大智度論 義疏通講 · 冊28Dazhidulun — Mahāprajñāpāramitā-upadeśa · Exposition Throughout · Vol. 28

Overview

"Dharmodgata" sets up no question at its opening; it is simply an answer. At the end of the preceding chapter, "Sadāprarudita", Sadāprarudita, having gone through every hardship—selling his body, cutting his flesh, travelling far—reached the City of Many Fragrances and met the Dharma teacher, and what he asked was a single sentence only—「諸佛從何所來？去至何處？」 tr. "From where do the buddhas come? Where do they go?" The first sentence of this chapter is Dharmodgata's answer: 「善男子！諸佛無所從來，去亦無所至。」 tr. "Good man! The buddhas come from nowhere, and in going reach nowhere." Without circling, without delay, he first takes apart the two Chinese characters ‘coming’ and ‘going’, and only then says why it is so: 「諸法如不動相，諸法如即是佛。」 tr. "The suchness of dharmas has the mark of not moving; the suchness of dharmas is precisely the Buddha." Under this one answer the dharma of non-arising, the dharma of non-ceasing, the dharma of the limit of reality, emptiness, the undefiled, quiescent extinction, and the nature of space are listed one by one, and every sentence is in two halves, 「無來無去」 tr. "neither comes nor goes" and 「即是佛」 tr. "is precisely the Buddha"; at the end he joins them, saying 「離是諸法更無佛；諸佛如、諸法如，一如無分別」 tr. "apart from these dharmas there is no further Buddha; the suchness of the buddhas and the suchness of dharmas are one suchness, without discrimination", and further explains for himself the reason, saying 「是如常一，無二、無三，出諸數法，無所有故」 tr. "this suchness is always one; it is not two, it is not three; it passes beyond all dharmas of number, because it is without anything existent". The whole chapter, two sūtra sections and two treatise sections, spans the two fascicles ninety-nine and one hundred and proceeds divided into three segments: in Fascicle 99, Sūtra Section, Dharmodgata refutes the clinging to coming and going with the five similes of the mirage, the illusion, the dream, the jewels of the ocean, and the konghou, and after that comes a long narrative of Sadāprarudita making offering with his body, standing for seven years, and piercing his body to sprinkle the ground; in Fascicle 99, Treatise Section, the treatise-author explains sentence by sentence the meaning of 「諸佛無來無去」 tr. "the buddhas are without coming and without going", and explains matter by matter the reasons for Sadāprarudita's deeds in seeking the Dharma; in Fascicle 100, Dharmodgata teaches directly the marks of prajñāpāramitā, running down in one line of paired declarations, ‘because dharmas are such-and-such, prajñā too is such-and-such’; Sadāprarudita, right there on his seat, obtains six million samādhi gates; the Buddha tells Subhūti in conclusion and exhortation; and the treatise-author, having explained every item, lays down his brush by assigning the share of entrustment to Ānanda.

Fascicle 99, Sūtra Section, refutes the view of coming and going. The five similes are not repetitions; each of the five refutes one layer. The mirage simile refutes ‘seeing existence within non-existence’: at midday at the end of spring, someone sees a mirage shimmering and chases it seeking water; Dharmodgata asks in return from what pool, what mountain, what spring the water comes, and Sadāprarudita answers crisply—「大師！焰中尚無水，云何當有來處、去處？」 tr. "Great teacher! In a mirage there is not even water; how could there be a place it comes from or a place it goes to?" Dharmodgata at once takes this as the parallel case: 「愚夫無智，為熱渴所逼，見焰動，無水生水想。」 tr. "The foolish ordinary person, without wisdom, pressed by heat and thirst, sees the mirage shimmer and, where there is no water, gives rise to the notion of water." Those who discriminate the Buddha as having coming and going are likewise so, and the reason lies in a single sentence: 「諸佛不可以色身見，諸佛法身無來無去」 tr. "the buddhas cannot be seen by the form body; the Dharma body of the buddhas neither comes nor goes". The illusion simile refutes ‘seeing something and taking it as existent’: of the elephants, horses, men, and women made by a conjurer, 「幻事無實，云何當有來去處？」 tr. "An illusory thing has no reality; how could there be a place of coming and going?" The dream simile refutes ‘what one's own mind manifests’: of what is seen in a dream, 「是夢中所見虛妄，云何當有來去？」 tr. "What is seen in this dream is false; how could it have coming and going?" After the three similes Dharmodgata gives one overall verdict, dividing the readers into two roads: those who do not know the meaning of dharmas and 「以名字色身著佛」 tr. "cling to the Buddha by name and by form body"—「是人數數往來五道，遠離般若波羅蜜，遠離諸佛法」 tr. "such people go and come again and again within the five destinies, far from prajñāpāramitā, far from the dharmas of the buddhas"; those who know as it really is and do not discriminate coming and going, arising and ceasing—「名為真佛弟子，不虛妄食人信施，是人應受供養，為世間福田」 tr. "are named true disciples of the Buddha; they do not falsely consume the faithful gifts of others; such people should receive offerings, and are a field of merit for the world". The two similes below this turn about: they no longer refute existence but instead establish causes and conditions. The simile of the ocean's jewels establishes from what they arise and cease: the jewels of the great ocean do not come from the ten directions; 「諸緣合故有，諸緣離故滅」 tr. "when the conditions join they exist; when the conditions part they perish", and the Buddha's body too is 「從本業因緣果報生」 tr. "born from the causes and conditions and the retribution of original deeds". The konghou simile establishes that it does not come from a single cause: there is the body, there is the neck, there is the skin, there are the strings, there are the pegs, there is the plectrum, and only when a person plays it with the hand is there sound; 「是聲亦不從槽出，不從頸出，不從皮出，不從絃出，不從柱出，不從棍出，亦不從人手出，眾緣和合爾乃有聲」 tr. "this sound does not come out of the body, does not come out of the neck, does not come out of the skin, does not come out of the strings, does not come out of the pegs, does not come out of the plectrum, nor does it come out of the person's hand; only when the many conditions come together is there sound", and therefore 「諸佛身不獨從一事成，來無所從、去無所至」 tr. "the bodies of the buddhas are not accomplished from a single matter alone; when coming they come from nowhere, when going they reach nowhere". When the five similes are finished, the sūtra text turns at once into a long narrative of offering, and what is remarkable about this narrative lies precisely in its coming right after "no coming and no going": Śakra gives him heavenly māndārava flowers; Sadāprarudita gives himself over to the teacher; the elder's daughter and the five hundred attendant maidens also give themselves over, and together with five hundred carriages of the seven jewels all are offered to Dharmodgata; Dharmodgata, having accepted, gives them back; at sunset he enters the palace; Sadāprarudita takes an oath, 「我為法故來，不應坐、臥」 tr. "I have come for the sake of the Dharma; I should not sit or lie down", and so for seven years walks and stands; Dharmodgata for seven years enters immeasurable asaṃkhyeya bodhisattva samādhis, and Sadāprarudita for seven years is 「無欲、恚、惱，心不著味」 tr. "without lust, anger, or harming, his mind not craving flavours"; once the seat has been spread he seeks water and cannot find it—the evil Māra has hidden the water away, wishing to make him give rise to a single thought of a feeble mind; Sadāprarudita at once pierces his own body and sprinkles the ground with his blood, saying to himself 「我何用此身！此身必當破壞。我從無始生死已來數數喪身，未曾為法」 tr. "What use is this body to me! This body will surely break apart. From beginningless birth and death until now I have lost my body again and again, and never once for the Dharma". Śakra exclaimed that such a thing had never been, and praised him, saying 「汝精進力大，堅固難動，不可思議！」 tr. "The power of your vigour is vast, firm and hard to shake, inconceivable!", and again gave him three thousand dan of heavenly flowers. At the end of the Sūtra Section, Dharmodgata, after seven years, rises from samādhi and goes to sit on the Dharma seat, and Sadāprarudita, seeing him, 「心淨悅樂，譬如比丘入第三禪」 tr. "his mind was pure, delighted and glad, like a bhikṣu entering the third dhyāna".

Fascicle 99, Treatise Section, explains the meaning of no coming and no going, and at the same time explains the causes of the matters in seeking the Dharma. The treatise-author first says why this Dharma is taught at this time: Sadāprarudita, 「雖知諸法空無來去相，未能深入」 tr. "though he knew that dharmas are empty and without the mark of coming and going, could not yet enter deeply"; his sickness lies not in not knowing emptiness but in this, 「於諸佛身恭敬深重故，不能觀空」 tr. "because his reverence for the bodies of the buddhas was deep and weighty, he could not contemplate emptiness"—「如大海水波，其力雖大，到須彌山邊則退而無用」 tr. "as the waves of the great ocean, though their force is great, when they reach the side of Mount Sumeru retreat and are of no use". Once he knows where the sickness lies, what follows presses on layer by layer. First he establishes the meaning of the suchness of dharmas: 「諸法實相，所謂性空、無所得、空等諸法門。」 tr. "The real mark of all dharmas, namely the many gates of the Dharma such as emptiness of nature, nothing to be attained, emptiness, and the like." Next he refutes the objection ‘the pure and subtle five aggregates come together and are named the Buddha’, and his answer lies only in dividing the truths: 「佛法中有二諦：世諦、第一義諦」 tr. "In the Buddha-dharma there are two truths: worldly truth and the truth of the highest meaning"; by reason of worldly truth it is said that the Buddha teaches prajñā; by reason of the highest meaning it is said that the buddhas are empty, without coming and without going. As for the relation between the five aggregates and the Buddha, the treatise-author cites the sūtra in which the Buddha himself states the causes and conditions, five sentences set side by side—「五眾非佛，離五眾亦無佛，五眾不在佛中，佛不在五眾中，佛非五眾有」 tr. "the five aggregates are not the Buddha; apart from the five aggregates there is no Buddha either; the five aggregates are not in the Buddha; the Buddha is not in the five aggregates; the Buddha does not possess the five aggregates", and every sentence has its reason: the five aggregates are not precisely the Buddha, because 「五眾是五、佛是一，一不作五、五不作一」 tr. "the five aggregates are five, the Buddha is one; the one does not make the five, the five do not make the one", and again because the five aggregates are without self-nature while the Buddha himself says 「一切無誑法中，我最第一」 tr. "among all dharmas without deception, I am the foremost"; if one says that the body adorned with the marks and minor signs is named the Buddha, then 「三十二相等，菩薩時亦有，何以不名為佛？」 tr. "the thirty-two marks and the rest are present already at the time of the bodhisattva; why is he not named the Buddha?"; if one says that the omniscience of all kinds within the subtle form body is named the Buddha, then the omniscience of all kinds is from the first quiescent and without idle discourse, 「若得是法，則名無所得，無所得故名為佛，佛即是空」 tr. "if one obtains this dharma, it is named nothing to be attained; because of nothing to be attained it is named the Buddha, and the Buddha is precisely emptiness". As for "apart from the five aggregates there is no Buddha either", the treatise-author takes the fist as a simile and does not let the objector slip away: 「是拳法若定有，除五指應更有拳可見，亦不須因五指。」 tr. "If this dharma of a fist definitely existed, then apart from the five fingers there should be a further fist that can be seen, and it would not need to rely on the five fingers." The five seekings exhausted, he then pronounces the verdict: 「如是五種求佛不可得故，當知無佛；佛無故無來無去。」 tr. "Because, seeking the Buddha in these five ways, he is unfindable, know that there is no Buddha; because the Buddha does not exist, there is no coming and no going." As soon as this is said, the questioner is sure to object to it as wrong view, and the treatise-author's answer is what most needs to be remembered: the "no Buddha" spoken of here is meant 「破著佛想」 tr. "to refute the notion of clinging to the Buddha", not to exchange it for a notion of no Buddha and grasp that; 「若有佛尚不令取，何況取無佛邪見！」 tr. "If even where there is a Buddha one is not allowed to grasp, how much less to grasp the wrong view that there is no Buddha!" So where it returns is still the middle—「離是有、無二邊，處中道，即是諸法實相」 tr. "leaving these two extremes of existence and non-existence, abiding in the middle way: this is the real mark of all dharmas", and 「得是諸法實相，名為得佛」 tr. "to obtain this real mark of all dharmas is named obtaining the Buddha". Having guarded against annihilation, the treatise-author sets up two bodies: 「佛有二種身：一者、法身，二者、色身。法身是真佛，色身為世諦故有。」 tr. "The Buddha has two kinds of body: first, the Dharma body; second, the form body. The Dharma body is the true Buddha; the form body exists for the sake of worldly truth." With the two bodies set up, the matter of how dharmas, though empty, still plainly bring suffering and joy also finds its explanation—like a mirage, like a dream, 「雖空、無所有，亦能令人得苦、樂、憂、喜事」 tr. "though empty and without anything existent, they can still cause people to meet with matters of suffering, joy, sorrow, and gladness". After that he explains the preceding sūtra matter by matter: the reason the true disciple of the Buddha should receive offerings is that the merit is 「乃至涅槃無盡無量」 tr. "inexhaustible and immeasurable, even up to nirvāṇa", 「如植種良田，成收必多」 tr. "as when seed is planted in a good field, the harvest gathered is surely great"; the reason the ocean's jewels are produced in a place where they are hard to obtain is that 「若寶生人中濁世，貪者覆藏，不令人得」 tr. "if the jewels were produced among humans in a turbid age, the greedy would hide them away and not let others obtain them", and what the simile points to is more pressing still—the great ocean is a simile for the lands of the six destinies in the ten directions, the jewels are the buddhas, and for beings to obtain deliverance two conditions must be complete, 「一者、內有正見，二者、外有善說法者」 tr. "first, right view within; second, one who teaches the Dharma well without", and so 「諸佛雖善說法，眾生內正見不具故，不能盡度」 tr. "though the buddhas teach the Dharma well, because beings' right view within is not complete, they cannot deliver them all"; the sound of the konghou is a simile for the relation between the Buddha's body and the six perfections, 「佛身不在六波羅蜜等法中，亦不離六波羅蜜等法」 tr. "the Buddha's body is not within the six perfections and the other dharmas, nor is it apart from the six perfections and the other dharmas"; and the Buddha's body in the end also returns to extinction, 「雖相好光明、福德成就、名稱無量、度人無限，亦歸磨滅」 tr. "though radiant with the marks and minor signs, accomplished in merit, immeasurable in renown, and without limit in the people it delivers, it too returns to wearing away". The latter half of the Treatise Section explains, matter by matter, the deeds of Sadāprarudita and the others, and its explanations are everywhere plain and close to people: why did the elder's daughter not offer herself to Dharmodgata but to Sadāprarudita? 「女人智短著多故，不用捨本師而供養他」 tr. "Because women's wisdom is short and their clinging is great, they should not abandon their own teacher to make offerings to another", and also out of concern that there would be criticism from outside; since the women had already come following their teacher, why give themselves again? Because 「女人之禮，幼則從父母，少則從夫，老則從子」 tr. "by the propriety of women, when young they follow their parents, when grown they follow their husbands, when old they follow their sons", and they may not long belong to no one; what is the sincere mind in Sadāprarudita's question 「汝等實以誠心」 tr. "do you truly, with a sincere mind"? 「誠心者，不自用心，隨所處分，如無心物」 tr. "A sincere mind is not acting on one's own decision, but following as one is disposed of, like a thing without a mind"; since Dharmodgata accepted, why give them back? 「曇無竭大智方便，令薩陀波崙大得福德而無所失，是謂上受」 tr. "Dharmodgata, by great wisdom and skilful means, caused Sadāprarudita to obtain great merit while losing nothing; this is called the highest kind of accepting"; why did a great bodhisattva, having taught the Dharma, enter the palace? 「隨世人法故」 tr. "Because of following the ways of worldly people"; why, for the sake of the Dharma, should one not sit or lie down? Because 「大欲、大精進與坐臥相違故」 tr. "great desire and great vigour are contrary to sitting and lying down"; how could a weak human body stand for seven years? 「是時人壽命長，雖復七歲，如今七日」 tr. "At that time people's lifespans were long; though it was seven years, it was like seven days now", and again 「身力雖弱，以心強故，能辦其事」 tr. "though the strength of the body was weak, because the mind was strong, he could accomplish the matter"; why did Dharmodgata enter concentration for seven years? To remove the doubt of those who have newly aroused the mind, letting them know that his mind and his mouth accord, 「譬如癰瘡未熟，醫則不破，但以藥塗令熟，熟則易破」 tr. "just as when an abscess is not yet ripe the physician does not open it, but only applies medicine to ripen it; when ripe it is easily opened", and moreover 「說法有二種：一者、口說法，二者、身現法」 tr. "teaching the Dharma is of two kinds: first, teaching the Dharma by mouth; second, showing the Dharma by the body", and entering concentration for seven years is precisely showing the Dharma by the body. On the section where Māra hides the water, the treatise-author judges its measure very precisely: 「魔知其心大，不可沮壞，但小沮壞，令其稽留。」 tr. "Māra knew that his mind was great and could not be destroyed; he only obstructed it a little, causing him to be held up and delayed." The reason blood was what the piercing drew is that 「身中水種雖多，血是命之所在，是故刺以灑地」 tr. "though the seeds of water in the body are many, blood is where life resides; therefore he pierced for it to sprinkle the ground"; that Māra could still hide the water though his merit was accomplished is because 「是菩薩新發意能成小願，未能却魔」 tr. "this bodhisattva had newly aroused the mind; he could bring about small wishes, but could not yet drive back Māra"; to the doubt ‘if he died piercing his body, who would then hear the Dharma’, the treatise-author answers that the gods and great bodhisattvas protected him so that he did not die, and further distinguishes it from the side of his mind: one who first trains in the mind of kindness, on being cut and severed, gives rise to regret, and this is called being changed, but this bodhisattva did not regret—「譬如慈母愛子，雖為子長受勤苦不淨，不以為惡」 tr. "just as a kind mother loves her child, and though for the child's sake she long undergoes toil and impure tasks, she does not find it loathsome", and Māra's finding his opening has from the first its gate, 「如人有瘡則受毒」 tr. "as a person who has a sore receives poison"; when the mind is not sorrowful there is no sore to enter. The reason Śakra exclaimed that such a thing had never been lies not in its strangeness either, but in this: 「初心既爾，後心轉增」 tr. "since his first mind was like this, his later mind would increase still more"; and Sadāprarudita, hearing the consolation, was 「如火得酥，轉更熾盛」 tr. "like a fire that obtains ghee, he blazed all the more fiercely". Two last questions close this segment: who can make one who has entered a subtle samādhi rise? 「行者初入時，自作限齊，然後入定；時至，其心自在從三昧起，悲心故而生覺觀」 tr. "When the practitioner first enters, he himself sets a time limit and only then enters concentration; when the time comes, his mind rises freely from samādhi, and because of a compassionate mind initial and sustained thought arise"; why is the joy of seeing the teacher likened only to the third dhyāna? Because beings of the desire realm mostly crave pleasant feeling; the happiness of nirvāṇa is without anything existent, and the mind does not delight in it; the fourth dhyāna above has severed suffering and joy, and the mind does not delight in it either; 「第三禪中樂，樂之極」 tr. "the happiness within the third dhyāna is the utmost of happiness".

Fascicle 100 teaches the marks of prajñā and ends with entrustment. The form of Sūtra ② is wholly different from that of Sūtra ①: Sūtra ① is question and answer with five similes; Sūtra ② is one unbroken run of paired declarations, without question and without objection. Dharmodgata says 「諦聽！諦受！今當為汝說般若波羅蜜相」 tr. "Listen well! Receive well! Now I shall proclaim to you the marks of prajñāpāramitā", and below it every sentence is one and the same pattern—「諸法等故，當知般若波羅蜜亦等」 tr. "because dharmas are equal, know that prajñāpāramitā too is equal": apart, unmoving, without thought, without fear, of one flavour, boundless, non-arising, non-ceasing; and then it turns to the boundlessness of the similes: space is boundless, the water of the great ocean is boundless, Mount Sumeru is adorned, space is without discrimination, form, feeling, perception, constructions, and consciousness are boundless, the elements of earth, water, fire, wind, and space are boundless, equal like the vajra; the last three sentences are the deepest—because the nature of dharmas is unfindable, the nature of prajñā too is unfindable; because dharmas are without making, prajñā too is without making; 「諸法不可思議故，當知般若波羅蜜亦不可思議」 tr. "because dharmas are inconceivable, know that prajñāpāramitā too is inconceivable". Beneath these twenty-odd paired declarations, Sadāprarudita, right there on his seat, obtains a samādhi for each mark, 「如是等，得六百萬諸三昧門」 tr. "such as these, and so on: he obtained six million samādhi gates". At this point the sūtra text suddenly changes scene: the speaker turns from Dharmodgata to the Buddha, the hearer from Sadāprarudita to Subhūti—the Buddha takes his own teaching of the marks of prajñā today as proof, making clear that the buddhas of the ten directions whom Sadāprarudita saw in samādhi taught prajñā just so, and then he speaks of its retribution: 「常不離諸佛，生於有佛土中」 tr. "he was never apart from the buddhas, and was born in lands where there are buddhas", 「乃至夢中未曾不見佛時」 tr. "even in dreams there was never a time when he did not see the Buddha", and he ends with one sentence of concluding exhortation: 「般若波羅蜜是過去、未來、現在十方諸佛母」 tr. "prajñāpāramitā is the mother of the buddhas of the ten directions in the past, future, and present". The explanation of Treatise ② goes down item by item, and everywhere it guards against one sickness. Explaining equality, he first distinguishes cause and fruit: 「般若及諸法雖一相、無二無別，行者初觀時是因，觀竟名為果」 tr. "although prajñā and dharmas are of one mark, without duality and without difference, when the practitioner first contemplates, it is the cause, and when the contemplation is finished it is named the fruit"; and the reason equality is taught first is that 「般若波羅蜜甚深微妙，不以方便說則無解者」 tr. "prajñāpāramitā is very deep and subtle; if it is not taught by skilful means, there is no one who can understand it"; where there is no equality afflictions arise, so he has the practitioner abide within the two equalities, 「住眾生等中，怨親、憎愛皆悉平等，開福德門，閉諸惡趣」 tr. "abiding in the equality of beings, enemy and kin, hatred and love, are all equal; he opens the gate of merit and shuts the evil courses", while abiding in the equality of dharmas, 「但見諸法空，空即是平等」 tr. "he only sees that dharmas are empty, and emptiness is precisely equality". Yet equality too can become a sickness, so next he speaks of apart—「行者取是平等相而生著」 tr. "the practitioner grasps at this mark of equality and gives rise to clinging", and for this reason he speaks further of being apart in self-nature. Having parted from it and abiding in emptiness, one is unmoving, and this unmoving he speaks of exhaustively: 「戲論不能動，諸煩惱山亦不能動，無常時亦不能動。」 tr. "Idle discourse cannot move him, the mountains of the afflictions cannot move him either, the time of impermanence cannot move him either." Without thought, because 「若有念，即是有相著處」 tr. "if there is thought, that is a place where marks are clung to"; without fear, because he has entered deeply into the nature of dharmas, and so 「於大眾中有難論諸相者，心無所畏」 tr. "when in the midst of the great assembly there are those who raise difficulties and debate the marks, there is nothing in his mind to fear". The section on one flavour shows his skill most: emptiness too has a flavour; when the practitioner first obtains the emptiness of equality and is greatly joyful, that very joy is flavour, 「如人為熱渴所逼，得清冷水，以為真味無比」 tr. "as when a person pressed by heat and thirst obtains clear cool water and takes it for a true flavour without compare"; true ultimate emptiness is neither flavour nor non-flavour. And the proper meaning of one flavour lies in what is taken as object and what is contemplated all returning to one, 「譬如煮石蜜欲熟時，雖異物和合，皆為石蜜」 tr. "just as when boiling rock sugar is about to be done, although different things come together in it, all become rock sugar", 「又如大海，百川歸之，皆為一味，所謂畢竟空味」 tr. "and again it is like the great ocean: the hundred rivers return to it, and all become of one flavour, namely the flavour of ultimate emptiness". The meaning of boundless the treatise-author divides into two layers—「無邊有二種：一者、實無邊，二者、人不能到故無邊」 tr. "the boundless is of two kinds: first, really boundless; second, boundless because people cannot reach it"; the boundlessness of the great ocean belongs to the latter, and the point of the simile is not the ocean: the ship of meditative concentration of those of the outside paths and of ordinary people can cross the two realms of desire and form, but the formless realm is like the great ocean and they cannot cross it, because they cannot break the mind of self; only 「諸賢聖人智慧、禪定翅力，破諸法邪相、得實相，故能度」 tr. "the worthies and noble ones, by the power of the wings of wisdom and meditative concentration, break the wrong marks of dharmas and obtain the real mark, and so can cross". Why is Sumeru, being of one colour, called adorned? The treatise-author lists in full the various accounts and the marks of its adornment, and then draws the simile four times over: when prajñā is not yet complete one receives the adornment of the retribution of humans and gods, and when it is complete one receives the adornment of the fruits of the paths, as Sumeru is adorned above and below; prajñā is 「一切善法中第一堅實牢固和合以為般若」 tr. "among all wholesome dharmas the foremost, solid, firm, and strong, coming together to make prajñā", as Sumeru is formed by the gathering of the wind and is firm; prajñā is what 「邪見、外道、戲論及諸魔民所不能動」 tr. "wrong views, the outside paths, idle discourse, and Māra's people cannot move", as Sumeru is not moved by wind and water; the practitioner climbs to the summit of prajñā and reaches the gardens of the concentrations to enjoy delight, like the four gardens on the summit of Sumeru. There is one more simile that takes the least effort—the birds that reach Sumeru all share its colour, 「諸法入中皆同一相，所謂無相」 tr. "dharmas that enter it all become of one mark, namely the signless". Below, explaining that the five aggregates are boundless, he points straight to 「五眾實相即是般若波羅蜜」 tr. "the real mark of the five aggregates is precisely prajñāpāramitā"; explaining like the vajra, 「如天王所執金剛，無憎無愛，隨所用處，無不摧碎」 tr. "like the vajra held by the heavenly king, which is without hatred and without love, and wherever it is used there is nothing it does not shatter"; explaining that nature is unfindable, he first sets up the definition of nature—「性者，名本有決定實事」 tr. "nature is named a definitely real matter that exists from the first", and then refutes it by causes and conditions: if it arises from causes and conditions, then before the coming together it does not exist, and so it is without nature; explaining without anything existent and equal, he takes fragrance as a simile, 「有，故有分別；無，故無分別。如草香、栴檀香，燒時有分別，滅時無分別」 tr. "because there is existence, there is discrimination; because there is non-existence, there is no discrimination. It is like the fragrance of grass incense and the fragrance of sandalwood: when burning there is discrimination; when extinguished there is no discrimination"; explaining without making, he refutes it completely from both ends, 「破眾生故無作者，破法故無所作」 tr. "because beings are refuted there is no maker; because dharmas are refuted there is nothing made"; explaining the inconceivable, he returns it to what the mind does not reach—「是法皆從心中憶想分別生，亦不可決定」 tr. "these dharmas are all born from recollection, imagining, and discrimination within the mind, and also cannot be determined", and cites words from a previous chapter as proof: 「一切諸法平等，一切賢聖不能行、不能到。」 tr. "All dharmas are equal; all the worthies and noble ones cannot practise it and cannot reach it." The most crucial question of the whole treatise section comes at the end: Sadāprarudita already knew the empty mark of dharmas; now, after all kinds of toil and standing for seven years, what further benefit did he obtain in seeing Dharmodgata? The answer points straight to his sickness: earlier he saw the buddhas and obtained the samādhis, and 「貴重般若波羅蜜生著相」 tr. "valued prajñāpāramitā highly and gave rise to clinging to marks", so Dharmodgata's rising from concentration after seven years to teach him prajñā was precisely to break his clinging mind—「一切法性自空，非般若波羅蜜令其空」 tr. "the nature of all dharmas is of itself empty; it is not that prajñāpāramitā makes it empty"; in teaching that dharmas are equal and so on up to inconceivable, his intent lies in 「不令因般若故更生垢著」 tr. "not letting him, because of prajñā, give rise further to defiled clinging", and he gives it a simile, saying 「如熱金雖好，不可手捉」 tr. "just as hot gold, though it is fine, cannot be held in the hand". As for why hearing the Dharma at once became samādhi, the treatise-author does not allow vagueness either: 「散亂心中，但有智慧，不名三昧」 tr. "in a scattered mind there is only wisdom, and it is not named samādhi"; now, having heard it from the teacher and reflecting with one mind, gathering the mind so that it does not scatter, wisdom then turns into samādhi, 「如風中燈不能照明，在靜室閉門，明乃遍照」 tr. "as a lamp in the wind cannot give light, while in a quiet room with the door shut its light then shines everywhere"; and again 「如水，寒風未至，未成為氷，則無堅用；若成凍氷，能有所蹈」 tr. "it is like water: before the cold wind has come, it has not become ice and has no firm use; once it has become frozen ice, it can be walked upon". Finally the treatise-author explains the Buddha's concluding exhortation, speaking out the retribution layer by layer to the end and returning to one sentence urging practice: 「若有欲求般若波羅蜜者，當如薩陀波崙菩薩，堅正一心，不可傾動！」 tr. "If there are those who wish to seek prajñāpāramitā, they should be like the bodhisattva Sadāprarudita, firm and upright with one mind, not to be shaken!" The whole chapter closes on the share of entrustment—「須菩提雖常樂空行，佛共說般若，又得無諍三昧，故不應囑累」 tr. "though Subhūti always delights in the practice of emptiness, and the Buddha taught prajñā together with him, and he has moreover obtained the samādhi of non-contention, therefore it should not be entrusted to him", 「阿難得聞持陀羅尼，又常親近世尊，故廣囑累」 tr. "Ānanda has obtained the dhāraṇī of hearing and retaining, and moreover is always close to the World-Honored One, therefore it is entrusted to him at length".

Through the three segments runs a single thread, namely the one Chinese character ‘clinging’, and the clinging each of the three segments refutes lies in a different place. What Fascicle 99, Sūtra Section, refutes is clinging to the Buddha's coming and going—since the mark of coming and going is set up by way of the form body, refuting it needs only one sentence, 「諸佛不可以色身見」 tr. "the buddhas cannot be seen by the form body"; what Fascicle 99, Treatise Section, refutes is clinging to the Buddha's body as really existent—only after the Buddha has been sought in five ways and found unfindable is it known that there is no coming and no going, yet what it refutes is still only a notion, not the Buddha, so the treatise-author expressly declares that his intent is only 「破著佛想」 tr. "to refute the notion of clinging to the Buddha", and not to set up a view that there is no Buddha; what Fascicle 100 refutes is clinging to the marks of prajñā—this layer is the hardest to notice, because what is clung to is already the best of dharmas, and so the treatise-author lays down the weightiest sentence of the whole chapter: 「不令因般若故更生垢著。」 tr. "Not letting him, because of prajñā, give rise further to defiled clinging." Of the three refutations each comes closer to the self than the last: first it refutes the Buddha who is sought, next the view that does the seeking, last the Dharma that is obtained. And what the three segments establish also forms one line: Sūtra ① establishes the Dharma body, 「諸佛法身無來無去」 tr. "the Dharma body of the buddhas neither comes nor goes"; Treatise ① establishes the two bodies without discarding the form body, 「色身為世諦故有」 tr. "the form body exists for the sake of worldly truth"; Fascicle 100 establishes the marks of prajñā without permitting the grasping of marks, 「一切法性自空，非般若波羅蜜令其空」 tr. "the nature of all dharmas is of itself empty; it is not that prajñāpāramitā makes it empty". Therefore, though this chapter takes a person's name as its title, what it speaks of does not lie in the person: Dharmodgata is the one who teaches the Dharma; Sadāprarudita is the one who seeks the Dharma; and what is discerned throughout the chapter is only how the one who seeks the Dharma may keep from turning the Dharma he seeks into a new place of clinging.

What especially deserves to be seen together is how this chapter's narrative and its doctrine complete each other. The doctrine of the whole chapter is extremely high—no coming and no going, nature unfindable, inconceivable; and the narrative of the whole chapter is extremely heavy—standing for seven years, piercing the body to draw blood, giving up everything inner and outer. If one reads only the doctrine, a kind of slighting easily arises: since there is no coming and no going, why go seven years without sitting or lying down? If one reads only the narrative, a kind of misrecognition easily arises again: thinking that the Dharma is gained from suffering, and the more suffering the more Dharma. The treatise-author blocks both ends completely. Where he speaks of the ascetic deeds, his explanations nowhere make them supernatural: not sitting or lying down is because 「大欲、大精進與坐臥相違故」 tr. "great desire and great vigour are contrary to sitting and lying down"; seven years not being hard is because 「是時人壽命長，雖復七歲，如今七日」 tr. "at that time people's lifespans were long; though it was seven years, it was like seven days now"; the blood being able to sprinkle the ground is because of the protection of the gods, and his body not dying is because 「諸天、大菩薩守護故，令其不死」 tr. "the gods and great bodhisattvas protected him, so they did not let him die"; where he speaks of the doctrine, his explanations nowhere leave it hanging in the air: the reason he could be unsparing of his body is 「見諸法實相畢竟空故，知是身但是虛誑和合」 tr. "because he saw that the real mark of all dharmas is ultimate emptiness, he knew that this body is only a false and deceptive coming together"; the reason Māra could not find his opening is 「心不憂愁故」 tr. "because his mind was not sorrowful". On one side he does not allow the ascetic deeds to be read as miracles; on the other side he does not allow the meaning of emptiness to be read as an excuse—this is precisely the intent of this chapter in joining narrative and doctrine into one chapter.

Therefore, in reading each segment of this chapter, one can ask on at least three levels. First, is what this sentence refutes the dharma, or my notion of the dharma—this is where this chapter is most easily misread. The treatise-author says 「當知無佛」 tr. "know that there is no Buddha"; if the reader reads it as there being no Buddha, he falls right into what is warned against; the treatise-author says plainly that his intent is only 「破著佛想」 tr. "to refute the notion of clinging to the Buddha", and 「若有佛尚不令取，何況取無佛邪見！」 tr. "If even where there is a Buddha one is not allowed to grasp, how much less to grasp the wrong view that there is no Buddha!" Likewise, the sūtra text says 「諸法等故，當知般若波羅蜜亦等」 tr. "because dharmas are equal, know that prajñāpāramitā too is equal", and the treatise-author's explanation is not that dharmas have been made equal by prajñā, but 「一切法性自空，非般若波羅蜜令其空」 tr. "the nature of all dharmas is of itself empty; it is not that prajñāpāramitā makes it empty". Whenever you see a sentence of refutation, first ask which end it refutes. Second, if this segment were read in reverse, what would it become—in this chapter there are three places that can be read in reverse: one is to hear 「諸佛無所從來，去亦無所至」 tr. "the buddhas come from nowhere, and in going reach nowhere" and no longer revere and make offerings, yet the whole latter half of the chapter is entirely a matter of offering, and the treatise-author says plainly that the form body exists 「為世諦故有」 tr. "for the sake of worldly truth"; two is to hear of standing for seven years and piercing the body to sprinkle the ground and long for its suffering, yet the treatise-author's explanation lies wholly in the mind: he says the reason he did not tire is 「以心強故」 tr. "because the mind was strong", and the reason he did not regret is the mind of a kind mother loving her child; he never takes suffering as the superior dharma; three is to hear that prajñā is supreme and value prajñā highly while despising the other dharmas, yet the treatise-author states plainly that the intent of his teaching of the marks is precisely 「不令輕賤餘法、貴重般若」 tr. "not to let him despise the other dharmas and value prajñā highly". Third, I have not yet met a good friend; of what use is this chapter to me—this chapter answers very concretely. What Sadāprarudita did, item by item, is not supernormal power; it is mind: not sitting or lying down is mind, spreading the seat and sprinkling the ground is mind, giving himself over to the teacher with a sincere mind is mind, the blood sprinkled on the ground is also mind; and what he obtained is not some other thing either, only this—after hearing the Dharma, reflecting with one mind, 「攝心不散，智慧變成三昧」 tr. "gathering the mind so that it does not scatter, wisdom turns into samādhi". Reading down along the three segments, one will in the end come to rest on the treatise-author's plainest verdict: the Dharma is not gained from suffering, nor gained from height; once the Dharma heard is gathered into a quiet mind, 「如風中燈不能照明，在靜室閉門，明乃遍照」 tr. "as a lamp in the wind cannot give light, while in a quiet room with the door shut its light then shines everywhere".

Reading On in the Order of the Treatise

Dharmodgata, Fascicle 99, Sūtra Section: Why the Buddhas Come from Nowhere and in Going Reach Nowhere; What the Three Similes of the Mirage, the Illusion, and the Dream and the Two Similes of the Ocean's Jewels and the Konghou Each Refute; Why the Dharma Body Cannot Be Seen by the Form Body; Why Not Falsely Consuming the Faithful Gifts of Others Is Tied to Not Discriminating Coming and Going; Why Śakra Offers Flowers Again and Again; Why Sadāprarudita, Having Given His Body Over to the Teacher, Turns and Presents It to the Teacher; Why for Seven Years He Walks and Stands, Not Sitting, Not Lying Down; Why Māra Hides the Water and Why the Practitioner Pierces His Body to Sprinkle the Ground; and Why the Joy of Seeing the Teacher Is Likened to a Bhikṣu Entering the Third Dhyāna

What Is Being Asked

In the previous chapter Sadāprarudita went through every hardship—selling his body to seek the Dharma, moving the buddhas to appear before him, travelling to the City of Many Fragrances—and at last met Dharmodgata. Having met him, the question only truly begins: the buddhas he saw in the sky—from where did they come, and to where did they go? This question was his deepest doubt along the whole road, and also his deepest clinging—precisely because he had seen the Buddha's marks and minor signs and heard the Buddha's voice, he would take the Buddha to be a person who can come and go. As this chapter opens, Dharmodgata's very first words pull this question up by the root: 「諸佛無所從來，去亦無所至。」 tr. "The buddhas come from nowhere, and in going reach nowhere." It is not that the Buddha comes too fast for you to see; it is that this pair of notions, 「來去」 tr. "coming and going", cannot from the very start be set upon the Buddha. So the grounds given below are not ‘the Buddha's supernormal powers surpass coming and going’, but 「諸法如不動相，諸法如即是佛」 tr. "the suchness of dharmas has the mark of not moving; the suchness of dharmas is precisely the Buddha"—the Buddha is not some further person apart from suchness; the Buddha is precisely the suchness of dharmas; and since suchness does not move, where could coming and going be set?

Then Dharmodgata lists them one by one: the dharma of non-arising, the dharma of non-ceasing, the dharma of the limit of reality, emptiness, the undefiled, quiescent extinction, the nature of space; of each he says 「無來無去」 tr. "neither comes nor goes", of each he says 「即是佛」 tr. "is precisely the Buddha". These are not seven buddhas; they are seven gates recognising one and the same thing. Then come five similes. The first three refute clinging—the mirage, the illusory thing, and the dream are all things ‘seen and yet in fact not there’, used to cut off the view 「有來有去」 tr. "there is coming and there is going"; the last two establish meaning—the jewels of the great ocean and the sound of the konghou are both things ‘truly existing and yet coming from no place’, used to guard against the doubt ‘since there is no coming and going, it is annihilation’. Refuting and establishing each have their share, and in reading they may not be mixed into one heap.

When the similes are finished, the sūtra text turns to narrative, and the narrative is in fact still speaking of the same thing. Śakra offering flowers, Sadāprarudita giving his body over to the teacher, the elder's daughter and the five hundred attendant maidens likewise giving themselves over, the carriages of the seven jewels and the offerings presented in full, Dharmodgata accepting and giving them back again, entering the palace at sunset, seven years in concentration, seven years of walking and standing, Māra hiding the water, piercing the body and drawing blood to sprinkle the ground, Śakra's three thousand dan of heavenly flowers—this long string is not an appendix after the doctrine, but how that person lives after ‘knowing that dharmas neither come nor go’. One who truly believes that the Buddha has no coming and going will not for that reason slight offering; quite the contrary, he gives even his body away. The Dharma body has no coming and going, and this body can be relinquished—in this unit these two things are two faces of one and the same thing.

So this unit has two questions to answer: the first concerns meaning—since the Buddha neither comes nor goes, what then is the Buddha I have seen, the Buddha to whom I make offerings? The second concerns practice—since all that is seen is like a mirage, like a dream, why still go seven years without sitting or lying down, why still pierce the body to sprinkle the ground? Only when these two questions are answered is Sūtra ① read through.

Passage by Passage

1. The general opening—the buddhas come from nowhere, and in going reach nowhere; suchness taught through seven gates, suchness always one, not two, not three. As soon as he opens his mouth Dharmodgata sets down the general headrope: 「善男子！諸佛無所從來，去亦無所至。」 tr. "Good man! The buddhas come from nowhere, and in going reach nowhere." Having set down the verdict, he at once asks himself the reason: 「何以故？諸法如不動相，諸法如即是佛。」 tr. "Why? The suchness of dharmas has the mark of not moving; the suchness of dharmas is precisely the Buddha." These two sentences are the foundation of the whole chapter. The first speaks of the substance and nature of 「如」 tr. "suchness"—suchness is the mark of not moving; were it to move there would be coming and going; not moving, coming and going have nowhere to be set up. The second speaks of the relation between the Buddha and suchness—it is not that the Buddha realised suchness, nor that the Buddha abides within suchness, but that 「諸法如即是佛」 tr. "the suchness of dharmas is precisely the Buddha". Since the Buddha is precisely suchness, and suchness does not move, the two marks of coming and going naturally cannot be established. Next, through seven gates, he says this one thing seven times: 「無生法無來無去，無生法即是佛」 tr. "the dharma of non-arising neither comes nor goes; the dharma of non-arising is precisely the Buddha", the dharma of non-ceasing, the dharma of the limit of reality, emptiness, the undefiled, quiescent extinction, the nature of space—the sentence pattern uniform, what is pointed to one. The seven gates are not seven meanings; from the seven angles of non-arising, non-ceasing, the limit of reality, emptiness, the undefiled, quiescent extinction, and space, they point to the one unmoving suchness. The three sentences at the end gather it in: 「離是諸法更無佛」 tr. "apart from these dharmas there is no further Buddha"—one may not seek a further Buddha outside these dharmas; 「諸佛如、諸法如，一如無分別」 tr. "the suchness of the buddhas and the suchness of dharmas are one and the same suchness, without discrimination"—the suchness of the Buddha and the suchness of dharmas are not two suchnesses; 「是如常一，無二、無三，出諸數法，無所有故」 tr. "this suchness is always one; it is not two, it is not three; it passes beyond all dharmas of number, because it is without anything existent"—suchness passes beyond all dharmas that can be counted, because it is itself without anything existent; being without anything existent, there is nothing by which to count it, and with nothing by which to count it there is no such thing as one Buddha coming and one Buddha going. On reading to this point, take note: Dharmodgata does not deny that there is a Buddha; what he denies is ‘the Buddha is a thing that can be described by coming and going’.

2. The mirage simile—one who sees a mirage and seeks water is precisely one who discriminates the Buddha as having coming and going; the Dharma body cannot be seen by the form body. The meaning set up, Dharmodgata at once sets out a simile: 「譬如春末月，日中熱時，有人見焰動，逐之求水望得。」 tr. "It is like the last month of spring, at midday when it is hot: a person sees a mirage shimmering, chases after it seeking water, and hopes to obtain it." Then he does not break it open directly, but asks Sadāprarudita in return: 「是水從何池、何山、何泉來？今何所去？」 tr. "From which pool, which mountain, which spring did this water come? And where does it now go?"—asking on through the four seas, pressing him to answer for himself. Sadāprarudita answers quite crisply: 「焰中尚無水，云何當有來處、去處？」 tr. "In a mirage there is not even water; how could there be a place it comes from or a place it goes to?" The water does not exist at all; to press after its coming and going is a joke. This answer hits the vital point exactly, and Dharmodgata then closes it: 「愚夫無智，為熱渴所逼，見焰動，無水生水想。」 tr. "The foolish ordinary person, without wisdom, pressed by heat and thirst, sees the mirage shimmer and, where there is no water, gives rise to the notion of water." The folly of the foolish person does not lie in seeing the mirage—the mirage truly can be seen; the folly lies in 「無水生水想」 tr. "where there is no water, giving rise to the notion of water", adding a really existent thing onto a visible mark. In the same way, 「若有人分別諸佛有來有去，當知是人皆是愚夫」 tr. "if anyone discriminates the buddhas as having coming and going, know that such people are all foolish ordinary persons". Immediately after comes the most vital sentence of the whole passage, settling the position: 「諸佛不可以色身見，諸佛法身無來無去」 tr. "the buddhas cannot be seen by the form body; the Dharma body of the buddhas neither comes nor goes". The Buddha has a form body, has marks and minor signs, has a voice; these can be seen and heard, as the mirage can be seen; but to take the form body as the Buddha himself is like taking the mirage for water. What is refuted is not the seeing, but the clinging added onto the seeing.

3. The illusion simile—an illusory thing has no reality, and so no coming and going; those who discriminate the Buddha as having coming and going are also like this. The second simile changes the angle: 「譬如幻師幻作種種」 tr. "it is like a conjurer who conjures up all kinds of things", an elephant, or a horse, or an ox, or a sheep, or a man, or a woman. The mirage is an error that arises of itself; the illusion is a false mark that someone makes. The mirage simile makes clear the clinging of ‘producing existence out of nothing’; the illusion simile makes clear the mark of ‘made yet not real’. Dharmodgata likewise asks in return about its coming and going, and Sadāprarudita likewise answers decisively: 「幻事無實，云何當有來去處？」 tr. "An illusory thing has no reality; how could there be a place of coming and going?" Dharmodgata gathers it in with one sentence: 「是人分別佛有來有去亦如是。」 tr. "Such people, discriminating the Buddha as having coming and going, are also like this." This passage is extremely short, so short it seems a repetition—precisely because it is short, readers easily slip past it. One must see its division of labour with the previous simile: the mirage is made by no one, the illusion is made by someone; the Buddha's body is 「從本業因緣果報生」 tr. "born from the causes and conditions and the retribution of original deeds", and has the mark of being made, so this move of the illusion simile is needed; otherwise, relying on the mirage simile alone, people would think the Buddha's body lacks even the provisional existence formed by causes and conditions.

4. The dream simile and the gathering-up—knowing as it really is, one does not discriminate coming and going, arising and ceasing; this is named a true disciple of the Buddha, a field of merit for the world. The third simile goes a layer further: 「譬如夢中見若象、若馬、若牛、若羊、若男、若女」 tr. "it is like seeing in a dream an elephant, or a horse, or an ox, or a sheep, or a man, or a woman"; asked about their coming and going, Sadāprarudita answers: 「是夢中所見虛妄，云何當有來去？」 tr. "What is seen in this dream is false; how could it have coming and going?" The mirage is an error of looking from afar; the illusion is made by another; the dream is what appears from one's own mind—the three similes go from outer to inner, coming nearer the further they go. So only here does Dharmodgata gather it all up: 「佛說諸法如夢。」 tr. "The Buddha said that dharmas are like a dream." Those who do not know this meaning and 「以名字色身著佛」 tr. "cling to the Buddha by name and by form body" then discriminate the buddhas as having coming and going; 「不知諸法實際相故，皆是愚夫無智之數」 tr. "because they do not know the mark of the limit of reality of dharmas, they all belong to the kind of foolish ordinary persons without wisdom"; their retribution is 「是人數數往來五道，遠離般若波羅蜜，遠離諸佛法」 tr. "such people go and come again and again within the five destinies, far from prajñāpāramitā, far from the dharmas of the buddhas"—note the fine symmetry of this sentence: those who cling to the Buddha as having coming and going themselves fall instead into real coming and going, going and coming again and again within the five destinies. Conversely, 「若有眾生如實知，是人不分別諸法若來若去、若生若滅」 tr. "if there are beings who know this as it really is, such people do not discriminate dharmas as coming or going, as arising or ceasing", 「則能知佛所說諸法實相」 tr. "then they can know the real mark of all dharmas taught by the Buddha", 「近阿耨多羅三藐三菩提，名為真佛弟子」 tr. "draw near to anuttarā samyaksaṃbodhi, and are named true disciples of the Buddha", and moreover 「不虛妄食人信施，是人應受供養，為世間福田」 tr. "do not falsely consume the faithful gifts of others; such people should receive offerings, and are a field of merit for the world". Here the doctrine is joined directly onto the qualification to receive offerings: being able to receive people's offerings without falsehood does not lie in having supernormal powers or name and rank, but in not giving rise to the discrimination of coming and going upon the Buddha's body. The reason a field of merit is a field of merit is that he truly clings to nothing.

