蜜」 tr. "within this prajñāpāramitā, if the bodhisattva fully practises the six perfections, obtains the power of wisdom and skilful means, and does not cling to this pāramitā of ultimate emptiness", he contemplates all dharmas as 「不生不滅、不增不減、不垢不淨、不來不去、不一不異、不常不斷、非有非無」 tr. "neither arising nor ceasing, neither increasing nor decreasing, neither stained nor pure, neither coming nor going, neither one nor different, neither permanent nor annihilated, neither existent nor non-existent"—this whole string is pairs of mutually dependent dharmas, and the treatise-author says so plainly, 「如是等無量相待二法」 tr. "countless pairs of mutually dependent dharmas such as these"; because it is the contemplation of wisdom, it 「破一切生滅等無常相」 tr. "breaks all the marks of impermanence, arising, ceasing, and the rest". Next comes the most finely layered letting-go in the whole treatise section: 「先因無常等故破常等倒」 tr. "first, by means of impermanence and the rest, he breaks the inversions of permanence and the rest"—this is the first layer, breaking permanence by impermanence; 「今亦捨無生無滅等、捨無常觀等」 tr. "now he also lets go of non-arising, non-ceasing, and the rest, and lets go of the contemplation of impermanence and the rest"—this is the second layer, letting go even of the contemplation that does the breaking; 「於不生不滅亦不著，亦不墮空無所有中」 tr. "to non-arising and non-ceasing he also does not cling, and he also does not fall into the emptiness of being without anything existent"—this is the third layer, letting go without landing in an annihilating emptiness; 「亦知是不生不滅相不得不著故，亦信用是不生不滅法」 tr. "he also knows that this mark of non-arising and non-ceasing is not obtained and not clung to, and so he also believes in and uses this dharma of non-arising and non-ceasing"—this is the fourth layer, not clinging and yet still believing in and using it. Breaking, letting go, not falling, believing and using—if any one of the four turns is missing, it goes lopsided: without not falling, letting go becomes annihilation; without believing and using, not clinging becomes not practising. At the end it returns to 「三世十方諸佛真智慧中，信力故通達無礙，是名菩薩得無生忍法，入菩薩位，名阿鞞跋致」 tr. "within the true wisdom of the buddhas of the three times and the ten directions, by the power of faith he penetrates without obstruction; this is called the bodhisattva obtaining the dharma of the acceptance of non-arising, entering the bodhisattva's position, and being called avaivartika". The three accounts stand side by side, and this is the meaning of this sūtra: the standard is not the number of kalpas, the standard is not a concrete event; the standard is the acceptance realised.

46. From the first arousing of the mind he is already called avaivartika, but because the marks are not yet complete he is not given the prediction. The treatise-author resolves a surface contradiction: 「是菩薩雖從初發心以來名阿鞞跋致；阿鞞跋致相未具足故，不與授記。」 tr. "Though this bodhisattva is called avaivartika from the first arousing of the mind onward, because the marks of the avaivartika are not yet complete, he is not given the prediction." The name can be obtained early; the prediction requires the marks to be complete. Why must the marks be complete? The reason the treatise-author gives lies not in the Buddha but in the onlookers: 「外道聖人、諸天、小菩薩等作此念：『佛見是人有何等事而與授記？是人於佛道因緣中未住，云何與授記？』是故佛未與授記。」 tr. "The sages of the outside paths, the gods, the small bodhisattvas, and others think: ‘What matter did the Buddha see in this person that he gave him the prediction? This person does not yet abide in the causes and conditions of the Buddha's path; how could he be given the prediction?’ Therefore the Buddha does not yet give him the prediction." The prediction is spoken not only to the person concerned but also to the great assembly; if the assembly sees that his marks are incomplete and hears that he has received the prediction, it becomes on the contrary a condition for doubt. The Buddha's not predicting is protecting the faith of beings, not begrudging him the position.

47. The two kinds of body, and the two kinds of avaivartika in a fleshly body. The treatise-author divides the stations: 「是菩薩有二種：一者、生死肉身，二者、法性生身。得無生忍法，斷諸煩惱；捨是身後，得法性生身。」 tr. "This bodhisattva is of two kinds: first, the fleshly body within birth and death; second, the body born of the Dharma-nature. Obtaining the dharma of the acceptance of non-arising, he severs all afflictions; after giving up this body, he obtains the body born of the Dharma-nature." The fleshly body within birth and death is the body brought about by the retribution of deeds; the body born of the Dharma-nature is the body received after realising the acceptance of non-arising and severing the afflictions. Further, within the station of the fleshly body there are two kinds: 「有於佛前得授記；有不於佛前授記——若佛不在世時，得無生法忍，是不於佛前授記。」 tr. "Some receive the prediction in the presence of a Buddha; some do not receive the prediction in the presence of a Buddha—if, when no Buddha is in the world, one obtains the acceptance of the non-arising of dharmas, this is not receiving the prediction in the presence of a Buddha." This division is most considerate: one who obtains the acceptance of non-arising when no Buddha is in the world has not thereby lost his station; there is only no Buddha to predict it for him. If a reader has the thought ‘now there is no Buddha in the world, and practice too has nothing to rely on’, this sentence of the treatise-author is precisely the answer.

48. Question: those who read, recite, and accord with it but have not obtained meditative concentration—what kind of bodhisattva are they? The treatise-author again sets up a question: 「若爾者，有人讀、誦、說、正憶念，隨順無生法忍義，是人未得禪定，或生疑心、或為著心所牽，如是人比，是何等菩薩？為是阿鞞跋致不？」 tr. "If so, there is someone who reads, recites, expounds, and rightly recollects, and accords with the meaning of the acceptance of the non-arising of dharmas; this person has not obtained meditative concentration, and may give rise to a doubting mind, or be dragged by a clinging mind—people of this sort, what kind of bodhisattva are they? Are they avaivartika or not?" This question is asked very close to the real situation: according with its meaning but not having obtained its concentration, the mind still gives rise to doubt and is still dragged away by the clinging mind—do such people count? Only when the question reaches this point is the standard of 「不疑」 tr. "not doubting" set up earlier truly put to use.

49. Answer: he is not called avaivartika. The treatise-author answers crisply: 「是人不名為阿鞞跋致。」 tr. "This person is not called avaivartika." His reason is an inference running back from deep to shallow: 「阿鞞跋致菩薩，於甚深佛法中尚無疑，何況無生忍初法門！」 tr. "The avaivartika bodhisattva has no doubt even within the very deep Dharma of the Buddha, how much less in the first gate of the Dharma, the acceptance of non-arising!" Since even at the deepest place he does not doubt, how much less at the gate of entry. Seen the other way round: if one still doubts at the gate of entry, the deep place needs no comment. This answer does not disparage those who read and recite; it keeps the reality of name and position—once name and position are loosened, the meaning of self-realisation set up earlier loses all its weight.

50. The two kinds of those who have not obtained it—compliant acceptance and love of dharmas. The treatise-author divides the stations of those who have not obtained it, and points out a way forward: 「是未得阿鞞跋致者，有二種：一者、信少疑多，二者、疑少信多。」 tr. "Those who have not yet obtained the avaivartika are of two kinds: first, little faith and much doubt; second, little doubt and much faith." Next he compares their merits: 「疑多信少者，於讀誦經人小勝」 tr. "those of much doubt and little faith are a little better than people who read and recite the sūtras"—a notch above people who only read and recite without reflecting; 「信多疑少者，若得禪定，即時得柔順忍」 tr. "those of much faith and little doubt, if they obtain meditative concentration, at once obtain compliant acceptance". Compliant acceptance is the share of the power of acceptance that accords with the real mark without the mind going against it, and its position is before the acceptance of non-arising. Those who obtain this acceptance still have their sickness: 「未斷法愛故，或生著心，或還退沒。」 tr. "Because they have not yet severed love of dharmas, they may give rise to a clinging mind, or turn back and sink." What is loved is the Dharma, yet it is still love—this is the sentence most worth remembering in this passage. At the end he shows the way: 「是人若常修習此柔順忍，柔順忍增長故，斷法愛，得無生忍，入菩薩位。」 tr. "If this person constantly cultivates this compliant acceptance, then because compliant acceptance grows, he severs love of dharmas, obtains the acceptance of non-arising, and enters the bodhisattva's position." Cultivating compliant acceptance to sever love of dharmas, severing love of dharmas to obtain the acceptance of non-arising—the road goes through; it only has to be walked.

51. The meaning of the marks of the avaivartika has been briefly explained. The treatise-author closes the whole chapter in one sentence: 「略說阿鞞跋致相義。」 tr. "The meaning of the marks of the avaivartika has been briefly explained." The one Chinese character 「略」 tr. "briefly" looks back over the whole text: the appearances listed before and after cannot be called few, and yet the treatise-author still calls his account brief. So the marks of not retrogressing cannot be exhausted in the telling; that the sūtra again and again closes with 「以是行、類、相貌，當知是名阿鞞跋致」 tr. "by this conduct, kind, and appearance, know that this is called avaivartika" is teaching people to seek it by kind, not asking them to count the items off in full.

Do Not Misread

Do not read 「於自地中了了，不疑」 tr. "he is clear about his own ground, and does not doubt" as self-affirming confidence. The reason the sūtra gives is 「乃至不見少許法於阿耨多羅三藐三菩提中，若轉、若不轉」 tr. "even to the point that he does not see the least dharma within anuttarā samyaksaṃbodhi that either turns or does not turn", and the treatise-author further judges 「疑，名取相有所得」 tr. "doubt means grasping at a mark with something attained"—he does not doubt because marks are unfindable and doubt has no place to dwell, not because his faith is strong enough. One who presses doubt down with confidence presses down the mark of doubt, not the cause of doubt; once he meets a matter that goes against it and falls short, what was pressed down will still turn up again.

Do not read 「觀是魔事如佛法，觀諸魔身如佛無異」 tr. "he contemplates these deeds of Māra as the Buddha's Dharma, and contemplates the bodies of the Māras as no different from the Buddha" as meaning that Māra and the Buddha are indistinguishable and that Māra may be followed. In the same passage the treatise-author first says 「不隨逐」 tr. "he does not follow after it", and afterwards says 「如佛無異」 tr. "no different from the Buddha"—not following after is the judgement in the gate of practice; no different from the Buddha is the illumination in the gate of contemplation; what they rest on is 「一切法及實際同一相，所謂無相故」 tr. "because all dharmas and the limit of reality are of one and the same mark, namely the signless". Because he illuminates its signlessness he does not fear it; because he judges it not the Dharma he does not follow it; the two go together, and if one is missing it goes lopsided.

Do not read the simile of the five heinous sins as taking evil for the Dharma. The treatise-author says plainly that the point taken by the simile is 「是二心厚重故不可却」 tr. "these two minds are heavy and thick, and so cannot be driven back", and he himself distinguishes their difference: 「須陀洹心，常不却；五逆心，罪畢乃除……」 tr. "the mind of the srota-āpanna never shrinks back; the mind of the five heinous sins is removed only when the sin is exhausted..." It takes the immovability of the mind, not the deed; one good and one evil raised together at the same point is precisely the method of simile, and one must not drag in its other meanings.

Do not read 「所有言說眾事，得陀羅尼菩薩皆不忘、不失，不疑、不悔」 tr. "all the many matters of speech there are, the bodhisattva who has obtained dhāraṇī in every case does not forget, does not lose, does not doubt, does not regret" as meaning that everything one hears should be believed and accepted. The treatise-author at once distinguishes: 「所說有道理，能信、持、不疑；無道理者，持之無疑而不信。」 tr. "What is said with reason in it he can believe, hold, and not doubt; what has no reason in it he holds without doubt, yet does not believe." Holding is a capacity; believing is a choice. If the two are mixed into one matter, it becomes credulity without discrimination, which on the contrary runs counter to the immovable wisdom this chapter sets up.

Do not read 「不說五眾事，不說十二入事，不說十八界事」 tr. "he does not speak of matters of the five aggregates, does not speak of matters of the twelve sense-fields, does not speak of matters of the eighteen elements" as discarding the forms of the teaching. The treatise-author explains it as 「不喜說分別五眾、十二入、十八界決定相」 tr. "he does not like to speak of the fixed marks that discriminate the five aggregates, the twelve sense-fields, and the eighteen elements"—what is blocked is the fixed mark, not names and marks themselves. Further on in the text the bodhisattva still, for the sake of beings, 「種種分別善、不善法等，令眾生得解」 tr. "discriminates in every way wholesome and unwholesome dharmas and the rest, so that beings may come to understand", which shows that the use of discrimination has not been abolished.

Do not read the section on 「魔作佛身」 tr. "Māra takes the body of a Buddha" as meaning that on seeing a Buddha one should give rise to doubt. The criterion set up in these three rounds is from start to finish only one—「身是而言非」 tr. "the body is right but the words are wrong", together with 「佛不應教菩薩遠離阿耨多羅三藐三菩提」 tr. "the Buddha would not teach a bodhisattva to depart far from anuttarā samyaksaṃbodhi". Not looking at the image but listening to its Dharma is a method of discernment, not a method of suspicion and fear; to give rise to doubt across the board would run directly counter to the text 「心不異、不沒、不驚、不畏」 tr. "his mind does not change, does not sink, is not startled, is not afraid".

Do not read the bodhisattva's 「沒命佐助」 tr. "giving up his life to help" as contending to get the better of others. The treatise-author first relates that the bodhisattva 「觀察、籌量」 tr. "observes and weighs", and only then speaks; what he knows is that the one expounding the Dharma has 「無著心、隨佛語憐愍故說」 tr. "a mind without clinging, and speaks following the Buddha's words, out of pity", and that the madman 「著語言取相」 tr. "clings to words and grasps at marks"; what he protects is 「不以怖畏而壞諸法性」 tr. "not, out of terror, ruining the nature of dharmas". This is protecting the Dharma after clear discernment, not a contest of temper; and what is weighed at the end lies not in winning or losing but in 「若有益而死，勝無益而生」 tr. "to die with benefit is better than to live without benefit".

Do not read 「初發心以來名阿鞞跋致」 tr. "from the first arousing of the mind onward he is called avaivartika" and 「是人不名為阿鞞跋致」 tr. "this person is not called avaivartika" as contradicting each other. The former speaks of the name—on arousing the mind he obtains this name, but his marks are not yet complete, so the Buddha does not give him the prediction; the latter speaks of the position—one who reads, recites, and accords with it but has not obtained meditative concentration, and who still has doubt and clinging, does not actually occupy this position. Name and position being spoken of separately, the two places are of themselves without contradiction.

Bearing on Practice

Take 「疑，名取相有所得」 tr. "doubt means grasping at a mark with something attained" and examine your own doubt by it. When the mind is uneasy, do not first hurry to look for affirming evidence; first see which two marks you have grasped and are wavering between—as when at night one sees a tree stump and doubts whether it is a person. Once the marks loosen, doubt of itself has no place to dwell; if the marks do not loosen, however much evidence you find, you are only exchanging one place of wavering for another.

Take 「身是而言非」 tr. "the body is right but the words are wrong" as the touchstone for every state. Seeing the marks and excellences, receiving a response, meeting someone who with an authoritative voice tells you which road to take—in every case do not look at the body; listen only to the Dharma: do these words bring me nearer to awakening, or farther from it? As when one tests a gold coin: flick it, the sound comes out, and real and false are told apart of themselves.

Take the three powers and sort out your own sicknesses. If the Dharma does not go in when you hear it, that is a matter of the power of faith; if it goes in but does not stay, that is a matter of hearing and retaining; if it stays and the mind still wavers, that is a matter of severing doubt. Three sicknesses, three medicines—do not take the wrong medicine: blaming yourself for lacking faith when you cannot remember, or working only at memorising and reciting when faith will not arise, are both mistreatments.

Take 「持之無疑而不信」 tr. "holds without doubt, yet does not believe" and practise listening to people by it. Words that do not accord with reason can be heard clearly and remembered plainly, without needing to accept them and without needing to be stirred to anger. Once holding and believing are separated, the mind's measure is actually broader: one can make room for differing words precisely because one need not be dragged away by them.

Take 「此空不可但口說而心著，是故先行次第法」 tr. "this emptiness cannot merely be spoken by the mouth while the mind clings; therefore one first practises the graded dharmas" and check your lip-emptiness by it. Whoever likes to say that all is empty and yet still calculates when matters arise—the treatise-author's sentence has exposed it in advance. The graded dharmas—meditative concentration, wisdom, and the rest—are not an expedient for beginners; they are the real road to obtaining emptiness; the more practised the spoken emptiness, the more one must look back to see how many steps of the graded way have actually been walked.

Take 「種種供養利樂因緣不能令捨實相心及慈悲心」 tr. "every kind of cause and condition of offerings, gain, and pleasure cannot make it abandon the mind of the real mark and the mind of kindness and compassion" and guard against favourable circumstances by it. Most people are prepared against adversity seizing the mind; favourable circumstances seizing the mind often go unnoticed. At a time of receiving people's respect and offerings, add one question: are my mind of the real mark and my mind of kindness and compassion still in their original place at this moment?

Take 「未斷法愛故，或生著心，或還退沒」 tr. "because they have not yet severed love of dharmas, they may give rise to a clinging mind, or turn back and sink" and examine your own love of the Dharma by it. Loving the Dharma is a good thing; love of dharmas is a bondage—to be so pleased with a view, a gate of the Dharma, or a state that one cannot let it go is the sickness not yet severed within compliant acceptance. The road the treatise-author gives is not to stop loving, but 「常修習此柔順忍，柔順忍增長故，斷法愛」 tr. "constantly cultivating this compliant acceptance, and because compliant acceptance grows, severing love of dharmas".

Take 「我無量世中，為煩惱邪見故喪身無數」 tr. "in countless lives, because of afflictions and wrong views, I have lost my body countless times" as a method of reckoning. When for the Dharma you suffer loss, suffer suspicion and censure, or even suffer great calamity, go through the accounts this way: losses suffered without benefit have already been suffered countless times; this time it is with benefit. When the accounts are clear, courage need not be forced up.

Take the one sentence 「略說阿鞞跋致相義」 tr. "the meaning of the marks of the avaivartika has been briefly explained" and be spared by it the anxiety of checking yourself item by item. The treatise-author himself calls it brief, which shows that the appearances cannot be exhausted in the telling; that every passage of the sūtra says 「以是行、類、相貌，當知是名阿鞞跋致」 tr. "by this conduct, kind, and appearance, know that this is called avaivartika" is teaching people to seek it by kind. Checking oneself is for recognising the road, not for keeping score—item after item falling short while the direction does not change is precisely the not turning this chapter speaks of.

Further Resonances

The one line by which the Last Part carries on from the First Part is this: it pushes 「轉不轉」 tr. "turning and not turning" from the discrimination of name and meaning to the reality of self-realisation, and from the reality of self-realisation to the testing by Māra's trials. The First Part established the name: evil Māra came with the meaning of emptiness to ruin the mind, and the bodhisattva held himself firm with 「諸法雖如虛空，無所有、自相空，而眾生不知、不見、不解」 tr. "though all dharmas are like space, without anything existent, empty of specific marks, yet beings do not know, do not see, do not understand"; Subhūti asked which, turning or not turning, is called avaivartika, and the Buddha's two answers were both yes—because he does not turn in the two grounds he is called not turning, because he turns in the two grounds he is also called not turning; one character is used two ways, and the matter is only one matter. Then the marks were listed: entering the dhyānas without receiving their fruit, not prizing any meritorious dharma, a single undistracted mind in the four deportments, being a householder and yet able to fill Jambudvīpa with giving, the vajra-holding spirit king constantly following him, the vajra-holding spirits of the five clans constantly following and guarding him, always complete in the five faculties, being a superior person and not an inferior person. The Last Part makes the marks finer and the circumstances more dangerous: he does not speak of the various worldly matters but speaks only of prajñā; abiding in the emptinesses, he is clear about his own ground and does not doubt; Māra takes the body of a Buddha and comes three times to test him, and each time he is aware and knows it; for the sake of protecting and upholding the Dharma of the buddhas of the three times and the ten directions he does not begrudge body and life; hearing what the Buddha and those who are not the Buddha say, he neither forgets nor loses it. The treatise-author's explanation everywhere moves the basis from the outside to the inside: the reason he does not doubt lies in 「疑，名取相有所得」 tr. "doubt means grasping at a mark with something attained"; the reason he does not follow Māra lies in 「身是而言非」 tr. "the body is right but the words are wrong", as when one tests a gold coin: flick it and the sound comes out; the reason he does not fear death lies in 「是法亦是我法」 tr. "this Dharma is also my Dharma" and 「若有益而死，勝無益而生」 tr. "to die with benefit is better than to live without benefit"; the reason he holds without believing indiscriminately lies in 「所說有道理，能信、持、不疑；無道理者，持之無疑而不信」 tr. "what is said with reason in it he can believe, hold, and not doubt; what has no reason in it he holds without doubt, yet does not believe". At the end one question is set up—from obtaining what matter onward is one called avaivartika—and three accounts are set side by side and return to obtaining the acceptance of non-arising and entering the bodhisattva's position; further, the two kinds of body and the two kinds of fleshly body are divided, the station is fixed for those who read, recite, and accord with it but have not obtained meditative concentration, and the road of severing love of dharmas by compliant acceptance is brought out. From the head of the chapter to its end, the three Chinese characters 「轉不轉」 tr. "turning and not turning" here reach their full weight: the First Part makes clear the name, the Last Part makes clear the reality; the two uses of the name lie in turning away and not turning into, and the one thread of the reality lies in there being no doubt because there is no mark.

The title of this chapter is transmitted differently in the various witnesses; they are recorded together below without forcing a judgement. The base text titles it "Turning and Not Turning"; the variant-translation sūtra text of the Larger Sūtra has as its proper title "Firmness", while its interlinear note in the Khitan edition reads 「轉不轉品」 tr. "the chapter on Turning and Not Turning", agreeing with the title of the base text; the Palace edition again reads 「堅固品」 tr. "the chapter on Firmness". The two names take different things: 「轉不轉」 tr. "turning and not turning" is set up from his turning away from, and not turning into, the grounds of the two vehicles; 「堅固」 tr. "firmness" is set up from his mind being heavy and thick and unable to be moved or turned—which answers exactly to the sentence of this unit, 「種種苦事逼迫不能動，種種供養利樂因緣不能令捨實相心及慈悲心」 tr. "when every kind of painful matter presses on it, it cannot be moved; every kind of cause and condition of offerings, gain, and pleasure cannot make it abandon the mind of the real mark and the mind of kindness and compassion".

Jizang, explaining the name of this chapter in his Commentary on the Larger Sūtra, records two ancient accounts: 「有人言：不退與堅固，左右相成。所以不退者，由堅固也；所以堅固者，由不退也。又人解云：內煩惱不能壞為不退，外惡緣不能動為堅固也。」 tr. "Someone says: non-retrogression and firmness complete each other from left and right. The reason one does not retrogress is firmness; the reason one is firm is non-retrogression. Another person explains: that the inner afflictions cannot ruin it is non-retrogression; that outer evil conditions cannot move it is firmness." The former account takes the two names as cause and effect of each other; the latter divides them into inner and outer—the inner afflictions not ruining it belongs to non-retrogression, the outer evil conditions not moving it belongs to firmness. Reading this unit by it, abiding in the emptinesses and not giving rise to doubt falls on the inner side, and Māra taking the body of a Buddha and coming three times to test without being followed falls on the outer; Jizang also, at the end of the previous chapter, already marks the doctrinal heading of this chapter with 「轉不轉」 tr. "turning and not turning", which shows that though what he explains is titled 「堅固」 tr. "Firmness", the meaning it hangs on is still turning and not turning. Huiying's Commentary has no special section on this chapter, but in his commentary on the following chapter it twice points back to this chapter: once it says 「但據從上不退品已來皆說故」 tr. "only because it has all been spoken of from the Non-retrogression chapter above onward", and once, in the passage on the vajra-holding spirits, it says 「五種執金剛神已下，上不退品中言五性，今言五種」 tr. "from ‘the five kinds of vajra-holding spirits’ onward: in the Non-retrogression chapter above it says ‘five natures’; here it says ‘five kinds’"—both use 「上不退品」 tr. "the Non-retrogression chapter above" as a general name for the chapters before this, which shows that Huiying's division of the text treats this chapter as continuing the previous chapter in one thread. The two masters, seen together, both lean toward non-retrogression and firmness being two faces of one matter; the differences among the witnesses' titles are recorded as they are, and the choice between them belongs to the translator.

Further Resonances

The vein of meaning in the chapter "Turning and Not Turning" has something it inherits before it and something it opens after it, and the place where it inherits is especially close. What it inherits is the preceding chapter, "Avaivartika": at that chapter's opening Subhūti asks 「世尊！以何等行、何等類、何等相貌知是阿鞞跋致菩薩摩訶薩？」 tr. "World-Honored One! By what conduct, what kind, what appearance is one known to be an avaivartika bodhisattva-mahāsattva?", and the Buddha then answers item by item with conduct, kind, and appearance; midway through, that chapter has already set up a pattern—「若菩薩摩訶薩色中轉，受、想、行、識中轉，是名菩薩不轉」 tr. "If the bodhisattva-mahāsattva turns within form, turns within feeling, perception, constructions, and consciousness, this is called the bodhisattva's not turning"; to turn within dharmas and be called not turning is precisely the forerunner of this chapter's 「轉故亦名阿鞞跋致」 tr. "one is also called avaivartika because of turning"; at the end of that chapter Subhūti asks again, 「世尊！於何法轉名為不轉？」 tr. "World-Honored One! In what dharma does one turn, so as to be called not turning?", the Buddha answers 「於色相等法中轉還」 tr. "He turns back within the mark of form and the other such dharmas," and the treatise-author there and then records its manner of exposition, saying 「上略說，今廣說」 tr. "Above was the brief explanation; now is the extended explanation"—this 「廣說」 tr. "extended explanation" still lies within Treatise ② of the preceding chapter, and is made with reference to that chapter's own two rounds of asking about turning and not turning; this chapter takes up that vein of meaning and goes on to make it clear at length: since the preceding chapter closed with 「得無生法忍菩薩，是名阿鞞跋致」 tr. "The bodhisattva who has obtained the acceptance of the non-arising of dharmas—this is called avaivartika," this chapter at its very opening lets Māra use the language of emptiness to snatch away this very obtaining—「薩婆若與虛空等，無所有相」 tr. "Sarvajñā is equal to space, without the mark of anything existent"—and then unfolds the three Chinese characters 「轉、不轉」 tr. "turning, not turning" from the conclusion of a single sentence into the skeleton of a whole chapter. The method of testing Māra is inherited as well: the preceding chapter takes false gold as a simile, 「譬如偽金，火燒磨打，若黑、若赤、若白，乃知非真」 tr. "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," and again takes a dog wearing a lion's skin as a simile, 「諸獸見之雖怖，聞聲則知是狗」 tr. "though the beasts fear it when they see it, when they hear its voice they know it is a dog"—the treatise-author of this chapter takes this up and adds a turning word, 「如試金錢，彈之聲出，則知其真偽」 tr. "As when one tests a gold coin: flick it, the sound comes out, and one knows whether it is real or false"; what is tested is still the sound, not the form, and so the judgement that Māra's taking the body of a Buddha is false rests only on the one sentence 「身是而言非」 tr. "The body is right but the words are wrong." As for what it opens, the first signs are already seen in that last question at the end of this chapter: this chapter concludes with 「得何事來名阿鞞跋致」 tr. "from obtaining what matter onward is one called avaivartika," and judges 「是名菩薩得無生忍法，入菩薩位，名阿鞞跋致」 tr. "this is called the bodhisattva's obtaining the dharma of the acceptance of non-arising and entering the bodhisattva's position; he is called avaivartika"; at the opening of the next chapter, "The Lamp-wick," Subhūti at once goes on to praise, 「世尊！是阿鞞跋致菩薩摩訶薩大功德成就！」 tr. "World-Honored One! This avaivartika bodhisattva-mahāsattva is accomplished in great merit!", and the Buddha assents and speaks of the reason—「是菩薩摩訶薩得無量無邊智慧，不與一切聲聞、辟支佛共故」 tr. "because this bodhisattva-mahāsattva obtains wisdom without measure and without limit, not shared with any śrāvaka or pratyekabuddha"; Subhūti then asks straight on into what this chapter did not reach: 「世尊！何等是深奧處，阿鞞跋致菩薩摩訶薩住是中行六波羅蜜時，具足四念處，乃至具足一切種智？」 tr. "World-Honored One! What is the profound place, abiding in which the avaivartika bodhisattva-mahāsattva, when he practises the six perfections, completes the four foundations of mindfulness, and so on up to completing the omniscience of all kinds?" The Buddha answers, 「深奧處者，空是其義，無相、無作、無起、無生、無染、離、寂滅、如、法性、實際、涅槃」 tr. "As for the profound place: emptiness is its meaning—the signless, non-action, non-origination, non-arising, non-staining, separation, quiescence, suchness, the nature of dharmas, the limit of reality, nirvāṇa." This chapter says who is avaivartika; the next chapter says where the avaivartika dwells; and the 「深奧處」 tr. "profound place" that the next chapter answers with is precisely that emptiness which Māra borrowed at this chapter's opening—one and the same emptiness: in this chapter it is the language Māra uses to snatch away the vow; in the next chapter it is the ground the Buddha uses to establish where he dwells.

