大智度論 義疏通講 · 冊16Dazhidulun — Mahāprajñāpāramitā-upadeśa · Exposition Throughout · Vol. 16

Overview

In the title of "The Great Skilful Means" the eye lies in a single 「方便」 tr. "skilful means", and what the whole chapter answers is in fact only one question: since all dharmas are empty of self-nature, can the matter of practising the six perfections still be established or not? The preceding chapter said that the bodhisattva abides in one perfection and takes up the other five perfections; Treatise ① of this chapter, as it opens, at once takes up that sentence—「須菩提聞菩薩摩訶薩大利根相，所謂一波羅蜜邊能生五波羅蜜，行一波羅蜜即能具五波羅蜜，如上品中說；是事希有」 tr. "Subhūti heard of the mark of the great keen faculties of the bodhisattva-mahāsattva—namely, that from the side of one perfection he can give rise to the five perfections, and that by practising one perfection he can fulfil the five perfections, as was said in the previous chapter; this matter is rare"—and thereupon Subhūti first asks how deep such a person's origins go: 「是菩薩摩訶薩如是方便力成就者，發意已來幾時？」 tr. "This bodhisattva-mahāsattva who has thus accomplished the power of skilful means—how long is it since he aroused intent?" The Buddha answers 「無量億阿僧祇劫」 tr. "immeasurable koṭi of asaṃkhyeya kalpas", answers further 「供養如恒河沙等諸佛」 tr. "he has made offerings to buddhas as many as the sands of the Ganges", and answers further that the roots of goodness he has planted are 「從初發意已來，於檀波羅蜜無不具足」 tr. "from the first arousing of intent onward, in dānapāramitā nothing that is not fulfilled". To ask about origins is in fact to ask where the power of skilful means comes from. The reason the chapter's name bears 「大」 tr. "great" lies precisely here: skilful means is not a cleverness for the matter at hand; it is that portion of power which, after the six perfections have been fulfilled through immeasurable kalpas, is still able to set out to practise within ultimate emptiness. The whole chapter, two sūtras and two treatises, spans fascicles eighty-two and eighty-three: the First Part is Sūtra ①, which speaks, simile after simile, of prajñā guiding the five perfections, then asks all the way on to the perfections' being without difference and the several kinds of clinging and losing, and closes by gathering the four gates of suchness, the nature of dharmas, the limit of reality, and neither joined nor dispersed into 「略攝般若波羅蜜」 tr. "the brief gathering of prajñāpāramitā"; the Middle Part is Treatise ①, which explains the sūtra of the part above sentence by sentence: for every simile in the sūtra it gives what is likened, for every difficulty in the sūtra it gives the reason; the Last Part is the 「之餘」 tr. "continued" of fascicle eighty-three, where Sūtra ② answers that 「是門」 tr. "this gate" does not sift by capacity and lists the benefits obtained by those who practise prajñā, and Treatise ② explains why its four gates can be entered by everyone, and explains one by one that long string of 「善知」 tr. "knows well".

The First Part speaks of the guiding of prajñā and of the practitioner's losing. Sūtra ① opens with three questions, asking about the time, the offerings, and the roots of goodness of one who has accomplished the power of skilful means, and then the Buddha praises prajñā with a whole string of similes: prajñā illuminates the five perfections—「譬如日月周行，照四天下，多有所益」 tr. "It is as the sun and moon go round, illuminating the four continents and greatly benefiting them"; the five perfections apart from prajñā lose their name—「譬如轉輪聖王，若無輪寶，不得名為轉輪聖王」 tr. "It is as with a wheel-turning sage king: if he has no wheel-jewel, he does not obtain the name of wheel-turning sage king"; apart from prajñā they are easily ruined—「譬如無夫婦人，易為侵凌」 tr. "It is as a woman without a husband is easily encroached upon and abused"; not apart from prajñā they cannot be ruined—「譬如軍將，鎧仗具足，隣國強敵所不能壞」 tr. "It is as a general in an army, fully equipped with armour and weapons, cannot be ruined by the powerful enemies of neighbouring countries"; the five perfections follow prajñā—「譬如諸小國王，隨時朝侍轉輪聖王」 tr. "It is as the lesser kings, at the proper times, pay court to and serve the wheel-turning sage king"; together they return to sarvajñā—「譬如眾川萬流，皆入於恒河，隨入大海」 tr. "It is as the many rivers and myriad streams all flow into the Ganges, and following it flow into the great sea"; in use, convenient and inconvenient—「譬如人之右手，所作事便，般若波羅蜜亦如是；如人左手，造事不便，五波羅蜜亦如是」 tr. "It is as a person's right hand, with which doing things is convenient—prajñāpāramitā is likewise; as a person's left hand, with which doing and making things is inconvenient—the five perfections are likewise"; entering the sea, one taste—「譬如眾流，若大、若小俱入大海，合為一味」 tr. "It is as the many streams, whether great or small, all flow together into the great sea and become a single taste"; and the most important is the simile of the wheel-jewel in front—prajñā 「導五波羅蜜到薩婆若，常是中住，不過其處」 tr. "guides the five perfections to reach sarvajñā, and constantly abides therein, not passing beyond its place", and it guides without a mind: prajñā does not discriminate 「檀波羅蜜隨從我」 tr. "Dānapāramitā follows me", and dānapāramitā likewise does not discriminate 「我隨從般若波羅蜜」 tr. "I follow prajñāpāramitā", and the reason for it is only one sentence: 「諸波羅蜜性無所能作、自性空、虛誑、如野馬。」 tr. "The nature of the perfections has nothing it is able to do; their self-nature is empty, is false and deceptive, like a mirage." The similes finished, Subhūti at once makes this a difficulty: 「若一切法自性空，云何菩薩摩訶薩行六波羅蜜當得阿耨多羅三藐三菩提？」 tr. "If all dharmas are empty of self-nature, how is it that the bodhisattva-mahāsattva practises the six perfections and is to obtain anuttarā samyaksaṃbodhi?" The Buddha's answer is exactly where the name of this chapter comes from—the bodhisattva has this thought, 「是世間心皆顛倒，我若不行方便力，不能度脫眾生生死」 tr. "The minds of this world are all inverted; if I do not practise the power of skilful means, I cannot deliver beings from birth and death", and thereupon for the sake of beings he practises the six perfections: when giving up he thinks 「我無所捨」 tr. "I give up nothing" and fulfils giving; he never breaks the precepts and fulfils morality; he does not give rise to a single thought of hatred and fulfils patience; he does not give rise to laziness and fulfils vigour; he does not give rise to distraction and fulfils meditation; he never departs from wisdom and fulfils prajñā—「除智慧，不可以餘法度脫眾生故。」 tr. "Because apart from wisdom, one cannot deliver beings by any other dharma." Below this, three rounds ask again why prajñā alone is highest, and the Buddha's answer lies only between the worldly and the highest meaning: though within the real meaning there is no discrimination, 「但以世俗法故說」 tr. "yet by reason of worldly dharmas one speaks of" the six perfections; and why prajñā is highest lies in this, that it 「取一切善法到薩婆若中，住不住故」 tr. "takes all wholesome dharmas into sarvajñā, and this is because it takes abiding as not abiding". From here it turns to taking and giving up, and to thinking and abiding: prajñā 「無法可取、無法可捨」 tr. "has no dharma that can be taken and no dharma that can be given up", towards form and so on up to awakening it is 「不取不捨」 tr. "not taking and not giving up", and what is called not taking is precisely 「不念」 tr. "not thinking"; as to why not thinking is instead able to increase roots of goodness, the Buddha answers: 「以念故著欲界、色界、無色界，不念故無所著」 tr. "Because of thinking one clings to the desire realm, the form realm, and the formless realm; because of not thinking there is nothing one clings to." The places where the practitioner most easily loses are likewise pointed out here one by one: if he has the thought 「我今行般若波羅蜜、修般若波羅蜜」 tr. "I now practise prajñāpāramitā and cultivate prajñāpāramitā" and grasps at marks, 「則遠離般若波羅蜜」 tr. "he is far from prajñāpāramitā"; if he has the thought 「住是般若波羅蜜，能生檀波羅蜜，乃至能生大悲」 tr. "abiding in this prajñāpāramitā, one can give rise to dānapāramitā, and so on up to can give rise to great compassion", 「則為失般若波羅蜜」 tr. "he loses prajñāpāramitā"; if he has the thought 「諸佛知諸法無受相故，得阿耨多羅三藐三菩提」 tr. "the buddhas, because they knew that dharmas have no mark of receiving, obtained anuttarā samyaksaṃbodhi" and expounds and instructs, then too 「則失般若波羅蜜」 tr. "he loses prajñāpāramitā"; and so on up to this: after answering how one is without fault, it still adds one sentence, 「若菩薩摩訶薩著無所有法，則遠離般若波羅蜜」 tr. "if the bodhisattva-mahāsattva clings to the dharma of being without anything existent, he is far from prajñāpāramitā". The marks having been listed thus far, the sūtra turns to ask about the path and what is not the path: 「聲聞道非菩薩道，辟支佛道非菩薩道；一切種智道是菩薩摩訶薩道。」 tr. "The śrāvaka path is not the bodhisattva path; the pratyekabuddha path is not the bodhisattva path; the path of the omniscience of all kinds is the bodhisattva-mahāsattva's path." Subhūti thereupon praises prajñā as 「為大事故起」 tr. "arising for the sake of a great matter". The last great section passes from practice into knowing: the bodhisattva should train in the six perfections whether brief or extensive, and the gates for knowing the brief and extensive marks are four—to know, of form and so on up to the omniscience of all kinds, the 「如相，無生、無滅、無住異」 tr. "mark of suchness: without arising, without ceasing, without abiding-and-changing"; to know the limit of reality, that 「無際是名實際」 tr. "being without limit is called the limit of reality"; to know the nature of dharmas, that 「色性是名法性，是性無分、無非分」 tr. "the nature of form is called the nature of dharmas; this nature is without parts and without non-parts"; to know all dharmas as 「不合不散」 tr. "neither joined nor dispersed". The four gates having been listed, Subhūti at once gathers them in, saying 「是名菩薩摩訶薩略攝般若波羅蜜」 tr. "this is called the bodhisattva-mahāsattva's brief gathering of prajñāpāramitā", and says that within it 「初發意菩薩摩訶薩應學，乃至十地菩薩摩訶薩亦應學」 tr. "the bodhisattva-mahāsattva who has first aroused intent should train, and so on up to the bodhisattva-mahāsattva of the ten grounds should also train".

The Middle Part explains the sūtra of the part above sentence by sentence: for every simile it gives what is likened, for every difficulty it gives the reason. Treatise ① first explains the order of the three questions: asking how long ago he aroused the mind is because 「是事希有」 tr. "this matter is rare"; asking about offerings is because 「或有菩薩發心已來無量億阿僧祇劫，大罪因緣覆心故不見佛，不親近供養」 tr. "perhaps there is a bodhisattva who, since arousing the mind, has passed immeasurable koṭi of asaṃkhyeya kalpas, yet because the causes and conditions of great sin have covered his mind, he does not see the Buddha, and does not draw near and make offerings"; asking about roots of goodness is because one who aroused the mind long ago and has made many offerings of flowers and incense has not necessarily already planted roots of goodness—「若以深心行六波羅蜜，為阿耨多羅三藐三菩提故作功德，是名『種善根』。」 tr. "If one practises the six perfections with a deep mind and makes merit for the sake of anuttarā samyaksaṃbodhi, this is called ‘planting roots of goodness’." And what is called rare the treatise-author states most plainly: 「未斷諸煩惱、未離生死，而能勝斷煩惱、離生死法者」 tr. "one who has not yet cut off the afflictions and has not yet left birth and death, yet is able to surpass the dharma of those who have cut off the afflictions and left birth and death", and 「一切眾生無恩於菩薩，而菩薩常欲利益」 tr. "all beings have done the bodhisattva no kindness, and yet the bodhisattva constantly wishes to benefit them". The simile of the sun and moon the treatise-author divides into two meanings: one meaning takes their making the myriad things grow—「月是陰氣，日是陽氣，二氣和合故萬物成長」 tr. "the moon is the yin breath and the sun is the yang breath; because the two breaths come together, the myriad things grow"—likening the bodhisattva's great compassion and great wisdom; the other meaning takes their enabling sight—「眾生雖復有眼，若無日月，則無所見」 tr. "though beings have eyes, if there were no sun and moon they would see nothing"—likening 「眾生雖有世俗善根利智，不得般若波羅蜜照明，尚不得二乘」 tr. "though beings have worldly roots of goodness and keen knowledge, if they do not obtain the illumination of prajñāpāramitā, they cannot obtain even the two vehicles". The simile of the wheel-jewel takes up what the name hangs on: though the wheel-turning sage king has a thousand sons and six jewels, he 「不得名為轉輪聖王」 tr. "does not obtain the name of wheel-turning sage king"; though the bodhisattva has giving and the other wholesome dharmas, if he does not obtain prajñā, he is 「但名為行善法，有量有盡故」 tr. "only called one who practises wholesome dharmas, because they are measured and have an end". The simile of the streams entering the sea raises a separate question: the five perfections are like the rivers and prajñā like the sea, so why does the sūtra say that they enter sarvajñā, and not that they enter prajñā? The treatise-author answers directly: 「薩婆若即是般若異名」 tr. "sarvajñā is another name for prajñā"; the merit of the five perfections, entering into prajñā, obtains pure prajñā, and 「般若清淨故，得佛道，變名薩婆若」 tr. "because prajñā is pure, one obtains the Buddha path, and its name is changed to sarvajñā". In the simile of the wheel-jewel leading in front, the treatise-author fills out the four Chinese characters rendered here as ‘guiding without a mind’: the wheel 「無所分別：『我常在前，餘寶在後；無憎愛心：是可來、是不可來。』」 tr. "makes no discrimination: ‘I am always in front and the other jewels behind; there is no mind of hatred or love: this one may come, that one may not come.’", and the non-discrimination of prajñā is likewise. And the most important passage of the whole treatise section is its explanation of what the two Chinese characters 「方便」 tr. "skilful means" actually refer to—since the bodhisattva's thought in the sūtra, as the treatise restates it, is 「我若不以方便力，則不可得度」 tr. "if I do not use the power of skilful means, they cannot be delivered", then what is skilful means? The treatise-author lists it item by item: 「所謂金色身、三十二相，八十隨形好，無量光明，神通變化」 tr. "namely, the golden-coloured body, the thirty-two marks, the eighty minor marks, immeasurable light, supernormal powers and transformations", and so on up to 「十力、四無所畏、十八不共法、無礙解脫、一切種智、大慈大悲等」 tr. "the ten powers, the four fearlessnesses, the eighteen unshared dharmas, unobstructed liberation, the omniscience of all kinds, great kindness and great compassion, and so on"; having fulfilled these immeasurable dharmas of the Buddha, he is then able to teach and transform, and beings are then able to believe and accept; and its effect is said to the full in one sentence: 「得如是力，假令妄語，人猶當信，何況實語！」 tr. "Having obtained such power, even if he were to speak falsely people would still believe him, how much more when he speaks the truth!" That they are without difference and yet prajñā alone is great, the treatise-author likewise answers with a simile: 「如諸異色物，到須彌山邊，皆同一色」 tr. "as things of various different colours, on reaching the side of Mount Sumeru, all become one colour alike", and so one cannot raise the difficulty of its alone being called great; he also says: 「雖諸善法和合能破煩惱、得阿耨多羅三藐三菩提，而般若波羅蜜於中功力最大。譬如大軍摧敵，而主將得功名。」 tr. "Though the wholesome dharmas, coming together, can break the afflictions and obtain anuttarā samyaksaṃbodhi, yet among them the power and function of prajñāpāramitā are the greatest. It is as when a great army crushes the enemy, and the general obtains the fame of the achievement." As to why not thinking increases roots of goodness, the simile lies in planting grain—「雖有善根，以取相著心顛倒故不增長；譬如種穀，其苗雖好，穢草多故，不能增長。」 tr. "Though there are roots of goodness, because of the inversion of the mind that grasps at marks and clings, they do not increase; it is as when grain is planted: though its sprouts are good, because foul weeds are many they cannot increase." The explanation of the several losings must be read with special care: of one who has the thought that he is able to practise thus, 「以我心外著空、內著我，不如般若行，故言遠離般若」 tr. "with the mind of a self he clings outwardly to emptiness and inwardly to a self, and does not practise in accord with prajñā, so it is said that he is far from prajñā"; of one who breaks emptiness and turns to cling to prajñā, 「上以著空故失，今以破空得般若，而著般若無性故失」 tr. "above, one lost by clinging to emptiness; now, having broken emptiness and obtained prajñā, one yet loses by clinging to prajñā's being without nature"; of one who does not cling to emptiness and does not cling to being without nature, and considers himself to have obtained the true path, 「是亦為失，以其心有悕望故」 tr. "this too is losing, because in his mind there are hopes"; of one who places himself among ordinary persons and only follows the Buddha's words in disclosing to others, 「是不取相法，乃至假名字不可說，何況有所得」 tr. "this dharma of not grasping at marks cannot be spoken of even as a provisional name, how much less could there be something attained". The treatise-author himself sums up its essentials: 「菩薩著畢竟空、著無性、著菩薩所行道，佛說三種皆失」 tr. "The bodhisattva clings to ultimate emptiness, clings to being without nature, clings to the path the bodhisattva practises; the Buddha says that all three kinds are losing"; and there is still one layer subtler yet—the bodhisattva, having given up the clinging mind, 「今猶著佛所行未息」 tr. "now still clings to what the Buddha practises and has not stopped", while as to the dharma the Buddha obtained in his mind, 「佛亦無所得；無所得故不貪貴佛、不輕賤餘人，於一切眾生其心平等」 tr. "the Buddha too has nothing to be attained; because of nothing to be attained, he does not covet and prize the Buddha and does not slight and despise other people; towards all beings his mind is equal". Last, explaining the four gates, in the section on 「不合不散」 tr. "neither joined nor dispersed" the treatise-author takes the finger as a simile and analyses it again and again: 「三節皮肉具足為指，指無定法」 tr. "only when three joints, skin, and flesh are complete is there a finger; a finger has no fixed dharma"; 「設有指法，亦不盡合，一分合，多分不合」 tr. "even supposing there is the dharma of a finger, it is not wholly joined: one part is joined and the greater part is not joined"; 「指與分不異不一故，即是無指；無指故無合」 tr. "because the finger and its parts are neither different nor one, there is no finger; because there is no finger there is no joining". What is broken is not the joining the eye sees; it is the fixed dharma the mind grasps.

The Last Part carries the continuation title 「之餘」 tr. "continued" at the head of the fascicle, and turns from the four gates of the brief gathering to who can enter and what those who enter obtain. Where Sūtra ② begins, Subhūti says 「是門，利根菩薩摩訶薩所入」 tr. "this gate is what the bodhisattva-mahāsattva of keen faculties enters", and the Buddha does not allow this judgement: 「鈍根菩薩亦可入是門，中根菩薩、散心菩薩亦可入是門」 tr. "the bodhisattva of dull faculties can also enter this gate; the bodhisattva of middling faculties and the bodhisattva of scattered mind can also enter this gate"; what sifts lies not in the keenness or dullness of the faculties, only in whether or not the mind is lazy—「懈怠、少精進、妄憶念、亂心者所不能入，精進、不懈怠、正憶念、攝心者能入。」 tr. "The lazy, those of little vigour, those of false recollection, and those of disordered mind are those who cannot enter; the vigorous, the not lazy, those of right recollection, and those of collected mind can enter." For one who practises this gate, 「所有魔事欲起即滅」 tr. "whatever deeds of Māra there are cease the moment they would arise", and he is kept in mind by the buddhas now present in the ten directions; the reason is 「般若波羅蜜中生過去、未來、現在諸佛故」 tr. "because from within prajñāpāramitā are born the buddhas of the past, the future, and the present". Below this it shows its force by weighing merit: practising prajñā 「乃至彈指頃」 tr. "even for the space of a single finger-snap", his merit already surpasses teaching the beings of the three-thousand great-thousand world all to practise giving, the precepts, meditation, and wisdom, and so on up to obtaining the fruits of the two vehicles; practising it for a moment, for a day, or for a hundred kalpas, his merit surpasses still more teaching the beings of worlds as many as the sands of the Ganges in the ten directions. And one who abides as prajñā teaches is precisely avaivartika, 「如是方便力成就」 tr. "has thus accomplished the power of skilful means", and so on up to 「住法王子地，滿足諸願，常不離諸佛」 tr. "abides in the ground of the Dharma-prince, fulfils his vows, is never apart from the buddhas". In a long last section the sūtra lists its 「善知」 tr. "knows well" item by item: beginning from 「善知字門、善知非字門」 tr. "knows well the gates of letters, knows well what are not gates of letters", it goes through speech and the speech of men and women, form and so on up to consciousness, the nature of the world and the nature of nirvāṇa, the conditioned and the unconditioned, self-nature and other-nature, joined and dispersed, associated and non-associated, suchness and non-suchness, the nature of dharmas and the position of dharmas, the aggregates, elements, and sense-fields, the truths and the twelve links of causes and conditions, meditation and the immeasurable minds and the formless absorptions, the six perfections and the four foundations of mindfulness and so on up to the omniscience of all kinds, the contemplations, the emptinesses, giving up the path and not giving up the path, arising and ceasing and abiding-and-changing, desire, hatred, and delusion and non-desire, non-hatred, and non-delusion, view and non-view, name-and-form, the four conditions, the four truths, the five paths and the five destinies, the four fruits and four directions and the pratyekabuddha and the Buddha, the faculties, and so on up to the eleven kinds of wisdom, and on to the three times, skilful means, waiting for beings, the mind and the deep mind, meaning and words, ending with 「善知分別三乘」 tr. "knows well how to distinguish the three vehicles". And the Buddha gathers in this long list with one sentence: 「菩薩摩訶薩行般若波羅蜜、生般若波羅蜜、修般若波羅蜜，得如是等利益。」 tr. "The bodhisattva-mahāsattva who practises prajñāpāramitā, gives rise to prajñāpāramitā, and cultivates prajñāpāramitā obtains such benefits as these." What Treatise ② explains lies first in accounting for the Buddha's not sifting by capacity: Subhūti's meaning is that the four gates, 「以甚深故，利根者乃得入」 tr. "because they are very deep, only those of keen faculties can enter", while the Buddha's meaning is 「但一心精進欲學者可入」 tr. "anyone who with a single mind is vigorous and wishes to train can enter"; its simile is the plainest—「譬如熱時，清涼池，有目有足皆可入；雖近，不欲入者則不入。」 tr. "It is like a clear and cool pool in the time of heat: all who have eyes and have feet can enter; though it is near, one who does not wish to enter does not enter." Since it is not that the pool refuses anyone, what sifts lies only in wishing or not wishing to enter. The treatise-author further matches the four phrases in the sūtra to the noble path: 「不懈怠者是正精進，不妄念者是正念，不亂心者是正定，如等四門是正見，正見等安住是戒行——此八聖道能得般若波羅蜜。」 tr. "The not lazy is right vigour, the one without false thought is right mindfulness, the one without a disordered mind is right concentration, the four gates of suchness and the rest are right view, and right view and the rest abiding securely is the practice of the precepts—this eightfold noble path can obtain prajñāpāramitā." And why does Subhūti judge that those of keen faculties alone enter? 「須菩提小乘智短故」 tr. "Because Subhūti's knowledge, being of the Small Vehicle, is short." Why does the Buddha say that the middling and the dull all enter? 「佛此中以大悲氣故說『中根、鈍根皆可得入』。」 tr. "Here the Buddha, because of the breath of great compassion, says ‘those of middling faculties and dull faculties can all obtain entry’." Next it explains the relation between training in prajñā and training in the five perfections, first raising a difficulty against itself—「上說『但般若能至一切種智』，今何以言『與五波羅蜜合故得至』？」 tr. "Above it was said, ‘only prajñā can reach the omniscience of all kinds’; why is it now said, ‘one reaches it because it is joined with the five perfections’?" Its answer is that in the usual course one obtains it only by practising the six perfections together, except that 「或時有清淨佛國，但聞實相得至薩婆若，不用次第行諸波羅蜜」 tr. "at times there are pure buddha-lands where, merely by hearing the real mark, one reaches sarvajñā, without needing to practise the perfections in sequence". Last, it explains 「善知」 tr. "knows well" heading by heading, and of these the ones most worth carrying away are several: 「非字名如、法性、實際，此中無文字」 tr. "not-letters means suchness, the nature of dharmas, and the limit of reality: within these there are no letters"; knowing well giving up the path is 「從一地至一地，捨下地不憂，得上地不貪」 tr. "going from one ground to another ground, giving up the lower ground without sorrow and obtaining the higher ground without greed"; the eleven kinds of wisdom are each given their meaning: swift wisdom is 「速知諸法」 tr. "swiftly knowing dharmas", emerging wisdom is 「於種種難中能自拔出」 tr. "being able, amid various difficulties, to pull oneself out", penetrating wisdom is 「究盡通達」 tr. "thoroughly penetrating to the end", deep wisdom is 「觀一切法無量、無相、不可思議」 tr. "contemplating all dharmas as immeasurable, signless, and inconceivable", unequalled wisdom is 「於般若中不著般若」 tr. "not clinging to prajñā within prajñā", and jewel wisdom is likened to the wish-fulfilling jewel—「自無定色，隨前物而變；般若亦如是，自無定相，隨諸法行」 tr. "it has no fixed colour of its own but changes according to the thing before it; prajñā is likewise: it has no fixed mark of its own, and moves according to dharmas"; and the definition of the two Chinese characters 「方便」 tr. "skilful means" the treatise-author sets down most tightly only here: 「方便名欲成辦其事，能具足因緣多少得所，於中不令有失。如菩薩雖行空，不證實際；雖行福德，亦復不著。」 tr. "Skilful means names wishing to accomplish a matter, being able to bring about the full complement of causes and conditions, in the right measure of more and less, and within it not letting there be any loss. It is as the bodhisattva, though he practises emptiness, does not realise the limit of reality; though he practises merit, he also does not cling." Waiting for beings also has a simile: 「如估客、大將雖乘駃馬能疾到所止，故待眾人；菩薩亦如是，乘智慧駃馬，雖能疾入涅槃，亦待眾生故不入。」 tr. "As a merchant or a great general, though riding a swift horse he could swiftly arrive at the place where they stop, still waits for the others; the bodhisattva is likewise: riding the swift horse of wisdom, though he could swiftly enter nirvāṇa, he too, for the sake of waiting for beings, does not enter."

The difference among the three parts can be settled in one phrase: the First Part speaks of the guiding of prajñā and of the practitioner's losing, the Middle Part speaks of why it is so, and the Last Part speaks of the unobstructedness of its gate and of what those who enter obtain. What the First Part lists are mostly marks to be praised—simile after simile, round after round speaking of the excellence of prajñā; what the Middle Part gives are mostly principles to be asked about—for every simile it returns what is likened, for every difficulty it returns the reason; what the Last Part answers is a road that can be walked—it does not sift by capacity, it sifts only laziness. And through the three parts runs one thread, namely the two Chinese characters 「方便」 tr. "skilful means". The skilful means of Sūtra ① is 「我若不行方便力，不能度脫眾生生死」 tr. "if I do not practise the power of skilful means, I cannot deliver beings from birth and death", so skilful means is setting out to practise for the sake of beings; the skilful means of Treatise ① is the thirty-two marks and the eighty minor marks, and so on up to the ten powers and the four fearlessnesses, so skilful means is what practice accomplishes; the skilful means of Treatise ② is 「雖行空，不證實際；雖行福德，亦復不著」 tr. "though he practises emptiness, he does not realise the limit of reality; though he practises merit, he also does not cling", so skilful means is that portion of measured deliberation, between practice and emptiness, which does not fall to either extreme. Seen together, the three places make the meaning of skilful means complete: it arises from compassion, is accomplished through practice, and through not clinging is not lost. The reason the chapter's name bears 「大」 tr. "great" is also precisely this—not the greatness or smallness of a dexterity, but the breadth of whom it covers, the length of what it passes through, and the thoroughness of its not clinging.

Therefore, in reading each passage of this chapter, one can ask at least three layers. First: does this sentence speak of the virtue of prajñā, or of my sickness? The first half of Sūtra ① praises prajñā round after round, and reads very smoothly; but once one enters what follows 「若菩薩摩訶薩作是念」 tr. "if the bodhisattva-mahāsattva has this thought", every sentence is sickness—the sickness is not failing to practise, it is practising and having the thought; not failing to obtain, it is obtaining and grasping at marks. So whenever a good mark appears before one, first ask whether this mark is spoken of to be praised, or spoken of to be recognised. Second: is what this sentence breaks the matter, or the clinging? When the treatise-author breaks the joining of two fingers, he is not saying that fingers cannot join; he is saying 「指無定法」 tr. "a finger has no fixed dharma"; when he breaks clinging to emptiness, he is not saying that emptiness cannot be practised; he is saying 「般若波羅蜜是不著相」 tr. "prajñāpāramitā is of the mark of not clinging". Wherever one sees the treatise-author putting his strength into breaking, what is broken mostly lies in a single Chinese character rendered here as ‘fixed’: that there is fixedly a dharma that can be taken, fixedly a place that can be abided in, fixedly a person who is able to practise. Third: I am now of dull faculties and scattered mind—of what use is this chapter to me? The Last Part is set up precisely for this: the Buddha does not allow the judgement ‘only those of keen faculties enter’, and takes the clear and cool pool as a simile—the pool does not choose people; it chooses only those who have eyes and have feet and are willing to enter; so the four phrases of the eightfold noble path are, phrase by phrase, where I can set my hand today. Read on along the two sūtras and two treatises, and one will come to rest at last on that sentence in which the treatise-author explains skilful means: 「方便名欲成辦其事，能具足因緣多少得所，於中不令有失。」 tr. "Skilful means names wishing to accomplish a matter, being able to bring about the full complement of causes and conditions, in the right measure of more and less, and within it not letting there be any loss." What is called the great skilful means is nothing other than bringing to accomplishment, within ultimate emptiness and without losing any portion of it, a matter that must be accomplished.

Reading On in the Order of the Treatise

The Great Skilful Means, First Part: Where the Power of Skilful Means Comes From; the Similes of Prajñā Illuminating the Five Perfections; the Six Perfections within Emptiness of Self-Nature; Not Taking and Not Giving Up, and the Losses of Grasping at Marks; the Four Gates of the Brief and Extensive, and the Brief Gathering of Prajñā

What Is Being Asked

The preceding chapter spoke of the bodhisattva of keen faculties who, within a single mind, at a single time, is able to fulfil the six perfections—within one perfection he contains the other five, and to practise one perfection is precisely to practise the six. Of such a thing the listener will naturally ask: how was this trained into being? At the opening of this chapter it is exactly this that Subhūti asks, and he asks three questions in a row: 「發意已來幾時」 tr. "how long since he aroused intent", 「為供養幾佛」 tr. "how many buddhas has he made offerings to", 「種何等善根」 tr. "what roots of goodness has he planted". The length of the kalpas, the number of buddhas met, the depth of the roots of goodness—taken together, the three questions ask one and the same thing: the power of skilful means is not clever wit; it is capital. The Buddha's three answers match the three questions one by one: immeasurable koṭi of asaṃkhyeya kalpas; buddhas as many as the sands of the Ganges; from the first arousing of intent onward, in the six perfections 「無不具足」 tr. "nothing that is not fulfilled". The reason the power of skilful means can contain all five perfections within one perfection is that those five perfections were already on him from the first, long since fulfilled, and do not wait to be pieced together on the spot.

Once the questions and answers are settled, the sūtra turns to direct instruction, and with nine similes in a row sets out the relation of prajñā to the five perfections: the sun and moon illuminating the four continents; the wheel-jewel of the wheel-turning sage king; the woman with a husband and without a husband; the general fully equipped with armour and weapons; the lesser kings paying court; the many rivers and myriad streams entering the sea; the convenience and inconvenience of the right hand and the left hand; the many streams entering the sea and becoming a single taste; the wheel-jewel leading the way in front and the four kinds of troops having their wishes fulfilled. Each of the nine similes speaks of one meaning, and yet they tend toward only one thing—the five perfections apart from prajñā cannot even hang on to the three Chinese characters 「波羅蜜」 tr. "pāramitā"; only when they obtain prajñā do they have a name, have a guard, have a direction, and become one taste. Yet when the nine similes have been spoken to the utmost, the sūtra itself overturns them: 「諸波羅蜜性無所能作、自性空、虛誑、如野馬。」 tr. "The nature of the perfections has nothing it is able to do; their self-nature is empty, is false and deceptive, like a mirage."

This overturning turns up the first real question of this unit: if all dharmas are empty of self-nature, what six perfections is the bodhisattva still to practise, what anuttarā samyaksaṃbodhi is he still to obtain? The Buddha's reply does not argue from the principle of emptiness; it answers from a single thought—when the bodhisattva practises the six perfections he has this thought: 「是世間心皆顛倒，我若不行方便力，不能度脫眾生生死。」 tr. "The minds of this world are all inverted; if I do not practise the power of skilful means, I cannot deliver beings from birth and death." Emptiness of self-nature is the real meaning; the inversion of beings is the fact; the power of skilful means takes its stand between the two. So below, the six perfections are fulfilled one by one, and the reason each perfection is accomplished is tied to the four Chinese characters 「為眾生故」 tr. "for the sake of beings": for the sake of beings he gives up and knows 「我無所捨」 tr. "I give up nothing"; for the sake of beings he never breaks the precepts; for the sake of beings he does not give rise to a single thought of hatred; for the sake of beings he does not give rise to laziness; for the sake of beings he does not give rise to distraction; for the sake of beings he never departs from wisdom. Empty, and yet practice is not abandoned, because there are beings; practising, and yet it does not become clinging, because he knows its self-nature is empty.

The second question follows close behind, and is asked twice: since the perfections are without difference, why is prajñā alone called foremost, highest, and wondrous? The first time, the Buddha answers by the name—without prajñā the five perfections do not obtain the name of pāramitā; the second time, Subhūti presses 「若隨實義無分別」 tr. "if, following the real meaning, there is no discrimination", and the Buddha then answers in two layers: within the real meaning there is indeed no discrimination, but 「以世俗法故說」 tr. "by reason of worldly dharmas one speaks of" the names of the six perfections. This answer settles the measure of the whole chapter: foremost, highest, and wondrous is an order within worldly speaking of the Dharma, not a ranking of high and low within the real meaning. The sūtra at once points out, with 「取一切善法到薩婆若中，住不住故」 tr. "takes all wholesome dharmas into sarvajñā, and this is because it takes abiding as not abiding", why prajñā is highest, and from there slides into the longest stretch of teaching in this unit—not taking and not giving up, not thinking, not clinging, not abiding, peeled off layer by layer; and at the end it gives a further passage of admonition: if the bodhisattva thinks of himself 「我今行般若波羅蜜」 tr. "I now practise prajñāpāramitā", if he thinks of himself 「住是般若波羅蜜，能生檀波羅蜜」 tr. "abiding in this prajñāpāramitā, one can give rise to dānapāramitā", if he thinks of himself 「諸佛知諸法無受相故，得阿耨多羅三藐三菩提」 tr. "the buddhas, because they knew that dharmas have no mark of receiving, obtained anuttarā samyaksaṃbodhi" and expounds and discloses it, all three are losing prajñā. Not even 「無所有」 tr. "being without anything existent" may be clung to—「若菩薩摩訶薩著無所有法，則遠離般若波羅蜜」 tr. "if the bodhisattva-mahāsattva clings to the dharma of being without anything existent, he is far from prajñāpāramitā".

The last stretch turns to the 「略廣相」 tr. "brief and extensive marks". Subhūti says that the bodhisattva should receive and uphold, read and recite the brief and the extensive of the six perfections; the Buddha approves and pushes it a step further: knowing the brief and extensive of the six perfections, one should then know the brief and extensive marks of all dharmas. How is one to know them? The sūtra gives four gates—the mark of suchness, the limit of reality, the nature of dharmas, neither joined nor dispersed—four questions and four answers, asking all the way to 「有為性、無為性不合不散」 tr. "the conditioned nature and the unconditioned nature are neither joined nor dispersed", and closing with 「是諸法自性無，云何有合有散」 tr. "these dharmas are without self-nature—where would there be joining, where dispersing?" Subhūti then sets down a verdict: 「是名菩薩摩訶薩略攝般若波羅蜜」 tr. "this is called the bodhisattva-mahāsattva's brief gathering of prajñāpāramitā", and says that this brief gathering of prajñā the bodhisattva who has first aroused intent should train in, and so on up to the bodhisattva of the ten grounds should also train in. What the unit of the First Part has to answer is these three questions: where the power of skilful means comes from; why, within emptiness of self-nature, the six perfections are still practised; and by what gate one enters the brief and extensive marks of all dharmas.

Passage by Passage

1. The first question and answer—how long since he aroused intent. Subhūti, taking up the preceding chapter's matter of the bodhisattva fulfilling the six perfections within a single mind, asks: 「世尊！是菩薩摩訶薩如是方便力成就者，發意已來幾時？」 tr. "World-Honored One! This bodhisattva-mahāsattva who has thus accomplished the power of skilful means—how long is it since he aroused intent?" The Buddha answers: 「是菩薩摩訶薩能成就方便力者，發心已來無量億阿僧祇劫。」 tr. "This bodhisattva-mahāsattva who is able to accomplish the power of skilful means has, since arousing the mind, passed immeasurable koṭi of asaṃkhyeya kalpas." What is asked is time, and what is answered is also time, yet the number answered is so great that it no longer counts as a number—immeasurable koṭi of asaṃkhyeya kalpas. This answer first knocks down an illusion: the power of skilful means is not cleverness of the moment; it is the accumulation of long kalpas. To see someone contain the five perfections all at once within one perfection and envy his skill is to mistake the freedom on the side of the fruit for a shortcut on the side of the cause.

2. The second question and answer—how many buddhas has he made offerings to. Subhūti asks again: 「是菩薩摩訶薩如是成就方便力者，為供養幾佛？」 tr. "This bodhisattva-mahāsattva who has thus accomplished the power of skilful means—how many buddhas has he made offerings to?" The Buddha answers: 「是菩薩成就方便力者，供養如恒河沙等諸佛。」 tr. "This bodhisattva who has accomplished the power of skilful means has made offerings to buddhas as many as the sands of the Ganges." The first question asks the number of kalpas, which is lengthwise; this question asks about the buddhas met, which is breadthwise. To cultivate long and not meet a buddha is like travelling long with no one to point the way; buddhas as many as the sands of the Ganges speak of how broadly he received teaching along this road. Only when the two matters, the kalpas and the buddhas met, are raised together is the account of where the power of skilful means comes from complete.

3. The third question and answer—what roots of goodness has he planted. Subhūti asks a third time: 「世尊！菩薩得如是方便力者，種何等善根？」 tr. "World-Honored One! The bodhisattva who has obtained such a power of skilful means—what kind of roots of goodness has he planted?" The Buddha answers: 「菩薩成就如是方便力者，從初發意已來，於檀波羅蜜無不具足，於尸羅波羅蜜、羼提波羅蜜、毘梨耶波羅蜜、禪波羅蜜、般若波羅蜜無不具足。」 tr. "The bodhisattva who accomplishes such a power of skilful means has, from the first arousing of intent onward, in dānapāramitā nothing that is not fulfilled; and in śīlapāramitā, kṣāntipāramitā, vīryapāramitā, dhyānapāramitā, and prajñāpāramitā nothing that is not fulfilled." This answer is the conclusion of the three questions, and also the root of the whole chapter: what are called roots of goodness are not elsewhere; they are the six perfections, fulfilled all the way from the very first arousing of intent. Since the six perfections were from the first fulfilled in him, containing the five perfections within one perfection is no conjuring trick, but the natural appearing of what was already there. With this the three questions and three answers are complete—the kalpas are the length of time, the offerings to buddhas are the breadth of teaching received, the fulfilment of the six perfections is the substance of the content.

4. The exclamation at its rarity, and the Buddha's approval. Having heard it, Subhūti exclaims: 「世尊！菩薩摩訶薩成就如是方便力者，甚希有！」 tr. "World-Honored One! The bodhisattva-mahāsattva who accomplishes such a power of skilful means is truly rare!" The Buddha approves it: 「如是！如是！須菩提！菩薩摩訶薩成就如是方便力者，甚希有！」 tr. "Just so! Just so! Subhūti! The bodhisattva-mahāsattva who accomplishes such a power of skilful means is truly rare!" Between the exclamation and the approval, the momentum of the sūtra's language turns from question and answer to instruction—the nine similes below are all the unfolding of this one phrase, 「甚希有」 tr. "truly rare". What matters is that the Buddha does not play down its rarity; on the contrary he says it again: it is rare precisely because of its length, its breadth, and its substance, not because it is strange.

5. The simile of the sun and moon going round—prajñā is to the five perfections as illumination. 「須菩提！譬如日月周行，照四天下，多有所益。般若波羅蜜亦如是，照五波羅蜜，多有所益。」 tr. "Subhūti! It is as the sun and moon go round, illuminating the four continents and greatly benefiting them. Prajñāpāramitā is likewise: it illuminates the five perfections and greatly benefits them." The first of the nine similes takes the meaning of 「照」 tr. "illuminating". The sun and moon do not produce the things of the four continents, yet the myriad things wait on their illumination before they come to completion; prajñā does not give or keep the precepts in place of the five perfections, yet the five perfections wait on prajñā's illumination before they become perfections. This simile first sets up a general outline: prajñā and the five perfections are not six things side by side; one of them is present throughout the other five.