5. The simile of the ocean's jewels—they exist because the conditions join, they perish because the conditions part; the Buddha's body is born from the causes and conditions and the retribution of original deeds. The first three similes all refute; here it turns to establishing. 「譬如大海水中諸寶，不從東方來」 tr. "It is like the many jewels in the waters of the great ocean: they do not come from the east", nor do they come from the south, the west, or the north, the four intermediate directions, or above and below; rather, 「眾生善根因緣故，海生此寶」 tr. "it is by the causes and conditions of beings' roots of goodness that the ocean produces these jewels". What is vital is the sharp turn of the next sentence: 「此寶亦不無因緣而生」 tr. "nor are these jewels produced without causes and conditions"—not coming from the ten directions is not the same as existing out of thin air. This is exactly the move that guards against annihilation: the misunderstanding that most easily arises in one who has heard the three similes is ‘since it is like a mirage, like a dream, then there is nothing at all’. The sūtra text at once closes the gap: the jewels really are jewels; it is only that 「諸緣合故有，諸緣離故滅」 tr. "when the conditions join they exist; when the conditions part they perish". Then it returns to the Buddha's body: 「諸佛身亦如是，從本業因緣果報生，生不從十方來，滅時亦不去至十方」 tr. "the bodies of the buddhas are also thus: they are born from the causes and conditions and the retribution of their original deeds; when born they do not come from the ten directions, and when they perish they do not go to the ten directions either". The existence of the Buddha's body is an existence formed by causes and conditions; the Buddha's body has no coming and going because it was never a thing carried over from some place. The jewels in the ocean, people diving down truly can obtain; the Buddha's body, beings truly can see—this does not hinder its neither coming nor going.

6. The simile of the sound of the konghou—only when the many conditions come together is there sound; it is not accomplished from a single matter alone. The fifth simile is finer still: 「譬如箜篌聲，出時無來處，滅時無去處。」 tr. "It is like the sound of a konghou: when it comes out it has no place it comes from, and when it ceases it has no place it goes to." The jewels are still things with form; sound does not even have form, and is best suited to show ‘existing yet having no place it comes from’. The sūtra text counts out the conditions to the last: 「有槽、有頸、有皮、有絃、有柱、有棍，有人以手鼓之」 tr. "there is the body, there is the neck, there is the skin, there are the strings, there are the pegs, there is the plectrum, and there is a person who plays it with the hand", and then denies them one by one: the sound does not come out of the body, does not come out of the neck, does not come out of the skin, does not come out of the strings, does not come out of the pegs, does not come out of the plectrum, nor does it come out of the person's hand; 「眾緣和合爾乃有聲」 tr. "only when the many conditions come together is there sound". This string of item-by-item exclusion has great power to teach: when ordinary people hear music, they always want to point out where it comes from—point to the strings? The strings do not sound of themselves. Point to the hand? An empty hand makes no sound. Point through all seven places, and each one is not it, and yet put together there is, after all, sound. 「是因緣離時，亦無去處」 tr. "when these causes and conditions part, it has no place it goes to either"—after the sound stops, you cannot say where it has withdrawn to either. The Buddha's body is just so: 「從無量功德因緣生，不從一因一緣一功德生，亦不無因緣有，眾緣和合故有。」 tr. "It is born from the causes and conditions of immeasurable merits, not born from one cause, one condition, one merit; nor does it exist without causes and conditions; it exists because the many conditions come together." The one phrase 「不獨從一事成」 tr. "not accomplished from a single matter alone" cuts off the thought of looking for a single origin in the Buddha's body; 「來無所從、去無所至」 tr. "when coming they come from nowhere, when going they reach nowhere" answers the general headrope at the opening, and the five similes are here brought to a close.

7. Conclusion—knowing that the Buddha and dharmas neither come nor go, neither arise nor cease, one will surely obtain awakening and be able to practise prajñā and the power of skilful means. Dharmodgata puts the similes away and hands the conclusion back to Sadāprarudita: 「應當如是知諸佛來相去相」 tr. "in this way you should know the mark of the buddhas' coming and the mark of their going", and moreover 「亦當知一切法無來去相」 tr. "you should also know that all dharmas are without the mark of coming and going". This extension is the key step of the whole passage—the Buddha's having no coming and going is not a special case of the Buddha; it is the common mark of all dharmas; if this contemplation is made only upon the Buddha's body, it is still discrimination. At the end he promises the fruit: 「必得阿耨多羅三藐三菩提，亦能行般若波羅蜜及方便力。」 tr. "You will surely obtain anuttarā samyaksaṃbodhi, and will also be able to practise prajñāpāramitā and the power of skilful means." Obtaining awakening is named together with being able to practise prajñā and skilful means, which shows that this contemplation is not idle talk that stops at view; it is directly the point of entry for practising prajñā and giving rise to skilful means. The doctrinal passage of Sūtra ① is finished here; what follows turns to narrative.

8. Śakra offers flowers—by the power of his causes and conditions beings are benefited; a good person such as this is truly hard to meet. The teaching of the Dharma finished, Śakra Devānām Indra gives heavenly māndārava flowers to Sadāprarudita and bids him pass them on as an offering to Dharmodgata, saying of himself 「我當守護供養汝」 tr. "I shall protect you and make offerings to you". The reason he gives is not ‘you have understood the Dharma’ but 「汝因緣力故，今日饒益百千萬億眾生，使得阿耨多羅三藐三菩提」 tr. "by the power of your causes and conditions, today hundreds of thousands of myriads of koṭi of beings are benefited and made to obtain anuttarā samyaksaṃbodhi"—Sadāprarudita, one person seeking the Dharma, has drawn along the conditions for the deliverance of hundreds of thousands of myriads of koṭi of people, and so is worth protecting. Śakra further exclaims: 「如是善人，甚為難遇！」 tr. "A good person such as this is truly hard to meet!" Where does the hardness of meeting lie? In 「為饒益一切眾生故，無量阿僧祇劫受諸勤苦」 tr. "for the sake of benefiting all beings, through immeasurable asaṃkhyeya kalpas he undergoes all kinds of toil and hardship". This passage looks like an interlude, but it has a deep intent: just as the doctrine has said that the Buddha neither comes nor goes, straight after comes the lord of the gods running up to make offerings to an ordinary person in a fleshly body—precisely because the Dharma body is not elsewhere, the causes and conditions of this present seeking of the Dharma are the very place where the Dharma body is manifest.

9. Giving his body over to the teacher—Sadāprarudita declares it three times; the elder's daughter and the five hundred attendant maidens likewise give themselves over. Sadāprarudita receives the flowers and scatters them over Dharmodgata's body, and then speaks the first sentence in this unit that is about 「以身」 tr. "with the body": 「我從今日以身屬師，供給供養。」 tr. "From this day on I give this body over to the teacher, to provide for you and make offerings to you." And moreover 「如是三白已，合手師前立」 tr. "having addressed him thus three times, he stood before the teacher with joined palms"—saying it three times is not wordiness; it is taking an oath; and after taking the oath he neither sits nor leaves, but stands with joined palms. The elder's daughter and the five hundred attendant maidens at once follow him: 「我等從今日亦以身屬師」 tr. "from this day on we too give these bodies over to the teacher", and they expect for themselves that by the causes and conditions of these roots of goodness 「當得如是法」 tr. "we shall obtain such a Dharma as this", 「亦如師所得」 tr. "just as the teacher has obtained it", and they vow life after life to make offerings to the buddhas together with the teacher, and life after life always to make offerings to the teacher. Here two layers of belonging must be seen: Sadāprarudita belongs to Dharmodgata; the elder's daughter and the others belong to Sadāprarudita. The person who has just heard 「諸佛無所從來」 tr. "the buddhas come from nowhere" turns round, and the first thing he does is hand himself over—this is not a contradiction. No coming and no going speaks of not being able to grasp; giving the body over to the teacher speaks of leaving nothing in reserve; both are equally the practice of 「無所有」 tr. "without anything existent", the one in view, the other in deed.

10. Presenting the carriages to the teacher as well—Śakra praises relinquishing all one has; the buddhas of the past too abode thus in giving. Sadāprarudita first asks the elder's daughter and the others whether it is with a sincere mind, receives the answer 「我等以誠心屬師，當隨師教」 tr. "we give ourselves over to the teacher with a sincere mind, and shall follow the teacher's instruction", and then, people and carriages together, along with the adorning jewels and the finest offerings, presents them all on to Dharmodgata: 「我持是五百女人奉給大師，是五百乘車隨師所用。」 tr. "I present these five hundred women to provide for the great teacher; these five hundred carriages are for the teacher's use." What he has just received he at once hands on—toward the two Chinese characters 「屬我」 tr. "belong to me" he has not a moment of keeping anything as his own. Śakra Devānām Indra then praises him again: 「菩薩摩訶薩捨一切所有，應如是如是布施，疾得阿耨多羅三藐三菩提。」 tr. "A bodhisattva-mahāsattva who relinquishes all that he has should give in just this way, in just this way, and then swiftly obtains anuttarā samyaksaṃbodhi." And he adds a sentence pointing straight at the matter at hand: 「作如是供養說法人，必得聞般若波羅蜜及方便力。」 tr. "Making offerings in this way to the one who teaches the Dharma, he will surely be able to hear prajñāpāramitā and the power of skilful means." And he cites the buddhas of the past, who, when they originally practised the bodhisattva path, likewise abode thus in giving and so heard prajñā and obtained awakening. Relinquishing and hearing are here tied into one line of cause and effect—it is not that the more one relinquishes the faster one learns, but that only when one has relinquished to the point of holding nothing back do the ears that hear the Dharma truly open.

11. Accepting and then giving back—the skilful means of making his roots of goodness complete; entering the palace at sunset; the oath to wait for the teacher walking and standing. Dharmodgata, 「欲令薩陀波崙菩薩善根具足故」 tr. "in order to make the bodhisattva Sadāprarudita's roots of goodness complete", accepted the five hundred carriages, the elder's daughter, and the five hundred attendant maidens; 「受已，還與薩陀波崙菩薩」 tr. "having accepted them, he gave them back to the bodhisattva Sadāprarudita". This one accepting and one giving back must be seen clearly: were he not to accept, the giver's dānapāramitā would not be accomplished and his roots of goodness could not be made complete; were he to accept and not give back, those who were given would have no way to be at ease, and the things given would also become a burden. First accepting, then giving back—both ends are whole. Then Dharmodgata taught the Dharma until sunset, rose, and went into the palace. Sadāprarudita at once has the thought: 「我為法故來，不應坐、臥，當以二事：若行、若立」 tr. "I have come for the sake of the Dharma; I should not sit or lie down; I should use two things—either walking or standing", and in this way waits for the Dharma teacher to come out of the palace and teach the Dharma. With the teacher gone into the palace, the disciple has no Dharma to listen to, and at this moment his mind is seen most clearly—he did not go away, nor did he sit down; he only made good the four Chinese characters 「為法故來」 tr. "came for the sake of the Dharma" as a standing body.

12. Seven years in concentration and seven years of walking and standing—not sitting, not lying down, without sleep, the mind not craving flavours; after seven years, the thought of spreading the Dharma seat. This one entry into concentration of Dharmodgata's is precisely 「七歲一心入無量阿僧祇菩薩三昧」 tr. "for seven years with one mind entering immeasurable asaṃkhyeya bodhisattva samādhis", practising at the same time prajñāpāramitā and the power of skilful means. Sadāprarudita, for his part, 「七歲經行、住立，不坐、不臥，無有睡眠，無欲、恚、惱，心不著味」 tr. "for seven years walked and stood, not sitting, not lying down, without sleep, without lust, anger, or harming, his mind not craving flavours". The sūtra text points out item by item his inner state through the seven years: in the body, walking and standing; in the mind, without lust, without anger, without harming, not craving flavours—it is not gritting the teeth and holding out by force; it is that the afflictions do not arise. And what supports all this is only one thought: 「何時當從三昧起，出而說法？」 tr. "When will he rise from samādhi and come out to teach the Dharma?" For seven years he thought only this one sentence. After seven years had passed, what he thought of was still not that he had at last endured to the end, but spreading the seat for the teacher: he should spread a seat for teaching the Dharma, should sprinkle the ground to make it clean, should scatter all kinds of flowers to adorn the place. So with the elder's daughter and the five hundred attendant maidens he spread a couch of the seven jewels, and the five hundred women each took off their upper garments and spread them on the seat. Take note of this move: seven years of waiting in the end come down to a seat spread ready.

13. Māra hides the water—wishing to make him give rise to a single thought of a timid and feeble mind, of a changed mind, so that his roots of goodness do not grow and his wisdom gives no illumination. The seat was spread, yet something went amiss: 「求水灑地而不能得。」 tr. "He sought water to sprinkle the ground but could not obtain it." The sūtra text itself breaks open the reason: 「惡魔隱蔽，令水不現。」 tr. "The evil Māra hid it and covered it over, so that the water did not appear." And it records Māra's reckoning word for word: he wants Sadāprarudita, seeking water and not obtaining it, 「乃至生一念劣心、異心，則善根不增、智慧不照，於一切智而有稽留」 tr. "to give rise even to a single thought of a timid and feeble mind, of a changed mind; then his roots of goodness will not grow, his wisdom will give no illumination, and toward omniscience there will be delay and obstruction". What Māra wants is not much—only a single thought. A single thought of belittling oneself, a single thought of change, and the roots of goodness stop growing, wisdom loses its illumination, and one is held back on the way to omniscience. This place is well worth savouring: seven years without sitting or lying down Māra could not destroy, yet a dipper of water might destroy it. The nearer the end and the smaller the matter, the more it is where hindrance lies; and what makes a hindrance a hindrance is not whether there is water or not, but whether the mind is feeble and changed.

14. Piercing the body to sprinkle the ground—what use is this body to me; none had a changed mind, and the evil Māra could not find his opening. Sadāprarudita's counteraction is not to go elsewhere to look for water, but 「我當自刺其身，以血灑地，令無塵土來坋大師」 tr. "I should pierce my own body and sprinkle the ground with my blood, so that no dust comes to soil the great teacher". The reasons he gives himself are three sentences: 「我何用此身！此身必當破壞。」 tr. "What use is this body to me! This body will surely break apart."—this body in the end returns to ruin, so what use is keeping it; 「我從無始生死已來數數喪身，未曾為法」 tr. "from beginningless birth and death until now I have lost my body again and again, and never once for the Dharma"—since beginningless time he has lost his body countless times, yet not once was it lost for the sake of the Dharma. So with a sharp knife he pierced himself and drew blood to sprinkle the ground. The result is: Sadāprarudita and the elder's daughter together with the five hundred attendant maidens 「皆無異心，惡魔亦不能得便」 tr. "none of them had a changed mind, and the evil Māra could not find his opening". What Māra wanted was a single thought of a changed mind; here, though it is plainly the most painful moment, it is precisely the moment when a changed mind has the least gap by which to enter—because he is not enduring, he is giving. Whether Māra finds his opening or does not find it hangs entirely on this.

15. Śakra's praise—the power of vigour vast, firm and hard to shake; the buddhas of the past too with a deep mind loved, cherished, and valued the Dharma. Śakra Devānām Indra, seeing this, has the thought: 「未曾有也！」 tr. "It is unprecedented!" He marvels at his loving the Dharma to the point of piercing himself with a knife and drawing blood to sprinkle the ground, and that 「薩陀波崙及眾女人心不動轉，惡魔波旬不能壞其善根」 tr. "the minds of Sadāprarudita and the women do not move or turn, and the evil Māra Pāpīyas cannot destroy their roots of goodness"; his mind is firm, he arouses the great adornment, does not spare body or life, and with a deep mind wishes to seek awakening, and will deliver all beings from the suffering of immeasurable births and deaths. Then he speaks his praise aloud: 「汝精進力大，堅固難動，不可思議！」 tr. "The power of your vigour is vast, firm and hard to shake, inconceivable!" And he praises again: 「汝愛法、求法，最為無上！」 tr. "Your love of the Dharma and your seeking of the Dharma are most unsurpassed!" At the end it returns still to the ancient precedent: the buddhas of the past were also thus, 「以深心愛法、惜法、重法，集諸功德」 tr. "with a deep mind they loved the Dharma, cherished the Dharma, and valued the Dharma, and accumulated all kinds of merits", and obtained anuttarā samyaksaṃbodhi. Śakra praises twice: the first praise is of his relinquishing, this praise is of his patience, and both times it closes with 「過去諸佛亦如是」 tr. "the buddhas of the past were also thus"—this tells the reader that what is seen before the eyes is not some strange man of ascetic practice, but a road walked by all the buddhas together.

16. Three thousand dan of heavenly flowers; Dharmodgata comes out of concentration and takes the seat; seeing the teacher, his mind is pure, delighted and glad, as on entering the third dhyāna. The blood sprinkled on the ground, Sadāprarudita thinks again: 「當於何處得好名華莊嚴此地？」 tr. "Where shall I obtain fine flowers of renown to adorn this ground?"—the ground already clean, he still wishes to adorn it with flowers; and he has already thought ahead to scattering flowers as an offering when the Dharma is taught. Śakra Devānām Indra knew what he was thinking, and 「即以三千石天曼陀羅華與薩陀波崙」 tr. "at once gave Sadāprarudita three thousand dan of heavenly māndārava flowers". After receiving the flowers Sadāprarudita makes an extremely fine gesture: 「以半散地，留半待曇無竭菩薩摩訶薩坐法座上說法時當供養」 tr. "he scattered half of them on the ground, and kept half to make offerings with at the time when the bodhisattva-mahāsattva Dharmodgata would sit on the Dharma seat to teach the Dharma"—one half used for the present, one half kept for when the Dharma is about to be taught. Here the causes and conditions are complete; Dharmodgata, 「過七歲已，從諸三昧起」 tr. "after seven years had passed, rose from the samādhis", and for the sake of teaching prajñāpāramitā, 「與無量百千萬眾恭敬圍遶，往法座上坐」 tr. "reverently surrounded by an immeasurable assembly of hundreds of thousands of myriads, went to the Dharma seat and sat down". And when Sadāprarudita saw the teacher, 「心淨悅樂，譬如比丘入第三禪」 tr. "his mind was pure, delighted and glad, like a bhikṣu entering the third dhyāna". Sūtra ① closes with this one sentence; its wonder lies in not saying that he was wild with joy, but saying that he was as one entering the third dhyāna—the third dhyāna is the ground where one parts from joy and abides in happiness, with happiness pervading the whole body, and this happiness is neither restless nor elated. Seven years of standing and a body's blood are exchanged not for excitement, but for purity. The sūtra segment stops here; the reasons why, the treatise-author explains one by one in what follows.

Do Not Misread

Do not read 「無來無去」 tr. "neither coming nor going" as meaning that the Buddha does not exist. When Dharmodgata says 「離是諸法更無佛」 tr. "apart from these dharmas there is no further Buddha", he negates ‘seeking a separate Buddha outside dharmas’; he is not saying that there is no Buddha to be sought. He himself says right after, 「諸佛身亦如是，從本業因緣果報生」 tr. "the bodies of the buddhas are also thus: they are born from the causes and conditions and the retribution of their original deeds"—the Buddha's body does exist; only its existence is an existence formed by causes and conditions, not a substance moved over from some place and moved on to some place. What is refuted is the mark of coming and going, not the existence of the Buddha.

Do not mix the first three similes and the last two into one class. The three similes of the mirage, the illusion, and the dream speak of ‘seen yet not real’; what they refute is clinging. The two similes of the ocean's jewels and the konghou speak of ‘existing yet having no place it comes from’; what they guard against is annihilation. If the simile of the ocean's jewels too is read as ‘the jewels are false’, it goes against what the sūtra text plainly says, 「此寶亦不無因緣而生」 tr. "nor are these jewels produced without causes and conditions"; if the mirage simile too is read as ‘within the mirage there is in fact other, true water’, it goes against the answer 「焰中尚無水」 tr. "in a mirage there is not even water". The five similes each have their place and may not be swapped for one another.

Do not read 「諸佛不可以色身見」 tr. "the buddhas cannot be seen by the form body" as meaning that there is no need to venerate the form body. Dharmodgata, who speaks these words, right after accepts Sadāprarudita's flowers and accepts the five hundred carriages and the five hundred women, while Sadāprarudita, having said 「以身屬師」 tr. "I give this body over to the teacher", further 「經行住立」 tr. "walked to and fro and stood" for seven years. The sūtra text never slights the mark before the eyes because the Dharma body is signless; quite the contrary, the whole narrative exhausts reverence within marks. That he cannot be seen by the form body says that one may not take the form body as the ultimate of the Buddha; it does not say that the form body may be slighted.

Do not read the seven years of walking and standing as taking suffering to be the path. The sūtra text records his mental conduct as 「無欲、恚、惱，心不著味」 tr. "without lust, anger, or harming, his mind not craving flavours", and records what he thought as 「何時當從三昧起，出而說法」 tr. "when will he rise from samādhi and come out to teach the Dharma"—the content of the seven years is being without afflictions and a single thought of seeking the Dharma; the suffering is only an accompanying form. If one turns it round, taking long standing as merit and not lying down as virtue, one has mistaken a thing that aids the path for the path itself.

Do not read piercing the body to sprinkle the ground as the sūtra text urging people to destroy the body. Sadāprarudita's piercing of his body presupposes that Māra had hidden the water and no water could be obtained, and what he sought was only to keep the dust from soiling the great teacher; the reasoning he states himself is that this body will surely break apart, and that since beginningless time he has lost his body countless times and never once for the Dharma. What the sūtra text praises is his mind of 「心不動轉」 tr. "the mind not moving or turning" and of 「不惜身命」 tr. "not sparing body or life"; what Śakra marvels at likewise lies in 「愛法、求法，最為無上」 tr. "love of the Dharma and seeking of the Dharma, most unsurpassed", not in the quantity of blood. To take this as a precedent and harm one's own body is to mistake the place that is praised.

Do not read Māra's hindrance as the strength of an outside force. All Māra can do is hide a dipper of water, and all he hopes for is that the practitioner 「生一念劣心、異心」 tr. "gives rise to a single thought of a timid and feeble mind, of a changed mind". What truly decides victory and defeat is the mind: when everyone 「皆無異心」 tr. "had no changed mind", Māra 「不能得便」 tr. "could not find his opening". If it is read as Māra's power being able to destroy roots of goodness, it contradicts Māra's thought as the sūtra text itself records it—Māra himself says very clearly that the roots of goodness not growing is because of that single thought, not because of that dipper of water.

Bearing on Practice

Where you revere, first examine the clinging to 「來去」 tr. "coming and going". The person weightiest in one's mind, the Dharma one trusts most, is the most easily given a substance that can come and go: when he comes I have something to rely on; when he goes I lose what I rely on. Take the five similes of this passage to look at yourself—if what you rely on is a mark, the mark is like a mirage, like a dream; if what you rely on is suchness, suchness from the first does not move; with no coming, why need to welcome it; with no going, why need to detain it? Reverence not diminished while the clinging of reliance gradually thins—this is the most direct use of this unit.

Use 「不獨從一事成」 tr. "not accomplished from a single matter alone" to refute the notion of a single cause. In favourable circumstances wanting to find the one who earned the credit, in adverse circumstances wanting to find the chief culprit—this is the same mind as pointing out on the konghou the place the sound comes from. Count through them item by item—body, neck, skin, strings, pegs, plectrum, hand; each one is not it, and only together is there sound. In daily affairs, when meeting a matter, try listing its conditions one by one and denying to each its power to do it alone, and the mind will of itself turn from ‘whom to blame’ to ‘from what conditions’.

Look at relinquishing and hearing together. Sadāprarudita hands on to the teacher in full what he had just received, and Śakra at once says 「作如是供養說法人，必得聞般若波羅蜜及方便力」 tr. "making offerings in this way to the one who teaches the Dharma, he will surely be able to hear prajñāpāramitā and the power of skilful means". When in seeking the Dharma you always feel you cannot take it in or remember it, you need not work only on memory; turn back and see whether there is some place where you are still holding back. Only when you relinquish to the point of holding nothing back do the ears that hear the Dharma open.

Guard the last dipper of water. A person whom seven years did not break may break on a small matter; what Māra schemes for is not a great setback, but a single thought of a timid and feeble mind, of a changed mind. When something is about to be accomplished and an obstruction suddenly arises, that is precisely where hindrance is thickest. Recognise ‘this wants me to give rise to a single thought of belittling myself’; to recognise it is to guard against it, with no need to argue with it.

Gather up long waiting with the mind that spreads the seat. Seven years of standing in the end come down to a seat spread ready—if waiting has nothing to do, it is mere enduring; if the end of the waiting is joined to something prepared for others, the waiting becomes practice. Whenever there is something you wait for, ask yourself: the seat that will be needed when the waiting ends—have I spread it first?

Check joy by the happiness of the third dhyāna. Of the joy of seeing the teacher, the sūtra text does not say wild joy but 「譬如比丘入第三禪」 tr. "like a bhikṣu entering the third dhyāna"—parting from joy and abiding in happiness, the whole body at peace. If joy in the Dharma is restless, wants to be told to others, must keep being stepped up, it is most likely still in the ground of joy; when one has truly arrived, it is instead quiet. Checking oneself by this, one can avoid mistaking excitement for accord.

Further Resonances

This unit, a single sūtra segment, sets down the headrope of the whole chapter: taking 「諸佛無所從來，去亦無所至」 tr. "the buddhas come from nowhere, and in going reach nowhere" as the general opening, teaching suchness through seven gates and returning to one suchness without discrimination, five similes refuting and establishing together—the mirage, the illusion, and the dream refute the clinging to coming and going; the ocean's jewels and the konghou guard against falling into annihilation—and at the end, with 「亦當知一切法無來去相」 tr. "you should also know that all dharmas are without the mark of coming and going", extending the Buddha's having no coming and going into the common mark of all dharmas. The doctrine finished, it then, through ten matters—Śakra offering flowers, giving the body over to the teacher, presenting the carriages to the teacher as well, accepting and giving back again, entering the palace at sunset, seven years in concentration and seven years of walking and standing, Māra hiding the water, piercing the body to sprinkle the ground, the three thousand dan of heavenly flowers, coming out of concentration and taking the seat—sets ‘knowing that there is no coming and going’ down as the place where one person walks, and ends with 「心淨悅樂，譬如比丘入第三禪」 tr. "his mind was pure, delighted and glad, like a bhikṣu entering the third dhyāna".

In the old masters' explanations of this passage, one must first know that the chapter name differs from that of this treatise. Jizang made his commentary following the chapter headings of the Larger Sūtra, and the Larger Sūtra sets up a separate chapter for this chapter of this treatise, titled Dharma-Esteeming—Dharma-Esteeming is the rendering by meaning of Dharmodgata—so at the head of the chapter Jizang first explains its name: 「若曇無竭，此云法尚，以其弘於大法而物宜欽。」 tr. "As for Dharmodgata, here it is called Dharma-Esteeming, because he spreads the great Dharma and beings ought to revere him." In his commentary he mostly calls Dharmodgata Dharma-Esteeming and Sadāprarudita Ever Weeping; only the one sentence explaining the name still gives the name Dharmodgata, and the passage of debate likewise still calls him Sadāprarudita; in reading one must first recognise this pair of names. Before this, at the end of his commentary on the chapter Ever Weeping, Jizang marked off with one sentence where this chapter comes from: 「因曇無竭言下，第六、自護求法請決疑也。」 tr. "From the words ‘because of Dharmodgata’ below: sixth, guarding oneself in seeking the Dharma and requesting the resolution of doubt."—the seeking of the Dharma finished, what remains is resolving his doubt, and this chapter joins on here.

Having entered the chapter, Jizang first judges the bones of the whole chapter: 「斷疑即是明佛來，云無來去明果，我說般若妙法明因義。」 tr. "Cutting off doubt is precisely making clear the Buddha's coming: saying there is no coming or going makes clear the fruit; ‘I teach the wondrous Dharma of prajñā’ makes clear the meaning of the cause." The passage cutting off doubt makes clear the fruit, the passage teaching prajñā makes clear the cause; this unit belongs precisely to the gate of the fruit, cutting off doubt. Within cutting off doubt he divides again: 「初中為兩：第一明來去無來去辨法身義，二明無來去去辨應身義。」 tr. "Within the first there are two: first, making clear that coming and going is without coming and going, distinguishing the meaning of the Dharma body; second, making clear going without coming and going, distinguishing the meaning of the response body."—the first half speaks of no coming and going with respect to the Dharma body, the latter half speaks of no coming and going with respect to the response body; dividing the five similes by this corresponds exactly to this unit's division, in which the three similes of the mirage, the illusion, and the dream mainly refute and the two similes of the ocean's jewels and the konghou mainly establish. His explanation of the difference between the two similes says: 「二、譬異者，初譬正明感應因緣，次譬明因因緣果。」 tr. "Second, as for the difference of the similes: the first simile directly makes clear the causes and conditions of stimulus and response; the next simile makes clear the cause, the causes and conditions, and the fruit." The simile of the ocean's jewels makes clear the conditions of stimulus and response; the konghou simile makes clear the fruit of causes and conditions; the two similes cannot stand in for each other. The sūtra sentence to which Jizang ties this is also this unit's vital sentence: 「文言諸佛不可以色見，法佛法身無來無去」 tr. "The text says: the buddhas cannot be seen by form; the Dharma body of the Dharma Buddha neither comes nor goes." As to why Dharmodgata speaks particularly of this meaning, Jizang points straight at the reason: 「為對薩陀波崙去來疑，故云無去來耳。」 tr. "It is to answer Sadāprarudita's doubt about going and coming that he says there is no going and coming." He also asks why Sadāprarudita, having already obtained the samādhis and already understood the emptiness of dharmas, alone did not understand the Buddha's having no going and coming, and answers: 「始行之人雖總相知諸法空，於佛身來能了語，是故疑也。」 tr. "Although one who has begun to practise knows by the general mark that dharmas are empty, as to the coming of the Buddha's body he can understand the words; therefore he doubts."—knowing emptiness by the general mark and getting through on the Buddha's body are two different things; this answer can well explain why this unit must press the point again and again with five similes. On the simile of the ocean's jewels, Jizang further pairs seeking the jewels with seeing the Buddha: 「又大海有寶不惜身命，一心去乃得，不爾不得。眾生一心精進乃見佛，不爾不見也。」 tr. "Further, the great ocean has jewels: one who does not spare body and life and goes with one mind then obtains them; otherwise one does not obtain them. Beings who are vigorous with one mind then see the Buddha; otherwise they do not see him."

In the narrative passage too, Jizang brings out the intent matter by matter. Śakra gives flowers and Sadāprarudita offers his body: the difference lies in inner and outer: 「次常啼以身奉法尚者，天主唯教其外施，其今行內施也。」 tr. "Next, as for Ever Weeping offering his body to Dharma-Esteeming: the lord of the gods taught him only outer giving; now he practises inner giving." The intent of Dharmodgata's accepting and then giving back lies in producing, beyond wisdom, his merit as well: 「受以還施常啼者，前為說法生其慧也，今受其施生其福也。」 tr. "As for accepting and giving back to Ever Weeping: before, he taught the Dharma to give rise to his wisdom; now he accepts his giving to give rise to his merit." For the reason of the seven years in concentration Jizang gives several explanations, one of which is precisely to refute the doubt of those who have begun to practise: 「又七年入定者，常啼及始行之人，見法尚居家受五欲，或言有染，故七年入深三昧，則顯無所著也。」 tr. "Further, as for entering concentration for seven years: Ever Weeping and those who had begun to practise, seeing Dharma-Esteeming living at home and enjoying the five desires, might say that he was defiled; so for seven years he entered deep samādhi, which shows that he clings to nothing." He also poses himself the question of how one could bear seven years of walking and standing: 「問：常啼云何能七年不坐臥耶？答：此時好世七年如今七日。」 tr. "Question: How could Ever Weeping go seven years without sitting or lying down? Answer: In that good age seven years were like seven days now." And he adds, as aids to understanding, that the people of that time had merit and good health and were protected by heavenly spirits. For why, though water was sought and not obtained, the blood could succeed, his explanation lies in Māra stopping of himself: 「魔見其決志，雖求水不得其心不異，故不更惱之。」 tr. "Māra saw his resolve: though he sought water and could not obtain it, his mind did not change; so he troubled him no further." The two phrases in Māra's thought, 「善根不增、智慧不照」 tr. "his roots of goodness will not grow, his wisdom will give no illumination", Jizang explains as the two things of belittling oneself and sorrow: 「令其於身自輕心生愛染，則善根不增，以憂愁覆心故智慧不照，如霞覆日其明不照也。」 tr. "To make him belittle himself in body and give rise in mind to defiled love: then his roots of goodness do not grow; because sorrow covers the mind, his wisdom gives no illumination, as haze covering the sun keeps its light from shining." At the end, by Dharmodgata's having set himself a time limit when he entered concentration, he explains how Sadāprarudita knew that he would come out at seven years: 「又法尚初入定時，自誓云七年方於也。」 tr. "Further, when Dharma-Esteeming first entered concentration, he himself took an oath, saying: seven years, and only then." These explanations and the answers of this treatise's treatise segment are fuller or briefer than one another; the power of choosing between them does not lie here; they are recorded for reference.

The extant text of Huiying's Commentary does not reach this point, and this chapter lacks his explanation; only in the sectional divisions within his fascicles did he once, looking ahead, name the title of the chapter Dharmodgata. In the whole text of Junzheng's commentary no discussion of this chapter has been seen.

The sūtra segment having ended, the treatise-author's explanation rises after it: Sadāprarudita, though he already knew emptiness, had not entered it deeply, so Dharmodgata taught him no coming and no going; whether the five aggregates are the Buddha or not the Buddha, whether apart from the five aggregates there is a Buddha or no Buddha, the division of the two truths, the two kinds of Buddha-body, the Dharma body and the form body, and even why the ocean's jewels are produced in a place where they are hard to obtain; then a separate explanation of the konghou simile, making clear that the sound is not in the many conditions and yet apart from the many conditions there is no sound; and also why Śakra offered flowers, why the women gave themselves over to Sadāprarudita and not to Dharmodgata, why Dharmodgata accepted and then gave back, why a great bodhisattva entered the palace after teaching the Dharma, how a weak human body could go seven years without sitting or lying down, why the blood was sprinkled on the ground and why Māra could not find his opening, and why the happiness of the third dhyāna alone was taken as the simile—wherever there is something open to doubt in this unit's narrative, the treatise-author for the most part poses a question and answers it. All these are matters of the treatise segment of Fascicle 99, and are not anticipated here.

Dharmodgata, Fascicle 99, Treatise Section: Why the Power of the Great Knowledge of Emptiness Is of No Use on Reaching the Place of the Buddha, How the Suchness of Dharmas Is Precisely the Buddha, Why the Saying That There Is a Buddha and the Saying That There Is No Buddha Are Both the Buddha-Dharma at Once, Why the Simile of the Five Fingers and the Fist Must Be Used Both Ways, Why Seeking the Buddha in Five Ways and Finding Him Unfindable Does Not Fall into Annihilation, Why Refuting the Notion of Clinging to the Buddha and Grasping a Notion of No Buddha Are Only a Hair's Breadth Apart, Why the Two Bodies, the Dharma Body and the Form Body, Must Be Divided Here, Why Not Falsely Eating Faithful Gifts Requires the Grades of Receiving Offerings to Be Listed Position by Position, Why the Two Similes of the Ocean's Jewels and the Konghou Must Each Be Explained Once More and a Simile of the Image in a Mirror Be Added, Why Jewels Are Produced Precisely Where They Are Hard to Obtain in the Great Ocean, Why the Reason for Śakra and the Flowers Must Be Asked, Why the Elder's Daughter in Giving Her Body Did Not Give It to Dharmodgata, the Greater Field of Merit, Why Dharmodgata's Accepting and Giving Back Is Called the Highest Kind of Accepting, Why Entering Concentration for Seven Years and Standing and Waiting for Seven Years Must Each Be Examined for Their Possibility, Why Piercing the Body to Draw Blood Is Not Taking Suffering as the Path, and Why the Happiness of the Third Dhyāna Alone Is Picked Out as a Simile

What Is Being Asked

The sūtra text of the previous unit is Dharmodgata disclosing directly, by the five similes of the mirage, the illusion, the dream, the ocean's jewels, and the konghou, that 「諸佛無所從來、去亦無所至」 tr. "the buddhas come from nowhere, and in going reach nowhere", followed by a long narrative passage of Sadāprarudita making offerings and seeking the Dharma. This unit is the treatise-author's explanation of that whole passage of sūtra text, and what it asks is really only two things: one lies in meaning, one lies in matters.

The one in meaning is why the four Chinese characters 「無來無去」 tr. "without coming and without going" can stand. The sūtra text only says that the Buddha is like a mirage, like a dream, and that the Dharma body is without coming and going, yet the treatise-author will not let it pass at that—he first raises the sharpest objection: if, as you say, the Buddha is empty, without coming and without going, then is the body of the Buddha formed by the coming together of these pure five aggregates—the thirty-two marks, the eighty minor marks, the ten powers, the four fearlessnesses—false? The five fingers coming together are named a fist; its name, shape, and power and function all differ from a single finger; who can say there is no fist? This objection is a real, solid objection of common sense, not a play on words. The treatise-author's way of answering is not to deny the fist, but first to set up 「二諦」 tr. "the two truths": by reason of worldly truth it is said that the Buddha teaches prajñā; by reason of the highest meaning it is said that the buddhas are empty, without coming and without going. With the two truths set up, only then does he examine and break through, one by one, with five ways of seeking—the five aggregates are not precisely the Buddha, apart from the five aggregates there is no Buddha either, the Buddha is not in the five aggregates, the five aggregates are not in the Buddha, the Buddha does not possess the five aggregates—sought in five ways he is not found, so it is said there is no Buddha; because the Buddha does not exist, there is no coming and no going. Immediately after, he at once blocks the annihilationist view that would slip out from here: the 「無佛」 tr. "no Buddha" spoken of here is to refute the notion of clinging to the Buddha, not to have people take up another notion of 「無佛」 tr. "no Buddha". When both sides, existence and non-existence, are left and one abides in the middle way, this is the real mark of all dharmas, and the real mark of all dharmas is precisely the Buddha. The skeleton of the meaning of the whole passage is set up just between this one refutation and this one blocking.

The one in matters is why that long narrative of making offerings and seeking the Dharma is not idle text. The treatise-author asks after the causes and conditions of matter after matter: why did Śakra conjure flowers and give them to him? Why did the elder's daughter not give her body to Dharmodgata, the greater field of merit, but give it to Sadāprarudita? Since Dharmodgata accepted in order to bring his dānapāramitā to accomplishment, why did he then give it back to him? Why did a great bodhisattva who teaches the Dharma have to enter the palace? Why, for the sake of the Dharma, should one not sit or lie down? The human body being weak, how could he not sit or lie down for seven years? Why did Dharmodgata's entry into concentration have to be as long as seven years? Since accomplished merit can bring about whatever one wishes, how could Māra still hide his water? If, piercing his body to draw blood, his body had died, who would come to hear the Dharma?—question by question, answer by answer, a story of seeking the Dharma that seems merely moving is restored into principles that can be examined one by one. At the end one more question is added: happiness is of four kinds; why is the happiness of the third dhyāna alone taken as a simile? Even the choice of a single simile must be asked for its reason.

So what this unit must answer is this: why the Buddha says there is no coming and no going, and why Sadāprarudita sought the Dharma in that way—these two matters are two faces of one matter: only when one sees that dharmas are without coming and without going can one let go of body and life; only when one lets go of body and life does one truly see that dharmas are without coming and without going.

Passage by Passage

1. General opening—why the power of the great knowledge of emptiness is of no use on reaching the place of the Buddha. In beginning his explanation, the treatise-author does not first explain the words and phrases of the sūtra text, but first speaks of the ground of Sadāprarudita's mind. He 「雖知諸法空無來去相」 tr. "though he knew that dharmas are empty and without the mark of coming and going", yet 「未能深入，亦不能解種種法門」 tr. "he could not yet enter deeply, nor could he understand the many gates of the Dharma"; more important is the next sentence—「於諸佛身恭敬深重故，不能觀空」 tr. "because his reverence for the bodies of the buddhas was deep and weighty, he could not contemplate emptiness". Deep and weighty reverence is good, yet it is precisely the obstruction to contemplating emptiness here. The treatise-author at once brings out a simile: 「如大海水波，其力雖大，到須彌山邊則退而無用」 tr. "as the waves of the great ocean, though their force is great, when they reach the side of Mount Sumeru retreat and are of no use"—the force of the waves cannot be called anything but great, yet meeting Sumeru they retreat; Sadāprarudita's knowledge of emptiness cannot be called anything but great, yet reaching the place of the Buddha it too is of no use. On reading the treatise up to here one should first take in one thing: what obstructs is not necessarily an evil dharma; a measure of deep and weighty reverence can also become the place where the contemplation of emptiness gains no strength. That Dharmodgata must here say 「諸佛無所從來、去亦無所至」 tr. "the buddhas come from nowhere, and in going reach nowhere" is said precisely facing this place.

2. The suchness of dharmas has the mark of not moving—what is the suchness of dharmas. The treatise-author first takes up the causes and conditions that Dharmodgata himself stated: 「諸法如不動相，諸法如即是佛。」 tr. "The suchness of dharmas has the mark of not moving; the suchness of dharmas is precisely the Buddha." He at once poses a question himself: what is the suchness of dharmas? The answer is extremely brief—「諸法實相，所謂性空、無所得、空等諸法門。」 tr. "The real mark of all dharmas, namely the many gates of the Dharma such as emptiness of nature, nothing to be attained, emptiness, and the like." This question must not be looked on as a small question. The character 「如」 tr. "suchness" is used everywhere in the sūtras; if its content is not first examined and settled, the sentence below, 「諸法如即是佛」 tr. "the suchness of dharmas is precisely the Buddha", becomes explaining an abstruse word with an abstruse word. The treatise-author sets 「如」 tr. "suchness" down directly upon the many gates of the Dharma such as emptiness of nature, nothing to be attained, emptiness, and the like, and does not let people seek, outside the gates of the Dharma, a separate 「如」 tr. "suchness".

3. The two truths—why the saying that there is a Buddha and the saying that there is no Buddha are both the Buddha-dharma at once. This question is the weightiest objection of the whole passage. The objector says: prajñā is the foremost dharma among the six perfections; without a Buddha there is no one to teach prajñā; and the form dharmas and formless dharmas—the thirty-two marks, the eighty minor marks, the ten powers, the four fearlessnesses, and the like—these pure five aggregates coming together are named the Buddha; just as the five fingers coming together are named a fist, 「名字既異，形亦異，力用亦異，不得言無拳」 tr. "since the name is different, the shape is different too, and the power and function are different too, one cannot say there is no fist", and from this one knows that there is a Buddha. The treatise-author answers decisively: 「不然！佛法中有二諦：世諦、第一義諦。」 tr. "It is not so! In the Buddha-dharma there are two truths: worldly truth and the truth of the highest meaning." By reason of worldly truth it is said 「佛說般若波羅蜜」 tr. "the Buddha teaches prajñāpāramitā"; by reason of the highest meaning it is said 「諸佛空，無來無去」 tr. "the buddhas are empty, without coming and without going". Once the two truths are set up, the two sayings no longer obstruct each other—the one who says there is a Buddha is not false, the one who says there is no Buddha is not annihilationist. Next, he refutes the clinging to coming together with sūtra proof: 「五眾非佛，離五眾亦無佛，五眾不在佛中，佛不在五眾中，佛非五眾有。」 tr. "The five aggregates are not the Buddha; apart from the five aggregates there is no Buddha either; the five aggregates are not in the Buddha; the Buddha is not in the five aggregates; the Buddha does not possess the five aggregates." The reader should here remember a rule: on meeting two sayings that both come from the Buddha's mouth and seem to contradict each other, first ask to which truth each belongs; do not hurry to judge which one is of definitive meaning.

4. The five aggregates are not precisely the Buddha—the objector twice retreats and the treatise-author refutes step by step. The treatise-author first gives the reason why they are not precisely the Buddha: 「五眾是五、佛是一，一不作五、五不作一」 tr. "the five aggregates are five, the Buddha is one; the one does not make the five, the five do not make the one"; again, because the five aggregates have no self-nature they are false, deceptive, and not real, while the Buddha himself said: 「一切無誑法中，我最第一。」 tr. "Among all dharmas without deception, I am the foremost." What is false and deceptive cannot be precisely the foremost of what is without deception; therefore the five aggregates are not precisely the Buddha. Further, one turn tightens it more: if the five aggregates were precisely the Buddha, then 「諸有五眾者皆應是佛」 tr. "all who have the five aggregates should be buddhas". The objector retreats a step, saying that what I said before was 「第一清淨五眾、三十二相等名為佛」 tr. "the foremost pure five aggregates, the thirty-two marks, and the rest are named the Buddha"; the treatise-author answers: the thirty-two marks and the rest are already present at the bodhisattva's position; why is he not named the Buddha at that time? The objector retreats again, saying that at that time, though he has the marks and minor signs, he does not have the omniscience of all kinds, and only if the omniscience of all kinds is within the foremost subtle form body is it named the Buddha; the treatise-author answers: 「一切種智」 tr. "the omniscience of all kinds" is said within prajñā to be the mark of quiescence, without idle discourse; obtaining this dharma is named nothing to be attained; because of nothing to be attained it is named the Buddha, and the Buddha is precisely emptiness. Twice the objector moves the definition of 「佛」 tr. "Buddha" back one notch, and the treatise-author follows him to that notch and refutes it there—what is refuted is not one particular definition, but this very matter of ‘a Buddha must be set down somewhere’.

5. The simile of the fist—apart from the five aggregates there is no Buddha either, and the simile of the fist is used both ways. Above he refuted 「即」 tr. "being precisely"; from here down he refutes 「離」 tr. "being apart from". The treatise-author says: 「離是五眾，更無餘法可說；如離五指更無拳法可說。」 tr. "Apart from these five aggregates there is no other dharma to speak of; just as, apart from the five fingers, there is no further dharma of a fist to speak of." The objector does not submit: since the shape is different and the power and function are different, if it were only fingers there should not be this difference; because the five fingers come together the dharma of a fist arises, and although this dharma of a fist is impermanent and has arising and ceasing, one simply cannot say it does not exist. The treatise-author's answer is only one sentence: 「是拳法若定有，除五指應更有拳可見，亦不須因五指。」 tr. "If this dharma of a fist definitely existed, then apart from the five fingers there should be a further fist that can be seen, and it would not need to rely on the five fingers."—the joint lies in the two Chinese characters 「定有」 tr. "definitely existing". What the objector speaks of is a fist arising from causes and conditions; what the treatise-author refutes is a definitely existing fist; what arises from causes and conditions need not be refuted, and what definitely exists falls as soon as it is refuted. Note that this simile is used both ways in this passage: earlier the objector used it to prove that there is a Buddha; here the treatise-author uses it to prove that apart from the five aggregates there is no Buddha. That one simile can be used on two sides shows precisely that a simile cannot by itself settle right and wrong; what settles right and wrong is the meaning it is paired with.

