大智度論 義疏通講 · 冊20Dazhidulun — Mahāprajñāpāramitā-upadeśa · Exposition Throughout · Vol. 20
次第學品Training in Sequence
全文五層 →Full five layers →總說
〈次第學品〉之題只有「次第」二字，而全品所爭只是一件事：一切法既然無所有，次第安在何處。品之開卷即是這一難——「世尊！若有法相者，尚不得順忍，何況得道！」有法相則諸法各住自相，連順忍尚不可得；然而若一切法皆無，則「若無有法，是諸法則不生；若不生是諸法，則不能得一切種智」。兩頭俱塞：有則不能進，無則無可進。佛先可其後問——「如是！如是！若無有法者，則有順忍乃至斷一切煩惱習」；及須菩提逕問行般若時有法相不，佛乃直答「不也！須菩提！菩薩摩訶薩行般若波羅蜜時，無有法相、非法相，即是菩薩順忍」，並就此立其道果——「若無有法相、無有非法相，即是修道，亦是道果」，終以一句收定全品之根：「有法是菩薩道，無法是菩薩果。以是因緣故，當知一切法無所有性。」順忍既不在有法邊、亦不在無法邊，則所謂次第，自始便不是在諸法上排一列階級，而是於無所有性中行、學、道。全品二經二論，跨卷八十六、八十七：之上一經一論，佛自引己身為證，說已行者何以能於空中起禪起通；之下一經一論，為新發意者開次第之目，說未行者從何處下手，終以須菩提為當來世請問而收。
之上一分，以佛自證答空中何以有得。經①之問步步逼近：先問順忍與修道，次問行般若時有法相不——所列者自色相乃至一切種智相，並及「若色相、若色斷相」一路到「斷一切煩惱習相」，相與斷相一併舉盡；佛既答「不也」，須菩提遂問到佛身上——「世尊！若一切法無所有性，佛云何知一切法無所有性故得成佛，於一切法得自在力？」佛之答不是說理，是舉自身之履歷：「我本行菩薩道修六波羅蜜，離諸欲、離惡不善法，有覺有觀，離生喜樂入初禪，乃至入第四禪」；而其行禪之法有一節最要——於諸禪及支雖取相，卻「不念有是禪，不受禪味，不得是禪，無染、清淨行四禪」，且「我於是諸禪不受果報」。神通亦然：「依四禪住，起五神通」，而「於諸神通不取相，不念有是神通，不受神通味，不得是神通，我於是五神通不分別行」。禪通俱行而俱不受，末後「我爾時用一念相應慧得阿耨多羅三藐三菩提」。須菩提之難至此更急：「云何世尊於諸法無所有性中起四禪、六神通，亦無眾生而分別作三聚？」——這一問把全品之關竅逼出來。佛之答不是說『雖空而猶能行』，是反過來說『正因空故才行得成』：「若諸欲、惡不善法當有性——若自性、若他性，我本為菩薩行時，不能觀諸欲、惡不善法無所有性入初禪」；神通亦爾，「以神通無有性——若自性、若他性皆無所有性，以是故，諸佛於神通，知無所有性，得阿耨多羅三藐三菩提」。若五欲實有定性，則離之無路；若神通實有定性，則此一段功德便成一物，取之即住。空不是次第之障，空正是次第之所以可能——此一句是全品之樞，之下一分所開之目，皆從此處生。
論①先解須菩提何以重問。問者以為「諸法空一義，何以故須菩提種種因緣重問」，論主答得極體貼：「是諸法畢竟空義，甚深難解！說者尚難，何況受者、行者！」故須菩提「以般若垂訖，恐人多疑多惑故，種種因緣重問」；且「所問義雖一，所因處異」——或從五道問，或從三乘問，或從八地入位問，「如是等種種問，異門故義得差別，般若無一定相故」。其下分判順忍之兩重：「須菩提先問順忍者，是小乘順忍；今須菩提問菩薩順忍法」；而菩薩順忍之所以不落兩邊，在「見有、無二俱有過故」，故「於一切法中不生有相，即是修道」。至於「有法是菩薩道，無法是果」一句，論主並不定於一解，列三家而後總收：一者「有法名有為法，無法是無為法；行有為八聖道，斷諸煩惱，得無為果」；復有人言「五波羅蜜名有法，是菩薩道；般若波羅蜜畢竟空故無有法，是菩薩果」；又有人言「般若波羅蜜智慧相，有為法故，是為道；如、法性、實際，不從因緣生、常有故，名為果」——三說並存，同歸一句「當知一切法皆是無所有性，名為無法」。其釋佛之自引，逐字落到禪法之實：「離欲者，離五欲；離惡、不善法者，離五蓋」，而惡與不善亦有分別——「將人入惡道，名為惡；障善法故，名不善」；初禪二禪同有喜樂而其源不同，「初禪中喜樂，從離欲故生；二禪喜樂，從定生」；何以獨初禪稱離生，論主答以欲界之散——「欲界中散亂故，無定稱；行者能離欲故，名為離生」，而色界煩惱為患微弱，所失之處在覺觀。取相與不受味之際亦說得極細：初習時取相乃至得，「得已，恐著味故觀無常」，故能「無染心行四禪，異於外道」；神通亦「依四禪住，起五神通，亦如禪法，不受其味」。而神通之用終須落在悲上：宿命知本、天眼知末，知眾生本末已則「心生大悲」，所念者是「云何斷眾生生死相續苦」；於是「爾時，心迴向入漏盡通，即時以一念相應慧得阿耨多羅三藐三菩提」——五通不自為究竟，迴入漏盡乃成佛道。自性他性之辨亦不玄，論主逕以身事釋之：「自性名自身不淨性，他性名衣服等莊嚴身具」，而「內外五欲中，無有常、樂、我、淨實」。末後一段最可帶走：「我觀五欲等空、虛誑、無定相故，不著此禪，而起諸神通」，「諸禪有相、有量故可捨」，而其所以無難可設者只一句——「初離欲時，以無所有性為因，得阿耨多羅三藐三菩提果亦無所有」，故曰「若禪定空，阿耨多羅三藐三菩提不空，可有是難；今皆空故，不應有難！」難之所以成難，全在因果兩邊不齊；兩邊俱空，難自不立。
之下一分，卷首帶「之餘」續題，由已行者轉向初行者。經②開口即換人：「新學菩薩摩訶薩云何於諸法無所有性中次第行、次第學、次第道，以是次第行、次第學、次第道，得阿耨多羅三藐三菩提？」佛之答不從行起，從聞起——初從諸佛聞，或從多供養諸佛菩薩者聞，或從四果聖人聞，所聞之內容即是無所有：「一切賢聖皆以得無所有故有名。一切有為作法無所有性，乃至無有如毫末許所有。」聞已所起之念，是全品最奇之一轉：「我若當得阿耨多羅三藐三菩提、若不得，一切法常無有性，我何以不發心得阿耨多羅三藐三菩提？」——得與不得既是一等，發心遂無所待；而所為者仍在眾生，「得阿耨多羅三藐三菩提已，一切眾生行於有相，當令住無所有中」。發心既定，次第乃開，而佛所開之次第有二門。前門是六波羅蜜：「是新發意菩薩應學六波羅蜜」，而每一波羅蜜皆備四種行相——以檀為例，「自行布施，亦教人行布施，讚歎行布施功德，歡喜讚歎行布施者」，其所施之物亦一一列出，「布施眾生飲食、衣服、香、華、瓔珞、房舍、臥具、燈燭，種種資生所須，盡給與之」；由施得財富、得五眾功德，乃至過二乘地、入菩薩位、淨佛國土、成就眾生、得一切種智、轉法輪、度眾生——一條長鏈列盡，而每一波羅蜜之末皆收以同一句：「菩薩以是布施，次第行、次第學、次第道，是皆不可得。何以故？自性無所有故。」尸羅一門更把教化寫成對症之事——「見貧窮者施以財物，不持戒者教令持戒，亂意者教令禪定，愚癡者教令智慧，無解脫者教令解脫，無解脫知見者教令解脫知見」；羼提、毘梨耶、禪、般若次第皆爾，末歸「是名初發意菩薩摩訶薩次第行、次第學、次第道」。後門是六念：「以一切種智相應心，信解諸法無所有性，修六念，所謂念佛、念法、念僧、念戒、念捨、念天。」而此六念之念法，句句是遮：念佛而「不以色念，不以受、想、行、識念」，亦「不以三十二相念，亦不念金色身、不念丈光、不念八十隨形好」，乃至「不應以十力念佛，不應以四無所畏、四無礙智、十八不共法念佛，不應以大慈大悲念佛」——所以者何，是諸法自性無，故結之曰「無憶故，是為念佛」。念法則善不善、記無記、世出世、淨不淨、聖凡、有漏無漏、三界繫、有為無為一概不念，「無所念，是為念法」，而後更進一步：「於是法中，乃至無少許念，何況念法！」念僧則「無為法故分別有佛弟子眾，是中乃至無有少許念，何況念僧」；念戒則歷數聖戒之九名——「應念聖戒——無缺戒、無隙戒、無瑕戒、無濁戒、無著戒、自在戒、智者所讚戒、具足戒、隨定戒」，而仍歸無少許念；念捨則自他、財法、煩惱俱捨，「觀是捨不可得故，乃至無少許念，何況念捨」；念天則以信戒施聞慧自校——「四天王諸天所有信、戒、施、聞、慧，此間命終，生彼天處；我亦有是信、戒、施、聞、慧」，而仍歸「尚無少許念，何況念天」。六門既盡，收以「菩薩摩訶薩行是六念，是名次第行、次第學、次第道」。此一段最不可讀滑：所念之境條條列全，正為使人於此六處各各不取——念之法不是把佛想成一物而執之，是於所念處無一相可住。經②末後一難最重：「世尊！若一切法無所有性者，是則無道、無智、無果。」佛不正答而反問：「汝見是色性實有不？」須菩提答「不見也！世尊！」佛乃將問還之：「汝若不見諸法實有，云何作是問？」須菩提於是自明其問非疑——「我於是法不敢有疑，但為當來世諸比丘求聲聞、辟支佛道、菩薩道者」，彼輩將作是言「若一切法無所有性，誰垢誰淨？誰縛誰解」，「是不知不解故而破於戒、破正見、破威儀、破淨命」，終至墮三惡道；故曰「我畏當來世有如是事，以是故問佛。世尊！我於是法中信，不疑不悔」。一品之末不落在得上，落在防上——所防者不是空，是取空。
論②之釋，把上來之目逐條坐實。先定新學之名：須菩提所以更問，因空中起禪起通「是大菩薩近成佛者能行」，今未知新發意者云何行；而新學之界說極寬——「雖無量劫發意，未得諸法實相，皆名新學」。有問者難之：既是新學，但應教以布施持戒，何以逕教畢竟空？論主答曰「今明始入無所有、畢竟空法故，令行無所有」，而以一喻收之：「譬如小兒服藥，須蜜乃下。是故雖新發意，亦觀深空，無咎。」此喻是全品方法之眼——深空是藥，六度六念是蜜；不因其苦而不與藥，亦不因其為新學而去其蜜。其釋所聞之人，亦不含糊：多供養諸佛者，指「遍吉、觀世音、得大勢菩薩、文殊師利、彌勒菩薩等」；四果聖人如先所說，而「辟支佛不樂說法故，不說」；何以獨從聖人聞，因「餘人多以著心說，諸聖人以無著心說，是故但從聖人聞」。所聞之義亦重申一遍：「一切有為作法從因緣和合生起故有，無有實定性乃至如毫末許所有」，而諸聖人之差別亦不在別處，「涅槃即是寂滅相、無所有法」。發心一節，論主連設二問窮之。其一：既知畢竟空，何以復言我何以不發心作佛？答只一句——「畢竟空，無所有，無所障礙，何妨發心作佛？」更進一步反質：「若說畢竟空，滅諸戲論，云何障發心？若障，即是有性，云何言無所有性？」其二：「若不障發心，亦應不障不發心，菩薩何不安住而發心受諸勤苦？」此問最切近人情，而論主之答全不從理上取——先說親里之苦，「譬如人得好良藥，親里知識受諸病苦，云何不與」；次說自度未足，「我雖聞諸法實相，心未深入，未有禪定，智慧未熟，受諸苦惱」；三說怨親平等而成忍度，其所據亦只一個因緣無定——「怨親無定，以因緣故，親或為怨，怨或為親」，故「是以菩薩視怨如親」，並以二喻明之：「譬如欲過嶮道，應當敬重頂戴導師；又如良醫雖賤，為貴者所重。」發心既明，論主乃逐問三名之義。「次第行、次第學、次第道有何差別」一問，答以數說並列：或「無差別；若行、若學、若道，義一而語異」；或「初名行，中名學，後名道」；或「行名布施，學名持戒，道名智慧」；或「行名持戒，學名禪定，道名智慧」；或分八聖道為三分而以正見為體——「正見是道體；發起是道，名正思惟」，正語正業正命助益正見故名行，正精進正念正定成就正見故名學；又有人以六度分配，「檀波羅蜜、毘梨耶波羅蜜名為行，初入道故」，尸羅禪那制心故名學，而「忍為善，般若為智慧，善、智具足故名道。譬如人有眼有足，隨意所至」。諸說既列，論主不判其一，只曰「如是等，名為三事差別」。繼而正面回答「何以名次第」：正因一切法無所有，初發心者於空法中不知從何漸入，故立次第；而「諸法雖空難解，次第行得力故，能得成就；譬如緣梯，從一初桄漸上，上處雖高雖難，亦能得至」——梯不是路之外之物，是路之可踏處；一桄一桄踏上去，與空並不相礙。四種行檀之釋尤為周至：能四種行者，由於「善拔慳貪根，深愛檀波羅蜜，慈悲於眾生，通達諸法實相」；而不能具足者之病，論主一一舉出——有自行而不能教人者，「或畏他瞋，或畏為己教布施以之為恩」；有能教而自不行者；「或有人種種讚歎布施之德，勸人令施而不能自行」；有三事俱備而不能隨喜者，因「或有破戒惡人行施而不喜見」；又「有人喜見施主而不讚歎，以其邪見不識施果故」——「如是，各各不能具足」。四事之所以能全，只在「菩薩大悲心、深愛善法故，能行四事」。何以必教人自作，論主代菩薩說一段極樸實的話：「我不惜財物，我雖多施汝，汝亦不得持至後世；汝今當自作，後當自得。」何以於破戒者之施亦隨喜，因「見行施者雖是破戒惡人，但念其好心布施之德，不念其惡，是故歡喜讚歎」。而財富之來本非所求，「譬如人為穀故種禾，而稾草自至」。其下「是菩薩布施時，先施何等人」一問，兩說相反而並存：一說必先聖人——「必先供養諸佛、大菩薩、辟支佛、阿羅漢及諸聖人」，無聖人則次第下推至持戒離欲人、出家弟子、持五戒行十善者、中人、五逆惡人及畜生；一說則反是——「應先布施五逆罪人、斷善根者，貧窮、老病、下賤、乞匃者，乃至畜生；譬如慈母，多有眾子，先念羸病，給其所須」。兩說並列而不強判，論主只從心地上分其所屬：「一切眾生皆是菩薩福田，能生大悲故」；得無生忍者平等無差，而「未得無生忍者，或慈悲心多、或分別心多，此二心不得俱行」——悲心多者先施貧惡，其念是「種福田中，果報雖大，憐愍眾生故，先利貧者」，「如是田雖不良，以慈悲心，得大果報」；分別心多者先供養佛，其念是「諸佛有無量功德故，應先供養」，此心雖小而「福田良故，功德亦大」。及至入方便力中，二者不再相妨，「心得自在，二事俱行——慈愍眾生，又視皆如佛」。其下兩問尤見細膩：經何以言須食與食而不言與衣食，因「有人須食與飲、須飲與衣，以不稱受者意故，福德少」；「有人若羞、若怖，雖有所須，不能發言，云何知其所須」，則「菩薩觀其相貌，隨時所須、土地所宜」。由施轉戒亦有其心路——「我憐愍眾生，以衣食布施，所益甚少；不如持戒，常以無惱、無畏施於眾生」；由戒生定，由定成慧，而後解脫、解脫知見，五眾次第自成。何以經文此處說五眾而不說六度，答曰「法雖一，以種種異名說，是故說五眾無咎」，且一一以度相攝；何以必言眾，因入位非一戒一定可辦，「譬如一人、二人，不名為軍；和合多人，乃成為軍，能破怨敵」。次第之義至此可一言道盡：「先麁後細，先易後難，漸漸習學，名為次第」；而次第與空之不相違，亦只一句——「諸法性雖無所有，而隨世諦行，為破顛倒故」。六念之所以列為初門，因「念佛等六念是初次第行，以易行易得故」；有難者曰六念中亦言不以色念佛，云何言易，答曰「有法共行，故名為易；譬如服苦藥，以蜜下之則易」——蜜之喻於此再出，前為新學觀空，此為六念帶空，同是一法。而何以只說六度六念不說三解脫門，論主答得極負責：「六波羅蜜、六念等，柔軟易行，不生邪見，是菩薩次第學法。餘三解脫門等，思惟籌量，或生邪見故不說。」末後釋佛之反問，亦只還他一句：「汝若不見實定有，云何以次第等難空？」——「而次第法不離於空。」須菩提之受解，論主代為說盡：所憂者是當來人「以罪重智鈍故，取空相」，於是「以少因緣而破戒及威儀，無所畏忌」，出家而仰給白衣，妄語求利，破於正命，種此罪故墮三惡道，「或重於白衣」；而其自身則「我已得道，於諸法無所受，又常聞佛說空法，云何戲論生疑？又我常修無諍三昧，憐愍眾生，是故問佛」。一問之來處既明，全品乃在慈悲上收筆。
兩分之別，一言可斷：之上說已行者何以能空中起行，之下說未行者何以能從空中起步。之上所舉是佛自身之事——入禪、起通、一念相應而成佛；之下所舉是初學可下手之事——聞法、發心、四種行六度、六念。故之上一路收在「今皆空故，不應有難」，是破難；之下一路收在「我畏當來世有如是事」，是防難。而兩分之間有一線貫串，即那個被翻轉的「故」字：不是雖無所有性而猶能次第，是「以諸欲、惡不善法無所有性——若自性、若他性皆是無所有性故」乃能入初禪；不是次第之外別有空，是「次第法不離於空」。品名之所以立在次第而不立在空，亦正為此——空已於前諸品說盡，此品所補者是空中之路；路不在空外，空亦不廢路。
因此，讀此品之每一段時，至少可問三層。其一，此處所空的是什麼——全品所遮者皆是「性」字：五欲無自性他性，神通無自性他性，六度之行「是皆不可得。何以故？自性無所有故」，六念之所念「是為無所有」。所空者是定性，不是那件事；施仍要施，戒仍要持，禪仍要入，只是不於其中立一實法而住。故凡讀到一個「不可得」，先問所不可得者是事還是性，便不至於把一句畢竟空讀成一句作罷。其二，此處之次第是為誰立的——論主說得明白，次第是應須菩提「初發心菩薩於是空法中云何能漸次第學」之問而立，所對者是新學；而新學之界寬到「雖無量劫發意，未得諸法實相，皆名新學」。所以這一品的每一目都可以對號入座：自己屬於哪一等施主之病——不能教人、不能自行、不能讚歎、不能隨喜；自己是慈悲心多還是分別心多；自己於六念之中能不能不取相。次第之為次第，正在它容得下不齊之人。其三，我若聽了畢竟空而反鬆了手，此品於我何用——這正是須菩提末後之所以問，也是全品最實用之處。論主已把病名寫出：「取空相」、「不解佛語深義以何事而說」；而其對治不是叫人少講空，是把空與行並成一事——藥與蜜同服，梯與空同用。順著二經二論讀下去，終會落在那一句最平實的判語上：「先麁後細，先易後難，漸漸習學，名為次第。」次第不是離空的方便，是空在時間裡的樣子。
依原論次序讀下去
Overview
The title "Training in Sequence" turns on just the two Chinese characters 「次第」 tr. "sequence", and what the whole chapter contends over is only one matter: since all dharmas are without anything existent, where is sequence to be placed? The opening of the chapter is precisely this objection—「世尊！若有法相者，尚不得順忍，何況得道！」 tr. "World-Honored One! If there is the mark of dharmas, one still does not obtain compliant acceptance—how much less the path!" If there is the mark of dharmas, then each dharma abides in its own mark, and even compliant acceptance is unfindable; yet if all dharmas are non-existent, then 「若無有法，是諸法則不生；若不生是諸法，則不能得一切種智」 tr. "if there are no dharmas, these dharmas do not arise; if these dharmas do not arise, one cannot obtain the omniscience of all kinds". Both ends are blocked: with existence one cannot advance; with non-existence there is nothing by which to advance. The Buddha first affirms his latter question—「如是！如是！若無有法者，則有順忍乃至斷一切煩惱習」 tr. "Just so! Just so! If there is no dharma, then there is compliant acceptance and so on up to the severance of all the afflictions and their habitual residues"; and when Subhūti asks straight out whether, when one practises prajñā, there is the mark of dharmas, the Buddha answers directly, 「不也！須菩提！菩薩摩訶薩行般若波羅蜜時，無有法相、非法相，即是菩薩順忍」 tr. "Not so, Subhūti! When the bodhisattva-mahāsattva practises prajñāpāramitā, there is no mark of dharmas and no mark of what is not a dharma; this is the bodhisattva's compliant acceptance", and on this he establishes the path and its fruit—「若無有法相、無有非法相，即是修道，亦是道果」 tr. "if there is no mark of dharmas and no mark of what is not a dharma, this is cultivating the path, and it is also the path and its fruit"—ending with one sentence that settles the root of the whole chapter: 「有法是菩薩道，無法是菩薩果。以是因緣故，當知一切法無所有性。」 tr. "An existent dharma is the bodhisattva's path; a non-existent dharma is the bodhisattva's fruit. For these causes and conditions, one should know that all dharmas are without any existent nature." Since compliant acceptance lies neither on the side of existent dharmas nor on the side of non-existent dharmas, what is called sequence was from the very start not a row of stages laid out upon dharmas, but practising, training, and following the path within the nature without anything existent. The whole chapter, two sūtras and two treatises, spans fascicles eighty-six and eighty-seven: in the First Part, one sūtra and one treatise, the Buddha cites his own person as witness and tells how those who have already practised can give rise to dhyāna and to the powers within emptiness; in the Last Part, one sūtra and one treatise, the items of sequence are opened for those who have newly aroused the mind, telling where those who have not yet practised are to set their hand, and it closes with Subhūti asking on behalf of the world to come.
The First Part answers, by the Buddha's own witness, how there can be any attaining within emptiness. The questions of Sūtra ① press closer step by step: first he asks about compliant acceptance and cultivating the path, then asks whether, when one practises prajñā, there is the mark of dharmas—what he lists runs from the mark of form up to the mark of the omniscience of all kinds, together with 「若色相、若色斷相」 tr. "whether the mark of form or the mark of the severance of form" all the way to 「斷一切煩惱習相」 tr. "the mark of the severance of all the afflictions and their habitual residues", the marks and the marks of severance listed out together to the end; once the Buddha has answered 「不也」 tr. "Not so", Subhūti carries the question to the Buddha's own person—「世尊！若一切法無所有性，佛云何知一切法無所有性故得成佛，於一切法得自在力？」 tr. "World-Honored One! If all dharmas are without any existent nature, how is it that the Buddha, because he knows that all dharmas are without any existent nature, came to become a Buddha and obtained the power of sovereignty over all dharmas?" The Buddha's answer does not argue a principle; it cites his own record: 「我本行菩薩道修六波羅蜜，離諸欲、離惡不善法，有覺有觀，離生喜樂入初禪，乃至入第四禪」 tr. "When I formerly practised the bodhisattva path and cultivated the six perfections, I parted from the desires and parted from evil and unwholesome dharmas, and with initial and sustained thought, with the joy and pleasure born of separation, I entered the first dhyāna, and so on up to entering the fourth dhyāna"; and in his way of practising dhyāna one point matters most—though he grasped at marks as to the dhyānas and their limbs, he yet 「不念有是禪，不受禪味，不得是禪，無染、清淨行四禪」 tr. "did not think that there was this dhyāna, did not receive the flavour of dhyāna, did not obtain this dhyāna, and, undefiled and pure, practised the four dhyānas", and moreover 「我於是諸禪不受果報」 tr. "in these dhyānas I did not receive the retribution". The supernormal powers likewise: 「依四禪住，起五神通」 tr. "abiding by the four dhyānas, I gave rise to the five supernormal powers", and 「於諸神通不取相，不念有是神通，不受神通味，不得是神通，我於是五神通不分別行」 tr. "as to the supernormal powers I did not grasp at marks, did not think that there was this supernormal power, did not receive the flavour of the supernormal powers, did not obtain this supernormal power; in these five supernormal powers I practised without discrimination". Dhyāna and the powers are both practised and both not received, and at the very end 「我爾時用一念相應慧得阿耨多羅三藐三菩提」 tr. "at that time I, with the wisdom associated with a single thought, obtained anuttarā samyaksaṃbodhi". Subhūti's objection presses harder at this point: 「云何世尊於諸法無所有性中起四禪、六神通，亦無眾生而分別作三聚？」 tr. "How is it that the World-Honored One, within dharmas without any existent nature, gave rise to the four dhyānas and the six supernormal powers, and, there being no beings either, distinguished them into the three groups?"—this one question forces out the crux of the whole chapter. The Buddha's answer does not say ‘though it is empty, one can still practise’; it says the reverse, ‘precisely because it is empty can practice be accomplished’: 「若諸欲、惡不善法當有性——若自性、若他性，我本為菩薩行時，不能觀諸欲、惡不善法無所有性入初禪」 tr. "If the desires and evil and unwholesome dharmas were to have their nature—whether self-nature or other-nature—then when I formerly practised as a bodhisattva, I could not have contemplated the desires and evil and unwholesome dharmas as without any existent nature and entered the first dhyāna"; the supernormal powers likewise, 「以神通無有性——若自性、若他性皆無所有性，以是故，諸佛於神通，知無所有性，得阿耨多羅三藐三菩提」 tr. "because the supernormal powers do not have their nature—whether self-nature or other-nature, they are all without any existent nature—for this reason the buddhas, as to the supernormal powers, know them to be without any existent nature, and obtain anuttarā samyaksaṃbodhi". If the five desires really had a fixed nature, there would be no road by which to part from them; if the supernormal powers really had a fixed nature, this stretch of merit would become a thing, and on grasping it one would stop there. Emptiness is not an obstacle to sequence; emptiness is exactly what makes sequence possible—this sentence is the pivot of the whole chapter, and the items the Last Part opens all arise from this place.
Treatise ① first explains why Subhūti asks again. The questioner holds that 「諸法空一義，何以故須菩提種種因緣重問」 tr. "that all dharmas are empty is one and the same meaning; why does Subhūti ask again and again by various causes and conditions", and the treatise-author answers with great understanding: 「是諸法畢竟空義，甚深難解！說者尚難，何況受者、行者！」 tr. "This meaning of the ultimate emptiness of all dharmas is very deep and hard to understand! Even for the one who speaks it, it is hard—how much more for the one who receives it and the one who practises it!" Hence Subhūti, 「以般若垂訖，恐人多疑多惑故，種種因緣重問」 tr. "because prajñā was about to be spoken to the end, fearing that people would have much doubt and much confusion, asked again and again by various causes and conditions"; moreover, 「所問義雖一，所因處異」 tr. "though the meaning asked is one, the place it rests on differs"—he asks now from the five destinies, now from the three vehicles, now from the eight grounds and entering the position: 「如是等種種問，異門故義得差別，般若無一定相故」 tr. "such various questions as these: because the gates of approach differ, the meaning comes to have differences, since prajñā has no single fixed mark". Below this he distinguishes two layers of compliant acceptance: 「須菩提先問順忍者，是小乘順忍；今須菩提問菩薩順忍法」 tr. "the compliant acceptance Subhūti asked about earlier is the compliant acceptance of the Small Vehicle; what Subhūti asks about now is the dharma of the bodhisattva's compliant acceptance"; and the reason the bodhisattva's compliant acceptance falls on neither side lies in 「見有、無二俱有過故」 tr. "because seeing existence and seeing non-existence both have faults", so that 「於一切法中不生有相，即是修道」 tr. "within all dharmas he does not give rise to a mark of existence; this is cultivating the path". As for the sentence 「有法是菩薩道，無法是果」 tr. "an existent dharma is the bodhisattva's path; a non-existent dharma is the fruit", the treatise-author does not fix it to a single explanation, but lists three schools and then gathers them as a whole: the first, 「有法名有為法，無法是無為法；行有為八聖道，斷諸煩惱，得無為果」 tr. "an existent dharma is named a conditioned dharma; a non-existent dharma is an unconditioned dharma. One practises the conditioned eightfold noble path, cuts off the afflictions, and obtains the unconditioned fruit"; again someone says, 「五波羅蜜名有法，是菩薩道；般若波羅蜜畢竟空故無有法，是菩薩果」 tr. "the five perfections are named existent dharmas, and are the bodhisattva's path; prajñāpāramitā, because of ultimate emptiness, is without any existent dharma, and is the bodhisattva's fruit"; yet another says, 「般若波羅蜜智慧相，有為法故，是為道；如、法性、實際，不從因緣生、常有故，名為果」 tr. "prajñāpāramitā is the mark of wisdom; because it is a conditioned dharma, it is the path; suchness, the nature of dharmas, and the limit of reality are not born from causes and conditions and exist always, and so are named the fruit"—the three sayings stand side by side and return together to one sentence, 「當知一切法皆是無所有性，名為無法」 tr. "one should know that all dharmas are without any existent nature; this is named a non-existent dharma". His explanation of the Buddha's citing himself comes down word by word on the substance of the dharma of dhyāna: 「離欲者，離五欲；離惡、不善法者，離五蓋」 tr. "parting from desire is parting from the five desires; parting from evil and unwholesome dharmas is parting from the five hindrances", and evil and unwholesome are themselves distinguished—「將人入惡道，名為惡；障善法故，名不善」 tr. "what brings a person into the evil destinies is named evil; because it obstructs wholesome dharmas, it is named unwholesome"; the first and the second dhyāna both have joy and pleasure, but their sources differ: 「初禪中喜樂，從離欲故生；二禪喜樂，從定生」 tr. "the joy and pleasure within the first dhyāna arise because of parting from desire; the joy and pleasure of the second dhyāna arise from concentration"; as to why the first dhyāna alone is called born of separation, the treatise-author answers with the scattering of the desire realm—「欲界中散亂故，無定稱；行者能離欲故，名為離生」 tr. "because within the desire realm there is scattering and distraction, there is no name of concentration; because the practitioner can part from desire, it is named born of separation"—whereas the afflictions of the form realm are slight and weak as a trouble, and the place where it falls short lies in initial and sustained thought. The juncture between grasping at marks and not receiving the flavour is also told very finely: in first practising, one grasps at marks up to obtaining it, and 「得已，恐著味故觀無常」 tr. "having obtained it, because one fears clinging to its flavour, one contemplates impermanence", and so one can 「無染心行四禪，異於外道」 tr. "with an undefiled mind practise the four dhyānas, unlike those of the outside paths"; the supernormal powers too: 「依四禪住，起五神通，亦如禪法，不受其味」 tr. "abiding by the four dhyānas, one gives rise to the five supernormal powers, and, just as with the dharma of dhyāna, does not receive their flavour". And the use of the supernormal powers must in the end come down to compassion: the knowledge of former lives knows the beginning, the divine eye knows the end, and having known the beginning and the end of beings, 「心生大悲」 tr. "his mind gives rise to great compassion", and what he thinks of is 「云何斷眾生生死相續苦」 tr. "how can the suffering of the continuity of beings' birth and death be cut off"; and so 「爾時，心迴向入漏盡通，即時以一念相應慧得阿耨多羅三藐三菩提」 tr. "at that time, his mind turned and entered the supernormal power of the exhaustion of outflows, and at once, with the wisdom associated with a single thought, he obtained anuttarā samyaksaṃbodhi"—the five supernormal powers are not of themselves the ultimate; only by turning into the exhaustion of outflows is the Buddha path completed. The distinction of self-nature and other-nature is not abstruse either; the treatise-author explains it directly by matters of the body: 「自性名自身不淨性，他性名衣服等莊嚴身具」 tr. "self-nature means the impure nature of one's own body; other-nature means clothing and the other implements that adorn the body", and 「內外五欲中，無有常、樂、我、淨實」 tr. "within the inner and outer five desires there is no reality of permanence, pleasure, self, or purity". The last section is the one most worth carrying away: 「我觀五欲等空、虛誑、無定相故，不著此禪，而起諸神通」 tr. "because I contemplated the five desires and the rest as empty, false and deceptive, and without a fixed mark, I did not cling to these dhyānas, and gave rise to the supernormal powers", 「諸禪有相、有量故可捨」 tr. "because the dhyānas have marks and have measure, they can be given up", and why no objection can be raised is just one sentence—「初離欲時，以無所有性為因，得阿耨多羅三藐三菩提果亦無所有」 tr. "when one first parts from desire, one takes there being no existent nature as the cause, and the fruit obtained, anuttarā samyaksaṃbodhi, is also without anything existent"—and so he says, 「若禪定空，阿耨多羅三藐三菩提不空，可有是難；今皆空故，不應有難！」 tr. "If meditative concentration were empty while anuttarā samyaksaṃbodhi were not empty, there could be such an objection; now, because both are empty, there should not be this objection!" What makes the objection an objection lies wholly in the two sides of cause and fruit being uneven; with both sides empty, the objection does not stand of itself.
The Last Part, whose fascicle opening carries the continued title 「之餘」 tr. "remainder", turns from those who have already practised to those who are beginning to practise. Sūtra ② changes person as soon as it opens: 「新學菩薩摩訶薩云何於諸法無所有性中次第行、次第學、次第道，以是次第行、次第學、次第道，得阿耨多羅三藐三菩提？」 tr. "How do bodhisattva-mahāsattvas new to the training, within dharmas that are without any existent nature, practise in sequence, train in sequence, and follow the path in sequence, and by this sequential practice, sequential training, and sequential path obtain anuttarā samyaksaṃbodhi?" The Buddha's answer does not start from practice; it starts from hearing—first one hears from the buddhas, or hears from those who have made many offerings to the buddhas and bodhisattvas, or hears from the sages of the four fruits, and what is heard is precisely there being nothing existent: 「一切賢聖皆以得無所有故有名。一切有為作法無所有性，乃至無有如毫末許所有。」 tr. "All the worthies and sages have their names because they obtain that nothing exists. All conditioned, made dharmas are without any existent nature, with not even so much as a hair's tip existent." The thought that arises once he has heard is the strangest turn of the whole chapter: 「我若當得阿耨多羅三藐三菩提、若不得，一切法常無有性，我何以不發心得阿耨多羅三藐三菩提？」 tr. "Whether I come to obtain anuttarā samyaksaṃbodhi or do not obtain it, all dharmas are ever without nature; why should I not arouse the mind to obtain anuttarā samyaksaṃbodhi?"—since obtaining and not obtaining are all one, the arousing of the mind thereupon waits on nothing; and what it is for still lies in beings: 「得阿耨多羅三藐三菩提已，一切眾生行於有相，當令住無所有中」 tr. "having obtained anuttarā samyaksaṃbodhi, since all beings practise within marks, I shall cause them to dwell within there being nothing existent". Once the arousing of the mind is settled, sequence then opens, and the sequence the Buddha opens has two gates. The front gate is the six perfections: 「是新發意菩薩應學六波羅蜜」 tr. "this bodhisattva who has newly aroused the mind should train in the six perfections", and every perfection is furnished with the four kinds of practice—taking dāna as the example, 「自行布施，亦教人行布施，讚歎行布施功德，歡喜讚歎行布施者」 tr. "he himself practises giving, also teaches others to practise giving, praises the merit of practising giving, and rejoices in and praises those who practise giving", and the things given are also listed one by one, 「布施眾生飲食、衣服、香、華、瓔珞、房舍、臥具、燈燭，種種資生所須，盡給與之」 tr. "he gives beings food and drink, clothing, incense, flowers, necklaces, dwellings, bedding, lamps and candles—whatever of every kind is needed to sustain life, giving it all to them"; from giving one obtains wealth and obtains the merits of the five aggregates, and so on up to passing beyond the grounds of the two vehicles, entering the bodhisattva's position, purifying buddha-lands, bringing beings to accomplishment, obtaining the omniscience of all kinds, turning the wheel of the Dharma, and delivering beings—a long chain listed out to the end, and at the close of every perfection it is gathered with the same sentence: 「菩薩以是布施，次第行、次第學、次第道，是皆不可得。何以故？自性無所有故。」 tr. "The sequential practice, sequential training, and sequential path that the bodhisattva has by this giving—these are all unfindable. Why? Because self-nature is without anything existent." The gate of śīla goes further and writes teaching and transforming as a matter of fitting the remedy to the illness—「見貧窮者施以財物，不持戒者教令持戒，亂意者教令禪定，愚癡者教令智慧，無解脫者教令解脫，無解脫知見者教令解脫知見」 tr. "seeing the poor, he gives them wealth; those who do not keep morality he teaches to keep morality; those of scattered mind he teaches meditative concentration; the deluded he teaches wisdom; those without liberation he teaches liberation; those without the knowledge and vision of liberation he teaches the knowledge and vision of liberation"; kṣānti, vīrya, dhyāna, and prajñā are all so in sequence, returning at the end to 「是名初發意菩薩摩訶薩次第行、次第學、次第道」 tr. "this is called the sequential practice, sequential training, and sequential path of a bodhisattva-mahāsattva of the first arousing of intent". The rear gate is the six recollections: 「以一切種智相應心，信解諸法無所有性，修六念，所謂念佛、念法、念僧、念戒、念捨、念天。」 tr. "With a mind associated with the omniscience of all kinds, he believes and understands that dharmas are without any existent nature, and cultivates the six recollections, namely recollection of the Buddha, recollection of the Dharma, recollection of the Saṅgha, recollection of morality, recollection of giving up, and recollection of the gods." And the way of recollecting in these six recollections is, sentence after sentence, negation: recollecting the Buddha, one 「不以色念，不以受、想、行、識念」 tr. "does not recollect by form, does not recollect by feeling, perception, constructions, or consciousness", and also 「不以三十二相念，亦不念金色身、不念丈光、不念八十隨形好」 tr. "does not recollect by the thirty-two marks, and also does not recollect the golden body, does not recollect the light of one zhang, does not recollect the eighty minor marks", and so on up to 「不應以十力念佛，不應以四無所畏、四無礙智、十八不共法念佛，不應以大慈大悲念佛」 tr. "one should not recollect the Buddha by the ten powers; one should not recollect the Buddha by the four fearlessnesses, the four unobstructed knowledges, or the eighteen unshared dharmas; one should not recollect the Buddha by great kindness and great compassion"—why so? Because the self-nature of these dharmas is non-existent; and so it concludes, 「無憶故，是為念佛」 tr. "because there is no remembering, this is recollection of the Buddha". Recollecting the Dharma, one recollects none of these at all—wholesome and unwholesome, determinate and indeterminate, worldly and world-transcending, pure and impure, of sages and of ordinary persons, with outflows and without outflows, bound to the three realms, conditioned and unconditioned—「無所念，是為念法」 tr. "recollecting nothing—this is recollection of the Dharma", and then a step further: 「於是法中，乃至無少許念，何況念法！」 tr. "Within this Dharma, up to there not being even a little recollection, how much less recollecting the Dharma!" Recollecting the Saṅgha, 「無為法故分別有佛弟子眾，是中乃至無有少許念，何況念僧」 tr. "he distinguishes that there is the assembly of the Buddha's disciples because of the unconditioned dharma; within this, up to there not being even a little recollection, how much less recollecting the Saṅgha"; recollecting morality, he counts out the nine names of noble morality—「應念聖戒——無缺戒、無隙戒、無瑕戒、無濁戒、無著戒、自在戒、智者所讚戒、具足戒、隨定戒」 tr. "he should recollect noble morality—morality without breach, morality without crack, morality without flaw, morality without turbidity, morality without clinging, sovereign morality, morality praised by the wise, complete morality, and morality that accords with concentration"—and still returns to not even a little recollection; recollecting giving up, oneself and others, wealth and Dharma, and the afflictions are all given up, 「觀是捨不可得故，乃至無少許念，何況念捨」 tr. "because he contemplates this giving up as unfindable, up to there not being even a little recollection, how much less recollecting giving up"; recollecting the gods, he measures himself against faith, morality, giving, learning, and wisdom—「四天王諸天所有信、戒、施、聞、慧，此間命終，生彼天處；我亦有是信、戒、施、聞、慧」 tr. "the faith, morality, giving, learning, and wisdom possessed by the gods of the Four Heavenly Kings—having ended their lives here, they were born in that heavenly place; I too have such faith, morality, giving, learning, and wisdom"—and still returns to 「尚無少許念，何況念天」 tr. "there is still not even a little recollection, how much less recollecting the gods". The six gates exhausted, it gathers with 「菩薩摩訶薩行是六念，是名次第行、次第學、次第道」 tr. "the bodhisattva-mahāsattva's practising these six recollections—this is called sequential practice, sequential training, and sequential path". This section, above all, must not be read smoothly past: the objects recollected are listed in full, item by item, precisely so that one takes up none of them in each of these six places—the way of recollecting is not to imagine the Buddha as a thing and hold to it, but that in the place recollected there is not one mark to abide in. The last objection of Sūtra ② is the weightiest: 「世尊！若一切法無所有性者，是則無道、無智、無果。」 tr. "World-Honored One! If all dharmas are without any existent nature, then there is no path, no knowledge, no fruit." The Buddha does not answer directly but asks in return: 「汝見是色性實有不？」 tr. "Do you see this nature of form as really existent?" Subhūti answers, 「不見也！世尊！」 tr. "I do not see it, World-Honored One!" The Buddha then turns the question back on him: 「汝若不見諸法實有，云何作是問？」 tr. "Since you do not see dharmas as really existent, why do you ask this question?" Subhūti thereupon makes clear that his question is not doubt—「我於是法不敢有疑，但為當來世諸比丘求聲聞、辟支佛道、菩薩道者」 tr. "I dare not have doubt about this Dharma; it is only for the sake of the bhikṣus in the world to come who seek the śrāvaka path, the pratyekabuddha path, and the bodhisattva path"; those people will speak thus, 「若一切法無所有性，誰垢誰淨？誰縛誰解」 tr. "if all dharmas are without any existent nature, who is stained and who is pure? Who is bound and who is released", and 「是不知不解故而破於戒、破正見、破威儀、破淨命」 tr. "because of this not knowing and not understanding, they break morality, break right view, break deportment, break pure livelihood", ending in a fall into the three evil destinies; hence he says, 「我畏當來世有如是事，以是故問佛。世尊！我於是法中信，不疑不悔」 tr. "I fear that such things will happen in the world to come; for this reason I asked the Buddha. World-Honored One! Within this Dharma I have faith; I do not doubt and do not regret". The end of the chapter does not come down on attaining; it comes down on guarding—what is guarded against is not emptiness, but grasping at emptiness.
The explanation in Treatise ② makes the items above solid one by one. First it settles the name ‘new to the training’: Subhūti asks again because giving rise to dhyāna and to the powers within emptiness 「是大菩薩近成佛者能行」 tr. "is something the great bodhisattvas near to becoming a Buddha can practise", and he did not yet know how those who have newly aroused the mind practise; and the definition of ‘new to the training’ is very wide—「雖無量劫發意，未得諸法實相，皆名新學」 tr. "though he has aroused the intent for immeasurable kalpas, so long as he has not yet obtained the real mark of all dharmas, he is called new to the training". A questioner objects: since they are new to the training, they should be taught only giving and keeping morality; why teach them ultimate emptiness straight away? The treatise-author answers, 「今明始入無所有、畢竟空法故，令行無所有」 tr. "it is now in order to make clear the beginning of entry into the dharma of there being nothing existent and ultimate emptiness that he is made to practise there being nothing existent", and gathers it with a simile: 「譬如小兒服藥，須蜜乃下。是故雖新發意，亦觀深空，無咎。」 tr. "It is as a small child taking medicine: it needs honey to go down. Therefore, though he has newly aroused the intent, there is no fault in his also contemplating deep emptiness." This simile is the eye of the method of the whole chapter—deep emptiness is the medicine, the six perfections and the six recollections are the honey; one does not withhold the medicine because it is bitter, nor take away the honey because he is new to the training. His explanation of those from whom one hears is not vague either: those who have made many offerings to the buddhas means 「遍吉、觀世音、得大勢菩薩、文殊師利、彌勒菩薩等」 tr. "Samantabhadra, Avalokiteśvara, the Bodhisattva Mahāsthāmaprāpta, Mañjuśrī, the Bodhisattva Maitreya, and others"; the sages of the four fruits are as spoken of before, while 「辟支佛不樂說法故，不說」 tr. "the pratyekabuddhas are not mentioned, because they do not delight in expounding the Dharma"; and why one hears only from the sages: because 「餘人多以著心說，諸聖人以無著心說，是故但從聖人聞」 tr. "the other people mostly speak with a clinging mind, while the sages speak with a mind without clinging; for this reason he hears only from the sages". The meaning heard is also restated once: 「一切有為作法從因緣和合生起故有，無有實定性乃至如毫末許所有」 tr. "all conditioned, made dharmas exist because they arise from the coming together of causes and conditions, and have no really fixed nature, up to there not being even so much as a hair's tip of anything existent", and the difference among the sages too lies nowhere else: 「涅槃即是寂滅相、無所有法」 tr. "nirvāṇa is the mark of quiescence, the dharma of there being nothing existent". On arousing the mind, the treatise-author sets two questions in succession to exhaust it. The first: since one knows ultimate emptiness, why say further, ‘why should I not arouse the mind to become a Buddha’? The answer is just one sentence—「畢竟空，無所有，無所障礙，何妨發心作佛？」 tr. "Ultimate emptiness is without anything existent and has nothing that obstructs; how does it hinder arousing the mind to become a Buddha?" Going a step further, he questions back: 「若說畢竟空，滅諸戲論，云何障發心？若障，即是有性，云何言無所有性？」 tr. "If it is said that ultimate emptiness extinguishes all idle discourse, how could it obstruct arousing the mind? If it obstructs, that is an existent nature; how then can it be called the nature without anything existent?" The second: 「若不障發心，亦應不障不發心，菩薩何不安住而發心受諸勤苦？」 tr. "If it does not obstruct arousing the mind, it should equally not obstruct not arousing the mind; why does the bodhisattva not dwell at ease, but arouse the mind and undergo all manner of toil and suffering?" This question comes closest to human feeling, and the treatise-author's answer takes nothing at all from principle—first he speaks of the suffering of kin, 「譬如人得好良藥，親里知識受諸病苦，云何不與」 tr. "it is as a person who has obtained an excellent good medicine, while his kin and friends are undergoing all manner of pains of sickness: how could he not give it to them"; next he speaks of his own crossing not yet being sufficient, 「我雖聞諸法實相，心未深入，未有禪定，智慧未熟，受諸苦惱」 tr. "though I have heard of the real mark of all dharmas, my mind has not yet deeply entered it; I do not yet have meditative concentration, my wisdom is not yet ripe, and I undergo all manner of suffering and vexation"; third he speaks of enemy and kin being equal, which completes the perfection of patience, and what it rests on is again only one thing, the unfixedness of causes and conditions—「怨親無定，以因緣故，親或為怨，怨或為親」 tr. "enemy and kin are not fixed; because of causes and conditions, kin at times become enemies, and enemies at times become kin", and so 「是以菩薩視怨如親」 tr. "therefore the bodhisattva regards enemies as kin", which he makes clear with two similes: 「譬如欲過嶮道，應當敬重頂戴導師；又如良醫雖賤，為貴者所重。」 tr. "It is as one who wishes to pass through a dangerous road should respect and carry on his head the guide; and as a good physician, though lowly, is valued by the noble." Arousing the mind made clear, the treatise-author then asks, question by question, after the meaning of the three names. To the question 「次第行、次第學、次第道有何差別」 tr. "what difference is there among sequential practice, sequential training, and sequential path", he answers by listing several sayings side by side: some say 「無差別；若行、若學、若道，義一而語異」 tr. "there is no difference; whether practice, whether training, whether path—the meaning is one and the words differ"; some say 「初名行，中名學，後名道」 tr. "the beginning is named practice, the middle is named training, the end is named path"; some 「行名布施，學名持戒，道名智慧」 tr. "practice is named giving, training is named keeping morality, path is named wisdom"; some 「行名持戒，學名禪定，道名智慧」 tr. "practice is named keeping morality, training is named meditative concentration, path is named wisdom"; some divide the eightfold noble path into three parts, with right view as the body—「正見是道體；發起是道，名正思惟」 tr. "right view is the body of the path; what gives rise to the path is named right thought"; right speech, right action, and right livelihood aid right view and so are named practice, and right effort, right mindfulness, and right concentration accomplish right view and so are named training; again, someone assigns them to the six perfections: 「檀波羅蜜、毘梨耶波羅蜜名為行，初入道故」 tr. "dānapāramitā and vīryapāramitā are named practice, because they are the first entry into the path", śīla and dhyāna restrain the mind and so are named training, and 「忍為善，般若為智慧，善、智具足故名道。譬如人有眼有足，隨意所至」 tr. "patience is goodness, prajñā is wisdom; because goodness and wisdom are complete, it is named path. It is as a person who has eyes and has feet, and goes wherever he wishes". The sayings listed, the treatise-author does not judge for any one of them, saying only, 「如是等，名為三事差別」 tr. "such as these are named the differences of the three matters". Then he answers head-on 「何以名次第」 tr. "why is it named sequence": precisely because all dharmas are without anything existent, one who has first aroused the mind does not know from where to enter gradually within the dharma of emptiness, and so sequence is set up; and 「諸法雖空難解，次第行得力故，能得成就；譬如緣梯，從一初桄漸上，上處雖高雖難，亦能得至」 tr. "though dharmas are empty and hard to understand, because sequential practice gains strength, one can reach accomplishment; it is as climbing a ladder: from the first rung one gradually goes up, and though the place above is high and hard, one can still reach it"—the ladder is not a thing outside the road; it is where the road can be stepped on; stepping up rung by rung, it does not obstruct emptiness at all. The explanation of practising dāna in four ways is especially thorough: one can practise it in four ways because one has 「善拔慳貪根，深愛檀波羅蜜，慈悲於眾生，通達諸法實相」 tr. "well pulled up the root of stinginess and greed, deeply loves dānapāramitā, is kind and compassionate toward beings, and penetrates the real mark of all dharmas"; and the ailments of those who cannot complete them the treatise-author names one by one—there are those who practise it themselves but cannot teach others, 「或畏他瞋，或畏為己教布施以之為恩」 tr. "either he fears others' anger, or he fears that others will take his urging them to give, done for their own sake, as a favour"; there are those who can teach yet do not themselves practise; 「或有人種種讚歎布施之德，勸人令施而不能自行」 tr. "or there are people who praise the virtue of giving in all manner of ways and urge others to give, but cannot practise it themselves"; there are those complete in all three matters who yet cannot rejoice, because 「或有破戒惡人行施而不喜見」 tr. "perhaps there is a precept-breaking evil person practising giving, and he does not like to see it"; and further 「有人喜見施主而不讚歎，以其邪見不識施果故」 tr. "there are people who are glad to see a donor but do not praise him, because with their wrong views they do not recognise the fruit of giving"—「如是，各各不能具足」 tr. "thus each of them is unable to complete them". That the four matters can be whole lies only in 「菩薩大悲心、深愛善法故，能行四事」 tr. "because the bodhisattva has the mind of great compassion and deeply loves wholesome dharmas, he can practise the four matters". As to why one must teach others to do it themselves, the treatise-author speaks on the bodhisattva's behalf a passage of great plainness: 「我不惜財物，我雖多施汝，汝亦不得持至後世；汝今當自作，後當自得。」 tr. "I do not begrudge wealth; though I give you much, you still cannot take it with you into later lives; you should now do it yourselves, and later you will obtain it yourselves." As to why one rejoices even in the giving of the precept-breaking: because 「見行施者雖是破戒惡人，但念其好心布施之德，不念其惡，是故歡喜讚歎」 tr. "seeing one who practises giving, even if he is a precept-breaking evil person, he thinks only of the virtue of his good mind in giving and does not think of his evil; for this reason he rejoices and praises". And the coming of wealth is from the first not what is sought: 「譬如人為穀故種禾，而稾草自至」 tr. "it is as a person who plants grain for the sake of the grain, and the straw comes of itself". Below this, to the question 「是菩薩布施時，先施何等人」 tr. "when this bodhisattva gives, to what kind of people does he give first", two opposite sayings stand side by side: one says one must go first to the sages—「必先供養諸佛、大菩薩、辟支佛、阿羅漢及諸聖人」 tr. "he certainly first makes offerings to the buddhas, the great bodhisattvas, the pratyekabuddhas, the arhats, and the sages"—and if there are no sages, it is pushed down in order to those who keep morality and are free of desire, the disciples who have left home, those who keep the five precepts and practise the ten wholesome paths, the middling people, and the evil people of the five heinous sins and the animals; the other says the reverse—「應先布施五逆罪人、斷善根者，貧窮、老病、下賤、乞匃者，乃至畜生；譬如慈母，多有眾子，先念羸病，給其所須」 tr. "one should first give to people of the five heinous sins, to those who have cut off the roots of goodness, and to the poor, the old and sick, the lowly, and the begging, up to the animals; it is as a kind mother who has many children and first thinks of the weak and sick, giving them what they need". The two sayings are listed side by side without forced judgement; the treatise-author only distinguishes, from the ground of the mind, where each belongs: 「一切眾生皆是菩薩福田，能生大悲故」 tr. "all beings are the bodhisattva's field of merit, because they can give rise to great compassion"; for one who has obtained the acceptance of non-arising it is equal and without difference, while 「未得無生忍者，或慈悲心多、或分別心多，此二心不得俱行」 tr. "among those who have not yet obtained the acceptance of non-arising, in some the mind of kindness and compassion is greater, in some the discriminating mind is greater; these two minds cannot proceed together"—the one in whom the mind of compassion is greater gives first to the poor and the evil, and his thought is 「種福田中，果報雖大，憐愍眾生故，先利貧者」 tr. "among the fields of merit in which to plant, though the retribution is great, out of pity for beings I first benefit the poor", 「如是田雖不良，以慈悲心，得大果報」 tr. "thus, though the field is not good, by the mind of kindness and compassion one obtains great retribution"; the one in whom the discriminating mind is greater makes offerings first to the buddhas, and his thought is 「諸佛有無量功德故，應先供養」 tr. "because the buddhas have immeasurable merit, they should be offered to first", and though this mind is small, 「福田良故，功德亦大」 tr. "because the field of merit is good, the merit too is great". When one comes to enter the power of skilful means, the two no longer hinder each other: 「心得自在，二事俱行——慈愍眾生，又視皆如佛」 tr. "the mind becomes free, and the two things proceed together—pitying beings with kindness, and also regarding all as a Buddha". The two questions below show an especial fineness: why the sūtra says ‘to one who needs food, give food’ and does not say ‘give clothing and food’—because 「有人須食與飲、須飲與衣，以不稱受者意故，福德少」 tr. "there are people who to one who needs food give drink, and to one who needs drink give clothing; because it does not suit the recipient's wish, the merit is small"; and 「有人若羞、若怖，雖有所須，不能發言，云何知其所須」 tr. "there are people who are either ashamed or afraid; though they have needs, they cannot speak out; how is one to know what they need", whereupon 「菩薩觀其相貌，隨時所須、土地所宜」 tr. "the bodhisattva observes their appearance, what is needed at the time, and what suits the land". The turn from giving to morality also has its course of mind—「我憐愍眾生，以衣食布施，所益甚少；不如持戒，常以無惱、無畏施於眾生」 tr. "I pity beings and give clothing and food, but what it benefits is very little; it is better to keep morality, and constantly give beings freedom from vexation and freedom from fear"; from morality concentration arises, from concentration wisdom is completed, and then liberation and the knowledge and vision of liberation follow, and the five aggregates form of themselves in sequence. Why the sūtra text here speaks of the five aggregates and not of the six perfections—the answer is 「法雖一，以種種異名說，是故說五眾無咎」 tr. "though the dharma is one, it is spoken of by various different names; for this reason there is no fault in speaking of the five aggregates", and each is shown to be contained by a perfection; why it must say ‘aggregate’—because entering the position is not something one precept or one concentration can achieve: 「譬如一人、二人，不名為軍；和合多人，乃成為軍，能破怨敵」 tr. "it is as one person or two persons are not called an army; only when many people are combined do they make an army that can break the enemy". The meaning of sequence can at this point be said in a word: 「先麁後細，先易後難，漸漸習學，名為次第」 tr. "first coarse then fine, first easy then hard, little by little training in and learning, is named sequence"; and that sequence and emptiness do not contradict each other is also just one sentence—「諸法性雖無所有，而隨世諦行，為破顛倒故」 tr. "though the nature of dharmas is without anything existent, one practises following worldly truth, in order to break inversion". The six recollections are set as the first gate because 「念佛等六念是初次第行，以易行易得故」 tr. "the six recollections, recollection of the Buddha and the rest, are the first sequential practice, because they are easy to practise and easy to obtain"; an objector says that in the six recollections too it is said that one does not recollect the Buddha by form, so how can they be called easy; the answer is 「有法共行，故名為易；譬如服苦藥，以蜜下之則易」 tr. "because there is a dharma that can be practised along with it, it is called easy; it is as taking bitter medicine: sending it down with honey makes it easy"—the simile of honey appears here a second time: before, it was for one new to the training contemplating emptiness; here, it is the six recollections carrying emptiness—one and the same dharma. And as to why only the six perfections and the six recollections are spoken of and not the three gates of liberation, the treatise-author answers with great responsibility: 「六波羅蜜、六念等，柔軟易行，不生邪見，是菩薩次第學法。餘三解脫門等，思惟籌量，或生邪見故不說。」 tr. "The six perfections, the six recollections, and the like are gentle and easy to practise and do not give rise to wrong views; this is the dharma of the bodhisattva's sequential training. The rest, the three gates of liberation and the like, require reflection and reckoning and may give rise to wrong views, therefore they are not spoken of." At the very end, explaining the Buddha's counter-question, he too gives it back in just one sentence: 「汝若不見實定有，云何以次第等難空？」 tr. "If you do not see anything really and fixedly existent, how can you use sequence and the like to object to emptiness?"—「而次第法不離於空。」 tr. "And the dharma of sequence is not apart from emptiness." Subhūti's receiving and understanding the treatise-author tells in full on his behalf: what he is anxious about is that people to come, 「以罪重智鈍故，取空相」 tr. "because their sins are heavy and their knowledge dull, grasp at the mark of emptiness", and so 「以少因緣而破戒及威儀，無所畏忌」 tr. "on scant causes and conditions break morality and deportment, with nothing they fear or shun", leave home yet look to the white-robed for their support, lie to seek gain, and break right livelihood; because they plant these sins they fall into the three evil destinies, 「或重於白衣」 tr. "perhaps more heavily than the white-robed"; while as for himself, 「我已得道，於諸法無所受，又常聞佛說空法，云何戲論生疑？又我常修無諍三昧，憐愍眾生，是故問佛」 tr. "I have already obtained the path, and in dharmas there is nothing received; further, I constantly hear the Buddha speak the dharma of emptiness—how should idle discourse give rise to doubt? Further, I constantly cultivate the samādhi of non-contention and pity beings; therefore I ask the Buddha". The source of the one question made clear, the whole chapter then lays down its brush on kindness and compassion.
The difference between the two parts can be settled in a word: the First Part tells how those who have already practised can give rise to practice within emptiness; the Last Part tells how those who have not yet practised can take their first step from within emptiness. What the First Part cites is the Buddha's own matter—entering dhyāna, giving rise to the powers, becoming a Buddha in association with a single thought; what the Last Part cites is what a beginner can set his hand to—hearing the Dharma, arousing the mind, practising the six perfections in four ways, the six recollections. So the course of the First Part closes on 「今皆空故，不應有難」 tr. "now, because both are empty, there should not be this objection", which is breaking an objection; the course of the Last Part closes on 「我畏當來世有如是事」 tr. "I fear that such things will happen in the world to come", which is guarding against an objection. And between the two parts one thread runs through: that single character 「故」 tr. "because" that has been turned around—it is not that, though there is the nature without anything existent, one can still have sequence; it is that 「以諸欲、惡不善法無所有性——若自性、若他性皆是無所有性故」 tr. "because the desires and evil and unwholesome dharmas are without any existent nature—because whether self-nature or other-nature they are all without any existent nature" one can enter the first dhyāna; it is not that outside sequence there is emptiness apart; it is that 「次第法不離於空」 tr. "the dharma of sequence is not apart from emptiness". That the chapter's name is set on sequence and not on emptiness is precisely for this—emptiness was spoken out to the end in the preceding chapters; what this chapter supplies is the road within emptiness; the road is not outside emptiness, and emptiness does not do away with the road.