Among the later ancient masters who read this chapter, what they preserved on the matter of the chapter's name is most worth recording. This treatise's base text heads it 「轉不轉品第五十六」 tr. "Chapter Fifty-six, Turning and Not Turning"; the fascicle heading of the Song and Yuan editions reads 「大智度論釋轉不退輪品第五十六上」 tr. "Mahāprajñāpāramitā-upadeśa, Explaining ‘Turning the Non-retrogressing Wheel’, Chapter Fifty-six, First Part," the Ming edition reads 「釋不退輪品第五十六之上」 tr. "Explaining ‘The Non-retrogressing Wheel’, Chapter Fifty-six, First Part" and beneath the title cites the variant name of the sūtra text, saying 「經作轉不轉品」 tr. "the sūtra has ‘Turning and Not Turning’," the Palace edition reads 「大智度論釋第五十六品上堅固品」 tr. "Mahāprajñāpāramitā-upadeśa, Explanation of Chapter Fifty-six, First Part, Firmness," and the Shōgozō manuscript and the Ishiyama-dera manuscript read 「摩訶般若波羅蜜轉不轉品第五十五」 tr. "Mahāprajñāpāramitā, Turning and Not Turning, Chapter Fifty-five," the title numbering differing from the base text by one step, consistent with the several preceding chapters, and this is recorded as it is. In the transmitted text of the great sūtra that it explains, this chapter's proper title reads 「堅固品第五十六」 tr. "Chapter Fifty-six, Firmness," and only the interlinear note of the Khitan edition reads 「轉不轉品」 tr. "Turning and Not Turning," agreeing in wording with this treatise's base text; the chapter-order number that the general table of contents at the head of its fascicles attaches to this chapter is one and the same number as the one it attaches to the preceding chapter, "Non-retrogression"—the two chapters share it and it does not advance; this is a repetition within the markup layer of the table of contents itself, following the pattern already seen in the several preceding chapters, and it is recorded as it is without forcing an explanation. The commentaries of the ancient masters also divide into two roads, yet in the end do not stand in each other's way: Jizang, in his Commentary on the Larger Sūtra, follows the great sūtra it explains and reads 「堅固品第五十六」 tr. "Chapter Fifty-six, Firmness," and at the very opening cites two explanations in which the two names explain each other—「有人言：不退與堅固，左右相成。所以不退者，由堅固也；所以堅固者，由不退也」 tr. "Someone says: non-retrogression and firmness complete each other, left and right. The reason one does not retrogress is firmness; the reason one is firm is non-retrogression"—and further gives a separate explanation, 「又人解云：內煩惱不能壞為不退，外惡緣不能動為堅固也」 tr. "Again someone explains: that the inner afflictions cannot ruin it is non-retrogression; that outer evil conditions cannot move it is firmness"; and where he explains the text of this treatise, he matches it precisely to the three minds of this chapter's treatise-author, ‘firm, unmoved, not turning’, saying 「二、論釋三心，言煩惱箭射不能入為堅固，於三菩提不退為不退，外惡緣不能動為不動心也」 tr. "Second, the treatise explains the three minds, saying that what the arrows of the afflictions shoot at and cannot enter is firmness, that not retrogressing from saṃbodhi is non-retrogression, and that what outer evil conditions cannot move is the unmoved mind"—taking 「堅固」 tr. "firmness" as the treatise's 「堅」 tr. "firm," and taking 「不退」 tr. "non-retrogression" as the treatise's 「不轉」 tr. "not turning," so that the difference between the two names each has its own tie and they do not stand against each other. Jizang, in his structural division at the end of the preceding chapter, also of his own accord uses 「轉不轉」 tr. "Turning and Not Turning" to set up a section heading, from which one knows that in his book the two names run side by side. There is another ancient master who composed a commentary on this treatise itself: Huiying's Commentary, explaining the passage on the vajra-holding spirits, says 「五種執金剛神已下，上不退品中言五性，今言五種，餘經中五方，即是一義也」 tr. "From ‘the five kinds of vajra-holding spirits’ onward: above, in the Non-retrogression chapter, it says ‘five natures’; here it says ‘five kinds’; in other sūtras, ‘five directions’—these are one meaning"; this remark comes from his commentary explaining Chapter Sixty-five, pointing back to earlier text and using 「上不退品」 tr. "the Non-retrogression chapter above" as a general name for the chapters before it; it is not a dedicated section on this chapter; only, the base text here reads 「五姓執金剛神」 tr. "the vajra-holding spirits of the five clans," and the text he refers to, 「上不退品中言五性」 tr. "above, in the Non-retrogression chapter, it says ‘five natures’," is not seen in the base text's preceding chapter; the chapter boundaries he relied on differ from the base text's; both are recorded without judgement. As for Junzheng's book of essentials on the four treatises, a thorough search under the headings 「堅固品」 tr. "Firmness," 「轉不轉品」 tr. "Turning and Not Turning," and 「不退品」 tr. "Non-retrogression" is in every case 〔not found〕; his book is in the form of an outline of essentials, not a passage-by-passage explanation, and this is no defect; and in the commentaries and records on calming and contemplation of the Tiantai line, too, no citation of this chapter's text by name is seen—there is only a general use of the common meaning of 「阿鞞跋致」 tr. "avaivartika"—and no connection is forced; this is recorded as it is.

Bringing this whole line of further resonances back to this chapter, the two parties to the chapter's name that the ancient masters recorded precisely illuminate the two faces of this chapter's meaning. The name 「轉不轉」 tr. "Turning and Not Turning" picks out the matter—the pivot of the whole chapter lies in the Buddha's two answers, 「不轉故名阿鞞跋致，轉故亦名阿鞞跋致」 tr. "One is called avaivartika because of not turning; one is also called avaivartika because of turning," and the treatise-author judges them, saying 「佛二種答，以二諦故，所謂世諦、第一義諦」 tr. "The Buddha answers in two ways because of the two truths, namely worldly truth and the truth of the highest meaning": in worldly truth there really is something turned, 「轉聲聞、辟支佛心，直入菩薩位，是名轉」 tr. "turning away the mind of the śrāvaka and pratyekabuddha and entering straight into the bodhisattva's position is called turning"; in the highest meaning there is nothing that can be turned, 「諸法一相中，所謂無相，尚無一乘定相，何況三乘！則無所轉」 tr. "within the one mark of all dharmas, that is, the signless, there is not even a fixed mark of one vehicle, how much less of three vehicles! So there is nothing to turn." The name 「堅固」 tr. "Firmness" picks out the mind—what the sūtra text enjoins is only one sentence, 「應堅固其心，不動、不轉」 tr. "should make his mind firm, unmoved, not turning," and the treatise-author takes it apart into three: 「一切諸煩惱箭不入故，名為堅。一切外道魔民不能轉故，名不動。於阿耨多羅三藐三菩提不退故，名不轉。」 tr. "Because none of the arrows of the afflictions enters, it is called firm. Because none of the outside paths or Māra's people can turn it, it is called unmoved. Because it does not retrogress from anuttarā samyaksaṃbodhi, it is called not turning." One name takes the overturning in the marks of practice; the other takes the unsnatchability of the ground of the mind; what the ancient master called 「左右相成」 tr. "completing each other, left and right" finds its real substance precisely in the text of this treatise: not turning is the fruit, firmness is the cause—because the arrows of the afflictions do not enter and Māra's people cannot turn it, one does not retrogress from awakening. And looking at the two names together, one sees one thing more: the non-retrogression this chapter tests is never built upon the thought ‘I will not retrogress’—「疑，名取相有所得」 tr. "Doubt means grasping at a mark with something attained"; only where a mark is grasped is there doubt, and only there is there any so-called retrogressing or not retrogressing to be guarded; the bodhisattva, 「行無相三昧故，於一切法中不取相，則無生疑處」 tr. "because he practises the signless samādhi, grasps no mark in any dharma, and so there is no place for doubt to arise," and therefore 「於自地中了了，不疑我是阿鞞跋致、非阿鞞跋致」 tr. "he is clear about his own ground, and does not doubt whether I am avaivartika or not avaivartika"—this is not self-assurance; it is that there is no place for assurance.

Therefore what the chapter "Turning and Not Turning" finally leaves behind is a set of tests one can carry along. When I hear words that sound very much like the Buddha's Dharma and yet leave me disheartened, I remember that what Māra says is also 「諸法亦與虛空等，空無有相」 tr. "Dharmas too are equal to space, empty and without mark," and that the difference lies only in one sentence, 「汝唐受勤苦！」 tr. "You toil and suffer for nothing!"—emptiness does not cancel the vow: 「諸法雖如虛空，無所有、自相空，而眾生不知、不見、不解」 tr. "though dharmas are like space, without anything existent, empty of specific marks, yet beings do not know, do not see, do not understand," and that beings do not know is precisely why the vow is established. When I cultivate concentration and develop wisdom and my mind wishes to take the realisation, I remember that the mark this chapter lists is 「雖修四念處乃至五神通，是人不受四念處果」 tr. "though he cultivates the four foundations of mindfulness and so on up to the five supernormal powers, this person does not receive the fruit of the four foundations of mindfulness," and that the reason he does not receive it is only 「故為眾生受身，隨其所應而利益之」 tr. "so he takes a body for the sake of beings, and benefits them according to what suits them." When I examine myself in worldly business and idle talk, I remember that this chapter ties each of the ten rounds of worldly matters to one face of emptiness—speaking of matters of officials, it asks about noble and base; speaking of matters of thieves, it asks about gain and loss; speaking of matters of armies, it asks about many and few; speaking of matters of fighting, it asks about hatred and love—and what it keeps is only one thing: 「但好說般若波羅蜜，不遠離薩婆若心。」 tr. "He likes only to speak of prajñāpāramitā, and does not stray far from the mind of sarvajñā." When I meet someone who displays great majestic virtue and speaks words that differ from what I have learned, I remember 「身是而言非」 tr. "the body is right but the words are wrong," 「如試金錢，彈之聲出，則知其真偽」 tr. "as when one tests a gold coin: flick it, the sound comes out, and one knows whether it is real or false"; a true Buddha would not 「教菩薩遠離阿耨多羅三藐三菩提，教住聲聞、辟支佛道」 tr. "teach the bodhisattva to stray far from anuttarā samyaksaṃbodhi, and teach him to abide in the path of the śrāvaka or pratyekabuddha." When I ask myself what use it is to read this chapter when I have not yet reached this ground, I remember that the treatise-author at the last sets this very question himself and answers it himself: one who reads, recites, and rightly recollects yet in whom doubt and clinging are not yet removed is in truth 「不名為阿鞞跋致」 tr. "not called avaivartika," yet his road is already clear—「柔順忍增長故，斷法愛，得無生忍」 tr. "because compliant acceptance grows, he severs love of dharmas and obtains the acceptance of non-arising." Answer these few questions well in every circumstance, and one knows why this chapter can bear two names at once without their standing in each other's way: turning what ought to be turned, it is called not turning; the mind that cannot be snatched away, it is called firmness.

Overview

The name of "The Lamp-wick" is taken from a fire simile in the very last section of the whole chapter; yet what this chapter asks at its opening is ‘deep’. The two preceding chapters have said all there is to say about the marks of the avaivartika, and the treatise-author, on entering this chapter, himself states the road by which it comes: 「須菩提聞佛上二品中說阿鞞跋致具足相；入此品，佛方開四無礙門，更欲說阿鞞跋致相。」 tr. "Subhūti heard the Buddha, in the two chapters above, speak of the full marks of the avaivartika; on entering this chapter, the Buddha now opens the gate of the four unobstructed knowledges, wishing further to speak of the marks of the avaivartika." So Subhūti changes his way of asking—he no longer asks what marks and appearance the non-retrogressing one has, but asks about the place where he abides: 「世尊！何等是深奧處，阿鞞跋致菩薩摩訶薩住是中行六波羅蜜時，具足四念處，乃至具足一切種智？」 tr. "World-Honored One! What is the profound place in which the avaivartika bodhisattva-mahāsattva, abiding and practising the six perfections, fulfils the four foundations of mindfulness and so on up to fulfilling the omniscience of all kinds?" The Buddha answers with the utmost brevity: 「深奧處者，空是其義，無相、無作、無起、無生、無染、離、寂滅、如、法性、實際、涅槃。」 tr. "The profound place: emptiness is its meaning—the signless, non-action, non-origination, non-arising, non-staining, separation, quiescence, suchness, the nature of dharmas, the limit of reality, nirvāṇa." The bone of the whole chapter is set up from here: first it makes clear what ‘deep’ means; next it makes clear why a single day's practice of one who abides in this deep place surpasses kalpas as the sands of the Ganges; last, with the burning of the lamp-wick, it makes clear ‘neither the first nor the last, and yet the matter is accomplished’—three sūtras and three treatises spanning the two fascicles seventy-four and seventy-five: the First Part establishes the meaning of the profound and the weighing of merit, and the Last Part, with a fire simile, gathers up the doubt about cause and effect. Since the 「燈炷」 tr. "lamp-wick" of the chapter title lies in the last section, the reader reading in order will at first feel that the name does not answer to the opening; only on finishing does one know that the ‘coming together of causes and conditions, and yet without self-nature’ argued in the first two rounds is precisely the one matter that the lamp-wick simile of the last round sets out to make real.

The first round of the First Part argues ‘deep’. Sūtra ① first praises the merit of the non-retrogressing bodhisattva as immeasurable and boundless, because he has 「得無量無邊智慧，不與一切聲聞、辟支佛共故」 tr. "obtained immeasurable and boundless wisdom, which is not shared with any śrāvaka or pratyekabuddha", and abiding in this wisdom he gives rise to the four unobstructed knowledges; Treatise ① explains them by the four gates of meaning, dharma, expression, and delight in speaking, and closes with 「是菩薩安住四無礙中，一切眾生問難，無能窮盡」 tr. "this bodhisattva abides securely in the four unobstructed knowledges; of all the questions and difficulties of all beings, none can exhaust him". The meaning of the profound once established, the treatise-author at once poses a difficulty to himself: 「諸有法種種細分別，人不解故有深；空無所有，以何為深？」 tr. "Existent dharmas are discriminated finely in all kinds of ways, and because people do not understand them there is depth; emptiness is without anything existent—what makes it deep?"—existent dharmas differ in a thousand ways, and to call them deep because they are hard to understand is understandable; but emptiness is simply without anything existent, so where does depth come from? The answer takes it apart in three layers. First, this emptiness is not an emptiness spoken by the mouth; it is obtained only after one 「分別解諸有相，內不見有我，外不見定實法」 tr. "discriminates and understands the marks of all that exists, sees no self within, and sees no fixed real dharma without": 「此空是得道空，非但口說，是故言深」 tr. "this emptiness is the emptiness of attaining the path, not merely what the mouth says; therefore it is called deep". Second, 「空亦復空；若著是空，則有過失，是不名深」 tr. "emptiness too is empty; if one clings to this emptiness, there is a fault, and it is not called deep"—only because it can break itself is it deep. Third, one contemplates the arising and ceasing of the five aggregates to break permanence, and contemplates ultimate emptiness to break arising and ceasing, and 「此中破生滅，亦不著是不生不滅，故名為深」 tr. "here, in breaking arising and ceasing, one also does not cling to this non-arising and non-ceasing; therefore it is called deep". Next it asks further what kind of emptiness this is, and the treatise-author records two views and does not directly judge between them—one says 「三三昧——空、無相、無作；心數法名為定，定故能觀諸法空」 tr. "the three samādhi—emptiness, the signless, non-action; mental-factor dharmas are called concentration, and because of concentration one can contemplate the emptiness of dharmas"; one says 「外所緣色等諸法皆空，緣外空故名為空三昧」 tr. "the outer object-dharmas such as form are all empty; because one takes outer emptiness as object, it is called the emptiness samādhi"—and at once he cites the Buddha's words to leave these two extremes: if outer dharmas were fundamentally not empty and were made empty by the power of samādhi, that would be false; if outer dharmas were really empty, then the emptiness samādhi could not further arise. The account of the middle lies only in causes and conditions: 「因緣生法無自性，無自性故即是畢竟空」 tr. "dharmas born of causes and conditions are without self-nature; because they are without self-nature, this is ultimate emptiness", and this emptiness is 「從本以來空，非佛所作，亦非餘人所作」 tr. "empty from the very beginning, not made by the Buddha, nor made by anyone else". The meaning of deep once clear, the Buddha then extends ‘deep’ to all dharmas: not only are emptiness and so on up to nirvāṇa deep; form too is deep, feeling, perception, constructions, and consciousness too are deep, and so on up to anuttarā samyaksaṃbodhi too is deep—why? 「是色如，非是色、非離色」 tr. "this suchness of form is not form and is not apart from form"; because the suchness of form is deep, form is deep. Here the treatise-author sets down an extremely plain simile to make ‘neither this nor apart’ clear: 「譬如以泥為瓶，泥非即是瓶、不離泥有瓶，亦不得言無瓶。」 tr. "As when clay is made into a pot: the clay is not itself the pot, yet there is no pot apart from the clay, nor can one say there is no pot." This simile is the chapter's first firing: once the pattern of neither identical nor apart is fixed, the lamp-wick simile of the last round is only the same pattern said again with another thing.

The second round of the First Part weighs ‘merit’. The end of Sūtra ① has already buried this idea in advance—practising as taught, 「一念生時，當得無量無邊阿僧祇福德，是菩薩摩訶薩超越無量劫」 tr. "at the time a single thought arises, he shall obtain immeasurable, boundless, asaṃkhyeya merit; this bodhisattva-mahāsattva passes beyond immeasurable kalpas"; and the Buddha makes a simile from an utterly worldly matter: 「譬如多婬欲人與端正淨潔女人共期；此女人限礙，不得時往」 tr. "As when a man of much lust makes an appointment with a beautiful, clean, and comely woman; this woman is hindered and cannot go at the time"—within one day and one night this man's thoughts are very many, and the bodhisattva mindful of prajñā passes beyond a number of kalpas in the same way. The treatise-author explains why this simile can be used: beings' minds arise and cease thought by thought and continue without their being aware of it; only in the man of lust, because his mind clings deeply to what he desires and his passion is not fulfilled, can each thought's grasping at the mark and discriminating be clearly counted—「是心易覺知故，以為譬喻」 tr. "because this mind is easy to be aware of, it is taken as a simile"; and he adds one more simile: 「如人服軟藥，一歲乃差病；服大力藥，一日能差。」 tr. "As when a person takes a mild medicine and is cured of the illness only after a year, but takes a medicine of great strength and can be cured in a single day." Sūtra ② then unfolds this one idea into a long string of weighings, layer upon layer: apart from prajñā, to give to the Three Jewels for kalpas equal to the sands of the Ganges, to make offerings to the four fruits and to the pratyekabuddhas and the buddhas, to practise the six perfections, to practise the gift of Dharma, to cultivate the four foundations of mindfulness and so on up to the omniscience of all kinds, to dedicate the merit of the gift of wealth, the gift of Dharma, and meditative concentration, to rejoice in the roots of goodness of the three times and dedicate them—in every round Subhūti answers 「甚多」 tr. "Very great", and in every round the Buddha answers that it does not equal, within the deep prajñā, 「一日如說修行得福多」 tr. "for a single day practising as taught, the merit obtained is great". As to why this is so, sūtra and treatise each give a few hard sentences: 「般若波羅蜜是菩薩摩訶薩母故，是般若波羅蜜能生諸菩薩摩訶薩」 tr. "because prajñāpāramitā is the mother of the bodhisattva-mahāsattvas, this prajñāpāramitā can give birth to the bodhisattva-mahāsattvas"; Treatise ② shrinks it to one sentence, 「般若是諸佛母，住是般若中，能具足諸佛法」 tr. "prajñā is the mother of the buddhas; abiding in this prajñā, one can fulfil all the dharmas of the Buddha"; the round on dedication is judged by whether it is mixed or not mixed—「般若波羅蜜無雜毒、正迴向故」 tr. "because prajñāpāramitā is not mixed with poison, and is right dedication". Here Subhūti raises a great difficulty, and this is the most important question in the whole chapter: 「如佛所說，因緣起法從妄想生，非實。云何善男子、善女人得大福德？」 tr. "As the Buddha has said, dharmas arising from causes and conditions are born from false thinking and are not real. How do good men and good women obtain great merit?" Since dharmas arising from conditions are false and deceptive and unreal, even right view, the position of dharmas, the four fruits, and so on up to awakening should not be obtained through them—then from where does the merit of a single day arise? The Buddha does not deny the falseness; he turns only the ground of the mind: the bodhisattva who practises prajñā 「知因緣起法亦空、無堅固、虛誑不實」 tr. "knows that dharmas arising from causes and conditions are also empty, without firmness, false and deceptive and unreal"; precisely because he knows they are false and deceptive, his mind does not cling, and 「是福德清淨故，勝餘福德」 tr. "because this merit is pure, it surpasses other merit"; the treatise-author gathers it up with one simile—「如金剛雖小，能摧破大山。」 tr. "As with the vajra: though small, it can shatter a great mountain." The glosses below on the three names innumerable, immeasurable, and boundless, and the argument that 「不可說義無增無減」 tr. "in the meaning that cannot be spoken there is neither increase nor decrease", all follow from this. Of the three names: 「四事名雖異，義是一，所謂畢竟空」 tr. "though the names of the four matters differ, the meaning is one, namely ultimate emptiness"; since the Dharma cannot be spoken, the Buddha 「以方便力故分別說」 tr. "by the power of skilful means speaks of it with discrimination"; since there is neither increase nor decrease, the six perfections too are neither increased nor decreased, and yet the bodhisattva still obtains awakening—because he 「不作是念：『我增般若波羅蜜，乃至增檀波羅蜜。』」 tr. "does not have this thought: ‘I increase prajñāpāramitā, and so on up to increasing dānapāramitā.’"; it is called dānapāramitā only by way of a name, and he dedicates the roots of goodness as the mark of awakening is. At the last it returns to one definition: 「一切法如相是名阿耨多羅三藐三菩提」 tr. "The mark of suchness of all dharmas is called anuttarā samyaksaṃbodhi", which the treatise-author explains: 「是諸法如即是寂滅相，是無上道相」 tr. "this suchness of dharmas is the mark of quiescence, is the mark of the unsurpassed path"; and quiescence is 「不增不減、不高不下，滅諸煩惱、戲論，不動不壞、無所障礙」 tr. "neither increasing nor decreasing, neither high nor low, extinguishing the afflictions and idle discourse, unmoving and unbroken, without any obstruction".

The single round of the Last Part is the simile of the ‘lamp’. Since the preceding unit has said that dharmas neither increase nor decrease, Subhūti's doubt is pressed onto time: since there is neither increase nor decrease, in which thought is awakening obtained? 「是初心不至後心，後心不在初心。世尊！如是心心數法不俱，云何善根增益？」 tr. "This first mind does not reach the last mind, and the last mind is not in the first mind. World-Honored One! Since mind and mental-factor dharmas are thus not together, how are roots of goodness increased?"—the first mind and the last mind do not reach each other; from what are roots of goodness accumulated? The Buddha does not argue in principle; he speaks a simile directly: 「我當為汝說譬喻，智者得譬喻，則於義易解。」 tr. "I shall tell you a simile; when the wise obtain a simile, the meaning is easily understood." When a lamp is lit, is the wick burned by the first flame or by the last flame? Subhūti himself answers: 「非初焰燋炷，亦非離初焰」 tr. "It is not the first flame that burns the wick, nor is it apart from the first flame", and likewise with the last flame; but asked whether the wick is burned or not, he answers without the least ambiguity: 「炷實燋」 tr. "The wick is really burned." The simile established, the Dharma is at once present: the bodhisattva 「不用初心得阿耨多羅三藐三菩提，亦不離初心得阿耨多羅三藐三菩提」 tr. "does not obtain anuttarā samyaksaṃbodhi by the first mind, nor does he obtain anuttarā samyaksaṃbodhi apart from the first mind", and likewise with the last mind, and yet awakening is really obtained. Treatise ③ matches the three things in the simile one by one: 「燈譬菩薩道，炷喻無明等煩惱，焰如初地相應智慧乃至金剛三昧相應智慧」 tr. "The lamp stands for the bodhisattva path; the wick stands for ignorance and the other afflictions; the flames are like the wisdom that accords with the first ground and so on up to the wisdom that accords with the vajra samādhi"—the wick of the afflictions that is burned away is burned neither by the first flame nor by the last flame, and yet the wick is really burned away. The treatise-author further blocks a road at each end: if it were obtained only by the first mind without awaiting the last mind, 「菩薩初發心，便應是佛」 tr. "the bodhisattva, on first arousing the mind, should already be the Buddha"; if there were a last mind apart from the first mind—then 「若無初心，則無後心」 tr. "if there is no first mind, there is no last mind", for 「初心集種種無量功德，後心則具足」 tr. "the first mind gathers all kinds of immeasurable merit, and the last mind then fulfils it". The causes and conditions once clear, the Buddha then lists the ten grounds—「乾慧地、性地、八人地、見地、薄地、離欲地、已作地、辟支佛地、菩薩地、佛地」 tr. "the ground of dry wisdom, the ground of the stage of nature, the ground of the person of the eight, the ground of seeing, the ground of thinning, the ground of freedom from desire, the ground of what has been done, the pratyekabuddha ground, the bodhisattva ground, the Buddha ground"—and one who fulfils these grounds obtains awakening; Treatise ③ matches every ground to both the śrāvaka and the bodhisattva and explains its name and meaning: the ground of dry wisdom is that 「雖有智慧，不得禪定水則不能得道」 tr. "though he has wisdom, without obtaining the water of meditative concentration he cannot attain the path"; the ground of the person of the eight 「於菩薩則是無生法忍，入菩薩位」 tr. "for the bodhisattva is the acceptance of the non-arising of dharmas, entering the bodhisattva's position"; the ground of seeing 「於菩薩則是阿鞞跋致地」 tr. "for the bodhisattva is the ground of the avaivartika"; and of the Buddha ground, 「於自地中行具足，於他地中觀具足，二事具故名具足」 tr. "within his own ground practice is fulfilled, within the other grounds contemplation is fulfilled; because the two matters are fulfilled, it is called fulfilled". The grounds once listed, the sūtra text turns into a chain of counter-questions, pressing ‘mind’ until it has nowhere to stand: when the mind has ceased, does it arise again? No. Is the arising of the mind the mark of ceasing? It is the mark of ceasing. Is the mark of ceasing itself ceasing? No—if it were itself ceasing, then 「一心有兩時：生時、滅時」 tr. "one mind would have two times: the time of arising and the time of ceasing". The treatise-author states plainly that this is the Buddha's way of pressing: 「佛如是翻覆難，須菩提理窮故」 tr. "because the Buddha pressed the difficulty this way and that, Subhūti's reasoning was exhausted", and so, with the wisdom he had realised, he answers with one sentence: 「亦如是住，如如住」 tr. "It abides just so, abiding as suchness abides." Yet the questioner presses again: can this mind that abides as suchness abides be taken as itself the limit of reality? Subhūti answers no, and the treatise-author explains the turn of his mind—「心是虛誑法，小乘智慧力少，不能觀心即作實際」 tr. "the mind is a false and deceptive dharma; the power of the wisdom of the Small Vehicle is slight, and it cannot contemplate the mind as itself the limit of reality"; yet speaking in terms of the Dharma, 「如名一切法實相，心實相亦名如」 tr. "suchness is the name for the real mark of all dharmas; the real mark of the mind is also called suchness", and the difference between suchness and the mind lies only in this: 「如是一相、不二相；心憶想分別因緣生故，是二相」 tr. "suchness is one mark, a non-dual mark; the mind, because it is born from the causes and conditions of recollection, imagining, and discrimination, is a dual mark". Pressed to this point, a bodhisattva who has not yet obtained the acceptance of the non-arising of dharmas, hearing it, grows haughty in mind, and so the Buddha asks again where he practises; the answer is 「為無處所行」 tr. "he practises for no place at all"; fearing he will fall into annihilation, he asks again, and the answer is 「為第一義中行，二行不可得故」 tr. "he practises within the highest meaning, because the two practices are unfindable". At the end it returns to neither grasping nor destroying: the bodhisattva 「於諸法亦不取相，亦不壞相」 tr. "toward dharmas neither grasps at marks nor destroys marks", because 「取相即是有法，不取相即是無法；方便力故，離是有、無二邊，行於中道」 tr. "to grasp at a mark is the dharma of existence; not to grasp at a mark is the dharma of non-existence; by the power of skilful means he leaves these two extremes of existence and non-existence and practises the middle way", and the emptiness of specific marks 「破一切法相，亦自破其相」 tr. "breaks the marks of all dharmas, and also breaks its own mark". Abiding in this emptiness of specific marks, the bodhisattva brings beings to accomplishment with the three samādhi: 「見眾生作法中行，菩薩以方便力故，教令得無作；見眾生我相中行，以方便力故，教令行空；見眾生一切相中行，以方便力故，教令行無相。」 tr. "Seeing beings practising within the dharmas of making, the bodhisattva by the power of skilful means teaches them to obtain non-action; seeing beings practising within the mark of self, by the power of skilful means he teaches them to practise emptiness; seeing beings practising within all marks, by the power of skilful means he teaches them to practise the signless." Those who make vows and receive bodies are like this: 「以繩繫鳥，繩盡復還」 tr. "a bird is tied with a cord: when the cord runs out, it comes back again", and so they are cut off with non-action; those who hold to self and what belongs to self are cut off with emptiness; those who grasp at marks are cut off with the signless. The last question and answer of the whole chapter shows the most tender care: since teaching emptiness is enough, what use are the signless and non-action? The answer: 「眾生根有利、鈍。利根者聞空，即得無相、無作」 tr. "Beings' faculties are keen or dull. Those of keen faculties, hearing emptiness, at once obtain the signless and non-action"; those of dull faculties, hearing emptiness, instead grasp at a mark of emptiness, and so the signless and non-action must be further taught—and the whole chapter thereupon closes on 「以是因緣故，具說三三昧，教化眾生」 tr. "for these reasons the three samādhi are fully taught, to teach and transform beings".