6. Seeking the Buddha in five ways he is unfindable—why this does not fall into annihilation. The treatise-author then pushes the last three gates through to the end. 「佛不在五眾中，五眾不在佛中。何以故？異不可得故」 tr. "The Buddha is not in the five aggregates, and the five aggregates are not in the Buddha. Why? Because difference is unfindable"—if the five aggregates and the Buddha were different from each other, the Buddha should be in the five aggregates, and this is not so. Again, 「佛亦不在五眾」 tr. "nor is the Buddha in the five aggregates", because apart from the five aggregates there is no Buddha, and apart from the Buddha there are no five aggregates either; it is not like a bhikṣu having three robes and a bowl, who can be said to have them; the Buddha and the five aggregates cannot be divided as different, so one cannot say that the Buddha possesses the five aggregates. Sought by five gates he is in every case unfindable, therefore it is said: 「當知無佛；佛無故無來無去」 tr. "know that there is no Buddha; because the Buddha does not exist, there is no coming and no going". Here one must see clearly the order the treatise-author sets up: only with the two truths first as the base does he dare to say 「無佛」 tr. "no Buddha"; without the two truths before it, this sentence would be an annihilationist view. When the reader meets a sheer, severe saying, he should first turn back and look for the floorboard it stands on, which is often not far back in the preceding text.

7. Refuting the notion of clinging to the Buddha, not grasping a notion of no Buddha—a hair's breadth apart. As soon as the severe saying is out, the objection follows at once: 「若無佛，即是邪見，云何菩薩發心求作佛？」 tr. "If there is no Buddha, that is wrong view; how does the bodhisattva arouse the mind to seek to become a Buddha?" The treatise-author's answer is the pivot of this passage: the 「無佛」 tr. "no Buddha" spoken of here is 「破著佛想」 tr. "to refute the notion of clinging to the Buddha", and is not meant to have people 「取無佛想」 tr. "grasp at the notion of no Buddha"—saying there is no Buddha is an act, not a conclusion. The next sentence shuts the door tight: 「若有佛尚不令取，何況取無佛邪見！」 tr. "If even where there is a Buddha one is not allowed to grasp, how much less to grasp the wrong view that there is no Buddha!" Even existence one is not allowed to grasp, how much less non-existence. Going one layer further: the Buddha has the mark of being always quiescent, without idle discourse; if someone discriminates and engages in idle discourse about this matter of permanent quiescent extinction, this person likewise falls into wrong view. So the way out is not to choose one side between the two, but in 「離是有、無二邊，處中道」 tr. "leaving these two extremes of existence and non-existence, abiding in the middle way"—abiding in the middle way is precisely the real mark of all dharmas, and 「諸法實相即是佛」 tr. "the real mark of all dharmas is precisely the Buddha"; to obtain this real mark of all dharmas is named obtaining the Buddha. Earlier he said 「無佛」 tr. "no Buddha"; here he says 「得佛」 tr. "obtaining the Buddha"; the two sayings do not obstruct each other, because what is without existence is the Buddha that is clung to, and what is obtained is the Buddha of the real mark.

8. The mark of suchness of form and the other dharmas is precisely the Buddha—one suchness, without two and without three. The treatise-author, further, sets up the meaning directly: the mark of suchness of form and the other dharmas is precisely the Buddha; the emptiness of nature of form and the other dharmas is precisely the mark of suchness; the suchness of the buddhas too is emptiness of nature, and therefore they neither come nor go. Unarisen, unceasing, the nature of dharmas, the limit of reality, emptiness, the undefiled, quiescent extinction, the nature of space are likewise without coming and without going. The last sentence draws it in very tight: 「如，乃至虛空性如、佛如，是如一，無二、無三等別異。」 tr. "Suchness, and so on up to the suchness of the nature of space and the suchness of the Buddha—this suchness is one, without the differences of two, of three, and the like." This sentence is the direct answer to the earlier objection about 「無佛」 tr. "no Buddha"—the reason the Buddha is without coming and without going is not that the Buddha does not exist, but that the suchness of the Buddha and the suchness of all dharmas are one and the same suchness; being one and the same, there is no room for coming from anywhere or going to anywhere. The treatise-author at once takes up the causes and conditions that the sūtra text itself states: 「何以故？出諸數法，無所有故。」 tr. "Why? Because it passes beyond all dharmas of number, being without anything existent." Because it passes beyond all dharmas of number, it is not in the ranks of one, two, three; not being within number, naturally coming and going cannot be spoken of.

9. Within names there is number—empty, not real, because without anything existent. The treatise-author adds a small passage of gloss: 「如等法是實，是中無有憶想分別。取相故有名字，名字中有數。」 tr. "Suchness and the other dharmas are real; within them there is no recollection, imagining, and discrimination. Because of grasping at marks there are names; within names there is number."—number is not on the dharmas; it is on names; names do not come of themselves; they come from grasping at marks. So to refute 「數」 tr. "number" one need not go to the dharmas to refute it; one need only keep watch over grasping at marks. Next he brings out another sentence: 「空、非實，無所有故。」 tr. "Because it is empty, not real, without anything existent." The two occurrences here of 「此中自說因緣」 tr. "here it itself states the causes and conditions" are both the treatise-author pointing the reader to the fact that the reason is already within, with no need to seek elsewhere: the first, 「出諸數法，無所有故」 tr. "because it passes beyond all dharmas of number, being without anything existent", is an original sentence of the sūtra text, while the second, 「空、非實」 tr. "empty, not real", is the treatise-author's restating words, and the sūtra text has no such wording. When reading a sūtra one meets sentences such as 「何以故」 tr. "why?" and 「所謂」 tr. "namely", these are often the places where it explains itself, and they are least of all to be skipped.

10. If dharmas are without anything existent, how is there seeing, hearing, suffering, and joy—the root meaning of the similes of the mirage and the dream. The objector turns from principle to the seeing, hearing, suffering, and joy before his eyes: if this dharma is without anything existent, how can there still be seeing and hearing, still all kinds of distinctions such as suffering and joy, bondage and liberation? The treatise-author's answer does not set up a new teaching, but points back to the sūtra text—Dharmodgata himself has already spoken by all kinds of similes, 「所謂如春末月見焰，乃至是人不分別諸法若來若去」 tr. "namely, as the mirage seen in the last month of spring, and so on up to: this person does not discriminate dharmas as coming or going". He at once points out the crux of the simile of the mirage: 「如焰等中雖無實事，亦能誑人自生苦樂事」 tr. "as within the mirage and the like, though there is no real thing, they can still deceive people so that matters of suffering and joy arise of themselves"—without reality yet able to deceive, deceiving yet with suffering and joy: this is precisely the answer to ‘empty, yet there is seeing, hearing, suffering, and joy’. The dream and the other dharmas are likewise. One must see clearly that the treatise-author here neither admits that suffering and joy are real, nor denies that suffering and joy are felt; what he sets up is that 「無實事」 tr. "there is no real thing" and 「能誑人」 tr. "they can deceive people" stand side by side, and this standing side by side is the whole answer.

11. The two bodies, the Dharma body and the form body—the true Buddha and the Buddha of worldly truth. The treatise-author, further, opens out two bodies: 「佛有二種身：一者、法身，二者、色身。法身是真佛，色身為世諦故有。」 tr. "The Buddha has two kinds of body: first, the Dharma body; second, the form body. The Dharma body is the true Buddha; the form body exists for the sake of worldly truth." This division comes on from the two truths before. The treatise-author goes on to speak of the mark of the Buddha's Dharma body: the real mark of all dharmas spoken of above by all kinds of causes and conditions is precisely the mark of the Dharma body, and this real mark too is without coming and without going, so it is said 「諸佛無所從來，去亦無所至」 tr. "the buddhas come from nowhere, and in going reach nowhere". One who obtains the mark of the Dharma body is named near to anuttarā samyaksaṃbodhi—why is it called only 「近」 tr. "near"? The treatise-author answers himself: because he has not yet obtained omniscience he is named near, by reason of resemblance. The one character 「近」 tr. "near" keeps its ground very firmly, and does not let people take resemblance for the ultimate. Next he defines the true disciples of the Buddha: obtaining the real mark of all dharmas is named the Buddha; because the obtaining of the real mark of all dharmas has distinctions, there are the srota-āpanna and so on up to the pratyekabuddha and the great bodhisattva, and these are all named true disciples of the Buddha. So the criterion of 「真佛弟子」 tr. "a true disciple of the Buddha" lies in obtaining the real mark, not in outward form, name, or rank.

12. Not falsely eating people's faithful gifts—why the grades of receiving offerings must be listed position by position. In explaining the sentence of the sūtra text 「不虛妄食人信施」 tr. "does not falsely eat people's faithful gifts", the treatise-author first sets up the opposite side: giving to animals, though one obtains a hundredfold retribution, 「此福有盡有量，不能度眾生生死故」 tr. "this merit is exhaustible and measurable, because it cannot carry beings across birth and death", and it is named 「虛食」 tr. "eating in vain"; when the worthies and sages receive people's faithful gifts, the retribution of this merit is, all the way to nirvāṇa, inexhaustible and immeasurable, and so it is named not falsely eating people's faithful gifts. The judgement of in vain or not in vain lies not in how thick or thin the giver's mind is, but in whether the field given to can reach through to leaving birth and death. Then he lists, position by position, the grades of those who should receive offerings—the srota-āpanna receives the offerings of all ordinary people; the sakṛdāgāmin receives the offerings of ordinary people and so on up to the srota-āpanna; the anāgāmin receives the offerings of ordinary people and of the srota-āpanna and the sakṛdāgāmin; the arhat receives the offerings of ordinary people and of the first three fruits; the pratyekabuddha receives the offerings of ordinary people and of the srota-āpanna and so on up to the arhat; the great bodhisattva near to becoming a Buddha receives the offerings of ordinary people and of the śrāvakas and pratyekabuddhas. Why must they be listed in full, grade by grade? Because if it were only said ‘the worthies and sages should receive offerings’, the reader would have no way of knowing for himself where he stands; listed position by position, both sides, receiving offerings and giving offerings, have their measure. At the end he explains the meaning of a field of merit by 「如植種良田，成收必多」 tr. "as when seed is planted in a good field, the harvest gathered is surely great", and points out plainly that morality, meditative concentration, and wisdom are precisely the field of merit—the field is not outside; it lies in the virtues one has accomplished.

13. Because he fears they will fall into annihilation, causes and conditions and similes are taught—the simile of the ocean's jewels and the simile of the skilled archer. The treatise-author points out where the next passage of sūtra text comes from: above it was said 「諸佛無來無去」 tr. "the buddhas are without coming and without going", and Sadāprarudita and the listeners thought in their minds 「諸佛尚無，諸法亦應皆滅」 tr. "if even the buddhas do not exist, dharmas too should all be extinguished"; this would be falling into annihilation, 「是故今說因緣法譬喻」 tr. "therefore now the dharma of causes and conditions is taught, together with similes". One can see that the similes from the ocean's jewels on down are not a rhetorical spreading-out, but are set up to guard against the annihilationist view. Dharmodgata disclosed to him: 「如汝所著，意謂實有者無；為度眾生故，從因緣和合則有像現。」 tr. "What you cling to, thinking that it really exists, does not exist; for the sake of delivering beings, from the coming together of causes and conditions an image appears."—what does not exist is the real existence you cling to; what exists is the image that causes and conditions make appear. He at once takes the great ocean producing jewels as a simile: the jewels do not come from the ten directions and when they perish they go nowhere, nor are they produced without causes and conditions; it is by the causes and conditions of the merit of the beings of the four continents that the ocean produces these jewels; when the kalpa is exhausted and destroyed they also have no place to go, 「譬如燈滅，焰無所至」 tr. "just as when a lamp goes out, its flame goes nowhere". The Buddha's body is likewise: the roots of goodness and merit planted since the first arousing of the mind are all causes and conditions of the marks and minor signs of the Buddha's body; the Buddha's body too is not sovereign of itself, but arises as belonging to the retribution of the original causes, conditions, and deeds; though its causes and conditions abide long, its nature is conditioned and must return to impermanence. The treatise-author further adds a simile of his own—a skilled archer shoots upward into space; though the arrow goes far it will surely fall to the ground; though the bodies of the buddhas are radiant with marks and minor signs, accomplished in merit, immeasurable in renown, and without limit in the people they deliver, they too return to wearing away. This simile is not there to refute the Buddha; it is there to refute the notion ‘the Buddha's body can last forever’; if this notion is not refuted, the earlier without coming and without going still cannot land on solid ground.

14. Why jewels are not produced where beings are near—asked in the most ordinary way and answered in the most correct way. Here the treatise-author inserts a question: if it is by the causes and conditions of beings' merit that the ocean produces jewels, why are they not produced near where beings are, but are produced instead where they are hard to obtain in the great ocean? This question seems off the topic, but in fact it is a crack in the simile—if a simile has a crack, the meaning it illustrates leaks. The treatise-author first gives the plainest answer: 「海中亦有眾生，龍、阿修羅等用是寶。」 tr. "In the ocean too there are beings; the nāgas, the asuras, and the like use these jewels." Where the jewels are, they have their own users; there is no need to take the human world as the centre of measure. In reading the treatise one should learn this move: do not hurry to paste over the crack in a simile with abstruse principle; first see whether in fact there is a ready explanation.

15. A turbid age and a good age, and the two causes and conditions of deliverance—the great ocean is the six destinies, the jewels are the buddhas. The treatise-author, further, answers at length. If the jewels were produced among humans in a turbid age, the greedy would hide them away and not let others obtain them; if in a good age, jewels are produced of themselves among humans and no one is stingy with them—「如彌勒佛時，珍寶如瓦礫」 tr. "as at the time of the Buddha Maitreya, jewels are like tiles and pebbles". Because lazy and indolent people cherish their bodies and make strained vows seeking pleasure, the jewels in the great ocean cannot be obtained; only those of great mind who do not cherish body and life and seek diligently can obtain them. At this point the treatise-author closes the simile: 「大海水喻十方六道國土，諸珍寶即是諸佛。」 tr. "The water of the great ocean is a simile for the lands of the six destinies in the ten directions; the many jewels are precisely the buddhas." The jewels are produced for the sake of all beings, yet the lazy cannot obtain them; the buddhas appear in the world for the sake of beings, yet 「懈怠、小心、貪身著我者不得度」 tr. "those who are lazy, of small mind, greedy for the body, and clinging to a self do not obtain deliverance". Why do they not obtain deliverance? The treatise-author gives the general rule: 「諸法皆從眾緣和合生，眾生有二因緣故得度：一者、內有正見，二者、外有善說法者。」 tr. "All dharmas arise from the coming together of many conditions; beings obtain deliverance because of two causes and conditions: first, right view within; second, one who teaches the Dharma well without." When the outer condition is already present but the inner cause is not complete, one still does not obtain deliverance. The most important sentence of this passage is the analogy at the end—though the jewels come forth for the sake of beings, there are still poor beings; though the buddhas come forth for the sake of beings, because beings' right view within is slight, they too do not obtain deliverance. Those for whom the outer condition is already complete and who still do not obtain deliverance lack one of the two causes and conditions.

16. The simile of the sound of the konghou—the Buddha's body arises at the edge where the many conditions come together. The treatise-author explains again the simile of the konghou in the sūtra. There is the body, the neck, the skin, the strings, the plectrum, and a person plays it with the hand; when the many conditions come together there is sound; 「如聲亦不在眾緣中，離眾緣亦無聲」 tr. "just as the sound is not within the many conditions, and apart from the many conditions there is no sound either". Applied to the Buddha: the bodies of the buddhas too are like this; they arise at the edge where the many causes and conditions—the six perfections and the power of skilful means—come together, and 「佛身不在六波羅蜜等法中，亦不離六波羅蜜等法」 tr. "the Buddha's body is not within the six perfections and the other dharmas, nor is it apart from the six perfections and the other dharmas". What this simile refutes is the same as the simile of the five fingers and the fist before, but what it discloses is different—the simile of the fist refutes a definitely existing Buddha; the simile of the sound discloses the place where the Buddha's body arises. The two Chinese characters 「邊生」 tr. "arising at the edge" are placed with great precision: not within them, not apart outside them, it arises right on the edge of the coming together. Wherever one meets the sentence pattern ‘not within such-and-such a dharma, nor apart from such-and-such a dharma’, one can read it with this simile.

17. The simile of the image in a mirror—not from no causes and conditions, nor from scant causes and conditions. The treatise-author continues: just as sound is not by one cause and condition, nor without causes and conditions, the Buddha's body too is like this: 「不從無因緣，亦不從少因緣，諸善法因緣具足故，生諸佛身」 tr. "it does not come from no causes and conditions, nor does it come from scant causes and conditions; because the causes and conditions of all wholesome dharmas are complete, the bodies of the buddhas are born". Here one more slot, 「少因緣」 tr. "scant causes and conditions", is added, which the earlier simile did not have—not only must there be causes and conditions, the causes and conditions must also be complete. Next he adds a simile of his own, the image in a mirror, to gather it up, a simile the sūtra text does not have: the image in a mirror exists because many causes and conditions come together, and does not exist because the many conditions part; the buddhas too are like this: because there are causes and conditions they appear; because the causes and conditions scatter they perish. With this the three similes are read through, each with its own share of work: the ocean's jewels make clear that coming and going have no whence; the konghou makes clear not within and not apart; the image in the mirror makes clear appearing and perishing according to conditions. If the reader only remembers the four Chinese characters ‘like an illusion, like a conjuration’ without distinguishing what each of the three similes governs, he has lost in his reading the care with which the treatise-author divides the similes to explain them.

18. The sūtra text taken up again and the concluding exhortation—because all dharmas are without obstruction. The treatise-author takes up two sentences of the sūtra text again as a conclusion: 「善男子！應如是觀諸佛來去相，一切諸法相亦應如是知。」 tr. "Good man! You should contemplate the mark of the buddhas' coming and going in this way; the marks of all dharmas too should be known in this way."—the way of contemplating the Buddha is precisely the way of contemplating all dharmas; this is extending the meaning of a whole chapter to every place. Next he takes up the words of Dharmodgata to Sadāprarudita: 「善男子！汝能知諸法相不來不去，必得阿耨多羅三藐三菩提不退轉，亦必能行般若波羅蜜及方便力。何以故？一切法無障礙故。」 tr. "Good man! If you can know that the marks of dharmas neither come nor go, you will surely obtain non-retrogression from anuttarā samyaksaṃbodhi, and will surely also be able to practise prajñāpāramitā and the power of skilful means. Why? Because all dharmas are without obstruction." The last sentence is the gathering-up of the meaning of the whole passage—the reason one can be non-retrogressing and can practise prajñā and skilful means is not how much one has cultivated, but that all dharmas are from the first without obstruction. The passage on meaning ends here; from here down it turns to the passage on matters.

19. Why Śakra conjured flowers and gave them to him—because he loves the Buddha path he always makes offerings to bodhisattvas. The treatise-author raises the first question on matters: why did Śakra Devānām Indra conjure māndārava flowers and give them to Sadāprarudita? The answer is very plain: 「釋提桓因愛樂佛道故，常供養諸菩薩。」 tr. "Because Śakra Devānām Indra loves and delights in the Buddha path, he always makes offerings to the bodhisattvas." At first sight the reader will feel this question could be asked or not—gods making offerings to bodhisattvas is a common matter, so why ask? But in asking this question the treatise-author is precisely setting up a rule for reading narrative: wherever there is a matter in the sūtra, it must have its causes and conditions; if one does not ask, one reads past and forgets; only by asking does one know that every matter has its place where it lands. The ten-odd questions below are all brought out by this one.

20. A further answer, and what someone says—the intent of guiding beings, and the teaching that the flowers do not change and spoil. The treatise-author, further, answers again: Śakra Devānām Indra, wishing to take in beings and cause them to enter the Buddha path, appeared in the body of a heavenly king and gave him the flowers; because Sadāprarudita sought the Buddha path with one mind the gods came to make offerings, and beings who saw it all aroused the mind as well—so Śakra's making offerings to Sadāprarudita was for the sake of guiding beings. Below this he records a different teaching—someone says: 「釋提桓因深愛敬薩陀波崙，上品來試已，令身體平復，今復以華與之。釋提桓因力能與一切人華，以眾生無福力故，設當與者，華即變壞；薩陀波崙福德成就故，得必不變，是故與；若一切菩薩供養師時不盡與。」 tr. "Śakra Devānām Indra deeply loved and revered Sadāprarudita; in the previous chapter he came and tested him, then made his body whole again, and now again gives him flowers. Śakra Devānām Indra has the power to give flowers to all people, but because beings lack the power of merit, if he were to give them, the flowers would at once change and spoil; because Sadāprarudita's merit is accomplished, what he obtains will surely not change, and therefore he gives them; when all bodhisattvas make offerings to their teachers, he does not give to all of them." This teaching puts the weight on the merit of the receiver—the same heavenly flowers, received by one whose merit is not accomplished, at once spoil. The treatise-author records without judging, and the two teachings stand side by side: one speaks from the intent of guiding of the one who can give, the other from the merit that draws a response in the one given to. When reading the treatise and meeting a place where things are recorded side by side, it is fitting to take both meanings together; there is no need to force a division into higher and lower.

21. He should protect him and make offerings to him—the causes and conditions stated before, and the causes and conditions Śakra himself states. The treatise-author takes up the phrase 「應守護供養」 tr. "he should protect him and make offerings to him" and explains it, pointing out that the causes and conditions have already been stated before, namely that because of the cutting of flesh and drawing of blood, and his testing him thereby, they became close friends, and so he protects him. Further, he points out that here Śakra himself states the causes and conditions: 「汝因緣力故，饒益百千等眾生。」 tr. "Because of the power of your causes and conditions, hundreds of thousands of beings and more are benefited." The one is a condition from a past event, the other is words fitting the occasion; in setting the two side by side, the treatise-author wants the reader to know that the two Chinese characters 「守護」 tr. "protection" are not loose words in the sūtra: before them there is a matter, after them there are words.

22. Taking the flowers to make offerings and making an offering of his body—the elder's daughter and the others follow his example. The treatise-author relates that Sadāprarudita took the flowers and, in accordance with Śakra's intention, offered them to Dharmodgata; and he explains why he made an offering of his body—「初聞師名，後眼見聞法斷疑故」 tr. "because at first he heard the teacher's name, and later saw him with his own eyes, heard the Dharma, and severed his doubts". Hearing the name and seeing face to face with doubts severed are two degrees of depth; the thickness of the offering turns with this depth—this is the order of the mind's practice that the treatise-author points out for the reader. The elder's daughter and the others also followed Sadāprarudita's example and gave their bodies to Sadāprarudita—one sentence that brings out where the three questions below come from.

23. Why the women did not make an offering of their bodies to Dharmodgata—the field of merit was greater, yet they did not go to it. The treatise-author asks: Sadāprarudita made an offering of his body to Dharmodgata, and Dharmodgata is the greater field of merit; why did the women not make an offering of their bodies to Dharmodgata, but gave them to Sadāprarudita? The answer has two meanings: 「女人智短著多故，不用捨本師而供養他」 tr. "because women's wisdom is short and their clinging is great, they should not abandon their own teacher to make offerings to another"; and, because a woman's body is sinful and impure, 「心雖清白，為外有譏謗故」 tr. "though their minds are pure and clean, because outwardly there would be slander and reproach". The first meaning speaks from teacher and disciple—having received the Dharma from this person, it is not fitting to abandon one's own teacher and run to a greater field elsewhere; the second meaning speaks from the reproach of the world—the ground of the mind is pure and clean, yet outward appearance must still avoid suspicion. In reading the treatise one should keep watch over the four Chinese characters 「心雖清白」 tr. "though their minds are pure and clean": the treatise-author does not say the women had any fault; what is avoided is the mouths of others, not their own minds.

24. Why the elder's daughter, already belonging to Sadāprarudita, gave her body again—because of a mind that is its own master. The treatise-author asks again: since she had already left her parents and belonged to Sadāprarudita, why does she now give her body again? The answer: when she first left her parents, it was to go with Sadāprarudita to Dharmodgata and make offerings for the sake of the Dharma; it was not that she had herself given her body, nor had her parents given them to Sadāprarudita; now, seeing Sadāprarudita ask about the most profound meaning, Dharmodgata explain it for him, and Śakra Devānām Indra joyfully make offerings, they gave rise to a joyful mind and made an offering of their bodies, 「以自在心故」 tr. "because of a mind that was its own master". This answer divides very finely: before, it was going along; now, it is giving by oneself; before, there was no giving of one's own accord; now, there is a mind that is its own master. Only by being able to distinguish such layers in reading narrative will one not read two similar actions in two places as repetition.

25. If a woman's body has nowhere it belongs, it receives a bad name—worldly propriety and the vowing mind side by side. The treatise-author adds a layer of worldly principle: 「一切女身無所繫屬，則受惡名。女人之禮，幼則從父母，少則從夫，老則從子。」 tr. "Every woman's body, if it has nowhere it belongs, receives a bad name. By the propriety of women, when young they follow their parents, when grown they follow their husbands, when old they follow their sons." Though the women had come together along the road, they could not long be without anywhere they belonged, so they gave their bodies themselves. And the vow they made was: 「如師所得，我等亦當得之。」 tr. "As the teacher has obtained it, we too shall obtain it."—though the body has somewhere it belongs, the vow is not lessened because of that belonging. The treatise-author places worldly propriety and the world-transcending vowing mind side by side without their obstructing each other; this is the key to reading this passage: giving the body here is not submission; it is setting a place for seeking the Dharma within worldly propriety.

26. The question of a sincere mind and the intent of giving everything—wishing to remove the ordinary doubt of worldly people and to show that he himself has no attachment. Sadāprarudita wished to offer these women to Dharmodgata, and, concerned that they might feel resentment, first asked: 「汝等實以誠心供養，我當受汝。」 tr. "If you truly make this offering with a sincere mind, I shall accept you." The treatise-author at once glosses the two Chinese characters 「誠心」 tr. "sincere mind": 「誠心者，不自用心，隨所處分，如無心物。」 tr. "A sincere mind is not acting on one's own decision, but following as one is disposed of, like a thing without a mind." The women answered: 「實以誠心。」 tr. "Truly with a sincere mind." Thereupon he presented the elder's daughter together with the attendant maidens and the five hundred carriages to Dharmodgata. The treatise-author points out two layers of intent in this: the first is wishing to remove the ordinary doubt of worldly people—who would think he had deceived the elder and brought the women along—so he gave all of them away, showing that he himself had no attachment; the second is the further meaning—Sadāprarudita, as with what he heard from the voice in the sky, understood and rejoiced, and offered up all the inner and outer things that worldly people value, 「欲深入檀波羅蜜門故」 tr. "because he wished to enter deeply into the gate of dānapāramitā". The first intent turns outward to clear suspicion, the second turns inward to accomplish practice; only by looking at the two intents together does one know that this giving was not a momentary emotion.

27. Śakra praises him as excellent—taking the buddhas of the past as a comparison. The treatise-author explains Śakra's praise: Śakra knew that Sadāprarudita's craving, greed, and other afflictions were not yet exhausted, yet he could give away all his inner and outer things without anything left over, and so he praised him, saying: 「善哉！」 tr. "Excellent!" And he took the buddhas of the past as a comparison—because they did things hard to do they obtained a retribution hard to obtain, namely 「阿耨多羅三藐三菩提」 tr. "anuttarā samyaksaṃbodhi". Note that the treatise-author first points out 「愛貪等煩惱未盡」 tr. "craving, greed, and the other afflictions were not yet exhausted"—precisely because they were not exhausted and yet he could give away everything, this giving counts as hard to practise. If one whose afflictions were already exhausted gave it away, that would be nothing remarkable. That the praise holds depends on the practitioner's afflictions not being exhausted while he can give away everything, not on the outward surface of the act.

28. Why Dharmodgata accepted and gave back—this is called the highest kind of accepting. The treatise-author asks: if Dharmodgata accepted in order to make Sadāprarudita's roots of goodness complete—roots of goodness meaning the completion of dānapāramitā—why then did he give them back to him? The answer has four meanings: first, Dharmodgata, by great wisdom and skilful means, 「令薩陀波崙大得福德而無所失，是謂上受」 tr. "caused Sadāprarudita to obtain great merit while losing nothing; this is called the highest kind of accepting"; second, Sadāprarudita gave with a mind of utmost sincerity, severed all greed and clinging, and did not expect to get anything back, and his merit was already complete; third, Dharmodgata considered that he had come from far away and that his mind was not stained or attached to the five desires, 「舊人供養為善」 tr. "it is better for the people he already has to make offerings to him", and so he gave them back; fourth, he also heard that the women had earlier presented their bodies to Sadāprarudita, 「人非財物」 tr. "people are not goods and property", and he wished to fulfil their original intention. At the end he adds one more meaning: these women had been Sadāprarudita's disciples life after life. The two Chinese characters 「上受」 tr. "the highest kind of accepting" are the eye of this passage—accepting and giving back, the giver's merit is not lessened and the thing given is not lost; only this is the highest way of receiving offerings.

29. Why a great bodhisattva entered the palace—because of following the ways of worldly people. The treatise-author asks: the great bodhisattvas should not become utterly weary in teaching the Dharma; why did he enter the palace? The answer is 「隨世人法故」 tr. "because of following the ways of worldly people", which he at once explains at length: the beings in the City of Many Fragrances do not always seek the path; at times they weary and rest and enjoy the pleasures of the five desires; the gods, because they always enjoy the five desires, obstruct and neglect the seeking of the path; there are also lands where bodhisattvas dwell in which they always apply vigour diligently and do not enjoy the five desires. But the original vow of the beings of the City of Many Fragrances was to enjoy both together, and Dharmodgata, following their aspiration and wishing to guide them, was therefore born in that land. So when the beings were weary of hearing the Dharma he rose and entered the palace. Again, for those who have not yet obtained the path, though the Dharma is subtle, hearing it constantly also gives rise to weariness, and in the assembly there were precisely such people. Again, Dharmodgata enjoyed wealth and pleasure there, 「人法故，日沒應息」 tr. "because of the ways of people, when the sun has set one should rest". This answer does not plead on the bodhisattva's behalf that ‘in fact he was not weary’; it says he was following along. If the reader reads all bodhisattvas as people who have no need to follow along with worldly ways, this passage cannot be read through.

30. Why for the sake of the Dharma one should not sit or lie down—there is no such definite rule. Sadāprarudita thought: 「我為法來，不應坐臥。」 tr. "I have come for the sake of the Dharma; I should not sit or lie down." The treatise-author makes a point of asking: for the sake of the Dharma, why should one therefore not sit or lie down? The first sentence of the answer is very important—「無是定法」 tr. "there is no such definite rule". There is no rule laying down that one who is for the Dharma may not sit or lie down; it is that this person, because of great desire, great vigour, and reverence for the Dharma, himself had this thought: 「我若坐臥，則是懶惰。我初求法時，身尚不惜，何況疲惓！」 tr. "If I sit or lie down, that is laziness. When I first sought the Dharma I did not spare even my body; how much less weariness!" Next he gives the reason: great desire and great vigour are contrary to sitting and lying down; again, in sitting and lying one does not apply effort diligently, while in walking and standing one applies effort diligently and is vigorous, so he always abode in the two deportments of walking and standing to wait for the teacher to come out. The treatise-author first refutes 「定法」 tr. "a definite rule" and then speaks of 「此人」 tr. "this person", separating an individual's practice from a universal rule—not sitting or lying down is where this person's strength of mind reached, not a regulation that can be handed to everyone.

31. Did he know beforehand that the teacher would not come out for seven years—when he first came he did not know. The treatise-author asks: did Sadāprarudita know beforehand whether the teacher would not come out for seven years? The answer: 「初來不知故。」 tr. "Because when he first came he did not know." He adds three more meanings: Dharmodgata too always did not come out for seven years, and because of a cause and condition he himself took an oath to enter concentration for seven years, while Sadāprarudita himself took an oath, 「師未出，終不坐臥」 tr. "until the teacher comes out, I shall never sit or lie down"—what he swore was a condition, not a fixed term, so knowing or not knowing does not obstruct his oath; again, a great person does not go against himself even in worldly matters, how much less for the Dharma of the path; again, when he first sought the Dharma he did not cherish even his body; now, standing for seven years, what difficulty is that? The reason this question must be asked is that if he had known beforehand of the seven years and taken this oath, his mind would differ in depth from one who took the oath without knowing; the treatise-author's answer 「初來不知」 tr. "when he first came he did not know" brings out precisely the weight of this oath.

32. The human body being weak, how could he not sit or lie down for seven years—four meanings brought out together. The treatise-author asks about the bodily possibility. The answer has four parts: first, 「是時人壽命長，雖復七歲，如今七日」 tr. "at that time people's lifespans were long; though it was seven years, it was like seven days now"; second, the power of merit of people's bodies in a good age is great, so though he stood for seven years he did not find it hard, and he cites the bhikṣu Diligent as proof—he left home only at sixty and himself made a vow: 「我脇不著席，要盡得聲聞所應得事，乃至得六神通阿羅漢。」 tr. "My side shall not touch the mat until I have obtained all that a śrāvaka should obtain, up to obtaining arhatship with the six supernormal powers." Later he composed the upadeśa on the four Āgamas, which flourishes greatly in the world today; this person was like this even in an evil age, how much more Sadāprarudita, born in a good age. Third, though his bodily strength was weak, because his mind was strong he could accomplish his task. Fourth, further—one who seeks the Buddha path with one mind is kept in mind by the buddhas of the ten directions, and the great bodhisattvas and the gods who seek the Buddha path increase his strength, surround and guard him, so though he stood for seven years he did not become utterly weary. The four meanings go from outer conditions to the inner mind and then to being protected and kept in mind, supplementing one another layer by layer; the treatise-author will not dismiss a real difficulty with only one meaning, and this too is something to learn from in reading the treatise.

33. Why Dharmodgata entered concentration for seven years—to remove the doubts of the assembly and give rise to a mind of honour and reverence. The treatise-author asks: when Dharmodgata entered samādhi, why did it go as far as seven years? First he points to the earlier answer: people of a good age have long lifespans, so even seven years is not long. Next he brings out the main meaning: Dharmodgata's palaces, court maidens, and subtle five desires resembled those of the heavens; Sadāprarudita and the others, who had newly aroused the mind and whose minds were not yet soft and pliant, doubted that, 「雖說空法、讚歎離欲」 tr. "though he teaches the dharma of emptiness and praises leaving desire", his mind could not yet let go. So the samādhi of seven years was to remove the doubts of the assembly and give rise to a mind of honour and reverence—hearing that he had entered concentration for seven years, they would know that 「心、口相應能說、能行」 tr. "mind and mouth are in accord: he can teach and he can practise", and so they would believe and accept his words and be easily delivered. At the end he takes an abscess as a simile: 「譬如癰瘡未熟，醫則不破，但以藥塗令熟，熟則易破。」 tr. "Just as when an abscess is not yet ripe the physician does not open it, but only applies medicine to ripen it; when ripe it is easily opened." What this simile compares is timing—a concentration of seven years was not concentration for the sake of concentration, but waiting until beings' doubts had ripened to the time when they could be opened. The reader may note here: in teaching and transforming, waiting too is a kind of action.

34. Teaching the Dharma by mouth and showing the Dharma by the body—now it is for the sake of showing the Dharma by the body. The treatise-author, further, brings out two more meanings: first, 「欲受心生實樂故，入無量三昧」 tr. "because he wished to experience the real joy that arises in the mind, he entered immeasurable samādhis"; second, teaching the Dharma is of two kinds—「一者、口說法，二者、身現法」 tr. "first, teaching the Dharma by mouth; second, showing the Dharma by the body"—and now, wishing to show the Dharma by the body, he entered immeasurable samādhis, causing beings to know how to gather the mind and enter wisdom and obtain knowledge as it really is. At the end he points to two earlier explanations: the bodhisattva's samādhis are as explained in the meaning of bodhisattva, and practising prajñā and the power of skilful means is as explained in the chapter "Skilful Means". The three Chinese characters 「身現法」 tr. "showing the Dharma by the body" are the sentence most worth carrying away from this passage: the body that did not rise for seven years is itself a passage of Dharma.

35. During the seven years the three evil kinds of initial and sustained thought did not arise—subdued but not yet broken. The treatise-author relates that during the seven years in Sadāprarudita 「三惡覺觀不生，不味於味」 tr. "the three evil kinds of initial and sustained thought did not arise, and he did not crave the flavour of flavours", and adds a very important sentence of judgement: 「是人雖未破煩惱，而集諸善法故，制諸煩惱，不令得生」 tr. "though this person had not yet broken the afflictions, because he had accumulated all kinds of wholesome dharmas, he subdued the afflictions and did not let them arise"—it is subduing, not breaking. What he recollected was only one thing: 「曇無竭何時當出？我當從聞般若。」 tr. "When will Dharmodgata come out? I shall hear prajñā from him." The treatise-author will neither raise him up into one who has already severed the afflictions, nor lessen the reality of his vigour because he has not yet severed them; only when the position he is at is stated precisely can the reader learn it into his own hand—subduing the afflictions at the position of an ordinary person relies on the accumulation of wholesome dharmas and the focus of a single thought, not on first severing them all.

36. How did he know that after seven years Dharmodgata would come out—two different teachings recorded side by side. After the seven years had passed, Sadāprarudita thought: 「我當為曇無竭敷坐處，掃灑莊嚴。」 tr. "I shall spread a seat for Dharmodgata, and sweep, sprinkle, and adorn the place." The treatise-author asks: how did he know that once seven years had passed Dharmodgata would come out of concentration? He records two teachings: 「有人言：先曾七歲展轉聞知。」 tr. "Someone says: he knew it by hearing, passed on from one to another, of that earlier occasion of seven years." 「有人言：曇無竭初入三昧時，自說七歲為限。」 tr. "Someone says: when Dharmodgata first entered samādhi, he himself said that seven years was the limit." The latter teaching also cites an example as proof—as Śākyamuni Buddha told Ānanda: 「我欲一月、二月入禪定。」 tr. "I wish to enter dhyāna for one month, two months." Ānanda told it to the fourfold assembly. Of the two teachings, one speaks from what was passed on by hearing, the other from announcing beforehand, and the treatise-author records them side by side without judging. The matter cited of Śākyamuni telling Ānanda takes an established usage of the Buddha's time to prove that the latter teaching is possible; it does not judge the former teaching to be wrong.

37. Adorning the place of the teaching of the Dharma—the two kinds of adornment of those who have left home and those at home. The treatise-author explains why he adorned the place of the Dharma: because Sadāprarudita deeply loved the Buddha-dharma and revered Dharmodgata, he made offerings and adorned the place of the teaching of the Dharma. He at once distinguishes two kinds: 「出家菩薩但莊嚴其心，詣師受法；在家菩薩則莊嚴說法處，華香供養。」 tr. "The bodhisattva who has left home only adorns his mind and goes to the teacher to receive the Dharma; the householder bodhisattva adorns the place of the teaching of the Dharma and makes offerings with flowers and incense." Further, he brings out another meaning: making this adornment was wishing to make Dharmodgata know the mark of his love of the Dharma and desire for the Dharma and his deep-minded faith and delight, and so he displayed this matter; and so, together with the five hundred women and the others, he joined his strength in sweeping and sprinkling, and himself spread the seat with gold, silver, and jewels. The division of the two kinds of adornment must not be read as higher and lower—the reason the one who has left home only adorns his mind is that his body has no outer matters left to manage; the reason the householder adorns the place is precisely that he makes offerings with what he has. Each according to his share, nothing more.

38. Spreading the seat with the upper garments they wore; seeking water while Māra hid it. The treatise-author relates: though Sadāprarudita and the others had fine and beautiful cushions and mattresses of their own, 「為愛法情至故」 tr. "because their love of the Dharma had reached its utmost", they spread the seat with the upper garments they were wearing—what is valued lies not in whether the thing is fine or poor, but in whether the feeling has reached its utmost. Next he relates that he sought water to sprinkle the ground, and because Māra hid it he could not find it, and he takes up the causes and conditions the sūtra text itself states: what Māra reckoned in his mind was to make him seek water without finding it so that his mind would become timid and feeble and his aspiration unfulfilled, and also to make him look down on his own body—thinking that because his merit is thin he sought water for the sake of offering to the Dharma and could not find it—so that, belittling himself and sorrowful, sorrow would cover his mind. One must see clearly that what Māra aims at is not to block one matter, but to plant in his mind a thought of 「我薄福德」 tr. "my merit is thin". Of the dharmas that obstruct the path, the most dangerous often lie not in circumstances, but in the self-interpretation that circumstances call up.

39. When sorrow covers the mind, merit and wisdom do not shine—Māra knew his mind was great and so obstructed it only a little. The treatise-author takes up the phrase 「福德不增、智慧不照不明」 tr. "his merit does not grow; his wisdom does not shine and is not bright" and explains it: because all kinds of sorrow and affliction cover the mind, the many kinds of merit and wisdom cannot shine and be bright; 「譬如日障蔽故，其照不明」 tr. "just as when the sun is blocked and covered, its light is not bright". The sun is never lessened; what is lessened is the shining. Next he points out Māra's sense of measure: 「魔知其心大，不可沮壞，但小沮壞，令其稽留。」 tr. "Māra knew that his mind was great and could not be destroyed; he only obstructed it a little, causing him to be held up and delayed." Māra too knows how far his power reaches—a great mind cannot be destroyed; all he can do is hold up and delay. For the practitioner this sentence is a very great comfort and also a very precise warning: a truly great mind will not be destroyed, but it really can be dragged out.

40. Piercing his body to draw blood and sprinkling the ground—why he did not spare body and life. The treatise-author relates that Sadāprarudita pierced his own body and sprinkled the ground with the blood that came out to settle the dust, and explains his mind: 「人血肉雖臭，以其至心求水不得，意不分別香臭好惡」 tr. "though human blood and flesh are foul, because he sought water with his whole mind and could not obtain it, his mind did not discriminate fragrant or foul, fine or vile"; wishing to settle the dust, he did not spare body or life. Another meaning: because he loved prajñāpāramitā with a deep mind, there was nothing he cherished. The most important thing here is the sentence 「意不分別香臭好惡」 tr. "his mind did not discriminate fragrant or foul, fine or vile"—the reason he could use blood in place of water is not that he did not know blood is foul, but that in that moment he raised no discrimination about fragrant and foul. If one reads this passage as making oneself suffer to seek merit, it is the opposite of the treatise-author's meaning.

41. The blood changing into fragrant water and whatever he wished being brought about—two meanings recorded side by side. The treatise-author records one teaching—someone says: 「多有諸天龍、鬼神等常隨逐薩陀波崙，佐助守護，是故所出之血變為香水。如羼提仙人被割截時，血化為乳。」 tr. "Many gods, nāgas, ghosts and spirits, and the like constantly followed Sadāprarudita, assisting and protecting him; therefore the blood that came out changed into fragrant water. Just as when the sage Kṣānti was cut and severed, his blood transformed into milk." This speaks from outer protection. He also brings out a separate meaning: 「又以無量福德成就故，隨願即成」 tr. "Again, because immeasurable merit was accomplished, whatever he wished was at once brought about"—this speaks from his own merit. One outer, one inner, recorded side by side without judging. The cited matter of the sage Kṣānti's blood transforming into milk takes a matter of the same kind as proof; what it proves is that ‘there are matters of this kind’, not a judgement that this matter must be as that one was.

42. If merit was accomplished, how could Māra hide the water—one who has newly aroused the mind can bring about small wishes. The treatise-author asks himself: if merit is accomplished and whatever one wishes is obtained, Māra should not be able to hide his water. The answer: 「是菩薩新發意能成小願，未能却魔。」 tr. "This bodhisattva had newly aroused the mind; he could bring about small wishes, but could not yet drive back Māra." One sentence divides two kinds of ability—being able to bring about wishes and being able to drive back Māra are not one matter. Only in the previous passage did he say 「隨願即成」 tr. "whatever he wished was at once brought about", and here he raises an objection against it himself and limits it himself; one can see how careful the treatise-author is in setting up meaning: whenever he speaks of a power, he at once examines the limit of how far it reaches, and does not let the reader push a sentence of praise into a general rule.

43. He himself states the causes and conditions of drawing blood—again and again he lost his body, never once for the Dharma. The treatise-author points out that in the sūtra Sadāprarudita himself states the causes and conditions of drawing blood: 「我從無始生死已來數數喪身，未曾為法。」 tr. "From beginningless birth and death until now I have lost my body again and again, and never once for the Dharma." This sentence is the heart-marrow of the whole passage on matters—losing the body is not hard; losing the body for the Dharma is hard. The questions asked before, ‘why not sit or lie down’ and ‘why pierce the body’, only at this sentence obtain their final reason: it is not that he suddenly became brave and fierce, but that he saw clearly the past of countless times he had lost his body in vain.

44. If his body had died, who would then hear the Dharma—pointing to the earlier answer and bringing out two more meanings. The treatise-author asks: if, out of love for the Dharma, he pierced his body to draw blood and his body died, who would then hear the Dharma? First he points to the earlier answer—「是事如破骨出髓中答」 tr. "this matter is as answered in the passage on breaking the bone and drawing out the marrow"—and does not repeat it. He brings out, further, that the gods and great bodhisattvas protected him so that he did not die; and further, that the evil Māra knew his mind could not be destroyed, and 「水則還出」 tr. "the water then came out again". At the end he explains the phrase of the sūtra text 「皆無異心」 tr. "all had no changed mind", setting up the opposite case: as a person who first trains in a mind of kindness, wishing for the sake of beings and for the sake of prajñāpāramitā not to spare body and life, 「既得利刀割身，以痛自逼故，心生悔恨，是名異」 tr. "once his body is cut by a sharp knife, because he is pressed by pain, regret arises in his mind; this is called being changed". The single character 「異」 tr. "changed" has a definition here—it is not having some other second mind; it is the first mind retreating when one undergoes suffering. Only by speaking of 「異」 tr. "changed" from the opposite side does the weight of the positive 「無異心」 tr. "no changed mind" show.

45. Great power of faith and taking no account of suffering—why Māra found no opening. The treatise-author goes on to explain why he did not regret: first, because his power of faith was great and he wished to obtain the retribution of anuttarā samyaksaṃbodhi, he took no account of this suffering; second, because with a deep compassion he loved and cherished beings, though he underwent all kinds of suffering and vexation he did not find it hard, 「譬如慈母愛子，雖為子長受勤苦不淨，不以為惡」 tr. "just as a kind mother loves her child, and though for the child's sake she long undergoes toil and impure tasks, she does not find it loathsome"; third, because he saw that the real mark of all dharmas is ultimate emptiness, he knew that this body is only a false and deceptive coming together, and because he had broken through this falseness, when his body was cut and severed it did not obstruct anuttarā samyaksaṃbodhi. Next he explains 「魔不得其便」 tr. "Māra did not find his opening": 「如人有瘡則受毒」 tr. "as a person who has a sore receives poison"—if the bodhisattva has the sores of greed and sorrow, Māra finds his opening; because he drew blood to sprinkle the ground and his mind was not sorrowful, Māra did not find his opening. It reaches also the minds of the five hundred women, which were likewise—seeing him pierce his body they would by rights have been sorrowful, but because his wish was fulfilled they did not take it as sorrow. At the end he relates that Śakra, seeing this, exclaimed that such a thing had never been, and explains why it had never been: 「是人未得無生忍，諸煩惱未斷，為供養法故，不惜身命，如諸離欲人無異；割截其身，如斷草木。初心既爾，後心轉增。」 tr. "This person had not yet obtained the acceptance of non-arising, and his afflictions were not yet severed, yet for the sake of offering to the Dharma he did not spare body or life, no different from those who have left desire; he cut and severed his body as if cutting grass and trees. Since his first mind was like this, his later mind would increase still more." The three meanings go from faith, from compassion, from knowledge, in order and ever deeper; and the condition for ‘Māra finds his opening’ is put most usefully—it is not that Māra is strong, but that there was first a sore on the mind.

46. The causes and conditions of never having been that Śakra himself states, and his praise of him as excellent. The treatise-author, further, points out: as to what is called never having been, here Śakra Devānām Indra himself states the causes and conditions—「薩陀波崙愛法乃爾，以刀自刺等。」 tr. "Sadāprarudita loves the Dharma to such a degree that he pierces himself with a knife, and so on." Next he relates that after Śakra had given rise to joy in his mind, he praised him, saying: 「善哉！」 tr. "Excellent!" What he praised was 「愛法、樂法，勤心精進」 tr. "loving the Dharma, delighting in the Dharma, diligent of mind and vigorous". And he took the buddhas of the past as a comparison: 「非但汝今辛苦，過去諸佛求般若亦爾。」 tr. "It is not only you who toil now; the buddhas of the past also sought prajñā in this way." The use of this comparison lies not in commending but in steadying—letting the practitioner know that what he is doing is not a solitary case; the earlier buddhas were all so. Whenever, in a place of utmost suffering, one hears someone say ‘those before were also like this’, its power often surpasses praise.