Therefore, in reading each section of this chapter, one can ask at least three layers. First, what is it that is emptied here—what the whole chapter negates is in every case the character 「性」 tr. "nature": the five desires have no self-nature or other-nature, the supernormal powers have no self-nature or other-nature, of the practice of the six perfections it is said 「是皆不可得。何以故？自性無所有故」 tr. "these are all unfindable. Why? Because self-nature is without anything existent", and of what the six recollections recollect, 「是為無所有」 tr. "this is without anything existent". What is emptied is fixed nature, not the matter itself; giving must still be given, morality must still be kept, dhyāna must still be entered—only one does not set up a real dharma within it and abide there. So whenever one reads an 「不可得」 tr. "unfindable", first ask whether what is unfindable is the matter or the nature, and one will not read a sentence of ultimate emptiness as a sentence of calling it off. Second, for whom is the sequence here set up—the treatise-author says it plainly: sequence is set up in answer to Subhūti's question 「初發心菩薩於是空法中云何能漸次第學」 tr. "how can a bodhisattva of the first arousing of the mind, within this empty dharma, train little by little in sequence", and those it addresses are the ones new to the training; and the bounds of ‘new to the training’ are wide enough to reach 「雖無量劫發意，未得諸法實相，皆名新學」 tr. "though he has aroused the intent for immeasurable kalpas, so long as he has not yet obtained the real mark of all dharmas, he is called new to the training". So every item of this chapter can be matched to one's own seat: which donor's ailment is one's own—unable to teach others, unable to practise oneself, unable to praise, unable to rejoice; whether in oneself the mind of kindness and compassion is greater or the discriminating mind is greater; whether, among the six recollections, one can refrain from grasping at marks. That sequence is sequence lies precisely in its having room for people who are not alike. Third, if on hearing ultimate emptiness I loosen my grip instead, of what use is this chapter to me—this is exactly why Subhūti asks at the end, and it is also the most practical place in the whole chapter. The treatise-author has already written out the names of the illness: 「取空相」 tr. "grasp at the mark of emptiness", 「不解佛語深義以何事而說」 tr. "do not understand on what matter the deep meaning of the Buddha's words is spoken"; and its remedy is not to tell people to speak less of emptiness, but to make emptiness and practice into one matter—medicine and honey taken together, ladder and emptiness used together. Reading on along the two sūtras and two treatises, one will come at last to rest on that plainest of judgements: 「先麁後細，先易後難，漸漸習學，名為次第。」 tr. "First coarse then fine, first easy then hard, little by little training in and learning, is named sequence." Sequence is not a skilful means apart from emptiness; it is what emptiness looks like in time.
Reading On in the Order of the Treatise
次第學品之上Training in Sequence, Part 1 of 2
全文五層 →Full five layers →次第學品之上：順忍之所在；有法無法之為道為果；佛自引入禪起通之證；自性他性俱無所有故能離能入
在問什麼
般若說到此處已近垂訖，畢竟空之義說了又說。愈說得盡，一個疑就愈難壓住：法既畢竟空，那麼修行的階次、所斷的煩惱、所得的果，還立得住嗎？本品之上一單元，就是把這個疑正面提出來，而且提得比前面諸品更硬。
須菩提的第一問是一個反過來的問法。他不問『空了還能不能修』，他問：「世尊！若有法相者，尚不得順忍，何況得道！」——有法相反而不得順忍；那麼「若無法相者，當得順忍不？」並且一口氣把整條路都列上：十地、修道、斷煩惱、過二乘地、入菩薩位、得一切種智、斷一切煩惱習。末後再逼一句：「若無有法，是諸法則不生；若不生是諸法，則不能得一切種智。」問的實是一件事——無所有性與次第，究竟是相礙還是相成。
佛的答是全單元的第一個關節：「如是！如是！若無有法者，則有順忍乃至斷一切煩惱習。」不是勉強容許，是說正因為無有法，才有順忍乃至斷習。順著這一答，須菩提再問行般若時有法相不，佛答得更明白：「無有法相、非法相，即是菩薩順忍。」——順忍不在有相處，也不在立一個『無相』處；兩邊俱不立，那個地方就是順忍，「即是修道，亦是道果」。接著佛把道與果也安立下來：「有法是菩薩道，無法是菩薩果。」
第三問把難處推到佛身上：「佛云何知一切法無所有性故得成佛，於一切法得自在力？」佛的答不是說理，是自引為證——我本行菩薩道時，如何離欲入四禪，如何依四禪起五神通，如何用一念相應慧得阿耨多羅三藐三菩提。而每一步都押上同一句：不念有是禪、不受禪味、不得是禪。須菩提仍不放過，再問無所有性中何以能起禪通、何以能分別三聚；佛於是把理由和盤托出：正因為諸欲、惡不善法「若自性、若他性皆是無所有性故」，我才離得開、入得了；若它們真有定性，反而離不開、入不了。
論段承此逐條隨釋，並自設兩番問答：一問須菩提何以種種因緣重問，一問離初禪煩惱而得二禪何以不名離生。之上要答的，就是這三問——空何以不壞次第、道果之名何以可立、無所有性中何以能起四禪六神通。
逐段解明
一、須菩提問：有法相尚不得順忍，無法相當得順忍不；歷舉十地、修道斷惑乃至一切種智。 經段開口便是一組對舉：「世尊！若有法相者，尚不得順忍，何況得道！」而後轉問無法相之側。所列之地凡十，經文自列其名——「若乾慧地、若性地、若八人地、若見地、若薄地、若離欲地、若已辦地、若辟支佛地、若菩薩地、若佛地」；本論於此段但舉其名而不釋其相，此處亦照舉不代為訓釋，其相須俟本論別處之文。末後兩句把疑推到底：「若無有法，是諸法則不生；若不生是諸法，則不能得一切種智。」——這是全單元所要解的難處，也是後文佛答之所對。
二、佛可其問：若無有法者，則有順忍乃至斷一切煩惱習。 佛答只一句：「如是！如是！若無有法者，則有順忍乃至斷一切煩惱習。」要看的是那個「則有」——不是『雖無有法而仍可勉強有』，是無有法正是有順忍之所由。須菩提所慮的「則不生」，佛換成了「則有」。一問一答之間，空與次第的關係已經倒轉過來。
三、須菩提再問：行般若時有法相不；歷舉五眾、十二入、十八界乃至一切種智之相與斷相。 第二問把問處收到行般若的當下。所舉極廣，自「色相乃至識相」歷「眼相乃至意相」「眼界相乃至意識界相」「四念處相乃至一切種智相」，又以「若色相、若色斷相」之句式把「相」與「斷相」成對再舉一遍，末至「斷一切煩惱習相」。成對而舉是要緊處：所疑的不只是法有相，連『斷』也有相——若斷有相，則所斷之惑亦成實有。
四、佛答：無有法相、非法相，即是菩薩順忍；即是修道，亦是道果；有法是菩薩道，無法是菩薩果。 佛先斷然否之：「不也！須菩提！」而後給出本品的正解：「無有法相、非法相，即是菩薩順忍。」順忍之所在，不在有相，也不在另立一個無相——「若無有法相、無有非法相，即是修道，亦是道果」。一句之中，忍、修道、道果三名同處一地，不是三個階段各占一處。隨後安立道果：「有法是菩薩道，無法是菩薩果。」收句是「當知一切法無所有性」——道果既如此安立，一切法之無所有性也就由此可知。
五、須菩提問：一切法無所有性，佛何以能成佛、於一切法得自在力。 第三問把難處移到佛身上：「世尊！若一切法無所有性，佛云何知一切法無所有性故得成佛，於一切法得自在力？」問得很實在——理上說空可以說得通，事上佛確已成佛、確有自在之力，這兩件事如何在一處。此問一出，下文佛才有自引為證之必要。
六、佛自引為證：本行菩薩道修六度，離欲入四禪而於禪及支取相、不念有是禪、不受味、不得是禪、不受果報；依四禪起五通而不取相、不分別行；一念相應慧得菩提，成就十力乃至大慈大悲，分別三聚眾生。 佛不作理證而作事證，且所證是自身的一段路。先是禪：「我本行菩薩道修六波羅蜜，離諸欲、離惡不善法，有覺有觀，離生喜樂入初禪，乃至入第四禪」；隨即押上一串否定——「於是諸禪及支取相，不念有是禪，不受禪味，不得是禪，無染、清淨行四禪，我於是諸禪不受果報。」次是通：「依四禪住，起五神通：身通、天耳、知他人心、宿命通、天眼證」，五通之名經文自列；而後同樣押上一串否定——「於諸神通不取相，不念有是神通，不受神通味，不得是神通，我於是五神通不分別行。」末是道：「我爾時用一念相應慧得阿耨多羅三藐三菩提」，所知是苦、集、滅、道四諦，所成是十力、四無所畏、四無礙智、十八不共法與大慈大悲，所作是「分別三聚眾生：正定、邪定、不定」，三聚之名亦經文自列，本段不釋其相，此處不補。整段的骨全在那些『不』字上：事一件不少，而一件不取。
七、須菩提問：無所有性中云何起四禪六神通、亦無眾生而分別三聚。 須菩提不以事證為足，逼進一層：「云何世尊於諸法無所有性中起四禪、六神通，亦無眾生而分別作三聚？」問的是可能性——既說無所有，起之者何在、所分別之眾生何在。前問是佛何以能成佛，此問是這些事何以得起；前者問果，後者問其所由。
八、佛答：諸欲惡不善法與諸神通，若自性若他性皆無所有性，故能離能入、能知而得菩提。 佛的答是本單元最關鍵的一轉，而且是以反面立的：「若諸欲、惡不善法當有性——若自性、若他性，我本為菩薩行時，不能觀諸欲、惡不善法無所有性入初禪」——若它們真有定性，我反而入不了初禪。正面接著說：「以諸欲、惡不善法無所有性——若自性、若他性皆是無所有性故，我本行菩薩道時，離諸欲、惡不善法入初禪，乃至入第四禪。」神通亦同此例，末句作「以神通無有性——若自性、若他性皆無所有性，以是故，諸佛於神通，知無所有性，得阿耨多羅三藐三菩提。」——無所有性不是修行的障礙，是修行之所以可能。須菩提的疑到此被翻了過來。
九、論主設問：諸法空是一義，須菩提何以種種因緣重問。 論段開首即問：「諸法空一義，何以故須菩提種種因緣重問？」並把所重問之處逐字牒出：「有法相者不得順忍，乃至若不生是諸法，不能得薩婆若！」問得極自然——義既只一個，何必問了又問。
十、論主自答：畢竟空義甚深難解，般若垂訖恐人多疑多惑故重問。 答有兩層。先說難處之深：「是諸法畢竟空義，甚深難解！說者尚難，何況受者、行者！」說的人尚且難，受的人、行的人更難——這是把重問之故繫在法之深，不繫在問者之鈍。次說時節：「是故須菩提以般若垂訖，恐人多疑多惑故，種種因緣重問。」垂訖二字要緊：一部將盡，能問的機會不多了，所以趁此把疑一一問盡。
十一、論主復次：所問義雖一而所因處異，異門故義得差別。 第二答換一個角度：「復次，所問義雖一，所因處異。」並舉三種問法為例——「若一切法空，云何分別有五道？」「若一切無所有相，云何分別有三乘？」「有相者乃至不得順忍，云何當觀八地、入菩薩位？」同一個空義，從五道問、從三乘問、從八地問，所答自然有別。收句是「異門故義得差別，般若無一定相故」——般若既無一定相，說它的門也就不能只有一個。
十二、論主牒佛之可語。 「佛可須菩提意：「如是！如是！」」——論主先把佛之可語標出，是要讀者知道下文所釋者是這一可語之下的義，不是另起爐灶。可而不加辯，正是前段所答『義一處異』之實例。
十三、論主判二種順忍：先問者是小乘順忍，今問者是菩薩順忍法。 這一句是全段的分水嶺：「須菩提先問順忍者，是小乘順忍；今須菩提問菩薩順忍法。」同一個順忍之名，前後所指不同。此判一立，經文兩問之所以不重複，就有了著落——不是問了兩遍，是問了兩種。
十四、論主牒經之問。 「若菩薩行般若時，有法相不？」論主重牒經文所問，以為下文佛答之所對。牒經而不加語，是本論慣有的體例：先立所釋之文，後出其義。
十五、論主釋佛答：不生法相若有若無，見有見無二俱有過，於一切法中不生有相即是修道。 論主釋佛答云：「菩薩行般若時，無法生相若有、若無。」而後自出其理：「何以故？見有、無二俱有過故，則是菩薩順忍。」——兩邊皆有過，故兩邊皆不生，這正是經文「無有法相、非法相」之義。末句把修道也繫在此處：「於一切法中不生有相，即是修道。」不是不生之外另有修道，不生即是。
十六、論主牒經之道果句。 「須菩提！有法是菩薩道，無法是果。」論主牒此一句，為下文三說張本。經文原句作「無法是菩薩果」，論主牒作「無法是果」，省字而義不改。
十七、論主第一釋：有法即有為法、無法即無為法，行有為八聖道而得無為果。 第一說最為素直：「有法名有為法，無法是無為法；行有為八聖道，斷諸煩惱，得無為果。」道是有為，故可行、可斷；果是無為，故不從造作而得。以有為之行得無為之果，並不相礙——這正是本品所問『空中何以有次第』的一個現成答法。
十八、論主錄他說之一：五度名有法是道，般若畢竟空故無有法是果。 「復次，有人言：五波羅蜜名有法，是菩薩道；般若波羅蜜畢竟空故無有法，是菩薩果。」此說把有無之分落在六度之內：前五度有所作，故名有法而為道；般若畢竟空，故名無有法而為果。論主錄之而不加可否。
十九、論主錄他說之二：般若是智慧相、有為故為道，如法性實際不從因緣生故為果。 「有人言：般若波羅蜜智慧相，有為法故，是為道；如、法性、實際，不從因緣生、常有故，名為果。」此說與前說恰成對翻——前說以般若為果，此說以般若為道。同一個般若，繫於智慧相則屬有為而為道，繫於所證之如、法性、實際則為果。二說並列而論主不判，正是「異門故義得差別」之實例。
二十、論主收束：如是等有無法差別，故知一切法皆是無所有性，名為無法。 「如是等，有、無法差別。」三說既出，論主不取其一，只收一句：「以是因緣故，須菩提！當知一切法皆是無所有性，名為無法。」——諸說所爭在有無之分界何在，所同在末後同歸無所有性。收得極快，是因為本論所要的不是分界，是那個同歸之處。
二一、論主牒須菩提之復問：無所有性中佛云何正知得菩提、於諸法得自在。 「復問：「世尊！若一切法無所有性，佛云何於無所有性中正知得阿耨多羅三藐三菩提，於諸法中得自在？」」論主牒經第三問。經文作「知一切法無所有性故得成佛」，論主牒作「於無所有性中正知得阿耨多羅三藐三菩提」——把『知』標作『正知』，所重在知之不謬，下文「以無所有智合行一切法」即承此而來。
二二、論主釋佛可：菩薩以無所有智合行一切法，能斷一切著故得菩提；此中佛自引為證。 「佛可其言。」而後出其所以：「菩薩以無所有智合行一切法，能斷一切著故，得阿耨多羅三藐三菩提。」關節在「合行」二字——無所有智不是離開一切法而別有一智，是與一切法合而行之；正因為合行，才能就著所行處斷其著。末句點出下文之體例：「此中佛自引為證」，所引即「我本為菩薩時，行六波羅蜜；離欲、離惡不善法，有覺有觀，離生喜樂入初禪。」
二三、論主釋初禪諸名：離欲即離五欲、離惡不善法即離五蓋；覺觀、離生喜樂；色界二種樂與初禪二禪之別。 這是論中第一段逐字訓釋，所釋皆經文自有之名。「離欲者，離五欲；離惡、不善法者，離五蓋」——二名各有所指，不相重。惡與不善再分：「將人入惡道，名為惡；障善法故，名不善。」一是就果說，一是就障說。覺觀則云「有覺有觀，初禪所攝善覺觀」，標一個『善』字以簡別。「離生喜樂者，捨離五欲生喜樂」——喜樂之所從來，是捨離而非別得。隨後開色界之樂為二：「色界中有二種樂：一者、有喜樂，二者、無喜樂」，並各指其處——有喜樂在初禪、二禪，無喜樂在三禪。末以一問收之：初禪二禪俱有喜樂，何別？答曰「初禪中喜樂，從離欲故生；二禪喜樂，從定生」——同一喜樂而所從生異，此即下段問答之所本。
二四、論主設問：亦離初禪煩惱而得二禪，何以不說離生。 「問曰：亦離初禪煩惱得二禪，何以不說離生？」問得極細：既然二禪也是離了初禪之惑而得，何以獨初禪名離生，二禪不名離生。此問不設，前段「從離欲故生」與「從定生」之分就只是兩句話，立不住。
二五、論主答：欲界散亂無定稱，能離欲故名離生；初禪中有定，二禪因初禪定生故名定生。 答從『有定無定』下手：「欲界中散亂故，無定稱；行者能離欲故，名為離生。」欲界根本無定可稱，所以從欲界上來的那一步只能就『離』立名。二禪則不同：「初禪中有定，二禪因初禪定生故，名為定生。」所依既是定，就從『生』之所自立名。兩名之異不在功用高下，在所依之處不同。
二六、論主復次：欲界煩惱不善故障初禪、離大障故說離生；色界煩惱無記為患微弱，以覺觀失禪故佛說滅覺觀得二禪。 第二答從所離之惑的性質下手：「欲界煩惱不善相故障初禪；行者欲離大障故，是故說離生。」欲界之惑是不善，障得重，所以離它這一步值得別立一名。「色界煩惱名無記，為患微弱」——色界之惑是無記，為患輕，不足以別立離名；真正妨礙二禪的另有其物，就是覺與觀，「以覺、觀因緣故失禪」。故引佛語為結：「是故佛說：「滅諸覺、觀，內心清淨故得二禪。」」二禪之所以名定生而不名離生，至此兩面皆足。
二七、論主略過三禪四禪，云如先說。 「三禪、四禪，如先說。」一句帶過。本論於他處已具釋三禪四禪之相，此處不重出；讀者當知此非闕釋，是指歸前文。誌其為略，不代為補。
二八、論主釋不取禪相：初習時取相乃至得，得已恐著味故觀無常；不受味、無染心行四禪，異於外道；修不受果報禪。 論主牒經文「我於是諸禪支取相得已，不念有是禪」，而後把次第說得很細：「初習禪時，取相，乃至得」——取相並非過失，習禪之初正須取相。轉處在得之後：「得已，恐著味故觀無常」，於是「不念有是禪，不得是禪定相，亦不受味，無染心行四禪，異於外道。」數番否定之後押上一句判語——「異於外道」。外道亦得四禪，所異不在禪之有無，在得後受味與否。末句出其歸結：「於是諸禪，修不受果報禪。」不受果報，是連禪之報亦不取。
二九、論主釋五通不受味：依四禪住起五神通，亦如禪法不受其味。 「依四禪住，起五神通，亦如禪法，不受其味。」一句照前段之例推之：禪既不受味，依禪而起之通亦不受味。經文於禪與通各押一串否定，論主於此以「亦如禪法」四字收之，不再重釋——文省而義不缺。
三十、論主釋宿命天眼二通之用：知眾生本業因緣與未來所生處，知本末已而心生大悲。 論主獨取五通中之二通作釋，因其與下文之得道直接相繫。「宿命通故，知一切眾生本業因緣，來生是間」是知其本；「天眼通力故，見眾生未來世所生之處」是知其末。二者合則「隨其業行，知一切眾生本、末已，心生大悲」。要看的是那個『已』字——悲不是憑空發的，是知盡了眾生的來去之後自然起的；而所悲之事論主亦逐字出之：「云何斷眾生生死相續苦？」
三一、論主釋迴向漏盡通而得菩提：一念相應慧知四諦，通達四諦故得十力乃至十八不共法；分別三聚、住三神通度眾生。 大悲既起，「爾時，心迴向入漏盡通」——迴向二字把前面的五通與後面的得道接上，五通不是終點，是迴向之資。「即時以一念相應慧得阿耨多羅三藐三菩提」，所知者，論主以四句釋四諦：「所謂是苦相，苦因是愛，愛斷苦盡，為到苦盡是道」——經文但列四諦之名，論主於此以因果相生之語釋之，四諦之義遂不待外求。所成則「通達四諦故，得十力、四無所畏、四無礙智、十八不共法」。末說度生之事：「分別眾生作三聚；住三神通，度是眾生，所謂天耳、知他心、身通；為眾生說法，令度生死。」五通之中取此三者為度生之用，亦論主自出。
三二、論主牒須菩提之復問：諸法無所有，云何起四禪六神通、分別三聚。 「須菩提復問：「若諸法無所有，云何佛為菩薩時起四禪、六神通？若無眾生，云何分別眾生作三聚？」」論主牒經第四問。經文原作「於諸法無所有性中」，論主牒作「若諸法無所有」，省一『性』字而所疑不改——疑在無所有與能起之間。
三三、論主牒佛答之反面立言。 「佛答：「諸欲、諸惡若當有性——若自性、若他性，我本為菩薩時，不能觀諸欲、惡不善法無所有性入初禪。」」論主先牒反面一句，不先牒正面。反面立言是本段的說法之體：先說『若有定性則不能』，正面之『今無定性故能』自然現前。
三四、論主釋自性他性：自性名自身不淨性，他性名衣服等莊嚴身具；內外五欲中無常樂我淨實，故能觀空入初禪。 這是本單元最實在的一段訓釋。論主先把佛意展開：「佛意：若諸欲、不善法有定性實法若多、若少自相者，若自身中若有淨、常等性。」而後標名：「性有二種：若自性、若他性。」二名之義論主逐一自出——「自性名自身不淨性，他性名衣服等莊嚴身具。」自性就自身說，他性就身外莊嚴之具說；二者所以並舉，是因為五欲之可貪不外此內外兩處。隨即判之：「此皆無常、虛誑、苦惱因緣。」結論落在「內外五欲中，無有常、樂、我、淨實」——內外俱無四者之實，故可觀而入禪。末後以反正兩面收之：「若有者，我本行菩薩道時，不能觀五欲空無所有性入初禪」；「今欲、惡不善法無有實性——若自性、若他性，是故我為菩薩時，離五欲、惡不善法，入初禪，乃至入第四禪。」神通一段同此例，故論主只以一句帶過。
三五、論主牒須菩提之再問：諸法定無所有性空，佛云何於諸法中得自在力。 「須菩提問：「若諸法定無所有性空，佛云何於諸法中得自在力？」」此問把前問之『起禪通』改問『得自在力』。所疑不變而問處更緊：起是一時之事，自在是常時之用；空中起事尚可說是暫爾，空中常有自在之用，便更難安。
三六、論主牒佛答：四禪故於諸煩惱得解脫，六神通故於諸法得自在度眾生。 「佛答：「我以四禪故，於諸煩惱得解脫；六神通故，於諸法得自在度眾生。」」一答分兩路：四禪所對是煩惱，六神通所對是諸法與眾生。自在之力不是一個籠統之名，是就所對之處各有其用；此答之細，正為破前問之籠統。
三七、論主出須菩提意：四禪六神通是有，云何於空得自在力。 「須菩提意：以四禪、六神通是有，云何於空得自在力？」論主於此不牒經文而直出其意——經文至此已無此問，是論主代為點破須菩提所疑之所在。疑之根在一個『有』字：既以四禪六通為有，則以有為憑而言空中自在，自相違礙。此意不點出，下段佛示之語就無所對。
三八、論主釋佛示：觀五欲等空虛誑無定相故不著此禪而起神通；諸禪有相有量故可捨；因果俱無所有，故不應有難。 末段把全單元收在一處。先解那個『有』：「我觀五欲等空、虛誑、無定相故，不著此禪，而起諸神通。」禪確是起了，而不著——所以不成其為『有』。次判禪之可捨：「諸禪有相、有量故可捨，得阿耨多羅三藐三菩提。」有相有量者皆可捨，捨之而後菩提可得。再說因果之一貫：「初離欲時，以無所有性為因，得阿耨多羅三藐三菩提果亦無所有。」因既無所有，果亦無所有，因果同一無所有，中間並無斷裂。末以一句斷難：「若禪定空，阿耨多羅三藐三菩提不空，可有是難；今皆空故，不應有難！」——難之所以成，須先假定一空一不空；今兩頭俱空，難便無處可立。一單元之問至此全息。
不要讀錯
不要把「無有法相、非法相」讀成什麼都沒有。經文說的是有相不立、無相亦不立；若讀成『只承認無』，那正落在論主所簡的一邊——「見有、無二俱有過故，則是菩薩順忍」。兩邊俱有過，故兩邊俱不生；不生之處即是順忍，不是另有一個空相可守。
不要把「有法是菩薩道，無法是菩薩果」讀成先修有為、後得無為的兩截。論主於此出三說而不判一——有為八聖道與無為果、五度與般若、般若智慧相與如法性實際——三說所分之界各異，若執定其一為的解，反失論主「異門故義得差別」之意。三說所同者唯末後一句：「當知一切法皆是無所有性，名為無法。」
不要把佛自引四禪五通讀成佛在說自己的功德。整段的重心不在所得之事，在那一串『不』字上——「不念有是禪，不受禪味，不得是禪」，五通亦然。事一件不少而一件不取，這才是所以為證之處；若讀作功德之敘，則此段與前後之問答全不相干。
不要把「不受果報」讀成修禪無果。所不受者是禪之報，非謂行之無效。論主在此標出一句判語：「異於外道。」外道亦能得四禪，所異者正在得後受味與否；受味則落於報，不受味則禪成道資。若讀成『修禪沒有用』，則下文依四禪起五通、迴向漏盡而得菩提一路皆無著落。
不要把自性他性之無所有讀成否定禪定之事。佛的立言是反過來的：「若諸欲、惡不善法當有性——若自性、若他性，我本為菩薩行時，不能觀諸欲、惡不善法無所有性入初禪」——有定性反而入不了。無所有性不是把修行取消，是修行之所以可能；轉不過這一句，全品都會讀成空與行相爭。
不要把須菩提的重問讀作不解而反覆。論主已先替他解過：「所問義雖一，所因處異」，並舉五道、三乘、八地三種問門為例；又繫其時節於「以般若垂訖，恐人多疑多惑故」。所以重問是為後人問，不是為自己不明。
不要把「一念相應慧」讀成一剎那之僥倖。論主把它安在一條長線的末端——四禪、五通、知眾生本末、心生大悲、迴向入漏盡通，然後才是「即時以一念相應慧得阿耨多羅三藐三菩提」。一念之所以能相應，是前面的次第已足；離開次第說一念，正是本品所要對治的。
不要把經文所列十地與三聚當作本論於此已釋其相。十地之名、三聚之名皆經文自列，而本段論文於此二列不出訓釋；此處照舉其名而不代為訓釋，是依本論之文為限，非略而不教。所缺者當俟本論別處之文，不於此臆補。
修行作用
以「不受味」校自己的定境。用功稍得力，心裡自然生出受用之感，那正是著味之始。論主給的次第很清楚：「初習禪時，取相，乃至得」——取相不是病；「得已，恐著味故觀無常」——得後不觀無常才是病。所以每一次覺得『這一座坐得好』的時候，正是該把無常提起來的時候，不是該回味的時候。
以「所因處異」許自己重問。同一個道理聽過多次仍不透，多半不是記性不好，是問的門不同——從果上問過了，事上還沒問；理上明白了，臨境仍不明白。論主既許須菩提「種種因緣重問」，學人不必因為『這個我已經學過』而不許自己再問一遍。真正該警惕的是問而不待答，不是問了又問。
以自性他性之分對治五欲之貪。論主把貪的所緣分得極實在：「自性名自身不淨性，他性名衣服等莊嚴身具。」一是身自身，一是身外之莊嚴。臨境時可就此二處各自一問：所貪者是這個身，還是加在身上的那些？兩處各自看過，「內外五欲中，無有常、樂、我、淨實」這一句才不是空話。
以「離生」「定生」之分安頓用功的次第。從散亂上來的那一步，所憑唯在『離』——論主說得直白：「欲界中散亂故，無定稱；……」所以初用功時不必求定相，先求離；離得開，定自來。已有一分定之後，再求進步則不從離上使力，而從所依之定上生——「二禪因初禪定生故，名為定生」。用力處隨階段而轉，錯了階段，力就白費。
以大悲為所得之迴向處。論主敘佛之得道，中間插了一段極要緊的轉折：知眾生本末已，「心生大悲：「云何斷眾生生死相續苦？」」然後才「心迴向入漏盡通」。凡有所見、有所得，若只停在『我知道了』，路就斷在那裡；把所見轉成對眾生之悲，所得才有去處。
以「諸禪有相、有量故可捨」松開對境界的把持。可捨之判準論主說得很省：有相、有量。凡是可以描述、可以計較深淺的，都在可捨之列。用功之人最難的往往不是得，是得了之後肯不肯放；此句可以隨時拿來一校：這個我正握著的，有相嗎、有量嗎？
以「今皆空故，不應有難」息自設之難。許多修行上的糾結，細看都是一頭空一頭不空——世間是空的而我的修行不空，煩惱是空的而我的果位不空。論主指出這種難成立的條件：「若禪定空，阿耨多羅三藐三菩提不空，可有是難；……」條件不具，難自不立。遇到心裡打結時，先問自己是不是偷偷留了一頭不空。
承衍
之上一單元，一經一論，立的是本品的樞紐。經文以有法相反不得順忍發問，歷十地、修道、斷惑而至一切種智，佛答以「若無有法者，則有順忍乃至斷一切煩惱習」，繼以「無有法相、非法相，即是菩薩順忍」安順忍之所在，以「有法是菩薩道，無法是菩薩果」安道果之名，末以佛自身入禪起通得道為證；論主逐句隨釋，以「所問義雖一，所因處異」釋重問之故，以小乘順忍與菩薩順忍分前後兩問，以有為無為、五度般若、般若與如法性實際三說釋有法無法而同歸無所有性，以離生定生之分釋四禪之名，以「異於外道」判受味與否，以自性他性之無所有為離欲入禪之所由，末以「今皆空故，不應有難」斷須菩提之難。全段的重心可以收在一句上：無所有性不壞次第，正是次第之所由成。
品題之異，諸本不一，而三造同歸一名。底本論題作〈次第學品〉第七十五；宮本此題九字別作「釋第七十五品上三次品」十字，明標本品又稱三次品；所釋之經本正題即作〈三次品〉第七十五，而於品題下夾註「丹本次第行品」；明本於論題下註明「之上經作三次第行品」，宋、元二本則於題下加一「上」字以別之上之下；聖、石二本此處缺題。吉藏疏本亦題〈三次品〉第七十五。三造並見而稱名各有所本，此處並錄不判。
吉藏《大品經義疏》於本品開端即出科判，並把本品繫在入位之次第上：「此下第四、明菩薩次第漸增得入菩薩位，為三：……」於「有法是菩薩道，無法是菩薩果」一句，吉藏先出自己之解——「因中行有法，故有法為道；果地行無法，無法是果也」——隨即明言本論之解與之不同：「論之不爾，三釋」，並逐一錄之：「一云、八聖道是法，行八聖道斷煩惱得無為，得無為是果也。二、解云，五度為是法，道般若無法為果。三、解云，如法性無為法是果」。吉藏所錄之三釋，與本單元論主所出之三說相應；經疏自解與論解兩造並見，誌錄不判。
吉藏於此更設一問答，取〈集散品〉之義為難：「前集散品明實相能生般若，般若是果，實相是因，今何故般若是道，實相為果？」其答云：「般若就境智敬故，實相能生般若，般若是果；今明由般若斷煩惱得悟實相故，實相是果，般若是因也。」——就所望之處不同而因果互為，故前後不相違。論主於此不設此難，兩造詳略互見。
四禪一段，吉藏與論主所釋多相合而各有詳略。釋離惡，吉藏云「離惡者，離五蓋」，與論主同；釋初禪二禪之別，吉藏云「初禪喜樂從離五欲生，二禪喜樂從宣生」，於離生定生之問則答云「亦得如此，但初禪無說離生，二禪說定生也」——許其亦得，而但就立名之慣立說，與論主以欲界散亂無定稱、色界煩惱無記為患微弱釋之者，繁簡不同。釋取相，吉藏云「此是脩初禪時取禪枝相皃而脩也」；釋不取，云「不念有禪者，得禪念恐著禪味故現無光，不念有禪異外道也，從禪五通也」——「異外道」之判與論主「異於外道」一句相合。釋得道之次第，吉藏云「一念相應慧者，此是從禪發五通竟，迴心入偏盡通，以一念相應菩提見四諦故得十力等，其文次第也」，與論主「爾時，心迴向入漏盡通」所出之次第相同；其文作「偏盡」，疏本傳寫之異，照錄不改。
慧影《大智度論疏》現存之本止於卷二十四，所疏未及本品，於本品闕釋，非其說有異。均正《大乘四論玄義》通檢全書，於本品之品名與品義俱無逐字之引，誌其查無，不代為求。
至於新學菩薩於無所有性中云何次第行、次第學、次第道，六波羅蜜之四種行相與六念之逐條，乃至「若一切法無所有性者，是則無道、無智、無果」之難——本品之下繼此展開，此處不預。
Training in Sequence, First Part: Where Compliant Acceptance Lies; Existent and Non-existent Dharmas as Path and as Fruit; the Buddha's Own Witness of Entering Dhyāna and Giving Rise to the Powers; Because Self-Nature and Other-Nature Are Both Without Anything Existent, One Can Part and Can Enter
What Is Being Asked
When the discourse on prajñā reaches this point it is near its close, and the meaning of ultimate emptiness has been spoken again and again. The more completely it is spoken, the harder a doubt becomes to hold down: since dharmas are ultimately empty, can the stages of practice, the afflictions that are cut off, and the fruit that is obtained still stand? The First Part of this chapter, as one unit, raises this doubt head-on, and raises it more hardly than the earlier chapters did.
Subhūti's first question is put in a reversed way. He does not ask ‘once it is empty, can one still cultivate’; he asks: 「世尊！若有法相者，尚不得順忍，何況得道！」 tr. "World-Honored One! If there is the mark of dharmas, one still does not obtain compliant acceptance—how much less the path!"—with the mark of dharmas one does not, on the contrary, obtain compliant acceptance; then 「若無法相者，當得順忍不？」 tr. "if there is no mark of dharmas, should one obtain compliant acceptance?" And in one breath he lists the whole road: the ten grounds, cultivating the path, cutting off the afflictions, passing beyond the grounds of the two vehicles, entering the bodhisattva's position, obtaining the omniscience of all kinds, and cutting off all the afflictions and their habitual residues. At the end he presses one more sentence: 「若無有法，是諸法則不生；若不生是諸法，則不能得一切種智。」 tr. "If there are no dharmas, these dharmas do not arise; if these dharmas do not arise, one cannot obtain the omniscience of all kinds." What is asked is really one matter—whether being without any existent nature and sequence, in the end, obstruct each other or complete each other.
The Buddha's answer is the first joint of the whole unit: 「如是！如是！若無有法者，則有順忍乃至斷一切煩惱習。」 tr. "Just so! Just so! If there is no dharma, then there is compliant acceptance and so on up to the severance of all the afflictions and their habitual residues." It is not a reluctant concession; it says that precisely because there is no dharma there is compliant acceptance and so on up to the severance of the residues. Following this answer, Subhūti asks again whether, when practising prajñā, there is the mark of dharmas, and the Buddha answers more clearly still: 「無有法相、非法相，即是菩薩順忍。」 tr. "There is no mark of dharmas and no mark of what is not a dharma; this is the bodhisattva's compliant acceptance."—compliant acceptance does not lie where marks are, nor where a ‘signless’ is set up; where neither side is set up, that place is compliant acceptance, 「即是修道，亦是道果」 tr. "this is cultivating the path, and it is also the path and its fruit". Then the Buddha establishes path and fruit as well: 「有法是菩薩道，無法是菩薩果。」 tr. "An existent dharma is the bodhisattva's path; a non-existent dharma is the bodhisattva's fruit."
The third question pushes the difficulty onto the Buddha himself: 「佛云何知一切法無所有性故得成佛，於一切法得自在力？」 tr. "How is it that the Buddha, because he knows that all dharmas are without any existent nature, came to become a Buddha and obtained the power of sovereignty over all dharmas?" The Buddha's answer is not reasoning; it is citing himself as witness—how, when I formerly practised the bodhisattva path, I parted from desire and entered the four dhyānas, how by the four dhyānas I gave rise to the five supernormal powers, how with the wisdom associated with a single thought I obtained anuttarā samyaksaṃbodhi. And on every step he presses the same sentence: not thinking that there is this dhyāna, not receiving the flavour of dhyāna, not obtaining this dhyāna. Subhūti still does not let it go, and asks again how, within being without any existent nature, the dhyānas and powers can be given rise to, and how the three groups can be distinguished; the Buddha then lays the reason out entire: precisely because the desires and evil and unwholesome dharmas are without any existent nature, 「若自性、若他性皆是無所有性故」 tr. "because whether self-nature or other-nature they are all without any existent nature", could I part from them and enter; if they really had a fixed nature, I could, on the contrary, neither part from them nor enter.
The treatise section explains these point by point, and sets up two rounds of question and answer of its own: one asks why Subhūti asks again by various causes and conditions; one asks why, when one parts from the afflictions of the first dhyāna and obtains the second dhyāna, it is not named born of separation. What the First Part has to answer is these three questions—why emptiness does not break sequence, why the names of path and fruit can be established, and why within being without any existent nature the four dhyānas and the six supernormal powers can be given rise to.
Passage by Passage
1. Subhūti asks: with the mark of dharmas one still does not obtain compliant acceptance; without the mark of dharmas, should one obtain compliant acceptance; he lists the ten grounds, cultivating the path and cutting off the defilements, and so on up to the omniscience of all kinds. The sūtra section opens with a pair set against each other: 「世尊！若有法相者，尚不得順忍，何況得道！」 tr. "World-Honored One! If there is the mark of dharmas, one still does not obtain compliant acceptance—how much less the path!" and then turns to ask about the side of no mark of dharmas. The grounds listed are ten in all, and the sūtra lists their names itself—「若乾慧地、若性地、若八人地、若見地、若薄地、若離欲地、若已辦地、若辟支佛地、若菩薩地、若佛地」 tr. "whether the ground of dry wisdom, or the ground of the stage of nature, or the ground of the person of the eight, or the ground of seeing, or the ground of thinning, or the ground of freedom from desire, or the ground of what has been done, or the pratyekabuddha ground, or the bodhisattva ground, or the Buddha ground"; the treatise in this passage only raises their names and does not explain their marks, and here too they are raised as they are, without a gloss given on the treatise's behalf; their marks must wait for the treatise's text elsewhere. The last two sentences push the doubt to the bottom: 「若無有法，是諸法則不生；若不生是諸法，則不能得一切種智。」 tr. "If there are no dharmas, these dharmas do not arise; if these dharmas do not arise, one cannot obtain the omniscience of all kinds."—this is the difficulty the whole unit sets out to resolve, and also what the Buddha's answer below faces.
2. The Buddha approves his question: if there is no dharma, then there is compliant acceptance and so on up to the severance of all the afflictions and their habitual residues. The Buddha's answer is only one sentence: 「如是！如是！若無有法者，則有順忍乃至斷一切煩惱習。」 tr. "Just so! Just so! If there is no dharma, then there is compliant acceptance and so on up to the severance of all the afflictions and their habitual residues." What is to be looked at is that 「則有」 tr. "then there is"—it is not ‘though there is no dharma, there can still reluctantly be’; it is that there being no dharma is exactly where compliant acceptance comes from. The 「則不生」 tr. "then do not arise" that Subhūti feared, the Buddha replaces with 「則有」 tr. "then there is". Between one question and one answer, the relation between emptiness and sequence has already been turned round.
3. Subhūti asks again: when practising prajñā is there the mark of dharmas; he lists the marks and the marks of severance of the five aggregates, the twelve sense-fields, the eighteen elements, and so on up to the omniscience of all kinds. The second question draws the place of asking back to the very moment of practising prajñā. What he lists is extremely broad: from 「色相乃至識相」 tr. "the mark of form and so on up to the mark of consciousness", through 「眼相乃至意相」 tr. "the mark of the eye and so on up to the mark of the mind", 「眼界相乃至意識界相」 tr. "the mark of the eye element and so on up to the mark of the mind-consciousness element", 「四念處相乃至一切種智相」 tr. "the mark of the four foundations of mindfulness and so on up to the mark of the omniscience of all kinds", and again, in the sentence pattern 「若色相、若色斷相」 tr. "whether the mark of form or the mark of the severance of form", he raises 「相」 tr. "mark" and 「斷相」 tr. "the mark of severance" once more in pairs, ending at 「斷一切煩惱習相」 tr. "the mark of the severance of all the afflictions and their habitual residues". Raising them in pairs is the crucial point: what is doubted is not only that dharmas have marks, but that even ‘severance’ has a mark—if severance has a mark, then the defilements severed also become really existent.
4. The Buddha answers: there is no mark of dharmas and no mark of what is not a dharma—this is the bodhisattva's compliant acceptance; this is cultivating the path, and it is also the path and its fruit; an existent dharma is the bodhisattva's path, a non-existent dharma is the bodhisattva's fruit. The Buddha first flatly denies it: 「不也！須菩提！」 tr. "Not so, Subhūti!" and then gives the right understanding of this chapter: 「無有法相、非法相，即是菩薩順忍。」 tr. "There is no mark of dharmas and no mark of what is not a dharma; this is the bodhisattva's compliant acceptance." Where compliant acceptance lies is not in marks, nor in setting up a separate signless—「若無有法相、無有非法相，即是修道，亦是道果」 tr. "if there is no mark of dharmas and no mark of what is not a dharma, this is cultivating the path, and it is also the path and its fruit". Within one sentence, the three names—acceptance, cultivating the path, and the path and its fruit—stand in one place; they are not three stages each occupying a place of its own. Then he establishes path and fruit: 「有法是菩薩道，無法是菩薩果。」 tr. "An existent dharma is the bodhisattva's path; a non-existent dharma is the bodhisattva's fruit." The closing sentence is 「當知一切法無所有性」 tr. "one should know that all dharmas are without any existent nature"—since path and fruit are so established, that all dharmas are without any existent nature can thereby be known.
5. Subhūti asks: all dharmas being without any existent nature, how could the Buddha become a Buddha and obtain the power of sovereignty over all dharmas. The third question moves the difficulty onto the Buddha himself: 「世尊！若一切法無所有性，佛云何知一切法無所有性故得成佛，於一切法得自在力？」 tr. "World-Honored One! If all dharmas are without any existent nature, how is it that the Buddha, because he knows that all dharmas are without any existent nature, came to become a Buddha and obtained the power of sovereignty over all dharmas?" The question is very down-to-earth—in principle, speaking of emptiness can be made to hold; in fact, the Buddha has indeed become a Buddha and indeed has the power of sovereignty; how do these two things stand in one place? Only once this question is out does the Buddha below have need to cite himself as witness.
6. The Buddha cites himself as witness: formerly practising the bodhisattva path and cultivating the six perfections, he parted from desire and entered the four dhyānas, and as to the dhyānas and their limbs he grasped at marks, did not think that there was this dhyāna, did not receive its flavour, did not obtain this dhyāna, and did not receive the retribution; by the four dhyānas he gave rise to the five supernormal powers without grasping at marks, practising without discrimination; with the wisdom associated with a single thought he obtained awakening, accomplished the ten powers and so on up to great kindness and great compassion, and distinguished beings into the three groups. The Buddha gives not a proof by principle but a proof by fact, and what is proved is a stretch of his own road. First the dhyānas: 「我本行菩薩道修六波羅蜜，離諸欲、離惡不善法，有覺有觀，離生喜樂入初禪，乃至入第四禪」 tr. "When I formerly practised the bodhisattva path and cultivated the six perfections, I parted from the desires and parted from evil and unwholesome dharmas, and with initial and sustained thought, with the joy and pleasure born of separation, I entered the first dhyāna, and so on up to entering the fourth dhyāna"; at once he presses on a string of negations—「於是諸禪及支取相，不念有是禪，不受禪味，不得是禪，無染、清淨行四禪，我於是諸禪不受果報。」 tr. "As to these dhyānas and their limbs I grasped at marks; I did not think that there was this dhyāna, did not receive the flavour of dhyāna, did not obtain this dhyāna; undefiled and pure, I practised the four dhyānas, and in these dhyānas I did not receive the retribution." Next the powers: 「依四禪住，起五神通：身通、天耳、知他人心、宿命通、天眼證」 tr. "Abiding by the four dhyānas, I gave rise to the five supernormal powers: the bodily power, the divine ear, knowing the minds of others, the supernormal power of former lives, and the realisation of the divine eye"; the names of the five supernormal powers the sūtra lists itself; and then likewise he presses on a string of negations—「於諸神通不取相，不念有是神通，不受神通味，不得是神通，我於是五神通不分別行。」 tr. "As to the supernormal powers I did not grasp at marks, did not think that there was this supernormal power, did not receive the flavour of the supernormal powers, did not obtain this supernormal power; in these five supernormal powers I practised without discrimination." Last the path: 「我爾時用一念相應慧得阿耨多羅三藐三菩提」 tr. "At that time I, with the wisdom associated with a single thought, obtained anuttarā samyaksaṃbodhi"; what is known is the four truths of suffering, origination, cessation, and the path; what is accomplished is the ten powers, the four fearlessnesses, the four unobstructed knowledges, the eighteen unshared dharmas, and great kindness and great compassion; what is done is 「分別三聚眾生：正定、邪定、不定」 tr. "distinguished beings into the three groups: the group assured of rightness, the group assured of wrongness, and the unassured group"; the names of the three groups too the sūtra lists itself; this passage does not explain their marks, and here they are not supplied. The bones of the whole passage lie entirely in those ‘not’s: not one matter fewer, and not one matter taken up.
7. Subhūti asks: within being without any existent nature, how are the four dhyānas and the six supernormal powers given rise to, and, there being no beings either, how are the three groups distinguished. Subhūti does not take the proof by fact as enough, and presses one layer further: 「云何世尊於諸法無所有性中起四禪、六神通，亦無眾生而分別作三聚？」 tr. "How is it that the World-Honored One, within dharmas without any existent nature, gave rise to the four dhyānas and the six supernormal powers, and, there being no beings either, distinguished them into the three groups?" What is asked is possibility—since it is said there is nothing existent, where is the one who gives rise to them, and where are the beings who are distinguished? The earlier question was how the Buddha could become a Buddha; this question is how these matters can arise; the former asks about the fruit, the latter about where it comes from.
8. The Buddha answers: the desires, evil and unwholesome dharmas, and the supernormal powers, whether self-nature or other-nature, are all without any existent nature; therefore one can part, can enter, can know, and obtains awakening. The Buddha's answer is the most crucial turn of this unit, and it is set up from the reverse side: 「若諸欲、惡不善法當有性——若自性、若他性，我本為菩薩行時，不能觀諸欲、惡不善法無所有性入初禪」 tr. "If the desires and evil and unwholesome dharmas were to have their nature—whether self-nature or other-nature—then when I formerly practised as a bodhisattva, I could not have contemplated the desires and evil and unwholesome dharmas as without any existent nature and entered the first dhyāna"—if they really had a fixed nature, I could, on the contrary, not have entered the first dhyāna. Straight after, he speaks from the front side: 「以諸欲、惡不善法無所有性——若自性、若他性皆是無所有性故，我本行菩薩道時，離諸欲、惡不善法入初禪，乃至入第四禪。」 tr. "Because the desires and evil and unwholesome dharmas are without any existent nature—because whether self-nature or other-nature they are all without any existent nature—when I formerly practised the bodhisattva path, I parted from the desires and evil and unwholesome dharmas and entered the first dhyāna, and so on up to entering the fourth dhyāna." The supernormal powers follow the same pattern, the last sentence reading 「以神通無有性——若自性、若他性皆無所有性，以是故，諸佛於神通，知無所有性，得阿耨多羅三藐三菩提。」 tr. "Because the supernormal powers do not have their nature—whether self-nature or other-nature, they are all without any existent nature—for this reason the buddhas, as to the supernormal powers, know them to be without any existent nature, and obtain anuttarā samyaksaṃbodhi."—being without any existent nature is not an obstacle to practice; it is that by which practice is possible. Here Subhūti's doubt is turned over.
9. The treatise-author sets up a question: that all dharmas are empty is one meaning; why does Subhūti ask again by various causes and conditions? The treatise section asks at its very opening: 「諸法空一義，何以故須菩提種種因緣重問？」 tr. "That all dharmas are empty is one and the same meaning; why does Subhūti ask again and again by various causes and conditions?" and cites word for word the places asked again: 「有法相者不得順忍，乃至若不生是諸法，不能得薩婆若！」 tr. "One who has the mark of dharmas does not obtain compliant acceptance, and so on up to: if these dharmas do not arise, one cannot obtain sarvajñā!" The question is utterly natural—since the meaning is only one, why ask and ask again?
10. The treatise-author answers himself: the meaning of ultimate emptiness is very deep and hard to understand; as prajñā is about to be spoken to the end, fearing that people would have much doubt and much confusion, he asks again. The answer has two layers. First he speaks of the depth of the difficulty: 「是諸法畢竟空義，甚深難解！說者尚難，何況受者、行者！」 tr. "This meaning of the ultimate emptiness of all dharmas is very deep and hard to understand! Even for the one who speaks it, it is hard—how much more for the one who receives it and the one who practises it!" Even the one who speaks finds it hard; the one who receives it and the one who practises it find it harder still—this ties the reason for asking again to the depth of the dharma, not to the dullness of the asker. Next he speaks of the season: 「是故須菩提以般若垂訖，恐人多疑多惑故，種種因緣重問。」 tr. "Therefore, because prajñā was about to be spoken to the end, Subhūti, fearing that people would have much doubt and much confusion, asked again and again by various causes and conditions." The two Chinese characters ‘about to be spoken to the end’ are crucial: the whole text is about to close, and the chances to ask are few, so he seizes this moment to ask out every doubt one by one.
11. The treatise-author, again: though the meaning asked is one, the place it rests on differs; because the gates of approach differ, the meaning comes to have differences. The second answer takes another angle: 「復次，所問義雖一，所因處異。」 tr. "Again, though the meaning asked is one, the place it rests on differs." And he gives three ways of asking as examples—「若一切法空，云何分別有五道？」 tr. "If all dharmas are empty, how are the five destinies distinguished?" 「若一切無所有相，云何分別有三乘？」 tr. "If all are of the mark of there being nothing existent, how are the three vehicles distinguished?" 「有相者乃至不得順忍，云何當觀八地、入菩薩位？」 tr. "One who has marks, and so on up to, does not obtain compliant acceptance—how can he contemplate the eight grounds and enter the bodhisattva's position?" One and the same meaning of emptiness, asked from the five destinies, asked from the three vehicles, asked from the eight grounds—what is answered naturally differs. The closing sentence is 「異門故義得差別，般若無一定相故」 tr. "because the gates of approach differ, the meaning comes to have differences, because prajñā has no single fixed mark"—since prajñā has no single fixed mark, the gates by which it is spoken cannot be only one either.
12. The treatise-author cites the Buddha's words of approval. 「佛可須菩提意：「如是！如是！」」 tr. "The Buddha approved Subhūti's meaning: ‘Just so! Just so!’"—the treatise-author first marks out the Buddha's approval so that the reader knows that what is explained below is the meaning under this approval, not something started afresh. Approving without adding argument is precisely a real instance of what the previous passage answered: ‘the meaning is one, the place differs’.
13. The treatise-author distinguishes two kinds of compliant acceptance: what was asked earlier is the compliant acceptance of the Small Vehicle; what is asked now is the dharma of the bodhisattva's compliant acceptance. This sentence is the watershed of the whole passage: 「須菩提先問順忍者，是小乘順忍；今須菩提問菩薩順忍法。」 tr. "The compliant acceptance Subhūti asked about earlier is the compliant acceptance of the Small Vehicle; what Subhūti asks about now is the dharma of the bodhisattva's compliant acceptance." One and the same name, compliant acceptance, points to different things earlier and later. Once this distinction is set up, the reason the sūtra's two questions do not repeat each other has its footing—it is not that one thing was asked twice; two kinds were asked.
14. The treatise-author cites the sūtra's question. 「若菩薩行般若時，有法相不？」 tr. "If the bodhisattva practises prajñā, is there the mark of dharmas?" The treatise-author cites the sūtra's question again, as what the Buddha's answer below faces. Citing the sūtra without adding words is this treatise's customary form: first set up the text to be explained, then bring out its meaning.
15. The treatise-author explains the Buddha's answer: not giving rise to a mark of dharmas, whether existent or non-existent; seeing existence and seeing non-existence both have faults; within all dharmas not giving rise to a mark of existence is cultivating the path. The treatise-author explains the Buddha's answer: 「菩薩行般若時，無法生相若有、若無。」 tr. "When the bodhisattva practises prajñā, he does not give rise to a mark of dharmas, whether existent or non-existent." And then he brings out the reason himself: 「何以故？見有、無二俱有過故，則是菩薩順忍。」 tr. "Why? Because seeing existence and seeing non-existence both have faults; this is the bodhisattva's compliant acceptance."—both sides have faults, so on both sides nothing is given rise to; this is exactly the meaning of the sūtra's 「無有法相、非法相」 tr. "no mark of dharmas and no mark of what is not a dharma". The last sentence ties cultivating the path to this place too: 「於一切法中不生有相，即是修道。」 tr. "Within all dharmas he does not give rise to a mark of existence; this is cultivating the path." It is not that besides not giving rise there is a separate cultivating of the path; not giving rise is itself that.
16. The treatise-author cites the sūtra's sentence on path and fruit. 「須菩提！有法是菩薩道，無法是果。」 tr. "Subhūti! An existent dharma is the bodhisattva's path; a non-existent dharma is the fruit." The treatise-author cites this one sentence to lay the ground for the three sayings below. The sūtra's original sentence reads 「無法是菩薩果」 tr. "a non-existent dharma is the bodhisattva's fruit"; the treatise-author cites it as 「無法是果」 tr. "a non-existent dharma is the fruit", dropping words without changing the meaning.
17. The treatise-author's first explanation: an existent dharma is a conditioned dharma, a non-existent dharma is an unconditioned dharma; practising the conditioned eightfold noble path, one obtains the unconditioned fruit. The first saying is the plainest: 「有法名有為法，無法是無為法；行有為八聖道，斷諸煩惱，得無為果。」 tr. "An existent dharma is named a conditioned dharma; a non-existent dharma is an unconditioned dharma. One practises the conditioned eightfold noble path, cuts off the afflictions, and obtains the unconditioned fruit." The path is conditioned, so it can be practised and can sever; the fruit is unconditioned, so it is not obtained from making. Obtaining the unconditioned fruit by conditioned practice involves no obstruction—this is exactly a ready answer to what this chapter asks: ‘how is there sequence within emptiness’.
18. The treatise-author records another's saying, the first: the five perfections are named existent dharmas and are the path; prajñā, because of ultimate emptiness, is without any existent dharma and is the fruit. 「復次，有人言：五波羅蜜名有法，是菩薩道；般若波羅蜜畢竟空故無有法，是菩薩果。」 tr. "Again, someone says: the five perfections are named existent dharmas, and are the bodhisattva's path; prajñāpāramitā, because of ultimate emptiness, is without any existent dharma, and is the bodhisattva's fruit." This saying lays the division of existent and non-existent within the six perfections: the first five perfections have something they do, so they are named existent dharmas and are the path; prajñā is ultimate emptiness, so it is named without any existent dharma and is the fruit. The treatise-author records it without adding approval or disapproval.
19. The treatise-author records another's saying, the second: prajñā is the mark of wisdom and, being conditioned, is the path; suchness, the nature of dharmas, and the limit of reality, not being born from causes and conditions, are the fruit. 「有人言：般若波羅蜜智慧相，有為法故，是為道；如、法性、實際，不從因緣生、常有故，名為果。」 tr. "Someone says: prajñāpāramitā is the mark of wisdom; because it is a conditioned dharma, it is the path; suchness, the nature of dharmas, and the limit of reality are not born from causes and conditions and exist always, and so are named the fruit." This saying is the exact reversal of the previous one—the previous saying took prajñā as the fruit; this saying takes prajñā as the path. One and the same prajñā: tied to the mark of wisdom, it belongs to the conditioned and is the path; tied to the suchness, the nature of dharmas, and the limit of reality that are realised, these are the fruit. The two sayings are set side by side and the treatise-author does not judge between them—this is exactly a real instance of 「異門故義得差別」 tr. "because the gates of approach differ, the meaning comes to have differences".
20. The treatise-author gathers it up: such as these are the differences of existent and non-existent dharmas; therefore one knows that all dharmas are without any existent nature, and this is named a non-existent dharma. 「如是等，有、無法差別。」 tr. "Such as these are the differences between an existent dharma and a non-existent dharma." The three sayings out, the treatise-author takes none of them, and gathers up with only one sentence: 「以是因緣故，須菩提！當知一切法皆是無所有性，名為無法。」 tr. "Because of such causes and conditions, Subhūti! one should know that all dharmas are without any existent nature; this is named a non-existent dharma."—what the sayings dispute is where the boundary between existent and non-existent lies; where they agree is that at the end they return alike to being without any existent nature. He gathers up very quickly, because what this treatise wants is not the boundary but that place of common return.
21. The treatise-author cites Subhūti's renewed question: within being without any existent nature, how did the Buddha rightly know and obtain awakening, and obtain sovereignty within dharmas? 「復問：「世尊！若一切法無所有性，佛云何於無所有性中正知得阿耨多羅三藐三菩提，於諸法中得自在？」」 tr. "He asks again: ‘World-Honored One! If all dharmas are without any existent nature, how is it that the Buddha, within what is without any existent nature, rightly knew and obtained anuttarā samyaksaṃbodhi, and obtained sovereignty within dharmas?’" The treatise-author cites the sūtra's third question. The sūtra reads 「知一切法無所有性故得成佛」 tr. "because he knows that all dharmas are without any existent nature, came to become a Buddha"; the treatise-author cites it as 「於無所有性中正知得阿耨多羅三藐三菩提」 tr. "within what is without any existent nature rightly knew and obtained anuttarā samyaksaṃbodhi"—marking ‘knowing’ as ‘rightly knowing’; the weight lies on the knowing being without error, and 「以無所有智合行一切法」 tr. "joining with the knowledge of there being nothing existent, practises all dharmas" below comes on from this.
22. The treatise-author explains the Buddha's approval: the bodhisattva, joining with the knowledge of there being nothing existent, practises all dharmas and can cut off all clinging, and so obtains awakening; here the Buddha cites himself as witness. 「佛可其言。」 tr. "The Buddha approved his words." And then the reason is given: 「菩薩以無所有智合行一切法，能斷一切著故，得阿耨多羅三藐三菩提。」 tr. "Because the bodhisattva, joining with the knowledge of there being nothing existent, practises all dharmas and can cut off all clinging, he obtains anuttarā samyaksaṃbodhi." The joint is in the two Chinese characters 「合行」 tr. "joining … practises"—the knowledge of there being nothing existent is not a separate knowledge apart from all dharmas; it joins with all dharmas and practises them; precisely because it joins and practises, it can, right where it practises, cut off the clinging there. The last sentence points out the form of what follows: 「此中佛自引為證」 tr. "here the Buddha himself cites himself as witness", and what is cited is 「我本為菩薩時，行六波羅蜜；離欲、離惡不善法，有覺有觀，離生喜樂入初禪。」 tr. "When I was formerly a bodhisattva, I practised the six perfections; I parted from desire and parted from evil and unwholesome dharmas, and with initial and sustained thought, with the joy and pleasure born of separation, I entered the first dhyāna."
23. The treatise-author explains the names of the first dhyāna: parting from desire is parting from the five desires, parting from evil and unwholesome dharmas is parting from the five hindrances; initial and sustained thought, the joy and pleasure born of separation; the two kinds of pleasure of the form realm, and the difference between the first and the second dhyāna. This is the treatise's first word-by-word gloss, and what it glosses are all names the sūtra itself has. 「離欲者，離五欲；離惡、不善法者，離五蓋」 tr. "Parting from desire is parting from the five desires; parting from evil and unwholesome dharmas is parting from the five hindrances"—the two names each have their own referent and do not overlap. Evil and unwholesome are divided further: 「將人入惡道，名為惡；障善法故，名不善。」 tr. "What can bring a person into the evil destinies is named evil; because it obstructs wholesome dharmas, it is named unwholesome." One is spoken of in terms of the fruit, the other in terms of obstruction. On initial and sustained thought he says 「有覺有觀，初禪所攝善覺觀」 tr. "With initial and sustained thought: this is the wholesome initial and sustained thought included in the first dhyāna", marking the word ‘wholesome’ to set it apart. 「離生喜樂者，捨離五欲生喜樂」 tr. "The joy and pleasure born of separation: this is the joy and pleasure that arise from giving up and leaving the five desires"—where joy and pleasure come from is giving up and leaving, not a separate obtaining. Then he opens the pleasure of the form realm into two: 「色界中有二種樂：一者、有喜樂，二者、無喜樂」 tr. "Within the form realm there are two kinds of pleasure: first, pleasure with joy; second, pleasure without joy", and points to the place of each—pleasure with joy is in the first and second dhyānas, pleasure without joy is in the third dhyāna. At the end he closes with a question: the first dhyāna and the second dhyāna both have joy and pleasure; what is the difference? Answer: 「初禪中喜樂，從離欲故生；二禪喜樂，從定生」 tr. "The joy and pleasure within the first dhyāna arise because of parting from desire; the joy and pleasure of the second dhyāna arise from concentration"—the same joy and pleasure, but what they arise from differs; this is the basis of the question and answer in the next passage.
24. The treatise-author sets up a question: the second dhyāna too is obtained by parting from the afflictions of the first dhyāna; why is it not said to be born of separation? 「問曰：亦離初禪煩惱得二禪，何以不說離生？」 tr. "Question: The second dhyāna too is obtained by parting from the afflictions of the first dhyāna; why is it not said to be born of separation?" The question is extremely fine: since the second dhyāna too is obtained by parting from the defilements of the first dhyāna, why is the first dhyāna alone named born of separation, and the second dhyāna not? Were this question not set up, the distinction in the previous passage between 「從離欲故生」 tr. "arise because of parting from desire" and 「從定生」 tr. "arise from concentration" would be only two sentences and could not stand.