6. The simile of the wheel-jewel—without prajñā they do not obtain the name of pāramitā. 「譬如轉輪聖王，若無輪寶，不得名為轉輪聖王；輪寶成就故，得名轉輪聖王。」 tr. "It is as with a wheel-turning sage king: if he has no wheel-jewel, he does not obtain the name of wheel-turning sage king; because the wheel-jewel is accomplished, he obtains the name of wheel-turning sage king." The five perfections are likewise: 「若離般若波羅蜜，不得波羅蜜名字；不離般若波羅蜜故，得波羅蜜名字」 tr. "if they are apart from prajñāpāramitā, they do not obtain the name of pāramitā; because they are not apart from prajñāpāramitā, they obtain the name of pāramitā". The simile above speaks of the benefit of illumination; this simile speaks of the establishing of the name. Giving and upholding the precepts are in themselves still good; it is only that they do not obtain the title 「波羅蜜」 tr. "pāramitā"—pāramitā is reaching the further shore, and without prajñā one practises them and does not reach the shore, so name and reality do not correspond. Here the sūtra for the first time points out the two Chinese characters 「名字」 tr. "name", which the text below states again and again.

7. The simile of the woman with and without a husband—prajñā is to the five perfections as protection. 「譬如無夫婦人，易為侵凌」 tr. "It is as a woman without a husband is easily encroached upon and abused"; the five perfections far from prajñā—「魔、若魔天壞之則易」 tr. "it is easy for Māra, or the gods of Māra, to ruin them"; 「譬如有夫婦人，難可侵凌」 tr. "It is as a woman who has a husband is hard to encroach upon and abuse"; the five perfections that obtain prajñā—「魔、若魔天不能沮壞」 tr. "Māra, or the gods of Māra, cannot thwart and ruin them". Illumination is accomplishing, the name is establishing, protection is guarding and keeping—the three meanings advance in turn. Cultivating goodness without right view, what is most easily ruined is not the good deed itself but the mind of the one doing good; with prajñā present, wholesome dharmas have something to rely on.

8. The simile of the general's armour and weapons—what Māra and people of overweening pride, and so on up to a bodhisattva caṇḍāla, cannot ruin. 「譬如軍將，鎧仗具足，隣國強敵所不能壞」 tr. "It is as a general in an army, fully equipped with armour and weapons, cannot be ruined by the powerful enemies of neighbouring countries"; if the five perfections are not far from prajñā, then 「魔、若魔天、若增上慢人，乃至菩薩旃陀羅所不能壞」 tr. "Māra, or the gods of Māra, or people of overweening pride, and so on up to a bodhisattva caṇḍāla, cannot ruin them". The simile above raises only Māra and the gods of Māra; this simile, beyond the outer Māra, raises two further kinds of inner trouble: people of overweening pride are those who claim to have obtained what they have not obtained; a bodhisattva caṇḍāla is one whose name is in the ranks of the bodhisattvas and whose practice is not theirs. Those who ruin wholesome dharmas are not all on the outside paths; often they are among one's own fellow practitioners; what the phrase "fully equipped with armour and weapons" guards against is this layer.

9. The simile of the lesser kings paying court—the five perfections follow in accord with prajñā. 「譬如諸小國王，隨時朝侍轉輪聖王；五波羅蜜亦如是，隨順般若波羅蜜。」 tr. "It is as the lesser kings, at the proper times, pay court to and serve the wheel-turning sage king; the five perfections are likewise: they follow in accord with prajñāpāramitā." The four similes before speak of what prajñā does for the five perfections; this simile, conversely, speaks of the bearing of the five perfections toward prajñā—following in accord. The lesser kings each have their own country and their own government, and do not cease to be kings, yet by paying court they show whom they belong to; the five perfections likewise each have their own way of practice, and do not cease to be perfections, yet by following in accord they show where they tend.

10. The simile of the many rivers entering the Ganges—guarded by prajñā, they follow it and reach sarvajñā. 「譬如眾川萬流，皆入於恒河，隨入大海；五波羅蜜亦如是，般若波羅蜜所守護故，隨到薩婆若。」 tr. "It is as the many rivers and myriad streams all flow into the Ganges, and following it flow into the great sea; the five perfections are likewise: because they are guarded by prajñāpāramitā, they follow it and reach sarvajñā." The simile above speaks of the bearing of following in accord; this simile speaks of the fruit of following in accord—reaching sarvajñā. The myriad streams cannot reach the sea by themselves; they reach it after entering the Ganges; the five perfections cannot reach omniscience by themselves; they reach it after entering prajñā. In the simile the Chinese character 「隨」 tr. "follow" is the eye: it is not that prajñā carries the five perfections across; it is that the five perfections go with the current and arrive of themselves.

11. The simile of the right hand and the left hand—convenient and inconvenient. 「譬如人之右手，所作事便，般若波羅蜜亦如是；如人左手，造事不便，五波羅蜜亦如是。」 tr. "It is as a person's right hand, with which doing things is convenient—prajñāpāramitā is likewise; as a person's left hand, with which doing and making things is inconvenient—the five perfections are likewise." This simile is the shortest and the closest to one's own body. The left hand is not other than a hand; it is only inconvenient for doing things; the five perfections are not other than good; it is only that without prajñā they take effort at every point and are hard to bring to completion. Taking the left and right hands as the simile also shows that the two belong to one body—the point is not to discard the left and take the right, but to have the right hand as the master.

12. The simile of the many streams becoming a single taste—entering sarvajñā and obtaining the name of pāramitā. 「譬如眾流，若大、若小俱入大海，合為一味；五波羅蜜亦如是，為般若波羅蜜所護，隨般若波羅蜜入薩婆若，得波羅蜜名字。」 tr. "It is as the many streams, whether great or small, all flow together into the great sea and become a single taste; the five perfections are likewise: upheld by prajñāpāramitā, following prajñāpāramitā they enter sarvajñā, and obtain the name of pāramitā." The simile of the many rivers entering the Ganges speaks as far as the sea; this simile speaks of what follows entering the sea—becoming a single taste. The marks of the five perfections each differ, as streams are great and small; entering sarvajñā, they are the same salt taste and can no longer be divided. The phrase 「得波羅蜜名字」 tr. "obtain the name of pāramitā" echoes the simile of the sixth item, and yet the name established here goes further: not only do they obtain the name, they obtain the name within the single taste.

13. The simile of the wheel-jewel leading the way, and non-discrimination—the nature of the perfections is empty of self-nature, like a mirage. 「譬如轉輪聖王四種兵，輪寶在前導，王意欲住，輪則為住，令四種兵滿其所願，輪亦不離其處」 tr. "It is as with the four kinds of troops of a wheel-turning sage king: the wheel-jewel leads the way in front; when the king's mind wishes to stop, the wheel stops for him, letting the four kinds of troops fulfil what they wish, and the wheel also does not leave its place"; prajñā is likewise: 「導五波羅蜜到薩婆若，常是中住，不過其處」 tr. "it guides the five perfections to reach sarvajñā, and constantly abides therein, not passing beyond its place". This simile states again the meaning of guiding, and adds 「不過其處」 tr. "not passing beyond its place"—guiding without overstepping, abiding without leaving. Right after this the sūtra turns abruptly and says that prajñā 「亦不分別：『檀波羅蜜隨從我，尸羅波羅蜜、羼提波羅蜜、毘梨耶波羅蜜、禪波羅蜜不隨從我。』」 tr. "also does not make such a discrimination: ‘Dānapāramitā follows me; śīlapāramitā, kṣāntipāramitā, vīryapāramitā, and dhyānapāramitā do not follow me.’" Dānapāramitā likewise does not make the discrimination 「我隨從般若波羅蜜」 tr. "I follow prajñāpāramitā", and so it is with all the other perfections. Why? 「諸波羅蜜性無所能作、自性空、虛誑、如野馬。」 tr. "The nature of the perfections has nothing it is able to do; their self-nature is empty, is false and deceptive, like a mirage." The nine similes set up the order of guiding and following; here a single sentence sweeps away together the one that guides and what is guided, the one that follows and what is followed: guiding and following are provisions set up in speaking the Dharma; within emptiness of self-nature there is no one who is able to do, and no one who is done to. A mirage looks like water from afar, and when one goes up to it there is none; the marks of all the perfections are likewise.

14. Why the six perfections are still practised amid emptiness of self-nature—because the minds of the world are inverted he practises the power of skilful means. Subhūti at once raises the difficulty on this: 「世尊！若一切法自性空，云何菩薩摩訶薩行六波羅蜜當得阿耨多羅三藐三菩提？」 tr. "World-Honored One! If all dharmas are empty of self-nature, how is it that the bodhisattva-mahāsattva practises the six perfections and is to obtain anuttarā samyaksaṃbodhi?" The Buddha does not unravel it from the meaning of emptiness; he shows directly the bodhisattva's thought: 「是世間心皆顛倒，我若不行方便力，不能度脫眾生生死。我當為眾生故行檀波羅蜜」 tr. "The minds of this world are all inverted; if I do not practise the power of skilful means, I cannot deliver beings from birth and death. For the sake of beings I shall practise dānapāramitā", and so on up to prajñāpāramitā. This is the place where the 「大方便」 tr. "great skilful means" of the whole chapter gets its name as the great skilful means—skilful means is not giving the principle of emptiness a discount; it is, with the principle of emptiness in no way diminished, still not abandoning beings. Emptiness of self-nature is said with regard to dharmas; the inversion of the world is said with regard to beings; both sides are the real state of things, and the power of skilful means is the ability, between these two sides, not to fall to either side.

15. The fulfilment of dāna—I give up nothing. 「是菩薩為眾生故，捨內外物；捨時作是念：『我無所捨。何以故？是物必當壞敗。』菩薩作如是思惟，能具足檀波羅蜜。」 tr. "For the sake of beings this bodhisattva gives up inner and outer things; as he gives them up he has this thought: ‘I give up nothing. Why? Because these things must certainly decay and be ruined.’ When the bodhisattva reflects thus, he is able to fulfil dānapāramitā." For the sake of beings is the gate of practice; 「我無所捨」 tr. "I give up nothing" is the gate of contemplation; only when the two appear at the same time is it called fulfilment. The things given up must certainly decay and be ruined, so in giving up nothing is lost; with this thought, he gives without the mark of giving, and dāna then becomes pāramitā and does not stop at deeds of merit.

16. The fulfilment of śīla—from killing living beings up to craving the two vehicles, all is what should not be. 「為眾生故，終不破戒」 tr. "For the sake of beings he never breaks the precepts"; his thought is: 「我為眾生故發阿耨多羅三藐三菩提，若殺生是所不應；乃至我為眾生故發阿耨多羅三藐三菩提，若作邪見、若貪著聲聞辟支佛地，是所不應！」 tr. "For the sake of beings I have aroused the mind of anuttarā samyaksaṃbodhi; if I kill living beings, this is what should not be; and so on up to: for the sake of beings I have aroused the mind of anuttarā samyaksaṃbodhi; if I give rise to wrong views, or crave and cling to the ground of the śrāvaka and pratyekabuddha, this is what should not be!" The crux of this passage lies in the two ends of the precepts, lower and upper: below, from killing living beings; above, up to craving and clinging to the ground of the two vehicles—both alike judged 「所不應」 tr. "what should not be". The two vehicles are not evil dharmas, yet for one who has already aroused the mind of awakening they are breaking the precepts—what the precepts guard is not only the conduct of body and speech; it is still more that very first vow, made for the sake of beings.

17. The fulfilment of kṣānti—not giving rise to a single thought of hatred. 「菩薩為眾生故不瞋心，乃至不生一念。菩薩如是思惟：『我應利益眾生，云何而起瞋心？』」 tr. "For the sake of beings the bodhisattva does not give rise to a mind of hatred, and so on up to not giving rise to a single thought of it. The bodhisattva reflects thus: ‘I ought to benefit beings; how could I instead give rise to a mind of hatred?’" The utmost point of patience is not in being able to hold it in; it is in not giving rise to it. And the reason it does not arise is likewise only one sentence: having aroused the mind to benefit beings, as soon as a mind of hatred rises he contradicts himself. Here nothing is said about how painful feeling is to be endured; it is said only that the resolve and the mind of hatred cannot both stand—this is patience within prajñā, which is different from forcibly holding down one's temper.

18. The fulfilment of vīrya—constantly not giving rise to a lazy mind. 「菩薩為眾生故，乃至阿耨多羅三藐三菩提，常不生懈怠心。菩薩如是行，能具足毘梨耶波羅蜜。」 tr. "For the sake of beings the bodhisattva, and so on up to anuttarā samyaksaṃbodhi, constantly does not give rise to a lazy mind. When the bodhisattva practises thus, he is able to fulfil vīryapāramitā." In this passage the mark of vigour shows only one Chinese character, 「常」 tr. "constantly", and one limit, 「乃至阿耨多羅三藐三菩提」 tr. "and so on up to anuttarā samyaksaṃbodhi". It sets no short-term target; buddhahood is the term; it does not discuss a bearing of valour; it discusses only not giving rise to laziness. The two perfections before say 「思惟」 tr. "reflects"; this perfection says 「如是行」 tr. "practises thus"—vigour is a matter of practice, and does not wait for a further contemplation to be set up.

19. The fulfilment of dhyāna—not giving rise to a distracted mind. 「菩薩為眾生故，乃至得阿耨多羅三藐三菩提，不生散亂心。菩薩如是行，能具足禪波羅蜜。」 tr. "For the sake of beings the bodhisattva, and so on up to obtaining anuttarā samyaksaṃbodhi, does not give rise to a distracted mind. When the bodhisattva practises thus, he is able to fulfil dhyānapāramitā." It has the same sentence-pattern as vigour, only changing laziness to distraction. The sūtra does not say what concentration he enters or what limbs he obtains; it takes only 「不生散亂」 tr. "not giving rise to distraction" as the measure of dhyānapāramitā—for the sake of beings the mind is not scattered, and that is concentration; a single mind is the fruit, not being scattered is the cause; one puts in the work on the side of the cause and does not anticipate the appearance of the fruit.

20. The fulfilment of prajñā—apart from wisdom one cannot deliver beings by any other dharma. 「菩薩為眾生故，乃至得阿耨多羅三藐三菩提，終不離智慧。何以故？除智慧，不可以餘法度脫眾生故。」 tr. "For the sake of beings the bodhisattva, and so on up to obtaining anuttarā samyaksaṃbodhi, never departs from wisdom. Why? Because apart from wisdom, one cannot deliver beings by any other dharma." The six perfections are each tied to 「為眾生故」 tr. "for the sake of beings", and at prajñā the reason why is stated plainly: for the work of delivering beings there is no other dharma that can be used. The not giving up, not breaking, not hating, not slackening, and not being disordered of the first five perfections all must be illuminated by wisdom before they become perfections; and the reason wisdom cannot be departed from lies not in its loftiness but in its being the only thing that works.

21. Without difference, and yet prajñā is foremost—at the side of Mount Sumeru, the king of mountains, all are one colour. Subhūti raises the difficulty: 「若諸波羅蜜無差別相，云何般若波羅蜜於五波羅蜜中第一、最上、微妙？」 tr. "If the perfections have no mark of difference, why is prajñāpāramitā foremost, highest, and wondrous among the five perfections?" The Buddha's answer still takes the meaning of the name: without prajñā the five perfections do not obtain the name of pāramitā; because of prajñā they obtain it. And he brings out a simile: 「譬如種種色身，到須彌山王邊，皆同一色」 tr. "It is as bodies of various colours, on reaching the side of Mount Sumeru, the king of mountains, all alike become one colour"; the five perfections, because of prajñā, reach sarvajñā and are 「一種無異」 tr. "of one kind and without any difference", with no discriminating that this is dāna, this is śīla, and so on up to this is prajñā. Why? 「是諸波羅蜜無自性故。」 tr. "Because these perfections are without self-nature." The simile of the one colour at the side of Sumeru deepens the simile of the twelfth item, 「合為一味」 tr. "become a single taste": one taste is what cannot be divided; one colour is what cannot be distinguished—because it cannot be distinguished there is no difference, and the reason it can come to be indistinguishable is precisely that there is prajñā.

22. Without discrimination according to the real meaning, and yet still called highest—one speaks by reason of worldly dharmas. Subhūti raises the difficulty again: 「若隨實義無分別，云何般若波羅蜜於五波羅蜜中最上、微妙？」 tr. "If, following the real meaning, there is no discrimination, why is prajñāpāramitā highest and wondrous among the five perfections?" The Buddha then answers in two layers: 「雖實義中無有分別，但以世俗法故說」 tr. "Though within the real meaning there is no discrimination, yet by reason of worldly dharmas one speaks of" the names of the six perfections. And he states the reason further: it is for the sake of wishing to deliver beings from birth and death, and yet 「是眾生實不生不死、不起不退」 tr. "these beings in reality are neither born nor die, neither rise nor fall back"; because beings are without anything existent, one should know that all dharmas are without anything existent. At the end the jewel of the precious maiden is the simile—「譬如閻浮提眾女人中，玉女寶第一、最上、最妙」 tr. "It is as, among the many women of Jambudvīpa, the jewel of the precious maiden is foremost, highest, and most wondrous". This passage is where the measure of the whole chapter lies: foremost and highest are an order within worldly speaking of the Dharma, not a ranking of high and low within the real meaning; and the worldly speaking is not false speech, because the work of delivering beings does indeed go on within the worldly. Two difficulties and two answers: the first answer establishes the name; the second answer establishes the division of the two truths—if one who reads this chapter confuses these two layers, he will be at odds with it at every point.

23. With what intent the Buddha says highest—because it takes all wholesome dharmas into sarvajñā and takes abiding as not abiding. Subhūti asks: 「佛以何意故說般若波羅蜜最上、最妙？」 tr. "With what intent does the Buddha say that prajñāpāramitā is highest and most wondrous?" The Buddha answers: 「是般若波羅蜜取一切善法到薩婆若中，住不住故。」 tr. "This prajñāpāramitā takes all wholesome dharmas into sarvajñā, and this is because it takes abiding as not abiding." Within the one sentence there are two meanings: first, 「取一切善法到薩婆若中」 tr. "takes all wholesome dharmas into sarvajñā"—that it can carry; second, 「住不住故」 tr. "because it takes abiding as not abiding"—that it can not cling. If it could only carry, and abode in the place it reached, it would still be a dharma of abiding; abiding and yet not abiding—only then is it highest. This sentence is the summation of the long passage below on 「不取不捨」 tr. "not taking and not giving up"—the highness of prajñā is high in not abiding.

24. Is there a dharma that can be taken or given up—all dharmas cannot be taken and cannot be given up. Subhūti at once presses on the Chinese character 「取」 tr. "take": 「般若波羅蜜有法可取、可捨不？」 tr. "Does prajñāpāramitā have any dharma that can be taken or can be given up?" The Buddha answers: 「不也！須菩提！般若波羅蜜無法可取、無法可捨。何以故？一切法不可取、不可捨故。」 tr. "No, Subhūti! Prajñāpāramitā has no dharma that can be taken and no dharma that can be given up. Why? Because all dharmas cannot be taken and cannot be given up." The sentence above has just said 「取一切善法」 tr. "takes all wholesome dharmas", and here it says there is no dharma that can be taken; the words seem to conflict, but the meaning does not: "taking" is gathering in and bringing there, not holding as one's own. The reason in the Buddha's answer is tied not to anything special about prajñā but to 「一切法」 tr. "all dharmas"—that they cannot be taken or given up is how dharmas are of themselves, not something peculiar to prajñā.

25. With regard to what dharmas does it neither take nor give up—form, and so on up to anuttarā samyaksaṃbodhi. Question: 「般若波羅蜜於何等法不取不捨？」 tr. "With regard to what dharmas does prajñāpāramitā neither take nor give up?" Answer: 「般若波羅蜜於色不取不捨，於受想行識乃至阿耨多羅三藐三菩提不取不捨。」 tr. "Prajñāpāramitā neither takes nor gives up form; it neither takes nor gives up feeling, perception, constructions, and consciousness, and so on up to anuttarā samyaksaṃbodhi." What is listed begins from the five aggregates and stops at anuttarā samyaksaṃbodhi—beginning from the coarsest and ending with the most honoured. If one neither took nor gave up form, yet took and gave up awakening, the meaning of neither taking nor giving up would not be thoroughgoing; the sūtra deliberately makes awakening the end precisely in order to draw the very last thing that could be taken into the line as well.

26. How does one not take form—not thinking is called not taking. Question: 「云何不取色，乃至不取阿耨多羅三藐三菩提？」 tr. "What is called not taking form, and so on up to not taking anuttarā samyaksaṃbodhi?" Answer: 「若菩薩不念色，乃至不念阿耨多羅三藐三菩提，是名不取色，乃至不取阿耨多羅三藐三菩提。」 tr. "If the bodhisattva does not think of form, and so on up to does not think of anuttarā samyaksaṃbodhi, this is called not taking form, and so on up to not taking anuttarā samyaksaṃbodhi." This answer lands 「不取」 tr. "not taking" on 「不念」 tr. "not thinking". Taking and giving up are advancing and retreating in matters; thinking is the mind's clutching at objects; if in matters one does not take, yet in the mind one still thinks of it, the grasping at marks is there as plain as ever. Explaining not taking by not thinking is drawing the work back from the object to the mind—this is the first turn in this passage's going deeper layer by layer.

27. Why roots of goodness increase instead when one does not think—at the time of not thinking one then obtains awakening. Subhūti raises the difficulty: 「若不念色，乃至不念阿耨多羅三藐三菩提，云何得增益善根？善根不增，云何具足諸波羅蜜？若不具足諸波羅蜜，云何得阿耨多羅三藐三菩提？」 tr. "If one does not think of form, and so on up to does not think of anuttarā samyaksaṃbodhi, how can one obtain the increase of roots of goodness? If roots of goodness do not increase, how can one fulfil the perfections? If one does not fulfil the perfections, how can one obtain anuttarā samyaksaṃbodhi?" This difficulty goes along with ordinary feeling: not thinking, one does not cultivate; not cultivating, there are no roots of goodness. The Buddha's answer goes the opposite way: 「若菩薩不念色，乃至不念阿耨多羅三藐三菩提，是時善根增益」 tr. "If the bodhisattva does not think of form, and so on up to does not think of anuttarā samyaksaṃbodhi, at this time roots of goodness increase"; because roots of goodness increase he fulfils the perfections, and because the perfections are fulfilled he obtains awakening; 「何以故？不念色乃至不念阿耨多羅三藐三菩提時，便得阿耨多羅三藐三菩提。」 tr. "Why? Because at the time of not thinking of form, and so on up to not thinking of anuttarā samyaksaṃbodhi, he then obtains anuttarā samyaksaṃbodhi." Not thinking is not not doing; it is doing without being bound; bound, there is a measure; not bound, it is then immeasurable—the increase of roots of goodness is an increase just here.

28. By what cause and condition one obtains it by not thinking—because of thinking one clings to the three realms. Question: 「何因緣故，色不念時，乃至阿耨多羅三藐三菩提不念時，便得阿耨多羅三藐三菩提？」 tr. "By what cause and condition, at the time when form is not thought of, and so on up to at the time when anuttarā samyaksaṃbodhi is not thought of, does one then obtain anuttarā samyaksaṃbodhi?" Answer: 「以念故著欲界、色界、無色界，不念故無所著。如是，須菩提！菩薩摩訶薩行般若波羅蜜，不應有所著。」 tr. "Because of thinking one clings to the desire realm, the form realm, and the formless realm; because of not thinking there is nothing one clings to. Thus, Subhūti! when the bodhisattva-mahāsattva practises prajñāpāramitā, he should not cling to anything." The passage above speaks of the benefit of not thinking; this passage speaks of the harm of thinking, and points to the real place of that harm—clinging to the three realms. Thinking and clinging are two ends of one thing: the arising of a thought becomes the cause of bondage; so the concluding sentence does not say ‘he should not think of anything’ but 「不應有所著」 tr. "he should not cling to anything", which shows that what the Buddha means to cure lies in clinging, not in the name and mark of thinking.

29. Where should he abide—he does not abide in form, and so on up to the omniscience of all kinds. Question: 「菩薩摩訶薩如是行般若波羅蜜，當住何處？」 tr. "When the bodhisattva-mahāsattva practises prajñāpāramitā thus, where should he abide?" Answer: 「菩薩摩訶薩如是行，不住色，乃至不住一切種智。」 tr. "When the bodhisattva-mahāsattva practises thus, he does not abide in form, and so on up to does not abide in the omniscience of all kinds." A place is asked about, and the answer is no place. The text before went from not taking to not thinking, from not thinking to not clinging, and here it speaks of not abiding—the four Chinese characters rendered here as ‘taking, thinking, clinging, abiding’ tighten all the way: taking is a matter of the body and hands, thinking is a matter of the mind, clinging is a matter of feeling, abiding is a matter of where one settles one's body and life. The sentence about not abiding in the omniscience of all kinds is especially weighty: not even the ultimate dharma one seeks may be made a place to settle.

30. By what cause and condition one does not abide—not clinging, one does not abide; the three losings of grasping at marks. Question: 「何因緣故，色中不住，乃至一切種智中不住？」 tr. "By what cause and condition does he not abide in form, and so on up to not abide in the omniscience of all kinds?" Answer: 「不著故不住。何以故？是菩薩不見有法可著、可住。」 tr. "Because of not clinging he does not abide. Why? Because this bodhisattva does not see that there is any dharma that can be clung to or that can be abided in." After this the sūtra brings out three layers of losing through grasping at marks, the most admonishing passage of this unit. First: if he has this thought, 「若能如是行、如是修，是行般若波羅蜜；我今行般若波羅蜜、修般若波羅蜜」 tr. "if one can practise thus and cultivate thus, this is practising prajñāpāramitā; I now practise prajñāpāramitā and cultivate prajñāpāramitā", then 「若如是取相，則遠離般若波羅蜜」 tr. "if he grasps at marks in this way, he is far from prajñāpāramitā", and so on up to far from the omniscience of all kinds; and the reason is: 「般若波羅蜜無有著處、亦無著者，自性無故。」 tr. "In prajñāpāramitā there is no place that can be clung to and also no person who is able to cling, since its self-nature is non-existent." If again he grasps at marks in this way, 「則於般若波羅蜜退」 tr. "he falls back with regard to prajñāpāramitā"; to fall back from prajñā is to fall back from awakening, and 「不得受記」 tr. "he does not receive the prediction". Second: if he has this thought, 「住是般若波羅蜜，能生檀波羅蜜，乃至能生大悲」 tr. "abiding in this prajñāpāramitā, one can give rise to dānapāramitā, and so on up to can give rise to great compassion", then 「則為失般若波羅蜜」 tr. "he loses prajñāpāramitā"; losing it, he cannot give rise to dāna, and so on up to cannot give rise to great compassion. Third: if he has this thought, 「諸佛知諸法無受相故，得阿耨多羅三藐三菩提」 tr. "the buddhas, because they knew that dharmas have no mark of receiving, obtained anuttarā samyaksaṃbodhi", and 「如是演說、開示、教詔，則失般若波羅蜜」 tr. "thus expounds, discloses, and instructs, he loses prajñāpāramitā"; why? 「佛於諸法無所知、無所得，亦無法可說，何況當有所得！無有是處！」 tr. "The Buddha, with regard to dharmas, has nothing he knows and nothing he attains, and also has no dharma that can be spoken; how much less should there be something to be attained! There is no such case!" The order of the three losings is very strict: the first losing lies in approving one's own practice, the second losing lies in approving one's own power to give rise, the third losing lies in speaking of even 「無受相」 tr. "no mark of receiving" as something the Buddha knew and passing it on to others. The further on, the finer—at the third layer even speaking the Dharma to benefit others becomes a place of losing, precisely because the content spoken is not itself mistaken; the mistake lies in handing on what is unfindable as though it were findable.

31. How to be without these faults—clinging even to being without anything existent is also losing. Subhūti asks: 「菩薩行般若波羅蜜，云何無是過失？」 tr. "When the bodhisattva practises prajñāpāramitā, how is he to be without such faults?" The Buddha answers: if he has this thought, 「諸法無所有、不可取；若法無所有、不可取，則無所得。若如是行，為行般若波羅蜜」 tr. "dharmas are without anything existent and cannot be taken; if a dharma is without anything existent and cannot be taken, then there is nothing to be attained. If one practises thus, this is practising prajñāpāramitā", this is the right practice; but at once he adds a sentence: 「若菩薩摩訶薩著無所有法，則遠離般若波羅蜜。何以故？般若波羅蜜中無有著法故。」 tr. "If the bodhisattva-mahāsattva clings to the dharma of being without anything existent, he is far from prajñāpāramitā. Why? Because within prajñāpāramitā there is no dharma that can be clung to." Rather than saying that this passage answers ‘how to be without faults’, one should say that it blocks the very last line of retreat: to know that dharmas are without anything existent is right view; to cling to this being without anything existent is still clinging. What the three losings of the preceding passage break is having something to be attained; what this passage breaks is the view of nothing to be attained—both sides are sent away, and only then does prajñā appear.

32. Is prajñā far from prajñā—not giving rise to "this is form, whose form". Subhūti turns the two Chinese characters 「遠離」 tr. "far from" of the text before into a counter-difficulty: 「般若波羅蜜遠離般若波羅蜜耶？檀波羅蜜遠離檀波羅蜜耶？乃至一切種智遠離一切種智耶？」 tr. "Is prajñāpāramitā far from prajñāpāramitā? Is dānapāramitā far from dānapāramitā? And so on up to: is the omniscience of all kinds far from the omniscience of all kinds?" If each is far from itself, how then does the bodhisattva obtain it? The Buddha answers: when the bodhisattva practises prajñā, 「不生色——是色、誰色；乃至一切種智不生——是一切種智、誰一切種智。如是菩薩能生般若波羅蜜乃至能生一切種智。」 tr. "he does not give rise to form—this is form, this is whose form; and so on up to he does not give rise to the omniscience of all kinds—this is the omniscience of all kinds, this is whose omniscience of all kinds. Such a bodhisattva is able to give rise to prajñāpāramitā, and so on up to able to give rise to the omniscience of all kinds." What is called being far from is not the separation of A from B; it is not raising the two kinds of discrimination, ‘this is such-and-such a dharma’ and ‘this is so-and-so's such-and-such a dharma’. When the two clingings, to the self-nature of a dharma and to whom a dharma belongs, both at one time do not arise, prajñā then arises—「不生」 tr. "does not give rise to" and 「能生」 tr. "is able to give rise to" standing side by side within one sentence is precisely the eye of this passage.

33. Not contemplating permanent and impermanent and the rest—self-nature cannot give rise to self-nature; the four kinds of troops following, and the skilled driver of a chariot of four horses. 「復次，須菩提！菩薩摩訶薩行般若波羅蜜時，不觀色若常若無常、若苦若樂、若我若非我、若空若不空、若離若非離。何以故？自性不能生自性。」 tr. "Again, Subhūti! When the bodhisattva-mahāsattva practises prajñāpāramitā, he does not contemplate form as permanent or impermanent, as suffering or pleasure, as self or non-self, as empty or not empty, as separated or not separated. Why? Because self-nature cannot give rise to self-nature." Five pairs of mutually dependent views, with even ‘empty and not empty’ and ‘separated and not separated’ among what is not contemplated—from which one can see that what is sent away is not only worldly views: every view that forms a pair is within it. The reason is only one sentence, 「自性不能生自性」 tr. "self-nature cannot give rise to self-nature": if a dharma had self-nature, it would complete itself without waiting for contemplation, nor would it differ because of contemplation. After this two similes gather it up: 「譬如轉輪聖王有所至處，四種兵皆隨從」 tr. "It is as, wherever a wheel-turning sage king goes, the four kinds of troops all follow along"; wherever prajñā goes, the five perfections follow along and arrive to abide within sarvajñā; 「譬如善御駕駟，不失平道，隨意所至」 tr. "It is as a person skilled at driving, driving a chariot of four horses, does not lose the level road and goes wherever his mind intends"; prajñā drives the five perfections without losing the right path, and reaches sarvajñā. After the nine similes, two more similes are brought out, echoing the earlier ones yet with a slightly different meaning—the earlier similes mostly make clear the honour of prajñā; these two similes make clear that the use of prajñā lies in not losing the path.

34. The path and what is not the path—the path of the omniscience of all kinds is the bodhisattva path. Subhūti asks: 「何等是菩薩摩訶薩道？何等是非道？」 tr. "What is the bodhisattva-mahāsattva's path? What is not the path?" The Buddha answers: 「聲聞道非菩薩道，辟支佛道非菩薩道；一切種智道是菩薩摩訶薩道。」 tr. "The śrāvaka path is not the bodhisattva path; the pratyekabuddha path is not the bodhisattva path; the path of the omniscience of all kinds is the bodhisattva-mahāsattva's path." The words judging the path are extremely brief, and what is sifted out is not evil dharmas but the paths of the two vehicles. The two vehicles are not wrong, yet for the bodhisattva they are not the path—right and wrong in paths are not divided by good and evil; they are divided by where one tends. The passage on śīla before said that craving and clinging to the ground of the two vehicles is breaking the precepts; here it says that the path of the two vehicles is not the path; the two places have one and the same intent.

35. It arises for the sake of a great matter—prajñā is the guide of the bodhisattvas. Subhūti, taking this up, exclaims: 「諸菩薩摩訶薩般若波羅蜜為大事故起，所謂示是道、是非道。」 tr. "The prajñāpāramitā of the bodhisattva-mahāsattvas arises for the sake of a great matter—namely, to show that this is the path and this is not the path." The Buddha approves it and extends it: prajñā 「為度無量眾生故起，為利益阿僧祇眾生故起」 tr. "arises for the sake of delivering immeasurable beings, arises for the sake of benefiting asaṃkhyeya beings"; though it brings about this benefit, 「亦不受色，亦不受受、想、行、識；亦不受聲聞、辟支佛地」 tr. "it also does not receive form, nor receive feeling, perception, constructions, and consciousness; nor does it receive the ground of the śrāvaka and pratyekabuddha". He says further that prajñā 「是諸菩薩摩訶薩導，示阿耨多羅三藐三菩提，能令離聲聞、辟支佛地，住薩婆若」 tr. "is the guide of the bodhisattva-mahāsattvas; it shows them anuttarā samyaksaṃbodhi, and is able to make them leave the ground of the śrāvaka and pratyekabuddha and abide in sarvajñā", and that 「般若波羅蜜無所生、無所滅，諸法常住故」 tr. "prajñāpāramitā has nothing arising and nothing ceasing, because dharmas constantly abide". Bringing about great benefit and yet not receiving a single dharma is the crux of this passage; the last sentence, 「諸法常住」 tr. "dharmas constantly abide", above all deserves attention—without arising and without ceasing is not annihilation; it is constant abiding.

36. Without arising and without ceasing, how does one practise the six perfections—keeping sarvajñā in mind, he gives, keeps the precepts, is patient, is vigorous, concentrates, and is wise. Subhūti at once raises the difficulty: 「若般若波羅蜜無所生、無所滅，云何菩薩摩訶薩行般若波羅蜜時應布施？」 tr. "If prajñāpāramitā has nothing arising and nothing ceasing, when the bodhisattva-mahāsattva practises prajñāpāramitā, how should he give?"—and so on up to: how should he cultivate wisdom? The Buddha's way of answering is extremely plain: 「菩薩摩訶薩念薩婆若應布施，念薩婆若應持戒、忍辱、精進、禪定、智慧。」 tr. "Keeping sarvajñā in mind, the bodhisattva-mahāsattva should give; keeping sarvajñā in mind, he should uphold the precepts, and practise patience, vigour, meditative concentration, and wisdom." The practice of the six perfections is not abandoned; only, what is kept in mind is sarvajñā. Again, with the merit he 「與眾生共之」 tr. "shares it in common with beings" and 「迴向阿耨多羅三藐三菩提」 tr. "dedicates it to anuttarā samyaksaṃbodhi"—if he dedicates in this way, he fulfils the cultivation of the six perfections, and so on up to the mind of kindness and compassion and the other merits. At the end comes the concluding exhortation: not far from the six perfections, he is not far from sarvajñā; one who wishes to obtain awakening 「應學應行六波羅蜜」 tr. "should train in and should practise the six perfections". The passage before had just said without arising and without ceasing, and this passage then says he should give, should keep the precepts—the gate of practice within non-arising falls on one 「念薩婆若」 tr. "keeping sarvajñā in mind" and one 「迴向」 tr. "dedication".

37. How does one train in and practise the six perfections—neither joined nor dispersed, nowhere to abide, and the simile of the āmra fruit. Subhūti asks about the way of training in and practising, and the Buddha gives three answers: first, to contemplate 「色不合不散，受、想、行、識不合不散，乃至一切種智不合不散」 tr. "form is neither joined nor dispersed; feeling, perception, constructions, and consciousness are neither joined nor dispersed; and so on up to the omniscience of all kinds is neither joined nor dispersed"; second, to have the thought 「我當不住色中」 tr. "I shall not abide in form", and so on up to not abiding in the omniscience of all kinds, 「何以故？是色無所住，乃至薩婆若無所住」 tr. "Why? Because this form has nowhere to abide, and so on up to sarvajñā has nowhere to abide"; third, he gives a long simile—「譬如士夫欲食菴羅果、若波羅那婆果，當種其子，隨時溉灌、守護，漸漸生長，時節和合，便有果實得而食之」 tr. "It is as when a man wishes to eat the āmra fruit or the boluonapo fruit: he should plant its seed, water it and guard it at the proper times, and it grows little by little; when the times and seasons come together, there is fruit to be had and eaten"; the bodhisattva wishing to obtain awakening is likewise: he should train in the six perfections, 「以布施攝取眾生，持戒、忍辱、精進、禪定、智慧攝取眾生，度眾生生死」 tr. "gathering in beings by giving, gathering in beings by upholding the precepts, patience, vigour, meditative concentration, and wisdom, and delivering beings from birth and death". At the end he further lists the things wished for, to exhort training in prajñā: 「欲不隨他人語」 tr. "wishing not to be turned by the words of others", 「欲淨佛國土、成就眾生，欲坐道場，欲轉法輪」 tr. "wishing to purify buddha-lands and bring beings to accomplishment, wishing to sit at the seat of awakening, wishing to turn the wheel of the Dharma". The first two answers are the gate of contemplation; the third simile is the gate of practice; between the seed and the fruit lie the watering and guarding and the coming together of the times and seasons, and this simile says to the full at the same time the two matters of 「無所住」 tr. "nowhere to abide" and ‘needing to be nurtured and grown’—not abiding is not not planting.

38. Should one train thus—obtaining mastery, the simile of the great sea, the simile of the archer. Subhūti asks: 「應如是學般若波羅蜜耶？」 tr. "Should one train in prajñāpāramitā thus?" The Buddha answers 「菩薩應如是學」 tr. "the bodhisattva should train thus", and sets out three meanings together: first, 「欲於諸法得自在，當學般若波羅蜜」 tr. "wishing to obtain mastery over dharmas, he should train in prajñāpāramitā", because by training in prajñā one obtains mastery within all dharmas; second, prajñā 「於一切諸法中最大」 tr. "is the greatest among all dharmas", as the great sea is the greatest among the myriad rivers, so those who seek the paths of the śrāvaka and pratyekabuddha and the paths of the bodhisattvas should all train in prajñā, and so on up to the omniscience of all kinds; third, 「譬如射師，執如意弓箭，不畏怨敵」 tr. "It is as an archer, holding a bow and arrows that are as he wishes, does not fear hostile enemies"; when the bodhisattva practises prajñā, and so on up to the omniscience of all kinds, 「魔、若魔天所不能壞」 tr. "Māra, or the gods of Māra, cannot ruin him". The three meanings each have their own bearing: mastery is said with regard to oneself, the greatest is said with regard to the Dharma, not fearing hostile enemies is said with regard to hindrances. And the second meaning expressly allows that practitioners of the two vehicles too should train in prajñā; read together with passage 34's ‘the two vehicles are not the bodhisattva path’, it rightly shows that judging the path and exhorting training are two matters—the path is judged by where one tends, training is spoken of in terms of what one draws on. The last sentence, 「是行般若波羅蜜菩薩，為十方諸佛所念」 tr. "the bodhisattva who practises prajñāpāramitā thus is kept in mind by the buddhas of the ten directions", leads into the next passage.