47. Like a fire that obtains ghee—after being comforted he blazes all the more. The treatise-author relates that after Sadāprarudita had heard Śakra comfort his mind, 「如火得酥，轉更熾盛」 tr. "like a fire that obtains ghee, he blazed all the more fiercely", and had this thought: 「我既敷座灑地，當於何處得好名華莊嚴法處？」 tr. "I have spread the seat and sprinkled the ground; where shall I obtain fine flowers of renown to adorn the place of the Dharma?" A fire obtaining ghee and blazing more says that comfort does not make a person slacken but makes him go further. The reader may note the order here: first the austere practice of piercing the body and sprinkling the ground, next Śakra's comfort, and next again the thought of seeking flowers—each stage finer than the last, and the strength of mind in each stage stronger than the last.

48. When he did not see water, why did he not think of obtaining water—he knew it was done by Māra. The treatise-author asks: when at first he did not see water, why did he not have this thought—「當於何處得水灑地？」 tr. "Where shall I obtain water to sprinkle the ground?" The answer: because the places where there had been water before had all at once disappeared, Sadāprarudita 「知魔所作」 tr. "knew it was done by Māra", and so he did not seek further outside, but himself pierced the water element from his share of the four great elements to sprinkle the ground. The question is asked very finely, and the answer is very precise: the difference between seeking outside and taking from within is judged on whether one recognises the thought ‘is this done by Māra or not’. Knowing it is done by Māra, seeking outside is of no benefit; not knowing, one runs about in vain. This is one of the gates of practice most worth carrying away from this passage.

49. Though the seeds of water in the body are many, he pierced for blood alone—blood is where life resides. The treatise-author adds an explanation of why he did not take the water element from elsewhere but drew blood alone: 「身中水種雖多，血是命之所在，是故刺以灑地。」 tr. "Though the seeds of water in the body are many, blood is where life resides; therefore he pierced for it to sprinkle the ground." Among the shares of the four great elements the water element is not of one kind, and what he took had to be the thing bound up with life—what is offered to is prajñā, so what is given up cannot be something that may be had or not had. This one sentence pulls the earlier matter of piercing the body out of the reading of it as ‘austere practice’: the weight lies not in the pain but in the fact that what is given up is life.

50. The flowers were not his own—a thought arising when pressed by the force of circumstances. The treatise-author explains why the thought of seeking flowers arose: the flowers were not something he originally had of himself, and the time for Dharmodgata to come out of concentration was drawing near, 「不容遠求」 tr. "there was no time to seek far"; and the quantity needed was very great, to cover the whole ground, so the thought of wishing to obtain flowers arose. The treatise-author accounts for the force of circumstances in even such a small detail because he wants the reader to know that Śakra's giving the flowers below did not descend without cause—first there is a thought pressed by the force of circumstances, then the heavenly flowers arrive in response to the thought; the principle of stimulus and response lies here.

51. Śakra gives three thousand dan of māndārava flowers—wishing to make him give rise to a mind of rare wonder. The treatise-author relates that Śakra knew his thought and at once gave him three thousand dan of the subtlest of the heavenly flowers, named māndārava, 「足以周事」 tr. "enough to complete the matter". He also explains why Śakra did not give flowers of the human world: 「欲令發希有心故。」 tr. "Because he wished to make him give rise to a mind of rare wonder." Earlier the seeking of flowers was to adorn the place of the Dharma; here the giving of flowers adds another layer of intent—not only to accomplish his matter, but also to open his mind by means of it. The matter of offering has by this point become two-way: the person moves the gods by utmost sincerity; the gods open the person by rare wonder.

52. Receiving the flowers and dividing them into two portions—the fine ones kept to scatter, the rest covering the ground. The treatise-author relates that after Sadāprarudita received the flowers he divided them into two portions: the fine ones he kept to scatter at the time of the teaching of the Dharma, and the rest covered the ground; and he explains the custom of that country—「以華覆地，令行其上，以為供養。」 tr. "To cover the ground with flowers and let people walk on them is taken as an offering." One portion kept to wait for the time of teaching the Dharma, one portion used first in the present; the treatise-author records even this division in order to show how fine his care was—the one who adorns the place of the Dharma does not pour out all the flowers at one time, but knows which thing should be used at which time.

53. Dharmodgata, as he had agreed beforehand, rose from samādhi when the full seven years were complete. The treatise-author relates: Dharmodgata, according to his earlier appointed term, after the full seven years rose from samādhi and, reverently surrounded by immeasurable hundreds of thousands of people, went straight to the Dharma seat, 「為說般若故」 tr. "for the sake of teaching prajñā". Only here does the waiting of seven years have its response. The four Chinese characters 「如其先要」 tr. "as he had agreed beforehand" are the treatise-author's narrative words; at this point the sūtra text only says that the seven years had passed; these words correspond to the teaching recorded earlier, 「自說七歲為限」 tr. "he himself said that seven years was the limit", yet the treatise-author still records the two teachings side by side without judging.

54. Within subtle samādhi who can make him rise—setting one's own time limit, and the warning of the jianchui. The treatise-author asks: when the bodhisattvas enter subtle samādhi, who can make them rise? The answer: 「行者初入時，自作限齊，然後入定；時至，其心自在從三昧起，悲心故而生覺觀。」 tr. "When the practitioner first enters, he himself sets a time limit and only then enters concentration; when the time comes, his mind rises freely from samādhi, and because of a compassionate mind initial and sustained thought arise." Rising from concentration does not wait for an outer force; it is the time limit one set oneself on entering concentration that does its work. Next he cites a cautionary example: a bhikṣu, on entering the samādhi of the absorption of the cessation of feeling, set it for himself that he would rise on hearing the jianchui; after he had entered, the monastery caught fire, and the bhikṣus, panic-stricken, left without striking the jianchui; after twelve years had passed, when the donors brought the Saṅgha together to build the monastery, only then was the jianchui struck; he heard the sound and rose, and 「即身散而死」 tr. "at once his body scattered and he died". What this example warns against is not that concentration must not be entered, but that the condition relied upon must be one over which one is one's own master—taking a jianchui struck by others as one's time limit, when the condition is cut off, the body goes with it.

55. The great bodhisattvas whose bodies are born of the Dharma-nature—because of worldly ways there is the mark of coming out of and entering samādhi. The treatise-author, further, records a teaching: 「有人言：法性生身大菩薩，如諸佛常入三昧，無散亂麁心」 tr. "Someone says: the great bodhisattvas whose bodies are born of the Dharma-nature, like the buddhas, are always in samādhi, without a scattered and coarse mind", and because of the power of supernormal abilities they can teach the Dharma and fly about delivering beings; 「世俗法故，有出入三昧相」 tr. "because of worldly ways, there is the mark of coming out of and entering samādhi", so though he had entered subtle samādhi he could come out again, because he was drawn by the mind of great compassion, 「譬如呪術出龍」 tr. "just as a nāga is drawn out by spell-craft". Next he explains the phrases of the sūtra text: the great assembly surrounding him was his inner retinue, reverently scattering flowers, burning incense, and following him out, for the sake of teaching prajñāpāramitā; and what is called teaching prajñāpāramitā is 「因世諦名字語言，欲示眾生第一義不動相故」 tr. "relying on the names and words of worldly truth, wishing to show beings the unmoving mark of the highest meaning". At the end he relates that as soon as Sadāprarudita saw Dharmodgata he obtained a pure joy, and happiness filled his body, like a bhikṣu entering the third dhyāna, and explains why it is so: beings of many desires, though what they obtain is not pure and subtle, are still glad and happy, 「何況得見真功德莊嚴身者」 tr. "how much more one who sees a body adorned with true merit". This passage sets the marks of coming out of and entering concentration upon worldly truth, in one continuous line with the meaning of 「無來無去」 tr. "without coming and without going" of the whole chapter—even coming out and entering are marks of worldly truth, how much more coming and going.

56. Long thirsty longing and gladness—ever since hearing his name from the Buddha in the sky. The treatise-author traces back where Sadāprarudita's gladness came from: from the time he heard Dharmodgata's name from the Buddha in the sky, he at once gave rise to a great desire, obtained all kinds of samādhis, saw the buddhas of the ten directions, and further heard the buddhas of the ten directions speak of the causes and conditions of a former life—「唯有曇無竭能度汝耳。」 tr. "Only Dharmodgata can deliver you." Having heard this, his mind was increased and he longed thirstily to see him, so halfway along the road he wished to sell himself to make offerings, and now again in the City of Many Fragrances for seven years he did not sit or lie down, wishing to see him. The sentence 「如是渴仰，欲樂來久」 tr. "such thirsty longing, such wishing and delight, had been there a long time" is the summary. Next he brings out a simile: like a person pressed by heat and thirst who, obtaining muddy, warm rainwater, is still glad, how much more on obtaining clear, cool, sweet water. So his gladness has two causes: his thirsty longing was long, and Dharmodgata's merits were great. The treatise-author restores a passage of emotion into causes and conditions, and so the reader knows that joy in the Dharma is not a chance feeling, but a long-accumulated mind meeting a surpassing circumstance.

57. Happiness is of four kinds; why speak only of the happiness of the third dhyāna—it is spoken from what beings of the desire realm crave. The treatise-author asks: happiness is of four kinds; why does it speak only of the happiness of the third dhyāna, and not of the happiness of the concentrations of the higher grounds and the happiness of liberation? The answer: because the beings of the desire realm, among the three feelings, mostly crave pleasant feeling; hearing that the happiness of nirvāṇa is without anything existent, their minds do not delight in it; from the fourth dhyāna upward suffering and joy are severed, so their minds do not delight in that either; 「第三禪中樂，樂之極」 tr. "the happiness within the third dhyāna is the utmost of happiness". The standpoint of this answer is the hearer and not the substance of the Dharma—it is not that the happiness of the third dhyāna is the most surpassing, but that, speaking to beings of the desire realm, only this happiness can serve as a comparison. Whenever one meets a simile in reading the sūtras, one can ask oneself by this way of questioning: is this simile spoken from the Dharma, or spoken from the hearer?

58. Again, someone says—one who has newly aroused the mind relinquishes joy and obtains the pure nature of dharmas. At the end the treatise-author records a teaching as the conclusion: 「復有人言：薩陀波崙新發意未入細深妙定故，見曇無竭發大歡喜，似如三禪樂。」 tr. "Again, someone says: because Sadāprarudita had newly aroused the mind and had not yet entered fine, deep, and subtle concentration, on seeing Dharmodgata he gave rise to great joy, like the happiness of the third dhyāna." And the reason it resembles the third dhyāna has a separate layer—「薩陀波崙自覺我大歡喜故，即時捨喜，得清淨法性，遍身安樂」 tr. "because Sadāprarudita was himself aware that he had great joy, at once he relinquished the joy and obtained the pure nature of dharmas, peace and happiness filling his body", and so the happiness of the third dhyāna is taken as the simile. The former teaching sets up the simile from the hearer's craving for pleasant feeling; this teaching sets up the simile from the practitioner's real state: the mark of the third dhyāna is precisely leaving joy and obtaining a happiness that fills the body; Sadāprarudita, aware of his own joy, at once relinquished the joy, and what he obtained was also peace and happiness filling the body; because the two resemble each other it is taken as the simile. The treatise segment of Fascicle 99 stops here, yet the meaning of the whole chapter is not exhausted—what the marks of prajñāpāramitā are still waits for the next fascicle.

Do Not Misread

Do not read 「無佛」 tr. "no Buddha" as the Buddha not existing. The treatise-author says it very clearly: the 「無佛」 tr. "no Buddha" spoken of here is 「破著佛想」 tr. "to refute the notion of clinging to the Buddha", and 「不言」 tr. "it is not saying" that people should 「取無佛想」 tr. "grasp at the notion of no Buddha". This is a sentence that refutes clinging, not an assertion that the Buddha is definitely non-existent. Moreover it has a premise—before it the two truths were first set up: by reason of worldly truth it is said that the Buddha teaches prajñā; by reason of the highest meaning it is said that the buddhas are empty, without coming and without going; if, leaving this premise, one takes the two Chinese characters 「無佛」 tr. "no Buddha" alone, it becomes the very wrong view the treatise-author is refuting right there. The place where readers of the prajñā treatises most easily overturn is just here: taking words that refute clinging as words that establish a thesis.

Do not read seeking the Buddha in five ways and finding him unfindable as a debating technique. The five gates—the five aggregates are not precisely the Buddha, apart from the five aggregates there is no Buddha either, the Buddha is not in the five aggregates, the five aggregates are not in the Buddha, the Buddha does not possess the five aggregates—what they seek out is the matter of ‘there is definitely a Buddha to be found’. If one treats it as a formula that can be fitted onto any matter, running through it casually and then saying that something is unfindable, that is only idle discourse, and the treatise-author says plainly: 「若人分別、戲論常寂滅事，是人亦墮邪見」 tr. "if someone discriminates and engages in idle discourse about the matter of permanent quiescent extinction, this person too falls into wrong view". The seeking is in order to let go of what is clung to, not in order to gain a new conclusion that ‘everything is unfindable’.

Do not read the three similes of the ocean's jewels, the konghou, and the image in a mirror as three ways of saying one meaning. Each of the three similes has what it governs: the ocean's jewels make clear that what arises from causes and conditions does not come from the ten directions and when it perishes goes nowhere; the konghou makes clear 「聲亦不在眾緣中，離眾緣亦無聲」 tr. "the sound is not within the many conditions, and apart from the many conditions there is no sound either", and what it discloses is not within and not apart; the image in the mirror makes clear 「眾因緣和合故有，眾緣離故無」 tr. "it exists because many causes and conditions come together, and does not exist because the many conditions part", and what it discloses is appearing and perishing according to conditions. The two similes of the ocean's jewels and the konghou are the treatise-author explaining the sūtra text again; the one simile of the image in the mirror is added by the treatise-author himself; the reason he divides the similes to explain them is precisely that the similes are not repetitions of the same meaning. Reading the three similes as one ‘like an illusion’ wipes out entirely the labour the treatise-author spent in explaining them separately.

Do not read piercing the body to draw blood as taking suffering as the path. When the treatise-author explains this matter, the weight has never been on pain: in one place he says 「意不分別香臭好惡」 tr. "his mind did not discriminate fragrant or foul, fine or vile", in one place 「血是命之所在」 tr. "blood is where life resides", in one place 「見諸法實相畢竟空故，知是身但是虛誑和合」 tr. "because he saw that the real mark of all dharmas is ultimate emptiness, he knew that this body is only a false and deceptive coming together". What is given up is life, what is relied on is the knowledge of emptiness, and suffering only comes along with it. Moreover the treatise-author made a point of recording the opposite side—one who first trains in a mind of kindness, 「既得利刀割身，以痛自逼故，心生悔恨，是名異」 tr. "once his body is cut by a sharp knife, because he is pressed by pain, regret arises in his mind; this is called being changed": the same cutting of the body becomes two different things as soon as the mind regrets. The judgement lies in the mind, not in the blood.

Do not read standing and waiting for seven years and entering concentration for seven years as a ritual rule that can be imitated. In answering 「為法故何以不應坐臥」 tr. "for the sake of the Dharma, why should one not sit or lie down", the treatise-author's very first sentence is 「無是定法」 tr. "there is no such definite rule"—there is no such regulation. Not sitting and not lying down came from this person's great desire and great vigour, and was further supported by all kinds of conditions such as the long lifespans of a good age, the great power of merit, and the gods increasing his strength; Dharmodgata's entering concentration for seven years too was a skilful means set up to remove the doubts of those who had newly aroused the mind. Reading it as a rule that everyone should practise goes against the words 「無是定法」 tr. "there is no such definite rule".

Do not read the worry 「諸佛尚無，諸法亦應皆滅」 tr. "if even the buddhas do not exist, dharmas too should all be extinguished" as superfluous. The treatise-author says plainly that the similes below are set up precisely to guard against this thought—「是故今說因緣法譬喻」 tr. "therefore now the dharma of causes and conditions is taught, together with similes". Hearing of ultimate emptiness and having the mind give rise to the fear of annihilation is a pass that really occurs on the road of cultivation and training, not a sign of inferior capacity. The treatise-author neither scolds this thought nor lets it pass vaguely, but receives it plainly and honestly with the meaning of an image appearing from causes and conditions. If the reader gives rise to fear at this point, there is ready medicine in precisely this passage.

Bearing on Practice

Take the phrase ‘the knowledge of great emptiness, on reaching the place of the Buddha, cannot be used after all’ to shine on yourself at the dividing line between reverence and contemplating emptiness. The place one reveres most is often the place one is least willing to contemplate as empty—toward a teacher, toward the Dharma, toward some experience of one's own that one treasures greatly, it is so in every case. There is no need on this account to withdraw the reverent mind, but one should recognise that this is precisely where the contemplation of emptiness gains no strength. The treatise-author points out the place of the sickness without telling people to lessen reverence, so the remedy is not slighting, but being willing to shine on even the place one reveres most.

Use the two truths to settle the two languages of one's own teaching of the Dharma and contemplation of the mind. When speaking of the Buddha-dharma with others one says 「佛說般若」 tr. "the Buddha teaches prajñā"; when sitting alone contemplating the mind one says 「諸佛空，無來無去」 tr. "the buddhas are empty, without coming and without going"; both sayings are right; they only belong to different places. The most common perplexity of daily life—since all dharmas are empty, why still bow to the Buddha, why still seek the Dharma—mostly comes from stirring the two truths together in one place. First sort out whether this sentence is spoken on worldly truth or on the highest meaning, and many self-contradictory entanglements will loosen on the spot.

When you worry that cultivation will come to nothing, take the sentence 「如汝所著，意謂實有者無；為度眾生故，從因緣和合則有像現」 tr. "what you cling to, thinking that it really exists, does not exist; for the sake of delivering beings, from the coming together of causes and conditions an image appears" as your carpenter's line. What is empty is the real existence that is clung to; what remains is the image that causes and conditions make appear. Daily practice, making vows, taking responsibility for others—all are on the side of 「像現」 tr. "an image appears", and are not lost because of the meaning of emptiness; while the grasping at them should from the first be emptied. Checking oneself by this one sentence, one can avoid the slide of ‘since it is empty, why take it seriously’.

Use the two causes and conditions to examine the conditions of your own deliverance. 「內有正見」 tr. "Right view within" and 「外有善說法者」 tr. "one who teaches the Dharma well without"—when the outer condition is not complete, seek a teacher and visit friends; when the inner cause is not complete, cultivate right view. The easiest mistake is to push all the responsibility onto one side: either complaining that there is no good friend, or only reading books and not drawing near to people. The treatise-author says plainly that if one of the two causes and conditions is lacking one does not obtain deliverance, so the checking too must check both sides.

Use the one thought 「知魔所作」 tr. "knowing it is done by Māra" to turn toward seeking within. When one is blocked everywhere in matters and cannot find a usable condition, do not first hurry to keep running about outside, but learn this move of Sadāprarudita's—recognise that this is the work of obstructing conditions, and then find in oneself the share that can be brought out. What he took was the water element among the four great elements; what we take may be time, or bodily strength, or some thing we have always been unwilling to give up; the point is the same: when outer conditions are blocked, take from within the share of oneself one is least willing to bring out.

Take 「魔知其心大，不可沮壞，但小沮壞，令其稽留」 tr. "Māra knew that his mind was great and could not be destroyed; he only obstructed it a little, causing him to be held up and delayed" to steady and to warn yourself. A great mind will not be destroyed—this is steadying; but it really will be held back—this is warning. So on meeting obstruction one need not doubt whether one's aroused mind is still there, yet one must watch the dissipation of days and time. Recognising that this is 「稽留」 tr. "being held up and delayed" and not 「壞」 tr. "being destroyed", one will not, because of a momentary stagnation, judge oneself to have retrogressed.

Take 「是謂上受」 tr. "this is called the highest kind of accepting" as the way of receiving offerings and receiving gifts. When someone presents something, to accept it while causing the giver's merit not to be lost and his greed and clinging to be severed—this is the highest way of receiving; to keep declining instead leaves the giver's mind with nowhere to land. Dharmodgata first accepted and then gave back: accepting was to accomplish the other's giving; giving back was to fulfil their wish. When receiving people's goodwill in daily life one can take this as a rule—first receive it, then see how to let the intent the other seeks be fulfilled.

Further Resonances

This unit is a single whole explanation by the treatise, and what it explains is precisely the whole passage of sūtra text of the previous unit. The first half explains meaning: beginning from Sadāprarudita, though knowing emptiness, not yet being able to enter deeply, and Dharmodgata therefore teaching that the buddhas come from nowhere and in going reach nowhere, it sets up the two truths to answer the objection that the five aggregates coming together are named the Buddha, seeks the Buddha by five gates and finds him unfindable, at once blocks the annihilationist view with 'refuting the notion of clinging to the Buddha, not grasping a notion of no Buddha', and returns to leaving the two extremes of existence and non-existence, abiding in the middle way, the real mark of all dharmas being precisely the Buddha; next it makes clear that the mark of suchness of form and the other dharmas is precisely the Buddha, one suchness without two and without three, and takes up the causes and conditions the sūtra itself states; next it answers how, if there is nothing existent, there is seeing, hearing, suffering, and joy, and explains it by the mirage and the dream being without reality yet able to deceive; next it opens out the two bodies, the Dharma body and the form body, making clear that the Dharma body is the true Buddha, that obtaining the real mark is named being near to awakening, that because the obtaining of the real mark has distinctions there are the true disciples of the Buddha from the srota-āpanna up to the great bodhisattva, and explains the meaning of not falsely eating people's faithful gifts, of receiving offerings position by position, and of a field of merit for the world. The second half explains matters: first, giving the fear of falling into annihilation as the reason, it explains again, one by one, the similes of the ocean's jewels, the skilled archer, the konghou, and the image in a mirror, and answers why jewels are produced in the great ocean, bringing out the two causes and conditions of right view within and one who teaches the Dharma well without; next, with ten-odd rounds of question and answer, it examines the whole course of Sadāprarudita's seeking of the Dharma—the causes and conditions of Śakra giving the flowers, the three questions about the elder's daughter giving her body, the gloss on a sincere mind and the intent of giving everything, the highest kind of accepting in Dharmodgata's accepting and giving back, entering the palace following worldly ways, the possibility of walking and standing for seven years, the reason for entering concentration for seven years, teaching the Dharma by mouth and showing the Dharma by the body, subduing the afflictions without yet breaking them during the seven years, the two kinds of adorning the place of the Dharma, Māra hiding the water and sorrow covering the mind, not sparing body and life in piercing the body to draw blood, the side-by-side record of the blood changing into fragrant water and whatever he wished being brought about, the answer to who would hear the Dharma if his body died, Śakra exclaiming that such a thing had never been, the seeking of flowers and the three thousand dan of māndārava, Dharmodgata coming out of concentration at the full term, setting one's own time limit for samādhi and the warning of the jianchui, and the mark of coming out of and entering samādhi of those whose bodies are born of the Dharma-nature—and at the end, with the one question why, happiness being of four kinds, only the happiness of the third dhyāna is spoken of, it records two teachings side by side and stops.

The position of this unit within the whole chapter is to carry on from what comes before without yet reaching what comes after. What it carries on from is precisely the sūtra text of the previous unit, from which the treatise-author selects the key places to explain: in the passage on meaning he explains again the similes of the mirage, the ocean's jewels, and the konghou, passes over the simile of the dream with only one sentence, does not separately explain the simile of the illusion, and adds of his own the two similes of the skilled archer and the image in a mirror; in the passage on matters he sets up many questions to examine their causes and conditions; what is not yet reached is the marks of prajñāpāramitā taught in the sūtra text of the next fascicle and the treatise-author's item-by-item explanation of them, so the end of this unit only reaches Sadāprarudita seeing Dharmodgata and being glad, and the teaching of the Dharma has not yet opened its mouth. If the reader looks at the three units before and after together, he can see that the order of this chapter is: first refuting the clinging to coming and going, next seeing that person and that Dharma, and last hearing the marks of prajñā—only one who sees that dharmas are without coming and without going is qualified to hear that passage on the marks set forth in response.

Of the ancient masters' treatment of the meaning explained in this unit, what can be recorded is most detailed in Jizang. Jizang, in his Commentary on the Larger Sūtra, sets up a separate commentary for this chapter; his chapter heading follows the line of the sūtra text and reads 「法尚」 tr. "Dharma-Esteeming", which is a meaning-translation of Dharmodgata, so at the opening of his commentary he explains this name, saying: 「若曇無竭，此云法尚，以其弘於大法而物宜欽。」 tr. "As for Dharmodgata, here it is called Dharma-Esteeming, because he spreads the great Dharma and beings ought to revere him." His division of this chapter is twofold—first severing doubts, then teaching prajñā directly—and what this unit explains belongs precisely to the first section. On the single meaning of the two truths, Jizang points out plainly that it comes from the treatise text: 「論文中有二諦語，世諦則有佛，第一義諦佛空。」 tr. "In the treatise text there are words about the two truths: in worldly truth there is the Buddha; in the truth of the highest meaning the Buddha is empty." And he goes further, pairing the two truths with the two bodies: 「今論文中明二諦則是二身，故言世諦中隨眾生故，以色身為佛，第一義佛即是法身也。」 tr. "Now the two truths made clear in the treatise text are the two bodies; therefore it says that in worldly truth, because of following beings, the form body is taken as the Buddha, and the Buddha of the highest meaning is precisely the Dharma body."—this treatise first sets up the two truths and afterwards opens out the two bodies, the Dharma body and the form body; Jizang joins the two into one meaning, which corresponds to the order of this treatise. On the section on eating faithful gifts in vain, Jizang poses a question and answers it himself, and his judgement reads: 「又食此食能令施主度生死為不虗食」 tr. "Again, eating this food and being able to make the donor cross birth and death is not eating in vain"—taking as his criterion whether the donor's birth and death can be crossed, which is close in sense to this treatise's taking as its criterion whether the merit is measurable or immeasurable, yet the side on which it is taken differs; recorded side by side without judgement. On the single meaning of leaving the two extremes of existence and non-existence, Jizang cites the Mahāparinirvāṇa Sūtra and decides: 「識中道即識佛」 tr. "to recognise the middle way is precisely to recognise the Buddha"; on the simile of the ocean's jewels, his application to the Dharma reads: 「大海譬十方六道國土」 tr. "the great ocean is a simile for the lands of the six destinies in the ten directions", and further: 「此寶雖生大海而有不得者，佛雖為物出而有見不見。」 tr. "Though these jewels are produced in the great ocean, there are those who do not obtain them; though the Buddha comes forth for the sake of beings, there are those who see and those who do not see."—this is entirely the same as this treatise's application, 「大海水喻十方六道國土，諸珍寶即是諸佛」 tr. "the water of the great ocean is a simile for the lands of the six destinies in the ten directions; the many jewels are precisely the buddhas". On the simile of the sound of the konghou, Jizang's explanation also fits closely with this treatise: 「佛身亦爾，不從無因緣生，謂無六度萬行，亦不從不具足萬行生也。」 tr. "The Buddha's body is likewise: it does not arise from no causes and conditions, meaning without the six perfections and the myriad practices; nor does it arise from the myriad practices not being complete." But below this he first records the teaching of the northern masters, who take being without coming and going as the Dharma body and the simile of the ocean's jewels as the response body and the reward body, and continues, 「然三佛不無此義也」 tr. "yet the three buddhas are not without this meaning", and so brings out the names of the three buddhas: 「正法為身名為法佛，行因所得名為報佛，應化眾生名為應佛。」 tr. "The true Dharma as body is named the Dharma Buddha; what is obtained by the practice of causes is named the Reward Buddha; responding to and transforming beings is named the Response Buddha."—this treatise here sets up only the two bodies, the Dharma body and the form body, while Jizang's commentary brings out separately the names of three buddhas; recorded side by side without judgement. On the questions about the narrative, Jizang's answers too often illuminate this treatise: explaining why the elder's daughter did not give herself to Dharmodgata, he says: 「長者女應以身施法尚而施常啼者，女人智恒不棄本師。」 tr. "As for the elder's daughter, who ought to have given her body to Dharma-Esteeming but gave it to Ever Weeping: a woman's wisdom always does not abandon her own teacher." Explaining accepting and giving back, he says: 「受以還施常啼者，前為說法生其慧也，今受其施生其福也。」 tr. "As for accepting and giving back to Ever Weeping: before, he taught him the Dharma to give rise to his wisdom; now, he accepts his giving to give rise to his merit." Explaining the possibility of not sitting or lying down for seven years, he says: 「此時好世七年如今七日。」 tr. "At this time, in a good age, seven years were like seven days now." Explaining sorrow covering the mind, he says: 「以憂愁覆心故智慧不照，如霞覆日其明不照也。」 tr. "Because sorrow covers the mind, wisdom does not shine, as when clouds of mist cover the sun its brightness does not shine."—this treatise reads 「譬如日障蔽故，其照不明」 tr. "just as when the sun is blocked and covered, its light is not bright"; Jizang replaces it with clouds of mist covering the sun; the material of the simile differs slightly but the meaning is one. Further, explaining how it was known that he would come out after seven years, he says: 「又法尚初入定時，自誓云七年方於也。」 tr. "Again, when Dharma-Esteeming first entered concentration, he himself took an oath, saying seven years and only then." This agrees with the latter of the two teachings recorded in this treatise. As for Huiying's Commentary, its extant part stops at the earlier section of this treatise and does not reach this chapter; only his division of the text once looked ahead and named this chapter's title to mark the range of his subsequent divisions, which is not a commentarial explanation of this chapter; it is marked as lacking according to the facts. In Junzheng's Profound Meaning of the Four Mahāyāna Treatises, no citation of this chapter is seen in the whole book, nor any trace of restating its meaning; this is recorded as it is. Zhanran, in the Supporting Practice and Broad Resolution of Calming and Contemplation, repeatedly cites the matter of Sadāprarudita and Dharmodgata seeking the Dharma as an example, all of which are brief citations borrowing the matter to explain a principle; in one place among them he cites the question posed by the treatise as to whether Dharmodgata is a fleshly body or a Dharma body, but that text comes from the treatise of the preceding chapter and is not text of this unit, so it is recorded and not cited. The variant names of this chapter's title across the editions, and the meaning-translation variant name by which the line of the sūtra text takes 「法尚品」 tr. "the Dharma-Esteeming chapter" as its heading, are examined in detail in the apparatus layer.

Dharmodgata, Fascicle 100: The Item-by-Item Paired Declaration of the Marks of Prajñāpāramitā, the Six Million Samādhi Gates, and the Buddha's Concluding Exhortation to Subhūti

What Is Being Asked

What Fascicle 99 resolved was a doubt: ‘where does the Buddha come from, and where does he go?’ Sadāprarudita had travelled far to seek the Dharma, had seen a Buddha in the sky, and the Buddha had suddenly vanished, and this doubt arose in his mind; Dharmodgata then broke it with five similes—the mirage, the illusion, the dream, the jewels in the ocean, and the sound of the konghou—saying 「諸佛無所從來，去亦無所至」 tr. "the buddhas come from nowhere, and in going reach nowhere"; the treatise-author then explained it in detail through questions and answers, set up the division of the two truths, worldly truth and the highest meaning, refuted the reckonings that the five aggregates are the Buddha and that apart from the five aggregates there is a Buddha, and also spoke of the two kinds of Buddha-body, the Dharma body and the form body. What that passage answered was the side of 「佛」 tr. "the Buddha".

What Fascicle 100 answers is the other side. Once the doubt had been cut off, what Sadāprarudita sought was no longer to resolve a difficulty, but to hear the Dharma face to face. So the first sentence of this fascicle is the charge Dharmodgata gives once he is seated: 「善男子！諦聽！諦受！今當為汝說般若波羅蜜相」 tr. "Good man! Listen well! Receive well! Now I shall proclaim to you the marks of prajñāpāramitā". The treatise-author puts it with the greatest clarity here: 「上疑諸佛來去，已斷；今但欲聞甚深般若波羅蜜，是故為說『般若波羅蜜相』。」 tr. "The doubt above about the buddhas' coming and going has already been cut off; now he wishes only to hear the very deep prajñāpāramitā, and for this reason ‘the marks of prajñāpāramitā’ were proclaimed to him." Everything said in the whole fascicle after this grows out of this one sentence.

As for the 「相」 tr. "marks" that are taught, the sūtra text uses an extremely regular sentence pattern: ‘Because dharmas are such-and-such, know that prajñāpāramitā too is such-and-such.’ Equal, apart, unmoving, without thought, without fear, of one flavour, boundless, non-arising, non-ceasing—these are spoken of the marks of dharmas themselves; space boundless, the water of the great ocean boundless, Mount Sumeru adorned, space without discrimination—these are spoken by way of simile; form and the four aggregates boundless, the five elements of earth, water, fire, wind, and space boundless—these are spoken by way of the numbered categories of dharmas; equal like the vajra, dharmas without discrimination, the nature of dharmas unfindable, dharmas without anything existent and equal, dharmas without making, dharmas inconceivable—these are spoken as the gathering-up at the ultimate place. Not one sentence says how prajñā itself is; each says only how dharmas are—this is the turn of the brush in this fascicle that most needs to be seen clearly. The mark of prajñā is not a further mark set up on its own; it is the real mark of dharmas; so in speaking of prajñā, from beginning to end it speaks only of dharmas.

When Sadāprarudita had heard it, right there on his seat he obtained six million samādhi gates, and the names of the samādhis are each set up facing the marks spoken above. At the end the sūtra text changes speaker: the Buddha tells Subhūti, and gathers this jātaka (birth-story) back onto the hearers: Sadāprarudita, having obtained samādhi, saw the buddhas of the ten directions teaching prajñā likewise, and from then on his learning and wisdom were inconceivable, he was never apart from the buddhas, and he was reborn according to his vow; therefore the causes and conditions of prajñā can bring to accomplishment all the merits of the bodhisattva and obtain the omniscience of all kinds, and so one should receive and uphold it, read and recite it, write it out and make offerings to it—prajñā is the mother of the buddhas of the ten directions.

The treatise section first fills in a matter the sūtra text did not give in detail: Dharmodgata comes out of concentration and takes his seat, Sadāprarudita bows his head to his feet, and the treatise-author in passing explains the difference between the three kinds of bowing. After this it explains, item by item, the paired declaration above. There is a thread to follow in the way it explains: at the three marks of apart, one flavour, and boundless, the treatise-author himself sets up the question ‘this has already been spoken of above; why speak of it further?’, and then answers ‘because if the previous mark is grasped as something to cling to, the next mark is needed to dispel it’. So after equal comes apart, after apart unmoving, after unmoving without thought, after without thought without fear, after without fear one flavour, after one flavour boundless—not nine matters set side by side, but a sequence of dispelling clinging all along the way.

At the end the treatise-author sets himself a question that gathers the whole fascicle into its most intimate place: Sadāprarudita already knew the empty mark of dharmas; after seven years of toil he saw Dharmodgata—what benefit, after all, did he obtain? The answer is that earlier, when he saw the buddhas and obtained the samādhis, he 「貴重般若波羅蜜生著相」 tr. "valued prajñāpāramitā highly and gave rise to clinging to marks", and the Dharma that Dharmodgata now taught was precisely to break this portion of his clinging mind. Thereupon the wisdom in a scattered mind turned into samādhi, and the six million samādhi gates were formed from this. Where all the marks taught in the whole fascicle land is this one sentence.

Passage by Passage

1. Dharmodgata, seated and settled, tells them to listen well. The sūtra text opens: 「爾時，薩陀波崙菩薩摩訶薩及長者女并五百侍女到曇無竭菩薩摩訶薩所，散天曼陀羅華，頭面禮畢，退坐一面。」 tr. "At that time the bodhisattva-mahāsattva Sadāprarudita, together with the elder's daughter and the five hundred attendant maidens, came to where the bodhisattva-mahāsattva Dharmodgata was, scattered heavenly māndārava flowers, and, having finished bowing with their heads and faces, withdrew and sat down to one side." First ask a question: the flowers and the bowing have all been fully narrated in Fascicle 99; why are they narrated again here? Because this is the ground where the Dharma is taught, and offering and reverent bowing are the rite of entering the Dharma; it is not a repetition. When Dharmodgata sees that they are seated, what he tells them carries the weight of only two Chinese characters—「諦聽！諦受！」 tr. "Listen well! Receive well!" Here the reader first sets up a preparation: to listen without receiving, the Dharma does not enter the mind; to receive without care, what enters is one's own thinking.

2. Nine paired declarations: equal, apart, unmoving, without thought, without fear, of one flavour, boundless, non-arising, non-ceasing. 「諸法等故，當知般若波羅蜜亦等。」 tr. "Because dharmas are equal, know that prajñāpāramitā too is equal." The eight sentences that follow have exactly the same pattern. These nine sentences should be read together, not taken apart: equal dispels the view of the unequal, apart dispels clinging to grasping at the equal, unmoving dispels wavering, without thought dispels thought, without fear dispels fear, one flavour dispels difference, boundless dispels edges, non-arising and non-ceasing dispel arising and ceasing. Here one must guard against a misreading: it is not that prajñā has nine kinds of marks; it is that what is dispelled is ninefold, and once what is dispelled is exhausted, the mark of prajñā appears of itself. Brought down to use: in reading this passage there is no need to remember nine headings; one need only see that every sentence is taking back something that has been seized.

3. Four declarations by simile: space boundless, the water of the great ocean boundless, Mount Sumeru adorned, space without discrimination. 「虛空無邊故，當知般若波羅蜜亦無邊。大海水無邊故，當知般若波羅蜜亦無邊。須彌山莊嚴故，當知般若波羅蜜亦莊嚴。虛空無分別故，當知般若波羅蜜亦無分別。」 tr. "Because space is boundless, know that prajñāpāramitā too is boundless. Because the water of the great ocean is boundless, know that prajñāpāramitā too is boundless. Because Mount Sumeru is adorned, know that prajñāpāramitā too is adorned. Because space is without discrimination, know that prajñāpāramitā too is without discrimination." The previous passage speaks by way of dharmas; this passage speaks by way of simile. First a question: since it has already been said that dharmas are boundless, why take space and the great ocean again as similes? Because words about the marks of dharmas are hard for people to enter, while a simile lets one see it right in the matter. In the text below the treatise-author himself divides what has been spoken of from what has not: space being boundless points to a place already spoken of earlier, and no further question is set up; the two matters of the water of the great ocean being boundless and Mount Sumeru being adorned were not spoken of earlier, so he sets up a question for each and explains it briefly—see sections 39 to 45.

4. The boundlessness of the five aggregates and the six elements. 「色無邊故，當知般若波羅蜜亦無邊；受、想、行、識無邊故，當知般若波羅蜜亦無邊。地種無邊故，當知般若波羅蜜亦無邊；水種、火種、風種無邊故，當知般若波羅蜜亦無邊；空種無邊故，當知般若波羅蜜亦無邊。」 tr. "Because form is boundless, know that prajñāpāramitā too is boundless; because feeling, perception, constructions, and consciousness are boundless, know that prajñāpāramitā too is boundless. Because the earth element is boundless, know that prajñāpāramitā too is boundless; because the water element, the fire element, and the wind element are boundless, know that prajñāpāramitā too is boundless; because the space element is boundless, know that prajñāpāramitā too is boundless." What is listed here are all categories this treatise itself has, now explained in present-day words: the five aggregates are the five classes of dharmas gathered together—form, feeling, perception, constructions, and consciousness. Since the sūtra text has already said in general that dharmas are boundless, here it says it again, heading by heading, of the five aggregates and the six elements, bringing the general mark down to the nearest place in a person's body and mind—what is called boundless is not somewhere far away; it is right in one's own form, feeling, perception, constructions, and consciousness.

5. Equal like the vajra, dharmas without discrimination, the nature of dharmas unfindable. 「如金剛等故，當知般若波羅蜜亦等。諸法無分別故，當知般若波羅蜜亦無分別。諸法性不可得故，當知般若波羅蜜性亦不可得。」 tr. "Because, like the vajra, there is equality, know that prajñāpāramitā too is equal. Because dharmas are without discrimination, know that prajñāpāramitā too is without discrimination. Because the nature of dharmas is unfindable, know that the nature of prajñāpāramitā too is unfindable." The three sentences draw tighter and tighter all the way: the vajra speaks of equality by way of the function of severing the defilements; without discrimination speaks by way of the movement of the mind; nature unfindable speaks by way of the substance of dharmas. Here one must guard against a misreading: 「性亦不可得」 tr. "the nature too is unfindable" does not say that prajñā does not exist; it says that prajñā and dharmas are alike unfindable, and that there is not some further findable prajñā standing outside dharmas.

6. Without anything existent and equal, without making, inconceivable. 「諸法無所有等故，當知般若波羅蜜亦無所有等。諸法無作故，當知般若波羅蜜亦無作。諸法不可思議故，當知般若波羅蜜亦不可思議。」 tr. "Because dharmas are without anything existent and equal, know that prajñāpāramitā too is without anything existent and equal. Because dharmas are without making, know that prajñāpāramitā too is without making. Because dharmas are inconceivable, know that prajñāpāramitā too is inconceivable." Three sentences make the conclusion. The sentence about the inconceivable is the end of the whole passage, and what comes to an end is the road of words—having spoken to this point, to speak further would be falsehood. Brought down to use: when reading prajñā one feels one has already explained it clearly—that is precisely the place this sentence blocks.

7. Right there on his seat he obtains six million samādhi gates. 「是時，薩陀波崙菩薩摩訶薩即於座上得諸三昧，所謂諸法等三昧，諸法離三昧，諸法無畏三昧」 tr. "At this time the bodhisattva-mahāsattva Sadāprarudita, right there on his seat, obtained the samādhis, namely: the samādhi of the equality of dharmas, the samādhi of dharmas being apart, the samādhi of dharmas being without fear"; it runs through the names of the marks and ends by saying 「如是等，得六百萬諸三昧門」 tr. "such as these, and so on: he obtained six million samādhi gates". The names of the samādhis are each set up facing the marks spoken before, so it can be seen that what he obtained is not some separate dharma; it is precisely the Dharma he heard, entering concentration and becoming formed. First ask a question: why does hearing the Dharma at once obtain samādhi? The treatise-author has his own answer in sections 59 and 60; here the reader need only first remember this correspondence: as many marks as are taught, so many samādhis are obtained.

8. The Buddha tells Subhūti, to conclude its fruit. 「爾時，佛告須菩提」 tr. "At that time the Buddha told Subhūti"—here the speaker turns from Dharmodgata to the Buddha; these are words from another scene. What is told has three layers: first, that Sadāprarudita in samādhi saw the buddhas of the ten directions teaching prajñā just as I now teach it; second, that from then on his learning and wisdom were inconceivable, he was never apart from the buddhas, even in dreams he saw the Buddha, and he was reborn according to his vow; third, the concluding exhortation—「當知是般若波羅蜜因緣，能成就菩薩摩訶薩一切功德，得一切種智」 tr. "know that the causes and conditions of this prajñāpāramitā can bring to accomplishment all the merits of the bodhisattva-mahāsattva and obtain the omniscience of all kinds"—so one should receive and uphold it, recite and read it, rightly recollect it, teach it widely to others, write it out and make offerings to it. At the end it concludes with one sentence: 「般若波羅蜜是過去、未來、現在十方諸佛母……」 tr. "prajñāpāramitā is the mother of the buddhas of the ten directions in the past, future, and present……" Only when the jātaka has been told to this point is the intent of telling it seen—it is not narrating a story of ascetic toil; it is setting up a model of seeking the Dharma.

9. Dharmodgata comes out of concentration and takes his seat. The treatise section opens: 「曇無竭既出，至法座所，遍觀無勝己者，於是而坐。」 tr. "Dharmodgata, having come out, went to where the Dharma seat was, looked all round, and, there being no one who surpassed him, sat down there." First ask a question: why must the one who teaches the Dharma look all round? The phrase 「遍觀無勝己者」 tr. "looked all round, and there was no one who surpassed him" is not self-pride; it is the decorum of teaching the Dharma—the order of seats is from the first set according to the height of virtue; only when there is no one who surpasses him does he then sit. In reading this sentence one must guard against a misreading: no one surpassing him is said of the assembly at this one gathering, not that no one under heaven surpasses him.

10. Bowing the head to his feet, and the three kinds of bowing. 「爾時，薩陀波崙菩薩知坐已定，到曇無竭所，頭面禮足，一面坐。」 tr. "At that time the bodhisattva Sadāprarudita, knowing that he was seated and settled, came to where Dharmodgata was, bowed his head to his feet, and sat down to one side." The treatise-author at once explains the three grades of bowing: 「禮有三種：一者、口禮；二者、屈膝，頭不至地；三者、頭至地，是為上禮。」 tr. "Bowing is of three kinds: first, bowing by mouth; second, bending the knees with the head not reaching the ground; third, the head reaching the ground: this is the highest bow." Why is the head reaching the ground the highest? The treatise-author explains it himself: 「人之一身，頭為最上，足為最下，以頭禮足，恭敬之至。」 tr. "Of a person's whole body, the head is the highest and the feet are the lowest; to bow the head to the feet is reverence at its utmost." This uses the height and lowness of the body to show the bending and straightening of the mind; it is not mere ceremony. Brought down to use: the weight of a bow lies from the first in the mind; yet what the body does can also lead the mind, so one may not give it up on the grounds that ‘it is enough if the mind is there’.

11. Knowing that he does not spare body or life for the Dharma, he tells him to listen well. The treatise-author fills in the circumstances before and after: 「初相見時，日垂欲沒，少時聞法」 tr. "when they first met, the sun was about to set, and there was only a little time for hearing the Dharma", so Dharmodgata 「以日沒故，起入宮中」 tr. "because the sun had gone down, rose and went into his palace"; and now 「七歲渴仰，不生異心；垂欲出時，以血灑地」 tr. "for seven years he had thirsted and yearned without giving rise to any other mind; when the teacher was about to come out, he sprinkled the ground with his blood". So 「知其為法不惜身命，其心不退，決定無疑，堪受教化」 tr. "it was known that he did not spare body or life for the Dharma, that his mind did not retreat, that he was definitely without doubt, and that he was fit to receive teaching". Here one should see the treatise-author's intent: the charge to listen well is not an empty courtesy; it is a seal of approval—seven years of practice already sufficed to make him a vessel for hearing the Dharma, and only then did he tell him.

12. The doubt above has been cut off; now the marks of prajñā are taught. 「上疑諸佛來去，已斷；今但欲聞甚深般若波羅蜜，是故為說『般若波羅蜜相』。」 tr. "The doubt above about the buddhas' coming and going has already been cut off; now he wishes only to hear the very deep prajñāpāramitā, and for this reason ‘the marks of prajñāpāramitā’ were proclaimed to him." This one sentence is the pivot of the whole fascicle. First ask a question: what does the cutting off of doubt have to do with teaching the Dharma? Because while doubt remains, all that is heard becomes material for objections; only when doubt is cut off is what is heard the Dharma. The reader can turn the light on himself here: when one listens to the Dharma with an unresolved doubt lying across the mind, what one listens for is mostly the answer to that doubt, not the receiving of the Dharma.

13. The marks are as was said earlier in the meaning of the equality of dharmas. 「『般若波羅蜜相』者，如先諸法平等義中說。」 tr. "What is called ‘the marks of prajñāpāramitā’ is as was said earlier in the meaning of the equality of dharmas." The treatise-author does not set up a new meaning; he points back to the earlier text. This is a stroke this treatise uses throughout: whatever has been said before, he only points to its place and does not repeat it. The reader should know here: the 「相」 tr. "marks" spoken of in this fascicle are not a newly emerging meaning; they are the meaning of equality spoken before, brought up again.