25. The treatise-author answers: because the desire realm is scattered and distracted there is no name of concentration, and because one can part from desire it is named born of separation; within the first dhyāna there is concentration, and because the second dhyāna arises from the concentration of the first dhyāna it is named born of concentration. The answer starts from ‘with concentration or without concentration’: 「欲界中散亂故，無定稱；行者能離欲故，名為離生。」 tr. "Because within the desire realm there is scattering and distraction, there is no name of concentration; because the practitioner can part from desire, it is named born of separation." In the desire realm there is simply no concentration to be named, so the step that comes up out of the desire realm can take its name only from ‘parting’. The second dhyāna is different: 「初禪中有定，二禪因初禪定生故，名為定生。」 tr. "Within the first dhyāna there is concentration; because the second dhyāna arises from the concentration of the first dhyāna, it is named born of concentration." Since what it relies on is concentration, it takes its name from where its ‘arising’ comes from. The difference of the two names does not lie in higher or lower function; it lies in the difference of the place relied on.
26. The treatise-author, again: the afflictions of the desire realm are unwholesome and so obstruct the first dhyāna, and because one parts from the great obstruction it is said to be born of separation; the afflictions of the form realm are indeterminate and the harm they do is slight, and because one loses dhyāna through initial and sustained thought, the Buddha says that by extinguishing initial and sustained thought one obtains the second dhyāna. The second answer starts from the nature of the defilements parted from: 「欲界煩惱不善相故障初禪；行者欲離大障故，是故說離生。」 tr. "The afflictions of the desire realm, because they are of the mark of the unwholesome, obstruct the first dhyāna; because the practitioner wishes to part from the great obstruction, therefore it is said to be born of separation." The defilements of the desire realm are unwholesome and obstruct heavily, so the step of parting from them deserves a name of its own. 「色界煩惱名無記，為患微弱」 tr. "The afflictions of the form realm are named indeterminate, and the harm they do is slight"—the defilements of the form realm are indeterminate and do light harm, not enough to set up a separate name of parting; what really hinders the second dhyāna is something else, namely initial and sustained thought: 「以覺、觀因緣故失禪」 tr. "it is because of the causes and conditions of initial and sustained thought that one loses dhyāna". So he cites the Buddha's words in conclusion: 「是故佛說：「滅諸覺、觀，內心清淨故得二禪。」」 tr. "Therefore the Buddha said: ‘Extinguishing initial and sustained thought, the inner mind being pure, one obtains the second dhyāna.’" Why the second dhyāna is named born of concentration and not born of separation is here complete on both sides.
27. The treatise-author passes briefly over the third and fourth dhyānas, saying they are as was said before. 「三禪、四禪，如先說。」 tr. "The third and fourth dhyānas are as was said before." One sentence carries it past. This treatise has already fully explained the marks of the third and fourth dhyānas elsewhere and does not bring them out again here; the reader should know that this is not a missing explanation but a pointing back to the earlier text. It is recorded as abbreviated, and nothing is supplied on its behalf.
28. The treatise-author explains not grasping at the marks of dhyāna: when first training, one grasps at marks until one obtains, and having obtained, fearing clinging to the flavour, one contemplates impermanence; without receiving the flavour, with an undefiled mind one practises the four dhyānas, unlike those of the outside paths; one cultivates the dhyāna that does not receive retribution. The treatise-author cites the sūtra's 「我於是諸禪支取相得已，不念有是禪」 tr. "In these dhyānas and their limbs I grasped at marks; having obtained them, I did not think that there was this dhyāna", and then lays out the sequence very finely: 「初習禪時，取相，乃至得」 tr. "When one first trains in dhyāna, one grasps at marks, until one obtains it"—grasping at marks is not a fault; at the start of training in dhyāna one precisely must grasp at marks. The turn comes after obtaining: 「得已，恐著味故觀無常」 tr. "having obtained it, because one fears clinging to its flavour, one contemplates impermanence", and so 「不念有是禪，不得是禪定相，亦不受味，無染心行四禪，異於外道。」 tr. "one does not think that there is this dhyāna, does not obtain the mark of this meditative concentration, and also does not receive its flavour; with an undefiled mind one practises the four dhyānas, unlike those of the outside paths." After several negations he presses on a verdict—「異於外道」 tr. "unlike those of the outside paths". Those of the outside paths also obtain the four dhyānas; the difference lies not in having or not having dhyāna, but in whether, after obtaining it, one receives its flavour. The last sentence gives the conclusion: 「於是諸禪，修不受果報禪。」 tr. "In these dhyānas one cultivates the dhyāna that does not receive retribution." Not receiving retribution is not taking up even the retribution of dhyāna.
29. The treatise-author explains that the five supernormal powers do not receive the flavour: abiding by the four dhyānas one gives rise to the five supernormal powers, and, as with the dharma of dhyāna, does not receive their flavour. 「依四禪住，起五神通，亦如禪法，不受其味。」 tr. "Abiding by the four dhyānas, one gives rise to the five supernormal powers, and, just as with the dharma of dhyāna, does not receive their flavour." One sentence infers it by the pattern of the previous passage: since dhyāna does not receive the flavour, the powers that arise from dhyāna also do not receive the flavour. The sūtra presses a string of negations on the dhyānas and on the powers each; the treatise-author here gathers them up with the four Chinese characters 「亦如禪法」 tr. "just as with the dharma of dhyāna" and does not explain them again—the text is spare and the meaning is not lacking.
30. The treatise-author explains the use of the two powers of former lives and the divine eye: knowing the original deeds, causes, and conditions of beings and the places where they will be born in the future, and having known the beginning and the end, the mind gives rise to great compassion. The treatise-author picks out two of the five supernormal powers alone to explain, because they bear directly on the obtaining of the path that follows. 「宿命通故，知一切眾生本業因緣，來生是間」 tr. "Because of the supernormal power of former lives, he knows the original causes and conditions of the deeds of all beings, by which they have come to be born here"—this is knowing their beginning; 「天眼通力故，見眾生未來世所生之處」 tr. "Because of the power of the supernormal power of the divine eye, he sees the places where beings will be born in the world to come"—this is knowing their end. When the two combine, 「隨其業行，知一切眾生本、末已，心生大悲」 tr. "following their deeds, having known the beginning and the end of all beings, his mind gives rise to great compassion". What is to be looked at is that word ‘having’—compassion is not aroused out of nothing; it arises of itself once the coming and going of beings has been known to the end; and the matter of the compassion, too, the treatise-author gives word for word: 「云何斷眾生生死相續苦？」 tr. "How can the suffering of the continuity of beings' birth and death be cut off?"
31. The treatise-author explains turning in dedication to the power of the exhaustion of outflows and obtaining awakening: with the wisdom associated with a single thought he knows the four truths, and because he penetrates the four truths he obtains the ten powers and so on up to the eighteen unshared dharmas; he distinguishes the three groups and, abiding in three supernormal powers, delivers beings. Once great compassion has arisen, 「爾時，心迴向入漏盡通」 tr. "at that time his mind turned in dedication and entered the supernormal power of the exhaustion of outflows"—the two Chinese characters ‘turned in dedication’ join the five supernormal powers before with the obtaining of the path after; the five supernormal powers are not an end point but a resource for dedication. 「即時以一念相應慧得阿耨多羅三藐三菩提」 tr. "and at once, with the wisdom associated with a single thought, he obtained anuttarā samyaksaṃbodhi"; what is known, the treatise-author explains as the four truths in four phrases: 「所謂是苦相，苦因是愛，愛斷苦盡，為到苦盡是道」 tr. "that is: this is the mark of suffering; the cause of suffering is craving; when craving is cut off, suffering is exhausted; what leads to the exhaustion of suffering is the path"—the sūtra only lists the names of the four truths; the treatise-author here explains them in words of cause and effect giving rise to one another, so the meaning of the four truths need not be sought outside. What is accomplished is 「通達四諦故，得十力、四無所畏、四無礙智、十八不共法」 tr. "because he penetrated the four truths, he obtained the ten powers, the four fearlessnesses, the four unobstructed knowledges, and the eighteen unshared dharmas". Last he speaks of the matter of delivering beings: 「分別眾生作三聚；住三神通，度是眾生，所謂天耳、知他心、身通；為眾生說法，令度生死。」 tr. "He distinguished beings into the three groups; abiding in three supernormal powers, he delivers these beings, namely the divine ear, knowing the minds of others, and the bodily power; he expounds the Dharma for beings, causing them to be delivered from birth and death." Taking these three of the five supernormal powers as the means of delivering beings is likewise the treatise-author's own.
32. The treatise-author cites Subhūti's renewed question: if dharmas are without anything existent, how are the four dhyānas and the six supernormal powers given rise to, and the three groups distinguished? 「須菩提復問：「若諸法無所有，云何佛為菩薩時起四禪、六神通？若無眾生，云何分別眾生作三聚？」」 tr. "Subhūti asks again: ‘If dharmas are without anything existent, how is it that the Buddha, when he was a bodhisattva, gave rise to the four dhyānas and the six supernormal powers? If there are no beings, how did he distinguish beings into the three groups?’" The treatise-author cites the sūtra's fourth question. The sūtra originally reads 「於諸法無所有性中」 tr. "within dharmas without any existent nature"; the treatise-author cites it as 「若諸法無所有」 tr. "if dharmas are without anything existent", dropping the one word ‘nature’ without changing what is doubted—the doubt lies between there being nothing existent and being able to give rise.
33. The treatise-author cites the Buddha's answer, stated from the reverse side. 「佛答：「諸欲、諸惡若當有性——若自性、若他性，我本為菩薩時，不能觀諸欲、惡不善法無所有性入初禪。」」 tr. "The Buddha answers: ‘If the desires and the evils were to have their nature—whether self-nature or other-nature—then when I was formerly a bodhisattva, I could not have contemplated the desires and evil and unwholesome dharmas as without any existent nature and entered the first dhyāna.’" The treatise-author first cites the reverse sentence, and does not cite the front sentence first. Stating from the reverse side is the form of speaking of this passage: first say ‘if there were a fixed nature, one could not’, and the front side, ‘now there is no fixed nature, therefore one can’, appears of itself.
34. The treatise-author explains self-nature and other-nature: self-nature means the impure nature of one's own body, other-nature means clothing and the other implements that adorn the body; within the inner and outer five desires there is no reality of permanence, pleasure, self, or purity, therefore one can contemplate emptiness and enter the first dhyāna. This is the most concrete gloss of this unit. The treatise-author first unfolds the Buddha's meaning: 「佛意：若諸欲、不善法有定性實法若多、若少自相者，若自身中若有淨、常等性。」 tr. "The Buddha's meaning: if the desires and unwholesome dharmas were real dharmas with a fixed nature, whether many or few, having marks of their own, if within one's own body there were natures of purity, permanence, and the like." And then he sets out the names: 「性有二種：若自性、若他性。」 tr. "Nature is of two kinds: whether self-nature or other-nature." The meaning of the two names the treatise-author gives himself, one by one—「自性名自身不淨性，他性名衣服等莊嚴身具。」 tr. "Self-nature means the impure nature of one's own body; other-nature means clothing and the other implements that adorn the body." Self-nature is spoken of the body itself, other-nature of the implements of adornment outside the body; the reason the two are raised together is that what is craved in the five desires does not go beyond these two places, inner and outer. At once he judges them: 「此皆無常、虛誑、苦惱因緣。」 tr. "These are all causes and conditions of impermanence, of what is false and deceptive, and of suffering and vexation." The conclusion lands on 「內外五欲中，無有常、樂、我、淨實」 tr. "within the inner and outer five desires there is no reality of permanence, pleasure, self, or purity"—inside and outside alike there is no reality of the four, so one can contemplate and enter dhyāna. At the end he gathers it up from both the reverse and the front side: 「若有者，我本行菩薩道時，不能觀五欲空無所有性入初禪」 tr. "if there were, then when I formerly practised the bodhisattva path, I could not have contemplated the five desires as empty and without any existent nature and entered the first dhyāna"; 「今欲、惡不善法無有實性——若自性、若他性，是故我為菩薩時，離五欲、惡不善法，入初禪，乃至入第四禪。」 tr. "Now desire and evil and unwholesome dharmas have no real nature—whether self-nature or other-nature—and therefore when I was a bodhisattva I parted from the five desires and evil and unwholesome dharmas, entered the first dhyāna, and so on up to entering the fourth dhyāna." The passage on the supernormal powers follows the same pattern, and so the treatise-author carries it past with only one sentence.
35. The treatise-author cites Subhūti's further question: dharmas being definitely without any existent nature and empty, how did the Buddha obtain the power of sovereignty within dharmas? 「須菩提問：「若諸法定無所有性空，佛云何於諸法中得自在力？」」 tr. "Subhūti asks: ‘If dharmas are definitely without any existent nature and empty, how is it that the Buddha obtained the power of sovereignty within dharmas?’" This question changes the earlier question's ‘giving rise to dhyānas and powers’ into asking about ‘obtaining the power of sovereignty’. What is doubted does not change, but the place of asking is tighter: giving rise is a matter of one time, sovereignty is a use at all times; giving rise to something within emptiness can still be said to be momentary, but to have, within emptiness, the use of sovereignty at all times is harder still to settle.
36. The treatise-author cites the Buddha's answer: because of the four dhyānas he obtained liberation from the afflictions; because of the six supernormal powers he obtained sovereignty within dharmas and delivers beings. 「佛答：「我以四禪故，於諸煩惱得解脫；六神通故，於諸法得自在度眾生。」」 tr. "The Buddha answers: ‘Because of the four dhyānas, I obtained liberation from the afflictions; because of the six supernormal powers, I obtained sovereignty within dharmas and deliver beings.’" One answer splits into two roads: what the four dhyānas face is the afflictions; what the six supernormal powers face is dharmas and beings. The power of sovereignty is not one vague general name; it has its own use according to what it faces; the fineness of this answer is precisely to break the vagueness of the earlier question.
37. The treatise-author brings out Subhūti's meaning: the four dhyānas and the six supernormal powers are existent; how is the power of sovereignty obtained within emptiness? 「須菩提意：以四禪、六神通是有，云何於空得自在力？」 tr. "Subhūti's meaning is this: taking the four dhyānas and the six supernormal powers as existent, how is the power of sovereignty obtained within emptiness?" Here the treatise-author does not cite the sūtra text but brings out the meaning directly—the sūtra at this point no longer has this question; it is the treatise-author who points out, on Subhūti's behalf, where his doubt lies. The root of the doubt is in one word, ‘existent’: since the four dhyānas and six powers are taken as existent, then to rely on the existent and speak of sovereignty within emptiness contradicts and obstructs itself. Were this meaning not pointed out, the Buddha's words shown in the next passage would have nothing to face.
38. The treatise-author explains what the Buddha shows: because he contemplated the five desires and the rest as empty, false and deceptive, and without a fixed mark, he did not cling to these dhyānas and gave rise to the supernormal powers; because the dhyānas have marks and have measure they can be given up; cause and fruit are both without anything existent, so there should not be an objection. The last passage gathers the whole unit into one place. First he resolves that ‘existent’: 「我觀五欲等空、虛誑、無定相故，不著此禪，而起諸神通。」 tr. "Because I contemplated the five desires and the rest as empty, false and deceptive, and without a fixed mark, I did not cling to these dhyānas, and gave rise to the supernormal powers." Dhyāna was indeed given rise to, but not clung to—so it does not amount to ‘existent’. Next he judges that dhyāna can be given up: 「諸禪有相、有量故可捨，得阿耨多羅三藐三菩提。」 tr. "Because the dhyānas have marks and have measure, they can be given up, and anuttarā samyaksaṃbodhi is obtained." Whatever has marks and has measure can all be given up; given up, and then awakening can be obtained. Then he speaks of the unity of cause and fruit: 「初離欲時，以無所有性為因，得阿耨多羅三藐三菩提果亦無所有。」 tr. "When one first parts from desire, one takes there being no existent nature as the cause, and the fruit obtained, anuttarā samyaksaṃbodhi, is also without anything existent." Since the cause is without anything existent, the fruit too is without anything existent; cause and fruit are one and the same absence of anything existent, and there is no break between them. At the end he cuts off the objection with one sentence: 「若禪定空，阿耨多羅三藐三菩提不空，可有是難；今皆空故，不應有難！」 tr. "If meditative concentration were empty while anuttarā samyaksaṃbodhi were not empty, there could be such an objection; now, because both are empty, there should not be this objection!"—for the objection to stand, one must first suppose one side empty and one side not empty; now both ends are empty, and the objection has nowhere to stand. Here the questions of the unit all come to rest.
Do Not Misread
Do not read 「無有法相、非法相」 tr. "no mark of dharmas and no mark of what is not a dharma" as there being nothing at all. What the sūtra says is that marks are not set up, and the signless is not set up either; if it is read as ‘acknowledging only non-existence’, that falls exactly into the one side the treatise-author sets aside—「見有、無二俱有過故，則是菩薩順忍」 tr. "because seeing existence and seeing non-existence both have faults; this is the bodhisattva's compliant acceptance". Both sides have faults, so on both sides nothing is given rise to; where nothing is given rise to is compliant acceptance, not a separate mark of emptiness to be guarded.
Do not read 「有法是菩薩道，無法是菩薩果」 tr. "an existent dharma is the bodhisattva's path; a non-existent dharma is the bodhisattva's fruit" as two halves: first cultivating the conditioned, afterwards obtaining the unconditioned. Here the treatise-author gives three sayings and judges none to be the one—the conditioned eightfold noble path and the unconditioned fruit; the five perfections and prajñā; prajñā as the mark of wisdom, and suchness, the nature of dharmas, and the limit of reality—and the boundaries the three sayings draw each differ; to fix on one of them as the exact explanation would instead lose the treatise-author's intent, 「異門故義得差別」 tr. "because the gates of approach differ, the meaning comes to have differences". What the three sayings share is only the final sentence: 「當知一切法皆是無所有性，名為無法。」 tr. "One should know that all dharmas are without any existent nature; this is named a non-existent dharma."
Do not read the Buddha's citing of his own four dhyānas and five supernormal powers as the Buddha speaking of his own merit. The weight of the whole passage lies not in the matters obtained but in that string of ‘not’s—「不念有是禪，不受禪味，不得是禪」 tr. "did not think that there was this dhyāna, did not receive the flavour of dhyāna, did not obtain this dhyāna", and the five supernormal powers likewise. Not one matter fewer, and not one matter taken up—this is what makes it witness; if it is read as an account of merit, this passage has nothing to do with the questions and answers before and after it.
Do not read 「不受果報」 tr. "not receiving the retribution" as meaning that cultivating dhyāna has no fruit. What is not received is the retribution of dhyāna; it does not mean the practice is without effect. Here the treatise-author marks out a verdict: 「異於外道。」 tr. "Unlike those of the outside paths." Those of the outside paths can also obtain the four dhyānas; where they differ is precisely whether, after obtaining, one receives the flavour; receiving the flavour, one falls into retribution; not receiving the flavour, dhyāna becomes a resource of the path. If it is read as ‘cultivating dhyāna is of no use’, then the whole road below—giving rise to the five supernormal powers by the four dhyānas, turning in dedication to the exhaustion of outflows, and obtaining awakening—has no footing.
Do not read the absence of anything existent in self-nature and other-nature as a denial of the matter of meditative concentration. The Buddha's statement is put in reverse: 「若諸欲、惡不善法當有性——若自性、若他性，我本為菩薩行時，不能觀諸欲、惡不善法無所有性入初禪」 tr. "If the desires and evil and unwholesome dharmas were to have their nature—whether self-nature or other-nature—then when I formerly practised as a bodhisattva, I could not have contemplated the desires and evil and unwholesome dharmas as without any existent nature and entered the first dhyāna"—with a fixed nature one could, on the contrary, not enter. Being without any existent nature does not cancel practice; it is that by which practice is possible; if one cannot turn this sentence round, the whole chapter will be read as emptiness and practice contending with each other.
Do not read Subhūti's asking again as repeating because he does not understand. The treatise-author has already explained it for him: 「所問義雖一，所因處異」 tr. "though the meaning asked is one, the place it rests on differs", giving as examples three gates of questioning—the five destinies, the three vehicles, and the eight grounds; and he ties its season to 「以般若垂訖，恐人多疑多惑故」 tr. "because prajñā was about to be spoken to the end, fearing that people would have much doubt and much confusion". So asking again is asking for those who come after, not because he himself is unclear.
Do not read 「一念相應慧」 tr. "the wisdom associated with a single thought" as a lucky stroke of one instant. The treatise-author places it at the end of a long line—the four dhyānas, the five supernormal powers, knowing the beginning and the end of beings, the mind giving rise to great compassion, turning in dedication to enter the power of the exhaustion of outflows, and only then 「即時以一念相應慧得阿耨多羅三藐三菩提」 tr. "at once, with the wisdom associated with a single thought, he obtained anuttarā samyaksaṃbodhi". That a single thought can be associated is because the sequence before it is complete; to speak of a single thought apart from sequence is exactly what this chapter sets out to remedy.
Do not take the ten grounds and the three groups listed in the sūtra as already explained in their marks by the treatise here. The names of the ten grounds and the names of the three groups are both listed by the sūtra itself, and the treatise text of this passage gives no gloss on these two lists here; raising their names as they are, without a gloss given on the treatise's behalf, is to keep within the limit of the treatise's text, not to abridge and leave them untaught. What is lacking must wait for the treatise's text elsewhere, and is not supplied here by conjecture.
Bearing on Practice
Use 「不受味」 tr. "not receiving the flavour" to check one's own states of concentration. When one's effort has gained a little strength, a feeling of enjoyment arises naturally in the mind, and that is precisely the beginning of clinging to the flavour. The sequence the treatise-author gives is very clear: 「初習禪時，取相，乃至得」 tr. "when one first trains in dhyāna, one grasps at marks, until one obtains it"—grasping at marks is not the sickness; 「得已，恐著味故觀無常」 tr. "having obtained it, because one fears clinging to its flavour, one contemplates impermanence"—not contemplating impermanence after obtaining is the sickness. So each time one feels ‘this sitting went well’ is exactly the time to take up impermanence, not the time to savour it.
Use 「所因處異」 tr. "the place it rests on differs" to allow oneself to ask again. When one has heard the same principle many times and still has not penetrated it, it is mostly not that one's memory is poor, but that the gate of asking differs—one has asked from the side of the fruit but not yet from the side of matters; one understands in principle, yet facing circumstances one still does not understand. Since the treatise-author allows Subhūti 「種種因緣重問」 tr. "to ask again and again by various causes and conditions", the learner need not refuse himself another asking because ‘I have already learned this’. What one should really guard against is asking without waiting for the answer, not asking again and again.
Use the division of self-nature and other-nature to remedy craving for the five desires. The treatise-author divides the objects of craving very concretely: 「自性名自身不淨性，他性名衣服等莊嚴身具。」 tr. "Self-nature means the impure nature of one's own body; other-nature means clothing and the other implements that adorn the body." One is the body itself; the other is the adornment outside the body. When facing circumstances, one can put a question at each of these two places: is what I crave this body, or the things added onto the body? Only when each of the two places has been looked at does the sentence 「內外五欲中，無有常、樂、我、淨實」 tr. "within the inner and outer five desires there is no reality of permanence, pleasure, self, or purity" cease to be empty words.
Use the division of 「離生」 tr. "born of separation" and 「定生」 tr. "born of concentration" to settle the sequence of one's effort. In the step that comes up out of scattering, what one relies on lies only in ‘parting’—the treatise-author says it plainly: 「欲界中散亂故，無定稱；……」 tr. "Because within the desire realm there is scattering and distraction, there is no name of concentration; ……" So when first applying effort one need not seek the mark of concentration; first seek parting; if one can part, concentration comes of itself. Once there is a measure of concentration, seeking further progress does not apply force at parting but arises from the concentration relied on—「二禪因初禪定生故，名為定生」 tr. "because the second dhyāna arises from the concentration of the first dhyāna, it is named born of concentration". Where force is applied turns with the stage; mistake the stage, and the force is spent in vain.
Take great compassion as the place to which what is obtained is dedicated. In narrating the Buddha's obtaining of the path, the treatise-author inserts in the middle an extremely important turn: having known the beginning and the end of beings, 「心生大悲：「云何斷眾生生死相續苦？」」 tr. "his mind gives rise to great compassion: ‘How can the suffering of the continuity of beings' birth and death be cut off?’", and only then 「心迴向入漏盡通」 tr. "his mind turned in dedication and entered the supernormal power of the exhaustion of outflows". Whatever is seen, whatever is obtained, if it stops only at ‘I know it now’, the road is cut off there; turn what is seen into compassion for beings, and what is obtained has somewhere to go.
Use 「諸禪有相、有量故可捨」 tr. "because the dhyānas have marks and have measure, they can be given up" to loosen one's grip on states. The criterion for what can be given up the treatise-author states very sparely: having marks, having measure. Whatever can be described, whatever can be weighed as deep or shallow, is among what can be given up. For one who applies effort, the hardest thing is often not obtaining but whether, having obtained, one is willing to let go; this sentence can be taken up at any time as a check: this thing I am now holding—has it marks, has it measure?
Use 「今皆空故，不應有難」 tr. "now, because both are empty, there should not be this objection" to still the objections one sets up for oneself. Many knots in practice, looked at closely, are one end empty and one end not empty—the world is empty but my practice is not; the afflictions are empty but my fruit and position are not. The treatise-author points out the condition under which such an objection stands: 「若禪定空，阿耨多羅三藐三菩提不空，可有是難；……」 tr. "If meditative concentration were empty while anuttarā samyaksaṃbodhi were not empty, there could be such an objection; ……" The condition not met, the objection does not stand of itself. When the mind ties itself in a knot, first ask oneself whether one has secretly kept one end not empty.
Further Resonances
The First Part, as one unit—one sūtra section, one treatise section—sets up the pivot of this chapter. The sūtra asks from the point that with the mark of dharmas one, on the contrary, does not obtain compliant acceptance, passing through the ten grounds, cultivating the path, and cutting off the defilements, up to the omniscience of all kinds; the Buddha answers with 「若無有法者，則有順忍乃至斷一切煩惱習」 tr. "if there is no dharma, then there is compliant acceptance and so on up to the severance of all the afflictions and their habitual residues", continues with 「無有法相、非法相，即是菩薩順忍」 tr. "there is no mark of dharmas and no mark of what is not a dharma; this is the bodhisattva's compliant acceptance" to settle where compliant acceptance lies, and with 「有法是菩薩道，無法是菩薩果」 tr. "an existent dharma is the bodhisattva's path; a non-existent dharma is the bodhisattva's fruit" to settle the names of path and fruit, and at the end gives as witness his own entering of dhyāna, giving rise to the powers, and obtaining the path. The treatise-author explains sentence by sentence: with 「所問義雖一，所因處異」 tr. "though the meaning asked is one, the place it rests on differs" he explains the reason for asking again; with the compliant acceptance of the Small Vehicle and the bodhisattva's compliant acceptance he divides the two questions, earlier and later; with three sayings—the conditioned and the unconditioned, the five perfections and prajñā, prajñā and suchness, the nature of dharmas, and the limit of reality—he explains existent and non-existent dharmas, all returning alike to being without any existent nature; with the division of born of separation and born of concentration he explains the names of the four dhyānas; with 「異於外道」 tr. "unlike those of the outside paths" he judges whether or not the flavour is received; with the absence of anything existent in self-nature and other-nature he gives that by which one parts from desire and enters dhyāna; and at the end, with 「今皆空故，不應有難」 tr. "now, because both are empty, there should not be this objection", he cuts off Subhūti's objection. The weight of the whole section can be gathered into one sentence: being without any existent nature does not break sequence; it is exactly that by which sequence is accomplished.
On the chapter title the editions are not uniform, yet the three sources return alike to one name. The base text's treatise title is "Training in Sequence", the seventy-fifth; the Palace edition gives this title of nine Chinese characters instead as the ten Chinese characters 「釋第七十五品上三次品」 tr. "Explanation of the Seventy-fifth Chapter, Upper: The Three Sequences", plainly marking that this chapter is also called "The Three Sequences"; the main title of the sūtra explained is itself "The Three Sequences", the seventy-fifth, and below the chapter title there is an interlinear note 「丹本次第行品」 tr. "the Khitan edition: ‘Sequential Practice’ chapter"; the Ming edition notes below the treatise title 「之上經作三次第行品」 tr. "for the First Part, the sūtra reads ‘The Three Sequential Practices’ chapter"; the Song and Yuan editions add below the title the one Chinese character 「上」 tr. "Upper" to distinguish the First Part from the Last Part; the Shōgozō and Ishiyama manuscripts lack the title at this place. Jizang's commentary text also titles it "The Three Sequences", the seventy-fifth. The three sources are seen together, and each name has its own basis; here they are recorded side by side without judgement.
Jizang's Commentary on the Larger Sūtra gives a structural division right at the opening of this chapter, and ties this chapter to the sequence of entering the position: 「此下第四、明菩薩次第漸增得入菩薩位，為三：……」 tr. "From here down is the fourth: making clear that the bodhisattva, increasing gradually in sequence, obtains entry into the bodhisattva's position; it is in three: ……" On the sentence 「有法是菩薩道，無法是菩薩果」 tr. "an existent dharma is the bodhisattva's path; a non-existent dharma is the bodhisattva's fruit", Jizang first gives his own explanation—「因中行有法，故有法為道；果地行無法，無法是果也」 tr. "In the cause one practises an existent dharma, therefore an existent dharma is the path; at the ground of the fruit one practises a non-existent dharma; a non-existent dharma is the fruit"—and at once states clearly that this treatise's explanation differs from it: 「論之不爾，三釋」 tr. "The treatise is not so: three explanations", and records them one by one: 「一云、八聖道是法，行八聖道斷煩惱得無為，得無為是果也。二、解云，五度為是法，道般若無法為果。三、解云，如法性無為法是果」 tr. "The first says: the eightfold noble path is a dharma; practising the eightfold noble path one cuts off the afflictions and obtains the unconditioned; obtaining the unconditioned is the fruit. The second explanation says: the five perfections are taken as the dharma, the path; prajñā, a non-existent dharma, is taken as the fruit. The third explanation says: suchness and the nature of dharmas, unconditioned dharmas, are the fruit". The three explanations Jizang records correspond to the three sayings the treatise-author gives in this unit; the commentary's own explanation and the treatise's explanation are seen together, and recorded without judgement.
Jizang further sets up a question and answer here, taking the meaning of "Gathering and Dispersal" as a difficulty: 「前集散品明實相能生般若，般若是果，實相是因，今何故般若是道，實相為果？」 tr. "The earlier chapter ‘Gathering and Dispersal’ makes clear that the real mark can give rise to prajñā: prajñā is the fruit and the real mark is the cause; why now is prajñā the path and the real mark the fruit?" His answer says: 「般若就境智敬故，實相能生般若，般若是果；今明由般若斷煩惱得悟實相故，實相是果，般若是因也。」 tr. "Because prajñā is taken in terms of object and knowledge, the real mark can give rise to prajñā, and prajñā is the fruit; now it is made clear that through prajñā one cuts off the afflictions and awakens to the real mark, therefore the real mark is the fruit and prajñā is the cause."—because what is looked to differs, cause and fruit take each other's place, and so earlier and later do not contradict. The treatise-author does not set up this difficulty here; the two sources are fuller and briefer each in its turn.
In the passage on the four dhyānas, Jizang's and the treatise-author's explanations largely agree, each fuller or briefer in places. Explaining parting from evil, Jizang says 「離惡者，離五蓋」 tr. "Parting from evil is parting from the five hindrances", the same as the treatise-author; explaining the difference between the first and the second dhyāna, Jizang says 「初禪喜樂從離五欲生，二禪喜樂從宣生」 tr. "The joy and pleasure of the first dhyāna arise from parting from the five desires; the joy and pleasure of the second dhyāna arise from xuan", and on the question of born of separation and born of concentration he answers 「亦得如此，但初禪無說離生，二禪說定生也」 tr. "It may also be so; only, for the first dhyāna there is no speaking of born of separation, and for the second dhyāna born of concentration is spoken of"—allowing that it may also be so, yet speaking only from the custom by which the names are set up; compared with the treatise-author's explanation by the desire realm being scattered and without a name of concentration and the afflictions of the form realm being indeterminate and doing slight harm, the fullness differs. Explaining grasping at marks, Jizang says 「此是脩初禪時取禪枝相皃而脩也」 tr. "This is cultivating by grasping at the marks and appearance of the limbs of dhyāna when cultivating the first dhyāna"; explaining not grasping, he says 「不念有禪者，得禪念恐著禪味故現無光，不念有禪異外道也，從禪五通也」 tr. "‘Not thinking that there is dhyāna’: having obtained dhyāna, the thought fears clinging to the flavour of dhyāna, and so manifests no light; not thinking that there is dhyāna differs from those of the outside paths; from dhyāna come the five supernormal powers"—the verdict 「異外道」 tr. "differs from those of the outside paths" agrees with the treatise-author's sentence 「異於外道」 tr. "unlike those of the outside paths". Explaining the sequence of obtaining the path, Jizang says 「一念相應慧者，此是從禪發五通竟，迴心入偏盡通，以一念相應菩提見四諦故得十力等，其文次第也」 tr. "‘The wisdom associated with a single thought’: this is, having finished bringing forth the five supernormal powers from dhyāna, turning the mind to enter the power of partial exhaustion, and, because with the awakening associated with a single thought one sees the four truths, obtaining the ten powers and the rest; such is the sequence of the text", the same sequence as the treatise-author gives in 「爾時，心迴向入漏盡通」 tr. "at that time his mind turned in dedication and entered the supernormal power of the exhaustion of outflows"; his text reads 「偏盡」 tr. "partial exhaustion", a difference of transcription in the commentary text, recorded as it is without change.
Huiying's Commentary, in its extant text, stops at fascicle twenty-four; what it comments on does not reach this chapter, and for this chapter it has no explanation—not that his view differs. Junzheng's Profound Meaning of the Four Mahāyāna Treatises, searched through the whole book, has no word-for-word citation of either the name or the meaning of this chapter; it is recorded as not found, and nothing is sought on its behalf.
As for how bodhisattvas new to the training, within being without any existent nature, practise in sequence, train in sequence, and follow the path in sequence, the four kinds of practice in the six perfections and the six recollections item by item, and on to the difficulty 「若一切法無所有性者，是則無道、無智、無果」 tr. "if all dharmas are without any existent nature, then there is no path, no knowledge, no fruit"—the Last Part of this chapter unfolds them following on from this; they are not anticipated here.
次第學品之下Training in Sequence, Part 2 of 2
全文五層 →Full five layers →次第學品之下：新學菩薩之次第行學道、六波羅蜜與六念、無所有性中有道有果
在問什麼
之上一卷所問的，是「有相」與「無相」之際：有法相則連順忍也不得，無法相則順忍乃至斷一切煩惱習皆得成立；須菩提由此推到佛身上去，問佛既知一切法無所有性，何以能得成佛、於一切法得自在力。佛以自己本行菩薩道時之事作答——修六波羅蜜，離諸欲惡不善法而入四禪，於諸禪及支取相而不念有是禪、不受味、不得是禪；依四禪住而起五神通，於諸神通則不取相、不受味；末後用一念相應慧得阿耨多羅三藐三菩提。論主逐段釋之，於「是諸法畢竟空義，甚深難解！」一節反覆致意，於「有法是菩薩道，無法是菩薩果」一句別出三解。
之下承此而來，卻把問頭整個換了一個方向。之上所問是『大菩薩何以能於空中起用』，之下所問是『新學的人何以能於空中起步』。須菩提開口便說得明白：既然大菩薩知諸法無所有性而能因四禪五神通得菩提，那麼「新學菩薩摩訶薩云何於諸法無所有性中次第行、次第學、次第道」？一個「新」字是本單元的全部關節。大菩薩於空中行，人尚可說是證力使然；初發心的人連實相都未見，卻教他一上來就在畢竟空裡走路，這才是難處。
佛的答法分三重，一重比一重低，也一重比一重實。第一重是發心之由：從諸佛與四果聖人處聽來一句話——一切賢聖皆以得無所有故有名，一切有為作法乃至無有如毫末許所有；聽了這話而作一個推算，得與不得既然一等，那麼我何不發心？第二重是六波羅蜜：檀、尸羅、羼提、毘梨耶、禪、般若，一一皆以『自行、教人、讚歎、歡喜讚歎』四種方式行之，一一皆從生天人中、得大尊貴起，歷五眾而過二乘地、入菩薩位、淨佛國土、成就眾生、得一切種智、轉法輪、以三乘度眾生；而每一段之末必綴一句「是事皆不可得。何以故？一切法自性無所有故」。第三重是六念：念佛、念法、念僧、念戒、念捨、念天；念佛一門又開五番，番番皆說『不以某法念』，末後結成「無所念，是為念佛」。
三重說畢，經文忽然轉入一個最險的難：「若一切法無所有性者，是則無道、無智、無果。」這一難不是須菩提自己有疑，是他替當來世的人問的——他怕那些求三乘的比丘聽了空而不解，反問「誰垢誰淨？誰縛誰解？」因而破戒、破正見、破威儀、破淨命，墮三惡道。佛不正面答此難，只反問他一句：你見色性實有不？答曰不見。佛再逼一句：你既不見諸法實有，何以作這樣的問？逼到這裡，須菩提才把自己問的真意說出來。
論段隨經而釋，其骨在三處。其一，新學何以教行畢竟空——答在「譬如小兒服藥，須蜜乃下」一句：空不是另拿出來教的一門，是和合在布施持戒裡一同服下的。其二，行、學、道三名有何差別——論主連引六說而不定於一，末後只說「如是等，名為三事差別」。其三，何以名為次第——答在緣梯之譬：「從一初桄漸上，上處雖高雖難，亦能得至。」全單元之題面到此方才說足：次第不是把空擱下再談，是在空裡安梯。
所以之下要讀的，是一個看起來相反的兩件事如何並立——法性無所有，而次第宛然。論主末後自下一語作全單元之收：「諸法性雖無所有，而隨世諦行，為破顛倒故。」
逐段解明
一、須菩提正問新學之次第。 卷87 續題之後，經文即起新問。須菩提先牒上卷之義：「若菩薩摩訶薩知諸法無所有性，因四禪、五神通，得阿耨多羅三藐三菩提」；牒畢乃出正問：「新學菩薩摩訶薩云何於諸法無所有性中次第行、次第學、次第道，以是次第行、次第學、次第道，得阿耨多羅三藐三菩提？」先問一句：此問與上卷之問有何不同？上卷問的是佛與大菩薩，此處問的是「新學」。所以問處不在空理本身，在能行之人的分量。讀此段先立一個準備：下文佛所開的次第，不會是空理之外另立一條淺路——若是那樣，便成兩橛，空歸空、行歸行了。
二、佛答第一重：從聖人聞而發心。 佛告須菩提，菩薩最初或從諸佛聞，或從多供養諸佛菩薩聞，或從諸阿羅漢、阿那含、斯陀含、須陀洹所聞。所聞者是一句話：「得無所有故是佛，得無所有故是阿羅漢、阿那含、斯陀含、須陀洹，一切賢聖皆以得無所有故有名。一切有為作法無所有性，乃至無有如毫末許所有。」聞而作念，其念分三節：先立前提——「若一切法無所有性，得無所有故是佛，乃至得無所有故是須陀洹」；次作推算——「我若當得阿耨多羅三藐三菩提、若不得，一切法常無有性，我何以不發心得阿耨多羅三藐三菩提」；末立誓願——「得阿耨多羅三藐三菩提已，一切眾生行於有相，當令住無所有中。」這三節要看它的次序：不是先有悲願而後求理，是先聽見一句理上的話，由這話逼出一個算式，算完了才有願。所以發心之始不在情，在見。末後佛以過去諸菩薩所行為證，說明這條路不是新造的。
三、佛答第二重之總標：應學六波羅蜜。 「是新發意菩薩應學六波羅蜜，所謂檀波羅蜜、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。」此句是下六段之綱。六波羅蜜依次言之：檀是捨與，尸羅是止持之戒，羼提是忍受，毘梨耶是精進不息，禪是心一境而不散，般若是了達諸法實相之慧——六名皆本論全書通用，此處不別立新義。要緊的是「應學」二字：前段才說發心由見理而起，此段立刻落到六度上，可見所謂次第，第一步就是把理放進最尋常的行門裡。
四、檀波羅蜜之次第。 此段之體例是下五段之模子，故須逐節拆。第一節四事：「自行布施，亦教人行布施，讚歎行布施功德，歡喜讚歎行布施者」——自、教他、讚法、喜人，四者缺一不成四種行。第二節現報：「以是布施因緣故，得大財富」，並列所施之物——飲食、衣服、香、華、瓔珞、房舍、臥具、燈燭以及種種資生所須。第三節轉生：「行是布施及持戒，生天、人中，得大尊貴」。第四節成五眾：由持戒布施而得禪定眾，由布施持戒禪定而得智慧眾、解脫眾、解脫知見眾。第五節過地入位：「過聲聞、辟支佛地，入菩薩位」。第六節佛事：淨佛國土、成就眾生、得一切種智、轉法輪、以三乘法度脫眾生生死。第七節奪之：「菩薩以是布施，次第行、次第學、次第道，是皆不可得。何以故？自性無所有故。」七節之中前六節是建立，第七節是掃蕩；掃蕩不在六節之外別說一段空理，就綴在六節之末。此是本品說次第之定式，下五度皆然。
五、尸羅波羅蜜之次第。 與檀段同格而換其主：「自行持戒，教人持戒，讚歎持戒功德，歡喜讚歎行持戒者。」其別在中間一節——檀段說所施之物，此段說隨病與藥：「見貧窮者施以財物，不持戒者教令持戒，亂意者教令禪定，愚癡者教令智慧，無解脫者教令解脫，無解脫知見者教令解脫知見。」六句六病六藥，正見持戒之人所行不止於自守。末後仍以「是事皆不可得。何以故？一切法自性無所有故」奪之。此處可留意一字之異：檀段作「是皆不可得」，此段作「是事皆不可得」；經文自身如此，不必強齊。
六、羼提波羅蜜之次第。 「自行羼提波羅蜜，教人行羼提，讚歎羼提功德，歡喜讚歎行羼提者。」中間一節說行忍之時仍以布施為首——「布施眾生各令滿足，教令持戒，教令禪定乃至解脫知見」。過地之語此段作「過阿羅漢、辟支佛地」，與檀尸二段之「過聲聞、辟支佛地」用字不同而所指同；淨土之語此段作「得淨佛世界」，前二段作「得淨佛國土」。此類異文是經文自有的參差，讀時知其同指即可，不可因異而起別解。
七、毘梨耶波羅蜜之次第。 此段最短，四事既列，中間諸節逕以「乃至」括之：「乃至是事不可得，自性無所有故。」先問一句：何以獨此段從略？因為前三段已把模子立盡，餘者依例可知，故經文自用省筆。這裡要防一個誤讀：省筆不是說精進一度無此諸節，是說其節目與前同。凡遇經文「乃至」之處，皆當如此看。
八、禪波羅蜜之次第。 此段四事之所緣不是一法而是三法：「自入禪、入無量心、入無色定」，教人亦然，讚歎亦然，歡喜讚歎亦然。禪是色界四禪，無量心是慈悲喜捨四心，無色定是四無色之定——三者皆心地之法。既列三法，中間乃說住於此三而行利他：「住諸禪、定、無量心，布施眾生，各令滿足；教令持戒，教令禪定、智慧。」可見禪度不是閉門之事。末後亦以「乃至是事不可得，自性無所有故」奪之。
九、般若波羅蜜之次第，是名初發意菩薩次第行學道。 此段與前五段不同在一處：前五度各行己度，此度則「自行六波羅蜜，亦教他人令行六波羅蜜，讚歎六波羅蜜功德，歡喜讚歎行六波羅蜜者」——般若所行者是六度全體。又此段之過地別加一語：「以是檀波羅蜜、尸羅波羅蜜、羼提波羅蜜、毘梨耶波羅蜜、禪波羅蜜、般若波羅蜜因緣及方便力，過聲聞、辟支佛地，入菩薩位」，「及方便力」四字前五段所無。末後總結一句收此一重：「須菩提！是名初發意菩薩摩訶薩次第行、次第學、次第道。」
十、佛答第三重之總標：六念。 「菩薩摩訶薩從初以來，以一切種智相應心，信解諸法無所有性，修六念，所謂念佛、念法、念僧、念戒、念捨、念天。」六念是佛法中極舊之行門，此處卻加了兩個限定：一是「以一切種智相應心」，二是「信解諸法無所有性」。有此二限，六念才是本品所說之次第行。先問一句：六度已說，何以更說六念？六度是所行之事，六念是所繫之心；事有次第而心無所繫，則事成外飾。下文六門，門門皆說「乃至無少許念」，正為此。
十一、念佛之一：不以五眾念。 「菩薩摩訶薩念佛，不以色念，不以受、想、行、識念。」其所以者：「是色自性無，受、想、行、識自性無。若法自性無，是為無所有。」末句最要緊：「何以故？無憶故，是為念佛。」先問一句：念而無憶，豈不是自相違？不違。所謂憶者，是心上結一個相而守之；無憶者，是心向佛而不結相。若以五眾為佛而念，所念者是五眾，不是佛。這裡要防一個滑失：不以五眾念，不是說佛沒有五眾之身，是說不可取五眾之相作所念之境。
十二、念佛之二：不以相好念。 「不以三十二相念，亦不念金色身、不念丈光、不念八十隨形好。」四者皆佛身之殊勝相：三十二相是大相，金色身是身色，丈光是身所放之光，八十隨形好是隨大相而有之細好。其所以者：「是佛身自性無故。若法無性，是為無所有。」結語同前：「何以故？無憶故，是為念佛。」此段與前段合看，可見遮得極盡——先遮凡夫共有之五眾，再遮佛所獨有之相好；若相好尚不可取，則更無可取者。落到用處：修念佛而現相好於心目者，正當於此處自問一句，所念者是相，還是佛。
十三、念佛之三：不以五眾功德念。 「不應以戒眾念佛，不應以定眾、智慧眾、解脫眾、解脫知見眾念佛。」此五眾非前段之色受想行識五眾，是戒定慧解脫解脫知見五分法身之眾——前是生死之身，此是功德之身。其所以者：「是眾無有自性。若法無自性，是為非法。」結語此處換了一個說法：「無所有念，是為念佛。」前二番作「無憶故」，此番作「無所有念」，語變而意不異，皆是遮其取相。
十四、念佛之四：不以十力四無所畏等念。 「不應以十力念佛，不應以四無所畏、四無礙智、十八不共法念佛，不應以大慈大悲念佛。」所列皆佛之不共功德：十力是佛知見之十種決定力，四無所畏是說法無所怯，四無礙智是義法辭樂說四種無滯，十八不共法是唯佛所有而不共二乘者，大慈大悲是佛心之德。其所以者：「是諸法自性無。若法自性無，是為非法。」結語作「無所念，是為念佛」。至此所遮者已從色身遮到法身，從法身遮到心德。
十五、念佛之五：不以十二因緣念。 「不應以十二因緣法念佛。」十二因緣是佛所證所說之理法。其所以者：「是因緣法自性無。若法自性無，是為非法。」結語仍作「無所念，是為念佛」。先問一句：前四番所遮者皆屬佛身佛德，此番何以遮到理法上去？因為念佛之人退而求其次，往往以『佛所說之理』作所念之境，自以為非取相；經文連此一路也堵住了。五番既盡，所餘者只是一個不取任何法而心向佛，此即本品之念佛。
十六、念佛既說，結為次第行而住中能具道品。 「菩薩摩訶薩行般若波羅蜜時，應念佛，是為菩薩初發意次第行、次第學、次第道。」此是結上。下文轉出一層功用：住此次第之中，「能具足四念處、四正勤、四如意足、五根、五力、七覺分、八聖道分，修行空三昧、無相、無作三昧，乃至一切種智」——所列者是三十七道品與三解脫門，道品是修行之總目，三昧是所入之門。所以者何？「諸法性無所有故。」末後一句是全段之眼：「是菩薩知諸法性無所有，是中無有性、無無性。」有性固遮，無性亦遮；若立一個「無性」為所得，仍是有所得。
十七、念法。 佛開念法之門，逐對遮之：善法與不善法，記法與無記法，世間法與出世間法，淨法與不淨法，聖法與凡夫法，有漏法與無漏法，欲界繫、色界繫、無色界繫三界之法，有為法與無為法。此中七對兩兩相對，三界繫法別立三目，合為十七目，皆佛法中判法之常目。其所以者：「是諸法自性無。若法自性無，是為非法。無所念，是為念法。」次說其果：「念法中學無所有性故，乃至當得一切種智。是菩薩得阿耨多羅三藐三菩提時，得諸法無所有性；是無所有性中，非有相、非無相。」末句雙非，與前段「無有性、無無性」同一防意。收語最重：「於是法中，乃至無少許念，何況念法！」先問一句：既云無少許念，那麼「念法」二字還有何用？有用。所遮者是念上加念，所存者是不取一法而心不離法。
十八、念僧。 此門最短：「菩薩摩訶薩念僧，無為法故分別有佛弟子眾，是中乃至無有少許念，何況念僧！」一句之中有一關節：僧之為僧，不由人數、不由衣相，由「無為法」而分別有。無為法者，是諸賢聖所同證之寂滅；同證此者名為佛弟子眾。所以念僧不是念一群人，是念那使他們成為僧的東西。既是無為，則無相可取，故仍歸於「無有少許念」。
十九、念戒。 「從初發意已來，應念聖戒——無缺戒、無隙戒、無瑕戒、無濁戒、無著戒、自在戒、智者所讚戒、具足戒、隨定戒。」九目逐一今語言之：無缺是不缺損，無隙是無漏罅，無瑕是無玷污，無濁是不混雜，無著是持而不執持相，自在是持之無拘迫，智者所讚是合於有智之人所印可，具足是諸戒圓備，隨定是隨順定心而持。九目由麁至細，前四說其淨，中二說其心，後三說其成。末後仍收於「應念是戒無所有性，乃至無少許念，何況念戒！」持戒而念戒相者，戒反成縛，此門正治此病。
二十、念捨。 「應念捨——若自念捨、若念他捨，若捨財、若捨法、若捨煩惱；……」前二項說人，後三項說物：捨財是外，捨法是內，捨煩惱是根。三者次第分明——不捨財則法不能捨，不捨法則煩惱之根不動。其所以者：「觀是捨不可得故，乃至無少許念，何況念捨！」先問一句：既捨矣，何以又念捨？凡人行捨而心自記其捨，此記即是取；經文所遮者正是此記。
廿一、念天。 此門用一段作念之語：「四天王諸天所有信、戒、施、聞、慧，此間命終，生彼天處；我亦有是信、戒、施、聞、慧。乃至他化自在天所有信、戒、施、聞、慧，此間命終，生彼天處；我亦有是信、戒、施、聞、慧。」信戒施聞慧五者，是生天之因。四天王天是欲界六天之初，他化自在天是欲界六天之末，舉初舉末而中間四天在其中。念天之法，是以天所有之五事比己之五事而知其同因。然收語仍奪：「應念是天無所有性中尚無少許念，何況念天！」比而不著，此是念天之分寸。
廿二、六念既畢，結為次第。 「菩薩摩訶薩行是六念，是名次第行、次第學、次第道。」六念自佛而法、而僧、而戒、而捨、而天，自極尊至於極近；一一皆歸「無少許念」。所以六念之為次第，不在其六，在其貫——貫之者是「無所有性」一線。
廿三、須菩提設難：若無所有性，是則無道無智無果。 須菩提歷舉所念之法：色乃至識、眼乃至意、色乃至法，眼界乃至意識界，檀波羅蜜乃至般若波羅蜜、內空乃至無法有法空、四念處乃至八聖道分、佛十力乃至一切種智——自五眾六根六塵十八界，至六度諸空道品佛法，無一不是無所有性。既皆無所有，乃下斷語：「若一切法無所有性者，是則無道、無智、無果。」三事並奪：道是所行之路，智是能行之慧，果是所到之處。此難之重，在它是順著佛自己的話推出來的。
廿四、佛以反問答之。 佛不破其所立，卻問一句：「汝見是色性實有不？乃至一切種智實有不？」須菩提答：「不見也！世尊！」佛再逼：「汝若不見諸法實有，云何作是問？」三語之間，難已自解——所難者是『若無實法則無道果』，而難者自承不見有實法；既不見實法，則『無實法』一事不是佛所加的新見，是他本來所許。佛所破者不是問的內容，是問的姿態。這一段之體例與之上卷佛答須菩提之法相類：就其所立而推之，不別立一理與之爭。
廿五、須菩提自明問意：為當來世人而問。 須菩提剖白三層。第一層自明無疑：「我於是法不敢有疑」。第二層說所為：「但為當來世諸比丘求聲聞、辟支佛道、菩薩道者」，那些人將作此言——「若一切法無所有性，誰垢誰淨？誰縛誰解？」第三層說其害：「是不知不解故而破於戒、破正見、破威儀、破淨命；是人破此事故，當墮三惡道。」戒、正見、威儀、淨命四事俱破，其序自內而外——見既破則行隨之。末後再申一句：「我於是法中信，不疑不悔。」此段定了全難之性質：是護法之問，不是諍論之問。
廿六、論主釋須菩提問意。 論段起首即標「釋曰：」，先釋須菩提之心：「須菩提伏受佛語，一切諸法雖空，而能起四禪、神通，是大菩薩近成佛者能行；今未知新發意者云何行，是故疑，問佛：……」「伏受」二字要看——不是被折服，是自伏其疑情而受之。既受矣，何以又問？所疑者已不在理，在人：理已信得及，只是不知初心人如何下腳。
廿七、何謂新學。 「以次第行、次第學、次第道故，當知是新發意菩薩；雖無量劫發意，未得諸法實相，皆名新學。」此一句破一個常見之誤：以為新學是時劫短。論主判得極清——判新舊不以時劫，以得實相與否。發意雖經無量劫，未得實相仍名新學；反之亦然。落到用處：不必以年歲久近自量，只問實相見未見。
廿八、問答一：新學何以令行畢竟空。 論主自設問：「若如是人是新學，但應教行布施、持戒等，佛何以教令於諸法無所有畢竟空性中行？」答有兩節。第一節說所以：「今明始入無所有、畢竟空法故，令行無所有。」第二節說其法：「而是菩薩以無所有畢竟空和合布施、持戒等行」，並以譬明之——「譬如小兒服藥，須蜜乃下。」此譬之取點在「和合」二字：藥是空，蜜是布施持戒；不是先服蜜後服藥，是和在一處服下。結語：「是故雖新發意，亦觀深空，無咎。」這裡要防一個誤讀：譬中以空為藥、以事行為蜜，不是說事行是甜頭而空是苦事，是說空之義難受而假事行以入。
廿九、牒經釋所從聞之人。 論主牒經文一句再申釋：「佛答須菩提：「菩薩若初從諸佛聞，若從多供養諸佛者聞。」」牒畢逐一釋之：「諸佛者，若過去、若現在」——不及未來，以未來佛未出世故。「多供養諸佛者，遍吉、觀世音、得大勢菩薩、文殊師利、彌勒菩薩等」——所舉皆大菩薩之名，此是本論釋經之常法，以實例明其類。「四種聲聞聖人義，如先說」——四果之義前文已釋，此處不重出。末一句最堪注意：「辟支佛不樂說法故，不說。」經文所列能說之人中無辟支佛，論主特為指出其所以然；經文之所無，論主亦釋之，此是本論細處。
三十、諸聖人皆因無所有、因涅槃而有差別。 先總說：「諸佛等聖人皆因無所有故有是分別。」次別釋其故：「聖人雖有禪定等諸功德，皆為涅槃故。涅槃即是寂滅相、無所有法，……」末乃牒結：「是故說：「諸聖人，皆因涅槃有是差別。」」此段之理路要看清：聖人之所以分四果佛果者，不由其所得之功德多少，由其所趣之涅槃；而涅槃即是無所有。所以「賢聖皆以得無所有故有名」一語不是玄談，是就聖人之所趣而言。
卅一、一切有為作法無有定性。 「一切有為作法從因緣和合生起故有，無有實定性乃至如毫末許所有。」次分二門而破：「有為有二種：一者、色，二者、無色。色法破壞，分別乃至微塵，無有定實；無色法中，乃至無有一念定實。」色法以分析至極微而破，無色法以剎那不住而破——一橫一豎，破法之兩路。末云「破義，如上說」，指前文已廣破，此處不重。落到用處：此段是前段「毫末許所有」之腳注，凡經文一語而論主分門破之者，皆當如此讀。
卅二、何以但從聖人聞。 「是菩薩從諸佛聖人聞是法，餘人多以著心說，諸聖人以無著心說，是故但從聖人聞。」此段答一個未問之問：法既是法，從誰聞不同？不同。同一句「一切法無所有」，以著心說者，聽的人所得是一個可執之空；以無著心說者，聽的人所得是不可執。所以擇師不是擇其言，是擇其心。
卅三、次第學菩薩之籌量。 此段是發心之算式，最當細看。先說其智：「以比智籌量決定，知諸法究竟必空，皆入佛所得實相中，所謂寂滅、無戲論相。」比智者，是以所聞比度而知，非現證。次立其算：「我若得作佛、若不作佛，一等無異。」何以一等？「諸法實相不增不減，更無新法可得故，法亦不失。」再進一層，連所度之眾生與所修之功德亦入算中：「若度眾生，眾生畢竟空，本末不可得；我所願、所作功德及成佛時神通力皆如夢、如幻故，無一定實相，畢竟空。」算既盡，乃翻出結論：「得、不得雖同，我何以不發心作佛？」先問一句：這結論何以不是『既同則不必發心』？因為「同」是兩邊俱可，不是一邊獨可；既無一法阻我，則發心無礙。此處是本單元第一個要害，下文兩番問答即從此出。
卅四、問答二：畢竟空何妨發心。 論主自設問：「若知諸法畢竟空、無所有者，云何復言「我何以不發心作佛」？」答曰：「畢竟空，無所有，無所障礙，何妨發心作佛？」此答只是把「無所有」一詞的意思推足：無所有者，是連「障礙」也無。難者暗中把空當作一個有力的東西，能取消發心；論主指出空無此力，亦無此體。