39. How do the buddhas keep him in mind—they keep him in mind by way of unfindability. Subhūti asks: 「云何十方諸佛念是菩薩摩訶薩？」 tr. "How do the buddhas of the ten directions keep this bodhisattva-mahāsattva in mind?" The Buddha answers: when the bodhisattva practises the six perfections, 「十方諸佛皆念」 tr. "the buddhas of the ten directions all keep him in mind"; and what is called keeping in mind is: 「布施不可得，持戒、忍辱、精進、禪定、智慧不可得，乃至一切種智不可得。菩薩能如是不得諸法故，諸佛念是菩薩摩訶薩」 tr. "Giving is unfindable; upholding the precepts, patience, vigour, meditative concentration, and wisdom are unfindable; and so on up to the omniscience of all kinds is unfindable. Because the bodhisattva is able in this way not to find dharmas, the buddhas keep this bodhisattva-mahāsattva in mind". Again he says: 「諸佛不以色故念，不以受、想、行、識故念，乃至不以一切種智故念。」 tr. "The buddhas do not keep him in mind by reason of form, do not keep him in mind by reason of feeling, perception, constructions, and consciousness, and so on up to do not keep him in mind by reason of the omniscience of all kinds." What is asked is how the buddhas keep him in mind, and what is answered is how the bodhisattva does not find—what the buddhas keep in mind is his having nothing to be attained, and nothing more. This passage turns ‘being kept in mind by the buddhas’, a matter that most easily breeds self-comforting thoughts, into a place where there is nothing to comfort oneself with: what is kept in mind is precisely your having nothing to be attained.

40. Much that is trained in, and in reality nothing trained in. Subhūti says: 「菩薩摩訶薩多有所學，實無所學。」 tr. "The bodhisattva-mahāsattva has much that he trains in, and in reality nothing that he trains in." The Buddha approves it: 「如是！如是！須菩提！菩薩多有所學，實無所學。何以故？是菩薩所學諸法皆不可得。」 tr. "Just so! Just so! Subhūti! The bodhisattva has much that he trains in, and in reality nothing that he trains in. Why? Because the dharmas this bodhisattva trains in are all unfindable." This saying comes on from the 「不可得」 tr. "unfindable" of the passage above, and gathers it up with the Chinese character rendered here as ‘train’. Having much that he trains in is the reality of the appearances of things—the six perfections, the omniscience of all kinds, each and every one must be trained in; in reality nothing trained in is the reality of the nature of dharmas—the dharmas trained in are all unfindable. The two sentences do not obstruct one another, just as in the text before, practising and not clinging, abiding and not abiding.

41. Training in the six perfections briefly and extensively, one then knows the brief and extensive marks of all dharmas. Subhūti says to the Buddha that the dharma the Buddha speaks is 「若略、若廣」 tr. "sometimes brief, sometimes extensive", and that the bodhisattvas who wish to seek awakening, whether the six perfections be brief or extensive, 「應當受持、親近、讀、誦；讀誦已，思惟、正觀，心、心數法不行故」 tr. "should receive and uphold them, draw near to them, read them, and recite them; having read and recited them, they should reflect on them and rightly contemplate them, because mind and mental-factor dharmas do not move". The Buddha approves and extends it: 「菩薩摩訶薩略、廣學六波羅蜜，當知一切法略廣相。」 tr. "When the bodhisattva-mahāsattva trains in the six perfections briefly and extensively, he will know the brief and extensive marks of all dharmas." Here the great section of the last stretch opens. What Subhūti asked about was at first the brief and extensive of the six perfections; the Buddha's answer extends the scope to 「一切法」 tr. "all dharmas"—training in the brief and extensive of the six perfections is the place to set one's hand; knowing the brief and extensive marks of all dharmas is the place one arrives at. And the phrase in Subhūti's words, 「心、心數法不行」 tr. "mind and mental-factor dharmas do not move", has already pointed out beforehand that the utmost rule of reading, reciting, and reflecting does not lie in hearing much.

42. How does one know the brief and extensive marks—knowing the mark of suchness. Question: 「云何菩薩摩訶薩知一切法略廣相？」 tr. "How does the bodhisattva-mahāsattva know the brief and extensive marks of all dharmas?" Answer: 「知色如相，知受、想、行、識乃至知一切種智如相，如是能知一切法略廣相。」 tr. "He knows the mark of suchness of form; he knows the mark of suchness of feeling, perception, constructions, and consciousness, and so on up to knows the mark of suchness of the omniscience of all kinds; thus he is able to know the brief and extensive marks of all dharmas." The first gate is called the mark of suchness. Brief and extensive are the briefness and extensiveness of speaking the Dharma; yet knowing the marks of its briefness and extensiveness is not known from how much or how little the Dharma is spoken; it is known from the suchness of dharmas. This answer settles the common pattern of the four gates below: each gate is a place of entry, not a kind of classification.

43. What is the mark of suchness—without arising, without ceasing, without abiding-and-changing; the turn into the limit of reality. Question: 「云何色如相？云何受想行識乃至一切種智如相？」 tr. "What is the mark of suchness of form? What is the mark of suchness of feeling, perception, constructions, and consciousness, and so on up to the omniscience of all kinds?" Answer: 「色如相，無生、無滅、無住異，是名色如相；乃至一切種智如相，無生、無滅、無住異，是名一切種智如相。是中菩薩摩訶薩應學。」 tr. "The mark of suchness of form is without arising, without ceasing, without abiding-and-changing; this is called the mark of suchness of form; and so on up to the mark of suchness of the omniscience of all kinds is without arising, without ceasing, without abiding-and-changing; this is called the mark of suchness of the omniscience of all kinds. The bodhisattva-mahāsattva should train within this." The gloss on the mark of suchness is only three things—without arising, without ceasing, without abiding-and-changing: arising and ceasing, and abiding-and-changing, are all sent away together. Having glossed the mark of suchness, the sūtra at once goes on to say 「菩薩摩訶薩知諸法實際時，知一切法略廣相」 tr. "when the bodhisattva-mahāsattva knows the limit of reality in all dharmas, he knows the brief and extensive marks of all dharmas", turning into the second gate. Between the four gates no words of division are set up; it turns directly with a single sentence, from which one can see that the four are not four kinds of dharma but four names for one matter.

44. What is the limit of reality—being without limit is called the limit of reality; the turn into the nature of dharmas. Question: 「何等是諸法實際？」 tr. "What is the limit of reality in all dharmas?" Answer: 「無際是名實際。菩薩學是際，知一切諸法略廣相。」 tr. "Being without limit is called the limit of reality. When the bodhisattva trains in this limit, he knows the brief and extensive marks of all dharmas." To gloss the limit of reality by being without limit is negating rather than asserting: the limit of reality is not some ultimate boundary that can be reached; precisely because it is without limit it is called the limit of reality. Having answered, it again turns at once: 「若菩薩摩訶薩知諸法法性，是菩薩能知一切法略廣相」 tr. "If the bodhisattva-mahāsattva knows the nature of dharmas in all dharmas, this bodhisattva is able to know the brief and extensive marks of all dharmas", leading into the third gate.

45. What is the nature of dharmas—the nature of form is called the nature of dharmas, without parts and without non-parts. Question: 「何等是諸法法性？」 tr. "What is the nature of dharmas in all dharmas?" Answer: 「色性是名法性，是性無分、無非分。須菩提！菩薩摩訶薩知法性故，知一切法略廣相。」 tr. "The nature of form is called the nature of dharmas; this nature is without parts and without non-parts. Subhūti! Because the bodhisattva-mahāsattva knows the nature of dharmas, he knows the brief and extensive marks of all dharmas." No separate nature of dharmas is set up outside form; the very nature of form is the nature of dharmas—this is where the third gate sets its hand. And the phrase 「無分、無非分」 tr. "without parts and without non-parts" sends away both sides together: it cannot be divided, nor can it be said that it cannot be divided. The preceding gate negates the limit of reality by being without limit; this gate negates the nature of dharmas by being without parts and without non-parts; the way of negating is consistent throughout.

46. Further, how does one know the brief and extensive marks—knowing that all dharmas are neither joined nor dispersed. Subhūti asks further: 「復云何應知一切法略廣相？」 tr. "Further, how is one to know the brief and extensive marks of all dharmas?" The Buddha answers: 「若菩薩摩訶薩知一切法不合不散。」 tr. "If the bodhisattva-mahāsattva knows that all dharmas are neither joined nor dispersed." The fourth gate is called neither joined nor dispersed. These words have already appeared before, in passage 37 at the place of training in and practising the six perfections; there it was the gate of practice, here it is the gate of knowing; the same words used twice within one unit shows that 「不合不散」 tr. "neither joined nor dispersed" is a key phrase running through this chapter.

47. What dharmas are neither joined nor dispersed—the conditioned and the unconditioned are all so; because they are without self-nature. Question: 「何等法不合不散？」 tr. "What dharmas are neither joined nor dispersed?" Answer: 「色不合不散，受、想、行、識不合不散，乃至一切種智不合不散。有為性、無為性不合不散。何以故？是諸法自性無，云何有合有散？若法自性無，是為非法，非法不合不散。」 tr. "Form is neither joined nor dispersed; feeling, perception, constructions, and consciousness are neither joined nor dispersed; and so on up to the omniscience of all kinds is neither joined nor dispersed. The conditioned nature and the unconditioned nature are neither joined nor dispersed. Why? Because these dharmas are without self-nature—where would there be joining, where dispersing? If a dharma is without self-nature, this is not a dharma; what is not a dharma is neither joined nor dispersed." What is listed runs from the five aggregates to the omniscience of all kinds, with the further addition of the pair 「有為性、無為性」 tr. "the conditioned nature and the unconditioned nature", and so gathers in all dharmas without remainder. The reason why is likewise only one sentence: because they are without self-nature. Joining and dispersing are matters that exist by two dharmas depending on each other; since self-nature is non-existent, the matter of mutual dependence is non-existent too; the last sentence, 「非法不合不散」 tr. "what is not a dharma is neither joined nor dispersed", goes one layer further—even of 「非法」 tr. "what is not a dharma" it cannot be said that it joins or disperses. With this the four gates have been fully spoken.

48. This is called the brief gathering of prajñā—from the first arousing of intent to the ten grounds, all should train in it. Subhūti concludes it, saying: 「世尊！是名菩薩摩訶薩略攝般若波羅蜜。」 tr. "World-Honored One! This is called the bodhisattva-mahāsattva's brief gathering of prajñāpāramitā." And he says: 「是略攝般若波羅蜜中，初發意菩薩摩訶薩應學，乃至十地菩薩摩訶薩亦應學。是菩薩摩訶薩學是略攝般若波羅蜜，則知一切法略廣相。」 tr. "Within this brief gathering of prajñāpāramitā, the bodhisattva-mahāsattva who has first aroused intent should train, and so on up to the bodhisattva-mahāsattva of the ten grounds should also train. This bodhisattva-mahāsattva, training in this brief gathering of prajñāpāramitā, knows the brief and extensive marks of all dharmas." The whole unit closes with these sentences. What is called the brief gathering is said precisely over against the 「若略、若廣」 tr. "sometimes brief, sometimes extensive" of the text before: the four gates of suchness, the limit of reality, the nature of dharmas, and neither joined nor dispersed are precisely the brief of prajñā. And this brief is not shallow—the one who has first aroused intent trains in it, the one of the ten grounds also trains in it; the positions are high and low, yet what is trained in is not two. The whole Larger Sūtra speaks at length without measure, and yet it can be abridged to four gates, can be abridged to a single sentence; the one training below is not left with nowhere to set his hand because of its briefness, and the one in a high position does not seek something else because of its briefness—here one meaning of the name 「大方便」 tr. "the great skilful means" is seen.

Do Not Misread

Do not read 「方便」 tr. "skilful means" as an expedient device. The three questions and three answers at the opening of this chapter speak of where the power of skilful means comes from—immeasurable koṭi of asaṃkhyeya kalpas, buddhas as many as the sands of the Ganges, in the six perfections 「無不具足」 tr. "nothing that is not fulfilled". The power of skilful means is capital accumulated over long kalpas, not adaptability in the face of events; reading it as a deft knack of handling, one will go to learn its use and be unwilling to lay down its cause—which is exactly the illusion the sūtra's three questions mean to guard against.

Do not read the nine similes as cutting prajñā and the five perfections into two sections. The illumination of the sun and moon, the guiding of the wheel-jewel, the protection of the husband, the general who cannot be ruined—all the similes take prajñā as the master, and are easily read as prajñā above and the five perfections below. Yet the sūtra says right after that prajñā 「亦不分別」 tr. "also does not make the discrimination" that dāna and the rest follow it, and that dāna and the rest 「亦不分別」 tr. "also do not make the discrimination" that they follow prajñā, and returns to 「諸波羅蜜性無所能作、自性空、虛誑、如野馬」 tr. "the nature of the perfections has nothing it is able to do; their self-nature is empty, is false and deceptive, like a mirage". The similes are for making the relation clear; once it is clear they must be put down; taking the similes as real, guiding and following both become two things depending on each other, which is falling right into what the sūtra sends away.

Do not read 「自性空」 tr. "empty of self-nature" as meaning there is no need to practise the six perfections. This is exactly how Subhūti asked, and what the Buddha answered is the bodhisattva's thought: 「是世間心皆顛倒，我若不行方便力，不能度脫眾生生死。」 tr. "The minds of this world are all inverted; if I do not practise the power of skilful means, I cannot deliver beings from birth and death." Emptiness of self-nature is said of the reality of dharmas; the inversion of beings is said of the reality of events; the two do not cancel each other. Below, the six perfections are fulfilled one by one, and each perfection is tied to the four Chinese characters 「為眾生故」 tr. "for the sake of beings"—the clearer the meaning of emptiness, the closer the gate of practice; only this is what this chapter calls the great skilful means.

Do not read 「第一、最上、微妙」 tr. "foremost, highest, and wondrous" as a ranking of high and low within the real meaning. Subhūti presses twice, and the second time the Buddha explains plainly: 「雖實義中無有分別，但以世俗法故說」 tr. "Though within the real meaning there is no discrimination, yet by reason of worldly dharmas one speaks of" the names of the six perfections. Calling prajñā foremost is an order within worldly speaking of the Dharma; if one holds that within the real meaning prajñā is truly higher than the five perfections, then the earlier words 「諸波羅蜜無差別」 tr. "the perfections are without difference" and 「無自性故」 tr. "because they are without self-nature" have nothing to rest on. Conversely, if because the real meaning is without discrimination one makes light of worldly speaking, then the work of delivering beings has nowhere to be set up—the two layers must be kept apart, and must also be brought together.

Do not read 「不念」 tr. "not thinking" and 「不住」 tr. "not abiding" as not cultivating and not training. The sūtra says plainly that at the time of not thinking roots of goodness increase instead and the perfections are fulfilled instead; it also says that in training in and practising the six perfections one should use 「無所住法」 tr. "the dharma of nowhere to abide", and at once takes the seed of the āmra fruit as a simile—one should plant its seed, water it and guard it at the proper times, and only when the times and seasons come together is there fruit. Not abiding is not not planting; not thinking is not not doing; what is sent away is being bound and clinging, not the gate of practice. If one abandons the six perfections on the ground of not abiding, one runs directly counter to the concluding exhortation of the earlier passage, 「應學應行六波羅蜜」 tr. "should train in and should practise the six perfections".

Do not read the three layers of losing through grasping at marks as forbidding the speaking of the Dharma. The third losing says that if the bodhisattva thinks 「諸佛知諸法無受相故，得阿耨多羅三藐三菩提」 tr. "the buddhas, because they knew that dharmas have no mark of receiving, obtained anuttarā samyaksaṃbodhi" and 「如是演說、開示、教詔，則失般若波羅蜜」 tr. "thus expounds, discloses, and instructs, he loses prajñāpāramitā"; what is lost does not lie in the one matter of speaking the Dharma; it lies in handing on ‘what the Buddha knew’ as a thing that can be attained; the sūtra at once explains itself: 「佛於諸法無所知、無所得，亦無法可說，何況當有所得！無有是處！」 tr. "The Buddha, with regard to dharmas, has nothing he knows and nothing he attains, and also has no dharma that can be spoken; how much less should there be something to be attained! There is no such case!" The same passage also says 「著無所有法，則遠離般若波羅蜜」 tr. "clings to the dharma of being without anything existent, he is far from prajñāpāramitā"—from which one can see that both sides are sent away. If one reads it as silence being highest, that instead becomes a clinging of the second layer.

Bearing on Practice

Use the three questions and three answers to check where one's own effort lies. When one feels that others' practice has strength and one's own is stuck, there is no need first to envy their skill; first measure oneself by the sūtra's three questions: the length of the kalpas is not something I can reckon; the breadth of meeting buddhas and receiving teaching—how much of my mind have I put into it; among the six perfections, how many of mine are 「無不具足」 tr. "nothing that is not fulfilled". Since the power of skilful means is formed by accumulation, what is lacking one simply makes up; here there is no shortcut to be sought, and no need to be disheartened either.

Use the four Chinese characters 「為眾生故」 tr. "for the sake of beings" to settle why one practises the six perfections. In the sūtra the six perfections are fulfilled one by one, and the reason is uniformly tied to "for the sake of beings": giving up while knowing that I give up nothing; guarding the precepts and not craving the two vehicles; not hating and keeping in mind that one ought to benefit beings; not slackening and not being disordered, with awakening as the term; never departing from wisdom and knowing that apart from wisdom there is no dharma for delivering beings. When the practice of the six perfections feels dry or forced, one can come back to these four Chinese characters and check: is one practising for the sake of beings, or for the sake of the appearance of one's own practice?

Use the four Chinese characters rendered here as ‘taking, thinking, clinging, abiding’ as a graded self-examination. The sūtra goes from not taking and not giving up to not thinking, from not thinking to not clinging, from not clinging to not abiding. In daily life one can look along these four layers, ever more finely: in matters, have I already stopped taking and giving up? In the mind, am I still thinking of it? Within the thinking, is there still a feeling of liking and disliking? In feeling, am I still taking some place as where to settle body and life? The further on, the finer, and the last layer does not allow abiding even in the omniscience of all kinds—this very sentence guards against the practitioner making the highest dharma into a new home.

Use the three layers of losing through grasping at marks to guard against ‘self-approval after putting in effort’. The first losing is thinking of oneself 「我今行般若波羅蜜」 tr. "I now practise prajñāpāramitā"; the second losing is thinking of oneself ‘abiding in this prajñā, one can give rise to dānapāramitā’, and so on up to great compassion; the third losing is speaking of what is unfindable as findable and passing it on to others. All three arise only after effort has been put in and something gained, so one must be especially watchful: as soon as there is a little accord, the thought ‘I am cultivating’ arises; as soon as there is a little benefit, the reckoning ‘this dharma can give rise to that virtue’ arises; as soon as one can speak a little, the idea ‘what I hand on is what the Buddha knew’ arises. The sūtra does not forbid the practice, the giving rise, or the speaking; it only blocks that one thought of grasping at marks.

Use the four gates as places of entry for reading the sūtra and contemplating the mind. The mark of suchness, the limit of reality, the nature of dharmas, neither joined nor dispersed—the four are four names for one matter, and one can take any one of them as is convenient and use it: when objects are in confusion, contemplate that they are without arising, without ceasing, without abiding-and-changing; when seeking the ultimate and finding nowhere to come home to, reflect that being without limit is called the limit of reality; when looking among the myriad dharmas for a real substance, know that the nature of form is itself the nature of dharmas, without parts and without non-parts; when seeing dharmas gather and disperse, arise and cease, and the mind rising and falling with them, reflect: because they are without self-nature, where would there be joining, where dispersing? Raise any one of the four gates, and it opens onto the brief and extensive marks.

Use ‘the one who has first aroused intent should train in it, and so on up to the one of the ten grounds should also train in it’ to settle one's own position. The brief gathering of prajñā does not have a separate shallow dharma because one is a beginner, nor a separate deep dharma because one has cultivated long. The one who has first aroused intent need not doubt, because of its briefness, that it is enough to settle the great matter; the one of the ten grounds does not seek another dharma because he has been at it long—what is trained in is not two; the positions have their own ripening, and do not wait for the dharma trained in to be changed.

Further Resonances

The unit of the First Part is a single stretch of sūtra text only, and yet it has already set up the skeleton of this chapter. The three questions and three answers set up where the power of skilful means comes from; the nine similes set up the relation of prajñā to the five perfections; one difficulty and one answer set up the reason why the six perfections are not abandoned within emptiness of self-nature; two difficulties and two answers set up the measure of the division between the two layers of the real meaning and the worldly; after that, from not taking and not giving up, to not thinking, to not clinging, to not abiding, it peels off layer by layer, inserting in the middle the three layers of losing through grasping at marks and the losing of 「著無所有」 tr. "clinging to being without anything existent", sending both sides away; at the end it turns to the brief and extensive marks, opens the four gates of the mark of suchness, the limit of reality, the nature of dharmas, and neither joined nor dispersed, and closes with Subhūti's words 「是名菩薩摩訶薩略攝般若波羅蜜」 tr. "this is called the bodhisattva-mahāsattva's brief gathering of prajñāpāramitā", making clear as well that from the first arousing of intent to the ten grounds all train in this brief gathering.

Within the one unit, the sūtra itself has already spoken the meaning of 「大方便」 tr. "the great skilful means" from two sides: on one side, for the sake of beings the six perfections are not abandoned; on the other side, the six perfections are practised without grasping a single mark. As for how the treatise-author explains this stretch—why the three questions are in this order, why one who has long aroused the mind and does not plant roots of goodness is so, where the meaning of rarity lies, what each of the nine similes bears on, and so on up to the reason for not taking and not giving up and the four gates of the brief and extensive—all this belongs to what the unit of the Middle Part carries, and is not anticipated here. And from the 「之餘」 tr. "continued" title of fascicle eighty-three onward, the sūtra further brings out the various skills of the path of skilful means and the meaning of the bodhisattva not realising the limit of reality, which the treatise-author explains in turn; this is the unit of the Last Part. This chapter spans two fascicles and makes three units: what the First Part sets up is the outline, what the Middle Part sets out is the meaning, what the Last Part continues is the use; the reader should follow them down in order.

Of the explanations of the ancient masters, what can be recorded for this unit is one school, Huiying's Commentary. Huiying marks the order of this chapter, saying: 「第六十八品者，名為方便品，即是方便門中第三品也」 tr. "The sixty-eighth chapter is named the chapter ‘Skilful Means’; it is the third chapter within the gate of skilful means"—his chapter number is one step lower than the present text's, and the phrase 「方便門中第三品」 tr. "the third chapter within the gate of skilful means" shows the category to which he judges this chapter to belong. Explaining why this chapter is set up after the preceding chapter, he says: 「所以次六度相攝品後明此品者，上明菩薩於一度中而能具足諸波羅蜜，今明所以然者，由菩薩善巧方便故，所以如此，故次六度相攝品後明方便品。」 tr. "The reason this chapter is made clear after the chapter ‘The Six Perfections Contain One Another’ is that above it was made clear that the bodhisattva, within one perfection, is able to fulfil all the perfections; now it is made clear why this is so: it is because of the bodhisattva's skilful means that it is so; therefore after the chapter ‘The Six Perfections Contain One Another’ the chapter ‘Skilful Means’ is made clear." This corresponds exactly to the question at the opening of this unit: since the preceding chapter made clear that all the perfections are fulfilled within one perfection, this chapter then makes clear that the reason why lies in skilful means.

Huiying further sets up a four-part division for this chapter. Of its first part he says: 「就此品中大有四分：第一就人辨方便，是故善吉問成就久近、供養佛多少、發心時節，菩薩即是方便之人，波若即是方便之法。」 tr. "Within this chapter there are broadly four parts. The first distinguishes skilful means with regard to the person; therefore Good Auspice asks how long ago it was accomplished, how many buddhas were given offerings, and at what time the mind was aroused; the bodhisattva is precisely the person of skilful means, prajñā is precisely the dharma of skilful means." What it corresponds to is the three questions and three answers of passages 1 to 3 of this unit's Passage by Passage. Of its second part he says: 「第二從譬如日月周行照四天下，明波若方便導成眾行。」 tr. "The second, from ‘it is as the sun and moon go round, illuminating the four continents’, makes clear that prajñā and skilful means guide the many practices to completion." What it corresponds to is the bundle of similes from passage 5 to passage 13. Of its third part he says: 「第三明脩因得果，名為因果方便。」 tr. "The third makes clear cultivating the cause and obtaining the fruit; it is called the skilful means of cause and fruit." What it corresponds to is the six perfections within emptiness of self-nature, from passage 14 onward. Of its fourth part he says: 「第四明菩薩善學波若雙照二諦，名為照達方便。有此四意。」 tr. "The fourth makes clear that the bodhisattva trains well in prajñā and illuminates both of the two truths; it is called the skilful means of illuminating penetration. There are these four intents." What it corresponds to is the text from passage 40, much that is trained in and in reality nothing trained in, onward, through to the brief and extensive marks. The headings of the four parts broadly correspond to the order of this unit, yet where the boundaries fall the two each speak in their own terms; both are recorded side by side without judgement.

In his passage-by-passage explanation, Huiying says of the simile of the sun and moon: 「明譬如日月周行陰陽、周行四域，多有所益。波若、方便二法亦爾。其猶日月，葢眾行也。」 tr. "It makes clear that, as the sun and moon go round through yin and yang, go round the four regions, and greatly benefit them, so the two dharmas of prajñā and skilful means are likewise. They are like the sun and moon, covering the many practices." This corresponds to passage 5. Of the simile of the wheel-jewel he says: 「若無輪寶者，但名似轉輪王，唯王一天下也。」 tr. "If he has no wheel-jewel, he is only called one resembling a wheel-turning king, ruling only one continent." This corresponds to passage 6, making clear precisely that without prajñā the five perfections do not obtain the name of pāramitā. Of the brief and extensive marks he says: 「略相即是總相，廣相即是別相，大小兩乘盡有此總別二相也」 tr. "The brief mark is precisely the general mark; the extensive mark is precisely the specific mark; the two vehicles, great and small, both have these two marks, the general and the specific", which corresponds to the four gates of passages 41 to 47. And the last words of his extant commentary are 「云何菩薩摩訶薩知一切法略廣相已下，欲廣明之，故設此問也。」 tr. "From ‘how does the bodhisattva-mahāsattva know the brief and extensive marks of all dharmas’ onward: wishing to make it clear at length, he therefore sets out this question." What it quotes is exactly the question of passage 42—the point of breaking off falls precisely within this unit, and nothing below it survives; this belongs to where the extant text stops, and is not Huiying leaving it unexplained.

The Great Skilful Means, Middle Part: Explaining the Three Questions, the Nine Similes, the Five Perfections Entering Prajñā, the Three Losings and Being without Losing, the Bodhisattva Path and What Is Not the Bodhisattva Path, and the Four Gates of Suchness, the Nature of Dharmas, the Limit of Reality, and Neither Joined nor Dispersed

What Is Being Asked

The whole fascicle of the First Part is sūtra text. What the sūtra asks is only three sentences—this bodhisattva who has thus accomplished the power of skilful means: how long has it been since he aroused intent? How many buddhas has he made offerings to? What roots of goodness has he planted? The Buddha answers each one, and at once turns to a long string of similes: the sun and moon illuminating the four continents, the wheel-jewel of the wheel-turning sage king, the woman without a husband, the general's armour and weapons, the minor kings attending in court, the many rivers entering the sea, a person's right hand, the wheel-jewel leading the four troops. When the similes are finished, Subhūti raises difficulty after difficulty, starting from ‘all dharmas are empty of self-nature; how does one practise the six perfections and obtain awakening?’, passing through ‘the perfections are without difference; how is prajñā the most honoured?’, ‘neither taking nor giving up; how can it be said that it arrives at sarvajñā and abides?’, ‘not keeping in mind; how do roots of goodness increase?’, all the way to 「何所住、何所得」 tr. "where does he abide, what does he attain"; besides the Buddha's answers there come four kinds of 「是失」 tr. "this is losing", and at the end the four gates of suchness, the nature of dharmas, the limit of reality, and neither joined nor dispersed are gathered in upon the one sentence 「是名略攝般若波羅蜜」 tr. "this is called the brief gathering of prajñāpāramitā".

The Middle Part, then, is the treatise-author explaining this whole stretch of sūtra text. That is why the face of the Middle Part is entirely different from that of the First Part: the First Part is the question and answer between the Buddha and Subhūti; the Middle Part is the treatise-author explaining, sentence by sentence, why these questions are asked in this way and why they are answered in this way. In reading the Middle Part one must first set up this dividing line—wherever 「佛答」 tr. "the Buddha answers" or 「須菩提問」 tr. "Subhūti asks" appears in this fascicle, it is not a newly begun dialogue; it is the treatise-author taking up the sūtra text of the First Part and explaining it; only where 「問曰」 tr. "Question:" and 「答曰」 tr. "Answer:" appear is it the treatise-author setting a difficulty of his own and answering it himself. These two layers must not be read mixed together as one layer.

In what the treatise-author explains there are four joints. The first joint lies in the order of the three questions: how long since arousing the mind, how many buddhas he has made offerings to, what roots of goodness he has planted—these three questions look trivial, but the treatise-author points out the source of each: one who aroused the mind long ago has not necessarily seen the Buddha, and one who has seen the Buddha has not necessarily planted roots of goodness, and so there is the second question and the third question; and the definition of 「種善根」 tr. "planting roots of goodness" the treatise-author lays down with the utmost strictness—it is not offering flowers and incense; it is practising the six perfections with a deep mind and turning them towards awakening. The second joint lies in the general meaning of the nine similes: the five perfections, if they do not obtain prajñā, are not called pāramitā. This sentence is the backbone of the whole fascicle. The treatise-author uses the woman without a husband to speak of how easily they are ruined, uses the wheel-turning king without the wheel-jewel to speak of how they do not attain the name, uses the stalwart general's weapons to speak of how they do not fear the enemy, uses the minor kings paying court and the many streams entering the sea to speak of where they tend, uses the right hand and left hand to speak of convenience and inconvenience, uses the guide in front and the wheel-jewel leading the way to speak of that by which they are brought to completion—though the similes are nine, what they make clear is only one. The third joint lies in the losing that comes from grasping at marks: clinging to emptiness is losing, clinging to prajñā's being without nature is losing, not clinging to emptiness and not clinging to being without nature and taking that to be the true path is losing, thinking oneself to be following the Buddha's words and disclosing them to others is losing; the treatise-author lists four stretches in turn, and at the end himself gathers them as 「三種皆失」 tr. "all three kinds are losing". The losings turn finer layer by layer, and the last losing is so fine that one can hardly see that it is losing—this is the most perilous place in the whole fascicle, and also the place where the treatise-author puts forth his deepest effort. The fourth joint lies in the four gates: suchness, the nature of dharmas, the limit of reality, neither joined nor dispersed. The first three gates are gates of meaning; the fourth gate is a gate of breaking attachment; at the fourth gate the treatise-author sets up in particular the question and answer on the joining and dispersing of two fingers, taking apart 「合」 tr. "joining", this most ordinary of experiences, until there is nothing left to take apart, and then brings in the Buddha's words 「一切法自性無」 tr. "all dharmas are without self-nature" as the conclusion.

So what is to be read in the Middle Part is not a string of similes and a string of questions and answers; it is the position the treatise-author fixes for prajñāpāramitā: it is not the best one among the six perfections; it is that which makes the other five perfections be perfections at all. Once this position is fixed, why the losings are losing, and why the four gates can gather the brief and the extensive, can all be seen clearly from here. The final sentence, 「是名略攝般若波羅蜜」 tr. "this is called the brief gathering of prajñāpāramitā"—the two Chinese characters rendered here as ‘brief gathering’ say precisely that these four gates gather the whole of prajñā into one place.

Passage by Passage

1. The first of Subhūti's three questions: how long since arousing the mind. As soon as he begins to explain, the treatise-author points out where this question comes from: 「須菩提聞菩薩摩訶薩大利根相，所謂一波羅蜜邊能生五波羅蜜，行一波羅蜜即能具五波羅蜜，如上品中說；是事希有，故問佛」 tr. "Subhūti heard of the mark of the great keen faculties of the bodhisattva-mahāsattva—namely, that from the side of one perfection he can give rise to the five perfections, and that by practising one perfection he can fulfil the five perfections, as was said in the previous chapter; this matter is rare, and so he asked the Buddha". First ask one thing: why does Subhūti ask about nothing else, only about the length of time? Because what he has heard is ‘one is able to fulfil five’—one perfection at once fulfilling the six, which by ordinary reckoning is something extremely hard to believe. With a thing hard to believe, the first thing one asks is ‘how long does it take to reach this point?’ So this question is not curiosity; it is a question that seeks the root, born of rarity. The five Chinese characters 「如上品中說」 tr. "as was said in the previous chapter" must be noted: the treatise-author states plainly that this meaning is carried over from the previous chapter and is not newly set up in this chapter; if the reader takes it as a new meaning of this chapter, then the four Chinese characters 「大利根相」 tr. "the mark of the great keen faculties" below have nothing to attach to.

2. The Buddha answers: since arousing the mind, immeasurable koṭi of asaṃkhyeya kalpas. The treatise-author takes up the Buddha's answer, saying: 「是菩薩發心已來，除大菩薩，於餘眾生無量億阿僧祇劫。」 tr. "Since this bodhisattva aroused the mind—leaving aside the great bodhisattvas, and compared with the rest of beings—it is immeasurable koṭi of asaṃkhyeya kalpas." The joint lies in the four Chinese characters 「除大菩薩」 tr. "leaving aside the great bodhisattvas". This is a phrase of limitation—it does not say that all bodhisattvas must take so long; it says that, setting the great bodhisattvas aside, and speaking of the rest of beings, it is so long. Without these four Chinese characters it would become the general rule that ‘whoever obtains the power of skilful means must pass through immeasurable kalpas’, which would go against the meaning of the Great Vehicle's sudden arousing. The treatise-author records it as it stands without changing it, precisely to leave this measure in place.

3. Where the second question comes from: one who aroused the mind long ago has not necessarily seen the Buddha. Explaining why Subhūti goes on to ask how many buddhas he has made offerings to, the treatise-author says: 「或有菩薩發心已來無量億阿僧祇劫，大罪因緣覆心故不見佛，不親近供養。」 tr. "Perhaps there is a bodhisattva who, since arousing the mind, has passed immeasurable koṭi of asaṃkhyeya kalpas, yet because the causes and conditions of great sin have covered his mind, he does not see the Buddha, and does not draw near and make offerings." The most important sentence in this passage is 「大罪因緣覆心故不見佛」 tr. "because the causes and conditions of great sin have covered his mind, he does not see the Buddha". Length of time and kalpas cannot guarantee seeing the Buddha—sin can cover the mind, and when the mind is covered, the Buddha is present and yet is not seen. So the number of years since arousing the mind is not a qualification. In reading this place, guard against one slip: do not read 「不見佛」 tr. "does not see the Buddha" as the Buddha not appearing in the world; it is that the mind is covered and does not see. The question below arises from this: since one who aroused the mind long ago has not necessarily seen the Buddha, one must ask a further question—how many buddhas has he made offerings to.

4. The Buddha answers: he has made offerings to buddhas as many as the sands of the Ganges. The treatise-author takes it up, saying: 「是菩薩為已供養如恒河沙等諸佛。」 tr. "This bodhisattva has already made offerings to buddhas as many as the sands of the Ganges." This answer has the same format as the answer above—it does not give an exact number; it gives an amount that cannot be counted. The reason the sūtra's answer takes this form is precisely that what is asked about does not lie in a number at all; if the answer were an exact number, the trainee would measure himself by the number, and it would turn into an obstruction.

5. The explanation where the two numbers meet: many numbers, the same principle. The treatise-author adds a note of his own: 「上言『無量億阿僧祇』，今言『恒河沙』者，多數理同故。」 tr. "Above it says ‘immeasurable koṭi of asaṃkhyeya’, and now it says ‘the sands of the Ganges’, because the principle of a great number is the same." This sentence resolves a possible doubt for the reader—the measure-words used in the two places differ; is what they refer to different? The treatise-author answers: it is not different; both simply take their greatness. Notes of this kind are extremely many in this treatise; their use is not to add meaning but to keep the reader from sprouting side-branches over small differences in the wording. In reading this treatise one should grow used to such notes: they tell you where there is no need to probe deeply.

6. Where the third question comes from, and the definition of 「種善根」 tr. "planting roots of goodness" . Explaining the third question, the treatise-author says: 「有菩薩久發心，雖多以華香供養諸佛，而未能種善根」 tr. "There are bodhisattvas who aroused the mind long ago, and though they have made many offerings to the buddhas with flowers and incense, they have not yet been able to plant roots of goodness"—making offerings and yet not having planted roots of goodness: this is where the third question comes from. At once the treatise-author defines 「種善根」 tr. "planting roots of goodness" with the utmost strictness: 「若以深心行六波羅蜜，為阿耨多羅三藐三菩提故作功德，是名『種善根』。」 tr. "If one practises the six perfections with a deep mind and makes merit for the sake of anuttarā samyaksaṃbodhi, this is called ‘planting roots of goodness’." Of the two conditions, neither can be lacking: first, one must practise the six perfections with a deep mind; second, it must be for the sake of awakening. For whoever lacks these two, though he offers flowers and incense everywhere, the treatise-author does not allow it to be called planting roots of goodness. This place must not be read lightly: the matter of making offerings is something everyone can do; the matter of planting roots of goodness requires somewhere to dedicate it. And the treatise-author points out in particular that kind of mind which 「作是念：『我必當得果報……』」 tr. "has this thought: ‘I shall certainly obtain the retribution …’"—this is exactly the mark of the mind of one who has not planted roots of goodness: he practises the six perfections, but what he looks for is retribution, not awakening.

7. The Buddha answers: he has fulfilled the practice of the six perfections. The treatise-author takes up the Buddha's answer, saying: 「是菩薩從初發心已來，具足行六波羅蜜，一切福德無不作者，一切善法無不修集。」 tr. "This bodhisattva, since first arousing the mind, has fulfilled the practice of the six perfections; there is no merit he has not made, and no wholesome dharma he has not cultivated and gathered." This answer corresponds exactly to the definition set up above: what was asked was 「種何等善根」 tr. "what roots of goodness has he planted", and what is answered is 「具足行六波羅蜜」 tr. "has fulfilled the practice of the six perfections"—which shows that the meaning the treatise-author fixes is not his own invention; it is read out of the sūtra's answer. The six Chinese characters 「從初發心已來」 tr. "since first arousing the mind" are especially important: it is not that one becomes complete only after practising until later; it is so from the first arousing of the mind onward. This sentence is the distant cause of the losing among the losings below that is 「著菩薩所行道」 tr. "clinging to the path the bodhisattva practises"; when one reads as far as that, one can look back here.

8. Praising the rarity: the mind that came afterwards, and benefit where there is no kindness. The treatise-author explains Subhūti's praise of the rarity, analysing it into two matters. The first: 「未斷諸煩惱、未離生死，而能勝斷煩惱、離生死法者。」 tr. "He has not yet cut off the afflictions and has not yet left birth and death, yet he is able to surpass the dharma of those who have cut off the afflictions and left birth and death."—this compares the one who has not yet cut off with those who have already cut off, and says that the one who has not yet cut off is the more excellent. The treatise-author then gives the reason for it: 「無始生死已來集諸惡法，菩薩心後來，而能用後來心，不隨先所集惡心」 tr. "From beginningless birth and death onward evil dharmas have been accumulated; the bodhisattva's mind came afterwards, and yet he is able to use the mind that came afterwards and not follow the evil mind accumulated before". The evil mind is an old resident who has lived there for beginningless kalpas; the bodhisattva's mind is a newly arrived guest; that the new guest is able not to follow the old resident—only this is called rare. The second: 「一切眾生無恩於菩薩，而菩薩常欲利益。」 tr. "All beings have done the bodhisattva no kindness, and yet the bodhisattva constantly wishes to benefit them."—and it goes a layer further: 「是諸眾生或欲奪菩薩命、割截身體，菩薩欲以第一佛樂智慧命，欲與眾生。」 tr. "These beings may wish to take the bodhisattva's life or to cut and sever his body, yet the bodhisattva wishes to give to beings the life of wisdom, which is the foremost bliss of the Buddha." On one side they wish to take his bodily life; on the other he wishes to give them the life of wisdom; only when the two are set against each other is the meaning of rarity complete. In reading this passage one should know: rarity does not lie in supernormal powers; it lies in the reversal of the mind's conduct at these two places.

9. The simile of the sun and moon: the two breaths come together and the myriad things grow. The treatise-author explains the Buddha's intention in making a simile, saying 「欲令此事明了故作譬喻」 tr. "wishing to make this matter clear, he made a simile", and at once explains the simile of the sun and moon. His way of explaining this simile deserves a close look: the treatise-author does not only say that the sun and moon can illuminate; he further says 「月是陰氣，日是陽氣，二氣和合故萬物成長」 tr. "the moon is the yin breath and the sun is the yang breath; because the two breaths come together, the myriad things grow"—taking the point that the two need each other and neither can be neglected. Applied to the bodhisattva, it is 「以大悲心憐愍眾生故，能隨所願行一切善法；大智慧力故，破眾生著善法心」 tr. "because he pities beings with the mind of great compassion, he is able to practise all wholesome dharmas according to the vows he has made; because of the power of great wisdom, he breaks beings' mind of clinging to wholesome dharmas". Compassion is like the yin of the moon, wisdom like the yang of the sun; the one makes wholesome dharmas grow, the other breaks the clinging mind towards them; only when the two come together can the six perfections, and so on up to awakening, be accomplished. If there were only compassion without wisdom, wholesome dharmas would merely increase attachment; if there were only wisdom without compassion, there would be no wholesome dharmas to increase. This is the first meaning of the twin wheels in this fascicle.