14. Or someone says: by the power of prajñā one contemplates dharmas as equal. 「或有人言：般若波羅蜜力故，觀諸法皆平等；非諸法性性自平等。」 tr. "Or someone says: because of the power of prajñāpāramitā, one contemplates dharmas as all equal; it is not that the nature of dharmas is of itself equal." This is a different view recorded side by side; the treatise-author records it without judging. What that person relies on is the likeness of cause and fruit: 「初觀諸法平等是因，決定心得般若波羅蜜是為果。」 tr. "First contemplating the equality of dharmas is the cause; the settled mind obtaining prajñāpāramitā—this is the fruit." Here one must guard against a misreading: recording side by side does not mean the treatise-author adopts this view; in the next passage the treatise-author at once sets up a question against it, so it can be seen to be a meaning still awaiting decision.

15. Question: contemplating equality is precisely prajñā; why divide cause and fruit? 「觀諸法平等即是般若、般若即是平等，何以分別為因、果？」 tr. "Contemplating the equality of dharmas is precisely prajñā, and prajñā is precisely equality; why discriminate them as cause and as fruit?" The question is extremely precise: if the two are one, the division of cause and fruit has nowhere to rest. The reader should see here the treatise-author's way of setting up questions—he does not refute what is set up; he first takes what is set up and pushes it onward.

16. Answer: at the first contemplation it is the cause; when the contemplation is finished it is named the fruit. 「般若及諸法雖一相、無二無別，行者初觀時是因，觀竟名為果。」 tr. "Although prajñā and dharmas are of one mark, without duality and without difference, yet when the practitioner first contemplates, it is the cause, and when the contemplation is finished it is named the fruit." What is divided lies not in the dharma but in the practitioner's position. The treatise-author further takes two similes: 「如須陀洹道得、向」 tr. "as the path of the srota-āpanna has the attainment and the approach"—it is the same path of the srota-āpanna: before it is realised it is named the approach, once realised it is named the attainment; 「又如有漏五眾，因時名集，果時名苦」 tr. "and again like the five aggregates with outflows: at the time of the cause they are named origination; at the time of the fruit they are named suffering"—they are the same five aggregates: by what they can bring about they are named origination, by what is received they are named suffering. Here one must guard against a misreading: the division of cause and fruit is said with respect to practice; it is not that prajñā itself has a before and after. Brought down to use: when first contemplating equality and not yet gaining strength, there is no need to doubt that what one contemplates is not true; it is one and the same dharma, and positions are raw or ripe.

17. The equality of form and all dharmas is precisely the equality of prajñā. 「色等一切法平等，即是般若波羅蜜平等。」 tr. "The equality of form and all dharmas is precisely the equality of prajñāpāramitā." This one sentence gathers up the text above. What is called the equality of prajñā is not set up separately outside dharmas; it is precisely the equality of all dharmas such as form, feeling, perception, constructions, and consciousness. The reader can test himself here: leaving the forms, sounds, smells, and tastes before his eyes to go looking elsewhere for an equality, what he finds will surely be imagination.

18. Question: one ought to speak of the marks of prajñā; why speak of equality? 「應說『般若波羅蜜相』，今何以說平等？因不平故有平等，因平故有不平。於般若中亦不一相、亦不異相，汝何以故欲取一相？」 tr. "One ought to speak of ‘the marks of prajñāpāramitā’; why now speak of equality? It is because there is the unequal that there is equality; it is because there is the equal that there is the unequal. Within prajñā there is neither one mark nor a different mark; why do you wish to grasp at one mark?" This question is very sharp: the word equality is from the first set up against the unequal; since it exists in mutual dependence, it is not fit to be the mark of prajñā; moreover prajñā is neither one nor different, and to speak of equality is to grasp at one mark.

19. Answer: if it is not taught by skilful means, there is no one who understands. 「般若波羅蜜甚深微妙，不以方便說則無解者……」 tr. "Prajñāpāramitā is very deep and subtle; if it is not taught by skilful means, there is no one who can understand it……" This is the whole of the answer. So speaking of equality is not setting up a mark; it is the speech of skilful means. The treatise-author at once tells the fault of not speaking thus: 「是故若分別不等，則生諸煩惱，三毒增長，所謂憎怨，愛親；愛善，憎不善。」 tr. "For this reason, if one discriminates things as not equal, the afflictions arise and the three poisons grow, namely hating enemies, loving kin; loving the good, hating the not good." It can be seen that what speaking of equality counteracts is the love and hatred that arise from discriminating the unequal.

20. Abiding in the two kinds of equality, he contemplates all dharmas as equal. 「菩薩住是二等中，觀一切法皆平等……」 tr. "The bodhisattva abides in these two kinds of equality and contemplates all dharmas as all equal……" The two kinds of equality are the equality of beings and the equality of dharmas. Abiding in the equality of beings, 「怨親、憎愛皆悉平等，開福德門，閉諸惡趣」 tr. "enemy and kin, hatred and love, are all equal; he opens the gate of merit and shuts the evil courses"; abiding in the equality of dharmas, 「於一切法中憶想分別、著心取相皆除滅，但見諸法空，空即是平等」 tr. "within all dharmas recollection, imagining, and discrimination, the clinging mind and the grasping at marks, are all removed and extinguished; he only sees that dharmas are empty, and emptiness is precisely equality". Here one should see the sequence of the two kinds of equality: first being equal toward people, then being equal toward dharmas; to talk first of the emptiness of dharmas while still unequal toward people mostly turns into talk by mouth.

21. To obtain the emptiness of equality without idle discourse is true equality. 「有人得是諸法平等空，直趣菩薩道，於空不戲論；有人雖得平等而生戲論：『若觀都空，有如是失！』如是人於平等即是不等。」 tr. "There are people who, having obtained this emptiness of the equality of dharmas, tend straight toward the bodhisattva path and do not make idle discourse about emptiness; there are people who, although they have obtained equality, give rise to idle discourse: ‘If one contemplates everything as empty, there is such a fault!’ For people like this, equality is precisely inequality." Both obtain equality, yet the two part ways, and where they part is idle discourse. So the treatise-author concludes: 「是故此中為『真平等』故說『般若波羅蜜等』，非是戲論。」 tr. "For this reason, here, for the sake of ‘true equality’, it is said that ‘prajñāpāramitā is equal’; it is not idle discourse." Brought down to use: one who studies emptiness and likes to argue with others over the gains and losses of emptiness—his mind is already within inequality.

22. To be apart from the two extremes of equal and unequal is the mark of prajñā. 「離平等、不平等二邊，是般若波羅蜜相。」 tr. "To be apart from the two extremes of equal and unequal: this is the mark of prajñāpāramitā." This sentence answers the objection above, 「亦不一相、亦不異相」 tr. "neither one mark nor a different mark". First equality is set up to dispel the unequal, then one is apart from equality to dispel what was set up—this treatise's breaking of clinging has always been twofold like this.

23. Question: equality is already complete; why speak further of apart? 「平等者，於般若波羅蜜相已具足，何以故更說『離等是般若波羅蜜相』？」 tr. "Equality is already complete as the mark of prajñāpāramitā; why say further ‘apart from equality is the mark of prajñāpāramitā’?" The questioner takes what was said before to be enough. In this question one should see where the sickness lies: to think that one sentence can say it all is precisely the beginning of grasping at marks.

24. Answer: for fear of grasping at the mark of equality and giving rise to clinging. 「經中但說『諸法等故般若等』，行者取是平等相而生著，是故說：『般若波羅蜜平等相自性離，色等諸法自相離故。』」 tr. "The sūtra only says ‘because dharmas are equal, prajñā is equal’; the practitioner grasps at this mark of equality and gives rise to clinging; for this reason it says: ‘The mark of equality of prajñāpāramitā is apart in its self-nature, because form and the other dharmas are apart in their own marks.’" Apart is spoken of in order to dispel the clinging that grasps at the equal; and apart can dispel it because the mark of equality is from the first of itself apart, not by adding a further apart. Here one must guard against a misreading: apart is not leaving equality to have some other dharma; it is that equality itself is apart.

25. The meaning of apart is as is said in the chapter "Marks and the Signless". 「離義，如〈相無相品〉中說。」 tr. "The meaning of apart is as is said in the chapter ‘Marks and the Signless’." The treatise-author once again points back to the earlier text and does not repeat it. The reader can note here a form this treatise keeps: wherever it says ‘as is said in such-and-such a chapter’, it is meaning already spoken, not something left out and unsaid.

26. Having obtained equality and again being apart from equality, he securely abides in emptiness and is unmoving. 「得此諸法平等，又於平等離，安住空中，空中則不動——戲論不能動，諸煩惱山亦不能動，無常時亦不能動。」 tr. "Having obtained this equality of dharmas, and again being apart from equality, he securely abides in emptiness, and within emptiness he is unmoving—idle discourse cannot move him, the mountains of the afflictions cannot move him, the time of impermanence cannot move him either." The three unmovings each face something: idle discourse moves one's views, the afflictions move one's feelings, impermanence moves what one relies on. Why one can be unmoving the treatise-author explains himself: 「所以者何？於一切法得實相故。」 tr. "Why? Because he has obtained the real mark in all dharmas." At the end he concludes: 「菩薩住是二空，得不動般若波羅蜜，是則究竟。」 tr. "The bodhisattva abides in these two kinds of emptiness and obtains the unmoving prajñāpāramitā: this is the ultimate." The two kinds of emptiness are the emptiness of equality and the emptiness of being apart.

27. The meaning of without thought. 「若有念，即是有相著處；是故說：『諸法無念故，當知般若波羅蜜亦無念。』」 tr. "If there is thought, that is a place where marks are clung to; for this reason it says: ‘Because dharmas are without thought, know that prajñāpāramitā too is without thought.’" Why is having thought a place of clinging? Because thought always has something thought of; what is thought of is a mark, and a mark is the ground that is clung to. The treatise-author further explains: 「無動相是般若波羅蜜，般若波羅蜜諸相滅故。」 tr. "The mark of non-moving is prajñāpāramitā, because in prajñāpāramitā all marks are extinguished." Here one must guard against a misreading: without thought is not the not-knowing of wood and stone; it is that because all marks are extinguished there is nothing to think of—not forcibly making oneself not think.

28. Where being without fear comes from. 「若不念是般若，或迷悶無所趣向，有戲論者，在大眾中則生怖畏；或於涅槃中不了故，亦生怖畏。」 tr. "If one does not think of this prajñā, one may be bewildered and have nowhere to tend toward; those who have idle discourse give rise to fear in the midst of the great assembly; or, because they are not clear about nirvāṇa, they too give rise to fear." Fear has two places: one is toward people, amid the objections and debates of the great assembly; the other is toward the Dharma, not being clear about nirvāṇa and fearing that it is annihilation. 「是故說『無怖畏相是般若波羅蜜』」 tr. "For this reason it says ‘the mark of being without fear is prajñāpāramitā’"—being without fear is not boldness; it is that there is no place to fear.

29. Because he has entered deeply into the nature of dharmas, he has nothing to fear in the great assembly. 「是人雖不決定取諸法相，而深入法性故，於大眾中有難論諸相者，心無所畏，於諸法得無相故。」 tr. "Although this person does not definitely grasp at the marks of dharmas, because he has entered deeply into the nature of dharmas, when in the midst of the great assembly there are people who raise difficulties and debate the marks, there is nothing in his mind to fear, because he has obtained the signless in all dharmas." To be without fear while not grasping at marks is precisely the crux of this passage: worldly people's fearlessness mostly comes from how firmly they hold on; the fearlessness here comes from holding on to nothing. The treatise-author speaks of one more layer: 「又入無生法忍時，知一切法不可得，於是中亦無所畏。」 tr. "Again, at the time of entering the acceptance of the non-arising of dharmas, he knows that all dharmas are unfindable, and in this too there is nothing to fear." At the end he concludes the reason: 「是菩薩善通達一切法故。」 tr. "Because this bodhisattva thoroughly penetrates all dharmas."

30. Because all dharmas are of one mark, prajñā is of one flavour. 「復次，一切法一相，所謂性空；是故般若波羅蜜隨一切法故，亦性空一味。」 tr. "Further, all dharmas are of one mark, namely emptiness of nature; for this reason, because prajñāpāramitā accords with all dharmas, it too is of the one flavour of emptiness of nature." This sentence is the general heading of one flavour. What is called one flavour is not that dharmas are blended into one flavour; it is that dharmas from the first share the one mark of emptiness of nature, and prajñā accords with them and so is also of one flavour.

31. Question: equality has already been spoken of above; why speak further of one flavour? 「上已說諸法平等，今何以更說一味？」 tr. "The equality of dharmas has already been spoken of above; why now speak further of one flavour?" It is the same way of asking as section 23—since there is equality, what use is one flavour? The reader should see here the treatise-author's method of teaching: each time he sets up a mark, he always sets himself this question, to show what this mark dispels.

32. Answer: emptiness sometimes has flavour and sometimes has none. 「空，或時有味，或時無味。」 tr. "Emptiness sometimes has flavour and sometimes has no flavour." Having flavour is when, after 「行者為諸見取相分別好醜籌量」 tr. "the practitioner, drawn along by the views, grasps at marks, discriminates fair and ugly, and weighs and calculates", he suddenly obtains the emptiness of equality and 「大歡喜故名為味」 tr. "because his mind greatly rejoices it is named flavour"; the treatise-author takes a simile: 「如人為熱渴所逼，得清冷水，以為真味無比，隨時用故名味。」 tr. "It is as when a person pressed by heat and thirst obtains clear cool water and takes it for a true flavour without compare: according to its use at that time it is named flavour." And 「真實畢竟空，則無味、不味」 tr. "in real ultimate emptiness there is neither flavour nor non-flavour". Here one must guard against a misreading: saying that emptiness has flavour is not praise; it points out that the joy at first obtaining emptiness is still a flavour that exists in mutual dependence; within ultimate emptiness neither flavour nor non-flavour can be established.

33. Further, one flavour means that what is taken as object and what is contemplated all become of one flavour. 「復次，一味者，菩薩行般若波羅蜜時，所緣、所觀皆為一味；空智力大故，餘法皆隨而為空。」 tr. "Further, what is called one flavour means that when the bodhisattva practises prajñāpāramitā, what he takes as object and what he contemplates all become of one flavour; because the power of the knowledge of emptiness is great, the other dharmas all follow it and become empty." The treatise-author takes two similes: 「譬如煮石蜜欲熟時，雖異物和合，皆為石蜜」 tr. "It is just as when boiling rock sugar is about to be done: although different things come together in it, all become rock sugar"—this simile is of different things entering and becoming the same; 「又如大海，百川歸之，皆為一味，所謂畢竟空味」 tr. "And again it is like the great ocean: the hundred rivers return to it, and all become of one flavour, namely the flavour of ultimate emptiness"—this simile is of the many streams returning and sharing one flavour. So 「色等諸法亦如是，凡夫心中各各別異；入般若波羅蜜中，皆為一味」 tr. "form and the other dharmas are also thus: in the mind of ordinary people each is distinct and different; once they enter prajñāpāramitā, all become of one flavour". At the end the treatise-author turns from this to the meaning of boundless: 「邊名為相，若有、若無。實觀色等諸法非有非無故無相，無相即是無邊……」 tr. "An edge is named a mark, whether existence or non-existence. Observing truly, because form and the other dharmas are neither existent nor non-existent, they are signless; the signless is precisely the boundless……" It can be seen that one flavour and boundless are two ways of speaking of one matter.

34. Someone says: edges are of two kinds. 「復次，有人言：邊有二種：常邊、斷邊，世間邊、涅槃邊，惡邊、善邊等。」 tr. "Further, someone says: edges are of two kinds: the edge of permanence and the edge of annihilation, the edge of the world and the edge of nirvāṇa, the edge of evil and the edge of good, and so on." Three pairs, six edges, all two ends set up in mutual dependence. 「此中無如是等諸邊故，名為無邊般若波羅蜜。」 tr. "Because within it there are no edges such as these, it is named the boundless prajñāpāramitā." This is one view recorded side by side; the treatise-author records it without judging.

35. Someone says: edges are named the prior limit and the later limit. 「復次，有人言：邊名前際、後際。世間無始故無前際，入無餘涅槃故有前際；不復更出故無後際。」 tr. "Further, someone says: edges are named the prior limit and the later limit. Because the world is without beginning, there is no prior limit; because one enters nirvāṇa without remainder, there is a prior limit; because one does not come out again, there is no later limit." This is yet another view, setting up edges at the two ends of time. The treatise-author points out its sickness: 「如是等分別諸邊，著世間故畏涅槃。」 tr. "Discriminating edges in such ways, because they cling to the world they fear nirvāṇa." And within prajñā there are none of all these edges; 「但聞諸法實相無入無出」 tr. "one only hears that the real mark of all dharmas is without entering and without leaving". Here one must guard against a misreading: without entering and without leaving does not say that nirvāṇa is unfindable; it says that the pair of words, entering and leaving, has nothing to apply to in the real mark.

36. Question: equality and apart are both boundless; why speak of it separately again? 「諸法平等、諸法離皆是無邊，何以復別說？」 tr. "The equality of dharmas and dharmas being apart are both boundless; why speak of it separately again?" Again the same way of asking. This time the questioner can already cite the two previous marks as grounds, so it can be seen that the nine sentences of the sūtra text are, under the treatise-author's brush, one continuous line, not a scattered list.

37. Answer: boundless is taught for those who grasp at marks and cling to one flavour. 「有人知諸法平等、知諸法離，則不須說；若有人取相，著是一味，故說無邊。」 tr. "For someone who knows the equality of dharmas and knows that dharmas are apart, there is no need to say more; if someone grasps at marks and clings to this one flavour, therefore boundless is taught." So it is said further only to counteract; if not to counteract, all saying would be surplus words. Brought down to use: when, reading a sūtra, one feels that a certain sentence is of no use to oneself, it is not necessarily that the sentence is useless; mostly it is that this sickness has not yet arisen.

38. Dharmodgata does not teach only for Sadāprarudita. 「曇無竭非但為薩陀波崙故說，薩陀波崙亦不但自為故問，但為眾生有種種心、種種行故，於般若波羅蜜相中略說。」 tr. "Dharmodgata does not teach only for the sake of Sadāprarudita, and Sadāprarudita does not ask only for his own sake; it is only because beings have all kinds of minds and all kinds of practices that it is taught briefly within the marks of prajñāpāramitā." This passage explains what is public and what is private in the one question and one answer: the asker does not ask for himself, the teacher does not teach for one person. The reader can know here why the marks in this fascicle have many gates—the many gates come from the many minds and practices, not from the Dharma being of many kinds.

39. For what has been spoken of he points to its place; what has not been spoken of is now spoken of briefly. 「無生、無滅，如先種種因緣『破生滅』中說。虛空無邊，如摩訶衍虛空譬喻中說。大海水無邊、須彌莊嚴，先未說故，今當略說。」 tr. "Non-arising and non-ceasing are as was said earlier, by all kinds of causes and conditions, in ‘refuting arising and ceasing’. Space being boundless is as is said in the simile of the Mahāyāna being like space. The water of the great ocean being boundless and Mount Sumeru being adorned have not been spoken of before, so now they should be spoken of briefly." Here the treatise-author divides the nine sentences and the four similes of the sūtra text into two classes: for what has been spoken of he points to its place; what has not been spoken of he then explains. Sections 40 to 45 below are precisely the explanation of these two matters not yet spoken of.

40. Question: the great ocean has a measure in yojanas; why is it said to be boundless? 「虛空，無為、常法故無得其邊者，可言無邊。大海水在四天中，繞須彌山，有由旬數量，有人能渡，何以言無邊？」 tr. "Space, because it is unconditioned and a constant dharma, has no edge that anyone can find, so it can be said to be boundless. The water of the great ocean lies within the four continents and surrounds Mount Sumeru; it has a measure in yojanas, and there are people who can cross it; why is it said to be boundless?" This question is very concrete: space is unconditioned, and to say it is boundless is acceptable; the great ocean has a measure and can be crossed—how can it share the name? The reader should see here that what the questioner holds is that 「無邊」 tr. "boundless" has only one meaning.

41. Answer: the boundless is of two kinds, and the ocean too is of two kinds. 「無邊有二種：一者、實無邊，二者、人不能到故無邊。」 tr. "The boundless is of two kinds: first, really boundless; second, boundless because people cannot reach it." The ocean too is of two kinds: 「一者、可渡；二者、繞須彌山在九寶山裏，廣八萬二千由旬，世間人不能得邊，故言無邊。」 tr. "first, that which can be crossed; second, that which surrounds Mount Sumeru, within the nine jewel mountains, eighty-two thousand yojanas wide, whose edge the people of the world cannot find, so it is said to be boundless." The treatise-author further uses the simile of the ship to separate what can and what cannot: 「如小海，船力可渡；大海水，船力不可渡，唯有神通者能度。」 tr. "It is like a small sea, which the power of a ship can cross; the water of the great ocean the power of a ship cannot cross; only those who have supernormal powers can cross it." And he matches it with concentration and wisdom: 「如外道凡夫能生禪定船，度欲界、色界海；無色界如大海，深廣則不能渡，以不能破我心故。諸賢聖人智慧、禪定翅力，破諸法邪相、得實相，故能度……」 tr. "It is like those of the outside paths and ordinary people, who can raise the ship of meditative concentration and cross the oceans of the desire realm and the form realm; the formless realm is like the great ocean, deep and wide, and they cannot cross it, because they cannot break the mind of self. The worthies and noble ones, by the power of the wings of wisdom and meditative concentration, break the wrong marks of dharmas and obtain the real mark, so they can cross……" The realms divided here are all categories this treatise itself has: the desire realm, the form realm, and the formless realm are the three realms; the meditative concentration of those of the outside paths and ordinary people can go out of the first two and cannot go out of the last, and what obstructs lies in the one phrase 「不能破我心」 tr. "cannot break the mind of self". Brought down to use: the power of concentration can move a person beyond coarse objects, but cannot of itself break the view of self; what breaks the view of self is wisdom.

42. Question: Mount Sumeru is of one colour; why is it said to be adorned? 「須彌山一色，何以言莊嚴？」 tr. "Mount Sumeru is of one colour; why is it said to be adorned?" What the questioner relies on is the account of the outside books. Adornment must come from many ornaments, and one colour has nothing to be ornamented—this question too arises from common sense.

43. Answer: the marks of the adornment of Mount Sumeru. The treatise-author first records the outside books: 「外書說須彌山一色，純是黃金。」 tr. "The outside books say Mount Sumeru is of one colour, pure yellow gold." Next he cites the treatise of his own tradition: 「六足阿毘曇中說：須彌山四邊，各以一寶成，金、銀、頗梨、琉璃莊嚴。若諸鳥隨所至方，各同其色。」 tr. "In the six-part abhidharma it is said: each of the four sides of Mount Sumeru is made of one jewel, adorned with gold, silver, sphaṭika, and beryl. Birds, according to the side they reach, each become the same as its colour." Below this he narrates its adornments one by one: the nāga-king brothers 「以身圍繞七匝」 tr. "coil their bodies round it seven times"; the palaces of the Heaven of the Thirty-three on the summit of the mountain, 「其城七重，名為憙見，九百九十九門，一一門邊皆有十六青衣大力鬼神守護」 tr. "its city has seven walls and is named Joyful-to-See; it has nine hundred and ninety-nine gates, and beside each gate there are sixteen blue-robed spirits of great strength who guard it"; 「城中高處作殿，名曰最勝，四邊有四大園」 tr. "in a high place within the city a hall is built, named Most Excellent, and on its four sides there are four great gardens"; the Youqiantuo mountains where the Four Heavenly Kings dwell, 「各高四萬二千由旬」 tr. "each forty-two thousand yojanas high"; and so on to 「四大海水，諸阿修羅宮及諸龍王宮殿」 tr. "the waters of the four great oceans, the palaces of the asuras and the palaces of the nāga kings" and 「日月、五星、二十八宿及諸餘星圍繞莊嚴」 tr. "the sun, the moon, the five planets, the twenty-eight lunar mansions, and the other stars circle round and adorn it". At the end he concludes: 「如是等種種雜飾以為莊嚴，視之無厭。」 tr. "With all kinds of varied ornaments such as these it is adorned, and one looks at it without ever tiring." Here one must guard against a misreading: the treatise-author's narrating these features is not to describe the structure of the world; it is to gather material for the simile of the next passage—adornment is adornment in that its many virtues support one another.

44. The adornment of prajñā too has two times, not yet complete and complete. 「六波羅蜜果報故，作轉輪王、梵、釋天王、淨居天王、大自在天——如是等果報，行般若波羅蜜未具足時，受此果報莊嚴。般若波羅蜜具足時，則有須陀洹果、斯陀含果、阿那含果、阿羅漢果、辟支佛道、阿毘跋致菩薩、諸佛道果莊嚴。」 tr. "Because of the retribution of the six perfections, one becomes a wheel-turning king, the Brahmā king, the heavenly king Śakra, a king of the Pure Abodes, or the Great Sovereign Heaven—retributions such as these are the adornments of retribution received when the practice of prajñāpāramitā is not yet complete. When prajñāpāramitā is complete, there are the adornments of the fruit of srota-āpanna, the fruit of sakṛdāgāmin, the fruit of anāgāmin, the fruit of arhat, the path of the pratyekabuddha, the avaivartika bodhisattva, and the fruit of the path of the buddhas." The ornaments of the two times differ: what is received when it is not yet complete is the honoured positions of the world; what one has when it is complete is the fruits of the paths that transcend the world. Here one must guard against a misreading: the former is not a wrong road; it is the retribution of practising prajñā while it is not yet full; yet the practitioner may not make it what he hopes for.

45. Adorned above and below, and taking also the three meanings of the forming of the mountain, its being unmoved, and its four gardens. 「如須彌山，上、下皆有莊嚴。般若波羅蜜莊嚴亦爾……」 tr. "Just as Mount Sumeru has adornments both above and below, so too are the adornments of prajñāpāramitā……" The treatise-author further takes three meanings from Sumeru: first, the cause of the mountain's forming—「劫初立時，四邊大風吹，聚地之精味，積為須彌山；更有風吹，令堅而成寶」 tr. "at the beginning of the kalpa, when it was being formed, great winds blew on the four sides, gathered the essences and flavours of the earth, and piled them up to become Mount Sumeru; and again wind blew, making it firm so that it became jewel", a simile for prajñā being 「一切善法中第一堅實牢固和合以為般若」 tr. "among all wholesome dharmas the foremost, solid, firm, and strong, coming together to make prajñā"; second, being unmoved—「四邊大風吹、大海水波所不能動」 tr. "it cannot be moved by the great winds blowing on its four sides or by the waves of the great ocean", a simile for prajñā, which 「邪見、外道、戲論及諸魔民所不能動」 tr. "wrong views, the outside paths, idle discourse, and Māra's people cannot move"; third, receiving happiness on the summit—「須彌山頂四園，諸天到者，受種種樂」 tr. "in the four gardens on the summit of Mount Sumeru, the gods who go there receive all kinds of happiness", a simile for 「行者能登般若頂，到四禪等諸定園中，受種種樂」 tr. "the practitioner can climb to the summit of prajñā, come into the gardens of the concentrations, the four dhyānas and the others, and receive all kinds of happiness". Brought down to use: wholesome dharmas must accumulate for a long time before they become firm; once firm they are not moved by outer conditions; once unmoved, the happiness of concentration can be obtained; the three matters are a sequence along one road.

46. Someone says: the many birds becoming one colour is a simile for dharmas sharing one mark. 「復次，有人言：須彌山，眾鳥到者皆同一色；般若波羅蜜亦如是，諸法入中皆同一相，所謂無相。」 tr. "Further, someone says: at Mount Sumeru, the birds that reach it all become of one colour; prajñāpāramitā too is thus: dharmas that enter it all become of one mark, namely the signless." This is one view recorded side by side. What this simile takes lies in the character 「同」 tr. "same": birds are from the first of different colours, and at the mountain become the same; dharmas are from the first of different marks, and entering prajñā become the same in the signless.

47. Space without discrimination. 「如虛空無分別者，虛空無分別是內是外、是遠是近、是長是短、是淨是不淨等；般若波羅蜜亦如是，諸法入般若中，亦無內外、善不善等分別。」 tr. "What is called being like space, without discrimination, means that space does not discriminate: this is inner, this is outer, this is far, this is near, this is long, this is short, this is pure, this is impure, and so on; prajñāpāramitā too is thus: when dharmas enter prajñā, there is also no discrimination of inner and outer, wholesome and unwholesome, and so on." Here one must guard against a misreading: saying that within prajñā there is no discrimination of wholesome and unwholesome does not say that the practitioner need not choose between good and evil; what is absent is the discrimination that grasps at marks, not the choosing of cause and fruit being abolished. Below, in section 51, the treatise-author himself explains why discrimination arises; the two can be read together.

48. The five aggregates boundless. 「如五眾無邊者，五眾常遍滿世間；般若波羅蜜亦如是，不遠離於五眾，五眾實相即是般若波羅蜜。」 tr. "What is called being like the five aggregates, boundless, means that the five aggregates always pervade the world; prajñāpāramitā too is thus: it is not far from the five aggregates; the real mark of the five aggregates is precisely prajñāpāramitā." What matters most in this passage is its last sentence. Those who seek prajñā often wish to seek it apart from the five aggregates; the treatise-author pointedly says 「不遠離於五眾」 tr. "it is not far from the five aggregates"—what is left behind is the marks of the five aggregates; what it is one with is the real mark of the five aggregates.

49. Form analysed down to atoms has no spatial parts, and so is boundless. 「復次，如色等法，分析破裂，乃至微塵則無方，無方故無邊；無色法，無形故無此彼，無此彼故無邊。」 tr. "Further, dharmas such as form, analysed and broken apart, and so on until they reach atoms, have no spatial parts, and because they have no spatial parts they are boundless; formless dharmas, because they have no shape, have no this and that, and because they have no this and that they are boundless." Dharmas that have form, analysed to the utmost, have no spatial location; formless dharmas from the first have no shape and so have no that and this; both return to the boundless. The treatise-author further says it in terms of the practitioner: 「般若波羅蜜亦如是，於一切法，分別色乃至微塵、分別無色法乃至一念中，不見決定有常、樂、我、淨。」 tr. "Prajñāpāramitā too is thus: in all dharmas, discriminating form down to atoms and discriminating formless dharmas down to a single thought, it does not see definitely existent permanence, bliss, self, or purity." Here one should see the intent of analysing dharmas: analysis is not for the sake of destroying, but to show that within them there is no definite thing that can be relied on. What are called permanence, bliss, self, and purity are the four kinds of inversion that beings reckon upon dharmas.

50. Equal like the vajra. 「乃至虛空六種，亦如是。如金剛等者，如天王所執金剛，無憎無愛，隨所用處，無不摧碎……」 tr. "And so on up to the six kinds such as space: it is likewise. What is called equal like the vajra means: like the vajra held by the heavenly king, which is without hatred and without love, and wherever it is used there is nothing it does not shatter……" The virtue of the vajra lies in two matters: without hatred and without love, so it does not pick what it breaks; there is nothing it does not shatter, so there is nothing it does not break. It is used as a simile for 「諸佛一切智前心，此心中三昧能斷一切結使煩惱顛倒及習皆滅，故名為如金剛」 tr. "the mind just before the omniscience of the buddhas—the samādhi in this mind can sever all fetters, afflictions, and inversions, together with the habitual residues, so that all are extinguished; therefore it is named like the vajra". The treatise-author further makes its sequence clear: 「如金剛三昧相應智慧觀一切法皆平等，般若波羅蜜觀諸法平等亦如是。何以故？般若先觀諸法平等，然後得是三昧。」 tr. "As the wisdom associated with the like-vajra samādhi contemplates all dharmas as all equal, prajñāpāramitā contemplating dharmas as equal is also thus. Why? Because prajñā first contemplates the equality of dharmas, and afterward obtains this samādhi." It can be seen that prajñā is before and samādhi after, agreeing with the sequence seen in section 7.

51. Dharmas without discrimination. 「世間凡夫煩惱力故，種種分別諸法；得諸法實相，則皆破壞、變異。是故聖人得般若波羅蜜，不隨憶想分別諸法，入空、無相、無作三昧中……」 tr. "Worldly ordinary people, because of the power of the afflictions, discriminate dharmas in all kinds of ways; when the real mark of dharmas is obtained, these are all destroyed and changed. For this reason the noble ones obtain prajñāpāramitā, do not follow recollection, imagining, and discrimination of dharmas, and enter the emptiness, signless, and non-action samādhis……" The arising of discrimination comes from the first from the power of the afflictions; once the afflictions are removed, what was discriminated breaks down of itself. The treatise-author further speaks of its proof: 「若得諸法變異時，則不憂愁，以先來不分別取諸法相故。」 tr. "If they meet the time when dharmas change, they do not sorrow, because all along they have not discriminated and grasped at the marks of dharmas." This one sentence is where the whole passage lands—the proof of not discriminating lies not in words, but in whether the mind moves or not at the time circumstances change.

52. The nature of dharmas unfindable. 「一切法皆從因緣和合生，無有無因緣、若少因緣而起者；若從因緣生，則無自性。」 tr. "All dharmas are born from the coming together of causes and conditions; nothing arises without causes and conditions, or from scant causes and conditions; if it is born from causes and conditions, it has no self-nature." The treatise-author at once fixes the meaning of 「性」 tr. "nature": 「性者，名本有決定實事。」 tr. "What is called nature is named a definitely real matter that exists from the first." Since it exists from the first and is definite, it runs against being born of causes and conditions, so he infers: 「若性從因緣和合邊生，當知未和合時則無；若先無今從因緣和合有者，則知無性。」 tr. "If a nature were born from the side of the coming together of causes and conditions, know that before they came together it did not exist; if it did not exist before and now exists from the coming together of causes and conditions, one can know that it is without nature." He goes a layer further: 「若從因緣而生性者，性即是作法。性名不相待、不相因，常應獨有；如是有為法則無。」 tr. "If a nature is born from causes and conditions, the nature is precisely a made dharma. Nature means not depending on another and not caused by another; it should always exist alone; thus conditioned dharmas have none." So he concludes: 「是故言『一切諸法性不可得，般若波羅蜜性亦爾』。」 tr. "For this reason it says: ‘The nature of all dharmas is unfindable, and the nature of prajñāpāramitā is also thus.’" Here one must guard against a misreading: refuting self-nature is not refuting dharmas born from causes and conditions; it is precisely by way of their being born from causes and conditions that their lack of self-nature is shown.

53. Dharmas without anything existent and equal. 「諸法性不可得故，眾因緣亦不可得；眾因緣亦不可得故，皆是無所有；入無所有中故，則皆平等。」 tr. "Because the nature of dharmas is unfindable, the many causes and conditions are also unfindable; because the many causes and conditions are also unfindable, all are without anything existent; because they enter into being without anything existent, all are equal." Nature and causes and conditions, depending on each other, are dispelled together; when the dispelling is complete there is equality. The treatise-author explains why himself: 「有，故有分別；無，故無分別。」 tr. "Because there is existence, there is discrimination; because there is non-existence, there is no discrimination." He further takes a simile: 「如草香、栴檀香，燒時有分別，滅時無分別。」 tr. "It is like the fragrance of grass incense and the fragrance of sandalwood: when burning there is discrimination; when extinguished there is no discrimination." The point of the simile lies in the arising and ceasing of discrimination at the boundary of existence and non-existence, not in which fragrance is better or worse.

54. Dharmas without making. 「眾生空、法空故，則皆無作。」 tr. "Because beings are empty and dharmas are empty, all are without making." The treatise-author first lists the two classes of what is made: 「眾生所作者，所謂十善、十不善等。法作者，所謂火然、水流、風動、識能識，智能知——如是法，各各自有力。」 tr. "What beings make is, namely, the ten wholesome paths, the ten unwholesome paths, and so on. What dharmas make is, namely, fire burning, water flowing, wind moving, consciousness being able to cognise, knowledge being able to know—dharmas such as these each have their own power." Next he decides it by what has already been refuted earlier: 「無眾生乃至無知者、見者，無色等乃至一切種智，先已破。破眾生故無作者，破法故無所作……」 tr. "There are no beings, and so on up to no knower and no seer, no form and so on up to no omniscience of all kinds—this has already been refuted earlier. Because beings are refuted, there is no maker; because dharmas are refuted, there is nothing made……" At the end he points to the view of ordinary people: 「但凡夫人顛倒覆故言：『我有所作。』」 tr. "It is only because ordinary people are covered by inversion that they say: ‘I have something I make.’" Here one must guard against a misreading: without making is said with respect to the self-nature of the maker and of what is made; it does not say that things need not be done. The ten wholesome and the ten unwholesome are the ten paths of deeds—three of body, four of speech, three of mind; in accord with them it is wholesome, against them it is unwholesome.

55. Dharmas inconceivable. 「色等一切法不得決定——若常、若無常，若苦、若樂，若實、若空，若我、若無我，若生滅、若不生滅，若寂滅、若不寂滅，若離、若不離，若有、若無等種種門分別，亦如是不可得思議。」 tr. "Form and all dharmas cannot be determined—whether permanent or impermanent, whether suffering or bliss, whether real or empty, whether self or non-self, whether arising and ceasing or not arising and ceasing, whether quiescent or not quiescent, whether apart or not apart, whether existent or non-existent, and so on: discriminations through all kinds of gates such as these likewise cannot be conceived or discussed." The headings of the eight pairs are all set up in mutual dependence. The treatise-author explains the reason himself: 「是法皆從心中憶想分別生，亦不可決定；一切法實性，皆過心、心數法、出名字語言道。」 tr. "These dharmas are all born from recollection, imagining, and discrimination within the mind, and also cannot be determined; the real nature of all dharmas passes beyond mind and mental-factor dharmas, and goes out beyond the way of names and words." He further cites the text of a previous chapter as proof: 「如前品說：『一切諸法平等，一切賢聖不能行、不能到。』」 tr. "As is said in a previous chapter: ‘All dharmas are equal; all the worthies and noble ones cannot practise it and cannot reach it.’" At the end he concludes: 「般若波羅蜜亦爾，觀是法故生。」 tr. "Prajñāpāramitā too is thus, because it is born from contemplating this dharma."

56. Right there on his seat Sadāprarudita obtains the samādhis. 「是時，薩陀波崙即於坐上得諸三昧。」 tr. "At this time Sadāprarudita, right there on his seat, obtained the samādhis." Here the treatise section takes up the result the sūtra text narrates. The one question and one answer below are precisely to explain this one sentence.

57. Question: what benefit did seven years of toil and seeing Dharmodgata obtain? 「薩陀波崙先已知諸法空相，今種種勤苦，住立七歲，見曇無竭得何等利益？」 tr. "Sadāprarudita already knew earlier the empty mark of dharmas; now, through all kinds of toil and hardship, standing for seven years, and seeing Dharmodgata, what benefit did he obtain?" This question is asked on the reader's behalf: since he already knew emptiness, why this round of hardship? It is asked very close to home—whoever has practised for a long time and doubts whether what he practises has been in vain doubts precisely this question.

58. Answer: to break his clinging mind that valued prajñā highly. 「薩陀波崙先見諸佛，得諸三昧，貴重般若波羅蜜生著相；今曇無竭七歲從定起，為說般若破其著心，一切法性自空，非般若波羅蜜令其空。」 tr. "Earlier, when Sadāprarudita saw the buddhas and obtained the samādhis, he valued prajñāpāramitā highly and gave rise to clinging to marks. Now Dharmodgata, after seven years, rose from concentration and proclaimed prajñā to him to break his clinging mind: the nature of all dharmas is from the first of itself empty; it is not that prajñāpāramitā makes it empty." What the long string of paired marks above was taught for lies here. The treatise-author further speaks of its twofold not letting: 「不令輕賤餘法、貴重般若」 tr. "not to let him despise the other dharmas and value prajñā highly", 「不令因般若故更生垢著」 tr. "not to let him, because of prajñā, give rise further to defiled clinging". He takes a simile: 「般若波羅蜜雖畢竟清淨，多所饒益，復不可取相而生著心；如熱金雖好，不可手捉。」 tr. "Although prajñāpāramitā is ultimate purity and of much benefit, still one may not grasp at its mark and give rise to a clinging mind; just as hot gold, though it is fine, cannot be held in the hand." At the end he concludes what was obtained: 「薩陀波崙得是教化，斷般若中著心，即得諸法等諸三昧。」 tr. "Having received this teaching, Sadāprarudita severed the clinging mind toward prajñā, and then obtained the samādhis, the equality of dharmas and the others." This passage is the pivot of the whole fascicle; only here does the reader know what the marks listed in sections 2 to 6 were for.

59. In a scattered mind there is only wisdom, and it is not named samādhi. 「句句解說，散亂心中，但有智慧，不名三昧；今從師聞已，一心思惟，名為三昧，攝心不散，智慧變成三昧。」 tr. "Explaining phrase by phrase: in a scattered mind there is only wisdom, and it is not named samādhi; now, having heard it from the teacher, he reflects with one mind, and it is named samādhi: gathering the mind so that it does not scatter, wisdom turns into samādhi." The difference between wisdom and samādhi lies in the mind being scattered or gathered, not in how much is known. The treatise-author takes a simile: 「如風中燈不能照明，在靜室閉門，明乃遍照。」 tr. "As a lamp in the wind cannot give light, while in a quiet room with the door shut its light then shines everywhere." Here one must guard against a misreading: it is not obtaining some samādhi besides wisdom; it is the same wisdom, within the gathered mind, that is named samādhi.

60. Because the mind of the desire realm is scattered, the power of wisdom is not yet accomplished. 「先已欲界心散亂故，智慧力未成就；今入攝心中，所聞諸法皆名三昧，能破諸煩惱等及魔人民。」 tr. "Earlier, because the mind of the desire realm was scattered, the power of wisdom was not yet accomplished; now, having entered the gathering of the mind, the dharmas he has heard are all named samādhi, and can break the afflictions and so on, as well as Māra's people." The treatise-author further takes a simile: 「如水，寒風未至，未成為氷，則無堅用；若成凍氷，能有所蹈。」 tr. "It is like water: before the cold wind has come, it has not become ice and has no firm use; once it has become frozen ice, it can be walked upon." Water and ice are the same water; scattered and gathered are the same mind; the difference lies in whether it can bear a load. Brought down to use: if the Dharma one has learned cannot be put to strength, it is not necessarily that the Dharma is untrue; mostly the mind has not yet set.

61. The meaning of obtaining six million samādhi gates. 「薩陀波崙得聞曇無竭所說法，得諸法中大智慧明，所謂種種諸法實相門。諸法平等——平等是智慧，入薩陀波崙禪定心中，變為三昧。」 tr. "Sadāprarudita, having been able to hear the Dharma taught by Dharmodgata, obtained the light of great wisdom within dharmas, namely all kinds of gates of the real mark of all dharmas. The equality of dharmas—equality is wisdom; it entered Sadāprarudita's mind of meditative concentration and turned into samādhi." The number six million is not elsewhere; it lies precisely in the many gates of the real mark of all dharmas he heard: gate by gate entering concentration, gate by gate becoming samādhi. The correspondence seen in section 7 finds its explanation here.

62. The retribution in the present life and in later lives. 「今欲說三昧、智慧今世後世果報故，爾時，佛告須菩提……」 tr. "Now, because he wishes to speak of the retribution of samādhi and wisdom in the present life and in later lives, at that time the Buddha told Subhūti……" The treatise-author first marks the intent of the Buddha's words, then takes up the sūtra text and explains it. The present-life retribution: 「深愛樂法故，多集諸經，廣誦多聞」 tr. "because he deeply loves and delights in the Dharma, he gathers many sūtras, recites widely, and hears much", like Ānanda's being able to keep what the Buddha taught, and so 「多聞、智慧不可思議，如大海水。即於是世常不離佛」 tr. "his learning and wisdom are inconceivable, like the water of the great ocean. In this very life he is never apart from the Buddha". The later-life retribution: 「捨身常生有佛國中，好修行念佛三昧故，乃至夢中初不離見佛」 tr. "having cast off this body, he is always born in lands where there is a Buddha; because he has cultivated well the samādhi of recollecting the Buddha, even in dreams he has never been apart from seeing the Buddha", 「地獄等諸難皆已永絕，隨意往生諸佛國土」 tr. "the difficulties such as the hells are all cut off for ever, and according to his intent he is reborn in the buddha-lands". And as to why he can be so, the treatise-author returns it to one sentence: 「以其深入般若波羅蜜、集無量功德故，不隨業生。」 tr. "Because he has entered deeply into prajñāpāramitā and gathered immeasurable merits, he is not born according to his deeds." At the end he takes a simile and concludes with an exhortation: 「薩陀波崙從一佛土至一佛土，供養諸佛，度脫眾生，集無量功德；譬如豪貴長者，從一會至一會，乃至今在大雷音佛所，淨修梵行。若有欲求般若波羅蜜者，當如薩陀波崙菩薩，堅正一心，不可傾動！」 tr. "Sadāprarudita goes from one buddha-land to another buddha-land, making offerings to the buddhas, delivering beings, and gathering immeasurable merits; it is like a wealthy and noble elder going from one assembly to another, and so on until now, in the presence of the Buddha Great Thunder-Sound, he purely cultivates pure conduct. If there are those who wish to seek prajñāpāramitā, they should be like the bodhisattva Sadāprarudita, firm and upright with one mind, not to be shaken!"

63. Because of the causes and conditions of prajñā, all merits are accomplished. 「諸菩薩等得般若者，貪欲瞋恚等在家罪垢、邪疑戲論等出家罪垢，皆悉除滅，得心清淨；心清淨故，得一切功德成就。」 tr. "Those, such as the bodhisattvas, who have obtained prajñā have the sinful stains of the householder, such as greed and hatred, and the sinful stains of the one who has gone forth, such as wrong doubts and idle discourse, all entirely removed and extinguished, and obtain purity of mind; because the mind is pure, they obtain the accomplishment of all merits." Householders and those who have gone forth each have their own stains; what is cited differs, but alike it is removed. The treatise-author further explains two phrases: 「得一切種智者，所謂得阿耨多羅三藐三菩提」 tr. "obtaining the omniscience of all kinds is what is called obtaining anuttarā samyaksaṃbodhi"; 「六波羅蜜者，從初地乃至七地得無生忍法；八地、九地、十地，是深入佛智慧，得一切種智，成就作佛。」 tr. "As for the six perfections: from the first ground and so on up to the seventh ground one obtains the dharma of the acceptance of non-arising; the eighth ground, the ninth ground, and the tenth ground—this is entering deeply into the wisdom of the Buddha, obtaining the omniscience of all kinds, and accomplishing Buddhahood." The grounds and positions listed here are categories this treatise itself has: the first ground to the seventh ground are the positions of obtaining the acceptance of non-arising; the eighth ground and above are the positions of entering deeply into the wisdom of the Buddha.

64. Those who attain sovereignty in all dharmas should receive and uphold it and make offerings to it. 「於一切法得自在者，皆應受持，乃至華香、妓樂。」 tr. "Those who attain sovereignty in all dharmas should all receive and uphold it, and so on up to flowers, incense, and music." The treatise-author gathers up the concluding exhortation of the sūtra text in one sentence. What is called attaining sovereignty in all dharmas does not mean having already accomplished it; it says that all who take this as what they hope for should receive and uphold it.

65. It should not be entrusted to Subhūti. 「須菩提雖常樂空行，佛共說般若，又得無諍三昧，故不應囑累。」 tr. "Though Subhūti always delights in the practice of emptiness, and the Buddha taught prajñā together with him, and he has moreover obtained the samādhi of non-contention, therefore it should not be entrusted to him." The three matters are cited together and concluded with 「不應囑累」 tr. "it should not be entrusted to him"—not belittling him, but there is no need. The samādhi of non-contention: one who abides in this concentration can keep beings from giving rise to minds of contention.

66. Ānanda is entrusted at length. 「阿難得聞持陀羅尼，又常親近世尊，故廣囑累。」 tr. "Ānanda has obtained the dhāraṇī of hearing and retaining, and moreover is always close to the World-Honored One, therefore it is entrusted to him at length." Two matters are the grounds: the dhāraṇī of hearing and retaining is the power to hear and keep without forgetting; always being close to the World-Honored One is the condition of attending on him. That the charge of the entrustment goes to Ānanda is decided by his virtue and his position, not by partiality. The chapter ends here.