Taking the two arcs together, the shape of the chapter is very orderly. The First Part speaks of ‘deep’ and uses the pattern of neither identical nor apart—suchness is not form and is not apart from form; the clay is not the pot, and the pot is not apart from the clay. The Last Part speaks of ‘obtaining’ and uses the same pattern—awakening is not the first mind and is not apart from the first mind; the burning is not the first flame and is not apart from the first flame. The First Part, through the weighing of merit, forces out the doubt ‘arising from conditions is false and deceptive, and yet merit is not lost’; the Last Part, through the argument about thoughts of the mind, forces out the doubt ‘first and last are not together, and yet roots of goodness are accumulated’—the two doubts are in fact one doubt: how can what is born of causes and conditions and is without self-nature accomplish anything? The answer too is one answer: precisely because it is without self-nature, it can come together and be accomplished; precisely because it comes together, it cannot be pinned to one flame or one thought. The simile of the clay and the pot is set up in the First Part, the simile of the lamp-wick gathers it up in the Last Part, and the meaning of the whole chapter lies entirely between these two similes. As for the chapter title, more than one form has come down from antiquity; what the editions write and what the ancient masters call it differ from one another; each is tied to its own source, recorded side by side without judgement, and the details are in the Apparatus.

Therefore, in reading this chapter, one can hold at least three questions. First, ask where ‘deep’ lies—in the dharma contemplated, or in the mind that contemplates? The treatise-author says plainly, 「非直口說名字故空」 tr. "it is not empty merely because the mouth says the name", and says further, 「若著是空，則有過失，是不名深」 tr. "if one clings to this emptiness, there is a fault, and it is not called deep": depth lies not in speaking of emptiness but in not clinging to emptiness; the same empty words, clung to or not clung to, are as far apart in depth as heaven and earth. Second, ask where ‘surpassing’ lies—why does a single day surpass kalpas as the sands of the Ganges? The sūtra text never says that giving and making offerings are at fault; it only says 「不如」 tr. "does not equal"; nor does the treatise-author judge those persons wrong; he judges only whether their merit is pure or not pure and whether their dedication is mixed or not mixed, 「般若波羅蜜無雜毒、正迴向故」 tr. "because prajñāpāramitā is not mixed with poison, and is right dedication": what is weighed is not the size of the deed but whether the mind clings or does not cling. Third, ask where ‘obtaining’ lies—if it is neither the first mind nor the last mind, in which thought, after all, is awakening obtained? Once this question is made real, one knows it is of the same type as 「炷為燋不」 tr. "is the wick burned or not": ask which flame burned it, and there is no answer; ask whether the wick has burned, and 「炷實燋」 tr. "the wick is really burned". Read on in order through the three sūtras and three treatises, and one will come at last to that sentence with which the treatise-author matches the simile—「燈譬菩薩道，炷喻無明等煩惱」 tr. "The lamp stands for the bodhisattva path; the wick stands for ignorance and the other afflictions": the path is not a single thought, and the afflictions are not exhausted all at once either; one need not seek the obtaining in a single thought, but need only keep the lamp always burning.

Reading On in the Order of the Treatise

The Lamp-wick, First Part: The Twelve Names of the Profound Place; The Suchness of Form Is Profound, and the Simile of the Clay Pot; The Simile of the Man of Much Lust Thinking of the Woman; The Sevenfold Weighing of What Is Far Removed from Prajñā; The Simile of the Vajra Shattering the Mountain; The Three Meanings of Countless, Immeasurable, and Boundless; The Meaning That Cannot Be Spoken Neither Increases nor Decreases

What Is Being Asked

The two chapters before this one have fully set out the complete marks of the avaivartika; having heard them, the first response that arises in Subhūti's mind is praise: such a bodhisattva accomplishes 「大功德」 tr. "great merit", 「無量功德」 tr. "immeasurable merit", 「無邊功德」 tr. "boundless merit". The Buddha affirms this praise and at once points out its causes and conditions for him—merit is immeasurable because wisdom is immeasurable; because wisdom is immeasurable, the four unobstructed knowledges are born from it, and neither the gods above nor humans below can stump him with questions. As soon as the praise lands, the question follows: since the avaivartika practises the six perfections abiding in a certain place, and only so fulfils the four foundations of mindfulness and so on up to the omniscience of all kinds, where is that place? Subhūti therefore asks 「何等是深奧處」 tr. "what is the profound place"—the First Part of this chapter unfolds around this one question.

The Buddha's answer has two layers. The first layer gives names: the profound place is that 「空是其義」 tr. "emptiness is its meaning", and below it the signless, non-action, non-origination, non-arising, non-staining, separation, quiescence, suchness, the nature of dharmas, the limit of reality, nirvāṇa—together with emptiness, twelve names in all. The second layer at once stretches these names open: it is not only these twelve names that are profound; form, feeling, perception, constructions, and consciousness, the twelve sense-fields, the eighteen elements, the six perfections, and so on up to anuttarā samyaksaṃbodhi—「一切法亦是深奧義」 tr. "all dharmas too have the profound meaning"; and the reason all dharmas are profound lies nowhere else but in their 「如」 tr. "suchness"—「是色如，非是色、非離色」 tr. "this suchness of form is not form and is not apart from form". What is called deep, it turns out, is not the depth of being hard to understand, but the depth of the original mark of dharmas themselves.

Next the sūtra text turns in another direction: since it is profound, how is one to draw near it? The answer is vigour and continuity—when a single thought arises in accord with prajñā, one 「超越無量劫」 tr. "passes beyond immeasurable kalpas"; and it takes as a simile a man of much lust thinking of a woman: within one day and one night his thoughts are countless beyond reckoning, and the bodhisattva's thinking of prajñā is likewise unbroken, thought after thought. Sūtra ② then sets this 「一日」 tr. "one day" upon the scales and weighs it back and forth, step by step, through seven rounds: giving to the Three Jewels for kalpas like the sands of the Ganges, making offerings to the four fruits, the pratyekabuddhas, and the buddhas, practising the six perfections, practising the gift of Dharma, cultivating the four foundations of mindfulness and so on up to the omniscience of all kinds, dedicating the merit of wealth, of Dharma, and of meditative concentration, dedicating with rejoicing—on all seven rounds hang the seven Chinese characters 「遠離般若波羅蜜」 tr. "far removed from prajñāpāramitā", and so all seven rounds lose to one day of practising as taught. After the weighing, Subhūti raises the sharpest difficulty of the whole chapter: since dharmas arising from causes and conditions are 「從妄想生，非實」 tr. "born from false thinking and not real", by what can a false and deceptive dharma give birth to great merit? The Buddha does not deny the falseness; on the contrary, he admits it to the end, and then answers from the place of 「善學內空乃至善學無法有法空」 tr. "having trained well in inner emptiness, and so on up to having trained well in the emptiness of non-existent and existent dharmas". From this is drawn out the distinction of the three meanings countless, immeasurable, and boundless; from this is drawn out 「一切法不可說」 tr. "all dharmas cannot be spoken"; and from this is further drawn out 「不可說義無增無減」 tr. "the meaning that cannot be spoken neither increases nor decreases"—and neither increase nor decrease at once forces out another difficulty: since wholesome dharmas do not increase, from where is awakening obtained? Sūtra ② explains awakening by 「一切法如相是名阿耨多羅三藐三菩提」 tr. "the mark of suchness of all dharmas is called anuttarā samyaksaṃbodhi", and at the end returns to 「菩薩摩訶薩以是不增不減法故，應般若波羅蜜行」 tr. "because of this dharma of neither increase nor decrease, the bodhisattva-mahāsattva should practise prajñāpāramitā".

Treatise ① and Treatise ② supply the reasons for these two passages of sūtra text. What Treatise ① must answer is: since emptiness is without anything existent, on what ground is it called deep? Which kind of emptiness is it that is deep? The dharmas without outflows of the two vehicles have not even the merit of retribution; how is it that the bodhisattva's contemplation of ultimate emptiness, on the contrary, obtains immeasurable merit? What Treatise ② must answer is: where does the superior cause and condition of each of the seven rounds of weighing lie? How can a false and deceptive dharma accomplish pure merit? How does each name of the three meanings settle in its own place? The long string of names of the real mark of all dharmas—how was each one attached? How is it that neither increase nor decrease and the obtainability of awakening do not obstruct each other? The First Part, a single unit—two passages of sūtra text and two passages of treatise explanation—stops at the sentence at the end of fascicle seventy-four, 「菩薩如是疾得無上道，以不增不減、不可得故」 tr. "the bodhisattva thus swiftly obtains the unsurpassed path, because it neither increases nor decreases and is unfindable"; the Last Part of this chapter begins from the continued title of the next fascicle and opens Sūtra ③ and Treatise ③ separately.

Passage by Passage

1. Subhūti praises three kinds of merit of the avaivartika; the Buddha affirms it and brings out its causes and conditions—because wisdom is immeasurable, merit is immeasurable. At the opening of the sūtra text, Subhūti praises in three sentences in a row: the avaivartika bodhisattva-mahāsattva 「大功德成就」 tr. "is accomplished in great merit", 「無量功德成就」 tr. "is accomplished in immeasurable merit", 「無邊功德成就」 tr. "is accomplished in boundless merit". The Buddha does not merely give his seal; after saying the three sentences over again, he pursues their reason: 「是菩薩摩訶薩得無量無邊智慧，不與一切聲聞、辟支佛共故」 tr. "because this bodhisattva-mahāsattva obtains immeasurable and boundless wisdom, not shared with any śrāvaka or pratyekabuddha"; abiding in this wisdom, he gives rise to the four unobstructed knowledges, and having obtained the unobstructed knowledges, 「一切世間天及人無能窮盡」 tr. "none among the gods and humans of all the world can exhaust him". The order here must be seen clearly—merit is not heaped up out of nothing; it is the shadow of wisdom; only because wisdom is immeasurable is merit immeasurable. And the distinguishing feature of this wisdom is that it is 「不共」 tr. "unshared": the two vehicles too have wisdom, but not this kind. Setting the criterion upon wisdom at the very opening is what gives all the later weighing its ground.

2. For kalpas like the sands of the Ganges the Buddha could praise and speak of it without exhausting it. Subhūti goes on to say: 「佛能以如恒河沙等劫歎說阿鞞跋致菩薩摩訶薩行、類、相貌。」 tr. "The Buddha could, for kalpas equal to the sands of the Ganges, praise and speak of the conduct, kind, and appearance of the avaivartika bodhisattva-mahāsattva." Conduct, kind, and appearance, the three matters set side by side—conduct is what is done, kind is what one belongs to, appearance is the sign displayed outwardly. Even speaking for kalpas like the sands of the Ganges one could not finish; this sentence is both praise and a push of the topic toward the next question: since the merit cannot be spoken to the end, there is no need to lay it out any further outward; one should ask inward.

3. The question 「何等是深奧處」 tr. "what is the profound place" —the Buddha praises it and brings out the twelve names. Subhūti therefore turns to ask: 「何等是深奧處，阿鞞跋致菩薩摩訶薩住是中行六波羅蜜時，具足四念處，乃至具足一切種智？」 tr. "What is the profound place, in which the avaivartika bodhisattva-mahāsattva, abiding and practising the six perfections, fulfils the four foundations of mindfulness, and so on up to fulfilling the omniscience of all kinds?" The question is asked with great precision—it does not ask how much merit there is; it asks the place where the merit abides. The Buddha first praises him, 「善哉！善哉」 tr. "Excellent! Excellent", affirming that this question is asked on behalf of the avaivartika, and then gives the names: 「深奧處者，空是其義，無相、無作、無起、無生、無染、離、寂滅、如、法性、實際、涅槃。」 tr. "The profound place: emptiness is its meaning—the signless, non-action, non-origination, non-arising, non-staining, separation, quiescence, suchness, the nature of dharmas, the limit of reality, nirvāṇa." Emptiness leads, with eleven names below it, twelve in all. These twelve names are not twelve things; they are twelve entrances to one and the same thing: spoken of from the negation of marks, it is the signless and non-action; from not originating and not arising, it is non-origination and non-arising; from not being stained and not being bound, it is non-staining and separation; from stilling, it is quiescence; from being as it really is, it is suchness, the nature of dharmas, and the limit of reality; from the ultimate, it is nirvāṇa. Though the names are many, what they point to is one place.

4. Not only the twelve names are profound; all dharmas are profound. Subhūti at once presses: 「但空乃至涅槃是深奧，非一切法深奧耶？」 tr. "Is it only emptiness and so on up to nirvāṇa that is profound, and not all dharmas that are profound?" This question needed to be asked—once the twelve names come out, people will naturally fence off the profound as a special zone and leave form, feeling, perception, constructions, and consciousness outside it. The Buddha's answer tears down the wall: 「一切法亦是深奧義」 tr. "all dharmas too have the profound meaning"; form too is profound, feeling, perception, constructions, and consciousness too are profound; the eye and so on up to the mind, forms and so on up to dharmas, the eye element and so on up to the mind-consciousness element, dānapāramitā and so on up to prajñāpāramitā, the four foundations of mindfulness and so on up to anuttarā samyaksaṃbodhi—all are profound. From the five aggregates to the twelve sense-fields and the eighteen elements, from the six perfections to awakening, the sūtra text counts all the way through the ordinary and the noble, the stained and the pure—there is not one dharma outside the profound.

5. Form is profound because the suchness of form is profound. Subhūti asks again: 「云何色深奧乃至阿耨多羅三藐三菩提亦深奧？」 tr. "How is form profound, and so on up to anuttarā samyaksaṃbodhi also being profound?" The Buddha answers: 「色如深奧故，色深奧」 tr. "because the suchness of form is profound, form is profound", and so on up to: because the suchness of awakening is profound, awakening is profound. This sentence is the pivot of this chapter. Form in itself is a dharma that can be seen and can be destroyed; nothing deep can be seen in it; what is deep is the 「如」 tr. "suchness" of form. So to say that all dharmas are profound is not to say that all dharmas are hard to understand; it is to say that each dharma has an original mark that cannot be destroyed and cannot be discriminated, and that original mark is the depth. The depth is not outside the dharma, nor inside the dharma; it is in the dharma's 「如」 tr. "suchness".

6. The suchness of form is not form and is not apart from form. Thereupon Subhūti presses a third time: 「云何色如深奧乃至阿耨多羅三藐三菩提如深奧？」 tr. "How is the suchness of form profound, and so on up to the suchness of anuttarā samyaksaṃbodhi being profound?" The Buddha answers: 「是色如，非是色、非離色」 tr. "this suchness of form is not form and is not apart from form", and likewise the suchness of consciousness, and so on up to the suchness of awakening. This is a double-negation sentence: say ‘suchness is just form’, and suchness arises and ceases along with form and is destroyed; say ‘suchness exists separately, apart from form’, and suchness becomes another real dharma, still fallen into existence. Both sides are negated, and this is exactly why the deep is deep—whatever can be pinned down on one side is still not deep enough. The layer-upon-layer deepening of three questions and three answers is completed here: from name to dharma, from dharma to suchness, from suchness to the double negation.

7. Subhūti praises the subtle skilful means—leaving form to dwell in nirvāṇa. Hearing this, Subhūti praises: 「希有！世尊微妙方便力故，令阿鞞跋致菩薩離色處涅槃」 tr. "Rare! Because of the World-Honored One's power of subtle skilful means, he causes the avaivartika bodhisattva to leave form and dwell in nirvāṇa", and so on up to leaving feeling, perception, constructions, and consciousness, leaving all dharmas—worldly and world-transcending, with contention and without contention, with outflows and without outflows—and dwelling in nirvāṇa. Note that this 「離」 tr. "leaving" is not throwing aside and ignoring, but not grasping at marks and settling within them; worldly dharmas must of course be left, and world-transcending dharmas and dharmas without outflows must equally be left. The reason the skilful means is subtle lies exactly in its enabling a person to rise up even from the place most like nirvāṇa.

8. The Buddha affirms his praise and shows that when a single thought arises, immeasurable merit is obtained and immeasurable kalpas are passed beyond; the question set up about the man of much lust making an appointment. After affirming it, the Buddha turns to the gate of practice: the bodhisattva, 「如是甚深法與般若波羅蜜相應，觀察、籌量、思惟」 tr. "with such very deep dharmas in accord with prajñāpāramitā, contemplates, reckons, and considers", and makes the thought—I should practise thus, as taught in prajñā; I should train thus, as spoken in prajñā. If he can practise as spoken, train as spoken, and contemplate as in prajñā, then 「具足勤精進，一念生時，當得無量無邊阿僧祇福德」 tr. "fully endowed with diligent vigour, when a single thought arises, he will obtain immeasurable, boundless asaṃkhyeya merit", and this bodhisattva 「超越無量劫，近阿耨多羅三藐三菩提」 tr. "passes beyond immeasurable kalpas and draws near to anuttarā samyaksaṃbodhi"; how much more one who constantly practises prajñā. The reason the magnitude here is so startling is that the object is the deepest dharma, not that the time of effort is long. Then the Buddha sets up a simile: 「譬如多婬欲人與端正淨潔女人共期」 tr. "As when a man of much lust makes an appointment with a beautiful, clean, and comely woman"; the woman is hindered and cannot keep the appointment—where does that man's thought fall? The simile does not praise lust; it takes the clinging and the density of his thought as a measuring rule.

9. Thought after thought always with her; in one day and one night his thoughts are very many. Subhūti answers truly: 「是人念念常在彼女人所，恒作是念，憶想當來與共坐臥歡樂。」 tr. "Thought after thought, this man is always where that woman is, constantly thinking this thought, recollecting and imagining how she will come and they will sit and lie together in pleasure." The Buddha asks again: 「是人一日一夜為有幾念生？」 tr. "In one day and one night, how many thoughts arise in this man?" Subhūti answers: 「是人一日一夜其念甚多！」 tr. "In one day and one night this man's thoughts are very many!" One question and one answer push the simile to the vital point: an unfulfilled desire most of all keeps the thoughts from breaking off, and thoughts that do not break off are exactly the one point being borrowed here.

10. The bodhisattva thinking of prajñā passes beyond a number of kalpas in the space of a single thought; the roots of goodness of one day surpass the other merits of worlds like the sands of the Ganges. The Buddha gathers it together with this: the bodhisattva who thinks of prajñāpāramitā and practises this path as spoken in prajñā, 「一念頃超越劫數，亦如彼人一日一夜心念之數」 tr. "in the space of a single thought passes beyond a number of kalpas, like the number of that man's thoughts in one day and one night"; because he practises prajñā he is far removed from all offences, namely 「離阿耨多羅三藐三菩提罪」 tr. "free of the offences against anuttarā samyaksaṃbodhi"; the merit of the roots of goodness obtained in one day, even if set against the other merits filling three-thousand great-thousand worlds as many as the sands of the Ganges, 「猶亦不減」 tr. "is still not less", and the other merits 「百分不及一分」 tr. "do not reach one part in a hundred", and so on up to being beyond the reach of calculation and simile. The use of the simile is now clear: it takes the density, takes the unbrokenness, and discards the object clung to. The thoughts of the man of much lust stick to a woman who is hindered and does not come; the bodhisattva's thoughts stick to the deepest dharma—once the object is changed, the same continuity becomes the provision for passing beyond kalpas.

11. The treatise-author begins his explanation—Subhūti, hearing the marks, rejoices and praises. The treatise-author explains, first reconstructing the state of mind in which Subhūti spoke: he 「聞阿鞞跋致相時，具聞阿鞞跋致功德，心大歡喜」 tr. "when he heard the marks of the avaivartika, heard in full the merits of the avaivartika, and his mind greatly rejoiced"; because he wished to praise these merits, he said to the Buddha that the avaivartika is accomplished in great merit, in immeasurable and boundless merit. The treatise-author's habit in explaining the sūtra can be glimpsed here—he first asks who said this sentence and in what state of mind, and then asks what it said.

12. The Buddha affirms his praise and speaks its causes and conditions; four explanations of the four unobstructed knowledges; like the water of the great sea, which cannot be poured out and exhausted. The treatise-author next explains the Buddha's affirmation: the Buddha 「更自說大功德等因緣」 tr. "further himself spoke of the causes and conditions of the great merit and the rest", namely that the avaivartika obtains immeasurable, boundless wisdom and does not practise in common with the two vehicles—here the treatise-author supplies an order: 「要先知而後行，行已，受其功德」 tr. "one must first know and then practise; having practised, one receives its merit", and so the causes and conditions of merit return to wisdom, and wisdom is prajñāpāramitā. Abiding in prajñā, one gives rise to the four unobstructed knowledges, and the treatise-author gives a definition of each: wisdom unobstructed and unhindered within the real meaning of all dharmas is unobstructed knowledge of meaning; having known meaning without obstruction, discriminating the various names of dharmas so as to speak their meaning is unobstructed knowledge of dharmas; names must come forth by way of language, and this is unobstructed knowledge of expression; because one has obtained unobstructed knowledge of dharmas and of expression, one delights in speaking the real meaning of dharmas, and this is unobstructed knowledge of delight in speaking. The four are not four abilities set side by side; they are one line—first penetrating the meaning, then being able to set names to it, then being able to put it into speech, and finally being able to speak without end. Abiding securely in them, 「一切眾生問難，無能窮盡；如大海水，不可傾竭」 tr. "all beings who question and challenge cannot exhaust him; like the water of the great sea, it cannot be poured out and exhausted". What the sea simile takes is not greatness, but that it cannot be ladled dry.

13. The two preceding chapters spoke of the complete marks; only in this chapter is the gate of the four unobstructed knowledges opened. The treatise-author adds a further structural remark: Subhūti had heard the complete marks of the avaivartika spoken in the two chapters above; 「入此品，佛方開四無礙門，更欲說阿鞞跋致相」 tr. "entering this chapter, the Buddha only now opens the gate of the four unobstructed knowledges, wishing to speak further of the marks of the avaivartika", and that is why there are words praising the Buddha—the Buddha's wisdom is immeasurable and boundless, the merit of the avaivartika is also immeasurable and boundless, and even if one delighted in speaking of it for kalpas like the sands of the Ganges, one could not finish. This passage connects for the reader the thread between chapter and chapter: this chapter does not start afresh; it carries on from the marks of the avaivartika and goes one layer deeper.

14. The treatise-author restates the question of the profound place, and the Buddha's praise, approval, and setting-up of names. Following the sūtra, the treatise-author restates three matters: Subhūti asks 「何等是阿鞞跋致深奧處」 tr. "what is the profound place of the avaivartika", abiding in which profound place one can fulfil the six perfections, the four foundations of mindfulness, and so on up to the omniscience of all kinds; the Buddha praises him, 「善哉！汝能為阿鞞跋致菩薩問深奧義」 tr. "Excellent! You are able to ask about the profound meaning on behalf of the avaivartika bodhisattvas"; the Buddha tells Subhūti 「空等乃至涅槃是名深奧」 tr. "emptiness and the rest, and so on up to nirvāṇa, are called profound". Restating is not repeating; it first fixes the topic to be debated below—since the topic is ‘why emptiness is deep’, the question and answer that follow have somewhere to land.

15. Question—emptiness is without anything existent; by what is it deep? Question: 「諸有法種種細分別，人不解故有深；空無所有，以何為深？」 tr. "Existent dharmas have all kinds of fine discriminations; because people do not understand them, there is depth. Emptiness is without anything existent; by what is it deep?" This question has great force. What the world calls deep is mostly the depth of the intricate and hard to understand: the finer the marks of dharmas are divided, the less people understand, and so they call it deep. Since emptiness has nothing at all, nothing to discriminate and nothing to delve into, where does depth come from? The questioner speaks out the plainest doubt on the reader's behalf—might 「深」 tr. "deep" be nothing but an empty word of praise?

16. Answer—this emptiness is the emptiness of attaining the path, not merely what the mouth says; therefore it is called deep. Answer: 「非直口說名字故空」 tr. "it is not empty merely because the mouth says the name"—it is not that saying the word ‘empty’ with the mouth counts as emptiness. Rather, 「分別解諸有相，內不見有我，外不見定實法」 tr. "one discriminates and understands the marks of existents; within, one sees no self; without, one sees no fixed, real dharma"; having obtained this emptiness, 「觀一切法相皆是虛誑，有諸過罪」 tr. "one contemplates the marks of all dharmas as all false and deceptive, having all kinds of faults and offences"; having seen their faults, 「若滅諸相，更不作願生三界」 tr. "if one extinguishes the marks, one no longer makes a vow to be born in the three realms". Therefore 「此空是得道空，非但口說，是故言深」 tr. "this emptiness is the emptiness of attaining the path, not merely what the mouth says; therefore it is called deep". The gist of the answer is: the depth of emptiness lies not in the complexity of the concept, but in whether it can truly sever the vow and truly leave the three realms. The emptiness of names and marks anyone can speak of; the emptiness of attaining the path must be tested against birth and death—the measure of deep and shallow lies here, not in the density of names and marks.

17. Furthermore—emptiness too is empty; it is deep because it does not cling to emptiness. The treatise-author advances another layer: 「復次，空亦復空；若著是空，則有過失，是不名深。」 tr. "Furthermore, emptiness too is empty; if one clings to this emptiness, there is a fault, and it is not called deep." If emptiness comes forth from refuting the existence held by wrong views, that is deep; 「若於空中，亦不著空故亦深」 tr. "if within emptiness one also does not cling to emptiness, it is also deep". This layer turns the previous one over again: if the emptiness of attaining the path is grasped as something attained, it at once degenerates into another existence, and the depth is lost too. So depth has two thresholds—first one must truly be able to refute existence, and then one must not keep in one's hand even the tool that refuted existence.

18. Furthermore—contemplating arising and ceasing refutes permanence; contemplating ultimate emptiness refutes arising and ceasing; the two kinds of non-arising-and-non-ceasing; each name obtains its depth. The treatise-author's third layer is spoken most finely: 「觀五眾生滅，破常顛倒；觀畢竟空，破生滅」 tr. "contemplating the arising and ceasing of the five aggregates refutes the inversion of permanence; contemplating ultimate emptiness refutes arising and ceasing", because 「空中無無常、無生滅故」 tr. "within emptiness there is no impermanence and no arising and ceasing". And 「無生滅有二種」 tr. "non-arising-and-non-ceasing is of two kinds": first, people of wrong view speak of no arising and ceasing because they say the world is permanently existent; second, because arising and ceasing are refuted, one speaks of no arising and ceasing. The same phrase, 「無生滅」 tr. "no arising and ceasing"—one is an inversion, one is the path; the watershed lies in whether it comes from refuting or from grasping. Here one refutes arising and ceasing and 「亦不著是不生不滅，故名為深」 tr. "also does not cling to this non-arising and non-ceasing; therefore it is called deep". Next the treatise-author matches the twelve names class by class with the reason they are deep: afflictions are hard to remove, so it says 「離欲、寂滅故深」 tr. "deep because of freedom from desire and quiescence"; error is easy and the real is hard, so suchness, the nature of dharmas, and the limit of reality are deep; nirvāṇa is 「諸梵天等九十六種道所不能及」 tr. "what the ninety-six kinds of paths, of the Brahmā gods and the rest, cannot reach", so it is deep; again, within nirvāṇa all who have attained the path 「入者永不復出」 tr. "having entered, never come out again", so it is deep. One can see that 「深」 tr. "deep" in the treatise-author's hands is always a judgement with a reason, not an adjective of praise—deep because hard to remove, deep because hard to obtain, deep because unreachable, deep because one never comes out again.

19. Question—what kind of emptiness is the deep spoken of here? Question: 「此中說空等法深，是何等空？」 tr. "Here it is said that emptiness and the other dharmas are deep; what kind of emptiness is this?" Earlier it was already made clear why emptiness is deep; here the question changes to which emptiness it is. This question is necessary, because 「空」 tr. "emptiness" at that time already had ready-made explanations in circulation, and if it is not named, it will be taken over by the ready-made explanations.

20. Answer—two views set side by side: because of the concentration of the three samādhi one contemplates emptiness; because the outer form taken as object is empty, it is called the emptiness samādhi. The treatise-author gives his Answer: first setting two views side by side. The first view: 「有人言：三三昧——空、無相、無作；心數法名為定，定故能觀諸法空。」 tr. "Someone says: the three samādhi—emptiness, the signless, non-action; a mental-factor dharma is called concentration, and because of concentration one can contemplate the emptiness of dharmas." This view assigns emptiness to the contemplating mind of concentration—emptiness is what the power of concentration lights up. The names of the three samādhi are given here in passing: emptiness, the signless, non-action. The second view: 「有人言：外所緣色等諸法皆空，緣外空故名為空三昧。」 tr. "Someone says: the outer dharmas taken as object, form and the rest, are all empty; because one takes outer emptiness as object, it is called the emptiness samādhi." This view assigns emptiness to the outer realm taken as object—the outer realm is originally empty, and taking it as object is what is called the emptiness samādhi. One view stresses the subject, one stresses the object; the two views are set side by side, and the treatise-author does not judge first here.