10. The simile of having eyes but no sun and moon: worldly goodness and keen knowledge are not enough to illuminate. The treatise-author continues this simile and turns it over to another face: 「又復眾生雖復有眼，若無日月，則無所見」 tr. "Further, though beings have eyes, if there were no sun and moon they would see nothing". The eye is the capacity beings have of themselves; the sun and moon are illumination coming from outside; having eyes but no illumination, one sees nothing at all. Applied, it is 「眾生雖有世俗善根利智，不得般若波羅蜜照明，尚不得二乘，何況得阿耨多羅三藐三菩提」 tr. "though beings have worldly roots of goodness and keen knowledge, if they do not obtain the illumination of prajñāpāramitā, they cannot obtain even the two vehicles, how much less anuttarā samyaksaṃbodhi". This sentence is set down with great weight: worldly roots of goodness and cleverness cannot reach even the two vehicles. The misreading to guard against is taking 「利智」 tr. "keen knowledge" as a small portion of prajñā—the treatise-author's meaning is precisely the opposite: keen knowledge belongs to the eye, prajñā belongs to the sun and moon; it is not a difference of more and less within the same kind of thing.

11. Without obtaining prajñā they are not called pāramitā: because the clinging mind is not broken. The treatise-author sets down a general verdict: 「菩薩雖行五波羅蜜，不得般若波羅蜜，不得名波羅蜜，以不破著心故。」 tr. "Though the bodhisattva practises the five perfections, if he does not obtain prajñāpāramitā they do not obtain the name of pāramitā, because the clinging mind is not broken." This sentence is the backbone of the whole fascicle and must be looked at character by character. It does not say ‘without obtaining prajñā the five perfections have no merit’; it says 「不得名波羅蜜」 tr. "they do not obtain the name of pāramitā"—the merit is still there; the name and standing are not attained. Why is that? 「以不破著心故」 tr. "Because the clinging mind is not broken." Pāramitā means reaching the further shore; if the clinging mind is not broken, the root on this shore has not been pulled up, and though one practises one cannot arrive, and so one does not obtain the name. All the similes below are making this one sentence clear.

12. The simile of the woman without a husband: his mind is easily ruined. Continuing from the above, the treatise-author says: 「若菩薩乃至能自以身命布施，若無般若，其心易破，如無夫之婦，侵凌則易」 tr. "If a bodhisattva is able even to the point of giving his own body and life, yet has no prajñā, his mind is easily ruined, as a woman without a husband is easily encroached upon". What this simile takes lies at only one point—having nothing to rely on, one is easily encroached upon. In taking a simile one must see which point it takes: it does not say that the five perfections are lowly and weak; it says that whatever has nothing to guard and uphold it is easily ruined. That is why a sentence follows immediately, 「若有般若，則不可破壞」 tr. "if he has prajñā, it cannot be ruined", and only when the positive and negative are set side by side is the meaning of the simile fixed. The phrase 「乃至能自以身命布施」 tr. "even to the point of giving his own body and life" must be especially noted: giving that goes as far as giving up body and life is already the utmost; if even the utmost is easily ruined, the rest can be known.

13. The simile of the wheel-turning sage king without the wheel-jewel: because they are measured and have an end, they are not called pāramitā. The treatise-author starts afresh, saying: 「菩薩雖行種種諸餘深法，不得般若，不名為行波羅蜜，但名為行善法，有量有盡故。」 tr. "Though the bodhisattva practises various other deep dharmas, if he does not obtain prajñā he is not called one who practises the perfections; he is only called one who practises wholesome dharmas, because they are measured and have an end."—here the reason for not obtaining the name is given: being measured and having an end. At once the wheel-turning king is taken as a simile: 「雖有千子、八萬四千小王及六寶，不得名為轉輪聖王，不能飛行到四天下；若天遣金輪寶至，乃得名為轉輪聖王。」 tr. "Though he has a thousand sons, eighty-four thousand minor kings, and the six jewels, he does not obtain the name of wheel-turning sage king and cannot fly to the four continents; if the heavens send the golden wheel-jewel to come to him, only then does he obtain the name of wheel-turning sage king." The thousand sons and the six jewels are all virtues he really has; what is lacking is only the one thing, the wheel-jewel; lacking this one thing, neither the name nor the function is attained. Applied, it is 「雖有布施等諸善法，不得般若波羅蜜故，不名為『菩薩為行六波羅蜜人』，不能除障礙、行菩薩道故」 tr. "though he has giving and the other wholesome dharmas, because he does not obtain prajñāpāramitā he is not called ‘a bodhisattva who is a person practising the six perfections’, because he cannot remove the obstructions and practise the bodhisattva path". This simile and the one above divide their work clearly: the woman without a husband speaks of being easily ruined; the lack of the wheel-jewel speaks of not being attained.

14. The simile of the stalwart general's weapons, and the bodhisattva caṇḍāla. The treatise-author explains this simile very briefly: 「健將即是菩薩，器仗是般若。」 tr. "The stalwart general is the bodhisattva; the weapons are prajñā." At once he explains one by one those listed in the sūtra who are able to ruin him. Those of overweening pride the treatise-author defines as 「未得聖道，意謂已得」 tr. "they have not yet obtained the noble path, yet in their minds they think they have already obtained it"; as to why they disparage and ruin the bodhisattva, the treatise-author places it in 「菩薩說畢竟空法；是人行善法，心不同故」 tr. "the bodhisattva speaks the dharma of ultimate emptiness; these people practise wholesome dharmas, and because their minds are not the same"—it is not that they deliberately set themselves against him; it is that the dharmas they practise differ, and they naturally repel each other. Last he comes to 「菩薩旃陀羅」 tr. "the bodhisattva caṇḍāla"; the treatise-author does not set up a meaning of his own but brings in the text of the "Māra" chapter to substantiate it: 「聞魔來稱其名字而與受記，而生輕慢。」 tr. "Hearing that Māra has come, calling his name and giving him the prediction, he gives rise to contempt." This is a cross-chapter citation rarely seen in the whole fascicle, and what it cites is the text of this sūtra itself, not an outside teaching. In reading this place one should know: what the treatise-author gives 「菩薩旃陀羅」 tr. "the bodhisattva caṇḍāla" is not a term of abuse but a mark that can be verified—giving rise to contempt because Māra called his name and gave him the prediction.

15. The five perfections are spoken of for the sake of prajñā: each of the five matters has what it breaks. The treatise-author turns up a more fundamental layer of meaning: 「為般若波羅蜜故說五波羅蜜；若人能直行諸法實相，則不為說布施等入般若初門。」 tr. "The five perfections are spoken of for the sake of prajñāpāramitā; if a person is able to practise the real mark of all dharmas directly, giving and the rest are not spoken to him as the first gate of entering prajñā."—the five perfections are entrance gates set up for the sake of prajñā, not six things standing side by side with prajñā. Why they are set up lies in 「人鈍根、罪重故」 tr. "because people's faculties are dull and their sins heavy". At once he speaks of the remedy of each perfection: 「以布施破慳；持戒折薄諸煩惱；忍辱開福德門，能行難事；精進如風吹火，熾然不息；禪定攝心一定，觀諸法實相故。」 tr. "Giving breaks stinginess; upholding the precepts subdues and thins the afflictions; patience opens the gate of merit and makes one able to do what is hard to do; vigour is like wind blowing on fire, blazing without rest; meditative concentration gathers the mind in one place and settles it, for the sake of contemplating the real mark of all dharmas." Each of the five matters has what it treats, and the order is well arranged—giving treats stinginess, the precepts treat the thickness of the afflictions, patience opens the gate, vigour aids the momentum, meditation gathers in the scattering. Once the five are complete, then 「皆趣向般若波羅蜜」 tr. "all tend toward prajñāpāramitā". Two similes conclude it: the minor kings paying court to the wheel-turning sage king, and the many streams all entering the great sea.

16. Question and answer: why it is said that the five perfections are guarded by prajñā and enter sarvajñā. This is the first place where the treatise-author sets up a question and answer of his own, and what he raises as a difficulty is an unevenness in a simile: 「五波羅蜜如諸川流，般若波羅蜜應如大海；今何以言『五波羅蜜為般若波羅蜜所守護故，得入薩婆若』？」 tr. "The five perfections are like rivers and streams, and prajñāpāramitā ought to be like the great sea; why is it now said, ‘because the five perfections are guarded by prajñāpāramitā, they are able to enter sarvajñā’?" The difficulty is extremely precise—by the simile, what they enter should be prajñā, yet the sūtra says they enter sarvajñā; the two do not match. The treatise-author's answer does not lie in changing the simile but in explaining the name: 「汝不聞先說般若有種種名字耶？薩婆若即是般若異名。」 tr. "Have you not heard it said before that prajñā has various names? Sarvajñā is another name for prajñā." At once he says why the name differs: 「五波羅蜜福德，入般若波羅蜜中，即得清淨般若；般若清淨故，得佛道，變名薩婆若。」 tr. "The merit of the five perfections, entering into prajñāpāramitā, obtains pure prajñā; because prajñā is pure, one obtains the Buddha path, and its name is changed to sarvajñā."—one and the same dharma with different names in the position of cause and the position of result: in the cause it is named prajñā, at the result it is named sarvajñā. Therefore he concludes: 「是故言『入薩婆若』，即是『入般若』。」 tr. "Therefore saying ‘entering sarvajñā’ is saying ‘entering prajñā’." From this passage one can learn a method: where names and marks in the sūtra do not match, first see whether it is one substance with different names; do not hurry to judge them two matters.

17. The simile of the right hand and the left hand: the doubt that each has its own power and function. The treatise-author first brings out the doubt: 「有人疑：諸波羅蜜各各有力，何以獨言『般若波羅蜜功用為大』？」 tr. "Someone doubts: the perfections each have their own power; why is it said only that ‘the function of prajñāpāramitā is great’?" This doubt fits ordinary feeling very well—each of the six perfections has its own function, so on what ground is one perfection alone held up? The answer uses the sūtra's simile of the right hand and left hand: 「譬如人之右手，自然穩便；五波羅蜜如左手，不得般若波羅蜜，則所作不便。」 tr. "It is as a person's right hand is naturally steady and convenient; the five perfections are like the left hand—if they do not obtain prajñāpāramitā, what they do is not convenient." The subtlety of this simile lies in not disparaging the left hand: the left hand is not useless; it is inconvenient. So the greatness of prajñā does not lie in the other five perfections being useless; it lies in this: with it, things are convenient; without it, they are not.

18. Opening the eyes, the guide, and the wheel-jewel leading the way: whatever is cultivated, gathered, and brought to completion all relies on prajñā. The treatise-author sets down three similes in a row. Doing things with the eyes open speaks of all that is done being accomplished; the guide in front speaks of 「進止取捨，皆隨導師，不得自在」 tr. "in advancing and halting, in taking and discarding, all follow the guide and are not their own masters"; the wheel-jewel leading the way speaks of 「輪住餘寶則住」 tr. "when the wheel stops, the other jewels also stop". The three similes make clear one and the same meaning: 「般若波羅蜜亦如是，導五波羅蜜，所可修集成辦，皆仰般若。」 tr. "Prajñāpāramitā is likewise: it guides the five perfections, and whatever is cultivated, gathered, and brought to completion all relies on prajñā." After this the treatise-author brings in the text of the first chapter of the Prajñā to substantiate the matter: 「菩薩欲具足檀波羅蜜，不見施者、受者及財物。」 tr. "When the bodhisattva wishes to fulfil dānapāramitā, he does not see a giver, a receiver, or wealth."—and explains it himself, saying 「先籌量分別斷一切著，然後布施，是則般若在前導」 tr. "first he reckons and distinguishes and cuts off all clinging, and afterwards he gives—this is prajñā leading the way in front". Here the two Chinese characters 「前導」 tr. "leading the way" are brought down to something real: it is not that prajñā walks in front showing the road; it is that before giving one first cuts off one's clinging. The most important section at the end is the treatise-author's explanation of the wheel's having no mind: the wheel makes no such discrimination as 「我常在前，餘寶在後」 tr. "I am always in front and the other jewels behind", and has no hatred or love of 「是可來、是不可來」 tr. "this one may come, that one may not come"; prajñā likewise makes no such discrimination as 「檀波羅蜜隨我來，尸羅波羅蜜勿來」 tr. "dānapāramitā, follow me; śīlapāramitā, do not come". Guiding without a mind—this is the eye of this passage. At the end he brings in the causes and conditions the Buddha himself sets out: 「一切法性無所能作。」 tr. "The nature of all dharmas has nothing it is able to do."—since the guiding has no mind, what is called the guide also has nothing it is able to do, and the meaning is complete.

19. Subhūti's difficulty: the nature of all dharmas is empty; how does one practise the six perfections and obtain awakening? Here the sūtra turns to raising difficulties, and the treatise-author takes it up, saying: 「須菩提聞是已，白佛言：『若一切法性空、無所有，云何菩薩行六波羅蜜能得阿耨多羅三藐三菩提？』」 tr. "Having heard these things, Subhūti addressed the Buddha: ‘If all dharmas are empty in nature and without anything existent, then how does the bodhisattva practise the six perfections and become able to obtain anuttarā samyaksaṃbodhi?’" This difficulty is pressed out precisely from the sentence above, 「一切法性無所能作」 tr. "the nature of all dharmas has nothing it is able to do": since there is nothing it is able to do, practice too does nothing, so from where would the result be obtained? All of Subhūti's difficulties have this feature—it is not that he does not believe; it is that he pushes the meaning the Buddha has set up to the very end and sees that it seems to have an obstruction.

20. The Buddha answers: without the power of skilful means they cannot be delivered. The treatise-author takes up the thought in the Buddha's answer, saying: 「諸法雖畢竟空，眾生狂顛倒故，深著不解；我若不以方便力，則不可得度。」 tr. "Though dharmas are ultimately empty, because beings are mad and inverted they cling deeply and do not understand; if I do not use the power of skilful means, they cannot be delivered."—the answer does not add to or subtract from emptiness; it sets up skilful means on the side of beings. At once the treatise-author lists in full what the two Chinese characters 「方便」 tr. "skilful means" refer to: the golden-coloured body, the thirty-two marks, the eighty minor marks, immeasurable light, supernormal powers and transformations, one finger shaking the lands of the ten directions, expounding the Dharma with the Brahmā voice without satiety, the form body, the ten powers, the four fearlessnesses, the eighteen unshared dharmas, unobstructed liberation, the omniscience of all kinds, great kindness and great compassion, and so on. Here one must see the treatise-author's intention clearly: skilful means is not an expedient turn of speech; it is this whole set of body and dharmas that the Buddha has accomplished; because there is this, 「然後能教化眾生，眾生必能信受」 tr. "he is then able to teach and transform beings, and beings will certainly believe and accept". The treatise-author further sets down an extremely vivid sentence: 「得如是力，假令妄語，人猶當信，何況實語！」 tr. "Having obtained such power, even if he were to speak falsely people would still believe him, how much more when he speaks the truth!"—this speaks of the power of gathering people in, not of being allowed to speak falsely; the vehemence of the phrasing is precisely to show the weight of the power of skilful means. At the end he brings in the sūtra's words 「我雖知諸法實相，能入涅槃，但為眾生故行檀波羅蜜」 tr. "though I know the real mark of all dharmas and am able to enter nirvāṇa, yet for the sake of beings I practise dānapāramitā" and 「不可以異事度眾生」 tr. "beings cannot be delivered by any other matter" as evidence: being able to enter nirvāṇa and not entering is exactly the real meaning of skilful means; the three Chinese characters of this chapter's name, 「大方便」 tr. "the great skilful means", find their footing only here.

21. A further difficulty: in ultimate emptiness there is no difference; how is prajñā the most honoured? Subhūti changes his angle and raises a difficulty again: 「若諸波羅蜜畢竟空故無差別，云何般若波羅蜜於諸波羅蜜中最尊？」 tr. "If the perfections are without difference because of ultimate emptiness, then why is prajñāpāramitā the most honoured among the perfections?" This difficulty is sharper than the previous one—the previous difficulty asked how, within emptiness, one can practise; this difficulty asks how, within emptiness, there can be higher and lower. Whenever one says ‘most honoured’, that is a difference; once ultimate emptiness is granted, where would a difference be set up? In reading the difficulty one must read out its shape as ‘a dilemma’: granting difference goes against emptiness; not granting difference goes against the sūtra.

22. The Buddha grants his difficulty and takes Mount Sumeru as a simile. The treatise-author explains the manner of the Buddha's answer, saying 「佛可須菩提，畢竟空中諸波羅蜜實無差別」 tr. "the Buddha approved Subhūti: within ultimate emptiness the perfections are indeed without difference"—first granting in full what he has set up, then bringing out a meaning on top of what is granted. The meaning brought out has two parts. The first is the one who can know: 「若無般若波羅蜜，諸波羅蜜畢竟空、無差別，誰能知者？」 tr. "If there were no prajñāpāramitā, who could know that the perfections are ultimately empty and without difference?" The very meaning of being without difference needs prajñā before it can be known. The second is the obtaining of the name: 「若無般若，五法云何得波羅蜜名字？」 tr. "If there were no prajñā, how would the five dharmas obtain the name of pāramitā?" At once he divides two times, before entering and after entering: 「五波羅蜜未入般若時，有差別；既入般若，則無差別。」 tr. "When the five perfections have not yet entered prajñā, they have difference; once they have entered prajñā, they are without difference." Sumeru is the simile: 「如諸異色物，到須彌山邊，皆同一色」 tr. "as things of various different colours, on reaching the side of Mount Sumeru, all become one colour alike"—they are one colour alike, and yet one cannot on that account say that Sumeru is not great. The treatise-author turns back to the main topic: 「檀波羅蜜等亦如是，雖無差別，皆是般若力故，不得言：『何以獨稱般若為大？』」 tr. "Dānapāramitā and the others are likewise: though they are without difference, it is all because of the power of prajñā, and one cannot say: ‘Why is prajñā alone called great?’" The point this simile takes is: what makes the things one colour is precisely Sumeru, so their being one colour does not harm its being great.

23. Not yet understanding it well, he asks again by another road. Here the treatise-author sets down an extremely important remark: 「須菩提雖蒙開釋，猶未善解，復以異塗而問世尊」 tr. "though Subhūti had received the explanation, he had not yet understood it well, and again, by another road, he asked the World-Honored One"—stating plainly that this question and the previous one are not a repetition; it is asking again by a changed road. What is the road he changed to? The treatise-author explains it himself: 「先說未得聖道空，今說得聖道空，是故說第一實義。」 tr. "What was spoken before was the emptiness of one who has not yet obtained the noble path; what is spoken now is the emptiness of one who has obtained the noble path; therefore it speaks of the foremost real meaning." The previous question asked about the emptiness as understood by the ordinary person; this question asks about the emptiness realised by the noble path. And he adds a sentence, 「第一實義聖道，是最可信，是中亦無差別」 tr. "the noble path of the foremost real meaning is the most worthy of belief, and within it too there is no difference"—precisely because it is the most worthy of belief, if there were still higher and lower within it, there would be nowhere left to retreat. In the questions and answers of this treatise, what must most be avoided is taking a question on a changed road as a repeated question; here the treatise-author has already marked it plainly.

24. The Buddha answers: distinctions are all for the sake of worldly convention; the simile of the jewel of the precious maiden. The bone of the Buddha's answer lies in one sentence: 「我說六波羅蜜分別，皆為世俗故。」 tr. "I speak of the distinctions of the six perfections all for the sake of worldly convention." At once he gives the reason: 「世人不可但為說諸法實相，聞則迷悶，生於疑悔。」 tr. "To the people of the world one cannot speak only of the real mark of all dharmas; hearing it they are bewildered and give rise to doubt and regret." So his method is 「以第一義為心，用世俗語言為說」 tr. "taking the highest meaning as the mind, one uses worldly language to speak"—the mind in the highest meaning, the words in worldly convention. These thirteen Chinese characters can serve as a general rule for reading the distinctions in all the scriptural teachings. Since the distinguishing is for the sake of worldly convention, what is distinguished is still empty: 「眾生實無有法，皆是空、不生不死、不退不起；色等法亦如是。」 tr. "Beings in reality are without any dharma; all are empty, neither arising nor dying, neither retrogressing nor rising; form and the other dharmas are likewise." At the end it comes back to: 「是故般若波羅蜜雖空，能示如是事故，而最上、最妙」 tr. "therefore, though prajñāpāramitā is empty, because it is able to show such a matter it is the highest and most wondrous"—the reason it is the highest lies in the two Chinese characters 「能示」 tr. "able to show": it is not that it is more real than the others; it is that it alone can disclose and show this matter. The jewel of the precious maiden, foremost among all women, is the simile, taking the point that it stands out alone among its own kind.

25. Taking up the sūtra: with what intention the Buddha always says that prajñā is the highest. From here the treatise-author takes up two phrases of the sūtra in a row and explains them. The first phrase, 「須菩提白佛：佛以何意故常說般若最上」 tr. "Subhūti addressed the Buddha: With what intention does the Buddha constantly say that prajñā is the highest?"—the treatise-author explains where the question comes from, saying: 「須菩提種種因緣說般若、五波羅蜜無差別，佛亦然可其所說，而復言般若最上。」 tr. "Subhūti has, by various causes and conditions, spoken of prajñā and the five perfections as without difference, and the Buddha too approved what he said, yet he further says that prajñā is the highest." Why the question arises lies precisely in the Buddha first granting that they are without difference and afterwards saying that it is the highest; granting and saying stand together, and so he cannot but ask. This passage is taking up the text; it is not a new dialogue, and the reader must not read it as yet another round of question and answer.

26. Taking up the sūtra: prajñā guards all wholesome dharmas so that they arrive in sarvajñā and abide there. What the second phrase takes up is the Buddha's words, and the treatise-author explains it, saying: 「一切雖空，若無般若，一切諸善法皆不能至薩婆若。」 tr. "Though everything is empty, if there were no prajñā, none of the wholesome dharmas could arrive at sarvajñā." And he defines what 「善法」 tr. "wholesome dharmas" refers to: 「五波羅蜜、三十七品、大慈悲等諸菩薩法。」 tr. "The five perfections, the thirty-seven limbs of the path, great kindness and compassion, and the other dharmas of the bodhisattvas." This definition is useful—it marks out in advance the scope of the question below: what is asked about is not worldly wholesome dharmas; it is the wholesome dharmas of the bodhisattva.

27. Question and answer: why is it said only that it is by prajñā that one is able to arrive? The treatise-author sets up a question of his own: 「若行諸善法亦能至薩婆若，何以但說『般若故得至』？」 tr. "If practising the wholesome dharmas can also arrive at sarvajñā, why is it said only ‘it is by prajñā that one is able to arrive’?" The answer says: 「雖諸善法和合能破煩惱、得阿耨多羅三藐三菩提，而般若波羅蜜於中功力最大。」 tr. "Though the wholesome dharmas, coming together, can break the afflictions and obtain anuttarā samyaksaṃbodhi, yet among them the power and function of prajñāpāramitā are the greatest."—the answer is extremely measured: it does not deny that the wholesome dharmas coming together can break the afflictions; it only says that the power and function of prajñā are the greatest. The simile is 「大軍摧敵，而主將得功名」 tr. "a great army crushes the enemy, and the general obtains the fame of the achievement": the achievement is in fact accomplished by the many, but the name goes to the general; this is exactly why ‘only prajñā is spoken of’. What this simile treats is a kind of greed for more in the way of reading: seeing that the sūtra says prajñā is able to arrive, one then thinks the other dharmas useless.

28. Someone further says: prajñā alone is able to arrive—the evidence of the buddha-land of Lion's Thunder-Voice. The treatise-author records a stronger view: 「諸善法不得般若，不得至薩婆若；般若不得諸善法，獨能至薩婆若。」 tr. "The wholesome dharmas, if they do not obtain prajñā, cannot arrive at sarvajñā; prajñā, though it does not obtain the wholesome dharmas, is able on its own to arrive at sarvajñā." And it cites the sūtra to substantiate it: 「師子雷音佛國，寶樹莊嚴，其樹常出無量法音，所謂一切法畢竟空、無生無滅等。其土人民生便聞此法音故，不起惡心，得無生法忍。」 tr. "The buddha-land of the Buddha Lion's Thunder-Voice is adorned with jewelled trees, and its trees constantly give forth immeasurable sounds of the Dharma, namely that all dharmas are ultimately empty, without arising and without ceasing, and so on. Because the people of that land hear these sounds of the Dharma as soon as they are born, they do not give rise to an evil mind, and they obtain the acceptance of the non-arising of dharmas."—the people of that land hear these sounds of the Dharma from the moment they are born and obtain acceptance, and so it asks in return: 「如此人何有布施、持戒等諸功德？」 tr. "Where would such people have giving, upholding the precepts, and the other merits?" It further raises 「狂人、醉人從佛聞四諦，即時得道」 tr. "madmen and drunkards who heard the four truths from the Buddha and at that very time obtained the path" as side evidence. At the end it decides the matter from the reverse direction: 「如是等無有智慧，行餘法得道，無有是事！」 tr. "In such cases and the like, if there is no wisdom, then to practise the other dharmas and obtain the path—there is no such case!" In this passage two matters must be clearly distinguished: first, the treatise-author ‘records’ this view and does not set it up himself—the four Chinese characters 「復有人言」 tr. "someone further says" at the head of the text already mark this; second, this view and the answer above do not contradict each other—the answer above says that the many dharmas come together and the achievement of prajñā is great; this view says that in an extreme case prajñā can arrive alone. The two views standing together is exactly an instance of this treatise's recording without forcing a judgement.

29. Subhūti's difficulty: neither taking nor giving up; how can it be said that it arrives at sarvajñā and abides? The treatise-author takes up Subhūti's question, saying: 「般若畢竟空，不取聖法、不捨凡夫法，云何佛言『是般若波羅蜜能至薩婆若住』？」 tr. "Prajñā is ultimately empty; it does not take up the noble dharmas and does not give up the dharmas of ordinary persons; then why does the Buddha say ‘this prajñāpāramitā is able to arrive at sarvajñā and abide there’?" The precision of this difficulty lies in the two Chinese characters 「至」 tr. "arrive" and 「住」 tr. "abide": arriving is reaching somewhere; abiding is stopping somewhere; since there is neither taking nor giving up, there is neither reaching nor stopping. The questioner is not contending with the Buddha; he is pressing on the meaning of two verbs in the Buddha's words.

30. The Buddha grants his words and explains the meaning of taking and abiding. The Buddha first grants it in full: 「如是！如是！是般若波羅蜜無取無捨。」 tr. "Just so! Just so! This prajñāpāramitā is without taking and without giving up." At once the treatise-author explains the turn in the Buddha's words: 「雖言取薩婆若，以不取法故取。住義亦如是。」 tr. "Though it is said to take sarvajñā, it takes by way of the dharma of not taking. The meaning of abiding is likewise."—one and the same word 「取」 tr. "take" is used on two levels: what is taken is the dharma of not taking, so it is taking and yet not taking; abiding follows the same pattern. The treatise-author goes on to cite the causes and conditions the Buddha himself sets out: 「一切法不取相。」 tr. "In all dharmas one does not grasp at marks." And he defines the scope of what is called all dharmas: 「色乃至菩提。」 tr. "From form all the way to awakening." Below he says why one does not take: 「是法虛誑，從因緣生，自性無故不取，不取故不捨，以不憶念取相故。」 tr. "These dharmas are false and deceptive, born from causes and conditions; because they have no self-nature one does not take them, and because one does not take them one does not give them up, because one does not keep them in mind and grasp at marks." The three occurrences of 「故」 tr. "because" follow one another in a single line: because there is no self-nature one does not take; because one does not take one does not give up; and the hinge lies in 「不憶念取相」 tr. "not keeping in mind and grasping at marks". These five Chinese characters are where the question of the next passage comes from.

31. Subhūti's difficulty: if one does not keep in mind, how do roots of goodness increase? The treatise-author takes it up, saying: 「若不憶念色等法，云何增長善根？善根不增長，云何得阿耨多羅三藐三菩提？」 tr. "If one does not keep in mind form and the other dharmas, then how do roots of goodness increase? If roots of goodness do not increase, how does one obtain anuttarā samyaksaṃbodhi?" This difficulty is extremely practical—keeping in mind is where the practitioner sets his hand to effort; if one says not to keep in mind, roots of goodness seem to have no way to accumulate. The questioner goes down two steps in a row: if they do not increase, one does not obtain awakening. If the reader has ever thought that ‘keeping the Buddha-dharma much in mind is increase’, this difficulty speaks exactly what is in your heart.

32. The Buddha answers: extinguishing keeping in mind is the three gates of liberation; the simile of planting grain among foul weeds. The treatise-author takes up the Buddha's answer, saying: 「若菩薩能滅一切法中憶念，即是空、無相、無作解脫門，解脫即是諸法實相。」 tr. "If a bodhisattva is able to extinguish keeping in mind with regard to all dharmas, this is the gates of liberation of emptiness, the signless, and non-action, and liberation is the real mark of all dharmas."—the way of answering is to equate ‘extinguishing keeping in mind’ directly with the three gates of liberation, and so the doubt about not increasing breaks of itself: extinguishing keeping in mind is not ceasing to make effort; it is precisely the utmost of effort. At once he explains the reverse side: 「雖有善根，以取相著心顛倒故不增長」 tr. "though there are roots of goodness, because of the inversion of the mind that grasps at marks and clings, they do not increase"; and planting grain is the simile: 「其苗雖好，穢草多故，不能增長。」 tr. "Though its sprouts are good, because foul weeds are many they cannot increase." The point this simile takes is exact—the sprouts are good and yet do not grow: the sickness is not in the sprouts but in the foul weeds; roots of goodness are there and yet do not increase: the sickness is not in the roots of goodness but in the mind that grasps at marks. So removing the foul weeds is making the sprouts grow, and extinguishing keeping in mind is increasing roots of goodness.

33. The causes and conditions the Buddha himself sets out: because of keeping in mind one is born in the three realms. The treatise-author records the causes and conditions spoken by the Buddha: 「以眾生憶念故，生三界善、不善處；若無憶念則不著，不著則不生。」 tr. "Because beings keep things in mind, they are born in the wholesome and unwholesome places of the three realms; if there is no keeping in mind, then one does not cling, and not clinging, one is not born." This sentence speaks of the harm of keeping in mind down to the root—it is not only an obstruction to increase; it is the cause of the places of birth in the three realms. Three clauses descend in turn: because of keeping in mind there is clinging, and because of clinging there is birth; without keeping in mind there is no clinging, and without clinging there is no birth. By the time one reads to here, the doubt of the previous passage should have wholly dissolved: the questioner thought that without keeping in mind nothing would accumulate; the Buddha answers that keeping in mind is exactly why one flows on in the round.

34. Subhūti considers and reckons, and asks about abiding and attaining. Here the treatise-author marks out a process: 「須菩提從佛聞是已，思惟籌量」 tr. "having heard these things from the Buddha, Subhūti considered and reckoned"—he does not ask as soon as he hears; he considers and afterwards asks. What he considers is: 「是法畢竟空、無所有；若行是法，亦應無所得、無住處。何以故？因果相似故。」 tr. "This dharma is ultimately empty and without anything existent; if one practises this dharma, there should also be nothing to be attained and no place of abiding. Why? Because cause and fruit resemble one another." The four Chinese characters 「因果相似」 tr. "cause and fruit resemble one another" are the ground of his reasoning: since the dharma practised is empty, the result obtained should also be empty. From this he then asks: 「菩薩作是念行般若，何所住、何所得？」 tr. "The bodhisattva who has this thought and practises prajñā—where does he abide, and what does he attain?" This question is the place in all the questions and answers of the whole fascicle where Subhūti's use of mind is most visible; the treatise-author marks out the traces of his considering expressly so that the reader may know where a good question comes from.

35. The Buddha answers: he does not abide, and so on up to: in not abiding he also does not abide. The treatise-author takes up the Buddha's answer, saying: 「色等一切法中不住，乃至不住中亦不住。」 tr. "In all dharmas, form and the rest, he does not abide, and so on up to: in not abiding he also does not abide."—the last phrase is the joint: once not abiding is set up, someone will settle himself on 「不住」 tr. "not abiding", and so another layer is broken. The treatise-author explains the reason himself: 「不取相故不著，不著故則不住。」 tr. "Because he does not grasp at marks he does not cling, and because he does not cling he does not abide." And he cites the causes and conditions the Buddha himself sets out: 「是菩薩不見法有可著、可住、著者、住者。」 tr. "This bodhisattva does not see that there is any dharma that can be clung to or that can be abided in, nor one who clings nor one who abides." Four things are dismissed together—the dharma clung to, the place abided in, the person able to cling, the person able to abide. At the end the treatise-author sets down a remark on the manner of the text: 「此中法難破故，但說法，不說著者。」 tr. "Here, because dharmas are hard to break, only dharmas are spoken of, and the one who clings is not spoken of."—the sūtra here breaks only dharmas and does not break the person; the treatise-author points out that this is because dharmas are hard to break, and when dharmas are broken the person is broken of itself; this is an abbreviation often met in reading the sūtra, and the treatise-author points it out.

36. The first losing: abiding in the emptiness of beings and the emptiness of dharmas and having this thought, ‘I am able to practise thus’. From here one enters the section on the losing that comes from grasping at marks. Here the treatise-author lists four stretches of losing, and at the end himself gathers them as 「三種皆失」 tr. "all three kinds are losing"—the four stretches are the order of the text; the three kinds are the classification by meaning. For the first losing, the treatise-author takes up the sūtra, saying: 「若菩薩住是眾生空、法空，作是念『我能如是行』者，則是失、則是離。」 tr. "If a bodhisattva abides in this emptiness of beings and emptiness of dharmas and has this thought, ‘I am able to practise thus’, then that is losing, that is separation." The losing lies wholly in the two Chinese characters 「我能」 tr. "I am able". The treatise-author explains the reason: 「般若波羅蜜是不著相。是菩薩以我心外著空、內著我，不如般若行，故言遠離般若。」 tr. "Prajñāpāramitā is of the mark of not clinging. This bodhisattva, with the mind of a self, clings outwardly to emptiness and inwardly to a self, and does not practise in accord with prajñā, so it is said that he is far from prajñā."—clinging outwardly to emptiness and inwardly to a self, he clings at both ends. What must most be noted is this: what this person abides in is the two emptinesses, and what he practises is not mistaken; the mistake lies only in his thinking that there is an 「我」 tr. "I" practising this matter. So the first losing is not an error in view; it is an error in position.

37. The next losing: breaking emptiness and clinging to prajñā's being without nature. The treatise-author marks its turn, saying: 「上以著空故失，今以破空得般若，而著般若無性故失」 tr. "above, one lost by clinging to emptiness; now, having broken emptiness and obtained prajñā, one yet loses by clinging to prajñā's being without nature"—the second losing is finer than the first: he has already broken the clinging to emptiness and no longer says ‘I am able to practise’, yet he gives rise to attachment on 「般若無性」 tr. "prajñā's being without nature". Its consequence the treatise-author states with great weight: 「失故不得受記。」 tr. "Because of losing, one does not receive the prediction." And he adds an example: 「若作是念『住般若中能生檀波羅蜜等』者，亦復是失。」 tr. "If one has this thought, ‘abiding in prajñā, one can give rise to dānapāramitā and the others’, that too is likewise losing." This example deserves attention—abiding in prajñā and being able to give rise to the perfections: the sense of the words is wholly right, and yet once there is the word 「住」 tr. "abiding" it becomes losing. It can be seen that what the losings dismiss is not an error of meaning; it is where the mind comes to rest.

38. Question and answer: what is taken as losing in the third losing. The treatise-author sets up a question of his own: 「上二失因緣可爾，今以何為失？」 tr. "The causes and conditions of the two losings above can be explained thus; what is taken as losing now?"—this question is extremely well set: each of the first two losings has something it clings to, while the third kind of person does not cling to emptiness and does not cling to being without nature, and one cannot see where the losing lies. The answer first traces back the sickness of the first two losings: 「以著空、著無性法故，便不能修檀波羅蜜等功德，而生邪見故，作是念：『若法都空，復何所行？』」 tr. "Because of clinging to emptiness and clinging to the dharma of being without nature, one then cannot cultivate dānapāramitā and the other merits, and because one gives rise to wrong views, one has this thought: ‘If dharmas are all empty, what is there that can be practised?’"—the real harm of the first two losings lies in abandoning practice. The third kind of person has seen exactly this harm and changed: 「是人以不著空、不著無性故行檀波羅蜜等」 tr. "this person, because of not clinging to emptiness and not clinging to being without nature, practises dānapāramitā and the others"; yet he immediately has the thought: 「能不著空、無性而能行是功德，是為真道。」 tr. "To be able not to cling to emptiness and to being without nature, and yet to be able to practise these merits—this is the true path." The losing lies precisely in this thought. The treatise-author decides it, saying: 「是亦為失，以其心有悕望故。」 tr. "This too is losing, because in his mind there are hopes." The two Chinese characters rendered here as ‘hopes’ are the name of this losing—he does not cling to emptiness and does not cling to being without nature, yet he clings to ‘only my doing it this way is the true path’. This is the kind of mind that practitioners most often have and can least see for themselves.

39. Losing prajñā, one cannot practise giving, and so on up to great compassion. After the three losings the treatise-author inserts a general verdict: 「若失般若，則不能行檀波羅蜜乃至大悲。」 tr. "If one loses prajñā, one cannot practise dānapāramitā, and so on up to great compassion." And he gives the reason: 「阿耨多羅三藐三菩提是真實法，般若波羅蜜與此相似；檀等諸善法不相似，以其取相著故。」 tr. "Anuttarā samyaksaṃbodhi is a true and real dharma, and prajñāpāramitā resembles it; giving and the other wholesome dharmas do not resemble it, because they grasp at marks and cling."—the meaning is set up by 「相似」 tr. "resembling": prajñā and awakening are one and the same signlessness, so they correspond; the perfections grasp at marks, so they do not resemble it. So for one who loses prajñā, the perfections he practises do not correspond to the result he seeks, and therefore it is said that he cannot practise them. This sentence is also a footnote to the earlier ‘without obtaining prajñā they are not called pāramitā’.

40. The fourth losing: recollecting, imagining, and discriminating for oneself and disclosing it to others. The fourth losing is the finest, and the treatise-author peels it layer by layer. What this person thinks is: 「一切法不取相，諸佛知是已，得阿耨多羅三藐三菩提。」 tr. "All dharmas are not grasped at as marks; the buddhas knew this and obtained anuttarā samyaksaṃbodhi."—the meaning he thinks is wholly the right meaning, and the treatise-author himself at once explains 「不取相」 tr. "not grasping at marks": 「名畢竟空，不可取，諸相滅故。」 tr. "It is named ultimate emptiness, which cannot be taken, because all marks have ceased." Yet 「亦為他開示、演說，則失般若」 tr. "if he further discloses it and expounds it for others, then he loses prajñā". Why does the right meaning turn instead into losing? The treatise-author writes out the traces of this person's mind: 「我是凡夫生死人，諸煩惱未盡，云何能得？但隨佛語，自不分別，而定心為他人說」 tr. "I am an ordinary person in birth and death, my afflictions are not yet exhausted, how could I obtain it? I simply follow the Buddha's words, do not myself discriminate, and with a concentrated mind speak to others"—this is an extremely humble person: he knows he has not obtained it, he only passes on the Buddha's words, and he does not himself discriminate. The treatise-author still judges it losing. Why? 「諸佛於諸法無所得，取義亦如是；是不取相法，乃至假名字不可說，何況有所得！」 tr. "The buddhas have nothing to be attained with regard to dharmas, and the meaning of taking is likewise; this dharma of not grasping at marks cannot be spoken of even as a provisional name, how much less could there be something attained!" At the end he concludes: 「諸佛法寂滅相，無諸戲論，一切語言道斷故。」 tr. "The Dharma of the buddhas is of the mark of quiescence, without any idle discourse, because the way of all words is cut off." The losing lies in the five Chinese characters 「自憶想分別」 tr. "recollecting, imagining, and discriminating for oneself"—in his mind he has first set up a mark of 「不取相」 tr. "not grasping at marks", and then holds this mark to speak to people. Here the losings reach their utmost: from ‘I am able to practise’, to clinging to being without nature, to clinging to the true path, to holding the right meaning and speaking it—each layer more like the path than the last, and each layer harder to know for oneself.

41. Subhūti asks: how is one who practises without these faults? The treatise-author marks Subhūti's thought, saying: 「若空有失，空空中亦有失，無取法中亦有失，然不可無道。」 tr. "If within emptiness there is losing, and within the emptiness of emptiness there is also losing, and within the dharma of not taking there is also losing—yet there cannot be no path."—the five Chinese characters 「然不可無道」 tr. "yet there cannot be no path" are the bone of this question: everywhere there is losing, and yet it is impossible that there should be no road. So he asks the Buddha: 「云何行者無是過失？」 tr. "How does one practise so as to be without these faults?" This question is the question that must come after the losings, and also the pivot on which the whole fascicle turns from breaking to establishing.