Do Not Misread

Do not read ‘Because dharmas are such-and-such, know that prajñāpāramitā too is such-and-such’ as a comparison between two things. What the sūtra text sets up is not that prajñā resembles dharmas; it is that prajñā is precisely the real mark of dharmas; so every sentence speaks only of how dharmas are, and the mark of prajñā shows of itself. If it is read as two things compared, then prajñā becomes a second thing outside dharmas—precisely what this fascicle dispels.

Do not read the nine paired declarations as nine kinds of merit. At the three marks of apart, one flavour, and boundless, the treatise-author himself sets up the question ‘such-and-such has already been spoken of above; why now speak further of such-and-such?’, so it can be seen that the nine sentences are a sequence of dispelling clinging all along the way, not headings set side by side. Equal dispels the unequal, apart dispels grasping at the equal, unmoving dispels what is moved, without thought dispels thought, without fear dispels fear, one flavour dispels difference, boundless dispels edges—what each later sentence dispels is precisely the sickness that arises when the previous sentence is grasped as a mark.

Do not read 「或有人言」 tr. "or someone says" as the treatise-author's settled teaching. 「或有人言：般若波羅蜜力故，觀諸法皆平等；非諸法性性自平等」 tr. "Or someone says: because of the power of prajñāpāramitā, one contemplates dharmas as all equal; it is not that the nature of dharmas is of itself equal" is a different view recorded side by side, and right below it the treatise-author sets up a question against it; the three places 「復次，有人言：邊有二種」 tr. "further, someone says: edges are of two kinds", 「復次，有人言：邊名前際、後際」 tr. "further, someone says: edges are named the prior limit and the later limit", and 「復次，有人言：須彌山，眾鳥到者皆同一色」 tr. "further, someone says: at Mount Sumeru, the birds that reach it all become of one colour" are the same. This treatise records the various views side by side without judging, and the reader may not take one of them and say that the treatise-author says so.

Do not read 「初觀時是因，觀竟名為果」 tr. "when he first contemplates, it is the cause; when the contemplation is finished it is named the fruit" as prajñā being two. The treatise-author says plainly 「般若及諸法雖一相、無二無別」 tr. "although prajñā and dharmas are of one mark, without duality and without difference"; what is divided is the practitioner's position, not the substance of the dharma. If it is read as the prajñā of the causal position and the prajñā of the fruition position being two, then the sentence below, 「色等一切法平等，即是般若波羅蜜平等」 tr. "the equality of form and all dharmas is precisely the equality of prajñāpāramitā", has nowhere to rest.

Do not read 「離」 tr. "apart" as leaving equality. The treatise-author's words are 「般若波羅蜜平等相自性離，色等諸法自相離故」 tr. "the mark of equality of prajñāpāramitā is apart in its self-nature, because form and the other dharmas are apart in their own marks"—apart is the self-nature of equality as it is of itself, not taking some further dharma outside equality. If one seeks an apart separately, what one obtains is still one mark, exactly what the sūtra text dispels.

Do not read 「無念」 tr. "without thought" as not being allowed to give rise to thoughts. The reason the treatise-author himself gives is 「般若波羅蜜諸相滅故」 tr. "because in prajñāpāramitā all marks are extinguished"; what is absent is marks that can be thought of, not the pressing down of thoughts. If forcibly holding back thoughts is taken as without thought, the mind that holds them back is precisely a mind that has thought.

Do not read 「空，或時有味」 tr. "emptiness sometimes has flavour" as ultimate emptiness having flavour. What this saying of the treatise-author points to is the great joy of the practitioner when he first obtains the emptiness of equality, named flavour according to the time; right below it he says 「真實畢竟空，則無味、不味」 tr. "in real ultimate emptiness there is neither flavour nor non-flavour". If the joy of first obtaining is taken as the ultimate flavour, then the 「貴重般若波羅蜜生著相」 tr. "valued prajñāpāramitā highly and gave rise to clinging to marks" refuted in section 58 lies right within it.

Do not read 「五眾實相即是般若波羅蜜」 tr. "the real mark of the five aggregates is precisely prajñāpāramitā" as the five aggregates being prajñā. What it is one with is the real mark, not the marks of the five aggregates; the treatise-author says plainly 「般若波羅蜜亦如是，不遠離於五眾」 tr. "prajñāpāramitā too is thus: it is not far from the five aggregates". To seek prajñā separately apart from the five aggregates is certainly wrong; to take the five aggregates as prajñā is wrong too.

Do not read 「諸法無分別」 tr. "dharmas without discrimination" as not telling good from evil. The discrimination the treatise-author speaks of is the discrimination of 「世間凡夫煩惱力故，種種分別諸法」 tr. "worldly ordinary people, because of the power of the afflictions, discriminate dharmas in all kinds of ways", and its proof lies in 「若得諸法變異時，則不憂愁」 tr. "if they meet the time when dharmas change, they do not sorrow"; what is removed is recollection, imagining, and grasping at marks, not the choosing of cause and fruit. The sūtra text also has the refutation 「無色等乃至一切種智」 tr. "no form and so on up to no omniscience of all kinds", and it too is all said with respect to self-nature.

Do not read 「性不可得」 tr. "the nature unfindable" as there being no cause and no fruit. The treatise-author's inference argues precisely from causes and conditions: 「一切法皆從因緣和合生，無有無因緣、若少因緣而起者；若從因緣生，則無自性。」 tr. "All dharmas are born from the coming together of causes and conditions; nothing arises without causes and conditions, or from scant causes and conditions; if it is born from causes and conditions, it has no self-nature." What is refuted is a nature that is 「本有決定實事」 tr. "a definitely real matter that exists from the first", not dharmas born of causes and conditions. If, because the nature is unfindable, one says there is no cause and fruit, then the grounds, positions, and retributions spoken of in section 63 all have nothing to hang on.

Do not read 「無作」 tr. "without making" as there being no need to do anything. The treatise-author first cites what beings make, the ten wholesome and ten unwholesome, and what dharmas make, fire burning and water flowing, making clear that they 「各各自有力」 tr. "each have their own power", and only then refutes them with respect to the self-nature of the maker and of what is made; in the last sentence, 「但凡夫人顛倒覆故言：『我有所作。』」 tr. "it is only because ordinary people are covered by inversion that they say: ‘I have something I make’", what is refuted is the 「我」 tr. "I", not the 「作」 tr. "making".

Do not read the seven years of toil as labour in vain. The treatise-author sets up his question precisely for this doubt, and answers that what was obtained lies in 「破其著心」 tr. "breaking his clinging mind". Without these seven years, his thirsting and yearning when he saw Dharmodgata would not have been deep, and what he heard could not have entered concentration and become samādhi; the difference between the scattered mind and the gathered mind spoken of in sections 59 and 60 is precisely what these seven years brought about.

Bearing on Practice

Take 「諸法等故，當知般若波羅蜜亦等」 tr. "because dharmas are equal, know that prajñāpāramitā too is equal" as a ruler for how you look at the Dharma. Whenever you hear a teaching and feel that it is higher than the matters before your eyes, you can turn back and ask: is it somewhere else, apart from this form, feeling, perception, constructions, and consciousness before your eyes? Every sentence of this fascicle speaks only of dharmas, precisely so that people take the place they seek back to what is present.

Take the sequence of the nine sentences and examine where you dwell. Having obtained equality, one dwells in equality; having obtained apart, one dwells in apart; having obtained one flavour, one dwells in one flavour—this is precisely what the question the treatise-author sets up in each passage means to dispel. The proof of practice lies not in which mark one has obtained, but in whether, having obtained it, one is still willing to put it down.

Take 「初觀時是因，觀竟名為果」 tr. "when he first contemplates, it is the cause; when the contemplation is finished it is named the fruit" to settle how raw or ripe you are. When at the start of learning to contemplate equality it feels stiff and unreal, there is no need on that account to doubt that what you practise is not the Dharma; it is one and the same dharma, and in the causal position this is simply how it looks. What is needed is to go on contemplating, not to change to a dharma that looks more like the fruit.

Take 「住眾生等中，怨親、憎愛皆悉平等」 tr. "abiding in the equality of beings, enemy and kin, hatred and love, are all equal" as the order of the two kinds of equality. Equality in dharmas is hard to see; equality toward people can be checked: within one day, toward the close and the distant, toward those who respect you and those who slight you, how far apart is the warmth or coldness of your mind? If you are unequal here and talk first of the emptiness of all dharmas, what you talk of is mostly talk by mouth.

Take 「有人雖得平等而生戲論」 tr. "although they have obtained equality, give rise to idle discourse" as a warning to yourself about the deeds of speech after studying emptiness. The more thoroughly emptiness is studied, the easier it becomes to argue with others over the gains and losses of emptiness; when the argument heats up, the mind is already within inequality. The test is very simple: when you speak of emptiness, has your mind grown softer or harder?

Take 「於一切法得實相故」 tr. "because he has obtained the real mark in all dharmas" and look at the three kinds of being unmoved. When idle discourse comes, see whether you move or not; when afflictions arise, see whether you move or not; when impermanence arrives, see whether you move or not—the three places are three ways of testing one mind. Being unmoved is not holding on; it is there being no place where one can be moved.

Take 「如人為熱渴所逼，得清冷水」 tr. "as when a person pressed by heat and thirst obtains clear cool water" and turn the light on the joy of first attainment. When in practice one first tastes a little lightness and clarity, that joy is real, yet it is a flavour that exists according to the time. Knowing it is a flavour, you will not take it as something to rely on; not knowing, you will chase it your whole life.

Take 「以不能破我心故」 tr. "because they cannot break the mind of self" to tell concentration from wisdom apart. The mind growing quiet and the states becoming subtle is the power of concentration; whether the view of self has grown a little thinner is the proof of wisdom. The meditative concentration of those of the outside paths and ordinary people can cross the oceans of the desire and form realms but cannot cross the formless realm, and what obstructs lies only in this one phrase.

Take 「聚地之精味，積為須彌山；更有風吹，令堅而成寶」 tr. "gathered the essences and flavours of the earth, and piled them up to become Mount Sumeru; and again wind blew, making it firm so that it became jewel" and look at how wholesome dharmas accumulate and become firm. When wholesome dharmas are first done they are loose and scattered; only after long accumulation are they formed; once formed they must still pass through wind and sun before they are not moved by outer conditions. So there is no need to seek a moment's fierceness; what must be sought is continuity.

Take 「若得諸法變異時，則不憂愁」 tr. "if they meet the time when dharmas change, they do not sorrow" as an experiment in not discriminating. To say one does not grasp at marks is easy on ordinary days; only when circumstances change is the true and false seen: when the people and matters one leans on suddenly change, when the work one has accomplished suddenly falls apart—at that time, however much the mind moves, that is how much one grasps at marks.

Take 「如熱金雖好，不可手捉」 tr. "just as hot gold, though it is fine, cannot be held in the hand" and examine your own greed and clinging toward the Dharma. The finer the Dharma, the easier it is to cling to it, because when clinging to it one feels oneself in the right. Whenever toward some Dharma-gate there arises the mind ‘this alone is supreme, the rest are all inadequate’, that is hot gold in the hand, and the first one burnt is oneself.

Take 「如風中燈不能照明，在靜室閉門，明乃遍照」 tr. "as a lamp in the wind cannot give light, while in a quiet room with the door shut its light then shines everywhere" to arrange the order of your practice. When the meaning you have learned is plainly understood yet cannot be put to strength, it is mostly not that the meaning is untrue, but that the mind is too scattered. Rather than adding new meanings, it is better first to shut the door and sit quietly, and reflect one sentence you already know through to the end.

Take 「如水，寒風未至，未成為氷，則無堅用」 tr. "it is like water: before the cold wind has come, it has not become ice and has no firm use" and regard the long feeling that nothing is working. Water before it becomes ice looks no different from before, yet it is already changing. What is hardest in practice is this stretch when no proof can be seen; knowing it is a stretch that must be passed through, you will not retreat at this time.

Take 「當如薩陀波崙菩薩，堅正一心，不可傾動」 tr. "they should be like the bodhisattva Sadāprarudita, firm and upright with one mind, not to be shaken" to gather up the whole fascicle. The reason the jātaka is told in such detail is not to have people imitate the outward deeds of selling his body and piercing it to draw blood, but to have them take up his resolve of a single mind that cannot be shaken; once this resolve is set up, the hard places of daily life all become ground for practice.

Further Resonances

At the continuing heading at the start of this fascicle, what the various editions hand down is not uniform; they are recorded side by side below without forcing a judgement. The base text heads it 「大智度論釋曇無竭品第八十九」 tr. "The Mahāprajñāpāramitā-upadeśa's explanation of the chapter ‘Dharmodgata’, the eighty-ninth", and under the heading has the interlinear note 「卷第一百」 tr. "Fascicle One Hundred"; the Song and Yuan editions read 「大智度論卷第一百釋曇無竭品第八十九下」 tr. "Mahāprajñāpāramitā-upadeśa, Fascicle One Hundred, explanation of the chapter ‘Dharmodgata’, the eighty-ninth, last part", the Ming edition reads 「大智度論卷第一百釋曇無竭品第八十九之下」 tr. "Mahāprajñāpāramitā-upadeśa, Fascicle One Hundred, explanation of the chapter ‘Dharmodgata’, the eighty-ninth, the last part", and the Palace edition changes the chapter name and reads 「大智度論卷第一百釋說般若相品第八十九下」 tr. "Mahāprajñāpāramitā-upadeśa, Fascicle One Hundred, explanation of the chapter ‘Teaching the Marks of Prajñā’, the eighty-ninth, last part". The Palace edition's different name especially deserves notice—at the heading at the start of Fascicle 99 the Palace edition likewise changes the chapter name to Teaching the Marks of Prajñā; since what this fascicle teaches is precisely 「般若波羅蜜相」 tr. "the marks of prajñāpāramitā", it can be known that the chapter name of the Palace line is set up after the Dharma that is taught, while the base text's 「曇無竭品」 tr. "the chapter ‘Dharmodgata’" is set up after the person who teaches the Dharma. The two forms stand side by side, one naming by person, one naming by Dharma; choosing between them belongs to the translator. The Shōgozō manuscript reads 「大智度經論卷第一百釋第八十八品下訖第八十八品」 tr. "Great Wisdom-Crossing Sūtra-Treatise, Fascicle One Hundred, explanation of the eighty-eighth chapter, last part, ending the eighty-eighth chapter", and the Ishiyama-dera manuscript reads 「摩訶般若波羅蜜品第八十八之二，一百」 tr. "the Mahāprajñāpāramitā chapter, the eighty-eighth, second part, one hundred"—both manuscripts call it 「第八十八」 tr. "the eighty-eighth", one step lower than the base text, consistent with the pattern ‘the Shōgozō and Ishiyama manuscripts are one step lower’ seen in this work since chapter 44. At the boundary at the end of the chapter, the Ishiyama manuscript adds below 「故廣囑累」 tr. "therefore it is entrusted to him at length" the six Chinese characters 「釋八十八品竟」 tr. "the explanation of the eighty-eighth chapter ends", the Shōgozō manuscript reads 「釋八十九品」 tr. "explanation of the eighty-ninth chapter" where the next chapter's heading begins, and the Ishiyama manuscript reads 「摩訶般若波羅蜜品第八十九後囑累」 tr. "the Mahāprajñāpāramitā chapter, the eighty-ninth, followed by Entrustment"—the pattern of one step lower runs through consistently at both ends of this chapter, head and tail, without exception.

Jizang's Commentary on the Larger Sūtra, explaining this passage, follows for its chapter divisions not this treatise but the sūtra it explains. In the sūtra this chapter is headed 「法尚品第八十九」 tr. "the chapter ‘Dharma-Esteeming’, the eighty-ninth", and Jizang's commentary too sets up a division 「法尚品第八十九」 tr. "the chapter ‘Dharma-Esteeming’, the eighty-ninth" as a separate section, whose preceding division is 「常啼品第八十八」 tr. "the chapter ‘Ever Weeping’, the eighty-eighth"—it can be known that the chapter boundaries Jizang relies on differ from this treatise's: this treatise divides it into two chapters, Sadāprarudita and Dharmodgata, while his commentary takes the one chapter Ever Weeping to cover the whole course of the seeking of the Dharma, and separately the one chapter Dharma-Esteeming to cover the hearing of the Dharma. He explains the chapter name thus: 「若曇無竭，此云法尚，以其弘於大法而物宜欽。」 tr. "As for Dharmodgata, here it is called Dharma-Esteeming, because he spreads the great Dharma and beings rightly revere him." He also divides this chapter as a whole thus: 「品初是第二彼具足聞法。就中為二：第一為疑斷，第二正說般若。」 tr. "The beginning of the chapter is the second part, his hearing the Dharma in full. Within it there are two: first, the doubt cut off; second, properly teaching prajñā." The former 「為疑斷」 tr. "the doubt cut off" corresponds exactly to the sūtra and treatise segments of Fascicle 99 of this treatise; the latter 「正說般若」 tr. "properly teaching prajñā" corresponds to this fascicle.

His division of the sūtra text of this fascicle corresponds precisely to the four classes in the sūtra: the nine sentences, the four similes, the numbered categories of dharmas, and the ultimate. Below 「諸法等故」 tr. "because dharmas are equal" Jizang says: 「諸法等故下，第二、正為說般若。」 tr. "From ‘because dharmas are equal’ onward is the second: properly teaching prajñā for him." And he divides it into seven intents, the first two of which say: 「初、八門，就諸法異相以顯般若，般若諸法實相也；第二、三門，就譬喻歎般若無德不備……」 tr. "First, eight gates, which disclose prajñā by way of the different marks of dharmas—prajñā is the real mark of all dharmas; second, three gates, which praise prajñā by way of similes as lacking no virtue……" At 「如虛空」 tr. "like space" and what follows he further marks: 「如虗空下，第二、喻說。」 tr. "From ‘like space’ onward is the second: teaching by simile." He divides teaching by simile from teaching by dharma into two sections, sharing the same intent as the treatise-author's division 「先未說故，今當略說」 tr. "have not been spoken of before, so now they should be spoken of briefly".

On the sentence 「諸法等故般若等」 tr. "because dharmas are equal, prajñā is equal", what Jizang discusses is precisely the same difficult point contended over in the treatise-author's passage on 「或有人言」 tr. "or someone says". His words are: 「諸法等故般若等者，諸法非等不等，不知何以目之？為破眾生不等病，故歎以為等也。」 tr. "As for ‘because dharmas are equal, prajñā is equal’: dharmas are neither equal nor unequal, and one does not know what to call them; it is to break beings' sickness of inequality that they are praised as equal." He also says: 「不言般若等故諸法等者，恐惑者言諸法萬化不等，以般若力故。」 tr. "That it does not say ‘because prajñā is equal, dharmas are equal’ is for fear that the deluded would say that dharmas in their myriad transformations are unequal, and that it is because of the power of prajñā." And he settles his account with 「今言良由諸法實性本來平等，故後若觀平等耳」 tr. "now it is said so truly because the real nature of dharmas is from the first equal, and therefore afterwards, if one contemplates, there is equality, that is all"—that is, he takes ‘the nature of dharmas is of itself equal’ and does not take ‘by the power of prajñā they are made equal’. This treatise records the two views side by side without judging, while Jizang plainly takes one of them; it is recorded here for reference, and his judgement belongs to his own teaching and does not establish a meaning on the treatise-author's behalf.

On the passage of obtaining the samādhis, Jizang says: 「即得諸法等三昧下，第三、聞法得益也。法尚如行說，常啼如說行……」 tr. "From ‘then obtained the samādhi of the equality of dharmas’ onward is the third: the benefit of hearing the Dharma. Dharma-Esteeming teaches as he practises; Ever Weeping practises as he is taught……" He also cites the text of this treatise in abridged form, saying: 「論云：今從師同一心思惟名三昧，攝心不散智慧及名三昧也。」 tr. "The treatise says: now from the teacher, together reflecting with one mind, it is named samādhi; gathering the mind so that it does not scatter, wisdom too is named samādhi." Collated against the original text of this treatise, which reads 「今從師聞已，一心思惟，名為三昧，攝心不散，智慧變成三昧」 tr. "now, having heard it from the teacher, he reflects with one mind, and it is named samādhi: gathering the mind so that it does not scatter, wisdom turns into samādhi"—what Jizang cites is an abridged citation and not word for word, and moreover 「智慧變成三昧」 tr. "wisdom turns into samādhi" reads 「智慧及名三昧」 tr. "wisdom too is named samādhi", a difference of one character with a difference in the weight of the meaning: this treatise says that wisdom changes and becomes samādhi, while his citation says that wisdom too is named samādhi. The two texts are set side by side for comparison, without choosing between them on anyone's behalf.

On the concluding exhortation of the last passage, where the Buddha tells Subhūti, Jizang's explanation is wholly the same as this treatise: 「爾時佛告下，第三、結觀修行之般羅蜜。深入佛智慧者，論云初地至七地名無生忍，八地、九地、十地名深入佛智，得一切種智作佛也。」 tr. "From ‘at that time the Buddha told’ onward is the third: concluding the contemplation of the pāramitā to be cultivated and practised. As for entering deeply into the wisdom of the Buddha, the treatise says that from the first ground to the seventh ground is named the acceptance of non-arising; the eighth, ninth, and tenth grounds are named entering deeply into the wisdom of the Buddha, obtaining the omniscience of all kinds and becoming a Buddha." This is precisely the text of section 63 of this unit, and it can be seen that in judging the grounds and positions he relies wholly on this treatise.

The extant text of Huiying's Commentary stops at the end of fascicle 24, far before this chapter, so it lacks an explanation of this fascicle; in its structural divisions around chapter 55 it twice points ahead to the name 「曇無竭品」 tr. "the chapter ‘Dharmodgata’", which marks in advance the divisions that come later, not a commentary on this chapter; its lack is recorded according to the facts. Junzheng's Profound Meaning of the Four Mahāyāna Treatises is not seen anywhere in its whole text to reach this chapter; its absence is recorded according to the facts.

This fascicle's teaching of the marks of prajñā takes over from above the breaking of the clinging to coming and going in Fascicle 99 of this chapter, and opens below the handing on of the Dharma in the chapter "Entrustment". Breaking coming and going breaks the marks that arise toward the Buddha's body; teaching the marks of prajñā breaks the marks that arise toward prajñā. The two matters are one Dharma-gate, yet the sickness each faces differs: in the former what is clung to is the person; in the latter what is clung to is the Dharma. So at the end of the fascicle the treatise-author sets himself the question 「見曇無竭得何等利益」 tr. "seeing Dharmodgata, what benefit did he obtain", and answers it with 「破其著心」 tr. "breaking his clinging mind"—what the two fascicles of the whole chapter were for here comes together into one matter. That the next chapter entrusts prajñā to Ānanda and not to Subhūti—the reason for it the treatise-author has already given in advance in the last two passages of this fascicle; the reader can view them together.

Further Resonances

What "Dharmodgata" inherits is the very last question of the preceding chapter. The preceding chapter, "Sadāprarudita," writes the whole course of Sadāprarudita's going east to seek the Dharma—hearing the voice in the sky, seeing the Buddha in the sky, selling his body to make offerings, cutting his flesh and drawing blood, travelling far to the City of Many Fragrances—and of all that he did along the way the treatise-author has already pointed out the sickness: 「若新發意菩薩雖能總相知諸法空、無相，於諸佛所深愛著故，不能解佛相畢竟空，雖知空而不能與空合。」 tr. "If he is a bodhisattva who has newly aroused the mind, although he can know by the general mark that dharmas are empty and signless, because he deeply loves and clings to the buddhas he cannot understand that the mark of a Buddha is ultimately empty; though he knows emptiness he cannot be united with emptiness." The very last sentence at the end of the preceding chapter's treatise is precisely what brings this root of the sickness before the reader's eyes—「薩陀波崙深著諸佛故不能知，而問大師：『今為我說諸佛來去相，我見佛身無厭足故，常不離見諸佛。』」 tr. "Because Sadāprarudita clung deeply to the buddhas, he could not know, and so he asked the great teacher: ‘Now tell me the mark of the coming and going of the buddhas; because I look at the Buddha's body without ever being satisfied, I never part from seeing the buddhas.’" Once the question has been put, the preceding chapter stops. The first sentence of this chapter is precisely the answer that was not yet given: 「善男子！諸佛無所從來，去亦無所至。」 tr. "Good man! The buddhas come from nowhere, and in going reach nowhere." So the juncture of these two chapters is not the beginning of a separate matter; it is one question and one answer divided into two places by the boundary of a fascicle: the preceding chapter is named after a person's seeking, this chapter is named after the Dharma's teaching; what the preceding chapter writes is how far the seeker of the Dharma can give things up, what this chapter teaches is that the Dharma sought has from the first no coming and going. What it opens likewise lies in its last sentences. This chapter ends with the portion on entrustment—「須菩提雖常樂空行，佛共說般若，又得無諍三昧，故不應囑累」 tr. "though Subhūti always delights in the practice of emptiness, and the Buddha taught prajñā together with him, and he has moreover obtained the samādhi of non-contention, therefore it should not be entrusted to him", 「阿難得聞持陀羅尼，又常親近世尊，故廣囑累」 tr. "Ānanda has obtained the dhāraṇī of hearing and retaining, and moreover is always close to the World-Honored One, therefore it is entrusted to him at length"; once the two Chinese characters for ‘entrustment’ have been spoken and not yet unfolded, the next chapter, "Entrustment," at the opening of its scroll goes on to write it out: 「爾時，佛告阿難：『於汝意云何？佛是汝大師不？汝是佛弟子不？』」 tr. "At that time the Buddha told Ānanda: ‘What do you think? Is the Buddha your great teacher? Are you the Buddha's disciple?’" and then properly hands over its Dharma—「我滅度後，是一切愛敬、供養、供給事，當愛敬、供養般若波羅蜜！」 tr. "After my passing into extinction, all these matters of loving, revering, making offerings to, and providing for—you should love, revere, and make offerings to prajñāpāramitā!" This chapter says that prajñā is the mother of the buddhas, and the next chapter then says to whom the Dharma of this mother is given; this chapter writes of one seeker of the Dharma who walked and stood for seven years and obtained six million samādhi gates, and the next chapter writes of how the Dharma of the whole sūtra is passed into the hands of later ages. The great treatise as a whole lays down its brush here, and the place where it does so is exactly what the last two sentences of this chapter foretold.

In the texts handed down later, the name of this chapter is where two versions stand side by side and is most worth recording. The base text of this treatise gives the chapter heading in two places, at Fascicle 99 and at Fascicle 100, and the variant readings at the two places also form one series. At Fascicle 99 the heading reads 「大智度論釋曇無竭品第八十九」 tr. "The Mahāprajñāpāramitā-upadeśa's explanation of the chapter ‘Dharmodgata’, the eighty-ninth", while the Song and Yuan editions read 「大智度論卷第九十九釋曇無竭品第八十九上」 tr. "Mahāprajñāpāramitā-upadeśa, Fascicle Ninety-nine, explanation of the chapter ‘Dharmodgata’, the eighty-ninth, first part", the Ming edition reads 「之上」 tr. "the first part", and the Palace edition simply changes the name—「大智度論卷第九十九釋說般若相品品第八十九上」 tr. "Mahāprajñāpāramitā-upadeśa, Fascicle Ninety-nine, explanation of the chapter ‘Teaching the Marks of Prajñā’ chapter, the eighty-ninth, first part"; the heading of Fascicle 100 is likewise, the Song and Yuan editions reading 「大智度論卷第一百釋曇無竭品第八十九下」 tr. "Mahāprajñāpāramitā-upadeśa, Fascicle One Hundred, explanation of the chapter ‘Dharmodgata’, the eighty-ninth, last part", the Ming edition 「之下」 tr. "the last part", and the Palace edition 「大智度論卷第一百釋說般若相品第八十九下」 tr. "Mahāprajñāpāramitā-upadeśa, Fascicle One Hundred, explanation of the chapter ‘Teaching the Marks of Prajñā’, the eighty-ninth, last part". One names by a person, one names by the Dharma: the base text sets up its heading after the person who teaches the Dharma, the Palace edition sets up its heading after the Dharma that is taught, and what both point to is the same chapter. If one discusses it by what this chapter really contains, the Palace edition's name strikes exactly its latter half—in the passage of Fascicle 100, from 「今當為汝說般若波羅蜜相」 tr. "Now I shall proclaim to you the marks of prajñāpāramitā" onward, sentence after sentence is a mark of prajñā; while the base text's name strikes its former half—once Dharmodgata appears, the doubt about the coming and going of the buddhas is cut off. The two names stand side by side and between them happen to speak of one face each of the two halves of this chapter, front and back; they are recorded without judgement. In the reckoning of fascicle number and chapter number, the Shōgozō and Ishiyama-dera manuscripts again form a series of their own: at Fascicle 99 the Shōgozō manuscript reads 「大智度經論卷第九十九釋第八十八品上」 tr. "Great Wisdom-Crossing Sūtra-Treatise, Fascicle Ninety-nine, explanation of the eighty-eighth chapter, first part", and the Ishiyama-dera manuscript reads 「摩訶般若波羅蜜品第八十八曇無竭品九十九」 tr. "the Mahāprajñāpāramitā chapter, the eighty-eighth, the Dharmodgata chapter, ninety-nine"; at Fascicle 100 the Shōgozō manuscript reads 「大智度經論卷第一百釋第八十八品下訖第八十八品」 tr. "Great Wisdom-Crossing Sūtra-Treatise, Fascicle One Hundred, explanation of the eighty-eighth chapter, last part, ending the eighty-eighth chapter", and the Ishiyama-dera manuscript reads 「摩訶般若波羅蜜品第八十八之二，一百」 tr. "the Mahāprajñāpāramitā chapter, the eighty-eighth, second part, one hundred"—both manuscripts record it as the eighty-eighth, one step behind the base text, which is the continuation into this chapter of the pattern ‘the Shōgozō and Ishiyama manuscripts one lower’ seen since chapter 44. And this pattern runs consistently at the end of this chapter too: where the next chapter's heading begins at the end of the chapter, the base text reads 「大智度論釋囑累品」 tr. "The Mahāprajñāpāramitā-upadeśa's explanation of the chapter ‘Entrustment’" and attaches it to the ninetieth, the Palace edition adds one Chinese character below the chapter number to read 「第九十品」 tr. "the ninetieth chapter", the Ming edition reads 「釋囑累品第九十」 tr. "explanation of the chapter ‘Entrustment’, the ninetieth", while the Shōgozō manuscript reads 「釋八十九品」 tr. "explanation of the eighty-ninth chapter", and the Ishiyama-dera manuscript reads 「摩訶般若波羅蜜品第八十九後囑累」 tr. "the Mahāprajñāpāramitā chapter, the eighty-ninth, followed by Entrustment"—the two manuscripts are still one lower. At both ends of the chapter, head and tail, the pattern of one lower differs in not a single place, from which it can be known that it is not a chance error but a separate method of reckoning. In the Great Sūtra being explained, the proper heading of this chapter reads 「法尚品第八十九」 tr. "the chapter ‘Dharma-Esteeming’, the eighty-ninth"; Dharma-Esteeming is the meaning-translation of Dharmodgata; its chapter number is eighty-nine, the same as in this treatise, and its content, beginning from 「爾時曇無竭菩薩摩訶薩語薩陀波崙菩薩言：『善男子！諸佛無所從來，去亦無所至。』」 tr. "At that time the bodhisattva-mahāsattva Dharmodgata said to the bodhisattva Sadāprarudita: ‘Good man! The buddhas come from nowhere, and in going reach nowhere.’", corresponds item by item to the sūtra text quoted by this treatise, with no splitting or joining. Only the numbering of its table-of-contents marking layer, across these few chapters, has one place where a number is repeated and one place where a number is skipped; this is a shift within the marking layer itself and has nothing to do with the correspondence of the chapters.

Of the commentaries of the ancient masters, those that have a substantive correspondence to this chapter that survive today are headed by Jizang's Commentary on the Larger Sūtra. Jizang writes his commentary according to the chapter names of the Great Sūtra (the Great Sūtra spoken of here means the Mahāprajñāpāramitā Sūtra being explained; where Jizang in his commentary himself says 「大經」 tr. "the Great Sūtra", it means the Mahāparinirvāṇa Sūtra—the same word pointing to different things), so his heading reads 「法尚品第八十九」 tr. "the chapter ‘Dharma-Esteeming’, the eighty-ninth", and on the meaning of the chapter name he first gives an explanation: 「若曇無竭，此云法尚，以其弘於大法而物宜欽。」 tr. "As for Dharmodgata, here it is called Dharma-Esteeming, because he spreads the great Dharma and beings ought to revere him." His judgement of this chapter's position fits exactly the structure of this chapter's two sūtra segments and two treatise segments—「品初是第二彼具足聞法。就中為二：第一為疑斷，第二正說般若。」 tr. "The beginning of the chapter is the second part, his hearing the Dharma in full. Within it there are two: first, the doubt cut off; second, properly teaching prajñā." The section on cutting off doubt he further analyses into two layers, and what is most worth noting in his judgement lies in reading the Buddha's body as two faces: 「第一明來去無來去辨法身義，二明無來去去辨應身義」 tr. "first, making clear that coming and going is without coming and going, distinguishing the meaning of the Dharma body; second, making clear going without coming and going, distinguishing the meaning of the response body", and so his judgement says 「此明法身無來去，應身有來去」 tr. "This makes clear that the Dharma body has no coming and going, while the response body has coming and going." This judgement runs in the same track as the two bodies set up in this treatise, yet Jizang here guards one layer further: if it is said that the Dharma body has no coming and going, does the Dharma body not then become permanent? He sets himself this objection and answers it, saying 「須得經意，為對薩陀波崙去來疑，故云無去來耳」 tr. "One must grasp the sūtra's intent: it is to answer Sadāprarudita's doubt about going and coming that it says there is no going and coming, that is all," and goes further to say 「而法身未曾去來，亦不曾無去來，未曾常，未曾無常」 tr. "Yet the Dharma body has never gone or come, nor has it ever been without going and coming; it has never been permanent, never been impermanent," finally gathering it up with the words of the sūtra—「故經云：來者無所從來，去者無所至也。」 tr. "Therefore the sūtra says: the one who comes comes from nowhere; the goer reaches nowhere." So the phrase ‘no coming and going’, as he reads it, is also words of counteraction, not the setting up of a separate mark of no coming and going that could be grasped. In explaining the two truths he corresponds to what this treatise says, and his wording is more ordered: 「則世諦有佛，第一義無佛；世諦有去來，第一義無去來」 tr. "then in worldly truth there is a Buddha, in the highest meaning there is no Buddha; in worldly truth there is going and coming, in the highest meaning there is no going and coming"; and the juncture of the two truths and the two bodies he ties directly to the text of this treatise—「今論文中明二諦則是二身，故言世諦中隨眾生故，以色身為佛，第一義佛即是法身也。」 tr. "Now the two truths made clear in the treatise text are the two bodies; therefore it says that in worldly truth, because of following beings, the form body is taken as the Buddha, and the Buddha of the highest meaning is precisely the Dharma body." The one simile of the ocean's jewels he takes in the sense of stimulus and response, and speaks of it very close to people: 「此寶雖生大海而有不得者，佛雖為物出而有見不見」 tr. "Though these jewels are produced in the great ocean, there are those who do not obtain them; though the Buddha comes forth for the sake of beings, there are those who see and those who do not see," and so 「眾生一心精進乃見佛，不爾不見也」 tr. "beings who are vigorous with one mind then see the Buddha; otherwise they do not see him." On the passage of the seven years of entering concentration, the cause he gives differs slightly from this treatise yet does not contradict it: this treatise says it was to remove the doubt of those who have newly aroused the mind, while Jizang speaks of the one matter of living at home and enjoying desires—「常啼及始行之人，見法尚居家受五欲，或言有染，故七年入深三昧，則顯無所著也」 tr. "Ever Weeping and those who had begun to practise, seeing Dharma-Esteeming living at home and enjoying the five desires, might say that he was defiled; so for seven years he entered deep samādhi, which shows that he clings to nothing"; as for how seven years of standing could be borne, his answer is the same as this treatise: 「此時好世七年如今七日。」 tr. "At that time, in a good age, seven years were like seven days now." Entering the passage of the Great Sūtra's proper teaching, he divides it into seven gates and speaks gate by gate of why each is so, and his explanation of the gate of equality shows the greatest sense of measure: 「諸法等故般若等者，諸法非等不等，不知何以目之？為破眾生不等病，故歎以為等也」 tr. "As for ‘because dharmas are equal, prajñā is equal’: dharmas are neither equal nor unequal, and one does not know what to call them; it is to break beings' sickness of inequality that they are praised as equal"; and as for why it is not said the other way round, that because prajñā is equal dharmas are equal, he also has an argument—「今言良由諸法實性本來平等，故後若觀平等耳」 tr. "now it is said so truly because the real nature of dharmas is from the first equal, and therefore afterwards, if one contemplates, there is equality, that is all", which is one and the same road as this treatise's 「一切法性自空，非般若波羅蜜令其空」 tr. "the nature of all dharmas is of itself empty; it is not that prajñāpāramitā makes it empty". As for why apart is spoken of after equality, he answers 「離等不等故其心不可動」 tr. "because it is apart from equal and unequal, its mind cannot be moved," which takes up exactly this treatise's unmoving; the gate of one flavour he judges, saying 「如此而了唯佛法有此味，只是一味」 tr. "Understood in this way, only the Buddha-dharma has this flavour; it is just one flavour"; the gate of the similes he sums up in intent, saying 「上來明般若雖妙絕心行，言說詔斷而包含廣博，故如虗空、如大海、如寶山也」 tr. "What has come above makes clear that prajñā, though wondrous and cut off from the workings of the mind, with words and speech decreed cut off, yet embraces and contains vastly and widely; therefore it is like space, like the great ocean, like a mountain of jewels"; in the gate of the boundlessness of form, the words he cites are the ones later people have most handed down and recited—「道遠乎哉？即事而真。聖遠乎哉？然之即神也。」 tr. "Is the Way far off? In the very matter it is real. Is the sage far off? To make it so is precisely to be spirit." At the passage on the benefit obtained at the end, he judges teacher and disciple with one phrase: 「法尚如行說，常啼如說行」 tr. "Dharma-Esteeming teaches as he practises; Ever Weeping practises as he is taught." And at the close of the whole chapter he cites the text of this treatise to settle the stage: 「論云初地至七地名無生忍，八地、九地、十地名深入佛智，得一切種智作佛也。」 tr. "The treatise says that from the first ground to the seventh ground is named the acceptance of non-arising; the eighth, ninth, and tenth grounds are named entering deeply into the wisdom of the Buddha, obtaining the omniscience of all kinds and becoming a Buddha." Only, the count of years recorded in his commentary is written ‘seven nian’, while this treatise and the Great Sūtra both write ‘seven sui’; the two are kept and recorded side by side without judgement.

Of the remaining masters, some are missing and some are not directly connected, and all are recorded as they are. Huiying's Commentary is a work commenting on this treatise chapter by chapter, but its surviving text stops at the explanation of the chapter "The Great Skilful Means," the sixty-ninth, and is incomplete, falling far short of Fascicles 99 and 100 where this chapter lies; for this chapter it is recorded as wanting an explanation. Only, among the earlier chapters, his work has twice already mentioned the name of this chapter looking ahead: in one place, judging the bounds of the path of skilful means, he says 「從此品去至曇無竭品，通明方便道義；囑累一品，明其付囑」 tr. "from this chapter on to the Dharmodgata chapter, making clear throughout the meaning of the path of skilful means; the one chapter on Entrustment, making clear its entrusting"; in another place, relating the third division of an earlier person's division, he says 「第三從薩陀波崘品至曇無竭二品，明其舉人勸脩勸學波若」 tr. "third, from the Sadāprarudita chapter to the Dharmodgata chapter, the two chapters, making clear the holding up of persons to exhort cultivation and exhort the learning of prajñā". These two places are both forward-looking mentions, not commentary text on this chapter; yet his joining of the two chapters Sadāprarudita and Dharmodgata into one division, naming it 「舉人勸脩勸學」 tr. "holding up persons to exhort cultivation and exhort learning", corresponds exactly to the movement of these two chapters of this treatise, one seeking and one teaching, together making one matter, and also shows what the ancient masters valued in reading these two chapters. Junzheng's Profound Meaning of the Four Mahāyāna Treatises: a full search of the four headwords Dharmodgata, Dharma-Esteeming, Sadāprarudita, and Ever Weeping yields not a single hit, and for this chapter it is 〔not found〕; his work is in the form of an outline of essentials and not an explanation following the text, so this is not a defect. The Tiantai line is recorded as it is: Zhiyi's Great Calming and Contemplation twice cites Sadāprarudita's seeking of the Dharma as an example; Zhanran's Supporting Practice and Broad Resolution of Calming and Contemplation touches on Dharmodgata and Sadāprarudita in several places altogether, sometimes relating the features of the City of Many Fragrances and the matter of the Dharma master teaching prajñā three times every day, sometimes, where it discusses the four kinds of samādhi, borrowing the episodes of his seven years of walking and standing and of selling his body to seek the Dharma as similes; all of these belong to citations and narrative retellings that borrow the events to speak of principle, and none is found quoting this chapter's text word for word, so they do not enter the citations here; only their existence is recorded. As for the Annotations on the Profound Meaning of the Lotus, one place ties directly to the events of this chapter—「大品中指薩陀波崙見佛後曇無竭為說」 tr. "in the Larger Sūtra it points to Dharmodgata's teaching for Sadāprarudita after he saw the buddhas"—using it to make clear the Dharma body; this cites the events of this chapter to verify a meaning, and is not a word-for-word citation of this chapter's text (Section VI of the Apparatus has recorded its anchor); the Profound Meaning of the Lotus, the Words and Phrases of the Lotus, the Commentary on the Vimalakīrti, and other works, searched in full for this chapter's heading words and its core sentences, have nothing connected, and this too is recorded as it is.

Bringing this course of further resonances back to this chapter, what the masters keep and where they differ exactly reflect the name and the reality of this chapter. Those who name it by a person see its events—Dharmodgata is the person who teaches the Dharma, Sadāprarudita is the person who seeks the Dharma, so the base text heads it Dharmodgata, the ancient master's commentary heads it Dharma-Esteeming, and the old division Huiying relates goes further and joins these two chapters straight into the one division 「舉人勸脩勸學」 tr. "holding up persons to exhort cultivation and exhort learning"; those who name it by the Dharma see its meaning—the Palace edition's heading, Teaching the Marks of Prajñā, points exactly to the paired marks set against each other in the passage of Fascicle 100. Each of the two names has its grounds, and the wonder of this chapter lies precisely in the two not being two: if the Dharma taught truly has no coming and no going, then the person who teaches the Dharma cannot be seen by the form body either; and if the Dharma sought truly cannot be grasped by its marks, then what the seeker of the Dharma obtained by walking and standing for seven years is not one more something gained either. The reason Jizang in the section on cutting off doubt takes pains to separate out the two faces of the Dharma body and the response body is precisely for this place: if one holds only to no coming and going, then making offerings, spreading the seat, and sprinkling the ground with blood all become superfluous; if one holds only to having coming and going, then what is sought is still the form body. This treatise's setting up of two bodies, Jizang's dividing of two faces, and the Palace edition's changing of the name—what the three protect is one and the same thing: the Dharma does not come from anywhere because of the body of the one who teaches the Dharma, and a person may not grasp at marks because the Dharma sought is the highest.

Therefore what "Dharmodgata" leaves in the end is a dividing line that can be carried into daily use. When I read 「諸佛無所從來，去亦無所至」 tr. "the buddhas come from nowhere, and in going reach nowhere" and feel that reverence and offerings can all be dispensed with, I remember that after this chapter has spoken these words, a whole long passage is written entirely about offering—Śakra presenting flowers, giving one's body over to the teacher, giving away all five hundred carriages—and the treatise-author says plainly that the form body 「為世諦故有」 tr. "exists for the sake of worldly truth", never teaching anyone to omit a single bow. When I read of the seven years of standing and of piercing the body to sprinkle the ground, and my mind grows daunted or grows enamoured of the marvellous, I remember that the treatise-author's explanation never makes the matter supernatural: he did not sit or lie down only 「大欲、大精進與坐臥相違故」 tr. "because great desire and great vigour are contrary to sitting and lying down"; he could stand long only because 「身力雖弱，以心強故，能辦其事」 tr. "though the strength of the body was weak, because the mind was strong, he could accomplish the matter"; and the reason he had no regret is no more than 「譬如慈母愛子，雖為子長受勤苦不淨，不以為惡」 tr. "just as a kind mother loves her child, and though for the child's sake she long undergoes toil and impure tasks, she does not find it loathsome". When I read that one dharma is the highest and do not notice myself slighting the other dharmas, I remember that this chapter speaks of this sickness most gravely: Sadāprarudita had already obtained the samādhis and still 「貴重般若波羅蜜生著相」 tr. "valued prajñāpāramitā highly and gave rise to clinging to marks", so the marks Dharmodgata taught after rising from concentration at the end of seven years were wholly 「不令因般若故更生垢著」 tr. "not to let him, because of prajñā, give rise further to defiled clinging", and the simile for it is of the utmost simplicity too—「如熱金雖好，不可手捉」 tr. "just as hot gold, though it is fine, cannot be held in the hand". The last sentence is the one best to carry away: after hearing the Dharma there is no need to seek anything extraordinary besides; one need only reflect with one mind, gathering the mind so that it does not scatter, and then what has been heard comes into its use—「如風中燈不能照明，在靜室閉門，明乃遍照。」 tr. "As a lamp in the wind cannot give light, while in a quiet room with the door shut its light then shines everywhere."

Entrustment: Why the Buddha, Having Already Severed Love of Dharmas, Still Earnestly Entrusts without This Becoming Love and Clinging; Why He Entrusts Prajñā to Ānanda the Śrāvaka and Not to Maitreya and the Other Great Bodhisattvas; Why the Lotus and Other Sūtras Entrust, the Other Way Round, to Bodhisattvas; Why, Prajñā Not Being a Secret Dharma, It Is Said That Only Great Bodhisattvas Can Receive, Uphold, and Use It; Why, Having Already Entrusted It in "Seeing Akṣobhya Buddha", Entrusting It Again Now Is Not a Repetition; Why the Path of Prajñā and the Path of Skilful Means, One in Original Substance, Must Be Divided into Two Names; Why He Is Earnest and Solemn up to Three Tellings without Falling into the Craving and Clinging of Ordinary People; Why the Buddha, Knowing Full Well That Ānanda Is His Disciple, Still Asks before the Assembly Whether He Is His Disciple; Why, Prajñā Being the Teacher of the Buddhas, What Ānanda Reveres Is the Buddha; Why, One Entrustment Being Enough, It Goes to Three and beyond Three Adds No More; Why, an Earlier Chapter Having Made Clear That Prajñā Is Not Increased by Being Taught nor Decreased by Not Being Taught, It Now Says Do Not Let It Be Cut Off and Extinguished; On What Ground It Is Said That Prajñā Being in the World Is the Buddha Being in the World; How People of Heavy Sin Who Hear, Receive, Write Out, and Uphold It Can Be Not Apart from the Buddhas; Why the Great Arhats Who Have Already Realised the Limit of Reality Still Have Great Joy; Why, the Buddha Having Entrusted It to Ānanda, the Mahāyāna Is Not Seen in the Compiling of the Three Baskets; and Why the Whole Treatise Is Gathered In by the Colophon of the Translation Hall on How the Treatise Was Brought Out from Beginning to End

What Is Being Asked

This chapter is the last chapter of the whole treatise, and the matter it speaks of is extremely simple: the Buddha hands prajñāpāramitā over to Ānanda. The sūtra text is short, but the questions are large—so large that only when the whole treatise has walked this far can they be asked.

The Buddha first asks something that seems superfluous: 「佛是汝大師不？汝是佛弟子不？」 tr. "Is the Buddha your great teacher? Are you the Buddha's disciple?" Ānanda answers, the Buddha confirms it once more, and only then does he say what he means to hand over: in the way you loved, revered, and made offerings to me while I was in the world, after my passing into extinction turn all this loving, revering, and making offerings toward prajñāpāramitā; and so on up to a second time and a third time, I entrust prajñāpāramitā to you; do not forget it, do not lose it, do not be the last person who cuts off the lineage. The sūtra text then gives a criterion: 「隨爾所時般若波羅蜜在世，當知爾所時有佛在世說法。」 tr. "For however long a time prajñāpāramitā is in the world, know that for so long a time there is a Buddha in the world teaching the Dharma." Finally it says that those who write it out, uphold, read, recite, and make offerings to it are 「不離見佛、不離聞法、常親近佛」 tr. "not apart from seeing the Buddha, not apart from hearing the Dharma, and always close to the Buddha", and it concludes with the great assembly rejoicing.