21. Here the Buddha speaks the middle way, apart from the two extremes—because what comes together from causes and conditions has no self-nature, it is ultimate emptiness. The treatise-author cites the Buddha's words to refute both extremes: 「不以空三昧故空，亦不以所緣外色等諸法故空。」 tr. "It is not empty because of the emptiness samādhi, nor is it empty because of the outer dharmas taken as object, form and the rest." Refuting the first view: if outer dharmas are not really empty and are made empty only by the power of samādhi, 「是虛妄不實」 tr. "this is false and unreal"—such an emptiness is made by the mind, not what dharmas originally are. Refuting the second view: if samādhi arises by taking outer emptiness as object, that does not hold either, because 「若色等法實是空相，則不能生空三昧；若生空三昧，則非是空」 tr. "if form and the other dharmas are really of the mark of emptiness, then they cannot give rise to the emptiness samādhi; if they give rise to the emptiness samādhi, then they are not empty"—if the object is already empty, there is no mark that can be taken as object to give rise to concentration; if there is a mark that can be taken as object, it is not empty. Both extremes refuted, the treatise-author brings out the middle way: 「離是二邊說中道，所謂諸法因緣和合生，是和合法無有一定法故空」 tr. "apart from these two extremes the middle way is spoken, namely that dharmas arise from the coming together of causes and conditions; these dharmas that come together have not a single fixed dharma, and therefore they are empty"; dharmas born of causes and conditions have no self-nature, and 「無自性故即是畢竟空」 tr. "because they have no self-nature, they are ultimate emptiness". And he adds three important sentences: this ultimate emptiness 「從本以來空」 tr. "has been empty from the very beginning"; it 「非佛所作，亦非餘人所作」 tr. "is not made by the Buddha, nor made by anyone else", and the buddhas only speak it for the beings who can be delivered; 「是空相是一切諸法實體，不因內外有」 tr. "this mark of emptiness is the real substance of all dharmas, and does not exist because of inner or outer". Emptiness belongs neither to the subject, nor to the object, nor to a maker—this is the true body of the 「深」 tr. "deep" spoken of earlier.

22. This emptiness has all kinds of names. The treatise-author closes it in one sentence: 「是空有種種名字，所謂無相、無作、寂滅、離、涅槃等。」 tr. "This emptiness has all kinds of names, namely the signless, non-action, quiescence, separation, nirvāṇa, and the rest." The string of names at the opening of the sūtra text here finds its settling place—they are not twelve profound dharmas, but the various designations of one and the same ultimate emptiness. The names are many and the substance is one; this is the first thing most to be grasped when reading the names and marks of this chapter.

23. Subhūti asks on behalf of those of keen faculties who deeply cling to nirvāṇa; the Buddha answers that form and the rest are very deep because of suchness, and suchness is right contemplation. The treatise-author supplies the motive of Subhūti's second question: 「須菩提知諸菩薩利根，深著涅槃」 tr. "Subhūti knew that the bodhisattvas were of keen faculties and deeply clung to nirvāṇa", and for the sake of these bodhisattvas asked 「但涅槃甚深，諸法不甚深耶」 tr. "is only nirvāṇa very deep, and are dharmas not very deep?" He does not ask because he himself does not understand; he asks on behalf of a sickness—those of keen faculties most easily enshrine nirvāṇa and throw form away. The Buddha answers: 「正觀色等一切法得涅槃，色等諸法因涅槃故甚深」 tr. "by rightly contemplating form and all other dharmas one obtains nirvāṇa; form and the other dharmas are very deep because of nirvāṇa", and so the sūtra says 「色等如故甚深」 tr. "form and the rest are very deep because of suchness"; and the treatise-author adds a key equation: 「色等如即是正觀。」 tr. "The suchness of form and the rest is right contemplation." Nirvāṇa is not set up as another realm outside form; rightly contemplating form and the rest is obtaining nirvāṇa; suchness is precisely what right contemplation sees. The sickness of clinging to nirvāṇa and discarding dharmas is here pulled out by the root.

24. Subhūti asks how; the Buddha himself speaks the causes and conditions of the deep, taking the clay pot as simile. Subhūti asks again, 「云何色等如故色等法甚深」 tr. "how are form and the other dharmas very deep because of the suchness of form and the rest", and the treatise-author says 「此中佛自說深因緣」 tr. "here the Buddha himself speaks the causes and conditions of the deep", namely that sentence of the sūtra text, 「如，非是色、非離色」 tr. "suchness is not form and is not apart from form". Then he gives the first simile of this unit: 「譬如以泥為瓶，泥非即是瓶、不離泥有瓶，亦不得言無瓶。」 tr. "As when clay is made into a pot: the clay is not the pot, yet there is no pot apart from the clay, nor can one say there is no pot." The relation of clay and pot falls exactly so that beyond the double negation there is still something that cannot be denied—one cannot say the clay is the pot, one cannot say there is a pot apart from the clay, nor can one on that account say there is no pot at all. So too with suchness in relation to form: it cannot be equated, cannot be separated, cannot be dismissed as nothing. All three sentences must be present; lacking the third, one slides into annihilation.

25. Subhūti praises the rare; the Buddha affirms it and praises the merit of a single thought. The treatise-author continues: 「須菩提知是因緣法甚深，如大海無有底故」 tr. "Subhūti knew that this dharma of causes and conditions is very deep, like the great sea that has no bottom", and so praised it as rare—that the Buddha by the power of subtle skilful means causes the bodhisattva to leave form and the other dharmas and dwell in nirvāṇa, 「亦不著涅槃，亦不住世間」 tr. "yet also not clinging to nirvāṇa, nor abiding in the world". This sentence of the treatise-author's is supplied at a crucial point: leaving the world yet not abiding in nirvāṇa, leaving nirvāṇa yet not falling into the world—abiding in neither is what is called subtle skilful means. The Buddha affirms his praise, and praises the merit of retribution of the bodhisattva who practises the real mark of all dharmas—「如是甚深法與般若相應，觀察、籌量等一念生時，得無量無邊阿僧祇福德」 tr. "with such very deep dharmas in accord with prajñā, when a single thought of contemplating, reckoning, and the rest arises, he obtains immeasurable, boundless asaṃkhyeya merit".

26. Question—the dharmas without outflows of the two vehicles have not even the merit of retribution; how much less the contemplation of ultimate emptiness. Question: 「二乘無漏法尚無果報福德，何況大乘畢竟空觀法得無量福德！」 tr. "The dharmas without outflows of the two vehicles have not even the merit of retribution; how much less can the Great Vehicle's dharma of contemplating ultimate emptiness obtain immeasurable merit!" The questioner adds a reason: 「福德從大慈悲愍眾生故生，如罪亦由惱害眾生故得。」 tr. "Merit arises from great kindness and compassion pitying beings, just as offence too is incurred by vexing and harming beings." The skeleton of this question is: merit has an object and a counterpart—kindness and compassion take beings as object and give rise to merit; vexing and harming take beings as object and incur offence; contemplating ultimate emptiness is precisely sweeping the object away into emptiness; once it is swept away, how does it still give rise to merit? Moreover, even in the mind without outflows of the two vehicles there is no response of retribution, how much less in the contemplation of ultimate emptiness, emptier than the two vehicles. The question is hard, because it seizes on the surface contradiction between emptiness and merit.

27. Answer—because afflictions are exhausted there is no retribution; because the limit of reality is realised, all merits are burned up. Answer: the treatise-author gives two layers in a row. The first layer speaks from the afflictions: 「二乘無漏心中煩惱盡故，無果報福德；菩薩煩惱未盡故，應有福德果報。」 tr. "Because in the mind without outflows of the two vehicles the afflictions are exhausted, there is no merit of retribution; because the bodhisattva's afflictions are not yet exhausted, there should be the retribution of merit." Retribution exists because there is still someone to receive retribution; the afflictions of the two vehicles are already exhausted, there is no one to receive the fruit, and so there is no merit of retribution—this is not that the two vehicles' merit is thin; it is that there is nowhere for it to land. The second layer speaks from realising and not realising: 「二乘於實際證故，燒盡諸功德；菩薩不證，更有生故，便有福德。」 tr. "Because the two vehicles realise the limit of reality, all merits are burned up; the bodhisattva does not realise it and has further births, so there is merit." Realising and entering the limit of reality is like entering fire, in which all merits are burned up; the bodhisattva does not take realisation, keeps the afflictions to moisten birth, and only so does merit have ground on which to continue. Taking the two layers together, the contradiction of the previous question is in fact a misplacement—emptiness does not cancel merit; taking realisation cancels merit.

28. Furthermore—the depth and shallowness of fields of merit; the step-by-step increase from giving to animals up to the noble ones; the contrast of the ordinary person and the srota-āpanna; continuity thought after thought and the simile of the man of much lust; the simile of the mild medicine and the medicine of great strength. The treatise-author's third layer starts from ‘merit comes from the reality one faces’: 「人於實事錯謬故福德少，正行實事故得福多。」 tr. "Because people err about real matters, their merit is small; because they rightly practise real matters, the merit obtained is great." He at once gives the order of the increasing merit of giving—giving to animals obtains a hundredfold, giving to evil people obtains a thousandfold, giving to good people obtains a hundred-thousandfold, giving to people free of desire obtains a hundred-thousand-koṭi-fold, giving to the srota-āpanna and the other noble ones obtains immeasurable merit. The criterion of this series lies not in the fine standing of the recipient, but in how much the recipient has attained of the real mark of all dharmas; the evidence is the contrast the treatise-author gives right after: 「凡夫人雖離欲行慈悲心，不得實法相故，不得作無量福田；須陀洹雖未離欲，分別諸法實相故，福田無量。」 tr. "Though an ordinary person is free of desire and practises the mind of kindness and compassion, because he has not obtained the mark of the real dharma, he cannot be an immeasurable field of merit; though the srota-āpanna is not yet free of desire, because he discerns the real mark of all dharmas, he is an immeasurable field of merit." The ordinary person free of desire loses to the first fruit not yet free of desire—one can see that the power of concentration is not the measure of a field of merit; seeing the real mark is. From this it follows: 「諸法實相，得有深淺；是故菩薩深入實相故，一念中福德無量無邊。」 tr. "The real mark of all dharmas may be attained deeply or shallowly; therefore, because the bodhisattva enters deeply into the real mark, in a single thought his merit is immeasurable and boundless." The earlier question is thus fully answered: the contemplation of ultimate emptiness does not sweep away the object; it sees the real mark most deeply, and therefore its merit is on the contrary the greatest. Next the treatise-author explains the sūtra's simile of the man of much lust: the minds of beings, 「雖念念生滅，但相續生故，不覺隨滅」 tr. "though they arise and cease thought after thought, yet because they arise in continuity, one does not notice them ceasing one after another"; the mind of the man of much lust clings deeply to what he desires and is not satisfied, and so 「心生憶念、取相」 tr. "the mind gives rise to recollection and grasps at marks", discriminating in all sorts of ways why she has not come—has she regretted it herself and not come? Has someone blocked her and kept her from coming?—「如是等多生覺觀心」 tr. "in such ways many minds of initial and sustained thought arise". The treatise-author also explains the reason for taking this simile: 「是心易覺知故，以為譬喻」 tr. "because this mind is easy to be aware of, it is taken as a simile"—not because it is noble, but because it is obvious, and anyone can verify in himself how densely thoughts follow in continuity. 「如是一念因緣事超一劫。」 tr. "In this way, the matter of the causes and conditions of a single thought passes beyond a kalpa." At the end another simile is added to conclude: 「如人服軟藥，一歲乃差病；服大力藥，一日能差。」 tr. "As when a person takes a mild medicine and is cured of the illness only after a year, but takes a medicine of great strength and can be cured in a single day." The bodhisattva is also like this—those who practise the five perfections become buddhas only after a long, long time; those who practise prajñāpāramitā swiftly become buddhas. The medicine simile makes plain prajñā's place among the six perfections: it is not one more ingredient of the medicine, but the one ingredient that makes the illness heal quickly.

29. Furthermore—the substance of the merit of one day's practice of prajñā is not diminished. At the end the treatise-author restates the sūtra's words of magnitude: the merit of practising prajñāpāramitā for one day, 「假令有形」 tr. "supposing it had form", if compared with the merits filling three-thousand great-thousand worlds as many as the sands of the Ganges, 「於一日中正功德體，猶故不減」 tr. "the true substance of the merit within the one day would still not be diminished", and all the other merits 「百分不及一，乃至算數譬喻所不能及」 tr. "do not reach one in a hundred, and so on up to being beyond the reach of calculation and simile". The four Chinese characters 「假令有形」 tr. "supposing it had form" are a hypothetical—merit is originally formless; one provisionally supposes it has form in order to compare, and the result of the comparison is still that it is not diminished. Treatise ① ends here, and this sentence is also the fuse of the sevenfold weighing of Sūtra ②.

30. The first and second rounds of Sūtra ②—giving to the Three Jewels; making offerings to the four fruits, the pratyekabuddhas, and the buddhas. Sūtra ② continues from the teaching of the preceding passage with 「復次，須菩提」 tr. "Furthermore, Subhūti". The first round: if the bodhisattva, 「遠離般若波羅蜜」 tr. "far removed from prajñāpāramitā", gives to the Buddha Jewel, the Dharma Jewel, and the Jewel of the Bhikṣu Saṅgha for kalpas equal to the sands of the Ganges, is the merit obtained great? Subhūti answers, 「甚多！無量無邊阿僧祇」 tr. "Very great! Immeasurable, boundless, asaṃkhyeya." The Buddha judges: 「不如菩薩摩訶薩深般若波羅蜜中一日如說修行得福多」 tr. "It does not equal the bodhisattva-mahāsattva who for a single day practises as taught within the deep prajñāpāramitā; his merit is greater", and brings out the superior cause and condition—prajñā is the path of the bodhisattvas; 「乘是道，疾得阿耨多羅三藐三菩提」 tr. "riding this path, they swiftly obtain anuttarā samyaksaṃbodhi". The second round is set up at once: making offerings for kalpas like the sands of the Ganges to the srota-āpanna, the sakṛdāgāmin, the anāgāmin, the arhat, the pratyekabuddha, and the buddhas—is the merit obtained great? The common sentence pattern of the seven rounds must be seen clearly: the field of giving becomes more excellent round by round, the time is uniformly kalpas like the sands of the Ganges, and every round carries the seven Chinese characters 「遠離般若波羅蜜」 tr. "far removed from prajñāpāramitā"—what is weighed is never giving and offering themselves, but giving and offering apart from prajñā.

31. The judgement of the second round and the third round—passing beyond the two grounds and entering the bodhisattva's position; practising the six perfections. The Buddha judges the second round: it does not equal practising as taught for a single day, whose merit is greater, because 「菩薩摩訶薩行是般若波羅蜜，過一切聲聞、辟支佛地，入菩薩位，漸漸得阿耨多羅三藐三菩提」 tr. "the bodhisattva-mahāsattva who practises this prajñāpāramitā passes beyond all the śrāvaka and pratyekabuddha grounds, enters the bodhisattva's position, and gradually obtains anuttarā samyaksaṃbodhi". However great the merit of making offerings to the noble ones of the two vehicles, it is still within the realm of the two vehicles; prajñā is the step that passes beyond the grounds of the two vehicles and enters the bodhisattva's position. The third round is set up: practising giving, morality, patience, vigour, meditation, and wisdom for kalpas like the sands of the Ganges—is the merit obtained great?—note that this round is no longer giving to others but practising the six perfections oneself; the blade of the weighing begins to turn toward practice itself.

32. The judgement of the third round and the fourth round—prajñā is the mother of the bodhisattvas; practising the gift of Dharma. The Buddha judges: it does not equal practising giving and so on up to wisdom as taught for a single day, whose merit is greater; the superior cause and condition is 「般若波羅蜜是菩薩摩訶薩母故，是般若波羅蜜能生諸菩薩摩訶薩」 tr. "because prajñāpāramitā is the mother of the bodhisattva-mahāsattvas; this prajñāpāramitā can give birth to the bodhisattva-mahāsattvas"; abiding in prajñā, 「能具足一切佛法」 tr. "one can fulfil all the dharmas of the Buddha". As a simile, mother is taken for her ability to give birth: the five perfections are the children given birth to, prajñā the mother who gives birth; to have children apart from the mother—this is why the third round loses. The fourth round is set up: practising the gift of Dharma for a lifespan of kalpas like the sands of the Ganges—is the merit obtained great? Among the gifts of the world the gift of Dharma is already supreme—even it must carry 「遠離般若」 tr. "far removed from prajñā" to be compared.

33. The judgement of the fourth round and the fifth round—not apart from prajñā, one is not apart from the omniscience of all kinds; cultivating the four foundations of mindfulness and so on up to the omniscience of all kinds. The Buddha judges the fourth round: it does not equal the gift of Dharma of a single day, whose merit is greater, because 「是菩薩摩訶薩不遠離般若波羅蜜，則不遠離一切種智；不遠離一切種智，則不遠離般若波羅蜜」 tr. "this bodhisattva-mahāsattva, not far removed from prajñāpāramitā, is then not far removed from the omniscience of all kinds; not far removed from the omniscience of all kinds, he is then not far removed from prajñāpāramitā"—the two sentences speak each other, showing that prajñā and the omniscience of all kinds are the two ends, cause and fruit, of one and the same thing; apart from this, one is apart from both. Hence the concluding exhortation: 「欲得阿耨多羅三藐三菩提，不當遠離般若波羅蜜。」 tr. "One who wishes to obtain anuttarā samyaksaṃbodhi should not be far removed from prajñāpāramitā." The fifth round is set up: far removed from prajñā, cultivating for kalpas like the sands of the Ganges the four foundations of mindfulness and so on up to the eightfold noble path, inner emptiness and so on up to the omniscience of all kinds—is the merit obtained great? The weighing has by now been pushed to the limbs of the path and the emptinesses—even the practices most like prajñā, apart from prajñā, are still on the side being weighed.

34. The judgement of the fifth round and the sixth round—that one should turn back from sarvajñā is impossible; dedicating the merit of the gift of wealth, the gift of Dharma, and meditative concentration. The Buddha judges: it does not equal cultivating the four foundations of mindfulness and so on up to the omniscience of all kinds as taught for a single day, whose merit is greater, because 「若菩薩摩訶薩不遠離般若波羅蜜，於薩婆若轉者，無有是處」 tr. "if the bodhisattva-mahāsattva is not far removed from prajñāpāramitā, that he should turn back from sarvajñā is impossible"; conversely, if, far removed from prajñā, he retrogresses from sarvajñā, 「則有是處」 tr. "then this is possible". This is a judgement set in positive and negative opposition: not apart from prajñā, one certainly does not retrogress; apart from prajñā, retrogression becomes possible—and so it says 「常不應遠離般若波羅蜜行」 tr. "one should never practise far removed from prajñāpāramitā". The sixth round is set up: dedicating to anuttarā samyaksaṃbodhi, for a lifespan of kalpas like the sands of the Ganges, the merit of the gift of wealth, the gift of Dharma, and meditative concentration—is the merit obtained great? Once dedication enters the scene, the weighing is pushed from practice to where practice goes.

35. The judgement of the sixth round and the seventh round—the foremost dedication; dedication with rejoicing. The Buddha judges: it does not equal practising as taught for a single day and dedicating the merit of the gift of wealth, the gift of Dharma, and meditative concentration, whose merit is greater, because 「是第一迴向，所謂般若波羅蜜迴向。若遠離般若波羅蜜迴向，是不名迴向」 tr. "this is the foremost dedication, namely the dedication of prajñāpāramitā. A dedication far removed from prajñāpāramitā is not called dedication". The judgement is very heavy—dedication apart from prajñā is not merely one grade lower; even the name of dedication does not hold for it. Hence the exhortation 「應方便學般若波羅蜜迴向」 tr. "one should by skilful means train in the dedication of prajñāpāramitā". The seventh round is set up: for a lifespan of kalpas like the sands of the Ganges, gathering together the roots of goodness of the buddhas of the past, future, and present and of their disciples, rejoicing and dedicating them to anuttarā samyaksaṃbodhi—is the merit obtained great? Dedication with rejoicing is the broadest of all dedications—the roots of goodness of the buddhas of the three times and of their disciples are entirely gathered into it—and yet it is still the side being weighed.

36. The judgement of the seventh round—one should train in the dedication by skilful means within prajñā. The Buddha judges: it does not equal dedicating the roots of goodness of rejoicing for a single day, whose merit is greater, and gathers up all seven rounds in one sentence: 「菩薩摩訶薩欲得阿耨多羅三藐三菩提，應學般若波羅蜜中方便迴向阿耨多羅三藐三菩提。」 tr. "The bodhisattva-mahāsattva who wishes to obtain anuttarā samyaksaṃbodhi should train in dedicating to anuttarā samyaksaṃbodhi by the skilful means within prajñāpāramitā." The seven rounds advance layer by layer—from giving to the Three Jewels to making offerings to the noble assembly, from the six perfections to the gift of Dharma, from the limbs of the path and the emptinesses to dedication and rejoicing—what is weighed looks more and more like the Buddha path, and the conclusion is always the same one: it lies not in the matter practised, but in whether, when practising, one is apart from prajñā or not.

37. Subhūti raises the difficulty that dharmas arising from causes and conditions are false and deceptive; the Buddha admits their falseness and returns to having trained well in the eighteen emptinesses. The weighing done, Subhūti raises the heaviest question of the whole passage: 「如佛所說，因緣起法從妄想生，非實。云何善男子、善女人得大福德？」 tr. "As the Buddha has said, dharmas arising from causes and conditions are born from false thinking and are not real. How do good men and good women obtain great merit?" And he pushes it to the end—by using these dharmas arising from causes and conditions, one should not obtain right view or enter the position of the Dharma, should not obtain the fruit of the srota-āpanna and so on up to the fruit of awakening. The Buddha's answer first admits it wholly: 「如是！如是！」 tr. "Just so! Just so!" By using dharmas arising from causes and conditions one indeed should not obtain right view, enter the position of the Dharma, and so on up to awakening. Only after admitting it does he turn it over: the bodhisattva who practises prajñā 「知因緣起法亦空、無堅固、虛誑不實」 tr. "knows that dharmas arising from causes and conditions are also empty, without firmness, false and deceptive and unreal", because he 「善學內空乃至善學無法有法空故」 tr. "has trained well in inner emptiness, and so on up to having trained well in the emptiness of non-existent and existent dharmas"; abiding in these eighteen emptinesses, 「種種觀作法空，即不遠離般若波羅蜜」 tr. "contemplating in all sorts of ways that made dharmas are empty, he is then not far removed from prajñāpāramitā", and thus, gradually not apart from prajñā, he 「漸漸得無數、無量、無邊福德」 tr. "gradually obtains countless, immeasurable, boundless merit". The key lies in a single Chinese character, 「知」 tr. "know": the same false and deceptive dharmas arising from causes and conditions—one who does not know is deceived by them, one who knows is not deceived by them—merit is not born from false and deceptive dharmas; it is born from the mind that is not deceived by what is false and deceptive. As for the eighteen emptinesses, the sūtra text here cites only the first and the last—beginning from inner emptiness and ending at the emptiness of non-existent and existent dharmas—as the collective name of a whole set of ways of contemplating emptiness.

38. The difference among the three meanings countless, immeasurable, and boundless. Subhūti asks: 「無數、無量、無邊，有何等異？」 tr. "Countless, immeasurable, boundless—what difference is there among them?" The Buddha distinguishes them one by one: 「無數者，名不墮數中——若有為性中、若無為性中」 tr. "Countless means not falling within number—whether within the conditioned nature or within the unconditioned nature"; 「無量者，量不可得，若過去、若未來、若現在」 tr. "immeasurable means that measure is unfindable, whether past, future, or present"; 「無邊者，諸法邊不可得」 tr. "boundless means that the bounds of dharmas are unfindable". The three names each take one angle—countless speaks of nature and class, not falling into the division of conditioned and unconditioned; immeasurable speaks of time: in all three times it cannot be weighed and measured; boundless speaks of limits: the boundaries of dharmas are unfindable. The three names do not describe its greatness; they say that it simply does not enter the ranks of the measurable.

39. Form and the rest also have the three meanings, because of emptiness. Subhūti asks further: 「頗有色亦無數、無量、無邊？」 tr. "Is there any way in which form too is countless, immeasurable, boundless?"—and likewise for feeling, perception, constructions, and consciousness. The Buddha answers 「有因緣」 tr. "there are causes and conditions". Subhūti asks again what causes and conditions, and the Buddha answers: 「色空故，無數、無量、無邊；受、想、行、識空故，無數、無量、無邊。」 tr. "Because form is empty, it is countless, immeasurable, boundless; because feeling, perception, constructions, and consciousness are empty, they are countless, immeasurable, boundless." The three meanings were originally words praising merit; here they are set upon the five aggregates—and the reason is only one word: emptiness. One can see that the three meanings are not terms of magnitude belonging to merit alone, but marks possessed by everything that is empty; the very reason merit is countless, immeasurable, and boundless is that it is set upon emptiness.

40. All dharmas are empty; the meaning of the four matters has no difference. Subhūti presses once more: 「但色空、受想行識空，非一切法空耶？」 tr. "Is it only form that is empty, and feeling, perception, constructions, and consciousness that are empty, and not all dharmas that are empty?" The Buddha asks back: 「我不說一切法空耶？」 tr. "Have I not said that all dharmas are empty?" Subhūti thereupon speaks the conclusion himself: the World-Honored One says all dharmas are empty, and the emptiness of dharmas 「即是不可盡、無有數、無量、無邊」 tr. "is inexhaustible, without number, immeasurable, boundless", because 「空中數不可得、量不可得、邊不可得」 tr. "within emptiness number is unfindable, measure is unfindable, bounds are unfindable", and so 「是不可盡、無數、無量、無邊義，無有異」 tr. "these meanings—inexhaustible, countless, immeasurable, boundless—have no difference". This passage is a typical case of a disciple completing the Buddha's words for him—after asking three times, the answer is spoken by the questioner himself, the four names returning to one meaning.

41. This dharma cannot be spoken; the Buddha by the power of skilful means distinguishes and speaks thirteen names. The Buddha affirms: 「是法義無別異。」 tr. "The meanings of this dharma have no difference." He then points out one layer deeper: 「是法不可說，佛以方便力故分別說」 tr. "this dharma cannot be spoken; the Buddha, by the power of skilful means, distinguishes and speaks it"—what are called inexhaustible, countless, immeasurable, boundless, non-clinging, emptiness, without perception, non-action, non-origination, non-arising, non-ceasing, non-staining, nirvāṇa, thirteen names in all, are all ways of speaking distinguished by the power of skilful means. This sentence gathers up the whole of the preceding analysis of names: the reason the sameness and difference between names can be analysed is that they are all originally skilful means; and the dharma they point to cannot originally be spoken.

42. Subhūti exclaims at the rare; all dharmas too cannot be spoken, and the mark that cannot be spoken is emptiness. Subhūti exclaims: 「諸法實相不可說，而佛以方便力說」 tr. "the real mark of all dharmas cannot be spoken, and yet the Buddha speaks it by the power of skilful means", and extends it one step—「如我解佛所說義，一切法亦不可說」 tr. "as I understand the meaning of what the Buddha says, all dharmas too cannot be spoken". The Buddha affirms it and goes one layer further: 「一切法不可說。一切法不可說相即是空，是空不可說。」 tr. "All dharmas cannot be spoken. The mark that all dharmas cannot be spoken is emptiness, and this emptiness cannot be spoken." The layers must be seen clearly: first it says that dharma cannot be spoken, then it says that the mark that cannot be spoken is emptiness, then it says that this emptiness itself too cannot be spoken. Unspeakability does not stop at silence; it does not set up as a dharma even the place to which 「不可說」 tr. "cannot be spoken" points.

43. The meaning that cannot be spoken neither increases nor decreases; from this is forced out the difficulty ‘if wholesome dharmas do not increase, how is awakening obtained’. Subhūti asks: 「不可說義有增有減不？」 tr. "Does the meaning that cannot be spoken increase or decrease, or not?" The Buddha answers: 「不也！須菩提！不可說義無增無減。」 tr. "No, Subhūti! The meaning that cannot be spoken neither increases nor decreases." Subhūti at once sees the consequence of this sentence and pushes it through item by item: if the meaning that cannot be spoken neither increases nor decreases, dānapāramitā and so on up to prajñāpāramitā should neither increase nor decrease; the four foundations of mindfulness and so on up to the eightfold noble path should neither increase nor decrease; the four dhyānas, the four immeasurable minds, the four formless absorptions, the five supernormal powers, the eight liberations, the eight spheres of mastery, the nine successive absorptions, the ten powers of the Buddha, the four fearlessnesses, the four unobstructed knowledges, and the eighteen unshared dharmas should also neither increase nor decrease. Thus the difficulty is formed: 「若菩薩摩訶薩六波羅蜜不增乃至十八不共法不增者，云何菩薩摩訶薩得阿耨多羅三藐三菩提？」 tr. "If the bodhisattva-mahāsattva's six perfections do not increase, and so on up to the eighteen unshared dharmas not increasing, how does the bodhisattva-mahāsattva obtain anuttarā samyaksaṃbodhi?" This difficulty is the most real concern of practitioners—if merit does not grow, what meaning is there in making effort?