42. The Buddha answers: knowing that it cannot be found or known—one who practises thus is without losing. The treatise-author takes up the Buddha's answer, saying: 「若菩薩知諸法畢竟空、無所有、不可取，是法不可得知，如是行者則無失。」 tr. "If a bodhisattva knows that dharmas are ultimately empty, without anything existent, and cannot be taken, and that this dharma cannot be found or known, one who practises thus is without losing." The joint lies in the six Chinese characters 「是法不可得知」 tr. "this dharma cannot be found or known"—it is not knowing a thing called ultimate emptiness; it is knowing that it cannot be found or known. Knowing that it cannot be known, one sets nothing up; setting nothing up, one clings to nothing. The treatise-author at once gathers in what went before: 「菩薩著畢竟空、著無性、著菩薩所行道，佛說三種皆失。」 tr. "The bodhisattva clings to ultimate emptiness, clings to being without nature, clings to the path the bodhisattva practises; the Buddha says that all three kinds are losing."—here the losings above are gathered in three kinds: clinging to ultimate emptiness, clinging to being without nature, clinging to the path the bodhisattva practises; as for the one losing of still clinging to what the Buddha practises, it is gathered in separately in the next passage.

43. Still clinging to what the Buddha practises—now being able to be like the dharma the Buddha obtained in his mind. The treatise-author goes a layer further: 「菩薩聞是已，則捨著心，今猶著佛所行未息」 tr. "having heard these things, the bodhisattva gave up the clinging mind, yet now he still clings to what the Buddha practises and has not stopped"; his thought is: 「如佛所行，必是真道，我但當隨佛行。」 tr. "What the Buddha practises must certainly be the true path; I should only follow the Buddha in practice." The treatise-author judges: 「一切法無所有、不取相，是故為失。」 tr. "All dharmas are without anything existent and are not grasped at as marks; therefore this is losing."—following the Buddha in practice also becomes losing: this is the last gathering-in of the losings. Where it is remedied the treatise-author speaks most beautifully: 「今能如佛心中所得法，如是法相，佛亦無所得；無所得故不貪貴佛、不輕賤餘人，於一切眾生其心平等。」 tr. "Now he is able to be like the dharma the Buddha obtained in his mind: of such a mark of dharmas, the Buddha too has nothing to be attained; because of nothing to be attained, he does not covet and prize the Buddha and does not slight and despise other people; towards all beings his mind is equal."—from the Buddha's having nothing to be attained, to not prizing the Buddha and not despising people, to the mind being equal. This is the utmost of breaking attachment in the whole fascicle: even the esteem for the Buddha must be put down—not slighting the Buddha, but knowing that what the Buddha attained was from the first nothing attained.

44. A further question: if one is apart from its own mark, how can one practise? The treatise-author takes up the further question here, saying: 「如是，是清淨般若，無有過失，離自相不著。不離自相是即有相著法；若離自相，云何可行？」 tr. "Thus, this is pure prajñā, without fault, apart from its own mark and not clinging. Not to be apart from its own mark is a dharma that has marks and clings; if it is apart from its own mark, then how can one practise it?"—this question blocks both sides completely: not being apart from its own mark there is clinging; being apart from its own mark there is nothing to practise. Whenever one reads a question of this kind, blocked on both sides, one must know that the answer will certainly not lie within the two sides.

45. The Buddha answers: not giving rise to any dharma is called being able to practise prajñā. The treatise-author takes up the Buddha's answer, saying: 「若菩薩於一切法不生，是名能行般若。是菩薩不說是色若常若無常等、是色、誰色。」 tr. "If a bodhisattva does not give rise to any dharma, this is called being able to practise prajñā. This bodhisattva does not say that this form is permanent or impermanent and so on, nor is form, nor whose form." At once he explains it word by word: 「是色，破色；誰色，破人。」 tr. "Is form breaks form; whose form breaks the person."—the question 「是色」 tr. "is form" breaks attachment to dharmas, the question 「誰色」 tr. "whose form" breaks attachment to the person; the two questions are dismissed together, and person and dharmas are both empty. The scope is extended to 「色乃至一切種智，亦如是」 tr. "form, and so on up to the omniscience of all kinds, is likewise". At the end he says why it cannot be given rise to: 「若法如是畢竟空，推求不可得，是不可生。所以者何？性不能生性，無性不能生無性。」 tr. "If a dharma is ultimately empty in this way, and when searched for is unfindable, this is what cannot be given rise to. Why is that? Because nature cannot give rise to nature, and what is without nature cannot give rise to what is without nature."—neither road, nature or being without nature, can give rise, and so it is said: not giving rise. The answer to 「云何可行」 tr. "how can one practise it" lies in the two Chinese characters 「不生」 tr. "not giving rise": practice is not doing some one thing; it is not giving rise with regard to any dharma.

46. The simile of the four kinds of troops following: by the power of prajñā the dharmas together arrive at the Buddha path. The treatise-author gathers up what came before, saying: 「如是等破顛倒，得實論議，皆是般若波羅蜜力，餘波羅蜜皆隨從」 tr. "discourses such as these, which break inversion and obtain the true and real, are all the power of prajñāpāramitā, and the other perfections all follow it"; the simile is the four kinds of troops always following the wheel-turning sage king: 「聖王福故，四種兵皆能飛；般若力故，諸餘法皆是實性，同至佛道。」 tr. "Because of the merit of the sage king, the four kinds of troops are all able to fly; because of the power of prajñā, the other dharmas all become of real nature and together arrive at the Buddha path." The point this simile takes lies in the three Chinese characters 「皆能飛」 tr. "all able to fly"—troops by themselves cannot fly, but because of the king's merit they can; the perfections by themselves are not of real nature, but because of the power of prajñā they together arrive at the Buddha path.

47. The simile of the good charioteer driving a team of four: though there is strength, without the driver one cannot arrive. The treatise-author starts afresh, saying: 「譬如善御駕駟，不失平道。馬雖有致車之力，若無御者，則不能有所至」 tr. "It is as a person skilled at driving drives a carriage of four horses and does not lose the level road. Though the horses have the strength to pull the carriage, without the driver they cannot arrive anywhere"; applied, it is 「布施等亦如是，雖有功德果報力，無般若調御，不能至佛道」 tr. "giving and the others are likewise: though they have the power of the retribution of merit, without prajñā to tame and drive them they cannot arrive at the Buddha path". This simile and the previous one divide their work: the previous simile says that the power of prajñā changes the quality of the dharmas; this simile says that the function of prajñā lies in taming and driving. The strength of the horses stands for the power of the retribution of merit, the driver for prajñā—the strength is not lacking but the direction is, and so they cannot arrive.

48. Concluding praise: though the five perfections, having entered prajñā, are without difference, prajñā is the most honoured and most wondrous. The treatise-author closes the whole passage with one sentence: 「如是種種譬喻，五波羅蜜入般若中雖無差別，以是事故而般若波羅蜜最尊、最妙。」 tr. "By various similes such as these: though the five perfections, having entered into prajñā, are without difference, because of this matter prajñāpāramitā is the most honoured and the most wondrous." This sentence joins the two matters of the preceding text into one: it both grants that they are without difference and grants that it is the most honoured; the reason the two can stand together without contradicting each other is exactly the meaning of the earlier 「以第一義為心，用世俗語言為說」 tr. "taking the highest meaning as the mind, one uses worldly language to speak".

49. What is the bodhisattva path, and what is not the bodhisattva path. The treatise-author explains where this question comes from, marking two sources: 「須菩提聞佛種種因緣說般若最大，又聞不行是行般若波羅蜜」 tr. "Subhūti heard the Buddha speak by various causes and conditions of prajñā as the greatest, and further heard that not practising is practising prajñāpāramitā"—the one is hearing the praise, the other is hearing 「不行是行」 tr. "not practising is practising". Since he knows that prajñā is the greatest and yet what is practised is the practice of not practising, the path as a path must be asked about anew. So he asks: 「世尊！何等是菩薩道？何等非菩薩道？」 tr. "World-Honored One! What is the bodhisattva path? What is not the bodhisattva path?"

50. The Buddha answers that the two vehicles are not the bodhisattva path; the treatise-author explains why the two vehicles alone are raised. The Buddha's answer is only six Chinese characters: 「二乘非菩薩道。」 tr. "The two vehicles are not the bodhisattva path." The treatise-author's explanation lies in supplying what was not raised: 「雖有凡夫及諸煩惱非菩薩道，麁故不說」 tr. "though ordinary persons and the afflictions are also not the bodhisattva path, they are not spoken of because they are coarse"—ordinary persons and the afflictions are of course not the bodhisattva path; because this is too obvious, there is no need to say it. The reason the two vehicles alone are raised lies in: 「二乘同行空、同求涅槃故，說非菩薩道。」 tr. "It is because the two vehicles likewise practise emptiness and likewise seek nirvāṇa that they are spoken of as not the bodhisattva path."—precisely because they are similar, they must be distinguished. The treatise-author further sets down a general rule: 「麁事人不疑，細事人疑故。」 tr. "For people do not doubt coarse matters; it is about subtle matters that people doubt." This is the key to reading every text of distinguishing: whatever the sūtras and treatises expressly distinguish is sure to be what is similar and easily confused. At the end he adds a sentence: 「薩婆若是菩薩道，因中說果故。」 tr. "Sarvajñā is the bodhisattva path, because it is speaking of the result in the cause." Sarvajñā is by rights the result; here it is spoken of as the path—an instance of speaking of the result in the cause, which the treatise-author points out in one phrase without further argument.

51. Subhūti praises prajñā as arising for a great matter. The treatise-author takes it up, saying: 「須菩提歡喜讚歎般若，作是言：『世尊！般若波羅蜜為大事故起。』」 tr. "Subhūti rejoiced and praised prajñā, speaking these words: ‘World-Honored One! Prajñāpāramitā arises for the sake of a great matter.’" And with 「如經中廣說，乃至『諸法常住故』」 tr. "as is said at length in the sūtra, and so on up to ‘because dharmas abide constantly’" he abridges what lies between. This kind of abridgement by 「乃至」 tr. "and so on up to" is the regular practice of this treatise: raising the head and raising the tail and abridging the middle; the reader should know that what is abridged remains in the sūtra, not that the treatise-author has cut it out.

52. Difficulty: without arising and without ceasing, how does one practise giving and upholding the precepts? The treatise-author takes up Subhūti's difficulty, saying: 「若般若無所生無所滅，云何行布施、持戒等？」 tr. "If prajñā has nothing arising and nothing ceasing, then how does one practise giving, upholding the precepts, and the rest?"—this difficulty has the same format as the earlier ‘the nature of all dharmas is empty; how does one practise the six perfections’, but what it rests on is different: the earlier one rested on emptiness of nature; this one rests on being without arising and without ceasing. The Buddha answers: 「以般若無所生無所滅，即是畢竟空；畢竟空故，不妨行六波羅蜜。」 tr. "Because prajñā has nothing arising and nothing ceasing, it is ultimate emptiness; because it is ultimate emptiness, it does not hinder practising the six perfections." The turn in the words of the answer lies in the two Chinese characters 「不妨」 tr. "does not hinder": it is not that because of emptiness one is able to practise; it is that emptiness does not hinder practice. The measure of these two Chinese characters is extremely fine—if one said that one practises because of emptiness, emptiness would become a cause that can give rise; saying ‘does not hinder’, emptiness is empty of itself and practice practises of itself.

53. Practising the dharmas for the sake of omniscience, establishing them in the real mark and dedicating them. The treatise-author relates the bodhisattva's practice, saying: 「菩薩聞種種因緣讚一切智；為一切智故，行布施等法；是法為度一切眾生故，迴向阿耨多羅三藐三菩提」 tr. "the bodhisattva hears omniscience praised by various causes and conditions; for the sake of omniscience he practises giving and the other dharmas; these dharmas, for the sake of delivering all beings, are dedicated to anuttarā samyaksaṃbodhi"—three matters linked together: what it is for is omniscience, what is practised is the perfections, and those for whose sake it is done are beings. At the end he goes a layer further: 「是六波羅蜜功德安立諸法實相中，迴向阿耨多羅三藐三菩提。」 tr. "The merit of these six perfections is established within the real mark of all dharmas and dedicated to anuttarā samyaksaṃbodhi." Dedicating and, beyond that, establishing in the real mark—therefore his practice 「不顛倒，正行善根故」 tr. "is not inverted, because he rightly practises roots of goodness". This passage and the earlier definition of 「種善根」 tr. "planting roots of goodness" shine on each other from before and after: practising the six perfections with a deep mind and making merit for the sake of awakening—here it is said more fully.

54. How should one train in the six perfections: neither joined nor dispersed. Subhūti asks: 「菩薩云何應習六波羅蜜？」 tr. "How should the bodhisattva train in the six perfections?" The Buddha answers: 「若菩薩觀色等諸法不合不散。」 tr. "If a bodhisattva contemplates form and the other dharmas as neither joined nor dispersed." The treatise-author explains for him the meaning of joining and dispersing: 「色等諸法顛倒煩惱和合故合，以正智慧觀故散。」 tr. "Form and the other dharmas are joined because the inverted afflictions come together, and are dispersed because they are contemplated with right wisdom." At once he speaks of the bodhisattva's contemplation: 「以利智慧深觀，則無法合；顛倒煩惱皆虛誑，故非合。」 tr. "When he contemplates deeply with keen wisdom, there is no dharma that is joined; the inverted afflictions are all false and deceptive, and so it is not joining."—what is called joining is from the first formed by the inverted afflictions; since the inversion is false, the joining too is not formed. And he points to its source, 「如先破染、染者事中說」 tr. "as was said before in the matter of breaking defilement and the one defiled". At the end he concludes: 「菩薩知諸法本不合故亦無散，則不生高心。」 tr. "The bodhisattva, knowing that dharmas are from the first not joined, also has no dispersing, and then does not give rise to a haughty mind." The four Chinese characters 「不生高心」 tr. "does not give rise to a haughty mind" are the real effect of training in the six perfections: knowing that from the first there is no joining, there is nothing to break; with nothing to break, there is nothing to exalt oneself over. The 「不合不散」 tr. "neither joined nor dispersed" here is the foreshadowing of the fourth gate below.

55. One should not think that with true wisdom one makes dharmas pure and abides in them. The treatise-author starts afresh, saying: 「菩薩不應作是念：『我以真智慧令色等諸法清淨而住其中……』」 tr. "The bodhisattva should not have this thought: ‘With true wisdom I make form and the other dharmas pure and abide in them …’" The reason is 「色等法無住處」 tr. "form and the other dharmas have no place of abiding". At once he takes fourfold abiding upon one another as a simile: 「如地住於水，水住於風，風住於空，空無所住」 tr. "as earth abides on water, water abides on wind, wind abides on space, and space abides on nothing"—layer upon layer abiding upon one another, and in the end coming back to no abiding; therefore it is said 「以本無住處故，一切都無住」 tr. "because from the first there is no place of abiding, all things abide on nothing". At the end he establishes right practice: 「菩薩應如是住無住法中，得阿耨多羅三藐三菩提。」 tr. "The bodhisattva should abide thus in the dharma of non-abiding and obtain anuttarā samyaksaṃbodhi." This passage carries on from the earlier 「乃至不住中亦不住」 tr. "and so on up to: in not abiding he also does not abide": there the attachment to abiding was broken; here the abiding of non-abiding is established.

56. The simile of planting a tree: prajñā as the seed, the five perfections as the water. The treatise-author explains the simile of the tree in the sūtra, matching each thing with a meaning: 「樹是般若波羅蜜，菓是阿耨多羅三藐三菩提」 tr. "the tree is prajñāpāramitā, and the fruit is anuttarā samyaksaṃbodhi", and further says 「人是行者，水是五波羅蜜」 tr. "the person is the practitioner, and the water is the five perfections". And he speaks of its season: 「如人溉灌樹時，雖未見果實，時至則得時節和合，是具足諸法。」 tr. "As when a person waters a tree, though he has not yet seen the fruit, when the time comes he obtains it—the season coming together: this is the fulfilment of the dharmas." What most repays savouring in this simile lies in the phrase 「雖未見果實」 tr. "though he has not yet seen the fruit": at the time of watering the fruit has not yet appeared, and yet what is done is not in vain. When the practitioner makes effort and has not yet seen any sign of effect, this simile is set up exactly for him. What is called 「時節和合」 tr. "the season coming together" the treatise-author explains as 「具足諸法」 tr. "the fulfilment of the dharmas"—not sitting and waiting for the days to pass, but all the conditions being made complete.

57. Praising prajñā and exhorting to train in it. The treatise-author brings in the sūtra's text of praise to close this passage: 「若菩薩欲不隨他行，得諸法實相；若有邪見人來破壞，覺而不隨；若欲淨佛國土、坐道場、轉法輪，當學般若。」 tr. "If a bodhisattva wishes not to practise by following others, and to obtain the real mark of all dharmas; if, when people of wrong views come to destroy it, he is to be aware and not follow them; if he wishes to purify buddha-lands, to sit at the seat of awakening, and to turn the wheel of the Dharma, he should train in prajñā." What is listed is six matters in all—not practising by following others, obtaining the real mark, not following wrong views, the pure land, the seat of awakening, and the wheel of the Dharma. The six matters go from shallow to deep, and they come to rest in only one sentence: one should train in prajñā.

58. Subhūti asks whether one should train in prajñā; the Buddha says, I teach people to train in it. This one question and one answer are very short: 「如佛所教，菩薩當學般若？」 tr. "As the Buddha teaches, should the bodhisattva train in prajñā?" 「我教令學般若。」 tr. "I teach people to train in prajñā." Short as it is, it must not be passed over—Subhūti is confirming, the Buddha is sealing. With confirming questions of this kind in the sūtras, their use lies in what follows: once the confirmation is settled, the difficulty below has something to hold on to.

59. All dharmas are of the mark of equality; why does he teach people to train only in prajñā? Subhūti at once has a thought and raises a difficulty: 「一切法平等相，何以故但教學般若？」 tr. "All dharmas are of the mark of equality; why does he teach people to train only in prajñā?"—this difficulty comes on from the earlier ‘within ultimate emptiness there is no difference’, which shows that Subhūti turns his attention to this one meaning again and again. The Buddha answers: 「學是般若波羅蜜，於一切法得自在故，我教學般若波羅蜜。」 tr. "Because by training in this prajñāpāramitā one is able to obtain mastery in all dharmas, therefore I teach people to train in prajñāpāramitā." The answer does not lie in contending over higher and lower but in speaking of function: one who trains in prajñā obtains mastery in all dharmas. Equality is the substance, mastery is the function; the substance being equal does not hinder the function having that through which it comes.

60. The three similes of prajñā being the greatest. The treatise-author compares it with three matters: 「般若波羅蜜於一切法中最大，如佛於一切眾生中最尊；又如萬川，大海為大。」 tr. "Prajñāpāramitā is the greatest among all dharmas, as the Buddha is the most honoured among all beings; and again, as among the myriad rivers the great sea is the greatest."—the Buddha being the most honoured among beings stands for its standing out alone among its own kind; the great sea being the greatest among the myriad rivers stands for its being where they return. The three matters are raised together and what they make clear is one: being greatest is not overwhelming the rest; it is being that to which the rest return and on which they rely.

61. The metaphor of the archer, and what Māra cannot overcome. The treatise-author raises the sūtra's metaphor of the archer without repeating its text, and at once brings out the meaning: 「若菩薩能如是一切法中行自在般若，魔、若魔人所不能勝，何況增上慢及邪見人！」 tr. "If a bodhisattva is able thus to practise the prajñā of mastery in all dharmas, neither Māra nor Māra's men can overcome him, how much less people of overweening pride and people of wrong views!"—this place calls back to the earlier simile of the stalwart general's weapons: there it was said that with weapons complete one does not fear enemies; here it is said that practising the prajñā of mastery, Māra cannot overcome. Head and tail are one meaning, with many passages lying between; the reader should link them for himself.

62. Kept in mind by the buddhas of the ten directions—the simile of the brave warrior entering battle. The treatise-author explains the meaning of 「為諸佛所念」 tr. "is kept in mind by the buddhas", first pointing to its source, 「諸佛念義，如先說」 tr. "the meaning of the buddhas' keeping in mind is as was said before", and at once bringing in what the Buddha says here: 「若菩薩行六波羅蜜，亦能觀六波羅蜜畢竟空；如是人有大功夫故，為諸佛所念。」 tr. "If a bodhisattva practises the six perfections and is also able to contemplate the six perfections as ultimately empty, such a person, because he has great effort, is kept in mind by the buddhas."—the ground of being kept in mind lies in having both things together: ‘practising and being able to contemplate emptiness’. The brave warrior is the simile: 「入陣，破賊而不被瘡，則為主所念」 tr. "entering battle, breaking the bandits, and receiving no wound, he is kept in mind by his lord"; applied, it is 「破諸煩惱賊，具足六波羅蜜，而不著六波羅蜜」 tr. "breaking the bandits of the afflictions, fulfilling the six perfections, and not clinging to the six perfections". The three joints of the simile and the three joints of its application correspond one to one: entering battle matches fulfilling the six perfections, breaking the bandits matches breaking the afflictions, receiving no wound matches not clinging to the six perfections. The three Chinese characters rendered here as ‘receiving no wound’ are the finest—achievement without injury is exactly the mark of practising without clinging.

63. The buddhas keep him in mind without taking his form. The treatise-author starts afresh, saying: 「諸佛不取是菩薩色故念，不取受、想、行、識故念。」 tr. "The buddhas do not keep him in mind by taking this bodhisattva's form, nor by taking feeling, perception, constructions, and consciousness." Its reason: 「色等諸法虛誑不實故」 tr. "because form and the other dharmas are false and deceptive and not real"; and that by which they do keep him in mind: 「諸佛觀是菩薩身如實相故念。」 tr. "The buddhas keep him in mind by contemplating the mark as it really is of this bodhisattva's body."—this passage is a necessary correction to the previous passage: since it was said that he is kept in mind by the buddhas, it was feared that people would think the buddhas keep him in mind because they see his form and appearance and his meritorious deeds, so this is expressly sifted out. What is kept in mind is the mark as it really is, not the five aggregates.

64. Subhūti praises the bodhisattva as having much to train in. The treatise-author explains this praise, saying: 「亦學俗法、亦學道法，亦學諸波羅蜜、亦學畢竟空，亦學起、亦學滅。」 tr. "He trains in worldly dharmas and also trains in the dharmas of the path; he trains in the perfections and also trains in ultimate emptiness; he trains in rising and also trains in ceasing." And he sets the three vehicles against one another: 「凡夫學起不能學滅；聲聞學滅不能學起；菩薩亦學起亦學滅」 tr. "ordinary persons train in rising and cannot train in ceasing; śrāvakas train in ceasing and cannot train in rising; the bodhisattva trains both in rising and in ceasing"—these three sentences are the simplest and clearest classification of the teachings in the whole fascicle: the ordinary person knows only arising, the śrāvaka knows only coming to rest, the bodhisattva trains in both sides. Therefore it is said that he has much to train in. At the end the treatise-author gathers it himself: 「是起滅如幻、如夢，畢竟空故，實無所學。」 tr. "This rising and ceasing are like an illusion, like a dream; because of ultimate emptiness, in reality there is nothing to train in." Much and nothing stand together—exactly where the question of the next passage comes from.

65. The Buddha grants his words: what he trains in is all with nothing to be attained. The treatise-author takes up the Buddha's approval, saying: 「佛可其言，自說因緣：『菩薩所學，皆無所得。』」 tr. "The Buddha approved his words and himself set out the causes and conditions: ‘What the bodhisattva trains in is all with nothing to be attained.’"—what is approved is 「多有所學」 tr. "has much to train in", yet the causes and conditions given are 「皆無所得」 tr. "all with nothing to be attained". The two statements stand side by side without hindering each other: the matter of training is not abandoned; the mark of attaining is not set up.

66. Subhūti's difficulty: whether brief or extensive, all should be trained in; why is it said that there is nothing to be attained? The treatise-author takes up the difficulty, saying: 「佛所說法，若略、若廣，菩薩所應學，何以故言所學皆無所得？」 tr. "The dharmas the Buddha speaks, whether brief or extensive, are what the bodhisattva should train in; why is it said that what he trains in is all with nothing to be attained?"—this difficulty presses from the Buddha's own approval: having granted that he has much to train in, the Buddha also says it is all with nothing to be attained, and the two statements clash. The section on the four gates rises from this difficulty.

67. Subhūti's meaning: what the three vehicles train in and what the bodhisattva trains in. The treatise-author states clearly for him the questioner's meaning: 「如佛所說八萬四千法聚、十二部經，若廣、若略，諸三乘人所學」 tr. "as the eighty-four thousand heaps of Dharma and the twelve divisions of the scriptures that the Buddha has spoken, whether extensive or brief, are what people of the three vehicles train in"; while what the bodhisattva trains in is 「應學六波羅蜜若略、若廣」 tr. "should train in the six perfections, whether brief or extensive". The method of his training is: 「應當受持、親近是法，讀、誦、思惟、正觀；乃至入無相三昧，心、心數法不行。」 tr. "He should receive and uphold this Dharma and draw near to it, read it, recite it, consider it, and rightly contemplate it; and so on up to entering the signless samādhi, where mind and mental-factor dharmas do not move."—this string, from receiving and upholding to the signless samādhi, is a sequence: from the text one enters the meaning, from the meaning one enters contemplation, from contemplation one enters concentration, until mind and mental-factor dharmas do not move. At the end he concludes: 「菩薩能如是學，則能知諸法略、廣相。」 tr. "When the bodhisattva is able to train thus, he is able to know the brief marks and the extensive marks of dharmas." So one knows that the knowing of the brief and the extensive is not a classification in understanding; it comes out of this string of effort.

68. The boundary of the extensive and the brief. The treatise-author first sets up one meaning: 「廣者，從八萬四千法聚已來無量佛法；略者，乃至小品，小品中一品，一品中一段。」 tr. "What is called extensive is the immeasurable Buddha-dharma from the eighty-four thousand heaps of Dharma onward; what is called brief goes down even to the Smaller Sūtra, one chapter in the Smaller Sūtra, one passage in one chapter."—this is spoken in terms of the amount of text. That the brief goes down to a single passage says that even at its briefest it does not lose its being Dharma.

69. The second meaning, introduced by the word further: emptiness and the specific marks. The treatise-author brings out a further meaning: 「略者，知諸法一切空、無相、無作、無生無滅等；廣者，諸法種種別相分別」 tr. "what is called brief is to know that dharmas are all empty, signless, non-action, without arising and without ceasing, and so on; what is called extensive is the distinguishing of the various specific marks of dharmas"—this is spoken in terms of the general and the specific in meaning, no longer in terms of the amount of text. And he points to where it is detailed: 「如後『善知識』中說」 tr. "as is said later under ‘the good friend’". The two meanings are brought out together: the first meaning is the extensive and brief of the measure of text; the second meaning is the general and specific of the marks of meaning. The reader must not let the later meaning set aside the earlier, nor mix them into one.

70. Asked how to know the brief and extensive marks, the Buddha answers: being like the mark of suchness. Subhūti asks: 「云何菩薩知一切法略、廣相？」 tr. "How does the bodhisattva know the brief marks and the extensive marks of all dharmas?" The Buddha answers: 「若知諸法如如相者，所謂不生、不滅、不住異。」 tr. "If he knows dharmas to be like the mark of suchness, namely: not arising, not ceasing, not abiding-and-changing." The first of the four gates is set up here. What is called being like the mark of suchness is shown by the three matters 「不生、不滅、不住異」 tr. "not arising, not ceasing, not abiding-and-changing"; the three matters break the three marks of arising, abiding, and ceasing. Knowing these three nots is knowing suchness.

71. Question and answer: suchness being thus a single mark, how does one know the general mark and the specific marks? The treatise-author sets up a question of his own: 「若如一相、無生相，云何菩薩知是如故，知諸法總相、別相？」 tr. "If suchness is a single mark, the mark of non-arising, then how is it that the bodhisattva, because he knows this suchness, knows the general mark and the specific marks of dharmas?" And he himself marks the equation: 「總相、別相，即是略、廣相。」 tr. "The general mark and the specific marks are the brief marks and the extensive marks."—this question is asked exactly right: how can a single mark know many marks? The answer first defines what suchness means: 「如名諸法實相，常住不壞，不隨諸觀。」 tr. "Suchness is the name of the real mark of all dharmas; it abides constantly and is indestructible, and does not turn with the various contemplations."—the four Chinese characters 「不隨諸觀」 tr. "does not turn with the various contemplations" are important: it does not change according to how you contemplate. Next he speaks of the effect of obtaining suchness: 「菩薩得是如，即破無明邪見等諸顛倒；是人得實法故，一切世間法總相、別相，了了知。」 tr. "When the bodhisattva obtains this suchness, he breaks ignorance, wrong views, and the other inversions; because this person has obtained the real dharma, he knows clearly and distinctly the general mark and the specific marks of all worldly dharmas." At the end he proves it from the reverse side: 「先凡夫時智慧眼病，以無明顛倒覆故，不能實知。」 tr. "Formerly, when he was an ordinary person, his wisdom-eye was diseased; because it was covered by ignorance and inversion, he could not know as it really is."—the ordinary person's not knowing is not because dharmas are many but because the eye is diseased. Once the eye is healed, the many marks are clear of themselves.

72. A further question and answer: within the ceasing of all knowledges, how can one know clearly and distinctly? The treatise-author sets up a further question, tighter than the previous one: 「實法相者，所謂空、無相、無作，諸智滅；云何言『得如實相故，了了知諸法總相、別相』？」 tr. "What is called the mark of the real dharma is emptiness, the signless, and non-action, where all knowledges cease; then why is it said ‘because one obtains the mark as it really is, one clearly and distinctly knows the general mark and the specific marks of dharmas’?"—the difficulty lies in the three Chinese characters 「諸智滅」 tr. "all knowledges cease": since knowledge has ceased, from where would clear and distinct knowing come? The answer first rebukes its sickness: 「我已先答，而汝於如中取相故，復作是難；汝若知如，不應作是難。」 tr. "I have already answered this before, yet because you grasp at marks within suchness, you raise this difficulty again; if you knew suchness, you would not raise this difficulty."—the reason the difficulty arises is that the questioner has grasped a mark on 「如」 tr. "suchness". Next comes the direct answer: 「是如畢竟無相故，不妨知諸法總相、別相，以智慧明了了故。」 tr. "Because this suchness is ultimately signless, it does not hinder knowing the general mark and the specific marks of dharmas, because wisdom is bright, clear, and distinct." At once he sets up an excellent simile: 「譬如人年既長大，乃知小時所行皆愚癡可笑。」 tr. "It is as when a person, having grown up, only then knows that what he did as a small child was all foolish and laughable." Applied, he says: the bodhisattva 「入諸法實相，起已，還在顛倒果報六情中，念寂滅解脫樂，乃知世間六情所著皆是虛誑可捨法——是名『總相』」 tr. "having entered the real mark of all dharmas and risen from it, while still within the six faculties that are the retribution of inversion, keeps in mind the bliss of the liberation of quiescence, and only then knows that what the six worldly faculties cling to are all false and deceptive dharmas that can be given up—this is called ‘the general mark’".—the knowing of the general mark is obtained by looking back upon the world after coming out of the real mark; just as only after growing up does one know the folly of childhood. The specific marks are 「於此中分別不淨有上、中、下，無常、苦、空、無我等亦如是，乃至八萬四千種諸錯謬」 tr. "within this, distinguishing that impurity has the superior, the middling, and the inferior; impermanence, suffering, emptiness, non-self, and so on are likewise; and so on up to the eighty-four thousand kinds of error". This simile resolves the doubt ‘knowledge has ceased, so how can one know?’: what ceases is the discrimination within inversion; what knows is the clear and distinct light that comes out and shines back.

73. General account of the three gates of suchness, the nature of dharmas, and the limit of reality. The treatise-author starts afresh, saying: 「復次，知如、法性、實際故，亦知諸法略、廣相。」 tr. "Further, because one knows suchness, the nature of dharmas, and the limit of reality, one also knows the brief marks and the extensive marks of dharmas." And he points to where it is detailed, 「如初品中說」 tr. "as was said in the first chapter"—the meaning of the differences among the three names has already been distinguished in the first chapter of this treatise and is not brought out again here. The first three of the four gates are set up together here.

74. The gate of the limit of reality: non-limit is the limit of reality. The treatise-author records the Buddha's words: 「非際是實際。」 tr. "Non-limit is the limit of reality." And he explains it himself, saying: 「非際者，無相可取，無定法可著。」 tr. "What is called non-limit is that there is no mark that can be taken and no fixed dharma that can be clung to."—a limit means an edge, a boundary; to say that non-limit is the limit of reality is to say that the real limit lies precisely in being without limit. Of the two phrases explained, one breaks grasping at marks and one breaks clinging to dharmas, running straight through the purport of this whole fascicle.

75. The gate of the nature of dharmas: without parts, without non-parts. The treatise-author first speaks of the effect of obtaining the nature of dharmas: 「得法性故，知色等十八性皆是法性。」 tr. "Because one obtains the nature of dharmas, one knows that the eighteen natures, form and the rest, are all the nature of dharmas." Next he records the Buddha's words: 「無分、無非分。」 tr. "Without parts, without non-parts." And he explains them word by word: 「無分者，不可示此示彼，無分別、無相、無量」 tr. "what is called without parts is that one cannot point out this or point out that; it is without discrimination, signless, and immeasurable"—this breaks the attachment to having marks and having measure; 「無非分者，不著是無相、無量等破量相」 tr. "what is called without non-parts is that one does not cling to this mark of breaking measure—the signless, the immeasurable, and so on"—this breaks the attachment to the signless and the immeasurable. At once he sums up why this double negation is set up: 「法性，二事妨故不見：一、有相、有量，二、無相、無量。」 tr. "The nature of dharmas is not seen because two things obstruct it: first, having marks and having measure; second, being signless and immeasurable." And he judges their coarseness and fineness: 「有相、有量為麁，無相、無量為細」 tr. "having marks and having measure is coarse; being signless and immeasurable is subtle"; and so he concludes, 「法性相無分、無非分」 tr. "the mark of the nature of dharmas is without parts and without non-parts". At the end he gathers the whole passage: 「菩薩入三解脫門，住如等三實法，則能籌量知一切法總相、別相。」 tr. "The bodhisattva enters the three gates of liberation and abides in the three real dharmas, suchness and the rest, and then is able to reckon and know the general mark and the specific marks of all dharmas."—this sentence gathers the first three gates. The way this double negation is set up is what most needs attention in the whole fascicle: breaking the coarse is easy, breaking the fine is hard; having broken having marks and having measure, if one abides in the signless and immeasurable, it is still an obstruction.

76. The gate of neither joined nor dispersed: wishing to ask further about other approaches of the immeasurable Buddha-dharma. The treatise-author marks Subhūti's intention, saying: 「聞佛答已，欲更問無量佛法異門事。」 tr. "Having heard the Buddha's answer, he wished to ask further about the matter of other approaches of the immeasurable Buddha-dharma." The Buddha answers: 「知一切法無合無散故，則知諸法總相、別相。」 tr. "Because one knows that all dharmas are without joining and without dispersing, one knows the general mark and the specific marks of dharmas."—the fourth gate is set up here. This gate is different in kind from the first three gates: the first three gates set up names on the side of the real mark; this gate sets up a breaking on the side of the experience closest to beings. And so below there is the question and answer on the two fingers.

77. Question and answer: the eye sees two fingers joining and dispersing. The treatise-author sets up a question of his own: 「眼見二指有合散，云何言『無合散』？」 tr. "The eye sees two fingers joining and dispersing; why is it said ‘without joining or dispersing’?" This question is set up very plainly, and also very forcefully—joining and dispersing is something everyone can see; to say there is no joining or dispersing goes against what the eye sees. The first meaning of the answer is only one sentence: 「我先言：『肉眼所見，與牛羊無異，不可信。』」 tr. "I said before: ‘What the fleshly eye sees is no different from what cattle and sheep see; it cannot be trusted.’"—first he takes away the faculty that is able to see. These words appear earlier in this treatise, and here the treatise-author only cites them without setting them up again. What is taken away is not that everything the eye sees is false; it is that taking what the fleshly eye sees as the standard of judgement cannot be established.

78. Three joints, skin, and flesh; and the greater part not joined. The treatise-author goes on to bring out the second and third meanings. The second: 「三節皮肉具足為指，指無定法。」 tr. "Only when three joints, skin, and flesh are complete is there a finger; a finger has no fixed dharma."—first he breaks the thing that is joined: a finger is from the first a gathering of three joints, skin, and flesh, and no fixed finger can be found. The third: 「設有指法，亦不盡合，一分合，多分不合；多分不合故，不得言指合。」 tr. "Even supposing there is the dharma of a finger, it is not wholly joined: one part is joined and the greater part is not joined; because the greater part is not joined, one cannot say that the finger is joined."—stepping back to grant that there is the dharma of a finger, he breaks it on the scope of the joining: when two fingers are said to join, what actually touches is only one part. The three meanings in order: breaking the eye that can see, breaking the thing that is joined, breaking the reality of the joining.

79. Question and answer: is it acceptable to call it joined because a small part is joined? The treatise-author sets up a further question: 「以少合故名為合？」 tr. "Is it called joined because a small part is joined?"—this is the questioner's ground of retreat: there is no need for complete joining; the joining of a small part is enough to earn the name of joining. The answer turns the person's own standard against him: 「指少分不名為指，云何言指合？」 tr. "A small part of the finger is not called a finger, so how can one say that the finger is joined?"—since you do not allow a small part to be a finger, how do you allow the joining of a small part to be a joining of fingers? Next he sets the positive and negative against each other: 「若多分不合不名為不合，何以少分合故名為合？」 tr. "If the greater part's not being joined is not called not joined, why should the joining of a small part be called joined?"—the same proportion is not allowed to stand where there is no joining, yet is allowed to stand where there is joining: this contradicts itself. Therefore he decides: 「是故不得言二指合。」 tr. "Therefore one cannot say that the two fingers are joined." This passage is the place of densest reasoning in this fascicle; its method is to take the standard the opponent has set up and turn it back upon him.

80. The gate of breaking one and different, and the Buddha's words as proof. Last the treatise-author brings out one meaning, breaking by way of one and different: 「指與分不異不一故，即是無指；無指故無合；入破一異門中，則都無合。」 tr. "Because the finger and its parts are neither different nor one, there is no finger; because there is no finger there is no joining; entering into the gate of breaking one and different, there is no joining at all."—the finger and its parts are neither one nor different, so the finger as a thing is not formed; if the finger is not formed, the joining has nothing to rely on. At the end he brings in what the Buddha says here as the ground: 「一切法自性無，性無故即是無法，無法云何有合散？」 tr. "All dharmas are without self-nature; because nature is non-existent, they are non-existent dharmas; how could non-existent dharmas have joining and dispersing?"—from being without self-nature to being non-existent dharmas, from being non-existent dharmas to being without joining and dispersing. The treatise-author's breaking here comes to rest in the Buddha's words, and he sets up no thesis of his own.

81. This is called the brief gathering of prajñāpāramitā. The treatise-author closes the whole fascicle, saying: 「須菩提聞佛說如、法性、實際、不合不散四門，知略、廣相，是故須菩提言：『世尊！是名略攝般若波羅蜜。略攝聞是安隱道故，一切菩薩所應學。』」 tr. "Subhūti heard the Buddha speak of the four gates—suchness, the nature of dharmas, the limit of reality, and neither joined nor dispersed—and knew the brief marks and the extensive marks; therefore Subhūti said: ‘World-Honored One! This is called the brief gathering of prajñāpāramitā. Because the brief gathering, when heard, is the path of peace and security, it is what all bodhisattvas should train in.’"—the two Chinese characters 「略攝」 tr. "brief gathering" are the name of this passage: because the four gates gather up entirely the brief and the extensive of prajñā, it is called the brief gathering. The three Chinese characters 「安隱道」 tr. "the path of peace and security" are its fruit: this path does not startle and does not frighten, and so it is what all bodhisattvas should train in. The whole fascicle rises from the three questions, passes through the nine similes, the losings, and the four gates, and here is gathered in upon the one phrase 「一切菩薩所應學」 tr. "what all bodhisattvas should train in"—rising from the question of how long skilful means takes and ending in the exhortation to all bodhisattvas to train: head and tail hold each other.

Do Not Misread

Do not read ‘without obtaining prajñā they are not called pāramitā’ as meaning that the five perfections are useless. The treatise-author says plainly that one who loses prajñā is 「但名為行善法」 tr. "only called one who practises wholesome dharmas"—wholesome dharmas are still wholesome dharmas, and the merit is still there; what is lost is only the name and standing of 「波羅蜜」 tr. "pāramitā", and what the name and standing attach to is ‘reaching the further shore’. So this verdict does not demote the five perfections; it says that the five perfections' being able to reach the shore depends on prajñā. If one reads it as the five perfections being useless, then the text below, 「為般若波羅蜜故說五波羅蜜」 tr. "the five perfections are spoken of for the sake of prajñāpāramitā", and the text on the remedies of the five matters, have no footing at all.

Do not pass over the four Chinese characters 「除大菩薩」 tr. "leaving aside the great bodhisattvas". In the Buddha's answer on how long since arousing the mind, the original text is 「除大菩薩，於餘眾生無量億阿僧祇劫」 tr. "leaving aside the great bodhisattvas, and compared with the rest of beings, immeasurable koṭi of asaṃkhyeya kalpas". Without these four Chinese characters, it becomes the general rule that ‘whoever obtains the power of skilful means must pass through immeasurable kalpas’. The treatise-author records it without adding argument, precisely leaving the measure within the original text; if the reader drops it on his own, what he obtains is a verdict the sūtra never spoke.