What the treatise-author does on taking it over is not to say this passage once more, but to pick out fourteen places of unease within it and ask about them one by one. The first place is the most important: the Buddha has already severed love of dharmas, and even toward the omniscience of all kinds and nirvāṇa he does not cling and does not grasp at marks; now, by all kinds of causes and conditions, he entrusts this one Dharma—does that not look like exactly love and clinging? If this question is not broken, the whole chapter becomes the Buddha contradicting his own words. The treatise-author's way of answering does not argue from ‘the Buddha does not love and cling’, but speaks from ‘the Buddha's great compassion, from the first arousing of intent up to the gate of nirvāṇa, is never abandoned’—between the twin śāla trees he could even, by the vajra samādhi, break his body into pieces like hemp seeds and rice for the sake of beings; how much more a sūtra-dharma that enriches so many. The reason the entrustment is not love and clinging is that what is loved is not the Dharma itself but the beings who hear the Dharma and are saved.

The second place asks about the person: prajñā is the dharma of bodhisattvas; why hand it to a śrāvaka? The treatise-author sets out several sayings side by side: Ānanda always attended at the Buddha's left and right, obtained the dhāraṇī of hearing and retaining, hearing once and never losing it, and is the third teacher who can turn the wheel of the Dharma following the Buddha; the great bodhisattvas each scatter after the Buddha's passing into extinction, and moreover already deeply know the power of prajñā, so they need no bitter urging. The third place asks back in return: then why do the Lotus and other sūtras entrust them to bodhisattvas? The treatise-author answers that what those sūtras teach is a very deep dharma hard to believe, and that the śrāvakas were not present in the assembly, or heard and could not use it. The fourth place presses one layer further: is there then a dharma deeper than prajñā? The treatise-author answers with great steadiness—prajñā is not a secret dharma; it is only that the Lotus and the others say that arhats receive the prediction and become Buddhas, which only great bodhisattvas can put to use, 「譬如大藥師能以毒為藥」 tr. "just as a great physician can use poison as medicine".

Through a long middle section the treatise-author holds fast to the two Chinese characters 「慇懃」 tr. "earnest": the merchant chief is specially earnest about the precious jewels of great price because his son does not recognise their price; the Buddha entrusts it himself among his disciples and does not praise it in a different assembly, to avoid the suspicion of 「自稱讚法」 tr. "praising his own dharma"; first he taught that dharmas are empty to block the extreme of existence, now he earnestly entrusts to refute the extreme of non-existence, 「如是，則離二邊」 tr. "in this way he parts from the two extremes". When it comes to the question 「一囑累則足，何以至三」 tr. "one entrustment would be enough; why go to three", the answer is 「佛深愛般若波羅蜜故三囑」 tr. "because the Buddha deeply loves prajñāpāramitā, he entrusts it three times"; pressed by one more question, 「若深愛者，何限於三」 tr. "if he deeply loves it, why limit it to three", the answer is only eight Chinese characters: 「諸佛常法，語不過三。」 tr. "The constant way of the buddhas is that their speech does not exceed three."—even earnestness has its measure; going too far and falling short are both wrong.

The most perilous question of the whole chapter comes in the second half: an earlier chapter plainly said that prajñā is 「說亦不增、不說亦不減，畢竟寂滅相」 tr. "not increased by being taught, nor decreased by not being taught, having the mark of ultimate quiescent extinction", yet now it says 「莫令斷滅」 tr. "do not let it be cut off and extinguished"; like space, who could extinguish it? The treatise-author's answer is the pivot of the whole chapter: what is entrusted is the side of 「文字語言書般若波羅蜜經卷，為他人說」 tr. "the scrolls of the prajñāpāramitā sūtra written in letters and words, taught to others", which is 「於此因中而說其果」 tr. "its result is spoken of within this cause"; and what can truly 「滅般若」 tr. "extinguish prajñā" is not someone from outside either, but that one way of reading which grasps at marks and discriminates, gives rise to strife through clinging, and raises sinful deeds through strife. Reading 「有般若在世，則為佛在」 tr. "when there is prajñā in the world, the Buddha is present" again from here, one will not read it as a sentence of consolation—prajñā is the mother of the buddhas, the Dharma Jewel is not apart from the Buddha Jewel, and with the teacher present and the mother present, it is said that the root of the benefit is present.

The last question returns to a matter of history: since the Buddha entrusted it to Ānanda, why is the Mahāyāna not seen in the three baskets compiled by Mahākāśyapa? The treatise-author answers with its being hard to believe, answers with its great quantity, answers with 「小物應在大中，大物不得入小」 tr. "a small thing should be within a great one; a great thing cannot enter a small one", and records one saying: Mañjuśrī, Maitreya, and the other great bodhisattvas also led Ānanda to compile this Mahāyāna. What closes the whole treatise is not doctrine but a colophon of the translation hall—he arrived at Chang'an in the third year of Hongshi, and it was finished only on the twenty-seventh day of the twelfth month of the seventh year; the first chapter, thirty-four fascicles, is the complete text, and from the second chapter onward the Dharma master abridged it. Only on reading this far does one know: the ‘do not let it be cut off’ entrusted in this chapter was, in the land of Han, caught up precisely by this piece of history.

Passage by Passage

1. The Buddha asks Ānanda: is the Buddha your great teacher; are you the Buddha's disciple. The whole chapter begins from one question, and what this question asks about is a matter everyone takes to have been settled long ago. The relation of teacher and disciple between the Buddha and Ānanda was known to everyone in the assembly, yet before making his entrustment the Buddha first asks about it once before the assembly. When reading a sūtra and meeting such ‘asking what one well knows’, do not first take it as a courtesy: whenever the Buddha sets a question before entrusting a weighty matter, his question must establish something—what it establishes is the standing that the one entrusted acknowledges for himself before the assembly. What the treatise-author explains later in the seventh round of question and answer is exactly this meaning.

2. Ānanda answers: the Buddha is my great teacher, the Sugata is my great teacher, I am the Buddha's disciple. There is one place in Ānanda's answer worth stopping at: he does not only answer 「佛是我大師」 tr. "the Buddha is my great teacher", he adds one more phrase, 「脩伽陀是我大師」 tr. "the Sugata is my great teacher". Sugata is another name of the Buddha; Ānanda's bringing up the other name again and answering once more is to make the answer to the same matter more solid. Only at the end of the answer does he say 「我是佛弟子」 tr. "I am the Buddha's disciple"—first acknowledging the teacher, then acknowledging the disciple, the order clear. When the treatise-author says later 「阿難為欲令人信故重答」 tr. "Ānanda, in order to make people believe, answers again, repeating it", what he points to is just this one Chinese character 「重」 tr. "again, repeating".

3. The Buddha confirms it and three times entrusts prajñā, bidding that after his passing into extinction the love, reverence, and offerings given to the Buddha be given to prajñā; not to forget, not to lose, not to be the last person who cuts off the lineage; and showing that prajñā being in the world is the Buddha being in the world, and the benefit that those who write it out, uphold, and make offerings are not apart from seeing the Buddha. This passage is the main body of the whole chapter's sūtra text and contains four layers within it; the reader should look at them separately, layer by layer. The first layer is confirmation and reckoning up: from 「如是！如是！」 tr. "Just so! Just so!" onward it says that what a disciple ought to do 「汝已作竟」 tr. "you have already done it all", and enumerates that Ānanda made offerings and provided with deeds of kindness of body, speech, and mind, 「亦常如我意，無有違失」 tr. "and always accorded with my mind, without fault or failing". The second layer is a turning: the love, reverence, offerings, and provision you gave while my body was present—「我滅度後」 tr. "after my passing into extinction"—all of this turns toward prajñāpāramitā. The third layer is entrustment and admonition: 「乃至第二、第三，以般若波羅蜜囑累汝」 tr. "and so on up to a second time and a third time, I entrust prajñāpāramitā to you", 「汝莫忘莫失，莫作最後斷種人」 tr. "do not forget it, do not lose it, do not be the last person who cuts off the lineage". The fourth layer is the showing of two retributions: when prajñā is in the world, one knows there is a Buddha in the world teaching the Dharma; those who write it out, uphold, read, recite, rightly recollect, widely explain, and make all kinds of offerings are 「不離見佛、不離聞法、常親近佛」 tr. "not apart from seeing the Buddha, not apart from hearing the Dharma, and always close to the Buddha". Reading the four layers in one breath, one sees that what the Buddha hands over is not a scroll of a book but an unbroken line of the Dharma.

4. The great assembly, hearing what the Buddha said, all greatly rejoice. The sūtra section concludes with narration, and there is no further speaker. The assembly listed begins from Maitreya and the other bodhisattva-mahāsattvas, goes on to the venerable Subhūti, Śāriputra, Mahāmaudgalyāyana, Mahākāśyapa, Pūrṇa Maitrāyaṇīputra, Mahākauṣṭhila, Mahākātyāyana, Ānanda, and the others, and at the end sums up with 「并一切大眾，及一切世間諸天、人、犍闥婆、阿修羅等」 tr. "together with the whole great assembly, and the gods, humans, gandharvas, asuras, and others of all the world". Here the bodhisattvas are listed before the śrāvakas, while the one who receives the entrustment is Ānanda among the śrāvakas—the gap between this listing and this entrustment is exactly where the treatise-author's second round of question and answer arises from. The last phrase, the four Chinese characters 「皆大歡喜」 tr. "all greatly rejoiced", the treatise-author later explains with a question set up specially; it must not be read past carelessly.

5. The question of the first question and answer: the Buddha has already severed love of dharmas; why now does he by all kinds of causes and conditions entrust this Dharma, as if in love and clinging. The treatise-author begins his explanation with a very heavy question: even toward the omniscience of all kinds and nirvāṇa the Buddha 「不著不取相」 tr. "does not cling and does not grasp at marks", yet now by all kinds of causes and conditions he earnestly hands over one Prajñā, which looked at from outside is exactly the mark of love and clinging. This question is not fault-finding; it asks out first, on the reader's behalf, the doubt most easily raised. In reading the treatise one should learn this method: whenever one feels that the sūtra text and the doctrine do not fit at some point, first state the misfit to the utmost, and then look at the answer.

6. The answer of the first question and answer: the mind of great kindness and compassion of the buddhas, from the first arousing of intent until the gate of nirvāṇa, is never abandoned; it brings out the matter of breaking his body into pieces like hemp seeds and rice by the vajra samādhi between the twin śāla trees. The answer does not argue over the Chinese character 「愛」 tr. "love", but changes the object of what is loved: what the Buddha never abandons is beings, not the Dharma. The treatise-author brings up an extremely weighty matter as proof—between the twin śāla trees, by the vajra samādhi, he broke his body into pieces like hemp seeds and rice for the sake of beings. Even his body he broke and scattered in giving, 「何況經法多所饒益而不囑累」 tr. "how much more would he entrust the sūtra-dharma, which enriches so many!" One must see the weighting in this counter-question: the body can still be given up by the Buddha, but the Dharma cannot be left unhanded to beings. The entrustment is not love and clinging exactly because this is where it is directed.

7. Again, Ānanda is not yet free from desire and does not yet fully know the power, force, and retribution of prajñā; therefore it is earnestly entrusted. The treatise-author adds a second layer of reason, spoken from the side of the one entrusted: Ānanda is 「未離欲人」 tr. "one not yet free from desire", who cannot yet fully know how greatly the power, force, and retribution of prajñā benefit. Since the one entrusted cannot himself yet gauge the weight of what he receives, the one entrusting cannot but be earnest. The sentence 「汝當好受持無令忘失！」 tr. "You should receive and uphold it well, and not let it be forgotten or lost!" is spoken precisely to this kind of recipient. This reasoning is of one vein with the simile of the merchant chief later on.

8. Therefore, although the Buddha is without hatred and without love toward all dharmas, always having the mark of quiescence, he entrusts this prajñā. The treatise-author gathers the two layers of reason into one pronouncement: the Buddha's being 「無憎愛、常寂滅相」 tr. "without hatred and without love, always having the mark of quiescence" toward all dharmas, and his 「囑累是般若」 tr. "entrusting this prajñā", stand together without conflict. Here the reader should keep one general rule in mind—the non-clinging of a holy one does not equal doing nothing; within the mark of quiescence there are still all kinds of arrangements, and what is arranged is for beings, not for himself.

9. The question of the second question and answer: Ānanda is a śrāvaka; why is prajñā entrusted to him and not to Maitreya and the other great bodhisattvas. The second round of question and answer turns to 「人」 tr. "the person". This question is accurately aimed: prajñā is the dharma the bodhisattvas practise, yet the one entrusted is a śrāvaka, and the Dharma and the person seem ill-matched. Whenever, in reading the sūtras and treatises of the Great Vehicle, one sees śrāvakas and bodhisattvas set side by side, this kind of question arises most easily; the treatise-author answers it fully here once and for all.

10. The answer of the second question and answer cites what someone says: Ānanda always attended at the Buddha's left and right, obtained the dhāraṇī of hearing and retaining, is the third teacher who turns the wheel of the Dharma following the Buddha, and is the teacher of five hundred arhats. The treatise-author first cites the saying of one school, listing item by item the virtues by which Ānanda is fit to receive the entrustment: he always attended at the Buddha's left and right and provided what was needed; he obtained the dhāraṇī of hearing and retaining, 「一聞常不失」 tr. "hearing once, he never loses it"; he is both the Buddha's cousin and a man of much knowledge and wide acquaintance, his renown wide and universal, the one on whom the four assemblies rely; he is 「能隨佛轉法輪第三師」 tr. "the third teacher who can turn the wheel of the Dharma following the Buddha". In the middle is inserted one sentence of proof from the reverse side—「佛知舍利弗壽短早滅度故不囑累」 tr. "because the Buddha knew that Śāriputra's life was short and that he would pass into extinction early, he did not entrust it to him"—showing that the choosing of a person weighs not only virtue but also the length of his stay in the world. At the end it brings up that Ānanda is the teacher of five hundred arhats with the six supernormal powers, the three clarities, and liberation both ways. Every item is the plain text of this treatise, and the reader can check for himself: what makes one fit to receive the entrustment lies in ‘being able to pass it on’ and not in 「已證」 tr. "having already realised".

11. Maitreya and the other great bodhisattvas each scatter after the Buddha's passing into extinction, and moreover deeply know the power of prajñā, so they need no bitter entrusting. This is the other side of the same answer: the great bodhisattvas each scatter after the Buddha's passing into extinction, going to the lands of the beings they are each to save—Maitreya returns up to the Tuṣita heaven, and Vimalakīrti and Mañjuśrī too go to the places of the beings they are to save. Having scattered, each to the place where he is to save, they also 「深知般若波羅蜜力」 tr. "deeply know the power of prajñāpāramitā", and need no bitter, pressing exhortation. This passage gives an extremely plain principle: the reason for earnest exhortation is exactly that the person does not know; the one who knows, on the contrary, does not need it.

12. Ānanda is a śrāvaka who follows the dharma of the Small Vehicle; therefore the Buddha earnestly entrusts it. The treatise-author closes this round of question and answer with one sentence: the reason for earnestness is exactly that he 「隨小乘法」 tr. "follows the dharma of the Small Vehicle". Taken together from front to back, the answer of the second round of question and answer is not ‘Ānanda is more fit than the bodhisattvas to be entrusted’ but ‘precisely because he is a śrāvaka, he needs the more earnestness’—what the questioner took to be a shortcoming is exactly the reason the answerer takes up. When reading the treatise and meeting this kind of reversal, one should remember the method.

13. The question of the third question and answer: why do the Lotus and the other vaipulya sūtras entrust them to the bodhisattvas King of Joy and the others. Since it was said that because a śrāvaka needs earnestness the entrustment was made to Ānanda, the questioner at once brings up a counter-example: why do the Lotus Sūtra and the other vaipulya sūtras entrust them to the bodhisattvas King of Joy and the others? This question takes sūtra-proof to question sūtra-proof; it does not question with its own opinion. Throughout the whole chapter the questioner often uses this method, and the answerer often answers by distinguishing the capacities addressed.

14. The answer of the third question and answer cites what someone says: the very deep dharma hard to believe that was taught at that time had no śrāvakas present; again, as with the Sūtra of Inconceivable Liberation, the five hundred arhats, though at the Buddha's side, did not hear it. The treatise-author answers by citing a saying, and the reasons are two: first, when those sūtras were taught the śrāvakas were not present in the assembly; second, even if present they could not receive it—as when the Buddha taught the Sūtra of Inconceivable Liberation, the five hundred arhats, 「雖在佛邊而不聞，或時得聞而不能用」 tr. "though at the Buddha's side, did not hear it, or at times heard it and could not use it". These two phrases must be kept clearly apart: not hearing is one layer, hearing yet not being able to use is another. In the matter of entrustment, what is looked at is not whether one is present but whether one can use it.

15. The question of the fourth question and answer: is there some further dharma very deep and surpassing prajñā, that prajñā is entrusted to Ānanda and the other sūtras to bodhisattvas. The fourth question presses the previous answer to its extreme: if śrāvakas are not fit to hear the Lotus yet fit to receive the Prajñā, is that not saying that the Lotus is deeper than the Prajñā? If this question is not broken, the whole treatise's tenet of ‘prajñā first’ is shaken. The treatise-author sets up this question precisely to hold the tenet fast.

16. The answer of the fourth question and answer: prajñā is not a secret dharma; the Lotus and the others say that arhats receive the prediction and become Buddhas, which great bodhisattvas can receive, uphold, and use; just as a great physician can use poison as medicine. The answer comes in two parts. The first part establishes the tenet: 「般若波羅蜜非祕密法」 tr. "prajñāpāramitā is not a secret dharma"—prajñā is a dharma taught openly, which anyone can hear, and so it can be handed to a śrāvaka. The latter part resolves the difficulty: the Lotus and other sūtras say that arhats receive the prediction and become Buddhas, and such words are what 「大菩薩能受持用」 tr. "great bodhisattvas can receive, uphold, and use"; and it brings out a simile—「譬如大藥師能以毒為藥」 tr. "just as a great physician can use poison as medicine". One must see exactly what this simile compares: poison is not medicine, yet a great physician can use it as medicine; likewise, the saying 「阿羅漢受決作佛」 tr. "arhats receive the prediction and become Buddhas" can become an obstacle when heard by those of small capacity, and only in the hands of great bodhisattvas becomes a wondrous use. The judgement of deep and shallow lies not in the Dharma but in the person who uses the Dharma.

17. Again, prajñā is of two kinds: that taught in common with the śrāvakas and that taught only for the great bodhisattvas dwelling on the ten grounds; the general mark is one, yet in depth and shallowness there are differences. The treatise-author adds a further, finer distinction: prajñā is of two kinds—first, taught in common with the śrāvakas; second, taught only for the great bodhisattvas of the ten directions who dwell on the ten grounds, 「非九住所聞，何況新發意者」 tr. "not something those of the ninth abode can hear, how much less those who have newly aroused the mind"; further, there is what is heard on the ninth ground, and so on up to what is heard on the first ground, 「各各不同」 tr. "each different". At the end it gathers up in one sentence: 「般若波羅蜜總相是一，而深淺有異，是故囑累阿難無咎。」 tr. "The general mark of prajñāpāramitā is one, but in depth and shallowness there are differences; therefore to entrust it to Ānanda is without fault." This sentence should be remembered most of all: the general mark is one, so one cannot say there are two Prajñās; in depth and shallowness there are differences, so it can be handed over according to capacity. The earlier answer's 「非祕密法」 tr. "not a secret dharma" and this answer's 「深淺有異」 tr. "in depth and shallowness there are differences" combine into one meaning, and the difficulty resolves of itself.

18. The question of the fifth question and answer: earlier, in the chapter "Seeing Akṣobhya Buddha", it was entrusted; now it is entrusted again; what difference is there. The fifth question turns to the pattern of the text: this sūtra already had an entrustment earlier, in the chapter "Seeing Akṣobhya Buddha"; why entrust it once more here? Whenever the same matter appears twice in a sūtra, the reader easily judges it a repetition; the treatise-author does not allow carelessness and must find its proper place for it.

19. The answer of the fifth question and answer: the bodhisattva path is of two kinds—the path of prajñāpāramitā and the path of skilful means; the earlier entrustment was for having finished teaching the substance of prajñā, the present for having finished teaching skilful means; therefore after "Seeing Akṣobhya Buddha" the "Upāya-kauśalya" chapter is taught. The answer sets up one main line: 「菩薩道有二種：一者、般若波羅蜜道，二者、方便道。」 tr. "The bodhisattva path is of two kinds: first, the path of prajñāpāramitā; second, the path of skilful means." The earlier entrustment was 「為說般若波羅蜜體竟」 tr. "because the teaching of the substance of prajñāpāramitā had been completed"; this entrustment is because 「說令眾生得是般若方便竟」 tr. "the teaching of the skilful means by which beings are brought to obtain this prajñā has been completed". And it brings up the sūtra's order as proof: after "Seeing Akṣobhya Buddha" the "Upāya-kauśalya" chapter is taught. Each of the two entrustments has its own matter that it concludes, so it is not a repetition. When reading a sūtra and meeting a doubt of repetition, this passage can serve as a pattern—first look at what each of the two places concludes, not at whether the wording is the same.

20. Although within prajñāpāramitā there is skilful means and within skilful means there is prajñā, each takes its name from whichever is more; the original substance is one, and because there is a small difference in what they are used for they are spoken of separately, as a goldsmith makes different things out of gold. Fearing that people would judge prajñā and skilful means to be two things, the treatise-author at once adds clarification: the two contain each other and are only 「隨多受名」 tr. "each taking its name from whichever is more". The pronouncement is 「般若與方便，本體是一，以所用小異故別說」 tr. "prajñā and skilful means are one in their original substance; because there is a small difference in what they are used for, they are spoken of separately". Next it brings out a simile—a goldsmith, with clever skilful means, uses gold to make all kinds of different things, 「雖皆是金，而各異名」 tr. "although all are gold, each has a different name". This simile is extremely important: different names do not hinder one substance, and one substance does not prevent different uses. Wherever two dharmas are set against each other, the student can use this simile to look at himself.

21. When the bodhisattva obtains the real mark of prajñā, he wishes to pass into extinction; by the power of skilful means he does not take the realisation of nirvāṇa, passes beyond the two grounds and enters the bodhisattva's position, knows the dharma without letters and guides beings; this is called skilful means. Here the treatise-author speaks directly of the mark of skilful means, and speaks very concretely. When the bodhisattva obtains the real mark of prajñā—「一切法性空、無所有、寂滅相」 tr. "the nature of all dharmas is empty, without anything existent, the mark of quiescence"—he at once wishes to pass into extinction; that he does not take the realisation is the power of skilful means. The thought he makes in his mind the treatise-author cites word for word: 「一切法性空，涅槃亦空，我今於菩薩功德未具足，不應取證；功德具足，乃可取證。」 tr. "The nature of all dharmas is empty, and nirvāṇa too is empty; I have not yet made complete the merit of a bodhisattva, and should not take the realisation; when the merit is complete, only then may I take the realisation." Thereby he 「過二地，入菩薩位」 tr. "passes beyond the two grounds and enters the bodhisattva's position", and dwelling in the bodhisattva's position he knows the very deep and subtle dharma without letters and guides beings. In this passage one can see that skilful means is not a stratagem; it is the kind of power that, after having seen the real mark, is still willing to stay in the world.

22. Again, there is skilful means: knowing ultimate emptiness, yet able to rise again to wholesome dharmas and practise the six perfections, not following emptiness; among the four matters of doubt, wrong views, entering nirvāṇa, and becoming a Buddha, to remove wrong views and doubt and not enter nirvāṇa is skilful means. The treatise-author speaks of one more layer of skilful means, its emphasis in the three Chinese characters 「不隨空」 tr. "not following emptiness": knowing that all dharmas are 「畢竟空性、無所有」 tr. "of the nature of ultimate emptiness, without anything existent", and yet 「能還起善法、行六波羅蜜」 tr. "able to rise again to wholesome dharmas and practise the six perfections". Next it lists four kinds of matters—either doubt, or wrong views, or entering nirvāṇa, or becoming a Buddha—showing the four directions that can arise after hearing prajñā; one who can remove wrong views and doubt and does not enter nirvāṇa, that is skilful means. These four matters are a ready-made table for checking oneself: after hearing of emptiness, where does the mind land? To land in doubt and wrong views is loss; to land in entering nirvāṇa is stagnation; only the last matter is where one is headed.

23. Someone says: prajñā is the most excellent among the great heaps of precious jewels; the Buddha knew that after his passing into extinction many enemies and thieves would wish to destroy it; even to entrust it in chapter after chapter would be without fault, how much more in two places. The treatise-author cites one saying to close this round of question and answer: prajñā is 「於大珍寶聚中最勝」 tr. "the most excellent among great heaps of precious jewels", and the Buddha foreknew that after his passing into extinction 「多有怨賊欲毀壞者」 tr. "many enemies and thieves would wish to destroy it"; so even if he entrusted it in chapter after chapter there would be no fault, how much more in only two places. This saying overturns at a stroke the earlier question ‘why entrust it in two places’—the questioner thought two places already too many; the answerer says two places are still few. Here the reader can reflect on himself: the places where we feel ‘too much is said’ are often exactly the places the teacher knows cannot be held.

24. The question of the sixth question and answer: if he is to entrust it, why is he so earnest and solemn. The sixth question no longer asks ‘whether to entrust or not’, but instead asks ‘why so earnest’. The earlier questions asked whether the matter exists; this question asks the weight of the feeling. The treatise-author does not avoid this question, and afterwards brings out four passages of answer in a row; it is the place in the whole chapter where human feeling shows most.

25. The answer of the sixth question and answer: the Buddha guides beings in accordance with the worldly way; it brings out the simile of the merchant chief who, going far away to another country, is specially and earnestly insistent in entrusting to his son the precious jewels of great price. The answer first sets up one meaning—「佛隨世俗法引導眾生」 tr. "the Buddha guides beings in accordance with the worldly way"; earnestness and solemnity are the ordinary state of things in the world when entrusting something weighty, and nothing to wonder at. Next it brings out the simile: the merchant chief is about to go far away to another country; though he entrusts all his wealth and jewels to his son, toward the precious jewels of great price he is 「偏獨慇懃」 tr. "specially and earnestly insistent"—why? 「以其子未識妙寶價重故」 tr. "because his son does not yet recognise how heavy the price of the precious jewels is". There is one more turn within the simile that should least be passed over: bystanders, because the merchant chief is one who knows the price of jewels, on seeing him so earnest, will 「必知其貴」 tr. "certainly know that they are precious"; if they only heard his son praise the price of the jewels, they would 「不信之」 tr. "not believe it". So one sees that earnestness is set up not only for the one entrusted but also for the onlookers—the preciousness of the Dharma is made manifest through the solemnity of one who knows its worth.

26. Again, if he praised prajñā and entrusted it among other people or in a different assembly, people would ridicule the Buddha for praising his own dharma; entrusting it himself among his disciples, there is no suspicion. The treatise-author adds a second reason, which lands on avoiding suspicion: if he praised prajñā and handed it over in some other assembly, people would ridicule and suspect the Buddha of 「自稱讚法」 tr. "praising his own dharma", and would doubt and not believe; entrusting it among his own disciples, there is no such layer of suspicion. The sense of measure this passage shows is very usable: the more a dharma one teaches is something one holds weighty oneself, the more one must mind the setting in which one teaches it, lest suspicion arise before the Dharma has entered people's minds.

27. Again, someone says: in an earlier chapter it was taught that the mark of quiescence is without idle discourse and that there is no fixed dharma to be grasped, and people thought there was nothing worth valuing; now that he earnestly entrusts it, one knows that the Buddha does not cling to the dharma of emptiness. The third reason speaks from the earlier chapter: what the earlier chapter taught was 「寂滅相無戲論，是一切智，是中無有決定法可取」 tr. "the mark of quiescence is without idle discourse, this is omniscience, and within it there is no fixed dharma to be grasped", and hearers could easily give rise from this to a misunderstanding—since there is no dharma to be grasped, this Dharma has nothing worth valuing. Now with one display of earnest entrustment, 「則知佛不著空法」 tr. "then one knows that the Buddha does not cling to the dharma of emptiness". The last two sentences go a step further: among all beings none loves and cherishes prajñā more than the Buddha; the Buddha, 「知般若恩深故，貴重是般若而慇懃囑累」 tr. "because he knows how deep the kindness of prajñā is, values this prajñā highly and earnestly entrusts it". Here the two Chinese characters 「恩深」 tr. "deep kindness" must be read with care: what is valued is that prajñā shows kindness to beings, not that prajñā is precious in itself.

28. Someone says: the Buddha entrusts it because he wishes to show the middle way—first he taught that dharmas are empty to block the extreme of existence; now he earnestly entrusts it, and this refutes the extreme of non-existence; in this way he parts from the two extremes. The fourth reason is the most round and complete: earlier he taught that dharmas are empty, and what this blocks is the extreme of existence; now he earnestly entrusts, and what this refutes is the extreme of non-existence. The treatise-author also sets the two misunderstandings against each other—if someone says that the Buddha 「貪心愛著此法」 tr. "loves and clings to this dharma with a craving mind", the Buddha has already by all kinds of causes and conditions taught the mark of emptiness of prajñā; if someone says that the Buddha has 「墮斷滅中」 tr. "fallen into annihilation", therefore he earnestly entrusts it. One emptiness and one entrustment exactly cure these two illnesses: 「如是，則離二邊」 tr. "in this way he parts from the two extremes". Having read the whole chapter this far, one can look back: earnest entrustment is not an emotion; it is a move of the middle way.

29. The question of the seventh question and answer: the Buddha knows that Ānanda is his disciple; why does he ask: are you my disciple, am I your teacher. The seventh question returns to that question at the head of the chapter. The treatise-author does not let this ‘asking what one well knows’ pass, precisely because the entrustment of the whole chapter is established by this question. In reading the sūtras one should learn this eye: the places that look most like idle text are often the joints of the structure.

30. The answer of the seventh question and answer: the Buddha had evil disciples, Sunakṣatra and others, and Susīma became a disciple in order to steal the Dharma; these are named disciples in name. The answer first brings up the facts: the Buddha had evil disciples such as Sunakṣatra and others, who 「有少因緣故作弟子」 tr. "became disciples for some scant causes and conditions", their real intent being to obtain archery at the Buddha's place; the Buddha did not teach it, and so he gave up the precepts and said 「我非佛弟子」 tr. "I am not the Buddha's disciple"; again, as Susīma 「為盜法故作弟子」 tr. "became a disciple in order to steal the Dharma". The treatise-author marks their name as 「名字弟子」 tr. "disciples in name". Since there are disciples in name, the two Chinese characters 「弟子」 tr. "disciple" are not sufficient to rely on, and the reason the Buddha must ask before the assembly is exactly to sift the true from the false.

31. Further, those of the outside paths and others said that Ānanda stayed at the Buddha's side only because he had no choice; he had once been a disciple of the outside paths, wearing grass robes and seeking the spirit-immortals, and now attends on him out of respect because the Buddha is his kinsman. The second layer speaks of the doubt of bystanders: those of the outside paths and others said that Ānanda's attending on the Buddha was 「不得已」 tr. "because he had no choice"—he had once been a disciple of the outside paths, wore grass robes, and sought the spirit-immortals, and now he merely attends on him out of respect because the Buddha is his kinsman. If this doubt is not broken, the Dharma that Ānanda passes on is discounted in advance. The Buddha's one question before the assembly is exactly to dispel this doubt.

32. Because of such matters as these, in the midst of the great assembly he asks whether you are my disciple; if you say you are a true disciple, you should follow my command. The treatise-author gathers these two layers and brings out one extremely forceful sentence: 「若言是真弟子，當隨我勅。」 tr. "If you say you are a true disciple, you should follow my command."—acknowledging one's standing for oneself before the assembly at once becomes the reason why one must receive the command. That the entrustment can be established lies not in the Buddha handing it over one-sidedly, but in the recipient's confirming his own position before the assembly. Here the reader can reflect: whoever calls himself a student of some school takes on not only the name and standing, but the command that the name and standing carry.

33. Therefore Ānanda, in order to make people believe, answers again, repeating it. Here the treatise-author turns back to explain the 「重」 tr. "repeating" in Ānanda's answer: the reason for answering again a second time is not to make himself clear but 「令人信」 tr. "to make people believe". The bringing up again of 「脩伽陀是我大師」 tr. "the Sugata is my great teacher" seen in the second passage above has its use here. This small passage is extremely short, yet it settles a turn of feeling in the sūtra text that is not easy to notice.

34. The treatise-author cites the sūtra: the Buddha told Ānanda that the dharmas a disciple ought to do, you have made all of them complete. The treatise-author cites one sentence of the sūtra again in order to open the following explanation. Sentences that cite the sūtra like this appear often in the treatise; they are the treatise-author's way of carrying his explanation forward, and what is cited is still the Buddha's words, not a fresh passage of sūtra text. In reading the treatise one must keep two things apart: the treatise-author's own judgements, and the sūtra text the treatise-author cites, belong to different speakers.

35. The dharma of a disciple is to provide for the teacher with wholesome deeds of body, speech, and mind; some have good minds but body and speech do not match, some have good body and speech but the mind does not match; Ānanda, body and speech matching, not sparing body and life, has made all these matters complete. The treatise-author explains 「弟子所應作法」 tr. "the dharmas a disciple ought to do" layer by layer. The general mark is 「以善身、口、意業供給師」 tr. "to provide for the teacher with wholesome deeds of body, speech, and mind". Next it divides two kinds of insufficiency: 「有弟子心好，身、口業不稱」 tr. "some disciples have good minds, but their deeds of body and speech do not match"; 「有弟子身、口業好，而心不稱」 tr. "some disciples have good deeds of body and speech, but their minds do not match". Next it brings out the mark of being complete: with a wholesome mind deeply loving and delighting in the teacher, body and speech matching, 「不惜身命、不難懃勞，自捨其心，隨師教勅」 tr. "not sparing body and life, not counting diligent toil as hard, abandoning his own intentions and following the teacher's command". At the end it pronounces that Ānanda 「盡具足此事」 tr. "has made all these matters complete". This passage can serve as the standard for serving a teacher: the mind matching body and speech is the first pass, 「自捨其心」 tr. "abandoning his own intentions" is the second pass—what is abandoned is one's own views, not one's own power of judgement.

36. The treatise-author cites the sūtra: the Buddha told Ānanda: you now at present revere me; after my passing into extinction, in revering prajñā you should also be like this. The treatise-author cites the sūtra text again, taking exactly the backbone sentence of the whole chapter's entrustment. What this sentence establishes is an equation: the reverence toward the Buddha now turns, after the passing into extinction, toward prajñā, without diminishing in weight. The eighth round of question and answer below arises from this equation.

37. The question of the eighth question and answer: prajñā is the teacher of the buddhas; why then does Ānanda not revere that teacher but revere the Buddha. This question is asked very cleverly: since it is said that prajñā is the teacher of the buddhas, what Ānanda ought to revere first should be prajñā; why is what he reveres before him the Buddha? The questioner does not mean to belittle the Buddha; he means to ask out the reason for ‘using the Buddha as a simile for prajñā’.

38. The answer of the eighth question and answer: though Ānanda has obtained the first path, because his outflows are not yet exhausted he does not deeply know the reality of dharmas; therefore the Buddha tells him: revere prajñā as you revere me. The answer speaks from Ānanda's rank: 「雖得初道」 tr. "although he has obtained the first path", yet 「漏未盡故，不深知法實，如佛所知」 tr. "because his outflows are not yet exhausted, he does not deeply know the reality of dharmas as the Buddha knows it". Since he cannot yet know the real virtue of prajñā, he has no way to give rise to a matching reverence; the Buddha therefore uses the reverence he already has as a bridge—「汝恭敬般若，如恭敬我」 tr. "revere prajñā as you revere me". This answer gives a general rule of teaching: to teach people to revere what they do not yet recognise, one must lead from what they already recognise.

39. Again, beings seeing the Buddha's marks, minor signs, and radiance mostly love and revere; prajñā is subtle, very deep, without shape and without form, and the wise can know it; therefore the Buddha uses his body as a simile for prajñā. The treatise-author speaks further of beings in general: those who see the Buddha's 「三十二相、八十隨形好、大光明、金色身」 tr. "thirty-two marks, eighty minor marks, great radiance, and golden-coloured body" mostly give rise to love and reverence, whereas prajñā is 「微妙甚深，無形、無色」 tr. "subtle and very deep, without shape, without form", and only 「智者能知」 tr. "the wise can know it". He adds one more sentence: as for the marks and minor signs of the Buddha's body, 「愚、智視之，皆無厭足」 tr. "whether the foolish or the wise look at them, none is ever satisfied"—the foolish and the wise alike can take them in, and so they are fit to serve as a simile. The pronouncement is 「是故佛以身喻般若」 tr. "therefore the Buddha uses his body as a simile for prajñā". Here the reader can know: the Buddha's using himself as a simile is not self-exaltation; it takes a thing seen alike by the foolish and the wise to point to a dharma that only the wise can know.

40. While the Buddha was in the world he could himself ward off Māra; therefore the Buddha told Ānanda: after my passing into extinction, guard and protect prajñā well. The treatise-author adds the reason of the entrustment as regards time: while the Buddha was in the world he 「能自遮魔」 tr. "could himself ward off Māra", so prajñā needed no one to protect it; after the passing into extinction, the matter of warding off Māra falls upon the disciples. The weight of the sentence 「我滅度後，好守護般若」 tr. "after my passing into extinction, guard and protect prajñā well" lies precisely between this ‘himself’ and ‘not himself’. The origin of the duty of guarding is made clear here.

41. The question of the ninth question and answer: one entrustment would be enough; why go to three. The ninth question turns to the number of times. The questions before this all asked 「何以囑累」 tr. "why entrust"; this question is ‘why three’. It is asked very finely, and the treatise-author's answer thereby speaks the boundary of the matter of 「慇懃」 tr. "earnestness" through to the bottom.

42. The answer of the ninth question and answer: because the Buddha deeply loves prajñāpāramitā, he entrusts it three times. The answer is only one sentence, and it uses the two Chinese characters 「深愛」 tr. "deeply loves". This must not be read as the Buddha having love and clinging—the first round of question and answer has already broken this doubt; what is called 「深愛」 tr. "deep love" is deeply knowing its kindness to beings. The answer is this brief in order to draw out the next question.

43. The question of the tenth question and answer: if he deeply loves it, why limit it to three. This question is the necessary question that follows from the previous answer: since it is deep love, why stop exactly at three? The previous question found it too many; this question finds it too few—with the two questions pressing from both sides, the measure of the middle way shows of itself. The intent of the treatise-author in setting up these two linked questions lies here.

44. The answer of the tenth question and answer: the constant way of the buddhas is that their speech does not exceed three; if after three someone does not comply, the vajra-holding spirit raises his pestle at him; further, his intent is that if someone does not comply after three times he is a rebellious person and should be killed. The answer first sets up the general rule: 「諸佛常法，語不過三。」 tr. "The constant way of the buddhas is that their speech does not exceed three." Next it brings up its strictness: if someone does not comply after three times, the vajra-holding spirit 「則以杵擬之」 tr. "will raise his pestle at him"; further, the intent of the vajra-holding spirit is that one who does not comply after three times is a rebellious person, and 「便當殺之」 tr. "should be killed". It concludes 「是故佛問不過三」 tr. "therefore the Buddha's questions do not exceed three". What this passage speaks of is the fixed rule of entrustment in the Buddha-dharma, not something set up for this chapter at one time. Here the reader need not seek the fine details of the matter; he should take its meaning: the limit of three both leaves the one entrusted ample room to turn around, and sets for the one entrusting a boundary of not forcing people.

45. Again, if said once it is still too slack; beyond three, too urgent, like an ordinary person who craves and clings. The treatise-author speaks further from the sense of measure: saying it once is 「猶緩」 tr. "still too slack"; beyond three it is 「太急」 tr. "too urgent", so urgent that it seems to have become the craving and clinging of an ordinary person. These words are well worth savouring—if earnestness exceeds its measure, it falls back on the contrary into the reproach of 「似如愛著」 tr. "as if in love and clinging" that the treatise-author's first round of question and answer broke. So one sees that the middle way is not only in doctrine; it is also in the lightness and weight of speech.

46. Again, the minds of the recipients are of three kinds; those of dull faculties give rise to a wholesome mind only at the third time; though Ānanda has keen faculties, his mind turns toward the śrāvakas, seeking only to be saved in his own person; therefore he is told three times. The treatise-author speaks further from the side of the recipient: the minds of the recipients are of three kinds, and people of dull faculties 「至三乃生善心」 tr. "give rise to a wholesome mind only at the third time". Next, as for Ānanda: though he has keen faculties, his 「心向聲聞，但一身求度」 tr. "mind turns toward the śrāvakas, seeking only to be saved in his own person", his aim being to save himself and not to pass it on widely, so he still needs to be told three times. This passage brings the reason for 「三」 tr. "three" down onto a concrete person, and the general rule spoken of above here finds its footing. The reader too can reflect on himself: toward the teaching I have received, do I receive it at one hearing, or must it come again and again before my mind is moved?

47. The reason for entrusting is so as not to let the Dharma be extinguished; teaching one another in turn is like one lamp lighting other lamps, its light growing ever more; not being the last person who cuts off the lineage is as when people of the world have sons who do not continue the line, which is named cutting off the lineage, the greatest shame. Here the treatise-author speaks in general of what the entrustment is for: 「為不令法滅故。」 tr. "So as not to let the Dharma be extinguished." Its method is teaching one another in turn—「汝當教化弟子，弟子復教餘人」 tr. "you should teach and transform disciples, and the disciples in turn teach others"—and he brings out a simile: 「譬如一燈復然餘燈，其明轉多。」 tr. "Just as one lamp lights other lamps, and its light grows ever more." Next he explains the sentence 「莫作最後斷種人」 tr. "do not be the last person who cuts off the lineage": when people of the world have sons who do not continue the line, it is named cutting off the lineage, 「最為可恥」 tr. "the greatest shame", and with this comparison the Buddha tells Ānanda: 「汝莫於汝身上令般若斷絕！」 tr. "Do not let prajñā be cut off in your own person!" The responsibility this passage establishes is extremely heavy and extremely plain—it lies not in how many grounds one has realised, but in not letting this lamp go out in one's own hands.

48. The question of the eleventh question and answer: an earlier chapter made clear that prajñā is not increased by being taught nor decreased by not being taught, having the mark of ultimate quiescent extinction; why now does it say do not let it be cut off and extinguished; like space, who could extinguish it. The eleventh question is the most perilous question of the whole chapter, and the questioner takes the earlier text of this treatise as his ground: the earlier chapter had already made clear that 「般若波羅蜜，說亦不增、不說亦不減，畢竟寂滅相」 tr. "prajñāpāramitā is not increased by being taught, nor decreased by not being taught, having the mark of ultimate quiescent extinction"; this being so, why then say 「莫令斷滅」 tr. "do not let it be cut off and extinguished"? And he brings out a simile in proof: 「譬如虛空，誰能滅者？」 tr. "Like space, who could extinguish it?" If this question is not broken, the entrustment of the whole chapter falls empty in its doctrine. Here the reader can first answer it once himself, and then see how the treatise-author divides it.

49. The answer of the eleventh question and answer: although prajñā is quiescent extinction, without arising and ceasing, like space, and cannot be made the object of idle discourse, yet the scrolls of the sūtra written in letters and words and taught to others are the prajñā here; its result is spoken of within this cause. The answer divides the two Chinese characters 「般若」 tr. "prajñā" into two layers: prajñā as the real mark is 「寂滅、無生無滅相、如虛空、不可戲論」 tr. "quiescent extinction, the mark of non-arising and non-ceasing, like space, not to be made the object of idle discourse", and in this layer there is truly nothing to extinguish; whereas 「文字語言書般若波羅蜜經卷，為他人說」 tr. "the scrolls of the prajñāpāramitā sūtra written in letters and words, taught to others" are 「此中般若」 tr. "the prajñā here"—what this chapter entrusts is exactly this layer. The last sentence is the key: 「於此因中而說其果。」 tr. "Within this cause its result is spoken of." The letters and scrolls are the cause, prajñā as the real mark is the fruit, and in the sūtra the name of the fruit is spoken upon the cause; so one can speak of its being cut off and of its not being cut off. This distinction is the key to reading every saying about ‘the Dharma's extinction’ and ‘the Dharma's abiding’.

50. Ordinary people, hearing that prajñā is subtle, at once give rise to a clinging mind, grasp at the mark of prajñā, and discriminate dharmas; because of discriminating they give rise to clinging, because of clinging fighting and strife, because of fighting and strife they raise up all sinful deeds; such people are named those who extinguish prajñāpāramitā. The treatise-author next gives 「滅般若」 tr. "extinguishing prajñā" an unexpected definition: those who extinguish prajñā are not those of the outside paths, not enemies and thieves, but people who hear prajñā and give rise to a clinging mind. The treatise-author states its sequence very distinctly: hearing of the subtle, they give rise to a clinging mind, grasp at the mark of prajñā, and discriminate 「是善、是不善，是世間、是涅槃」 tr. "this is wholesome, this is unwholesome; this is worldly, this is nirvāṇa" and so on; because of discriminating they give rise to clinging within the Dharma, because of clinging fighting and strife, because of fighting and strife they raise up all sinful deeds. 「如是人名為滅般若波羅蜜。」 tr. "Such people are named those who extinguish prajñāpāramitā." Here the reader should be struck with awe: the ones most able to cut off the lineage of prajñā are exactly those who take themselves to be guarding and upholding prajñā.

51. The Buddha told Ānanda: you should, in accordance with the mark of prajñā, not cling to letters and words, and teach and transform beings; this is called not extinguishing. Having said what extinguishing is, it at once says what not extinguishing is. The treatise-author cites the Buddha's words as the answer: 「汝當如般若波羅蜜相，莫著文字語言，教化眾生。」 tr. "You should, in accordance with the mark of prajñāpāramitā, not cling to letters and words, and teach and transform beings."—what is kept to is not refraining from using letters, but using letters without clinging. The last words, 「是名不滅」 tr. "this is called not extinguishing", stand against the previous passage's 「名為滅」 tr. "are named those who extinguish", and the two definitions combine into one meaning: whether the Dharma survives or perishes lies not in whether there are scrolls and volumes, but in whether readers grasp at marks.

52. The treatise-author cites the sūtra: for however long a time prajñā is in the world, know that for so long a time the Buddha is in the world, as is said at length in the sūtra. The treatise-author cites the words of the fourth layer of the sūtra and notes 「如經中廣說」 tr. "as is said at length in the sūtra", showing that this meaning is already complete in the sūtra text. He cites without explaining, wanting the reader to look back at the sūtra text; only the next passage properly explains why it is so.

53. The Buddha states the causes and conditions of the entrustment: when there is prajñā in the world, the Buddha is present; prajñā is the mother of the buddhas, the buddhas take the Dharma as their teacher, and if the teacher is present and the mother is present, it is not named losing the benefit. The treatise-author first states how it arose: at the moment of the Buddha's earnest entrustment, 「在會眾生有疑」 tr. "the beings in the assembly had doubts", so the Buddha stated the causes and conditions of the entrustment, namely 「有般若在世，則為佛在」 tr. "when there is prajñā in the world, the Buddha is present". Next he explains its principle, and the principle has three steps: first, 「般若波羅蜜是諸佛母」 tr. "prajñāpāramitā is the mother of the buddhas"; second, 「諸佛以法為師。法者，即是般若波羅蜜」 tr. "the buddhas take the Dharma as their teacher. The Dharma is precisely prajñāpāramitā"; third, 「若師在、母在，不名為失利」 tr. "if the teacher is present and the mother is present, it is not named losing the benefit"—why? 「利本在故。」 tr. "Because the root of the benefit is present." So he concludes: 「若般若在世，佛亦在世。」 tr. "If prajñā is in the world, the Buddha too is in the world." This step is not words of consolation; it establishes its saying on the relation of the Dharma and the Buddha—that by which a Buddha is a Buddha has its root in this Dharma; with the root present, the benefit obtained is not lost.