卅五、若空能障，即是有性。 「復次，若說畢竟空，滅諸戲論，云何障發心？若障，即是有性，云何言無所有性？」此是同一義的另一逼法，而更緊：假使空真能障發心，則空自身成了一個有作用的實體，那就不叫無所有性了。所以『空障發心』一說自相矛盾。落到用處：凡因聞空而覺萬事無謂者，當於此句自省——那個使你無謂的東西，你是把它當實有在用。
卅六、問答三：何不安住而發心受苦。 問曰：「若不障發心，亦應不障不發心，菩薩何不安住而發心受諸勤苦？」此問甚利：既兩邊俱不障，何以偏取其苦者？答分三節，此為第一節——「有人言：是菩薩有種種因緣應發心」，所舉是親屬知識之苦：「或以多諸親屬知識皆不聞、不知、不得是諸法實相，是故今世、後世受諸苦惱；我幸有力，能使是人得離眾苦。」並以譬明之：「譬如人得好良藥，親里知識受諸病苦，云何不與？」結云：「是故菩薩雖知諸法性無所有，因親里故而發心，利益眾生。」此節之理不在高處：既無一法逼我發心，卻有活生生的人在苦中，此即所以發。
卅七、第二節：為自身未熟故發心。 「菩薩復作是念：「我雖聞諸法實相，心未深入，未有禪定，智慧未熟，受諸苦惱。」是故發心求阿耨多羅三藐三菩提，集諸功德，以無所有法作證，自為，亦為他人。」前節為他，此節兼自。所謂「心未深入」者，是聞而未證；聞而未證則苦惱猶在，故須發心修集。末句「自為，亦為他人」是兩節之合。這裡要防一個誤讀：說「自為」不是說菩薩為己求樂，是說於己之未熟處不自欺。
卅八、第三節：住眾生等法等而怨親平等。 「是菩薩復聞大乘深義，住眾生等、法等中，無別異心，可得佛。」下釋其所以：「是菩薩以畢竟空心，煩惱微薄、怨親平等」，並記其念：「怨親無定，以因緣故，親或為怨，怨或為親。」由此而具足忍波羅蜜，「得作佛。由何而得？由忍怨故。是以菩薩視怨如親。」次以二譬明之：「譬如欲過嶮道，應當敬重頂戴導師；又如良醫雖賤，為貴者所重。」前譬取其不得不倚，後譬取其雖賤而重。末後記其思惟：「中人、怨家，雖於我無用，而是佛道因緣。」三節合看，發心之緣有三：因親里之苦、因自身未熟、因怨親平等而成忍——一向外，一向內，一向怨。
卅九、結第一重之次第。 「是名一種次第行、次第學、次第道。是故以過去菩薩所行為證。」所謂「一種」者，是發心一門之次第；下文六度六念各是一種。此句回應經文「如過去諸菩薩摩訶薩所行道」一語，明其非新創。
四十、問答四之起與第一說。 問曰：「次第行、次第學、次第道有何差別？」此問是全單元名相之關節。答中連舉諸說而不即定，第一說是：「有人言：無差別；若行、若學、若道，義一而語異。」此說取其同：三名只是一事之三種說法。先立此說有其用——防人於三名上強分階級而失其一貫。
四一、第二說：初中後。 「有人言：初名行，中名學，後名道。」此說取其時：同一事而分前後三分。與第一說相對，一主同、一主異；論主並列而不判，是本論對古來異說之常法。
四二、第三說：布施持戒智慧。 「行名布施，學名持戒，道名智慧。」此說以三事配三名。布施在初，故名行；持戒須制心相續，故名學；智慧是所至，故名道。
四三、第四說：持戒禪定智慧。 「復次，行名持戒，學名禪定，道名智慧。」此說較前說進一階：以戒定慧三學配之。與前說相較，前說起於布施，此說起於持戒；所配之法不同而三分之意同。
四四、第五說：八聖道分為三分。 「行名正語、正業、正命，學名正精進、正念、正定，道名正見、正思惟。」既配已，論主更釋其所以：「此八事雖名為道，然分別有三分：正見是道體；發起是道，名正思惟。正語、正業、正命，助益正見，故名為行。正精進、正念、正定，能成就正見，使令牢固，是名學。」此釋極清：一體、一發起、三助益、三成就。所謂道體者，是八事之中唯正見是所依，餘七皆繞之而立。落到用處：用功而不知何者為體，則七支皆成散事。
四五、第六說：六波羅蜜配三名。 「有人言：檀波羅蜜、毘梨耶波羅蜜名為行，初入道故。尸羅波羅蜜名為學」，其所以者：「人心常隨五欲難禁難制，無須臾停息，漸以尸羅波羅蜜、禪波羅蜜制伏其心，是故名學。」「羼提波羅蜜、般若波羅蜜名為道。何以故？忍為善，般若為智慧，善、智具足故名道。」末以譬結：「譬如人有眼有足，隨意所至。」眼喻般若，足喻忍——有慧而無忍則不能行，有忍而無慧則不知所往。
四六、六說之總收。 「如是等，名為三事差別。」「如是等」三字是要緊處：所舉六說不是窮盡，是舉例。論主於此不判高下，亦不自立一說。這裡要防一個誤讀：不判不是含糊，是此處所爭在名不在義——六說所指之行相其實相通，強定一說反失其通。
四七、問答五：何以名次第，緣梯之譬。 問曰：「何以名次第？」答中先申須菩提之問意：「以須菩提意：若一切法無所有，初發心菩薩於是空法中云何能漸次第學？以是故說次第。」次立正義：「諸法雖空難解，次第行得力故，能得成就；……」末以譬明之：「譬如緣梯，從一初桄漸上，上處雖高雖難，亦能得至。」此譬之取點在「初桄」二字——梯之為梯，不在其高，在有第一級可踏。空之難不在其難懂，在無下手處；次第者，即是給空一個下手處。此譬與前小兒服藥之譬合看：彼說空須和合事行而入，此說事行須分級而上。
四八、次第行者，四種行六波羅蜜。 「次第行者，四種行六波羅蜜，如經中說。」此句是下文之綱。所謂四種，即經中『自行、教人、讚歎、歡喜讚歎』四事；下文十餘段皆釋此四事，而以檀度為例。論主釋經之法於此可見：經文六度並列，論主獨取其一詳釋，餘者例知。
四九、四種行檀之所以。 論主牒經四句：「自行檀，教人行檀，讚檀功德，歡喜讚行檀」，而釋其所以能行者四：「善拔慳貪根，深愛檀波羅蜜，慈悲於眾生，通達諸法實相；以此因緣故，能四種行檀波羅蜜。」四因逐一今語言之：拔慳貪根者，去其所以不施之本；深愛檀者，於施法生好樂；慈悲眾生者，所施有所向；通達實相者，施而不取施相。四因自淺至深，末一因正是本品之義。
五十、不能具足四事之諸相。 此段以反面列不具足之相，逐一皆有其病因。其一，自行而不能教人——「或畏他瞋，或畏為己教布施以之為恩」，二病皆在顧忌。其二，「教人布施，自不能施」。其三，「種種讚歎布施之德，勸人令施而不能自行」。其四，「自行布施，亦教人布施、稱讚布施之德，而見人布施不能歡喜」，其病在「或有破戒惡人行施而不喜見」。其五，「喜見施主而不讚歎」，其病在「以其邪見不識施果故」。結云：「如是，各各不能具足。」五相之列是照著四事逐一缺而成的，讀時當與前段四事對看。
五一、菩薩能行四事，教眾生自作。 「菩薩大悲心、深愛善法故，能行四事，如上說。」次說教人之所以必要：「菩薩若但自布施、不教他人，但能今世少許利益。是眾生隨業因緣墮貧窮處，……」故菩薩教之曰：「我不惜財物，我雖多施汝，汝亦不得持至後世；汝今當自作，後當自得。」此語是全段之眼——施物只濟一時，教其自作乃濟其後世。末說歡喜之所以：「見行施者雖是破戒惡人，但念其好心布施之德，不念其惡，是故歡喜讚歎。」正對前段第四相之病。
五二、三寶無盡福田。 「復次，見三寶無盡福田中施故，施福不盡，必至佛道；觀其未來無盡功德故，歡喜行是四種布施，世世財富。」此段補說歡喜之另一因：前段之歡喜是不念其惡，此段之歡喜是觀其未來。所謂無盡福田者，是所施之田無盡，故所生之福亦無盡。
五三、財富自至，種禾稾草之譬。 「是菩薩雖不為財富布施，未具足阿耨多羅三藐三菩提、六波羅蜜等法，中間而財富自至；譬如人為穀故種禾，而稾草自至。」此譬之取點在「自至」二字：稾草不是所求，卻隨穀而有。菩薩不為財富而施，財富卻隨施而來。這裡要防一個誤讀：不是說求財富亦無妨，是說不求而自來者可用而不可著——下段即說其用法。
五四、得財物報時離慳貪心。 「菩薩得財物報時，離慳貪心，隨眾生意布施，須食與食等。」此句承上啟下：承上者，所得之財即前段自至之財；啟下者，「須食與食」四字引出下文問答八。所謂隨眾生意者，是以受者之所須為準，不以施者之所有為準。
五五、問答六：布施時先施何等人。 問曰：「是菩薩布施時，先施何等人？」答中先立正次：「是菩薩雖因眾生起大悲心，而菩薩布施，必先供養諸佛、大菩薩、辟支佛、阿羅漢及諸聖人。」以下逐級遞降，凡五轉：無聖人則施「持戒、精進、禪定、智慧離欲人」；無此人則施「一切出家佛弟子」；無是人則施「持五戒、行十善道，及持一日戒、三歸」者；無此人則施「中人非正非邪者」；無此人則施「五逆惡人，及諸畜生」。末立一總則：「不可不與，菩薩以施攝一切眾生故。」此一級一級，是以福田之勝劣為序。
五六、異說：應先施五逆貧病。 「有人言：應先布施五逆罪人、斷善根者，貧窮、老病、下賤、乞匃者，乃至畜生；……」與前說恰成反向——前以田之良為序，此以受者之急為序。二譬明之：「譬如慈母，多有眾子，先念羸病，給其所須」，取其母心之偏向弱者；「又如菩薩為餓虎欲食子故，以身施之」，取其極處。二說並列而未判，下一問即為判此而設。
五七、問答七：如是種種應先施何者。 問曰：「如是種種，應先施何者？」答分四層。第一層立總則：「一切眾生皆是菩薩福田，能生大悲故。菩薩常欲以阿耨多羅三藐三菩提施眾生，何況衣食等而有分別！」此層直說不必分別——以田之勝劣分者，是就衣食說；若所欲施者是菩提，則無可分。第二層分位而說：「又菩薩得無生忍法，平等無差。未得無生忍者，或慈悲心多、或分別心多，此二心不得俱行。」得忍者無此問，未得忍者則二心不能並。
五八、悲心多者先施貧窮惡人。 「悲心多者，先施貧窮惡人，作是念：「種福田中，果報雖大，憐愍眾生故，先利貧者。」如是田雖不良，以慈悲心，得大果報。」此段判得極平：田不良而心良，故果報仍大。所以前段之異說不是錯，是悲心多者之行相。
五九、分別心多者先供養諸佛。 「分別心多者，作是念：「諸佛有無量功德故，應先供養。」以分別諸法、取著佛身故心小；其心雖小，福田良故，功德亦大。」此段判得亦平，而語更細：說其「心小」是不諱其病——分別即是取著；說其「功德亦大」是不沒其實——田良故也。二段合看，前者心大田劣，後者心小田良，各得一邊。落到用處：不必以自己偏於哪一邊為病，當知其為分位。
六十、得實相者二事俱行。 「若得諸法實相，入般若波羅蜜方便力中，心得自在，二事俱行——慈愍眾生，又視皆如佛。如是等，菩薩隨因緣行布施。」此是前二段之會通：悲與敬本不相礙，所以不能並者，是未得實相方便之故。末句「隨因緣行布施」是全問之收——無定法，隨緣而行。
六一、問答八：經何以言須食與食。 問曰：「經何以不言「與衣食等」，而言「須食與食」？」答曰：「有人須食與飲、須飲與衣，以不稱受者意故，福德少，是故言須食與食。」此問極細而極實：經文一句用字之異，論主亦為之釋。所判者是一個準則——施之福德不以所施之物貴賤定，以稱受者之意與否定。落到用處：與人以我所欲與者，不如與人以彼所須者。
六二、問答九：若羞若怖者云何知其所須。 問曰：「有人若羞、若怖，雖有所須，不能發言，云何知其所須？」此問承上而起：既以稱意為準，則不能發言者如何稱？答曰：「菩薩觀其相貌，隨時所須、土地所宜；或有知他心者，資生之具，隨意而與。」三法並列：觀其相貌是就人，隨時所須、土地所宜是就境，知他心者是就通力。前二是人人可行之事，後一是有神通者之事——論主不以通力為常法，故置於末而繫以「或有」二字。
六三、布施成戒眾乃至解脫知見眾。 「是人因是布施，得成戒眾」，其所以者，是行施之後自作是念：「我憐愍眾生，以衣食布施，所益甚少；不如持戒，常以無惱、無畏施於眾生。」下逐眾而說：「菩薩住是持戒中，為守護戒故，生禪定。心不散、清淨故，得成慧眾；無戲論、捨諸著是慧相。以是慧破諸煩惱縛，得解脫眾。了了知見證解脫故，名解脫知見眾。」五眾相生之序歷歷：施生戒，戒生定，定生慧，慧生解脫，解脫而知見之。此段是經文自「得禪定眾」至「解脫知見眾」一段之詳釋。
六四、先行布施及五眾，故過二乘地入菩薩位。 「是人先行布施及五眾因緣故，過聲聞、辟支佛地，入菩薩位。」此句是上段之結，亦是下二問之因。所當留意者：「先行布施」四字把五眾之起點仍繫在施上，與前文「布施為主」相貫。
六五、問答十：何以說五眾而不說六波羅蜜。 問曰：「菩薩應行六波羅蜜，入菩薩位，此中何以說五眾？」答先立通則：「法雖一，以種種異名說，是故說五眾無咎。」次說其所以偏舉：「是人從一波羅蜜中欲起諸波羅蜜，布施為主，已先說。」次逐一相配：「持戒眾名尸波羅蜜；定眾、解脫眾名禪波羅蜜；慧眾、解脫知見眾是般若波羅蜜；行諸波羅蜜時，能忍諸惡事，是名羼提波羅蜜；能起諸波羅蜜，不休不息，是名毘梨耶波羅蜜。」五眾配六度，其法是：戒配尸羅，定與解脫二眾配禪，慧與解脫知見二眾配般若，忍與精進則不別立眾而通於諸度之行時。此配法要看清——不是五對六少了一個，是忍與進本非一段功德，是行諸度時之相。
六六、問答十一：何以不但說波羅蜜名。 問曰：「若爾者，何以不但說諸波羅蜜名而說五眾？」答曰：「是人欲入菩薩位，此中不但以持戒、禪定得，和合眾戒、清淨戒、無盡戒。以要言之，攝一切戒名為戒眾；能破煩惱，過二乘，入菩薩位。」次以譬明之：「譬如一人、二人，不名為軍；和合多人，乃成為軍，能破怨敵。」末云：「餘眾亦如是。」此譬之取點在「和合」——「眾」之一字本有聚集之義，說眾而不說度，正為顯其非一法之力。落到用處：所謂破煩惱者，不是靠某一條戒、某一種定，是靠聚而成軍。
六七、教化眾生、迴向淨佛國而得一切種智。 「菩薩自得禪定等眾，亦令眾生得，是名菩薩教化眾生；教化眾生已，持自功德及眾生功德，盡迴向淨佛國。具此二法，即得一切種智，轉法輪，以三乘度眾生。」此段釋經文之後半。所謂「二法」者，是教化眾生與迴向淨土；此二成，則佛事自成。與前段合看：五眾成則入位，二法成則成佛，次第分明。
六八、結次第之義：先麁後細，先易後難。 「是名菩薩次第行、次第學、次第道。先麁後細，先易後難，漸漸習學，名為次第。」此十二字是全品「次第」二字之正訓。先問一句：何以不說『先淺後深』而說「先麁後細」？麁細就法之相說，易難就人之力說——一就所學，一就能學，兩面俱到。與前緣梯之譬合看，梯之級即是此麁細易難。
六九、餘五波羅蜜隨義分別；隨世諦行。 「餘五波羅蜜，亦應隨義分別。」此句明前之詳釋檀度是舉例。末後一句是全論段之骨：「諸法性雖無所有，而隨世諦行，為破顛倒故。」無所有是第一義，隨世諦行是所以有次第；而隨世諦之目的仍在破顛倒，不在成立世諦。這裡要防一個誤讀：說「隨世諦行」不是說次第只是權宜而無實益，是說次第之立處在世諦，其所成之事——破顛倒——是實。
七十、六念是初次第行。 「復次，念佛等六念是初次第行，以易行易得故。」六度說畢，回到六念。判六念為「初」，其理由只有四字：易行易得。先問一句：六念既於一一門皆說「無少許念」，何得云易？此疑即下一問答所設。
七一、問答十二：不以色念佛云何言易。 問曰：「六念中亦言不以色念佛，云何言易？」答曰：「有法共行，故名為易；譬如服苦藥，以蜜下之則易。」「有法共行」四字是答之本：六念雖遮取相，其所念之佛法僧戒捨天畢竟是有可繫之事，不是一上來便令觀無相。此譬與前小兒服藥之譬同取一喻而用處不同：彼喻用於六度之和合空義，此喻用於六念之和合無相——一喻兩用，正見論主以喻為工具而不執喻。
七二、六念義如初品中廣說。 「六念義，如初品中廣說。」論主於此不重釋六念之目，指歸前文。此是本論之體例：同一法數前已廣說者，後不重出。讀者遇此語，當知其非略，是指路。
七三、六度六念柔軟易行，餘三解脫門不說。 「六波羅蜜、六念等，柔軟易行，不生邪見，是菩薩次第學法。餘三解脫門等，思惟籌量，或生邪見故不說。」此段判得極要緊：三解脫門不是不好，是於新學有險——空、無相、無作三門須思惟籌量，力不及者取之成邪見。所以佛於此品為新學說六度六念而不說三門。落到用處：擇法當就己力，不就法之高下。
七四、論主釋須菩提之難。 「此中須菩提難：「世尊！若實無所有，云何有次第行等？」」論主以一句括經文之長難，正見其判此難之骨在「無所有」與「次第」之相違。與經文對看，經文所列之法目甚多，而論主一語收之——此是本論釋經之常法，取其關節而不隨文鋪。
七五、佛之反問與須菩提之答。 「佛反問須菩提：「汝以聲聞智慧見色等法是一定實法不？」」此處論主添出「以聲聞智慧」五字，是就須菩提之分位而言，經文原作「汝見是色性實有不」。次記其答：「答言：「不見！」」論主更代為申其所以：「色等一切法但從因緣和合，假有其名，無有定實，云何言有？」此申語是論主之釋，非經文；讀時當分清哪一句是經、哪一句是論——論主於此正是把須菩提一個「不見」背後的理由說出來。
七六、佛之再逼與論主之斷。 「佛語須菩提：「汝若不見實定有，云何以次第等難空？」」下接論主自下之一句斷語：「而次第法不離於空。」此八字是全單元之總結——次第與空不是二物相待，次第本來就在空之中。若次第離空而別有，則佛之反問不成；正因不離，故不見實法者無可以次第為難。
七七、須菩提受解了了。 「爾時，須菩提受解了了，是故說……」以下論主以一長段代述須菩提之意，逐層皆與經文相應。先自明：「我無所疑」。次說所為：「為當來世求三乘人，聞佛說空無所有性，以罪重智鈍故，取空相」。「取空相」三字是論主所加，正指其病根——不是聞空而生疑，是聞空而取空為相。次舉其言：「誰垢誰淨？凡夫、惡人，何以名垢？出家、得道人，何以名淨？」此中「凡夫、惡人」「出家、得道人」兩對是論主所補之例，經文只作「誰垢誰淨？誰縛誰解？」。
七八、破戒破見之次第與須菩提自明。 論主逐一釋其墮落之序：「是人不解佛語深義以何事而說，著是空故，言：『何用持戒等為？』」——此是因。「以是因緣，即生邪見，破正見；破正見故，以少因緣而破戒及威儀，無所畏忌」——此是自見及行。「出家人資仰白衣，便妄語求利衣食等，破於正命等」——此是破淨命之實相，論主特就出家人之處境而言。「種此罪故，墮三惡道，或重於白衣」——末五字是論主所加之判：同一破戒，出家者罪或更重，以其資仰白衣而妄語故。末後代須菩提自明三事：「我已得道，於諸法無所受」；「又常聞佛說空法，云何戲論生疑」；「又我常修無諍三昧，憐愍眾生，是故問佛。」三事之中，無諍三昧一事是論主所補而經文所無，正見其所以代人問而不自疑。全單元至此而收：始於『新學云何行』之問，終於『為當來世人』之答——一始一終，皆不為自己。
不要讀錯
不要把「無所有性」讀成什麼都沒有。經文說一切法無所有性，同一段裡卻說得四禪、五神通、得阿耨多羅三藐三菩提；論主更明說「而次第法不離於空」。所遮者是法上之定實自性，不是法之作用與次第。若讀成什麼都沒有，則經文所列六波羅蜜、六念、三十七道品全成空話，而佛何必為新學開此三重。
不要把「無憶故，是為念佛」讀成念佛時什麼都不想。五番遮法各有所指——遮五眾、遮相好、遮五分功德之眾、遮十力等不共法、遮十二因緣法；所遮者皆是『取某法為所念之境』。經文自身仍說「應念佛」，可見所存者是念，所去者是取相。若讀成不想，則與木石無異，亦與下文「能具足四念處」乃至「乃至一切種智」不相應。
不要把「乃至無少許念，何況念戒」讀成不必持戒。此語在念戒門中，而念戒門所念者正是「無缺戒、無隙戒、無瑕戒、無濁戒」等九種聖戒。所遮者是持戒之後心中自記其戒相，不是戒行本身。經末須菩提之所以憂懼，正是怕人由空而「破於戒、破正見、破威儀、破淨命」；把此語讀成不必持戒，便是須菩提所預言的那種人。
不要把三名六說讀成論主未定其義。論主連舉六說而結曰「如是等，名為三事差別」，是說行、學、道三名所指之行相本可就多面而分，非有一定。六說之中無一相違——或就時分初中後，或就法配布施持戒智慧，或配戒定慧，或配八聖道之三分，或配六波羅蜜。若強取一說為正而廢其餘，反與論主「義一而語異」之首說相違。
不要把緣梯之譬讀成次第在空之外。譬中所緣之梯即架在空法之中——問處原是「初發心菩薩於是空法中云何能漸次第學」，答處便是「諸法雖空難解，次第行得力故，能得成就」。梯不是離開牆而自立的。若以為先立次第、後入空，則與「以無所有畢竟空和合布施、持戒等行」一語相違。
不要把小兒服藥之譬讀成空是苦事。譬中蜜之用在使藥得下，不在使藥變甜；論主取譬之點在「和合」，不在苦樂。同一喻後文又用一次——「譬如服苦藥，以蜜下之則易」——彼處所說是六念之易，可見此喻在本單元是一個通用之工具，隨處取其一點，不可牽其餘義。
不要把「必先供養諸佛、大菩薩」與「應先布施五逆罪人」讀成前後相違。論主於下一問即為之會通：未得無生忍者，悲心多則先貧窮惡人，分別心多則先諸佛；得諸法實相入方便力者，「二事俱行」。二說各是一種分位之行相，非一正一誤。末後一句「如是等，菩薩隨因緣行布施」，正是不立定法。
不要把「其心雖小，福田良故，功德亦大」讀成論主許可分別心。論主明說其「以分別諸法、取著佛身故心小」——取著是病，已判得明白；說功德亦大者，是就田說，不是就心說。二事分列而不相掩，正是本論判事之細處；把後半讀成許可，便把前半的判語抹去了。
不要把「餘三解脫門等，思惟籌量，或生邪見故不說」讀成佛不許人修三解脫門。此語有其限——限於本品所為之人，即「新發意」「新學」。同一論中三解脫門處處廣說，非本品所廢。所以不說者，是「思惟籌量，或生邪見」之險，就人之力而言，不就法之勝劣而言。
不要把「得、不得雖同，我何以不發心作佛」讀成菩薩以無謂之心發心。論主於下文自設兩問而答之：一答「畢竟空，無所有，無所障礙，何妨發心作佛」，二答發心之三緣——親屬知識之苦、自身智慧未熟、聞大乘深義而怨親平等。可見『得不得同』只是除去阻礙之語，發心之實緣在後三節。若止讀前句而不讀後文，便成一個冷語。
修行作用
拿「雖無量劫發意，未得諸法實相，皆名新學」量自己的分位。不要以修學年數自定深淺，只問實相見未見。這樣一量，久學者不必自足，初學者也不必自輕——同在一個「新」字裡，所差只是腳程。
拿「自行布施，亦教人行布施，讚歎行布施功德，歡喜讚歎行布施者」四事自檢一件善事。做了沒有？勸人沒有？讚其法沒有？見人做而心裡歡喜沒有？論主列了五種不具足之相，每一相都有其病因；照著四事一一自問，病在哪一格便清楚了。
拿「我雖多施汝，汝亦不得持至後世；汝今當自作，後當自得」看待助人之限度。給與是一時之濟，教其自作才是長久之益。這句話用在布施上，用在別的幫助上也一樣——凡只能替人做一次的事，都要順便把做的方法留下。
拿「不稱受者意故，福德少」校自己與人之物。與人以我所多者易，與人以彼所須者難；難處不在物，在肯不肯先問一句他要什麼。經文只換了一個字——不說「與衣食等」而說「須食與食」——分寸全在此。
拿「菩薩觀其相貌，隨時所須、土地所宜」練習看人。有所須而不能說者最多，羞與怖是兩個常見的因。所以不要等人開口；看神色、看時節、看處境，這三看是人人可行的，不必等有他心之智。
拿「先麁後細，先易後難，漸漸習學」安排自己的功課。凡覺得用功無處下手者，多半是把細的、難的擺在前頭。先問一句：這一步是不是梯子的第一級？若不是，就往下找一級。緣梯之譬所以可貴，正在它承認上頭高而難，卻不因此廢了第一桄。
拿「有法共行，故名為易」看待可依之行門。六念之所以易，不在它淺，在它有事可繫。用功而覺心無著落者，不必急著去修無相；先取一個有法可共行的門類走著，是本品為新學所開之正路。
拿「餘三解脫門等，思惟籌量，或生邪見故不說」自製其躁。喜聞高深而力未及者，最易在此處出事——所出之事不是修不成，是生邪見。擇法先量力，這一句是本品給的明文。
拿「是人不解佛語深義以何事而說，著是空故」自察聞空之後的心。聞空而覺持戒無謂、作福無謂者，正是取了空相。對治之法在論主一句：空是「隨世諦行，為破顛倒故」——問問自己的顛倒破了沒有，便知那個『無謂』是證量還是錯覺。
拿「譬如一人、二人，不名為軍；和合多人，乃成為軍」看待零散的用功。一條戒、一次定、一回慧觀，各自皆是好事，卻未必能破煩惱；能破者是聚而成眾。所以功課之要不在某一項特別精，在諸項不缺而相續。
拿「怨親無定，以因緣故，親或為怨，怨或為親」鬆自己的怨結。此語不是勸人寬大，是說事實——關係本由因緣而轉。看清了這一點，忍就不是強忍。論主接著說「由何而得？由忍怨故」，可見怨家在佛道上不是障，是緣。
拿「我幸有力，能使是人得離眾苦」定發心之實處。發心不必先有大願之相，先看眼前有沒有一個在苦裡的人是自己幫得上的。論主把親屬知識列在發心三緣之首，正是從最近處說起。
承衍
之下承之上而來的一條線，是把同一個「無所有性」從證位挪到初心。之上所說皆是已成之事：佛自陳本行菩薩道時離欲入四禪、依四禪起五神通，禪則取相得已而不念有、不受味，通則不取相、不受味，末以一念相應慧得菩提；論主於其間釋畢竟空之難解、釋順忍之通小大、釋「有法是菩薩道，無法是菩薩果」之三解。之下則轉問初心——同是這無所有性，新學之人如何下腳。佛之答三重：一由聞聖人語而發心，二由六波羅蜜之四種行，三由六念。論段隨之而三骨：新學何以教行畢竟空、行學道三名有何差別、何以名為次第。三答各有其一語：第一在「譬如小兒服藥，須蜜乃下」，第二在「如是等，名為三事差別」，第三在「譬如緣梯，從一初桄漸上，上處雖高雖難，亦能得至」。末後論主以「而次第法不離於空」八字作全單元之斷，又以「諸法性雖無所有，而隨世諦行，為破顛倒故」一語立其所以。合之上之下而觀，品名「次第學」三字乃足：所學者是空，所以能學者是次第。
此品之題，諸本所傳不一，並錄如下而不強為判定。底本題作〈次第學品〉，明本無「大智度論」四字，聖本、石本則連品題十三字亦缺。宮本別出異名，其卷端校記作「（（釋次…十五））九字＝（（釋第七十五品上三次品））十字【宮】」——是宮本逕稱本品為「三次品」。所釋之《大品》經本，其品題作「三次品第七十五」，題下夾註一行云丹本作「次第行品」，而其品題一字之校記作「次＋（第行）【三】【宮】【聖】」——是宋、元、明、宮、聖五本於「三次品」之「次」下增「第行」二字。本單元卷首續題之校記亦兩見異文：一作「次第學品＝次品【宋】【宮】，〔次第學品〕－【聖】」，是宋、宮二本作「次品」而聖本全缺；一作「第七十五之餘＝第七十五品下訖第七十六品【宋】【聖】，第七十五下訖第七十六品【元】，第七十五之下【明】，七十四品下訖第七十五品【聖】」——聖本作「七十四品下訖第七十五品」，較底本之品次恆少一階，與本論前數品所見之模式無異。諸名所取不同：「次第學」就其漸次而學立，「三次」就行、學、道三者之次立，「次第行」就其行立；本品論段正有「次第行、次第學、次第道有何差別」一問而連舉六說，三名各得一邊。
智顗《摩訶止觀》判頓漸不定三教，於「漸」一項下逕引本品品名之核心語為證，其文云：「《大品》云：「次第行、次第學、次第道。」此證漸也。」所引三名與本品經論反覆出現之定型句全同，而明繫於《大品》——是本品之三名在天台判教中曾被取作漸教之明證。
吉藏《大品經義疏》釋本品，題作〈三次品〉，其科判與釋義多與本單元相應，並錄其要者。於本單元之起問，吉藏判為佛答之第二段：「新學菩薩云何次第行下，第二、為始行菩薩開行次第也」，並牒論主之語云：「論云須菩提信受佛語，諸法雖空而能起五通等，此是知菩薩所能行也。新學菩薩云何於無所有中脩行次第？」與論主「須菩提伏受佛語」一節正合。於佛答之三重，吉藏總判云：「佛答中約三種明次第：一者、約發心明次第；二者、約六度明次第；三者、得六念明次第」——三重之分與本單元經文之次全同。於「新學」之義，吉藏設問而答：「問：何等是新學？答：雖未得無生現前無量劫脩行，皆名新學」，與論主「雖無量劫發意，未得諸法實相，皆名新學」同一判。於三名之諸說，吉藏亦作四說並列：「人解三次有四說：一、行學道；三、名異了，義更無異。二云、初行中名學後道。三云、布施名行、持戒名學、智慧名道。三云、戒名行、定名學、慧名道，約八正戒定慧亦然。四云、檀與精進六度為行，持戒與禪二度為學，忍是善、般若是慧，具足故名為道也。」其所列與論主六說互有出入而大體相合。於但從聖人聞一節，吉藏釋云：「此中明始行菩薩但從聖人邊開法者，聖說多無依著故，緣覺不說法故，不從緣覺聞」——與論主「餘人多以著心說，諸聖人以無著心說」及「辟支佛不樂說法故，不說」兩節相應。於發心亦具三次之疑，吉藏自問自答：「向發心中云何有次第行學道耶？答：此約初中後明學道，故發心亦具三也。」於六度之四種行，吉藏分列而說其不具足之相：「此中度皆具四行：一、自行；二、化他；三、歎人。有人雖自能行施，不能教化行施，以畏嗔故。又畏為已教布施，以之為息故，不能教化行施。有人雖能教化行施，而自不能行。有人具三事：一、自行施；二、能教他；三、歎布施法，見破戒惡人行施也。皆不具四事。菩薩具足四事」——與論主所列五相同其意趣。於因布施而生五分之疑，吉藏設問云：「問：此云菩薩因布施生五分，得入菩薩位，云何作之？答：菩薩布施故，得果報如竟，不猶戒即生眾。又施眾生無畏，亦是戒眾。以持戒故得空，空故發慧，發慧斷煩惱，得脫眾生，可知見證解脫，名解脫知見眾也。」於五分與六度之相攝，吉藏云：「五分身六度相攝者，尸羅攝戒身，攝解脫身及定身，般若攝慧身及解脫智見」——與論主「持戒眾名尸波羅蜜；定眾、解脫眾名禪波羅蜜；慧眾、解脫知見眾是般若波羅蜜」之配法大同。於六念一節，吉藏從略，僅云：「第二、約六念明三次，如文也。」於末後須菩提之難，吉藏判為第三段並釋其意：「須菩提白佛下，第三、須菩提取惑情為問，請佛今通使教通無。應問意云：若諸法實無所有，則無有次第行學等。佛反問：汝聲聞人見色等法是定實不？須菩提答：一切法從因緣假名有，無有實定故，我不見其實定一也。」於末段破戒破見之序，吉藏釋云：「破正見者，惡取空是邪見故破正見，內破正見故外破戒及威儀，以不畏罪故便妄語求利，故破淨命也」——內外之分與論主「即生邪見，破正見；破正見故，以少因緣而破戒及威儀」之次全合。
慧影《大智度論疏》現存之本止於卷二十四，所疏訖於品六十九之中，本品在其現存疏本範圍之外，故於本品闕釋，非其疏而不及。均正《大乘四論玄義》以主題立論而不逐品作疏，於本品三名皆無所引，據實誌錄，不作有無之判。
Training in Sequence, Last Part: The Sequential Practice, Training, and Path of Bodhisattvas New to the Training, the Six Perfections and the Six Recollections, and There Being a Path and a Fruit within the Nature without Anything Existent
What Is Being Asked
What the fascicle of the First Part asked about was the border between 「有相」 tr. "having marks" and 「無相」 tr. "the signless": having the mark of dharmas, not even compliant acceptance is obtained; without the mark of dharmas, compliant acceptance, up to the severing of all the afflictions and their habitual residues, can all be established; from this Subhūti pressed on to the Buddha himself and asked: since the Buddha knows that all dharmas are without any existent nature, how could he become a Buddha and obtain the power of sovereignty over all dharmas? The Buddha answered with what he himself did when formerly practising the bodhisattva path—he cultivated the six perfections, parted from the desires and from evil and unwholesome dharmas, and entered the four dhyānas; toward the dhyānas and their limbs he grasped their marks and yet did not think that there was this dhyāna, did not receive its flavour, did not obtain this dhyāna; dwelling in reliance on the four dhyānas he gave rise to the five supernormal powers, and toward the supernormal powers he did not grasp at their marks and did not receive their flavour; at the last, with the wisdom associated with a single thought, he obtained anuttarā samyaksaṃbodhi. The treatise-author explains it passage by passage; on the section 「是諸法畢竟空義，甚深難解！」 tr. "This meaning of the ultimate emptiness of dharmas is very deep and hard to understand!" he dwells again and again, and on the sentence 「有法是菩薩道，無法是菩薩果」 tr. "An existent dharma is the bodhisattva's path; a non-existent dharma is the bodhisattva's fruit" he sets out three separate explanations.
The Last Part comes on from this, yet turns the head of the question wholly in another direction. What the First Part asked was ‘how the great bodhisattva can give rise to function within emptiness’; what the Last Part asks is ‘how one new to the training can take the first step within emptiness’. Subhūti says it plainly as soon as he opens his mouth: since the great bodhisattva, knowing that dharmas are without any existent nature, can obtain awakening by way of the four dhyānas and the five supernormal powers, then 「新學菩薩摩訶薩云何於諸法無所有性中次第行、次第學、次第道」 tr. "how do bodhisattva-mahāsattvas new to the training, within dharmas that are without any existent nature, practise in sequence, train in sequence, and follow the path in sequence"? The single Chinese character 「新」 tr. "new" is the whole joint of this unit. That the great bodhisattva walks within emptiness, people can still say is brought about by the power of his realisation; but one who has first aroused the mind has not yet even seen the real mark, and yet he is taught to walk within ultimate emptiness from the very outset—this is where the difficulty lies.
The Buddha's way of answering falls into three layers, each layer lower than the last and also each layer more concrete than the last. The first layer is the source of arousing the mind: from the buddhas and the sages of the four fruits one hears a sentence—all the worthies and sages have their names because they obtain that nothing exists; all conditioned, made dharmas are without anything existent, up to not even so much as a hair's tip; having heard this sentence, one makes a reckoning: since obtaining and not obtaining are equal, why then do I not arouse the mind? The second layer is the six perfections: dāna, śīla, kṣānti, vīrya, dhyāna, prajñā, each one practised in the four ways ‘himself practising, teaching others, praising, rejoicing and praising’, each one beginning from being born among gods and humans and obtaining great nobility, passing through the five aggregates and beyond the grounds of the two vehicles, entering the bodhisattva's position, purifying the buddha-land, bringing beings to accomplishment, obtaining the omniscience of all kinds, turning the wheel of the Dharma, and delivering beings by the three vehicles; and at the end of each passage there is always attached the sentence 「是事皆不可得。何以故？一切法自性無所有故」 tr. "these matters are all unfindable. Why? Because the self-nature of all dharmas is without anything existent". The third layer is the six recollections: recollection of the Buddha, recollection of the Dharma, recollection of the Saṅgha, recollection of morality, recollection of giving up, recollection of the gods; the one gate of recollection of the Buddha further opens into five rounds, and every round says ‘one does not recollect by such-and-such a dharma’, at the end gathering into 「無所念，是為念佛」 tr. "recollecting nothing—this is recollection of the Buddha".
When the three layers have been spoken, the sūtra suddenly turns to a most dangerous difficulty: 「若一切法無所有性者，是則無道、無智、無果。」 tr. "If all dharmas are without any existent nature, then there is no path, no knowledge, no fruit." This difficulty is not Subhūti's own doubt; he asks it on behalf of the people of the world to come—he fears that those bhikṣus who seek the three vehicles, hearing of emptiness and not understanding it, will ask in turn 「誰垢誰淨？誰縛誰解？」 tr. "Who is stained and who is pure? Who is bound and who is released?", and so break morality, break right view, break deportment, break pure livelihood, and fall into the three evil destinies. The Buddha does not answer this difficulty head-on; he only asks him a question in return: do you see the nature of form as really existent? He answers that he does not see it. The Buddha presses him once more: since you do not see dharmas as really existent, why do you ask such a question? Pressed to this point, Subhūti only then speaks out the real intent of his own question.
The treatise section explains following the sūtra, and its bones are in three places. First, why one new to the training is taught to practise ultimate emptiness—the answer lies in the sentence 「譬如小兒服藥，須蜜乃下」 tr. "it is as a small child taking medicine: it needs honey before it can go down": emptiness is not a separate gate taken out and taught by itself; it is combined into giving and keeping morality and swallowed down along with them. Second, what difference there is among the three names practice, training, and path—the treatise-author cites six sayings in a row and does not settle on one, saying at the end only 「如是等，名為三事差別」 tr. "such as these are named the differences of the three matters". Third, why it is named sequence—the answer lies in the simile of climbing a ladder: 「從一初桄漸上，上處雖高雖難，亦能得至。」 tr. "From the first rung one goes up little by little, and though the place above is high and hard, one can still reach it." Only here is the face of the title of the whole unit fully spoken: sequence is not setting emptiness aside to discuss later; it is setting up a ladder within emptiness.
So what is to be read in the Last Part is how two things that look opposite stand side by side—the nature of dharmas is without anything existent, and yet the sequence is plainly there. At the end the treatise-author himself lays down a sentence as the close of the whole unit: 「諸法性雖無所有，而隨世諦行，為破顛倒故。」 tr. "Though the nature of dharmas is without anything existent, one practises following worldly truth, in order to break inversion."
Passage by Passage
1. Subhūti's main question on the sequence of those new to the training. After the continuation title of fascicle 87, the sūtra at once raises a new question. Subhūti first takes up the meaning of the previous fascicle: 「若菩薩摩訶薩知諸法無所有性，因四禪、五神通，得阿耨多羅三藐三菩提」 tr. "suppose a bodhisattva-mahāsattva knows that dharmas are without any existent nature, and by way of the four dhyānas and the five supernormal powers obtains anuttarā samyaksaṃbodhi"; having taken it up, he then puts the main question: 「新學菩薩摩訶薩云何於諸法無所有性中次第行、次第學、次第道，以是次第行、次第學、次第道，得阿耨多羅三藐三菩提？」 tr. "How do bodhisattva-mahāsattvas new to the training, within dharmas that are without any existent nature, practise in sequence, train in sequence, and follow the path in sequence, and by this sequential practice, sequential training, and sequential path obtain anuttarā samyaksaṃbodhi?" First ask a question: how does this question differ from the question of the previous fascicle? The previous fascicle asked about the Buddha and the great bodhisattvas; here what is asked about is 「新學」 tr. "those new to the training". So the point of the question lies not in the principle of emptiness itself but in the measure of the person who is to practise it. In reading this passage, first get ready for one thing: the sequence the Buddha opens below will not be a shallow road set up apart from the principle of emptiness—were it so, it would break into two separate pieces, emptiness going back to emptiness and practice going back to practice.
2. The Buddha's answer, first layer: hearing from the sages and arousing the mind. The Buddha tells Subhūti that the bodhisattva at the very first hears either from the buddhas, or from bodhisattvas who have made many offerings to the buddhas, or from the arhats, anāgāmins, sakṛdāgāmins, and srota-āpannas. What is heard is one set of words: 「得無所有故是佛，得無所有故是阿羅漢、阿那含、斯陀含、須陀洹，一切賢聖皆以得無所有故有名。一切有為作法無所有性，乃至無有如毫末許所有。」 tr. "Because he obtains that nothing exists, he is a Buddha; because they obtain that nothing exists, they are arhats, anāgāmins, sakṛdāgāmins, and srota-āpannas; all the worthies and sages have their names because they obtain that nothing exists. All conditioned, made dharmas are without any existent nature, up to there not being even so much as a hair's tip of anything existent." Having heard, he thinks, and his thought falls into three sections: first he sets the premise—「若一切法無所有性，得無所有故是佛，乃至得無所有故是須陀洹」 tr. "if all dharmas are without any existent nature—because he obtains that nothing exists he is a Buddha, up to because he obtains that nothing exists he is a srota-āpanna"; next he makes the reckoning—「我若當得阿耨多羅三藐三菩提、若不得，一切法常無有性，我何以不發心得阿耨多羅三藐三菩提」 tr. "whether I come to obtain anuttarā samyaksaṃbodhi or do not obtain it, all dharmas are ever without nature; why should I not arouse the mind to obtain anuttarā samyaksaṃbodhi"; last he makes the oath and vow—「得阿耨多羅三藐三菩提已，一切眾生行於有相，當令住無所有中。」 tr. "Having obtained anuttarā samyaksaṃbodhi, since all beings practise within marks, I shall cause them to dwell within there being nothing existent." These three sections should be looked at for their order: it is not that there is first a compassionate vow and then the principle is sought; it is that one first hears a sentence about principle, this sentence presses out a reckoning, and only when the reckoning is done is there the vow. So the beginning of arousing the mind lies not in feeling but in seeing. At the end the Buddha takes what the bodhisattvas of the past practised as proof, making clear that this road is not newly made.
3. General heading of the Buddha's second layer: one should train in the six perfections. 「是新發意菩薩應學六波羅蜜，所謂檀波羅蜜、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。」 tr. "This bodhisattva who has newly aroused the mind should train in the six perfections, namely dānapāramitā, śīlapāramitā, kṣāntipāramitā, vīryapāramitā, dhyānapāramitā, and prajñāpāramitā." This sentence is the headrope of the six passages below. Speaking of the six perfections in order: dāna is giving away; śīla is morality that restrains and upholds; kṣānti is patient bearing; vīrya is vigour without pause; dhyāna is the mind on one object and not scattered; prajñā is the wisdom that penetrates the real mark of all dharmas—all six names are used in common throughout this treatise, and no new meaning is set up for them here. What matters is the two Chinese characters 「應學」 tr. "should train": the passage before has only just said that arousing the mind arises from seeing the principle, and this passage at once comes down to the six perfections; from this it can be seen that the first step of what is called sequence is putting the principle into the most ordinary gates of practice.
4. The sequence of dānapāramitā. The pattern of this passage is the mould for the five passages below, so it must be taken apart section by section. The first section is the four matters: 「自行布施，亦教人行布施，讚歎行布施功德，歡喜讚歎行布施者」 tr. "he himself practises giving, also teaches others to practise giving, praises the merit of practising giving, and rejoices in and praises those who practise giving"—oneself, teaching others, praising the dharma, delighting in people: if one of the four is lacking, it does not make up the four kinds of practice. The second section is the present retribution: 「以是布施因緣故，得大財富」 tr. "through the causes and conditions of this giving he obtains great wealth", with the things given listed alongside—food and drink, clothing, incense, flowers, necklaces, dwellings, bedding, lamps and candles, and all the various things needed to sustain life. The third section is the turning of birth: 「行是布施及持戒，生天、人中，得大尊貴」 tr. "practising this giving and also keeping morality, he is born among gods and humans and obtains great nobility". The fourth section is the accomplishing of the five aggregates: from keeping morality and giving he obtains the aggregate of meditative concentration; from giving, keeping morality, and meditative concentration he obtains the aggregate of wisdom, the aggregate of liberation, and the aggregate of the knowledge and vision of liberation. The fifth section is passing beyond the grounds and entering the position: 「過聲聞、辟支佛地，入菩薩位」 tr. "he passes beyond the grounds of the śrāvakas and the pratyekabuddhas and enters the bodhisattva's position". The sixth section is the Buddha's work: purifying the buddha-land, bringing beings to accomplishment, obtaining the omniscience of all kinds, turning the wheel of the Dharma, and delivering beings from birth and death by the Dharma of the three vehicles. The seventh section takes it away: 「菩薩以是布施，次第行、次第學、次第道，是皆不可得。何以故？自性無所有故。」 tr. "The sequential practice, sequential training, and sequential path that the bodhisattva has by this giving—these are all unfindable. Why? Because self-nature is without anything existent." Of the seven sections, the first six are establishing and the seventh is sweeping away; the sweeping away is not a separate passage on the principle of emptiness spoken outside the six sections; it is attached right at the end of the six sections. This is the fixed pattern by which this chapter speaks of sequence, and the five perfections below are all so.
5. The sequence of śīlapāramitā. The same frame as the dāna passage, with its subject changed: 「自行持戒，教人持戒，讚歎持戒功德，歡喜讚歎行持戒者。」 tr. "He himself keeps morality, teaches others to keep morality, praises the merit of keeping morality, and rejoices in and praises those who practise the keeping of morality." Its difference lies in the middle section—the dāna passage speaks of the things given; this passage speaks of giving the medicine according to the sickness: 「見貧窮者施以財物，不持戒者教令持戒，亂意者教令禪定，愚癡者教令智慧，無解脫者教令解脫，無解脫知見者教令解脫知見。」 tr. "Seeing poor people, he gives them wealth; those who do not keep morality he teaches to keep morality; those of scattered mind he teaches meditative concentration; the deluded he teaches wisdom; those without liberation he teaches liberation; those without the knowledge and vision of liberation he teaches the knowledge and vision of liberation." Six sentences, six sicknesses, six medicines: just this shows that what a person who keeps morality practises does not stop at guarding himself. At the end it is still taken away with 「是事皆不可得。何以故？一切法自性無所有故」 tr. "these matters are all unfindable. Why? Because the self-nature of all dharmas is without anything existent". Here a difference of one Chinese character may be noted: the dāna passage reads 「是皆不可得」 tr. "these are all unfindable", this passage reads 「是事皆不可得」 tr. "these matters are all unfindable"; the sūtra itself is so, and there is no need to force them into line.
6. The sequence of kṣāntipāramitā. 「自行羼提波羅蜜，教人行羼提，讚歎羼提功德，歡喜讚歎行羼提者。」 tr. "He himself practises kṣāntipāramitā, teaches others to practise kṣānti, praises the merit of kṣānti, and rejoices in and praises those who practise kṣānti." The middle section says that while practising patience he still puts giving first—「布施眾生各令滿足，教令持戒，教令禪定乃至解脫知見」 tr. "he gives to beings and lets each of them be satisfied, teaches them to keep morality, teaches them meditative concentration, up to the knowledge and vision of liberation". The words on passing beyond the grounds in this passage read 「過阿羅漢、辟支佛地」 tr. "passes beyond the grounds of the arhats and the pratyekabuddhas", differing in wording from the 「過聲聞、辟支佛地」 tr. "passes beyond the grounds of the śrāvakas and the pratyekabuddhas" of the two passages on dāna and śīla, but pointing to the same thing; the words on the pure land in this passage read 「得淨佛世界」 tr. "obtains a pure buddha-world", while the two passages before read 「得淨佛國土」 tr. "obtains a pure buddha-land". Variant wordings of this kind are unevennesses the sūtra itself has; in reading, it is enough to know that they point to the same thing, and one must not raise a separate explanation because of the difference.
7. The sequence of vīryapāramitā. This passage is the shortest: once the four matters are listed, the middle sections are simply bracketed with 「乃至」 tr. "up to": 「乃至是事不可得，自性無所有故。」 tr. "Up to: this matter is unfindable, because self-nature is without anything existent." First ask a question: why is this passage alone abridged? Because the three passages before have already set up the mould completely, the rest can be known by the pattern, and so the sūtra itself uses an economy of the brush. Here one must guard against a misreading: the economy of the brush does not say that the one perfection of vigour lacks these sections; it says that its items are the same as before. Wherever the sūtra has 「乃至」 tr. "up to", it should all be read in this way.
8. The sequence of dhyānapāramitā. In this passage the object of the four matters is not one dharma but three: 「自入禪、入無量心、入無色定」 tr. "he himself enters the dhyānas, enters the immeasurable minds, enters the formless absorptions", and likewise in teaching others, likewise in praising, likewise in rejoicing and praising. Dhyāna is the four dhyānas of the form realm; the immeasurable minds are the four minds of kindness, compassion, sympathetic joy, and equanimity; the formless absorptions are the absorptions of the four formless states—all three are dharmas of the mind-ground. Having listed the three dharmas, the middle then speaks of dwelling in these three while practising benefit for others: 「住諸禪、定、無量心，布施眾生，各令滿足；教令持戒，教令禪定、智慧。」 tr. "Dwelling within the dhyānas, the absorptions, and the immeasurable minds, he gives to beings and lets each of them be satisfied; he teaches them to keep morality, teaches them meditative concentration and wisdom." From this it can be seen that the perfection of dhyāna is not a matter of closing one's door. At the end it too is taken away with 「乃至是事不可得，自性無所有故」 tr. "up to: this matter is unfindable, because self-nature is without anything existent".
9. The sequence of prajñāpāramitā; this is called the sequential practice, training, and path of a bodhisattva of the first arousing of intent. This passage differs from the five passages before in one place: in the five perfections before, each practises its own perfection, while in this perfection 「自行六波羅蜜，亦教他人令行六波羅蜜，讚歎六波羅蜜功德，歡喜讚歎行六波羅蜜者」 tr. "he himself practises the six perfections, also teaches other people to practise the six perfections, praises the merit of the six perfections, and rejoices in and praises those who practise the six perfections"—what prajñā practises is the six perfections as a whole. Further, the passing beyond the grounds in this passage adds a phrase of its own: 「以是檀波羅蜜、尸羅波羅蜜、羼提波羅蜜、毘梨耶波羅蜜、禪波羅蜜、般若波羅蜜因緣及方便力，過聲聞、辟支佛地，入菩薩位」 tr. "through the causes and conditions of this dānapāramitā, śīlapāramitā, kṣāntipāramitā, vīryapāramitā, dhyānapāramitā, and prajñāpāramitā, together with the power of skilful means, he passes beyond the grounds of the śrāvakas and the pratyekabuddhas and enters the bodhisattva's position"; the four Chinese characters 「及方便力」 tr. "together with the power of skilful means" are not in the five passages before. At the end a summing-up sentence gathers in this layer: 「須菩提！是名初發意菩薩摩訶薩次第行、次第學、次第道。」 tr. "Subhūti! This is called the sequential practice, sequential training, and sequential path of a bodhisattva-mahāsattva of the first arousing of intent."
10. General heading of the Buddha's third layer: the six recollections. 「菩薩摩訶薩從初以來，以一切種智相應心，信解諸法無所有性，修六念，所謂念佛、念法、念僧、念戒、念捨、念天。」 tr. "From the very first onward, the bodhisattva-mahāsattva, with a mind associated with the omniscience of all kinds, believes and understands that dharmas are without any existent nature, and cultivates the six recollections, namely recollection of the Buddha, recollection of the Dharma, recollection of the Saṅgha, recollection of morality, recollection of giving up, and recollection of the gods." The six recollections are among the very oldest gates of practice in the dharmas of the Buddha, yet here two qualifications are added: one is 「以一切種智相應心」 tr. "with a mind associated with the omniscience of all kinds", the other is 「信解諸法無所有性」 tr. "believes and understands that dharmas are without any existent nature". Only with these two qualifications are the six recollections the sequential practice spoken of in this chapter. First ask a question: the six perfections having been spoken of, why speak further of the six recollections? The six perfections are the matters practised; the six recollections are the mind that is bound to them; if the matters have a sequence but the mind is bound to nothing, the matters become outer ornament. In the six gates below, every gate says 「乃至無少許念」 tr. "up to there not being even a little recollection", precisely for this reason.
11. Recollection of the Buddha, first: not recollecting by the five aggregates. 「菩薩摩訶薩念佛，不以色念，不以受、想、行、識念。」 tr. "The bodhisattva-mahāsattva, recollecting the Buddha, does not recollect by form, does not recollect by feeling, perception, constructions, or consciousness." The reason for it: 「是色自性無，受、想、行、識自性無。若法自性無，是為無所有。」 tr. "The self-nature of this form is non-existent, and the self-nature of feeling, perception, constructions, and consciousness is non-existent. If the self-nature of a dharma is non-existent, this is without anything existent." The last sentence matters most: 「何以故？無憶故，是為念佛。」 tr. "Why? Because there is no remembering—this is recollection of the Buddha." First ask a question: recollecting and yet without remembering—is this not self-contradictory? It is not. What is called remembering is tying a mark onto the mind and keeping it; without remembering is the mind turning toward the Buddha without tying a mark. If one takes the five aggregates as the Buddha and recollects them, what is recollected is the five aggregates, not the Buddha. Here one must guard against a slip: not recollecting by the five aggregates does not say that the Buddha has no body of the five aggregates; it says that one may not take the marks of the five aggregates as the object recollected.
12. Recollection of the Buddha, second: not recollecting by the marks and minor signs. 「不以三十二相念，亦不念金色身、不念丈光、不念八十隨形好。」 tr. "He does not recollect by the thirty-two marks, and also does not recollect the golden body, does not recollect the light of one zhang, does not recollect the eighty minor marks." All four are surpassing marks of the Buddha's body: the thirty-two marks are the major marks, the golden body is the colour of the body, the light of one zhang is the light the body sends forth, the eighty minor marks are the fine excellences that come along with the major marks. The reason for it: 「是佛身自性無故。若法無性，是為無所有。」 tr. "Because the self-nature of this Buddha-body is non-existent. If a dharma has no nature, this is without anything existent." The closing words are as before: 「何以故？無憶故，是為念佛。」 tr. "Why? Because there is no remembering—this is recollection of the Buddha." Read this passage together with the one before, and it can be seen that the blocking goes as far as it can go—first it blocks the five aggregates that ordinary persons share, then it blocks the marks and minor signs that the Buddha alone has; if even the marks and minor signs may not be grasped, then there is nothing further that may be grasped. Brought down to practice: one who cultivates recollection of the Buddha and has the marks and minor signs appear before the mind's eye should, right at this point, ask himself one question—is what is recollected the marks, or the Buddha?
13. Recollection of the Buddha, third: not recollecting by the aggregates of merit. 「不應以戒眾念佛，不應以定眾、智慧眾、解脫眾、解脫知見眾念佛。」 tr. "One should not recollect the Buddha by the aggregate of morality; one should not recollect the Buddha by the aggregate of concentration, the aggregate of wisdom, the aggregate of liberation, or the aggregate of the knowledge and vision of liberation." These five aggregates are not the five aggregates of form, feeling, perception, constructions, and consciousness of the passage before; they are the aggregates of the fivefold Dharma body of morality, concentration, wisdom, liberation, and the knowledge and vision of liberation—the former is the body of birth and death, this is the body of merit. The reason for it: 「是眾無有自性。若法無自性，是為非法。」 tr. "These aggregates have no self-nature. If a dharma has no self-nature, this is not a dharma." Here the closing words change to another phrasing: 「無所有念，是為念佛。」 tr. "Recollecting by there being nothing existent—this is recollection of the Buddha." The first two rounds read 「無憶故」 tr. "because there is no remembering"; this round reads 「無所有念」 tr. "recollecting by there being nothing existent"; the words change but the meaning does not differ—all are blocking the grasping at marks.
14. Recollection of the Buddha, fourth: not recollecting by the ten powers, the four fearlessnesses, and the rest. 「不應以十力念佛，不應以四無所畏、四無礙智、十八不共法念佛，不應以大慈大悲念佛。」 tr. "One should not recollect the Buddha by the ten powers; one should not recollect the Buddha by the four fearlessnesses, the four unobstructed knowledges, or the eighteen unshared dharmas; one should not recollect the Buddha by great kindness and great compassion." What is listed are all the Buddha's unshared merits: the ten powers are the ten kinds of decisive power of the Buddha's knowledge and vision; the four fearlessnesses are being without timidity in expounding the Dharma; the four unobstructed knowledges are the four kinds of being unhindered in meaning, dharma, phrasing, and eloquence; the eighteen unshared dharmas are what the Buddha alone has and does not share with the two vehicles; great kindness and great compassion are the virtue of the Buddha's mind. The reason for it: 「是諸法自性無。若法自性無，是為非法。」 tr. "The self-nature of these dharmas is non-existent. If the self-nature of a dharma is non-existent, this is not a dharma." The closing words read 「無所念，是為念佛」 tr. "recollecting nothing—this is recollection of the Buddha". By this point what is blocked has gone from the form body to the Dharma body, and from the Dharma body to the virtue of the mind.
15. Recollection of the Buddha, fifth: not recollecting by the twelve links of causes and conditions. 「不應以十二因緣法念佛。」 tr. "One should not recollect the Buddha by the dharma of the twelve links of causes and conditions." The twelve links of causes and conditions are the dharma of principle that the Buddha realised and spoke. The reason for it: 「是因緣法自性無。若法自性無，是為非法。」 tr. "The self-nature of this dharma of causes and conditions is non-existent. If the self-nature of a dharma is non-existent, this is not a dharma." The closing words still read 「無所念，是為念佛」 tr. "recollecting nothing—this is recollection of the Buddha". First ask a question: what the four rounds before blocked all belonged to the Buddha's body and the Buddha's virtues; why does this round go on to block the dharma of principle? Because a person who recollects the Buddha, falling back to the next best, often takes ‘the principle the Buddha spoke’ as the object recollected, and thinks of himself as not grasping at marks; the sūtra stops up this road too. When the five rounds are exhausted, what remains is only a mind that grasps no dharma whatever and turns toward the Buddha—this is recollection of the Buddha in this chapter.
16. Recollection of the Buddha having been spoken of, it is summed up as sequential practice, and dwelling within it one can fulfil the limbs of the path. 「菩薩摩訶薩行般若波羅蜜時，應念佛，是為菩薩初發意次第行、次第學、次第道。」 tr. "When the bodhisattva-mahāsattva practises prajñāpāramitā, he should recollect the Buddha; this is the sequential practice, sequential training, and sequential path of the bodhisattva of the first arousing of intent." This sums up what is above. The text below turns out a further layer of function: dwelling within this sequence, 「能具足四念處、四正勤、四如意足、五根、五力、七覺分、八聖道分，修行空三昧、無相、無作三昧，乃至一切種智」 tr. "he can fulfil the four foundations of mindfulness, the four right efforts, the four bases of supernormal power, the five faculties, the five powers, the seven limbs of awakening, and the eightfold noble path, and cultivate and practise the emptiness samādhi, the signless samādhi, and the non-action samādhi, up to the omniscience of all kinds"—what is listed is the thirty-seven limbs of the path and the three gates of liberation; the limbs of the path are the general headings of practice, the samādhis are the gates that are entered. Why is this? 「諸法性無所有故。」 tr. "Because the nature of dharmas is without anything existent." The last sentence is the eye of the whole passage: 「是菩薩知諸法性無所有，是中無有性、無無性。」 tr. "This bodhisattva knows that the nature of dharmas is without anything existent; within this there is neither an existent nature nor a non-existent nature." An existent nature is of course blocked, and a non-existent nature is blocked too; if one sets up a 「無性」 tr. "non-existent nature" as something attained, it is still having something to be attained.
17. Recollection of the Dharma. The Buddha opens the gate of recollection of the Dharma and blocks it pair by pair: wholesome dharmas and unwholesome dharmas, determinate dharmas and indeterminate dharmas, worldly dharmas and world-transcending dharmas, pure dharmas and impure dharmas, the dharmas of sages and the dharmas of ordinary persons, dharmas with outflows and dharmas without outflows, the dharmas of the three realms bound to the desire realm, bound to the form realm, and bound to the formless realm, conditioned dharmas and unconditioned dharmas. Among these, seven pairs stand two against two, and the dharmas bound to the three realms are set up separately as three items, making seventeen items in all—all of them the usual headings for judging dharmas in the dharmas of the Buddha. The reason for it: 「是諸法自性無。若法自性無，是為非法。無所念，是為念法。」 tr. "The self-nature of these dharmas is non-existent. If the self-nature of a dharma is non-existent, this is not a dharma. Recollecting nothing—this is recollection of the Dharma." Next it speaks of its fruit: 「念法中學無所有性故，乃至當得一切種智。是菩薩得阿耨多羅三藐三菩提時，得諸法無所有性；是無所有性中，非有相、非無相。」 tr. "Because he trains in the nature without anything existent within recollection of the Dharma, up to his coming in time to obtain the omniscience of all kinds. When this bodhisattva obtains anuttarā samyaksaṃbodhi, he obtains the nature of dharmas without anything existent; within this nature without anything existent there is neither having marks nor the signless." The double negation of the last sentence has the same guarding intent as 「無有性、無無性」 tr. "neither an existent nature nor a non-existent nature" of the passage before. The closing words weigh most: 「於是法中，乃至無少許念，何況念法！」 tr. "Within this Dharma, up to there not being even a little recollection, how much less recollecting the Dharma!" First ask a question: since it says there is not even a little recollection, what use do the two Chinese characters 「念法」 tr. "recollection of the Dharma" still have? They have a use. What is blocked is adding recollection upon recollection; what is kept is not grasping a single dharma while the mind does not leave the Dharma.
18. Recollection of the Saṅgha. This gate is the shortest: 「菩薩摩訶薩念僧，無為法故分別有佛弟子眾，是中乃至無有少許念，何況念僧！」 tr. "The bodhisattva-mahāsattva, recollecting the Saṅgha, distinguishes that there is the assembly of the Buddha's disciples because of the unconditioned dharma; within this, up to there not being even a little recollection, how much less recollecting the Saṅgha!" Within the one sentence there is a joint: what makes the Saṅgha the Saṅgha is not the number of people, not the marks of the robe; it is distinguished as existing because of 「無為法」 tr. "the unconditioned dharma". The unconditioned dharma is the quiescence that the worthies and sages realise in common; those who realise this in common are named the assembly of the Buddha's disciples. So recollection of the Saṅgha is not recollecting a group of people; it is recollecting that which makes them the Saṅgha. Since it is unconditioned, there is no mark that can be grasped, and so it still comes back to 「無有少許念」 tr. "there not being even a little recollection".
19. Recollection of morality. 「從初發意已來，應念聖戒——無缺戒、無隙戒、無瑕戒、無濁戒、無著戒、自在戒、智者所讚戒、具足戒、隨定戒。」 tr. "From the first arousing of intent onward, he should recollect noble morality—morality without breach, morality without crack, morality without flaw, morality without turbidity, morality without clinging, sovereign morality, morality praised by the wise, complete morality, and morality that accords with concentration." The nine items, put one by one into present-day words: without breach is not broken or damaged; without crack is without leaking gaps; without flaw is without stain or blemish; without turbidity is not mixed; without clinging is keeping it without clinging to the mark of keeping; sovereign is keeping it without constraint or pressure; praised by the wise is according with what people of knowledge approve; complete is all the precepts being perfectly provided; according with concentration is keeping it in accord with the concentrated mind. The nine items go from coarse to fine: the first four speak of its purity, the middle two speak of its mind, the last three speak of its accomplishment. At the end it is still gathered into 「應念是戒無所有性，乃至無少許念，何況念戒！」 tr. "He should recollect that this morality is without any existent nature, up to there not being even a little recollection, how much less recollecting morality!" When one keeps morality and recollects the marks of morality, morality turns into a bond instead; this gate treats precisely this sickness.