Do not read 「種善根」 tr. "planting roots of goodness" as making offerings. The treatise-author expressly sets up a meaning: 「若以深心行六波羅蜜，為阿耨多羅三藐三菩提故作功德，是名『種善根』。」 tr. "If one practises the six perfections with a deep mind and makes merit for the sake of anuttarā samyaksaṃbodhi, this is called ‘planting roots of goodness’." And first he raises its counter-example—「雖多以華香供養諸佛，而未能種善根」 tr. "though they have made many offerings to the buddhas with flowers and incense, they have not yet been able to plant roots of goodness"—that person's thought being 「我必當得果報」 tr. "I shall certainly obtain the retribution". What distinguishes them does not lie in the diligence or slackness of the outward form of the deed but in where it is turned: turned towards retribution, it is not; turned towards awakening, it is.

Do not read 「薩婆若」 tr. "sarvajñā" and 「般若」 tr. "prajñā" as two dharmas. In answering the question of the rivers and streams entering the sea, the treatise-author says plainly 「薩婆若即是般若異名」 tr. "sarvajñā is another name for prajñā", and says why the name differs: 「五波羅蜜福德，入般若波羅蜜中，即得清淨般若；般若清淨故，得佛道，變名薩婆若。」 tr. "The merit of the five perfections, entering into prajñāpāramitā, obtains pure prajñā; because prajñā is pure, one obtains the Buddha path, and its name is changed to sarvajñā." In the cause it is named prajñā, at the fruit it is named sarvajñā. If one reads them as two dharmas, the sentence 「是故言『入薩婆若』，即是『入般若』」 tr. "therefore saying ‘entering sarvajñā’ is saying ‘entering prajñā’" cannot be understood.

Do not read 「導」 tr. "guiding" as a guiding with a mind. In the simile of the wheel-jewel leading the way, the treatise-author expressly adds a section: the wheel makes no such discrimination as 「我常在前，餘寶在後」 tr. "I am always in front and the other jewels behind", and has no hatred or love; prajñā likewise makes no such discrimination as 「檀波羅蜜隨我來，尸羅波羅蜜勿來」 tr. "dānapāramitā, follow me; śīlapāramitā, do not come". At the end he brings in the Buddha's words 「一切法性無所能作」 tr. "the nature of all dharmas has nothing it is able to do" as the conclusion. If one reads prajñā as a subject able to rule over the perfections, this whole section becomes dead text.

Do not read the losing that comes from grasping at marks as an error of view. Among the losings, the one of the second losing has already broken the attachment to emptiness, the one of the third losing already does not cling to emptiness and does not cling to being without nature, and what the one of the fourth losing thinks, 「一切法不取相，諸佛知是已，得阿耨多羅三藐三菩提」 tr. "all dharmas are not grasped at as marks; the buddhas knew this and obtained anuttarā samyaksaṃbodhi", is the right meaning word for word. The losing the treatise-author judges falls on these places where the mind comes to rest—「我能」 tr. "I am able", 「悕望」 tr. "hopes", 「自憶想分別」 tr. "recollecting, imagining, and discriminating for oneself"—not on the meaning spoken. If in reading the losings one only goes about checking the rightness or wrongness of the meaning, one will feel that the last two losings have no losing to point to.

Do not read 「不得受記」 tr. "does not receive the prediction" as receiving a punishment. The phrase 「失故不得受記」 tr. "because of losing, one does not receive the prediction" under the second losing says that since his mind clings, it does not correspond to the conditions for receiving the prediction; it is not that the Buddha withholds it from him. Looked at together with the matter recorded in the earlier chapter, 「聞魔來稱其名字而與受記，而生輕慢」 tr. "hearing that Māra has come, calling his name and giving him the prediction, he gives rise to contempt", it can be seen all the more that in this treatise the matter of receiving the prediction is from first to last tied to the conduct of the mind, not to a permission added from outside.

Do not read 「不貪貴佛」 tr. "does not covet and prize the Buddha" as slighting the Buddha. These words come where the last losing is broken, and the full text is: 「今能如佛心中所得法，如是法相，佛亦無所得；無所得故不貪貴佛、不輕賤餘人，於一切眾生其心平等。」 tr. "Now he is able to be like the dharma the Buddha obtained in his mind: of such a mark of dharmas, the Buddha too has nothing to be attained; because of nothing to be attained, he does not covet and prize the Buddha and does not slight and despise other people; towards all beings his mind is equal." The reason he does not covet and prize is precisely that he sees that what the Buddha attained was from the first nothing attained; 「不輕賤餘人」 tr. "does not slight and despise other people" is raised together with it, which shows that what is broken is the mind that discriminates high and low, not the mind that reveres the Buddha.

Do not read 「無所得」 tr. "nothing to be attained" as there being no need to train. Subhūti praises 「菩薩多有所學」 tr. "the bodhisattva has much to train in", and the Buddha grants his words and says 「菩薩所學，皆無所得」 tr. "what the bodhisattva trains in is all with nothing to be attained"; the brief and extensive marks brought out immediately after, and the receiving and upholding, reading and reciting, considering, and right contemplation, and so on up to the signless samādhi, are all the reality of what is trained in. Having much to train in and all being with nothing to be attained stand together—this is exactly the manner of this fascicle. If one abandons training because of nothing to be attained, the text of the four gates has nowhere to be placed.

Do not take 「無相、無量」 tr. "the signless and the immeasurable" as final. When the treatise-author explains the mark of the nature of dharmas, 「無分、無非分」 tr. "without parts, without non-parts", he plainly sets up two obstructions—「一、有相、有量，二、無相、無量」 tr. "first, having marks and having measure; second, being signless and immeasurable"—and judges 「有相、有量為麁，無相、無量為細」 tr. "having marks and having measure is coarse; being signless and immeasurable is subtle"—both alike are obstructions. Having broken the coarse attachment and abiding in the fine attachment is exactly what the losings of this fascicle warn against again and again. This is the place in the whole fascicle where it is easiest to go wrong oneself: the nearer an attachment is to the right meaning, the harder it is to see for oneself.

Do not read the breaking of the two fingers as denying what the eye sees. In answering 「眼見二指有合散」 tr. "the eye sees two fingers joining and dispersing", what the treatise-author cites is 「肉眼所見，與牛羊無異，不可信」 tr. "what the fleshly eye sees is no different from what cattle and sheep see; it cannot be trusted". What is taken away is taking what the fleshly eye sees as the standard of judgement, not saying that all seeing and hearing is false. The later text further breaks it layer by layer with the three joints, skin, and flesh, the greater part not joined, and the gate of one and different—what is broken is the possibility of the concept 「合」 tr. "joining" being established, not a denial of what you have seen.

Do not read 「略攝」 tr. "brief gathering" as abridgement. What the final sentence, 「是名略攝般若波羅蜜」 tr. "this is called the brief gathering of prajñāpāramitā", refers to is the four gates of suchness, the nature of dharmas, the limit of reality, and neither joined nor dispersed—by the four gates the brief mark and the extensive mark of prajñā are gathered up entirely, and so it is called the brief gathering. It is not saying prajñā a little more briefly; it is finding the four places of entry that can hold the whole of it. What follows immediately, 「略攝聞是安隱道故，一切菩薩所應學」 tr. "because the brief gathering, when heard, is the path of peace and security, it is what all bodhisattvas should train in", says exactly that the use of this gathering lies in peace and security, not in saving trouble.

Bearing on Practice

Take 「深心行六波羅蜜，為阿耨多羅三藐三菩提故作功德」 tr. "practising the six perfections with a deep mind and making merit for the sake of anuttarā samyaksaṃbodhi" and examine the merit you make by it. After each deed, look back with one question: where have I turned this deed? If it is turned towards retribution, the treatise-author has already said that it 「未能種善根」 tr. "has not yet been able to plant roots of goodness". This way of examining is extremely simple and extremely sharp; there is no need to wait until the matter is large before using it.

Take 「用後來心，不隨先所集惡心」 tr. "using the mind that came afterwards and not following the evil mind accumulated before" both to ease yourself and to spur yourself on. The evil mind is an old resident who has lived there for beginningless kalpas; the good mind is a newly arrived guest—feeling that old habits are hard to change is simply the fact, not a sign of retrogressing. What is to be trained is only this one thing: when this thought arises, does one follow it or not? Following or not following is something one can decide in the present moment; the number of years and kalpas is not.

Take 「以布施破慳；持戒折薄諸煩惱；忍辱開福德門」 tr. "giving breaks stinginess; upholding the precepts subdues and thins the afflictions; patience opens the gate of merit" and prescribe medicine for your own effort. Each of the five perfections has what it treats; they are not five equally good things. One whose stinginess is heavy need not first seek concentration; one who is scattered need not first seek what is hard to practise—first see where the sickness lies, then take the corresponding perfection. Using the wrong medicine is not without effect; it is slow.

Take 「先籌量分別斷一切著，然後布施，是則般若在前導」 tr. "first he reckons and distinguishes and cuts off all clinging, and afterwards he gives—this is prajñā leading the way in front" and train in actual giving. At the time of giving, first look at whether anything is set up in the three places of giver, receiver, and wealth; once the three places are empty, the giving is pāramitā. What is called prajñā leading the way in front is not first sitting in meditation and then doing good; it is cutting off the place of clinging before one sets one's hand to the deed.

Take 「其苗雖好，穢草多故，不能增長」 tr. "though its sprouts are good, because foul weeds are many they cannot increase" and examine why long practice brings no progress. When one makes effort and sees no progress, do not first ask whether the sprouts are good; go and look at the foul weeds—the mind that grasps at marks, the mind that counts results, the mind that approves of itself. Removing the weeds is making the sprouts grow; there is no need to seek fertiliser elsewhere.

Take 「以其心有悕望故」 tr. "because in his mind there are hopes" as the mirror of the third losing. Whenever in the mind there arises that moment of ‘only my doing it this way is the true path’, this losing is present. This thought is the hardest to notice, because it always appears together with correct conduct. The way to notice it is only one sentence: see whether, in that thought, there is a self waiting to be affirmed.

Take 「是法不可得知，如是行者則無失」 tr. "this dharma cannot be found or known; one who practises thus is without losing" and put down the mind that seeks proof. What is known is 「不可得知」 tr. "cannot be found or known", not knowing a thing called ultimate emptiness. Whenever you feel that you ‘have understood emptiness’, this sentence can serve as a question: has what you understood become, once again, something that can be attained?

Take 「不貪貴佛、不輕賤餘人，於一切眾生其心平等」 tr. "does not covet and prize the Buddha and does not slight and despise other people; towards all beings his mind is equal" and weigh your own reverence and contempt. Revering the Buddha and slighting people are two faces of one and the same discriminating mind; one who truly sees that what the Buddha attained is nothing attained will naturally not have his reverence fall upon high and low. In daily life, at the moment you find yourself looking down on someone, come back to this sentence.

Take 「不合不散」 tr. "neither joined nor dispersed" and view the gatherings and partings of people and affairs. Joining is formed by the inverted afflictions; dispersing is seen by the contemplation of right wisdom; once one knows that from the first there is no joining, then there is also no such thing as dispersing. This contemplation is best used on the meeting and parting of relationships and the coming and going of circumstances—not forcing oneself to say there is no feeling, but not setting up real existence on 「合」 tr. "joining", so that when dispersing comes there is nothing to be ruined.

Take 「如人溉灌樹時，雖未見果實」 tr. "as when a person waters a tree, though he has not yet seen the fruit" and bear the times when effort shows no result. At the time of watering the fruit has not yet appeared, and yet what is done is not in vain; what one waits for is 「時節和合」 tr. "the season coming together", and the season coming together the treatise-author explains as 「具足諸法」 tr. "the fulfilment of the dharmas"—not sitting and waiting for the days to pass, but making the conditions complete one by one. So what should be done when no result is seen is to examine the conditions, not to wait more intently.

Take 「入陣，破賊而不被瘡」 tr. "entering battle, breaking the bandits, and receiving no wound" and examine your mind after a matter is done. When a matter is accomplished and the mind has elation, has weariness, has calculation—that is receiving a wound. Achievement without injury is exactly 「具足六波羅蜜，而不著六波羅蜜」 tr. "fulfilling the six perfections and not clinging to the six perfections". Each time a matter is finished, one can examine oneself by this once.

Take 「肉眼所見，與牛羊無異，不可信」 tr. "what the fleshly eye sees is no different from what cattle and sheep see; it cannot be trusted" and restrain the habit of taking direct perception as the standard of judgement. What is taken away is not the content of what you see; it is your taking ‘I saw it with my own eyes’ as the ground of a conclusion. When you find yourself saying ‘I clearly saw it’, this saying is exactly what applies.

Further Resonances

On the place of this fascicle within the whole chapter, the sectional divisions of the two commentaries of the ancient masters are roughly the same, while their fullness and brevity complement each other. Jizang's Commentary on the Larger Sūtra, at the beginning of this chapter, first distinguishes the meaning of the name 「方便」 tr. "skilful means", with very clear choices: 「今經云方便者，照空為實，遊空不著，涉有無滯，運用善巧，故名方便也。」 tr. "What this sūtra calls skilful means is this: illuminating emptiness is the real; roaming in emptiness without clinging, crossing into existence without obstruction, applying good skill—therefore it is called skilful means." Before that he sets it against the two sūtras, the Lotus and the Śrīmālā—the Lotus takes the One Vehicle as the real and the three as skilful means; the Śrīmālā sums up the two wisdoms as the One Vehicle, and the One Vehicle is also called skilful means; Jizang judges that these two 「皆是總義」 tr. "are both the general sense", while this sūtra 「即開一乘為方便，故是別義也」 tr. "opens the One Vehicle as skilful means, and so it is the specific sense". Having finished distinguishing the name, he then gives the division of the whole chapter: 「上明方便體及方便用竟，今第三歎釋方便勸學者修行。第一明昔因久遠歎行方便人，第二歎方便妙用窮能善巧，第三歎行方便人得無邊功德。」 tr. "Above, the substance of skilful means and the function of skilful means have been made clear; now, third, skilful means is praised and explained, exhorting trainees to practise. First, it makes clear that the former causes are long and distant, praising the person who practises skilful means; second, it praises the wondrous function of skilful means, exhausting its capacity for good skill; third, it praises the person who practises skilful means as obtaining boundless merit." What this fascicle explains falls on the greater part of his first and second sections, and the four gates of the brief and extensive at the end have already entered the front portion of his third section.

On the order of the three questions, Jizang's explanation brings out what the treatise-author explains and is still simpler: 「雖發心時久，未必多見佛，故問供養幾佛。雖復見佛，或住人天二乘，及有得善根，故問種何等善根。」 tr. "Though the time since arousing the mind is long, he has not necessarily seen many buddhas, so it asks how many buddhas he has made offerings to. Though he has seen the Buddha, he may abide in the human and heavenly states or the two vehicles, or have roots of goodness with something to be attained, so it asks what roots of goodness he has planted."—the three matters of how long, seeing the Buddha, and roots of goodness cannot stand in for one another at any layer; this is exactly why none of the three questions can be omitted. On the Buddha's answer, the phrase 「初發心度無不具足」 tr. "from the first arousing of the mind, of the perfections there is none not fulfilled", Jizang further sets up a question and answer of his own to resolve its difficulty: 「問：得無生可言具足六度，云何初心便是具足？答：發心畢竟二不別故，初是後初，初後既具後亦具」 tr. "Question: Having obtained non-arising, one could say that the six perfections are fulfilled; how is it that the first mind is already fulfilled? Answer: Because the arousing of the mind and the ultimate are not two and not separate, the first is the first of the later; since first and later are both complete, the later too is complete", and at the end comes to rest in 「是故發心即作無生觀，故六度具足也」 tr. "therefore in arousing the mind one at once makes the contemplation of non-arising, and so the six perfections are fulfilled". Explaining the completeness of the first mind by the non-duality of arousing the mind and the ultimate is the meaning Jizang brings out in this place; it and this treatise's explanation each form a road of their own, recorded side by side without judgement.

On the ten similes, Jizang first gives the pairing of an 「古解」 tr. "old explanation"—「初有十譬。古解言：十譬兩三相著，皆是歎上無盡品中三事也」 tr. "First there are ten similes. The old explanation says: the ten similes cling together in twos and threes, and all praise the three matters in the Inexhaustible chapter above"—and pairs them one by one with: being able to form the substance, forming the name, outside evil not interfering, forming inner practice, according in the cause, carefully reaching the result, the first establishing, later care, its understanding, and not discriminating within the understanding. What he pairs is not sectioned in the same way as this treatise's explanation simile by simile, yet what the two make clear does not conflict. Jizang also explicitly cites this treatise to resolve the doubt about the rivers and streams entering the sea: 「論云：薩婆若是般若異名」 tr. "The treatise says: sarvajñā is another name for prajñā", and extends it, saying 「五度入般若中皆成般若，般若變薩婆若」 tr. "the five perfections, entering into prajñā, all become prajñā, and prajñā changes into sarvajñā"—entirely the same as the treatise-author's answer in this fascicle. On the question of the foremost real meaning, Jizang also cites this treatise: 「論云：先就未得聖道空故直云空，今說得聖道空故云」 tr. "The treatise says: before, it was on the emptiness of one who has not yet obtained the noble path, and so it simply said emptiness; now it speaks of the emptiness of one who has obtained the noble path, and so it says", which is exactly what the phrase in this fascicle, 「先說未得聖道空，今說得聖道空」 tr. "what was spoken before was the emptiness of one who has not yet obtained the noble path; what is spoken now is the emptiness of one who has obtained the noble path", rests on.

On the losings, the most perilous part of this fascicle, Jizang sets up the section heading 「失中四失」 tr. "the four losings within losing", corresponding one by one with this treatise: the first losing is 「內著我、外著空，云我能行生、法二空」 tr. "clinging inwardly to a self and outwardly to emptiness, saying: I am able to practise the two emptinesses of beings and of dharmas"; the second losing is 「破著空方是般若，復著般若即是著空」 tr. "only breaking the clinging to emptiness is prajñā; clinging again to prajñā is clinging to emptiness"; the third losing is 「今住波若能具萬行，是行菩薩道，此亦失也」 tr. "now abiding in prajñā one can fulfil the myriad practices, and this is practising the bodhisattva path—this too is losing", and he dissects the mind in it, saying 「此人謂由般若故能具萬行，雖非是空不空，終有般若能成萬行，故失也」 tr. "this person thinks that it is because of prajñā that he can fulfil the myriad practices; though it is not emptiness or non-emptiness, in the end there is a prajñā that can accomplish the myriad practices, and so it is losing"; the fourth losing is 「我是生死凡夫，未能了無生，故所學皆失，唯諸佛不取相無過失。我所學佛所知，如佛所知為眾生說法，亦是失也」 tr. "I am an ordinary person in birth and death and have not yet been able to understand non-arising, so what I train in is all losing; only the buddhas do not grasp at marks and are without fault. What I train in is what the Buddha knows; as the Buddha knows, I speak the Dharma for beings—this too is losing", and at the end he explicitly cites this treatise: 「論云：著佛道故失。」 tr. "The treatise says: because of clinging to the Buddha path, it is losing." In this place Jizang further sets down a passage of extremely severe words: 「今諸法實相，何佛不佛而起佛見耶？何曾有悟不悟？而汝言凡夫未悟，佛是悟耶？乃見有失不皆是失，見悟不悟皆是不悟也。」 tr. "Now, in the real mark of all dharmas, what Buddha or non-Buddha is there, that one should give rise to a view of the Buddha? When has there ever been awakened or not awakened? And yet you say the ordinary person is not yet awakened and the Buddha is awakened? Thus seeing that there is losing is itself nothing but losing; seeing awakened and not awakened is itself nothing but not being awakened."—gathering the four losings with 「見悟不悟皆是不悟」 tr. "seeing awakened and not awakened is itself nothing but not being awakened", his blade is more exposed than this treatise's. As for the section that makes clear the attaining set against the losing, Jizang divides it, saying: 「上四皆失，今不應無得，故問云何無是過失也。」 tr. "The four above are all losing; now there should not be no attaining, and so he asks how one is without these faults." And he explains the Buddha's answer, saying: 「以了諸法無所有即無取著，不著空、不著空空、不著菩薩道、不著佛，一無所取故是清淨，故無上過失也。」 tr. "Because one understands that dharmas are without anything existent, there is no grasping and clinging: not clinging to emptiness, not clinging to the emptiness of emptiness, not clinging to the bodhisattva path, not clinging to the Buddha; because there is nothing whatever taken, it is pure, and so there are none of the faults above." The list of four non-clingings corresponds exactly to the three losings gathered in this treatise together with the one losing of 「著佛所行」 tr. "clinging to what the Buddha practises".

On the passage about training in the six perfections, Jizang divides it into two trainings: 「佛答中初作不合散習，有諸煩惱為合，正觀求不得為散，今深習般若不見，此合散也。次作不住習，恐不見散謂是正觀，故欲寄心於中住，故明無住習也。」 tr. "In the Buddha's answer, first there is the training of neither joining nor dispersing: having the afflictions is joining; seeking with right contemplation and not finding is dispersing; now, training deeply in prajñā, one does not see this joining and dispersing. Next there is the training of not abiding: it is feared that, not seeing dispersing, one will call this right contemplation and so wish to lodge the mind in it and abide there, and therefore it makes clear the training of non-abiding."—explaining where the training of not abiding comes from by ‘the fear that one will lodge the mind in it and abide there’ goes one step further in understanding the section of this treatise 「不應作是念：『我以真智慧令色等諸法清淨而住其中』」 tr. "one should not have this thought: ‘With true wisdom I make form and the other dharmas pure and abide in them’". On the simile of planting a tree, Jizang matches the meanings, saying: 「士夫是菩薩，樹子為般若水，為五度得無上菩提果也。」 tr. "The man is the bodhisattva; the seed of the tree is prajñā; the water is the five perfections; one obtains the fruit of unsurpassed awakening."

On the brief and the extensive, Jizang records two explanations and keeps both: 「一解云：八萬法藏為廣，一部為略，乃至一長行為廣，一偈為略也。二解云：略廣是總別義也。」 tr. "One explanation says: the eighty thousand treasuries of Dharma are the extensive, one text is the brief, and so on down to one prose passage being the extensive and one verse the brief. The second explanation says: brief and extensive are the meaning of general and specific." These two explanations have the same order as the two meanings the treatise-author brings out one after the other in this fascicle—the extensive and brief of the measure of text, and the general and specific of the marks of meaning. On the four gates, Jizang explains the one gate of the nature of dharmas, saying: 「法性無有此彼分，故云無非分也」 tr. "The nature of dharmas has no division into this and that, and so it says without non-parts"; explaining the one gate of neither joined nor dispersed, he points out what it treats: 「第四句不合散者，人多謂如等三法為境，悟此三法生智，智與境合，故今明不合散也。」 tr. "The fourth phrase, neither joined nor dispersed: people mostly take the three dharmas, suchness and the rest, as the object; awakening to these three dharmas gives rise to knowledge, and knowledge joins with the object; therefore it now makes clear neither joined nor dispersed."—speaking of what the fourth gate breaks as the attachment to the joining of object and knowledge is the meaning Jizang brings out at this gate. At the end he concludes on the name 「略攝」 tr. "brief gathering", saying: 「略攝般若者，知如等四法故，便知略廣，名略攝般若也。」 tr. "The brief gathering of prajñā: because one knows the four dharmas, suchness and the rest, one then knows the brief and the extensive; this is called the brief gathering of prajñā."

Of Huiying's Commentary on this chapter only one passage survives, and it falls exactly on what this fascicle explains. He explains the order of the chapter, saying: 「第六十八品者，名為方便品，即是方便門中第三品也。」 tr. "The sixty-eighth chapter is named the Skilful Means chapter; it is the third chapter within the gate of skilful means."—Huiying here too writes 「第六十八品」 tr. "the sixty-eighth chapter", agreeing with the Shōgozō and Ishiyama-dera manuscripts' chapter order that is one fewer; this is the third document in which this reading is independently seen. He explains why this chapter comes after the previous chapter: 「上明菩薩於一度中而能具足諸波羅蜜，今明所以然者，由菩薩善巧方便故，所以如此，故次六度相攝品後明方便品。」 tr. "Above it made clear that the bodhisattva, within one perfection, is able to fulfil the perfections; now it makes clear why this is so: it is because of the bodhisattva's good skill in skilful means that it is thus, and so after the chapter The Six Perfections Contain One Another it makes clear the Skilful Means chapter."—corresponding exactly to the phrase the treatise-author cites at the beginning of his explanation in this fascicle, 「一波羅蜜邊能生五波羅蜜，行一波羅蜜即能具五波羅蜜，如上品中說」 tr. "from the side of one perfection he can give rise to the five perfections, and by practising one perfection he can fulfil the five perfections, as was said in the previous chapter".

Huiying sets up a four-part division for this chapter: 「就此品中大有四分」 tr. "Within this chapter there are broadly four parts"—the first distinguishes skilful means in terms of the person; the second, from 「譬如日月周行照四天下」 tr. "it is as the sun and moon go round illuminating the four continents" onward, 「明波若方便導成眾行」 tr. "makes clear that the skilful means of prajñā guides and accomplishes the many practices"; 「第三明脩因得果，名為因果方便。第四明菩薩善學波若雙照二諦，名為照達方便。有此四意。」 tr. "the third makes clear cultivating the cause and obtaining the result, called the skilful means of cause and fruit. The fourth makes clear that the bodhisattva trains well in prajñā, illuminating the two truths together, called the skilful means of illuminating penetration. There are these four intents." What this fascicle explains spans his second, third, and fourth parts. The starting point of his third part Huiying ties to 「爾時須菩提白佛言：世尊！若一切法自性空，云何菩薩摩訶薩行六波羅蜜當得阿耨多提已下」 tr. "At that time Subhūti addressed the Buddha: World-Honored One! If all dharmas are empty of self-nature, how will the bodhisattva-mahāsattva, practising the six perfections, obtain anuttarā … awakening—from here onward"—exactly the place in this fascicle where the treatise-author takes up Subhūti's first difficulty.

What Huiying's commentary takes up passage by passage is all sūtra text of fascicle eighty-two, and what he explains often touches on the treatise-author's text in this fascicle; on the section of the buddha-land of Lion's Thunder-Voice, the sūtra phrase he takes up, 「除智慧不可以餘法度脫眾生已下」 tr. "excepting wisdom, beings cannot be delivered by any other dharma—from here onward", lies in the sūtra text of the First Part, while the matter he explains is exactly what the treatise-author cites in this fascicle, and his text is more detailed than this treatise's: 「除智慧不可以餘法度脫眾生已下，如師子雷音佛國，種種寶玩皆勝諸天，亦無行戒施等福德事，但彼諸樹等皆能出實相音，令眾生得解得無生法忍至薩婆若。」 tr. "‘Excepting wisdom, beings cannot be delivered by any other dharma’—from here onward: as in the buddha-land of Lion's Thunder-Voice, the various jewels and treasures all surpass those of the gods, and yet there are no meritorious matters such as practising the precepts and giving; it is only that the trees there and the rest can all give forth the sound of the real mark, causing beings to obtain understanding, obtain the acceptance of the non-arising of dharmas, and arrive at sarvajñā." And he judges its meaning, saying: 「此國唯以智慧得佛，如諸天等雖有福德而不能至佛，唯智慧可有獨得佛之義，故云除智慧。若此間國土等始須福智二事得佛，如彼國者唯智慧得佛道也。」 tr. "In this land buddhahood is obtained by wisdom alone; as the gods and the rest, though they have merit, cannot arrive at buddhahood, only wisdom can have the meaning of obtaining buddhahood alone, and so it says ‘excepting wisdom’. In lands such as this one, one needs the two things, merit and wisdom, to obtain buddhahood; in a land like that one, the Buddha path is obtained by wisdom alone."—speaking separately of the two roads to buddhahood in this land and that land exactly resolves why the passage of 「復有人言」 tr. "someone further says" in this fascicle stands together with the preceding answer without contradicting it. Here Huiying further records his teacher's different explanation, citing the Sūtra of Maitreya's Ascent and the larger-text sūtra to speak of the bounds between causal nature and the Buddha-nature, and at the end says 「一解有者，不妨當說」 tr. "if there is one explanation, there is no harm in speaking of it"—keeping it without deciding; it is recorded as it is.

On the simile of the four kinds of troops, Huiying only explains the name: 「四兵者，謂車、馬、步、象等也，當說。」 tr. "The four troops are chariots, horses, foot soldiers, elephants, and so on; this will be spoken of." The passage of 「多有所學實無所學」 tr. "having much to train in and in reality nothing to train in" Huiying divides as the beginning of his fourth part: 「第四、明菩薩善學波若雙照二諦照達方便也。」 tr. "Fourth, it makes clear the skilful means of illuminating penetration, by which the bodhisattva trains well in prajñā, illuminating the two truths together." On the two marks of brief and extensive, Huiying's definition is the simplest: 「略相即是總相，廣相即是別相，大小兩乘盡有此總別二相也」 tr. "The brief mark is the general mark, the extensive mark is the specific marks; both vehicles, great and small, all have these two marks, general and specific"—the same as the treatise-author's second meaning in this fascicle, and further pointing out that the two marks, general and specific, run through both vehicles, great and small. The very last words of his commentary take up the question in the sūtra text of the First Part, 「云何菩薩摩訶薩知一切法略廣相」 tr. "how does the bodhisattva-mahāsattva know the brief and extensive marks of all dharmas", and the treatise's explanation corresponding to it is passage 70 of this fascicle: 「云何菩薩摩訶薩知一切法略廣相已下，欲廣明之，故設此問也。」 tr. "‘How does the bodhisattva-mahāsattva know the brief and extensive marks of all dharmas’—from here onward: wishing to make it clear at length, he sets up this question."—the extant text of Huiying's Commentary stops here; fascicle twenty-four ends, and nothing follows; from this chapter onward, therefore, there is no such commentary to consult. The place where it stops falls just before the four gates of this fascicle, so for the explanation of the four gates in the last passages of this fascicle, of the two commentaries only Jizang's can be cited as evidence.

The variant readings attached to the final sentence of this fascicle are recorded together below without choosing between them. In the sentence 「略攝聞是安隱道故」 tr. "because the brief gathering, when heard, is the path of peace and security", for the character 「聞」 tr. "heard" the base text has 「聞」 tr. "heard", and the four editions of Song, Yuan, Ming, and the Ishiyama-dera manuscript have 「門」 tr. "gate". The two readings each make sense: reading 「聞」 tr. "heard", it carries on from the preceding text in which Subhūti heard the four gates, meaning that hearing these four gates is the path of peace and security; reading 「門」 tr. "gate", it ties directly to the name 「四門」 tr. "four gates" of suchness, the nature of dharmas, the limit of reality, and neither joined nor dispersed in the preceding text, meaning that these four gates are the path of peace and security. The treatise-author's explanation in this fascicle reads exactly 「須菩提聞佛說如、法性、實際、不合不散四門」 tr. "Subhūti heard the Buddha speak of the four gates—suchness, the nature of dharmas, the limit of reality, and neither joined nor dispersed", so both readings have something to rely on here, and both are kept. Further, in the title at the end of this fascicle, the base text has 「論」 tr. "treatise" where the Ishiyama-dera manuscript has 「經」 tr. "sūtra"; below the fascicle number, the three editions of Song, Yuan, and the Palace add 「釋第六十九品上」 tr. "explaining the sixty-ninth chapter, first part", and the Ishiyama-dera manuscript adds 「釋第六十八品上」 tr. "explaining the sixty-eighth chapter, first part"—the Ishiyama-dera manuscript's chapter order being one fewer is consistent with what was seen before in the Shōgozō and Ishiyama-dera manuscripts and in Huiying's commentary.

The Great Skilful Means, Last Part: Why the Sentence ‘This Gate Is What Those of Keen Faculties Enter’ Is Not the Buddha's Words, Why the Buddha Removes the Limit of Keen Faculties Altogether, Why the Three Chinese Characters Rendered Here as ‘Trains with a Single Mind’ Are the True Threshold, Why ‘the Deeds of Māra Cease the Moment They Would Arise’ Is Tied to Practice and Not to Guarding, Why the Space of a Single Finger-Snap Surpasses Teaching the Beings of a World to Obtain the Path, Why Abiding as Taught Is at Once Judged to Be Avaivartika, Why So Long a List of Knowing Well Is Explained Only in Small Part, Why the Four Gates Can Be Matched with the Eightfold Noble Path, Why ‘Only Prajñā Can Reach’ and ‘Reaches Because Joined with the Five Perfections’ Do Not Contradict One Another, Why Knowing Well Letters and Knowing Well No Letters Lie One in Gathering Merit and One in Breaking Inversions, Why the Eleven Names of the Wisdoms Each Have an Illness They Answer, Why Skilful Means and Waiting for Beings Are Two Faces of One Matter, and Why ‘Because They Are Hard to Understand They Are Explained, What Is Easy to Understand Is Not Spoken’ Is the Avowal of Method for the Whole Section

What Is Being Asked

The Last Part comes on from fascicle eighty-two. In the closing section of the Middle Part the treatise-author has already tied off the meaning of the four gates—Subhūti, hearing the Buddha speak of the four gates of suchness, the nature of dharmas, the limit of reality, and neither joined nor dispersed, knows the brief and extensive marks, and so says 「是名略攝般若波羅蜜」 tr. "this is named the brief gathering of prajñāpāramitā". The very first sentence of the Last Part's fascicle follows right on from this sentence: 「世尊！是門，利根菩薩摩訶薩所入。」 tr. "World-Honored One! This gate is what the bodhisattva-mahāsattva of keen faculties enters." Here the reader must first see one thing clearly: the one who says this sentence is not the Buddha. The sūtra text does not again mark words addressed to the Buddha; it carries on from what precedes only with the vocative ‘World-Honored One’, and when the treatise section below restates this passage of its own accord, it sets Subhūti's meaning and the Buddha's answer straight against each other—「須菩提意：以四種門雖安隱，以甚深故，利根者乃得入。佛答：「無不入者。」」 tr. "Subhūti's meaning is: though these four kinds of gates are peaceful and secure, because they are very deep, only people of keen faculties can enter them. The Buddha answered: ‘There is none who cannot enter.’" The attribution is made clear by the treatise itself and does not wait on conjecture. What is asked is no longer what the four gates are, but who can enter the four gates.

The Buddha's answer removes altogether the threshold that Subhūti had set up: 「鈍根菩薩亦可入是門，中根菩薩、散心菩薩亦可入是門」 tr. "the bodhisattva of dull faculties can also enter this gate; the bodhisattva of middling faculties and the bodhisattva of scattered mind can also enter this gate", and he lays down a general verdict—「是門無礙」 tr. "this gate is without obstruction". Having removed it, he at once supplies the true threshold, and this threshold does not fall on the keenness or dullness of the faculties; it falls on the single mind of training: 「若菩薩摩訶薩一心學者皆入是門。」 tr. "If a bodhisattva-mahāsattva trains with a single mind, all can enter this gate." Next he brings out the four who cannot enter and the four who can enter, pair against pair; then he brings out two kinds of people who can enter, the one those who wish to abide in the ground of the avaivartika, the other those who wish to attain the omniscience of all kinds. The first question and the first answer of this unit lie wholly here.

After the first answer the sūtra text turns all the way into praise of virtues. First it speaks of the dharma to be trained in—to train as prajñāpāramitā teaches, and so on up to training as dānapāramitā teaches; next it speaks of the proof of practising prajñā—whatever deeds of Māra there are cease the moment they would arise; next it speaks of the response to practising prajñā—the buddhas now present in immeasurable asaṃkhyeya lands of the ten directions keep this bodhisattva in mind, and the reason for it is a single sentence: the buddhas of the three times are born from within this prajñāpāramitā. Next it compares merit: cultivation for even the space of a single finger-snap surpasses teaching the beings of the three-thousand great-thousand world to give as they please, to uphold the precepts, meditative concentration, and wisdom, to obtain liberation and the knowledge and vision of liberation, and so on up to obtaining the four fruits and the pratyekabuddha path; and, pushing it wider, from a moment, half a day, one day, up to immeasurable, boundless asaṃkhyeya kalpas, it surpasses teaching the beings of worlds as many as the sands of the Ganges in the ten directions. At the end it turns into a long praise: one who abides as taught is precisely avaivartika, is kept in mind by the buddhas, has accomplished the power of skilful means, has drawn near to and made offerings to immeasurable buddhas, has long practised the six perfections and long cultivated all dharmas, abides in the ground of the Dharma-prince, fulfils his vows, is never apart from the buddhas, has inexhaustible eloquence and has fully obtained dhāraṇī, and because his bodily form and his receiving of the prediction are complete he takes on a body for the sake of beings—and it is gathered up in one extremely long list of headings: knows well the gates of letters, knows well what are not gates of letters, and from there ranged all the way down to knows well how to distinguish the three vehicles.

What the treatise section has to deal with is therefore three matters. First, who can enter the four gates—the treatise-author does not answer directly; he first sets up a simile, next matches the four gates with the eightfold noble path, and at the end sets the short knowledge of the Small Vehicle against the Buddha's breath of great compassion, making the difference between Subhūti and the Buddha clear. Second, the contradiction between training in prajñā and training in the five perfections—since the sūtra says that one who trains as prajñā teaches then obtains omniscience, why does the treatise-author also say that one reaches it because prajñā is joined with the five perfections? This difficulty the treatise-author raises himself and answers himself. Third, how so long a list of headings is to be explained—the treatise-author does not explain every heading to the end; he picks out only what is hard to understand to explain, and at the end of the section avows his method himself: 「如是難解故解說，易解者不說。」 tr. "Because such things are hard to understand, they are explained; what is easy to understand is not spoken." The whole unit can be gathered up at this point into one question: since the four gates are very deep gates, why is the place of entry on the contrary so wide; and what is obtained after entering, why is it so broad an expanse of fine and close knowing well?

Passage by Passage

1. Subhūti says that this gate is what the bodhisattva-mahāsattva of keen faculties enters. The first sentence of the Last Part is spoken carrying on from the words of the previous fascicle. Subhūti has just said that the four gates are the brief gathering of prajñā, and next he lays down a judgement: this gate is what the bodhisattva-mahāsattva of keen faculties enters. This judgement has its line of reasoning—the four gates are suchness, the nature of dharmas, the limit of reality, and neither joined nor dispersed, none of them dharmas with marks that can be climbed on, and one who hears them and can enter should not be of dull faculties. Here the reader must first recognise the speaker: the sūtra text does not again bring out the mark of words addressed to the Buddha, but carries on from what precedes only with the vocative ‘World-Honored One’, and the treatise section of its own accord restates it as Subhūti's meaning; therefore this sentence belongs to Subhūti and not to the Buddha. Whenever the sūtra text carries on from what precedes directly with a vocative, one should look back at the speaker above, and not, because the next sentence has the two Chinese characters rendered here as ‘the Buddha said’, assign the sentence above to the Buddha as well.

2. The Buddha says that the bodhisattvas of dull faculties, of middling faculties, and of scattered mind can also enter this gate, that this gate is without obstruction, and that those who train with a single mind all enter; the four who cannot enter and the four who can enter; those who wish to abide in the ground of the avaivartika and who wish to attain the omniscience of all kinds can enter. The Buddha's answer is in three sections. First, three kinds of people can all enter—dull faculties, middling faculties, scattered mind, precisely the three kinds Subhūti had not reckoned; he lays down a general verdict, 「是門無礙」 tr. "this gate is without obstruction", four Chinese characters that dismantle the threshold completely. Second, he sets up the true threshold: 「若菩薩摩訶薩一心學者皆入是門。」 tr. "If a bodhisattva-mahāsattva trains with a single mind, all can enter this gate." This sentence is the eye of the whole section—what is sifted is not the faculties; it is whether the mind is single or not. Third, with eight words set against each other he brings out those who cannot enter and those who can: 「懈怠、少精進、妄憶念、亂心者所不能入，精進、不懈怠、正憶念、攝心者能入。」 tr. "The lazy, those of little vigour, those of false recollection, and those of disordered mind are those who cannot enter; the vigorous, the not lazy, those of right recollection, and those of collected mind can enter." Four illnesses and four medicines, set one against one, and all four belong to the workings of the mind; not one belongs to the nature of the faculties. At the end he brings out two kinds of people who can enter—「欲住阿鞞跋致地、欲逮一切種智者能入」 tr. "those who wish to abide in the ground of the avaivartika, and those who wish to attain the omniscience of all kinds, can enter"—and this is said with respect to aspiration. The reader should look at them together: the gate is without obstruction and people obstruct themselves; the place of obstruction lies in laziness and a disordered mind, not in keenness or dullness.

3. The Buddha says that training as prajñā and so on up to dānapāramitā teach, one will obtain omniscience, and that when one practises prajñā, whatever deeds of Māra there are cease the moment they would arise. Having opened the gate, the Buddha at once points out what is to be trained in. One must see clearly the sentence pattern here—「如般若波羅蜜所說當學，乃至如檀波羅蜜所說當學」 tr. "he should train as prajñāpāramitā teaches, and so on up to: he should train as dānapāramitā teaches"—it speaks from prajñā back to dāna, not from dāna on to prajñā. What is to be trained in being complete, only then does he give a sentence of proof: 「所有魔事欲起即滅」 tr. "whatever deeds of Māra there are cease the moment they would arise". This sentence is well worth savouring—it is not that the practitioner first goes to detect Māra, guard against Māra, break Māra; it is that the deeds of Māra cease of themselves at the moment they would arise. The proof is tied to the one matter of practising prajñā, not to the work of guarding against Māra. If the reader here gives rise to a thought of counteracting, he has misunderstood this sentence.