44. The Buddha answers—because of the power of skilful means he does not make the thought of increase; it is called dānapāramitā only by name; dedicating according to the mark of awakening. The Buddha first does not loosen his words: 「不可說義無增無減」 tr. "the meaning that cannot be spoken neither increases nor decreases" still holds. The turning point is in the power of skilful means: the bodhisattva who trains in and practises prajñā, 「有方便力故，不作是念：『我增般若波羅蜜，乃至增檀波羅蜜。』」 tr. "because he has the power of skilful means, does not make this thought: ‘I increase prajñāpāramitā, and so on up to increasing dānapāramitā.’"; 「當作是念：『但名字故，名檀波羅蜜。』」 tr. "he should make this thought: ‘It is called dānapāramitā only by name.’". When he practises dānapāramitā, 「是心及善根，如阿耨多羅三藐三菩提相迴向」 tr. "this mind and its roots of goodness are dedicated according to the mark of anuttarā samyaksaṃbodhi", and so on up to when he practises prajñā, likewise. The crux of the answer is moving 「增」 tr. "increase" away from the dharmas practised: dharmas originally have no increase, only names; and the mind and roots of goodness with which one practises do not stop at oneself but are dedicated entirely according to the mark of awakening. Not making the thought of increase is precisely the way wholesome dharmas are accomplished, not a reason for wholesome dharmas to be made void.

45. What anuttarā samyaksaṃbodhi is—the mark of suchness of all dharmas. Subhūti asks: 「何等是阿耨多羅三藐三菩提？」 tr. "What is anuttarā samyaksaṃbodhi?" The Buddha answers: 「一切法如相是名阿耨多羅三藐三菩提。」 tr. "The mark of suchness of all dharmas is called anuttarā samyaksaṃbodhi." This answer interlocks head and tail with Sūtra ①'s 「色如深奧故，色深奧」 tr. "because the suchness of form is profound, form is profound"—the profound place is suchness, and the awakening sought is also suchness. Seeking awakening is not seeking something attained outside dharmas; it is seeking the original mark of suchness of dharmas.

46. The mark of suchness of form and so on up to the mark of suchness of nirvāṇa; the mark of suchness neither increases nor decreases, and therefore one should practise prajñā. Subhūti asks again what the mark of suchness of all dharmas is, and the Buddha answers: 「色如相，受、想、行、識如相，乃至涅槃如相，是阿耨多羅三藐三菩提。」 tr. "The mark of suchness of form, the mark of suchness of feeling, perception, constructions, and consciousness, and so on up to the mark of suchness of nirvāṇa—this is anuttarā samyaksaṃbodhi." And he adds: 「是如相亦不增不減。」 tr. "This mark of suchness too neither increases nor decreases." The bodhisattva, not apart from prajñā, 「常觀是如法，不見有增有減」 tr. "constantly contemplates this dharma of suchness and does not see any increase or decrease"; for these causes and conditions, the meaning that cannot be spoken neither increases nor decreases, and dānapāramitā and so on up to the eighteen unshared dharmas also neither increase nor decrease. The last sentence is where Sūtra ② comes to rest: 「菩薩摩訶薩以是不增不減法故，應般若波羅蜜行。」 tr. "Because of this dharma of neither increase nor decrease, the bodhisattva-mahāsattva should practise prajñāpāramitā." The earlier difficulty is here wholly dissolved—it is not that there must first be increase for there to be attainment; it is by practising with the dharma of neither increase nor decrease that one accords with awakening.

47. The treatise-author begins to explain in Treatise ②—the first two rounds of the sevenfold weighing; passing beyond the two grounds, entering the bodhisattva's position, accomplishing the unsurpassed path. In Treatise ② the treatise-author explains, gathering the seven rounds of Sūtra ② into a few sentences. First the two rounds are spoken of together: making offerings to the Three Jewels for kalpas like the sands of the Ganges, apart from prajñā, does not equal practising prajñā for one day; again, one who, abiding in life for kalpas like the sands of the Ganges, makes offerings to the srota-āpanna and the others also does not equal practising prajñā for one day. The superior cause and condition is what the sūtra text brings out: 「菩薩行般若，過二地，入菩薩位，成無上道。」 tr. "The bodhisattva who practises prajñā passes beyond the two grounds, enters the bodhisattva's position, and accomplishes the unsurpassed path." The treatise-author uses the three Chinese characters 「過二地」 tr. "passes beyond the two grounds" to sum up the sūtra text's 「過一切聲聞、辟支佛地」 tr. "passes beyond all the śrāvaka and pratyekabuddha grounds"—the śrāvaka ground and the pratyekabuddha ground are the two grounds passed beyond.

48. The third, fourth, and fifth rounds—prajñā is the mother of the buddhas; that one should turn back from sarvajñā is impossible. The treatise-author continues: practising the six dharmas of giving and the rest for kalpas like the sands of the Ganges, far removed from prajñā, does not equal practising the six dharmas for one day abiding in prajñā as it is taught; the superior cause and condition is 「般若是諸佛母，住是般若中，能具足諸佛法」 tr. "prajñā is the mother of the buddhas; abiding in this prajñā, one can fulfil the dharmas of the buddhas". Again, practising the gift of Dharma for kalpas like the sands of the Ganges, far removed from prajñā, does not equal practising the gift of Dharma for one day abiding in prajñā; furthermore, cultivating the four foundations of mindfulness by the dharmas of the śrāvaka and the pratyekabuddha for kalpas like the sands of the Ganges does not equal cultivating the four foundations of mindfulness for one day abiding in prajñā as it is taught, and so on up to the omniscience of all kinds. Here the superior cause and condition is 「不離般若，於薩婆若轉者，無有是處」 tr. "not apart from prajñā, that one should turn back from sarvajñā is impossible". Note that on the fifth round the treatise-author adds a qualification the sūtra text does not state explicitly—one who cultivates the limbs of the path far removed from prajñā uses 「聲聞、辟支佛法」 tr. "the dharmas of the śrāvaka and the pratyekabuddha"; this sentence points out more clearly the two parties of the weighing: cultivating the same four foundations of mindfulness, cultivating by the dharmas of the two vehicles and cultivating by prajñā are separated in the magnitude of their retribution as kalpas like the sands of the Ganges are from one day.

49. The sixth and seventh rounds—right dedication unmixed with poison; dedication with rejoicing. The treatise-author explains the sixth round: dedicating to the unsurpassed path, apart from prajñā, for kalpas like the sands of the Ganges, the merit born of the gift of wealth, the gift of Dharma, and meditative concentration does not equal dedicating for one day in accord with prajñā: 「何以故？般若波羅蜜無雜毒、正迴向故」 tr. "Why? Because prajñāpāramitā is a right dedication, unmixed with poison." The three Chinese characters 「無雜毒」 tr. "unmixed with poison" most deserve savouring—dedication apart from prajñā is not without goodness; rather, the poison of grasping at marks is mixed into the goodness; the poison lies not in more or less, but in whether it is present or not. The seventh round: apart from prajñā, rejoicing and dedicating the merits of the buddhas of the ten directions and the three times for a lifespan of kalpas like the sands of the Ganges does not equal the rejoicing and dedicating of one day in accord with prajñā. With this the explanation of the seven rounds is complete.

50. Subhūti objects that false and deceptive dharmas cannot make merit superior; the Buddha affirms his words and judges it superior because the merit is pure; the simile of the vajra shattering the mountain. The treatise-author then explains that difficulty of Sūtra ②: 「爾時，須菩提難佛：『如佛說一切有為法，虛誑不實、如幻，不能生正見、入正位，云何菩薩一日福德勝？』」 tr. "At that time Subhūti objected to the Buddha: ‘As the Buddha says, all conditioned dharmas are false and deceptive, unreal, like an illusion, and cannot give rise to right view or to entry into the right position; how is the bodhisattva's merit of one day superior?’" The Buddha affirms his words—conditioned dharmas are all false and deceptive, and 「不得以虛誑法入正位、得聖道」 tr. "one cannot enter the right position or obtain the noble path by false and deceptive dharmas"; the turning point is this: the merit made by the bodhisattva when practising prajñā, 「知皆虛誑、空、無堅固，心不著是福德。是福德清淨故，勝餘福德」 tr. "he knows to be all false and deceptive, empty, without firmness, and his mind does not cling to this merit. Because this merit is pure, it surpasses other merit". The treatise-author then gives a simile: 「如金剛雖小，能摧破大山。」 tr. "As with the vajra: though small, it can shatter a great mountain." The point where the simile lands is that the power of purity does not depend on quantity—the merit of kalpas like the sands of the Ganges is the great mountain, the non-clinging merit of one day is the vajra; victory and defeat are compared not by bulk but by hardness and sharpness. This simile is woven on the same loom as the earlier simile of the mild medicine and the medicine of great strength: what is contended over is quality, not quantity.

51. The four rounds of ‘although… yet…’ of having trained well in the eighteen emptinesses; not clinging and yet able to give rise to merit—this is called practising not apart from prajñā. The treatise-author explains the Buddha's saying 「菩薩善學十八空」 tr. "the bodhisattva has trained well in the eighteen emptinesses", and unfolds four rounds in which the two do not obstruct each other: although he contemplates emptiness, 「而能行諸功德」 tr. "yet he can practise all merits"; although he knows nirvāṇa and the unsurpassed path, 「而憐愍眾生故修集福德」 tr. "yet out of pity for beings he cultivates and gathers merit"; although he knows that the marks of all dharmas cannot be spoken, 「而為眾生種種方便說法」 tr. "yet for beings he teaches the Dharma by all kinds of skilful means"; although he knows that within the nature of dharmas there is no discrimination, one mark that is no mark, 「而為眾生分別是善是不善、是可行是不可行、是取是捨、是利是失等」 tr. "yet for beings he discriminates this as wholesome and this as unwholesome, this as to be practised and this as not to be practised, this as to be taken and this as to be relinquished, this as gain and this as loss, and so on". The four sentences are all one sentence pattern: the first half is knowledge of the real mark, the second half is practice of the gate of transformation—knowing and practising not only do not conflict; the more thoroughly one knows, the more unobstructedly one practises. Thus the treatise-author concludes: 「若菩薩雖觀畢竟空，而能起諸福德，是名『不離般若波羅蜜行』。」 tr. "If the bodhisattva, though contemplating ultimate emptiness, can yet give rise to merits, this is called ‘practising not apart from prajñāpāramitā’." The earlier doubt, ‘how can emptiness give rise to merit’, here receives its most direct answer: it is not that emptiness gives rise to merit; it is that because of non-clinging the merit is pure, and because the merit is pure it is superior.

52. The causes and conditions of gradually obtaining the three meanings—in first training the afflictions are strong and prajñā weak; the three meanings explained name by name. The treatise-author continues: 「若菩薩常不離般若波羅蜜，漸得無數、無量、無邊功德。」 tr. "If the bodhisattva is never apart from prajñāpāramitā, he gradually obtains countless, immeasurable, boundless merit." Why 「漸」 tr. "gradually"? Because 「菩薩初學般若時，煩惱力強，般若力弱；漸漸得般若力，斷諸煩惱、滅諸戲論」 tr. "when the bodhisattva first trains in prajñā, the power of the afflictions is strong and the power of prajñā is weak; gradually he obtains the power of prajñā, severs the afflictions, and extinguishes idle discourse", and so his merit is countless, immeasurable, boundless. This is the sentence of the whole unit that comes closest to beginners—not being apart from prajñā does not mean having strength from the start; the waxing and waning of strength has its own order, and the exchange of strong and weak takes time. Then the treatise-author explains the three meanings, slightly differently from the sūtra text and more crisply: 「無數者，不墮若有為性中、若無為性中」 tr. "countless means not falling within either the conditioned nature or the unconditioned nature"; 「三世量不可得，故名無量」 tr. "the measure of the three times is unfindable, so it is called immeasurable"; 「十方邊不可得，故名無邊」 tr. "the bounds of the ten directions are unfindable, so it is called boundless". Immeasurable is tied to time, boundless to direction—the treatise-author lands the sūtra text's 「諸法邊不可得」 tr. "the bounds of dharmas are unfindable" concretely upon the ten directions.

53. The five aggregates have the three meanings because of emptiness; all dharmas are empty. The treatise-author restates four exchanges of question and answer from the sūtra text: Subhūti asks the Buddha 「五眾頗有因緣亦無數、無量、無邊耶」 tr. "are there any causes and conditions by which the five aggregates too are countless, immeasurable, boundless?", and the Buddha answers 「有！以五眾空故，亦無數、無量、無邊」 tr. "There are! Because the five aggregates are empty, they too are countless, immeasurable, boundless"; Subhūti asks 「但五眾空，非一切法空耶」 tr. "are only the five aggregates empty, and not all dharmas empty?", and the Buddha answers 「一切法空」 tr. "all dharmas are empty". The question and answer here are the treatise-author's retelling of the question and answer of the sūtra text, not a separately set-up host and guest—this passage is entirely in the narrative form ‘Subhūti asks / the Buddha answers’, and the treatise-author himself does not set up a further layer of debate with ‘Question’ and ‘Answer’.

54. The four matters differ in name but are one in meaning; the Buddha affirms his words and speaks the causes and conditions of forcibly making names. The treatise-author continues with Subhūti's words: 「是空法即不可盡，不可盡故即是無數，無數即是無量，無量即是無邊」 tr. "this dharma of emptiness is inexhaustible; because it is inexhaustible it is countless; countless is immeasurable; immeasurable is boundless"; within emptiness, exhaustion, number, measure, and bounds are all four unfindable, and so they are called inexhaustible, countless, immeasurable, and boundless. The treatise-author himself gives the verdict: 「四事名雖異，義是一，所謂畢竟空。」 tr. "Though the names of the four matters differ, the meaning is one, namely ultimate emptiness." The Buddha affirms his words, 「如是」 tr. "just so", and further himself speaks the causes and conditions: 「是空法相不可說；若不可說，不名為空」 tr. "the mark of this dharma of emptiness cannot be spoken; if it cannot be spoken, it is not called empty"—even the name 「空」 tr. "empty" is not its own name. The Buddha, 「以大慈悲心憐愍眾生故方便為說，強作名字語言，令眾生得解」 tr. "out of the mind of great kindness and compassion, pitying beings, speaks it for them by skilful means, forcibly making names and words so that beings may understand". The two Chinese characters 「強作」 tr. "forcibly making" should be remembered: all names and words here are marked as provisional devices, including the most central one.

55. The names of the real mark of all dharmas glossed one by one. The treatise-author then explains a string of names one by one as to where each comes from; this is the passage of the unit that most shows his skill. The real mark, 「不生、不作故說『不盡』」 tr. "because it does not arise and is not made, is said to be ‘inexhaustible’". When the noble ones obtain the real mark of all dharmas and enter nirvāṇa without remainder, they 「不墮六道數」 tr. "do not fall into the count of the six destinies"; the dharma of the real mark too 「不墮有為、無為等諸法數中」 tr. "does not fall within the count of dharmas such as the conditioned and the unconditioned", and so it is said to be 「無數」 tr. "countless". 「量」 tr. "Measure" is 「以智慧稱量好醜、多少、大小、是非等」 tr. "weighing and measuring with wisdom the fair and the ugly, the many and the few, the great and the small, the right and the wrong, and so on"; because within the real mark of all dharmas all marks are extinguished, it is said to be 「無量」 tr. "immeasurable". Because the real mark cannot be measured, it is said to be 「無邊」 tr. "boundless". Because the real mark is quiescent, it is said to be 「無著」 tr. "non-clinging". Because in the real mark 「我我所定相不可得故」 tr. "the fixed marks of I and mine are unfindable", it is said to be 「空」 tr. "empty". 「空故無相，無相故則『無作』、『無起』。」 tr. "Because it is empty, it is signless; because it is signless, it is ‘non-action’ and ‘non-origination’." 「是法常住不壞故『無生』、『無滅』。」 tr. "Because this dharma abides always and is not destroyed, it is ‘non-arising’ and ‘non-ceasing’." 「是法能斷三界染故名『無染』。」 tr. "Because this dharma can sever the staining of the three realms, it is called ‘non-staining’." 「更不織煩惱業故名『涅槃』。」 tr. "Because it no longer weaves the deeds of affliction, it is called ‘nirvāṇa’." The string of names is here no longer a pile of synonyms; each name has its own reason: countless is tied to not entering the classes of number, immeasurable to being apart from weighing and measuring, boundless to having no limits, non-clinging to quiescence, empty to I and mine being unfindable; the signless, non-action, and non-origination are drawn out in order from emptiness; non-arising and non-ceasing are tied to abiding always and not being destroyed; non-staining to being able to sever the staining of the three realms; nirvāṇa to no longer weaving the deeds of affliction. The treatise-author's last sentence gathers it all: 「如是等有無量名字，種種因緣說是諸法實相。」 tr. "In this way there are immeasurable names; by all kinds of causes and conditions the real mark of all dharmas is spoken." One more matter is noted here: in Sūtra ②'s list the name is written 「無想」 tr. "without perception", while the treatise-author here explains it as 「無相」 tr. "signless"; the two places differ in the characters used, and they are recorded side by side as they stand, without forced explanation.

56. Subhūti again exclaims at the rare; all dharmas in the end return to emptiness and so cannot be spoken, and the meaning that cannot be spoken is neither increase nor decrease. The treatise-author continues: at that time Subhūti said to the Buddha, exclaiming at the rare, that though the real mark of all dharmas cannot be spoken, the Buddha speaks it by the power of skilful means; 「如我解佛義，非但實相不可說，一切諸法亦不可說」 tr. "as I understand the Buddha's meaning, not only can the real mark not be spoken, all dharmas too cannot be spoken". The Buddha affirms his words and speaks the causes and conditions: 「一切法終歸於空，歸於空故不可說，不可說義即是無增無減。」 tr. "All dharmas in the end return to emptiness; because they return to emptiness they cannot be spoken; the meaning that cannot be spoken is neither increase nor decrease." Here the treatise-author strings three matters into one line: because in the end they return to emptiness, they cannot be spoken; since they cannot be spoken, there is no place for increase or decrease. Increase and decrease are spoken with regard to what can be spoken and measured; since what is pointed to cannot be spoken, increase and decrease naturally have no ground on which to be set up.

57. The difficulty of how the path is obtained if wholesome dharmas do not increase; because of the power of skilful means, I and mine and arrogance are severed; not grasping at marks, one dedicates according to the mark of the unsurpassed path. Subhūti's difficulty appears again: 「若一切法無增無減，六波羅蜜等諸善法亦無增無減；若六波羅蜜善法不增者，云何得無上道？」 tr. "If all dharmas neither increase nor decrease, the six perfections and the other wholesome dharmas also neither increase nor decrease; if the wholesome dharmas of the six perfections do not increase, how is the unsurpassed path obtained?" The Buddha affirms his words and further speaks the causes and conditions for him: 「法雖無增減，而可得無上道。」 tr. "Though dharmas have no increase or decrease, yet the unsurpassed path can be obtained." That is, the bodhisattva who trains in and practises prajñā, by the power of skilful means, though he practises dānapāramitā and the other dharmas that aid the path, 「我我所、憍慢斷故，不作是念：『我增長是六波羅蜜等法。』」 tr. "because I and mine and arrogance are severed, does not make this thought: ‘I increase these dharmas, the six perfections and the rest.’"; 「不取內外諸法相行，是謂善法，如無上道相迴向」 tr. "practising without grasping at the marks of inner and outer dharmas—this is called wholesome dharma, dedicated according to the mark of the unsurpassed path". Here the treatise-author returns the sūtra text's ‘not making the thought of increase’ to a deeper root—not making the thought of increase is not deliberately refraining from thinking of it; it is that I and mine and arrogance are already severed, and there is originally no 「我」 tr. "I" increasing anything. The sickness of the thought of increase has its root in the view of self and in pride, not in counting.

58. What the unsurpassed path is and what all dharmas are—the suchness of dharmas is the mark of quiescence. The treatise-author continues with four exchanges of question and answer: Subhūti asks 「何等是無上道」 tr. "what is the unsurpassed path", and the Buddha answers 「諸法如即是無上道」 tr. "the suchness of dharmas is the unsurpassed path"; Subhūti asks 「何等是一切法」 tr. "what are all dharmas", and the Buddha answers 「色等法乃至涅槃。是諸法如即是寂滅相，是無上道相」 tr. "form and the other dharmas, and so on up to nirvāṇa. The suchness of these dharmas is the mark of quiescence, is the mark of the unsurpassed path". Though the questions and answers are short, what they gather in is very great—Sūtra ② says 「一切法如相是名阿耨多羅三藐三菩提」 tr. "the mark of suchness of all dharmas is called anuttarā samyaksaṃbodhi", and Treatise ② adds one more turn: the suchness of dharmas is the mark of quiescence, and the mark of quiescence is the mark of the unsurpassed path. Suchness, quiescence, the unsurpassed path—three names, one matter.

59. The mark of quiescence; causing giving and the rest to be like the mark of quiescence; because one constantly thinks of the mark of quiescence one swiftly obtains the unsurpassed path. The treatise-author explains quiescence: 「寂滅者，不增不減、不高不下，滅諸煩惱、戲論，不動不壞、無所障礙。」 tr. "Quiescence is neither increasing nor decreasing, neither high nor low, extinguishing the afflictions and idle discourse, unmoving and indestructible, without any hindrance." Four meanings are set side by side—neither increasing nor decreasing counters measuring, neither high nor low counters comparing, unmoving and indestructible counters change, without any hindrance counters stagnation and obstruction; the 「滅諸煩惱、戲論」 tr. "extinguishing the afflictions and idle discourse" in the middle is where these four meanings come from: only once the afflictions and idle discourse are extinguished can there be talk of neither increase nor decrease and so on up to being without any hindrance. And the bodhisattva, 「以般若波羅蜜方便力故，亦能令布施等如寂滅相」 tr. "by the power of skilful means of prajñāpāramitā, can also cause giving and the rest to be like the mark of quiescence": quiescence is not set only upon the real mark of all dharmas; even a matter as full of marks as giving can be tuned by the power of skilful means into the mark of quiescence. The last sentence is where this unit comes to rest: 「若菩薩常念無上道寂滅相，令一切法皆同寂滅相，亦觀不可說義，所謂不增不減相；菩薩如是疾得無上道，以不增不減、不可得故。」 tr. "If the bodhisattva constantly thinks of the mark of quiescence of the unsurpassed path, causes all dharmas to be the same as the mark of quiescence, and also contemplates the meaning that cannot be spoken, namely the mark of neither increase nor decrease, the bodhisattva thus swiftly obtains the unsurpassed path, because it neither increases nor decreases and is unfindable." The whole unit, which began by asking 「何等是深奧處」 tr. "what is the profound place", here answers it in a complete circle—the profound place is suchness; suchness is the mark of quiescence; constantly thinking of the mark of quiescence and causing all dharmas to be the same as it is the path of swiftly obtaining the unsurpassed path. Treatise ② ends here, and fascicle seventy-four also closes here; the Last Part of this chapter begins from the continued title of the next fascicle and opens Sūtra ③ and Treatise ③ separately.

Do Not Misread

Do not read 「深奧」 tr. "profound" as hard to understand. The treatise-author blocks this road already in answering the first question: what the world calls deep is 「諸有法種種細分別，人不解故有深」 tr. "existent dharmas have all kinds of fine discriminations; because people do not understand them, there is depth"; while the depth of this chapter is 「此空是得道空，非但口說」 tr. "this emptiness is the emptiness of attaining the path, not merely what the mouth says". The criterion lies not in the intricacy of concepts, but in whether one can 「更不作願生三界」 tr. "no longer make a vow to be born in the three realms". If one reads the profound as lofty and hard to understand, this chapter becomes a contest of names and marks, whereas it is precisely saying: however fine the names and marks, that does not count as deep; only being able to sever the vow of the three realms counts as deep.

Do not read 「一切法亦是深奧義」 tr. "all dharmas too have the profound meaning" as saying that all dharmas are something remarkable. The sūtra text says very clearly that form is profound because 「色如深奧故」 tr. "the suchness of form is profound"—what is deep is suchness, not form itself. And suchness is further delimited by the double-negation sentence: 「是色如，非是色、非離色」 tr. "this suchness of form is not form and is not apart from form". If one takes the profound as some excellent attribute of the dharma of form itself, one falls exactly on the first extreme the sūtra text negates; if one imagines suchness as a real entity existing apart from form, one falls on the second extreme. The simile of the clay pot has all three sentences—not identical, not apart, and one cannot say there is none—and not one of them may be lacking.

Do not read the simile of the man of much lust thinking of the woman as praising the stained mind. The treatise-author himself states the reason for taking the simile: 「是心易覺知故，以為譬喻。」 tr. "Because this mind is easy to be aware of, it is taken as a simile." What is taken is the density and continuity of thought, a point that in the stained mind is most easily noticed by the person himself, and so it is borrowed as a measuring rule. The man in the simile thinks of a woman who is hindered and does not come; the bodhisattva thinks of the deepest dharma—once the object is changed, the nature of the continuity is entirely different. To read it as taking desire as the path is to mistake the vehicle of the simile for its tenor.

Do not read the sevenfold weighing as belittling giving, offering, the six perfections, the limbs of the path, and dedication. The wording of every round carries the same qualifier—「遠離般若波羅蜜」 tr. "far removed from prajñāpāramitā". What is judged not to equal is never giving itself, but giving apart from prajñā; not dedication itself, but dedication apart from prajñā—of such a dedication the sūtra text even says 「是不名迴向」 tr. "it is not called dedication". If one reads it as meaning that all practices outside prajñā may be abandoned, one goes exactly against those four sentences of Treatise ②, 「雖觀空，而能行諸功德」 tr. "although he contemplates emptiness, yet he can practise all merits"—the function of prajñā is to make all practices pure, not to make them void.

Do not read ‘dharmas arising from causes and conditions are false and deceptive and unreal’ as meaning that merit is fake. The Buddha admits the falseness to the end; the turning point lies only in a single Chinese character, 「知」 tr. "know": the bodhisattva 「知因緣起法亦空、無堅固、虛誑不實」 tr. "knows that dharmas arising from causes and conditions are also empty, without firmness, false and deceptive and unreal", so 「心不著是福德」 tr. "his mind does not cling to this merit", and 「是福德清淨故，勝餘福德」 tr. "because this merit is pure, it surpasses other merit". The simile of the vajra that, though small, can shatter a great mountain compares quality, not quantity. If one reads it as ‘since it is false and deceptive, there is no need to cultivate merit’, one has entirely missed the treatise-author's 「知」 tr. "know"—the person who does not cultivate merit has not thereby obtained that purity.

Do not read 「不可說義無增無減」 tr. "the meaning that cannot be spoken neither increases nor decreases" as meaning that effort has no point. Subhūti asks this worry most fully on the reader's behalf, and the Buddha's answer is not to withdraw neither increase nor decrease, but to move 「增」 tr. "increase" off the dharmas: dharmas have only names—「但名字故，名檀波羅蜜」 tr. "it is called dānapāramitā only by name"; while the mind and roots of goodness with which one practises are 「如阿耨多羅三藐三菩提相迴向」 tr. "dedicated according to the mark of anuttarā samyaksaṃbodhi". Treatise ② further returns not making the thought of increase to 「我我所、憍慢斷故」 tr. "because I and mine and arrogance are severed"—it is not suppressing thoughts of progress; it is that there is fundamentally no I calculating progress. Wholesome dharmas are to be practised as before; only one does not keep accounts on oneself.

Do not take the two views of the three samādhi and of outer emptiness as the treatise-author's settled conclusion. Those two sentences of 「有人言」 tr. "someone says" are divergent views set side by side, and the treatise-author immediately refutes both with the Buddha's words: 「不以空三昧故空，亦不以所緣外色等諸法故空。」 tr. "It is not empty because of the emptiness samādhi, nor is it empty because of the outer dharmas taken as object, form and the rest." Emptiness belongs neither to the contemplating concentration nor to the realm taken as object; rather it is 「因緣和合生，是和合法無有一定法故空」 tr. "arising from the coming together of causes and conditions; these dharmas that come together have not a single fixed dharma, and therefore they are empty". On reaching the three Chinese characters 「有人言」 tr. "someone says", pause first—that this treatise cites a divergent view without at once endorsing it is a common pattern.

Bearing on Practice

Carry the seven Chinese characters of the weighing with you. The key to every round of the sevenfold weighing lies not in the matter practised, but in the seven Chinese characters 「遠離般若波羅蜜」 tr. "far removed from prajñāpāramitā". Whenever one does any good deed in daily life—making offerings, giving, reciting and upholding, lecturing, dedicating—one can ask oneself with these seven characters: at this moment am I apart from prajñā or not? If in the present moment one does not grasp at marks, does not count merit, knows it to be false and deceptive and is still willing to do it, then this deed is within prajñā; if in one's heart one is tallying the weight of the merit, then though the deed is the same, one has already left it.

Turn the simile of the man of much lust back upon one's own continuity. The treatise-author says this simile is taken because 「是心易覺知」 tr. "this mind is easy to be aware of"—an unfulfilled desire most easily lets a person see how many thoughts he has in one day and one night. Since it can be seen, it can be used as a reference: I can keep what I desire in mind thought after thought without forgetting it—can I do so with the Dharma? The work lies not in fierceness at one moment, but in whether thoughts can return by themselves like that. The object has changed; the density need not change.

Wash one's good deeds with the sentence 「知皆虛誑、空、無堅固，心不著是福德」 tr. "he knows them to be all false and deceptive, empty, without firmness, and his mind does not cling to this merit". Having done a good deed, something usually remains in the heart—that something is the mixed poison. The treatise-author says the dedication of prajñā is superior in being 「無雜毒、正迴向」 tr. "a right dedication, unmixed with poison"; the poison lies not in more or less, but in presence or absence. Let go as soon as the deed is done and keep no aftertaste: the vajra, though small, can shatter a mountain precisely in this not keeping.