20. Recollection of giving up. 「應念捨——若自念捨、若念他捨，若捨財、若捨法、若捨煩惱；……」 tr. "He should recollect giving up—whether recollecting his own giving up or recollecting the giving up of others, whether it is giving up wealth, giving up the Dharma, or giving up the afflictions; ……" The first two items speak of persons, the last three speak of things: giving up wealth is the outer, giving up the Dharma is the inner, giving up the afflictions is the root. The order of the three is clear—if wealth is not given up, the Dharma cannot be given up; if the Dharma is not given up, the root of the afflictions is not moved. The reason for it: 「觀是捨不可得故，乃至無少許念，何況念捨！」 tr. "Because he contemplates this giving up as unfindable, up to there not being even a little recollection, how much less recollecting giving up!" First ask a question: having already given up, why recollect giving up as well? An ordinary person practises giving up and his mind keeps a record of his own giving up; this record is precisely grasping; what the sūtra blocks is exactly this record.
21. Recollection of the gods. This gate uses a passage of words for the recollecting: 「四天王諸天所有信、戒、施、聞、慧，此間命終，生彼天處；我亦有是信、戒、施、聞、慧。乃至他化自在天所有信、戒、施、聞、慧，此間命終，生彼天處；我亦有是信、戒、施、聞、慧。」 tr. "The faith, morality, giving, learning, and wisdom possessed by the gods of the Four Heavenly Kings—having ended their lives here, they were born in that heavenly place; I too have such faith, morality, giving, learning, and wisdom. Up to the faith, morality, giving, learning, and wisdom possessed by the gods Sovereign over Others' Transformations—having ended their lives here, they were born in that heavenly place; I too have such faith, morality, giving, learning, and wisdom." The five—faith, morality, giving, learning, and wisdom—are the causes of being born in the heavens. The Heaven of the Four Heavenly Kings is the first of the six heavens of the desire realm, the heaven of the gods Sovereign over Others' Transformations is the last of the six heavens of the desire realm; the first and the last are named, and the four heavens in between are within them. The method of recollecting the gods is comparing the five things the gods have with one's own five things and knowing that the causes are the same. Yet the closing words still take it away: 「應念是天無所有性中尚無少許念，何況念天！」 tr. "He should recollect these gods as without any existent nature; within this there is still not even a little recollection, how much less recollecting the gods!" Comparing without clinging—this is the measure of recollecting the gods.
22. The six recollections being finished, they are summed up as sequence. 「菩薩摩訶薩行是六念，是名次第行、次第學、次第道。」 tr. "The bodhisattva-mahāsattva's practising these six recollections—this is called sequential practice, sequential training, and sequential path." The six recollections go from the Buddha to the Dharma, to the Saṅgha, to morality, to giving up, and to the gods—from the most honoured to the nearest at hand; each one comes back to 「無少許念」 tr. "not even a little recollection". So what makes the six recollections a sequence lies not in their being six but in their being threaded together—what threads them together is the one line of 「無所有性」 tr. "the nature without anything existent".
23. Subhūti raises a difficulty: if there is the nature without anything existent, then there is no path, no knowledge, no fruit. Subhūti lists one by one the dharmas recollected: form up to consciousness, the eye up to the mind, form up to dharmas, the eye-element up to the mind-consciousness-element, dānapāramitā up to prajñāpāramitā, inner emptiness up to the emptiness of non-existent and existent dharmas, the four foundations of mindfulness up to the eightfold noble path, the Buddha's ten powers up to the omniscience of all kinds—from the five aggregates, the six faculties, the six sense-objects, and the eighteen elements, to the six perfections, the emptinesses, the limbs of the path, and the dharmas of the Buddha, there is not one that is not without any existent nature. Since all are without anything existent, he then passes a verdict: 「若一切法無所有性者，是則無道、無智、無果。」 tr. "If all dharmas are without any existent nature, then there is no path, no knowledge, no fruit." The three things are all taken away together: the path is the road that is practised, knowledge is the wisdom that can practise, the fruit is the place that is reached. The weight of this difficulty lies in its being inferred along the line of the Buddha's own words.
24. The Buddha answers with a counter-question. The Buddha does not break what he has set up, but asks a question: 「汝見是色性實有不？乃至一切種智實有不？」 tr. "Do you see this nature of form as really existent? Up to: is the omniscience of all kinds really existent?" Subhūti answers: 「不見也！世尊！」 tr. "I do not see it, World-Honored One!" The Buddha presses again: 「汝若不見諸法實有，云何作是問？」 tr. "Since you do not see dharmas as really existent, why do you ask this question?" Between the three utterances the difficulty has dissolved of itself—what is put as a difficulty is ‘if there are no real dharmas, there is no path and no fruit’, and the one who raises the difficulty himself admits that he does not see that there are real dharmas; since he does not see real dharmas, then the matter of ‘there being no real dharmas’ is not a new view the Buddha has added, but what he himself had granted from the start. What the Buddha breaks is not the content of the question but the posture of the question. The pattern of this passage is of a kind with the way the Buddha answered Subhūti in the fascicle of the First Part: he infers from what the other has set up, and does not set up a separate principle to contend with him.
25. Subhūti makes clear the intent of his question: he asks for the sake of the people of the world to come. Subhūti lays himself open in three layers. The first layer makes clear that he himself has no doubt: 「我於是法不敢有疑」 tr. "I dare not have doubt about this Dharma". The second layer says for whom it is: 「但為當來世諸比丘求聲聞、辟支佛道、菩薩道者」 tr. "it is only for the sake of those bhikṣus in the world to come who seek the path of the śrāvakas, the path of the pratyekabuddhas, and the path of the bodhisattvas"; those people will say these words—「若一切法無所有性，誰垢誰淨？誰縛誰解？」 tr. "If all dharmas are without any existent nature, who is stained and who is pure? Who is bound and who is released?" The third layer speaks of its harm: 「是不知不解故而破於戒、破正見、破威儀、破淨命；是人破此事故，當墮三惡道。」 tr. "Because of this not knowing and not understanding, they break morality, break right view, break deportment, break pure livelihood; because they break these things, those people will fall into the three evil destinies." The four things—morality, right view, deportment, and pure livelihood—are all broken, and their order goes from the inner to the outer—once view is broken, conduct follows it. At the end he states once more: 「我於是法中信，不疑不悔。」 tr. "In this Dharma I have faith; I do not doubt and do not regret." This passage settles the character of the whole difficulty: it is a question that protects the Dharma, not a question of disputation.
26. The treatise-author explains the intent of Subhūti's question. At the start of the treatise section it is marked at once with 「釋曰：」 tr. "Explanation:", and it first explains Subhūti's mind: 「須菩提伏受佛語，一切諸法雖空，而能起四禪、神通，是大菩薩近成佛者能行；今未知新發意者云何行，是故疑，問佛：……」 tr. "Subhūti subdued himself and received the Buddha's words—though all dharmas are empty, one can still give rise to the four dhyānas and the supernormal powers; this is something the great bodhisattvas near to becoming a Buddha can practise; now he did not yet know how those who have newly aroused the mind should practise, and for this reason doubted, and asked the Buddha: ……" The two Chinese characters 「伏受」 tr. "subdued himself and received" should be looked at—it is not being forced into submission; it is subduing his own feeling of doubt and receiving it. Having received it, why ask further? What he doubts is no longer the principle but the person: in the principle he already has faith enough; he only does not know where a person of the beginning mind sets down his foot.
27. What is meant by new to the training. 「以次第行、次第學、次第道故，當知是新發意菩薩；雖無量劫發意，未得諸法實相，皆名新學。」 tr. "Because of sequential practice, sequential training, and sequential path, one should know that this is a bodhisattva who has newly aroused the mind; though he has aroused the intent for immeasurable kalpas, so long as he has not yet obtained the real mark of all dharmas, he is called new to the training." This sentence breaks a common error: thinking that being new to the training means the time in kalpas is short. The treatise-author judges it most clearly—new and old are judged not by the time in kalpas but by whether or not one has obtained the real mark. Though one has aroused the intent through immeasurable kalpas, if one has not yet obtained the real mark one is still called new to the training; and the reverse is likewise so. Brought down to practice: there is no need to measure oneself by how long or short one's years have been; only ask whether the real mark has been seen or not.
28. Question and answer one: why one new to the training is made to practise ultimate emptiness. The treatise-author sets a question for himself: 「若如是人是新學，但應教行布施、持戒等，佛何以教令於諸法無所有畢竟空性中行？」 tr. "If such a person is new to the training, he should only be taught to practise giving, keeping morality, and such matters; why does the Buddha teach him to practise within the nature of dharmas that is without anything existent and ultimately empty?" The answer has two sections. The first section says why: 「今明始入無所有、畢竟空法故，令行無所有。」 tr. "It is now in order to make clear the beginning of entry into the dharma of there being nothing existent and ultimate emptiness that he is made to practise there being nothing existent." The second section says the method: 「而是菩薩以無所有畢竟空和合布施、持戒等行」 tr. "and this bodhisattva combines the practices of giving, keeping morality, and the rest with there being nothing existent and ultimate emptiness", and makes it clear with a simile—「譬如小兒服藥，須蜜乃下。」 tr. "It is as a small child taking medicine: it needs honey before it can go down." The point this simile takes lies in the two Chinese characters 「和合」 tr. "combines": the medicine is emptiness, the honey is giving and keeping morality; it is not taking the honey first and the medicine afterwards; it is mixing them in one place and swallowing them down. The closing words: 「是故雖新發意，亦觀深空，無咎。」 tr. "For this reason, though he has newly aroused the mind, he also contemplates deep emptiness, and there is no fault." Here one must guard against a misreading: in the simile emptiness is taken as the medicine and the practice of matters as the honey; it does not say that the practice of matters is the sweet part and emptiness is a bitter affair; it says that the meaning of emptiness is hard to take in, and so one borrows the practice of matters to enter it.
29. Taking up the sūtra to explain the people from whom one hears. The treatise-author takes up a sentence of the sūtra and explains it further: 「佛答須菩提：「菩薩若初從諸佛聞，若從多供養諸佛者聞。」」 tr. "The Buddha answered Subhūti: ‘The bodhisattva hears it at the very first from the buddhas, or hears it from those who have made many offerings to the buddhas.’" Having taken it up, he explains it item by item: 「諸佛者，若過去、若現在」 tr. "as for the buddhas: either those of the past or those of the present"—it does not extend to the future, because the buddhas of the future have not yet appeared in the world. 「多供養諸佛者，遍吉、觀世音、得大勢菩薩、文殊師利、彌勒菩薩等」 tr. "as for those who have made many offerings to the buddhas: Samantabhadra, Avalokiteśvara, the Bodhisattva Mahāsthāmaprāpta, Mañjuśrī, the Bodhisattva Maitreya, and others"—what is named are all names of great bodhisattvas; this is the constant way of this treatise in explaining the sūtra, making clear the class by actual examples. 「四種聲聞聖人義，如先說」 tr. "the meaning of the four kinds of śrāvaka sages is as spoken of before"—the meaning of the four fruits has been explained in an earlier passage, and is not brought out again here. The last sentence most deserves attention: 「辟支佛不樂說法故，不說。」 tr. "The pratyekabuddhas are not mentioned, because they do not delight in expounding the Dharma." Among those able to speak listed in the sūtra there is no pratyekabuddha, and the treatise-author points out specially why it is so; what the sūtra does not have, the treatise-author explains as well—this is a fine point of this treatise.
30. The sages all have their differences because of there being nothing existent, because of nirvāṇa. First a general statement: 「諸佛等聖人皆因無所有故有是分別。」 tr. "The buddhas and the other sages all have such distinctions because of there being nothing existent." Next he explains the reason separately: 「聖人雖有禪定等諸功德，皆為涅槃故。涅槃即是寂滅相、無所有法，……」 tr. "Though the sages have meditative concentration and all manner of merits, these are all for the sake of nirvāṇa. Nirvāṇa is the mark of quiescence, the dharma of there being nothing existent, ……" At the end he takes it up and concludes: 「是故說：「諸聖人，皆因涅槃有是差別。」」 tr. "For this reason it is said: ‘All the sages have such differences because of nirvāṇa.’" The line of reasoning of this passage should be seen clearly: what divides the sages into the four fruits and the fruit of Buddhahood is not how much merit they have obtained but the nirvāṇa toward which they tend; and nirvāṇa is precisely being without anything existent. So the sentence 「賢聖皆以得無所有故有名」 tr. "the worthies and sages all have their names because they obtain that nothing exists" is not abstruse talk; it is said with reference to where the sages tend.
31. All conditioned, made dharmas have no fixed nature. 「一切有為作法從因緣和合生起故有，無有實定性乃至如毫末許所有。」 tr. "All conditioned, made dharmas exist because they arise from the coming together of causes and conditions, and have no really fixed nature, up to there not being even so much as a hair's tip of anything existent." Next it divides into two gates and refutes: 「有為有二種：一者、色，二者、無色。色法破壞，分別乃至微塵，無有定實；無色法中，乃至無有一念定實。」 tr. "The conditioned is of two kinds: first, form; second, the formless. Dharmas of form can be broken; when analysed down to fine particles, there is nothing fixed and real; within formless dharmas, up to there being not a single thought that is fixed and real." Dharmas of form are refuted by analysing them to the utmost minuteness; formless dharmas are refuted by their not abiding for an instant—one across and one along, the two roads of refuting dharmas. At the end it says 「破義，如上說」 tr. "the meaning of the refutation is as spoken of above", pointing to the broad refutation of the earlier text, which is not repeated here. Brought down to practice: this passage is the footnote to 「毫末許所有」 tr. "so much as a hair's tip of anything existent" in the passage before; wherever the sūtra has a phrase and the treatise-author divides it into gates and refutes it, it should all be read in this way.
32. Why one hears only from the sages. 「是菩薩從諸佛聖人聞是法，餘人多以著心說，諸聖人以無著心說，是故但從聖人聞。」 tr. "This bodhisattva hears this Dharma from the buddhas and the sages, because the other people mostly speak with a clinging mind, while the sages speak with a mind without clinging; for this reason he hears only from the sages." This passage answers a question that was not asked: since the Dharma is the Dharma, does it make a difference from whom one hears it? It does. With one and the same sentence, 「一切法無所有」 tr. "all dharmas are without anything existent", when it is spoken with a clinging mind, what the hearer gets is an emptiness that can be clung to; when it is spoken with a mind without clinging, what the hearer gets cannot be clung to. So choosing a teacher is not choosing his words; it is choosing his mind.
33. The reckoning of the bodhisattva of sequential training. This passage is the reckoning of arousing the mind and most deserves close reading. First it speaks of his knowledge: 「以比智籌量決定，知諸法究竟必空，皆入佛所得實相中，所謂寂滅、無戲論相。」 tr. "With subsequent knowledge he reckons and decides, and knows that dharmas are in the end certainly empty and all enter into the real mark the Buddha obtained, namely the mark of quiescence and of no idle discourse." Subsequent knowledge is knowing by comparing and inferring from what has been heard; it is not direct realisation. Next he sets up his reckoning: 「我若得作佛、若不作佛，一等無異。」 tr. "Whether I come to become a Buddha or do not become a Buddha, the two are equal and without difference." Why equal? 「諸法實相不增不減，更無新法可得故，法亦不失。」 tr. "Because the real mark of all dharmas neither increases nor decreases, there being no further new dharma to obtain, and no dharma is lost either." Going in one layer further, even the beings to be delivered and the merit to be cultivated enter into the reckoning: 「若度眾生，眾生畢竟空，本末不可得；我所願、所作功德及成佛時神通力皆如夢、如幻故，無一定實相，畢竟空。」 tr. "As for delivering beings: beings are ultimately empty, and root and branch they are unfindable; the vows I make, the merit I perform, and the power of the supernormal powers at the time of becoming a Buddha are all like a dream, like an illusion, and so there is no fixed and real mark—they are ultimately empty." The reckoning being exhausted, he then turns out the conclusion: 「得、不得雖同，我何以不發心作佛？」 tr. "Since obtaining and not obtaining are the same, why should I not arouse the mind to become a Buddha?" First ask a question: why is this conclusion not ‘since they are the same, there is no need to arouse the mind’? Because 「同」 tr. "the same" means that either side is equally possible, not that one side alone is possible; since no single dharma obstructs me, arousing the mind meets no obstruction. This is the first vital point of this unit, and the two rounds of question and answer below come out of it.
34. Question and answer two: what hindrance ultimate emptiness is to arousing the mind. The treatise-author sets a question for himself: 「若知諸法畢竟空、無所有者，云何復言「我何以不發心作佛」？」 tr. "If one knows that dharmas are ultimately empty and without anything existent, why does it further say ‘why should I not arouse the mind to become a Buddha’?" The answer says: 「畢竟空，無所有，無所障礙，何妨發心作佛？」 tr. "Ultimate emptiness is without anything existent and has nothing that obstructs; how does it hinder arousing the mind to become a Buddha?" This answer only pushes the meaning of the word 「無所有」 tr. "without anything existent" to its full: without anything existent means that even 「障礙」 tr. "obstruction" is not there. The one raising the difficulty has secretly treated emptiness as a powerful thing that can cancel arousing the mind; the treatise-author points out that emptiness has no such power, and no such substance either.
35. If emptiness could obstruct, it would be an existent nature. 「復次，若說畢竟空，滅諸戲論，云何障發心？若障，即是有性，云何言無所有性？」 tr. "Again, if it is said that ultimate emptiness extinguishes all idle discourse, how could it obstruct arousing the mind? If it obstructs, that is an existent nature; how then can it be called the nature without anything existent?" This is another way of pressing the same meaning, and a tighter one: supposing emptiness really could obstruct arousing the mind, then emptiness itself would become a real entity with a function, and then it would not be called the nature without anything existent. So the saying ‘emptiness obstructs arousing the mind’ contradicts itself. Brought down to practice: whoever, through hearing of emptiness, feels that all things are pointless should examine himself by this sentence—that thing which makes you feel it pointless, you are using as if it really existed.
36. Question and answer three: why not dwell at ease, rather than arouse the mind and undergo suffering. The question says: 「若不障發心，亦應不障不發心，菩薩何不安住而發心受諸勤苦？」 tr. "If it does not obstruct arousing the mind, it should equally not obstruct not arousing the mind; why does the bodhisattva not dwell at ease, but arouse the mind and undergo all manner of toil and suffering?" This question is very sharp: since neither side is obstructed, why take precisely the one with suffering? The answer falls into three sections, and this is the first—「有人言：是菩薩有種種因緣應發心」 tr. "Someone says: this bodhisattva has various causes and conditions for which he should arouse the mind", and what is cited is the suffering of relatives and friends: 「或以多諸親屬知識皆不聞、不知、不得是諸法實相，是故今世、後世受諸苦惱；我幸有力，能使是人得離眾苦。」 tr. "Perhaps because he has many relatives and friends who have never heard, never known, never obtained this real mark of all dharmas, and for this reason undergo all manner of suffering and vexation in this life and in later lives; ‘I fortunately have the strength to let these people get free of all suffering.’" And it makes this clear with a simile: 「譬如人得好良藥，親里知識受諸病苦，云何不與？」 tr. "It is as a person who has obtained an excellent good medicine, while his kin and friends are undergoing all manner of pains of sickness: how could he not give it to them?" It concludes: 「是故菩薩雖知諸法性無所有，因親里故而發心，利益眾生。」 tr. "For this reason, though the bodhisattva knows that the nature of dharmas is without anything existent, he arouses the mind for the sake of his kin, and benefits beings." The reasoning of this section does not lie in high places: though no dharma presses me to arouse the mind, there are living people within suffering—this is why one arouses it.
37. The second section: arousing the mind because one is himself not yet ripe. 「菩薩復作是念：「我雖聞諸法實相，心未深入，未有禪定，智慧未熟，受諸苦惱。」是故發心求阿耨多羅三藐三菩提，集諸功德，以無所有法作證，自為，亦為他人。」 tr. "The bodhisattva further has this thought: ‘Though I have heard of the real mark of all dharmas, my mind has not yet entered it deeply; I do not yet have meditative concentration, my wisdom is not yet ripe, and I undergo all manner of suffering and vexation.’ For this reason he arouses the mind and seeks anuttarā samyaksaṃbodhi, gathers all manner of merit, and takes the dharma of there being nothing existent as his realisation, for himself and also for others." The section before was for others; this section takes in oneself as well. What is called 「心未深入」 tr. "the mind has not yet entered it deeply" is having heard and not yet realised; having heard and not yet realised, suffering and vexation are still there, and so one must arouse the mind to cultivate and gather. The last phrase 「自為，亦為他人」 tr. "for himself and also for others" is the joining of the two sections. Here one must guard against a misreading: saying 「自為」 tr. "for himself" does not say that the bodhisattva seeks pleasure for himself; it says that he does not deceive himself about where he is not yet ripe.
38. The third section: dwelling within the equality of beings and the equality of dharmas, and enemy and kin being equal. 「是菩薩復聞大乘深義，住眾生等、法等中，無別異心，可得佛。」 tr. "This bodhisattva further hears the deep meaning of the Great Vehicle, dwells within the equality of beings and the equality of dharmas, has no mind of separate difference, and can attain buddhahood." Below it explains why: 「是菩薩以畢竟空心，煩惱微薄、怨親平等」 tr. "this bodhisattva, with the mind of ultimate emptiness, has slight and thin afflictions, and enemy and kin are equal", and records his thought: 「怨親無定，以因緣故，親或為怨，怨或為親。」 tr. "Enemy and kin are not fixed; because of causes and conditions, kin at times become enemies, and enemies at times become kin." From this he fulfils the pāramitā of patience, 「得作佛。由何而得？由忍怨故。是以菩薩視怨如親。」 tr. "and obtains becoming a Buddha. From what is it obtained? It is obtained from bearing with enemies. Therefore the bodhisattva regards enemies as kin." Next it makes this clear with two similes: 「譬如欲過嶮道，應當敬重頂戴導師；又如良醫雖賤，為貴者所重。」 tr. "It is as one who wishes to pass through a dangerous road should respect and carry on his head the guide; and as a good physician, though lowly, is valued by the noble." The first simile takes its having no choice but to rely; the second takes its being valued though lowly. At the end it records his reflection: 「中人、怨家，雖於我無用，而是佛道因緣。」 tr. "Middling people and enemies, though they are of no use to me, are causes and conditions of the Buddha-path." Look at the three sections together, and the conditions for arousing the mind are three: because of the suffering of kin, because one is oneself not yet ripe, and because enemy and kin are equal and so patience is accomplished—one facing outward, one facing inward, one facing the enemy.
39. Concluding the sequence of the first layer. 「是名一種次第行、次第學、次第道。是故以過去菩薩所行為證。」 tr. "This is called one kind of sequential practice, sequential training, and sequential path. For this reason what the bodhisattvas of the past practised is taken as the proof." What is called 「一種」 tr. "one kind" is the sequence of the one gate of arousing the mind; below, the six perfections and the six recollections are each one kind. This sentence answers to the phrase of the sūtra 「如過去諸菩薩摩訶薩所行道」 tr. "just like the path practised by the bodhisattva-mahāsattvas of the past", making clear that it is not newly created.
40. The rise of question and answer four, and the first saying. The question says: 「次第行、次第學、次第道有何差別？」 tr. "What difference is there among sequential practice, sequential training, and sequential path?" This question is the joint of the names and marks of the whole unit. In the answer he lists the sayings in a row and does not settle at once; the first saying is: 「有人言：無差別；若行、若學、若道，義一而語異。」 tr. "Someone says: there is no difference; whether practice, whether training, whether path—the meaning is one and the words differ." This saying takes their sameness: the three names are only three ways of saying one matter. First, establish that this saying has its use—it guards against people forcing distinctions of rank upon the three names and losing their single thread.
41. The second saying: beginning, middle, and end. 「有人言：初名行，中名學，後名道。」 tr. "Someone says: the beginning is named practice, the middle is named training, the end is named path." This saying takes their time: one and the same matter divided into three portions, before and after. Set against the first saying, one holds to sameness and one holds to difference; the treatise-author sets them side by side and does not judge—this is the constant way of this treatise toward the differing sayings from of old.
42. The third saying: giving, keeping morality, wisdom. 「行名布施，學名持戒，道名智慧。」 tr. "Practice is named giving, training is named keeping morality, path is named wisdom." This saying matches the three names with three matters. Giving comes at the beginning, so it is named practice; keeping morality requires restraining the mind continuously, so it is named training; wisdom is where one arrives, so it is named path.
43. The fourth saying: keeping morality, meditative concentration, wisdom. 「復次，行名持戒，學名禪定，道名智慧。」 tr. "Again, practice is named keeping morality, training is named meditative concentration, path is named wisdom." This saying advances one step on the saying before: it matches them with the three trainings of morality, concentration, and wisdom. Compared with the saying before, the saying before starts from giving, this saying starts from keeping morality; the dharmas matched differ, but the intent of dividing into three is the same.
44. The fifth saying: the eightfold noble path divided into three parts. 「行名正語、正業、正命，學名正精進、正念、正定，道名正見、正思惟。」 tr. "Practice is named right speech, right action, and right livelihood; training is named right effort, right mindfulness, and right concentration; path is named right view and right thought." Having matched them, the treatise-author further explains why: 「此八事雖名為道，然分別有三分：正見是道體；發起是道，名正思惟。正語、正業、正命，助益正見，故名為行。正精進、正念、正定，能成就正見，使令牢固，是名學。」 tr. "Though these eight things are named the path, when distinguished they have three parts: right view is the body of the path; what gives rise to the path is named right thought. Right speech, right action, and right livelihood aid right view, and so are named practice. Right effort, right mindfulness, and right concentration can accomplish right view and make it firm; this is named training." This explanation is most clear: one is the body, one gives rise, three aid, three accomplish. What is called the body of the path means that among the eight things right view alone is what they rest on, and the other seven are all set up around it. Brought down to practice: if one applies effort without knowing which is the body, the seven limbs all become scattered matters.
45. The sixth saying: the six perfections matched with the three names. 「有人言：檀波羅蜜、毘梨耶波羅蜜名為行，初入道故。尸羅波羅蜜名為學」 tr. "Someone says: dānapāramitā and vīryapāramitā are named practice, because they are the first entry into the path. Śīlapāramitā is named training", and the reason for it: 「人心常隨五欲難禁難制，無須臾停息，漸以尸羅波羅蜜、禪波羅蜜制伏其心，是故名學。」 tr. "The human mind constantly chases after the five desires, is hard to restrain and hard to control, and does not rest for a moment; little by little, by śīlapāramitā and dhyānapāramitā, one subdues one's mind, and for this reason it is named training." 「羼提波羅蜜、般若波羅蜜名為道。何以故？忍為善，般若為智慧，善、智具足故名道。」 tr. "Kṣāntipāramitā and prajñāpāramitā are named path. Why? Patience is goodness, prajñā is wisdom; because goodness and wisdom are complete, it is named path." At the end it concludes with a simile: 「譬如人有眼有足，隨意所至。」 tr. "It is as a person who has eyes and has feet, and reaches wherever he wishes." The eyes stand for prajñā, the feet stand for patience—with wisdom and without patience one cannot walk; with patience and without wisdom one does not know where to go.
46. The general gathering of the six sayings. 「如是等，名為三事差別。」 tr. "Such as these are named the differences of the three matters." The three Chinese characters 「如是等」 tr. "such as these" are the vital point: the six sayings cited are not exhaustive; they are examples. Here the treatise-author does not judge high and low, nor does he set up a saying of his own. Here one must guard against a misreading: not judging is not vagueness; what is at issue here lies in the names, not in the meaning—the marks of practice that the six sayings point to in fact run through one another, and forcibly fixing one saying would instead lose their running through.
47. Question and answer five: why it is named sequence; the simile of climbing a ladder. The question says: 「何以名次第？」 tr. "Why is it named sequence?" In the answer he first sets out the intent of Subhūti's question: 「以須菩提意：若一切法無所有，初發心菩薩於是空法中云何能漸次第學？以是故說次第。」 tr. "According to Subhūti's intent: if all dharmas are without anything existent, how can a bodhisattva of the first arousing of the mind, within this empty dharma, train little by little in sequence? For this reason sequence is spoken of." Next he sets up the right meaning: 「諸法雖空難解，次第行得力故，能得成就；……」 tr. "Though dharmas are empty and hard to understand, because sequential practice gains strength, one can reach accomplishment; ……" At the end he makes it clear with a simile: 「譬如緣梯，從一初桄漸上，上處雖高雖難，亦能得至。」 tr. "It is as climbing a ladder: from the first rung one goes up little by little, and though the place above is high and hard, one can still reach it." The point this simile takes lies in the two Chinese characters 「初桄」 tr. "the first rung"—what makes a ladder a ladder is not its height but its having a first step that can be trodden on. The difficulty of emptiness lies not in its being hard to understand but in there being no place to set one's hand to; sequence is precisely giving emptiness a place to set one's hand to. Read this simile together with the simile of the small child taking medicine before: that one says emptiness must be combined with the practice of matters to be entered; this one says the practice of matters must be climbed step by step.
48. Sequential practice is practising the six perfections in four kinds of practice. 「次第行者，四種行六波羅蜜，如經中說。」 tr. "The one who practises in sequence practises the six perfections in four kinds of practice, as the sūtra says." This sentence is the headrope of the text below. What are called the four kinds are the four matters of the sūtra, ‘himself practising, teaching others, praising, rejoicing and praising’; the ten-odd passages below all explain these four matters, taking dānapāramitā as the example. The treatise-author's method of explaining the sūtra can be seen here: the sūtra lists the six perfections side by side; the treatise-author takes one of them alone and explains it in detail, and the rest are known by the example.
49. Why dāna is practised in four ways. The treatise-author takes up the four phrases of the sūtra: 「自行檀，教人行檀，讚檀功德，歡喜讚行檀」 tr. "he himself practises dāna, teaches others to practise dāna, praises the merit of dāna, and rejoices in and praises those who practise dāna", and explains the four reasons he can practise them: 「善拔慳貪根，深愛檀波羅蜜，慈悲於眾生，通達諸法實相；以此因緣故，能四種行檀波羅蜜。」 tr. "He has well pulled up the root of stinginess and greed, deeply loves dānapāramitā, is kind and compassionate toward beings, and penetrates the real mark of all dharmas; because of these causes and conditions, he can practise dānapāramitā in four ways." The four causes, put one by one into present-day words: pulling up the root of stinginess and greed is removing the root of why one does not give; deeply loving dāna is giving rise to delight in the dharma of giving; being kind and compassionate toward beings is the giving having something it turns toward; penetrating the real mark is giving without grasping the mark of giving. The four causes go from shallow to deep, and the last cause is precisely the meaning of this chapter.
50. The various cases of not being able to complete the four matters. This passage lists from the reverse side the cases of not completing them, and each one has its cause of sickness. First, practising it himself but unable to teach others—「或畏他瞋，或畏為己教布施以之為恩」 tr. "either he fears others' anger, or he fears that others will take his urging them to give, done for their own sake, as a favour"; both sicknesses lie in scruples. Second, 「教人布施，自不能施」 tr. "he teaches others to give but cannot himself give". Third, 「種種讚歎布施之德，勸人令施而不能自行」 tr. "in all manner of ways he praises the virtue of giving and urges people to give, but cannot himself practise it". Fourth, 「自行布施，亦教人布施、稱讚布施之德，而見人布施不能歡喜」 tr. "he himself practises giving, also teaches others to give and praises the virtue of giving, yet seeing others give cannot rejoice", and its sickness lies in 「或有破戒惡人行施而不喜見」 tr. "perhaps there is a precept-breaking evil person practising giving, and he does not like to see it". Fifth, 「喜見施主而不讚歎」 tr. "he likes to see a donor but does not praise him", and its sickness lies in 「以其邪見不識施果故」 tr. "because he holds wrong views and does not recognise the fruit of giving". It concludes: 「如是，各各不能具足。」 tr. "Thus each of them is unable to complete them." The list of five cases is made by lacking the four matters one by one, and in reading it should be set against the four matters of the passage before.
51. The bodhisattva can practise the four matters and teaches beings to do it themselves. 「菩薩大悲心、深愛善法故，能行四事，如上說。」 tr. "Because the bodhisattva has the mind of great compassion and deeply loves wholesome dharmas, he can practise the four matters, as spoken of above." Next it says why teaching others is necessary: 「菩薩若但自布施、不教他人，但能今世少許利益。是眾生隨業因緣墮貧窮處，……」 tr. "If the bodhisattva only gave himself and did not teach others, he could give only a little benefit in this life. These beings, following the causes and conditions of their deeds, fall into a place of poverty, ……" So the bodhisattva teaches them, saying: 「我不惜財物，我雖多施汝，汝亦不得持至後世；汝今當自作，後當自得。」 tr. "I do not begrudge wealth; though I give you much, you still cannot take it with you into later lives; you should now do it yourselves, and later you will obtain it yourselves." These words are the eye of the whole passage—giving things relieves only for a time; teaching them to do it themselves relieves their later lives. At the end it says why he rejoices: 「見行施者雖是破戒惡人，但念其好心布施之德，不念其惡，是故歡喜讚歎。」 tr. "Seeing one who practises giving, even if he is a precept-breaking evil person, he thinks only of the virtue of his good mind in giving and does not think of his evil; for this reason he rejoices and praises." This answers exactly to the sickness of the fourth case in the passage before.
52. The Three Jewels, the inexhaustible field of merit. 「復次，見三寶無盡福田中施故，施福不盡，必至佛道；觀其未來無盡功德故，歡喜行是四種布施，世世財富。」 tr. "Again, because he sees giving within the inexhaustible field of merit of the Three Jewels, the merit of the giving is not exhausted and will certainly reach the Buddha-path; because he contemplates its inexhaustible merit in the future, he joyfully practises these four kinds of giving, and life after life he has wealth." This passage adds another cause of rejoicing: the rejoicing of the passage before is not thinking of his evil; the rejoicing of this passage is contemplating his future. What is called the inexhaustible field of merit means that the field into which one gives is inexhaustible, and so the merit produced is inexhaustible too.
53. Wealth comes of itself; the simile of planting grain and the straw. 「是菩薩雖不為財富布施，未具足阿耨多羅三藐三菩提、六波羅蜜等法，中間而財富自至；譬如人為穀故種禾，而稾草自至。」 tr. "Though this bodhisattva does not give for the sake of wealth, before he has fulfilled anuttarā samyaksaṃbodhi, the six perfections, and such dharmas, in the meantime wealth comes of itself; it is as a person who plants grain for the sake of the grain, and the straw comes of itself." The point this simile takes lies in the two Chinese characters 「自至」 tr. "comes of itself": the straw is not what is sought, yet it comes along with the grain. The bodhisattva does not give for the sake of wealth, yet wealth comes along with the giving. Here one must guard against a misreading: it does not say that seeking wealth too is no harm; it says that what comes of itself without being sought can be used but must not be clung to—the next passage tells how to use it.
54. When he obtains the retribution of wealth, he parts from the mind of stinginess and greed. 「菩薩得財物報時，離慳貪心，隨眾生意布施，須食與食等。」 tr. "When the bodhisattva obtains the retribution of wealth, he parts from the mind of stinginess and greed and gives according to the wishes of beings: to one who needs food, he gives food, and so on." This sentence takes up what is above and opens what is below: it takes up what is above in that the wealth obtained is the wealth that came of itself in the passage before; it opens what is below in that the four Chinese characters 「須食與食」 tr. "to one who needs food, give food" draw out question and answer eight below. What is called according to the wishes of beings means taking as the standard what the recipient needs, not what the giver has.
55. Question and answer six: when giving, to what kind of people does he give first. The question says: 「是菩薩布施時，先施何等人？」 tr. "When this bodhisattva gives, to what kind of people does he give first?" In the answer he first sets the right order: 「是菩薩雖因眾生起大悲心，而菩薩布施，必先供養諸佛、大菩薩、辟支佛、阿羅漢及諸聖人。」 tr. "Though this bodhisattva gives rise to the mind of great compassion because of beings, yet when the bodhisattva gives, he certainly first makes offerings to the buddhas, the great bodhisattvas, the pratyekabuddhas, the arhats, and the sages." From there it descends level by level, in five turns in all: if there are no sages, he gives to 「持戒、精進、禪定、智慧離欲人」 tr. "those who keep morality, are vigorous, are in meditative concentration, are wise, and are free of desire"; if there are no such people, he gives to 「一切出家佛弟子」 tr. "all the Buddha's disciples who have left home"; if there are no such people, he gives to those who 「持五戒、行十善道，及持一日戒、三歸」 tr. "keep the five precepts and practise the ten wholesome paths, and keep the one-day precepts and the three refuges"; if there are no such people, he gives to 「中人非正非邪者」 tr. "middling people who are neither right nor wrong"; if there are no such people, he gives to 「五逆惡人，及諸畜生」 tr. "the evil people of the five heinous sins, and the animals". At the end he sets a general rule: 「不可不與，菩薩以施攝一切眾生故。」 tr. "He may not withhold it, because the bodhisattva gathers in all beings by giving." This descent level by level takes the superiority and inferiority of the field of merit as its order.
56. A differing saying: one should first give to those of the heinous sins, the poor, and the sick. 「有人言：應先布施五逆罪人、斷善根者，貧窮、老病、下賤、乞匃者，乃至畜生；……」 tr. "Someone says: one should first give to people of the five heinous sins, to those who have cut off the roots of goodness, and to the poor, the old and sick, the lowly, and the begging, up to the animals; ……" It runs exactly in the opposite direction to the saying before—the former takes the goodness of the field as its order, this takes the urgency of the recipient as its order. Two similes make it clear: 「譬如慈母，多有眾子，先念羸病，給其所須」 tr. "it is as a kind mother with many children first thinks of the weak and sick and supplies what they need", taking the leaning of a mother's heart toward the weak; 「又如菩薩為餓虎欲食子故，以身施之」 tr. "it is also as the bodhisattva who, because a hungry tiger wished to eat its young, gave his body to it", taking its utmost point. The two sayings are set side by side and not yet judged; the next question is set up precisely to judge them.
57. Question and answer seven: among all these, to whom should one give first. The question says: 「如是種種，應先施何者？」 tr. "Among all these, to which should one give first?" The answer falls into four layers. The first layer sets the general rule: 「一切眾生皆是菩薩福田，能生大悲故。菩薩常欲以阿耨多羅三藐三菩提施眾生，何況衣食等而有分別！」 tr. "All beings are the bodhisattva's field of merit, because they can give rise to great compassion. The bodhisattva constantly wishes to give anuttarā samyaksaṃbodhi to beings; how much less would he make distinctions over clothing, food, and the like!" This layer says directly that there is no need to distinguish—distinguishing by the superiority and inferiority of the field is said with reference to clothing and food; if what one wishes to give is awakening, there is nothing to distinguish. The second layer speaks by distinguishing positions: 「又菩薩得無生忍法，平等無差。未得無生忍者，或慈悲心多、或分別心多，此二心不得俱行。」 tr. "Further, the bodhisattva who has obtained the dharma of the acceptance of non-arising is equal and without difference. Among those who have not yet obtained the acceptance of non-arising, in some the mind of kindness and compassion is greater, in some the discriminating mind is greater; these two minds cannot proceed together." For one who has obtained acceptance there is no such question; for one who has not yet obtained acceptance the two minds cannot stand together.
58. The one in whom the mind of compassion is greater gives first to poor evil people. 「悲心多者，先施貧窮惡人，作是念：「種福田中，果報雖大，憐愍眾生故，先利貧者。」如是田雖不良，以慈悲心，得大果報。」 tr. "The one in whom the mind of compassion is greater gives first to poor evil people, and has this thought: ‘Among the fields of merit in which to plant, though the retribution is great, out of pity for beings I first benefit the poor.’ Thus, though the field is not good, because of the mind of kindness and compassion he obtains great retribution." This passage judges most evenly: the field is not good but the mind is good, so the retribution is still great. So the differing saying of the passage before is not wrong; it is the mark of practice of one in whom the mind of compassion is greater.
59. The one in whom the discriminating mind is greater makes offerings first to the buddhas. 「分別心多者，作是念：「諸佛有無量功德故，應先供養。」以分別諸法、取著佛身故心小；其心雖小，福田良故，功德亦大。」 tr. "The one in whom the discriminating mind is greater has this thought: ‘Because the buddhas have immeasurable merit, I should make offerings to them first.’ Because he discriminates dharmas and grasps at and clings to the Buddha's body, his mind is small; though his mind is small, because the field of merit is good, the merit too is great." This passage too judges evenly, and its words are finer still: saying his 「心小」 tr. "mind is small" is not concealing his sickness—discriminating is precisely grasping and clinging; saying his 「功德亦大」 tr. "merit too is great" is not burying what is real in it—because the field is good. Read the two passages together: the former has a great mind and an inferior field, the latter a small mind and a good field; each obtains one side. Brought down to practice: there is no need to take as a sickness which side one leans toward oneself; one should know it to be a matter of position.
60. One who has obtained the real mark practises both things together. 「若得諸法實相，入般若波羅蜜方便力中，心得自在，二事俱行——慈愍眾生，又視皆如佛。如是等，菩薩隨因緣行布施。」 tr. "If one obtains the real mark of all dharmas and enters the power of skilful means of prajñāpāramitā, the mind becomes free, and the two things proceed together—pitying beings with kindness, and also regarding all as a Buddha. Such as these: the bodhisattva practises giving according to causes and conditions." This is the reconciling of the two passages before: compassion and reverence from the first do not obstruct each other; the reason they cannot stand together is that one has not yet obtained the real mark and skilful means. The last phrase 「隨因緣行布施」 tr. "practises giving according to causes and conditions" is the gathering-in of the whole question—there is no fixed dharma; one practises according to conditions.
61. Question and answer eight: why the sūtra says ‘to one who needs food, give food’. The question says: 「經何以不言「與衣食等」，而言「須食與食」？」 tr. "Why does the sūtra not say ‘give clothing, food, and the like’, but says ‘to one who needs food, give food’?" The answer says: 「有人須食與飲、須飲與衣，以不稱受者意故，福德少，是故言須食與食。」 tr. "There are people who to one who needs food give drink, and to one who needs drink give clothing; because it does not suit the recipient's wish, the merit is small; for this reason it says to one who needs food, give food." This question is extremely fine and extremely concrete: the difference of wording in one phrase of the sūtra the treatise-author also explains. What is judged is a standard—the merit of giving is fixed not by the costliness or cheapness of the thing given but by whether or not it suits the recipient's wish. Brought down to practice: giving people what I wish to give is not as good as giving people what they need.
62. Question and answer nine: how to know what is needed by those who are ashamed or afraid. The question says: 「有人若羞、若怖，雖有所須，不能發言，云何知其所須？」 tr. "There are people who are either ashamed or afraid; though they have needs, they cannot speak out; how is one to know what they need?" This question rises out of what is above: since suiting the wish is the standard, how can one suit those who cannot speak out? The answer says: 「菩薩觀其相貌，隨時所須、土地所宜；或有知他心者，資生之具，隨意而與。」 tr. "The bodhisattva observes their appearance, what is needed at the time, and what suits the land; or, if he has knowledge of others' minds, he gives the requisites that sustain life according to their wishes." Three methods are set side by side: observing their appearance is with reference to the person; what is needed at the time and what suits the land is with reference to the circumstances; one with knowledge of others' minds is with reference to supernormal power. The first two are things everyone can do; the last is the affair of those who have supernormal powers—the treatise-author does not take supernormal power as the constant way, and so places it last and attaches to it the two Chinese characters 「或有」 tr. "or, if he has".
63. Giving accomplishes the aggregate of morality, up to the aggregate of the knowledge and vision of liberation. 「是人因是布施，得成戒眾」 tr. "Through this giving this person is able to accomplish the aggregate of morality", and the reason for it is that after practising giving he himself has this thought: 「我憐愍眾生，以衣食布施，所益甚少；不如持戒，常以無惱、無畏施於眾生。」 tr. "I pity beings and give clothing and food, but what it benefits is very little; it is better to keep morality, and constantly give beings freedom from vexation and freedom from fear." Below it speaks aggregate by aggregate: 「菩薩住是持戒中，為守護戒故，生禪定。心不散、清淨故，得成慧眾；無戲論、捨諸著是慧相。以是慧破諸煩惱縛，得解脫眾。了了知見證解脫故，名解脫知見眾。」 tr. "Dwelling within this keeping of morality, the bodhisattva gives rise to meditative concentration for the sake of guarding morality. Because the mind is not scattered and is pure, he is able to accomplish the aggregate of wisdom; being without idle discourse and abandoning all clinging is the mark of wisdom. With this wisdom he breaks the bonds of all the afflictions and obtains the aggregate of liberation. Because he realises liberation by clearly knowing and seeing, it is named the aggregate of the knowledge and vision of liberation." The order in which the five aggregates give rise to one another is clear point by point: giving gives rise to morality, morality gives rise to concentration, concentration gives rise to wisdom, wisdom gives rise to liberation, and liberation is known and seen. This passage is the detailed explanation of the stretch of the sūtra from 「得禪定眾」 tr. "obtains the aggregate of meditative concentration" to 「解脫知見眾」 tr. "the aggregate of the knowledge and vision of liberation".
64. Because he first practises giving and the five aggregates, he passes beyond the grounds of the two vehicles and enters the bodhisattva's position. 「是人先行布施及五眾因緣故，過聲聞、辟支佛地，入菩薩位。」 tr. "Because of the causes and conditions of first practising giving and of the five aggregates, this person passes beyond the grounds of the śrāvakas and the pratyekabuddhas and enters the bodhisattva's position." This sentence is the conclusion of the passage above, and also the cause of the two questions below. What should be noted: the four Chinese characters 「先行布施」 tr. "first practising giving" still tie the starting point of the five aggregates to giving, running through with 「布施為主」 tr. "giving as the chief" in the earlier text.
65. Question and answer ten: why the five aggregates are spoken of and not the six perfections. The question says: 「菩薩應行六波羅蜜，入菩薩位，此中何以說五眾？」 tr. "The bodhisattva should practise the six perfections to enter the bodhisattva's position; why are the five aggregates spoken of here?" The answer first sets a general rule: 「法雖一，以種種異名說，是故說五眾無咎。」 tr. "Though the dharma is one, it is spoken of by various different names; for this reason there is no fault in speaking of the five aggregates." Next it says why one is singled out: 「是人從一波羅蜜中欲起諸波羅蜜，布施為主，已先說。」 tr. "This person wishes to give rise to all the perfections from within one pāramitā; giving is the chief, and it has already been spoken of first." Next it matches them one by one: 「持戒眾名尸波羅蜜；定眾、解脫眾名禪波羅蜜；慧眾、解脫知見眾是般若波羅蜜；行諸波羅蜜時，能忍諸惡事，是名羼提波羅蜜；能起諸波羅蜜，不休不息，是名毘梨耶波羅蜜。」 tr. "The aggregate of keeping morality is named śīlapāramitā; the aggregate of concentration and the aggregate of liberation are named dhyānapāramitā; the aggregate of wisdom and the aggregate of the knowledge and vision of liberation are prajñāpāramitā; being able to bear all evil things while practising the perfections—this is called kṣāntipāramitā; being able to give rise to the perfections without resting and without ceasing—this is called vīryapāramitā." The way the five aggregates are matched with the six perfections is this: morality is matched with śīla; the two aggregates of concentration and liberation are matched with dhyāna; the two aggregates of wisdom and of the knowledge and vision of liberation are matched with prajñā; patience and vigour are not set up as separate aggregates but run through the time of practising all the perfections. This way of matching should be seen clearly—it is not that five against six is one short; it is that patience and vigour are from the first not a single stretch of merit but marks of the time of practising all the perfections.
66. Question and answer eleven: why not speak only of the names of the perfections. The question says: 「若爾者，何以不但說諸波羅蜜名而說五眾？」 tr. "If so, why not speak only of the names of the perfections, but speak of the five aggregates?" The answer says: 「是人欲入菩薩位，此中不但以持戒、禪定得，和合眾戒、清淨戒、無盡戒。以要言之，攝一切戒名為戒眾；能破煩惱，過二乘，入菩薩位。」 tr. "This person wishes to enter the bodhisattva's position; here it is not obtained merely by keeping morality and meditative concentration; he combines the many precepts, the pure precepts, and the inexhaustible precepts. To put it briefly, gathering in all the precepts is named the aggregate of morality; it can break the afflictions, pass beyond the two vehicles, and enter the bodhisattva's position." Next it makes this clear with a simile: 「譬如一人、二人，不名為軍；和合多人，乃成為軍，能破怨敵。」 tr. "It is as one person or two persons are not called an army; only when many people are combined do they make an army that can break the enemy." At the end it says: 「餘眾亦如是。」 tr. "The other aggregates are likewise." The point this simile takes lies in 「和合」 tr. "combining"—the Chinese character 「眾」 tr. "aggregate" carries from the first the sense of gathering; speaking of aggregates and not of perfections is precisely to show that it is not the power of a single dharma. Brought down to practice: what is called breaking the afflictions does not rely on some one precept or some one kind of concentration; it relies on gathering them into an army.
67. Teaching and transforming beings, dedicating to the pure buddha-land, and obtaining the omniscience of all kinds. 「菩薩自得禪定等眾，亦令眾生得，是名菩薩教化眾生；教化眾生已，持自功德及眾生功德，盡迴向淨佛國。具此二法，即得一切種智，轉法輪，以三乘度眾生。」 tr. "The bodhisattva himself obtains the aggregates of meditative concentration and the rest, and also lets beings obtain them; this is called the bodhisattva's teaching and transforming beings; having taught and transformed beings, he takes his own merit and the merit of beings and dedicates it all to the pure buddha-land. Fulfilling these two dharmas, he then obtains the omniscience of all kinds, turns the wheel of the Dharma, and delivers beings by the three vehicles." This passage explains the latter half of the sūtra. What are called the 「二法」 tr. "two dharmas" are teaching and transforming beings and dedicating to the pure land; when these two are accomplished, the Buddha's work accomplishes itself. Read together with the passage before: when the five aggregates are accomplished one enters the position; when the two dharmas are accomplished one becomes a Buddha—the sequence is clear.
68. Concluding the meaning of sequence: first coarse then fine, first easy then hard. 「是名菩薩次第行、次第學、次第道。先麁後細，先易後難，漸漸習學，名為次第。」 tr. "This is called the bodhisattva's sequential practice, sequential training, and sequential path. First coarse then fine, first easy then hard, little by little training in and learning, is named sequence." These twelve Chinese characters are the proper gloss on the two Chinese characters 「次第」 tr. "sequence" of the whole chapter. First ask a question: why does it not say ‘first shallow then deep’ but says 「先麁後細」 tr. "first coarse then fine"? Coarse and fine are said of the marks of dharmas; easy and hard are said of the strength of the person—one with reference to what is learned, one with reference to the one who can learn, both faces covered. Read together with the earlier simile of climbing the ladder, the steps of the ladder are precisely this coarse and fine, easy and hard.
69. The other five perfections are distinguished according to their meaning; practising following worldly truth. 「餘五波羅蜜，亦應隨義分別。」 tr. "The other five pāramitās should also be distinguished according to their meaning." This sentence makes clear that the detailed explanation of dānapāramitā before is an example. The last sentence is the bone of the whole treatise section: 「諸法性雖無所有，而隨世諦行，為破顛倒故。」 tr. "Though the nature of dharmas is without anything existent, one practises following worldly truth, in order to break inversion." Being without anything existent is the highest meaning; practising following worldly truth is why there is sequence; and the purpose of following worldly truth is still to break inversion, not to establish worldly truth. Here one must guard against a misreading: saying 「隨世諦行」 tr. "practises following worldly truth" does not say that sequence is only an expedient without real benefit; it says that the place where sequence is set up is worldly truth, while the matter it accomplishes—breaking inversion—is real.
70. The six recollections are the first sequential practice. 「復次，念佛等六念是初次第行，以易行易得故。」 tr. "Again, the six recollections, recollection of the Buddha and the rest, are the first sequential practice, because they are easy to practise and easy to obtain." The six perfections having been spoken of, it returns to the six recollections. It judges the six recollections to be 「初」 tr. "the first", and its reason is only four Chinese characters: easy to practise and easy to obtain. First ask a question: since the six recollections say in every single gate 「無少許念」 tr. "not even a little recollection", how can they be called easy? This doubt is what the next question and answer is set up for.
71. Question and answer twelve: not recollecting the Buddha by form—how can it be called easy. The question says: 「六念中亦言不以色念佛，云何言易？」 tr. "Within the six recollections it is also said that one does not recollect the Buddha by form; how can it be called easy?" The answer says: 「有法共行，故名為易；譬如服苦藥，以蜜下之則易。」 tr. "Because there is a dharma that can be practised along with it, it is called easy; it is as taking bitter medicine: sending it down with honey makes it easy." The four Chinese characters 「有法共行」 tr. "there is a dharma that can be practised along with it" are the root of the answer: though the six recollections block the grasping at marks, what they recollect—the Buddha, the Dharma, the Saṅgha, morality, giving up, and the gods—is after all something the mind can be tied to; it is not being made to contemplate the signless from the very outset. This simile takes the same image as the earlier simile of the small child taking medicine but uses it differently: that one is used for the six perfections being combined with the meaning of emptiness, this one for the six recollections being combined with the signless—one image used in two ways, which shows precisely that the treatise-author uses similes as tools and does not cling to the simile.
72. The meaning of the six recollections is as broadly explained in the first chapter. 「六念義，如初品中廣說。」 tr. "The meaning of the six recollections is as broadly explained in the first chapter." Here the treatise-author does not explain the items of the six recollections again, but points back to the earlier text. This is the pattern of this treatise: a dharma-number already broadly explained earlier is not brought out again later. When the reader meets these words, he should know that they are not an omission but a signpost.
73. The six perfections and the six recollections are gentle and easy to practise; the rest, the three gates of liberation, are not spoken of. 「六波羅蜜、六念等，柔軟易行，不生邪見，是菩薩次第學法。餘三解脫門等，思惟籌量，或生邪見故不說。」 tr. "The six perfections, the six recollections, and the like are gentle and easy to practise and do not give rise to wrong views; this is the dharma of the bodhisattva's sequential training. The rest, the three gates of liberation and the like, require reflection and reckoning and may give rise to wrong views, therefore they are not spoken of." This passage judges a most vital point: it is not that the three gates of liberation are not good; it is that for one new to the training they are dangerous—the three gates of emptiness, the signless, and non-action require reflection and reckoning, and one whose strength does not reach them grasps them and makes wrong views. So in this chapter the Buddha speaks to those new to the training of the six perfections and the six recollections and does not speak of the three gates. Brought down to practice: in choosing a dharma, go by one's own strength, not by the height of the dharma.
74. The treatise-author explains Subhūti's difficulty. 「此中須菩提難：「世尊！若實無所有，云何有次第行等？」」 tr. "Here Subhūti raises an objection: ‘World-Honored One! If there is really nothing existent, how can there be sequential practice and the rest?’" The treatise-author encloses the long difficulty of the sūtra in a single sentence, which shows precisely that he judges the bone of this difficulty to lie in the contradiction between 「無所有」 tr. "being without anything existent" and 「次第」 tr. "sequence". Read against the sūtra, the headings of dharmas listed in the sūtra are very many, yet the treatise-author gathers them in a single phrase—this is the constant way of this treatise in explaining the sūtra, taking its joints and not spreading out along the text.
75. The Buddha's counter-question and Subhūti's answer. 「佛反問須菩提：「汝以聲聞智慧見色等法是一定實法不？」」 tr. "The Buddha in return asked Subhūti: ‘With the wisdom of a śrāvaka, do you see form and the other dharmas as one fixed, real dharma?’" Here the treatise-author adds the five Chinese characters 「以聲聞智慧」 tr. "with the wisdom of a śrāvaka", speaking with reference to Subhūti's position; the sūtra originally reads 「汝見是色性實有不」 tr. "do you see this nature of form as really existent". Next it records his answer: 「答言：「不見！」」 tr. "He answered: ‘I do not see it!’" The treatise-author further sets out the reason on his behalf: 「色等一切法但從因緣和合，假有其名，無有定實，云何言有？」 tr. "Form and all the other dharmas only come from the coming together of causes and conditions and provisionally have a name; there is nothing fixed and real; how can they be said to exist?" This added statement is the treatise-author's explanation, not the sūtra; in reading one should keep clear which sentence is sūtra and which is treatise—the treatise-author here is precisely speaking out the reason behind Subhūti's one 「不見」 tr. "I do not see it".
76. The Buddha's pressing again and the treatise-author's verdict. 「佛語須菩提：「汝若不見實定有，云何以次第等難空？」」 tr. "The Buddha told Subhūti: ‘Since you do not see anything fixed and real, why do you use sequence and such matters to challenge emptiness?’" There follows a verdict the treatise-author lays down himself: 「而次第法不離於空。」 tr. "And the dharma of sequence is not apart from emptiness." These eight Chinese characters are the general conclusion of the whole unit—sequence and emptiness are not two things standing over against each other; sequence is from the first within emptiness. If sequence existed separately apart from emptiness, the Buddha's counter-question would not hold; precisely because it is not apart, one who does not see real dharmas has nothing by which to use sequence to raise a difficulty.
77. Subhūti receives it and understands it clearly and distinctly. 「爾時，須菩提受解了了，是故說……」 tr. "At that time Subhūti received and understood it clearly and distinctly, and for this reason said ……" From here the treatise-author, in a long passage, states Subhūti's intent on his behalf, and layer by layer it all corresponds to the sūtra. First he makes himself clear: 「我無所疑」 tr. "I have nothing to doubt". Next he says for whom: 「為當來世求三乘人，聞佛說空無所有性，以罪重智鈍故，取空相」 tr. "for the sake of people in the world to come who seek the three vehicles: hearing the Buddha speak of emptiness and of the nature without anything existent, because their sins are heavy and their knowledge dull, they grasp at the mark of emptiness". The three Chinese characters 「取空相」 tr. "grasp at the mark of emptiness" are added by the treatise-author, pointing precisely to the root of the sickness—it is not that hearing emptiness gives rise to doubt; it is that hearing emptiness one grasps emptiness as a mark. Next he cites their words: 「誰垢誰淨？凡夫、惡人，何以名垢？出家、得道人，何以名淨？」 tr. "Who is stained and who is pure? Why are ordinary persons and evil people called stained? Why are those who have left home and those who have obtained the path called pure?" Here the two pairs 「凡夫、惡人」 tr. "ordinary persons and evil people" and 「出家、得道人」 tr. "those who have left home and those who have obtained the path" are examples the treatise-author supplies; the sūtra reads only 「誰垢誰淨？誰縛誰解？」 tr. "Who is stained and who is pure? Who is bound and who is released?".
78. The sequence of breaking morality and breaking view, and Subhūti's making himself clear. The treatise-author explains one by one the order of their falling: 「是人不解佛語深義以何事而說，著是空故，言：『何用持戒等為？』」 tr. "These people do not understand on what matter the deep meaning of the Buddha's words is spoken; because they cling to this emptiness, they say: ‘What need is there for keeping morality and such matters?’"—this is the cause. 「以是因緣，即生邪見，破正見；破正見故，以少因緣而破戒及威儀，無所畏忌」 tr. "Through these causes and conditions they give rise to wrong views and break right view; because they break right view, on scant causes and conditions they break morality and deportment, with nothing they fear or shun"—this is going from view to conduct. 「出家人資仰白衣，便妄語求利衣食等，破於正命等」 tr. "those who have left home, relying on the white-robed, then tell lies to seek gain, clothing, food, and so on, and break right livelihood and the rest"—this is the real face of breaking pure livelihood, which the treatise-author speaks of specially with reference to the situation of those who have left home. 「種此罪故，墮三惡道，或重於白衣」 tr. "because they plant these sins, they fall into the three evil destinies, perhaps more heavily than the white-robed"—the last five Chinese characters are a judgement added by the treatise-author: for the same breaking of morality, the sin of one who has left home may be heavier, because he relies on the white-robed and tells lies. At the end he makes three things clear on Subhūti's behalf: 「我已得道，於諸法無所受」 tr. "I have already obtained the path, and in dharmas there is nothing received"; 「又常聞佛說空法，云何戲論生疑」 tr. "and I constantly hear the Buddha speak the Dharma of emptiness; how could I make idle discourse and give rise to doubt"; 「又我常修無諍三昧，憐愍眾生，是故問佛。」 tr. "Further, I constantly cultivate the samādhi of non-contention and pity beings; for this reason I asked the Buddha." Of the three things, the samādhi of non-contention is supplied by the treatise-author and is not in the sūtra, which shows precisely why he asks on behalf of others and does not doubt himself. The whole unit closes here: beginning with the question ‘how does one new to the training practise’, ending with the answer ‘for the sake of the people of the world to come’—one beginning and one end, neither for his own sake.
Do Not Misread
Do not read 「無所有性」 tr. "the nature without anything existent" as there being nothing at all. The sūtra says that all dharmas are without any existent nature, yet in the same passage it says that one obtains the four dhyānas and the five supernormal powers and obtains anuttarā samyaksaṃbodhi; the treatise-author further says plainly 「而次第法不離於空」 tr. "and the dharma of sequence is not apart from emptiness". What is blocked is a fixed, real self-nature on dharmas, not the function and the sequence of dharmas. If it is read as there being nothing at all, then the six perfections, the six recollections, and the thirty-seven limbs of the path listed in the sūtra all become empty talk, and why would the Buddha need to open these three layers for those new to the training?
Do not read 「無憶故，是為念佛」 tr. "because there is no remembering, this is recollection of the Buddha" as thinking of nothing at all while recollecting the Buddha. The five rounds of blocking each point to something—blocking the five aggregates, blocking the marks and minor signs, blocking the aggregates of the fivefold merit, blocking the ten powers and the other unshared dharmas, blocking the dharma of the twelve links of causes and conditions; what is blocked is in every case ‘taking some dharma as the object recollected’. The sūtra itself still says 「應念佛」 tr. "he should recollect the Buddha", from which it can be seen that what is kept is recollection and what is removed is grasping at marks. If it is read as not thinking, it is no different from wood or stone, and it also fails to accord with 「能具足四念處」 tr. "he can fulfil the four foundations of mindfulness" up to 「乃至一切種智」 tr. "up to the omniscience of all kinds" in the text below.