4. The Buddha says that one who wishes to obtain the power of skilful means should practise prajñā; that the buddhas now present in the ten directions keep in mind the bodhisattva who thus practises, trains, and cultivates, because the buddhas of the three times are born from within prajñā; that one should reflect, ‘The dharma the buddhas have obtained, I too shall obtain’; and that one who trains thus swiftly obtains awakening, and should constantly not be far from the thought of sarvajñā. The skilful means of the chapter title is here clearly tied to prajñā: 「菩薩摩訶薩欲得方便力，當行般若波羅蜜。」 tr. "The bodhisattva-mahāsattva who wishes to obtain the power of skilful means should practise prajñāpāramitā." Next it speaks of the buddhas' keeping in mind—the buddhas now present in immeasurable asaṃkhyeya lands keep in mind this bodhisattva who practises prajñā, and the Buddha himself gives the reason for it: 「是般若波羅蜜中生過去、未來、現在諸佛故」 tr. "because from within this prajñāpāramitā are born the buddhas of the past, the future, and the present". This answer does not speak from stimulus and response; it speaks from where they come from: prajñā is that from which the buddhas are born, so one who practises prajñā shares the same root with the buddhas, and those who keep him in mind are of themselves keeping in mind that from which they came. The sūtra text at once turns this meaning into a thought the practitioner can hold—the dharma that the buddhas of the past, the future, and the present have obtained, I too shall obtain. At the end it is gathered into the plainest sentence of all: one should constantly not be far from the thought of sarvajñā.

5. The Buddha says that cultivation for even the space of a finger-snap has very much merit, surpassing teaching the beings of the three-thousand great-thousand world to give as they please, to uphold the precepts, meditative concentration, and wisdom, to obtain liberation and the knowledge and vision of liberation, and to obtain the four fruits and the pratyekabuddha path; because these dharmas are born from within prajñā. This passage compares merit. One side of the comparison is extremely small—cultivating prajñā for even the space of a single finger-snap; the other side is extremely large—teaching the beings of a great-thousand world to practise giving, morality, concentration, and wisdom, to obtain liberation and the knowledge and vision of liberation, and so on up to teaching them to obtain the fruit of the srota-āpanna and so on up to the fruit of the arhat and the pratyekabuddha path. The small surpasses the large, and the reason is still the same sentence: these dharmas are all born from within prajñā, and the buddhas now present in the ten directions are also born from within prajñā. Here the reader should see clearly what is being compared: not the length of time of the practice, but the rank, among dharmas, of the dharma that is cultivated. Cultivating for an instant at the place from which they are born surpasses teaching a world upon the dharmas that are born.

6. The Buddha says that practising prajñā with the thought of sarvajñā, from a moment, half a day, one day, and so on up to immeasurable, boundless asaṃkhyeya kalpas, has very much merit, surpassing teaching the beings of worlds as many as the sands of the Ganges in the ten directions to obtain the fruits; because the buddhas are born from within prajñā and speak these dharmas. The previous passage took the shortness of a finger-snap as its example; this passage speaks on the contrary from length: a moment, half a day, one day, one month, a hundred days, one year, a hundred years, one kalpa, a hundred kalpas, and so on up to immeasurable, boundless asaṃkhyeya kalpas. The side being compared is also pushed from one great-thousand world to worlds as many as the sands of the Ganges in the ten directions. The short already surpasses it, and the long surpasses it too—from which it can be seen that what surpasses does not lie in the length of time, but still lies in the dharma practised. What matters is the first sentence of this passage: 「菩薩摩訶薩應薩婆若念行般若波羅蜜」 tr. "the bodhisattva-mahāsattva should practise prajñāpāramitā with the thought of sarvajñā". Practising prajñā and taking sarvajñā as one's thought—only this is the practice being compared here; apart from this thought, however long the time, it is not within the comparison.

7. The Buddha says that one who abides as prajñā teaches should be known to be avaivartika, kept in mind by the buddhas, and accomplished in the power of skilful means; should be known to have drawn near to and made offerings to immeasurable buddhas, planted roots of goodness, kept company with the good friend, long practised the six perfections, and long cultivated the eighteen emptinesses and the four foundations of mindfulness and so on up to the omniscience of all kinds; should be known to abide in the ground of the Dharma-prince, fulfil his vows, never be apart from the buddhas, not be apart from roots of goodness, and go from one buddha-land to another buddha-land; should be known to have inexhaustible eloquence and full dhāraṇī, and, because his bodily form is complete and his receiving of the prediction is complete, to take on a body for the sake of beings. The four rounds of ‘one should know’ in this passage infer backwards from one matter where it came from. What it rests on is only one sentence—「如般若波羅蜜所說住」 tr. "abides as prajñāpāramitā teaches"; from this one sentence it is judged that he is avaivartika, is kept in mind by the buddhas, and has accomplished the power of skilful means. The next three rounds of ‘one should know’ infer his former causes and present position: having drawn near to and made offerings to immeasurable buddhas, having long practised and long cultivated—these are the former causes; abiding in the ground of the Dharma-prince, fulfilling his vows, never being apart from the buddhas—this is the present position; inexhaustible eloquence, full dhāraṇī, the completeness of bodily form and of receiving the prediction—these are its function. The last sentence, 「為眾生受身」 tr. "takes on a body for the sake of beings", is where this passage comes home—the complete body is not taken on for himself; it is taken on for beings. The reader should look at the direction of these four rounds of ‘one should know’: it does not first ask about his former causes and then grant him his present position; it sees where he now abides and then knows what he has accumulated before.

8. The Buddha says one should know that this bodhisattva knows well the gates of letters and what are not gates of letters, is skilled in speech and non-speech, in one word, two words, and many words, in the speech of women and the speech of men; knows well form and so on up to consciousness, the nature of the world and the nature of nirvāṇa, the marks of dharmas, the conditions, the truths, the grounds, fruits, and paths, the faculties, the wisdoms, the three times, skilful means and waiting for beings, the mind and the deep mind, meaning and words, and so on up to knowing well how to distinguish the three vehicles. This is the longest passage of this unit, and also the place where the whole chapter is gathered up. The sūtra text ranges all the way down with the two Chinese characters rendered here as ‘knows well’, starting from the finest, the gates of letters and what are not gates of letters, passing through speech in one, two, and many words, of men and of women, passing through the five aggregates, passing through the nature of the world and the nature of nirvāṇa, passing through the marks of dharmas—conditioned and unconditioned, existent and non-existent, self and other, joined and dispersed, associated and non-associated—passing through suchness and non-suchness, the nature of dharmas and the position of dharmas, conditions and the absence of conditions, passing through the aggregates, elements, and sense-fields, the truths and the twelve links of causes and conditions, meditation and the immeasurable minds and the formless absorptions, the six perfections and the four foundations of mindfulness and so on up to the omniscience of all kinds, passing through the conditioned nature and the unconditioned nature, having a nature and being without nature, passing through the contemplations and the emptiness of the marks, passing through giving up the path and not giving up the path, passing through arising, ceasing, and abiding-and-changing, passing through desire, hatred, and delusion and non-desire, non-hatred, and non-delusion, passing through view and non-view, wrong, right, and all views, passing through name-and-form and the four conditions, passing through practising marks and the four truths, passing through the five paths and the five destinies, passing through the person, path, and fruit of the four fruits, passing through the pratyekabuddha and the Buddha's omniscience and its path, passing through the faculties and the completeness of the faculties, passing through the eleven kinds of wisdom, passing through the three times, passing through skilful means and waiting for beings, passing through the mind and the deep mind, meaning and words, and coming home at the end to knowing well how to distinguish the three vehicles. Here the reader need not at first seek to understand heading by heading—the treatise section will itself pick out what is hard to understand and explain it, and the rest the treatise-author says plainly he does not explain. What is to be seen is the shape of this list: what is known well runs from the finest, letters, to the greatest, the three vehicles, and there is not one dharma in between that is not within it; the one said in the passage above to have accomplished the power of skilful means—the mark of his accomplishment is precisely this great expanse of knowing well.

9. The Buddha concludes that the bodhisattva who practises prajñā, gives rise to prajñā, and cultivates prajñā obtains such benefits as these. Sūtra ② ties off with one sentence: practising, giving rise to, and cultivating prajñāpāramitā, one obtains such various benefits as these. The three Chinese characters set side by side are worth savouring—practising is the rising of function, giving rise is what issues forth, cultivating is continuity. All the praise of virtues and the list of headings above are gathered under these three Chinese characters as the name of benefit. If the reader has read the list of the passage above as a checklist of the bodhisattva's abilities, this sentence reminds him: those are benefits, not qualifications.

10. The treatise-author explains: Subhūti's meaning is that though the four gates are peaceful and secure, because they are very deep only those of keen faculties can enter; the Buddha answers that there is none who cannot enter. The treatise-author begins his explanation by first returning the two opening sentences of Sūtra ② each to its speaker: Subhūti's meaning is that the four gates, though peaceful and secure, are very deep, and so only people of keen faculties can enter them; the Buddha's answer is 「無不入者」 tr. "there is none who cannot enter". This sentence, placed at the head of the section, is precisely the internal evidence for the attribution of speakers in the sūtra text—the limit Subhūti set up and the limit the Buddha removed are set against each other, and here there can be no doubt whose the first sentence of the sūtra is. In reading the treatise one should watch for this kind of self-restatement: the subject used when the treatise-author retells the sūtra's meaning is often the most direct ground for deciding the speaker of a sūtra passage.

11. The treatise-author makes clear that what Subhūti sets up lies in wisdom and keen faculties, while the Buddha's meaning lies in single-minded vigour and the wish to train; he sets up the simile of the clear and cool pool. The treatise-author states the difference between the two parties still more clearly: what Subhūti makes clear is that those of keen faculties in wisdom can enter; the Buddha's meaning is that anyone who with a single mind is vigorous and wishes to train can enter. At once he brings out a simile—it is like a clear and cool pool in the time of heat: all who have eyes and have feet can enter; though it is near, one who does not wish to enter does not enter. This simile is taken with great precision: the pool does not choose people; what it chooses is only eyes and feet, and wishing or not wishing. The four gates and the pool of prajñā are likewise: of the beings of the four quarters there is none whom it bars. The reader should see clearly the three parts in the simile—the pool is what is entered, eyes and feet are the means of entering, wishing to enter is the real key to entering; of the three, the pool never sets a limit.

12. The treatise-author matches the four gates with the eightfold noble path: the not lazy is right vigour, the one without false thought is right mindfulness, the one without a disordered mind is right concentration, the four gates of suchness and the rest are right view, and right view and the rest abiding securely is the practice of the precepts; this eightfold noble path can obtain prajñāpāramitā. The treatise-author fits those whom the sūtra lists as able to enter one by one into the eightfold noble path: the not lazy is right vigour, the one without false thought is right mindfulness, the one without a disordered mind is right concentration; then he matches the four gates themselves as right view—the four gates of suchness and the rest are right view; at the end he takes right view and the rest abiding securely as the practice of the precepts. Put together, the eightfold noble path is complete, and 「此八聖道能得般若波羅蜜」 tr. "this eightfold noble path can obtain prajñāpāramitā". In this matching one thing must be seen clearly: the four marks of those able to enter that the sūtra brings out were originally workings of the mind spoken of scatteredly; once the treatise-author matches them, they become one complete path. Whenever in reading a sūtra one sees headings of virtue listed scatteredly, one can learn this method and look back to see whether they have an order of their own.

13. The treatise-author judges that because Subhūti's knowledge, being of the Small Vehicle, is short, he says only that those of keen faculties can enter, and that because the Buddha, being of the Great Vehicle, has great knowledge, he says that those of middling and dull faculties can enter with the eight dharmas coming together; here he speaks because of the breath of great compassion. Here the treatise-author passes a judgement: because Subhūti's knowledge, being of the Small Vehicle, is short, he says only 「利根者能入」 tr. "people of keen faculties can enter"; because the Buddha, being of the Great Vehicle, has great knowledge, he says 「雖中根、鈍根，八法和合故，能入是四門」 tr. "though they are of middling faculties or dull faculties, because the eight dharmas come together, they can enter these four gates". The so-called eight dharmas coming together is precisely the eightfold noble path matched in the passage above—it is not that the faculties have turned keen; it is that the eight dharmas are used together. The last sentence especially must be looked at: 「佛此中以大悲氣故說」 tr. "here the Buddha, because of the breath of great compassion, says" 「中根、鈍根皆可得入」 tr. "that those of middling faculties and dull faculties can all obtain entry". In judging whether people can or cannot enter, there is a share of knowledge and also a share of compassion; the reason the Buddha opens the gate as far as the middling and the dull, the treatise-author attributes to the breath of great compassion. The reader here should take both meanings together: because of knowledge he knows that they can enter; because of compassion he says that they can enter.

14. The treatise-author makes clear that one who trains in the six perfections as prajñā teaches before long obtains sarvajñā; that as the śrāvaka obtains the path not by right view alone but by practising the eight limbs together, so the Great Vehicle obtains it not by training in prajñā alone but because prajñā is joined with the five perfections. The treatise-author carries on from above and turns: if the bodhisattva can train in the six perfections as prajñā teaches, before long he will obtain sarvajñā. Why must the five perfections be spoken of along with it? He takes the dharma of the śrāvakas as a comparison—one does not obtain the path by right view alone; it is because the eight limbs are practised together. The Great Vehicle is likewise: it is not by training in prajñā alone that one obtains sarvajñā; one obtains it because prajñā is joined with the five perfections. At the end, with 「是故說」 tr. "therefore it is said", he restates the sūtra text: 「菩薩如所說般若波羅蜜，當學得一切智。」 tr. "The bodhisattva should train as prajñāpāramitā teaches, and then he obtains omniscience." The reasoning of this passage continues that of the passage above—the passage above explained the ability to enter by the eight dharmas coming together, this passage explains the ability to obtain by the six perfections practised together; the meaning of practising together runs through them both.

15. Question: Above it was said that only prajñā can reach the omniscience of all kinds; why is it now said that one reaches it because prajñā is joined with the five perfections? The treatise-author raises a difficulty himself, and a very proper one: above it was said again and again that only prajñā can reach the omniscience of all kinds, yet here it is said that one reaches it only when prajñā is joined with the five perfections; before and after seem to contradict. Whenever, in reading the treatise, two statements before and after contradict and one has not noticed it oneself, this question is precisely asking it on the reader's behalf. Here the reader would do well first to answer it once himself, and then look at the treatise-author's answer.

16. Answer: It is constantly said that one reaches it because it is joined with the six perfections; or at times there are pure buddha-lands where, merely by hearing the real mark, one reaches sarvajñā, without needing to practise the perfections in sequence. The treatise-author's answer is in two sections. First, the direct statement: 「常說與六波羅蜜合故得至」 tr. "it is constantly said that one reaches it because it is joined with the six perfections"—the usual teaching is from the first that the six perfections are practised together, not that prajñā practises alone. Second, he opens an exception: or at times there are pure buddha-lands where, merely by hearing the real mark, one reaches sarvajñā, without needing to practise the perfections in sequence. This section deserves great attention—the exception does not lie in the power of prajñā being twofold; it lies in the place where the Dharma is received and the person who receives it being different; in a pure buddha-land, on hearing the real mark one at once arrives—this is not abolishing the five perfections; it is not needing to practise them in sequence. The reader must not take this section as grounds for abolishing practice; what the treatise-author marks is the two Chinese characters rendered here as ‘at times’, not the usual way.

17. The treatise-author makes clear that since it is said here that the bodhisattva obtains sarvajñā, the reward of the merit of prajñā is already complete, and that now it only praises the power and might of the person who practises prajñā; he cites what is said in the sūtra, that the deeds of Māra cease as soon as they arise. The treatise-author settles the rank of the praise of virtues above: since it is said here that the bodhisattva obtains sarvajñā, the reward of the merit of prajñā is already complete; what is now spoken of is no longer the reward, but praise of the power and might of the person who practises prajñā. At once he cites the sūtra's words as evidence: 「是菩薩行般若，所有魔事起即滅。」 tr. "When this bodhisattva practises prajñā, whatever deeds of Māra there are cease as soon as they arise." The reader should distinguish these two layers—the reward is the fruit obtained, the power and might is the mark at the time of practice. For the long section of the sūtra text from the praise of virtues onward, the treatise-author has fixed its nature with a single sentence: it is praise of power and might, not a continued account of the virtues of the fruit.

18. The treatise-author judges that everything from ‘kept in mind by the buddhas’ up to here is praise of the merit of the bodhisattva's practising prajñā, and so on up to knowing well how to distinguish the three vehicles. The treatise-author then passes another general judgement, marking the beginning and end of the section of praise of virtues: from 「諸佛所念」 tr. "kept in mind by the buddhas" above up to here, all is praise of the merit of the bodhisattva's practising prajñā, and so on up to 「分別善知三乘」 tr. "knows well how to distinguish the three vehicles". This judgement is very useful—it tells the reader that the large expanse in between, the comparison of merit and the long list of knowing well, belongs to one and the same section of the outline, and does not each speak on its own. Whenever in reading the treatise one sees the treatise-author mark a beginning and an end, he is drawing the outline for the reader; in reading the sūtra one can divide the sections accordingly.

19. The treatise-author explains that knowing well the gates of letters is as is said in the dhāraṇī of letters, and that not-letters means suchness, the nature of dharmas, and the limit of reality, within which there are no letters; stating its meaning briefly, it lies in knowing well the two dharmas of the world and nirvāṇa: because he gathers the path of merit he knows well letters, because he breaks the inversions within merit he knows well no letters. From here on the treatise-author enters the explanation of the list of headings. He first explains the gates of letters and what are not gates of letters: the gates of letters are 「如文字陀羅尼中說」 tr. "as is said in the dhāraṇī of letters", and the treatise-author does not bring out their headings again; not-letters are 「非字名如、法性、實際，此中無文字」 tr. "not-letters means suchness, the nature of dharmas, and the limit of reality: within these there are no letters"—precisely three of the four gates set up in the Middle Part, from which it can be seen that the not-letters here are not spoken of loosely. Next the treatise-author himself brings out a brief meaning: this bodhisattva, because of the power of immeasurable merit, knows well two dharmas, namely the world and nirvāṇa; if he is weary of the suffering of the world, he keeps nirvāṇa in mind; if he wishes to sink into nirvāṇa, he turns back and keeps the world in mind. At the end he closes with two sentences: 「集諸福德道故，善知字；破福德中顛倒故，善知無字。」 tr. "Because he gathers the path of all merits, he knows well letters; because he breaks the inversions within merit, he knows well no letters." This close is very deft—letters and not-letters are from the first matters of speech, and with a single turn the treatise-author ties them to gathering merit and to breaking inversions; knowing letters is being able to gather, knowing no letters is not clinging to what is gathered.

20. The treatise-author explains speech and non-speech, one word, two words, and many words, the speech of men and the speech of women, making clear that because the bodhisattva knows these matters well he can subdue those of the wrong paths and the powerful and eminent. The treatise-author continues with the explanation of the class of speech. What is called one word is that by this one word one can distinguish how many pure words and impure words there are; one word, two words, many words, the speech of men, the speech of women, and so on—their sounds each differ. At the end he brings out its use: because the bodhisattva knows these matters well, he can subdue those of the wrong paths and the powerful and eminent. The reader should see where this use falls—not in skill in one's own speaking, but in being able to subdue others; subduing those of the outside paths and subduing the powerful and eminent are both uses of speech. The letters and not-letters of the passage above are spoken with respect to principle, the speech and non-speech of this passage are spoken with respect to use; the two passages together form a pair.

21. The treatise-author explains that the two kinds of mark of form and so on up to consciousness—whether permanent or impermanent—are as was said before; he explains giving up the path as going from one ground to another ground, giving up the lower ground without sorrow and obtaining the higher ground without greed, and not giving up the path as abiding within this ground. This passage explains two headings together. The two kinds of mark of the five aggregates the treatise-author passes over with only the three Chinese characters 「如先說」 tr. "as was said before", without bringing them out again—this is precisely the method he avows below. Giving up the path and not giving up the path he explains in detail: giving up the path is that the bodhisattva goes from one ground to another ground, 「捨下地不憂，得上地不貪」 tr. "giving up the lower ground without sorrow and obtaining the higher ground without greed"; not giving up the path is 「住是地中」 tr. "abiding within this ground". One must see clearly that what giving up the path gives up is the ground, not the path—the path practised has never been given up; what is given up is the position already passed; and only when there is no sorrow at the moment of giving up and no greed at the moment of obtaining is it named knowing well. If the reader reads giving up the path as giving up practice, it will contradict the abiding within this ground of not giving up the path.

22. The treatise-author explains wrong view, next worldly right view, and all views as the views of those in training and those beyond training and so on, and practice as the sixteen aspects; he explains that the srota-āpanna is the person, the path of the srota-āpanna is the path of seeing the truths, and the fruit of the srota-āpanna is the sixteenth mind and mental-factor dharmas, the precepts without outflows, and such dharmas, and so on up to the Buddha likewise; he explains knowing well the faculties as distinguishing well the twenty-two faculties. All that this passage explains lies within the bounds of names and marks. Among the views, the three—wrong view, worldly right view, and all views—the treatise-author only marks their headings and divides their kinds: all views are the views of those in training and those beyond training, and so on. Practice is the sixteen aspects. The sixteen aspects are the four aspects of each of the four truths, whose headings this treatise lists itself elsewhere: 「觀苦四種：無常、苦、空、無我；觀苦因四種：集、因、緣、生；觀苦盡四種：盡、滅、妙、出；觀道四種：道、正、行、跡。」 tr. "Contemplating suffering, four kinds: impermanence, suffering, emptiness, non-self; contemplating the cause of suffering, four kinds: origin, cause, condition, arising; contemplating the ending of suffering, four kinds: exhaustion, cessation, sublimity, exit; contemplating the path, four kinds: path, rightness, practice, track." Now, in present-day language, heading by heading—of the four for contemplating suffering: impermanence is flowing on without abiding, suffering is oppression without peace, emptiness is that nothing belonging to a self can be found, non-self is that there is no master to be grasped; of the four for contemplating the cause of suffering: origin is the gathering-in brought about by afflictions and deeds, cause is the power that directly produces, condition is the share that helps to complete, arising is arising in continuity; of the four for contemplating the ending of suffering: exhaustion is the cause already exhausted, cessation is the fruit already at rest, sublimity is being apart from all trouble and burden, exit is leaving the three realms for ever; of the four for contemplating the path: path is the road that leads through to nirvāṇa, rightness is not being crooked, practice is being able to tend toward it, track is that following it one can arrive. One truth, four aspects; four truths, and so sixteen. Below this he explains the names of the four fruits, taking the srota-āpanna as the sample and dividing it into three: 「須陀洹者，人也」 tr. "the srota-āpanna is the person"; 「須陀洹道者，見諦道也」 tr. "the path of the srota-āpanna is the path of seeing the truths"; the fruit of the srota-āpanna is 「第十六心、心數法及無漏戒等諸法」 tr. "the sixteenth mind, mental-factor dharmas, and the precepts without outflows, and such dharmas". One name divided into three, person, path, and fruit—why the list of headings in the sūtra text lists three, 「善知須陀洹、善知須陀洹果、善知須陀洹道」 tr. "knows well the srota-āpanna, knows well the fruit of the srota-āpanna, knows well the path of the srota-āpanna", only becomes clear here. The treatise-author at once extends it to the whole list with the one sentence ‘and so on up to the Buddha, it is likewise’. Finally he explains knowing well the faculties as 「善分別二十二根」 tr. "being skilled in distinguishing the twenty-two faculties". As for why a faculty is named a faculty, this treatise itself explains its mark as 「利解了了自在相」 tr. "the mark of keen understanding, of clarity, and of mastery"—being clear toward its object and obtaining mastery, able to be the master of dharmas, it is therefore named a faculty. The full list of the twenty-two faculties this treatise nowhere in the whole work enumerates one by one in a single place, but those scattered in other places can be picked out group by group, and they are now spoken of heading by heading according to the explicit text of this treatise. The first group: the six faculties of eye, ear, nose, tongue, body, and mind. When refuting the real existence of beings, this treatise itself brings out their functions: 「眼自見色，耳自聞聲，鼻嗅香，舌知味，身知觸，意知法」 tr. "the eye of itself sees form, the ear of itself hears sound, the nose smells scent, the tongue knows taste, the body knows touch, the mind knows dharmas"—the eye faculty is the faculty able to see forms, the ear faculty is the faculty able to hear sounds, the nose faculty is the faculty able to smell scents, the tongue faculty is the faculty able to know tastes, the body faculty is the faculty able to feel touch, the mind faculty is the faculty able to know dharmas; the six each master one object and obtain mastery in it, and therefore each is named a faculty. The body faculty has a further meaning: this treatise says 「如人初入胎中得二根：身根，命根」 tr. "as when a person first enters the womb he obtains two faculties: the body faculty and the life-faculty"—it is what is obtained first on entering the womb. The mind faculty too has a further meaning: this treatise says 「五根所依意根，必與受俱，若喜、若樂、若捨」 tr. "the mind faculty, on which the five faculties rely, is necessarily together with feeling—whether joy, or pleasure, or equanimity"—the mind faculty is the ground on which the five faculties, faith and the rest, rely, and it necessarily goes together with feeling. As for the marks of keenness and dullness of the six faculties, this treatise only says 「眼等六根，如《法華經》說」 tr. "the six faculties, the eye and the rest, are as the Lotus Sūtra says" and points to another sūtra, not bringing it out again here. The second group: the male faculty and the female faculty. This treatise brings out the heading of the male faculty only in the place on the keenness and dullness of the faculties: 「男根淨者，得陰藏相」 tr. "one whose male faculty is pure obtains the mark of the concealed private parts"—one whose male faculty is pure does not cling to smoothness and knows desire to be a fault; this is keenness. For the heading of the female faculty this treatise has no separate explanation; the gap is now recorded as it is, and nothing is supplied on its behalf. The third group: the life-faculty. The life-faculty is the faculty by which the life of one lifetime continues without break; this treatise says 「有命根故，餘根有用」 tr. "because there is the life-faculty, the other faculties have their use"—when the life-faculty is present, the other faculties all have their use; if the life-faculty perishes, the other faculties all perish along with it. Its mark of keenness is 「命根不為老、病、貧、窮等所惱，安隱受樂」 tr. "the life-faculty is not troubled by old age, sickness, poverty, want, and the like, and receives pleasure in peace and security". The fourth group, which this treatise lists as the five kinds of feeling: 「樂根、苦根、憂根、喜根、捨根」 tr. "the faculty of pleasure, the faculty of pain, the faculty of distress, the faculty of joy, the faculty of equanimity". The two faculties of pleasure and joy this treatise divides most finely: 「麁樂名樂，細樂名喜」 tr. "coarse pleasure is named pleasure; fine pleasure is named joy", and again it says 「初得樂時是名樂」 tr. "when pleasure is first obtained, this is named pleasure", 「歡心內發，樂相外現，歌舞踊躍，是名喜」 tr. "a glad mind arising within, the mark of pleasure appearing without, singing and dancing and leaping—this is named joy"—pleasure is the coarse pleasure received, joy is the fine pleasure arising within. For the three faculties of pain, distress, and equanimity this treatise only lists their names and does not explain their marks separately; the gap is recorded here as it is; only, speaking of them as one group, this treatise says 「喜、樂等五根了了覺知，故言利」 tr. "the five faculties, joy, pleasure, and the rest, are clearly aware; therefore they are called keen"—the keenness of the five feelings as faculties lies not in the thickness or thinness of the feeling, but in being clearly aware at the time of feeling and not giving rise to greed along with it. The fifth group, the five faculties of faith, vigour, mindfulness, concentration, and wisdom, this treatise explains heading by heading itself: 「信道及助道善法，是名信根」 tr. "believing in the path and in the wholesome dharmas that aid the path: this is named the faculty of faith"—the faculty of faith is being able to believe and receive the path and the dharmas that aid the path without doubting; 「懃求不息，是名精進根」 tr. "seeking diligently without rest: this is named the faculty of vigour"—the faculty of vigour is, when practising this path, seeking diligently without rest; 「念道及助道法，更無他念，是名念根」 tr. "keeping in mind the path and the dharmas that aid the path, with no other thought: this is named the faculty of mindfulness"—the faculty of mindfulness is being bound solely to the path with no other thought; 「一心念不散，是名定根」 tr. "a single mind, the thought not scattered: this is named the faculty of concentration"—the faculty of concentration is the mind being single and not scattered; 「觀無常等十六行，是名慧根」 tr. "contemplating the sixteen aspects, impermanence and the rest: this is named the faculty of wisdom"—the faculty of wisdom is being able to contemplate the sixteen aspects of the four truths. The sixth group is the three faculties without outflows, of which this treatise speaks in most detail: the faculty of coming to know what is not yet known is possessed, in the path of seeing the truths, by 「信行、法行人」 tr. "persons practising in faith and practising by the Dharma", and its substance is 「無漏九根和合」 tr. "the coming together of nine faculties without outflows"—「所謂信等五根，喜、樂、捨根，意根」 tr. "namely the five faculties, faith and the rest; the faculties of joy, pleasure, and equanimity; and the mind faculty"; 「信解、見得人，思惟道中」 tr. "for persons of faith and understanding and of attainment by view, in the path of reflection", these nine faculties are renamed the faculty of knowing; 「無學道中，是九根名『知已根』」 tr. "in the path beyond training, these nine faculties are named ‘the faculty of having known’". This treatise also asks itself why, among the twenty-two faculties, only these three are taken, and answers 「餘十九根，根相不具足，故不取」 tr. "the other nineteen faculties are not complete in the mark of a faculty; therefore they are not taken"—not being taken does not mean that there are no such faculties; it is that their mark of a faculty is not sufficient to enter nirvāṇa directly. All these heading-by-heading explanations stop where the explicit text of this treatise reaches; what this treatise does not list is recorded as a gap as it is, and this work supplies nothing on its behalf. From this the reader can gain a method for reading a list of headings: whenever one name is divided into several headings, first ask whether what is divided is the person, the path, or the fruit.

23. The treatise-author records someone's saying that one observes whether the faculties of beings who can be delivered are keen or dull, and knows for oneself whether one's roots of goodness are complete, bringing out the simile of the fledgling's feathers; next he explains the wisdoms—wisdom is the general mark; swift wisdom knows dharmas swiftly, yet the power of knowledge differs as strong or weak, keen or dull; emerging wisdom can pull itself out; penetrating wisdom penetrates thoroughly to the end; broad wisdom knows everything entirely, religious and lay; deep wisdom contemplates dharmas as immeasurable, signless, and inconceivable; great wisdom is fully endowed with all the wisdoms above and is also named great because the Buddha is great and the great prajñā is great; unequalled wisdom does not cling to prajñā within prajñā; jewel wisdom is like the wish-fulfilling jewel, of itself without a fixed mark, moving according to dharmas. This passage first records one school's saying: 「有人言」 tr. "someone says" one observes that the faculties of beings who can be delivered are keen or dull: those whose faculties are complete can be delivered, those whose faculties are not complete cannot yet be delivered; again, the bodhisattva also knows for himself whether his roots of goodness are complete or not complete, 「如鳥子自知毛羽具足，爾乃可飛」 tr. "as a fledgling knows for itself when its feathers are complete, and only then can fly". This simile is very apt—flying or not flying does not depend on the wish; it depends on the feathers. Below, he explains the eleven kinds of wisdom, and each name has an illness it answers. Wisdom is the general mark of all wisdom; it is the general name. Swift wisdom knows dharmas swiftly; yet swift is not necessarily strong, 「如馬雖疾而力弱」 tr. "as a horse, though swift, is weak in strength", so powerful wisdom is set up separately; strong is not necessarily keen, 「譬如鈍斧雖有大力，不能破物」 tr. "as a blunt axe, though it has great strength, cannot split things", so keen wisdom is set up separately—the three names link together, each name making up for what the one before lacks. Emerging wisdom is being able, amid various difficulties, to pull oneself out, and also being able, amid the afflictions, to pull oneself out of the three realms and enter nirvāṇa. Penetrating wisdom is thoroughly penetrating to the end: within the dharmas of the Buddha, and so on up to the exhaustion of the outflows and the obtaining of nirvāṇa, breaking up dharmas and reaching into the nature of dharmas. Broad wisdom is that, of the various scriptures, books, treatises, and debates of the religious and the lay, and of what exists and what does not exist within the dharmas of the Buddha, there is nothing he does not know entirely. Deep wisdom is contemplating all dharmas as immeasurable, signless, and inconceivable; here the treatise-author, in passing, sets apart the deep wisdom of the world—being able to know matters of long ago and far away, that within gain there is decline and within decline there is gain—of the same name as deep wisdom but different in reality. Great wisdom is being fully endowed with all the wisdoms above, and so great; again, among all beings the Buddha is great, among all dharmas prajñā is great; knowing the Buddha, believing in the Dharma, and coming together with the great Dharma, it is therefore named great. Unequalled wisdom is 「於般若中不著般若」 tr. "not clinging to prajñā within prajñā"; able to enter so deeply, there is no other dharma that can serve as a simile for it; again, the bodhisattva little by little practises the path and reaches into the nature of the inconceivable, and there is none equal to him. Jewel wisdom is like the wish-fulfilling jewel, which has no fixed colour of its own but changes according to the thing before it; prajñā is likewise: 「自無定相，隨諸法行」 tr. "it has no fixed mark of its own, and moves according to dharmas"; again, it is like the wish-fulfilling pearl, by which whatever one wishes is obtained—the practitioner can obtain the vow of buddhahood. The reader can read these eleven names as one string in sequence: from swift, to powerful, to keen, to able to emerge, to able to penetrate, to broad, to deep, to great, to unequalled, to wish-fulfilling—all the way pushed from the keenness or dullness of function through to the non-clinging of substance.

24. The treatise-author explains knowing well the three times: the past has already ceased and the future has not yet arisen, one cannot say that they exist and cannot say that they do not exist, and yet one can practise the real mark within them; the present arises and ceases thought by thought and so cannot be known, and yet one can penetrate it. The single heading of the three times the treatise-author explains extremely briefly and extremely strictly. The past has already ceased, the future has not yet arisen, 「不得言有、不得言無」 tr. "one cannot say that they exist, one cannot say that they do not exist"—both ends are barred, and yet within this one can practise the real mark: this is named knowing well. Present dharmas have another difficulty: because they arise and cease thought by thought they cannot be known, and yet one can penetrate them: this is named knowing well the present age. One must see clearly that what the two counteract is different—with regard to the past and the future, the illness lies in judging whether they exist or not; with regard to the present, the illness lies in relying on its being knowable. Knowing well is not knowing more; it is being able to practise where nothing can be said, and being able to penetrate where nothing can be known.

25. The treatise-author explains skilful means as wishing to accomplish a matter, being able to bring about the full complement of causes and conditions, in the right measure of more and less, and not letting there be any loss—as the bodhisattva, though he practises emptiness, does not realise the limit of reality, and though he practises merit, also does not cling; he explains waiting for beings with the simile of a merchant or a great general waiting for the others, making clear that the bodhisattva, riding the swift horse of wisdom, though he could swiftly enter nirvāṇa, does not enter because he waits for beings. Here, on the skilful means of the chapter title, the treatise-author gives the closest definition in the whole chapter: 「方便名欲成辦其事，能具足因緣多少得所，於中不令有失。」 tr. "Skilful means names wishing to accomplish a matter, being able to bring about the full complement of causes and conditions, in the right measure of more and less, and within it not letting there be any loss." At once he brings out its instance: 「如菩薩雖行空，不證實際；雖行福德，亦復不著。」 tr. "As the bodhisattva, though he practises emptiness, does not realise the limit of reality; though he practises merit, he also does not cling." Within one sentence there are two layers of not losing—practising emptiness without losing oneself in realisation, practising merit without losing oneself in clinging. Next he explains waiting for beings: as a merchant or a great general, though riding a swift horse he could swiftly arrive at the place where they stop, still waits for the others; the bodhisattva is likewise, 「乘智慧駃馬，雖能疾入涅槃，亦待眾生故不入」 tr. "riding the swift horse of wisdom, though he could swiftly enter nirvāṇa, he too, for the sake of waiting for beings, does not enter". This simile and the sentence above bring each other out exactly: not realising the limit of reality is being able and not taking; waiting for beings is being able and not going—both are one and the same not losing. The reader should read the two matters as one matter, and not read waiting for beings as a separate item of compassion.

26. The treatise-author explains knowing well the good and evil minds and the deep mind of beings—though now evil, the root is good—bringing out two proofs, father and mother beating a child and the Buddha delivering Aṅgulimāla, and making clear that when the bodhisattva observes that the five wholesome roots, faith and the rest, come from the deep mind, then they can be delivered; he explains that meaning is of two kinds, both dharma and name, that words are naming things by names, and that meaning is tied to the unobstructed knowledge of meaning and of dharmas, words to the unobstructed knowledge of expression and of delight in speaking. The first half of this passage explains the mind and the deep mind. The deep mind is 「現在雖惡，其本則好」 tr. "though now he is evil, his root is good", and the treatise-author brings out two proofs: as when father and mother beat a child, 「外惡內善」 tr. "harsh outside and good within"; as when the Buddha delivered Aṅgulimāla, knowing that though his shallow mind was evil, his deep mind was in fact good. Below, he speaks of the bodhisattva's use: when he observes that the five wholesome roots of beings, faith and the rest, come from within the deep mind, at that time they can be delivered—whether one can be delivered or not depends not on the good or evil now in action, but on what is in the deep mind. The second half explains meaning and words: meaning is of two kinds, both dharma and name; words are speech, naming things by names. The attribution too is clear: 「得義無礙、法無礙故，名善知義」 tr. "because he obtains the unobstructed knowledge of meaning and the unobstructed knowledge of dharmas, it is named knowing well meaning"; because of the unobstructed knowledge of expression and the unobstructed knowledge of delight in speaking, it is named knowing well words. The four unobstructed knowledges are tied two to each heading; here the reader can look back at knowing well meaning and knowing well words in the sūtra's list, and the place where they divide lies exactly here.

27. The treatise-author concludes that abiding within these two kinds of knowing well he can deliver beings by the three vehicles, and that this is named knowing well how to distinguish the three vehicles; and he avows himself that because such things are hard to understand they are explained, and what is easy to understand is not spoken. These two sections are joined and each has its use. First, it concludes the last heading of the list: the bodhisattva, abiding within these two kinds of knowing well—namely the meaning and words of the passage above—can deliver beings by the three vehicles; this is named knowing well how to distinguish the three vehicles. From this it can be seen that the last heading does not start another matter; it is the use of the two headings before it; meaning and words being without obstruction, the teaching of the Dharma can then divide the differences of the three vehicles. Second, the treatise-author avows the method by which he explains this list: 「如是難解故解說，易解者不說。」 tr. "Because such things are hard to understand, they are explained; what is easy to understand is not spoken." The reason why above he picked only these few headings—the gates of letters, speech, giving up the path, the views, the four fruits, the faculties, the wisdoms, the three times, skilful means, the deep mind, and meaning and words—to explain, and explained none of the rest, lies in this sentence. The reader need not supply explanations on his behalf for the headings not explained; not explaining is method, not a gap.

28. Question: Why is knowing well form and so on up to consciousness spoken of first, and knowing the aggregates, the elements, and the sense-fields afterwards; why is knowing well conditions spoken of first, and cause, sequence, object, and dominant afterwards? Answer: It is first spoken of extensively and afterwards briefly. The whole chapter is closed with one round of question and answer, and what is asked is the order of the list and not doctrinal principle: why is 「善知色乃至識」 tr. "knowing well form and so on up to consciousness" spoken of first, and 「知眾、界、入」 tr. "knowing the aggregates, the elements, and the sense-fields" afterwards; why is 「善知緣」 tr. "knowing well conditions" spoken of first, and 「因、次第、緣、增上」 tr. "cause, sequence, object, and dominant" afterwards. The treatise-author answers very briefly: 「先廣說，後略說。」 tr. "It is first spoken of extensively, and afterwards spoken of briefly." The five aggregates are raised as a whole, the aggregates, elements, and sense-fields are a separate division; therefore the extensive comes first and the brief afterwards. Here the reader can know how finely the treatise-author reads the sūtra—he does not let go even of the order of the list; and the reason he has to ask is precisely that the order of the list is itself the sūtra's order of teaching, not arranged at random.

29. Again someone says that the five aggregates earlier are of three kinds, wholesome, unwholesome, and indeterminate, and that the aggregate of morality and the other four are also named the five aggregates; at the end he makes clear that conditions are first spoken of briefly and afterwards extensively. At the end the treatise-author records one more school's different saying: 「復有人言」 tr. "again someone says"—the five aggregates earlier are of three kinds, wholesome, unwholesome, and indeterminate; the aggregate of morality and the other four are also named the five aggregates. This saying does not go by the same road as the answer above: the answer above explains it by the order of extensive and brief, while this saying explains it by the two meanings of the one name ‘five aggregates’; the treatise-author records it and does not judge. At the end he adds one sentence correcting himself: conditions are 「先略說，後廣說」 tr. "first spoken of briefly, and afterwards spoken of extensively"—precisely the reverse of the five aggregates' extensive first and brief afterwards; the two places each have their own order, and he does not force them level. The whole chapter ends here. The reader may note the way the treatise-author closes the scene: he makes no words of summary, but stops as soon as he has answered the doubt about the order of the sūtra's list, which fits exactly the method he has avowed.