Fix the proportion of emptiness and practice by the four sentences of ‘although… yet…’. Although contemplating emptiness, yet able to practise all merits; although knowing nirvāṇa, yet out of pity for beings cultivating and gathering merit; although knowing it cannot be spoken, yet teaching the Dharma by skilful means; although knowing there is no discrimination, yet for beings discriminating good and evil, taking and relinquishing. The sickness most prone to arise in one who studies emptiness is abandoning practice for emptiness; the treatise-author's four sentences all put the weight on the second half. Whenever one feels ‘anyway everything is empty’ and grows lazy about one's tasks, set these four sentences against it, and one will know that the emptiness one has obtained is not yet the emptiness the treatise-author speaks of.

Remember this sentence: 「初學般若時，煩惱力強，般若力弱」 tr. "when first training in prajñā, the power of the afflictions is strong and the power of prajñā is weak". It relieves everyone still on the road: not being apart from prajñā does not mean having strength at once; the exchange of strong and weak is by nature a matter of 「漸漸」 tr. "gradually". When effort shows no result, there is no need to doubt one's direction; only ask whether one has left it; as long as one has not left it, the waxing and waning of strength is a matter of sooner or later.

Close a day with 「常念無上道寂滅相，令一切法皆同寂滅相」 tr. "constantly thinks of the mark of quiescence of the unsurpassed path, causes all dharmas to be the same as the mark of quiescence". The treatise-author speaks of the mark of quiescence very concretely—neither increasing nor decreasing, neither high nor low, extinguishing the afflictions and idle discourse, unmoving and indestructible, without any hindrance. Before sleep, take the things met with in the day, the good done, the vexations suffered, and look at them one by one through these few meanings: which one am I still adding to or subtracting from? Which one am I still comparing as higher or lower? Which one is still shaking me? Which one is still entangling me, still drawing me into idle discourse? If one can see it, one is already causing all dharmas to be the same as the mark of quiescence.

Further Resonances

The First Part, a single unit of two sūtra passages and two treatise passages, establishes this chapter's opening question and its measure. Sūtra ①, from praising the merit of the avaivartika, turns out the question 「何等是深奧處」 tr. "what is the profound place"; the Buddha answers with twelve names led by emptiness, then pulls down the wall of names and marks and says that all dharmas are profound, the reason for their depth being tied to 「如」 tr. "suchness", and suchness being located by the double-negation sentence; at the end, by the simile of the man of much lust thinking of the woman, it shows the power of continuity thought after thought, and returns to one day of practising prajñā surpassing the other merits of worlds like the sands of the Ganges. Treatise ① supplies four layers of reasons for this passage: the depth of emptiness lies not in names and marks but in attaining the path; emptiness too is empty and is not clung to; neither arising-and-ceasing nor non-arising-and-non-ceasing is clung to; each of the twelve names has its own depth; the true body of emptiness belongs neither to the contemplating concentration nor to the realm taken as object, but is the ultimate emptiness of what comes together from causes and conditions and has no self-nature; the simile of the clay pot fixes that suchness and dharma are neither identical nor apart; the depth or shallowness of a field of merit is tied to the depth or shallowness of seeing the real mark, so the two vehicles have no retribution while the bodhisattva's merit is immeasurable, and the simile of the mild medicine and the medicine of great strength makes plain prajñā's place among the six perfections. Sūtra ②, with the sevenfold weighing, sets 「一日如說修行」 tr. "practising as taught for a single day" opposite the practices of kalpas like the sands of the Ganges, each round carrying 「遠離般若」 tr. "far removed from prajñā"; then from the difficulty that dharmas arising from causes and conditions are false and deceptive it draws out the eighteen emptinesses, the distinction of the three meanings, that all dharmas cannot be spoken, and that the meaning that cannot be spoken neither increases nor decreases, and closes on 「一切法如相是名阿耨多羅三藐三菩提」 tr. "the mark of suchness of all dharmas is called anuttarā samyaksaṃbodhi". Treatise ② explains the superior cause and condition of each round, fixes by the simile of the vajra shattering the mountain that purity surpasses breadth and number, fixes by the four sentences of ‘although… yet…’ that emptiness and practice do not obstruct each other, settles each of the long string of names of the real mark of all dharmas in its own place by glossing them name by name, and concludes with this: the suchness of dharmas is the mark of quiescence, and constantly thinking of the mark of quiescence one swiftly obtains the unsurpassed path.

On the chapter title the masters are not uniform. The base text titles it "The Lamp-wick", while the table of contents of Jizang's Commentary on the Larger Sūtra titles this chapter 「深奧品第五十七」 tr. "Chapter Fifty-seven, The Profound", and in its explanatory text it again refers to this chapter's simile with 「若依燈炷喻者」 tr. "if one goes by the simile of the lamp-wick"; the section title of Huiying's Commentary reads 「釋灯喻品第五十七之餘」 tr. "Explaining Chapter Fifty-seven, The Lamp Simile, continued", while at the head of his commentary he says 「第五十七品釋論者，名為淨土品。何故次燈炷明淨土品論」 tr. "The treatise explaining the fifty-seventh chapter is named the Pure Land chapter. Why does the treatise making clear the Pure Land chapter follow the Lamp-wick?"; Junzheng's Profound Meaning of the Four Mahāyāna Treatises further lists three names side by side: 「此或題灯炷啄品，或歸功德品，或云住菩提品」 tr. "this is sometimes titled the Lamp-wick Pecking chapter, or the Returning Merit chapter, or is called the Abiding in Awakening chapter". One chapter has the names Lamp-wick, Profound, Pure Land, Returning Merit, and Abiding in Awakening: those who take the simile rely on the comparison of the first flame and the last flame; those who take the meaning rely either on the depth of what is expressed, or on where merit returns, or on the awakening in which one abides; each master has his basis, and here they are recorded side by side without judgement. The First Part, a single unit, happens to have no lamp-wick simile, and first opens the question 「何等是深奧處」 tr. "what is the profound place"; if the reader here asks ‘why is it called the Lamp-wick?’, it is precisely in this string of variant names that one can see where each master's eye fell in judging this chapter.

The two sūtra passages and two treatise passages are here all complete, and fascicle seventy-four also closes on the sentence 「菩薩如是疾得無上道，以不增不減、不可得故」 tr. "the bodhisattva thus swiftly obtains the unsurpassed path, because it neither increases nor decreases and is unfindable"; the Last Part of this chapter begins from the continued title of the next fascicle and opens Sūtra ③ and Treatise ③ separately. As for the lamp-wick simile for which this chapter is most renowned—whether it is the first flame or the last flame that burns the wick, and that the bodhisattva obtains the unsurpassed path neither by the first mind nor apart from the first mind, neither by the last mind nor apart from the last mind—and the meanings opened from it: the order of the ten grounds, the back-and-forth difficulties about the mark of the arising and ceasing of the mind and about abiding as suchness abides, practising within the highest meaning and the emptiness of specific marks, the three samādhi bringing beings to accomplishment, and the rest—all unfold in the Last Part; they are not anticipated here.

The Lamp-wick, Last Part: The Question of the First Mind and the Last Mind, the Simile of the Lamp-wick, the Fulfilment of the Ten Grounds, Abiding as Suchness Abides and Practising within the Highest Meaning, and the Emptiness of Specific Marks and the Three Samādhi Bringing Beings to Accomplishment

What Is Being Asked

What the First Part opened, all the way through, was 「深奧」 tr. "the profound". The Buddha explained the meaning of the profound by twelve names—emptiness, the signless, non-action, non-origination, non-arising, non-staining, separation, quiescence, suchness, the nature of dharmas, the limit of reality, nirvāṇa—and extended it to all dharmas by 「色如深奧故，色深奧」 tr. "because the suchness of form is profound, form is profound"; then, by seven tiers rising one above another—giving for kalpas as the sands of the Ganges, making offerings, the six perfections, the gift of Dharma, the four foundations of mindfulness, dedication, rejoicing—he showed that practising the various goods apart from prajñā does not equal a single day of practising as taught; in the closing section the treatise-author argued that conditioned dharmas are false and deceptive and yet merit is not lost, that the eighteen emptinesses and teaching the Dharma by skilful means are without obstruction, and gave the glosses of the three meanings of countless, immeasurable, and boundless, gathering it all into one sentence—all dharmas neither increase nor decrease and are unfindable; because the bodhisattva constantly recollects the mark of quiescence of the unsurpassed path, he quickly obtains the unsurpassed path. Fascicle 74 ends here; fascicle 75 continues under the heading 「大智度論釋燈喻品第五十七之餘」 tr. "Mahāprajñāpāramitā-upadeśa: Explanation of the Lamp Simile Chapter, the Fifty-seventh, the Remainder" and lists the author and the translator once again; the Dharma lineage is unbroken, yet the question has been pushed to its sharpest point.

The very first sentence the Last Part speaks is picked up precisely from that 「不增不減」 tr. "neither increase nor decrease": since dharmas neither increase nor decrease, on what do roots of goodness rely to grow? On what does the bodhisattva rely to walk step by step from the ground of ordinary people to anuttarā samyaksaṃbodhi? Subhūti presses this difficulty into a dilemma of alternatives—does the bodhisattva obtain awakening by the very first thought of mind, or by the very last thought of mind? He himself blocks the road on both sides: the first mind does not reach the last mind, the last mind is not in the first mind; the mind and the dharmas that belong to the mind are not at the same time, earlier and later; not being at the same time, they have no way to come together; not coming together, roots of goodness are not accumulated. Later in the text the treatise-author plainly points out where this question comes from: 「須菩提上聞諸法不增不減，心自生疑」 tr. "Subhūti had heard above that dharmas neither increase nor decrease, and doubt arose of itself in his mind"—the Last Part does not start a new thread; it is a sentence of the First Part not yet fully answered.

So what the Last Part must answer is three questions locked together. The first question is where the mechanism lies: how could a stream of mind that arises and ceases thought by thought, earlier and later never reaching each other, possibly accumulate into unsurpassed awakening? The Buddha does not answer from principle; he first gives a ready-made matter of fact—the lamp-wick. The second question is the road: since it is neither in the first nor in the last, what is it that the bodhisattva walks along this road? The Buddha opens the ten grounds, from the ground of dry wisdom to the Buddha ground; the treatise-author explains the name ground by ground, setting a śrāvaka meaning and a bodhisattva meaning against each other on the two sides, and places the whole graded sequence of the path beneath the simile. The third question is the place of practice: where does a bodhisattva who practises thus practise, does he practise marks or not, does he destroy marks or not? With a string of counter-questions, 「於汝意云何」 tr. "what do you think", the sūtra presses Subhūti until his reasoning is exhausted, pressing out the three Chinese characters 「如如住」 tr. "abiding as suchness abides", and at once bars the way against taking the mind as the limit of reality; at the end it returns to the emptiness of specific marks, and the emptiness of specific marks is not sitting dead in emptiness—it is precisely from within the emptiness of specific marks that the bodhisattva rises into the three samādhi, to treat three kinds of beings. The backbone of the whole unit is one sentence: it is obtained because causes and conditions come together, and what is obtained is neither first nor last, neither existent nor non-existent.

Passage by Passage

1. The question of the first mind and the last mind—mind and mental-factor dharmas are not together. Subhūti reports to the Buddha: does the bodhisattva-mahāsattva obtain anuttarā samyaksaṃbodhi by the first mind, or obtain it by the last mind? The first mind does not reach the last mind, and the last mind is not in the first mind; since mind and mental-factor dharmas are thus not together, how are roots of goodness increased? If roots of goodness do not increase, how shall awakening be obtained? First look at the structure of this question: he is not asking ‘can it be obtained’; he is asking ‘by which thought is it obtained’. To lock the cause of attaining the path onto some one thought of mind, and then to prove that no single thought can bear it—this is exactly the ancestral pattern of every difficulty of the form ‘because it is impermanent it cannot be accomplished’. What are called mental-factor dharmas are the various dharmas belonging to the mind that arise at the same time as the mind; not together means that earlier and later do not exist side by side at the same time. The whole difficulty lies in the two Chinese characters rendered here as ‘not together’.

2. The Buddha grants a simile—as when a lamp is lit, the first flame and the last flame. The Buddha tells Subhūti: I shall tell you a simile; when the wise obtain a simile, the meaning is easily understood. As when a lamp is lit: is it the first flame that burns the wick, or the last flame that burns the wick? The way the Buddha answers this question is worth remembering first: he does not first break the questioner's logic; he first substitutes a matter of fact the questioner sees every day. In this treatise a simile is not a rhetorical ornament; it pulls the four Chinese characters rendered here as ‘inconceivable’ right before the eyes. The sentence 「智者得譬喻，則於義易解」 tr. "when the wise obtain a simile, then the meaning is easily understood" is precisely why similes are set up throughout the chapter.

3. It is not the first flame that burns the wick, nor is it apart from the first flame. Subhūti answers: it is not the first flame that burns the wick, nor is it apart from the first flame; it is not the last flame that burns the wick, nor is it apart from the last flame. Once the four positions are out, the questioner's difficulty breaks of itself—he himself talks this way. One must see clearly that these four positions are not abstruse talk: a lamp is lit for a whole night; ask which instant's fire scorched the wick, and no one can name a particular instant; but to say it has nothing to do with the first flame also makes no sense. Not, and not apart from: the two sides hold at the same time—this is the grammar of the dharma of causes and conditions.

4. Is the wick burned or not? The Buddha asks again: what do you think, is the wick burned or not? This question is the joint of the simile. The four positions before broke only ‘it belongs to some one flame’, and have not yet established ‘the fact is accomplished’; the Buddha must make the second half solid, otherwise the four positions slide toward annihilation—that would be the real misreading.

5. The wick is really burned. Subhūti answers: World-Honored One! The wick is really burned. The three Chinese characters rendered here as ‘the wick is really burned’ weigh a thousand catties. Neither first nor last does not mean not burned; that its cause cannot be pinned down does not hinder its result from being plainly there. Those who read the four positions and fall into emptiness are precisely those who have missed this sentence.

6. Matching the simile—the bodhisattva is also like this, and obtains it by fulfilling the ten grounds. The Buddha matches the simile: the bodhisattva-mahāsattva is also like this: he does not obtain awakening by the first mind, nor does he obtain it apart from the first mind; he does not obtain it by the last mind, nor does he obtain it apart from the last mind, and yet he obtains anuttarā samyaksaṃbodhi. Herein the bodhisattva, from the first arousing of intent, practises prajñāpāramitā, fulfils the ten grounds, and obtains awakening. Where the simile is matched, one more sentence appears—from the first arousing of intent he practises prajñā and fulfils the ten grounds. The simile answers ‘how it can be accomplished’; this sentence answers ‘by what road it is accomplished’; without this sentence, neither first nor last would become obtaining without a cause.

7. What are the ten grounds? Subhūti asks: what are the ten grounds, fulfilling which the bodhisattva obtains anuttarā samyaksaṃbodhi? This question is the turning point of the whole section. What was said above was principle; what is wanted here is the road; the sūtra follows the momentum and opens the whole graded sequence of the path, and the chapter's simile of 「燈炷」 tr. "the lamp-wick" and its teaching of 「十地」 tr. "the ten grounds" here lock together into one matter.

8. The names of the ten grounds, and neither first nor last repeated. The Buddha answers: he fulfils the ground of dry wisdom, the ground of the stage of nature, the ground of the person of the eight, the ground of seeing, the ground of thinning, the ground of freedom from desire, the ground of what has been done, the pratyekabuddha ground, the bodhisattva ground, the Buddha ground; fulfilling these grounds he obtains awakening; having trained in these ten grounds, it is not by the first mind that he obtains it, nor apart from the first mind; it is not by the last mind that he obtains it, nor apart from the last mind, and yet he obtains awakening. As soon as the names are listed, the Buddha at once repeats the four positions once more. The intent is utterly clear: the ten grounds are not ten steps for people to tread up one by one to collect a prize—if the ten grounds could be made solid as a staircase, 「非初非後」 tr. "neither first nor last" would be overturned again. Opening the road and barring clinging are done in one breath.

9. Subhūti praises the dharma of causes and conditions as very deep. Subhūti says: World-Honored One! This dharma of causes and conditions is very deep—namely, not by the first mind, not apart from the first mind, not by the last mind, not apart from the last mind is awakening obtained, and yet awakening is obtained. He is not repeating; he is confirming: these four positions are not a word game; they are the depths of the dharma of causes and conditions itself. In this treatise the praise in the two Chinese characters 「甚深」 tr. "very deep" is a signal that a finer objection is sure to follow in the text below; and indeed the Buddha at once turns to the arising and ceasing of the mind.

10. When the mind has ceased, does this mind arise again? The Buddha asks in return: what do you think, when the mind has ceased, does this mind arise again? What was discussed before was ‘the first mind and the last mind’; now he directly dissects ‘a single thought of mind’ itself. To prove that roots of goodness can be accumulated, one must first make clear just how the mind arises and ceases—this is putting the principle of the simile back onto the dharma of mind to check the sum.

11. No, World-Honored One. Subhūti answers: No. If it ceased and arose again, it would become a permanently abiding thing coming and going back and forth, and then it would not be an impermanent mind. The first question first seals off the side of 「常」 tr. "permanence".

12. When the mind arises, is it the mark of ceasing? The Buddha asks again: when the mind arises, is it the mark of ceasing? The point of the question turns, from the past mind that has already ceased to the present mind now arising. This is the rhythm of the counter-questions in this section—each question moves only one step, and allows no one to slur it over.

13. It is the mark of ceasing. Subhūti answers: it is the mark of ceasing. Arising contains ceasing; it does not wait for decay before it is called impermanent. This answer is the correct understanding of the Buddhist meaning of impermanence: it is not that first there is a thing abiding and then it decays; the very moment of arising is already the mark of ceasing.

14. Is the mark of the mind's ceasing itself ceasing? The Buddha asks again: the mark of the mind's ceasing—is it ceasing? Is the mark of ceasing itself ceasing, or is there a ceasing apart from the mark of ceasing? This question looks tongue-twisting but is really the vital point of the marks of dharmas—if mark and dharma are confused as one thing, the fault appears at once.

15. No, World-Honored One. Subhūti answers: No. The treatise-author himself explains the reason for this answer later in the text: if the mark of ceasing were itself ceasing, then within a single mind there would be two divisions of time, the time of arising and the time of ceasing, contrary to the meaning of 「心不過一念」 tr. "the mind does not exceed a single thought".

16. Does it also abide just so? The Buddha tells Subhūti: what do you think, does it also abide just so? Since he does not allow ‘the mark of ceasing is ceasing’, is he then saying it abides permanently? The Buddha hands him the second side too. Taking the two questions together, both ends, permanence and annihilation, are blocked, and Subhūti has no road to retreat—this is precisely the purpose of the counter-question form.

17. Abiding as suchness abides. Subhūti says: World-Honored One! It also abides just so, abiding as suchness abides. The answer comes when reasoning is exhausted, yet what comes out is not a third position; it is a return to the real mark: the mark of the mind's abiding is the same as the mark of abiding of 「如」 tr. "suchness". The vital point is this—it is not a compromise; it is leaving the very framing of the question as ‘permanence / annihilation’.

18. If this mind abides as suchness abides, should it be taken as the limit of reality? The Buddha at once presses forward: if this mind abides as suchness abides, should it be taken as the limit of reality? The sentence just established, the Buddha at once tests, to see whether it has been misread as ‘the mind is the ultimate’. Whenever a good answer has just left the mouth, this treatise always tries its boundary once on the reader's behalf.

19. No, World-Honored One. Subhūti answers: No. The mind cannot be taken directly as the limit of reality. Here first remember the conclusion; the treatise-author explains the reason later in two layers—one in terms of Subhūti's measure of realisation, one in terms of the limit of reality being signless.

20. Is suchness deep? The Buddha asks: is suchness deep? Having said that the mind abides as suchness abides and also that it cannot be taken as the limit of reality, just how deep, then, is this 「如」 tr. "suchness"? The question is utterly natural and utterly vital: the depth or shallowness of suchness decides whether the two answers before contradict each other.

21. Very deep. Subhūti answers: World-Honored One! Very deep. The treatise-author explains the true state of this answer: because Subhūti cannot know completely, he says very deep. This sentence reminds the reader that 「甚深」 tr. "very deep" here is not words of praise but a confession that what he knows has limits.

22. Is suchness only this mind? The Buddha asks: is suchness only this mind? Is 「如」 tr. "suchness" just this mind? This pushes 「心如如住」 tr. "the mind abides as suchness abides" to an extreme—if suchness were the mind, suchness would become a thing with discrimination.

23. No, World-Honored One. Subhūti answers: No. Suchness and mind are not one. The reason is in the treatise-author's text below: suchness is one mark, not two marks; the mind, being born of the causes and conditions of recollection, imagining, and discrimination, is therefore two marks.

24. Is this mind apart from suchness? The Buddha asks again: is this mind apart from suchness? Apart from suchness, is there another mind? The previous question broke 「一」 tr. "oneness"; this question breaks 「異」 tr. "difference"; the two gates of one and different are this treatise's constant method for examining the relations of names and marks.

25. No, World-Honored One. Subhūti answers: No. Suchness and mind are not different. Taken together with the preceding passage, it is not one and not different—exactly the same grammar as the earlier four positions of 「非初非後」 tr. "neither first nor last", applied to suchness and mind.

26. Does suchness see suchness? The Buddha asks: does suchness see suchness? Since they are neither one nor different, can suchness see itself? This question presses straight on subject and object. If within suchness a seer and a seen were set up, suchness would become two marks.

27. No, World-Honored One. Subhūti answers: No. The treatise-author below explains this as 「如中無分別」 tr. "within suchness there is no discrimination": no knower and no known. This answer gathers the whole section of counter-questions into the absence of subject and object, and thereby plants the root for 「無處所行」 tr. "practising for no place at all" below.

28. If the bodhisattva can practise thus, is it practising deep prajñā? The Buddha asks: if the bodhisattva can practise thus, is it practising deep prajñāpāramitā? Everything before was examining dharmas; this question turns to the person—does the view examined this way, when it lands in practice, count as deep prajñā? From here the joint of the sūtra turns from 「解」 tr. "understanding" to 「行」 tr. "practice".

29. To practise thus is to practise deep prajñā. Subhūti says: if the bodhisattva-mahāsattva can practise thus, it is practising deep prajñāpāramitā. He answers in the affirmative. The treatise-author below points out the state of mind in which he affirms it: because he contemplates the Small Vehicle as shallow and thin, and contemplates the dharma of the Great Vehicle as deep.

30. Practising thus, where does he practise? The Buddha asks: the bodhisattva-mahāsattva practising thus—where does he practise? The affirmation has just landed, and the Buddha at once asks the place. Wherever there is 「行」 tr. "practice" there must be 「處」 tr. "a place"—this is the firmest rope of ordinary feeling.

31. Practising for no place at all—abiding in the suchness of dharmas, without thought, without a place of thought, without a thinker. Subhūti says: practising thus is practising for no place at all. Why? The bodhisattva practising prajñāpāramitā abides in the suchness of dharmas, without such thought, without a place of thought, without a thinker. The three occurrences of 「無」 tr. "without" are a set: the one who can think, the place thought of, and thinking itself—all three wheels are quiescent. Note that he does not say ‘do nothing at all’; what he says is practising without landing in a place.

32. The Buddha asks again where he practises. The Buddha tells Subhūti: if the bodhisattva-mahāsattva practises thus, where does he practise? The same question asked once more. The treatise-author below explains the intent: fearing that people, hearing 「無處所」 tr. "no place at all", would fall into annihilation, he asks once more, pressing out the positive statement. Repeated questions in this treatise are never mere repetition.

33. Practising within the highest meaning; the two practices are unfindable. Subhūti says: this bodhisattva-mahāsattva practising thus practises within the highest meaning, because the two practices are unfindable. The previous answer negated; this answer affirms. What is called the two practices being unfindable means that both layers, the one who practises and what is practised, have nothing to be found—it is not setting up another place called 「第一義」 tr. "the highest meaning" in which to practise.

34. Practising within the highest meaning without thought—is it practising marks? The Buddha asks: if the bodhisattva practises within the highest meaning without thought, is he practising marks? No sooner is 「第一義」 tr. "the highest meaning" established than he tests whether it has become a new mark to be grasped. This is the method running through this section: establish a meaning, then examine that meaning.

35. No, World-Honored One. Subhūti answers: No. The treatise-author explains: all dharmas are ultimately empty and without recollection; this is not practising marks. Practising without thought, it therefore does not amount to grasping at marks.

36. Does this bodhisattva destroy marks? The Buddha asks: does this bodhisattva-mahāsattva destroy marks? Not grasping at marks—is that destroying the marks of dharmas? This question is extremely vital—not grasping at marks and destroying marks are separated by only a single line; fall on the wrong side and it becomes annihilation.

37. No, World-Honored One. Subhūti answers: No. Not grasping at marks is not the same as destroying marks. This answer is the direct barrier set before the place in the whole unit most easily misread.

38. What is called not destroying marks? The Buddha presses: what is called not destroying marks? The Buddha does not allow him to answer with only the one word 「不」 tr. "no"; he wants him to state the reasoning. The long answer in the next passage is the summation of the gate of practice for the whole chapter.

39. Not making the thought of destroying marks; by the power of skilful means neither grasping nor destroying; entering the three samādhi within the emptiness of specific marks. Subhūti says: this bodhisattva, practising prajñāpāramitā, does not make this thought—I shall destroy the marks of dharmas; the bodhisattva who has not yet fulfilled the Buddha's ten powers, four fearlessnesses, four unobstructed knowledges, great kindness and great compassion, and eighteen unshared dharmas does not obtain anuttarā samyaksaṃbodhi; by the power of skilful means, toward dharmas he neither grasps at marks nor destroys marks. Why? Because he knows that all dharmas are empty of specific marks. Abiding in this emptiness of specific marks, for the sake of beings he enters the three samādhi, and by the three samādhi brings beings to accomplishment. This passage has three layers, each interlocking with the next: the first layer is the mind's conduct—the thought of breaking marks does not arise at all; the second layer is the station—while merits are not yet fulfilled one does not obtain awakening, so one cannot rush to sweep the marks clean and be done; the third layer is the support—the emptiness of specific marks. The meaning of the emptiness of specific marks is this: dharmas do not wait for someone to break them; their specific marks are empty from the start, so there is neither need to grasp nor anything to destroy. The last sentence is the most vital—abiding in the emptiness of specific marks one enters the three samādhi; emptiness is not the end point, it is the place from which function arises.

40. How does one enter the three samādhi and bring beings to accomplishment? Subhūti asks: World-Honored One! How does the bodhisattva-mahāsattva enter the three samādhi and bring beings to accomplishment? The question lands exactly where it should. Having said 「用三三昧成就眾生」 tr. "by the three samādhi brings beings to accomplishment" before, if he does not explain how it is used, the emptiness of specific marks still hangs in the air.

41. The three samādhi set against three kinds of beings. The Buddha answers: the bodhisattva abiding in these three samādhi, seeing beings practising within the dharmas of making, by the power of skilful means teaches them to obtain non-action; seeing beings practising within the mark of self, by the power of skilful means teaches them to practise emptiness; seeing beings practising within all marks, by the power of skilful means teaches them to practise the signless. The three samādhi here are not an arrangement of three states of concentration; they are three prescriptions for three illnesses: to those who act and receive bodies, non-action; to those who cling to I and mine, emptiness; to those who grasp at marks and discriminate, the signless. Sūtra ③ ends here; the treatise-author below will lay out the pathology of each prescription once more.

42. The treatise-author takes up the sūtra's question. The treatise-author begins his explanation, first taking up the sūtra's question: Subhūti asked the Buddha whether one obtains the unsurpassed path by the first mind or by the last mind. The form in which this treatise explains a sūtra is first to cite the question and then to resolve the difficulty; following this marker, the reader knows which sentence is being explained below.

43. Question: for what cause and condition did Subhūti pose this difficulty? The treatise-author sets up a question: for what cause and condition did Subhūti pose this difficulty? This question is where this treatise's skill in teaching shows most. The sūtra records only the question; the treatise-author wants to trace where the question came from—once the origin of the question is clear, the answer can land on solid ground.

44. The marker of the answer. The treatise-author opens what follows with Answer:. In this treatise's form, objection and explanation each make up their own passage; seeing the marker, the reader knows that what follows is the explanation, and does not mistake the words that set up the difficulty for the correct meaning.

45. Where the doubt came from—having heard above of neither increase nor decrease. Answer: Subhūti had heard above that dharmas neither increase nor decrease, and doubt arose of itself in his mind—if dharmas neither increase nor decrease, how is the unsurpassed path obtained? Furthermore, if the unsurpassed path is obtained by practising rightly as things really are, only the Buddha can do so; the bodhisattva has not yet severed ignorance and the other afflictions—how can he practise rightly as things really are? This is exactly the joint between the First Part and the Last Part. The doubt has two layers: one layer on the side of the dharma—if there is neither increase nor decrease, there is nothing to be increased; one layer on the side of the person—if the afflictions are not severed, there is no strength to practise rightly. Neither layer is a doubt forced out for argument's sake; both are doubts a practitioner really does raise.

46. Subhūti himself states the cause and condition of his difficult question. Furthermore, Subhūti here himself states the cause and condition of his difficult question, namely: the first mind does not reach the last mind, the last mind is not in the first mind; how are roots of goodness increased and the unsurpassed path obtained? The treatise-author pointedly notes: the reason for raising the difficulty is given by the questioner himself, without the treatise-author drafting it for him. The rigour of this treatise in resolving difficulties lies here—first let the other side finish stating his own reasons.