Do not read 「乃至無少許念，何況念戒」 tr. "up to there not being even a little recollection, how much less recollecting morality" as there being no need to keep morality. These words are in the gate of recollection of morality, and what the gate of recollection of morality recollects is precisely the nine kinds of noble morality: 「無缺戒、無隙戒、無瑕戒、無濁戒」 tr. "morality without breach, morality without crack, morality without flaw, morality without turbidity" and the rest. What is blocked is the mind keeping a record of the marks of its morality after keeping morality, not the practice of morality itself. At the end of the sūtra, the very reason for Subhūti's worry and fear is that he fears people will, because of emptiness, 「破於戒、破正見、破威儀、破淨命」 tr. "break morality, break right view, break deportment, break pure livelihood"; to read these words as there being no need to keep morality is to be just the kind of person Subhūti foretold.
Do not read the six sayings on the three names as the treatise-author having not settled their meaning. The treatise-author lists six sayings in a row and concludes 「如是等，名為三事差別」 tr. "such as these are named the differences of the three matters", saying that the marks of practice to which the three names practice, training, and path point can from the first be divided along many faces, and there is no single fixed way. Among the six sayings not one contradicts another—some divide by time into beginning, middle, and end; some match them with the dharmas of giving, keeping morality, and wisdom; some with morality, concentration, and wisdom; some with the three parts of the eightfold noble path; some with the six perfections. If one forcibly takes one saying as correct and discards the rest, one instead contradicts the treatise-author's first saying, 「義一而語異」 tr. "the meaning is one and the words differ".
Do not read the simile of climbing the ladder as sequence being outside emptiness. The ladder climbed in the simile is set up right within the dharma of emptiness—where the question was raised is 「初發心菩薩於是空法中云何能漸次第學」 tr. "how can a bodhisattva of the first arousing of the mind, within this empty dharma, train little by little in sequence", and where it is answered is 「諸法雖空難解，次第行得力故，能得成就」 tr. "though dharmas are empty and hard to understand, because sequential practice gains strength, one can reach accomplishment". The ladder is not something standing by itself apart from the wall. If one thinks that sequence is set up first and emptiness entered afterwards, this contradicts the sentence 「以無所有畢竟空和合布施、持戒等行」 tr. "combines the practices of giving, keeping morality, and the rest with there being nothing existent and ultimate emptiness".
Do not read the simile of the small child taking medicine as emptiness being a bitter affair. The use of the honey in the simile lies in making the medicine go down, not in making the medicine sweet; the point the treatise-author takes from the simile lies in 「和合」 tr. "combining", not in bitterness and sweetness. The same image is used once more in the later text—「譬如服苦藥，以蜜下之則易」 tr. "it is as taking bitter medicine: sending it down with honey makes it easy"—and what is spoken of there is the ease of the six recollections, from which it can be seen that in this unit this image is a common tool, taking one point from it wherever it is used, and one may not drag in its other meanings.
Do not read 「必先供養諸佛、大菩薩」 tr. "he certainly first makes offerings to the buddhas and the great bodhisattvas" and 「應先布施五逆罪人」 tr. "one should first give to people of the five heinous sins" as contradicting each other. The treatise-author reconciles them in the very next question: of those who have not yet obtained the acceptance of non-arising, the one in whom the mind of compassion is greater puts the poor and evil first, and the one in whom the discriminating mind is greater puts the buddhas first; the one who has obtained the real mark of all dharmas and entered the power of skilful means 「二事俱行」 tr. "practises both things together". The two sayings are each the mark of practice of one position, not one right and one wrong. The last sentence, 「如是等，菩薩隨因緣行布施」 tr. "such as these: the bodhisattva practises giving according to causes and conditions", is precisely not setting up a fixed dharma.
Do not read 「其心雖小，福田良故，功德亦大」 tr. "though his mind is small, because the field of merit is good, the merit too is great" as the treatise-author approving of the discriminating mind. The treatise-author says plainly that his mind is small 「以分別諸法、取著佛身故心小」 tr. "because he discriminates dharmas and grasps at and clings to the Buddha's body, his mind is small"—grasping and clinging is a sickness, and this is judged clearly; saying that the merit too is great is said with reference to the field, not with reference to the mind. The two matters are listed separately and do not cover each other—precisely the fine point in this treatise's judging of matters; to read the latter half as approval is to wipe out the judgement of the first half.
Do not read 「餘三解脫門等，思惟籌量，或生邪見故不說」 tr. "the rest, the three gates of liberation and the like, require reflection and reckoning and may give rise to wrong views, therefore they are not spoken of" as the Buddha not permitting people to cultivate the three gates of liberation. These words have their limit—limited to the people for whom this chapter is spoken, namely 「新發意」 tr. "those who have newly aroused the mind" and 「新學」 tr. "those new to the training". In the same treatise the three gates of liberation are broadly spoken of everywhere; they are not abolished by this chapter. The reason they are not spoken of is the danger of 「思惟籌量，或生邪見」 tr. "requiring reflection and reckoning, they may give rise to wrong views", said with reference to the strength of the person, not with reference to the superiority or inferiority of the dharma.
Do not read 「得、不得雖同，我何以不發心作佛」 tr. "since obtaining and not obtaining are the same, why should I not arouse the mind to become a Buddha" as the bodhisattva arousing the mind with an indifferent heart. In the text below the treatise-author himself sets two questions and answers them: one answers 「畢竟空，無所有，無所障礙，何妨發心作佛」 tr. "ultimate emptiness is without anything existent and has nothing that obstructs; how does it hinder arousing the mind to become a Buddha", the other answers with the three conditions for arousing the mind—the suffering of relatives and friends, one's own wisdom not yet being ripe, and, hearing the deep meaning of the Great Vehicle, enemy and kin being equal. From this it can be seen that ‘obtaining and not obtaining are the same’ is only words that remove the obstruction; the real conditions for arousing the mind are in the three sections after. If one reads only the first sentence and not the text after, it becomes a cold remark.
Bearing on Practice
Take 「雖無量劫發意，未得諸法實相，皆名新學」 tr. "though he has aroused the intent for immeasurable kalpas, so long as he has not yet obtained the real mark of all dharmas, he is called new to the training" and measure your own position by it. Do not fix your depth or shallowness by the number of years of cultivation and training; only ask whether the real mark has been seen or not. Measured this way, one who has trained long need not be self-satisfied, and a beginner need not belittle himself either—both are within one 「新」 tr. "new", and the only difference is the distance walked.
Take the four matters 「自行布施，亦教人行布施，讚歎行布施功德，歡喜讚歎行布施者」 tr. "he himself practises giving, also teaches others to practise giving, praises the merit of practising giving, and rejoices in and praises those who practise giving" and check one good deed of your own by them. Did you do it? Did you urge others? Did you praise its dharma? On seeing others do it, did you rejoice in your heart? The treatise-author lists five cases of not completing them, each with its cause of sickness; ask yourself according to the four matters one by one, and in which square the sickness lies becomes clear.
Take 「我雖多施汝，汝亦不得持至後世；汝今當自作，後當自得」 tr. "though I give you much, you still cannot take it with you into later lives; you should now do it yourselves, and later you will obtain it yourselves" and regard by it the limit of helping people. Giving is relief for a time; teaching them to do it themselves is the lasting benefit. These words used on giving are equally so used on other kinds of help—whatever one can do for a person only once, one should leave behind the way of doing it as well.
Take 「不稱受者意故，福德少」 tr. "because it does not suit the recipient's wish, the merit is small" and check by it the things you give to people. Giving people what I have much of is easy; giving people what they need is hard; the hardness lies not in the thing but in whether one is willing first to ask what he wants. The sūtra changed only one Chinese character—not saying 「與衣食等」 tr. "give clothing, food, and the like" but saying 「須食與食」 tr. "to one who needs food, give food"—and the whole measure lies here.
Take 「菩薩觀其相貌，隨時所須、土地所宜」 tr. "the bodhisattva observes their appearance, what is needed at the time, and what suits the land" and practise looking at people by it. Those who have needs but cannot say them are the most numerous, and shame and fear are two common causes. So do not wait for people to open their mouths; look at the countenance, look at the season, look at the situation—these three lookings anyone can do, and there is no need to wait for the knowledge of others' minds.
Take 「先麁後細，先易後難，漸漸習學」 tr. "first coarse then fine, first easy then hard, little by little training in and learning" and arrange your own lessons by it. Whoever feels that in applying effort there is nowhere to set his hand has mostly put the fine and the hard at the front. First ask a question: is this step the first step of the ladder? If it is not, look for a step further down. What makes the simile of climbing the ladder precious is precisely that it admits the top is high and hard, yet does not for that reason give up the first rung.
Take 「有法共行，故名為易」 tr. "because there is a dharma that can be practised along with it, it is called easy" and regard by it the gates of practice that can be relied on. What makes the six recollections easy is not that they are shallow but that they have something the mind can be tied to. Whoever applies effort and feels the mind has nowhere to land need not hurry to cultivate the signless; first take up a kind of gate that has a dharma that can be practised along with it and walk on—this is the right road this chapter opens for those new to the training.
Take 「餘三解脫門等，思惟籌量，或生邪見故不說」 tr. "the rest, the three gates of liberation and the like, require reflection and reckoning and may give rise to wrong views, therefore they are not spoken of" and restrain your own restlessness by it. One who delights in hearing the lofty and deep while his strength does not yet reach it is most apt to come to grief here—and the grief is not failing in cultivation; it is giving rise to wrong views. In choosing a dharma, first measure your strength—this sentence is the plain text this chapter gives.
Take 「是人不解佛語深義以何事而說，著是空故」 tr. "these people do not understand on what matter the deep meaning of the Buddha's words is spoken; because they cling to this emptiness" and examine by it your mind after hearing of emptiness. Whoever, having heard of emptiness, feels that keeping morality is pointless and making merit is pointless has precisely grasped the mark of emptiness. The way of treating it lies in one sentence of the treatise-author: emptiness is 「隨世諦行，為破顛倒故」 tr. "practising following worldly truth, in order to break inversion"—ask yourself whether your inversion has been broken or not, and you will know whether that ‘pointlessness’ is a measure of realisation or a delusion.
Take 「譬如一人、二人，不名為軍；和合多人，乃成為軍」 tr. "it is as one person or two persons are not called an army; only when many people are combined do they make an army" and regard by it scattered efforts. One precept, one session of concentration, one round of contemplation with wisdom—each by itself is a good thing, yet each may not be able to break the afflictions; what can break them is gathering into an aggregate. So the key of one's lessons lies not in some one item being especially refined, but in all the items being without lack and continuous.
Take 「怨親無定，以因緣故，親或為怨，怨或為親」 tr. "enemy and kin are not fixed; because of causes and conditions, kin at times become enemies, and enemies at times become kin" and loosen your own knots of enmity by it. These words do not exhort people to be magnanimous; they state a fact—relationships turn from the first through causes and conditions. When this is seen clearly, patience is not forced patience. The treatise-author goes on to say 「由何而得？由忍怨故」 tr. "From what is it obtained? It is obtained from bearing with enemies", from which it can be seen that on the Buddha-path the enemy is not an obstruction but a condition.
Take 「我幸有力，能使是人得離眾苦」 tr. "I fortunately have the strength to let these people get free of all suffering" and settle by it the concrete place of arousing the mind. Arousing the mind need not first have the appearance of a great vow; first see whether before your eyes there is a person in suffering whom you yourself can help. The treatise-author places relatives and friends at the head of the three conditions for arousing the mind, precisely speaking from the nearest place.
Further Resonances
The line by which the Last Part comes on from the First Part is moving one and the same 「無所有性」 tr. "nature without anything existent" from the position of realisation to the beginning mind. What the First Part speaks of are all matters already accomplished: the Buddha states for himself that when formerly practising the bodhisattva path he parted from the desires and entered the four dhyānas, and in reliance on the four dhyānas gave rise to the five supernormal powers; toward the dhyānas he grasped their marks and obtained them and yet did not think that they existed and did not receive their flavour; toward the powers he did not grasp at their marks and did not receive their flavour; at the last, with the wisdom associated with a single thought, he obtained awakening; along the way the treatise-author explains how hard to understand ultimate emptiness is, explains how compliant acceptance runs through the small and the great, and explains the three explanations of 「有法是菩薩道，無法是菩薩果」 tr. "an existent dharma is the bodhisattva's path; a non-existent dharma is the bodhisattva's fruit". The Last Part then turns to ask about the beginning mind—with this same nature without anything existent, where does one new to the training set down his foot? The Buddha's answer has three layers: first, arousing the mind from hearing the words of the sages; second, the four kinds of practice of the six perfections; third, the six recollections. The treatise section follows it with three bones: why one new to the training is taught to practise ultimate emptiness, what difference there is among the three names practice, training, and path, and why it is named sequence. Each of the three answers has its one sentence: the first lies in 「譬如小兒服藥，須蜜乃下」 tr. "it is as a small child taking medicine: it needs honey before it can go down", the second in 「如是等，名為三事差別」 tr. "such as these are named the differences of the three matters", the third in 「譬如緣梯，從一初桄漸上，上處雖高雖難，亦能得至」 tr. "it is as climbing a ladder: from the first rung one goes up little by little, and though the place above is high and hard, one can still reach it". At the end the treatise-author takes the eight Chinese characters 「而次第法不離於空」 tr. "and the dharma of sequence is not apart from emptiness" as the verdict on the whole unit, and further with the sentence 「諸法性雖無所有，而隨世諦行，為破顛倒故」 tr. "though the nature of dharmas is without anything existent, one practises following worldly truth, in order to break inversion" establishes why it is so. Viewing the First Part and the Last Part together, the three Chinese characters 「次第學」 tr. "training in sequence" of the chapter title are only then fully spoken: what is trained in is emptiness; what enables one to train is sequence.
The title of this chapter is not handed down alike in the various editions; they are recorded side by side below without forcing a judgement. The base text titles it "Training in Sequence"; the Ming edition lacks the four Chinese characters 「大智度論」 tr. "Mahāprajñāpāramitā-upadeśa", and the Shōgozō and Ishiyama-dera manuscripts lack even the thirteen Chinese characters of the chapter title. The Palace edition gives a separate variant name; its collation note at the head of the fascicle reads 「（（釋次…十五））九字＝（（釋第七十五品上三次品））十字【宮】」 tr. "‘((Explaining Ci… fifteen))’, nine characters, = ‘((Explaining the seventy-fifth chapter, upper, the Three Sequences chapter))’, ten characters, (Palace)"—that is, the Palace edition directly calls this chapter 「三次品」 tr. "The Three Sequences". In the text of the Larger Sūtra being explained, the chapter title reads 「三次品第七十五」 tr. "the seventy-fifth chapter, The Three Sequences", and below the title an interlinear note of one line says that the Khitan edition reads 「次第行品」 tr. "the chapter on Sequential Practice", while the collation note on one character of its chapter title reads 「次＋（第行）【三】【宮】【聖】」 tr. "after ‘Ci’ add ‘(di xing)’ (the three editions, Palace, Shōgozō)"—that is, the five witnesses, the Song, Yuan, and Ming editions, the Palace edition, and the Shōgozō manuscript, add, in 「三次品」 tr. "The Three Sequences", below its 「次」 tr. "Ci", the two Chinese characters 「第行」 tr. "di xing". The collation notes on the continuation title at the head of this unit's fascicle also show variant readings twice: one reads 「次第學品＝次品【宋】【宮】，〔次第學品〕－【聖】」 tr. "‘Training in Sequence chapter’ = ‘Sequence chapter’ (Song, Palace); ‘[Training in Sequence chapter]’ omitted (Shōgozō)", that is, the Song and Palace editions read 「次品」 tr. "The Sequence Chapter" and the Shōgozō manuscript lacks it entirely; the other reads 「第七十五之餘＝第七十五品下訖第七十六品【宋】【聖】，第七十五下訖第七十六品【元】，第七十五之下【明】，七十四品下訖第七十五品【聖】」 tr. "‘remainder of the seventy-fifth’ = ‘seventy-fifth chapter, lower, through the seventy-sixth chapter’ (Song, Shōgozō); ‘seventy-fifth, lower, through the seventy-sixth chapter’ (Yuan); ‘seventy-fifth, Last Part’ (Ming); ‘seventy-fourth chapter, lower, through the seventy-fifth chapter’ (Shōgozō)"—the Shōgozō manuscript reads 「七十四品下訖第七十五品」 tr. "seventy-fourth chapter, lower, through the seventy-fifth chapter", its chapter number constantly one step lower than the base text's, no different from the pattern seen in the several chapters of this treatise before. What the various names take differs: 「次第學」 tr. "Training in Sequence" is set up from its training gradually; 「三次」 tr. "Three Sequences" is set up from the sequence of the three, practice, training, and path; 「次第行」 tr. "Sequential Practice" is set up from its practice; the treatise section of this chapter has precisely the question 「次第行、次第學、次第道有何差別」 tr. "what difference is there among sequential practice, sequential training, and sequential path" and lists six sayings in a row, and the three names each obtain one side.
In his Great Calming and Contemplation, Zhiyi divides the three teachings, sudden, gradual, and indeterminate, and under the item 「漸」 tr. "gradual" cites directly the core words of this chapter's name as evidence; his text says: 「《大品》云：「次第行、次第學、次第道。」此證漸也。」 tr. "The Larger Sūtra says: ‘Sequential practice, sequential training, sequential path.’ This is evidence for the gradual." The three names he cites are wholly the same as the fixed formula that recurs again and again in the sūtra and treatise of this chapter, and are explicitly attributed to the Larger Sūtra—so in the Tiantai division of the teachings the three names of this chapter were once taken as plain evidence for the gradual teaching.
Jizang's Commentary on the Larger Sūtra explains this chapter under the title "The Three Sequences", and its divisions and explanations largely correspond to this unit; the essentials are recorded side by side. On the opening question of this unit, Jizang judges it the second section of the Buddha's answer: 「新學菩薩云何次第行下，第二、為始行菩薩開行次第也」 tr. "From ‘how do bodhisattvas new to the training practise in sequence’ onward: second, opening the sequence of practice for bodhisattvas beginning their practice", and he takes up the treatise-author's words, saying: 「論云須菩提信受佛語，諸法雖空而能起五通等，此是知菩薩所能行也。新學菩薩云何於無所有中脩行次第？」 tr. "The treatise says Subhūti believed and received the Buddha's words: though dharmas are empty, one can give rise to the five supernormal powers and the rest; this is knowing what a bodhisattva can practise. How do bodhisattvas new to the training cultivate the sequence of practice within there being nothing existent?"—agreeing exactly with the treatise-author's section 「須菩提伏受佛語」 tr. "Subhūti subdued himself and received the Buddha's words". On the three layers of the Buddha's answer, Jizang judges in general: 「佛答中約三種明次第：一者、約發心明次第；二者、約六度明次第；三者、得六念明次第」 tr. "In the Buddha's answer, sequence is made clear by way of three kinds: first, sequence made clear by way of arousing the mind; second, sequence made clear by way of the six perfections; third, sequence made clear by obtaining the six recollections"—the division into three layers is wholly the same as the order of the sūtra in this unit. On the meaning of 「新學」 tr. "new to the training", Jizang sets a question and answers it: 「問：何等是新學？答：雖未得無生現前無量劫脩行，皆名新學」 tr. "Question: what is new to the training? Answer: though one has cultivated practice for immeasurable kalpas, if non-arising has not yet been obtained and made present, all are called new to the training", the same judgement as the treatise-author's 「雖無量劫發意，未得諸法實相，皆名新學」 tr. "though he has aroused the intent for immeasurable kalpas, so long as he has not yet obtained the real mark of all dharmas, he is called new to the training". On the sayings about the three names, Jizang too sets four sayings side by side: 「人解三次有四說：一、行學道；三、名異了，義更無異。二云、初行中名學後道。三云、布施名行、持戒名學、智慧名道。三云、戒名行、定名學、慧名道，約八正戒定慧亦然。四云、檀與精進六度為行，持戒與禪二度為學，忍是善、般若是慧，具足故名為道也。」 tr. "People explain the three sequences with four sayings: first, practice, training, and path; the three names differ, and in meaning there is no further difference. The second says: the beginning is practice, the middle is named training, the end is path. The third says: giving is named practice, keeping morality is named training, wisdom is named path. The third says: morality is named practice, concentration is named training, wisdom is named path, and by way of the eightfold right path, morality, concentration, and wisdom, it is likewise. The fourth says: dāna and vigour among the six perfections are practice, keeping morality and dhyāna, two perfections, are training, patience is goodness and prajñā is wisdom, and because they are complete it is named path." What it lists differs here and there from the treatise-author's six sayings but on the whole agrees with them. On the section on hearing only from the sages, Jizang explains: 「此中明始行菩薩但從聖人邊開法者，聖說多無依著故，緣覺不說法故，不從緣覺聞」 tr. "Here it makes clear that the bodhisattva beginning his practice hears the Dharma only from the side of the sages, because the sages' speaking is mostly without reliance and clinging; because pratyekabuddhas do not expound the Dharma, he does not hear from pratyekabuddhas"—corresponding to the treatise-author's two sections 「餘人多以著心說，諸聖人以無著心說」 tr. "the other people mostly speak with a clinging mind, while the sages speak with a mind without clinging" and 「辟支佛不樂說法故，不說」 tr. "the pratyekabuddhas are not mentioned, because they do not delight in expounding the Dharma". On the doubt whether arousing the mind also has the three sequences, Jizang asks and answers himself: 「向發心中云何有次第行學道耶？答：此約初中後明學道，故發心亦具三也。」 tr. "In the arousing of the mind just mentioned, how is there sequential practice, training, and path? Answer: this makes clear training and path by way of beginning, middle, and end; therefore arousing the mind too has all three." On the four kinds of practice of the six perfections, Jizang lists them separately and speaks of the cases of not completing them: 「此中度皆具四行：一、自行；二、化他；三、歎人。有人雖自能行施，不能教化行施，以畏嗔故。又畏為已教布施，以之為息故，不能教化行施。有人雖能教化行施，而自不能行。有人具三事：一、自行施；二、能教他；三、歎布施法，見破戒惡人行施也。皆不具四事。菩薩具足四事」 tr. "Here the perfections all have four practices: first, practising oneself; second, transforming others; third, praising people. There is someone who, though he himself can practise giving, cannot teach and transform others to practise giving, because he fears anger. Again, he fears that because he has taught them to give, they will take it as interest, and so he cannot teach and transform others to practise giving. There is someone who, though he can teach and transform others to practise giving, cannot practise it himself. There is someone who has the three matters: first, practising giving himself; second, being able to teach others; third, praising the dharma of giving—he sees a precept-breaking evil person practising giving. None of them has the four matters. The bodhisattva fulfils the four matters"—of the same purport as the five cases listed by the treatise-author. On the doubt about the five portions arising from giving, Jizang sets a question saying: 「問：此云菩薩因布施生五分，得入菩薩位，云何作之？答：菩薩布施故，得果報如竟，不猶戒即生眾。又施眾生無畏，亦是戒眾。以持戒故得空，空故發慧，發慧斷煩惱，得脫眾生，可知見證解脫，名解脫知見眾也。」 tr. "Question: this says that the bodhisattva, through giving, gives rise to the five portions and obtains entry into the bodhisattva's position; how is this done? Answer: because the bodhisattva gives, he obtains the retribution as it comes to completion, not like morality at once giving rise to the aggregate. Again, giving beings fearlessness is also the aggregate of morality. Because of keeping morality he obtains emptiness; because of emptiness wisdom arises; wisdom arising severs the afflictions, and he obtains the liberation of beings; it can be known and seen that he has realised liberation, and it is named the aggregate of the knowledge and vision of liberation." On the mutual containing of the five portions and the six perfections, Jizang says: 「五分身六度相攝者，尸羅攝戒身，攝解脫身及定身，般若攝慧身及解脫智見」 tr. "As for the five-portioned body and the six perfections containing one another: śīla contains the body of morality, contains the body of liberation and the body of concentration, and prajñā contains the body of wisdom and the knowledge and vision of liberation"—largely the same as the treatise-author's way of matching, 「持戒眾名尸波羅蜜；定眾、解脫眾名禪波羅蜜；慧眾、解脫知見眾是般若波羅蜜」 tr. "the aggregate of keeping morality is named śīlapāramitā; the aggregate of concentration and the aggregate of liberation are named dhyānapāramitā; the aggregate of wisdom and the aggregate of the knowledge and vision of liberation are prajñāpāramitā". On the section on the six recollections, Jizang is brief, saying only: 「第二、約六念明三次，如文也。」 tr. "Second, the three sequences are made clear by way of the six recollections, as in the text." On Subhūti's difficulty at the end, Jizang judges it the third section and explains its intent: 「須菩提白佛下，第三、須菩提取惑情為問，請佛今通使教通無。應問意云：若諸法實無所有，則無有次第行學等。佛反問：汝聲聞人見色等法是定實不？須菩提答：一切法從因緣假名有，無有實定故，我不見其實定一也。」 tr. "From ‘Subhūti said to the Buddha’ onward: third, Subhūti takes up deluded feelings to make a question, asking the Buddha now to resolve them, so that the teaching may get through without obstruction. The intent of the question should be: if dharmas really are without anything existent, then there is no sequential practice, training, and so on. The Buddha asks in return: you, a śrāvaka, do you see form and the other dharmas as fixed and real? Subhūti answers: all dharmas exist as provisional names from causes and conditions, and there is nothing real and fixed; therefore I do not see their real and fixed oneness." On the order of breaking morality and breaking view in the last passage, Jizang explains: 「破正見者，惡取空是邪見故破正見，內破正見故外破戒及威儀，以不畏罪故便妄語求利，故破淨命也」 tr. "As for breaking right view: wrongly grasping emptiness is wrong view, and so it breaks right view; because right view is broken within, morality and deportment are broken without; because they do not fear sin, they then tell lies to seek gain, and so they break pure livelihood"—the division of inner and outer agrees wholly with the treatise-author's order, 「即生邪見，破正見；破正見故，以少因緣而破戒及威儀」 tr. "they give rise to wrong views and break right view; because they break right view, on scant causes and conditions they break morality and deportment".
The extant text of Huiying's Commentary stops at fascicle twenty-four, and what it comments on ends in the middle of chapter sixty-nine; this chapter lies outside the range of his extant commentary, and so for this chapter his explanation is lacking—it is not that his commentary covered it and failed to reach it. Junzheng's Profound Meaning of the Four Mahāyāna Treatises sets out its discussion by topics and does not comment chapter by chapter; it cites nothing on the three names of this chapter, and this is recorded according to the facts, without judging whether there is or is not.
次第學品 · 承衍Training in Sequence · Further Resonances
全文五層 →Full five layers →承衍
〈次第學品〉之所承，接在一個詞上。前品〈遍學品〉之末正論順忍，論主於彼判曰「是小乘順忍。小乘順忍尚無，何況大乘」，又分見色為兩重——「見色有二種：一者、見色實相了了，二者、斷繫諸色煩惱故名為見」，而以「若人見色、修道尚無，何況能得修須陀洹果乃至斷煩惱習」收筆。本品開卷第一句即從此接住：「世尊！若有法相者，尚不得順忍，何況得道！」順忍二字未換，而問法一翻——前品說有所得則順忍尚不可得，本品便逼問無法相者當得順忍不，於是佛乃立「無有法相、非法相，即是菩薩順忍」，把順忍從有無兩邊一併提出。所啟者亦在一句之間。本品之末，須菩提之難是「若一切法無所有性者，是則無道、無智、無果」，佛不正答而反問，其事未及正說便止；次品〈一心具萬行品〉開卷，須菩提即把同一難改口再問——「世尊！若一切法性無所有，菩薩見何等利益故，為眾生求阿耨多羅三藐三菩提？」而佛此番正面答之，仍以那個被翻轉的「故」字為軸：「以一切法性無所有故，菩薩為眾生求阿耨多羅三藐三菩提」，並直斷「諸有得、有著者，難可解脫」，終立一句與本品遙相對舉之語——「無所得即是道、即是果、即是阿耨多羅三藐三菩提，法性不壞故。」本品說無所有中猶有次第，次品說無所得即是道果；一縱一收，本是一事。
後來傳本於此品之名分歧最多，可誌者有三面。其一是本論品題：底本題「大智度論釋次第學品第七十五」，而明本缺「大智度論」四字，品題逕作「釋次第學品第七十五」；聖本、石本則連此十三字整段皆缺，是其品題另編或併入前品之流。宋本、元本於「五」字下增一「上」字，標其為上卷之分；石本又於此處標「卷第八十七首」，是其卷界逕以品界為界，與底本卷界落在品中者不同，兩存並錄不判。最可注意者是宮本：底本九字之題，宮本作十字「釋第七十五品上三次品」——是宮本明標本品又名「三次品」。其二是本論卷末與卷首之續題：卷八十六卷尾，宮本作「釋第七十四品訖第七十五品上」，聖本作「釋第七十品訖第七十四品上」，較宮本差四品——是聖本卷分自成一系，非題號逐一相差，不可以「差一階」一語通括卷題；卷八十七卷首續題，宋本、宮本「次第學品」作「次品」，聖本則連「次第學品」四字亦缺，而「第七十五之餘」一語，宋本作「第七十五品下訖第七十六品」，元本作「第七十五下訖第七十六品」，明本作「第七十五之下」，聖本作「七十四品下訖第七十五品」——聖本仍差一階，如實誌之。其三是所釋大經之傳本：其品正題作「三次品第七十五」，題下夾註「丹本次第行品」，而諸本於「次」字讀作「次第行」，即題為「三次第行品」；本論明本於品題處所註「之上經作三次第行品」一語，正與之相合，是論之明本所見大經與大經諸本用字同流。至其卷首總目所繫之品次編號，本品與次品同號，係目錄標記層自身之偏移，鄰接數品皆有此例，如實誌之不強解。三面合觀，則本品之名實有三造並存：論之底本作「次第學品」，宮本與大經底本作「三次品」，大經諸本與論之明本註作「次第行品」或「三次第行品」——而三名所指，正是經文一句之三個詞：次第行、次第學、次第道。異名不是異義，是取之者各就其一。
古德之疏，於本品可考者以吉藏《大品經義疏》為主。其書從所釋大經作「三次品第七十五」，開卷即定其在全經之位次與義脈：「此下第四、明菩薩次第漸增得入菩薩位」，而科為三分——「因前只未明大乘順忍之相，即顯無生忍」為第一，「為始行菩薩開之次第」為第二，「須菩提取惑情為難，請如來今通使教無應」為第三。此三分與本論二經二論之走勢相合：初分正顯大乘順忍而終顯無生忍，中分為新學開目，末分則是須菩提代當來人設難。於「有法是菩薩道，無法是菩薩果」一句，吉藏先出一家之解——「因中行有法，故有法為道；果地行無法，無法是果也」，而自註本論不爾，別出三釋，即本論所列八聖道、五度與般若、如法性實際三說；又自設一問，問前之集散品既明實相能生般若而以般若為果，今何以反以般若為道、實相為果，其答在所就之門不同——「般若就境智敬故，實相能生般若，般若是果；今明由般若斷煩惱得悟實相故，實相是果，般若是因也」。於次第一節，其判與本論之目全合：「佛答中約三種明次第：一者、約發心明次第；二者、約六度明次第；三者、得六念明次第」；而新學之界說亦同——「問：何等是新學？答：雖未得無生現前無量劫脩行，皆名新學。」三名之異解，吉藏並列四說，與本論之並列數說同其體例，其起句曰「人解三次有四說」，所分亦不外行學道之三分、施戒慧之三分、戒定慧之三分與六度之分配。六度四行相一節，其語最簡而最全：「此中度皆具四行：一、自行；二、化他；三、歎人」，並舉不能具足之病——畏嗔故不能教化行施，畏其以之為恩故不能教化行施，能教化而自不能行——與本論所列諸病相發。至末分惡取空之失，吉藏亦逐層點出其內外之序：「惡取空是邪見故破正見，內破正見故外破戒及威儀」，而後妄語求利以破淨命——本論所謂破戒、破正見、破威儀、破淨命四事，於此得一貫穿之線：病起於見，見壞而後行壞。
另兩家則無可徵。慧影《大智度論疏》為逐品隨文之作，然其現存之本止於前數十品之中，品七十以下皆在其本之外，本品〔查無〕其釋，是闕釋而非棄釋，如實標闕不以他處之文充之。均正《大乘四論玄義》遍檢「次第學」「三次品」二目皆〔查無〕，其書為綱要體而非隨文釋，於此類後段細目之品本罕逐字引，非缺陷。另有一事可誌：智顗《摩訶止觀》判五時頓漸不定，歷引諸經為證，於漸教一項所引大品之文，即本品品名之核心句——其文曰「次第行、次第學、次第道」，繫之《大品》而斷曰「此證漸也」。是天台一家取此三名以證漸教之有據。此取義與本論之用不同：本論之三名，是為新發意者於畢竟空中開其可踏之處，故論主既列數說而不判，又明言「諸法性雖無所有，而隨世諦行，為破顛倒故」；而天台所取者是判教之漸相。兩造各就其用，如實誌之不判。
把這一路承衍帶回本品，三個品名恰好照見本品義理之三面。曰次第學者，舉其所學——六波羅蜜之四種行相與六念之六門，一目一目列全，是可學之事。曰次第行者，舉其所行——「先麁後細，先易後難，漸漸習學，名為次第」，是可踏之階。曰三次者，舉其名數——行、學、道三者或一義而異語，或初中後之分，或施戒慧之分，本論並列數說而不定於一，正因此三名所指本是一條路之三種看法。三名並存而不相妨，猶如本論之列數說、吉藏之列四說而皆不判：次第之義既不在名上，便不必爭名。
因此，〈次第學品〉最終留下的，是一套可以帶進日用的量法。我聞畢竟空而覺得無事可作時，記得佛之自證不是說雖空猶能行，是說若五欲實有定性，則「我本為菩薩行時，不能觀諸欲、惡不善法無所有性入初禪」——空正是行之所以可能。我嫌自己是新學而不敢觀深法時，記得論主之喻：「譬如小兒服藥，須蜜乃下。」我覺得次第太長而生怯時，記得那一架梯子——「譬如緣梯，從一初桄漸上，上處雖高雖難，亦能得至。」我行施而只顧自作時，記得四種行缺一不成，而其病不過是「或畏他瞋」「以其邪見不識施果故」之類。我在先施聖人與先施貧病之間猶豫時，記得論主不判其一，只教人認得自己是慈悲心多還是分別心多，並指出二者終有俱行之時——「心得自在，二事俱行——慈愍眾生，又視皆如佛。」而我若讀空讀到手上鬆了，記得須菩提末後之所以問，不為自疑，是為後人：「我畏當來世有如是事，以是故問佛。」全品說盡了無所有，末後仍歸於一句可行之語——「而次第法不離於空。」
Further Resonances
What "Training in Sequence" inherits is joined at a single term. At the end of the preceding chapter, "Training in All," the discussion turns squarely on compliant acceptance; there the treatise-author judges, 「是小乘順忍。小乘順忍尚無，何況大乘」 tr. "It is the compliant acceptance of the Small Vehicle. If even the compliant acceptance of the Small Vehicle is lacking, how much more that of the Great Vehicle," and further divides seeing form into two layers—「見色有二種：一者、見色實相了了，二者、斷繫諸色煩惱故名為見」 tr. "Seeing form is of two kinds: the first is seeing the real mark of form clearly; the second is called seeing because the afflictions that bind one to forms have been cut off"—and lays down the brush with 「若人見色、修道尚無，何況能得修須陀洹果乃至斷煩惱習」 tr. "If a person sees form, even cultivating the path is lacking; how much less can he obtain the cultivation of the fruit of the srota-āpanna, and so on up to the cutting off of the afflictions and their habitual residues." The very first sentence at the opening of this chapter takes it up from right here: 「世尊！若有法相者，尚不得順忍，何況得道！」 tr. "World-Honored One! If there is the mark of dharmas, one still does not obtain compliant acceptance—how much less the path!" The two Chinese characters for compliant acceptance are not changed, and yet the way of asking is turned over—the preceding chapter says that with something to be attained even compliant acceptance is unfindable, and this chapter then presses the question whether one without the mark of dharmas should obtain compliant acceptance or not; and so the Buddha sets up 「無有法相、非法相，即是菩薩順忍」 tr. "There is no mark of dharmas and no mark of what is not a dharma; this is the bodhisattva's compliant acceptance," lifting compliant acceptance out of both sides, existence and non-existence, at once. What it opens likewise lies within a single sentence. At the end of this chapter, Subhūti's difficulty is 「若一切法無所有性者，是則無道、無智、無果」 tr. "If all dharmas are without any existent nature, then there is no path, no knowledge, no fruit"; the Buddha does not answer it directly but asks in return, and the matter stops before it comes to be spoken of directly. At the opening of the next chapter, "One Mind Complete with All Practices," Subhūti at once asks the same difficulty again in changed words—「世尊！若一切法性無所有，菩薩見何等利益故，為眾生求阿耨多羅三藐三菩提？」 tr. "World-Honored One! If the nature of all dharmas is without anything existent, what benefit does the bodhisattva see, that for the sake of beings he seeks anuttarā samyaksaṃbodhi?"—and this time the Buddha answers it head-on, still taking as its axis that overturned 「故」 tr. "because": 「以一切法性無所有故，菩薩為眾生求阿耨多羅三藐三菩提」 tr. "Because the nature of all dharmas is without anything existent, the bodhisattva seeks anuttarā samyaksaṃbodhi for the sake of beings," and he judges straight out, 「諸有得、有著者，難可解脫」 tr. "Those with something attained and something clung to find it hard to be liberated," finally setting up a sentence that answers this chapter from afar—「無所得即是道、即是果、即是阿耨多羅三藐三菩提，法性不壞故。」 tr. "Nothing to be attained is precisely the path, precisely the fruit, precisely anuttarā samyaksaṃbodhi, because the nature of dharmas is indestructible." This chapter says that within there being nothing existent there is still sequence; the next chapter says that nothing to be attained is precisely the path and its fruit. One letting go and one gathering in: from the first they are one matter.
The later transmitted texts diverge most of all on this chapter's name, and what is worth recording has three sides. The first is this treatise's chapter title. The base text heads it 「大智度論釋次第學品第七十五」 tr. "Mahāprajñāpāramitā-upadeśa, Explanation of ‘Training in Sequence’, Chapter Seventy-five," while the Ming edition lacks the four Chinese characters 「大智度論」 tr. "Mahāprajñāpāramitā-upadeśa," its chapter title reading simply 「釋次第學品第七十五」 tr. "Explanation of ‘Training in Sequence’, Chapter Seventy-five"; the Shōgozō and Ishiyama-dera manuscripts lack even the whole stretch of these thirteen Chinese characters, being of the stream in which the chapter title is arranged separately or merged into the preceding chapter. The Song and Yuan editions add beneath the character 「五」 tr. "five" one character 「上」 tr. "Upper," marking it as the division of the upper fascicle; the Ishiyama-dera manuscript further marks at this place 「卷第八十七首」 tr. "head of Fascicle Eighty-seven," that is, its fascicle boundary is taken straight from the chapter boundary, unlike the base text, whose fascicle boundary falls within the chapter; both are kept and recorded together without judgement. Most worth attention is the Palace edition: for the base text's title of nine Chinese characters, the Palace edition has ten, 「釋第七十五品上三次品」 tr. "Explanation of the Seventy-fifth Chapter, Upper: The Three Sequences"—that is, the Palace edition plainly marks that this chapter is also named 「三次品」 tr. "The Three Sequences." The second is the continuation titles at the end and the head of this treatise's fascicles. At the end of fascicle eighty-six, the Palace edition reads 「釋第七十四品訖第七十五品上」 tr. "Explanation of Chapter Seventy-four ends; Chapter Seventy-five, Upper," and the Shōgozō manuscript reads 「釋第七十品訖第七十四品上」 tr. "Explanation of Chapter Seventy ends; Chapter Seventy-four, Upper," four chapters off from the Palace edition—that is, the Shōgozō manuscript's division of fascicles forms a system of its own and is not a title numbering differing one by one, and the fascicle titles may not be covered across the board by the single phrase 「差一階」 tr. "one step off." In the continuation title at the head of fascicle eighty-seven, the Song edition and the Palace edition have, for 「次第學品」 tr. "Training in Sequence," 「次品」 tr. "The Sequence Chapter," and the Shōgozō manuscript lacks even the four Chinese characters 「次第學品」 tr. "Training in Sequence"; and for the phrase 「第七十五之餘」 tr. "the remainder of Chapter Seventy-five," the Song edition reads 「第七十五品下訖第七十六品」 tr. "Chapter Seventy-five, Lower, through Chapter Seventy-six," the Yuan edition reads 「第七十五下訖第七十六品」 tr. "Seventy-five, Lower, through Chapter Seventy-six," the Ming edition reads 「第七十五之下」 tr. "Seventy-five, Last Part," and the Shōgozō manuscript reads 「七十四品下訖第七十五品」 tr. "Chapter Seventy-four, Lower, through Chapter Seventy-five"—the Shōgozō manuscript is still one step off, and this is recorded as it is. The third is the transmitted text of the Larger Sūtra being explained. Its main chapter title reads 「三次品第七十五」 tr. "The Three Sequences, Chapter Seventy-five," with an interlinear note below the title, 「丹本次第行品」 tr. "the Khitan edition: ‘Sequential Practice’ chapter," while the various editions read the character 「次」 tr. "sequence" as 「次第行」 tr. "sequential practice," that is, the title is 「三次第行品」 tr. "The Three Sequential Practices"; the phrase noted at the chapter title in this treatise's Ming edition, 「之上經作三次第行品」 tr. "for the First Part, the sūtra reads ‘The Three Sequential Practices’ chapter," accords exactly with this, so the Larger Sūtra seen by the treatise's Ming edition is of one stream in its wording with the various editions of the Larger Sūtra. As for the chapter-order number attached in its general table of contents at the head of the scroll, this chapter and the next chapter bear the same number; this is a shift within the table-of-contents markup layer itself, and the several adjoining chapters all have this pattern; it is recorded as it is without forcing an explanation. Taking the three sides together, this chapter's name in fact has three parties standing side by side: the treatise's base text has 「次第學品」 tr. "Training in Sequence," the Palace edition and the base text of the Larger Sūtra have 「三次品」 tr. "The Three Sequences," and the various editions of the Larger Sūtra and the note of the treatise's Ming edition have 「次第行品」 tr. "Sequential Practice" or 「三次第行品」 tr. "The Three Sequential Practices"—and what the three names point to is precisely three terms of a single sentence of the sūtra: sequential practice, sequential training, sequential path. Different names are not different meanings; those who took them up each went by one of them.
Among the commentaries of the ancient masters, what can be examined for this chapter is chiefly Jizang's Commentary on the Larger Sūtra. His book follows the Larger Sūtra being explained in calling it 「三次品第七十五」 tr. "The Three Sequences, Chapter Seventy-five," and at its opening at once fixes its place in the order of the whole sūtra and its vein of meaning: 「此下第四、明菩薩次第漸增得入菩薩位」 tr. "From here down is the fourth: making clear that the bodhisattva, increasing gradually in sequence, obtains entry into the bodhisattva's position"; and he divides it into three parts—「因前只未明大乘順忍之相，即顯無生忍」 tr. "Because the preceding had only not yet made clear the mark of the compliant acceptance of the Great Vehicle, it then shows the acceptance of non-arising" is the first; 「為始行菩薩開之次第」 tr. "opening the sequence for bodhisattvas beginning their practice" is the second; 「須菩提取惑情為難，請如來今通使教無應」 tr. "Subhūti takes up deluded feelings to make a difficulty, requesting the Tathāgata now to resolve it, so that the teaching leaves nothing to answer" is the third. These three parts accord with the course of this treatise's two sūtra sections and two treatise sections: the first part directly shows the compliant acceptance of the Great Vehicle and in the end shows the acceptance of non-arising; the middle part opens out the items for those new to the training; and the last part is Subhūti setting up a difficulty on behalf of the people to come. On the sentence 「有法是菩薩道，無法是菩薩果」 tr. "An existent dharma is the bodhisattva's path; a non-existent dharma is the bodhisattva's fruit," Jizang first gives one school's explanation—「因中行有法，故有法為道；果地行無法，無法是果也」 tr. "In the cause one practises an existent dharma, therefore an existent dharma is the path; at the ground of the fruit one practises a non-existent dharma; a non-existent dharma is the fruit"—and notes himself that this treatise is not so, setting out separately three explanations, namely the three sayings this treatise lists: the eightfold noble path; the five perfections and prajñā; and suchness, the nature of dharmas, and the limit of reality. He further sets up a question himself: since the earlier "Gathering and Dispersal" made clear that the real mark can give rise to prajñā and took prajñā as the fruit, why now, on the contrary, is prajñā taken as the path and the real mark as the fruit? His answer lies in the difference of the gate from which each is taken—「般若就境智敬故，實相能生般若，般若是果；今明由般若斷煩惱得悟實相故，實相是果，般若是因也」 tr. "Because prajñā is taken in terms of object and knowledge, the real mark can give rise to prajñā, and prajñā is the fruit; now it is made clear that through prajñā one cuts off the afflictions and awakens to the real mark, therefore the real mark is the fruit and prajñā is the cause." On the section on sequence, his judgement wholly accords with this treatise's items: 「佛答中約三種明次第：一者、約發心明次第；二者、約六度明次第；三者、得六念明次第」 tr. "In the Buddha's answer, sequence is made clear by way of three kinds: first, sequence made clear by way of arousing the mind; second, sequence made clear by way of the six perfections; third, sequence made clear by obtaining the six recollections"; and his definition of the one new to the training is also the same—「問：何等是新學？答：雖未得無生現前無量劫脩行，皆名新學。」 tr. "Question: what is new to the training? Answer: though one has cultivated practice for immeasurable kalpas, if non-arising has not yet been obtained and made present, all are called new to the training." On the different explanations of the three names, Jizang sets four sayings side by side, in the same format as this treatise's setting several sayings side by side; his opening phrase is 「人解三次有四說」 tr. "People explain the three sequences with four sayings," and what he divides does not go beyond the threefold division of practice, training, and path, the threefold division of giving, morality, and wisdom, the threefold division of morality, concentration, and wisdom, and the assignment to the six perfections. On the section on the four practising marks of the six perfections, his words are the most concise and the most complete: 「此中度皆具四行：一、自行；二、化他；三、歎人」 tr. "Here the perfections all have four practices: first, practising oneself; second, transforming others; third, praising people"; and he lists the sicknesses of being unable to complete them—because he fears anger he cannot teach and transform others to practise giving; because he fears they will take it as a favour he cannot teach and transform others to practise giving; he can teach and transform others and yet cannot himself practise—which shed light on the sicknesses this treatise lists. As for the fault of wrongly grasping emptiness in the last part, Jizang also points out layer by layer its order of within and without: 「惡取空是邪見故破正見，內破正見故外破戒及威儀」 tr. "Wrongly grasping emptiness is wrong view, and so it breaks right view; because right view is broken within, morality and deportment are broken without," and after that one tells lies to seek gain and so breaks pure livelihood—the four matters this treatise speaks of, breaking morality, breaking right view, breaking deportment, and breaking pure livelihood, here obtain a thread that runs through them: the sickness arises in view; view breaks, and then conduct breaks.
For the other two masters there is nothing to cite as evidence. Huiying's Commentary is a work that follows the text chapter by chapter, yet its extant text stops within the earlier several dozen chapters, and chapter seventy onward all lies outside it; for this chapter its explanation is 〔not found〕—the explanation is lacking, not discarded, and the lack is marked as it is, without filling it with text from elsewhere. Junzheng's Profound Meaning of the Four Mahāyāna Treatises, searched throughout for the two headings 「次第學」 tr. "training in sequence" and 「三次品」 tr. "The Three Sequences," is 〔not found〕 for both; his book is in the form of essentials, not a running commentary on the text, and for chapters of fine detail in the later sections such as this it rarely cites word for word in the first place; this is not a defect. There is one more matter worth recording: Zhiyi's Great Calming and Contemplation, in classifying the five periods and the sudden, the gradual, and the indeterminate, cites sūtras one after another as evidence, and the text of the Larger Sūtra that it cites under the item of the gradual teaching is precisely the core sentence of this chapter's name—its words are 「次第行、次第學、次第道」 tr. "sequential practice, sequential training, sequential path," which it attaches to the Larger Sūtra, concluding, 「此證漸也」 tr. "This is evidence for the gradual." So the Tiantai line has a basis for taking these three names as evidence for the gradual teaching. This taking of the meaning differs from this treatise's use. In this treatise the three names open, for those who have newly aroused the mind, a place within ultimate emptiness where they can set foot; therefore the treatise-author both lists several sayings without judging them and states plainly, 「諸法性雖無所有，而隨世諦行，為破顛倒故」 tr. "Though the nature of dharmas is without anything existent, one practises following worldly truth, in order to break inversion"; whereas what Tiantai takes is the gradual aspect in the classification of the teachings. The two parties each go by their own use; this is recorded as it is without judgement.
Bringing this whole line of further resonances back to this chapter, the three chapter names precisely illuminate three faces of this chapter's meaning. The name ‘Training in Sequence’ picks out what is trained in—the four kinds of practising marks of the six perfections and the six gates of the six recollections, listed in full item by item: these are matters that can be trained in. The name ‘Sequential Practice’ picks out what is practised—「先麁後細，先易後難，漸漸習學，名為次第」 tr. "First coarse then fine, first easy then hard, little by little training in and learning, is named sequence": these are steps that can be set foot on. The name ‘The Three Sequences’ picks out the number of its names—practice, training, and path are either one meaning in different words, or a division into beginning, middle, and end, or a division into giving, morality, and wisdom; this treatise sets several sayings side by side and does not fix on one, precisely because what these three names point to is from the first three ways of looking at one road. The three names stand together without obstructing one another, just as this treatise lists several sayings and Jizang lists four, and neither judges: since the meaning of sequence does not lie in the name, there is no need to dispute over names.
So what "Training in Sequence" leaves us in the end is a set of measures that can be carried into daily use. When I hear of ultimate emptiness and feel there is nothing to be done, I remember that the Buddha's own testimony does not say that though it is empty one can still practise; it says that if the five desires really had a fixed nature, then 「我本為菩薩行時，不能觀諸欲、惡不善法無所有性入初禪」 tr. "when I formerly practised as a bodhisattva, I could not have contemplated the desires and evil and unwholesome dharmas as without any existent nature and entered the first dhyāna"—emptiness is precisely what makes practice possible. When I disdain myself as new to the training and dare not contemplate deep dharmas, I remember the treatise-author's simile: 「譬如小兒服藥，須蜜乃下。」 tr. "It is as a small child taking medicine: it needs honey before it can go down." When I feel the sequence is too long and grow faint-hearted, I remember that ladder—「譬如緣梯，從一初桄漸上，上處雖高雖難，亦能得至。」 tr. "It is as climbing a ladder: from the first rung one goes up little by little, and though the place above is high and hard, one can still reach it." When I give and attend only to doing it myself, I remember that of the four kinds of practice not one may be lacking, and that their sicknesses are no more than such things as 「或畏他瞋」 tr. "or he fears others' anger" and 「以其邪見不識施果故」 tr. "because he holds wrong views and does not recognise the fruit of giving." When I hesitate between giving first to the sages and giving first to the poor and sick, I remember that the treatise-author does not judge for either one, but only teaches a person to recognise whether in himself the mind of kindness and compassion is greater or the discriminating mind is greater, and points out that the two at last have a time of proceeding together—「心得自在，二事俱行——慈愍眾生，又視皆如佛。」 tr. "The mind becomes free, and the two things proceed together—pitying beings with kindness, and also regarding all as a Buddha." And if, reading of emptiness, I read until my grip goes slack, I remember that the reason Subhūti asks at the very end is not his own doubt but for the sake of those who come after: 「我畏當來世有如是事，以是故問佛。」 tr. "I fear that such things will happen in the world to come; for this reason I asked the Buddha." The whole chapter has said all there is to say about there being nothing existent, and at the last it still comes back to one sentence that can be practised—「而次第法不離於空。」 tr. "And the dharma of sequence is not apart from emptiness."