Do Not Misread

Do not read ‘this gate is without obstruction’ as ‘entering the gate is easy’. What the Buddha removed is the limit of the faculties, not the limit of practice. In the same passage, right after removing the limit, he brings out four kinds who cannot enter—the lazy, those of little vigour, those of false recollection, and those of disordered mind. The gate does not choose people, and yet the lazy and those of disordered mind still cannot enter. The treatise-author's simile of the clear and cool pool exhausts this measure: the pool bars no one, and yet 「雖近，不欲入者則不入」 tr. "though it is near, one who does not wish to enter does not enter". ‘Without obstruction’ speaks of the pool; it does not say that one who has eyes and has feet need not set out.

Do not read ‘those of keen faculties can enter’ as Subhūti having spoken wrongly. The treatise-author judges that because Subhūti's knowledge, being of the Small Vehicle, is short, he says only that those of keen faculties can enter; this judges the measure of what he sees, not his words as false. Those of keen faculties can indeed enter; it is only not the whole; what the Buddha adds is that those of middling faculties, of dull faculties, and of scattered mind enter too. Here the reader should learn the treatise-author's sense of measure—he does not say that Subhūti's words are wrong, only that the Buddha's words are great; and the reason the Buddha speaks so greatly the treatise-author attributes to the 「大悲氣」 tr. "breath of great compassion", not to knowledge alone.

Do not read ‘only prajñā can reach the omniscience of all kinds’ and ‘one reaches it because it is joined with the five perfections’ as contradicting one another. The treatise-author himself raises this difficulty and himself answers it: 「常說與六波羅蜜合故得至」 tr. "it is constantly said that one reaches it because it is joined with the six perfections"—the usual way is from the first practice together. The reason there are words of ‘only prajñā’ is that they speak of the leading position of prajñā among the six perfections; the reason there are words of practising together is that they speak of actual accomplishment. As for the section on pure buddha-lands, where merely by hearing the real mark one at once arrives, the treatise-author marks it with the two Chinese characters rendered here as ‘at times’; it opens an exception and does not establish a general rule. One who takes this section as grounds for abolishing the five perfections has read ‘at times’ as ‘always’.

Do not read ‘the deeds of Māra cease the moment they would arise’ as there being a dharma that can counteract Māra. The sūtra says 「所有魔事欲起即滅」 tr. "whatever deeds of Māra there are cease the moment they would arise", and the cause it is tied to is only practising prajñā. The ceasing of the deeds of Māra does not come from detecting and does not come from subduing; it is that at the moment they would arise they have of themselves nothing on which to stand. If here one seeks another dharma of counteraction, that is setting up a further dharma outside prajñā; and setting up a further dharma outside prajñā is precisely the place where the deeds of Māra get to arise.

Do not read the list of knowing well as subjects the bodhisattva must master one by one. On this list the treatise-author explains only what is hard to understand, and avows himself 「如是難解故解說，易解者不說」 tr. "because such things are hard to understand, they are explained; what is easy to understand is not spoken"—from which it can be seen that what he weighs is not seeking knowledge heading by heading. The sūtra itself also ties this list under the sentence of abiding as prajñā teaches: it is the mark of the fruit of what is abided in, not a curriculum of what is to be trained. If the reader, because of the length of this list, grows timid, he has mistaken its rank.

Do not read giving up the path as abandoning practice. The treatise-author explains it very plainly: giving up the path is 「捨下地不憂，得上地不貪」 tr. "giving up the lower ground without sorrow and obtaining the higher ground without greed", and what is given up is a ground already passed; not giving up the path is 「住是地中」 tr. "abiding within this ground". The two are from the first two faces of one matter—able to give up with regard to grounds, able to be at rest with regard to where one abides. If they are read as giving up practice set against not giving up practice, the sentence ‘abiding within this ground’ of not giving up the path has nothing to rest on.

Do not read waiting for beings as a further piece of compassion the bodhisattva arouses separately. The treatise-author sets it side by side with ‘though he practises emptiness, does not realise the limit of reality’, the two matters standing together under the one heading of skilful means. The definition of skilful means is 「欲成辦其事，能具足因緣多少得所，於中不令有失」 tr. "wishing to accomplish a matter, being able to bring about the full complement of causes and conditions, in the right measure of more and less, and within it not letting there be any loss"—not realising the limit of reality is not losing oneself in realisation, waiting for beings is not losing beings. Compassion here is not a thought added on; it is what the meaning of skilful means already contains.

Bearing on Practice

The first use is to take the three Chinese characters rendered here as ‘trains with a single mind’ as the standard of daily life. The four gates are very deep and yet the gate is without obstruction; the difference between being able to enter and not lies only in whether the mind is single or not. The treatise-author further matches it with the eightfold noble path: the not lazy is right vigour, the one without false thought is right mindfulness, the one without a disordered mind is right concentration. The practitioner can hold these three sentences to check himself—in today's effort, has he been lazy, has he had false thoughts, or has his mind been disordered? Remove only one of the three, and the gate is one share nearer; remove all three, and the eight dharmas come together of themselves.

The second use is to break the thought of belittling oneself with the simile of the clear and cool pool. All who limit themselves by the dullness of their faculties and will not set their hand to it are precisely the one in the simile who, though near, does not wish to enter. The pool does not choose people; what it waits for is only the wish to enter. In reading this passage one should look back at oneself: is what I call being unable really having no eyes and feet, or only not wishing? Since the treatise-author has said that the Buddha, because of the breath of great compassion, says that those of middling faculties and dull faculties can all obtain entry, the practitioner should not set limits in the Buddha's place.

The third use is to turn the sentence ‘the deeds of Māra cease the moment they would arise’ round and use it as a test. The sūtra ties the ceasing of the deeds of Māra to practising prajñā, not to counteraction. If in daily life one feels the deeds of Māra rising in confusion and has no leisure to counteract them, one may first not ask how to counteract them, but look back at whether the practice of prajñā has broken off. When the practice breaks off, what arises is endless; when the practice continues, what would arise ceases of itself—the power and might of the person who practises prajñā that the treatise-author praises shows precisely here.

The fourth use is to take the comparison of a single finger-snap to fix where one's effort is spent. The sūtra compares twice, as short as a finger-snap and as long as immeasurable kalpas; the side that surpasses is always cultivating prajñā, the other side is always teaching the beings of a world to practise giving, morality, concentration, and wisdom, and so on up to obtaining the path. This is not urging people to abandon teaching and transforming; it fixes the rank of what is cultivated—all dharmas are born from within prajñā, so exerting effort for an instant at the place from which they are born weighs more than labouring long upon the dharmas that are born. The practitioner can hold this and ask himself: is the effort I spend today spent at the place of birth, or at the tail end of what is born?

The fifth use is to check one's own practice by the definition of skilful means. The treatise-author says that skilful means is 「欲成辦其事，能具足因緣多少得所，於中不令有失」 tr. "wishing to accomplish a matter, being able to bring about the full complement of causes and conditions, in the right measure of more and less, and within it not letting there be any loss", and that its instance is that though practising emptiness one does not realise the limit of reality, and though practising merit one also does not cling. The practitioner can check himself at both ends: first, does my contemplation of emptiness go as far as being able to realise and yet not take it; second, does my making of merit, once made, leave no thought bound to it? Lose even one of the two, and however diligent the practice, it is still not named skilful means. And the section on waiting for beings is a ready remedy for testing—being able to go swiftly and not going, only this is waiting; being unable to go swiftly and lingering is not waiting.

Further Resonances

The backbone of this unit is one round of Sūtra ② and one round of Treatise ②. Sūtra ② begins from Subhūti's saying that the four gates are what the bodhisattva-mahāsattva of keen faculties enters; the Buddha answers that the bodhisattvas of dull faculties, of middling faculties, and of scattered mind can also enter, gives the general verdict that this gate is without obstruction, sets up the standard that those who train with a single mind all enter, and brings out the four who cannot enter and the four who can enter, and that those who wish to abide in the ground of the avaivartika and those who wish to attain the omniscience of all kinds can enter; next it says that training as prajñā and so on up to dānapāramitā teach, one obtains omniscience, that when one practises prajñā whatever deeds of Māra there are cease the moment they would arise, that one who wishes to obtain the power of skilful means should practise prajñā, that when one thus practises, trains, and cultivates, the buddhas now present in the ten directions keep this bodhisattva in mind, with the buddhas of the three times being born from within prajñā as the reason for it, that one should reflect that the dharma the buddhas have obtained, I too shall obtain, and so swiftly obtain awakening, and that one should constantly not be far from the thought of sarvajñā; next it compares merit: cultivation for even the space of a finger-snap surpasses teaching the beings of the three-thousand great-thousand world to give as they please, to uphold the precepts, meditative concentration, and wisdom, to obtain liberation and the knowledge and vision of liberation, and so on up to the four fruits and the pratyekabuddha path, and again practising prajñā with the thought of sarvajñā from a moment, half a day, and so on up to immeasurable, boundless asaṃkhyeya kalpas surpasses teaching the beings of worlds as many as the sands of the Ganges in the ten directions; next it says that one who abides as prajñā teaches should be known to be avaivartika, kept in mind by the buddhas, and accomplished in the power of skilful means, should be known to have drawn near to and made offerings to immeasurable buddhas, planted roots of goodness, kept company with the good friend, long practised the six perfections, and long cultivated all dharmas, should be known to abide in the ground of the Dharma-prince, fulfil his vows, never be apart from the buddhas, and go from one buddha-land to another buddha-land, and should be known to have inexhaustible eloquence and full dhāraṇī, and, because his bodily form is complete and his receiving of the prediction is complete, to take on a body for the sake of beings; at the end it exhausts its marks with the great list of headings from knowing well the gates of letters and what are not gates of letters onward, and concludes that practising prajñā, giving rise to prajñā, and cultivating prajñā, one obtains such benefits as these. Treatise ②, opening with ‘The treatise-author explains’, explains following the text: first it returns the first two sentences of Sūtra ② each to its speaker, making clear that Subhūti's meaning lies in the four gates being very deep, so that only those of keen faculties can enter, and that the Buddha answers that there is none who cannot enter; next it sets up the simile of the clear and cool pool to make clear that the pool bars no one and yet one who does not wish to enter does not enter; next it matches the marks of those able to enter the four gates with the eightfold noble path, and judges that the eightfold noble path can obtain prajñā; next it judges that because Subhūti's knowledge, being of the Small Vehicle, is short, he says only that those of keen faculties can enter, that because the Buddha, being of the Great Vehicle, has great knowledge, he says that those of middling and dull faculties can enter with the eight dharmas coming together, and that here he speaks because of the breath of great compassion; next, taking the śrāvaka's practising the eight limbs together as a comparison, it makes clear that the Great Vehicle too obtains sarvajñā because prajñā is joined with the five perfections, and restates the sūtra's sentence ‘should train and obtain omniscience’; next it raises itself the difficulty between ‘only prajñā can reach’ and ‘reaches because joined with the five perfections’, and answers that the six perfections are constantly said to be practised together, and that at times, in pure buddha-lands, one reaches it merely by hearing the real mark; next it fixes the rank of the section of praise of virtues as praise of the power and might of the person who practises prajñā, citing the sūtra's words that the deeds of Māra cease as soon as they arise; next it marks the beginning and end of the section of praise of virtues, from ‘kept in mind by the buddhas’ to knowing well how to distinguish the three vehicles; next it enters the explanation of the list—the gates of letters as said in the dhāraṇī of letters, not-letters as meaning suchness, the nature of dharmas, and the limit of reality, with the brief statement of their meaning as lying in knowing well the two dharmas of the world and nirvāṇa, and because he gathers the path of merit he knows well letters, because he breaks the inversions within merit he knows well no letters; speech and non-speech, and one, two, and many words and the speech of men and women, making clear that he can subdue those of the wrong paths and the powerful and eminent; the two kinds of mark of form and so on up to consciousness as said before, and giving up the path and not giving up the path; the views and the sixteen aspects, the threefold division of person, path, and fruit of the srota-āpanna, and the twenty-two faculties; someone's saying on the completeness of the faculties and the simile of the fledgling's feathers, and the glosses on the eleven kinds of wisdom; knowing well the three times; the definition of skilful means and the simile of the merchant and the great general for waiting for beings; the mind and the deep mind, and the two proofs of father and mother beating a child and the Buddha delivering Aṅgulimāla; and meaning and words, each tied to two unobstructed knowledges; next it concludes that abiding in the two kinds of knowing well he can deliver beings by the three vehicles, which is knowing well how to distinguish the three vehicles, and avows itself that what is hard to understand is therefore explained and what is easy to understand is not spoken; at the end it closes with the question and answer on the order of the list—knowing well form and so on up to consciousness spoken of first and knowing the aggregates, elements, and sense-fields afterwards, knowing well conditions spoken of first and cause, sequence, object, and dominant afterwards—answering that it is first spoken of extensively and afterwards briefly, again records someone's saying that the five aggregates are of three kinds and that the aggregate of morality and the other four are also named the five aggregates, and at the end makes clear that conditions are first spoken of briefly and afterwards extensively.

Among the explanations of the ancient masters, for this unit only one, Jizang, is to be recorded. Jizang, dividing the text below this point in his Commentary on the Larger Sūtra, says: 「利根菩薩入是門下，第二、明悟人也。即以上四法為門也」 tr. "From ‘the bodhisattva of keen faculties enters this gate’ onward: second, it makes clear the persons who awaken. It takes precisely the four dharmas above as the gate"—taking the four dharmas above, suchness, the nature of dharmas, the limit of reality, and neither joined nor dispersed, as the gate, which points to the same thing as this treatise's explaining ‘this gate’ by the four gates; and the meaning of his division of this passage he also marks himself, saying: 「明是門無礙，學者皆入」 tr. "It makes clear that this gate is without obstruction, and those who train all enter", which agrees with what this treatise judges. On the section of praise of virtues he judges: 「歎行方便人有大功德」 tr. "It praises the great merit of the person who practises skilful means", and divides it into two: first making clear the merit, next making clear the obtaining of wisdom—what is called the obtaining of wisdom refers to the list from knowing well the gates of letters onward; this division corresponds broadly to the beginning and end of the section this treatise marks, 「從上『諸佛所念』來至此」 tr. "from ‘kept in mind by the buddhas’ above up to here", yet the two masters each speak in their own words; they are recorded side by side without judgement. On the gates of letters he explains: 「字門即四十二字門，非字門謂如法性」 tr. "The gates of letters are precisely the forty-two gates of letters; what are not gates of letters means suchness and the nature of dharmas"—this treatise only says 「如文字陀羅尼中說」 tr. "as is said in the dhāraṇī of letters" and does not give their number, while Jizang fills it in directly with the forty-two gates of letters; this is his own supplement, recorded and not judged. On giving up the path he explains: 「捨道謂捨下地得地，得地不著喜、捨下地不憂也」 tr. "Giving up the path means giving up the lower ground and obtaining a ground; obtaining the ground he does not cling with joy, and giving up the lower ground he does not sorrow"—sharing its bones with this treatise's 「捨下地不憂，得上地不貪」 tr. "giving up the lower ground without sorrow and obtaining the higher ground without greed" but differing in wording, the one saying ‘does not cling with joy’, the other ‘without greed’; they are recorded side by side. On unequalled wisdom he explains: 「於波若中亦不著般若，此釋妙絕無所為喻名無等慧」 tr. "Within prajñā he also does not cling to prajñā; this explanation is wondrous beyond all, with nothing that can serve as a simile for it, and it is named unequalled wisdom", the same as this treatise's 「於般若中不著般若」 tr. "not clinging to prajñā within prajñā"; and his next sentence says: 「如如意寶能滿心願名為實慧」 tr. "Like the wish-fulfilling jewel, able to fulfil the wishes of the mind, it is named real wisdom"—this treatise has jewel wisdom, Jizang has real wisdom; the difference between the two Chinese characters is a variant naming of the term, recorded and not judged, and its details belong to the apparatus. On waiting for beings he explains: 「待眾生者，六度皆為眷屬，菩薩雖要待眾生共度生死也」 tr. "As for waiting for beings: the six perfections all form its retinue; the bodhisattva, even so, must wait for beings to cross over birth and death together"—close in intent to this treatise's simile of the merchant and the great general, yet a separate account. On the heading of meaning and words he explains: 「得義法亦無礙為善知語，得辭及樂說故知義，具此四能說三乘」 tr. "Obtaining meaning and dharma likewise without obstruction is knowing well words; obtaining expression and delight in speaking, therefore he knows meaning; complete in these four, he can speak the three vehicles"—while this treatise takes obtaining the unobstructed knowledge of meaning and of dharmas as knowing well meaning, and obtaining the unobstructed knowledge of expression and of delight in speaking as knowing well words; what the two masters tie is exactly the reverse; this is a difference of attribution, recorded side by side as it is without judgement. His explanation at the close says: 「此中五陰先廣說後略說，故先言前知色，後云善知陰入界」 tr. "Here the five aggregates are first spoken of extensively and afterwards briefly; therefore it first says, earlier, knowing form, and afterwards says knowing well the aggregates, sense-fields, and elements", 「此中先略說緣後廣說，故云因次第緣增上也」 tr. "Here conditions are first spoken of briefly and afterwards extensively; therefore it says cause, sequence, object, and dominant"—wholly the same as what this treatise answers in its final question and answer, and it can be read together with passage 28 of Passage by Passage above and the last sentence of passage 29.

Huiying's Commentary has no explanation for this unit. His commentary runs on continuously from the head of this chapter, with an outline of four kinds of skilful means, and explains the similes of the sun and moon going round, the wheel-jewel, and the four kinds of troops, up to the meaning of the brief and extensive marks; its extant text stops at the end of fascicle twenty-four, and the last sentence of the treatise it cites is 「云何菩薩摩訶薩知一切法略廣相」 tr. "How does the bodhisattva-mahāsattva know the brief and extensive marks of all dharmas?", which still lies in the preceding part of this chapter and does not reach Sūtra ② and Treatise ② of this unit; below it there follows at once the inscription at the end of the fascicle, and there it ends. Therefore the Further Resonances of this unit have only the one master, Jizang; Huiying's absence belongs to where the extant text stops, not to his passing over it without explanation; it is recorded as it is, and no inference of a missing explanation is drawn.

Further Resonances

What "The Great Skilful Means" inherits is joined more tightly than in most chapters. The preceding chapter, "The Six Perfections Contain One Another," speaks throughout of only one matter: abiding in one perfection and taking up the other five perfections—「菩薩摩訶薩布施時，持是布施迴向薩婆若，於眾生中住慈身口意業。是為菩薩住檀波羅蜜取尸羅波羅蜜」 tr. "When the bodhisattva-mahāsattva gives, he holds this giving and dedicates it to sarvajñā, and amid beings abides in kindly deeds of body, speech, and mind. This is the bodhisattva's abiding in dānapāramitā and taking up śīlapāramitā"—and in this way the six perfections take one another up, until at its last section it gathers them in with 「如是等菩薩利智慧故，一心中一時能具足六波羅蜜」 tr. "Bodhisattvas such as these, because their wisdom is keen, are able within a single mind, at a single time, to fulfil the six perfections." At the very opening of Treatise ① this chapter takes up that very sentence: 「須菩提聞菩薩摩訶薩大利根相，所謂一波羅蜜邊能生五波羅蜜，行一波羅蜜即能具五波羅蜜，如上品中說；是事希有」 tr. "Subhūti heard of the mark of the great keen faculties of the bodhisattva-mahāsattva—namely, that from the side of one perfection he can give rise to the five perfections, and that by practising one perfection he can fulfil the five perfections, as was said in the previous chapter; this matter is rare"—the preceding chapter said that it can be so; this chapter asks why it can be so, and the answer lies in the two Chinese characters 「方便」 tr. "skilful means". As for what it opens, the words for it are already in place in this chapter's last sentence. Sūtra ② closes with 「菩薩摩訶薩行般若波羅蜜、生般若波羅蜜、修般若波羅蜜，得如是等利益」 tr. "the bodhisattva-mahāsattva practises prajñāpāramitā, gives rise to prajñāpāramitā, cultivates prajñāpāramitā, and obtains such benefits as these," the three words practise, give rise to, and cultivate standing side by side and not explained separately; at the opening of the next chapter, "The Three Wisdoms," Subhūti at once asks about these three words one by one—「世尊！菩薩摩訶薩云何行般若波羅蜜？云何生般若波羅蜜？云何修般若波羅蜜？」 tr. "World-Honored One! How does the bodhisattva-mahāsattva practise prajñāpāramitā? How does he give rise to prajñāpāramitā? How does he cultivate prajñāpāramitā?" The Buddha answers 「色寂滅故，色空故，色虛誑故，色不堅實故，應行般若波羅蜜」 tr. "Because form is quiescent, because form is empty, because form is false and deceptive, because form is not firm and real, one should practise prajñāpāramitā," 「如虛空生故，應生般若波羅蜜」 tr. "because it arises like space, one should give rise to prajñāpāramitā," and 「修諸法破壞故，應修般若波羅蜜」 tr. "because one cultivates the breaking up of dharmas, one should cultivate prajñāpāramitā." This chapter concludes its benefits with the three words, and the next chapter opens its questions and answers with the three words: what this chapter speaks of is what the power of skilful means accomplishes; what the next chapter speaks of is what the marks of the practising, the giving rise to, and the cultivating of prajñā are like—one raises it, the other explains it, and the sequence is clear of itself.

Among the later ancient masters who read this chapter, what they preserved on the matter of the chapter's name is well worth recording. This treatise's base text heads it 「大方便品第六十九」 tr. "Chapter Sixty-nine, The Great Skilful Means"; but the fascicle heading of the Song edition reads 「大智度論卷八十二釋方便品第六十九品上」 tr. "Mahāprajñāpāramitā-upadeśa, Fascicle Eighty-two, Explaining ‘Skilful Means’, Chapter Sixty-nine, First Part of the Chapter," the Palace edition reads 「大智度論卷第八十二釋方便品第六十九品上」 tr. "Mahāprajñāpāramitā-upadeśa, Fascicle the Eighty-second, Explaining ‘Skilful Means’, Chapter Sixty-nine, First Part of the Chapter," and the Yuan edition reads 「大智度論卷八十二釋方便品第六十九上」 tr. "Mahāprajñāpāramitā-upadeśa, Fascicle Eighty-two, Explaining ‘Skilful Means’, Chapter Sixty-nine, First Part"—none of them has the character 「大」 tr. "great"; the Ming edition reads 「大智度論卷八十二釋方便品第六十九之上經作大方便品」 tr. "Mahāprajñāpāramitā-upadeśa, Fascicle Eighty-two, Explaining ‘Skilful Means’, Chapter Sixty-nine, First Part; the sūtra has ‘The Great Skilful Means’," using 「方便品」 tr. "Skilful Means" in the treatise's title while noting of itself that the sūtra text it cites has 「大方便品」 tr. "The Great Skilful Means," so that within a single edition the sūtra's title and the treatise's title differ from each other, and this is recorded as it is; the Shōgozō manuscript reads 「大智度經論卷第八十二釋第六十八品上」 tr. "Great Wisdom-Crossing Sūtra-Treatise, Fascicle the Eighty-second, Explaining the Sixty-eighth Chapter, First Part of the Chapter," and the Ishiyama-dera manuscript reads 「摩訶般若波羅蜜品第六十八方便品卷八十二」 tr. "Mahāprajñāpāramitā, Chapter Sixty-eight, Skilful Means, Fascicle Eighty-two," the title numbering in both differing from the base text by one step, consistent with the several preceding chapters. The continuation titles at the fascicle's end are the same: for the title at the end of fascicle eighty-two of the base text, the Song, Yuan, and Palace editions read 「釋第六十九品上」 tr. "Explaining the Sixty-ninth Chapter, First Part of the Chapter," whereas the Ishiyama-dera manuscript reads 「釋第六十八品上」 tr. "Explaining the Sixty-eighth Chapter, First Part of the Chapter"—the case of a one-step difference is seen again. What attaches to the continuation title 「之餘」 tr. "continued" at the head of fascicle eighty-three is especially complex: the Song edition reads 「大智度論卷八十三釋第六十九品下訖第七十品上方便品」 tr. "Mahāprajñāpāramitā-upadeśa, Fascicle Eighty-three, Explaining the Sixty-ninth Chapter, Last Part of the Chapter, ending at the Seventieth Chapter, First Part of the Chapter, ‘Skilful Means’," the Palace edition reads 「大智度論卷第八十三釋第六十九品下訖第七十品上方便品」 tr. "Mahāprajñāpāramitā-upadeśa, Fascicle the Eighty-third, Explaining the Sixty-ninth Chapter, Last Part of the Chapter, ending at the Seventieth Chapter, First Part of the Chapter, ‘Skilful Means’," the Yuan edition reads 「大智度論卷八十三釋方便品第六十九下訖第七十品上」 tr. "Mahāprajñāpāramitā-upadeśa, Fascicle Eighty-three, Explaining ‘Skilful Means’, Chapter Sixty-nine, Last Part, ending at the Seventieth Chapter, First Part of the Chapter," the Ming edition reads 「大智度論卷八十三釋方便品第六十九之下」 tr. "Mahāprajñāpāramitā-upadeśa, Fascicle Eighty-three, Explaining ‘Skilful Means’, Chapter Sixty-nine, Last Part," the Ishiyama-dera manuscript reads 「摩訶般若波羅蜜品六十八卷八十三」 tr. "Mahāprajñāpāramitā, Chapter Sixty-eight, Fascicle Eighty-three," while the Shōgozō manuscript reads 「大智度經論卷第八十釋第六十品下訖第六十九品上」 tr. "Great Wisdom-Crossing Sūtra-Treatise, Fascicle the Eightieth, Explaining the Sixtieth Chapter, Last Part of the Chapter, ending at the Sixty-ninth Chapter, First Part of the Chapter"—here the Shōgozō manuscript not only differs by one step in its chapter order, but also marks its fascicle order as 「卷第八十」 tr. "Fascicle the Eightieth" and not eighty-three; the way its book divides its fascicles is plainly different from the base text's, and both are kept and recorded side by side without judgement. As for the transmitted text of the great sūtra that it explains, the proper title reads 「方便品第六十九」 tr. "Chapter Sixty-nine, Skilful Means," whereas the Song, Yuan, Ming, and Palace editions all read 「大方便品」 tr. "The Great Skilful Means"; the Shōgozō manuscript crowns the chapter name with the sūtra's title and reads 「摩訶般若波羅蜜經方便」 tr. "Mahāprajñāpāramitā Sūtra, Skilful Means," and for the chapter order the Shōgozō manuscript reads 「第六十八」 tr. "the sixty-eighth"—from this it is known that the phrase the Ming edition notes under the treatise's title, 「經作大方便品」 tr. "the sūtra has ‘The Great Skilful Means’," truly has its grounds in the transmitted texts of the sūtra and is not an isolated claim.

Of the ancient masters' commentaries on this chapter, Jizang's Commentary on the Larger Sūtra is the most detailed. The great sūtra it explains reads 「方便品第六十九」 tr. "Chapter Sixty-nine, Skilful Means," and at the very opening he first distinguishes the breadth and narrowness of the name 「方便」 tr. "skilful means" across the sūtras: 「法華明一乘為實，三是方便，故開方便門顯真實義」 tr. "The Lotus makes clear that the One Vehicle is the real and that the three are skilful means, and therefore it opens the gate of skilful means and reveals the meaning of the true and real," while 「勝經明一乘大方便，一乘尚是方便，三乘寧非方便？」 tr. "the Śrīmālā makes clear the One Vehicle as the great skilful means; if even the One Vehicle is skilful means, how could the three vehicles not be skilful means?" The two sides having been set up, he then argues back and forth himself—「若望道門，三一皆是為緣，故皆是方便」 tr. "If it is viewed with respect to the gate of the path, the three and the one are all for the sake of conditions, and therefore all are skilful means," 「若望三乘是方便，即一乘非方便也」 tr. "if it is viewed with respect to the three vehicles as skilful means, then the One Vehicle is not skilful means"; and the skilful means of which this sūtra speaks has a definition of its own: 「今經云方便者，照空為實，遊空不著，涉有無滯，運用善巧，故名方便也。」 tr. "What this sūtra calls skilful means is this: illuminating emptiness is the real; roaming in emptiness without clinging, crossing into existence without obstruction, applying good skill—therefore it is called skilful means." He further compares the general and the specific: 「勝鬘總二慧為一乘，即若方便若實皆名為方便。今此中開一乘為二慧，故有實慧與方便也」 tr. "The Śrīmālā gathers the two wisdoms together as the One Vehicle, so that whether skilful means or the real, all are named skilful means. Now here the One Vehicle is opened into the two wisdoms, and therefore there are the wisdom of the real and skilful means," and therefore he says, 「法華明一乘為實，勝鬘一乘為方便，皆是總義。今即開一乘為方便，故是別義也。」 tr. "The Lotus makes clear the One Vehicle as the real, the Śrīmālā the One Vehicle as skilful means; both are the general sense. Now the One Vehicle is opened into skilful means, and therefore it is the specific sense." His sectional division divides the praise of skilful means into three: 「第一明昔因久遠歎行方便人，第二歎方便妙用窮能善巧，第三歎行方便人得無邊功德」 tr. "First, it makes clear that the former causes are long and distant, praising the person who practises skilful means; second, it praises the wondrous function of skilful means, exhausting its capacity for good skill; third, it praises the person who practises skilful means as obtaining boundless merit," and how the three give rise to one another he also lays bare in a single phrase—「由久植因故得妙用，有妙用故得無邊功德也。」 tr. "Because the causes have long been planted, the wondrous function is obtained; because there is the wondrous function, boundless merit is obtained." On the matter of the six perfections being fulfilled already at the first arousing of the mind, Jizang sets a question and answers it, saying 「發心畢竟二不別故，初是後初」 tr. "Because the arousing of the mind and the ultimate are not two and not separate, the first is the first of the later," and so 「發心即作無生觀，故六度具足也」 tr. "in arousing the mind one at once makes the contemplation of non-arising, and so the six perfections are fulfilled." On the ten rounds of similes, his book keeps side by side two explanations, the old explanation and the one that follows the treatise: the old explanation pairs the ten similes two by two, while the one that follows the treatise says 「初日月喻菩薩，二慧答四生也」 tr. "The first, the sun and moon, is a simile for the bodhisattva; the two wisdoms answer to the four kinds of birth," and further says 「眾生雖有世善無菩薩般若不見正道也」 tr. "Though beings have worldly goodness, without the bodhisattva's prajñā they do not see the right path." The doubt about the many streams entering the sea Jizang also answers by citing the treatise, saying 「論云：薩婆若是般若異名」 tr. "The treatise says: sarvajñā is another name for prajñā." His judgement of the practitioner's losing sets it at four—「失中四失」 tr. "the four losings within losing"—bringing out this treatise and being yet more plain and direct: 「內著我、外著空，云我能行生、法二空」 tr. "clinging inwardly to a self and outwardly to emptiness, saying: I am able to practise the two emptinesses of beings and of dharmas" is the first losing; 「破著空方是般若，復著般若即是著空」 tr. "only breaking the clinging to emptiness is prajñā; clinging again to prajñā is clinging to emptiness" is the second losing; 「著菩薩道故失」 tr. "because of clinging to the bodhisattva path, it is losing" is the third losing; and the fourth is placing oneself as an ordinary person and teaching the Dharma to people by what the Buddha knows—「論云：著佛道故失」 tr. "The treatise says: because of clinging to the Buddha path, it is losing"—and he rebukes it directly, saying 「乃見有失不皆是失，見悟不悟皆是不悟也」 tr. "Thus seeing that there is losing is itself nothing but losing; seeing awakened and not awakened is itself nothing but not being awakened." As for the four gates, Jizang specially points out that they do not take the three dharmas as the object contemplated: 「人多謂如等三法為境，悟此三法生智，智與境合，故今明不合散也」 tr. "People mostly take the three dharmas, suchness and the rest, as the object; awakening to these three dharmas gives rise to knowledge, and knowledge joins with the object; therefore it now makes clear neither joined nor dispersed"; and the meaning of the brief gathering also lies only here—「略攝般若者，知如等四法故，便知略廣，名略攝般若也。」 tr. "The brief gathering of prajñā: because one knows the four dharmas, suchness and the rest, one then knows the brief and the extensive; this is called the brief gathering of prajñā."

There is another ancient master who wrote a commentary on this treatise itself. Huiying's Commentary sets up a chapter of its own for this chapter, and at its very opening explains the chapter's name and its order: 「第六十八品者，名為方便品，即是方便門中第三品也。所以次六度相攝品後明此品者，上明菩薩於一度中而能具足諸波羅蜜，今明所以然者，由菩薩善巧方便故，所以如此，故次六度相攝品後明方便品」 tr. "The sixty-eighth chapter is named the chapter ‘Skilful Means’; it is the third chapter within the gate of skilful means. The reason this chapter is made clear after the chapter ‘The Six Perfections Contain One Another’ is that above it was made clear that the bodhisattva, within one perfection, is able to fulfil all the perfections; now it is made clear why this is so: it is because of the bodhisattva's good skill in skilful means that it is so; therefore after the chapter ‘The Six Perfections Contain One Another’ the chapter ‘Skilful Means’ is made clear"—his calling this chapter the sixty-eighth chapter agrees with the one-step difference of the Shōgozō and Ishiyama-dera manuscripts, so that this reading also has its transmission within the line of commentaries on the treatise; and the reason for the order that he judges corresponds exactly to the words with which Treatise ① of this treatise takes up the preceding chapter. His sectional division divides the whole chapter into four parts: 「第一就人辨方便」 tr. "The first distinguishes skilful means with regard to the person," and therefore it first asks how long ago it was accomplished, how many offerings were made, and at what time the mind was aroused—「菩薩即是方便之人，波若即是方便之法」 tr. "the bodhisattva is precisely the person of skilful means, prajñā is precisely the dharma of skilful means"; 「第二從譬如日月周行照四天下，明波若方便導成眾行」 tr. "the second, from ‘it is as the sun and moon go round, illuminating the four continents’, makes clear that prajñā and skilful means guide the many practices to completion"; 「第三明脩因得果，名為因果方便」 tr. "the third makes clear cultivating the cause and obtaining the fruit; it is called the skilful means of cause and fruit"; 「第四明菩薩善學波若雙照二諦，名為照達方便」 tr. "the fourth makes clear that the bodhisattva trains well in prajñā and illuminates both of the two truths; it is called the skilful means of illuminating penetration." On the simile of the wheel-jewel, his book cites a sūtra by way of comparison: 「薩遮尼乾經云：雖有六寶，千子具足。若無輪寶者，但名似轉輪王，唯王一天下也。」 tr. "The Sazhe Nirgrantha Sūtra says: though he has the six jewels and his thousand sons are complete, if he has no wheel-jewel, he is only called one resembling a wheel-turning king, ruling only one continent." On the sentence 「除智慧，不可以餘法度脫眾生」 tr. "apart from wisdom, one cannot deliver beings by any other dharma," he explains it by citing the buddha-land of Lion's Thunder-Voice, and comes to rest on the difference between the two lands: 「此國唯以智慧得佛」 tr. "In this land buddhahood is obtained by wisdom alone," 「若此間國土等始須福智二事得佛，如彼國者唯智慧得佛道也。」 tr. "In lands such as this one, one needs the two things, merit and wisdom, to obtain buddhahood; in a land like that one, the Buddha path is obtained by wisdom alone." His explanation of the brief and extensive marks is likewise concise and exact—「略相即是總相，廣相即是別相，大小兩乘盡有此總別二相也」 tr. "The brief mark is precisely the general mark; the extensive mark is precisely the specific mark; the two vehicles, great and small, both have these two marks, the general and the specific." What must be noted is that the extant text of this commentary of Huiying's breaks off right in the middle of this chapter: its last section explains as far as the question in the sūtra text 「云何菩薩摩訶薩知一切法略廣相」 tr. "How does the bodhisattva-mahāsattva know the brief and extensive marks of all dharmas?", and below it says 「欲廣明之，故設此問也」 tr. "wishing to make it clear at length, he therefore sets out this question," followed at once by the fascicle-end title of fascicle twenty-four, and the whole book stops; therefore under the heading of this chapter his book specially notes the two Chinese characters 「不完」 tr. "incomplete." Of Sūtra ② and Treatise ② in the latter half of this chapter, therefore, it has no explanation: it is not that it passes over them without explaining, but that its book as extant stops here—this is recorded as it is, and no inference of a missing explanation is made. As for Junzheng's book of essentials on the four treatises, a thorough search under both headings, 「大方便品」 tr. "The Great Skilful Means" and 「方便品第六十九」 tr. "Chapter Sixty-nine, Skilful Means," is in every case 〔not found〕; in the books of the Tiantai line—the Profound Meaning, the Annotations, and the books on calming and contemplation—a thorough search likewise finds no text under these two headings, 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 precisely illuminate the two faces of this chapter's meaning. The name 「方便品」 tr. "Skilful Means" picks out its function—skilful means is function, and so what the treatise-author explains is all the marks of function: the thirty-two marks and the eighty minor marks are function; what is guided in the similes of the sun and moon, the wheel-jewel, the right hand, and the great sea is function; and so on up to 「善知字門」 tr. "knows well the gates of letters" and the long string of 「善知」 tr. "knows well" from there onward—there is not one that is not function. The name 「大方便品」 tr. "The Great Skilful Means" picks out why it is great—and why it is great is threefold: first, in its length of time, 「發心已來無量億阿僧祇劫」 tr. "since arousing the mind, immeasurable koṭi of asaṃkhyeya kalpas," and 「供養如恒河沙等諸佛」 tr. "he has made offerings to buddhas as many as the sands of the Ganges"; second, in its breadth: its gate does not sift by capacity, 「鈍根菩薩亦可入是門，中根菩薩、散心菩薩亦可入是門」 tr. "the bodhisattva of dull faculties can also enter this gate; the bodhisattva of middling faculties and the bodhisattva of scattered mind can also enter this gate"; third, in its not clinging: skilful means is skilful means precisely in 「雖行空，不證實際；雖行福德，亦復不著」 tr. "though he practises emptiness, he does not realise the limit of reality; though he practises merit, he also does not cling." If one of the three is lacking, skilful means falls into mere cleverness and is not called great. The two names stand together without standing in each other's way: without 「大」 tr. "great" one does not see the length of time it has passed through and the breadth of those it reaches; without 「方便」 tr. "skilful means" one does not see that it is function and not substance.

So what "The Great Skilful Means" leaves us in the end is a sense of measure that can be carried into daily use. When I do one good deed and feel its power to be weak, I remember that what the similes of the sūtra say, round after round, is only one matter—the five perfections apart from prajñā 「不得波羅蜜名字」 tr. "do not obtain the name of pāramitā"; the difference lies not in the size of the deed but in whether or not there is that portion of illumination that does not grasp at marks. When I have attained a little and the thought arises, 「我今行般若波羅蜜、修般若波羅蜜」 tr. "I now practise prajñāpāramitā and cultivate prajñāpāramitā," I remember that the Buddha judges this thought as 「若如是取相，則遠離般若波羅蜜」 tr. "if he grasps at marks in this way, he is far from prajñāpāramitā." When I hold myself by emptiness and am unwilling to set out to practise, I remember the twofold medicine the treatise-author gives: the first is 「我若不以方便力，則不可得度」 tr. "if I do not use the power of skilful means, they cannot be delivered"; the second is 「雖諸善法和合能破煩惱、得阿耨多羅三藐三菩提，而般若波羅蜜於中功力最大」 tr. "Though the wholesome dharmas, coming together, can break the afflictions and obtain anuttarā samyaksaṃbodhi, yet among them the power and function of prajñāpāramitā are the greatest"—emptiness is not a reason for not practising; it is the safeguard of practising without losing. When I measure myself as of dull faculties and scattered mind and dare not enter this gate, I remember that simile of the clear and cool pool: 「有目有足皆可入；雖近，不欲入者則不入。」 tr. "All who have eyes and have feet can enter; though it is near, one who does not wish to enter does not enter." When I do not know where to set my hand, I remember the words with which the treatise-author matches the four phrases in the sūtra to the noble path—「不懈怠者是正精進，不妄念者是正念，不亂心者是正定，如等四門是正見」 tr. "The not lazy is right vigour, the one without false thought is right mindfulness, the one without a disordered mind is right concentration, the four gates of suchness and the rest are right view." And at the end of the chapter, the one sentence in which the treatise-author gives the definition of 「方便」 tr. "skilful means" is the one most fitting to hold firmly in memory—「方便名欲成辦其事，能具足因緣多少得所，於中不令有失。」 tr. "Skilful means names wishing to accomplish a matter, being able to bring about the full complement of causes and conditions, in the right measure of more and less, and within it not letting there be any loss." What is called the great skilful means is, in the end, nothing more than this: in a matter that must be accomplished, falling neither into emptiness nor into existence, and accomplishing it without losing a single portion.