47. Therefore he asked this question. For such causes and conditions as these he asked this question: is it obtained by the first mind, or by the last mind? The two preceding passages are gathered into one sentence. Reading to this point one should understand that beneath this seemingly contrived question of alternatives lies an honest perplexity.

48. The Buddha answers with the deep dharma of causes and conditions—not only the first mind, and not apart from the first mind. The Buddha answers with the deep dharma of causes and conditions, namely: it is not obtained only by the first mind, nor is it obtained apart from the first mind. Why? If it were obtained only by the first mind and not by the last, the bodhisattva on first arousing the mind would already be the Buddha; if there were no first mind, how could there be a second or third mind? The second and third minds take the first mind as their root cause and condition. The treatise-author fills in the reasons on both sides for the Buddha: the fault of saying ‘only the first mind’ is that on first arousing the mind one should already become the Buddha; the fault of saying 「離初心」 tr. "apart from the first mind" is that the later mind has nowhere to come from. One breaks, one establishes—exactly the practical use of the two Chinese characters rendered here as ‘causes and conditions’.

49. Also not only the last mind, and also not apart from the last mind. As for its being also not only the last mind and also not apart from the last mind—this last mind too is not apart from the first mind; if there were no first mind there would be no last mind. The first mind gathers all kinds of immeasurable merit, and the last mind then fulfils it; because it is fulfilled, he can sever the afflictions and their habitual residues and obtain the unsurpassed path. This passage puts the two Chinese characters rendered here as ‘accumulation’ back in their proper place: roots of goodness are not stock stored in some one thought; they are gathered all the way from the first mind, and only at the last mind are they declared complete. Severing the habitual residues of the afflictions and accomplishing the path happens at the time of fulfilment, and is not the work of some one thought.

50. Subhūti himself states the cause of his difficulty—not together, therefore not coming together. Subhūti here himself states the cause and condition of his difficulty: the first and last mind and mental-factor dharmas are not together; not being together, the past has already ceased and cannot come together; if there is no coming together, roots of goodness are not gathered; if roots of goodness are not gathered, how is the unsurpassed path accomplished? The treatise-author lays out the questioner's whole chain of reasoning: not together → not coming together → not gathered → not accomplished. Only when this chain is seen clearly does one know at which link the Buddha's answer undoes it—precisely the link of 「和合」 tr. "coming together".

51. The Buddha answers with a simile from a present matter—like the lamp-wick. The Buddha answers with a simile from a present matter: like the lamp-wick: it is not the first flame alone that burns it, nor is it apart from the first flame; it is not the last flame alone that burns it, nor is it apart from the last flame, and yet the lamp-wick is burned. What is called a present matter is a matter ready before the eyes and open to verification. The questioner's chain was reasoned out; the Buddha's answer is pointed out—the lamp-wick is right there burning, and however rigorous the reasoning, it cannot reason this fact away.

52. Matching and explaining the simile—the lamp stands for the path, the wick for the afflictions, the flames are like wisdom. The Buddha says to Subhūti: you yourself see that the wick is burned: neither first nor last, and yet the wick is burned; I too, with the Buddha-eye, see the bodhisattva obtain the unsurpassed path—not by the first mind nor apart from the first mind, not by the last mind nor apart from the last mind, and yet he obtains the unsurpassed path. The treatise-author then matches and explains it item by item: the lamp stands for the bodhisattva path; the wick stands for ignorance and the other afflictions; the flames are like the wisdom that accords with the first ground and so on up to the wisdom that accords with the vajra samādhi; what burns the wick of ignorance and the other afflictions is neither the flame of wisdom of the first mind nor the flame of wisdom of the last mind, and yet the wick of ignorance and the other afflictions is burned up, and the unsurpassed path is accomplished. Only once the matching is made has the simile really landed. The vital thing is the pairing of 「汝自見」 tr. "you yourself see" with ‘I see with the Buddha-eye’: the matter of fact seen with your own eyes and the principle seen by the Buddha-eye are one and the same pattern.

53. The ten grounds help to accomplish the path. Here the Buddha further explains the causes and conditions of obtaining the unsurpassed path, namely: the bodhisattva, from the first arousing of the mind onward, practises prajñāpāramitā and fulfils the first ground and so on up to the tenth ground; these ten grounds all help to accomplish the unsurpassed path. Remember the two Chinese characters 「佐助」 tr. "help": the ten grounds are conditions that help to accomplish, not the master that obtains. If the ten grounds are read as a staircase of qualifications for collecting awakening, the four positions before were spoken in vain.

54. The ten grounds: the ground of dry wisdom and the rest. The ten grounds are the ground of dry wisdom and the rest. One sentence opens the account. Below, each ground's name is explained in turn, and each ground is explained with both a śrāvaka meaning and a bodhisattva meaning—this is the form in which this treatise explains the ten grounds, and in reading one must look at both sides together.

55. The ground of dry wisdom—having wisdom but no water of concentration. The ground of dry wisdom is of two kinds: first, the śrāvaka's; second, the bodhisattva's. The śrāvaka, solely for the sake of nirvāṇa, exerts himself diligently, keeps the precepts with a pure mind, and is fit to receive the path; he may practise the samādhi of contemplating the Buddha, or the contemplation of impurity, or practise kindness and compassion, the contemplation of impermanence, and the other contemplations, discriminating and gathering the wholesome dharmas and abandoning the unwholesome dharmas; though he has wisdom, without obtaining the water of meditative concentration he cannot attain the path; therefore it is called the ground of dry wisdom. For the bodhisattva, it is from the first arousing of the mind up to before obtaining compliant acceptance. The meaning of the Chinese character 「乾」 tr. "dry" lies precisely in 「不得禪定水」 tr. "not obtaining the water of meditative concentration"—having wisdom without concentration, like dry ground. On the bodhisattva's side it is matched with the station from the first arousing of the mind up to before obtaining compliant acceptance.

56. The ground of the stage of nature—obtaining the water of concentration, loving and clinging to the real mark without giving rise to wrong views. The ground of the stage of nature: for the śrāvaka, from the dharma of warmth up to the highest worldly dharma; for the bodhisattva, he obtains compliant acceptance, loves and clings to the real mark of all dharmas, and yet does not give rise to wrong views, and obtains the water of meditative concentration. It stands directly against the ground of dry wisdom: that one lacks the water of concentration, this one obtains it. On the bodhisattva's side there is one more sentence, 「不生邪見」 tr. "does not give rise to wrong views"—loving and clinging to the real mark without falling into the net of views is exactly the measure of this station.

57. the ground of the person of the eight—the fifteen minds and the acceptance of the non-arising of dharmas. the ground of the person of the eight: from the acceptance of the dharma of suffering up to the acceptance of the subsequent knowledge of the path—these are the fifteen minds; for the bodhisattva, it is the acceptance of the non-arising of dharmas, entering the bodhisattva's position. What are called the fifteen minds are the fifteen moments of mind that appear in sequence in the station of the path of seeing, starting from the acceptance of the dharma of suffering and ending at the acceptance of the subsequent knowledge of the path; in this station one has entered the stream of the noble ones but has not yet obtained the fruit. On the bodhisattva's side it is matched with the acceptance of the non-arising of dharmas and entering the bodhisattva's position—both sides carry the meaning of ‘entering the position’, and so they are matched.

58. The ground of seeing—first obtaining the noble fruit, and the avaivartika. The ground of seeing: first obtaining the noble fruit, namely the fruit of the srota-āpanna; for the bodhisattva, it is the avaivartika ground. The previous ground was the practice of the fifteen minds; this ground is its fruit; on the bodhisattva's side it is matched with the ground of non-retrogression, taking what the two share: ‘realised and not retrogressing again’.

59. The ground of thinning—the nine kinds of afflictions partly severed, the remaining vapour also thin. The ground of thinning: either the srota-āpanna or the sakṛdāgāmin, because the nine kinds of afflictions of the desire realm are partly severed; for the bodhisattva, having passed beyond the avaivartika ground and up to before becoming a Buddha, he severs the afflictions, and their remaining vapour is also thin. 「薄」 tr. "Thinning" means partly severed but not yet exhausted; it is not the thinness of slighting. On the bodhisattva's side the range is extremely long—from non-retrogression upward to before becoming a Buddha, all lies in this station; from this one sees that the matching of the ten grounds is not a grid of equal lengths.

60. The ground of freedom from desire—the anāgāmin and the five supernormal powers. The ground of freedom from desire: being free of greed and the other afflictions of the desire realm and so on—this is called the anāgāmin; for the bodhisattva, because of the causes and conditions of freedom from desire he obtains the five supernormal powers. Both sides take 「離欲」 tr. "freedom from desire" as the cause; the fruit is on one side non-returning, on the other the supernormal powers. This also reminds us: in this treatise supernormal powers have always been the fruit of freedom from desire, not a separate craft.

61. The ground of what has been done—the knowledge of exhaustion and the knowledge of non-arising, and accomplishing the Buddha ground. The ground of what has been done: the śrāvaka obtains the knowledge of exhaustion and the knowledge of non-arising, and obtains arhatship; for the bodhisattva, it is accomplishing the Buddha ground. 「已作」 tr. "What has been done" means that what was to be done is accomplished. On the śrāvaka's side this is the ultimate fruit; on the bodhisattva's side it is matched directly with the Buddha ground—the same name, but a vastly different weight; the matching of the ten grounds is in terms of corresponding position in the sequence, not in terms of equal merit.

62. The pratyekabuddha ground—contemplating the deep dharma of causes and conditions and accomplishing the path. The pratyekabuddha ground: in a former life he planted the causes and conditions of the pratyekabuddha path, and in this life, obtaining a small cause and condition, he goes forth, and also contemplates the deep dharma of causes and conditions and accomplishes the path; he is called a pratyekabuddha; pratyeka in the language of Qin means causes and conditions, and it is also called awakening. This item also explains the meaning of the name: the one word pratyeka is rendered as causes and conditions and is also rendered as awakening. Of the ten grounds, this one alone marks out the name of a person, and the treatise-author below raises a question on this very point.

63. The bodhisattva ground—three accounts side by side. The bodhisattva ground: from the ground of dry wisdom up to the ground of freedom from desire, as said above. Furthermore, the bodhisattva ground: from the Ground of Joy up to the Ground of the Dharma Cloud, all are called the bodhisattva ground. Someone says: from the first arousing of the mind onward up to the vajra samādhi is called the bodhisattva ground. One ground, three accounts: one in terms of the bodhisattva portion included in the first six grounds, one in terms of the names of the ten grounds, and the third is another school's account. The treatise-author sets them side by side without deciding—「有人言」 tr. "someone says" is this treatise's marker for recording divergent accounts; the reader should know that here there are still divergent understandings, and must not cling to only one account.

64. The Buddha ground—practice fulfilled in his own ground, contemplation fulfilled in other grounds. The Buddha ground: the omniscience of all kinds and the other dharmas of the buddhas; the bodhisattva fulfils practice in his own ground and fulfils contemplation in other grounds; because the two matters are complete, it is called fulfilment. The two Chinese characters 「具足」 tr. "fulfilment" here receive a definition: it is not walking through all ten grounds once that is called fulfilment; it is practice full on one's own ground and contemplation full on other grounds, practice and contemplation both complete. This meaning, shining back on ‘fulfilling the ten grounds he obtains awakening’ above, shows what that sentence really points to.

65. Question: why is it not said that the bodhisattva resembles the pratyekabuddha ground? The treatise-author sets up a question: why is it not said that the bodhisattva resembles the pratyekabuddha ground? The question is extremely fine. Every ground before was matched as ‘for the bodhisattva it is such-and-such a station’; only at the item of the pratyekabuddha ground does the treatise-author's explanation change its tone; a reader who does not pay attention slides past it, and the treatise-author pulls it out for the reader.

66. The marker of the answer. The treatise-author opens what follows with Answer:. Once this marker appears, the two passages below both explain this one question.

67. The other grounds do not state a name; the pratyekabuddha ground states a name. Answer: The other grounds do not state a name; the pratyekabuddha ground states the name of the pratyekabuddha. The first layer of the answer establishes its meaning from the wording: the names of the other grounds are all names of stations, while this ground alone takes its name from a person; since the name points to a person, one cannot well say ‘resembling a certain person’. The answer is plain, but it is the fact.

68. The bodhisattva does the pratyekabuddha's work by wisdom—the example of Mañjuśrī. Furthermore, the bodhisattva can distinguish and know the beings who can be delivered by the causes and conditions of a pratyekabuddha; therefore the bodhisattva by wisdom does the pratyekabuddha's work, as in the Śūraṃgama Sūtra, where Mañjuśrī seventy-two koṭi times became a pratyekabuddha. The second layer of the answer turns one level further: in this ground the bodhisattva is not ‘resembling’; he really does it—to deliver beings who should be delivered by a pratyekabuddha, the bodhisattva at once manifests that work. What is cited is scriptural proof, not a figure of speech.

69. Having filled nine grounds and cultivated near to the Buddha path, it is called fulfilment. The bodhisattva too is like this: having filled nine grounds and cultivated and gathered the dharmas of a Buddha, though the ten powers, the four fearlessnesses, and the rest are not yet fulfilled, because by cultivation he is near the Buddha path it is called fulfilment; for this reason it says: because the ten grounds are fulfilled, he obtains the unsurpassed path. This passage resolves a difficulty: since the ten powers and the rest are not yet fulfilled, why does the sūtra say fulfilled? The answer lies in the Chinese character 「近」 tr. "near"—cultivation already near the Buddha path, on that account it is called fulfilment. The 「具足」 tr. "fulfilment" of the sūtra does not say that merit is already complete; it says that the road has already arrived.

70. Because dharmas come together from causes and conditions, it is obtained neither first nor last. Because all these dharmas come together from causes and conditions, it is not the first, nor apart from the first, not the last, nor apart from the last, and yet the unsurpassed path is obtained. The treatise-author gathers the whole great section on the ten grounds back into the general principle of the simile. With this, the first great question of the Last Part is fully answered: the increase of roots of goodness does not lie in some one thought; it lies in the continuity of the coming together of causes and conditions; one cannot point to one of them and obtain it, nor can one leave any one of them and accomplish it.

71. Subhūti praises and doubts again—does this mind abide or cease? Subhūti, because he reveres this dharma, praises it, saying: World-Honored One! This dharma of causes and conditions is very deep, namely that the past mind neither ceases nor abides, and yet can increase and obtain the unsurpassed path; this matter is very deep and rare, hard to believe and understand! Does this mind abide, or cease? After the praise there is still a question—it is exactly this question that draws out the long section of back-and-forth objections below. The treatise-author's laying-out lets the reader see clearly: the Buddha's chain of counter-questions that follows is not issued without cause; it arises in response to this one doubt.

72. The intent of the Buddha's counter-question—he asks because of the arising and ceasing seen by the six faculties. As for the Buddha's asking Subhūti in return 「於汝意云何？若心滅已更生不」 tr. "What do you think? When the mind has ceased, does it arise again?": though all dharmas are ultimately empty, neither arising nor ceasing, because beings see dharmas that arise and cease with the six faculties, he asks whether the mind, having ceased, arises again. This sentence resolves the premise of the whole section of counter-questions: ultimate emptiness is what the Buddha sees; arising and ceasing is what beings see; only by setting the question where beings see can the question get in. Without understanding this premise, one would feel that the Buddha contradicts himself.

73. Once the mind has ceased it does not arise again—arising again falls into permanence. Subhūti says: No, World-Honored One! Why? When the mind has ceased, how should it arise again? If the mind arose again after ceasing, it would fall into permanence. The reason for the answer is only one sentence: if it ceased and arose again, what ceased did not truly cease; it would be a permanently abiding thing coming and going—the fault of the view of permanence is established by this.

74. Above he asked of the past; now he asks of the present. As for whether, when the mind arises, it is the mark of ceasing—having asked above of the past mind, now he asks whether the mark of the present mind should cease or not. The treatise-author specially marks the shift in the order of questions: first the past, then the present. The counter-question form most easily confuses readers; hints of this kind from the treatise-author keep track of the road for the reader.

75. It is the mark of ceasing—arising and ceasing depend on each other. Therefore he answers: it is the mark of ceasing. Why? Arising and ceasing are dharmas that depend on each other; where there is arising there must be ceasing; because what formerly did not exist now exists, and what has existed returns to non-existence. The two Chinese characters 「相待」 tr. "depend on each other" are the key: arising and ceasing are not two events that happen one after the other; they are two faces of one matter, standing in mutual dependence. Understanding this, ‘arising is itself the mark of ceasing’ is no longer hard to grasp.

76. Is the mark of the mind's ceasing ceasing—is it identical, or is there another? As for whether the mark of the mind's ceasing is ceasing—is the mark of the mind's ceasing itself ceasing? Or is there a further ceasing? The treatise-author unfolds the sūtra's brief question into two branches of alternatives. Once it is unfolded, the fault becomes visible.

77. One mind does not fall into two times—the proof of the eight phrases of the Abhidharma Sūtra. He answers: No, World-Honored One! Why? If it were itself ceasing, then one mind would have two times—the time of arising and the time of ceasing. For those who speak of impermanence, the mind does not exceed the time of a single thought. As the Abhidharma Sūtra says: there are arising dharmas and non-arising dharmas; there are dharmas about to arise and dharmas not about to arise; there are ceasing dharmas and non-ceasing dharmas; there are dharmas about to cease and dharmas not about to cease. An arising dharma has two kinds in one present mind: first, arising; second, about to cease; arising is not the mark of being about to cease, and the mark of being about to cease is not arising. This is not so; therefore he says no. This passage is the finest section in the whole unit. The eight phrases cited set ‘already so’ against ‘about to be so’: the 「欲」 tr. "about to" of about to arise and about to cease means about to be but not yet arrived. Since in the one present mind there is both arising and about-to-cease, and yet arising is not about-to-cease and about-to-cease is not arising—if one says the mark of ceasing is itself ceasing, one must lodge two divisions of time in a single thought, contrary to 「心不過一念」 tr. "the mind does not exceed a single thought". Therefore he answers no.

78. Should it abide thus—abiding permanently is the mark of not ceasing. As for whether it should abide thus—if the mark of ceasing is not itself ceasing, should it abide permanently? If it abides permanently, that is the mark of not ceasing. The treatise-author points out how the Buddha presses with this question: not allowing 「即是滅」 tr. "is itself ceasing", he must then try ‘abides permanently’; only when both sides have been tried is there no escape from the line of reasoning.

79. Reasoning exhausted, he answers: abiding as suchness abides. The Buddha objects back and forth in this way; Subhūti, his reasoning exhausted, has this thought: if I say the mark of ceasing is itself ceasing, then one mind falls into two times; if I say it does not cease, it really is the mark of ceasing—how can I say it does not cease? Because both lines of reasoning above have faults, Subhūti answers from the wisdom he himself has realised: World-Honored One! It abides just so, abiding as suchness abides. 「理窮」 tr. "Reasoning exhausted" does not mean losing the debate; it means the road of thinking has been walked to its end; where the road ends he no longer answers by thinking, but answers instead by the wisdom he has realised. What one most needs to remember in reading this passage is this one turn—the three Chinese characters rendered here as ‘abiding as suchness abides’ are the words of a realised state, not yet another line of reasoning.

80. The question whether the mind can be taken directly as the limit of reality. As for whether, if this mind abides as suchness abides, it should be taken as the limit of reality—if one says that the mark of the mind abides the same as suchness abides, suchness is the limit of reality; if so, can the mind be taken directly as the limit of reality? The treatise-author completes the logic of the Buddha's question: suchness and the limit of reality are of one substance; since the mind abides as suchness abides, is it not the limit of reality? The question follows naturally from the reasoning, and that is why the answer below becomes so vital.

81. Subhūti does not allow it—the mind is a false and deceptive dharma. Subhūti says: No, World-Honored One! Why? Subhūti has long revered this limit of reality; the mind is a false and deceptive dharma; the wisdom-power of the Small Vehicle is slight and cannot contemplate the mind as directly the limit of reality; therefore he says no. The treatise-author's explanation here is extremely honest: he does not say that Subhūti answered perfectly; he says that his measure of realisation is such—revering the limit of reality, regarding the mind as false and deceptive, and therefore unable to make this contemplation. This is this treatise's constant way of recording the limits of an answerer, not a disparagement.

82. Question: since Subhūti has said this mind is suchness, why can it not be taken as the limit of reality? The treatise-author sets up a question: if Subhūti has already said that this mind is suchness, why can it not be taken as the limit of reality? Precisely this doubt is in the reader's mind, and the treatise-author asks it for him. The previous passage said only that Subhūti could not; it did not say whether in principle it could be; this question fills in the layer of principle.

83. The marker of the answer. The treatise-author opens what follows with Answer:. The three passages below all explain this question—one in terms of name and meaning, one in terms of the measure of realisation, one in terms of the signless.

84. Suchness means the real mark of all dharmas; the real mark of the mind is also called suchness. Answer: Suchness means the real mark of all dharmas; the real mark of the mind is also called suchness. First the name and its meaning are settled: suchness is the name of the real mark of all dharmas, and the real mark of the mind is likewise called suchness. This sentence first grants that 「心如」 tr. "the mind is suchness" holds, and only then can it say why the mind still cannot be taken as the limit of reality.

85. Two meanings: Subhūti's intent, and the limit of reality being signless. Subhūti's mind held that what ordinary people see with the six faculties is false and inverted, and therefore at fault; saying now that the mark of the mind is as it really is, is without blame; therefore he said abiding as suchness abides; now the limit of reality is nirvāṇa, and because Subhūti has long prized nirvāṇa, he cannot take the mind directly as nirvāṇa; therefore he says no. Furthermore, because the limit of reality is signless, one cannot say that the mind is the limit of reality. Two reasons: one on the side of the person—having long prized nirvāṇa, he is unwilling to let the false and deceptive mind stand for it; one on the side of the dharma—the limit of reality is signless, and whoever says 「心即是」 tr. "the mind is" has already grasped at a mark. The second is the general principle, not limited to Subhūti alone—this is where this passage truly lands.

86. Where the question whether suchness is deep comes from. As for whether suchness is deep—because Subhūti said that the mind abides as suchness abides and further said that it cannot be taken as the limit of reality, therefore the Buddha asks: is suchness very deep? The treatise-author points out where this question comes from: taken together, the two statements seem to obstruct each other, and the Buddha therefore asks about the depth of suchness. Once where the question comes from is clear, one knows how much the answer weighs.

87. He answers very deep—because he cannot know completely. Because Subhūti cannot know completely, he answers: very deep. The treatise-author again points out the limits of the answerer. 「甚深」 tr. "Very deep" here is not describing how good suchness is; it is a confession that what he knows cannot reach its bottom.

88. Is suchness only this mind? As for whether suchness is only this mind—the Buddha, on the phrase 「心如如住」 tr. "the mind abides as suchness abides", pushes the question: how could suchness be only this mind? This question carries on from the meaning of 85: since one cannot say that the mind is the limit of reality, neither can one say that suchness is the mind.

89. Suchness is one mark; the mind is two marks. Subhūti answers: No, World-Honored One! Why? Suchness is one mark, not two marks; the mind is born of the causes and conditions of recollection, imagining, and discrimination, and therefore is two marks. Suchness knows nothing; the mind knows something; moreover, because suchness is ultimately pure it knows nothing, while the mind has awareness and knowing. Three distinctions: one mark and two marks, knowing nothing and knowing something, ultimate purity and having awareness. What is called two marks is the discriminating and the discriminated forming a pair; because the mind is born from the causes and conditions of recollection, imagining, and discrimination, it must form a pair. Suchness is not so.

90. Apart from suchness there is no mind—all dharmas have suchness. Apart from suchness, with the mind it is likewise. Why? All dharmas have suchness; how could there be a mind apart from suchness? The previous passage broke ‘suchness is the mind’; this passage breaks ‘there is a mind apart from suchness’. One sentence of reason suffices: all dharmas have suchness; the mind too is one among dharmas; apart from suchness there is no mind to be found. Neither one nor different is here firmly established.

91. Can suchness see suchness? The Buddha asks Subhūti: can suchness see suchness? Since it is neither one nor different, can one say that suchness sees itself? This question probes straight at subject and object. Whenever a seer and a seen are set up, it has already fallen into two marks, contrary to 「如是一相」 tr. "suchness is one mark".

92. Within suchness there is no discrimination—not abiding in suchness, the nature of dharmas, or the limit of reality. He answers: within suchness there is no discrimination—this is knowing, this is the knowable; this bodhisattva does not abide in suchness, the nature of dharmas, or the limit of reality; he truly practises the deep bodhisattva path. What is called 「是知、是可知」 tr. "this is knowing, this is the knowable" is the knower and the known; within suchness there is no such discrimination, and so there is no matter of its seeing itself. The last sentence is especially vital: not abiding in suchness, not abiding in the nature of dharmas, not abiding in the limit of reality—only this is truly practising the deep bodhisattva path; even the three highest names and marks may not be abided in and clung to.

93. If he practises thus, can he practise deep prajñā? The Buddha asks Subhūti: if he practises thus, can he practise deep prajñāpāramitā? Having examined the dharma, he turns back to examine the person. This question corresponds to the sūtra, and here the treatise-author turns to a section on the gate of practice.

94. He answers because he contemplates the Small Vehicle as shallow and thin and the Great Vehicle as deep. Subhūti, contemplating for himself the Small Vehicle as shallow and thin and contemplating the dharma of the Great Vehicle as deep, answers: to practise thus is to practise deep prajñāpāramitā. The treatise-author once again records the answerer's state of mind. Such records in this treatise are not idle strokes—they let the reader know that the same sentence weighs differently in different mouths.

95. Breaking the haughty mind—the self-assessment of bodhisattvas who have not obtained the acceptance of the non-arising of dharmas. At that time there were bodhisattvas who had not obtained the acceptance of the non-arising of dharmas who, hearing this dharma, became haughty in mind, calling themselves out of the Small Vehicle and deep into the Great Vehicle. Wishing to break their haughty mind, the Buddha asked Subhūti: the bodhisattva practising thus—where does he practise? This passage is the scene the treatise-author supplies. In the sūtra one sees only the Buddha asking once more; the treatise-author points out that this question was for a certain class of listeners—the deeper the Dharma, the more easily arises the pride of ‘I have already entered deep’; the method of breaking this pride is not rebuke, but asking once more ‘where do you practise’.

96. Practising for no place at all—abiding in suchness, nothing is discriminated. Subhūti says: practising thus is practising for no place at all. Why? Because the bodhisattva abides in suchness and discriminates nothing. The answer is clean. The reason the haughty mind arises is precisely that in the mind a ‘place I have reached’ has been secretly set up; with the single phrase no place at all, the clinging falls away of itself.

97. He asks again, fearing a fall into annihilation. Hearing of practising for no place at all, the bodhisattva may fall into annihilation; therefore the Buddha asks Subhūti again: the bodhisattva practising prajñā—where does he practise? The treatise-author again points out the Buddha's intent. Right after breaking the haughty mind he guards against the view of annihilation—this is the two-handed method this treatise follows throughout: in pulling out the clinging to one side, it must guard against toppling over to the other.

98. Practising within the highest meaning—the highest meaning has no two marks. Subhūti says: he practises within the highest meaning. The mark of the highest meaning is that it has no two marks. It is established positively, and what is established is still non-duality. If one takes 「第一義」 tr. "the highest meaning" as a high place one can abide in, it becomes one mark again; the treatise-author negates even as he speaks, leaving no place to abide.

99. Practising the highest meaning without thought—is it practising the dharma of grasping at marks? The Buddha says to Subhūti: what do you think, if the bodhisattva practises the highest meaning without thought, is he practising the dharma of grasping at marks? No sooner is the highest meaning established than it is tested. Here the rhythm is entirely the same as in Sūtra ③: establish a meaning and examine that meaning; only when it passes the examination may it be used.

100. Ultimately empty and without recollection, this is not practising marks. Subhūti says: No, World-Honored One! Why? All dharmas are ultimately empty and without recollection; this is not practising marks. The key of the answer lies in 「無憶念」 tr. "without recollection"—grasping at marks can only be established by way of recollection, imagining, and discrimination; since there is no recollection, grasping at marks has no footing.

101. Does this bodhisattva destroy marks and obtain the signless? The Buddha asks Subhūti: does this bodhisattva destroy marks and obtain the signless? After not grasping at marks, the most ready misunderstanding is ‘then knock the marks away’. The Buddha brings this misunderstanding up directly as a question.

102. Marks from the very beginning do not exist—only inversion is removed. Subhūti says: No! Marks from the very beginning do not exist; it is only for the sake of removing inversion; he does not destroy the marks of dharmas. One sentence settles the case: marks do not exist from the beginning, so there is nothing to destroy; what the bodhisattva removes is inversion, not the marks of dharmas. This saying is the correct understanding of the whole unit's meaning of ‘neither grasping nor destroying’.

103. If he does not destroy marks, how does he practise the signless practice? The Buddha says to Subhūti: if he does not destroy marks, how does he practise the signless practice? The pursuit is utterly natural: if marks are not destroyed, where does signless practice come from? Without pressing this question, the previous answer could still be read as an evasion.