一心具萬行品One Mind Complete with All Practices
全文五層 →Full five layers →一心具萬行品：法性無所有何以不是取消發心的理由，無所得何以就是道就是果，法性不壞何以是這一句的根據，初地乃至十地與報得神通何以仍然安立，六度神通何以說無有差別而又分別說，一念中具足萬行何以不是壓縮時間，不遠離般若何以就是一念具足之因，不二相何以是一念的實義，檀波羅蜜中何以能攝諸波羅蜜，住無漏心布施何以不見施者受者所施物，六波羅蜜何以要在無相無得無作法中逐一開示，尸羅何以連聖果與轉輪聖王之報都不取，羼提何以要立生忍法忍兩種，毘梨耶何以分身精進與心精進，禪何以要除佛諸禪而說餘一切禪，般若何以說不見定實相，國土資生何以皆無有主，問者答者俱言無所有何以仍分得出誰問誰答，佛已先答何以須菩提更問，何等是一念，得無生法忍菩薩割截無痛何以反說他有大恩分
在問什麼
這一品問的是一個極容易走偏的問題：法既然都無所有，行還要不要行？行了又算不算有所得？
品首須菩提問得很直：一切法的體性都無所有，菩薩是見到什麼利益，纔為眾生求無上菩提？這一問不是難佛，是替聽法的人問。凡聽慣了空義而未消化的人，心裡會生出一個自以為徹底的結論——既然什麼都沒有，那麼發心、度生、成佛也一併沒有了。佛的答語卻不順著這個方向收攏，反而把它整個掉轉過來：正因為一切法性無所有，菩薩纔為眾生求無上菩提。接著補一句理由——有所得、有所著的人難以解脫，取相的人沒有道、沒有果、沒有無上菩提。於是全品的軸心一句出來了：無所得就是道、就是果、就是無上菩提，因為法性不壞的緣故。
這一句既立，第二重疑立刻跟上：若無所得就是道果，那麼初地乃至十地、無生忍、報得的神通與六度、成就眾生淨佛國土，乃至般涅槃後舍利受供養，這些次第又怎麼安立？佛的答語仍是同一個方向——正因為諸法是無所得相，纔得初地乃至十地。次第不是靠「有所得」撐起來的，它是在無所得中自然成立的。第三重疑接著問差別：若都無所得，六度與諸神通豈不成了一片混同？佛答無有差別，而所以分別說者，是因為眾生執著。
前半這三問三答立定之後，經文纔轉入本品的正題。須菩提問：菩薩怎樣在一念中具足行六波羅蜜乃至八十隨形好？佛的答語一層一層往裡收：先說所有布施乃至相好都不遠離般若；再問何謂不遠離，答曰不二相；再問何謂不二相，答曰欲具足檀波羅蜜時，檀波羅蜜中即攝諸波羅蜜以及四念處乃至相好；再問布施時怎樣攝諸無漏法，答曰住無漏心布施而不見誰施、誰受、所施何物。四層問答之後，經文再以一個總問收攏——若諸法無相無作，這六度與三十七品乃至相好究竟怎樣具足？——然後纔逐一開演檀、尸羅、羼提、毘梨耶、禪、般若六波羅蜜「於無相、無得、無作法中具足」之相。經段末以「不受一切法」作結：菩薩成佛時，國土一切資生之物皆無有主。
論段不另立新義，只作四番問答並逐句牒經而釋。第一番問得極細：問的人與答的人都說「無所有」，怎樣分得出哪一句是問、哪一句是答？論主答得更細：法雖是一個，心卻不同——問的人以著心問，答的人以無著心答。這一答是全論的鑰匙：本品前後所有的「無所得」，字面完全一樣，分別只在說者的心上。第二番問佛既已先答何以須菩提更問，答在眾中有新發意菩薩聞空而著空。第三番問須菩提何以問一念中行六度，答在既聞般若於諸法無礙，則無所不能。第四番問生身菩薩割截甚痛纔算難，得無生法忍的菩薩如化人無痛，有什麼恩分——論主的答語把「難」的重心從痛不痛移到捨不捨，是全品最後也最重的一轉。
逐段解明
一、法性無所有，菩薩見何利益而求菩提；佛答正以無所有故求。 品首須菩提稟白：若一切法的體性都無所有，菩薩是見何等利益，纔為眾生求無上菩提。此問的著力處在『利益』二字——凡言求，必有所為；凡有所為，必有所得。佛的答語不與他分辯利益之有無，逕把因果反轉：「以一切法性無所有故，菩薩為眾生求阿耨多羅三藐三菩提。」隨後自出理由：有得、有著的人難以解脫，取相的人沒有道、沒有果、沒有無上菩提。要看清這裡的層次——佛不是說無所有之中還勉強可以發心，而是說無所有正是發心之所以可能。眾生之所以流轉，是被得與著綁住；菩薩之所以能救，正因為他手裡沒有那條繩子。
二、無得相者有道果否；答無所得即是道即是果即是菩提，法性不壞故。 須菩提順勢再問：既然取相者沒有道果，那麼沒有得相的人，有道、有果、有無上菩提嗎？他問的是一個對句——若有相無，是否無相有。佛的答語不落在這個對句裡：「無所得即是道、即是果、即是阿耨多羅三藐三菩提，法性不壞故。」末四字是全句的根據，不可略過：道果之所以能在無所得中成立，不是因為無所得另外變出一個什麼，而是因為法性本來如此、未曾被壞。佛接著補一句反面的話——若在無所得法中還想要得道得果，那就是想壞法性。這一句把行人最隱微的一念揪了出來：口說無所得而心中仍在求得，那個求的動作本身，正是與法性相違的。
三、若無所得即是道果，云何有初地乃至十地與報得諸功德；答正以無所得相故得。 須菩提第三問問得最長，把整條菩薩道的建制一一數出：初地乃至十地、無生忍法、報得神通、報得的六度、住果報法中成就眾生淨佛國土、供養諸佛的衣服飲食香華瓔珞房舍臥具燈燭種種資生之具，乃至般涅槃後舍利與弟子仍受供養而福德不斷。問的意思是：這一整套次第若沒有所得，還立得住嗎？佛答仍是那個方向——正因為諸法是無所得相，纔得初地乃至十地與報得的五神通六度，又以善根因緣的緣故能利益眾生，乃至涅槃後舍利受供養。讀此段要把『無所得』與『無有』分開：經文從未說沒有十地，只說十地不是被得到的東西。
四、若諸法無所得相，六度神通有何差別；答無有差別，以眾生著故分別說。 第四問轉到差別上：若一切都無所得，那麼布施、持戒、忍辱、精進、禪定、智慧與諸神通之間還有沒有分別？佛答得乾脆——在無所得法中無有差別，之所以分別而說，是因為眾生執著布施乃至神通的緣故。這一答須兩面守住：一面，不可因「無有差別」而廢六度之別修，因為分別說本身就是佛所施設；另一面，也不可因分門別類而以為六度是六樣各自獨立的東西。差別在說法的一邊，不在法性的一邊。
五、云何無差別；答不得布施而行布施乃至不得諸佛法而得菩提，如是行者魔不能壞。 須菩提再問這「無差別」究竟怎麼說。佛的答語是一串整齊的句式：不得布施、施者受者皆不可得而行布施，不得戒而持戒，不得忍而行忍，不得精進而行精進，不得禪而行禪，不得智慧而行智慧，不得神通而行神通，不得四念處而行四念處乃至不得八聖道分而行八聖道分，不得空無相無作三昧而行空無相無作三昧，不得眾生而成就眾生，不得佛國土而淨佛國土，不得諸佛法而得無上菩提。每一句都是同一個格式——所行者行，所得者不得。末後佛加一句實效之語：菩薩這樣行無所得般若時，魔或魔天不能破壞。可見此句不止是理上的正確，更是行門上的安穩：無可得處即無可奪處。
六、云何一念中具足行六度乃至八十隨形好；答所有布施乃至相好皆不遠離般若。 本品正題自此問起。須菩提把要具足的名目一口氣列盡：六波羅蜜、四禪、四無量心、四無色定、四念處、四正勤、四如意足、五根、五力、七覺分、八聖道分、三解脫門、佛十力、四無所畏、四無礙智、十八不共法、大慈大悲、三十二相、八十隨形好——問的是這樣龐大的一堆，如何能在一念中具足。佛的第一層答語只有一句：菩薩所有的布施不遠離般若波羅蜜，所修的持戒忍辱精進禪定不遠離般若波羅蜜，乃至四禪四無量四無色與四念處乃至相好，都不遠離般若波羅蜜。答的不是『怎麼擠進一念』，而是『靠什麼纔在一念』。
七、云何不遠離故一念具足；答布施乃至相好皆不二相。 須菩提再問：不遠離般若怎麼就成了一念具足？佛答再收一層——所有布施不遠離般若而「不二相」，持戒時也不二相，修忍辱、勤精進、入禪定也不二相，乃至八十隨形好也不二相。不二相三字，是把「不遠離」由關係之語轉成體性之語：不是布施在這裡、般若在那裡而兩者靠得近，是布施與般若在行時本無兩個相可分。
八、云何不二相；答欲具足檀波羅蜜，檀中即攝諸波羅蜜及四念處乃至相好。 再問不二相怎麼說。佛答：菩薩行般若時欲具足檀波羅蜜，檀波羅蜜中就攝了諸波羅蜜以及四念處乃至八十隨形好。這一答把前問落到最先起修的一度上——布施。凡萬行之攝，不必等到第六度纔談，第一度上便已具足。行人於此可得一個定盤：不要等法門修全了纔說具足，一門之中若無二相，門門即在其中。
九、云何布施時攝諸無漏法；答住無漏心布施，不見誰施誰受所施何物，乃至不見一切佛法。 須菩提問得更實：布施的時候究竟怎樣把諸無漏法攝進來？佛答：菩薩住無漏心而布施，於無漏心中不見有相——誰在施、誰在受、所施的是何物；以這無相心、無漏心，斷愛、斷慳貪心而行布施，這時不見布施，乃至不見無上菩提之法。持戒、忍辱、精進、禪定、智慧、四念處乃至相好，亦皆以無相心無漏心行而不見其法。此段是前四問的落地之處：所謂不二相、所謂一念具足，其實踐面就是這一句「不見」。斷愛、斷慳貪是能捨的一面，不見三事是不取的一面，兩面同時纔是無漏心中的布施。
十、若諸法無相無作，云何具足六度乃至三十二相八十隨形好。 到此須菩提改換一個角度總問一次：若諸法無相、無作，究竟怎樣具足檀、尸、羼提、毘梨耶、禪、般若六波羅蜜？怎樣具足四念處乃至八聖道分？怎樣具足空、無相、無作三昧與佛十力、四無所畏、四無礙智、十八不共法、大慈大悲？怎樣具足三十二相八十隨形好？前四問問的是『一念何以能具』，此問問的是『無相之中何以能具』。佛不再以短語作答，而是自此逐一開演六波羅蜜，故此問實為後半經文的總綱。
十一、檀波羅蜜之相（上）：無相無漏心布施，內外盡與，人訶不悔，迴向而不見迴向相。 佛答檀波羅蜜，先說所施之廣：須要食物就給食物，乃至種種所須全都給與；或內或外——或支解自身、或國城妻子，都布施眾生。次說遇違緣時的持守：若有人來說「何用是布施為？是無所益！」，行般若的菩薩便作念「是人雖來訶我布施，我終不悔！我當勤行布施，不應不與。」此一節極可玩味——經文不給菩薩一個辯論的答覆，只給他一個不動的心。再次說施後之迴向：與一切眾生共之而迴向無上菩提，並且不見這些相——誰施、誰受、所施何物、迴向者誰、何等是迴向法、何等是迴向處。所以能不見者，經文自出其理：一切法皆以內空故空，外空故空，內外空故空，空空、有為空、無為空、畢竟空、無始空、散空、性空、一切法空、自相空故空。這一串空門逐一是說：向內之身心無自性，向外之器界無自性，內外合觀亦無自性，能空之空亦不可執，造作之法無自性，不造作之法亦無自性，究竟推之無自性，推其初始不可得，聚合之法散而無實，其性本來如此，一切法無例外，乃至各各自相亦不可得。菩薩如是觀已而作念「迴向者誰？迴向何處？用何法迴向？」——經文稱這纔叫作正迴向。
十二、檀波羅蜜之相（下）：成就眾生淨佛國土、具足諸法而不受世間果報、以三乘度脫眾生。 佛續說：那時菩薩能成就眾生、淨佛國土，能具足檀、尸羅、羼提、毘梨耶、禪、般若六波羅蜜，乃至三十七助道法、空無相無作三昧、乃至十八不共法。一度之中具足諸法，正是本品品題所指。次說果相：這菩薩能如是具足檀波羅蜜而不受世間果報——譬如他化自在諸天隨意所須即皆得之，菩薩亦如是，心生所願隨意即得。此喻不可讀成許以福報，經文緊接著說明這果報的用處：以是布施果報故能供養諸佛，亦能滿足一切眾生天人阿修羅，以檀波羅蜜攝取眾生，用方便力以三乘法度脫眾生。可見所得之果全數迴入攝生，故雖有果報之相而說「不受世間果報」。
十三、尸羅波羅蜜之相（上）：持種種戒而一切不取，但與眾生共之而迴向。 此下佛不待須菩提發問，逕自立次題而自答：菩薩摩訶薩云何於無相、無得、無作法中具足尸羅波羅蜜。所持之戒，經文列其五類——聖無漏入八聖道分戒、自然戒、報得戒、受得戒、心生戒。此五名經文但列其目，本論於本品未逐項出訓，古德於本品亦未別釋，故此處但依經列名，不代為分疏。又總標其德為不缺、不破、不雜、不濁、不著，並自在戒、智所讚戒。持此戒而「無所取」，所不取者經文歷數之：色受想行識，三十二相八十隨形好，剎利大姓、婆羅門大姓、居士大家，以及自四天王天至非有想非無想處的諸天，以及須陀洹果乃至阿羅漢果、辟支佛道，以及轉輪聖王與天王。要緊處在於：所不取的不只是人天福報，連四果與辟支佛道亦在其中。持戒而不取聖果，此即無相無得無作中之尸羅。末言但為與一切眾生共之而迴向無上菩提，以無相、無得、無二而迴向——並自標此是「為世俗法故，非第一實義」，明白告訴讀者迴向之說是隨順世諦的施設。
十四、尸羅波羅蜜之相（下）：以方便力起四禪得五神通，五通各有其用。 佛續說：這菩薩具足尸羅波羅蜜，以方便力起四禪而不味著，故得五神通。因四禪得天眼，且住修得、報得兩種天眼；得天眼已，見十方現在諸佛乃至得無上菩提而如所見不失。天耳清淨過於人耳，聞十方諸佛說法而如所聞不失，能自饒益亦益他人。以知他心智，知十方諸佛心及一切眾生心，亦能饒益一切眾生。以宿命智知過去諸業因緣，因是業因緣不失故，眾生在在處處所生悉知。以漏盡智令眾生得須陀洹果乃至阿羅漢果、辟支佛道，在在處處能令眾生入善法中。此節須看兩件事：其一、五通之得，源頭在戒而不在別求，故繫於尸羅波羅蜜下說；其二、五通之用，逐一都落在「饒益」「令眾生得」上，無一條為自身受用。
十五、羼提波羅蜜之相（上）：二忍與觀諸法實性。 須菩提問諸法無相無作無得，菩薩云何能具足羼提波羅蜜。佛答先標其時際之長：從初發意以來乃至坐道場，於其中間若一切眾生以瓦石刀杖相加，菩薩不起瞋心乃至不生一念。次立二忍：一者於一切眾生惡口罵詈刀杖瓦石而瞋心不起，二者一切法無生的無生法忍。前者是對人的忍，後者是對法的忍；缺前者則法忍成空談，缺後者則人忍終有竭時。次示所以能忍之法：菩薩應作是思惟「罵我者誰？譏訶者誰？打擲者誰？誰有受者？」，即時思惟諸法實性，所謂畢竟空，無法、無眾生；諸法尚不可得，何況有眾生。如是觀諸法相時，不見罵者、不見割截者，即得無生法忍。經文更自釋何謂無生法忍：知諸法相常不生，諸煩惱從本已來亦常不生。此一釋最須記取——無生法忍不是忍住一個生起的東西，是照見它本來不生。
十六、羼提波羅蜜之相（下）：住二忍故具足諸法與聖神通，末得一切種智轉法輪。 佛續說：菩薩住此二忍，能具足四禪、四無量心、四無色定，四念處乃至八聖道分，三解脫門，佛十力、四無所畏、四無礙智、十八不共法、大慈大悲；住此聖無漏出世間法，不共一切聲聞辟支佛，具足聖神通。其用亦逐一在利他：以天眼見東方諸佛而得念佛三昧乃至無上菩提終不斷絕，十方皆然；以天耳聞十方諸佛所說法而如所聞為眾生說；知十方諸佛心及一切眾生念而隨其心說法；以宿命智知眾生宿世善根而為說法令其歡喜；以漏盡神通教化眾生令得三乘。末結：行般若以方便力成就眾生，具足一切種智，得無上菩提，轉法輪。前段尸羅所得是五神通，此段二忍所得稱聖神通，其別在「不共一切聲聞、辟支佛」一句，讀時勿混。
十七、毘梨耶波羅蜜之身精進。 須菩提問無相無作無得中云何具足毘梨耶波羅蜜。佛答先分身心二精進，而先說身：菩薩行般若時成就身精進心精進，入初禪乃至第四禪，受種種神通力，能分一身為多身乃至手捫摸日月；以成就身精進故，飛到東方過無量百千萬諸佛世界，供養諸佛飲食衣服醫藥臥具華香瓔珞種種所須，乃至得無上菩提而福德果報終不可盡。得菩提時一切世間天人勤設供養，乃至入無餘涅槃後舍利及弟子得供養。亦以是神通力故至諸佛所聽受法教，乃至無上菩提終不違失；修一切種智時淨佛世界成就眾生。身精進之所以不是徒勞奔走，全在它所往之處是佛所、所作之事是供養與聽法。
十八、毘梨耶波羅蜜之心精進。 佛續自立次題：云何菩薩成就心精進能具足毘梨耶波羅蜜。答曰菩薩之心精進是聖無漏的，入八聖道分的精進，不令身業口業的不善得入。其正面之相是一長串的「不取」：不取諸法相若常若無常、若苦若樂、若我若無我、若有為若無為、若三界、若有漏無漏性、若四禪、若慈悲喜捨、若四無色處、若三十七品、若空無相無作、若佛十力乃至十八不共法；不取果證之相若四沙門果、若辟支佛道、若菩薩道、若無上菩提，亦不取能證之人若須陀洹乃至是菩薩是佛；不取斷結之相——是眾生斷三結故得須陀洹、三毒薄故得斯陀含、斷下分結故得阿那含、斷上分結故得阿羅漢、以辟支佛道故作辟支佛、行道種智故名菩薩。末以一句收其所以然：「不可以性取相，是性無故。」心精進之為精進，正在此處——不是心裡繃得更緊，是心中一切相取不住。末言以是心精進故廣利益眾生而亦不得是眾生，是為具足毘梨耶波羅蜜；具足諸佛法、淨佛國土、成就眾生，皆以不可得故。
十九、身心精進成就故攝一切善法而不著，神通隨意利益眾生。 佛續說身心二精進成就之後的總相：攝取一切諸善法而於是法亦不著，故能從一佛國至一佛國，為利益眾生所作神通隨意無礙——或雨諸華、或雨諸名香、或作伎樂、或動大地、或放光明、或示七寶莊嚴國土、或現種種身、或放大智光明令知聖道，令眾生遠離殺生乃至邪見；或以布施利益眾生，或以持戒，或支解身體、或以妻子、或以國土、或以己身給施，隨所方便利益眾生。此段把神通之用與捨身之行並列於一處，正見精進之義不在剛猛，而在無所不可捨、無所不可為。
二十、禪波羅蜜之相（上）：除佛諸禪，餘一切禪三昧皆能具足。 須菩提問住無相無作無得法中云何具足禪波羅蜜。佛答先作一個簡別：除佛諸禪定外，其餘一切諸禪、三昧皆能具足。此簡別甚要——菩薩地上所具者已極廣，而佛之諸禪仍別出其外，可知本品所說之「具足」是就菩薩位而言，非謂菩薩與佛無別。所具者次第列出：離諸欲諸惡不善法、離生喜樂、有覺有觀而入初禪，乃至入第四禪；以慈悲喜捨心遍滿一方乃至十方；過一切色相、滅有對相、不念別異相故入無邊虛空處乃至非有想非無想處；於禪波羅蜜中住而逆順入八背捨、九次第定，入空三昧、無相三昧、無作三昧，或時入如電光三昧、或時入聖正三昧、或時入如金剛三昧。
廿一、禪波羅蜜之相（下）：修助道法過諸地入菩薩位，得陀羅尼與報得神通，見法如幻而利眾生。 佛續說：住禪波羅蜜中修三十七助道法，用道種智入一切禪定，過乾慧地、性地、八人地、見地、薄地、離欲地、已辦地、辟支佛地而入菩薩位，入菩薩位已具足佛地；於是諸地中行乃至無上菩提而不中道取道果。次說其行處與利他：從一佛國至一佛國供養諸佛、植諸善根、淨佛國土、利益眾生，以布施持戒三昧智慧解脫解脫知見攝取眾生，教眾生令得四沙門果與辟支佛道，諸有善法能令眾生得道者皆教令得。次說其所得：能生一切陀羅尼門，得四無礙智、報得神通；終不入母人胞胎，終不受五欲，無生不生，雖生而不為生法所污。所以然者，經文自出——見一切作法如幻而利益眾生，亦不得眾生及一切法，教眾生令得無所得處；並自標此是「世俗法故，非第一實義」。末言住是禪波羅蜜則一切禪定解脫三昧乃至無上菩提終不離禪波羅蜜，行如是道種智時得一切種智，斷一切煩惱習，自益益他而為一切世間天人阿修羅作福田。
廿二、般若波羅蜜之相：不見定實相，行內空乃至無法有法空，具足菩薩道。 須菩提問住無相無作無得法中云何修具足般若波羅蜜。佛答：菩薩行般若時於諸法不見定實相——見色不定非實相乃至見識不定非實相；不見色生乃至不見識生；既不見生，則一切法若有漏若無漏，不見來處、不見去處、亦不見集處。如是觀時不得色性乃至識性，亦不得有漏無漏法性。次言其信解：信解一切諸法無所有相，如是信解已行內空乃至無法有法空，於諸法無所著——若色若受想行識乃至無上菩提。末結：菩薩行無所有般若波羅蜜，能具足菩薩道，所謂六波羅蜜乃至三十七助道法、佛十力、四無所畏、四無礙智、十八不共法、三十二相、八十隨形好。前五度所說皆是『行而不得』，至此般若則直說「不見」與「不得」，故般若是前五度之所以能不得者。
廿三、住空淨佛道中隨應教化，現神通度眾，報得六度五通成就一切功德。 佛續說般若行者的利生之相：住空淨佛道中，所謂六波羅蜜、三十七助道法、報得神通，以是法饒益眾生——宜以布施攝者教令布施，宜以戒攝者教令持戒，宜以禪定智慧解脫解脫知見攝者教令修之，宜以諸道法教者教令得四沙門果與辟支佛道，宜以佛道化者教令得菩薩道具足佛道，如是隨其所應道地而教化之，各令得所。次言現種種神通力時過無量恒河沙國土度脫眾生，隨其所須皆化給之，各令滿足；從一國土至一國土，見淨妙國土以自莊嚴己佛國土。次以二喻明其資生無乏：譬如他化自在天中資生所須隨意自至，亦如諸淨佛國離於求欲。末言以是報得的六波羅蜜與報得五神通，行菩薩道種智，成就一切功德，當得無上菩提。此段最可觀者是「隨其所應道地」一語——空中無定相，故教化亦無定法。
廿四、不受一切法故，得菩提時國土資生皆無有主。 經段以此結。佛言這菩薩爾時不受色法乃至識，不受一切法——若善若不善、若世間若出世間、若有漏若無漏、若有為若無為，如是一切法皆不受；得無上菩提時，國土一切所有資生之物皆無有主。所以然者，經文自出：是菩薩行一切法不受，以不可得故。「無有主」三字是全品經段的落處——前面說了那樣廣的萬行與果報，末後卻說連國土資生都無人主之。萬行具足而無一物屬我，這纔是「一心具萬行」的本義。
廿五、論主第一問答：問者答者俱言無所有，何以分得出誰問誰答。 論段起首即設一問，問得極細：問的人與答的人口中都說「無所有」，怎樣分別知道哪一句是問、哪一句是答？論主答曰：「所言法雖一而心異」——問的人以著心問，答的人以無著心答。此一答是讀本品乃至讀般若諸品的鑰匙。同樣三個字，出於著心則是難，出於無著心則是答；文字上沒有分別，分別全在能說之心。行人讀經至此，當回照自己念「無所得」時是哪一種心。
廿六、須菩提之意與其所以問。 論主續釋：須菩提的意思是說無所有中不應發心；然而他是為聽法者的著心纔作此問。諸法空中不見菩薩發心者、不見眾生可利益者、不見無上菩提，所以於無所有法中作難——「若一切法無所有性，菩薩見何利故發心？」論主隨即簡別一句最要緊的話：須菩提於菩薩、眾生、無上菩提三事中並不懷疑，他只是問無所有法。此一簡別防住了一個誤讀——不可把須菩提看成一個對佛道起疑的人；他是替著心的聽眾把話問出來。
廿七、牒佛答而釋：正以無所有空故能發心。 論主引佛之答「正以無所有、空故能發心」，隨即申其理：若是無所有、空，那麼菩薩、眾生、無上菩提也都是空無所有，這個難從何處起得來？必得眾生、菩薩及無上菩提離於無所有、空，纔可以有此難。又引前文所說「畢竟空於諸法無所障礙，何妨發心？」為證。論主末以一句道破佛的手法——佛還是以無所有、空來破須菩提所問。要留意：所破者非須菩提之人，是那一問裡藏著的『空能礙有』之見。
廿八、自說因緣：著心者難得解脫。 論主引佛自說之因緣「須菩提！著心者難得解脫」而廣釋之：這人從無始生死以來，以一切煩惱故深著諸法，聞有亦著、聞空亦著、得失亦著，如是眾生難可勉出。所以菩薩發無上道心，自以相好嚴身、得梵音聲、有大威德、知眾生三世心的根本，以種種神通力、因緣、譬喻，為說無所有法與空解脫門，引導其心；眾生見如是希有事，即時其心柔軟，信佛受法。末引經文「著有者難得解脫；有所得者，無道、無果、無阿耨多羅三藐三菩提」作結。此段給出了本品前半的用心所在——空義不是為了取消行門，正是為了鬆開那個「著」。
廿九、牒須菩提問與佛答：無所有即是道果菩提。 論主逐句牒經：須菩提問「世尊！若有所得者，無道、無果、無阿耨多羅三藐三菩提；無所得者有道、有果不？」佛答「無所有即是道、即是果、即是阿耨多羅三藐三菩提。」此二句是論主承上啟下之樞，牒而未釋，釋在下段。讀論至此要分清層次：論中所引之語出於經，論主自己的話在引語之外，二者不可混為一談。
三十、釋無所得即是道果之理，並釋法性即是諸法實相。 論主釋曰：若人不分別是有所得、是無所得，入諸法實相畢竟空中，這也是無所得，就是道、就是果、就是無上菩提，因為不破壞諸法實相的緣故。末補一句訓釋——「法性即是諸法實相」。此句極要緊：經文說「法性不壞故」，若不知法性即諸法實相，便會把法性想成一個別存的體。論主一語點破，使經中的「不壞法性」與論中的「不破壞諸法實相」成為同一件事。
卅一、須菩提之疑與佛答：法性雖不可壞，眾生邪行故名為破壞。 論主續出須菩提之意：法性無論正行邪行常不可破壞，何以佛說「不壞法性是道、是果」——既然本來壞不了，說「不壞」豈非多餘。佛答「法性雖不可破壞，眾生邪行故名為破壞」，論主以喻明之：如虛空，雲霧土塵雖不能染，亦名不淨；如人實欲染污虛空，是人為欲染污法性，無是事故。此喻的分寸要看準——雲霧不能真染虛空，而人仍說天不淨；同樣，邪行不能真壞法性，而經仍說壞法性。所說之「壞」在行人一邊，不在法性一邊。
卅二、佛說譬喻：欲壞法性者即是欲於無所有法中得道得果。 論主牒佛所說之譬喻：「若人欲壞法性，是人為欲於無所有法中得道、得果、得阿耨多羅三藐三菩提。」此句把上段的喻收回到行門上：所謂壞法性者，不是別有一種人去毀壞什麼，正是那個在無所得法中還要取得道果的心。讀者若覺得「壞法性」三字過重，可回看此句——它所指的其實是最常見的一念。
卅三、牒須菩提再問十地等諸菩薩法。 論主牒經：須菩提白佛「若無所有即是道，云何有十地等諸菩薩法？」並注明「如經廣說」四字，表示此問的完整內容已具於經段，論中不再重述。此一筆是本論的體例——論主於經文已備之處不作複錄，只取其要以接下文。
卅四、論主第二問答：佛已先答何以更問；答為新發意菩薩著所破法故。 論主自設第二番問答。問曰：此事佛已先答，所謂「若法空，菩薩見何事故發心？」今言「若法空，云何有初地等？」佛皆以空答，今須菩提何以更問。答曰：以眾生著心難解故更問——是眾中有新發意菩薩，聞是諸法實相空即生著心，佛破其著，亦著所破法；須菩提為是人故更問。「亦著所破法」五字最須玩味：破有而著空，破空而著『破空』，著處輾轉不絕。同一個問所以要問兩遍，不是佛答得不清，是聽者的著處換了位置。
卅五、牒佛答：以無所得故有初地乃至舍利得供養。 論主牒佛之答「以無所得故有初地，乃至般涅槃後舍利得供養」，並補一句自己的判語：有所著中，不可說初地及諸功德。此判語把經義說得更透——次第功德之所以能說，恰恰因為它們不是被得到的；若在有所著之中，這些名目反而立不住。
卅六、釋六度神通無有差別故不應難。 論主續釋：亦以無所得因緣故，從布施乃至諸神通無有差別，無有差別故不應難。此處「不應難」三字是對前問的收束——差別既無，則「有何差別」之問本身就落空了。
卅七、牒須菩提復問與佛答：似菩提寂滅相，布施畢竟空，魔不能破壞。 論主牒經：須菩提復問「云何無所得布施乃至諸神通無有差別？」佛答「菩薩從初發心已來，似阿耨多羅三藐三菩提寂滅相，布施畢竟空，所謂不得施者、受者、財物而行布施，如是布施中無有分別；乃至不得菩提而得阿耨多羅三藐三菩提，亦如是。是名菩薩行無所得般若波羅蜜。行是無所得般若波羅蜜，魔、若魔天不能破壞。」「似」字是這一段的眼目：菩薩初發心時所行之相，已與所趣之無上菩提的寂滅相相似，故因中即含果相，這纔是「無有差別」的實義。
卅八、論主立子題：一念中行六波羅蜜者。 論主於此立一句子題——「一念中行六波羅蜜者」。本論釋經，凡於一段之首單標一語者，即是告訴讀者下文所釋之範圍。此一標目之後的三問，皆環繞本品品題而發，故此句雖短，是全論後半的分水。
卅九、論主第三問答：須菩提何以問一念中行六度。 問曰：須菩提何以故問「一念中行六波羅蜜等諸功德」。答曰：須菩提從佛聞般若波羅蜜甚深無所有相、於諸法中無礙相；若爾者，則無所不能、無事不作，云何菩薩一念中能攝六波羅蜜乃至八十隨形好。論主又自出其所以有此一問之由：初發心時以著有無心重故，漸漸次第行；今有無悉捨故，無所不能，是故問。此答把『一念具足』的根由說得極清楚——不是行人把六度擠進一剎那，是心中著有著無的兩重障礙一旦捨盡，行便無所不能。次第而行者非法有次第，是心有障礙。
四十、牒佛答：不離般若故能一念中行；遠離則漸次。 論主牒佛之答「菩薩不離般若波羅蜜行布施等諸功德，無障礙故，能一念中行」，並自補反面一句：若遠離般若波羅蜜，則漸漸次第行。正反並出，方見「不遠離」三字是關鍵而非虛語。
四一、牒問答：云何名不遠離；答不以二相行布施等。 論主牒須菩提問「云何名不遠離？」與佛答「菩薩不以二相行布施等。」此一問一答在經段中已有，論主重牒者，是要把後文「何等是一念」接在這條線上。
四二、牒問答：云何不以二相；答於布施一念中攝一切善法。 論主牒復問「云何不以二相？」與佛答「菩薩行般若波羅蜜時，欲具足檀波羅蜜，於布施一念中攝一切善法。」末綴「如先說」三字，指前品已具，不復重釋。
四三、論主自釋何等是一念。 這是論段最要緊的一段自釋。論主問「何等是一念」，自答曰：所謂菩薩得無生法忍，斷一切煩惱，除諸憶想分別，安住無漏心中，布施一切。次釋無漏心之體——「無漏心是無相相」。次說其行相：菩薩住是心中，不見誰施、誰受、誰物，離一切相心布施；不見有一法，乃至無上菩提尚不見，何況餘法；是名不二相；乃至八十隨形好亦如是。此段把本品品題之「一念」給了定義——它不是時間上的一剎那，是得無生法忍、煩惱已斷、憶想分別已除之後的那個無漏無相心。故知一念具萬行之說，繫於證量而非繫於速度。
四四、牒須菩提更以異事問與佛答。 論主續牒：須菩提更以異事問此義——「世尊！諸法無相、無作、無起，云何能具足檀波羅蜜等，乃至八十隨形好？」佛答「菩薩無相、無作法中不取相故，無障礙心布施，須食與食等。」論主隨即說明自己何以不再廣釋：經中已委悉，又先品中亦廣說，是故更不解。本論凡遇經文已明、前品已廣之處即略而不釋，此是體例，非是闕文。
四五、論主分二：無漏無相六波羅蜜有二種。 論主自出一判：無漏、無相六波羅蜜有二種——一者得無生法忍菩薩所行，二者未得無生法忍菩薩所行；而此中所說者，是得無生法忍菩薩所行。其理由論主亦自出：住無相、無漏心中行布施等諸法故。此一判甚要——它替讀者標明了本品所說的高度，免得行人把『不見施者受者』當作初心即可現成做到的事。
四六、論主第四問答之問：得無生法忍菩薩割截無痛，有何恩分。 問曰：生身菩薩貪惜未除故，割截甚痛，是則為難；得無生法忍菩薩，如化人所作，割截無痛，有何恩分。此問問得極有人情——依常識論，忍痛者纔可敬，不痛者何足道。論主不迴避這個常識，反而把它整個提出來作問。
四七、答：捨寂滅樂入眾生中受種種身，是則為難。 答曰：得無生法忍菩薩行是六波羅蜜為難。所以者何——得無生法忍寂滅心，應受涅槃樂，而捨此寂滅樂，入眾生中受種種身，或為賤人、或為畜生等，是則為難。至於生身菩薩，貪愛未除，著佛身故以身布施，是為悕望、非清淨施，是故不如。此答把「難」的判準整個換過：難不在身受之苦，在所捨之樂之大、所入之處之卑。一個本可安住寂滅的人，自願入六道受賤人畜生之身，這纔是本品所說的難行。前段「有漏、有相」之施縱然痛徹，因其夾著悕望，反落於下。
四八、論主總結：能具足者有大恩分。 末段論主以「復次」起而總收：行無漏、無相六波羅蜜，是時能具足；有漏、有相則不能具足；是故能具足者有大恩分。全論以「具足」二字回扣品題，而把具足的條件明明白白繫在無漏無相上。至此，經段所開的萬行與論段所辨的一念，合為一義：萬行之所以能於一念中具足，正因為那一念是無漏無相之心。
不要讀錯
不要把「一切法性無所有」讀成什麼都沒有。經中佛答的第一句就是以無所有為求菩提之由，而不是以無所有為不必求之由。論主更點明須菩提於菩薩、眾生、無上菩提三事中並不懷疑，他只是問無所有法。若讀成斷滅，則後文六度萬行逐一開演之文，一句也安不上去。
不要把「無所得即是道、即是果」讀成不必修道。經文自帶根據——「法性不壞故」；論主也補訓「法性即是諸法實相」。道果之所以在無所得中成立，是因為諸法實相本自如此，不是因為修與不修沒有分別。緊接著佛還說，若在無所得法中想要得道得果，那就是欲壞法性——可見所遮的是『取得』之心，不是「行道」之事。
不要把「一念中具足」讀成把修行壓縮成一剎那。論主自問「何等是一念」而自答：得無生法忍，斷一切煩惱，除諸憶想分別，安住無漏心中。這個一念是就心之體性而說，不是就時間之短長而說。他又自判此中所說屬得無生法忍菩薩所行，另有未得無生法忍菩薩所行一類。行人若把它讀成速成之法，正與論主的簡別相反。
不要把『布施乃至神通無有差別』讀成六度可以不必分修。佛說無有差別的同一段裡，緊接著就說「以眾生著布施乃至神通故分別說」；而後半經文正是逐度分說檀、尸羅、羼提、毘梨耶、禪、般若之相。無差別是就無所得法而言，分別說是就眾生之著而設，兩句同出佛口，不相妨礙。
不要把尸羅段的「無所取」讀成輕視戒相。經文先歷列所持之戒為聖無漏入八聖道分戒、自然戒、報得戒、受得戒、心生戒，並標其不缺不破不雜不濁不著，然後纔說用是戒而無所取。所不取者是色受想行識乃至四沙門果、辟支佛道與轉輪聖王天王之報——是不取戒之果報，不是不持戒。且此段所得的五神通，經文明說是因戒起四禪而得，可見戒相愈嚴而取心愈輕，方是此段之義。
不要把羼提段的「不見罵者、不見割截者」讀成麻木。經文給的路徑是先思惟「罵我者誰？譏訶者誰？打擲者誰？誰有受者？」，再思惟諸法實性畢竟空，然後纔說不見。此是觀照所致，不是感受消失。且經文所立的二忍，第一種正是「一切眾生惡口罵詈、若加刀杖瓦石，瞋心不起」，明說有加者、有所加之事，只是瞋心不起而已。
不要把禪波羅蜜段的「除佛諸禪定」略過。經文所具足者是餘一切諸禪三昧，佛之諸禪仍在其外。本品說一度攝萬行、說菩薩位中具足佛地，若不看住這一句簡別，便會讀成菩薩與佛已無差別。
不要把「國土一切所有資生之物皆無有主」讀成國土空無。經文自出其理——「是菩薩行一切法不受，以不可得故」。無主是就不受不得而言，不是說無有資生之物；上文纔說隨其所須皆化給之、各令滿足。萬物具足而無一物屬我，正是「不受」二字的實義。
不要把論主第四番問答的「有何恩分」讀成論主也輕視不痛者。這是論主自設之問，代常情發難；其答語隨即把難的判準換掉——所難在捨寂滅樂而入六道受賤人畜生之身，不在身受之痛。讀問而不讀答，便成了與論主相反的結論。
修行作用
第一件受用，是把「無所得」拿來檢查自己的心而不是拿來作口號。論主第一番問答說得明白：同是「無所有」三字，出於著心是問難，出於無著心是解答。日用中誦空、說空之時，可作一照——此刻說空的心，是要放下一物，還是要多得一物？若是後者，論主已先說了，那正是「欲壞法性」的那一念。
第二件受用，是布施時的三不見可以當下就練。經文給的樣子極具體：住無漏心而布施，不見誰施、誰受、所施何物；斷愛、斷慳貪而行施；施已與一切眾生共之而迴向，並且連迴向者誰、迴向何處、用何法迴向都不見。行人縱未得無生法忍，也可於每一次施捨之後試著不去點數：不記自己施了、不記對方受了、不記所施之物。減一分記認，即近一分無漏。
第三件受用，是遇人訶責所行時有一句現成的持守。經文設了這樣一幕：有人來說「何用是布施為？是無所益！」，行般若的菩薩只作一念——「是人雖來訶我布施，我終不悔！我當勤行布施，不應不與。」此處佛不教菩薩去辯，只教他不改。凡行善而遇人冷語者，可取此一念自守：不辯、不悔、不減。
第四件受用，是忍時有一條可以走的路。經文的次第是先問後觀：先問「罵我者誰？譏訶者誰？打擲者誰？誰有受者？」，再思惟諸法實性畢竟空，無法、無眾生。這四問不是自我安慰之辭，是把『我被如何』一句拆開來推：前三問問的是能加害者——罵的是誰、譏訶的是誰、打擲的是誰；末一問「誰有受者？」問的才是受者。能、所兩面一併推求，所以經文接著說「諸法尚不可得，何況有眾生！」——不是先尋出一個受者再安慰他，是能所俱不可得。四問一起，瞋心自然無處著落——這比壓住脾氣要省力得多，也更牢。
第五件受用，是以身精進與心精進兩面自檢。身精進之相，經文落在往佛所、供養、聽受法教與利益眾生上；心精進之相，經文落在一長串的「不取」上——不取法相之常無常苦樂我無我，不取果證之相，不取斷結之相。行人可每日兩問：今日之奔走，所往者是何處？今日之用心，取了多少相？前者管住身之虛耗，後者管住心之暗結。
第六件受用，是把「難」的判準改過來。論主末番問答所給的判準是：難不在痛，在捨。本可安住的樂而肯捨，本可不入的處而肯入，這纔是大恩分。行人於發願、於承擔時，可持此一尺——不必以受苦之多寡自許，當看所捨之安逸有幾分、所入之低處有幾分。
第七件受用，是以「無有主」收束一日之所作。經段末說菩薩成佛時國土一切資生之物皆無有主。行人一日之中，凡所修所作、所施所成，至晚間可作一念：此中無一物屬我，亦無一物須我主之。萬行具足而不立一主，這是本品品題落到日用上最直捷的一句。
承衍
本品的骨幹，是一段長經與一段長論。經①自須菩提問一切法性無所有菩薩見何利益而為眾生求菩提起，佛答以性無所有故求、有得有著者難可解脫、得相者無道無果無菩提；次答無所得即是道即是果即是菩提而以法性不壞為據，並出欲於無所得法中得道果即是欲壞法性之誡；次答初地乃至十地與無生忍、報得神通六度、成就眾生淨佛國土乃至涅槃後舍利受供養皆以無所得相故得；次答六度諸神通於無所得法中無有差別而為眾生之著故分別說，並以不得布施而行布施乃至不得諸佛法而得菩提一串句式示其實行，結以魔不能破壞；次入本品正題，以四重問答逐層收攝——一念具足由不遠離般若、不遠離由不二相、不二相由欲具足檀波羅蜜時檀中即攝諸波羅蜜及四念處乃至相好、攝諸無漏法由住無漏心布施而不見施者受者所施物；次以「若諸法無相、無作，云何具足」一總問開出六度之逐項開演：檀則內外盡施、人訶不悔、迴向而不見迴向相並列諸空為據，尸羅則持五類戒而於色乃至諸天四果辟支佛道轉輪聖王天王一切不取、以方便力起四禪得五神通，羼提則立生忍法忍二種而以觀畢竟空得無生法忍、住二忍故具足諸法與聖神通，毘梨耶則分身心二精進而心精進以一串不取為相、末以「不可以性取相，是性無故」收，禪則除佛諸禪而餘一切禪三昧皆具、修助道法過八地入菩薩位具足佛地、不中道取證、見法如幻而利眾生，般若則不見定實相、不見色乃至識生、行內空乃至無法有法空而具足菩薩道；末說住空淨佛道中隨其所應道地教化各令得所，並以不受一切法故得菩提時國土資生皆無有主作結。論①以四番問曰答曰為骨而以牒經逐句而釋為肉：第一番辨問者答者俱言無所有而以著心無著心分之，次釋須菩提為聽者著心故問並簡別其於菩薩眾生菩提三事不疑，次牒佛答正以無所有空故能發心而申空不礙發心之理，次釋著心者難得解脫之由並出菩薩以相好梵音威德神通因緣譬喻引導其心，次牒無所有即是道果而釋法性即是諸法實相，次釋法性雖不可壞而眾生邪行故名為壞並出虛空雲霧之喻；第二番辨佛已先答何以更問而歸之於新發意菩薩著所破法，次牒以無所得故有初地乃至舍利得供養並判有所著中不可說初地及諸功德；第三番標「一念中行六波羅蜜者」子題而辨須菩提所以問，次牒不離般若故能一念中行、不以二相、於布施一念中攝一切善法諸答，次自釋何等是一念而以得無生法忍、斷一切煩惱、除諸憶想分別、安住無漏心為其體，並判無漏無相六波羅蜜有得無生法忍與未得二種；第四番辨得無生法忍菩薩割截無痛有何恩分而以捨寂滅樂入眾生中受種種身為難，末以「復次」總收——行無漏無相六波羅蜜是時能具足，有漏有相則不能具足，故能具足者有大恩分。
古德之釋，本品可誌者三家，而一家闕。吉藏於《大品經義疏》釋本品，先以兩品為一段而總標其意云：「此下第二段有兩品，明脩行純熟故一念具足斯備也。」其分兩品之由云：「先未得無生故未能無礙行，一念中不能具足眾行；今得無生，無生一念中具足一切行也。」——以未得無生與已得無生分兩品之先後，正與本論自釋「何等是一念」時以得無生法忍為其體者相發。其科本品為三云：「初品為三：第一明於無所有中起行，第二明一念中具起萬行，第三明行空無相故具足諸行。」——此三分與本論經段之次第相應：無所有中起行即前三問答，一念中具起萬行即本品正題，行空無相故具足諸行即六度之逐項開演。其釋佛答發心之意云：「良由無所有故得發心耳」——與本論所牒佛答「正以無所有、空故能發心」取義相同而語異。其釋第三段之所以立云：「二乘有所得人，行三空則失萬行，修萬行則失三空，故是取捨生滅觀。」——以二乘之三空與萬行不能兩存，反顯菩薩行空而萬行不動，此是吉藏自家之判，本論未有此語，並錄不判。其釋割截一節，設問「得無生忍割截不痛，何足為喻」而自答云：「得無生忍應不生六趣，今能以無生作生用，入六道中為割截，始為常有。」——所設之問與所立之答，皆與本論末番問答之問語答意相合，而措辭出於吉藏，可為佐證。吉藏於本品之品目作「一念品」，其標次品起處又云：「此下第二就譬說一心具萬行正意」——是於品目用略名而於正意用全稱，二名並行。湛然《法華玄義釋籤》釋生身佛、法身佛聽法進道一節，明標「《大論》八十七」而引本品論段之末番問答：其問作「生身菩薩，貪惜未除割截則難，若無生忍菩薩，猶如化人割截無痛，有何恩分？」，其答作「雖得無生，行亦為難。」，而以「能捨此樂入生死中，受於種種下賤之身。」為其所以難，末收於「是故無生忍菩薩方名大恩。」——所引與本論末番問答逐義相值，而措辭出於湛然之約，非逐字全同，故誌其為約引而不作逐字徵引；其所標之卷第與本品所在之卷八十七相合。均正《大乘四論玄義》引此段經文云：「十三卷一念品云：無所得即是道，即是果，即是阿耨多羅三藐三菩提。」——惟其上文標所出者作「故大品經。」，所用品名亦作「一念品」（所釋經之名），故其繫屬在所釋經一側；本論本品之經文與之同文，是同證而非同繫。所引之文與本論經文逐字相符，唯句中頓逗之標與底本有異；其所稱之卷第與本帙底本亦不同。慧影《大智度論疏》現存之文結構性不及本品，本品闕釋，據實標闕，不以他處之文充之。又智顗《法華玄義》中別有「一心具萬行」一語，與本品品題全稱字面相同，然彼自就其一家教相立言，未逐字引本品之文，亦未明點本論品題，故唯誌其詞面之同，不作徵引、不判其為引本品。至於本品品題之異名、諸本之品序與分卷之異，詳考據層。
One Mind Complete with All Practices: Why the Nature of Dharmas Being without Anything Existent Is Not a Reason for Cancelling the Arousing of the Mind; Why Nothing to Be Attained Is Precisely the Path and Precisely the Fruit; Why the Nature of Dharmas Being Indestructible Is the Ground of This Sentence; Why the First Ground and So On up to the Tenth Ground and the Supernormal Powers Obtained as Retribution Still Stand; Why the Six Perfections and the Supernormal Powers Are Said to Be without Difference and yet Are Spoken of with Distinctions; Why Being Complete with All Practices within a Single Thought Is Not a Compressing of Time; Why Not Being Far from Prajñā Is Precisely the Cause of Being Complete within a Single Thought; Why the Mark of Non-duality Is the Real Meaning of a Single Thought; Why within Dānapāramitā All the Pāramitā Can Be Contained; Why, Giving while Abiding in the Mind without Outflows, One Does Not See Giver, Recipient, or the Thing Given; Why the Six Perfections Must Be Shown One by One within Dharmas That Are Signless, without Attaining, and without Making; Why Śīla Takes Not Even the Noble Fruits and the Retribution of a Wheel-Turning Sage King; Why Kṣānti Must Set Up Two Kinds, the Acceptance toward Beings and the Acceptance of Dharmas; Why Vīrya Is Divided into Bodily Vigour and Mental Vigour; Why Dhyāna Must Except the Dhyānas of the Buddha and Speak of All the Other Dhyānas; Why Prajñā Is Said Not to See a Fixed and Real Mark; Why the Land and the Goods That Sustain Life All Have No Owner; Why, When Both Questioner and Answerer Say Without Anything Existent, One Can Still Tell Who Asks and Who Answers; Why, When the Buddha Has Already Answered, Subhūti Asks Again; What a Single Thought Is; and Why the Bodhisattva Who Has Obtained the Acceptance of the Non-arising of Dharmas, Feeling No Pain When Cut and Severed, Is on the Contrary Said to Have a Great Share of Grace
What Is Being Asked
What this chapter asks is a question that very easily goes astray: since dharmas are all without anything existent, should practice still be practised or not? And once it is practised, does it count as something to be attained or not?
At the head of the chapter Subhūti asks very directly: the nature of all dharmas is without anything existent, so what benefit does the bodhisattva see, that only then he seeks unsurpassed awakening for the sake of beings? This question is not an objection against the Buddha; it is asked on behalf of those listening to the Dharma. Anyone who has grown used to hearing the meaning of emptiness without having digested it will give rise in his mind to a conclusion he takes to be thoroughgoing—since nothing at all exists, then arousing the mind, delivering beings, and becoming a Buddha do not exist either. The Buddha's answer, however, does not gather things in along this direction; instead it turns the whole thing around: precisely because the nature of all dharmas is without anything existent does the bodhisattva seek unsurpassed awakening for the sake of beings. Next he adds a sentence of reason—those with something to be attained and something clung to find it hard to be liberated, and those who grasp at marks have no path, no fruit, no unsurpassed awakening. And so the axial sentence of the whole chapter comes out: nothing to be attained is precisely the path, precisely the fruit, precisely unsurpassed awakening, because the nature of dharmas is indestructible.
Once this sentence stands, a second doubt follows at once: if nothing to be attained is precisely the path and the fruit, then the first ground and so on up to the tenth ground, the acceptance of non-arising, the supernormal powers and the six perfections obtained as retribution, bringing beings to accomplishment and purifying buddha-lands, and so on up to the relics receiving offerings after parinirvāṇa—how is this sequence to be established? The Buddha's answer is still in the same direction—precisely because dharmas are of the mark of nothing to be attained does he obtain the first ground and so on up to the tenth ground. The sequence is not propped up by 「有所得」 tr. "something to be attained"; it is established of itself within nothing to be attained. The third doubt follows, asking about difference: if all is nothing to be attained, do the six perfections and the supernormal powers not become one undifferentiated mass? The Buddha answers that there is no difference, and that the reason they are spoken of with distinctions is that beings cling.
Only after these three questions and three answers of the first half have been set firm does the sūtra text turn into the proper topic of this chapter. Subhūti asks: how does the bodhisattva within a single thought make complete the practice of the six perfections and so on up to the eighty minor marks? The Buddha's answers gather inward layer by layer: first he says that all giving and so on up to the marks and minor signs are not far from prajñā; asked again what not being far means, he answers: the mark of non-duality; asked again what the mark of non-duality means, he answers that when one wishes to make dānapāramitā complete, within dānapāramitā are at once contained all the pāramitā, as well as the four foundations of mindfulness and so on up to the marks and minor signs; asked again how, when giving, all the dharmas without outflows are contained, he answers: abiding in the mind without outflows one gives, and does not see who gives, who receives, or what thing is given. After the four layers of question and answer, the sūtra text again gathers it up with one general question—if dharmas are signless and without making, how after all are these six perfections and the thirty-seven limbs of the path and so on up to the marks and minor signs made complete?—and only then unfolds one by one the marks of the six perfections, dāna, śīla, kṣānti, vīrya, dhyāna, and prajñā, being 「於無相、無得、無作法中具足」 tr. "made complete within dharmas that are signless, without attaining, and without making." The end of the sūtra section concludes with 「不受一切法」 tr. "receiving no dharma": when the bodhisattva becomes a Buddha, all the goods that sustain life in his land have no owner.
The treatise section does not set up any new meaning of its own; it only makes four rounds of question and answer and takes up the sūtra phrase by phrase to explain it. The first round asks very finely: the one who asks and the one who answers both say 「無所有」 tr. "without anything existent"; how can one tell which sentence is the question and which the answer? The treatise-author answers more finely still: though the dharma is one, the minds differ—the one who asks asks with a clinging mind, and the one who answers answers with a mind without clinging. This answer is the key to the whole treatise section: all the occurrences of 「無所得」 tr. "nothing to be attained" throughout this chapter are exactly the same in wording, and the difference lies only in the mind of the speaker. The second round asks why, since the Buddha has already answered, Subhūti asks again; the answer lies in there being, in the assembly, bodhisattvas who have newly aroused the mind and who, hearing of emptiness, cling to emptiness. The third round asks why Subhūti asks about practising the six perfections within a single thought; the answer lies in this: having heard that prajñā is unobstructed toward all dharmas, then there is nothing it cannot do. The fourth round asks: the bodhisattva in a fleshly body, for whom being cut and severed hurts severely, is the one for whom it counts as hard; the bodhisattva who has obtained the acceptance of the non-arising of dharmas is like a conjured person and feels no pain, so what share of grace has he?—the treatise-author's answer moves the centre of gravity of 「難」 tr. "hard" from whether it hurts to whether one gives up, and this is the last and also the weightiest turn of the whole chapter.
Passage by Passage
1. The nature of dharmas is without anything existent: what benefit does the bodhisattva see, that he seeks awakening? The Buddha answers that it is precisely because of being without anything existent that he seeks. At the head of the chapter Subhūti addresses the Buddha: if the nature of all dharmas is without anything existent, what kind of benefit does the bodhisattva see, that only then he seeks unsurpassed awakening for the sake of beings? The point where this question puts its strength lies in the two Chinese characters ‘benefit’—whenever one speaks of seeking, there must be something one does it for; whenever there is something one does it for, there must be something attained. The Buddha's answer does not argue with him over whether benefit exists or not; it straightaway reverses cause and effect: 「以一切法性無所有故，菩薩為眾生求阿耨多羅三藐三菩提。」 tr. "Because the nature of all dharmas is without anything existent, the bodhisattva seeks anuttarā samyaksaṃbodhi for the sake of beings." Then he himself brings out the reason: those with something attained and something clung to find it hard to be liberated, and those who grasp at marks have no path, no fruit, no unsurpassed awakening. One must see the layers here clearly—the Buddha is not saying that within being without anything existent one can still, with effort, arouse the mind; he is saying that being without anything existent is precisely what makes arousing the mind possible. The reason beings flow on in the round is that they are bound by attaining and clinging; the reason the bodhisattva can rescue them is precisely that he holds no such rope in his hand.
2. Does the one without the mark of attaining have a path and a fruit? The answer: nothing to be attained is precisely the path, precisely the fruit, precisely awakening, because the nature of dharmas is indestructible. Subhūti, following the momentum, asks again: since those who grasp at marks have no path and no fruit, then do those without the mark of attaining have a path, a fruit, and unsurpassed awakening? What he asks is a paired sentence—if with marks there is none, then without marks is there some? The Buddha's answer does not fall within this pairing: 「無所得即是道、即是果、即是阿耨多羅三藐三菩提，法性不壞故。」 tr. "Nothing to be attained is precisely the path, precisely the fruit, precisely anuttarā samyaksaṃbodhi, because the nature of dharmas is indestructible." The last four Chinese characters are the ground of the whole sentence and may not be skipped over: the reason the path and the fruit can stand within nothing to be attained is not that nothing to be attained conjures up something else besides, but that the nature of dharmas is so from the start and has never been destroyed. The Buddha then adds a sentence from the reverse side—if within the dharma of nothing to be attained one still wants to obtain the path and obtain the fruit, that is wanting to destroy the nature of dharmas. This sentence drags out the most hidden single thought of the practitioner: with the mouth saying nothing to be attained while in the mind still seeking to attain, that very act of seeking is precisely what goes against the nature of dharmas.
3. If nothing to be attained is precisely the path and the fruit, how are there the first ground and so on up to the tenth ground and the merits obtained as retribution? The answer: it is precisely because of the mark of nothing to be attained that they are obtained. Subhūti's third question is the longest, counting out one by one the whole establishment of the bodhisattva path: the first ground and so on up to the tenth ground, the dharma of the acceptance of non-arising, the supernormal powers obtained as retribution, the six perfections obtained as retribution, abiding in the dharmas of retribution to bring beings to accomplishment and purify buddha-lands, making offerings to the buddhas of clothing, food and drink, incense, flowers, necklaces, dwellings, bedding, lamps and candles, and all kinds of implements that sustain life, and so on up to the relics and the disciples still receiving offerings after parinirvāṇa, with the merit never cut off. The meaning of the question is: if this whole sequence has nothing attained, can it still stand? The Buddha's answer is still in that direction—precisely because dharmas are of the mark of nothing to be attained does he obtain the first ground and so on up to the tenth ground and the five supernormal powers and the six perfections obtained as retribution; and also, because of the causes and conditions of the roots of goodness, he can benefit beings, and so on up to the relics receiving offerings after nirvāṇa. In reading this passage one must keep ‘nothing to be attained’ apart from ‘there being nothing’: the sūtra text never says there are no ten grounds; it says only that the ten grounds are not something that gets attained.
4. If dharmas are of the mark of nothing to be attained, what difference is there among the six perfections and the supernormal powers? The answer: there is no difference; because beings cling, they are spoken of with distinctions. The fourth question turns to difference: if everything is nothing to be attained, is there still any distinction among giving, keeping morality, patience, vigour, meditation, wisdom, and the supernormal powers? The Buddha answers crisply—within the dharma of nothing to be attained there is no difference, and the reason they are spoken of with distinctions is that beings cling to giving and so on up to the supernormal powers. This answer must be guarded on both sides: on the one side, one may not, because of 「無有差別」 tr. "without difference," abandon the separate cultivation of the six perfections, for speaking with distinctions is itself something the Buddha has set up; on the other side, one may not either, because of the sorting into gates and categories, take the six perfections to be six separate, independent things. Difference lies on the side of speaking the Dharma, not on the side of the nature of dharmas.
5. How is there no difference? The answer: not finding giving, he practises giving, and so on up to not finding the dharmas of the buddhas, he obtains awakening; one who practises thus, Māra cannot destroy. Subhūti asks again how after all this 「無差別」 tr. "no difference" is to be spoken of. The Buddha's answer is a string of evenly built sentences: not finding giving, with giver and recipient both unfindable, he practises giving; not finding morality, he keeps morality; not finding patience, he practises patience; not finding vigour, he practises vigour; not finding dhyāna, he practises dhyāna; not finding wisdom, he practises wisdom; not finding the supernormal powers, he practises the supernormal powers; not finding the four foundations of mindfulness, he practises the four foundations of mindfulness, and so on up to: not finding the eightfold noble path, he practises the eightfold noble path; not finding the emptiness, signless, and non-action samādhi, he practises the emptiness, signless, and non-action samādhi; not finding beings, he brings beings to accomplishment; not finding buddha-lands, he purifies buddha-lands; not finding the dharmas of the buddhas, he obtains unsurpassed awakening. Every sentence is in one and the same pattern—what is practised is practised, and what is obtained is not found. At the end the Buddha adds a sentence of practical effect: when the bodhisattva practises the prajñā of nothing to be attained in this way, Māra or the gods of Māra cannot destroy him. One can see that this sentence is not only correct in principle but, still more, secure in the gate of practice: where there is nothing that can be attained, there is nothing that can be seized.
6. How, within a single thought, does he make complete the practice of the six perfections and so on up to the eighty minor marks? The answer: all his giving and so on up to the marks and minor signs are not far from prajñā. The proper topic of this chapter is raised from this question on. Subhūti lists in one breath all the items to be made complete: the six perfections, the four dhyānas, the four immeasurable minds, the four formless absorptions, the four foundations of mindfulness, the four right efforts, the four bases of supernormal power, the five faculties, the five powers, the seven limbs of awakening, the eightfold noble path, the three gates of liberation, the ten powers of the Buddha, the four fearlessnesses, the four unobstructed knowledges, the eighteen unshared dharmas, great kindness and great compassion, the thirty-two marks, and the eighty minor marks—what he asks is how so vast a heap can be made complete within a single thought. The Buddha's first layer of answer is only one sentence: all the bodhisattva's giving is not far from prajñāpāramitā; the keeping of morality, patience, vigour, and meditation that he cultivates are not far from prajñāpāramitā; and so on up to the four dhyānas, the four immeasurables, the four formless absorptions, and the four foundations of mindfulness and so on up to the marks and minor signs—all are not far from prajñāpāramitā. What he answers is not ‘how to squeeze it into a single thought’, but ‘by what it comes to be within a single thought’.
7. How, because of not being far from it, is it complete within a single thought? The answer: giving and so on up to the marks and minor signs are all of the mark of non-duality. Subhūti asks again: how does not being far from prajñā come to be complete within a single thought? The Buddha's answer gathers in one layer further—all giving is not far from prajñā and is 「不二相」 tr. "of the mark of non-duality"; when keeping morality it is also of the mark of non-duality; cultivating patience, being diligent in vigour, and entering meditation are also of the mark of non-duality; and so on up to the eighty minor marks, these too are of the mark of non-duality. The three Chinese characters for the mark of non-duality turn 「不遠離」 tr. "not being far from" from a word of relation into a word of essential nature: it is not that giving is here and prajñā is there and the two are close together; it is that, at the time of practice, giving and prajñā have from the start no two marks that could be divided.
8. What is the mark of non-duality? The answer: wishing to make dānapāramitā complete, within dāna are at once contained all the pāramitā and the four foundations of mindfulness and so on up to the marks and minor signs. He asks again how the mark of non-duality is to be spoken of. The Buddha answers: when the bodhisattva practises prajñā and wishes to make dānapāramitā complete, within dānapāramitā he has contained all the pāramitā as well as the four foundations of mindfulness and so on up to the eighty minor marks. This answer brings the previous question down onto the perfection with which cultivation first begins—giving. The containing of all practices need not wait until the sixth perfection to be discussed; on the first perfection it is already complete. Here the practitioner can obtain a fixed measure: do not wait until the dharma-gates have all been cultivated before speaking of completeness; if within one gate there are no two marks, every gate is within it.
9. How, when giving, does he contain all the dharmas without outflows? The answer: abiding in the mind without outflows he gives, and does not see who gives, who receives, or what thing is given, and so on up to not seeing all the dharmas of the Buddha. Subhūti asks more concretely still: when giving, how after all are the dharmas without outflows contained in it? The Buddha answers: the bodhisattva abides in the mind without outflows and gives, and within the mind without outflows sees no marks—who is giving, who is receiving, what the thing given is; with this signless mind, this mind without outflows, cutting off craving, cutting off the mind of stinginess and greed, he practises giving, and at this time he does not see giving, and so on up to not seeing the dharma of unsurpassed awakening. Keeping morality, patience, vigour, meditation, wisdom, the four foundations of mindfulness and so on up to the marks and minor signs—these too are all practised with the signless mind, the mind without outflows, without seeing their dharmas. This passage is where the four preceding questions land: what is called the mark of non-duality, what is called being complete within a single thought—their side in practice is just this one word, 「不見」 tr. "does not see." Cutting off craving and cutting off stinginess and greed is the side of being able to give up; not seeing the three things is the side of not grasping; only when the two sides are present at once is it giving within the mind without outflows.
10. If dharmas are signless and without making, how are the six perfections and so on up to the thirty-two marks and the eighty minor marks made complete? At this point Subhūti changes his angle and asks once in general: if dharmas are signless and without making, how after all does one make complete the six perfections, dāna, śīla, kṣānti, vīrya, dhyāna, and prajñā? How does one make complete the four foundations of mindfulness and so on up to the eightfold noble path? How does one make complete the emptiness, signless, and non-action samādhi and the ten powers of the Buddha, the four fearlessnesses, the four unobstructed knowledges, the eighteen unshared dharmas, and great kindness and great compassion? How does one make complete the thirty-two marks and the eighty minor marks? The four preceding questions asked ‘how a single thought can be complete’; this question asks ‘how within the signless one can be complete’. The Buddha no longer answers with short phrases, but from here on unfolds the six perfections one by one; therefore this question is in fact the general outline of the latter half of the sūtra text.
11. The marks of dānapāramitā (first part): giving with the signless mind without outflows, giving away everything inner and outer, not regretting when people rebuke, dedicating and yet not seeing the mark of dedication. In answering about dānapāramitā, the Buddha first speaks of the breadth of what is given: to one who needs food he gives food, and so on up to all kinds of needs, all are given; whether inner or outer—whether dismembering his own body, or his realm, cities, wife, and children—all are given to beings. Next he speaks of holding firm when meeting adverse conditions: if someone comes and says 「何用是布施為？是無所益！」 tr. "What use is this giving? It is of no benefit!", the bodhisattva who practises prajñā then has the thought 「是人雖來訶我布施，我終不悔！我當勤行布施，不應不與。」 tr. "Though this person comes to rebuke my giving, I shall never regret it! I should practise giving diligently and should not fail to give." This section is well worth savouring—the sūtra text does not give the bodhisattva an argument in reply; it only gives him an unmoving mind. Next again he speaks of the dedication after giving: holding it in common with all beings he dedicates it to unsurpassed awakening, and moreover does not see these marks—who gives, who receives, what thing is given, who it is that dedicates, what the dharma of dedication is, what the place of dedication is. As for why he can not see them, the sūtra text itself brings out the reason: all dharmas are empty through inner emptiness, empty through outer emptiness, empty through inner-and-outer emptiness, empty through the emptiness of emptiness, through the emptiness of the conditioned, through the emptiness of the unconditioned, through ultimate emptiness, through beginningless emptiness, through the emptiness of dispersal, through the emptiness of nature, through the emptiness of all dharmas, and empty through the emptiness of specific marks. This string of gates of emptiness says, one by one: body and mind, turning inward, are without self-nature; the receptacle world, turning outward, is without self-nature; contemplating inner and outer together, there is also no self-nature; the emptiness that empties may not be clung to either; made dharmas are without self-nature; unmade dharmas too are without self-nature; pushed to the ultimate, there is no self-nature; pushed back to its beginning, it is unfindable; dharmas that gather together scatter and have nothing real; their nature is so from the start; all dharmas, without exception; and so on up to each one's specific mark being unfindable too. Having contemplated thus, the bodhisattva has the thought 「迴向者誰？迴向何處？用何法迴向？」 tr. "Who is it that dedicates? Where is it dedicated? By what dharma is it dedicated?"—and the sūtra text says that only this is called right dedication.
12. The marks of dānapāramitā (last part): bringing beings to accomplishment and purifying buddha-lands, making all dharmas complete and yet not receiving worldly retribution, delivering beings by the three vehicles. The Buddha continues: at that time the bodhisattva can bring beings to accomplishment and purify buddha-lands, and can make complete the six perfections, dāna, śīla, kṣānti, vīrya, dhyāna, and prajñā, and so on up to the thirty-seven dharmas that aid the path, the emptiness, signless, and non-action samādhi, and so on up to the eighteen unshared dharmas. That all dharmas are made complete within one perfection is precisely what this chapter's title points to. Next he speaks of the mark of the fruit: this bodhisattva can thus make dānapāramitā complete and yet does not receive worldly retribution—just as the gods Sovereign over Others' Transformations obtain at once whatever they need at will, so too the bodhisattva: whatever vow arises in his mind, he obtains at will. This simile may not be read as a promise of rewards of merit; the sūtra text at once goes on to make clear the use of this retribution: because of the retribution of this giving he can make offerings to the buddhas, and can also satisfy all beings, gods, humans, and asuras; he gathers in beings by dānapāramitā, and with the power of skilful means delivers beings by the dharma of the three vehicles. One can see that the fruit obtained is turned back entirely into gathering in beings; therefore, though there is the mark of retribution, it is said that he 「不受世間果報」 tr. "does not receive worldly retribution."
13. The marks of śīlapāramitā (first part): keeping all kinds of morality and yet taking nothing at all, only holding it in common with beings and dedicating it. From here on, the Buddha, without waiting for Subhūti to ask, directly sets up the next topic and answers it himself: how does the bodhisattva-mahāsattva make śīlapāramitā complete within dharmas that are signless, without attaining, and without making? Of the morality he keeps, the sūtra text lists five kinds—the noble morality without outflows that enters the eightfold noble path, natural morality, morality obtained as retribution, morality obtained by receiving, and morality born of the mind. The sūtra text only lists these five names as headings; this treatise does not gloss them item by item in this chapter, and the ancient masters do not explain them separately for this chapter either; therefore here the names are only listed according to the sūtra, and no analysis is supplied on their behalf. It also marks out its virtues in general as not deficient, not broken, not mixed, not turbid, and not clinging, together with sovereign morality and morality praised by the wise. Keeping this morality, he 「無所取」 tr. "takes nothing," and what he does not take the sūtra text counts out one by one: form, feeling, perception, constructions, and consciousness; the thirty-two marks and the eighty minor marks; the great clans of the kṣatriyas, the great clans of the brahmins, and the great families of the householders; and the heavens from the Heaven of the Four Heavenly Kings up to the sphere of neither perception nor non-perception; and the fruit of the srota-āpanna and so on up to the fruit of the arhat and the pratyekabuddha path; and the wheel-turning sage king and the heavenly kings. The crucial point is this: what he does not take is not only the rewards of merit of humans and gods; even the four fruits and the pratyekabuddha path are among them. Keeping morality and not taking the noble fruits—this is śīla within the signless, without attaining, and without making. At the end it says that only in order to hold it in common with all beings does he dedicate it to unsurpassed awakening, dedicating it as signless, without attaining, and without duality—and it marks this itself as 「為世俗法故，非第一實義」 tr. "for the sake of worldly dharmas, not the foremost real meaning," telling the reader plainly that the talk of dedication is something set up in accord with worldly truth.