54. Again, the Dharma Jewel is not apart from the Buddha Jewel: a bodhisattva with the marks and minor signs is not named Buddha, and is named Buddha because he obtains the Dharma Jewel; as people obtain benefit from the Buddha up to liberation and nirvāṇa, those who can believe and practise within prajñā also enter nirvāṇa by the dharmas of the three vehicles. The treatise-author speaks again from another side: the Dharma Jewel is not apart from the Buddha Jewel. Its proof is a matter anyone can verify—a bodhisattva already has 「三十二相、八十隨形好」 tr. "the thirty-two marks and the eighty minor marks" and yet is 「不名為佛」 tr. "not named Buddha"; 「得法寶故名為佛」 tr. "because he obtains the Dharma Jewel, he is named Buddha". Since the name of Buddha is established by the Dharma Jewel, and 「法寶即是般若波羅蜜」 tr. "the Dharma Jewel is precisely prajñāpāramitā", then prajñā being in the world and the Buddha being in the world are not two. At the end he speaks further from the side of receiving its use: as people obtain benefit from the Buddha and so on up to obtaining liberation and nirvāṇa, if people 「於般若中能信行」 tr. "can believe and practise within prajñā", they too enter nirvāṇa by the dharmas of the three vehicles. The pronouncement is 「說法無異」 tr. "teaching the Dharma with no difference".

55. The treatise-author cites the sūtra: if someone hears and receives prajñā, writes it out, upholds it, and so on, know that this person is not apart from seeing the Buddha, hearing the Dharma, and drawing close to the buddhas. The treatise-author cites the words of the last layer of retribution in the sūtra, in order to open the next round of question and answer. This sentence is the great benefit granted by the sūtra text, and precisely because it is great, it draws out the following difficulty, ‘does a person of heavy sin also obtain this or not’.

56. The question of the twelfth question and answer: a person of heavy sin, with the three unwholesome deeds accomplished, hears, receives, writes out, and upholds prajñā; how can he come to be not apart from the buddhas, hearing the Dharma, and drawing close to the Buddha. The twelfth question is asked very practically: can a person of heavy sin, with the three unwholesome deeds of body, speech, and mind accomplished, obtain such a retribution merely by hearing, receiving, writing out, and upholding prajñā? This question asks right to the heart on behalf of all those who ‘hear the Dharma while their practice is not yet pure’, and the treatise-author's answer is accordingly very measured.

57. The answer of the twelfth question and answer: this matter was already answered in an earlier chapter; those who hear the Dharma are of two kinds—those who only hear and do not believe, receive, and practise, and those who hear and believe, receive, and carry it out; hearing with one mind, believing, receiving, and carrying it out, growing weary of the world and loving nirvāṇa, leaving the Small Vehicle and delighting in the Great Vehicle, is called true hearing; reciting and reading are likewise. The treatise-author first points out that this difficulty was already answered in an earlier chapter, and at once restates its distinction: those who hear the Dharma are of two kinds—「但聽而不信受行」 tr. "those who only hear and do not believe, receive, and practise", and 「聽而信受奉行」 tr. "those who hear and believe, receive, and carry it out". And he brings out a comparison to fix the name: as when a disciple does not listen to, and does not believe, receive, and carry out, the teacher's words, 「是名不聽」 tr. "this is called not hearing". The mark of true hearing has four matters: hearing with one mind, believing, receiving, and carrying it out, growing weary of the world and loving nirvāṇa, leaving the Small Vehicle and delighting in the Great Vehicle. At the end he adds one sentence, 「誦、讀亦如是」 tr. "reciting and reading are likewise", which shows that the writing out, upholding, reading, and reciting listed earlier must each and every one take this as the standard. The reason there is doubt about the ‘person of heavy sin’ the earlier question doubted is exactly that people look only at whether he has read, not at whether he truly hears.

58. Right recollection is following the Buddha's intent, parting from the two extremes of existence and non-existence, and practising the middle way; receiving and upholding as one has heard, understanding its meaning, and explaining it to others, at first thin and slight, and so on until the mind grows ever thicker and the merit ever greater, firm and unmoving. The treatise-author goes on to explain the 「正憶念」 tr. "right recollection" listed in the sūtra text: its mark is 「隨如佛意，離有無二邊，行於中道」 tr. "following the Buddha's intent, parting from the two extremes of existence and non-existence, and practising the middle way". Next he lists the matters practised: receiving and upholding as one has heard, understanding the meaning, explaining it to others, and revering, honouring, making offerings, praising, flowers and incense, and so on. At the end he speaks of its gradual course: 「初始微薄，乃至正憶念、為他人說，其心轉厚，功德轉多，牢固不動。」 tr. "At first it is thin and slight, and so on up to rightly recollecting and explaining it for others, the mind grows ever thicker and the merit ever greater, firm and unmoving." What this passage gives is a road from shallow to deep—one need not arrive at 「牢固不動」 tr. "firm and unmoving" from the very start, but one must be able to see whether one is growing thicker.

59. If a wise person who knows the merit of prajñā makes offerings, the merit is heavy; if one makes offerings without knowing, the merit is thin and slight; those of pure and thick merit, after changing bodies, are not apart from seeing the Buddha and hearing the Dharma; those of thin and slight merit, after repaying their many sins, after a long time will also certainly attain buddhahood. Here the treatise-author properly answers the earlier question. He divides two grades: those who know the merit of prajñā and make offerings have 「福德重」 tr. "heavy merit", those who do not know have 「福德微薄」 tr. "thin and slight merit". The fruits of the two grades also part into two roads: those of pure and thick merit, 「轉身不離見佛、聞法、親近諸佛」 tr. "after changing bodies, are not apart from seeing the Buddha, hearing the Dharma, and drawing close to the buddhas"; as for those of thin and slight merit, 「不言轉身得三福報」 tr. "it is not said that after changing bodies they obtain the three kinds of reward of merit"; they must, 「償眾罪已，久後亦必當得佛」 tr. "after they have repaid their many sins, after a long time, also certainly attain buddhahood". The excellence of this answer lies in not allowing people to trust to luck, nor letting people despair—it is not that a person of heavy sin does not obtain this benefit, only that he does not obtain it at the time of changing bodies; after repaying his sins, in the end he too attains buddhahood. Here the reader should keep his eye on two places: first, the difference between 「知」 tr. "knowing" and 「不知」 tr. "not knowing" lies in the weight of merit; second, the two Chinese characters 「久後」 tr. "after a long time" are not empty words.

60. Here the Buddha speaks generally of pure and thick merit and of thin and slight merit: little by little all will come to see the buddhas of the ten directions and hear what the buddhas teach, little by little make complete the six perfections, and all will become Buddhas. The treatise-author closes the previous passage, pointing out that here the Buddha is 「總說」 tr. "speaking generally"—whether pure and thick or thin and slight, at the last they return to one place: 「漸漸皆當見十方佛、聞佛所說，漸漸具足六波羅蜜，皆得作佛。」 tr. "Little by little all will come to see the buddhas of the ten directions and hear what the buddhas teach, little by little make complete the six perfections, and all will become Buddhas." The two occurrences of 「漸漸」 tr. "little by little" must be read with care: what is granted is not sudden attainment but certain arrival. Only by looking at the distinction of the previous passage together with the general statement of this passage does one have the sūtra's meaning.

61. Because the Buddha with the Buddha-eye sees that prajñā has such great benefit for beings, he therefore earnestly entrusts it. The treatise-author sums up the long preceding section with one sentence: the reason the Buddha is earnest is that with the Buddha-eye he himself sees that prajñā has such great benefit for beings. By now the doubt raised in the first round of question and answer—「似如愛著」 tr. "as if in love and clinging"—has been filled out on every side by all the answers: what is seen is the benefit of beings, so what is done is entrustment and not love and clinging.

62. The question of the thirteenth question and answer: the great arhats have already realised the limit of reality and no longer have sorrow or joy; even small joy they do not have, how much less great joy. The thirteenth question returns to the last phrase of the sūtra text, 「皆大歡喜」 tr. "all greatly rejoiced". This question carries great weight: one who has realised the limit of reality should not be moved by sorrow or joy; even small joy he does not have—why does the sūtra text say 「大歡喜」 tr. "greatly rejoiced"? The stock phrase most easily slid past in reading a sūtra is exactly where the treatise-author chooses to set up a question.

63. The answer of the thirteenth question and answer: the great arhats, though free from the desire of the three realms, have not yet obtained all wisdom, and within the very deep dharmas still have doubts they do not clearly understand; now it is clearly explained and their doubts are severed, therefore they greatly rejoice. The answer speaks from where they are not yet sufficient: the great arhats, 「雖離三界欲」 tr. "although they have parted from the desire of the three realms", have 「未得一切智慧」 tr. "not yet obtained all wisdom", so 「於諸甚深法中猶疑不了」 tr. "within all the very deep dharmas they still have doubts and do not understand them clearly". Now within the Mahāprajñāpāramitā these are 「了了解說，斷除其疑」 tr. "clearly explained, severing their doubts", and so they greatly rejoice. One sees that this joy is not a stirring of emotion; it is the clarity after doubt is gone. Here the reader can test for himself: the kind of lightness and ease that follows truly resolving a doubt differs in its nature from the joy drawn by pleasing things of the world.

64. Again, these great disciples have already realised the limit of reality; the limit of reality is emptiness, the signless, the immeasurable, without anything discriminated; the Buddha widely teaches this dharma of quiescent extinction by all kinds of discriminating names, words, and similes, and yet does not destroy the nature of dharmas nor go against the world; the arhats realised within this dharma, so they greatly rejoice. The treatise-author brings out one more layer of reason, and opens up the two Chinese characters 「實際」 tr. "the limit of reality": 「即是空、無相、無量，無所分別。」 tr. "It is emptiness, the signless, the immeasurable, without anything discriminated." And the Buddha can, with this quiescent dharma without anything discriminated, 「種種分別名字、語言、譬喻廣說」 tr. "widely explain it by all kinds of discriminating names, words, and similes", and 「亦不壞法性，又不與世間相違」 tr. "yet not destroy the nature of dharmas, nor go against the world". The great arhats are exactly those who realised within this dharma; seeing that the Buddha can teach in this way without destroying what they have realised, they greatly rejoice. What this passage praises is the Buddha's power of teaching—to make discriminations within non-discrimination with neither hindering the other is in itself a thing to rejoice at.

65. The Buddha well teaches this dharma of emptiness, the signless, the immeasurable, and quiescent extinction; the rest of the great assembly, though not all have exhausted their outflows, because their power of faith is deep also greatly rejoice, saying: this dharma can end the suffering of our birth and death and cause us to obtain the Buddha path. The treatise-author speaks further of the rest of the great assembly present: they have 「未悉漏盡」 tr. "not yet all exhausted their outflows", and what they rely on is that their 「信力深」 tr. "power of faith is deep". As for why they rejoice, the treatise-author records their words verbatim: 「此法能盡我等生死苦，令得佛道。」 tr. "This dharma can end the suffering of our birth and death, and cause us to obtain the Buddha path." The previous passage says the joy of those who have realised comes from resolving doubt; this passage says the joy of those who have not realised comes from the power of faith—the two joys each have their ground, and both return to the Dharma.

66. Because of immeasurable causes and conditions such as these, the great assembly all rejoice. The treatise-author sums up this round of question and answer in one sentence: the causes and conditions brought up are not only the several kinds listed above, so he says 「無量」 tr. "immeasurable". Here the four Chinese characters of the sūtra text, 「皆大歡喜」 tr. "all greatly rejoiced", have a real meaning: not a stock phrase at the end of the text, but each, according to his position, obtaining his own joy.

67. The question of the fourteenth question and answer: since the Buddha entrusted this prajñā to Ānanda, and after the Buddha's parinirvāṇa Ānanda together with Mahākāśyapa compiled the three baskets, why is it not mentioned therein. The fourteenth question, which is also the last question of the whole chapter, asks about a matter of history: since the Buddha entrusted prajñā to Ānanda, and Ānanda later compiled the three baskets together with Mahākāśyapa, why is this Dharma not seen within the three baskets? If this question is not explained, the entrustment spoken of before falls empty in fact. The treatise-author brings out several answers in a row, and answers very concretely.

68. The answer of the fourteenth question and answer: the Mahāyāna is very deep, hard to believe, hard to understand, hard to practise; while the Buddha was in the world there were bhikṣus who heard the Mahāyāna, did not believe or understand it, and rose from their seats and left, how much more after the Buddha's parinirvāṇa. The first answer speaks from capacity: the Mahāyāna is 「甚深難信、難解難行」 tr. "very deep, hard to believe, hard to understand, hard to practise". And it brings up a matter of the time when the Buddha was in the world as proof—there were bhikṣus who heard the Mahāyāna and did not believe or understand it, and 「從坐而去」 tr. "rose from their seats and left". If it was so even with the Buddha himself present in the assembly, how much more after his nirvāṇa. The sentence 「以是故不說」 tr. "for this reason it is not mentioned" speaks of the actual situation at the time of the compiling, not of the Mahāyāna being unworthy of being passed on.

69. Again, the three baskets have exactly three hundred thousand verses, making nine million six hundred thousand words, while the Mahāyāna is very much more, immeasurable and unlimited; the gods, nāgas, and spirits, with long lives and strong powers of memory and recollection, can keep a thousand koṭi of myriads of verses, while the people of this world now, with short lives and weak powers of memory and recollection, cannot read even the small Prajñā. The second answer speaks from quantity. The treatise-author first gives the number of the three baskets: 「三藏正有三十萬偈，并為九百六十萬言。」 tr. "The three baskets have exactly three hundred thousand verses, making nine million six hundred thousand words." Next he gives the quantity of the Mahāyāna: the "Prajñāpāramitā" chapter has twenty-two thousand verses, the "Great Prajñā" chapter has a hundred thousand verses, and in the palaces of the nāga kings, the asura kings, and the gods there are a thousand koṭi of myriads of verses, and so on. The reason they can keep them is 「此諸天、龍、神壽命長久、識念力強故」 tr. "because these gods, nāgas, and spirits have long lives and strong powers of memory and recollection". Looking back at the people of this world now, with 「壽命短促、識念力薄」 tr. "short lives and weak powers of memory and recollection", they cannot read even the "Small Prajñāpāramitā" chapter, how much less more than that. What this passage speaks of is not that people are unfit to hear, but that the vessel cannot take the quantity—what the compilers chose was the portion that this land could keep.

70. The prajñā known by the other great bodhisattvas is immeasurable and unlimited; the Buddha did not teach with one body only, and in immeasurable ages sometimes transformed himself into countless bodies, so what he taught is immeasurable. The treatise-author pushes one layer further: the prajñā known by the great bodhisattvas is 「無量無限」 tr. "immeasurable and unlimited". The reason it is immeasurable he gives very plainly—「佛非但一身所說」 tr. "the Buddha did not teach with one body only"; in immeasurable ages he 「或變化作無數身」 tr. "sometimes transformed himself into countless bodies", and therefore what he taught is immeasurable. These words can resolve a common doubt: the Buddha taught the Dharma for no more than some decades of his life; how can there be so many great scriptures? What the treatise-author answers lies not in disputing the years and months but in making clear that it is not the teaching of one body and one life.

71. Further, there are the Sūtra of Inconceivable Liberation and the other great sūtras, each with a hundred thousand verses, immeasurable and boundless like the jewels in the great ocean; how could they be put into the three baskets; a small thing should be within a great one, a great thing cannot enter a small one; if one is to ask, one should say: why is the Small Vehicle not within the Mahāyāna. The treatise-author goes on to list the titles of the great sūtras: the Sūtra of Inconceivable Liberation with a hundred thousand verses; the Sūtra of the Origins of the Buddhas, the Jewel Cloud Sūtra, the Great Cloud Sūtra, and the Dharma Cloud Sūtra, each with a hundred thousand verses; and the Lotus Sūtra, the Flower Hand Sūtra, the Great Compassion Sūtra, the Skilful Means Sūtra, the Sūtra of the Nāga King's Questions, the Sūtra of the Asura King's Questions, and the other great sūtras, 「無量無邊，如大海中寶」 tr. "immeasurable and boundless, like the jewels in the great ocean". At once he brings out a principle: 「小物應在大中，大物不得入小。」 tr. "A small thing should be within a great one; a great thing cannot enter a small one." And he turns the question over and hands it back to the questioner: if one is to ask, one should say 「小乘何以不在摩訶衍中？」 tr. "Why is the Small Vehicle not within the Mahāyāna?" At the end he pronounces 「摩訶衍能兼小乘法故，是故不應如汝所問」 tr. "because the Mahāyāna can include the dharma of the Small Vehicle, therefore one should not ask as you have asked". This reversal is a key example of the discussion in this chapter—if, at the point of asking, great and small are set up wrongly, the answer can never settle; the treatise-author first corrects what is asked, and the difficulty does not stand of itself.

72. Again, someone says: as Mahākāśyapa led the bhikṣus on Mount Gṛdhrakūṭa to compile the three baskets, after the Buddha's passing into extinction Mañjuśrī, Maitreya, and the other great bodhisattvas also led Ānanda to compile this Mahāyāna. The treatise-author cites one saying that answers directly ‘where was the Mahāyāna compiled’: Kāśyapa led the bhikṣus to compile the three baskets on Mount Gṛdhrakūṭa, while Mañjuśrī, Maitreya, and the other great bodhisattvas 「亦將阿難集是摩訶衍」 tr. "also led Ānanda to compile this Mahāyāna". It is worth noting that in both compilations Ānanda is present—the prajñā entrusted before here finds where its transmission lands. The treatise-author brings this saying out with 「有人言」 tr. "someone says", so the speaker it belongs to is clear; the reader should receive it as it is attributed, and not force it into a settled conclusion.

73. Further, Ānanda knew how to weigh the greatness or smallness of beings' aspirations and deeds, so he did not teach the Mahāyāna among the śrāvakas; the Buddha-dharma is all of one kind and one flavour, namely the flavour of liberation that is the exhaustion of suffering; this flavour has two kinds—being only for one's own person and being also for all beings; therefore there is the difference of the Great and Small Vehicles. The treatise-author adds one more layer, and speaks to the very source of the division of the Great and Small Vehicles. Ānanda 「知籌量眾生志業大小」 tr. "knew how to weigh the greatness or smallness of beings' aspirations and deeds", so he did not teach the Mahāyāna among the śrāvakas—「說則錯亂，無所成辦」 tr. "if it were taught, it would give rise to confusion and nothing would be accomplished". Next he establishes a meaning: 「佛法皆是一種一味，所謂苦盡解脫味。」 tr. "The Buddha-dharma is all of one kind and one flavour, namely the flavour of liberation that is the exhaustion of suffering." Though the flavour is one, the minds of the recipients are two: 「一者、但自為身，二者、兼為一切眾生。」 tr. "First, being only for one's own person; second, being also for all beings." Although alike they seek one gate of liberation, 「而有自利、利人之異」 tr. "there is the difference of benefiting oneself and benefiting others", and the distinction of the Great and Small Vehicles is established from this. At the end he concludes: for the sake of these two kinds of people, what the Buddha's mouth taught was 「以文字語言分為二種：三藏是聲聞法，摩訶衍是大乘法」 tr. "divided by letters and words into two kinds: the three baskets are the śrāvaka Dharma; the Mahāyāna is the Great Vehicle Dharma". This passage is extremely important—the division of great and small lies not in the flavour of the Dharma but in the arousing of the mind; dividing the teaching is an arrangement made according to capacity, not the Dharma having two substances.

74. Again, while the Buddha was in the world there was no name "three baskets", only bhikṣus who held the sūtra, held the Vinaya, and held the mātṛkā; the sūtra has two divisions, and the Vinaya too has two divisions—the Vinaya of the land of Mathurā includes the avadāna and the jātaka, with eighty sections; the Vinaya of the land of Jibin removes the jātaka and the avadāna, taking only what is essential to make ten sections. At the very end the treatise-author speaks from the source and course of names and categories. While the Buddha was in the world there was originally no name 「三藏」 tr. "three baskets"; there were only 「持修多羅比丘、持毘尼比丘、持摩多羅迦比丘」 tr. "bhikṣus who held the sūtra, bhikṣus who held the Vinaya, and bhikṣus who held the mātṛkā". Next he explains sūtra: it is the name of the scriptures in the four Āgamas, and also the name of the scriptures in the Mahāyāna; it has two divisions—the sūtra within the four Āgamas, and the Mahāyāna scriptures, which are named great; so 「修多羅入二分，亦大乘、亦小乘」 tr. "the sūtra enters both divisions; it is both the Great Vehicle and the Small Vehicle", and the two hundred and fifty precepts and the like are also named sūtra. Next he explains the Vinaya: 「名比丘作罪，佛結戒：應行是、不應行是，作是事得是罪」 tr. "it speaks of the offences bhikṣus commit; the Buddha lays down the precepts: one should do this, one should not do that; doing this matter incurs this offence"; briefly told there are eighty sections, and it too has two divisions—the Vinaya of the land of Mathurā includes the avadāna and the jātaka, with eighty sections; the Vinaya of the land of Jibin removes the jātaka and the avadāna, 「但取要用作十部」 tr. "taking only what is essential to make ten sections", and there are eighty sections of vibhāṣā explaining it. What this passage shows is something readers of the teaching often overlook: the names of the categories arose later, and what was compiled differed from place to place; using later names to measure the reality of an earlier age often gives rise to pointless disputes.

75. Therefore one knows that the Mahāprajñāpāramitā Sūtra and the others are within the sūtra scriptures; because the sūtras are great and their matters different they are spoken of separately, and therefore they are not within the compiling of the three baskets. The treatise-author settles the whole question with one sentence: the Mahāprajñāpāramitā Sūtra and the others are originally within the sūtra scriptures, and are set out separately only because 「經大、事異」 tr. "the sūtras are great and their matters different"; it is not that outside the three baskets there is some separate Dharma. The doubt of the earlier question, 「何以不說」 tr. "why is it not mentioned", is here wholly resolved—it is not that it was not passed on, but that it circulated separately. The fourteen rounds of question and answer of the whole chapter end here, and the matter of doctrine is finished.

76. The colophon of the translation hall: the Dharma master Kumārajīva arrived at Chang'an in the third year of Hongshi of the Qin; in the summer of the fourth year in the Xiaoyao Garden he brought out this Expository Treatise for the Heavenly King Yao, and on the twenty-seventh day of the twelfth month of the seventh year it was finished; he also brought out sūtras, Vinaya, and treatises of nearly five hundred thousand words, which with this Expository Treatise make one million five hundred thousand words; the first chapter, thirty-four fascicles, is the full complete text of the treatise, and from the second chapter onward the Dharma master abridged it. What stands at the end of the whole treatise is not doctrine but a record of the translation hall; it is enough to read it as it is, without forcing a doctrinal explanation on it. What it records are four matters: time and place—in the third year of Hongshi, the year xinchou, on the twentieth day of the twelfth month, he arrived at Chang'an; in the summer of the fourth year, in the upper storey of the western gate in the Xiaoyao Garden, he brought out this Expository Treatise for the Heavenly King Yao, and on the twenty-seventh day of the twelfth month of the seventh year it was finished; what was done alongside—in the meantime he also brought out sūtra texts, dhyāna sūtras, precepts and Vinaya, the Hundred Treatise, and the Essential Explanations of the Dhyāna Method, 「向五十萬言」 tr. "nearly five hundred thousand words", which together with this Expository Treatise make 「一百五十萬言」 tr. "one million five hundred thousand words"; the pattern of the text—「論初品三十四卷，解釋一品，是全論具本；二品已下，法師略之，取其足以開釋文意而已，不復備其廣釋」 tr. "the treatise's first chapter, thirty-four fascicles, explains one chapter, and is the full complete text of the treatise; from the second chapter onward the Dharma master abridged it, taking what sufficed to open up and explain the meaning of the text, and no longer providing its full extended explanation"; the quantity—「得此百卷，若盡出之，將十倍於此」 tr. "as for these hundred fascicles that we have obtained, were it brought out in full, it would be ten times this". These four matters stand exactly in contrast with the entrustment spoken of in this chapter: what the sūtra hands over is ‘do not let it be cut off’, and what is recorded here is how this treatise, in the land of Han, caught up that one entrustment. Having read the whole treatise to this point, one should pause a little—the hundred fascicles one has read are the one-tenth that remains after 「略之」 tr. "he abridged it".

Do Not Misread

Do not read 「囑累」 tr. "entrustment" as the Buddha having given rise to love and clinging toward prajñā. The treatise-author's first round of question and answer has already broken this doubt head-on: what the Buddha never abandons is beings, not the Dharma; between the twin śāla trees he even broke his body into pieces like hemp seeds and rice by the vajra samādhi for the sake of beings, 「何況經法多所饒益而不囑累」 tr. "how much more would he entrust the sūtra-dharma, which enriches so many!" If it is read as the Buddha loving and clinging to this Dharma, then the later sentence 「佛雖於一切法無憎愛、常寂滅相，而囑累是般若」 tr. "although the Buddha is without hatred and without love toward all dharmas, always having the mark of quiescence, he entrusts this prajñā" has nowhere to stand.

Do not read ‘entrusting it to Ānanda and not to the bodhisattvas’ as śrāvakas surpassing bodhisattvas. The reasons the treatise-author gives are three-sided: Ānanda is fit and able to pass it on and keep it; the great bodhisattvas each scatter after the passing into extinction and already deeply know the power of prajñā; and Ānanda 「隨小乘法」 tr. "follows the dharma of the Small Vehicle" and so needs earnestness. Taking the three sides together, what is taken up is ‘needing earnestness’ and ‘being able to stay long in this land to pass it on and keep it’, not high or low in rank. If it is read as a judgement of high and low, then the text in the same treatise, ‘the unshared prajñā is taught only for the great bodhisattvas dwelling on the ten grounds’, contradicts it.

Do not read 「莫令斷滅」 tr. "do not let it be cut off and extinguished" as prajñā itself being something people can extinguish. The treatise-author answers very distinctly: prajñā as the real mark is 「寂滅、無生無滅相、如虛空、不可戲論」 tr. "quiescent extinction, the mark of non-arising and non-ceasing, like space, not to be made the object of idle discourse", and in this layer there is nothing to extinguish; what is entrusted is the layer of 「文字語言書般若波羅蜜經卷，為他人說」 tr. "the scrolls of the prajñāpāramitā sūtra written in letters and words, taught to others", which is 「於此因中而說其果」 tr. "its result is spoken of within this cause". What can be cut off is the layer of the circulation of letters that serves as the cause; the layer that is like space has nothing to extinguish—if the two layers are not kept apart, ‘neither increased nor decreased’ and 「莫令斷滅」 tr. "do not let it be cut off and extinguished" must become a self-contradiction.

Do not read 「滅般若波羅蜜」 tr. "extinguishing prajñāpāramitā" as a thing done by people from outside. The extinguishers of the Dharma the treatise-author points to are those who hear prajñā and 「生著心，取般若相，分別諸法」 tr. "give rise to a clinging mind, grasp at the mark of prajñā, and discriminate dharmas"—because of discriminating they give rise to clinging, because of clinging fighting and strife, because of fighting and strife they raise up all sinful deeds. If a mind that protects the Dharma carries grasping at marks, it falls right into this. On the contrary, only 「如般若波羅蜜相，莫著文字語言，教化眾生」 tr. "in accordance with the mark of prajñāpāramitā, not clinging to letters and words, teaching and transforming beings" is 「是名不滅」 tr. "this is called not extinguishing".

Do not read 「有般若在世，則為佛在」 tr. "when there is prajñā in the world, the Buddha is present" as a sentence of consolation. What the treatise-author gives is a reason, not words of comfort: prajñā is the mother of the buddhas, 「諸佛以法為師。法者，即是般若波羅蜜」 tr. "the buddhas take the Dharma as their teacher. The Dharma is precisely prajñāpāramitā", so 「若師在、母在，不名為失利」 tr. "if the teacher is present and the mother is present, it is not named losing the benefit"—why? 「利本在故。」 tr. "Because the root of the benefit is present." And he takes as proof that a bodhisattva possessing the marks and minor signs is not named Buddha, and 「得法寶故名為佛」 tr. "because he obtains the Dharma Jewel, he is named Buddha". What is established is the relation of root and branch between the Dharma and the Buddha, not an emotional substitute.

Do not read ‘hearing, receiving, writing out, and upholding, one at once obtains not being apart from seeing the Buddha’ as not needing faith and practice. The treatise-author divides those who hear the Dharma into two kinds, and only those who 「一心聽聞，信受奉行，厭世、愛涅槃，離小乘、樂大乘」 tr. "hear with one mind, believe, receive, and carry it out, grow weary of the world and love nirvāṇa, leave the Small Vehicle and delight in the Great Vehicle" are such that 「是名真聽」 tr. "this is called true hearing"; offerings too are divided into knowing and not knowing, and merit is heavy or thin. It is not that a person of heavy sin does not obtain this benefit, but that 「償眾罪已，久後亦必當得佛」 tr. "after he has repaid his many sins, after a long time he too will certainly attain buddhahood". If these distinctions are left out, what the sūtra text grants becomes a gate of trusting to luck.

Do not read ‘the Mahāyāna is not mentioned in the three baskets’ as the Mahāyāna not being the Buddha's teaching. The treatise-author's answers are three: because it is hard to believe and hard to understand, it was not taught at that time; because the quantity is great and the vessel small, it did not enter those collections; because it circulated separately, 「以經大、事異故別說」 tr. "because the sūtras are great and their matters different, they are spoken of separately". He also records the saying that Mañjuśrī, Maitreya, and the other great bodhisattvas led Ānanda to compile this Mahāyāna. At the end he further sets the point of asking right—if one is to ask, one should say 「小乘何以不在摩訶衍中？」 tr. "Why is the Small Vehicle not within the Mahāyāna?" If the reader takes ‘not within the three baskets’ straight to mean ‘not from the Buddha's mouth’, it wholly contradicts the treatise-author's establishing that 「佛法皆是一種一味」 tr. "the Buddha-dharma is all of one kind and one flavour".

Bearing on Practice

The first use to receive is to take ‘revering prajñā as one reveres the Buddha’ as a thing one can do right now. What the Buddha gives Ānanda is not a new assignment but a turning: the love, reverence, offerings, and provision now given to the Buddha are, after the passing into extinction, turned just as they are toward prajñā. The treatise-author explains why—prajñā is 「無形、無色，智者能知」 tr. "without shape, without form; the wise can know it", so the Buddha's body, seen alike by the foolish and the wise, is used as a simile. The practitioner can ask himself here: the portion of solemnity that arises in me toward images of the Buddha and toward a place of practice—has the same portion turned toward the sūtras and the Dharma?

The second use to receive is to recognise whether one is oneself 「真聽」 tr. "truly hearing". The criteria the treatise-author gives are four: hearing with one mind, believing, receiving, and carrying it out, growing weary of the world and loving nirvāṇa, leaving the Small Vehicle and delighting in the Great Vehicle; he takes as the comparison for 「不聽」 tr. "not hearing" a disciple who does not believe, receive, and carry out his teacher's words, and at the end adds 「誦、讀亦如是」 tr. "reciting and reading are likewise". This one can be tested daily—the passage read today, did it enter the mind, or only pass before the eyes?

The third use to receive is to keep the measure of ‘not clinging to letters and words’. The extinguishers of the Dharma the treatise-author rebukes are exactly those who grasp at the mark of prajñā and discriminate this is wholesome, this is unwholesome, this is worldly, this is nirvāṇa, give rise to clinging through discrimination, and give rise to strife through clinging. The practitioner reading the sūtras falls into this most easily: the more familiar one's reading, the more easily one measures others by the words one has gained. At such a time one can hold up one sentence of the treatise-author's to look at oneself—「汝當如般若波羅蜜相，莫著文字語言，教化眾生。」 tr. "You should, in accordance with the mark of prajñāpāramitā, not cling to letters and words, and teach and transform beings."

The fourth use to receive is to learn the measure of 「語不過三」 tr. "speech does not exceed three". The Buddha deeply loves prajñā and entrusts it three times, and beyond three says no more; the treatise-author says it plainly: said once it is still too slack, beyond three too urgent, 「似如凡夫貪著者」 tr. "like an ordinary person who craves and clings". Anyone who urges the Dharma on others can take this as a rule—speak when one should speak; if one has spoken to the second and third time and the other does not receive it, stop. Stopping is not abandoning; it is not letting the Dharma be made light of through forceful clamour.

The fifth use to receive is to take up that lamp. The treatise-author states what the entrustment is for in one sentence only: 「為不令法滅故。」 tr. "So as not to let the Dharma be extinguished." Its method is 「汝當教化弟子，弟子復教餘人，展轉相教」 tr. "you should teach and transform disciples, and the disciples in turn teach others, teaching one another in turn", and its simile is 「一燈復然餘燈，其明轉多」 tr. "one lamp lights other lamps, and its light grows ever more"; the reverse side is 「莫作最後斷種人」 tr. "do not be the last person who cuts off the lineage". This one asks neither high or low position nor deep or shallow realisation—everyone who has gained a portion of benefit from the Dharma stands at the place where this lamp is passed on. The whole treatise closes with this; its intent is worth pondering.

Further Resonances

The backbone of this chapter is one passage of sūtra text and one passage of treatise explanation. Sūtra ① begins with the Buddha asking Ānanda 「佛是汝大師不？汝是佛弟子不？」 tr. "Is the Buddha your great teacher? Are you the Buddha's disciple?"; Ānanda answers that the Buddha is his great teacher, the Sugata is his great teacher, and he is the Buddha's disciple; the Buddha confirms it and says that what a disciple ought to do he has already done, then bids him after the passing into extinction to love, revere, and make offerings to prajñāpāramitā with the love, reverence, offerings, and provision given to the Buddha, 「乃至第二、第三，以般若波羅蜜囑累汝」 tr. "and so on up to a second time and a third time, I entrust prajñāpāramitā to you", admonishes him not to forget, not to lose, and not to be the last person who cuts off the lineage, and shows two matters—that as long as prajñā is in the world one knows there is a Buddha in the world teaching the Dharma, and that those who write it out, uphold, read, recite, rightly recollect, widely explain, and make all kinds of offerings are not apart from seeing the Buddha, not apart from hearing the Dharma, and always close to the Buddha; at the end it concludes by narration with Maitreya and the other bodhisattva-mahāsattvas, the venerable Subhūti and the other great disciples, together with the whole great assembly, and the gods, humans, gandharvas, asuras, and others, hearing what the Buddha said and all greatly rejoicing. Treatise ① takes fourteen rounds of question and answer as its skeleton, interspersed with re-explanations that cite the sūtra, and with supplements introduced by what someone says or by a further point: first it answers why the Buddha, having already severed love of dharmas, entrusts, and brings out the never-abandoned mind of great kindness and compassion and the matter of breaking his body into pieces like hemp seeds and rice; next it answers why he entrusts to the śrāvaka Ānanda and not to Maitreya and the other great bodhisattvas, setting out Ānanda's virtues fit for passing it on and the reasons why the bodhisattvas scatter and deeply know; next it answers why the Lotus and the other vaipulya sūtras are entrusted to the bodhisattvas King of Joy and the others; next it answers whether there is some further dharma very deep and surpassing prajñā, establishing that prajñā is not a secret dharma, bringing out the simile of the great physician using poison as medicine, and the division of the two kinds of prajñā, shared and unshared; next it answers what difference there is between the entrustment in the earlier chapter "Seeing Akṣobhya Buddha" and the present entrustment, establishing the two gates of the path of prajñā and the path of skilful means, and teaching the simile of the goldsmith making different things out of gold and the marks of two layers of skilful means; next it answers why he is so earnest and solemn, bringing out four sayings: the simile of the merchant chief entrusting precious jewels, that entrusting it himself among his disciples there is no suspicion, that the Buddha does not cling to the dharma of emptiness, and that wishing to show the middle way he parts from the two extremes; next it answers why the Buddha asks whether he is his disciple, bringing up the disciples in name and the doubt of those of the outside paths; next it cites the sūtra and explains the dharmas a disciple ought to do and revering prajñā as one reveres me, answers why, prajñā being the teacher of the buddhas, Ānanda reveres the Buddha, and brings out the meaning of the Buddha using his body as a simile for prajñā; next it answers why go to three when one entrustment would be enough, establishing three sayings: the constant way of the buddhas, that speech does not exceed three; once is still too slack and beyond three too urgent; and the minds of the recipients are of three kinds; next it explains that the reason for entrusting is so as not to let the Dharma be extinguished, the simile of one lamp lighting other lamps, and the admonition not to be the last person who cuts off the lineage; next it answers why, the earlier chapter having made clear that it is neither increased nor decreased, it now says do not let it be cut off and extinguished, dividing prajñā as the real mark from prajñā as letters and speaking of the result within the cause, and defines what is named extinguishing prajñā and what is named not extinguishing; next it explains the principle that when prajñā is in the world the Buddha is present, and the meaning that the Dharma Jewel is not apart from the Buddha Jewel; next it answers how people of heavy sin who hear, receive, write out, and uphold it can be not apart from the buddhas, dividing true hearing from not hearing, and pure and thick merit from thin and slight; next it answers why the great arhats who have already realised the limit of reality greatly rejoice, bringing out the two meanings of severing doubt and of the Buddha's being able to make discriminations within non-discrimination; at the end it answers why the Mahāyāna is not mentioned in the compiling of the three baskets, bringing out three answers—hard to believe, great in quantity, circulating separately—and records the saying that Mañjuśrī and Maitreya led Ānanda to compile the Mahāyāna, the meaning that the Great and Small Vehicles are divided by the arousing of the mind, and the source and course of the names of the three baskets; the whole treatise closes with the colophon on how the Dharma master Kumārajīva brought out this Expository Treatise from beginning to end.

As for the vein of meaning between this chapter and the chapters before and after it, two things can be seen. First, continuing from what precedes: the preceding chapter, "Dharmodgata", ends with the matter of Ever Weeping seeking the Dharma, and this chapter begins with the Buddha entrusting Ānanda to protect and uphold prajñā; seeking the Dharma and protecting the Dharma face each other, front and back, the one in being able to seek, the other in being able to keep. Second, this chapter is the last chapter of the whole treatise, and after it there is no next chapter to hand down to—the whole treatise is gathered in by the end-of-fascicle title 「大智度論卷第一百」 tr. "Fascicle one hundred of the Mahāprajñāpāramitā-upadeśa", and before the end of the fascicle there is first a passage of colophon from the translation hall, recording how this treatise was translated in the land of Han from beginning to end. The 「莫作最後斷種人」 tr. "do not be the last person who cuts off the lineage" admonished in the sūtra and the matter of its translation recorded at the end of the fascicle join exactly head to tail: the one charges that it not be cut off, the other records that in fact it was not cut off.

Of the explanations of the ancient masters, for this chapter one school can be recorded. Jizang's Commentary on the Larger Sūtra explains this chapter; there its chapter title is written 「囑累品第九十」 tr. "Entrustment, Chapter Ninety", the same as this treatise's chapter title. His sectioning of the main divisions of this chapter says: 「此下第二、明付屬流通方便。」 tr. "From here below is the second: it clarifies entrusting the circulation of skilful means." He at once sets up a question about the sameness and difference of prajñā and skilful means and answers it himself, saying: 「般若此品別而為論，付屬流通方便智慧與方便云何異耶？答：論云般若方便無有二物，隨用不同故開二耳。如金剛與金更無有異，而善巧以金為釧，故有金有釧二事不同也。」 tr. "Prajñā is discussed separately in this chapter; in entrusting the circulation of skilful means, how do wisdom and skilful means differ? Answer: the treatise says prajñā and skilful means are not two things; because their uses are not the same, they are opened into two. As vajra and gold have no further difference, yet with skill gold is made into a bracelet, so there are gold and bracelet, two things not the same."—the 「論云」 tr. "the treatise says" that he cites takes the same meaning as this chapter of this treatise's 「般若與方便，本體是一，以所用小異故別說」 tr. "prajñā and skilful means are one in their original substance; because there is a small difference in what they are used for, they are spoken of separately" and its simile of the goldsmith making different things out of gold, while the simile he sets up is of gold and bracelet, differing in fullness from this treatise's goldsmith making all kinds of different things; they are recorded side by side without judgement. His explanation of why the Buddha entrusts says: 「問：何故佛付屬流通耶？答：慈悲攝物何俟問耶？佛尚破身利益，況法寶耶？又上說空破有捨，今何屬破空？欲示中道故付屬也。」 tr. "Question: why does the Buddha entrust its circulation? Answer: kindness and compassion gather in beings; why wait to ask? The Buddha even broke his body to benefit them, how much more the Dharma Jewel! Again, above he taught emptiness to break existence and let it go; now, why does the entrustment break emptiness? Because he wishes to show the middle way, he entrusts it."—explaining it in two steps, first by kindness and compassion gathering in beings (taking the Buddha's even breaking his body to benefit them as a comparison) and next by wishing to show the middle way, which correspond to this treatise's first round of question and answer and to the saying 「佛欲現中道故囑累」 tr. "the Buddha entrusts it because he wishes to show the middle way". His explanation of why it is entrusted to Ānanda says: 「問：知付屬有利，何故不付屬菩薩而屬阿難？阿難是聲聞人，般若是菩薩法也。答：欲令物信故。」 tr. "Question: knowing that entrusting is of benefit, why not entrust it to the bodhisattvas, but entrust it to Ānanda? Ānanda is a śrāvaka, and prajñā is the dharma of bodhisattvas. Answer: because he wishes to make beings believe." And again he says: 「菩薩知般若恩德，自弘宣之，不須付屬。阿難是小乘人，不知般若恩，是故佛付屬也。」 tr. "The bodhisattvas know the kindness and virtue of prajñā and spread it of themselves; they need no entrusting. Ānanda is a person of the Small Vehicle who does not know the kindness of prajñā; therefore the Buddha entrusts it." His explanation of why the Lotus and other sūtras are entrusted to bodhisattvas says: 「答：法華明二乘作佛是秘密法，般若是顯現法。顯現法易用，秘密法難用。小藥師能用藥為藥，大藥師乃用毒作藥也。」 tr. "Answer: the Lotus makes clear that those of the two vehicles become Buddhas, which is a secret dharma; prajñā is a manifest dharma. A manifest dharma is easy to use; a secret dharma is hard to use. A lesser physician can use medicine as medicine; a great physician even uses poison to make medicine." And again he says: 「又有共、不共二般若，不共般若付屬菩薩，共者付聲聞也。」 tr. "Again, there are two prajñās, shared and unshared; the unshared prajñā is entrusted to bodhisattvas, the shared one to śrāvakas."—this treatise says 「般若波羅蜜非祕密法」 tr. "prajñāpāramitā is not a secret dharma" and takes what the Lotus and others say of arhats receiving the prediction and becoming Buddhas as what great bodhisattvas can receive, uphold, and use, while Jizang directly sets 「秘密」 tr. "secret" and 「顯現」 tr. "manifest" against each other and assigns them separately; the meaning taken is close while the names set up differ; they are recorded side by side without judgement. His question about where the Mahāyāna was compiled says: 「問：付屬阿難三藏，三藏在屬山，與迦葉結集。付阿難般若，何處集耶？答：文殊將阿難結集，未知何處。一云還在屬山，二云是鐵圍山邊也。」 tr. "Question: the three baskets were entrusted to Ānanda; the three baskets were at Mount Shu, compiled with Kāśyapa. Prajñā was entrusted to Ānanda; where was it compiled? Answer: Mañjuśrī led Ānanda to compile it; it is not known where. One saying is that it was again at Mount Shu; a second says it was beside the Iron Ring Mountains."—this treatise only records that Mañjuśrī, Maitreya, and the other great bodhisattvas led Ānanda to compile this Mahāyāna and does not state the place, while Jizang sets two sayings side by side about the place and himself marks 「未知何處」 tr. "it is not known where"; this is recorded without judgement. His sectioning of the passages of the sūtra text says: 「品為二：初、明付屬流通；二、大眾歡喜奉行。初三：第一、明慇懃付屬，令尊重供養；二、明付屬阿難，令流通不絕；三、明付囑之意也。今是初文。」 tr. "The chapter is in two: first, clarifying the entrusting of circulation; second, the great assembly rejoicing and carrying it out. The first has three: first, clarifying the earnest entrusting, bidding him honour and make offerings; second, clarifying the entrusting to Ānanda, bidding him circulate it without break; third, clarifying the intent of the entrustment. Now this is the first text." His explanation of why the Buddha asks Ānanda says: 「問：佛知阿難是弟子，何故今方問耶？答：二義：一、為簡真偽。」 tr. "Question: the Buddha knows that Ānanda is his disciple; why does he only now ask? Answer: there are two meanings: first, to sift the true from the false."—the same in intent as this treatise's bringing up the two matters of the disciples in name and the doubt of those of the outside paths. His explanation of the second and third entrustments says: 「第二、第三者，佛法不過三事，不受佛語便是逆人，金剛神便煞之。又過多則大，過不足故，但其三也。」 tr. "As for ‘a second time and a third time’: in the Buddha-dharma a matter does not exceed three; one who does not receive the Buddha's words is then a rebellious person, and the vajra spirit then kills him. Again, going beyond into many would be too great, and falling short would not suffice; therefore it is only three." His explanation of the section on not forgetting and not losing says: 「汝莫忘莫失下，第一、付囑令流通不斷絕也。人子不能紹繼家業，為斷種人，最為耻。」 tr. "From ‘do not forget it, do not lose it’ below is the first: entrusting it so that its circulation is not cut off. When a son cannot continue the family's work, he is a person who cuts off the lineage, the greatest shame." His explanation of the passage of the great assembly rejoicing says: 「問：無憂無喜是羅漢功德，尚無不喜云何言大喜？答：羅漢於四諦無疑、於一切法中皆疑，今說般若破其種種疑心，喜也，盡此無餘也。」 tr. "Question: being without sorrow and without joy is the merit of an arhat; since they have not even non-joy, how can it say great joy? Answer: the arhats have no doubt about the four truths, but within all dharmas they have doubts throughout; now prajñā is taught and breaks all kinds of doubting minds in them, so they rejoice; this exhausts them without remainder."—this treatise explains it by 「未得一切智慧故，於諸甚深法中猶疑不了」 tr. "because they have not yet obtained all wisdom, within all the very deep dharmas they still have doubts and do not understand them clearly", while Jizang says 「於四諦無疑、於一切法中皆疑」 tr. "they have no doubt about the four truths, but within all dharmas they have doubts throughout"; the placing of the doubt judged differs slightly, and they are recorded side by side without judgement. Jizang's commentary stops its explanation at this chapter, and right after it is titled 「大品經義疏卷第十」 tr. "Fascicle ten of the Commentary on the Larger Sūtra", so his book too ends with the Entrustment chapter, closing at the same place in the chapter order as this treatise; at the end of the fascicle there is separately a colophon of the copyist of the manuscript, recording the text he collated against: 「嘉元三年二月下旬候，以東南院古本終，交合切了……」 tr. "In the last ten days of the second month of the third year of Kagen, the collation against the old text of the Tōnan-in was finished and completed ……"; it belongs to the copyist, not to Jizang, and is recorded for reference. The extant part of Huiying's Commentary does not reach this chapter, and the lack is marked as it is, without filling it with text from elsewhere; only a few words of his sectioning point ahead to this chapter (see the Apparatus layer); his book also has an explanation of a chapter of the same name, "Entrustment", but what it explains is a different chapter of the same name in the earlier part of this treatise, not an explanation of this chapter, and it must not be cited to make up the number. Junzheng's book is not in the form of a chapter-by-chapter commentary, and for this chapter there is no text that can be cited; its lack too is recorded as it is. The variant titles of this chapter's name in the various editions and the differences of chapter names in the sūtra line are detailed in the Apparatus layer.