104. Not making the thought of breaking marks—by the power of skilful means making it neither as having marks nor as without marks. Subhūti says: World-Honored One! The bodhisattva does not make this thought—I shall break marks, and therefore practise prajñā. This bodhisattva, not yet having fulfilled the Buddha's ten powers and the other dharmas of the buddhas, by the power of skilful means makes it neither as having marks nor as without marks. The answer has two sections: one on the mind's conduct—the thought of breaking marks does not arise; one on the station—merit not yet complete, and by skilful means he holds the middle. The power of skilful means here is not an expedient trick; it is the very capacity not to fall into either side.

105. Grasping at marks and breaking marks both have faults—leaving the two extremes and practising the middle way. Why? If he grasps at marks, these marks are all false, deceptive, and lying speech, with many faults; if he breaks marks, he falls into annihilation, also with many faults. Therefore he grasps neither at having marks nor at being without marks. To grasp at a mark is the dharma of existence; not to grasp at a mark is the dharma of non-existence; by the power of skilful means he leaves these two extremes of existence and non-existence and practises the middle way. This passage sets the faults of both sides side by side and then marks out the middle way. Note the sentence 「不取相即是無法」 tr. "not to grasp at a mark is the dharma of non-existence"—even 「不取」 tr. "not grasping" can be clung to as an extreme of non-existence, so the middle way is not a compromising third point; it is abiding on neither of the two extremes, existence and non-existence.

106. Because of emptiness of own-nature he does not cling to existence or non-existence—the emptiness of specific marks also breaks its own mark. Here the Buddha himself states the cause and condition, namely: knowing that all dharmas are empty of own-nature, he does not cling to existence or non-existence. The emptiness of specific marks breaks the marks of all dharmas, and also breaks its own mark. The last sentence is the most crucial: this knife, the emptiness of specific marks, having broken the marks of all dharmas, breaks itself too, leaving no 「空」 tr. "emptiness" in the hand. If a mark of emptiness is left over, it is exactly the illness that the people of dull faculties below fall into.

107. The non-action samādhi severs beings' making of vows—the wrong vows of receiving bodies in the six destinies. The bodhisattva, abiding within this emptiness of specific marks, gives rise to the three samādhi to benefit beings. Beings in the six destinies make all kinds of vows and receive bodies: some do not gather the mind and cannot cultivate merit, indulge themselves and create deeds as they please; if they are to fall into the hells, at the time of death, pressed by a cold wind, they wish to obtain fire, and so enter the three evil destinies, such as the hells; if they become human, they are also poor and lowly; some gather the mind, can subdue avarice, practise giving, keeping the precepts, and other good conduct, and are born in places of wealth and pleasure among humans and gods of the desire realm; some leave the desire realm and remove the five hindrances, and by the five faculties of faith and the rest obtain the dhyānas with five limbs and the others, and are born in the form realm; some, because they relinquish all marks of form, extinguish the marks of resistance, and do not attend to the marks of diversity, enter the formless absorption of the sphere of boundless space and the rest. All these makings are wrong vows. Why? Because in the long run all shall break down and fall; as when a bird is tied with a cord: when the cord runs out, it comes back again. The bodhisattva by this non-action samādhi severs beings' making of vows. This passage ranges the receiving of bodies in the six destinies all the way up to the formless absorptions, yet the conclusion is uniform: all who make vows and receive bodies are making wrong vows—regardless of how high or low the place of birth. The simile of the bird tied with a cord is exact: with a long cord it flies far, and when the cord runs out it must still come back; the length of a stay in the heavens is exactly the length of the cord. What the non-action samādhi severs is precisely this cord.

108. The emptiness samādhi severs I and mine—the body empty, the mind like an illusion. Moreover, this body is entirely empty, having only sinews and bones and the five viscera, smeared with blood, wrapped in skin, filled with impurity, moved by wind as the mind directs; this mind arises and ceases without abiding, like an illusion, like a transformation, without a fixed real mark. Because beings see these marks of coming and going and of speech, they say there is a person, there is a self, there is what belongs to the self, and give rise to inverted minds; only because of recollection, imagining, and discrimination is there this error. The bodhisattva by the emptiness samādhi severs beings' mind of I and mine, and causes them to abide in emptiness. Body and mind are contemplated together on both sides: the body is analysed into sinew, bone, blood, and skin and has no master; the mind arises and ceases like an illusion and has no fixity. The reason the view of self arises is seeing the marks of coming and going and of speech and falsely reckoning a master behind them—the root of the illness is still recollection, imagining, and discrimination.

109. The signless samādhi severs the marks—grasping at marks gives rise to afflictions. Moreover, beings grasp at the marks of male and female, of form, sound, smell, and taste, of beautiful and ugly, of long and short; because of grasping at marks they give rise to all kinds of afflictions and undergo sorrows and sufferings. The bodhisattva by this signless samādhi severs beings' marks and causes them to abide in the signless. This item forms one set with the preceding two: the illness of making vows is treated by non-action, the illness of clinging to self by emptiness, the illness of grasping at marks by the signless. Three illnesses, three medicines, clearly in order.

110. Question: if obtaining emptiness is enough, what use are the signless and non-action? The treatise-author sets up a question: if in teaching and transforming beings it is enough to have them obtain emptiness, what use are the signless samādhi and the non-action samādhi? An excellent question. Since emptiness can break everything, why set up two more gates? If this question is not asked clearly, the three samādhi become a bed piled upon a bed.

111. The marker of the answer. The treatise-author opens what follows with Answer:. The passage below is the closing of the whole chapter.

112. The difference of keen and dull—for those who grasp at a mark of emptiness the signless is taught; for those who wish to make a body again non-action is taught. Answer: Beings' faculties are keen or dull. Those of keen faculties, hearing emptiness, at once obtain the signless and non-action. Those of dull faculties, hearing that emptiness breaks all dharmas, then grasp at a mark of emptiness; therefore the signless is taught. If someone, though knowing emptiness and the signless, because of this wisdom wishes further to make a body—this is a conditioned dharma, with all kinds of faults and troubles; therefore one should not make a body, as a sūtra says: apart from the bodhisattva's body, any other body is not delightful even for the space of a finger-snap, how much less to abide in it long! Therefore non-action is taught. For these reasons the three samādhi are fully taught, to teach and transform beings. The answer has three layers: for those of keen faculties one gate suffices, the three samādhi being originally of one flavour; those of dull faculties, hearing emptiness, grasp at a mark of emptiness, so the one gate of the signless is needed to take apart even the mark of emptiness; and there are those who know both emptiness and the signless yet still want to rely on this wisdom to receive one more body, so the one gate of non-action is needed to sever their vow of receiving a body. The sentence cited, 「離菩薩身，餘身彈指頃不可樂」 tr. "apart from the bodhisattva's body, any other body is not delightful even for the space of a finger-snap", marks out the single exception—the bodhisattva's body is received for the delivering of beings, and is not among what is severed. The whole chapter ends here: starting from the lamp-wick's neither first nor last and stopping at the three samādhi set up to fit the capacities, the whole text speaks of only one thing—it is accomplished by the coming together of causes and conditions, and therefore one may not cling to any one part of it, nor may one brush aside the whole.

Do Not Misread

Do not read ‘obtaining awakening neither by the first mind nor by the last mind’ as obtaining without a cause. Right after the four positions comes the sentence 「炷實燋」 tr. "the wick is really burned", and where the simile is matched there comes straight after it the sentence 「從初發意行般若波羅蜜，具足十地」 tr. "from the first arousing of intent he practises prajñāpāramitā and fulfils the ten grounds"—the sūtra twice adds this stroke precisely to guard against this misreading. That one cannot pin down some one thought as the cause of attaining the path does not mean that attaining the path has no cause; the treatise-author says plainly 「是諸法皆因緣和合故」 tr. "because all these dharmas come together from causes and conditions"; what is broken is the clinging to ‘obtaining only by some one thought’, not cause and effect itself.

Do not read the ten grounds as ten rungs of a ladder. The treatise-author marks the ten grounds as 「佐助成無上道」 tr. "helping to accomplish the unsurpassed path", and further explains the two Chinese characters 「具足」 tr. "fulfilment" by ‘fulfilling practice in one's own ground, fulfilling contemplation in other grounds’. If the ten grounds could be climbed rung by rung to collect awakening, why would the Buddha, right after listing the ten grounds, at once repeat once more ‘not obtained by the first mind, nor obtained apart from the first mind’? Opening the road and barring clinging appear together in the same passage; lacking either, it becomes lopsided.

Do not read ‘having filled nine grounds, though the ten powers, the four fearlessnesses, and the rest are not yet fulfilled … it is called fulfilment’ as merit already complete. The treatise-author's reason is 「以修習近佛道故」 tr. "because by cultivation he is near the Buddha path"—what is called fulfilment is said in terms of the road being already near, not in terms of merit being already full. The sūtra's 「具足」 tr. "fulfilment" and the ordinary feeling of ‘perfect completeness’ are not one meaning.

Do not read 「如如住」 tr. "abiding as suchness abides" as yet another line of reasoning. The treatise-author specially records the origin of this answer: Subhūti, after 「理窮故」 tr. "because his reasoning was exhausted", 「自以所證智慧答」 tr. "answered from the wisdom he himself had realised". All the questions and answers before lie within thinking; this sentence has already gone beyond thinking. To treat it as a third position set alongside permanence and annihilation is to lose its reality.

Do not read ‘the mind cannot be taken directly as the limit of reality’ as disparaging the mind. The treatise-author first establishes 「如名一切法實相，心實相亦名如」 tr. "suchness means the real mark of all dharmas; the real mark of the mind is also called suchness", and does not deny that the real mark of the mind is suchness; what is not allowed is the statement 「心即是實際」 tr. "the mind is the limit of reality", which grasps at a mark—「以實際無相故，不得言『心即是實際』」 tr. "because the limit of reality is signless, one cannot say ‘the mind is the limit of reality’". The dividing line lies in the two Chinese characters 「即是」 tr. "is", not in the mind.

Do not read 「不取相亦不壞相」 tr. "neither grasping at marks nor destroying marks" as vague equivocation. The fault of grasping at marks lies in 「是相皆虛誑妄語」 tr. "these marks are all false, deceptive, and lying speech"; the fault of breaking marks lies in 「墮斷滅中」 tr. "falling into annihilation"; since the faults of both sides are clear, the middle way is not a smoothing-over; it is leaving both extremes and having no other place to abide. The treatise-author adds one more cut—「不取相即是無法」 tr. "not to grasp at a mark is the dharma of non-existence"—not allowing even 「不取」 tr. "not grasping" to be clung to as an extreme.

Do not read 「自相空」 tr. "the emptiness of specific marks" as an emptiness one can abide in and cling to. The treatise-author says plainly 「自相空破一切法相，亦自破其相」 tr. "the emptiness of specific marks breaks the marks of all dharmas, and also breaks its own mark". If emptiness is kept in the hand, it becomes the mark of emptiness grasped by those of dull faculties, and the sūtra sets up the signless samādhi separately precisely for this illness. Breaking without keeping the breaker—only that is the emptiness of specific marks.

Do not read 「是諸所作，皆是邪願」 tr. "all these makings are wrong vows" as a rebuke of cultivating merit and being born in heaven. This saying is spoken of the one kind of person who 「作願受身」 tr. "makes vows and receives bodies"—all who by the power of a vow take a body that is the retribution of one period shall in the long run break down and fall, and so it is called a wrong vow; the simile of the bird tied with a cord speaks of its necessarily coming back, not of those with short cords being evil. What the non-action samādhi severs is the vow of receiving a body, not people's practising giving and keeping the precepts.

Bearing on Practice

Take the simile of the lamp-wick to treat the anxiety of ‘when will I ever finish the practice?’ When effort shows no progress, the mind often secretly asks which sitting, which day's work counts. Remember 「非初焰燋炷，亦非離初焰」 tr. "it is not the first flame that burns the wick, nor is it apart from the first flame"—there is no sitting that is the sitting, and no sitting is sat in vain; to ask by which thought the path is attained is to cut continuous effort into pieces and pick among them. The three Chinese characters rendered here as ‘the wick is really burned’ are a guarantee to all who apply themselves according to the Dharma.

Take 「初心集種種無量功德，後心則具足」 tr. "the first mind gathers all kinds of immeasurable merit, and the last mind then fulfils it" to settle into the long-enduring mind. That today's strength of mind is not yet enough to sever the habitual residues of the afflictions is the fact; but the treatise-author says clearly that severing the residues happens at the time of fulfilment, and fulfilment is gathered all the way from the first mind. What is gathered today does not show its effect today—knowing this, one does not give up because there is no effect.

Take the two-sided explanation of the ten grounds to measure one's own station. The ground of dry wisdom has no water of concentration, the ground of the stage of nature obtains the water of concentration, the ground of the person of the eight enters the position, the ground of seeing obtains the fruit, in the ground of thinning the remaining vapour is also thin—each ground has marks that can be verified. Measuring oneself is not pinning a station-label on oneself; it is looking at oneself against these marks to see which item is lacking: if there is wisdom but the water of concentration is not yet obtained, one should make up concentration; if one loves and clings to the real mark but wrong views are not yet purified, one should make up view.

Take 「不住如、法性、實際」 tr. "not abiding in suchness, the nature of dharmas, or the limit of reality" to examine the abiding and clinging in one's view. When the practice has deepened, what is hardest to let go is often not a coarse object but the 「如」 tr. "suchness" one has realised oneself. The treatise-author matches this sentence with 「真行深菩薩道」 tr. "truly practising the deep bodhisattva path"—whenever one feels one is abiding in a very high place, one should look back at this sentence.

Take 「爾時，有未得無生法忍菩薩聞是法則心高」 tr. "at that time there were bodhisattvas who had not obtained the acceptance of the non-arising of dharmas who, hearing this dharma, became haughty in mind" to illuminate one's own Dharma-pride. Hearing deep Dharma and having the feeling ‘I have already entered deep’ is the most common barrier on the path of training. The Buddha breaks this pride with only one question—where do you practise? Ask oneself this once, and the haughty mind has nowhere to settle.

Take the three samādhi to prescribe medicine according to the illness. In daily life, when one raises the mind to receive a body and seek a further existence, illuminate it with non-action; when one reckons a self and what belongs to a self and gives rise to love and hatred, illuminate it with emptiness; when afflictions arise over the marks of male and female, beautiful and ugly, long and short, illuminate them with the signless. The three gates need not be used all together; see which illness is present before you.

Take 「知空、無相，因是智慧，更欲作身」 tr. "knowing emptiness and the signless, because of this wisdom wishes further to make a body" as a warning to oneself. Having read emptiness until it is familiar, one instead wants to rely on this bit of view to take a good body again, a good situation—the treatise-author specially lists this kind of person separately. Conditioned dharmas have all kinds of faults and troubles; once this thought arises, it is a road of retreat, not progress.

Take 「離菩薩身，餘身彈指頃不可樂」 tr. "apart from the bodhisattva's body, any other body is not delightful even for the space of a finger-snap" to establish a vow. These are not words of weariness with the world; they point out the one body worth receiving: the body received to deliver beings. Knowing that other bodies are not delightful, arousing the mind to receive a body and deliver people is not forcing oneself; it is the only way out.

Further Resonances

For the Last Part, the divergence of the titles among the ancient masters is most worth recording. The base text titles fascicle 74 "The Lamp-wick", yet the continuation heading of fascicle 75 calls itself "The Lamp Simile"—two places within one text differing from each other; the Song, Yuan, and Palace editions title it "The Profound", and the Ming edition further states of itself, in an interlinear note under the title, that the sūtra reads "The Lamp-wick Profound". Looked at from the side of the sūtra text, the proper name of this chapter of the Larger Sūtra is "The Profound", while the interlinear note of the Khitan edition clearly writes "The Lamp-wick"—the sūtra and treatise layers each run two sets of titles in parallel, not arbitrary changes by later people. Jizang in his commentary lists the chapter as 「深奧品」 tr. "The Profound", yet when discussing the chapter's core simile calls it straightforwardly 「燈炷喻」 tr. "the lamp-wick simile"—the title uses that one while the term uses this one. In what Huiying transmits, the table of contents reads 「灯喻品」 tr. "The Lamp Simile", while the commentary text separately brings up an ancient name, saying 「第五十七品釋論者，名為淨土品」 tr. "the treatise's explanation of the fifty-seventh chapter is named the Pure Land chapter"; his reason is that since this chapter has made clear that the non-retrogressing bodhisattva's self-practice in the two virtues of wisdom and severance is already sufficient, next it should go on to adorn and purify lands to receive and transform beings, and therefore he names its treatise-explanation Pure Land—this is a name established from how the divisions of the text carry on, and it is yet another line apart from the Lamp-wick and the Profound. What Junzheng transmits lists three more names, saying 「此或題灯炷啄品，或歸功德品，或云住菩提品」 tr. "this is sometimes titled the Lamp-wick Pecking chapter, or the Returning Merit chapter, or called the Abiding in Awakening chapter". The Ishiyama text's title is further 「燈柱」 tr. "lamp-pillar", the same name as 「燈炷」 tr. "lamp-wick" and 「灯炷」 tr. "lamp-wick" but in a different character-form. All these names appear in the various transmitted texts and among the ancient masters; this unit records them all as they are, without judging better or worse.

Junzheng, citing the sūtra text of the ten grounds in this chapter, writes the item 「八人地」 tr. "the ground of the person of the eight" as 「八忍地」 tr. "the ground of the eight acceptances", differing from the base text. The base text has no collation note here to compare against; Junzheng himself also says: 「在見諦中，有八忍之位，是八忍人，故名八人地也」 tr. "within the seeing of the truths there is the station of the eight acceptances; these are the persons of the eight acceptances, and therefore it is named the ground of the person of the eight"—in his hands the two names were already interchangeable; the meanings the two names point to can also be read against each other—the base text's ground of the person of the eight the treatise-author explains as 「從苦法忍乃至道比智忍，是十五心」 tr. "from the acceptance of the dharma of suffering up to the acceptance of the subsequent knowledge of the path—these are the fifteen minds", which is exactly the continuity of acceptance and knowledge in the fifteen moments of the path of seeing, and writing 「八忍地」 tr. "the ground of the eight acceptances" does not contradict this meaning either. Both forms are recorded side by side, without forcing an explanation.

Further, as to the fascicles to which this chapter's sūtra and treatise belong, the records of the ancient masters also differ: some, when citing this chapter's text, attach it to fascicle 78 of the Great Treatise, which does not agree with fascicles 74 and 75 of the current base text. Such differences of fascicle number are not rare among the ancient masters' ways of citing books; the difference is recorded without judging right or wrong.

As to the vein of meaning, the First Part closed with 「不增不減、不可得」 tr. "neither increase nor decrease, unfindable", and the Last Part raises its doubt and asks from exactly this place; the simile of the lamp-wick answers its 「云何增益」 tr. "how are they increased", the teaching of the ten grounds answers its ‘by what road is it accomplished’, abiding as suchness abides and practising within the highest meaning answer its ‘where does one practise’, and the emptiness of specific marks and the three samādhi answer its ‘what after emptiness’. One unit, four turns, and they return to the one meaning of the coming together of causes and conditions. The previous chapter spoke of the turning and not turning of the avaivartika; this chapter speaks of how the bodhisattva who does not turn walks from the first mind to the ultimate; the next chapter turns to the matter of entering samādhi in a dream, pushing one layer further precisely from the meaning of practising for no place at all—since practice has no place, then between waking and sleeping there is no difference either. Three chapters in one line—this can be seen here.

Further Resonances

The vein of meaning in the chapter "The Lamp-wick" has something it inherits before it and something it opens after it. What it inherits is the preceding chapter, "Turning and Not Turning": that chapter explains at length the marks of the avaivartika, sets up an answer one by one to the words with which evil Māra would ruin the mind, and establishes a judgement in a single sentence that cuts both ways—「不轉故名阿鞞跋致，轉故亦名阿鞞跋致」 tr. "One is called avaivartika because of not turning; one is also called avaivartika because of turning"; at its end that chapter concludes of itself, saying 「略說阿鞞跋致相義」 tr. "the meaning of the marks of the avaivartika has been briefly explained." This chapter takes it up and turns the direction of the question, and at the opening of the fascicle the treatise-author himself states where it has come from: 「須菩提聞佛上二品中說阿鞞跋致具足相；入此品，佛方開四無礙門，更欲說阿鞞跋致相。」 tr. "Subhūti heard the Buddha, in the two chapters above, speak of the complete marks of the avaivartika; entering this chapter, the Buddha now opens the gate of the four unobstructed knowledges and wishes further to speak of the marks of the avaivartika." The marks having been fully spoken, he then asks about the place where one abides—「何等是深奧處」 tr. "What is the profound place"; the preceding chapter spoke of the appearance of non-retrogression, and this chapter speaks of the ground on which the non-retrogressing one stands. What it opens also has clear evidence: this chapter closes on the passage about the three samādhi bringing beings to accomplishment, 「見眾生作法中行，菩薩以方便力故，教令得無作」 tr. "Seeing beings practising within the dharmas of making, the bodhisattva, by the power of skilful means, teaches them to obtain non-action," and so on, and the last sentence of the whole chapter is 「以是因緣故，具說三三昧，教化眾生」 tr. "For these reasons the three samādhi are fully taught, to teach and transform beings"; the next chapter, "Entering Samādhi in a Dream," at its opening, with its very first question, bites down on these samādhi and will not let go—「若菩薩摩訶薩夢中入三三昧：空、無相、無作三昧，寧有益於般若波羅蜜不？」 tr. "If the bodhisattva-mahāsattva enters the three samādhi in a dream—the emptiness, signless, and non-action samādhi—is there any benefit to prajñāpāramitā or not?"—and it is answered with 「若菩薩晝日入三三昧有益於般若波羅蜜，夜夢中亦當有益」 tr. "If the bodhisattva's entering the three samādhi by day is of benefit to prajñāpāramitā, then in a dream at night it should also be of benefit." This chapter speaks of why the three samādhi are established; the next chapter asks how far the three samādhi reach—since what is practised when awake is neither grasping nor ruining, whether what is practised in a dream is of benefit or not is precisely the same line of questioning pushed one step further.

Among the later ancient masters who read this chapter, what they preserved on the matter of the chapter's name is most worth recording. This treatise's base text heads the fascicle "The Lamp-wick," while the continuation heading at the end of the fascicle itself reads "The Lamp Simile"; within one and the same base text two forms are already seen. Another text heads it 「燈柱品」 tr. "Lamp-pillar," and its chapter number differs from the base text's by one step, of the same type as the consistent one-step difference of the several preceding chapters. The Song, Yuan, Palace, and Ming editions head it 「深奧品」 tr. "The Profound," and the Ming edition further records beneath the title the variant name of the sūtra text. In the transmitted text of the great sūtra that it explains, the chapter title of the main text also reads 「深奧品」 tr. "The Profound," while the interlinear note of the Khitan edition attached to it plainly reads 「燈炷品」 tr. "The Lamp-wick"—from which one knows that the name 「燈炷」 tr. "Lamp-wick" is not transmitted by this treatise alone. The one master who composed a sectional commentary on this great sūtra and gave the greatest weight to the opening and closing of headings follows 「深奧」 tr. "Profound" in his section headings, yet elsewhere in his commentary, when discussing the meaning of the ten grounds and meditative concentration, directly calls this chapter's simile by the term 「燈炷喻」 tr. "the lamp-wick simile"; the two names are both seen in his book. Another ancient master once composed a commentary on this treatise itself, of which fragmentary fascicles survive today; for this chapter's heading he follows 「燈喻」 tr. "Lamp Simile," while in the body of the commentary he separately records that in the Expository Treatise this chapter has another name, 「淨土品」 tr. "Pure Land," and himself states the reason for his structural division: since this chapter has made clear that the non-retrogressing bodhisattva's own practice in the two virtues of wisdom and severance is already sufficient, what comes next should speak of adorning the land and transforming beings. Yet another, who comprehensively surveys the chapter names of the various masters, lists three headings as variant names of this chapter—「灯炷啄品」 tr. "Lamp-wick Pecking," 「歸功德品」 tr. "Returning Merit," 「住菩提品」 tr. "Abiding in Awakening"—and quotes word for word this chapter's sūtra text on the ten grounds as his evidence; among the ten grounds he quotes, the wording of one ground's name differs from the base text's 「八人地」 tr. "the ground of the person of the eight," and reads 「八忍地」 tr. "the ground of the eight acceptances." These seven forms in all are seen severally in the transmitted texts and in the books of the ancient masters, each tied to what it relies on; they are recorded side by side without judgement, and this edition follows the base text in reading "The Lamp-wick"; the sources and collation notes for each party, word for word, are all in the Apparatus. As for the commentaries and records on calming and contemplation of the Tiantai line, they too discuss the meaning of this chapter's ten grounds and stages of severance under the names 「燈喻」 tr. "Lamp Simile" and 「燋炷」 tr. "burning the wick"; in one place the fascicle number of this treatise that they cite does not agree with the fascicle in which this chapter actually lies; the connection is recorded and no explanation is forced.

Bringing this whole line of further resonances back to this chapter, the divergence of chapter names that the ancient masters recorded precisely illuminates the two faces of this chapter's meaning. The name 「深奧」 tr. "Profound" picks out its first half—what the first two rounds of the whole chapter debate is precisely the great passage from 「深奧處者，空是其義」 tr. "As for the profound place: emptiness is its meaning" onward, whose depth lies in not clinging to emptiness and not clinging to non-arising and non-ceasing. The names 「燈炷」 tr. "Lamp-wick" and 「燈喻」 tr. "Lamp Simile" pick out its second half—the last round gathers up cause and effect with the simile of fire, 「燈譬菩薩道，炷喻無明等煩惱，焰如初地相應智慧乃至金剛三昧相應智慧」 tr. "The lamp stands for the bodhisattva path; the wick stands for ignorance and the other afflictions; the flames are like the wisdom that accords with the first ground and so on up to the wisdom that accords with the vajra samādhi." The name 「淨土」 tr. "Pure Land" picks out where it is heading—once the practice of non-retrogression is sufficient, it must of necessity turn outward into the work of transforming beings and adorning the land. The three names each take one face, yet what they share is only one pattern: neither identical nor separate. The first half, speaking of the depth of dharmas, uses this pattern—「是色如，非是色、非離色」 tr. "This suchness of form is not form and is not apart from form," 「譬如以泥為瓶，泥非即是瓶、不離泥有瓶，亦不得言無瓶」 tr. "As when clay is made into a pot: the clay is not the pot, yet there is no pot apart from the clay, nor can one say there is no pot"; the second half, speaking of the accomplishment of the path, still uses this pattern—「不用初心得阿耨多羅三藐三菩提，亦不離初心得阿耨多羅三藐三菩提」 tr. "He does not obtain anuttarā samyaksaṃbodhi by the first mind, nor does he obtain anuttarā samyaksaṃbodhi apart from the first mind." Therefore, though the chapter names diverge, the meaning does not diverge: clay and pot, flame and wick—what they all say is that a dharma born of causes and conditions cannot be pinned down to any one thing, and yet the actual accomplishment does not on that account come to nothing. The sentence in the chapter that most refuses to be vague is precisely the shortest one—asked whether the wick is burned or not, the answer is 「炷實燋」 tr. "The wick is really burned."

Therefore what the chapter "The Lamp-wick" finally leaves behind is a way of asking along the road that can be used again and again. When I suspect that, all dharmas being empty, my roots of goodness have nowhere to settle, I remember that Subhūti asked the very same thing on my behalf—「如佛所說，因緣起法從妄想生，非實。云何善男子、善女人得大福德？」 tr. "As the Buddha has said, dharmas arising from causes and conditions are born from false thinking and are not real. How then do good men and good women obtain great merit?"—and the Buddha does not change his words to say that what arises from conditions is real; he says only that the practitioner should 「知因緣起法亦空、無堅固、虛誑不實」 tr. "know that dharmas arising from causes and conditions are also empty, without firmness, false and deceptive and unreal" and let the mind not cling, and 「是福德清淨故，勝餘福德」 tr. "because this merit is pure, it surpasses other merit." When I tally my practice as large or small, much or little, I remember that what the sūtra weighs is never the size of the deed—giving to the Three Jewels for kalpas as the sands of the Ganges, making offerings to the holy assembly, practising the six perfections: the Buddha grants that the merit of each is great, only it 「不如」 tr. "does not equal" practising as taught for a single day, and the point of judgement lies in the six Chinese characters 「無雜毒、正迴向」 tr. "not mixed with poison, a right dedication." When I examine myself and find that it has been long since I first aroused the mind and I see not an inch of progress, I remember 「初心集種種無量功德，後心則具足」 tr. "the first mind gathers all kinds of immeasurable merit, and the last mind then fulfils it," and 「若無初心，則無後心」 tr. "if there were no first mind, there would be no last mind"—today's thought need not show results, but it may not be absent. When I press to ask which thought in the end attains the path, I remember that this question is of the same type as 「炷為燋不」 tr. "Is the wick burned or not?": asked which flame burned it, there is no answer; asked whether the wick has burned, the answer is decisive. When I rest content in emptiness and slight skilful means, I remember that division at the very end of the whole chapter—「眾生根有利、鈍。利根者聞空，即得無相、無作」 tr. "Beings' faculties are keen or dull. Those of keen faculties, hearing emptiness, at once obtain the signless and non-action"; those of dull faculties, hearing emptiness, instead seize on a mark of emptiness, and so only when the three samādhi are fully taught can the teaching and transforming be accomplished. Answer these few questions well in every round of practice, and one knows why this chapter does not confine itself to 「深奧」 tr. "Profound" but takes 「燈炷」 tr. "Lamp-wick" as its name: the meaning of depth must in the end come down to a single lamp—not the first flame, not the last flame, and yet the wick is really burned to the end.