14. The marks of śīlapāramitā (last part): by the power of skilful means he gives rise to the four dhyānas and obtains the five supernormal powers, and each of the five supernormal powers has its use. The Buddha continues: this bodhisattva makes śīlapāramitā complete, by the power of skilful means gives rise to the four dhyānas and does not savour and cling to them, and therefore obtains the five supernormal powers. Because of the four dhyānas he obtains the divine eye, and abides in two kinds of divine eye, that obtained by cultivation and that obtained as retribution; having obtained the divine eye, he sees the buddhas present in the ten directions, and so on up to obtaining unsurpassed awakening, and what he has seen is not lost. With the pure divine ear that surpasses the human ear, he hears the buddhas of the ten directions speak the Dharma, and what he has heard is not lost; he can enrich himself and also benefit others. With the knowledge of others' minds, he knows the minds of the buddhas of the ten directions and the minds of all beings, and can also enrich all beings. With the knowledge of former lives, he knows the causes and conditions of past deeds; because these causes and conditions of deeds are not lost, he knows fully where beings are born, in place after place. With the knowledge of the exhaustion of outflows, he causes beings to obtain the fruit of the srota-āpanna and so on up to the fruit of the arhat and the pratyekabuddha path, and in place after place can cause beings to enter into wholesome dharmas. In this section two things must be seen: first, the obtaining of the five supernormal powers has its source in morality and not in seeking them separately, and so it is spoken of under śīlapāramitā; second, the uses of the five supernormal powers each fall, one by one, on 「饒益」 tr. "enriching" and 「令眾生得」 tr. "causing beings to obtain," and not one of them is for his own enjoyment.
15. The marks of kṣāntipāramitā (first part): the two kinds of acceptance, and contemplating the real nature of dharmas. Subhūti asks: dharmas being signless, without making, and without attaining, how can the bodhisattva make kṣāntipāramitā complete? The Buddha's answer first marks out the length of its span of time: from the first arousing of intent up to sitting at the seat of awakening, if in the interval all beings assail him with tiles and stones, knives and staves, the bodhisattva does not give rise to a mind of hatred, not even to a single thought. Next he sets up two kinds of acceptance: first, when all beings revile and abuse him with evil speech or assail him with knives and staves, tiles and stones, the mind of hatred does not arise; second, all dharmas are unarisen: the acceptance of the non-arising of dharmas. The former is acceptance toward people, the latter acceptance toward dharmas; lacking the former, the acceptance of dharmas becomes empty talk; lacking the latter, acceptance toward people will in the end run dry. Next he shows the method by which one can accept: the bodhisattva should reflect thus, 「罵我者誰？譏訶者誰？打擲者誰？誰有受者？」 tr. "Who is it that reviles me? Who ridicules and rebukes? Who strikes and throws? Who is there that receives?", and at once reflect on the real nature of dharmas, namely ultimate emptiness, with no dharmas and no beings; dharmas themselves are unfindable, how much less are there beings. When he contemplates the marks of dharmas thus, he does not see the one who reviles, does not see the one who cuts and severs, and at once obtains the acceptance of the non-arising of dharmas. The sūtra text further explains for itself what is called the acceptance of the non-arising of dharmas: knowing that the marks of dharmas are constantly unarisen, and that the afflictions too, from the very beginning, are constantly unarisen. This explanation most needs to be remembered—the acceptance of the non-arising of dharmas is not holding down something that has arisen; it is seeing clearly that it was never arisen from the start.
16. The marks of kṣāntipāramitā (last part): because he abides in the two kinds of acceptance, he makes complete all dharmas and the noble supernormal powers, and finally obtains the omniscience of all kinds and turns the wheel of the Dharma. The Buddha continues: the bodhisattva, abiding in these two kinds of acceptance, can make complete the four dhyānas, the four immeasurable minds, the four formless absorptions, the four foundations of mindfulness and so on up to the eightfold noble path, the three gates of liberation, the ten powers of the Buddha, the four fearlessnesses, the four unobstructed knowledges, the eighteen unshared dharmas, and great kindness and great compassion; abiding in these noble, world-transcending dharmas without outflows, not shared with any śrāvaka or pratyekabuddha, he makes complete the noble supernormal powers. Their uses too lie one by one in benefiting others: with the divine eye he sees the buddhas of the eastern direction and obtains the samādhi of recollecting the Buddha, and so on up to unsurpassed awakening, never cut off, and so in all ten directions; with the divine ear he hears the Dharma spoken by the buddhas of the ten directions and, as he has heard it, speaks it for beings; he knows the minds of the buddhas of the ten directions and the thoughts of all beings, and speaks the Dharma according to their minds; with the knowledge of former lives he knows the roots of goodness of beings in former lives, and speaks the Dharma for them, causing them to rejoice; with the supernormal power of the exhaustion of outflows he teaches and transforms beings, causing them to obtain the three vehicles. At the end it concludes: practising prajñā, with the power of skilful means he brings beings to accomplishment, makes complete the omniscience of all kinds, obtains unsurpassed awakening, and turns the wheel of the Dharma. What is obtained in the earlier passage on śīla is the five supernormal powers; what is obtained in this passage through the two kinds of acceptance is called the noble supernormal powers; the difference lies in the phrase 「不共一切聲聞、辟支佛」 tr. "not shared with any śrāvaka or pratyekabuddha"—do not confuse them in reading.
17. The bodily vigour of vīryapāramitā. Subhūti asks how, within the signless, without making, and without attaining, vīryapāramitā is made complete. The Buddha's answer first divides vigour into the two, bodily and mental, and speaks first of the bodily: when the bodhisattva practises prajñā he accomplishes bodily vigour and mental vigour, enters the first dhyāna and so on up to the fourth dhyāna, and receives all kinds of power of the supernormal powers: he can divide one body into many bodies, and so on up to stroking the sun and moon with his hand; because he accomplishes bodily vigour, he flies to the eastern direction, passes through immeasurable hundreds of thousands of myriads of buddha-worlds, and makes offerings to the buddhas of food and drink, clothing, medicine, bedding, flowers, incense, necklaces, and all kinds of needs, and so on up to obtaining unsurpassed awakening, and the retribution of the merit can never be exhausted. When he obtains awakening, the gods and humans of all the world diligently prepare offerings, and so on up to: after he enters nirvāṇa without remainder, the relics and the disciples receive offerings. Also because of this power of the supernormal powers he goes to where the buddhas are and hears and receives the teaching of the Dharma, and so on up to unsurpassed awakening, never failing in it; when he cultivates the omniscience of all kinds, he purifies buddha-worlds and brings beings to accomplishment. That bodily vigour is not running about in vain lies wholly in this: the place it goes to is where the buddhas are, and the work it does is making offerings and hearing the Dharma.
18. The mental vigour of vīryapāramitā. The Buddha continues and himself sets up the next topic: how does the bodhisattva accomplish mental vigour and make vīryapāramitā complete? He answers that the bodhisattva's mental vigour is noble and without outflows, the vigour that enters the eightfold noble path, and does not let the unwholesome of bodily deeds and verbal deeds enter. Its positive mark is a long string of 「不取」 tr. "not grasping": he does not grasp at the marks of dharmas—whether permanent or impermanent, whether suffering or pleasure, whether self or non-self, whether conditioned or unconditioned, whether the three realms, whether the nature with outflows or without outflows, whether the four dhyānas, whether kindness, compassion, joy, and equanimity, whether the four formless spheres, whether the thirty-seven limbs of the path, whether emptiness, the signless, and non-action, whether the ten powers of the Buddha and so on up to the eighteen unshared dharmas; he does not grasp at the marks of the fruits realised—whether the four fruits of the śramaṇa, whether the pratyekabuddha path, whether the bodhisattva path, whether unsurpassed awakening—nor does he grasp at the persons who realise them, whether a srota-āpanna and so on up to this being a bodhisattva, this being a Buddha; he does not grasp at the marks of cutting off the fetters—this being, because he cuts off the three fetters, obtains srota-āpanna; because the three poisons are thin, obtains sakṛdāgāmin; because he cuts off the lower fetters, obtains anāgāmin; because he cuts off the higher fetters, obtains arhatship; by the pratyekabuddha path becomes a pratyekabuddha; because he practises the knowledge of the kinds of paths, is named a bodhisattva. At the end one sentence gathers up why it is so: 「不可以性取相，是性無故。」 tr. "One may not grasp at a mark by nature, because this nature does not exist." That mental vigour is vigour lies precisely here—it is not the mind being strung tighter; it is that within the mind no mark can be grasped and held. At the end it says that because of this mental vigour he broadly benefits beings and yet does not find these beings either: this is making vīryapāramitā complete; making complete the dharmas of the buddhas, purifying buddha-lands, and bringing beings to accomplishment are all because of unfindability.
19. Because bodily and mental vigour are accomplished, he gathers in all wholesome dharmas and yet does not cling, and benefits beings by supernormal powers at will. The Buddha continues with the general mark after the two kinds of vigour, bodily and mental, are accomplished: he gathers in all wholesome dharmas and yet does not cling to these dharmas either, and therefore he can go from one buddha-land to another buddha-land, and the supernormal powers he performs for the sake of benefiting beings are unobstructed at will—whether raining down flowers, or raining down fine incenses, or making music, or shaking the great earth, or emitting light, or showing lands adorned with the seven jewels, or manifesting all kinds of bodies, or emitting the light of great knowledge, causing beings to know the noble path and causing them to be far from killing and so on up to wrong views; or he benefits beings by giving, or by keeping morality, or by dismembering his body, or by wife and children, or by his realm, or by giving his own body, benefiting beings according to whatever means are fitting. This passage places the uses of the supernormal powers and the practice of giving up the body side by side in one place, which shows precisely that the meaning of vigour lies not in being hard and fierce, but in there being nothing that cannot be given up and nothing that cannot be done.
20. The marks of dhyānapāramitā (first part): except for the dhyānas of the buddhas, all the other dhyānas and samādhi he can make complete. Subhūti asks how, abiding within dharmas that are signless, without making, and without attaining, dhyānapāramitā is made complete. The Buddha's answer first makes a distinction: except for the dhyānas and absorptions of the buddhas, all the other dhyānas and samādhi he can make complete. This distinction is very important—what is complete on the bodhisattva's ground is already extremely broad, and yet the dhyānas of the Buddha are still set apart outside it; one can know that the 「具足」 tr. "making complete" spoken of in this chapter is said with regard to the bodhisattva's position, and does not mean that the bodhisattva and the Buddha are without difference. What is made complete is listed in sequence: parting from all desires and all evil and unwholesome dharmas, with joy and bliss born of separation, with initial and sustained thought, he enters the first dhyāna, and so on up to entering the fourth dhyāna; with the mind of kindness, compassion, joy, and equanimity he pervades one direction and so on up to the ten directions; passing beyond all marks of form, extinguishing the marks of resistance, and because he does not think of the marks of difference, he enters the sphere of boundless space and so on up to the sphere of neither perception nor non-perception; abiding in dhyānapāramitā, in reverse and forward order he enters the eight liberations and the nine successive absorptions, enters the emptiness samādhi, the signless samādhi, and the non-action samādhi, at times enters the like-lightning samādhi, at times enters the noble right samādhi, at times enters the like-vajra samādhi.
21. The marks of dhyānapāramitā (last part): cultivating the dharmas that aid the path, he passes beyond the grounds and enters the bodhisattva's position, obtains dhāraṇī and the supernormal powers obtained as retribution, and sees dharmas as like an illusion and yet benefits beings. The Buddha continues: abiding in dhyānapāramitā, he cultivates the thirty-seven dharmas that aid the path, with the knowledge of the kinds of paths enters all dhyānas and absorptions, passes beyond the ground of dry wisdom, the ground of the stage of nature, the ground of the person of the eight, the ground of seeing, the ground of thinning, the ground of freedom from desire, the ground of what has been done, and the pratyekabuddha ground, and enters the bodhisattva's position; having entered the bodhisattva's position, he makes complete the Buddha ground; practising within these grounds, and so on up to unsurpassed awakening, he does not take the fruit of the path midway. Next it speaks of where he practises and of benefiting others: from one buddha-land to another buddha-land he makes offerings to the buddhas, plants all roots of goodness, purifies buddha-lands, and benefits beings; by giving, keeping morality, samādhi, wisdom, liberation, and the knowledge and vision of liberation he gathers in beings; he teaches beings, causing them to obtain the four fruits of the śramaṇa and the pratyekabuddha path; all the wholesome dharmas that can cause beings to obtain the path, he teaches them and causes them to obtain. Next it speaks of what he obtains: he can give rise to all the dhāraṇī gates, and obtains the four unobstructed knowledges and the supernormal powers obtained as retribution; he never enters a woman's womb, never receives the five desires, is without birth and is not born either; though he has birth, he is not defiled by the dharma of birth. As for why it is so, the sūtra text itself brings it out—he sees all made dharmas as like an illusion and yet benefits beings, and also does not find beings or any dharma, and teaches beings, causing them to obtain the place of nothing to be attained; and it marks this itself as 「世俗法故，非第一實義」 tr. "for the sake of worldly dharmas, not the foremost real meaning." At the end it says that, abiding in this dhyānapāramitā, all dhyānas, absorptions, liberations, and samādhi, and so on up to unsurpassed awakening, never part from dhyānapāramitā; when he practises such knowledge of the kinds of paths, he obtains the omniscience of all kinds, cuts off all the afflictions and their habitual residues, benefits himself and benefits others, and becomes a field of merit for the gods, humans, and asuras of all the world.
22. The marks of prajñāpāramitā: not seeing a fixed and real mark, practising inner emptiness and so on up to the emptiness of non-existent and existent dharmas, he makes the bodhisattva path complete. Subhūti asks how, abiding within dharmas that are signless, without making, and without attaining, one cultivates and makes prajñāpāramitā complete. The Buddha answers: when the bodhisattva practises prajñā, he does not see in dharmas a fixed and real mark—he sees form as not fixed and not a real mark, and so on up to seeing consciousness as not fixed and not a real mark; he does not see form arise, and so on up to not seeing consciousness arise; since he does not see arising, then of all dharmas, whether with outflows or without outflows, he does not see a place of coming, does not see a place of going, and also does not see a place of gathering. When he contemplates thus, he does not find the nature of form and so on up to the nature of consciousness, and also does not find the nature of dharmas with outflows and without outflows. Next it speaks of his faith and understanding: he has faith in and understands that all dharmas are of the mark of being without anything existent; having had faith and understanding thus, he practises inner emptiness and so on up to the emptiness of non-existent and existent dharmas, and clings to nothing in dharmas—whether form, or feeling, perception, constructions, and consciousness, and so on up to unsurpassed awakening. At the end it concludes: the bodhisattva practises the prajñāpāramitā that is without anything existent and can make complete the bodhisattva path, namely the six perfections and so on up to the thirty-seven dharmas that aid the path, the ten powers of the Buddha, the four fearlessnesses, the four unobstructed knowledges, the eighteen unshared dharmas, the thirty-two marks, and the eighty minor marks. What is said of the first five perfections is in every case ‘practising and yet not finding’; here at prajñā it says directly 「不見」 tr. "does not see" and 「不得」 tr. "does not find"; therefore prajñā is that by which the first five perfections are able not to find.
23. Abiding in the pure Buddha path of emptiness, he teaches and transforms as is appropriate, manifests supernormal powers and delivers the multitudes, and by the six perfections and the five supernormal powers obtained as retribution accomplishes all merits. The Buddha continues with the mark of benefiting beings of one who practises prajñā: abiding in the pure Buddha path of emptiness—namely the six perfections, the thirty-seven dharmas that aid the path, and the supernormal powers obtained as retribution—with these dharmas he enriches beings: those suited to be gathered in by giving, he teaches to give; those suited to be gathered in by morality, he teaches to keep morality; those suited to be gathered in by meditation, wisdom, liberation, and the knowledge and vision of liberation, he teaches to cultivate them; those suited to be taught by the dharmas of the paths, he teaches to obtain the four fruits of the śramaṇa and the pratyekabuddha path; those suited to be transformed by the Buddha path, he teaches to obtain the bodhisattva path and make the Buddha path complete—like this, according to the ground of the path appropriate to each, he teaches and transforms them, causing each to obtain its place. Next it says that when he manifests all kinds of power of the supernormal powers, he passes beyond lands as immeasurable as the sands of the Ganges and delivers beings, and according to what they need, conjures it all and gives it, causing each to be satisfied; from one land to another land, he sees pure and wondrous lands and uses them to adorn his own buddha-land. Next, with two similes, it makes clear that he lacks nothing to sustain life: as in the heaven of the gods Sovereign over Others' Transformations the goods needed to sustain life come of themselves at will, and also as the pure buddha-lands are parted from seeking and desire. At the end it says that with these six perfections obtained as retribution and the five supernormal powers obtained as retribution, he practises the bodhisattva's knowledge of the kinds of paths, accomplishes all merits, and will obtain unsurpassed awakening. What is most worth observing in this passage is the phrase 「隨其所應道地」 tr. "according to the ground of the path appropriate to each"—within emptiness there is no fixed mark, so teaching and transforming have no fixed method either.
24. Because he receives no dharma, when he obtains awakening the land and the goods that sustain life all have no owner. The sūtra section concludes with this. The Buddha says that this bodhisattva at that time does not receive form and so on up to consciousness, does not receive any dharma—whether wholesome or unwholesome, whether worldly or world-transcending, whether with outflows or without outflows, whether conditioned or unconditioned; all dharmas like this he does not receive; when he obtains unsurpassed awakening, all the goods that sustain life in his land have no owner. As for why it is so, the sūtra text itself brings it out: this bodhisattva practises all dharmas without receiving, because they are unfindable. The three Chinese characters 「無有主」 tr. "have no owner" are where the whole sūtra section of the chapter comes to rest—before this it spoke of such broad practices and retributions, and at the very end it says that even the land and the goods that sustain life have no one who owns them. All practices complete and not one thing belonging to me—only this is the root meaning of 「一心具萬行」 tr. "one mind complete with all practices."
25. The treatise-author's first question and answer: both questioner and answerer say without anything existent; how can one tell who asks and who answers? At the very start of the treatise section a question is set up, asked very finely: the one who asks and the one who answers both say 「無所有」 tr. "without anything existent" with their mouths; how can one distinguish which sentence is the question and which the answer? The treatise-author answers: 「所言法雖一而心異」 tr. "though the dharma spoken is one, the minds are different"—the one who asks asks with a clinging mind, the one who answers answers with a mind without clinging. This answer is the key to reading this chapter, and indeed to reading all the chapters on prajñā. The same three Chinese characters, coming from a clinging mind, are an objection; coming from a mind without clinging, they are an answer; in the wording there is no distinction—the distinction lies wholly in the mind that speaks. When the practitioner reads the sūtra up to here, he should turn the light back on himself: when he recites 「無所得」 tr. "nothing to be attained," which kind of mind is it?
26. Subhūti's meaning and why he asks. The treatise-author continues to explain: Subhūti's meaning is that within being without anything existent one should not arouse the mind; yet he asks this only for the sake of the clinging minds of those listening to the Dharma. Within the emptiness of dharmas one does not see a bodhisattva who arouses the mind, does not see beings who can be benefited, does not see unsurpassed awakening; therefore within the dharma of being without anything existent he raises the objection—「若一切法無所有性，菩薩見何利故發心？」 tr. "If all dharmas are of the nature of being without anything existent, what benefit does the bodhisattva see, that he arouses the mind?" The treatise-author at once makes a distinction in a most important sentence: Subhūti has no doubt about the three things, the bodhisattva, beings, and unsurpassed awakening; he only asks about the dharma of being without anything existent. This distinction guards against a misreading—one may not regard Subhūti as someone who has given rise to doubt about the Buddha path; he is asking the words out on behalf of the listeners with clinging minds.
27. Taking up the Buddha's answer and explaining it: it is precisely because of being without anything existent and empty that one can arouse the mind. The treatise-author cites the Buddha's answer, 「正以無所有、空故能發心」 tr. "it is precisely because of being without anything existent, because of emptiness, that one can arouse the mind," and at once sets out its reason: if it is without anything existent and empty, then the bodhisattva, beings, and unsurpassed awakening are likewise all empty and without anything existent; from where could this objection arise? Only if beings, the bodhisattva, and unsurpassed awakening were parted from being without anything existent and empty could there be this objection. He also cites what was said earlier, 「畢竟空於諸法無所障礙，何妨發心？」 tr. "Ultimate emptiness is without obstruction toward all dharmas; what hinders arousing the mind?", as proof. At the end the treatise-author lays bare the Buddha's method in one sentence—the Buddha still uses being without anything existent and emptiness to break what Subhūti asked. One must take note: what is broken is not Subhūti the person; it is the view hidden within that question, ‘emptiness can obstruct existence’.
28. He himself states the causes and conditions: those with a clinging mind find it hard to obtain liberation. The treatise-author cites the causes and conditions the Buddha himself states, 「須菩提！著心者難得解脫」 tr. "Subhūti! Those with a clinging mind find it hard to obtain liberation," and explains them at length: this person, from beginningless birth and death, because of all the afflictions, deeply clings to dharmas—hearing of existence he clings, hearing of emptiness he clings, to gain and loss he clings; such beings are hard to bring out by effort. Therefore the bodhisattva arouses the mind of the unsurpassed path, adorns his own body with the marks and minor signs, obtains the Brahmā voice, has great majestic virtue, knows the root of beings' minds in the three times, and by all kinds of power of the supernormal powers, causes and conditions, and similes, speaks for them the dharma of being without anything existent and the gate of liberation of emptiness, guiding their minds; when beings see such rare things, their minds at once become soft, and they have faith in the Buddha and receive the Dharma. At the end he cites the sūtra text, 「著有者難得解脫；有所得者，無道、無果、無阿耨多羅三藐三菩提」 tr. "Those who cling to existence find it hard to obtain liberation; those with something to be attained have no path, no fruit, no anuttarā samyaksaṃbodhi," as the conclusion. This passage gives where the intent of the first half of this chapter lies—the meaning of emptiness is not for cancelling the gate of practice; it is precisely for loosening that 「著」 tr. "clinging."
29. Taking up Subhūti's question and the Buddha's answer: being without anything existent is precisely the path, the fruit, and awakening. The treatise-author takes up the sūtra phrase by phrase: Subhūti asks, 「世尊！若有所得者，無道、無果、無阿耨多羅三藐三菩提；無所得者有道、有果不？」 tr. "World-Honored One! If those with something to be attained have no path, no fruit, no anuttarā samyaksaṃbodhi, do those with nothing to be attained have a path and a fruit, or not?" The Buddha answers, 「無所有即是道、即是果、即是阿耨多羅三藐三菩提。」 tr. "Being without anything existent is precisely the path, precisely the fruit, precisely anuttarā samyaksaṃbodhi." These two sentences are the hinge by which the treatise-author carries on from what precedes and opens what follows; he takes them up without explaining them, and the explanation is in the next passage. In reading the treatise up to here one must keep the layers distinct: the words cited in the treatise come from the sūtra, and the treatise-author's own words lie outside the citations; the two may not be lumped together.
30. Explaining the principle that nothing to be attained is precisely the path and the fruit, and explaining that the nature of dharmas is precisely the real mark of all dharmas. The treatise-author explains: if a person does not discriminate this as something to be attained and that as nothing to be attained, and enters the real mark of all dharmas, ultimate emptiness, this too is nothing to be attained, and is precisely the path, precisely the fruit, precisely unsurpassed awakening, because he does not destroy the real mark of all dharmas. At the end he adds a gloss—「法性即是諸法實相」 tr. "the nature of dharmas is precisely the real mark of all dharmas." This sentence is extremely important: the sūtra text says 「法性不壞故」 tr. "because the nature of dharmas is indestructible"; if one does not know that the nature of dharmas is precisely the real mark of all dharmas, one will imagine the nature of dharmas as a substance existing separately. The treatise-author points it out in a word, so that the 「不壞法性」 tr. "not destroying the nature of dharmas" in the sūtra and the 「不破壞諸法實相」 tr. "not destroying the real mark of all dharmas" in the treatise become one and the same matter.
31. Subhūti's doubt and the Buddha's answer: though the nature of dharmas cannot be destroyed, because of beings' wrong practice it is named destroyed. The treatise-author goes on to bring out Subhūti's meaning: the nature of dharmas, whether under right practice or wrong practice, can never be destroyed; why then does the Buddha say 「不壞法性是道、是果」 tr. "not destroying the nature of dharmas is the path, is the fruit"—since from the start it cannot be destroyed, is saying 「不壞」 tr. "not destroying" not superfluous? The Buddha answers, 「法性雖不可破壞，眾生邪行故名為破壞」 tr. "though the nature of dharmas cannot be destroyed, because of beings' wrong practice it is named destroyed," and the treatise-author makes it clear by a simile: as with space, though clouds, mist, earth, and dust cannot stain it, it is also called impure; as when a person really wishes to defile space, this person wishes to defile the nature of dharmas, and there is no such thing. The measure of this simile must be seen accurately—clouds and mist cannot really stain space, and yet people still say the sky is impure; likewise, wrong practice cannot really destroy the nature of dharmas, and yet the sūtra still speaks of destroying the nature of dharmas. The 「壞」 tr. "destroying" that is spoken of lies on the side of the practitioner, not on the side of the nature of dharmas.
32. The Buddha speaks a simile: one who wishes to destroy the nature of dharmas is precisely one who wishes, within the dharma of being without anything existent, to obtain the path and obtain the fruit. The treatise-author takes up the simile the Buddha speaks: 「若人欲壞法性，是人為欲於無所有法中得道、得果、得阿耨多羅三藐三菩提。」 tr. "If a person wishes to destroy the nature of dharmas, this person is one who wishes, within the dharma of being without anything existent, to obtain the path, to obtain the fruit, to obtain anuttarā samyaksaṃbodhi." This sentence brings the simile of the passage above back onto the gate of practice: what is called destroying the nature of dharmas is not some other kind of person going off to ruin something; it is precisely that mind which, within the dharma of nothing to be attained, still wants to take hold of the path and the fruit. If the reader feels that the three Chinese characters 「壞法性」 tr. "destroying the nature of dharmas" are too heavy, he can look back at this sentence—what it points to is in fact the most common single thought.
33. Taking up Subhūti's renewed question about the ten grounds and the other dharmas of the bodhisattva. The treatise-author takes up the sūtra: Subhūti said to the Buddha, 「若無所有即是道，云何有十地等諸菩薩法？」 tr. "If being without anything existent is precisely the path, how are there the ten grounds and the other dharmas of the bodhisattva?", and he notes with the four Chinese characters 「如經廣說」 tr. "as is said at length in the sūtra" that the full content of this question is already present in the sūtra section and is not restated in the treatise. This stroke is a set practice of this treatise—where the sūtra text is already complete, the treatise-author does not copy it out again, but takes only its essentials to connect with what follows.
34. The treatise-author's second question and answer: since the Buddha has already answered, why ask again? The answer: because bodhisattvas who have newly aroused the mind cling to the dharma that has been broken. The treatise-author himself sets up the second round of question and answer. Question: The Buddha has already answered this matter before, namely 「若法空，菩薩見何事故發心？」 tr. "If dharmas are empty, what does the bodhisattva see, that he arouses the mind?" Now it is said, 「若法空，云何有初地等？」 tr. "If dharmas are empty, how is there the first ground and the rest?" The Buddha answered each with emptiness; why does Subhūti now ask again? Answer: He asks again because beings' clinging minds are hard to loosen—in this assembly there are bodhisattvas who have newly aroused the mind; hearing this real mark of all dharmas, emptiness, they at once give rise to a clinging mind; the Buddha breaks their clinging, and they in turn cling to the dharma that has been broken; Subhūti asks again for the sake of such people. The five Chinese characters 「亦著所破法」 tr. "in turn cling to the dharma that has been broken" most need to be savoured: breaking existence, one clings to emptiness; breaking emptiness, one clings to ‘breaking emptiness’; the places of clinging turn over and over without end. The reason one and the same question has to be asked twice is not that the Buddha answered unclearly; it is that the listeners' place of clinging has changed position.
35. Taking up the Buddha's answer: because of nothing to be attained there is the first ground, and so on up to the relics receiving offerings. The treatise-author takes up the Buddha's answer, 「以無所得故有初地，乃至般涅槃後舍利得供養」 tr. "because of nothing to be attained there is the first ground, and so on up to: after parinirvāṇa the relics receive offerings," and adds a judgement of his own: within something clung to, one may not speak of the first ground and the merits. This judgement makes the meaning of the sūtra still more thorough—the reason the sequence and its merits can be spoken of is exactly that they are not something attained; within something clung to, these names on the contrary cannot stand.
36. Explaining that, because the six perfections and the supernormal powers are without difference, one should not raise an objection. The treatise-author continues to explain: also because of the causes and conditions of nothing to be attained, from giving up to the supernormal powers there is no difference; because there is no difference, one should not raise an objection. Here the three Chinese characters 「不應難」 tr. "one should not raise an objection" are the gathering-up of the earlier question—since difference does not exist, the question 「有何差別」 tr. "what difference is there" itself comes to nothing.
37. Taking up Subhūti's renewed question and the Buddha's answer: resembling the mark of quiescence of awakening, giving is ultimately empty, and Māra cannot destroy it. The treatise-author takes up the sūtra: Subhūti asks again, 「云何無所得布施乃至諸神通無有差別？」 tr. "How is it that, with nothing to be attained, giving and so on up to the supernormal powers are without difference?" The Buddha answers, 「菩薩從初發心已來，似阿耨多羅三藐三菩提寂滅相，布施畢竟空，所謂不得施者、受者、財物而行布施，如是布施中無有分別；乃至不得菩提而得阿耨多羅三藐三菩提，亦如是。是名菩薩行無所得般若波羅蜜。行是無所得般若波羅蜜，魔、若魔天不能破壞。」 tr. "From the first arousing of the mind onward, the bodhisattva, resembling the mark of quiescence of anuttarā samyaksaṃbodhi, gives, and his giving is ultimately empty: namely, not finding giver, recipient, or goods, he practises giving, and within such giving there is no discrimination; and so on up to: not finding awakening, he obtains anuttarā samyaksaṃbodhi—it is likewise. This is named the bodhisattva practising the prajñāpāramitā of nothing to be attained. One who practises this prajñāpāramitā of nothing to be attained, Māra and the gods of Māra cannot destroy." The Chinese character 「似」 tr. "resembling" is the eye of this passage: the mark of what the bodhisattva practises at the time of first arousing the mind already resembles the mark of quiescence of the unsurpassed awakening toward which he goes; therefore within the cause the mark of the fruit is already contained, and only this is the real meaning of 「無有差別」 tr. "without difference."
38. The treatise-author sets up a sub-heading: one who practises the six perfections within a single thought. Here the treatise-author sets up a one-sentence sub-heading—「一念中行六波羅蜜者」 tr. "one who practises the six perfections within a single thought." When this treatise explains the sūtra, wherever a single phrase is marked out alone at the head of a passage, it is telling the reader the scope of what is explained below. The three questions after this heading all arise around this chapter's title; therefore, though this sentence is short, it is the watershed of the latter half of the whole treatise section.
39. The treatise-author's third question and answer: why Subhūti asks about practising the six perfections within a single thought. Question: Why does Subhūti ask about 「一念中行六波羅蜜等諸功德」 tr. "practising the six perfections and the other merits within a single thought"? Answer: Subhūti has heard from the Buddha that prajñāpāramitā is of the very deep mark of being without anything existent, and is the unobstructed mark among dharmas; if so, there is nothing it cannot do and no matter it does not do; then how can the bodhisattva within a single thought contain the six perfections and so on up to the eighty minor marks? The treatise-author also himself brings out the source of there being this question: at the time of first arousing the mind, because the mind clinging to existence and non-existence is heavy, he practises little by little in sequence; now existence and non-existence are both given up, so there is nothing he cannot do; therefore he asks. This answer states the root of ‘being complete within a single thought’ with great clarity—it is not that the practitioner squeezes the six perfections into an instant; it is that once the twofold obstruction in the mind, clinging to existence and clinging to non-existence, has been entirely given up, practice can do anything. That one practises in sequence is not because the dharma has a sequence; it is because the mind has obstruction.
40. Taking up the Buddha's answer: because he does not part from prajñā, he can practise within a single thought; if far from it, then little by little in sequence. The treatise-author takes up the Buddha's answer, 「菩薩不離般若波羅蜜行布施等諸功德，無障礙故，能一念中行」 tr. "The bodhisattva, not parting from prajñāpāramitā, practises giving and the other merits; because he is without obstruction, he can practise them within a single thought," and himself adds a sentence from the reverse side: if he is far from prajñāpāramitā, then he practises little by little in sequence. Only when the positive and the reverse are brought out together does one see that the three Chinese characters 「不遠離」 tr. "not being far from" are the crux and not empty words.
41. Taking up the question and answer: what is named not being far from it? The answer: not practising giving and the rest by way of two marks. The treatise-author takes up Subhūti's question, 「云何名不遠離？」 tr. "What is named not being far from it?", and the Buddha's answer, 「菩薩不以二相行布施等。」 tr. "The bodhisattva does not practise giving and the rest by way of two marks." This one question and one answer are already in the sūtra section; the reason the treatise-author takes them up again is that he wants to attach the later 「何等是一念」 tr. "What is a single thought?" to this line.
42. Taking up the question and answer: what is it not to be by way of two marks? The answer: within a single thought of giving he contains all wholesome dharmas. The treatise-author takes up the further question, 「云何不以二相？」 tr. "What is it not to be by way of two marks?", and the Buddha's answer, 「菩薩行般若波羅蜜時，欲具足檀波羅蜜，於布施一念中攝一切善法。」 tr. "When the bodhisattva practises prajñāpāramitā and wishes to make dānapāramitā complete, within a single thought of giving he contains all wholesome dharmas." At the end he appends the three Chinese characters 「如先說」 tr. "as was said before," pointing out that it is already present in the preceding chapter and is not explained again.
43. The treatise-author himself explains what a single thought is. This is the most important self-explanation of the treatise section. The treatise-author asks 「何等是一念」 tr. "What is a single thought?", and himself answers: namely, the bodhisattva obtains the acceptance of the non-arising of dharmas, cuts off all the afflictions, removes all recollection, imagining, and discrimination, rests securely within the mind without outflows, and gives all. Next he explains the substance of the mind without outflows—「無漏心是無相相」 tr. "the mind without outflows is the mark of the signless." Next he speaks of its practising marks: the bodhisattva, abiding in this mind, does not see who gives, who receives, whose thing it is, and gives with a mind parted from all marks; he does not see a single dharma—even unsurpassed awakening he does not see, how much less the other dharmas; this is called the mark of non-duality; and so on up to the eighty minor marks, it is likewise. This passage gives a definition of the 「一念」 tr. "single thought" of this chapter's title—it is not an instant in time; it is that mind without outflows and signless, after the acceptance of the non-arising of dharmas has been obtained, the afflictions have been cut off, and recollection, imagining, and discrimination have been removed. Therefore one knows that the teaching of one mind complete with all practices rests on the measure of realisation and not on speed.
44. Taking up Subhūti's asking again by way of another matter, and the Buddha's answer. The treatise-author continues to take up the sūtra: Subhūti again asks this meaning by way of another matter—「世尊！諸法無相、無作、無起，云何能具足檀波羅蜜等，乃至八十隨形好？」 tr. "World-Honored One! Dharmas are signless, without making, and non-rising; how can one make complete dānapāramitā and the rest, and so on up to the eighty minor marks?" The Buddha answers, 「菩薩無相、無作法中不取相故，無障礙心布施，須食與食等。」 tr. "Because the bodhisattva, within the dharma of the signless and without making, does not grasp at marks, he gives with an unobstructed mind: to one who needs food, giving food, and so on." The treatise-author at once explains why he does not explain it at length again: the sūtra has already spoken of it in full detail, and it was also spoken of at length in the preceding chapter, so it is not explained again. Wherever this treatise meets a place that the sūtra text has already made clear or that a preceding chapter has already treated at length, it abbreviates and does not explain; this is a set practice, not a gap in the text.
45. The treatise-author divides into two: the six perfections without outflows and signless are of two kinds. The treatise-author himself brings out a judgement: the six perfections without outflows and signless are of two kinds—first, those practised by the bodhisattva who has obtained the acceptance of the non-arising of dharmas; second, those practised by the bodhisattva who has not yet obtained the acceptance of the non-arising of dharmas; and what is spoken of here is those practised by the bodhisattva who has obtained the acceptance of the non-arising of dharmas. The reason, too, the treatise-author brings out himself: because he abides within the signless mind and the mind without outflows and practises giving and the other dharmas. This judgement is very important—it marks out for the reader the height at which this chapter speaks, so that the practitioner does not take ‘not seeing giver and recipient’ as something a beginner's mind can do ready-made.
46. The question of the treatise-author's fourth question and answer: the bodhisattva who has obtained the acceptance of the non-arising of dharmas feels no pain when cut and severed—what share of grace has he? Question: The bodhisattva in a fleshly body has not yet removed greed and attachment, so when he is cut and severed it hurts severely; this is what is hard. The bodhisattva who has obtained the acceptance of the non-arising of dharmas is as what a conjured person does: cut and severed, he feels no pain; what share of grace is there? This question is asked with great human feeling—by common sense, only one who endures pain is worthy of respect, and what is there to say of one who feels no pain? The treatise-author does not evade this common sense; instead he brings it out whole and makes it a question.
47. The answer: giving up the pleasure of quiescence and entering among beings to receive all kinds of bodies—this is what is hard. Answer: For the bodhisattva who has obtained the acceptance of the non-arising of dharmas, practising these six perfections is what is hard. Why—having obtained the quiescent mind of the acceptance of the non-arising of dharmas, he ought to receive the pleasure of nirvāṇa, and yet he gives up this pleasure of quiescence and enters among beings to receive all kinds of bodies, now as a lowly person, now as an animal and the like: this is what is hard. As for the bodhisattva in a fleshly body, he has not yet removed greed and craving, and because he clings to the body of a Buddha, he gives his body in giving; this is hoping for something, not pure giving; therefore it is not as good. This answer changes the standard of 「難」 tr. "hard" entirely: the hardness lies not in the suffering the body undergoes, but in the greatness of the pleasure given up and the lowliness of the place entered. One who could have rested securely in quiescence, of his own will entering the six destinies to receive the body of a lowly person or an animal—only this is the hard practice spoken of in this chapter. The giving of the former case, 「有漏、有相」 tr. "with outflows and with marks," however piercing its pain, falls on the contrary to the lower place because hoping for something is mixed into it.
48. The treatise-author's general conclusion: the one who can make them complete has a great share of grace. In the last passage the treatise-author begins with 「復次」 tr. "Furthermore" and gathers it all up: practising the six perfections without outflows and signless, at that time he can make them complete; with outflows and with marks he cannot make them complete; therefore the one who can make them complete has a great share of grace. The whole treatise section turns back to the chapter's title with the two Chinese characters 「具足」 tr. "make complete," and ties the condition of making complete plainly and clearly to being without outflows and signless. Here the all practices opened up by the sūtra section and the single thought discussed by the treatise section join into one meaning: the reason all practices can be made complete within a single thought is precisely that that single thought is the mind without outflows and signless.
Do Not Misread
Do not read 「一切法性無所有」 tr. "the nature of all dharmas is without anything existent" as there being nothing at all. The very first sentence of the Buddha's answer in the sūtra takes being without anything existent as the reason for seeking awakening, not as the reason it need not be sought. The treatise-author further points out that Subhūti has no doubt about the three things, the bodhisattva, beings, and unsurpassed awakening; he only asks about the dharma of being without anything existent. If it is read as annihilation, then of the later text that unfolds the six perfections and all practices one by one, not one sentence can be fitted in.
Do not read 「無所得即是道、即是果」 tr. "nothing to be attained is precisely the path, precisely the fruit" as there being no need to cultivate the path. The sūtra text carries its own ground—「法性不壞故」 tr. "because the nature of dharmas is indestructible"; the treatise-author also adds the gloss 「法性即是諸法實相」 tr. "the nature of dharmas is precisely the real mark of all dharmas." The reason the path and the fruit stand within nothing to be attained is that the real mark of all dharmas is so of itself, not that there is no distinction between cultivating and not cultivating. Immediately after, the Buddha also says that if within the dharma of nothing to be attained one wants to obtain the path and obtain the fruit, that is wishing to destroy the nature of dharmas—one can see that what is blocked is the mind of ‘taking and attaining’, not the matter of 「行道」 tr. "practising the path."
Do not read 「一念中具足」 tr. "complete within a single thought" as compressing practice into an instant. The treatise-author himself asks 「何等是一念」 tr. "What is a single thought?" and himself answers: obtaining the acceptance of the non-arising of dharmas, cutting off all the afflictions, removing all recollection, imagining, and discrimination, resting securely within the mind without outflows. This single thought is spoken of with regard to the essential nature of the mind, not with regard to the length of time. He also himself judges that what is spoken of here belongs to the practice of the bodhisattva who has obtained the acceptance of the non-arising of dharmas, and that there is another class, the practice of the bodhisattva who has not yet obtained the acceptance of the non-arising of dharmas. If the practitioner reads it as a method of quick attainment, that is the very opposite of the treatise-author's distinction.
Do not read ‘giving and so on up to the supernormal powers are without difference’ as meaning that the six perfections need not be cultivated separately. In the same passage in which the Buddha says there is no difference, he immediately goes on to say 「以眾生著布施乃至神通故分別說」 tr. "because beings cling to giving and so on up to the supernormal powers, they are spoken of with distinctions"; and the latter half of the sūtra text precisely speaks separately, perfection by perfection, of the marks of dāna, śīla, kṣānti, vīrya, dhyāna, and prajñā. No difference is said with regard to the dharma of nothing to be attained; speaking with distinctions is set up with regard to beings' clinging; both sentences come from the Buddha's mouth and do not hinder each other.
Do not read the 「無所取」 tr. "takes nothing" of the śīla passage as making light of the marks of morality. The sūtra text first lists one by one the morality kept as the noble morality without outflows that enters the eightfold noble path, natural morality, morality obtained as retribution, morality obtained by receiving, and morality born of the mind, and marks it as not deficient, not broken, not mixed, not turbid, and not clinging; only then does it say that with this morality he takes nothing. What he does not take is form, feeling, perception, constructions, and consciousness, and so on up to the four fruits of the śramaṇa, the pratyekabuddha path, and the retribution of a wheel-turning sage king and a heavenly king—it is not taking the retribution of morality, not failing to keep morality. Moreover, of the five supernormal powers obtained in this passage, the sūtra text says plainly that they are obtained by giving rise to the four dhyānas because of morality; one can see that only when the marks of morality grow stricter while the grasping mind grows lighter is it the meaning of this passage.
Do not read the 「不見罵者、不見割截者」 tr. "does not see the one who reviles, does not see the one who cuts and severs" of the kṣānti passage as numbness. The path the sūtra text gives is first to reflect 「罵我者誰？譏訶者誰？打擲者誰？誰有受者？」 tr. "Who is it that reviles me? Who ridicules and rebukes? Who strikes and throws? Who is there that receives?", then to reflect that the real nature of dharmas is ultimate emptiness, and only then does it speak of not seeing. This is what contemplation brings about, not the disappearance of feeling. Moreover, of the two kinds of acceptance the sūtra text sets up, the first is precisely 「一切眾生惡口罵詈、若加刀杖瓦石，瞋心不起」 tr. "when all beings revile and abuse him with evil speech, or assail him with knives and staves, tiles and stones, the mind of hatred does not arise," saying plainly that there is one who assails and a matter of assailing; it is only that the mind of hatred does not arise.
Do not skip over the 「除佛諸禪定」 tr. "except for the dhyānas and absorptions of the buddhas" of the dhyānapāramitā passage. What the sūtra text makes complete is all the other dhyānas and samādhi; the dhyānas of the Buddha remain outside. This chapter says that one perfection contains all practices and that within the bodhisattva's position the Buddha ground is made complete; if one does not keep hold of this one distinction, one will read it as the bodhisattva and the Buddha already being without difference.
Do not read 「國土一切所有資生之物皆無有主」 tr. "all the goods that sustain life in his land have no owner" as the land being empty and void. The sūtra text itself brings out the reason—「是菩薩行一切法不受，以不可得故」 tr. "this bodhisattva practises all dharmas without receiving, because they are unfindable." Having no owner is said with regard to not receiving and not finding; it does not say that there are no goods to sustain life; just above it said that according to what they need he conjures it all and gives it, causing each to be satisfied. The ten thousand things complete and not one thing belonging to me—this is precisely the real meaning of the two Chinese characters 「不受」 tr. "not receiving."
Do not read the 「有何恩分」 tr. "what share of grace has he" of the treatise-author's fourth round of question and answer as the treatise-author too making light of the one who feels no pain. This is a question the treatise-author sets up himself, raising the objection on behalf of ordinary feeling; his answer at once replaces the standard of hardness—what is hard lies in giving up the pleasure of quiescence and entering the six destinies to receive the body of a lowly person or an animal, not in the pain the body undergoes. To read the question and not read the answer is to arrive at a conclusion opposite to the treatise-author's.
Bearing on Practice
The first benefit is to take 「無所得」 tr. "nothing to be attained" and use it to examine one's own mind rather than as a slogan. The treatise-author's first round of question and answer says it plainly: the same three Chinese characters 「無所有」 tr. "without anything existent," coming from a clinging mind, are an objection; coming from a mind without clinging, they are an answer. In daily life, when reciting emptiness or speaking of emptiness, one can turn a light on oneself—is the mind that speaks of emptiness at this moment wanting to put one thing down, or wanting to obtain one thing more? If it is the latter, the treatise-author has already said it beforehand: that is precisely the single thought of 「欲壞法性」 tr. "wishing to destroy the nature of dharmas."
The second benefit is that the three not-seeings in giving can be trained in right now. The model the sūtra text gives is very concrete: abiding in the mind without outflows one gives, not seeing who gives, who receives, or what thing is given; cutting off craving, cutting off stinginess and greed, one practises giving; having given, one holds it in common with all beings and dedicates it, and does not see even who it is that dedicates, where it is dedicated, or by what dharma it is dedicated. Even if the practitioner has not yet obtained the acceptance of the non-arising of dharmas, after each act of giving he can try not to keep count: not recording that he gave, not recording that the other received, not recording the thing given. Each degree less of recording and reckoning is a degree nearer to being without outflows.
The third benefit is that, when one meets with someone rebuking what one practises, there is a ready-made sentence to hold to. The sūtra text sets up such a scene: someone comes and says 「何用是布施為？是無所益！」 tr. "What use is this giving? It is of no benefit!", and the bodhisattva who practises prajñā has only one thought—「是人雖來訶我布施，我終不悔！我當勤行布施，不應不與。」 tr. "Though this person comes to rebuke my giving, I shall never regret it! I should practise giving diligently and should not fail to give." Here the Buddha does not teach the bodhisattva to argue; he only teaches him not to change. Whoever does good and meets with cold words can take up this one thought to guard himself: not arguing, not regretting, not lessening.
The fourth benefit is that in accepting there is a road one can walk. The sequence of the sūtra text is first asking, then contemplating: first asking 「罵我者誰？譏訶者誰？打擲者誰？誰有受者？」 tr. "Who is it that reviles me? Who ridicules and rebukes? Who strikes and throws? Who is there that receives?", then reflecting that the real nature of dharmas is ultimate emptiness, with no dharmas and no beings. These four questions are not words of self-consolation; they take apart the single sentence ‘I have been treated so’ and push at it: the first three questions ask about the one able to do harm—who is it that reviles, who is it that ridicules and rebukes, who is it that strikes and throws; only the last question, 「誰有受者？」 tr. "Who is there that receives?", asks about the one who receives. The two sides, the one who acts and the one acted upon, are pushed at together, and that is why the sūtra text goes on to say 「諸法尚不可得，何況有眾生！」 tr. "Dharmas themselves are unfindable, how much less are there beings!"—it is not first finding a receiver and then consoling him; it is that the one who acts and the one acted upon are both unfindable. Once the four questions arise, the mind of hatred naturally has nowhere to land—this takes far less effort than holding down one's temper, and is also more lasting.
The fifth benefit is to examine oneself on both sides, bodily vigour and mental vigour. The sūtra text sets the mark of bodily vigour on going to where the buddhas are, making offerings, hearing and receiving the teaching of the Dharma, and benefiting beings; it sets the mark of mental vigour on a long string of 「不取」 tr. "not grasping"—not grasping at the marks of dharmas, permanent and impermanent, suffering and pleasure, self and non-self; not grasping at the marks of the fruits realised; not grasping at the marks of cutting off the fetters. The practitioner can ask two questions each day: in today's running about, where was it that I went? In today's use of the mind, how many marks did I grasp? The former keeps the body's empty wasting in check; the latter keeps the mind's hidden knots in check.
The sixth benefit is to correct the standard of 「難」 tr. "hard." The standard given by the treatise-author's last round of question and answer is: hardness lies not in pain but in giving up. A pleasure in which one could have rested securely, and yet one is willing to give it up; a place one need not have entered, and yet one is willing to enter it—only this is a great share of grace. When making vows and when taking on burdens, the practitioner can hold to this one measuring-rule—there is no need to credit oneself by how much suffering one undergoes; one should look at how much ease one gives up and how low a place one enters.
The seventh benefit is to close the day's doings with 「無有主」 tr. "having no owner." At the end of the sūtra section it is said that when the bodhisattva becomes a Buddha, all the goods that sustain life in his land have no owner. In the course of a day, of all that the practitioner has cultivated and done, given and accomplished, he can, when evening comes, hold one thought: among these not one thing belongs to me, and not one thing needs me to own it. All practices complete and not one owner set up—this is the most direct sentence in which this chapter's title comes down into daily life.
Further Resonances
The backbone of this chapter is one long sūtra section and one long treatise section. Sūtra ① begins from Subhūti's asking what benefit the bodhisattva sees, the nature of all dharmas being without anything existent, that he seeks awakening for the sake of beings; the Buddha answers that he seeks because the nature is without anything existent, that those with something attained and something clung to are hard to liberate, and that those with the mark of attaining have no path, no fruit, no awakening; next he answers that nothing to be attained is precisely the path, precisely the fruit, precisely awakening, taking the indestructibility of the nature of dharmas as the ground, and brings out the warning that wishing to obtain the path and the fruit within the dharma of nothing to be attained is precisely wishing to destroy the nature of dharmas; next he answers that the first ground and so on up to the tenth ground, together with the acceptance of non-arising, the supernormal powers and the six perfections obtained as retribution, bringing beings to accomplishment and purifying buddha-lands, and so on up to the relics receiving offerings after nirvāṇa, are all obtained because of the mark of nothing to be attained; next he answers that the six perfections and the supernormal powers are without difference within the dharma of nothing to be attained and are spoken of with distinctions because of beings' clinging, and shows their actual practice with a string of sentences—not finding giving, he practises giving, and so on up to not finding the dharmas of the buddhas, he obtains awakening—concluding that Māra cannot destroy him; next it enters the proper topic of this chapter, gathering in layer by layer with four tiers of question and answer—being complete within a single thought comes from not being far from prajñā; not being far comes from the mark of non-duality; the mark of non-duality comes from this, that when one wishes to make dānapāramitā complete, within dāna are at once contained all the pāramitā and the four foundations of mindfulness and so on up to the marks and minor signs; and containing all the dharmas without outflows comes from abiding in the mind without outflows and giving without seeing giver, recipient, or the thing given; next, with the one general question 「若諸法無相、無作，云何具足」 tr. "if dharmas are signless and without making, how are they made complete," it opens out the item-by-item unfolding of the six perfections: for dāna, giving away everything inner and outer, not regretting when people rebuke, and dedicating without seeing the mark of dedication, with the emptinesses listed as its ground; for śīla, keeping the five kinds of morality and taking nothing at all, from form up to the heavens, the four fruits, the pratyekabuddha path, the wheel-turning sage king, and the heavenly kings, and by the power of skilful means giving rise to the four dhyānas and obtaining the five supernormal powers; for kṣānti, setting up the two kinds, the acceptance toward beings and the acceptance of dharmas, obtaining the acceptance of the non-arising of dharmas by contemplating ultimate emptiness, and, because of abiding in the two kinds of acceptance, making complete all dharmas and the noble supernormal powers; for vīrya, dividing it into the two kinds of vigour, bodily and mental, with mental vigour having a string of not-graspings as its mark, gathered up at the end with 「不可以性取相，是性無故」 tr. "one may not grasp at a mark by nature, because this nature does not exist"; for dhyāna, excepting the dhyānas of the buddhas and having all the other dhyānas and samādhi complete, cultivating the dharmas that aid the path, passing beyond the eight grounds, entering the bodhisattva's position and making complete the Buddha ground, not taking realisation midway, seeing dharmas as like an illusion and yet benefiting beings; for prajñā, not seeing a fixed and real mark, not seeing form and so on up to consciousness arise, and practising inner emptiness and so on up to the emptiness of non-existent and existent dharmas and so making the bodhisattva path complete; finally it says that, abiding in the pure Buddha path of emptiness, he teaches and transforms according to the ground of the path appropriate to each, causing each to obtain its place, and concludes that, because he receives no dharma, when he obtains awakening the land and the goods that sustain life all have no owner. Treatise ① takes the four rounds of question and answer as its bones and the explaining of the sūtra taken up phrase by phrase as its flesh: the first round discusses how questioner and answerer both say without anything existent, and distinguishes them by the clinging mind and the mind without clinging; next it explains that Subhūti asks because of the listeners' clinging minds, and makes the distinction that he has no doubt about the three things, the bodhisattva, beings, and awakening; next it takes up the Buddha's answer that it is precisely because of being without anything existent and empty that one can arouse the mind, and sets out the principle that emptiness does not obstruct arousing the mind; next it explains why those with a clinging mind find it hard to obtain liberation, and brings out how the bodhisattva guides their minds by the marks and minor signs, the Brahmā voice, majestic virtue, supernormal powers, causes and conditions, and similes; next it takes up that being without anything existent is precisely the path and the fruit, and explains that the nature of dharmas is precisely the real mark of all dharmas; next it explains that, though the nature of dharmas cannot be destroyed, because of beings' wrong practice it is named destroyed, and brings out the simile of space and of clouds and mist; the second round discusses why, since the Buddha has already answered, the question is asked again, and traces it back to bodhisattvas who have newly aroused the mind clinging to the dharma that has been broken; next it takes up that because of nothing to be attained there is the first ground and so on up to the relics receiving offerings, and judges that within something clung to one may not speak of the first ground and the merits; the third round marks out the sub-heading 「一念中行六波羅蜜者」 tr. "one who practises the six perfections within a single thought" and discusses why Subhūti asks; next it takes up the answers—because he does not part from prajñā he can practise within a single thought; not by way of two marks; within a single thought of giving he contains all wholesome dharmas; next it explains for itself what a single thought is, taking obtaining the acceptance of the non-arising of dharmas, cutting off all the afflictions, removing all recollection, imagining, and discrimination, and resting securely in the mind without outflows as its substance, and judges that the six perfections without outflows and signless are of two kinds, those of one who has obtained the acceptance of the non-arising of dharmas and those of one who has not; the fourth round discusses what share of grace the bodhisattva who has obtained the acceptance of the non-arising of dharmas has, feeling no pain when cut and severed, and takes giving up the pleasure of quiescence and entering among beings to receive all kinds of bodies as what is hard; finally it gathers everything up with 「復次」 tr. "Furthermore"—practising the six perfections without outflows and signless, at that time one can make them complete; with outflows and with marks one cannot make them complete; therefore the one who can make them complete has a great share of grace.
Of the ancient masters' explanations, three houses can be recorded for this chapter, and one house is lacking. Jizang, explaining this chapter in his Commentary on the Larger Sūtra, first takes two chapters as one section and marks out their intent in general, saying: 「此下第二段有兩品，明脩行純熟故一念具足斯備也。」 tr. "From here on, the second section has two chapters; it makes clear that because cultivation and practice are fully ripe, within a single thought all is complete and prepared." The reason for dividing the two chapters he gives as: 「先未得無生故未能無礙行，一念中不能具足眾行；今得無生，無生一念中具足一切行也。」 tr. "Before, because non-arising had not yet been obtained, one could not yet practise without obstruction, and within a single thought could not make the many practices complete; now non-arising has been obtained, and within a single thought of non-arising all practices are complete."—distinguishing the earlier and later of the two chapters by not yet having obtained non-arising and having obtained it, which bears out precisely this treatise's taking the obtaining of the acceptance of the non-arising of dharmas as the substance when it explains for itself 「何等是一念」 tr. "What is a single thought?". His division of this chapter into three reads: 「初品為三：第一明於無所有中起行，第二明一念中具起萬行，第三明行空無相故具足諸行。」 tr. "The first chapter is in three: the first makes clear the arising of practice within being without anything existent; the second makes clear the complete arising of all practices within a single thought; the third makes clear that because one practises emptiness and the signless, all practices are made complete."—these three divisions correspond to the sequence of this treatise's sūtra section: the arising of practice within being without anything existent is the first three questions and answers; the complete arising of all practices within a single thought is the proper topic of this chapter; and all practices being made complete because one practises emptiness and the signless is the item-by-item unfolding of the six perfections. His explanation of the intent of the Buddha's answer about arousing the mind reads: 「良由無所有故得發心耳」 tr. "It is truly because of being without anything existent that one can arouse the mind."—the same in meaning as, though different in words from, the Buddha's answer as taken up in this treatise, 「正以無所有、空故能發心」 tr. "it is precisely because of being without anything existent, because of emptiness, that one can arouse the mind." His explanation of why the third section is set up reads: 「二乘有所得人，行三空則失萬行，修萬行則失三空，故是取捨生滅觀。」 tr. "People of the two vehicles who have something to be attained lose all practices when they practise the three emptinesses, and lose the three emptinesses when they cultivate all practices; therefore theirs is a contemplation of taking and giving up, of arising and ceasing."—by the two vehicles' three emptinesses and all practices being unable to exist together, it shows by contrast that the bodhisattva practises emptiness while all practices remain unmoved; this is Jizang's own judgement, this treatise has no such words, and the two are recorded side by side without judgement. In his explanation of the passage on being cut and severed, he sets up the question 「得無生忍割截不痛，何足為喻」 tr. "If one who has obtained the acceptance of non-arising feels no pain when cut and severed, how is it worth taking as an example?" and himself answers: 「得無生忍應不生六趣，今能以無生作生用，入六道中為割截，始為常有。」 tr. "One who has obtained the acceptance of non-arising ought not to be born in the six destinies; now he can use non-arising to serve as birth, entering the six paths to be cut and severed—only then is it constantly so."—the question he sets up and the answer he gives both accord with the wording of the question and the intent of the answer in this treatise's last round of question and answer, while the phrasing comes from Jizang; it can serve as supporting evidence. For the heading of this chapter Jizang writes 「一念品」 tr. "the One Thought chapter," and where he marks the start of the next chapter he also says: 「此下第二就譬說一心具萬行正意」 tr. "From here on, the second, by way of simile, speaks of the proper intent of one mind complete with all practices"—that is, he uses the short name for the chapter heading and the full name for the proper intent, the two names running side by side. Zhanran, in his Annotations on the Profound Meaning of the Lotus, explaining the passage on the Buddha of the fleshly body and the Buddha of the Dharma body hearing the Dharma and advancing on the path, marks plainly 「《大論》八十七」 tr. "Great Treatise, eighty-seven" and cites the last round of question and answer of this chapter's treatise section: his question reads 「生身菩薩，貪惜未除割截則難，若無生忍菩薩，猶如化人割截無痛，有何恩分？」 tr. "For the bodhisattva in a fleshly body, whose greed and attachment are not yet removed, being cut and severed is hard; as for the bodhisattva of the acceptance of non-arising, who is like a conjured person and feels no pain when cut and severed, what share of grace has he?", his answer reads 「雖得無生，行亦為難。」 tr. "Though he has obtained non-arising, practice is still hard for him.", and he takes 「能捨此樂入生死中，受於種種下賤之身。」 tr. "He can give up this pleasure and enter into birth and death, receiving all kinds of lowly bodies." as the reason why it is hard, finally gathering it into 「是故無生忍菩薩方名大恩。」 tr. "Therefore the bodhisattva of the acceptance of non-arising is the one named a great grace."—what he cites corresponds point by point in meaning with this treatise's last round of question and answer, while the phrasing comes from Zhanran's abridgement and is not identical word for word; therefore it is recorded as an abridged citation and not treated as a word-for-word quotation; the fascicle number he marks agrees with fascicle eighty-seven, where this chapter lies. Junzheng's Profound Meaning of the Four Mahāyāna Treatises cites this passage of sūtra text, saying: 「十三卷一念品云：無所得即是道，即是果，即是阿耨多羅三藐三菩提。」 tr. "The One Thought chapter of fascicle thirteen says: Nothing to be attained is precisely the path, is precisely the fruit, is precisely anuttarā samyaksaṃbodhi."—only, the source he marks in the text above reads 「故大品經。」 tr. "Therefore the Larger Sūtra.", and the chapter name he uses is likewise 「一念品」 tr. "the One Thought chapter" (the name in the sūtra explained); therefore his attribution lies on the side of the sūtra explained; the sūtra text of this chapter of this treatise is the same text as his, which is the same evidence and not the same attribution. The text he cites agrees word for word with this treatise's sūtra text; only the marking of pauses within the sentence differs from the base text; the fascicle number he gives also differs from the base text of this collection. Of Huiying's Commentary, the extant text does not structurally reach this chapter; this chapter's explanation is lacking, the gap is marked as it really is, and it is not filled with text from elsewhere. Further, in Zhiyi's Profound Meaning of the Lotus there is separately the phrase 「一心具萬行」 tr. "one mind complete with all practices," the same in wording as the full name of this chapter's title; but there he speaks in terms of his own house's classification of the teachings, does not cite the text of this chapter word for word, and does not explicitly name this treatise's chapter title; therefore only the sameness of the wording is recorded—it is not treated as a citation, and it is not judged to be citing this chapter. As for the variant names of this chapter's title, the chapter order of the texts, and the differences of fascicle division, these are detailed in the Apparatus layer.